Agenda - Planning Commission - 07/06/1999

Home

:onstituencies with different issues and concerns. The process might become controversial, so the group should be ~killed and comfortable leading an open public process. Probably the most appropriate groups, given these observations, are the plan or zoning commissions constituted especially for this purpose. The assignment ofstaffto the revision group is critical. The process is too demanding and too important to be assigned to an individual who is overloaded with other duties. Persons working in the zoning revision should have available adequate planning or zoning department personnel to carry out the necessary research and conduct additional meetings. Even if the city decides to use a consultant in the revision process, provision for adequate and knowledgeable support staffwho know the ordinance is essential. Broad-based public input is diflqcult at the early stages of zoning revision. People find zoning an easy issue to talk about when it impacts individual property or a single neighborhood, but its often complex structure and detail make it a topic that does not h01d a high degree of interest. What is Wrong with Our Present Ordinance? You cannot fix the zoning ordinance unless you agree on what is broken. Therefore, a careful and complete listing of problems and issues is an important task. This list is besr developed through a program of community input that reaches out to the key members of the "zoning constituencies," including city staff; the plan commission and zoning board of appeals; the city council; the real estate community, including sales, construction, design, and finance; and the activist community, including representatives from homeowners associations, civic betterment leagues, and community-based organizations. Broad-based public input is difficult at the early stages of zoning revision. People find zoning an easy issue to talk about when it impacts individual property or a single neighborhood, but its often complex structure and detail make it a topic that does not hold a high degree of interest. Therefore, ir is best to structure working groups of representatives from the constituencies listed above to keep a routine check on issues from various perspectives. Obviously, ir is important to keep the community informed through the media and community outreach mechanisms, but a zoning update is much different from a comprehensive plan update, and in its initial stages usually fails to attract broad-based participation. Leslie S. Pollock is a principal consultant of Camiros Ltd., a planning andzoning consultingfirm with offices in Chicago, Denver, and ]ndianapolis. He has preparednumerous zoning ordinanc.~ r. evisions for communities across the country and is currently a~isting Clark Coun(y (Las Vegas). Nevada, with the preparation ora new Unified Development Code. Three key issue-based analyses should be performed to complement the issues addressed by the constituencies, including a review of the relationship of the comprehensive plan to the zoning ordinance, a technical review of the structure and consistency of the zoning ordinance in light of current best practices, and an analysis of zoning change actions over the past five years to gain a sense of key problems. Such analyses should look at the pattern of variations, text, and map amendments. Among the typical scope of issues to be addressed or investigated are: · The utility of the current ordinance organization. Does the ordinance clearly specify who is responsible for various application reviews and approvals? Is that responsibility assigned to the most appropriate board, commission, or staff position? · The relationship of district structure to the comprehensiveplan. Do the purposes and standards of each zoning district relate to applicable policies of the comprehensive plan? The adequacy of current administrative structure. Can applicants easily identify who to see or what to apply for when they have a zoning problem or need? Do the reviews and approvals happen in a timely manner? The utility of current development standards. Are cu rrent parking, landscape, environmental, and similar requirements easily applied, and do they have the desired results? The currency and/or lack of definitions. Are terms defined in a contemporary manner, and are all major terms used in the ordinance clearly defined? The scope of ordinance interpretations. Does the ordinanc~ clearly specify district requirements and the related approval process, or does the applicant often depend upon staff interpretation of such requirements? The relationship of zoning bulk standards to the development being constructed. Do the height and yard regulations encourage or discourage a desired type of development? Does it result in buildings of desirable scale and design? This material should be prepared and summarized in a form that can be presented to key decision makers, the zoning board, plan commission, or city council for review and confirmation, as well as made available to the participating public. This list essentially represents the first summary statement of the problems or conditions that need to be resolved or addressed through any zoning ordinance revision, and can help to focus the community and the group charged with the zoning revision on the scope of changes to be addressed. What Changes Are Necessary? The value of such a list is that it can be used to determine the changes that should be made to the zoning ordinance through the revision process. The scope of these changes can be thought of as proposed zoning policy. Comprehensive planning is often thought of as a policy exercise and zoning is often viewed of as a regulatory exercise. Yet, there is as much or more policy development inherent in the zoning process as within the comprehensive planning process. The need for policy at the zoning level may not be evident at first. However, if zoning is a book of rules, then why are such rules set, and by whom? Zoning is not a general regulatory measure, but a highly specific