Took the liberty to reprint a comment from the discussion group on last night meeting, since the issues discussed will effect everyone. The joint plan working with all the municipalities is a great ideal but the devil is going to be in the details. The consultant did seem more concern with the neatness of his maps then the property rights of the current owners. There appear to be maps of everything in the plan except maps showing what the property owners want to do with their land. They should first get a handle on what the different land use types should be, then spell it out for the citizens and let them color in their property. The map may not be as neat but the overall effect would probably be much the same. Just because top down 5-year plans never worked out in the old USSR is no reason they should have another chance.
********************
"Last night's Joint Planning Commission meeting was both informative and confusing at the same time. It included discussions ranging from how much development vs.open space per residence in all townships to how wide roads must be, which mandating road widening on many (most?) of our roads.
Early in the meeting vociferous comments came from the audience that this is a case of the State removing individual rights, which were strongly denied by the hired planner.
It’s my understanding that under the JCP conservation directives one residence will need 3 acres of open space allotted “somewhere”. This would mean a landowner who has three acres could sell off one to three of those acres, but only one residence could be placed there. If the buyer buys only one acre, the other two must remain as open space. Who would maintain the other acres is under question. If a landowner has 60 acres which were held as possible “retirement investment”, he/she will find that only 20 homes can be placed on that land, with 40 acres remaining as open lands. If those 40 acres are on totally unbuildable land, the 20 homes could be placed on one acre lots contiguously, for example. But who would buy land that has no use, can never be developed? If a buyer knows about the open land requirements, there is no incentive to buy the land which must remain undeveloped. If a buyer gave me the option to buy 60 wooded acres, but I knew he couldn’t develop more than twenty, why would I buy more than 20?
Farmers also had important questions about agricultural versus conservation zoning. They did not seem pleased that their zoning petition was disregarded, but the District Township supervisors argued that they did not know what farmers had been told when they signed the petition.
This JCP concept is a huge undertaking that will affect everyone in all townships. I strongly urge everyone to attend the next meeting so that YOUR concerns will not be overlooked. Attend your local townships’ planning meetings as well, since that is where decisions are made that get on the JCP slate.
The next JCP meeting is
January 20, 2004 at the District Twp. Building."