EPA-600/5-75-008
March 1975
Socioeconomic Environmental Studies Series
A Land Use Decision Methodology for
Environmental Control
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, O.C. 20460
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into five series. These five broad
categories were established to facilitate further development and appli-
cation of environmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping
was consciously planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum inter-
face in related fields. The five series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
This report has been assigned to the SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
series. This series includes research on environmental management,
economic analysis, ecological impacts, comprehensive planning and fore-
casting and analysis methodologies. Included are tools for determining
varying impacts of alternative policies, analyses of environmental plan-
ning techniques at the regional, state and local levels, and approaches
to measuring environmental quality perceptions, as well as analysis of
ecological and economic impacts of environmental protection measures.
Such topics as urban form, industrial mix, growth policies, control and
organizational structure are discussed in terms of optimal environmental
performance. These interdisciplinary studies and systems analyses are
presented in forms varying from quantitative relational analyses to manage-
ment and policy-oriented reports.
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the Office of Research and Development,
EPA, and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the
contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
Document is available to the public through the National Technical
Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22151.
-------
EPA-600/5-75-008
March 1975
A LAND USE DECISION METHODOLOGY
FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL
Kirk Wickersham
Roger P. Hansen
Albert G. Melcher
Grant No. R802423
Program Element 1HA098
ROAP NO. 21AKL TASK NO. 13
Dr. Martin J. Redding
Project Officer
Washington Environmental Research Center
Office of Research and Development
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Prepared for
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460
-------
ABSTRACT
This report to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes an
ecologically responsible land use decision-making system for local,
regional and, to an extent, state governments. It is referred to as
LUDMS. It is based on conclusions that local governments have not dealt
effectively with land use problems because traditional planning and land
use control devices are unecological, unresponsive and unsystematic.
The fundamental premise of LUDMS is that environmentally responsible
land use planning and control must be based on valid ecological infor-
mation combined with enlightened and informed public opinion. This
premise grows out of the philosophical conviction that Man and Nature
are not inherently incompatible but must become harmonious since Man
is a part of Nature.
LUDMS makes use of several basic concepts, including policy planning
(a process for combining public opinion with scientific and technical
information to create community policies); use of an interdisciplinary
team; public participation; an environmental resources inventory and
analysis; a staff which understands and can communicate about ecology;
legal devices for land use control; and positive community programs.
"Model" state and local codes are provided, although, because of the
diversity of requirements of various jurisdictions, the term "example"
might be more appropriate.
Throughout the report there runs a common philosophical concern: that
America needs a new land ethic if the quality of life is to be protected
and enhanced.
This report was submitted by the Rocky Mountain Center on Environment,
under the sponsorship of the Environmental Protection Agency. Work was
completed as of January 1975.
i!
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Abstract ii
List of Figures iv
Acknowledgments V
Sections
I Conclusions 1
II Recommendations 2
III Introduction: An Overview 3
IV Pol icy Planning 24
V Implementing the Policy Plan 44
VI References 76
VI I Appendices 87
A. Environmental Resource Inventory and Analysis 88
B. Model Land Use Code for Local Units of Government 111
C. Model State Land Use Code lU2
D. Testing the Proposed System 170
ill
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
No.
1. A Schematic Illustration of Pathways of Flow of Energy
and Matter through a Terrestrial Ecosystem. 18
2. The Planning and Implementation Process for Environmentally
Responsible "Land Use Decision-Making System. 21
3. Policy Planning Organizational Steps. 27
4. Policy Planning: Citizen Concerns and IDT Study Design. 34
5. Hierarchy of Value-Goal-Policy Relationships. 38
6. Policy Planning: Goals, Environmental Resource Inventory/
Ana Iys i s, PoIi c i es. 40
7. Alternative Futures and Policy Plan. 43
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The Rocky Mountain Center on Environment (ROMCOE), a private, non-profit
regional environmental service center headquartered in Denver, Colorado,
conducted this research project with its regular staff, specially hired
project staff, and outside consultants. Grateful appreciation is ex-
pressed to these people for their dedication, enthusiasm and hard work.
They are as follows.
ROMCOE Staff:
Roger P. Hansen, Executive Director to September 1973
Albert G. Melcher, Executive Director, September 1973-
January 1975
M. Buie Seawell, Director of Communications
Si grid Freese, Editor and Research Assistant
Dianne Kireilis, Office Manager
Gail Young, Secretary
Kathleen Hauther, Secretary
Special Project Staff:
Kirk Wickersham, Project Director, May 1973-May 1974
Gilbert Kruschwitz, Planner
Dennis Swain, Research Assistant
John Lansdowne, Legal Intern
Josephine Barnes, Robert Hi Her and James Monaghan,
Interns
Consultants:
Benjamin F. Carter, Partner, Crow Western Corporation
Dr. Richard Beidleman, Professor of Biology, Colorado College
Dr. Charles Howe, Department of Economics, University of Colorado
Alan Merson, University of Denver School of Law
Dr. Daniel Schler, Director, Regional and Urban Planning Program,
University of Colorado Denver Center
Darrel Smith, Urbicus, Inc.
Various ROMCOE Board Members provided review assistance and advice, and
gratitude is expressed to them.
Additional support for several of the research assistants was from a por-
tion of a grant for stipends for interns in environmental research from
the Rockefeller Foundation, New York City. The Rockefeller Foundation
-------
has not had any control over this project, nor is it involved in the
publication of the Report. We wish to thank the Rockefeller Foundation
for its assistance.
Finally, we thank the personnel of the Office of Research and Development,
especially Dr. Martin J. Redding, Project Officer, for their assistance
and cooperation.
Albert G. Melcher, P.E.
Executive Director
Rocky Mountain Center on Environment
VI
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
Present land use decision-making systems do. not utilize adequate infor-
mation on the biophysical and sociocultural environment in all decisions
at state, regional and local levels. Nor do they involve rigorously-
constructed relationships between planning and implementing plans.
There are a number of defects in land use planning and controls.
It is possible to integrate systematic, interdisciplinary environmental
analysis into land use planning and to develop a plan implementation
process which depends on and actually utilizes the interdisciplinary
analysis. The implementation controls can use either an improved
zoning-subdivision regulation approach or a permit system in lieu of
the more traditional devices. A Policy Plan would be the central focus
of the new system proposed in this research report.
-------
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATIONS
This research effort has resulted in a recommended generalized system of
planning and implementation of land use decision making. It could be
utilized by a political jurisdiction, with a development phase to adjust
it to the specific conditions of that jurisdiction.
It is recommended that the EPA and/or other Federal agencies consider
several courses of action for possible further use of this report, as
fol1ows:
(1) A "demonstration project" in a jurisdiction which may soon com-
mence a major planning effort, which has significant land use problems
or pressures and which has reasonable public acceptance of the need for
planning and controls.
(2) A series of regional citizen/official institutes or seminars to
disseminate the results of this research effort so that there could be
broader understanding of the key concepts (interdisciplinary analysis,
legal controls to utilize this analysis, etc.).
(3) A set of workbooks or guidebooks which could assist citizens and
officials in understanding findings of this report. These could be
generalized or could be developed for a specific state or region. The
latter approach would involve further research into the existing state
statutes, agency duties, and geopolitical character.
-------
SECTION I I I
INTRODUCTION: AN OVERVIEW
Ecologically irresponsible land use practice arising from gen-
erally ineffective land use control—aside from the "growth
ethic"—is the basic environmental problem facing America.
Land use patterns are the generators, the root causes, of the
environmental symptoms of polluted air, polluted waters, and
other problems to which we have given infinitely more atten-
tion.
Vast areas of the American landscape, including sparsely popu-
lated and seemingly environmentally virgin areas of the West
and Alaska, are under a state of siege from an army of diverse
forces. Triggering factors cannot be overstated: rapidity of
change, absence of adequate laws and institutions, a general
apathy and unawareness on the part of the public, and acceler-
ating population mobility. The Frontier Ethic—that every man
has a right to use his own property as he pleases—still per-
vades the American Dream. . . .
Land use is the most difficult of all environmental problems
even to approach, .let alone solve. It is guarded by the great,
bawling sacred cow called "private property"; land use planning
is an inflammatory phrase. . .and land use controls are still
considered by many to be some sort of Communist plot.*
A. THE PROBLEM
Now that ecologically irresponsible land use has become a national prob-
lem of crisis proportions, it is being attacked almost in desperation
with a curious diversity of weapons. Land use has become a popular con-
cern, a social phenomenon rivaling the environmental movement of the
early 1970's (to which it Is inextricably related) and the "energy
crisis." The Federal Government is considering its possible major entry
into the land use arena, and most state governments are groping with
* "A National Land Use Policy—Toward a New Land Ethic," Address to the
Twenty-Fourth Annual Institute on Oil and Gas Law and Taxation, by
Roger P. Hansen, Executive Director, Rocky Mountain Center on Environ-
ment (1973).
-------
legislation which relates land use and environmental quality.
In the meantime, local and regional governments, with a few notable
exceptions, are dealing with a few fragments of the problem, and at the
same time are concerned about potential state interference with the tra-
ditional roles of cities and counties. The facts are simply that inabil-
ity to deal effectively with land use problems has become a congenital
local government disease.
Despite attempts to alleviate problems through the use of traditional
planning and land use control devices, primarily zoning, the degradation
of the American landscape continues unabated: rivers of neon, forests of
billboards, suburban uglification, uncontrolled urban sprawl, and trailer
parks swelling at the gateways to most American cities. Effects of
present land use decisions have been described by a number of astute
observers in recent years. People such as Rachel Carson, Eugene Odom,
Louis Mumford, Christopher Tunnard and Boris Pushkarev, William H. Whyte,
Edmund K. Faltermayer, and others represent a broad spectrum of view-
points. The summation is a litany of poverty, social costs, urban decay,
high urban costs, loss of wildlife, adverse change in ecosystems and cli-
mate, loss of ecological stability, ugliness, loss of open space, pol-
luted air and water, human alienation, impoverished land and permanent
loss of land productivity, degradation of recreation qua I ity, and loss
of species.
Why haven't traditional planning and control devices such as zoning,
subdivision regulations, building codes, and urban renewal worked? The
major and most obvious reasons appear to be these:
1. Unecological. Traditional planning and land use controls rarely
incorporate the principles of the science of ecology. The first prin-
ciple of ecology, "everything affects everything else," has been ignored
with disastrous consequences. Housing, health, transportation, beauti-
fication, police protection and other community components have been
considered only as vertically arranged, unrelated compartments. The
interrelationships and interactions between the components of the environ-
ment have not been a major concern of planning. Geographically, politi-
cal jurisdictions do not coincide with ecological "districts" or charac-
teristics. Institutions are not organized on the basis of ecological
units (with the exception of river basin commissions or planning bodies).
Ecological and spatial thinking, in a holistic manner, is inadequate in
current planning.
2. Uncomprehensive. Planning has not been "comprehensive" in the true
sense of the word. It has been limited in scope; usually, physical
development factors and superficial social well-being factors comprise
the scope of planning concerns. Also, the knowledge base for sound and
truly comprehensive planning and decision making is inadequate; the earth
sciences, life sciences and social sciences in general and in regard to
specific areas have not always been able to provide the knowledge which
could or should be brought to bear on decisions. However, when this
-------
knowledge is available, it is usually not utilized in decisions.
3. Unsystematic. Planning is too often a series of unsystematized frag-
ments related to an immediate issue or crisis. Society tends to abdicate
major and long-range decisions In favor of short-range decisions; plan-
ning generally does not use a systematic approach to trace long-term
implications of today's decisions. The assessment of value conflicts,
"quality of life" indicators, intangible values, trade-offs, and inter-
active effects is inadequate, or often ignored. Planning generally does
not have systematic analytic procedures for deciding among alternatives,
with the consideration of the aforementioned factors. Public lands and
their management have been structured historically so that their role in
overall land use is not consistent with contemporary problems and needs.
Patterns of ownership, uses and lack of proper "multiple uses," manage-
ment consistent with environmental principles: these major defects are
found in public lands vis-a-vis a systematic land use decision system.
Public works decisions which are. actually land use decisions are not
considered as such; highways and water resources especially are outside
of the normal land use planning and decision systems.
4. Unresponsive. Planning and controls are usually not responsive to
the needs, desires, aspirations and goals of the community. Often, plan-
ning may not even seek the articulation of these factors. Planning and
land use control, implemented as they are by professional planners, plan-
ning commissions, mayors and city engineers, are often far removed from
the citizens of the community whose needs they are supposed to fulfill.
The public has little chance to participate in the planning decision-
making process since the basic mechanism for public involvement, the
public hearing, often takes place only after the decisions have already
been made.
5. UnIntel Iigible. Land use planning and control have been enveloped in
professional planning jargon, ponderous legalese, and bureaucratic double-
talk. Words and phrases like "systems matrix," "A-95 review," "701 plan-
ning," and other such terms are the language of an elite that is unintel-
ligible to intelligent laymen in the community for which the planners
supposedly work. Planning has fallen into the same trap as much art,
architecture and advertising: peer group esteem and recognition are
sometimes more important than service to society.
6. Unreliable. The traditional devices have proved themselves to be
unreliable time and time again—unreliable politically, unreliable tech-
nically, and unreliable legally. A decision to restrict building height
has shunted counciImen out of office, the shopping center turns out to be
in a flood plain, and the sign code is overruled by the supreme court.
It is little wonder that elected officials and citizens alike frequently
consider land use planning and control to be something they would be
better off without.
The reasons for the massive unreliability are simple even though some of
the solutions are extremely complex. First, planning is viewed solely
-------
and exclusively as a pol'ltieal process on which political reputations may
be made or lost. Second, there are relatively few mechanisms or even
personnel to collect and assemble the scientific and technical data
necessary to either support or abort a land use decision. Third, tradi-
tional control devices like zoning are frequently arbitrary, capricious,
and a "taking" of property unconstitutionally because they are not sup-
ported by facts about the use being controlled but are based on the "prec-
edent" of what happened in an entirely different situation. An ordinance
may be drafted by using an example from a remote city without any regard
to the local ecosystems, human community and forces of change.
7. Corruptible. When land use decisions are based neither on scientific
and technical data nor citizen desires, but instead on the whim of poli-
ticians, they are subject to continuing corruption as regards the well-
being of the public and the ecological community. Citizen suspicions
that money is being passed under the table are often justified. Develop-
ers with the most money or the most political clout often seem to get the
variance or the rezoning. Public cynicism about planning is understand-
able since planning has often become a chess game between officials and
developers or speculators, a game in which the third party—the public—
is not invited to play.
8- Inflexible. Even though variances, rezonings and other exceptions
are granted in some communities with relative ease, the zoning map, the
comprehensive plan, the building codes and other land use control mech-
anisms often become frozen 'in place at one point in time, offering only
one view of the future. Changing conditions—economic slumps, energy
crises, new technology, increased tax base—cannot be accommodated with-
out redoing the whole process which in turn becomes re-frozen. Little
updating is actually accomplished; systematic approaches for this are
generally lacking.
9. Unimplementable. Most plans, no matter how ambitious, expensive, or
time-consuming, wind up gathering dust in the county or city offices.
They have their own political, technical and legal built-in self-destruct
mechanisms because they do not firmly establish a direct flow of action
and legal process between the planning and the implementing. The public
does not come to their rescue because the public was never involved in
the first place. It is surprising in a way that after all these years
of planning without implementation, planning would still be a popular
crusade.
10. Unethical. The rationale for planning is still rooted in the growth
ethic and the community boosterism concept. Unimplemented plans are
shown in Chamber of Commerce brochures to lure new industry; and profes-
sional planners often sell their wares as growth agents and industrial
prospectors for the community. The ethic of the industrial society, fused
with the pioneer mentality, has pervaded the planning profession. The
view of the world and its organisms as something exclusively for the use
of man is reflected in planning. The very term "land use" has this impli-
cation. The public attitude—the land ethic—of America may well be the
6
-------
primary cause of the current degradation of the environment. Until the
planner is freed of the pressures of the growth ethic proponents, and
until the planner himself recognizes the holistic character of the
environment and its organisms, including man, land use decisions will
continue to produce ecological devastation.*
In the final context, to alter the trends in the land use of the past,
new systems of decisions must address each of the defects of the past.
Further, they must include the articulation of new policies, such as
those which are expressed in the National Environmental Policy Act.
These policies must be applicable to all levels of decision making.
Land use used to be viewed as a problem of limited concern.
Today we realize that land use issues Iie at the heart of
many of the most critical environmental decisions facing the
Nation, whether they be air quality implementation plans,
decisions on where to locate large-scale energy facilities,
policies for use in our public lands, how best to manage the
national parks and forests, seasonal home subdivisions in the
mountains and along the coasts, or problems of urban encroach-
ment on valuable natural areas. In short, land use has
developed as one of our most serious environmental problems.
There are a number of reasons for this worth mentioning.
First, land use issues are often very complex and often call
for value judgments related to acceptable degrees of develop-
ment and acceptable levels of mitigation of adverse impacts.
The effects of land use decisions are widespread throughout
the range of environmental concerns, including pollution,
crowding, loss of wildlife and natural cover, and nearly any
• other issue you can think of; in short, land use issues re-
quire an extraordinary degree of understanding of system
interrelationships and ecological balance.
Second, the job of institution-building for better land use
involves the difficult task of reforming an existing and com-
plicated structure of sometimes overlapping,often fragmented
decision-making processes. Developing EPA's air and water
pollution programs and other areas of environmental concern
was somewhat easier because there were fewer governmental
entities to deal with and less diffusion of institutional
commitment to those programs' goals. When we look at land
A detailed case study was conducted by the researchers on an actual
major industrial development. This included a flow chart of decisions
(and non-decisions) made by the industry, state, local officials and
others. It is not included in this report, but is available at the
Project Office and the research office (ROMCOE, 4260 East Evans Avenue,
Denver, Colorado 80222).
-------
use, however, we encounter an often mind-boggling array of
decision bodies, each with Its constituency, each with its
interests and requirements and regulations and sense of self-
preservation. That makes change harder to accomplish.
Finally, the kind of basic reform in our attitudes toward land
use which is required to meet the challenge of development and
preservation pressures In our country today necessitates a re-
examination of some of our most deep-seated values regarding
the private use of land and the public welfare. It is not
radical to undertake this reevaluatlon; indeed it is In the
American spirit to constantly question and reform and renew
our institutions to make them more responsive to changes in
public attitudes.*
B. AN ECOLOGICALLY RESPONSIBLE LAND USE DECISION-MAKING SYSTEM
This research project of the Rocky Mountain Center on Environment has a
basic objective of development of an integrated system of land use plan-
ning and plan implementation which thoroughly incorporates ecological
principles. It seeks to overcome the previously enumerated defects which
have led to ecologically irresponsible planning.
We recognize that many of the basic problems with making land use deci-
sions are probably Insoluble, although they can be mitigated. The
"growth ethic," for example, will not be eliminated by this proposed
system, but it can be mitigated by the recommended process of gathering
scientific data which establishes the concept that growth does have
ecological Iimits.
The most important aspects of LUDMS for the purposes of giving a broad
overview are: philosophical framework; policy planning; implementation;
and the relative roles of local, regional, state and Federal governments.
The heart of the entire system Is policy planning. Throughout this
report the terms "environment" and "environmental" must be understood to
include the social, cultural and economic components of the human popu-
lation as well as the biological and physical components which often are
singled out as "the environment."
The system described in this report will be referred to as the "land use
decision-making system" or "LUDMS." It has been systematized by several
means. First,'planning for land use is directly related to the plan
implementation; the second flows from and is structured by the first.
Second, in planning, three main groups of participants and the sequential
activities of each are systematically woven together. Third, imple-
* From "Foreword" by Russell E. Train, Administrator, Environmental \
Protection Agency, to "Land Use and Environmental Protection,"
Report to the Environmental Protection Agency by the National Youth
Advisory Board, 1974.
