I get the talk about zoning....

Marty, it is about private property! You need to respect our county's attitude toward private property. We simply don't want people trying to tell us what to do with our private property! It is about liberty! Planning to plan is just a euphemism for zoning.

Let's look at just one issue, subdivision regulations. IN Berkeley County we they exist and were recently changed. Why? Because of the death of a nine year old boy. The regulations govern how much of a turn around must be built at the end of a cul de sac. The developers, who are always looking to minimize expense, built one small enough that a school bus could not navigate it. So what happens? Children get picked up on a busy highway instead of in the development. A child dies at the school bus stop. Now the subdivsion regulations require a turning radius to accomodate a bus. An example of how certain "plans" accomodate

Norman,
You have made it clear that your highest priority is something you call “private property.” And your only goal is to protect the right of every individual to turn their little plot of land into a dump, sewer, whorehouse or rifle range regardless of who else might get hurt.
We get your point and respect your opinion. Now it’s time for you to show some respect for other opinions on this and other subjects.
Lots of people care about more than what you call ‘private property.’ They care about their own and their neighbor’s health and jobs. They care about the quality of this environment and its future. They respect and want to preserve our history and traditions. And they expect to have clean air to breath and clean water to drink and jump into on a hot summer day.
And they care about wild things and helpful neighbors. And about our unspoiled mountains. People who, like the original mountaineers, learn from and lived off of their environment.
Those are among the things that attract people, dollars, and jobs to Pocahontas County. And those are the things we must plan to protect in order to have any chance of a prosperous future.
Squirrels plan ahead and store food for the winter. Monkeys plan ahead and travel from tree to tree as fruit ripens. The people of this county are more intelligent than squirrels or monkeys. They are able to see, discuss, and plan for a better future. But not when outspoken people continue to spread hysteria and fear about the entire planning process. That is not helpful.
The problem is not that we ignore you. The problem is that we listen to you and, as a result, we believe ideas that are against our best interests. Ideas that tie our hands and cripple our future. Outside forces demand that the county produce some sort of plan or lose good jobs. Do you really want us to lose more jobs? We no longer have a choice. Absolute state requirements force us to produce a plan. That discussion is finished. Writing any further about not developing a plan is a waste of your time and ours.
Let’s move on.
Responsible adults know how to plan. They plan their gardens. They plan to change the oil in their trucks. And they try to plan for their family’s future.
A responsible community also plans. It plans for road repair and expansion. It plans to keep its waste from contaminating its water supply. It plans to educate its children. And it plans to protect the private property rights of all citizens. That’s right, communities must plan in order to protect the rights and privileges of private property owners.
We are now required to have a plan for the future. This county won’t always have a Norman Alderman around to remind us of the importance of private property rights. We need to put that in writing. That’s part of what a plan does.
The wiser the community, the more intelligent and flexible it’s long-term plan.
You’ve told us horror stories of communities where plans have been misused. With your understanding of planning, you can help the county to develop a process which will avoid the kind of problems you’ve found in other communities. Don’t lecture us, help us.
Without a plan we, as individuals and as a community, are less than we can be. We are like the grasshopper who ignorantly plays all summer then starves to death when cold weather inevitably arrives.
We are better than that.
Please, Norman. We all know what you care about. Please respect that other people care about other things which, if you had your way, would be at risk. Work with us to protect the future of this county. Remember that, as a wise man once said, “just because you believe you are right doesn’t prove you are right.”
Rich Laska

The politics require that we listen carefully to all points of view but that we are guided not by volume and rancor but by reason and consensus. I believe that planning is a very difficult issue to deal with and talk about because it is so large it necessarily encompasses colliding points of view. Tackling difficult challenges is the business of communities that want to succeed in the future. If all this were simple, it would already be done!

Has Roger moved to Hardy County? I thought he lived in Ohio. Excuse me!

This excerpt from Letter to Editor by Lawrence Cameron raises some real questions:
"The shorter the time horizon, the more likely things will turn out as we expect. If I make a list of things to do tomorrow, there’s a pretty good chance I’ll get most of them done. If Greenbrier County had erected a land-use plan in 2004, what bearing would that plan have had on wind turbines or waste coal plants? So time horizons in excess of two or three years must assume increasingly unlikely futures.

Miller’s list of factors, activities and issues to be considered in the “comprehensive” plan he espouses is fearfully long: it contains 13 “required” topics for which we must forecast goals, objectives, schedules and budgets plus six additional “may cover” topics. The expectation that we can predict, analyze, agree upon and control such a list seems utterly delusional. Look what’s gone on with the sewage treatment issue in Slaty Fork. And that’s just one part of the issue."

The question to me being "What would a Plan really do?" The questions raised by Mr. Cameron are right in the sense that a Plan really can not control events. But to me, a Plan helps us as a community talk to one another about what we value and in that sense helps us set compass points and steer towards certain largely agreed upon goals. Gives us a sense of responsibility and ownership to outcomes. But as his letter rightly points out, planning wont cement much of anything.

