Agenda - 11-25-1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

8-7 INCENTIVE ZONING § 8.01[4] requirements, usually benefits the land owner or developer,since the • . value of the bonus equals or slightly exceeds the cost to the developer of supplying the public benefit-2°In contrast,a dedication may result • in economic loss to the developer by requiring him to provide various facilities as a condition to subdivision approval.21 [4]--The Density Bonus Through Increased FAR The most common example of incentive zoning is an increase in density22 in the form of bonus floor area,23 In return for providing See Ch.9 info for comprehensive discussion of builders'exactions. 20 See San Francisco Planning Code §122. Also,see Costonis, '".The.Chicago Plan;Incentive Zoning and the Preservation of Urban.Landmarks,"'85 Mary L Rev 574,576(1972).The author in discussing incentive zoning_plans notes than "Although these programs differ widely among themselves,they are all pre- wised upon a trade between the city and the developer.The city telexes its zoning bulk restrictions, thereby allowing the developer to build more profitably by - including more rentable floor area in his project than the prevailing zoning otherwise permits.In return the developer must either provide a public amenity, such as a plaza,at his own expense or make a cash payment that will enable the _ city to finance the purchase of a public improvement. "How does the city derive the additional floor area that it allocates to the developer?If the city seeks an amenity,it simply creates the floor area ex nihilo and bestows it upon the developer as a so-called'zoning bonus.'The amount of the bonus is calculated to equal or slightly to exceed in value the cost that the developer incurs in providing the amenity." (Footnotes omitted.) 21 Despite the possibility of economic loss,the theory behind judicial approval of subdivision dedication and fee exaction requirements is the belief that the subdivider actually realizes a profit from governmental approval of a subdivision because the• subdivision makes his land more valuable. It has therefore been held that the subdivider has the duty to comply with reasonable conditons for design,dedication, improvement and restrictive use of the land. Ayres v. City Council of the City of Los Angeles,34( ma 31, 207 P2d 1 (1949). 22 In Village of Euclid v.Ambler Realty Co.,272 US 365,47 S Ct 114,71 L Ed 303(1926),the United States Supreme Court upheld the authority of local govern- ments to promulgate zoning regulations on the theory that the concentration of population had increased,and would probably require further restrictions on the use of private property in urban areas. Today, "density" control in urban areas is becoming more important than the regulation of uses. See Mandelker,"The Basic • Philosophy of Zoning:Incentive or Restraint,"in The New Zoning 14, 19(Marcus &Groves,eels. Praeger Publishers, 1970).. A municipality's power to regulate density rests on a grant of such power from (zoning Law) • .sue