|
|
|
The Coordinated Planning Act - as Proposed
|
The following Summary was prepared by the Michgian Society of Planning in March, 2001, shortly before enactment of the Coordinated Planning Act.
Michigan’s four existing planning enabling acts date back to 1931. Very few changes have been made since their adoption. The existing laws do not address the planning issues and problems of today. The proposed Coordinated Planning Act would take the three existing planning enabling acts (for cities, villages, townships, and counties) and create one unified Coordinated Planning Act which provides the mechanisms and tools for a local government to address today’s planning-related issues.
The lack of integrated and coordinated planning has been called by several state level reports the greatest threat to Michigan’s environment and to a sustainable economy. The Coordinated Planning Act would establish a process and incentives for cooperative, coordinated and compatible planning while preserving home rule principles and the right to local determination for land use planning and decision making.
The Coordinated Planning Act would provide a clear and comprehensive set of purposes for planning. It borrows ideas from many of the successful statutes in other states but it is not modeled after any of them. It is not a “one size fits all” planning act, but fits Michigan’s unique governmental structure, offering different types of plan options to meet the wide variety of community types, population sizes, capabilities and needs in Michigan. It even provides for the voluntary creation of a joint planning commission by two or more contiguous units of government.
The proposed Coordinated Planning Act does not require a state land use plan, nor is it a “top down” approach to planning, but it clearly defines the roles of each level of government (local, county, region, state) as they relate to coordinated planning. It would establish a process for coordination of all related entities with plans within a community (like a DDA, Historic District Commission, airport authority, etc.), as well as between contiguous communities, with the county, the region and with affected state and federal agencies.
The coordinated planning process would require notice to all these affected entities that a community is going to prepare or amend a plan, and would require a draft copy of the plan or amendment be sent for review and comment. All comments must be responded to and attached as an appendix to a plan. The governing body of the local unit of government, county or region proposing the plan would retain the right to final approval of the plan.
Communities that choose to plan would have 7 years to come into conformance with the new Act (the existing planning enabling acts would be repealed after 7 years). It would establish incentives for developing and maintaining a plan including a state grant program for 7 years; initial funding of regional and county data collection and mapping to be used by all jurisdictions, grants for the preparation of local plans, and state technical assistance and data sharing.
The Coordinated Planning Act would establish the minimum contents of and a menu of different types of plans ranging from a basic future land use plan to sophisticated growth management and redevelopment plans. Plans would be labeled based on their contents. It includes implementation authority to address contemporary planning issues.
Plans prepared under the Coordinated Planning Act would be required to have a 20-year focus and be reviewed every 5 years. Plans could be amended not more than once a year.
The Coordinated Planning Act would place considerable emphasis on infrastructure planning and coordination of infrastructure decisions at all levels of government. It would require the adoption, and annual update of a six-year capital improvements program (CIP) to implement a plan adopted under the Act. The CIP would be based on an analysis of the land use plan and its requirements for public facilities and services to support the quality of life (as measured by level of service) as envisioned in the land use plan. The CIP cannot be a “wish list” but must be “real” (i.e., it must be affordable with a realistic finance plan and time frame for the provision of facilities and services).
The proposed Coordinated Planning Act clearly defines and enhances the role of the planning commission as the entity preparing the plan and reviewing the capital improvements program (CIP) for consistency with the plan. The local governing body adopts the plan and CIP, elevating the status of the plan and CIP as public policy, and bringing a greater level of accountability to the planning process. The proposed Act also requires that zoning, subdivision regulations, condominium regulations, and capital improvement programs be based on a plan adopted under the Act.
A common and flexible set of requirements for establishing a planning commission are included, as are clear guidelines on planning commission powers, functions and operational responsibilities. Any existing zoning commission or zoning board (not board of appeals) would be eliminated and its powers transferred to the planning commission.
|
This page last updated on 9/3/2003.
|