You all need to talk to our development director up here in Berkeley County. He has told me more than once that the lack of zoning and a strong comprehensive plan is a drawback for businesses looking to locate in Berkeley County. Many of these businesses are formed or developed in urban areas where zoning is a fact of life and readily accepted. Whenever they hear of "no zoning" or "no comprehensive plan", their management folks fear moving here and the corporate types worry about infrastructure needs not being met. Zoning protects property values and works to ensure that development goes hand in hand with infrastructure availability and needs.

This leaves the only development that thrives on a lack of zoning and planning, residential. And study after study shows that residential development takes more money out of the local government through the demand for services than it puts in through real estate taxes and fees. Residential development does not pay for itself and it becomes a drain on the community. Ask anyone up here about their fire fees, sewer and water bills, and you will get the message.

Norma,
Pocahontas County needs to have a comprehensive plan because it's a state law. What part of that don't you understand?
Linda

According to Mr. Miller's entry of yesterday at 8:53 AM, WVC 8A - 3. I haven't read it yet, but would also like to have the specific place in the code that mandates the creation of a "comprehensive plan".

To my thinking, even if the legislature had not even mentioned planning, mandated or simply encouraged, a community can certainly benefit by having this discussion and trying to address the future with a road map instead of a blind fold.

Good going Stump. It is important that we distinguish between mandatory and obligatory. This quote from your thread illustrates the truth of your position: "(b) Therefore, the Legislature encourages and recommends the following:"

Encouragement and recommending are only suggestive, not obligatory.

Bill has some interesting points. "we might take will eventually result in restrictive zoning laws that will usurp all our property rights." Put a frog in warm water and gradually heat it to boiling and he won't jump out. Same thing with zoning! You have to understand that zoning is not a static concept. Planning is not static. Plans are constantly in motion. The changes occur usually over time. That's why we have "variances" in zoning laws. A variance is gov's way of saying, "Sorry we made a mistake and didn't anticipate (read plan for) a particular aspect of our ordinance. The gov officials then determine that they may or may not grant the variance. That is where the rub comes in!

In seeking a variance, every neighbor in the community who doesn't like the "variance" can file a complaint and force the landowner to pay out big bucks in legal fees to get the variance. AND HE MAY NOT GET IN EVEN AFTER ALL THAT EXPENSE.

In other words, the landowner's vulnerability to his neighbors whims is greatly increased with the likelihood that he will lose his right to improve his property. This has been referred to as "NIMBY" (Not in my backyard)

The atheist complains when a variance is granted for religious worship. The local shopkeeper complains about his neighbor's Ebay business. (despite the fact that it is online and via mail order.) The real estate developer complains about his neighbor's development because he doesn't want another dev competing against his business. And so on infinite um.

Instead of letting the normal capitalistic system weave its tapestry the law is used to hinder the free use of the land. Is this what we want.

Thank you for the compliment Mr. Alderman, I think.

The purpose of my posting the “general provisions” was not to incite one side or the other regarding this issue, it was merely an attempt to start finding a common ground that the majority can agree upon, if and when we are going to tackle this controversial issue. The hyperbolic rhetoric so far displayed on several different forums serves no purpose in my opinion.

I for one, as stated previously, would lean toward planning, if and when the appropriate safeguards were designed into the system of rules and regulations. I feel much more threatened by the guy that wants to start a rock quarry adjacent to my land, with the accompanying blasting, water, and air quality issues, than I do by the developer that wishes to establish a housing project with regulatory covenants and restrictions in place to protect all of the owners’ investments. As a real estate professional, I deal with not only those folks that are moving to this area, but also with those that choose to leave for various reasons. I even encourage those that move into this area to look for two things; either purchase property in an area with covenants and restrictions, or purchase enough land that you can protect your perimeter once you build your home. If not, your dream home might not be worth anything when your new neighbor is a 1958 Bluebird, of distinctive color and exterior design.

The issue with “planning” would be our ability to come to “common ground” that the majority can agree on. There is not only a place in this county for the dream home, but also the Bluebird!

The current administration in this county is obviously for a “comprehensive plan”, and would appear to be supported by the current legislators and administrators in Charleston. Due to the nature of my business, I believe it would behoove me to learn everything I can, and possibly positively influence the decisions regarding regulation, instead of throwing what appears to be a “hissy fit” on paper and disallowing any resemblance of credibility.

It would seem that the State of West Virginia has established the guidelines for a “planning to plan” discussion in Chapter 8. Although I don’t agree with very many aspects of a “comprehensive plan”, I do agree with Mr. Minion’s position that we, as a community, have the necessary mental resources to address these issues in a “comprehensive” manner. I not only believe in property rights, but also my personal civil rights. By law, afforded through our constitution, one has the right to be part of the problem, or part of the solution.

Oh, and before I get accused of being a carpetbagger….my paternal side of the family settled in what is now Hardy County in 1749. My maternal grandmother was born in Bath County, and raised in Green Bank and Cass. Some of my family moved further “West” to Calhoun and Gilmer County. You might have heard of Stumptown, WV. It is located just next to “Normantown”.