|
ZONING NEWS BRIEFS
<br />
<br /> Security Gates
<br /> APA's Planning Advisory Service staffhave recently observed an
<br /> increase in the number of inquiries for exterior security gates in
<br /> downtowns and commercial areas. The public's heightened
<br /> awareness of the value oF community aesthetics together with
<br /> store owners' fear of crime have presented planners with a
<br /> dilemma as to how to regulate (or prohibit) the gates and still
<br /> remain sensitive to the legitimate fears of retail merchants.
<br /> Exterior security gates may produce grim feelings of blight
<br /> and danger, deterring potential customers from strolling along
<br /> streets after shopping hours and increasing isolation and crime.
<br /> Solid gates also prevent window shopping, which is essential to
<br /> a lovely and exciting downtown. Furthermore, the gates pose a
<br /> safety hazard by preventing police and firefighters from
<br /> observing a theft or fire and gaining swift entry to deal with a
<br /> situation. According to some police departments, the majority
<br /> of break-ins are made through the back ora building or from
<br /> the roof, not the front door.
<br /> Some concerns over exterior security gates can be addressed
<br />through design guidelines, which can require shatterproofglass,
<br />interior mesh grilles, and lighting to give greater visibility fi.om the
<br />street. However, the cost and incentive of replacing existing.gates
<br />can be prohibitive to the merchant- espedally if insurance -
<br />companies offer a discount when they are in place. Some commu-
<br />nities (Boston, Philadelphia) and some business improvement
<br />districts (New York City) offer rebates or pay half the cost of
<br />conversion. It is worth noting that a recent study from the Norfolk,
<br />Virginia, Police Department found that there was no greater
<br />inddence of night-time crime in downtowns than in other areas.
<br /> The Planning Advisory Service has available for subscribers
<br />ordinances regulating storefront security grilles from White
<br />Plains, New York; San Francisco; and South Orange, New
<br />Jersey. Design guidelines are available from Philadelphia (for the
<br />Center City Business Improvement District); Norfolk, Virginia
<br />(for the Downtown Historic Overlay District); and Milwaukee,
<br />Wisconsin. PAS is looking for more information on this topic.
<br />Send to Fay Dolnick, Research Associate, American Planning
<br />Association, 122 South Michigan Avenue, Suite 1600, Chicago,
<br />Illinb. is, 60603; fax: 312431-9985; e-mail: fdolnick@planning, org.
<br /> Fay Dolnick
<br />Prescott Overlay District Ordinance
<br />The proposed Highway 69 Corridor Overlay District Ordinance
<br />has some city council members in Prescott, Arizona, asking whether
<br />such an ordinance is needed when existing codes may provide
<br />suffident regulation. City staffcompiled a 13-page comparison
<br />between the existing and proposed regulations, which examines
<br />such issues as informational meetings, site planning, landscaping,
<br />screening, architecture, grading, and signage.
<br />
<br />Zoning Newt is a monthly newsletter published by the American Planning A.~ociation.
<br />Subscriptions arc available for $55 (U.S.) and $75 (foreign). Frank $. $o, Exccuzivc Director,
<br />William IL Kleln, Director of'Research.
<br />Zoning News h produced at APA. Jim $chwab and Mike Da'~i&,on, Editors; Shannon
<br />Batty Bain, Jerome Cleland, Fay Dolnir_k, ganjay Jeer, Megan Lewh, Marya Moni*, Becki Retrain,
<br />Rcportcn4 C~thh Chedd, Atal,tmt F~tor, I. ha Barton, E~ign and Production.
<br />Copyright 01999 by American Planning/Ltsociadon, 122 S. Michigan Ave., Suite IGC}O.
<br />Chicago, IL 60603. The American Planning A.t~ociation also hu office.* at 1776 Ma.t~chu.~etu
<br />Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20036.