8
-------
mentation of plans, legal documents and the review of proposed land use
changes thoroughly incorporate environmental determinants. Fourth,
positive community action programs are developed as derivatives of the
three-group analytical process In planning.
There are many attempts in America to improve portions of the system.
These have created some additions to the present land use decision pro-
cess, such as local or state environmental impact statements. But the
writing of an impact statement does not mean that environmental informa-
tion will be woven into the process for decision making from beginning
to end. This latter is what LUDMS is intended to do.
The researchers conducted a limited test of the system in a workshop
simulation held at the Pueblo, Colorado, Council-of Governments in May,
1974. This is discussed in Appendix D.
1. Philosophical Framework
Tremendous pressures, originating from a variety of sources,
are producing through carelessness, ecological ignorance,
lack of awareness, and legal and institutional deficiencies
man-made environments which are neither sensitive to nor inte-
grated with the character and physical capability of natural
ecosystems or the human environment. Instead of "designing
with nature," man obliterates it.*.
If it is possible to express the overall thrust, of the proposed LUDMS, it
is this: environmentally responsible land use planning and control must
be based on valid ecological information combined with enlightened and
informed public opinion. This entire report is concerned with the mech-
anisms for achieving that objective.
It is a basic principle of environmental planning that Man and Nature can
live together harmoniously—that Man's activities can be planned as
though he were a part of Nature, which, in fact, he is. To achieve this
harmonious balance, Man's developments must be tempered to respond to
land capabilities and natural environmental constraints. The benefits
from such a practice will be as much social and economic as they will be
ecoIog i caI.
Attaining a harmonious relationship between Man and Nature is not merely
a biological or technological problem. It is basically a social and
psychological problem with several root causes In the social context:
(1) a prevailing social value system that has traditionally given prior-
ity to development and production over qualitative dimensions of living;
(2) a propensity to portray the "good life" in terms of annual increases
in the Gross National Product; (3) a proprietary attitude toward land and
all that It produces; (4) technological "progress" that is often Insensi-
tive to certain environmental imperatives; and (5) a massive ecological
* "A National Land Use Policy—Toward a New Land Ethic." . Address to the
Twenty-Fourth Annual Institue on Oil and Gas Law and Taxation, by Roger
P. Hansen, Exec. Director, Rocky Mountain Center on Environment (1973).
-------
ignorance which fragments, dissects and compartmentalizes without regard
to a basic ecological concept: everything affects everything else.
This concept, in scientific terms, is called "the principle of the holo-
coenotic environment." Holocoenotic comes from two Greek words: "holo,"
meaning whole, and "coenotic," meaning common. The principle, then,
means that the environment fs whole—a single entity—and everything is
in common. Everything is affecting, or being affected by, a variety of
other factors, organisms and processes.
There is a need for a decision-making process which utilizes basic eco-
logical concepts and which accounts for the chain of effects which will
occur over a period of time. As a corollary, the processes must recog-
nize that a "land use decision" involves much more than pure land use in
the traditional sense; it is, in truth, an ecosystems use decision. Dr.
Eugene Odum discusses the problem in terms of water quality:
Although the pond seems self-contained in terms of the bio-
logical components, its rate of metabolism and its relative '
stability over a period of years is very much determined by
the input of sun energy and especially by the rate of inflow
of water and materials from the watershed. A net inflow of
materials often occurs particularly when bodies of water are
small or outflow is restricted. When man increases soil
erosion or introduces quantities of organic material (sewage,
industrial wastes) at rates that cannot be assimilated, the
rapid accumulation of such materials may be destructive to
the system. The phrase cultural eutrophication (= cultural
enrichment) is becoming widely used to denote organic pollu-
tion resulting from man's activities. Therefore, it is the
whole drainage basin, not just the body of water, that must
be considered as the minimum ecosystem unit when it comes to
man's interests. The ecosystem unit for practical manage-
ment must then include for every square meter or acre of
water at least 20 times an area of terrestrial watershed.
The cause of and the solutions for water pollution are not
to be found by looking only into the water: it is usually
the bad management of the watershed that is destroying our
water resources. The entire drainage or catchment basiia must
be considered as the management unit.* (Emphasis added.)
Decisions involving land use and attendant ecological effects have tradi-
tionally been separated into unrelated compartments such as the land
itself (ownership and permitted type of development on each isolated
segment of land), water supply, runoff and flood control, air quality
control, fish and wildlife management, transportation, social and govern-
mental services, soil conservation, resource utilization and economics
(including subsidies), and so forth. The mentality which has viewed
ecosystems and processes in this fragmented, compartmentalized manner has
* Fundamentals of Ecology. Third Edition, by Eugene P. Odum, W. B.
Saunders and Company, Philadelphia, 1971. P. 420.
10
-------
also created institutions which further fragment. These include Federal,
state and local governmental agencies and private organizations. Their
existence constitutes a significant built-in resistance to the applica-
tion of any "ecosystems-use decision-making process." It leads to the
treatment of symptoms rather than causes; in the case of the lake, the
symptom which is usually treated is the water quality; the root cause,
land use decisions, is ignored. In a holistic land use decision-making
system, man must deal with the entire, interrelated, comprehensive system
of causes and effects, institutional and physical.
Thus LUDMS attempts to structure a land use decision-making system that
combines and balances human (citizen) desires, concerns and aspirations
for the future with reliable technical and scientific information about
the environment, natural and man-made. While this is not a "pure" eco-
logical approach, it comes much, much closer than traditional devices.
2. Basic LUDMS Concepts
While the overall LUDMS approach is referred to as "policy planning,"
with attendant implementation devices, it may be helpful to provide a
brief and simplified overview of major concepts and components of the
system that are discussed in detail in the following report: policy
planning and the "Policy Plan"; the Interdisciplinary Team; public parti-
cipation and the Citizen Advisory Committees; staffing; legal devices for
land use control; and positive community planning programs. None of
these concepts are brand new, but they have not previously been arranged
just this way in a land use decision-making system.
a. Pol icy Planning -
Policy planning involves a set of devices and institutional processes for
combining political considerations and scientific/technical information
about the human and non-human environment to establish and implement
environmentally responsible community goals. By "political" is meant
the expression of citizen concerns, goals and aspirations for their com-
munity and their individual lives; it is not to be construed in the often
negative context. In traditional planning and land use decision making,
decisions are based exclusively on human desires and human goals—whether
those of corrupt officials, insensitive politicians or democratically
organized citizen associations. In other words, land use and resource
management decisions are based primarily on a public opinion that is often
uninformed, insensitive to environmental needs, and ecologically ignorant.
LUDMS attempts to correct this situation not by eliminating the political
element, but by informing and supporting it with valid and reliable
scientific and technical data about the community or the region. The
product which results from the complex and continuing interaction between
concerned citizens, public officials, planning staff, and an interdisci-
plinary team of scientists and technicians is called the "Policy Plan."
It is a political and scientific statement of community goals and the
policies needed to carry them out.
11
-------
b. The Interdisciplinary Team—Scientific and Technical Data -
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) mandates that all agencies
of the Federal Government in preparing "environmental impact statements"
are to "utilize a systematic, interdisciplinary approach which will
insure the integrated use of the natural "and social sciences and the
environmental design arts." (Emphasis added.) Even though in most (but
not all) cases this is not required of local and regional planning
efforts, it is a procedure that must be followed if land use decisions
are to have any valid ecological and environmental basis. From a legal
standpoint, land use control devices (permit systems, zoning, subdivision
regulation, building codes, etc.) that are based on sound scientific and
technical data and not merely on "public opinion" will have a vastly
improved chance of being supported both by the community and by the
courts. LUDMS proposes that communities and regions hire or enlist as
volunteers individuals who are expert in various scientific and technical
disciplines, including but not limited to: geology, ecology, biology,
sociology, economics, law, architecture, landscape architecture, and
regional planning. The interactions of the members of the Interdisci-
plinary Team (IDT) between themselves and with elected officials and
citizens should result in a much more logical and defensible Policy Plan
than would otherwise occur. The fact that many smaller communities have
severe budgetary limitations for such a process does not alter the need
for scientific and technical information in planning and land use control.
c. The Environmental Resources Inventory and Analysis -
The major function of the IDT as proposed in LUDMS is to conduct a com-
munity-wide Environmental Resources .Inventory and Analysis (ERIA) which
will form the scientific and technical basis of the Policy Plan as well
as the legal implementation devices. The ERIA as proposed is not con-
fined to bird counts and a consideration of trees, grass and flowers.
Its major study components are biophysical (geology, soils, geomorphology,
plant ecology, animal ecology, climatology, air quality, etc.) and socio-
cultural (scenic resources, recreation resources, cultural and historic
resources, economic base, community facilities, etc.). To accomplish
the ERIA, the IDT would rely on both developed and existing data. As a
tool for policy planning, the ERIA is not to be construed as a project-
oriented "environmental impact statement," although possible "impacts"
of alternative futures for the community would be examined as part of
the process.
d. Public Participation—the CAC's -
"Public participation in the decision-making process at the earliest
possible stages of planning" has become a popular slogan with Federal and
state governmental agencies and with local planning commissions, among
many other public bodies. It is something everybody talks about but few
translate into action programs. The idea of utilizing Citizen Advisory
Committees (CAC's) to advise governmental functions is not new; there are
thousands of such committees scattered in all branches of government
12
-------
throughout the country. Citizen participation has been tried unsuccess-
fully by some agencies and officials, such as the Model Cities program.
Other agencies, such as the Corps of Engineers with its "fishbowl"
planning, have a strong commitment to citizen participation. The LUDMS
proposal of interweaving the CAC's, the IDT, the planning staff, and
the planning commission in one systematized process resulting in the
Policy Plan is a somewhat different concept. Whether or not it will
work will, of course, depend on a number of factors: organizational
ability of the leaders; quality and level of knowledge of participants;
managerial capability of the planning staff; receptivity of the planning
commission to "outside" opinion; sensitivity of elected officials to the
desires of citizens they represent; and other factors. LUDMS cannot
provide a formula for a model CAC. CAC's will be as diverse as the com-
munities which spawn them. But continual citizen involvement in the
process "from beginning to end" is Imperative If LUDMS is to succeed.
e. Staffing -
Enlisting a community staff of professional planners and assistants is
not a new idea either, In and of itself. Planning staffs—and consul-
tants—have been around for a long time. Frequently, they are so em-
broiled in zoning variances, building code enforcement and politicking
with members of the city administration that they never arrive at a plan
for the community. The critical staff component for LUDMS Is not just
more regional planners, architects, or landscape architects; it is the
need for staff members who can translate and communicate technical infor-
mation to the CAC's, the planning commission, and elected officials.
They could be journalists, sociologists, psychologists or lawyers as well
as representatives of traditional planning disciplines. For small com-
munities with tight budgets, it may be up to one extremely talented staff
member to do it all. The key ingredients for staff should be holistic
thinking and understanding of ecological principles.
*
6. Legal Devices for Land Use Control
Billions of dollars have been expended for local, regional and even
statewide planning in the United States—much of it through the "701"
program of the Housing Act of 1954—to no avail because the master or
comprehensive plans have never been implemented with tough and enforce-
able land use controls. It has been well documented that traditional
zoning simply has not worked. LUDMS proposes two alternative land use
control devices: (1) zoning and subdivision regulations which have been
adapted to the scientific and technical data developed by the IDT and
which are part of the legal codes and ordinances; and (2) a permit system
which analyzes all proposals for development to determine if they can or
cannot comply with the Policy Plan. Model local and state codes are con-
tained In the appendices to this report. In addition to these two basic
legal strategies, the report describes in detail other legal devices,
including easements, covenants, transfer of development rights, and power
of eminent domain. The major thrust of LUDMS in this area is: the Policy
13
-------
Plan can be implemented by a carefully conducted orchestra of legal de-
vices; it need not depend on only one or two instruments.
f. Positive Community Programs -
All land use regulation under the police power of the community or under
eminent domain (where just compensation is paid for a taking of property)
is considered oppressive, arbitrary, and capricious and inimical to the
free enterprise system. Even though LUDMS, if properly applied, can
greatly mitigate against arbitrariness in planning and control, it would
still be desirable to implement the Policy Plan with positive and even
voluntary community programs where possible. A wide range of such de-
vices Is considered in the report: outright purchases of open space;
greenbelting; acquisition of "development rights" retaining the fee in
the landowner; scenic and conservation easements; new towns; transfer of
development rights; buying and selling land for community benefits; and
new kinds of community development corporations. There are many other
possibilities which will vary from community to community. Capital im-
provement programs are also discussed as a means of implementing the
Pol icy Plan.
3. The Relative Roles of Local, Regional, State and Federal Government
It has already been pointed out that the Federal and state governments
have begun to exercise a much more active role in land use matters
because local governments have generally abdicated their-traditional
responsibilities. Nevertheless, LUDMS is proposed primarily as a land
use decision-making system for ~iooa1 government. For the purposes of
LUDMS, "local" Is defined as village, town, city,, county, or as a multi-
jurlsdictional region. The term "community" as used in the report refers
to any of the local jurisdictions defined above. While LUDMS could be
logically extended and adjusted to apply to a statewide Policy Plan, the
system proposed has "local" governmental entities primarily in mind.
Numerous books and articles have been written about the benefits—and
some of the drawbacks—of regional government. Such a treatise will not
be attempted here. It is logical to assume, however, that the fracturing
of America into thousands of townships, cities, counties and special
districts has resulted in governmental chaos, financial bankruptcy for
many communities, and environmental mayhem on a large scale. But while
everybody talks about "regionalism," comfortably ensconced local politi-
cians have successfully fought it off for a number of years. These are
probably the major reasons that the states and the Federal Government
are assuming stronger roles In land use.
Few can agree on the relative roles of various levels of government in
land use matters. The conservative approach favors keeping landfuse
planning and control at the lowest possible level of government, while the
liberal approach Is toward strong state and Federal control. Since local
14
-------
governments have generally been Ineffective in land use control efforts,
the real estate development industry appears to favor local control and
to be adamantly opposed to state and Federal interference. On the other
hand, some writers have observed that the liberal approach to land use
control will not work because state and Federal land use entities will be
even further from the people most affected and even more subject to cor-
ruption and undue Influence by vested development interests.
As an attempt at compromising the extreme positions on all sides of the
jurisdictional controversy, LUDMS proposes the following roles in land
use planning and control for Federal, state and local (as defined) govern-
ments. In brief:
Federal Role
— identify the "limiting factors" of growth and development on-a
national basis;
— estab I Ish minimum criteria and guidelines for land use planning
and land use regulation for state and local governments;
— establish guidelines for land use planning methodologies and
procedures;
— provide financial assistance and financial incentives to state
and local governments for planning and land use regulation;
— conduct a National Environmental Resources Inventory and
Analysis with data stored In regional data banks;
— establish emergency procedures to halt major developments that
may threaten an irretrievable loss of irreplaceable resources;
— develop programs and policies to encourage intra-state and
inter-state regional planning;
— identify areas of national environmental concern, including
but not Iimited to estuaries, coastal areas, rare and endangered
species habitat, national wilderness areas, and unique ecosystems;
and
— assist with planning and financing of new communities.
*
State Role
—develop statewide land use plans;
— identify and develop land use planning and control requirements
for matters of statewide concern, including but not limited to
estuaries, rare and endangered species habitat, unique ecosystems,
recreation and scenic resources, and major developments with more
than local impact;
— establish minimum criteria and guidelines for land use planning
and land use regulation for local government consistent with
Federal criteria and guidelines;
— provide financial assistance and financial incentive to regional
and local government for land use planning and regulation;
— conduct a statewide Environmental Resources Inventory and
Analysis and coordinate with national, sub-state regional, or
local Inventories; and
15
-------
— establish emergency procedures to halt major developments which
may threaten an irretrievable loss of irreplaceable resources
or which may threaten human life, health, or property.
LocaI Government
— develop community-wide or region-wide Policy Plans consistent
with minimal state and Federal requirements;
— identify and develop land use planning and control requirements
for matters of community or regional concern (see Federal and
state roles);
— conduct a community or regional Environmental Resources Inven-
tory and Analysis and maintain the information base for public
decisions and as a service to private parties in the community;
— develop legal procedures and community programs for implementing
the Pol icy Plan.
Obviously, local governments can recapture the initiative and control
much of their own destinies by developing and implementing programs and
legal requirements that go far beyond the minimal criteria and guide-
lines established by state and Federal entitles. However, unless those
state and Federal minimum performance standards are established, it is
extremely doubtful that local governments will do any more than follow,
the same old tradition of Inaction and ineffectiveness In land use
matters.
The type of planning and the use of the IDT recommended in LUDMS entails
a cost which may be higher than a county or a town may be able to afford
or may wish to pay. For this reason, a logical approach would be to
utilize regional planning districts, which would be-the same as the
"clearinghouse" districts In the Office of Management and Budget Circu-
lar A-95 process, as the basis for the IDT operation. Multi-county
funding would then be available for the IDT, and this aspect of the
planning would then be regional.
•
LUDMS could be used at the local level; there should be a regional mech-
anism for the roles described to deal with environmental matters and
impacts which transcend local jurisdictions and to serve as a balancing
mechanism where different local governments have competing goals. LUDMS
could be used at the regional level, with the majority of controls being
left in the local jurisdictions.
C. PRINCIPLES OF ECOLOGY
"Ecology" is derived from the Greek "oikos," meaning place to live or
habitat. Simply stated, ecology is the study of the interrelationships
of organisms to each other and to their environment.
16
-------
The science of ecology is vitally relctoJ to the making of environ-
mentally responsible and economically viable land use decisions. The
principles of ecology are practical tools for making better land use
decisions from a social, environmental and economic standpoint. It is
erroneous to believe that such decisions can be made by politicians and
public opinion alone. Most environmental laws, such as the Clean Air
Act, and most governmental agencies do not utilize ecological principles.
The existence of an Environmental Protection Agency or the writing of an
environmental impact statement does not mean that ecologically respon-
sible decisions will be made.
To focus definitively on the scientific meaning of the word:
(1) Ecology is the science that studies the dynamics of the ecosystems
of the landscape.
(2) Ecology is a discipline that studies the processes, interactions,
and dynamics of all living things with the chemical and physical features
of their surroundings and with each other, including the economic, social,
cultural, and psychological aspects peculiar to man.
(3) Ecology is an Integrative, Interdisciplinary study that must, by its
very nature, synthesize information and understanding from most, if not
all, other fields of learning—meteorology, geology, anthropology,
sociology, hydrology, economics, psychology, mathematics, physics, chem-
istry, political science, philosophy, religion, jurisprudence, to say
nothing of the many subdisciplInes.
(4) Ecology is also a viewpoint, a way of looking at the world holistic-
ally.
Because it is sometimes misconstrued, it is well to state what ecology is
not:
(1) Ecology is not environment.
(2) Ecology is not a living place.
(3) Ecology is not an emotional dislike of the industrial or technolog-
ical aspects of modern society.
t
The science of ecology's observations, experiments and analyses indicate
that there are definite principles which govern the dynamics of the
earth's systems. The intricate functioning of earth's ecosystems has
proceeded without man's assistance for perhaps three billion years under
the guidance of these principles. Different ecologists will have differ-
ent approaches, but there Is relatively uniform acceptance of basic prin-
ciples.
17
-------
Harvesters and
Manipulators
MINERAL
RESERVOIRS AND
INPUTS
ENERGY FLOW
Figure 1. A Schematic Illustration of Pathways of Flow of Energy and
Matter through a Terrestrial Ecosystem.
Source: Van Dyne, G. M., 1969. "Some Mathematical Models of Grassland
Ecosystems," P. 6, in R. L. Dix and R. G. Beidleman (ed.), "The Grass-
land Ecosystem: A Preliminary Synthesis." Range .Science Department
Science Series No. 2, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.
