Laserfiche WebLink
has changed very little since Walker's survey <br />in the ~93os. <br /> The Iowa survey also looked at whether · <br />board members' occupations had a pro-devel- <br />opment slant. We assumed, for example, that <br />developers, realtors, architect-", construction <br />company employees, abstractors, appraisers,. <br />contractors, and construction engineers <br />would favor increased development because <br />of i~ direct impact on their occupations. <br />The survey found that these direct-influence <br />occupations accounted for 3o percent of the <br />zoning board.members. Other occupations, <br />such as motel operator., or hardware store <br />owners, could be said to be indirectly affected <br />by deve[opment. When those "indirect-bias" <br /> <br />Occupations Total ' ~,ooo. <br /> <br />Professional/Technical/ 75 ] 68 83 <br />Managerial <br /> <br />Clerical/Sales 6 6 5 8 to 3 <br />Se~ice 8 <br />Agricu[tu~l t <br /> <br />Labor/Processin~/ 7 ~o ~2 8 5 3 <br />Trades <br /> <br />Unemptoyed/ 3 7 3 3 o o <br />Housespouse ! .... <br /> <br />Type of Influence 8ZA Pg, Z Commissions <br /> <br />OIRECT <br />(architects, developers) 30 30 <br /> <br />INDIRECT <br />(motel owners, lumberyard owners) t6 · 2o <br /> <br />NO 81AS <br />(teachers, facto~ workers) 54 50 <br /> <br />occupations are taken into ~onsideration, <br />the percentage of board members with a pro- <br />development bias rises to about hail. The data <br />are set out in Table 3. <br /> While the data suggest that; oveiall, the <br />majority of zoning board members do not have <br />occupations directly affected by development, <br />some individual boards are dominated by <br />these interests, in West Des Moines, a city <br />faced with significant sprawl issues, the plan <br />and zoning commission included an architect, <br />a construction manager, the president of an <br />irrigation company, a developer, a landscape <br />architect, and an attorney. Only one member <br />of the board could be said to be without a <br />pro.development bias: a homemaker. In <br />some cases, however, homemakers may be <br />married to developers. Another city's planning <br />and zoning commission was stacked with <br />a rea[ estate agent, a developer, a banker,, and <br />a landscape contractor. Moreover, even on <br />boards with less than a majority of "biased" <br />members, those with direct interests may <br />have disproportionate influence on board <br />decisions. <br /> The Oregon Study. Most states place no <br />restrictions on who is appointed to zoning <br />boards. A few have minimal restrictions, such <br />as Iowa's law that says that the 'majority of <br />ptanning commissions may not be made up of <br />those engaged in buying' and selling real <br />estate. Oregon is known for its comprehensive <br />control of plannin§ at the state [eve[ and has <br />a more restrictive control on board appoint- <br />ments. First, in an effort to achieve be~ter occu- <br />pationa~ diversity, it prohibits more than two <br />members from any one kind of occupation. <br /> <br />82 ZONINGPRACTICE lo.os <br /> AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIAllOI'I I page 4 <br /> <br /> <br />