|
coordination and' cooperation between those responsible for
<br /> their administration. The UDO might involve a greater level of
<br /> interdepartmental cooperation than in the past, and
<br /> jurisdictions contemplating a UDO should evaluate this
<br /> realistically.
<br /> Second, undertaking a UDO requires a commitment of time
<br />and other community resources. Of course, this would also be
<br />true of a simple update of a zoning code or subdivision
<br />regulations. However, undertaking a UDO will generally require
<br />stepping Further back to evaluate the relationship between a
<br />jurisdicdon'-s comprehensive plan. and ira land-use and
<br />development regulations. This f?equenrly requires more front-
<br />end policy evaluation that may mean more time and/or money
<br />depending upon the formulation and adoption process and type
<br />of community participation utilized. Consequently, a
<br />jurisdiction needs to make an objective estimate of the time,
<br />resources, and commitment needed to prepare and' adopt a
<br />UDO. Eighteen months is not an unusual timeframe for the
<br />process.
<br /> Another caution is to avoid "the three-ring binder approach'"
<br />to preparing a UDO. This refers to the practice of simply
<br />gathering all of a jurisdicrion's development-related ordinances,
<br />purring them into a singld book, and calling it a UDO without
<br />sufficieni attention to planning context, administrative
<br />integration, consistent language, and the other key elements
<br />that characterize a true UDO. This has been known to occur in
<br />situations where planning staff or consultants a=empt to adapt a
<br />UDO template'to their jurisdiction without the requisite front-
<br />end evaluations--frequently due to budget constraints or
<br />unrealisr_ic expectar, ions about the resources and time required to
<br />produce a UDO. This mistake, like some of the others
<br />previously mentioned, can usually be avoided by reviewing the
<br />professional literature about UDOs, talking to communities and
<br />consultants who have prepared and implemented UDOs, and
<br />scanning the considerable number ofUDO websites found on
<br />the Interner.
<br /> Another related issue regarding UDOs involves format
<br />versus content. Mark White, a planner and attorney with
<br />Freilich, Leimer, and Carlisle in Kansas City, says that a
<br />UDO is essentially a. framework for integrating land-use and
<br />development ordinances. A community can make'ail of its
<br />definitions consistent and have all the administrative
<br />processes integrated, yet still have an ineffective UDO if its
<br />basic development standards and-land-use regulatory
<br />provisions are not well crafted. Of course, the lesson here is
<br />rhar both format and content are. critical for an effective
<br />UDO.
<br />
<br />Conclusion
<br />In the 17 years since the publication of Michael Brough's
<br />book, UDOs have become increasingly accepted and
<br />endorsed by planners and the communities they serve. UDOs
<br />have proven to be an effective planning implementation tool
<br />offering numerous-benefits to planning staff responsible for
<br />administration and enforcement, to' the development
<br />community, and to citizens: Perhaps the most compelling
<br />argument for UDOs is. that they help all community
<br />stakeholders better understand imw land-use and
<br />development regulations fir into the jurisdiction's overall
<br />planning process. This, combined with their significant
<br />improvements in administrative efficiency and ordinance
<br />consistency, suggests rhar UDOs will remain an attractive
<br />implementation toot for planners-in the foreseeable future.
<br />
<br />2OO2 Zoning News Index
<br />
<br /> Administration
<br /> Seeking Countywide Rezoning Notices
<br /> GIS at Work in dar Building and Zoning Department
<br /> Adult Uses'
<br /> Court Hears C/fy of Los Angeles u. Alameda Books
<br /> Arguments
<br />
<br /> Nebraska Supreme Courr Upholds CAFO.Zoning
<br /> Big Box Retail
<br /> Vacant Big Boxes: A Follow-up Survey
<br /> Colleges and Universities
<br /> Coping with Colleges
<br /> Commercial Uies
<br />The New Urban. Grocery' Store
<br />Corridor Planning
<br />Transforming a Commercial Strip
<br />Entertainment
<br />Zoning for the Arts in Maryland
<br />Historic Preservation
<br />Promoting Innovative Historic.Preservation
<br /> Ordinances
<br />Housing
<br />Visirabilit-y Ordinances Drive Building
<br /> Code Changes
<br />Leg-al Issues
<br />No Takings FoUnd in Tahoe Moratorium Case
<br />Federal Distric~ Court Upholds Consrimtion~ry of RLUIPA
<br />New Jersey Supreme Court Reaffirms Mount Lauret.
<br /> Doctrine
<br />
<br />Residential Zoning
<br />Lakefronr Areas Downzoned in Chicago
<br />The Two Faces of Gentrificarion:
<br /> Can Zoning Help?
<br />Garages: Not Just for Can Anymore
<br />"Vasectomy" Zoning
<br />Resorts and Tourism
<br />Short-Term Vacation Rentals: Residential or
<br /> Commercial Use?
<br />States
<br />Maryland Resuscitates Land-Use Intervention
<br /> Aurb. oriry
<br />Telecommunications
<br />Telco Hotels find Their Zone
<br />Zoning
<br />Common Problems with Zoning Ordinances
<br />Unified Development Ordinances:
<br /> A Coordinated Approach m Development Regulation
<br />
<br />August
<br />October
<br />
<br />Januar:}r
<br /> May
<br /> May
<br /> May
<br /> September .
<br /> February
<br /> .August
<br />
<br />January
<br />
<br /> April
<br />
<br /> , June
<br /> July
<br />
<br />Sepmmher
<br />
<br /> February
<br />
<br /> June
<br /> August
<br />November
<br />
<br /> March
<br />
<br /> July
<br />April
<br />November
<br />December
<br />
<br />Zoning, News is a monthly newsletter published by ~he American Planning Association.
<br />Subscriptions are available for $60 (U,S.) and $82' (foreign}, W. Paul Farmer, ^m~,- Executive
<br />Directon William PC Klein, ,ucr, Director of Research.
<br />Zontng ~Vtws is produced at APA; Jim ,Schwab. ,ucc', and Michael David*on, Edicon: Barry Bain,
<br />aicl', Fay Oolnick, Josh Edwards, San jay Jeer, AICP. Megan Lewis, .ucc, Marya Morris, alcP,
<br />Roberto Rcquejn. Lynn Ross. Rcportem Shcrric Matthews, Assistant £ditorl, Lisa Barton,
<br />Design and Production.
<br />Copyright-©2002 hy American Plimning Association, 122 S: Michigan Ave., Suite 1600,
<br />Chicago, iL 60603. The American'Planning Association also ha~ offices at 1776 Massachtuom
<br />Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20036; www.planning, org
<br />All rights reserved. No parr of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any
<br />means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, secordinD or by any informauon ~tomgc
<br />and retrieval ~stem, without permission in writing from the American Planning Assodation.
<br />Printed on recycled paper, including 50-70% tccy'cled fiber ~
<br />and 10% postconsumer waste.
<br />
<br />
<br />
|