18
-------
The principles of ecology affect land use decisions, whether they are
recognized or not. The use of the principles of ecology in land use
management is essential, but it is not possible to study all relation-
ships and all ecosystem operations before decisions can be made. A
feasible and realistic approach is to examine critical areas and matters.
Some of these can be identified without study, although ecological in-
vestigations are usually needed to find out how a critical ecosystem
works and what should be done to maintain its stability and function.
Water-related ecosystems are generally critical areas anywhere, in any
major life zone. Streams, lakes, wetlands, aquifers and estuaries could
all be considered critical. Transitions between two ecosystems are
usually very important; these are "edges" or smaller ecosystems called
"ecotones." At these locations, life is usually more diverse, and each
ecosystem may be important to many forms of life. The shallow part of a
lake, where sunlight penetrates to the bottom and myriad life forms occur,
is very important to the life in the rest of the lake—the big fish. It
is important to many terrestrial creatures which feed in shallow waters.
The edge of a forest is as important to browsing animals as is the entire
forest.
Other critical areas may be related to fragility or stability. Geological
conditions of hi I I sides often are in delicate balance, and any slight
change of water, vegetation, or loading or cutting of the hillside may
cause a slide or movement. Some ecosystems are fragile because distur-
bance will lead to permanent change or recovery may be slow (decades or
centuries). These should be considered as critical in terms of the degree
of management or control. Some are critical because a slight chemical
change, such as chlorine in a river or pollutants in the air, may cause
the biota to change due to very sensitive limits or tolerances. Other
areas may relate to human values—scenery, history, neighborhood, recrea-
tion, commercial productivity—and should be managed as "critical" areas.
Dr. Eugene Odom has a persuasive and cogent comment on ecology and land
use:
When the human population of an area is small, poor land use
may affect only the people who are guilty of bad judgment.
As the population increases, however, everyone suffers when
land is improperly used, because everyone eventually pays for
rehabilitation or, as is now too often the case, everyone
suffers a permanent loss of resources. For example, if grass-
lands in regions of low rainfall are plowed up and planted to
wheat (poor land use), a "dust bowl" or temporary desert will
sooner or later be the result. Rehabilitation is expensive,
and all of us as taxpayers wilI have to pay. If the grass
cover is maintained and moderately grazed (good land use), no
dust bowl will be likely to develop. Likewise, if the lack of
local zoning restrictions allows houses and factories to be
built on flood plains (poor land use), then damage to such
investment is inevitable (or can be avoided only by expensive
flood control structures). If, on the other hand, flood plains
19
-------
are used for recreation, forestry, or agriculture (good land
uses), money Is added to, not subtracted from, tax dollars.
Land use Is thus everybody's business, and the application of
ecological principles to land-use planning is now undoubtedly
the most important application of environmental science.
So far, good land-use planning has come only after man has
first severely damaged a landscape. It is as Leopold has
said: Man does not seem to be able to understand a system
he did not build and, therefore, he seemingly must partially
destroy and rebuild before use limitations are understood.*
(Emphasis by Dr. Odum.)
D. THE PROPOSED SYSTEM
The proposed land use decision system—LUDMS—is presented as a gener-
alized method. It is a process. Rather than enumerate a number of frag-
ments of regulatory devices, policies, types of data, specific design
criteria or ecological zones, we have emphasized the systematized process
whereby a local government can establish these matters for its local
situation. Some parts will be discussed in greater detail than other
parts, however.
The major LUDMS concepts were briefly described in the previous section.
Fitting them together, interweaving them ensuring that the planning
phase and the implementing phase are correlated and unified, and develop-
ing a systematic sequence has been the research task. This system is
ideal and "universal," i.e., it was not built around any specific regional
or governmental structure. It will need some adaptation to existing laws
and organizations in applying it.
The basic structure of LUDMS is shown in Figure 2. It flows over time
from left to right. A critical activity is the adoption of the Policy
Plan (set of policies). Figure 2 does not show all the detailed steps
or linkages between the elements of the system. These will be described
in the simplified discussion in following sections of this report.
The reader is reminded that the primary purposes of the system are to:
(1) ensure that reliable environmental data is acquired and actually used
in all decisions on land use (which is the basic source of many environ-
mental problems); (2) to have such decisions understood and supported by
the public which Is affected, and (3) to have legal mechanisms, defen-
sible in cdurt, for controlling and implementing actions which affect the
human environment.
* Fundamentals of Ecology, Third Edition, b'y Eugene P. Odum, W. B.
Saunders and Company, Philadelphia, 1971. P. 420.
20
-------
o
H
O
Is)
D> en en
S.38
.t?-
C T 1
(0 O
in l_»
i— ~n — r~
O O 3 dl
O o. in s
Q» CD -f Ul
a -f a
— C 3
• -+• CL
in o" — »
-»• 3
ot tn
-*• ••
S>
^-
i v
o. m pk
3 -i m
0. 3 X
» — i/i
-i-
— o' g"
•O 1 O
T O
O >O
o g.—
— in N
-* O O
-t T 3
in
IS?
Q. -t. CT
t/> n — •
-t — o
01 01
-*. —
-t. in
(I) 3
1|
O.
(fl
0
•o
3
21
Organization \
\
Concerns \
Goals
Policies
Planning \
Organization \
Adopt
Goals
Alternative
Futures _____
Reconnaissance
Study Design Implications of
Alternative
Early Warning Futures
Report
Data Base and
Land Use Suitability
-f I/I 3 »
/ Deve 1 op
/ Positive
/ Programs'
' from
3 Po 1 1 cy
o Plan
>
to
Implement
Programs"
Oea 1 1 ng In
Real Estate
Institutional
Changes
On-going Citizen Participation
c re
' 1 3
MAJOR
PARTICIPANT
GROUPS
PLANNING
\ N. Public Official/ Staff responsibilities
f \
o \
~** \
o
5 Technical and
30 Legal Refinement
g of Policy Plan
Prooosa 1 s-
Impact Statement,
Review,
Aooroval/
Disapproval
(Periodic major or minor '
41
rep tanning)
IMPLEMENTATION
Note: Only major steps are shown In this figure. Links between steps
are not shown here, but are described In text and other figures.
Figure 2. The Planning and Implementation Process for Environmentally Responsible "Land Use Decision-Making System."
-------
The research on LUDMS was not Intended to cover three major categories
of subject matter on land use. A complete enumeration of all Federal
laws and programs relating to land use and the environment was not
developed. Some of these are sources of funds for planning and programs.
Some could be the basic framework for comprehensive planning, such as the
1972 Amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act; Others could
be integrated (as in a transportation-1 and use study) or woven in, as
would be possible in transportation planning requirements under "Action.
Plans" conducted In accordance with Federal Highway Administration Policy
and Procedure Memorandum 90-4.
Another type of subject matter not covered in this report is energy and
materials use. This would include recycling, conservation, renewable
energy sources, pollution control technology and transportation tech-
nology. Chemicals such as herbicides and pesticides which have become
a factor in American land use (and abuse) would be in this category.
Recycling of sewage nutrients in land treatment would also be included.
True environmental quality—man in harmonious balance with his total
environment—must include vigorous progress in this matter.
This report does not devote attention to urban design and the shaping of
urban form. Urban design is the creative process of arranging physical
form, space and human activity. Its purpose is to provide functional
arrangements, aesthetic quality, appropriate social contact, and respon-
sible use of environmental constraints and opportunities. It is people,
activity, transportation, and physical features in a four-dimensional
context. It is more than a two-dimensional plan or map. It may be in-
tensely urban such as a neighborhood, business district or industrial
zone. It can also be rural: a mountain home subdivision, a rural road-
side business area, a recreational facility or complex, a mountain park.
Urban design is essential in maintaining environmental quality, and is an
in gral part of this system. It involves both inventory and analysis,
and is most heavily involved In the development of criteria and guidance
in decision implementation. It is often a forlorn and forgotten art in
land use, but indeed epitomizes the problem of various disciplines work-
ing together: here, in Implementing decisions, the hydrologlst, clima-
tologist, ecologist, engineer, planner, architect and others must inte-
grate and meld their concerns to create a new environment, hopefully
harmonious with nature and enhancing the many human experiences which
will occur in the new environment for decades to come.
Urban design should offer a new way of thinking about some of the basic
problems of man and his finite resources. Time is growing short for
society to redirect its efforts toward a new- pattern of resource consump-
tion, toward a sustainable relationship with Its environment. What is
the role of an individual community in this effort? Does each community
have a responsibility to recycle materials, to conserve energy and use j
renewable energy instead of non-renewable energy? Can communities be
created which are not heavily dependent on the car? Can higher densi-
22
-------
ties actually improve the chances for better social relationships as
well as leading to energy conservation? Can pollution be avoided rather
than merely controlled?
There is strong evidence that these questions must be answered, not
merely by the nation, but by each individual and each community, and
they must be answered soon. The members of the interdisciplinary team,
the citizens and officials can all be involved in a creative process
regarding their community. Each town and region should seek to develop
as a community bf the future. The nation at present is living with the
built-in determinants of the past. Some of these go back to Colonial
days in the location and design of towns. Each decision today will
shape a future that others must live with, perhaps for centuries. Can
that future be predicated on the finiteness of man's resources, on the
limited ability of ecosystems to sustain impacts? The urban design
process should strive for great creativity in this respect.
23
-------
SECTION IV
POLICY PLANNING
LUDMS involves the development of a Policy Plan which represents the
culmination of the planning phase and at the same time constitutes the
basis of Implementation in legal and action mechanisms.
A. TERMINOLOGY
The following terms are used in the LUDMS policy planning phase. Some
are redefinitions, based on an ecological thought process, of terms tra-
ditional ly used in planning. "Community" Is an example: the researchers
recommend that such terms be thought of in the framework of man as an
organism in a biophysical environment.
Glossary of Terms
Community - Setting within which an individual interacts and where
the basic and most significant direct and indirect factors which
affect hi.s life are centered.
HoJIstic - Total, comprehensive, interrelated, including all compo-
nents of the system which comprises the human environment.
Planning Commission - Established regional or local governmental
body, or if none exists, the elected governing body of the local
jurisdiction.
Interd i sc ? pI I nary Team (IDT) - Team of specialists from various
scientific and technical disciplines who do environmental resources
inventory and analysis.
Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) - Appointed or voluntary group
which assists in defining community goals and creating the policy
plan.
Pol icy Plan - Written statement of environmental (biophysical,
social, economic) and governmental considerations which will guide
the future of the community.
Community Concern - Statement of a problem, or need, perceived by a
participant in the planning process as relating to the community.
24
-------
Goal - Restatement of community concern in a positive way as an
expression of citizen desire for the community's future, or as
a solution to existing problems.
Study Design - Detailed outline of what will be studied by the
IDT, and how the study will be conducted.
Imposed Policies and Standards - Policies established in Federal
or state laws which must be taken into consideration in the
community planning process.
Early Warning Report - Identification by the IDT of problems,
factors or areas of most significance which should receive major
attention.
Trade-off - Satisfaction of one goal at the total or partial
expense of another.
Alternative Futures - Potential outcomes of adoption of each of
several sets of policies; scenarios which describe what a com-
munity could be like in the future.
Pol icy - Specific statement of the kind of actions which will
lead to attainment of community goals.
Find ing - A subdivision of an adopted policy which states that
a proposed land development activity does or does not implement
a particular policy.
Standard - A technical measure, yardstick, or gauge against which
performance is quantified.
Technical Review.- Process of determining if standards have been
met.
Impact Statement - Evidence submitted with a development proposal
outlining the possible environmental effects.
Information Overlay Map - A base map with one or more clear over-
lays for each environmental component.
B. SYSTEMATIC STEPS IN POLICY PLANNING
The development of the Policy Plan involves three basic groups of people:
(1) elected and appointed public officials and staff, including the plan-
ning commission; (2) an interdisciplinary team (IDT); and (3)
Citizens Advisory Committees (CAC's). The public officials will include
those who are politically and legally responsible. In the entire LUDMS
system, the emphasis will be on a "Planning Commission" as the focus of
activities. Their ultimate powers are limited, and the officials to
whom they report (County Commission, Mayor/Council, etc.) are to be
25
-------
directly involved in LUDMS. This involvement in general is where formal
adoption/decisions must be made and where information and "constituent
and accountability" linkages are important. A harmonious interaction
and working relationship between the three groups of actors is essential.
The following is a brief summary of the proposed steps in.policy planning
which are detailed in this section. The numbers here do not refer to a
sequence, but rather to a task. In sequence, several tasks may occur
concurrently and may be interrelated.
1. Develop a Staff.
2. Organize the Citizens' Advisory Committees.
3. Establish an Interdisciplinary Team (IDT).
4. Review Existing Data.
5. Hold First Meeting(s) of the Citizens' Advisory Committee(s).
6. Analyze Existing Land Use Decision-Making System.
7. Identify Community Concerns.
8. Relate Community Concerns to the IDT Study Design.
9. Hold IDT Organizational Meeting and Field Reconnaissance.
10. Integrate the CAC's and the IDT.
11. Finalize the Study Design.
12. Review the Study Design.
13. Adopt the Study Design and Commence Environmental Resources
Inventory and Analysis.
14. Set Community Goals.
15. Prepare IDT "Early Warning" Report.
16. Integrate and Refine Community Goals.
17. Rank the Goals.
18. Report on Environmental Resource Inventory and Analysis.
19. Adopt Community Goals.
20. State Policies Needed to Achieve Goals.
21. Conduct a CAC Review of Policies.
22. Describe Alternative Futures for the Community.
23. Study Impacts of Alternatives.
24. Review the Alternative Policy Plans.
25. Adopt the Policy Plan.
These steps are described in greater detail as follows. Figures 3, 4, 6
and 7 show how they are linked and related in sequence.
1. Develop a Staff. The first action of the planning commission is to
hire a planning staff if they do not already have .one. The size of the
planning staff will vary considerably, depending upon the population of
the jurisdiction, the budget of the planning commission, and the type
and amount of development pressure which it ts experiencing. Ideally,
a planning staff would include individuals with education and experience
in a range of specialties, including physical, sciences, biological ,
sciences, engineering, economics, regional planning, sociology, urban
design, and communications arts. Too often, traditional staffing has not
included the ecological or biological competence needed for environmental
responsibiIity.
26
-------
INTERDISCIPLINARY
TEAM
PUBLIC OFFICIALS
AND STAFF
CITIZENS'ADVISORY
COMMITTEE(S)
Step 1.
Develop Staff
,Step 3.
Step 4.
Step 4.
Ex IstIng
Data
Step 5.
Initial CAC
Meetings
Step 2.
Organ
CAC's
<
Step 3.
Estab
IDT
'ze
f
Ish
Step 2.
Step 5.
Figure 3. Policy Planning Organizational Steps
27
-------
Members of the staff engaged in the policy planning process should not
be required to undertake detailed technical studies in specialized areas;
this is the Job of the Interdisciplinary Team. The staff would, however,
be required to understand the technical Information, know how to inte-
grate component information, and be able to translate and communicate
information in a form useful to the Planning Commission and members of
the Citizens' Advisory Committee. Thus the staff need not be expert in
economics or ecology, although they must understand how an economist or
an ecologist perceives and analyzes the community. The staff must also
help in stating legal phraseology about the environmental characteristics
described by technical specialists.
Staff members should be good communicators. A staff journalist would be
a great asset. If there is one most critical element to the development
of a Policy Plan, it is the intercommunication between those developing
data and technical information and those articulating the concerns and
goals of the community. This Intercommunication is a prime responsibility
of the staff. The staff must be responsible for taking the expressions
of the Citizens' Advisory Committees, the technical information of the
Interdisciplinary Team, and the interactions between them, and stating
them so that they can be used by those who are actually making decisions:
the members of the Planning Commission and the elected public officials.
Once the staff has been hired, their first task will be to collect tech-
nical data and information which already exists about the community, In-
cluding Federal and state requirements and programs. If the community
already has a comprehensive plan, whether it has been adopted or not, it
probably contains most of this information. However, updating may be
necessary because many communities with plans developed under the "701"
planning process of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
do not reflect new laws such as the Clean Air Act and the 1972 Amendments
to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA).
It must be recognized that many villages, municipalities and counties
with small populations and negligible tax base cannot afford to hire a
staff planner without state or Federal financial assistance. In such
cases, state and Federal funding would have to be solicited either for a
staff planner(s) or, as an alternative, a consultant from a college,
university or private consulting firm. Also, small planning staffs in
smaller communities may wish to strengthen their staff capability by
using temporary staff and/or consultants during the policy planning pro-
cess. It is extremely doubtful If volunteers could perform in this
capacity. Professional assistance of some kind is an imperative. This
"smalI-community" financial problem, along with required processes such
as the A-95 Clearinghouse function, constitutes a strong case for the
establishment of a planning region, a regional commission with the staff
described herein, and the use of the IDT at the regional commission
I eve I.
2. Organize the Citizens1 Advisory Committees. Any community planning
program which has been funded in part through a grant from the Federal
28
-------
Department of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to Section 701 of
the Federal Housing Act of 1954 is required to set up Citizens' Advisory
Committees as part of Its planning program. In many cases, the Citizens'
Advisory Committees are established only to fulfill the requirements of
the Federal grant; they often do little more than ratify the work of
professional planners and planning commissions, or HUD may consider a
planning commission to comprise full citizen participation. Increasing-
ly, Federal legislation (e.g., the FWPCA '72 Amendments, Executive Order
11514, and Federal Highway Administration Policy and Procedure Memoran-
dum 90-4 (the "Highway Action Plan")) requires public participation. In
the LUDMS policy planning process, Citizens' Advisory Committees have a
vital, integrated role from beginning to end. Thus how they are consti-
tuted and "administered" Is of critical importance.
a. Define the jurisdiction of the CAC's. A CAC should be established
for each "neighborhood" in a larger community, or for each small commu-
nity in a region. Thus, before any CAC's can be established, neighbor-
"hood boundaries should be identified on a map of the community.
A neighborhood can be characterized as a small geographic area with one
or more overriding homogeneous elements. An element can be almost any-
thing which produces a common experience for the people who live within
the area. It can be a social factor (such as a general condition of
affluence or poverty, or common ethnic background), an economic factor
(such as a common employment base), or an environmental factor (a unique
or discrete ecosystem such as a mountain valley or watershed, or, in an
urban area, the identification of a neighborhood by a prominent landmark
or park). Richard N. Goodwin, writing in the January 28, 1974 New Yorker
magazine, describes some of the elements of the concept of neighborhood:
It must exist within an area that can be comprehended by the
census—a place whose roads and shops, landmarks and physical
hazards, each inhabitant can know. It can be part of a much
larger whole, as older city neighborhoods were, but it must
nevertheless be distinguishable to its inhabitants. All the
material benefits of a community derived from this physical
base. . . .
Community Is a corner of society In which the Individual can
feel some confidence of acceptance on fairly honest terms and
can maintain a continuing association with others, whose
familiarity is comforting. . . .It relieves us of the need
continually to prove our worth or to seek reassurance of that
worth. It diminishes the destructive social process of judging
and being judged, which cripples our capacity for thinking and
not acting freely and with honesty. Members of a community
may not be friends, but they are not strangers.
The relationships of community also provide that sense of
shared purpose and shared concerns which is elemental to the
29
-------
concept of society itself. All the other components—culture,
language, ideology, economic process, political structure—
have crystallized around this nucleus.
b. Appoint the Citizens1 Advisory Committees. Once the boundaries of
each neighborhood or CAC community have been established, the next step
is to appoint the Citizens' Advisory Committee(s). While there is no
magic formula, several approaches can be suggested. A first step might
be to contact influential community leaders—those people who are widely
known and who have successfully completed community service projects in
the past. Another step might be to conduct a campaign in the media—
radio, television, and the newspapers—which contains the same informa-
tion and appeal. Yet another might be to retain a consulting firm of
community organization specialists.
