La Plata planning commission accepts annual report after staff corrects data; members press need for development-capacity analysis and staffing

The La Plata Planning Commission voted to accept the town’s 2024 annual planning report with corrections to numeric tables and clarifications to be made by staff before the document is forwarded to town council and submitted to the state.

Commission members pressed planning staff about a missing Development Capacity Analysis (DCA) and said the commission needs more staff and consultant resources to prepare data for an update to the town’s comprehensive plan and for refinement of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO).

Director Dooley, who presented the annual report, told the commission that “the state of Maryland requires us to provide an annual report every year on various planning activities in the town,” and that staff reviewed records to compile the 2024 submission. Dooley said the Maryland Department of Planning (MDP) has no staffing capacity to help La Plata prepare a DCA and that the last DCA on MDP’s record for the town was 2020. Dooley said the town’s planning department is “very limited in our staffing,” currently consisting of the director and a part‑time consultant, and that the department has engaged multiple outside consultants for technical tasks.

Commissioners asked for specific corrections and clarifications in the report, including inconsistent answers about annexations, a mistaken zero in a residential-capacity total (the PFA line should show 2,150), and how permit and certificate-of-occupancy counts relate to totals in other tables. Dooley said staff will reconcile the figures with Celia Crace, the consultant who prepared the worksheet, and will submit a corrected version to council as a “receive and file” document before the state deadline.

On staffing, Dooley said the town recently posted a full‑time senior planner position (about three weeks earlier) and had received two applications, one of which was qualified but later did not continue in the recruitment process. The planning director position has been vacant for roughly nine months to a year, Dooley said, and the town relies on contract planners, part‑time consultants and other departments for technical support. Dooley described a contract planner working about 29 hours a week and said the town will continue to use consultants for items such as grading, engineering, forest‑conservation reviews and sediment‑erosion control.

Commissioners discussed the timeline and cost for a comprehensive plan update. Dooley recommended sequencing a substantive DCA and said a full comp‑plan update would likely require hiring a consultant and subconsultants to perform traffic and economic analyses, substantial public outreach and multiple drafts. He gave a ballpark estimate, based on experience in other jurisdictions, that the studies and consultant work could run in the “$90,000 to $125,000” range and that the process could take about two years.

The commission noted a practical deadline for the annual report filing; staff said the updated report must be submitted by July 1. The commission moved to accept the annual report “with corrections and clarifications as necessary by staff,” and the motion was approved.

Councilman Guttenberg told staff he wants an open‑session agenda item on APFO prioritization and recommended the town attorney attend that discussion so the Town Council and planning commission can review priorities together. Dooley and commissioners agreed staff will prepare corrected report pages and circulate them to the commission and council prior to final submission.

The commission did not adopt a new APFO or make decisions on comprehensive‑plan allocations at the meeting; rather, members directed staff to correct the annual report figures, continue recruiting for planning positions, and prepare a scope and preliminary cost estimate for the DCA/comp‑plan work for future council consideration.