Plan Maryland: The alternative is more dumb growth!

Plan Maryland is a planning tool that the State of Maryland is currently preparing and debating that brings together local land use planning and the bigger state view. In Plan Maryland one can for the first time see how local plans and thye State programs AG-Print, Green-Print and the "Priority Funding Areas" add up or where the conflicts are. The result are newly defined "designated places". Official State website   

Needless to say, that all those who want government to do nothing or that hold private property rights over everything else are going nuts over this attempt to bring some rhyme and reason in the way how land in this state is developed. The state has developed more land since 1970 then in the entire history before and the pace is ever accelerating.

Fiscal conservatives and conservatives of any stripe should see Plan Maryland as what it really is, a tool to conserve resources, both, fiscal and environmental.  SUN editorial

Below see my open letter to the Secreatry of Planning with suggestions how to make Plan Maryland better, stronger and more accepted.

Dear Secretary Hall,

I want to commend your work and commitment to undertaking the very difficult task of

PlanMaryland. I have long believed that there is a need for a statewide plan that coordinates all

state investments, transportation and land policies and coordinates also local comprehensive plans.

Such a state plan would be needed even if local plans were perfect which, of course, they are not.

The plan especially needs to address the problem that local governments, in responding to previous

State smart growth efforts, have cast the net of Priority Funding Areas far too wide.

Therefore, I fully support this effort to align state agencies goals and efforts with each other and

with key policy goals embraced by the state. I believe this will help to achieve much more efficient

and coherent smart growth policies, monitoring, and eventually bring results. This statewide view is

also a valuable tool and resource for local government to assist them in avoiding conflicts between

their policies and those of the state or neighboring jurisdictions and generally see a bigger picture.

   With the introduction of the “Designated Places” the Plan also begins to address the need for
a tighter definition of the areas suitable for development. However, these core tenets of the plan are not clearly spelled out in the Plan’s current draft form.

Convincing local government and the public about the utility and need for this plan is made

unnecessarily difficult for the following reasons:

1. The document needs a much more concise “narrative arc” that goes from analysis of trends

and data to a determination where these are in conflict with state policies. Then to metrics
that would be effective in describing these conflicts and in implementing and monitoring
change.

2. As it is, the document does not document the insights and conflicts that the overlap of the

policy layers of green-print, ag-print and growth-print have brought to light as the result of
mapping these layers into an overall plan. Instead, the maps are simply shown.

3. Further, the document does not clearly spell out how well the overall plan fares relative to the policies and goals in place, i.e. how far is the current “plan” away from the goals and targets?
 

4. Designated places consist of areas suitable for development and places to be protected. This

is confusing especially for people used to thinking in the category of PFAs.


For the work done to date to be as effective as possible I have the following suggestions and
recommendations:

1. To be truly a plan for 

Maryland’s future the metrics need to be clearer . The draft suggest a slew of metrics, probably too many to be effective. The metrics should be grouped into core metrics and derived metrics (derivates of the core metrics). The metrics need to be clearly derived from current trend failures.

2. The most important metrics must be accompanied by benchmarks, ie. numerical targets

which are developed from existing “baseline” data. Only with benchmarks can we see if we are at least moving in the right direction and when unfavorable trends will be reversed. Targets have to be achievable. More time might be needed to develop solid target figures for key metrics.

3. PlanMaryland would be strengthened by making a stronger fiscal argument for Smart

Growth. The fiscal argument should include also demographics trends toward urban living in “smart communities” and how higher energy cost supports compacter development.

 4. Transportation polices hold the key to more efficient land use and that, therefore, the full
gamut of passenger rail, freight rail, roads, trails and navigable waterways needs to be
included in the plan. This is even more important since transportation is widely controlled
through state funding and state policies.

5. The plan element of “designated places” currently lacks clarity and probably instills fear in local government. As it is refined it needs to be done in a collaborative process between state and local governments. Such collaboration    will take time. The plan will likely not be “final”or complete during 2011. It is more important to build acceptance for the purpose and framework this year than to have a “final” plan.

6. Additionally designated places should not be just quantitative and the result of data

collection but they need to reflect are clear qualitative geo-spatial concepts in which place
making features of the built environment and landscapes are considered on all scales. Not

spatial or place making goals are set forth in the plan although these clearly are important for

quality of life.

7. The plan should be clear about how it will be used and enforced. Clarity of its intent and

transparency about its implementation and enforcement strategies will be essential for

building acceptance and support for the plan. Only with acceptance and local support will

the plan create real change for

Maryland’s future.

In summary, I see great potential and utility in the concept of a State Plan and am impressed with

of Maryland, Baltimore County NeighborSpace and in other venues, I am eager to work with you in

making this plan gradually and over time ever more effective and a truly efficient tool in the quest

for real Smart Growth in Maryland.

Regards,

Klaus Philipsen,