3. Establish an Interdisciplinary Team (IDT). The purpose of the IDT
is to provide reliable scientific and technical data for the policy
planning process. Each member of the IDT should be familiar with com-
munity conditions in the region as they relate to his or her area of
expertise. It is desirable to use professionals who have considerable
experience in the ecosystems, economic factors, social conditions and
values of a region.
The IDT member should be capable of relating well with other disciplines.
An analysis of the interaction of environmental components is accom-
plished primarily through a structure interaction between members of the
IDT.
The IDT members will not be going through an academic exercise; their
purpose is to provide information upon which to base veal land use
decisions in a veal community. It is their responsibility to ensure
that the information and analysis which they develop will be useful and
legally defensible in decision making. They should be capable of
explaining to citizens and officials what they are doing and why it is
relevant. They should plan for a considerable amount of field work over
several seasons.
Ideally, the IDT would include professional specialists capable of deal-
ing with each component. At a minimum it would include the following:
a. Physical Sciences
— environmental geologist for bedrock geology, soils, geomorphology
— climatologist for environmental- aspects of climate, air pollution
measurement and model ing
— hydro fogist for surface and subsurface hydrology, including water
quality.
30
-------
b. Biological Sciences
— plant ecologist for vegetation
— animal ecologist for large mammals, small mammals and birds
— aquatic biologist (Iimnoiogist) for aquatic ecosystems; if
both fresh and oceanic systems exist, a Iimnoiogist and a
marine biologist may be needed.
c. Human Systems
— regional planner
— sociologist
— economist
— architect
— landscape architect
— recreation specialist
— lawyer, familiar with environmental and land use law.
Additional team members may include:
— civil engineer (urban infrastructure and utilities)
— acoustical engineer
— public health specialist
— demographer
— archeologlst
— historian
— agronomist
4. Review Existing Data. By the time the IDT has been enlisted and the
Citizens' Advisory Committees are in the process of organization, the
existing data about .the community should have been assembled by the
staff. Since it has been generated by many different agencies for many
different purposes and at different points in time, the staff should
condense it and make it available to the IDT. Also, the staff should
prepare data presentations for the planning commission and the Citizens'
Advisory Committees.
It Is important to attempt to determine the reliability and completeness
of the existing data. The staff and the IDT should review the various
reports and maps available and, based on their familiarity with the com-
munity, should estimate the additional information which will be neces-
sary to do a thorough inventory and analysis. A critical point is how
much field investigation has been done and under what circumstances. If
good hydrologic studies have been done by the U.S. Geological Survey,
for example, this work need not be repeated by the IDT. Information on
remote sensing, air and water quality studies, and similar factors should
be assembled. Particular attention should be paid to the various require-
ments placed on the community by Federal and state laws, regulations, and
conditions placed on matching grants.
31
-------
The staff, IDT and CAC's, early in the process, should seek to identify
outside forces or pressures. Too many communities seem to be unaware
that their ocean front is a potential marina, that their coal may be
strippable, that their hills may be skiable. The information should be
developed into a presentation to a Citizens' Advisory Committee. The
presentation could take several forms, such as "fact sheets," audio-
visuals, maps or other communicative devices. These have an important
function in the process of articulating community concerns and committee
goals by the Citizens' Advisory Committees: they serve as a common bond
and common starting point for every person who participates in the Citi-
zens' Advisory Committee process. Throughout the policy planning pro-
cess, the staff should be developing materials and information which are
used in each Citizens' Advisory Committee meeting.
5. Hold First Meetinq(s) of the Citizens' Advisory Committee(s). The
purposes should be: to give the participants a chance to get to know
each other; to begin consideration of the geographical dimensions of
their community; and to gain an understanding of the planning process
and the social, environmental and economic importance of the development
of a policy plan and technical information.
A member of the staff should be assigned the task of assisting the CAC.
Fact sheets, slide shows, and maps of the community could be used in
presentations.
The first meeting could have a discussion of the relevance of local
government jurisdictions to the geographical pattern of the daily acti-
vities of the participants relative to the goal which considers the
interrelationships of human and natural phenomena in the area. Parti-
cipants could be asked whether any changes should be made in the bound-
aries of the CAC neighborhood. The staff and commission could adjust
any boundaries.
6. Analyze Existing Land Use Decision-Making System. Before the next
CAC meeting, the staff should develop an analysis of the existing land
use decision-making system and its basis. Is there a zoning ordinance,
and are "uses by right" subject to any review for environmental impacts?
Are there other land use regulations? Is there a capital improvements
program, and does it provide for mass transit, parkland acquisition, or
neighborhood facilities? What is the status of resource development in
the region, of air and water quality controls? What is required before
land can be rezoned?
7. Identify Community Concerns. It is.critical that participants in
the CAC's analyze their concerns about land use as it pertains to their
dairy lives. The concerns of ail the participants must be articulated
and the land use implications pinpointed. Participants should examine
the present land use decision-making system and analyze its adequacy for
resolving the land use implications of their concerns. Indeed, this is
a "concern" itself, and the ultimate addressing of this concern is a
major purpose of the process.
32
-------
These initial concerns about land use, community problems and develop-
ment, the economy and the environment are the basis for evolution of
official policies later in the planning process; hence, it must be
emphasized that these are incipient legal actions. The foundations are
being laid here for controls and actions in implementing plans.
8. Relate Community Concerns to the IDT Study Design. Community con-
cerns, and their perceived implications for land use decisions, should
influence the design of the study undertaken by the IDT. To expedite
this process, the staff should develop an integrated statement of com-
munity concerns. This is an interpretive process: to some extent, each
CAC will have developed its own view of the factors and the interrela-
tionships which are at work in the community. The staff should develop
an overview which aggregates these different perceptions on behalf of
the entire community. To the extent possible, the community concerns
should be expressed as root causes rather than symptoms. The implica-
tions for the IDT should be identified.
9. Hold IDT Organizational Meeting and__Fi_e_ld_ Reconnaissance. A vitaI
step in the organization of a good interdisciplinary study is the
initial team meeting and field reconnaissance. The project manager
should assemble the entire team for, at a minimum, a two-day work ses-
sion. Arrangements should be made for an aerial and ground tour of the
geographic area to be studied. Members of the CAC should be present
and should participate. The purposes of the meeting are to:
— discuss study objectives and end products
— discuss proposed analytical approaches, including the analysis of
interactions
— determine general scheduling
— review community concerns
— provide for additional team members, if needed
— analyze the geographic areas of study, the different study approaches,
and the level of detail
— discuss logistics, graphics, and administrative matters.
Following the meeting, each investigator on the IDT should independently
develop a component study design. The component study design should
include:
— a statement of objectives
— .methods of study
— personnel and equipment needed
— schedules
— logistics
— budget
The component study designs must be integrated into a single total study
design by the staff and the IDT project manager.
33
-------
INTERDISC!
TEAM
PL INARY
PUBLIC OFFICIALS
AND STAFF
CITIZENS' ADV
COMMITTEE(S)
SORY
1
Step 9.
Field
Reconnaissance
Step 11.
Finalize the
Study Design
Step 6.
Existing
Dec i s i on
System
Step 7.
Community
Concerns
Step 8.
Relate Concerns
to Prospective
IDT Study
Step 10.
Interrelate
Citizen Parti-
cipation and
IDT Study
Step 10.
Step 12.
Review the
Study Design
Step 12.
Step 13.
Adopt
Study Design
Figure 4. Policy Planning: Citizen Concerns and IDT Study Design,
34
-------
10. Integrate the CAC's and the IDT. A primary methodology for the
planning process is continuous interaction between professionals and
citizens. This should achieve policy plan development leading to:
— greater public understanding of and sensitivity to the environment
and community dynamics;
— policies which are relevant to the concerns of the community as
expressed by citizens and electorate;
— scientific and technical information which can be incorporated into
legal devices for.decision making; and
— a balance between public opinion and scientific and technical infor-
mation in decision making.
The staff can facilitate this by developing an arrangement for CAC sub-
teams to meet and, hopefully, go into the field periodically with IDT
members. In some components, such CAC-IDT interaction is imperative,
as in defining social problems and their causes and possible means of
attacking them. The preliminary component IDT study designs will help
the staff in organizing this participation.
11- Finalize the Study Design. The project manager with input from the
CAC and IDT should develop the final study design containing but not
Iimited to the following elements:
a. A discussion of the root problems of the community and the community
concerns which relate to them.
b. The study components described in detail, with study methods and
obj ect i ves.
c. The method of integrating the components into the community inven-
tory and analysis.
The study design developed by the IDT should demonstrate the importance
of scientific study to environmentally, socially and economically respon-
sible land use decisions. It should be a professional management tool.
12. Review the Study Design. Once the study design is finalized, the
staff should reproduce it in sufficient quantity for review by public
officials, the planning commission and the members of the CAC's. Review
comments should be solicited and incorporated into the final study
design. It is essential that the study design be well constructed and
well thought out. Too many interdisciplinary studies go astray because
of the lack of a good design.
13. Adopt the Study Design and Commence Environmental Resources
Inventory and Analysis. A public hearing for approval of the study
design might be held before it is approved and a contract awarded to the
IDT for commencement of the study. See Appendix A for detailed discus-
sion of the "Environmental Resource Inventory and Analysis" work by the
IDT.
35
-------
14. Set Community Goals. The CAC's should address their attention next
to community goals. Discussions with the IDT have occurred and some
community concerns have been identified. The planning process suggests
continuous interaction, using the "subcommittee" approach, during the
Environmental Resource Inventory and Analysis. At the next formal CAC
meeting, which should wait until the CAC and IDT interaction is well
under way, community concerns should be updated and an initial statement
of goals undertaken.'
Concerns are negative statements about problems in the community. Goals
are positive statements about how the citizens would like to see the
community develop in the future. At this point, the citizens will only
be talking about community goals, not the process for achieving those
goals. In particular, the members of the CAC should not be concerned at
this point with apparent tradeoffs between the goals which they articu-
late. But, by the same token, they should use common sense about what
they know about the community from the information already at hand:
they and the staff should make sure that the goals that are articulated
are within the realm of reason. Looking ahead, the goals will eventually
be restated as policies, and legal status will be developed.
Citizens should articulate the "good" things about the community which
should be preserved or enhanced in land use decision making. Particular
attention must be paid to those features of the neighborhood—landmarks,
parks, style of architecture, natural areas, wildlife, clean air, ethnic
composition, or even the setting and surroundings of an important build-
ing—which are important. Although the scope of good things to preserve
about the community can and shoulcj cover everything of value to the
people in the larger community (such as the vitality of the economic
base), each CAC should identify the important features of its neighbor-
hood.
15. Prepare. IDT "Early Warning" Report. The IDT, after an initial
period of inventory work, should develop a report in which each member
of the IDT would describe the critical factors which have become apparent.
These would be significant features or processes, with their geographic
location, which are important in the following ways:
(1) they should be used in developing goals and policies;
(2) they should be used in the analysis of interrelationships which the
IDT will subsequently undertake; and (s
(3) they should be used by the staff in the formulation of alternative
futures.
These could include wetlands, flood1 plains, unstabIe-geologic areas,
groundwater conditions, habitat of wildlife, commercially valuable re-
sources, adversely impacted neighborhoods, water quality factors, recrea-
tional conditions, etc.
36
-------
16. Integrate and Refine Community Goals. The task of integrating the
goals developed in each CAC meeting into one comprehensive statement is
a staff task. The goals will be specifically related to one of the com-
munity concerns in the adopted study design. All the goals developed by
all the different CAC's should be compiled. Two or three alternative
goals might be stated for one concern. Also, the component "early
warning" report should be an input into the goal synthesis. The IDT has
identified major critical factors; the staff should state goals relating
to these. Goal statements in terms of writing, rewriting and editing
are critical at this point. Clearness, simplicity and brevity are the
greatest virtues. Planning or scientific jargon should be avoided.
17. Rank the Goals. The Citizens' Advisory Committee should rank each
goal according to the importance which they place upon its achievement.
Suggested rankings are:
First. Those goals, no matter how insignificant, which require no trade-
offs in order to be achieved. Goals which are imposed by the state or
Federal governments (such as air and water quality standards) also must
be of the first priority no matter what the costs or trade-offs involved.
Second. Goals which are important and which require a trade-off, but
where the benefits achieved far outweigh the costs incurred.
Third. Goals which require major trade-offs with each other. As an
alternative, the CAC's may wish to "compromise" the achievement of major
goals which are in direct conflict with each other.
Fourth. Unrealistic and "unnecessary" goals. Unrealistic goals are
goals which, even though the CAC may consider them important, may be
almost impossible to achieve. Unnecessary goals are corollary or
alternative goals which will be achieved through satisfaction of other
goals.
The process of placing priorities on the achievement of goals would be
the first time the members of the CAC's will be required to work together
to arrive at a concensus. The concensus on priorities would be pre-
sented by the staff to the planning commission. The judgment of the
staff would have to be brought to bear on conflicts between the prior-
ities of one neighborhood and the next.
The final judgment on these matters must remain with the elected offi-
cials of the community. The planning commission (again, the term "plan-
ning commission" refers to elected or appointed decision makers) would
hold a public hearing to obtain citizen comment on the priorities placed
on the goals by the staff report. After discussion and debate, the plan-
ning commission would adopt the "Statement of Goals" for the community.
18. Report on Environmental Resource Inventory and Analysis. The IDT,
upon completion of its studies and analysis of interrelationships of
components of the environment, should develop a report. This would con-
tain:
37
-------
(1) Base data (maps, tables and text); a description of the environment.
(2) Interrelationships of critical factors; this would use the methods
described in detail in the Appendix.
(3) Land use opportunities and constraints, or "suitabilities," based
on the geographic "response units" and the individual component
analysis.
(4) Pol icy/program recommendations relative to land use; what should be
done to preserve or wisely use the environment.
19. Adopt Community Goals. The staff should conduct any additional work
to correlate IDT findings and CAC goal rankings into a comprehensive array
of goals. The IDT report may not correlate precisely with the CAC goals,
as the professional scientists will perceive the functioning of the
environment in a somewhat different manner than the layman. The planning
commission later would be adopting goals and restating them as policies.
The implementation of these policies would relate directly to the tech-
nical information assembled by the IDT. Therefore, the staff should take
care to ensure that IDT technical information, goals and possible poli-
cies are well coordinated.
The goals should be adopted, after public hearings, by the planning com-
mission. Goals can be fairly broad and general; a "goal" may never be
achieved, but once a goal is adopted, every effort should be made to
reach it. A generalized relationship of concerns, goals, policies, pro-
grams, and projects is as follows:
VaIues-Concerns
Policies
(Objectives)
Programs and
Findings
Projects and Criteria,
Standards
Figure 5. Hierarchy of Value-Goal-Policy Relationships.
38
-------
20. State Policies Needed to Achieve Goals. Goals can be "restated" as
policies. Working with the IDT and its material, more specific phrase-
ology can be developed by the staff. The significance of this step is
primarily legal: these policies may eventually be adopted, through due
process of law, into legislation upon which hard decisions will be based.
A vague policy, or one in which some matter is not included, may be sub-
ject to legal challenge. A policy which constitutes "taking" of property,
or one which cannot be substantiated technically (i.e., it may be "un-
reasonable, whimsical, arbitrary and capricious") may be overturned.
Therefore, it is essential that this step be done very carefully with
sound legal advice.
As an example, a goal and policy statement might appear thus: "Goal:
assure that all human activity will be compatible with the local natural
environment so thai" the resources of land, air, water, mineral, plant
and animal life will be conserved through wise use, and pollution of
these resources will be eliminated."
"Pol iciest (1) Pollution type, source and amount will be considered as
a prime determinant in making land use decisions to meet the Environ-
mental Protection Agency's I978 Pollution Standards and to eliminate all
measurable air pollution by I990; (2) Unique natural areas indicative of
the regional environment will be preserved for the education and enjoy-
ment of future generations and will be a prime determinant in making
land use decisions; (3) The preservation, protection, proper maintenance
and use of the county's wetlands, water bodies and water courses will be
provided for by preventing or minimizing erosion due to flooding and
storm water runoff, maintaining the natural groundwater supplies, and
protecting the purity, utility, water retention capability, ecological
functions, recreational usefulness and natural beauty of all wetlands,
water courses, water bodies and other related natural features of the
terrain, and by providing, protecting and appropriating for natural
wildlife."
21. Conduct a CAC Review of Policies. With the staff and the IDT, the
CAC's should review, refine and comment on the various policies.
22. Describe Alternative Futures for the Community. Decision-making,
in this very complex age and society, must no longer be based on the
premise that "trend is destiny." It must now take this approach: "Let's
examine the various courses of action available to us; let's look at
their various social benefits and costs, and then select the alternative
which appears best." An approach which is becoming accepted is that of
"alternative futures." In the policy planning process, this would be to
develop several alternative sets of policies which could create different
futures. Their implications could then be analyzed.
There is no immediate presumption that environmental policies always or
even usually conflict with economic policies. An "environmental alter-
native future" may be the best "economic alternative future."
39
-------
INTERDISCIPLINARY
TEAM
PUBLIC OFFICIALS
AND STAFF
CITIZENS' ADVISORY
COMMITTEE(S)
i
(Continuous relation between
IDT and CAC")
Step 14
Goals
Step 15
Early Warning
Report
Step 16
Integrate
and Refine
Goals
1
Step 17
Rank Goal
Step 18
Env i ronmentaI
Resource
Step 19
Adopt
Goals
1
Step 20
DeveI op
PoIi c i es
Step 21
Rev i ew
Policies
Figure 6. Policy Planning: Goals, Environmental Resource Inventory/
Analysis, Policies.
40
-------
The first alternative set of policies developed by the planning staff
should be the alternative of no policy. That is to say, one alternative
which is always available to the community is to not adopt a policy plan
and not institute controls on land development activities. This certainly
should imply the continuation of current controls—zoning and subdivision
regulations adopted pursuant to an existing comprehensive plan—if the
community already has them. The analysis of current conditions and pro-
jected trends for each component—population, social dislocations, em-
ployment, income, air and water pollution, land development, taxes and
public services, and all the rest—which is contained in the community
inventory should be compiled as the trend alternative available to the
community. The articulation of this alternative should clearly point
out that some goals and policies (such as those relating to air and water
pollution control), together with the controls necessary to implement
them, will be established under state and Federal law if the community
does not take action itself. This alternative will most certainly mean
that, except for existing zoning and subdivision controls, the destiny
of the community will be completely in the hands of the private Sector
and state and Federal agencies.
The alternative sets of policies developed by the planning staff should
consist of one alternative "set" of policies for each of the major goal
groupings. Each of these alternatives should include policies which are
imposed on the community by Federal or state agencies. The element which
makes them different from each other is that each contains a different
group of policies which is designed to achieve high priority goals which
have substantial conflicts with another high priority goal. The groups
of policies for each alternative would be basically incompatible with
each other. The conflicts may be represented by different patterns of
growth, and if the alternative futures can be presented as conceptual
maps showing varying densities and spatial distributions of land use,
they will probably be better understood. The implementation of one of
these alternatives may signal a new direction in the life of the com-
munity: redirecting growth to a "new community," a major greenbelt pro-
gram, a major effort to clean up blighted areas or attract major new
industrial employers—the possibilities are varied. The major difference
between the alternatives which include a "special set" of policies and
those which do not rests in the community-wide goal orientation, and the
land use programs and controls which will be necessary to achieve the
goal.
This step should be conducted by the staff, with'CAC review.
23. Study Impacts of Alternatives. The "alternative futures" represent
several distinct and clear-cut paths for future growth and development
which will impact the community. One of these paths will be chosen by
the public officials for the community-to follow. For this reason, it
is important to see to it that residents of the community understand the
various futures open to the community.
