Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/01/2018

Home

'Pink Zones' The pink zone concept of reducing red tape (eliminating bureaucratic processes that hamper activity) is often applied in selected areas as a pilot or test case. While uncom- mon in high-pressure markets, it is common in !ow -demand communities. Detroit is pre. - paring new zoning that proposes to enhance development opportunity by getting at the low -hanging fruit along commercial corridors through tools like reducing parking require- ments and allowing more by -right uses, in exchange for changes to design standards such as streetscape improvements. See also the concept of a Relaxed Zon- ing Overlay, intended for declining cities, where an increased use list (such as add- ing urban agriculture and corner stores to an existing neighborhood) is intended to spark activity in the market (Zoning Practice, September zosi: planning.orgjmedia/docu- ment/9oo6924). Both ideas are intended to simplify zoning through the reduction of standards and the streamlining of processes. Unfortunately, if experience from other communities is any guide, once development takes off in a pink zone, it will be reined in once again by demands for higher standards, more conditional uses, and more cumber- some review. Also, as a pilot project, one can hope it impacts the entire community eventually, otherwise it is just another layer of complexity (albeit a useful one). GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR ZONING REFORM Here's our chance. Let's set some guiding principles for every new zoning effort. Start with a Policy Foundation Set the goals and vision in a plan. Alt too often, zoning projects are,asked to apply new fea- tures to an area without any policy guidance orsupport. Zoning is a tool (ortoolkit) that is applied to implement planning and vision. Without this base of support, it is all too easy to forget why we have the zoning rules. Zone Like We Mean It Zoning impacts the value of property in a way that planning seldom does. This means the exercise is more serious for property owners (orwould-beproperty owners) than any plan- ning project. Yet planners rarely attempt to explain the "why" of zoning. We simply use the same tools we see in other communities, snagged off the Internet and sometimes com- bined in ways that work at cross-purposes. We should always have a sound reason for every rule we impose. Where we cannot enforce a rule, we should not apply it. Consider the Golden Rule: • Try to think about the potentially impacted next -door neighbor. Are the trade-offs of some localized impact worth the outcome for the community as a whole? • Think about others in the community who might like an opportunity to develop something similar. Are they given an equal chance at enhancing the commu- nity through development, or are they locked out? Let's ensure equity is a part of the planning and zoning discussion. Match Regulations to Existing Patterns All too often, zoning ignores underlying patterns of platting or development. Many communities have applied suburban lot area minimums over the top of traditional urban development patterns, leading to widespread nonconformities and frequent variance requests. Where existing patterns are acceptable to the community (and not meant to be transformed to another pattern), let's right -size the development regulations to allow reconstruction and enhancement of these traditional patterns. Be More Flexible About Use Consolidate uses to the maximum feasible extent. There are a variety of tools for man- aging uses, including use standards for performance and scale. Let's not get caught up in naming and defining every use in the known universe to ensure we have placed it in the perfect location —the market is pretty good at that! And let's focus on the real impacts, not perceived ones. Often, the use is not the problem. A bail bond establish- ment is really just an office. However, it is frequently the amount and garishness of its signage, or the perception of its users, that leads us to severely limit its location options. Let's also consider existing impact mitigation tools. Your community likely already has rules for impacts such as noise, glare, and property maintenance, along with an existing code enforcement process outside of zoning thatcan be relied upon. We should try not to duplicate that in zoning. Be More Flexible About Housing Types Let's resurrect the historic development patterns that are so often beloved in our older communities. Let's learn not to fear mixing housing types in urban neighbor- hoods —small apartment buildings can live pleasantly alongside duplexes, fourplexes, and single-family homes in many neigh- borhoods. Let's return to providing those "missing middle" housing options the mar- ket is craving. Quit with the Studies Even after we have planned (and built infrastructure) for a certain Level of devel- opment, we often study it to death when a site is proposed to be developed. Once the comprehensive plan has established a general intensity for an area, and the com- munity has provided public facilities to serve it, why are we continually studying every development to determine whether it should move forward? Consider Simple Rules to Convert Suburban Form to Urban Do we really need as much suburban form as we have developed on the fringes of our communities? Is a mall really better than a shopping street? As the market begins to modify the patterns of development that we have established over the past 5o years, can we use simple rules ("build to" instead of setback, for example), to begin to convert our suburban forms into more urban settings? Try to Differentiate the Real from the Perceived When it comes to urban development, we so often deal with perceptions of how uses or development patterns impact our communities that we cannot have any meaningful discussion of alternatives. We panic when perceived problem uses are allowed near our homes, when we should be focusing on the elimination of any externalities associated with the use. The U.S. has a tendency to pour amber over its suburban single-family neighborhoods, ZONINGPRACTICE 148 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION (page