|
strong pattern of out-migration, not unlike other
<br />older suburbs."
<br />
<br /> One obvious way to combat a stagnant
<br />tax base is to redevelop and improve otder
<br />areas of the city so that they include high
<br />revenue-general ng land uses such as upper-
<br />income housing, entertainment facilities,
<br />retail stores, and .a variety of services. ]'he
<br />city of Lakewood attempted this in the West
<br />End neighborhood, which consists primarily
<br />of single-family houses, most built prior to
<br />~94o, with some muttifamily and commercial
<br />uses The neighborhood street pattern pro-
<br />rides a dear break from the dominating grid
<br />of surrounding areas. The neighborhood's .
<br />geographic location made it a prime target
<br />for redevetopment. The southern edge sits
<br />atop bluffs overlooking the scenic Rocky
<br />River, and other locations afford views of
<br />Lake Erie. The scenic vistas would be a
<br />strong selling point for high-end residential
<br />units.
<br />
<br /> '['he city proposed a mixed-use project for
<br />the area. According to the '~.Lakewood Ohio
<br />West End Deveiopmant" report, the project
<br />was to include a full-scale bookstore, a movie
<br />theater, a wide variety of family and fine din-
<br />ing restaurants, a diverse collection of local,
<br />regional, and national fashion and home fur-
<br />nishing retailers, some unique to the
<br />Cleveland market, and at least 2OD condomini-
<br />ums. The latter, not currently available in
<br />Lakewood, would attract and keep young pro-
<br />fessionals and empty nesters in the city. The
<br />report further states that the project's financial
<br />benefit would produce Stoo million in new
<br />investment that, in turn, would provide a
<br />much needed increase in tax revenue as ,,veil
<br />as spur new development.
<br /> Implementing the proie~:t required
<br />vacating and demolishing many of the neigh-
<br />borhoods' single-family houses and busi-
<br />ness establishments through the use of emi-
<br />nent domain, which the city attempted to
<br />use by dec aring the neighborhood blighted
<br />in order acquire land. Several West End
<br />neighborhood residents, however, were not
<br />willin§ to move. They challenged the city's
<br />definitions of blight and, therefore, the use
<br />of eminent domain.
<br /> ]-he word blight traditionally conjures up
<br />images of housing in a woeful state of disrepair,
<br />dangerous code violations, crime, litter-strewn
<br />
<br />streets, vermin, and a proliferation of vacant and
<br />abandoned structures. In Lakewood, however,
<br />Mayor Cain noted ihat the city uses the word
<br />blight in the statutory sense, where it is defined
<br />according to specific conditions and attributes.
<br />James Saleet, an opposing'resident, noted on
<br />6o Minutes that the city's definition of blight
<br />included houses that lack such amenities as
<br />three bedrooms, central air conditioning, and
<br />attached garages. Because most of the homes
<br />were built in the first half of the zoth century,
<br />the maiority of structures in the city would fall
<br />into this definition of blight.
<br />
<br /> The result of this dispute over definitions?
<br />A heated fight that pitted opposing residents
<br />against their city government. The city govern-
<br />ment maintained that redevelopment ,,vas nec-
<br />essary for Lakewood to remain an economically
<br />viable communib/. Some residents were happy
<br />to accept the above-market offer for their prop-
<br />erties, but a coalition of opposing residents
<br />challenged the city's definition of blight. They
<br />also questioned whether it ,,vas appropriate;to
<br />use eminent domain to seize property from an
<br />owner and give it to a developer for the sole pur-
<br />pose of increasing tax revenue.
<br />
<br /> Zoning Practice attempted to contact city
<br />planning officials, but they declined to comment
<br />because of pending litigation. Saleet and other
<br />residents are suing the city over the blight cdte-
<br />rio. The residents are receiving [egat assistance
<br />from the Institute of Justice, a libettarian public
<br />interest law firm. The lawsuit is pendin§ in the
<br />Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, but
<br />may be dropped if the new city administration
<br />rescinds the blight ordinance.
<br />
<br /> ZONING REPORTS
<br />E~PANDING HOUSING OPPORTUNITY
<br />IN WASHINGTON, DC.' THE CASE FOR
<br />INCLUSIONARY ZONING
<br />Radhika K. Fox and Kalima Rose, principal
<br />authors. PolicyLink. Fall 2oo3.5~ PP. Available
<br />online at ww,?/ po icyiinicorg/,odfs/OCIZ, pofi
<br />This is a ,`veil-argued report documenting the
<br />need for mandatory inclusionary zoning stan-
<br />dards to meet the need for affordable housing in
<br />the nation's capital, a notoriously high-cost
<br />housing market. It details the pros and cons of
<br />various regulatory devices and offers a series of
<br />eight specific recommendations for revising the
<br />district's zoning ordinance to achieve effective
<br />
<br />administration of the proposed requirements.
<br />Also ihduded are reviews of existing practices
<br />in other jurisdictions,
<br />
<br />SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS:
<br />PRACTICES & A'I-rlTUDES
<br />
<br />Eran Ben-Joseph. Lincoln Institute of Land
<br />
<br />Policy. 2003. 68 pp. Working Paper available
<br />online at http://web.mit, eda/ebj/www/
<br />LincolnWPpdfi
<br />
<br />Although this paper could have benefited
<br />from better editing, .it is full of good humeri-
<br />cai insights into prevailing practices and
<br />attitudes among both developers and plan-
<br />ners with regard to subdivision approvals,
<br />One of the most persistent thames through-
<br />out the working paper is the tendency for
<br />more affluent communities to impose
<br />stricter and more costly regulations on new
<br />subdivisions than is the case with middle-
<br />and lower-income communities, with the
<br />likely result of tilting housing costs upwards
<br />with exclusionary results.
<br />
<br />VOL, ~, NO.
<br />Zoning Practice (formerly ZOning fVews) is a monthly
<br />newsletter published by the American Planning
<br />Association. Subscriptions are available for $65 (U,$.) and
<br />$90 (~oreign). W. Paul Farmer, ALE?, Executive
<br />Director;William R. Klein, AICP, Director of Research.
<br />Zoning Proctrce (ISSN
<br />
<br />Schwab, ~ICP. aDd Michael Oavidson, Editors; 8ar~ gain,
<br />AICP Fay Oolnick osh Edwards, Sania¥ leer, AICP, Me,an
<br />Lewis, AIC8 Ma~a Morris, AICR Rebecca Retzlaff, AICP, Lyon
<br />M. Ross. Reporters; Ka~hleen qeirs~eld, Assistant Editor; Lisa
<br />Barton· Design and Productiom
<br />
<br />COl),!ri~hl ~E;2oo~ by American Plannin~ Association, ~22 S.
<br />Michigan Aw., Suile ~bou. Ci~icago. !L 6o0o3. [he American
<br />
<br />Ave., ~'J.W.,
<br />
<br />All righ{s res~e~td, i4~ part ol ~l~i: pu~lic.ation may be
<br />
<br />tronic or mechanicai, iododin~ pho[ocopving,
<br />
<br />~rJoted ,)n
<br />
<br />ZONING PRACTICE O:t.04
<br />AI~ERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION j pg~5
<br />
<br />
<br />
|