41
-------
Using the policies which have been formulated, and their own inventory
and analysis, the IDT and the staff should work together to describe, in
layman's terms, the types of programs which would be undertaken, the ways
in which life in the community would be different, and the urban design
implications of each future. This is, in effect, a "programmatic environ-
mental impact statement." It would not present a decision and alterna-
tives to the decision, as is the situation with Federal Environmental
Impact Statements. Rather, it would present alternatives with no preju-
dice.
24. Review the Alternative Policy Plans. Once these descriptions,
together with such graphic materials as may be helpful in communicating
them, are developed, each would be formatted into a short report which
is published by the planning commission along with the set of policies
to which it refers. The reports would be published in a series by the
local newspapers, and other means of communication would be used. The
reports would be presented to CAC's and to meetings of civic and social
organizations. Members of the planning commission, the staff, the CAC's,
and the IDT should all be available for attendance at meetings to explain
the implications of each of the alternatives. In short, the alternative
sets of policies and the descriptions which accompany them should be
made the subject of broad public interest and debate.
25. Adopt the Policy Plan. After the residents of the community have
been given a reasonable opportunity to become familiar with the various
alternative futures and their implications, the planning commission
should hold both informal public meetings and formal hearings designed
to attract the broadest possible citi-zen comment on the various alterna-
tives. For example, at least one meeting should be held in each neigh-
borhood in the community. The Citizens' Advisory Committee for that
neighborhood could organize the meetings.
Formal adoption by the responsible public officials would bring the
policy planning phase to completion. At this point, the community would
have a policy plan, consisting of policies relating to specific goals
and environmental factors, an indication of the implications or signifi-
cance of the policies and the plan, and a data base and land use suita-
bility analysis.
The community and officials would be ready to develop controls to be used
in response to proposed land use changes and projects to carry out as
community actions to achieve the goals. They would have the policies and
basic scientific and technical information needed to establish precise
controls. They would have, hopefully, politically acceptable policies.
And, also hopefully, they would have a greater knowledge of the ecologi-
cal character of their region. They have used environmental information
in all decisions: adopting goals, examining alternative futures, and
adopting policles.
42
-------
INTERDISCIPLINARY
TEAM
PUBLIC OFFICIALS
AND STAFF
CITIZENS' ADV1
COMMITTEE(S)
SORY
Step 22
Alternative
Futures
Step 23
Impact of
Alternatives
Step 24
Rev i ew
Step 25
Adopt
Pol icy Plan
Figure 7. Alternative Futures and Policy Plan
43
-------
SECTION V
IMPLEMENTING THE POLICY PLAN
A. LEGAL/TECHNICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF POLICY
Introduction
At this point in the Land Use Decision-Making System, the community will
have developed a policy plan which states the social, economic, environ-
mental, and government services problems which the community wishes to
solve through land use decisions. It will have stated a set of goals
for future land development to follow. Supporting the policy plan will
be the technical information developed by the interdisciplinary team.
In addition, during the process of developing alternative futures for
the community, the implications of the policy plan will have been
assessed.
The purpose of developing and adopting a policy plan with supporting
technical information is to create a standard against which land develop-
ment proposals can be measured and new public actions initiated. However,
the policy plan does not provide an effective guidance system for deci-
sions until the next step is taken: refining the policy statements to
the point where engineers and designers have specific, legally enforce-
able standards to guide them in drafting a proposal and developing various
communication tools to ensure that the policies and their technical re-
finements are easily usable by land developers, public officials, and
concerned citizens.
The process of developing and adopting the refining and communicating
documents shouId be relatively simple. The documents should be drafted
by an attorney with the assistance of the planning commission and the
staff. The assistance of a consulting civil engineer and the IDT might
also be needed. The draft should be circulated to the CAC's for con-
formance with the adopted policy.plan. After changes or corrections are
made, the documents should be officially adopted by public officials.
Three documents are required to refine the policies: (1) "Standards,
and Technical Review Procedures," which are used to guide the design and
review of development proposals; (2) "Submission Requirements" for
development proposals; and (3) "Programs and Projects." The second
includes a description of the evidence which developers must submit with
44
-------
proposals showing the possible impact on the policy plan—the "Impact
Statement."
1. Find ings
In order for the planning commission to approve or disapprove a proposed
land development activity, it must make a finding that the proposal is
or is not consistent with the policy plan. For most policies, there
could be a variety of different findings. For example, suppose that it
is an adopted goal of the community "to provide for recreation in and on
the water, and for the propagation of sport fish." Pursuant to this
goal, the community has adopted a policy which states: "No land develop-
ment activity shall be permitted which causes, or contributes to, pollu-
tion of surface or groundwater supplies." Pursuant to this policy,
the planning commission could, after an examination of the evidence,
make several findings regarding any given proposed land development
activity:
(1) The policy is irrelevant to the proposal. In order to make this
finding, the planning commission would have to conclude that the
proposed land development activity will have no impact whatsoever
on ground or surface water supplies.
(2) The proposal implements the adopted policy. If the municipal
wastewater treatment facilities have unused capacity, hooking up
the proposed land development activity to the municipal sewer
system might implement the policy. Also, the run-off from the
development would have to be controlled so that it would not pol-
lute the water body in question, and this would complete the
analysis regarding implementing.
(3) The proposed land development activity does not meet the adopted
public policy. If the policy is stated in absolute terms, this
finding could be grounds for turning down the proposal. If, how-
ever, the adopted policy plan indicates a trade-off between the
particular policy and others, a variance from the policy might be
granted. This is where the balancing function of the LUDMS comes
into play. The trade-off, in the case of water quality, might be
in regard to financing additional sewage treatment facilities.
A finding must be made on each policy in the policy plan for every pro-
posed land development activity. All of the possible findings which
could be made for a given policy (including the finding that the develop-
ment does not implement the policy) are developed by the staff. Thus,
a developer would know in advance the different alternative courses of
conduct which he can undertake to implement the policy.
2. Standards and Technical Review Procedures.
Standards, criteria, and technical review procedures are scientific and
technical restatements of the policy plan. According to Webster, a
45
-------
standard is "something set up and established by authority as a rule for
the measure of quantity, weight, extent, value or quality." Synonyms:
criterion, gauge, yardstick, touchstone. Some environmental regulations,
e.g., Federal air quality regulations, distinguish between standards and
criteria although the distinction is artificial unless defined with legal
precision.
Thus a standard is a precise statement (as precise as possible) of value,
a yardstick against which proposed development acitivity can be measured.
For example, if an element of the policy plan is to "maintain adequate
elk habitat, particularly winter range," the wildlife biologist member
of the IDT will have to interpret this policy in terms of carrying capa-
city of the range for elk, number of acres that must be preserved from
development, etc. The standard might read: "Maintain a minimum of 160
acres of winter range in the central portion (later defined) of the Wood
River Valley." Standards would also be promulgated for maximum allowable
emissions of certain air pollutants, maximum allowable discharges of
certain water pollutants, number of acres or percent of development to
be left in open space, and numerous other factors. Standards for aesthe-
tic quality, scenic resources, quality of recreation experience, and
architectural design are much more difficult, but not impossible, to
establish. Groups of design experts might be established to set stan-
dards on a case-by-case basis.
3. Submission Requirements
After standards have been developed and adopted, procedures must be
adopted which identify for the developer the type and quality of evi-
dence which he must submit along with his proposal to indicate that he
does (or does not) implement the policy plan. This submittal is called
an "impact statement." Such evidence would frequently refer to policies
relating to the natural environment: hazards, conservation areas, soil
types, vegetation, slope, and significant natural features. Evidence
relating to policies and concerned, with governmental services could be
provided by commitment letters from the municipality or special service
district. Yet other types of evidence, e.g., the economic or social
impact of the development, might have to be provided by expert studies
and reports done at the developer's expense. Finally, evidence regarding
the construction of improvements, such as roads, to be dedicated to the
public, or dedication of land for school sites, park sites, bike trails,
or other improvements to be constructed by government agencies to serve
the development, could be provided by the representations of the developer,
backed up in some cases by a surety bond.
Procedural requirements for submission of evidence to accompany a develop-
ment proposal may be adopted in the form of an ordinance. The "impact
statement" proposed for LUDMS would be much simpler than the environmental
impact statement required by the National Environmental Policy Act. It
would be short, relatively easy for land developers to prepare, would
simplify scrutiny by interested public citizens, and, most important,
would be designed to facilitate a decision on the proposal by local public
officials.
46
-------
First, impacts would be analyzed and assessed for the adopted policy
plan. On the one hand, this impact statement expands the traditional
subject matter of the environmental impact statement to include impacts
on social and economic factors, the tax base, and the demand for public
services. On the other hand, it limits the amount of information re-
quired of a developer in that, by virtue of adopted policies and tech-
nical data, the developer can refer to public scientific and technical
information.
Second, because the topics covered by each developer's impact statement
would be the same, the format of the impact statement could be standard-
ized. Each policy might have a standard form developed for it.
4. Tools and Techniques.
After the policies are refined by the development and adoption of stan-
dards, submission requirements and impact statement forms, the next step
in the LUDMS is to develop and formally adopt tools which make the re-
fined policies more usable by developers, public officials, and inter-
ested citizens. These would include the following:
(1) Environmental Component Analysis Maps. These are maps which would
have been developed by the IDT in the planning process, and for
which a policy has been drafted and legally adopted. It is quite
possible that some component maps will never find their way into
policies and ordinances. Each would consist of a base map and a
series of clear plastic overlays, one for each component for which
mappable information has been developed. The base map should con-
tain survey information, topography and significant natural and man-
made features. The clear plastic overlays would be different for
each component. One set of overlays could indicate the components
which, in one way or another, constrain development activity:
natural or man-made hazards, air pollution pockets, groundwater
recharge areas unsuitable for septic systems, swelling soils, scenic
vistas which should not be blocked by billboards or tall buildings,
historical sites, wildlife habitat, mineral deposits, areas slated
as greenbelt between neighboring communities, land that has already
been developed or committed to development, land owned by govern-
ment agencies, etc. Every component would have its own clear plas-
tic overlay, with the information and data portrayed on it.*
For some policies, such as prohibiting development in floodplains, it
is extremely expensive and time-consuming to develop information accu-
rate enough to draw a "hard line" around an area on a map. For such
policies, it might be possible to develop only generalized information.
Mapping this generalized information can be done by indicating "sus-
pected" floodplain areas—those which an expert has reasonable grounds
to believe have been flooded in the past, but for which no hard flood-
plain line has been developed—in shading those areas on a map. In
such "suspected" areas, it is incumbent upon the land developer to hire
his own experts to draw the "hard line" of the floodplain through his
47
-------
Each would show "prohibited" and "restricted" areas, and would com-
prise one of the constraints maps. Information related to restric-
tions would be contained in the findings and standards of the
ordinances. Hence, it could be determined what land uses could be
permitted in certain areas, and how those uses must be accomplished
to avoid or minimize environmental damage.
Likewise, opportunities maps should be developed, with clear plas-
tic overlays showing the areas where various public policies en-
courage development activity: areas already served or about to be
served by water, sewer, and utility systems; new town sites; areas
assembled as industrial parks or shopping centers by public agencies;
urban renewal areas; areas served by mass transit or highway inter-
changes; opportunities for recreation development; and any area
where the community has determined that development would be com-
patible with the policy plan.
(2) Environmental Interrelationship Analysis Maps. From a legal stand-
point, whether the community uses the special zoning and subdivision
ordinances or the permit system to regulate land development, the
burden of proof is on the developer to convince public officials
that his development would be consistent with the policy plan. The
purpose of the interpretive maps is to cut even further the amount
of time and energy which must be devoted to a development proposal.
Environmental interrelationship analysis maps differ from environ-
mental component analysis maps in that they aggregate in a visual
presentation the opportunities or constraints of several components
that are interrelated: they analyze interrelationships. For
example, individual hazards expressed on environmental component
analysis maps may be: floodplains, avalanche areas, rocks Iide
areas, areas of potential forest fire, swamps, bogs, quicksand, etc.
Aggregated and interpreted on an interrelationship analysis map,
they may display a unit where an impact to one component could
trigger changes to other components or areas, or where a number of
ecological factors create a geographic unit of special character.
For example, habitat of a regionally rare species may include
springs and seeps, and an aquifer recharge area from which the
springs and seeps are fed. ' The entire system would comprise a
"unit." As another example, a marsh may be desirable to protect
for a number of reasons. But its ecological integrity may involve
protection of some erodible areas around it, or some springs which
feed it, or a buffer area around its perimeter. The entire area
could be treated as a unit because of ecological linkages.
When adopted by the planning commission, the analysis maps create
rebuttable presumptions regarding the policies which they portray.
property before he designs his development. Whether the developer's
proposal is accepted or not, the information he has developed on'the
floodplain line will be useful to neighboring developers and the pub-
Iic officials.
48
-------
These presumptions can be rebutted by additional evidence from the
land developer or from interested citizens, but the burden of proof
clearly shifts to the person rebutting the presumption.
The maps would make the work of interested citizens easier, and they
would be helpful to land developers. Before developers buy an op-
tion on property or draw up a development proposal, they could find
out the "opportunities" and "constraints'.1"
(3) Zoning Map. The analysis maps should not be considered zoning maps.
A zoning map, when adopted, gives some landowners absolute rights
to certain kinds of development, while absolutely prohibiting other
types of development. The analysis maps are only a graphic por-
trayal of the information developed pursuant to the policy plan.
The analysis maps create presumptions in favor of or against a land
developer which will aid or hinder him in obtaining a permit; the
adopted maps neither grant nor deny any "rights" to either a type
of use or a particular density.
Of course, a zoning map will not be prepared by every community
adopting all or part of the LUDMS. To reiterate a basic principle
of the LUDMS: the system offers two basic alternatives for land
use control: (1) zoning, subdivision regulations, and other tra-
ditional devices, and (2) a permit system. However, the great dis-
tinction between the LUDMS and traditional approaches is that both
of the alternative systems are based on the policy plan, which in-
cludes both an expression of the public interest and scientific/
technical information. A zoning map would be relevant only if the
community decided to maintain the traditional devices. Obviously,
to be consistent in implementing the policy plan, the zoning map
would have to be related very specifically to the environmental
component and interrelationship analysis maps. For example, it
would be patently ridiculous and irresponsible for a zoning map to
designate a "natural hazard area" as permissible for condominiums.
A LUDMS zoning map would be an enormous improvement over traditional
zoning since the latter is almost always based on future land use
projections which are only extentions of existing land use—and
thus merely a repetition of past mistakes.
(4) Monitoring. A critically important and often ignored technical tool
necessary to implement the policy plan is the development and adop-
tion of a process for the planning staff to monitor the community's
progress in implementing its adopted policies. The purpose of moni-
toring development activity and other land changes, such as the
abandonment of buildings, is to enable the planning commission and
interested citizens to propose changes in public policy, standards,
or legal devices as they become necessary or desirable.
Very little guidance can be offered on the subject of developing
the monitoring process because the processes will vary widely. For
some policies, periodic visual surveys and interviews with the mem-
49
-------
bers of the CAC's will suffice. For other policies, such as those
relating to air, water, and noise pollution, monitoring stations
with complex electronic sensing equipment may be necessary. The
staff, aided by the IDT and the CAC's, should develop the monitoring
process in the form of an ordinance to be adopted by the planning
commission. An essential element of the ordinance should be a
periodic report on the progress, or lack thereof, on the implemen-
tation of each policy. Also included should be an analysis of how
the policies impact each other—for instance, the degree to which
air and water pollution standards and criteria may be preventing
the expansion of employment opportunities or creating solid waste
problems.
A truly responsible monitoring system should monitor ecological
changes. Although it is not proposed in the LUDMS, it would be
interesting if all developments were subjected to a "monitoring
tax" which would pay for future IDT studies so that actual effects
of land use changes could be identified and corrective action
sought if impacts exceeded those predicted. A filing fee for
developer applicants ideally would cover the costs of both the
"impact statement" and monitoring.
B. PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION OF POLICY
Introduction
It should have been clear during the development of the policy plan that
there are social, economic, "and environmental limits to the goals and
policies which a community can reasonably hope to implement. Some alter-
native futures are not always available. Manhattan, New York, is just
not going to become the pastoral home of gentlemen farmers, and Man-
hattan, Kansas, will probably not be a deep water port.
Whether the community has chosen to adapt its zoning and subdivision
ordinance or. to try the new permit system, it is clear that these alone
will not ensure the implementation of a policy plan. There is much
built-fn resistance to any kind of land use control. In most communi-
ties where economic growth and development (or the lack thereof) has
been the chief concern, the thought of any kind of control on land
development has usually been considered to be counterproductive. In
policy planning, "control" or "regulation" can and should address such
subjects as economic progress and vitality, employment opportunities,
and especially the impact of the development on the demand for govern-
ment services and tax base.
However, there are many policies which will- not be implemented with the
police power. If a concern is about non-driver mobility, and a goal is
to provide transit and bikeways, a policy may be developed tc "create a
transit authority and funding to provide adequate transit service and
bikeways." Implementation of this policy would require additional plan-
50
-------
ning, identification of Federal aid, legal creation of a new agency with
new powers, enactment of local funding, etc.
This chapter discusses various incentives which a community can use to
encourage the kind of development which its policy plan calls for, as
well as the disincentives which will discourage applications for land
development activities which obviously frustrate public policy.
The first, and most important, is "dealing in real estate" with all its
ramifications: urban renewal and urban homestead ing, public housing,
industrial parks, scenic and conservation easements, greenbelts and
recreation areas, and even land banks for future development and new
town sites. The entire capital expenditure budgets of state and local
government, especially the extension of utilities, should be controlled
by the policy plan, providing incentives or disincentives to land owners.
Public ownership of suitable sites for development and control of-utili-
ties can be used to subsidize private development. These same devices
can be used to place covenants on the land before it is sold to a
developer.
In Vermont, the state legislature has passed a tax law which discourages
speculation by seeing to it that a large portion of speculative profits
is returned to the state. Many states are now taxing farmland at its
agricultural productivity rate rather than its speculative rate for
development.
It is a major concern of the researchers that all such programs be used
to implement the conclusions and findings of the interdisciplinary eco-
logical analysis. A greenbelt program which preserves open space is
worse than no program if it preserves the wrong open space and other
land which should be open space is permitted to be developed.
1. Pea I I ng in ReaI Estate.
Among the various programs which a community can undertake to implement
its policy plan is the buying of real estate. In every community there
will be situations where the public interest in a given piece of property
is so strong that the property must be purchased outright by the public
in order to protect it. Even with the most stringent regulations, the
choice of not developing or developing is still the choice of the prop-
erty owner, but there are many occasions when there is a legitimate pub-
lic Interest In having the government make those decisions. In such
instances—where policy calls for redevelopment of blighted areas, new
town development, greenbelts, protection of valuable wetlands, or public
recreation sites—the only feasible way to implement the policy may be to
assemble and buy the parcels of land. In addition, there will be occa-
sions when the government is legally obligated to acquire real property
in order to protect the owner's rights. Some property rights may be
transferred or sold away. Examples are the right to take over the prop-
erty upon default of a debt and the right of a lessee to "use and occupy"
the property. However, the rights associated with "regulating" the use
to which the land is put are always retained by the government.
51
-------
It is a well-established principle of constitutional law that the govern-
ment cannot take property "without just compensation," and since the
governmental ready has the right to regulate, the legal question arises:
at what point does the regulation take away so many property owner rights
that it amounts to a "taking" of the property itself?