<br />All righu r~erved. No pan ofthis publlcadon may be rcproduoed ir utilized in any form or by any
<br />meam, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage
<br />and re~c'~ system, without permiuion in writing from the American Planning A.uocladon.
<br />Printed on recycled paper, including 50-70% recycled fiber
<br /> A
<br />and 10% postconsumer waste.
<br />
<br />4
<br />
<br /> The 46-page corridor overlay zoning district is the result of
<br />complaints from residents in the surrounding hills who are
<br />bothered by mass grading, glare from roof treatments, traffic, and
<br />large parking lots. The a~-ea is also poised for intense development.
<br /> Developers fear that stricter regulations will drive away
<br />development and argue that Prescott's codes, covenants, and
<br />restrictions (CCRs) already meet or exceed what the overlay
<br />would require. Council members in favor of the overlay
<br />ordinance wonder why the developers are concerned if the
<br />proposed overlay would mean equal or perhaps even less
<br />restriction. Says one city councilman in the Prescott Daily
<br />Courier, "The difference [between existing regulations and an
<br />overlay ordinance] is, the CCRs are self-directed, and the other
<br />is government imposed."
<br /> The 13-page comparison report between existing and
<br />proposed regulations reveals some differences in requirements
<br />and costs. The corridor overlay requires more landscaping, a
<br />stringent buffer between conflicting land uses, and reduced
<br />residential densities on steeply sloped land, but gives tradeoffs
<br />and flexibility in these and other provisions.
<br /> The overlay proposal is currently tied up in city council
<br />workshops, as supporters and opponents batde over this
<br />increasingly visible and political issue. In the words of one city
<br />planner, ~This may never see a council public hearing." The
<br />Planning Advisory Service will make the Highway 69 Corridor
<br />Overlay Plan and Prescott's comparison report available to
<br />subscribers. Mike Davidson
<br />
<br /> The NYC Adult Establishment Ordinance
<br /> New York City won thc latest challenge to its controversial
<br /> adult use ordinance. Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court
<br /> supported lower court decisions by determining that they would
<br /> not hear the appeal brought forth by an adult cabaret owner and
<br /> the New York Civil Liberties Union. Since the ordinance was
<br /> amended in 1995, it has been challenged as a violation of the
<br /> First Amendment. This recent move by the Supreme Court may
<br /> set a precedence for future challenges on the issue.
<br /> New York CitT.'s Adult Establishment Ordinance prohibits the
<br />number of adult establishments in the boroughs through strict
<br />distancing requirements. The ordinance allows businesses within
<br />specified manufacturing and commerdal distri ,ets, provided they are
<br />not allowed within 500 feet of each other, a church, school, or
<br />residential district. The businesses are limited to a 10,000-square-
<br />foot floor area, and only one business per zoning lot is allowed. In
<br />early 1995, the City's planning department examined the percent-
<br />ageofland available that would permit adult uses under the
<br />ordinance. It was determined'that 3.9 percent of the land area in
<br />Manhattan, and 1 l.percent citywide, would allow such businesses.
<br />These figures hav~ slashed the number of allowable existing adult
<br />businesses in all the boroughs from 492 to 26, and fi.om 56 to 17
<br />in Manhattan alone. The rest have dosed down voluntarily or are
<br />fighting the ordinance.
<br /> Other challenges to the ordinance include the city's definition of
<br />an ~adult establishment," defined as Wa commercial establishment
<br />where a ~substanfial portion" of the establishment includes an adult
<br />book store, adult eating or drinking establishment, adult theatre, or
<br />other commercial establishment..." The "substantial portion"
<br />language in the definition has prompted adult shop owners to stock
<br />store shelves with non-pornographic material, but offer pornogra-
<br />phy in a back room. The Planning Advisory Service can provide
<br />subscribers with New York's Adult Establishment Ordinance, a
<br />commentary on the proposed text amendments, and the city's
<br />Adult Entertainment Study. Shannon Armstrong
<br />
<br />/0'7
<br />
<br />
<br />
|