Asleep at the Wheel
Part II – The role of the Planning Commission (visa-vi Municipal Comprehensive Planning)
From the outset of authoring this multipart series of articles, I stated that my intent was not to be overtly critical of our City’s Local Government. That withstanding, my narratives are meant to be thought provoking and a reflective wake-up call, not only for the planning commissioners but our city council at large (both past and present).
I am going to do some hard talking which some may find unpalatable; but I believe it needs to be said. While I do not want to ruffle too many feathers in our community; instead, this is meant to provide a level of constructive criticism (always a fine line).
Spoiler alert - I received some feedback (which I welcome) that my previous article was a little verbose for the intended audience. So, I have summarized my primary observations and concerns with the modus operand i of the current planning commission and why it failed to deliver a quality work-product in terms of the Comprehensive Plan (which incidentally did not even have an implementation section). So, if you are a speed reader and just into bullet-points, skip to the end!
Let’s start with the basics - what is a commission (versus a board or committee)? A major feature of a commission is that it is sanctioned to define strategies and policies – both of which should be reflected in the Comprehensive Plan. On those capabilities alone, a commission is fully empowered to make prudent and logical decision-making that should chart a positive future for our beautiful city. Consequently, the planning committee has an elevated status; the bottom line is it has a lot of power and influence. In contrast, boards and committees are typically used for decision-making and /or setting priorities. While the commission is empowered to make these decisions, it commonly delegates its responsibilities to sub-committee(s) of subject-matter experts or a third-party firm / organization to make a framework of recommendations and guide the development process. In the case of Georgetown’s Comprehensive Plan, that work was contracted out in 2021 to Waccamaw Council of Governments (WCOG). I do know the amount that was paid however I am not at liberty to divulge it, but it was a significant number.
For brevity, I will summarize the qualifications, functions and duties of planning commissioners (they are all codified in State Law and detailed by the leading oversight organization for City Comprehensive Planning, the Municipal Association of SC [MASC]) Text in italics is from one of these reference sources.
Membership, Qualifications and Terms of Office
While state law does not stipulate the maximum term of the commissioners, it seems reasonable that there should be pragmatic rotation of qualified candidates as the city develops. This has not occurred.
Regarding the qualifications for commission membership, SC Law states that “In the appointment of planning commission members the appointing authority shall consider their professional expertise, knowledge of the community, and concern for the future welfare of the total community and its citizens. Members shall represent a broad cross section of the interests and concerns within the jurisdiction”.
Furthermore, the guidelines recommend that the commission’s secretary is usually the planning director.
Comprehensive Plan Development and Revision
A local planning commission has a duty to engage in a continuous planning program.SC State Law requires that municipalities update their comprehensive plans at least every ten years, with a refresh every 5 years. None of this happened. The last Georgetown comprehensive plan was released in 2011 and since then it has not been revised to reflect the changing dynamics of the city, alternative development strategies and investment priorities. In a recent study, it is interesting to note that a failure to adopt a municipality comprehensive plan is attributable to #1 lack of citizen buy-in and # 2 lack of city buy-in. I think we have much work to do on both of these factors.
Each element must be based on careful and comprehensive surveys and studies of existing conditions and probable future development and include recommendations for implementing the plans. S.C. Code § 6-29-340
Comment: See later about past studies that should be leveraged.
Many municipalities engage an independent consultant to guide them through the development of the Comprehensive Plan. Most, if all, of these firms bring a wealth of real-world and hands-on experiences. This typically brings some cross-pollination to the table thru a broader purview of experience and exposure to other municipal plan. The net result is that it increases the overall quality of the work product.
Comprehensive Plan Implementation
Implementation. Prepare and recommend measures for implementing the plan by the appropriate governing bodies, including the following measures.
a. Zoning ordinances, including zoning district maps and necessary revisions.
b. Regulations for the subdivision or development of land. The planning commission is responsible for overseeing the administration of land development regulations adopted by the local governing body.
c. A capital improvements program listing projects required to implement adopted plans. The planning commission must submit an annual list of priority projects to the appropriate governmental bodies for consideration when they prepare annual capital budgets.
d. Policies and procedures to implement adopted comprehensive plan elements. These policies and procedures could cover such things as expanding corporate limits, extending public water and sewer systems, dedicating streets and drainage easements, and offering economic development incentive packages
Comment: This regulatory guidance sets forth the manner that ensures the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan is successful. The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is particularly important as it ranks individual projects under consideration in terms of the relevancy to the Comprehensive Plan and also identifies the funding sources.
2. No new street, structure, utility, square, park, or other public way, grounds, or open space or public buildings for any use may be constructed in the political jurisdiction until the proposed use has been submitted to the planning commission for review and comment as to the compatibility with the comprehensive plan. Section 6‐29‐510 (E)
Comment: This is a very wide ranging and powerful provision within the code of laws. Basically, it is saying that the Comprehensive Plan is THE authoritative roadmap for the city and should always be referenced when there is a proposal to build or develop something. Each future initiative should map over the strategies and goals defined within with the Comprehensive Plan.