Court decisions on the question vary from state to state. Generally, the
standard is whether, after the regulatory controls have been Imposed,
there is any "reasonable" use of the property left to the owner. In
recent years, however, the trend has been toward permitting more and more
government regulation without the requirement of compensation to the
owner. An excellent book has recently been written on this subject:
The Taking Issue: An Analysis of the Constitutional Limits of Land Use
Control.*
An outstanding example of the use of a land acquisition program to imple-
ment public policy is found in Stockholm, Sweden. There, for almost
three hundred years, the city has owned all of the land on its outskirts.
When new development was desirable, plans were drawn up by the city to
ensure compatibility with existing development, and then implemented by
private contractors. After World War II, the land surrounding the city
was designated a permanent greenbelt of farms and forests, and new satel-
Mte communities outside the greenbelt were developed. Unlike American
cities, Stockholm's growth over the centuries has enabled it to become
more desirable and more livable.
The process which Stockholm uses to grow and develop is similar to the
process Americans use for building highways, but highways are only one
of myriad factors which require closely coordinated, integrated planning
if we are ever to arrest the downward spiral of the quality of life in
our urban areas. Despite all the regulatory measures that the lawyers
and planners can devise, it is easier to implement a sophisticated,
integrated and environmentally responsible plan for a complex urban area
when the public has the property rights to the land.
Theoretically, if a community owned a I I of the developable land within
it and on its outskirts, it could implement almost any policies it
wanted to within the realm of reason and the parameters of the Federal
and state constitutions. But, of course, American communities do not
have the political or financial resources to implement such a program.
The ideas which follow are examples of the types of programs which,
traditionally, the private sector has been unwilling or unable to imple-
ment. They are programs which can derive from the policies of the plan.
a. Programs Relating to Outdoor Recreation -
Vacant land in inner city neighborhoods can be acquired, cleaned up
* Bossleman, F,, D. Callies, and J. Banta. The Taking Issue. Washing-
ton, D. C., U.S. Government Printing Office, December 1971.
52
-------
(usually with volunteer help from service clubs), and used for children's
playgrounds—which is probably what it Is used for anyway. In blighted
urban neighborhoods, homes and buildings which are unfit for habitation
are often abandoned or put up for tax sale. These buildings can be ac-
quired and demolished at relatively little cost, providing "pocket parks"
in neighborhoods with almost no open space.
The problem is more difficult on the fringes of the urban area, where
postwar housing developments stretch for miles. The homes are not
dilapidated and thus cannot logically be torn down. In such a case,
the most feasible solution may be to purchase large amounts of park land
on the fringes of the urban area. In private redevelopment, though,
requiring park dedication or "bargaining" in a planned unit development
approach can create open space.
b. Greenbelts and Open Space -
If two communities appear to be growing together, a large park between
them, purchased by both, will keep them separated and maintain the
separate identity of each. Thus, two policies have been served by the
purchase: providing recreational open space near the cities, and also
preventing the type of urban sprawl that would allow them to grow
together and lose their separate Identities.
This latter policy—shaping, directing, or containing growth on the
periphery of the community—generally calls for publicly-owned green-
belts. These open, areas may be devoted to recreational uses, or they
may continue to be used for agriculture or forestry or even very low
density cluster development.
c. Core Area Redevelopment -
Various Federal programs are available to ease the land use problems of
urban core areas: urban renewal, neighborhood redevelopment, "FACE,"
and other Federal public housing and publicly-subsidized private housing
programs. Several states have established programs to work on the same
problems—notable among these is New York State's urban development
corporation. The object is the same in all cases: to put monies in the
hands of the community to rejuvenate central city downtown areas and
blighted neighborhoods.
Many programs—notably urban renewal and federally subsidized housing
programs—require the establishment of a separate local governmental
body to be responsible for administering the program. It is important
that these bodies be so structured that their decisions implement the
policy plan. The programs of these semi-autonomous official bodies can
be coordinated with the on-going planning program in the community. For
instance, if a policy plan calls for the urban renewal area to be devel-
oped for commercial shopping, office space, and high-rise residential
development, a complementary policy could be developed which states that
no major new commercial shopping center, office buildings, and high-rise
53
-------
apartments will be permitted outside the urban renewal areas until the
program is complete.
d. Programs to Encourage Good Urban Design -
Zoning codes, building codes and design requirements for homes for which
the FHA will guarantee loans are three excellent examples of government
stultification of creative design techniques. These regulations, which
govern the size and design of lots, and the design and construction of
homes on the lots, have changed little since the postwar housing boom.
They are directly responsible for the dull, homogeneous housing tracts
which spread across the American landscape. These housing tracts, in
turn, are in large part responsible for the newly fashionable "no-growth"
or "slow-growth" movement in many American suburbs—a movement which, if
successful in its goal of stopping or slowing new housing construction,
could have far-reaching and disastrous implications for the future of
our urban areas.
It has often been observed that taste and morals cannot be legislated.
Yet there is no question that the ugliness of most American towns and
cities can be attributed to tastelessness. Aside from architectural
control, which again gets into the area of regulations, good design
should be rewarded by tax incentives, design competition, and abandon-
ment of the universal practice (often required by legislation) of taking
the low bid. The low bid often results in unimaginative solutions to
problems.
e. New Towns and Growth Pressure Transfer -
This type of program is the most sophisticated a community can undertake.
It speaks to the demand that "something has to be done." It is time to
undertake seriously the development of new towns and even new cities—
an area in which, heretofore, America has been incapable of emulating
the successful European experience.
The key ingredients for a new town are:
(1) Growth pressure.
(2) Growth in the existing community perceived as lowering the quality
of life.
(3) Existence of a regional land use decision-making body.
(4) Broad public support for the new towns program, and strong political
leadership.
(5) Selection and design of a site superior to that of the preexisting
community.
Development of the new town must be carefully staged. Commercial,
business, recreational opportunities, job opportunities, and various
cultural amenities must be provided before people can be expepted to
move to the new town. This requires not, only careful anticipation of
54
-------
trends in the housing market, but also careful financial footwork.
Because of these severe risks, and also because the lead time in land
development activity requires that capital be tied up in these risks for
a period of many years, developers tend to shy away from very large-
scale developments such as new towns. Title VII of the 1965 housing act
authorizes the Department of Housing and Urban Development to extend to
new town developers loan guarantees which make it easier for them to
obtain such long-term, risky financing. Unfortunately, hardly any funds
have been made available for this program, and until it is in full oper-
ation, it might be necessary for the state or the regional planning com-
mission to undertake a similar program.
2. Institutional Arrangements for Public Land Development
a. Urban Renewal -
In order to set the stage for the proposed development of new towns,
industrial parks, or the establishment of greenbelts, it will be neces-
sary to create an agency within each region to handle the process. This
agency should be modeled somewhat along the lines of the urban renewal
authorities. It might be useful to review the powers and duties assigned
to the urban renewal authorities before outlining how this model should
be used to create a public land development agency.
In order to put the urban renewal program to work, each state is required
to pass enabling legislation granting urban renewal authorities in
specific cities the opportunity to utilize the financial assistance, in
the form of grants and loans, which is provided by Congress. Each com-
munity, in turn, must then pass the necessary resolutions and ordinances
to permit such a program to be undertaken. Although the mayor or the
city council is responsible for appointing the director of the local
authority and must approve the appointment of the citizen commissioners
who are selected to serve under the director, the urban renewal authority
is essentially autonomous and not answerable to the executive or legis-
lative body.
After the urban renewal authority has been established by the local com-
munity, it is required to do a "workable program for community improve-
ment," which is basically a call for comprehensive planning. The workable
program includes: codes and code enforcement, planning and program budget,
housing and relocation plans, and citizen involvement. Only areas of the
city that are designated "blighted" by the comprehensive plan are eligible
for urban renewal redevelopment. The authority has the power to condemn
land in these areas only. The power of eminent domain is granted under
state enabling legislation to comply with the "public purpose," i.e., to
remove existing blight and prevent further decay of the inner city.
This is the way the urban renewal program is designed to work. In clear-
ing the slums of American cities, however, it was never easy to know what
to do about the people who were living in these deteriorating neighbor-
55
-------
hoods. Citizen involvement was one of the requirements of the workable
program, but often that meant only the input from downtown businessmen.
Relocation was an important aspect of the planning, but when it came
time to uproot families and individuals who were paying very low rents
in the inner city, it was extremely difficult to find them a similar
situation elsewhere. Also, many of these people felt a sense of com-
munity in their old neighborhoods and experienced great psychological
hardship in the relocation process. For these reasons, urban renewal
in the 1960fs came to be referred to as "Negro removal," and many of the
benefits of the revitalization opportunity went unrealized because of
the bitter disputes over the rights of people whose lives were disrupted
by the process. In 1972, Congress added a stipulation to urban renewal
money that relocation had to be worked out satisfactorily before the
redevelopment project was funded.
The essential goals of the urban renewal approach seem quite applicable
to the implementation of the regional policy plan. To quote from the
Act which set up the urban renewal program:
In the administration of this title, the Administrator sha11
encourage the operations of such local public agencies as are
established on a state, regional (within a state) or unified
metro basis as permits such agencies to contribute effectively
toward the solution of community development or redevelopment
problems on a state, regional or unified metro basis.*
b. New York State Urban Development Corporation -
In 1968, the New York State legislature created an urban development
corporation and gave it many of the same powers which some admire in the
urban renewal framework. It was created as a "complex interlocking
corporate structure which included a governmental development corpora-
tion, a quasi-public development and research corporation, and a quasi-
public guarantee fund.""1" The UDC has the powers of eminent domain and
the ability to become involved in new town development. It originally
had the power to supercede local zoning regulations, but the state legis-
lature recently rescinded this privilege.^
Office of the Administrator, Housing and Home Finance Agency, "Urban
Renewal provisions of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended through
August '55, and excerpts from other Federal Laws authorizing Federal
assistance to slum clearance and urban redevelopment and urban renew-
al." (Washington, D. C., U.S. Government Printing Office.)
Robert S. Amdursky, "A Public-Private Partnership for Urban Progress,"
The Journal of Urban Law, XLVI, 207.
The ability to override existing local zoning was one of the experi-
mental features of the UDC, and the fact that it has not worked seems
to indicate the difficulty that such an agency will have in providing
political insulation and coping with the resistance by cities to
threats to their cherished powers of home rule, and by suburbs to their
assumed rights to exclude low-income and racial groups. (James Clapp,
New Towns and Urban Policy, 1971)
56
-------
The one power that the UDC does not possess, a function which is one of
the strengths of the urban renewal authorities, is the power to "write
down" (or decrease) the price of property taken possession of in order
that it can be developed at a lower intensity. The UDC has been in-
volved in three new town developments in the state: northeast of
Buffalo, northwest of Syracuse in connection with the State University
of New York, and Welfare Island. Several other proposals are on the
drawing board.
c. Regional Public Land Development Agency
Using the examples of urban renewal authority in the cities and the
state model of the NYUDC, it seems logical to recommend the creation of
a regional public land development agency to help implement the policy
plan for each region. This agency would have to be created by the
respective state legislatures, but it would have jurisdiction only with-
in its regional boundaries. This agency would provide the means for the
region to directly initiate new town development, maintain green-
belt/open space, assemble industrial parks—anything the community would
like to do consistent with the policy plan for the region. A comprehen-
sive scheme for development of the entire regional area would be possible
under such a program. Since the agency would be authorized to assemble
by use of eminent domain large tracts of land in outlying areas for
resale to developers,.It would provide the public support to private
enterprise necessary to reduce risk and ensure the incorporation of
certain facilities. By state statute, it should have powers of eminent
domain and the ability to float bonds for its own activities. The prob-
lem encountered in New York regarding local zoning would be eliminated
because the corporation would be set up to apply the policy plan for a
region under the recommended permit system, and therefore local zoning
regulations would not be involved. In discussing this type of public
land development agency, James Clapp points out that:
This type of program would place the vital phases of initiation,
planning and disposition under the auspices of a public agency,
which would mark a significant departure from the traditional
measures for the control of suburban development, which separ-
ates regulation from execution.*
Planner John Reps, in a widely quoted article, concurs:
. . .effective Implementation of urban plans in the United
States requires large-scale public land acquisition. I
suggest that virtually .aI I land to be urbanized should come
into public ownership and then be made available for develop-
ment as needed, where required, and under conditions that will
assure building only in conformity with public development
plans.+
* James Clapp, New Towns and Urban Policy, p. 177.
+ John Reps, "The Future of American Planning: Requiem or Renascence?"
Planning 196? (Chicago: American Society of Planning Officials, 1967),
p. 59.
57
-------
The regional public land agency should have the powers to assemble land
for new town development. Except for Columbia, Maryland, all new towns
currently under construction in this country are being developed on
sites which have been acquired from what were previously large open land
holdings, for example, the large ranches like Irvine that are being
developed as new communities in California.
The supply of development sites in metropolitan areas is decreasing. One
of the major reasons that the regional approach Is recommended for future
planning, and for undertaking the operation of a land development program,
is the danger of balkanization caused by the "leap frogging" process in
the establishment of suburban developments.
3. Legal Devices to Acquire Various Interests in Land
Many public policies which cannot be adequately implemented by regulation
nevertheless do not require government acquisition of all of the property
rights. It is possible, as well as fiscally prudent, for the government
to acquire only those rights which it needs to Implement Its policy.
Some of the most important of these rights are as follows:
a. Easements -
Sometimes a community can acquire all or most of the benefits it seeks
from a parcel of property without any of the accompanying financial bur-
dens. Rather than purchasing the entire tract in fee, or condemning it,
at fair market value, the community can acquire by gift, purchase or
devise an easement—which is less than the fee title. When it acquires
a negative easement, it can prohibit specified types of development
activities on the property: billboards, high-rises, high density
housing, etc. Or it can acquire a positive easement on the land, e.g.,
a hiking trail, nature study center, picnic area, or other easements
allowing some form of public access. Easements have enormous flexibility
since each one is negotiated as a separate contract with the property
owner. They are more politically acceptable than eminent domain and
generally cheaper than buying the fee title, although in some circum-
stances an easement may cost as much or more than the fee. "Conservation
easements," "scenic easements" and "open space easements" have been used
throughout the nation but many communities are totally unaware of this
device.
b. Development Rights -
It is well established In the law that the "right" of a private property
owner to develop his land is subject to government regulation. Neverthe-
less, there may be instances where* the right to develop should be ac-
quired by public officials to implement the policy plan.
Perhaps two communities have decided to establish a greenbelt.of agri-
cultural land between them. They want to assure that succeeding genera-
58
-------
tions of public officials will not be able to develop the greenbelt.
There is no reason for buying the land outright. It can remain in agri-
cultural production. So the communities simply acquire the right of any
present or subsequent owner of the property to even apply for a develop-
ment permit. If the value of the land in question for agricultural pur-
poses is $500 an acre, and the value of the land for a housing develop-
ment is $3,000 an acre, the value of the "right to develop" the property
is the difference between the two, or $2,500 an acre.
Thus the interests of both landowner and community are served: the com-
munity has its greenbelt for less than the market value of the land, and
the family farmers remain on their property and continue their life just
as it was before. If the community had attempted to condemn or buy the
land outright, it would have run into stiff resistance from the farmers.
To implement some policies, not all development rights need to be ac-
quired. For example, suppose that a public policy called for particu-
larly scenic vistas from the public highways to be conserved but that a
utility company desires to run transmission lines parallel to the high-
way, marring the scenic vista. In order to protect it, the public offi-
cials, might merely purchase the "right" of the utility company to put in
the power lines and poles—and the value of that right would be the addi-
tional cost of underground ing the lines. The public officials would
have to pay the utility company to put the line underground. The type
of development right which the public officials would buy is also called
a scenic easement, and the access which has been purchased is really
nothing more than visual access across the utility company's right-of-
way. (See previous discussion on easements.)
c. Covenants -
A covenant is an agreement between the buyer and the seller of property
which obligates the buyer to do, or refrain from doing, certain things
with the land. Some covenants "run with the land"; that is, they bind
subsequent buyers in succeeding generations. There are two ways in which
covenants can be used to enforce public policy:
(1) When the community sells the land. When a piece of property which
is particularly important in the implementation of the policy plan
goes up for sale, the community buys it. The public officials then
draft a covenant setting forth those things which subsequent land-
owners must do, or must refrain from doing, and legally attach it
to the deed to the property. (Such a covenant might read: "The
property shall always remain a horse pasture," or "no buildings can
be constructed over 50 feet high,"or "any future housing development
on the property will be clustered on land which is unusable for agri-
cultural purposes.") Covenants often speak only to future contin-
gencies and thus often do not cost much money. For this reason, the
land with the covenant attached to it can often bring almost the
same price which the community paid for it in the first place.
59
-------
(2) Covenants where the community is a third-party beneficiary. A
covenant to implement public policy can be attached to land without
the necessity of public officials becoming real estate brokers.
This can be done by simply paying the present landowner to attach
the desired covenant to his deed. When this is done, the covenant
would bind the present landowner, as well as any future purchasers
of the land.
The compensation paid for the covenant should not be in the form of
a permit for a land development activity, or a certain zoning desig-
nation or density. This is called "contract zoning" and is viewed
as an illegal form of spot zoning in almost all states. If the
public officials feel that assurances and guarantees from the
developer are necessary for a permit to be granted, they should be
in the form of conditions on the permit rather than covenants on
the deed.
4. Other Methods of Acquisition
So far, the discussion of "dealing in real estate" has indicated that
the only method available is to buy the land, or various interests in
it. Beside discussing the various aspects of this method, several other
ways for the community to deal in real estate are set forth in this
section.
a. Buying and Selling Land: Variations on the Theme -
This section discusses two separate issues: means for the community to
obtain the money it needs to deal in real estate, and the use of the
power of eminent domain as a tool in implementing the policy plan.
(1) The community can "save up" the money it needs to deal in real
estate. In recent years, many communities have undertaken open
space or greenbelt programs funded by a specially earmarked in-
crease in the sales tax (a special mill levy would accomplish the
same purpose). Usually an additional 5/6 or 1/6 is added to the
sales tax, which is collected in a special fund. As money accumu-
lates in the fund, it is spent to acquire greenbelts or open space
pursuant to a specially developed plan which shows not only those
areas which should be acquired, but also the priority of each par-
cel for acquisition.* There is no reason (aside from possible
* The "regionality"of the land use decision-making body which is respon-
sible for developing, adopting and implementing a greenbelt or open
space program is especially significant. For example, supppse there is
large urban area composed of a central city completely surrounded by a
multiplicity of suburbs. The purpose of a greenbelt program, presum-
ably, is to give form and definition to the developed urban area, and
to contain urban sprawl. If the central city developed Its own green-
belt program, its acquisitions would hop-scotch over the suburbs and
contain their annexation programs against their will. The same kind
60
-------
limitations in some states' local government taxation enabling
legislation) for a community to limit its "dealing in real estate"
program to greenbelt and open space policies. For instance, it
might be desirable or necessary for a community to buy up land in
order to create an industrial park or regional shopping center, to
redevelop blighted areas (urban renewal) or build low-cost housing,
to acquire parks and outdoor recreation areas, scenic or conserva-
tion easements, historical sites and monuments, new town sites or
for any other public purpose set forth in the policy plan.
(2) The community can borrow the money. There are several advantages
to this. First, it permits the direct and coordinated implementa-
tion of the program in a very short period of time; and second, the
usual reason for entering into a "dealing in real estate" program
is that the the community feels that the land in question is sub-
ject to development pressure which would not implement the policy
plan. Moreover, the community probably feels that mere regulation
will not be sufficient. Undeveloped land which is subject to such
intense development pressure usually inflates in value at a much
faster rate than the rate of interest at which a public body can
borrow money. Thus, the community will save money in the long run
if it borrows money and pays the interest and buys the land now,
rather than waiting for the sales or property taxes to dribble in
to the special fund until there is enough money to pay cash for the
development.
