|
with up to $25 million in proceeds from sur-
<br />plus state property disposition, No payments
<br />are to be made before july z,
<br /> The third type of fiscal in[:entive require';
<br />that the Executive Office of Environmental
<br />Affairs, the Executive Office of Transportation,
<br />DHCD, and the Department of Administration
<br />and Finance use a discretionary fundint¢
<br />methodnlo,~ that favors municipalities h;:wing
<br />such districts or other policies that encoura§e
<br />affordable housing production,
<br /> Chapter 4oR provides for-a review
<br />process much like the Massachusetts Zoning
<br />Enabling Act's process for special permits, but
<br />with some important differences. Must impor-
<br />tantly, the statute sets a development review
<br />time frame of 1.2o days from the time the
<br />developer files an application to the time a
<br />decisiun is issued. AIthou§h this period may
<br />be extended by mutual agreement, it is less
<br />open-ended than the special permit process,
<br />where the time frame starts only after the
<br />he'ring is closed. Failure of the reviewing
<br />authority to act in time leads to constructive
<br />approval.
<br /> Chapter 4oR also limits the discretion of
<br /> a reviewing authority in the approval process.
<br /> An application may be denied only if:
<br />
<br /> · the project does not meet the conditions
<br /> and requirements set forth i~ the district
<br /> ordinance/bylaw;
<br />
<br /> · the applicant failed to submii:information
<br /> and fees required by the ordinance/bylaw
<br /> and necessary for an adequate and timely
<br /> review of the project design or its impacts;.or
<br />
<br /> · it is impossible to adequately mitigate sJg-
<br /> nificant adverse impacts on nearby proper-
<br /> ties by means of suitable conditions.
<br />
<br />ally included in the December issue of
<br />Zorn'rig News, has been transferred to
<br />the Zoning Practice web pages of the
<br />APA website. Go to 'Nww.rJlannin§.or§/
<br />zoningpractice/index, hun, and click on
<br />Annual Index to find this year's listings,
<br />a DOg with Cumulative and Subiect
<br />indexes that cover a~J issues of Zoning
<br />News (rom its inception in January t984.
<br />
<br /> In this respect, Chapter ~,oR's form of
<br />development review is closest to municipal
<br />site plan approval of by-right development,
<br />which does not encompas~ the outright denial
<br />of development applications except in those
<br />rare instances where it is im'poss[ble to condi-
<br />tiao a project to:mitigate its impacts~
<br /> Furthermore, ah application may be sub-
<br />ject only to conditions that are necessary to
<br />"ensure substantial compliance.., with the
<br />requirements of" the overlay district or ?to
<br />mitigate any extraordinary adverse impacts
<br />·.. on nearby properties."
<br /> The iudicial appeal process also
<br />departs in meanin§ful ways frum typical zon-
<br />ing appeals. An appeal must be perfected
<br />:and served as usual. But a plaintiff seeking
<br />to reverse the approval of a project under
<br />Chapter/+oR will be required to post a bond
<br />f. forfeited if the pla ntiff does not substan-
<br />tia[ly pievail) equal to twice the property
<br />owner's net carn/ing costs and attorney fees.
<br />A court must. affirm the reviewing authority's
<br />approval of a development project unless
<br />that authority abused its discretion under
<br />Chapter ~.oR. By contrast, in an appeal by
<br />the project applicant from a denial or condi-
<br />t anal approval, the ~'eviewing authority must
<br />justify its decision by substantial evidence
<br />in the record.
<br /> while this innovative and promising
<br /> statute has much to make it wa[thy of consid-
<br /> eration by developers and municipalities,
<br /> many issues cdtica( to its implementation are
<br /> already apparenb The most critical at this
<br /> early stage iS that the final version of Chapter
<br /> 4oR failed to include the task force's proposal
<br /> to commit, the commonwealth to cover any
<br /> increase in municipal education costs result-
<br /> ing from new public school students living in
<br /> the units created in the districts. This incen-
<br /> tive which the task force saw as critical
<br /> because it directly addresses a leading obsta~
<br /> cie to new residential deve{opment in many
<br /> municipal{ties, was watered down and finally
<br /> reduced, to a stud,/effort to be completed by
<br /> lu[y t, zoo6. F_ven with this and its other
<br /> imperfections, Chapter 4oR remains the most
<br /> signific~rit Statutory initiative to boost housin§
<br /> production in Massachusetts in more than 3o
<br /> years, Time will'tell if its promise will be ful-
<br /> filled.
<br /> Michael S. Giaimo and Matthew/. Lawlor ~re
<br /> both attorneys with Robinson & Cole LLP in
<br /> ~,:,L:[,~,/I
<br />
<br /> ZONING REPORTS'
<br />LOCALLY INITIATED INCLUSIONARY ZONING
<br />PROGRAMS: A GUIDE FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
<br />IN NORTH CAROLINA AND BEYOND
<br />Anita R. Brown-Graham, ed. Schoo~ of
<br />Government. The University of North Carolina
<br />~t Chapel N!fl, Chapel Hill, N.C. 88 pp.
<br />Available online at: http://ncinfo, iog. unc. edu/
<br />pubs/etectronicversions/pdfs/inczontoc, pdf.
<br />The Institute of Government at UN©Chapel Hill
<br />has been providing training to local govern-
<br />ments in North Carolina for more than 7o
<br />years. The evidence from this publication is
<br />that it is still alive and we[I and evolving to
<br />address current planning issues. The first half
<br />of this useful guide addresses policy issues
<br />connected with indusionary housin§ pro-
<br />grams; the second moves on in the legal
<br />aspects of local zoning and statutory authority
<br />to engage in such programs. The appendices.
<br />include a primer on the components of a good
<br />ordinance, links to existing ordinances, and
<br />research methodolo~/.
<br />
<br />VOL. 2~, NO. ~=
<br />Zoning Prnctice (formerly ~oning News) is a monthty
<br />publication of the American Plannit§ Association.
<br />Subscdgtions am available [or 565 (U.S,) and 590 (for-
<br />elan). W. Paul Farmer~cP, Executive Director; William
<br />Klein, ~[cP, Director o~ Research.
<br />
<br />Zoning Practice {ISSN [5~8-o135) is produced at APA. jim
<br />SchwaD, ~C~, and Michael Davidson, Editors; Bar~ Bain,
<br />~,cP. Fay Oolni~:K, lash Edwards, Megan Lewis, ~cP, Marya
<br />Mom~. ,,,~, Rr, becca Re[ziaff, ~cP, Lynn M, Ross, Sarah K.
<br />Wiebe~son, ~el)~)ne~s; Julie Vo~ Bergen, Assistant Editor;
<br />LiSa ~riUfl, Ou~i~ll dnd P~oduction.
<br />
<br />~:~,, ,,i~ ~lannin~ A~ada[io¢ also has u[flces at
<br />
<br />~ll n~hi5 ;es~r-~d. Hu par[ nf ~his puoiication may be i epm-
<br />
<br /> ':qn(ed ~)n recvded 2aPe[, ~nci~in~ ~o-7o% [ecvde~
<br />
<br />ZONING PRACTiCF. ~.2.o~.
<br />
<br />
<br />
|