Agenda - Planning Commission - 10/01/1996

Home

SEPTEMBER 1996 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION A Model Request for Proposals for Drafting a New Zonin Code By Smart Meek, AICP Aquestion frequently asked of APA's Planning Advisory Service is how to define the scope of work in a request for proposals for a consultant ~o draft a new zoning code. Formulating a new zoning code is a complex, thorny, and time-consuming task. Communities typically resort to consultants when they: · have no planning stall5 · have an overburdened and/or inexperienced staff; · are searching for external, independent expertise; · want an outside group'[to take the heat for controversial recommendations. This issue of Zoning iVews presents a model request for proposals (RFP) for planning services to draft a new zoning code. It is based on an RF~ that the author wrote for the city of Piqua, Ohio. The model aSsumes that the local planning commission will oversee t.he drafting process, but that the local government will appoint a project officer responsible for contract administration. In some communities, the planning commission or legislative body may create a special committee (which may include noncommission members such as builders, developers, and civic group representatives) to advise the commission or otherwise take responsibility for public review of the consultant's work. The model RFP addresses only the drafting of the zoning code itself, not the updating of the zoning map. Map preparation should be done separately after the new code is adopted because of the potential controversy that may arise concerning changes in the zoning map for individual properties and the need to relate them to a comprehensive plan. If map preparation is linked with the drafting of a new code, disputes over the map could derail or delay code adoption, depending on the local political climate. The work program should take no longer than 18 months. Beyond that point, participants in the process will begin to drop out, wear out, or lose interest, and may even forget why certain changes have been recommended. Moreover, a longer period will-place adoption of the code too dose to local legislative elections, which occur biennially in most communities. When that happens, local elected officials may understandably balk at making a decision. Note: Where numbers appear in brackets, they are suggestions only, subject to. change 'according to local needs. }~ · This is i' requ~t for a pr0'pS~ (~P) f0r'pl~ning se~ic~ ....... for ~e~-, ..:?i. .... ~ commmum ~at have had feint zoNng code revisiom [~calgovemment name suN ~' Ci~ of.- "',.: ~ to dm~ a.n~ .... '~-..'-..~. prepped by ~ns~= to determine a r~onable budget. ' , .. ' '. ...... .,-- · -'. ': '~e fOllOWing factors: t~) consmtant qumm~uo~; [ ~cal govemment] s gener~ ~d ~d [des~tbe other revenue sources ~&' . .' ...., ,. . ~ "' . ,~, , '..' · .-. - ,. 'e : · , -... unaersmmng orproject; ta) approach to project; t~) um~ or ~ ~&ral Ommunt~ D~e~pment B~ck Grant Fun& or state ~ants]. ' :' ' .... c ' , ~ , · ' ~ q n ~ '- wor~ t~ea on rererenc~ ana a r~ew or~e propose); (5) uah~ ~mment: If d~is ~timate is too low or completely unr~isti~ ~e '- 0f pr~entation to ~e selection commi=ee; ~d (6) cost. cons~t~t ~pi~ly w~ advise the prospective client. Conm~ o~er ~-. Consulters will be notified of~e selection by mill. ~e nurvose of this vroiec~ is to dr~ a new zoning code for ~e ' : The chrrent zoning code w~ adopted in ~ear]. The code has [local'gov'emm'ent na~e]; b~t ~cludln~ a new zonin~ map. The been amended [numb~] tim~ since adoption. ~endmen~ code app~rs in [ &s~'be ~?ation of zoning co& in local govemment covered ~c following topi~: [ Summari~ the te~ amendments and' general code, suc} ~ chapter, or artick numbs]. Au~oriW for provi~ amendment numbers, by year]. adoption of the code appe~s in [cite ap~licable state stamtes or The ~oning district map is mfint~ned by [name ofdepa~ent or section of local govemment /}a~er]. . ' . ' . ~cal govemment o~cial who maintaim zoning map] in a