(3) Recycling funds. To implement some public policies, the community
will not only be buying land, but also selling it. The money from
resale should be "recycled" back into the fund to enable further
implementation of the program. In this way, the amount aggregated
in the special fund (or borrowed) need only be a fraction of the
amount of money necessary to accomplish the entire program.
Another way to recycle the funds available to the program is to
lease the land back to the private sector for an appropriate use.
"Dealing in real estate"—when combined with an recycling program—
could be an extremely inexpensive and effective means of implemen-
ting pub Iic polIcy.
b. The Power of Eminent Domain -
Eminent domain is a powerful tool for implementing public programs, and,
if the the policy plan is based on good information, the power of eminent
of conflicts would occur if each suburb developed its own greenbelt
plan: -one suburb's greenbelt is its neighbor's future expansion area.
Greenbelts, which would benefit the entire metropolitan area, would be
implemented from the tax base of only those jurisdictions which chose
to attempt the program. Thus, an unfair burden would be placed on
those jurisdictions which were attempting to act responsibly.
61
-------
domain can be used to strengthen the implementation of any public policy.
Often, a "dealing in real estate" program is undertaken to assemble or
aggregate relatively small land holdings into a parcel large enough to
be able to implement the public policy: a greenbelt, urban park, new
town or industrial park site, or downtown redevelopment (urban renewal)
program. Because these programs have as their goal the aggregation of
land, they are ineffective if the agency which is to carry them out does
not have the power to condemn the land of reluctant property owners.
Put another way, every program which involves the spending of taxpayer
dollars must be given all of the power it needs to ensure its success.
This does not mean that every policy implemented by a "developing in
real estate" program requires use of the condemnation power. There is
usually a great deal of sympathy in the community for a person whose
property is condemned for some public purpose, which can result in a
public backlash against either the officials who ordered the condemna-
tion proceedings or even the public project itself. For this reason,
although the condemnation power should be an integral part of any
"developing in real estate" program, the actual exercise of it should be
restrained by a "political" balancing between the importance of the pub-
lic policy to be implemented (and the importance of the particular parcel
to that policy) against the normal community revulsion against condemna-
tion proceedings.
c. Dedications and Charitable Donations -
These two devices, which can be used by local jurisdictions in a majority
of states, have been neglected until very recently.
In most states, local governments are enabled to require that a certain
percentage of the land in any new subdivision be dedicated to the local
government for use as sites for parks and schools.* Although such site
dedications may appear to be a bribe in return for approval of the sub-
division plat, when they are coordinated with a school construction plan
and with an outdoor recreation plan which sets forth hiking and bicycle
trails or public access to the shores of rivers and lakes, the relation-
ship of the dedications to public necessity and welfare can readily be
seen.
Almost all local governments are permitted to receive charitable dona-
tions of land, or'interests in land, from public-spirited citizens.
When a landowner donates property, or sells it for less than market
value to the government for a public purpose, he is allowed to deduct
the amount of his donation—the difference between the price he received
In Colorado, counties are required to demand such dedications from
subdividers, although there (as elsewhere) the requirement can be
fulfilled by the subdivider by dedicating the sites to a homeowners'
association which maintains them as park space for the private use of
the residents of the subdivision.
62
-------
and the market price for tax purposes.* Possibly the main reason
charitable donations of this type are not more common is that it does
not occur to public officials to ask.
d. Acquisition by Tax Abandonment -
A story is repeated over and over again in the blighted neighborhoods of
our inner cities. The tenants of a house or building which is structur-
ally sound but badly in need of repairs either go on a rent strike or
call the building inspector who threatens to suspend the certificate of
occupancy. The building is old and the repairs are expensive. The
tenants are paying a low rent which is insufficient to cover the cost
of the repairs, and the landowner simply abandons the buiding. Even-
tually the building is condemned by the city for back taxes, sold at
auction, and the story is repeated.
Some cities, notably Baltimore, have broken this cycle with a program
intended to rehabilitate the building and turn it over to the poor
tenants who live there. The program is called urban homesteading.
Instead of selling the building at a tax sale, the city turns it over
(usually for a dollar) to a non-profit corporation comprised of the
tenants. Rent payments go into a special fund which pays for the im-
provements needed to bring the building into compliance with the build-
ing code and to make it a habitable, cheerfuJ place. When the renova-
tions are completed, the building is turned into either a cooperative or
a condominium owned by the tenants.
In this program, the city takes advantage of the acquisition which has
been imposed upon it by the defaulting landlord to provide low-cost,
owner-occupied housing for the city's poorest residents, and inciden-
tal ly to give them the pride of ownership associated with the major
renovation effort. The cost to the city of such a program is the de-
faulted taxes—often no more than a few hundred dollars. The benefits
to inner city dwellers have not yet been fully assessed in any of the
operating programs, but there is every reason to expect that they will
be substantial.
e. Private^ Sector Transactions Which Implement the Policy Plan -
There is a wide variety of land transactions between private individuals
which, with some attention from public officials, can be used to imple-
ment the policy plan:
(1) Transfer of development rights. This stems from the inherent
unfairness of a zoning ordinance which permits one landowner to
develop to a high intensity use while his neighbor must keep his
land in agriculture. The idea is to spread windfall profits derived
Recently a rancher in the Kawinechee Valley of Colorado who was nearing
retirement sold his ranch to the National Park Service for $300,000
\ess than the price offered him by a land developer.
63
-------
from the zoning designation and the growth pressure of the community
equally among all landowners, no matter what their zoning designa-
tion.
A "build-out" for the jurisdiction is determined by public policy—
the total number of dwelling units which will be permitted in the
future. This number is divided into the total privately owned un-
developed acreage in the jurisdiction, to determine the ultimate
overall density per acre in the jurisdiction. This figure is called
a "development right" and is apportioned to all owners of undevel-
oped land in the county. Thus if the ultimate desired buildout for
the county as a whole is two thousand more dwelling units, and there
are 1,000 acres of undeveloped land remaining in the county, land-
owners would get two "development rights" for every acre of unde-
veloped land which they own, regardless of the suitability of their
land for development.
Next, the areas which are suitable for development, according to the
policy plan, are identified. Many acres of the county will be
found unsuitable for one reason or another: hazards, conservation
areas, scenic vistas, prime agricultural land, etc.
The owners of the "high density" suitable land have just as many
development rights as the owners of marshes, cliffs, and mountain
tops. But in order for them to develop up to the density shown on
the zoning map, they must purchase development rights from the
owners of land which cannot be developed. When the owner of a "high
density" area has acquired enough development rights from the owners
of unsuitable areas to develop at his high density, he cashes them
in with the public officials. The result then is two-fold: a high
density development in a suitable area, coupled with the permanent
re Iinquishment of any possibility of development in an unsuitable
area. When the buildout is finally achieved, the jurisdiction will
be composed of high density development on suitable land, with the
rest in permanent open space. The owners of the unsuitable land do
not resist the policy plan because they have benefited from growth
and speculation the same as the owners of the suitable areas. And
although the transfer of development rights may have involved
millions of dollars, it has not cost the local government anything
to implement its policy.
Although the transfer, of development rights theory has received a
great deal of attention, it has not been applied at a significant
scale. Detailed discussion of all the potential problems and advan-
tages is beyond the scope of this chapter. It is generally felt
that more research is needed before this concept is readily usable.
(2) Covenants between private property owners which implement the policy
plan. Usually, these covenants are attached to property by a sub-
divider, and bind the subsequent purchasers of the lots. Such cove-
nants often read like a "private" zoning ordinance or building code:
64
-------
they prohibit resubdlvision; set forth minimum side, front and back-
yard setbacks; prohibit various (nonresidential) uses; and set forth
the style, size, exterior paint colors, and even minimum cost of
homes to be built there. After the subdivider has sold all of the
lots, the covenants are enforced by the subsequent lot owners; that
is, they are not only bound by the covenants but have the right to
enforce them against their neighbors.
In Houston, Texas, mutual covenants are in such widespread use that
the city has not even adopted a zoning code. And most observers
agree that land use problems in Houston are about the same as those
in other cities of comparable size and vintage.
5. The Capital Expenditures Program
A major governmental determinant of future land use and development 5s
the capital expenditures program of government. Unfortunately, there is
never one capital expenditures program; adjoining and overlapping juris-
dictions, each with its own policies, plans, budgets, priorities, and
construction programs, often work at cross purposes. A state agency is
building an interchange where the local community does not want any
growth pressure; special sewer districts are extending lines in one
direction while the city wants to annex in another; counties approve
subdivisions across the street from the city limits and hand the traffic
to someone else; the list could go on and on.
The solution to this problem is to create jurisdictions to contain all
the impacts of land, use changes. It is recommended that communities
establish "regional" planning commissions to make land use decisions,
but it is beyond the subject of this report to design a regional or
metropolitan-wide "government" to handle all public services and capital
expenditures programs. The essential goal is this: to ensure that all
capital expenditures of the taxpayer's dollar—state government, local
government, special service districts, school districts (and to the
extent possible, Federal programs)—are coordinated with each other and
implement the community's policy plan. In fact, the community should
demand no less in the use of its tax do Ilars.
There are several different ways which are presently available to the
community to achieve this goal:
a. Metropolitan Government -
It is beyond the scope of this study to recommend or design various
forms of metropolitan-wide government bodies, or special service agen-
cies. If a community is'a I ready served by such a government entity,
presumably both the power to review land use decisions and the capital
expenditures plan and budget are centralized. The adopted policy plan
should govern both types of decisions, thus ensuring complete coordina-
tion between land development by the private sector and the capital ex-
penditures program for the entire community.
65
-------
b. Coordination of State and Local Capital Expenditures Program with
Each Other, and with the Policy Plan, by a Regional Planning Com-
mission or Council of Governments -
In all areas which are not served by metropolitan-wide governments, the
regional "community" contains the jurisdictions of several local govern-
ment bodies, school districts, and special service districts, each with
its own capital expenditures program. In such cases, it is necessary to
establish a regional planning commission to coordinate all of the dif-
ferent capital expenditures programs with the policy plan. Several
different types of regional planning commissions can be envisioned.
Ranging from the most effective (in terms of implementing the policy plan)
to the least effective, they are:
(1) The regional planning commission with regulatory control over both
land use decisions and local and state capital expenditures pro-
grams. The regional planning commission envisioned in the model
state enabling legislation removes from the local level both the
planning power and the power to regulate land use decisions and
gives, it to the regional community level. If this same body is
given the power to review and pass upon the various public capital
expenditures programs for conformance with the policy plan, the
implementation of it by the capital expenditures programs should be
fairly well assured (but not to the degree that a metropolitan
government which develops and implements the capital expenditures
program for the entire community would have).
(2) A regional planning commission with the power to advise local
governments on their capital expenditures program with an appeal.
Instead of being able to veto a local government capital expendi-
tures program, this program would allow the regional planning com-
mission only the power to comment on the capital expenditures
programs. If the programs were in clear violation of the policy
plan, the regional planning commission would have the power to
appeal, either to a state-1 eve I agency or to the courts to ensure
enforcement.
(3) A regional council of governments with the power to review and com-
ment on local capital expenditures program. The regional planning
commissions envisioned in this study are composed of directly-
elected officials. A council of governments, on the other hand, is
composed of one or more elected officials from each participating
local government jurisdiction. Thus, a council of governments is
not so much an assembly of people as it is an .assembly of local
governments, and no attempt is made at one-man, one-vote democratic
decisions. This tends to make councils of governments somewhat
ineffective at reviewing and passing upon programs undertaken by
local governments because of a mutual back-scratching syndrome.
Nevertheless, many councils of governments have taken their jobs
seriously and can provide a relatively effective review procedure.
66
-------
(4) A-95 Review. The Federal Office of Management and Budget circular
A-95 provides that some coordinating agency must review every local
government application for Federal assistance in capital expendi-
tures programs (urban renewal, public housing, sewer grants, high-
way funds and the like) for consistency and compatibility. This
review function is often performed by regional planning commissions
or councils of government, but where these do not exist, the func-
tion is performed by a state agency. Because of the large number
of Federal grant programs for various capital expenditures, the A-95
review requirement can be an extremely effective tool for coordin-
ating capital expenditures programs. A-95 review should be ex-
panded by the community to cover not only coordination but imple-
mentation of all of the various policies in the policy plan. If
this is done, Federal dollars will be used to implement public
policy at the community level, one of the basic tenets of the "new
federal ism."
(5) Air and water pollution abatement programs. The Federal water and
air pollution control acts require the states to establish programs
to monitor and control pollution within guidelines established by
the Environmental Protection Agency. Many states, in turn, have
delegated this function to regional-level bodies which have the
power to issue or deny "permits" to operate a facility or activity
which pollutes, or which causes pollution (such as a shopping cen-
ter which attracts a significant amount of traffic). The Federal
laws recognize the significant interrelationships between land use
decisions and the generation of air and water pollution, and require
the states to take measures to plan and control land use changes to
minimize pollution. Two of the recommended policies contained in
the policy planning section are designed to implement this Federal
requirement at the community level. A logical extension of this
policy would be to combine regional air pollution control programs
and regional water pollution control programs with the regional
"land" pollution control programs into one agency. If this were
done, air, water, and land policies could be combined into one per-
mit procedure, saving time and money for developers and public
officials alike by creating a "one-stop permit" for all concerns.
(6) "Staged development" through capital expenditures planning, e.g.,
Ramapo 3 New York. Ramapo township is in Rock I and County on the
developing fringe of the New York City metropolitan area. It is
under significant development pressure for relatively low density,
single-family homes. The township is willing to accept this growth,
but it has discovered that in the past, as with most other communi-
ties, such growth does not pay its own way in the community. The
present residents of Ramapo are unwilling to subsidize the new
growth through increased taxes for the necessary public capital
improvements. They have developed a capital expenditures plan
which shows the rational and orderly expansion of roads and utili-
ties into the undeveloped areas of the county at a rate which would
ensure that the expected new growth would pay for the costs of the
67
-------
capital Improvements. According to the capital expenditures plan,
the township would grow in stages, and the entire township would
not be served with roads and public utilities for eighteen years.
Development would be allowed only in the areas which are served by
utilities. Thus, some developers will have to wait eighteen years
before they can build (except that they may do so if they bear the
entire cost of the utilities and roads to serve their development).
Developers who felt that the capital expenditures program prejudiced
their right to develop by making them wait brought suit, but the
Ramapo "staged development" program was upheld by the appellate
division of the New York State Supreme Court.
Ramapo's staged development program has come under criticism be-
cause the "ultimate buildout" of the township provided for only
minimal low-cost public housing and, in the opinion of some, irre-
sponsibly restricted the land available for much-needed housing
development in the New York City metropolitan area.
The dilemma—protecting the current residents of Ramapo from having
to subsidize new growth versus Ramapo's responsibility to help re-
solve the housing dislocations of the metropolitan area—is, like
so many other land use problems, a regional planning problem. Only
the metropolitan area as a whole can .see to it that enough new
housing is built to resolve the housing shortages in the metropoli-
tan area while ensuring that the costs of growth are borne by the
new residents. While Ramapo can insulate itself from general prob-
lems of the metropolitan area, a metropolitan-wide decision-making
authority could not-*
b. Financial Incentives and Disincentives: Public Subsidies which In-
duce Private Developers to Implement the PolicyPlan -
(1) Unconscious subsidization. Unconscious subsidization occurs when a
new development does not generate enough tax base to pay for a I I of
the capital improvements and public services which it requires, with
the difference being paid by the original residents and taxpayers,
either in the form of a lowering of services or higher taxes.
Another kind of unconscious subsidy can occur when massive new
development, which will ultimately pay all or more than all of the
costs of capital expenditures and public services which it requires,
does not generate those revenues during the short-run construction
period. For instance: a town has just accepted a large new sub-
division which will not be completely developed and occupied for
another ten years. The new subdivision will generate enough new
school children to require a new high school and several new elemen-
tary schools because the existing schools in the town are already
A metropolitan-wide land use planning and decision-making body is ex-
tremely unlikely. The metropolitan area of New York City comprises
parts of three states and over fourteen hundred special district juris-
dictions.
68
-------
overcrowded. When the development is completed ten years from now,
it wilI provide more than enough tax base to pay for the new
schools. Unfortunately, the schools must be planned and built im-
mediately in order to accommodate the first children who will be
moving in. Since the tax base developed in the subdivision in the
next two years wilI not be nearly enough to pay for the entire new
school construction program, the present residents of the town are
forced to raise their school taxes in order to build the schools
for the residents of the new subdivision.
(2) Conscious subsidies. Conscious subsidies are those which are the
result of an intentional decision on the part of public officials
to subsidize a developer who implements a public goal. They in-
clude programs such as: the use of the eminent domain power to
assemble an urban renewal site or a new industrial park, which is
turned over to private developers for less than the cost of acqui-
sition (often only one dollar); a conscious decision to assess the
property at only a fraction of its "fair" assessment value; free or
below cost provision of public services for a number of years (i.e.,
absolution from the requirement of paying local taxes for a number
of years); special provisions to permit rapid depreciation of capi-
tal investments; and assessment of agricultural land at its agri-
cultural value, rather than at its speculative value for housing
development. Many of these conscious subsidies are the result of
special provisions in state laws enacted to encourage new industrial
expansion and thus stimulate economic growth and new employment
opportunities, or (in the case of the latter) to prevent farmers
from being forced off the land.*
(3) The Vermont system of recovering excess profits from land specula-
tion. Several years ago, the state of Vermont adopted a special
tax to discourage speculation in raw land. The tax is similar to
an additional capital gains tax on quick speculative profits, except
that the tax is based on a sliding scale. If, for instance, a spec-
ulator makes a two hundred percent profit in only nine months, the
state tax takes almost the entire profit remaining after he pays
his Federal taxes. If, however, he sells the property for a small
profit during that short period of time, only a portion of that
profit is subject to the additional tax. The longer the period of
time which the speculator holds the property, and the smaller the
profit he makes on resale, the smaller the percentage of his actual
profit is taken by the additional tax. A small profit after several
years is not taxed, and no profit is taxed after the speculator has
owned the property for six years.+
* For an analysis of the effects of special tax assessment programs for
farmers, see White, Wi Iliam S., The Last Landscape.
+ Information on the Vermont Land Gains tax can be obtained from James
Kendall, Director of Audits, Vermont Department of Revenue, Montpelier,
Vermont.
69
-------
C. LAND USE CONTROL REGULATIONS
1 • A New Kind of Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance
The normal zoning ordinance divides the jurisdiction of the local
government i nto zoning^ districts—e. g., residential, commercial, indus-
trial, public facilities, agriculture—and then sets forth, for each
district, the types of land uses which are permitted or prohibited«in
that district. Sometimes the districts are further defined to indicate,
for instance, the housing densities which are permitted in different
kinds of residential districts, the various types of businesses which
are permitted in different commercial districts, or the types of indus-
tries which are permitted in different types of industrial districts.
Generally, uses which are permitted as a "matter of right" in a district
must meet certain conditions such as lot size, building size, height,
setback from the lot line, offstreet parking requirements, and various
other standards. Still other uses may be provided for in a district upon
"special review" by the public officials. These special review uses are
usually granted or denied to a developer based on the principles which
underlie the development of the comprehensive plan. They, like rezonings,
are often subject to charges of political abuse.
Zoning ordinances also provide for variances from specific technical
standards which would work a hardship on the developer, and vezonings
which, when they are granted, amount to a de facto amendment of the
zoning ordinance (and thus the comprehensive plan).
