|
p~anning context within which the land-use and development
<br />approval process occurs. Essentially, the ~rst two or diree
<br />chapters of a UDO provide the public and developers with
<br />answers co the why, who, and how questions regarding a
<br />jurisdiction's land-use and development regulatory process. This
<br />is a major benefit of UDOs and an element often missing from
<br />rradirional zoning and subdivision regulations.
<br /> There are.a number of other specific advantages:
<br />
<br />· Providing a single document incorporating ail of a
<br /> jurisdiction's land-use and development regulations rather
<br /> than having them scattered ~hrough mu[tip[e, often
<br /> conflicting, ordinances,
<br />
<br />· Putting the regulations in "understandable English,"
<br />
<br />· Providing a uniform set of definitions that are consistent,
<br />
<br />· Arranging the ordinance in a fashion that ~bllows the normal
<br /> sequence of development and d~e development review
<br /> Droces$,
<br />
<br />· Providing appropriate fle.,dbility in regulating development to
<br /> achieve comprehensive plan objectives 'while still protecting
<br /> public health, safety, and welfare, and
<br />
<br />· Providing a more coordinated system for development
<br /> approval and code enforcement.
<br />
<br /> Because nor all UDOs are created equally, these benefits are
<br />realized in different degrees by the jurisdictions char have
<br />adopted them.
<br /> One final observation on the structure and benefits o£UDOs
<br />ia worth emphasizing: When seasoned planning practitioners
<br />[ook ar r. he table o£contents in a v/pical UDO, Se initial
<br />reaction may be somewhat underwhetming. Perhaps 75 percent
<br />of' the chapter headings appear to be standard zoning and
<br />subdivision elemenr, s, bur the real value added is.discovered by
<br />digging deeper into the UDO document. This is when the
<br />relationships between the chapters and the overall planning '
<br />conte~xt of the document become evident, and the reason why a
<br />well-crafted UDO is truly a total regulatory package that is
<br />greater than the'sum of irs par~s.
<br />
<br />I/I/ho rise'= I.IDO': t, n8 Why
<br />A couple of hours on the ~nternet will reveal that UDOs are
<br />posted on municipal and county websites nationwide. Many-of
<br />the early UDOs appear to have been done in North Carolina
<br />and Florida. The North.Carolina experience is understandable
<br />because Michael Brough's book was based on work he did for
<br />municipalities in chat stare: Florida's large number of UDOs is
<br />at least partly attributable to the state's Planning legislation
<br />which encourages, if not mandates, UDOs for implementing
<br />comprehensive plans. Bur geography, alone does not determine
<br />which jurisdictions use UDOs. Interviews with consul, tan=,
<br />communikies, and counties that have adopted UDOs suggest
<br />several recurring themes behind their decisions.
<br /> Implementing a new comprehensive plan. One of the most
<br />prevalent reasons given for why a municipality or county opted
<br />}bra UDO was the need to implement policies outlined in a
<br />
<br />Barry [qogue, alc?, manages the St. Louis office for Parsons
<br />Planning Division, a national ptanning and urban design group
<br />with offices across the country. The company's websire can be found
<br />a£ www. xDarsons, g'om.
<br />
<br />new comprehensive plan. For example, Lake County, Illinois, an
<br />affluent, rapidly developing suburban county north of Chicago,
<br />produced a new framework plan in the mid-1990s. The new
<br />p{an included policies to protect natural resources and
<br />encourage affordable housing and infill development.
<br />Consequently, Lake County's UDO included regulatory
<br />strategies and development standards that encourage and
<br />prescribe those results as appropriate. Kirk Bishop, of Austin- '
<br />based Duncan Associates, and the county's UDO consultant,
<br />says, "Lake COunty has been a leader in natural resource
<br />protection for over 20 years. Their UDO is a great example of'
<br />how co meld policies and regulations to protect critical natural
<br />resources." Clay County's UDO helped implement the county's
<br />new "der development" policy based on rural, suburban; and
<br />urban development character. Carole Blume, Clay County's
<br />planning director, also noted r. har many local surveyors, civil
<br />engineers, and designers like the UDO and several provided
<br />input to help evaluate and tailor provisions to be appropriate for
<br />the. areas physical .and market conditions.
<br />
<br />CommuniO, character is
<br />one objective o/Beaufort,
<br />South Carolina's, unified
<br />development ordinance.
<br />
<br />
<br />
|