Records Retention
1. The local planning commission must keep a public record of its resolutions, findings and determinations. S.C. Code § 6-29-360(B). Public records must be made available for inspection and copying as provided in the Freedom of Information Act. S.C. Code § 30-4-30.
Comment: I personally challenge whether the city is in compliance. Needless to say, this is not being done effectively. There are obvious gaps in record keeping, particularly of planning commission minutes and communication about the Planning Commission’s activities to our citizens is poor. The absence of a portal that is dedicated to the Comprehensive (cited in Part I) is an example of failing to establish an adequate communication medium.
2. The Planning Commission has not ensured that policies and procedures are keeping pace with emerging trends. Take for example Short Term Rental (STR) – AirBnB and alike.
Comment: I feel there’s an extra dimension to where we currently are; it is the lack of qualified staff within the city’s administration. For example, recruiting an Economic development director would provide the necessary downstream linkage between aspiration thinking and feasibility studies to the planning stage.
From the comparative study I conducted, Camden has one of the better comprehensive plans for this very reason. https://www.masc.sc/uptown/09-2013/day-life-economic-development-director
As a consequence of the aforementioned shortcomings and inadequacies within our Planning Commission, public-use and infrastructure investment has stagnated in the last three decades. While there have been some incremental (and welcome) changes to East Bay Park, there has not been any large-scale investment since the 1980’s and 1990’s when the city undertook a downtown revitalization project. Harborwalk, an eleven-hundred-foot boardwalk overlooking the Sampit River, was constructed in 1988 and featured four parks linking it to the business district. A $6 million, five-block streetscape project in the business district was completed in 1993.
Since then, despite numerous (and expensive) studies very little has been achieved. The concepts, ideas and, proposals are still extremely relevant today and potentially transformative for our city. I encourage everyone to read them; they are amazingly insightful, well written and highlight boundless possibilities. Sadly, this emphasizes how narrow-minded the Planning Commission has been over recent years. There has been a continual history of short-termism; just making it through the next year.
2009 Georgetown Charrette Study
From the 2016 Urban Land Institute Report
Summary of Findings and Concerns
The Planning Commission has failed to meet its fiduciary accountabilities and duties which are to ensure timely updates to the previous CP (2011) and developing at new version within a 10-year time horizon.
Some of the commissioners do not appear to have the requisite knowledge and skills to serve.
Commission Chairman has significantly exceeded his maximum tenure.
The level of transparency is poor. Meeting minutes are frequently not maintained, distributed and archived – this is a violation of Freedom of Information Act.
The draft Comprehensive Plan in its current form needs significant rework and even lacks an implementation section (ironically something that was in the 2011 plan). Furthermore, there’s limited inclusion of ideas / concepts from past feasibility studies, including ULI, Bridge-to-Bridge, West End Redevelopment plan, Goat Island, etc. Collectively the past studies constitute significant time and investment over the last decade or so and they are likely to be squandered if not leveraged.
Given the broad dissatisfaction with the WCOG in developing a viable comprehensive plan, their involvement should be terminated and a third-party consultant engaged, bringing a fresh set of eyes. A lot of valuable groundwork has been completed so they would hit the ground running and would probably package the comprehensive plan differently with a specific implementation section.
A formal Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is a prerequisite to the development of comprehensive plan to steer the investment prioritization. This has never been formally defined and a process to prioritize projects adopted.
Final Thoughts
To close, I will end with some concerns that I think will resonate to us all. They are from former city council member and esteemed local historian, Paige Sawyer;
“My main concern is all the development in and around our city. Traffic is the first child of development and we're seeing and will continue to see a large increase in vehicular traffic.
All over our city, we have maintenance problems with sewer, water and utility lines. Our Historic District, West End, Maryville, Willowbank, etc. We see an increase in sea level. When we have a torrential rain storm, our streets flood and unfortunately, parts of Hwy 17 are impassable. Hwy 17 is federal highway and a designated evacuation route.
The Hammock Coast, as our area is called, attracts millions of visitors and vacationers every year. Many of these guests vacation at Pawleys Island and Litchfield areas. If we have a major storm in this area, these visitors, along with our local residents will need to travel west which requires a major exit through Georgetown to reach Highway 521. Even the majority of people south of Georgetown to the Santee River will have to travel to Georgetown to access Hwy 521
Add to congestion, the new developments on South Island Road and Hwy 701. Don't forget guests staying at our hotels. There are plans for multi-story condos on Hwy. 17 next to the old armory building. And the fish camp.
Having parts of an evacuation route (Hwy 17) impassable because of flooding is going to negatively put Georgetown in the spotlight again. What has DOT, the county and city done to address just this one problem?
This is my main concern with the continued growth in our area. I think the city needs to put a moratorium in place on development and growth until this problem is solved”
Closing out for Now
I will continue to author these articles on a timely basis. The next parts will address the following;
Part III – What are the key weaknesses in the draft CP, how should these be addressed and what provisions, policies and processes should be put in place to avoid repetitions in the future?
Part IV – Observations and best practices from a comparative study of Comprehensive Plans from other SC cities with historical roots.
Amen