Agenda - 10-12-1999 - 2 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

TWENTIETH CENTURY LAND USE PLANNING FIGURE 7. Map of permitted uses, Sanibel Source. • City of Sanibel 1981 design plan, because it shows where regulations apply, and boundaries are exact. The Contemporary - Hybrid Plan: Integrating Design, Policy, and Management The rationality of practice has integrated the use- ful parts of each of the separate prototypes reviewed here into contemporary. hybrid plans that not only map and classify land use in both specific and general ways, but also propose policies and management mea- sures. For example, Gresham, Oregon (1980) com- bined land use design (specifying residential, commercial, and industrial areas, and community facilities and public lands) with an overlay of land clas- sification districts (developed, developing, rural, and conservation), and also included standards and proce- dures for issuing development permits (i.e., a develop- ment code). Prepared with. considerable participation by citizens and interest grups, such plans usually re- flect animated political debates about the costs and benefits of land use alternatives. The states that manage growth have created new land use governance systems whose influence has broadened the conceptual arsenals of local planners. DeGrove (1992, 161) identifies the common elements of these systems: • consistency— intergovernmentally and internally (i.e., between plan and regulations) • concurrency— between infrastructure and new de- velopment • compactness —of new growth, to limit urban sprawl • affordability—of new housing • economic development, or "managing to grow" • sustainability-of natural systems DeGrove attributes the changes in planning under growth management systems to new hard -nosed con - cerns for measurable implementation and realistic funding mechanisms. For example, Florida local gov- ernments must adopt detailed capital improvement programs as part of their comprehensive plans, and substantial state grants may be withheld if their plans do not meet consistency and concurrenry requ. - ments. Another important influence on contemporary plans is the renewed attention to community design. The neotraditional and transit- oriented design move - ments have inspired a number of proposals for• mixed- use villages in land use plans (Calthorpe 1993; . Duany and Plater- Zyberk 1991). "A JoURML- sUMMHR 1995 377 T � FIGURE 7. Map of permitted uses, Sanibel Source. • City of Sanibel 1981 design plan, because it shows where regulations apply, and boundaries are exact. The Contemporary - Hybrid Plan: Integrating Design, Policy, and Management The rationality of practice has integrated the use- ful parts of each of the separate prototypes reviewed here into contemporary. hybrid plans that not only map and classify land use in both specific and general ways, but also propose policies and management mea- sures. For example, Gresham, Oregon (1980) com- bined land use design (specifying residential, commercial, and industrial areas, and community facilities and public lands) with an overlay of land clas- sification districts (developed, developing, rural, and conservation), and also included standards and proce- dures for issuing development permits (i.e., a develop- ment code). Prepared with. considerable participation by citizens and interest grups, such plans usually re- flect animated political debates about the costs and benefits of land use alternatives. The states that manage growth have created new land use governance systems whose influence has broadened the conceptual arsenals of local planners. DeGrove (1992, 161) identifies the common elements of these systems: • consistency— intergovernmentally and internally (i.e., between plan and regulations) • concurrency— between infrastructure and new de- velopment • compactness —of new growth, to limit urban sprawl • affordability—of new housing • economic development, or "managing to grow" • sustainability-of natural systems DeGrove attributes the changes in planning under growth management systems to new hard -nosed con - cerns for measurable implementation and realistic funding mechanisms. For example, Florida local gov- ernments must adopt detailed capital improvement programs as part of their comprehensive plans, and substantial state grants may be withheld if their plans do not meet consistency and concurrenry requ. - ments. Another important influence on contemporary plans is the renewed attention to community design. The neotraditional and transit- oriented design move - ments have inspired a number of proposals for• mixed- use villages in land use plans (Calthorpe 1993; . Duany and Plater- Zyberk 1991). "A JoURML- sUMMHR 1995 377