Subdivision ordinances usually set forth procedures and requirements
which must be met before a developer can divide a parcel of land into
lots to be built upon or resold. Not many years ago, the typical sub-
division ordinance contained little more than procedures for lot sur-
veyors and the road construction crew to follow. More progressive sub-
division ordinances adopted in recent years, however, have included
requirements for lot layout and design which make them more compatible
with the natural environment and surrounding neighborhood, requirements
for water and sewer systems Cor proof that water wells and septic tanks
are feasible on each site) and various other measures designed to pro-
tect the lot buyer. Requirements that the subdivider dedicate a certain
percentage of the land to the lot owners, or the local government, for
sites for schools and parks are not uncommon. Also, requirements for
posting a bond with the local government to ensure that the roads and
other public improvements will meet standards set by the local govern-
ment are routine. Provisions which permit or encourage the subdivider
to "cluster" all of the lots to which he is entitled in one corner of
the parcel, leaving the remainder undeveloped for the common use of the
residents of the subdivision, are gaining popularity. A clustered
development is called a planned unit development (PUD). A PUD is really
a process in which the developer and the community bargain back and
forth so that each gains something.
70
-------
In most instances, zoning ordinances and subdivision ordinances have been
adopted Independently of each other; they do not relate. A developer who
requires a conditional or special use permit, or a rezoning—and also
requires that his subdivision plat be approved—is often subject to com-
pletely different and independent requirements and public hearings which
must be undertaken sequentially. If the developer is also subject to the
jurisdiction of air pollution control boards, water pollution control
boards, the public health department, the school district, a host of over-
lapping special service districts and, in addition, is petitioning for an
annexation to a neighboring city or town, he is subject to a series of
processes and hearings which take months and even years. The developer's
attorneys must "win" every hearing before every individual board at every
step in every process. Besides making land development one of the more
ulcerogenic of human enterprises, this system needlessly lowers the sup-
ply and raises the cost of new housing through delay and uncertainty. It
also results in susceptibility to political abuse. And its ability to
protect the environment is highly suspect.
Most important, the system does not ensure that new land development
activity implements public policy.
The proposed new subdivision and zoning system of the LUDMS is designed,
to the greatest extent possible, to implement the policy plan. It
utilizes all of the traditional techniques of zoning and subdivision
regulation mentioned above, but with the following important adaptations.
The zoning map and ordinance are based on public policy and the scien-
tific and technical information developed pursuant to it. Thus the
boundaries of zoning districts are "natural"—following the contours of
the flood plain, for instance, rather than existing property lines. The
traditionally developed zoning map, because it is not based on conscious
public policy, attempts merely to encourage the patterns of traditional
growth. But by zoning according to the policy plan, the zoning map rep-
resents desirable future uses. The old zoning system is in reality
arbitrary and capricious; the new one would be technically and politically
sound.
The new zoning system encourages flexibility and innovation in land use
planning and discourages rigidity and balkanization of uses. While tra-
ditional zoning ordinances are negative, with a long list of prohibited
uses, the new zoning ordinance would be positive with few uses absolutely
prohibited. By the same token, there would few if any "uses by right"
excepting those pre-existing at the time the new system was adopted (and
they might be non-conforming). The critical difference between the old
and the new approaches is that the latter would test or permit a use
based on the policy plan with scientific and technical backup such as
the environmental component inventory and analysis maps. The critical
test would be: what will be compatible with the policy plan?
71
-------
So far, only the special zoning features of this ordinance have been
discussed,and indeed they contain the major innovations in the ordinance.
The subdivision regulations contain all of the provisions of a progres-
sive subdivision ordinance outlined above. There are two important
differences, however. First, the subdivider must prove that public
policy is being implemented. This ensures that the cumulative impact
of the new subdivision on public policy is assessed a I I at once, and not
piecemeal as each individual lot owner decides to build. Second, the
subdivision regulations, zoning ordinance, and planned unit development
regulations are all combined. Consolidation of all land use controls
into one coordinated ordinance assures developers, public officials,
and citizens of only one set of submission requirements and one series of
hearings.
2. The Permit System
Traditional land use controls could not survive carefully developed pub-
lic policy and scientific information. The permit system has been de-
vised to overcome the futility and unreliability of pre-establishing
permitted uses and densities in a zoning district. Under the permit
system, no uses or densities are ever absolutely prohibited or abso-
lutely permitted in advance of an actual proposal to develop. Land
development activity is regulated on the basis of the specifics of the
proposal (as opposed to the false presumption in zoning districts that
all housing tracts, shopping centers, or industrial plants can be lumped
together in the same category). Furthermore, permission is granted or
denied based upon an accurate knowledge of the current conditions in the
community rather than on some vague notion about the future) and current
public policy (as opposed to public policy when the zoning ordinance was
adopted, which may have been decades ago). And because there are no
vested rights to develop property, there is no way for a land developer
to avoid regulation and control. For these reasons, the permit system
is more reliable than the zoning system for implementing public policy.*
The permit system is very simple to understand: the developer submits a
proposal and evidence showing an intent to comply with the policy plan.
The staff and the planning commission review the proposal and make recom-
mendations to the elected officials. Notice is given and a public hear-
ing is held. The evidence from the developer is heard, as well as any
challenges to the proposal, and the public officials render a decision
as to whether the proposal implements public policy. The public offi-
cials may of course wish to attach certain conditions or guarantees to a
permit.
As will be seen, a permit is required to subdivide land; and the sub-
division regulations used in the "combined" ordinance are also used in
the "permit" ordinance. Thus, subdividers would be subject to the
same requirements under either, and the distinction between the permit
system and the specially adapted zoning system is a I I that remains.
72
-------
A critical question in the permit system is one of jurisdiction: what
kinds of development are subject to the permit process, and what kinds
are exempt? In the model ordinance, an activity which is regulated is
called a "land development activity" and it is defined. However, the
definition is a general one which will probably be reworked before any
community adopts the ordinance. (See Appendix B.) In general, a land
development activity should be considered as any change in the use of
land which, if undertaken, would have an impact on the policy plan of
that community, including its biological, physical and social environ-
ment.
If the word "impact" is taken literally, such a definition with its
attendant requirement of developing and filing impact statements and
going through public hearings could pose a real hardship on persons
making small land use changes as well as on overworked public officials..
Several features, then, should be added to the definition. The first of
these is that activities which do not change the present use of land,
but make its change inevitable, should be included. This is the
"triggering effect." Primarily this means subdivisions. If they are
included in the definition, the cumulative impact of the resulting
future housing development can be determined, obviating the necessity of
requiring a permit for each dwelling on each resulting lot. For minor
land use changes, there should be a presumption of "no impact" for most
adopted policies. Although persons wishing to make such changes would
still have to obtain a permit, the requirements of the impact statement
could be greatly reduced. For example, a farmer intending to build a
livestock watering pond or reservoir might only have to prove that he
would not be adversely affecting a downstream municipality's water
supply in order to obtain his permit.*
Although zoning is often arbitrary, it does settle many questions and
gives the landowner a secure and objectively discernible basis upon
which to proceed. Under the permit system, everything depends on the
public officials' decision in an individual case. Would the permit
system be even more vulnerable to charges of arbitrary action and politi-
cal favoritism than the zoning system? The zoning system is rarely if
ever based on re.liable data and public opinion; it affords public offi-
cials little basis for judging a rezoning application. The process for
developing the policy plan, on the other hand, should develop both re-
liable data and reliable public opinion. It is completely open to
* The requirement of obtaining a building permit should not be subject to
the same exemptions as those applying to land development activities.
In the case of a subdivision, for instance, the land development activ-
ity permit was granted on the basis of the housing tract's impact on
public policy, and thus by implication included the impact of each
resulting home, and this obviates the need for a land development
activity permit for each home. It does not consider the requirement
that each resulting home must comply with the standards of the build-
ing code.
73
-------
scrutiny and participation by interested citizens. Actions which con-
tradict the data for no apparent reason, or which obviously favor a
developer and violate public policy, would thus be plainly evident. Pub-
Iic^officials would act in peril of their political futures. If the
policy plan and technical implementation devices have been carefully
developed, the permit system would be less arbitrary than zoning both in
appearance and in reality.
One way of looking at the permit system is to say that it zones land to
existing use and makes all proposed new uses subject to special review.
In areas which are already zoned for more intensive uses and densities,
wouldn't this be an example of the government taking a vested property
right without just compensation in violation of the Constitution? The
Taking Issue, the book by Bosselman and Callies previously referred to,
should be required reading for attorneys engaged in land use matters.
If the permit system were viewed as a type of zoning (which it is not),
it could be viewed as simply adding a few more requirements before the
landowner can develop. If these requirements (compliance with public
policy) are founded upon good data and valid public opinion, there
should be no legal impediment to their enforcement. On the other hand,
the imposition of these requirements has also freed the landowner from
all of the prohibitions on uses and densities from which he suffered
under his former zoning classification. Thus instead of losing rights
to develop, by subjecting himself to the permit system he actually gains
many rights to develop which he did not have under the zoning ordinance.
Whether or not the permit system itself amounts to a "taking," couldn't
officials in a particular case "take" all property rights by simply
denying permit after permit? Such a situation is possible, depending
on the policies which a community adopts, but nevertheless highly un-
likely. In most jurisdictions, the courts have held that zoning does
not amount to "taking" if the landowner is left with "a reasonable" or
"an economically reasonable" use of his land. If the public policy of
a community strongly favored the protection of prime agricultural land
from development, and the owner of a one-acre parcel of such land were
repeatedly denied permission to develop on that basis, he might make
this case: "The public officials refuse to allow me to do anything but
farm my land. But I cannot farm my land economically because it is only
a one-acre parcel. Therefore, they have left me no options and hrave
taken my land without compensation." This is not an argument against
the adoption of a public policy in favor of protecting prime agricul-
tural lands, but'against the implementation of that policy in such a
way as to ruin a landowner.
A permit system, based on reliable scientific and technical information
and public opinion as expressed in the policy plan, has obvious legal
advantages both ways. Denial of a permit has a much better chance of
being upheld by the courts on a finding that it is not arbitrary and .!
74
-------
capricious and that it does not amount to a taking in that other uses
would be permitted. On the other hand, one denied a permit when such
denial was not based on the policy plan would have a good chance of
proving that the denial was arbitrary and capricious. This is another
example of why zoning is much more subject to corruption and political
abuse than the LUDMS-type permit system.
75
-------
REFERENCES
Section I I I
Adams, A. and N. Newhall. This is the American Earth. Ballantine.
Reissue.
America's Changing Environment. R. Revelle and H. H. Landsberg (eds.).
Boston, Houghton Miff I in, 1970.
CaI dwell, L. K. Environment: A Challenge for Modern Society. Garden
City, N. Y., Natural History Press for American Museum of Natural
History, 1970.
Carr, D. E. Death of the Sweet Waters. New York, W. W. Norton & Com-
pany, Inc., 1966.
Carson, R. Silent Spring. Greenwich, Connecticut, Fawcett Crest, 1962.
Commoner, B. The Closing Circle. New York, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1971
Democracy in the Space Age: Regional Government under a California
State Plan. California Tomorrow. J. W. Abbot (ed.).
The Environment. Fortune, Editors. New York, Harper & Rowe, 1970.
Environment and Change: The Next Fifty Years. W. R. Ewald, Jr. (ed.).
Bloomfngton, Indiana, Indiana University Press, 1968.
Environment: A New Focus for Land-Use Planning. GPO #3800-00161.
Environment for Man: The Next Fifty Years. W. R. Ewald, Jr. (ed.).
Bloomington, Indiana, Indiana University Press, 1967.
Faltermayer, E. Redoing America. Macmillan.
From Sea to Shining Sea: A Report on the American Environment—Our
Natural Heritage. By the President's Council on Recreation and Natural
Beauty. Washington, D. C., U. S. Government Printing Office, 1968.
The Good Earth of America: Planning our Land Use. The American Assem-
bly, Columbia University. Englewood Cliffs, N. J., Prentice-Hall, Inc.
1974.
•
Gordon, M. Sick Cities. New York, Macmillan, 1963.
Gottman, J. Megalopolis. Cambridge, Massachusetts, TheM.l.T. Press,
1961.
76
-------
Hansen, R. P. A National Land Use Policy—Toward a New Land Ethic.
Reprinted from the Proceedings of the Southwestern Legal Foundation
Twenty-Fourth Annual Institute on Oil and Gas Law and Taxation. Albany,
N. Y., Matthew Bender & Company, 1973.
Hylander, C. J. Wildlife Communities. Boston, Houghton Miff I in Company,
1966.
Jacobs, J. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York,
Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., (Random House), 1961.
Leopold, A. W. Sand County Almanac and Sketches Here and There. Oxford
University Press.
Linton, R. M. Terracide: America's Destruction of Her Living Environ-
ment. Boston, Little, Brown, 1970.
Little, C. E. Challenge of the Land. New York, Open Space Action
Institute, Inc., 1968.
Lynch, K. The Image of the City.
Marine, G. America the Raped: The Engineering Mentality and the
Devastation of a Continent. New York, Simon and Schuster, 1969.
McHarg, I.. F. Design with Nature. Garden City, N. Y., The Natural
History Press, 1969.
Metropolis in Crisis. J. H. Hadden, (ed.). Itasca, Illinois, F. E.
Peacock, Inc., 1967.
Mumford, L. The Urban Prospect. New York, Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc.,
1968.
Odum, E. P. Ecology. HR&W.
Owings, N. A. The American Aesthetic. New York, Harper and Row, 1969.
Patri > T.,, D. C. Stretfield, and T. J. Ingmire. Early Warning System:
The Santa Cruz Mountains Regional Pilot Study. Ford Foundation, 1970.
The Quality of the Urban Environment. H. S. Per I off (ed.). Washington,
D. C., Resources for the Future, Inc., 1969.
Public Land Policy and the Environment. A Study Prepared for the "Pub lie
Land Law Review Commission, Part II. Washington, D. C., January 1970.
Readings in Conservation Ecology. G. Cox (ed.). Appleton.
Rockefeller, L. S. et al. The Use of Land: A Citizens' Policy Guide to
Urban Growth. The Task Force on Land Use and Urban Growth, Citizens'
Advisory Committee on Environmental Quality, New York, Thomas Y. Crowell,
1973.
77
-------
Seminar on Environmental Arts and Sciences—Syllabus. Thorne Ecological
Institute, Boulder, Colorado, 1969-1974.
Subversive Science: Essays toward an Ecology of Man. P. Shepard and
D. McKinley (eds.). HM.
Spreiregen, P. D. Urban Design: The Architecture of Towns and Cities.
New York, McGraw Hill Book Company, 1965.
Tunnard, Christopher, and Pushkarev. Man-Made America: Chaos or
Control? New Haven, Yale University Press, 1963.
Udall, S. L. Quiet Crisis. Avon.
Watts, M. T. Reading the Landscape. New York, Macmillan, 1957.
Whyte, W. H. The Last Landscape. New York, Doubleday & Company, 1968.
Section IV
Altshuler, A. A. The City Planning Process: A Political Analysis.
Ithaca, N. Y., Cornell University Press, 1965.
Bacon, E. N. Design of Cities. New York, The Viking Press, 1967.
Black, Alan. Principles and Practice of Urban Planning. Washington,
D. C., ICMA, 1968.
Bui lard, W. E. Water Related Land Use Planning Guidelines. Interstate
Commission on the Potomac River Basin, March 1974.
The California Tomorrow Plan^ revised. California Tomorrow. Los Altos,
William Kaufmann, 1972.
Cartwright, T. J. Problems3 Solutions and Strategies: A Contribution
to the Theory and Practice of Planning. Journal of the American Insti-
tute of Planners. May 1973. pp. 179-187.
Chap in, F. S., Jr. Urban Land Use Planning. Second Ed. University of
I'll inois Press, 1970.
Citizens Make the Difference. Citizens' Advisory Committee on Environ-
mental Quality, Washington, D. C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1973.
Community Action for Environmental Quality. Citizens' Advisory Committee
on Environmental Quality, Washington, D. C., U.S. Government Printing
Office, 1970.
Environmental Plan for New York State. New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation, Albany, N. Y., 1973.
78
-------
Gal I ion, A. B., and S. Eisner. The Urban Pattern: City Planning and
Design. Princeton, N. J., Van Nostrand, 1963.
Hawaii's Growth Choice (Quality vs. Quantity or Both?). Summary of
Conference Proceedings. Center for Engineering Research, University of
Hawaii, September 1973.
The Heber Valley Story and WorT
-------
Lewin, S. F., A. H. Gordon, and C. J. Hartelius. Law and the Municipal
Ecology. National Institute of Municipal Law Officers. Washington,
D. C., 1970.
Section V-C
Anderson, R. M. The American Law of Zoning. Rochester, N. Y., Lawyers
Cooperative Publishing Company, 1968.
Berger, C. Land Ownership and Use. Indianapolis, Indiana, Bobbs-
Merrill Company, 1968.
Beuscher, J. and R. Wright. Land Use. St. Paul, Minnesota, West Pub-
lishing Company, 1969.
Bosselman, F., D. Callies, and J. Banta. The Taking Issue: An Analysis
of the Constitutional Limits of Land Use Control. Washington, D. C.,
U.S. Government Printing Office, December 1971.
Brenneman, R. L. Private Approaches to the Preservation of Open Land.
The Conservation and Research Foundation, 1967.
California Planning Enabling Legislation. State of California Govern-
ment Code, Section 65000 series, 1973.
Cases and Materials on Property: An Introduction to the Concept and the
Institution. C. Donahue, T. Kauper, and P. Martin (eds.). St. Paul,
Minnesota, West Publishing Company, 1974.
Delafons, J. Land-Use Controls in the United States. 2d ed,, 1969.
Green, P. Cases and Text on Planning Law and Administration. 1962.
Haar, C. Land Use Planning. Boston, Massachusetts, Little, Brown, & Co
Company, 2d ed., 1971.
Hagman, D. Public Planning and Control of Urban and Land Development.
St. Paul, Minnesota, West Publishing Company, 1971.
. Urban Planning and Land Development Control Law. St. Paul,
Minnesota, West Publishing Company, 1971.
Lefcoe, G. Land Development Law. Indianapolis, Indiana, Bobbs-MerriI I
Company, 1966.
Management and Control of Growth. Urban Land Institute, Washington,
D. C., 2 volumes.
Mandelker, D. Managing Our Urban Environment. Indianapolis, Indiana,
Bobbs-MerriI I Company, 1971.
80
-------
Mandelker, D. The Zoning Dilemma: A Legal Strategy for Urban Change.
Indianapolis, Indiana, Bobbs-MerriI I Company, 1971.
McDougal, M. and D. Haber. Property, Wealth., Land: Allocation, Plan-
ning and Development. 1948.
Metzenbaum, J. The Law of Zoning. Mt. Kisco, N. Y., Baker, Voorhis,
2d ed., 1955.
Poo ley, B. Planning and Zoning in the United States. Ann Arbor,
Michigan, University of Michigan Press, 1961.
Problems of Zoning and Land-Use Regulation. American Society of Plan-
ning Officials, Washington, D. C., Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific
and Technical Information, 1968.
Rathkopf, A. The Law of Zoning and Planning. New York, N. Y., Matthew
Bender, 3d ed., 1956.
Roberts, E. Land Use Planning. New York, N. Y., Matthew Bender, 1971.
ROMCOE Land Use Packet #1. Rocky Mountain Center on Environment,
Denver, Colorado, 1971.
Rose, J. "The Courts and the Balanced Community: Recent Trends in New
Jersey Laws." American Institute of Planners. July 1973, pp. 265-276.
"Securing Open Space for Urban America: Conservation Easements." Urban
Land Institute. Technical Bulletin 36, December 1959.
Shomon, J. J. Open Land for Urban America: Acquisition, Safekeeping,
and Use. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins Press, 1971.
Wengert, N. Legal Aspects of Land Use Policies, Plans, and Implementa-
tion. Paper given at National Land Use Policy Congress, 1972.
Yokley, E. Zoning Law and Practice. CharlottesviIle, Virginia, Michie
Company, 3d ed., 1965.
Your Property and Scenic Easements: A Guide to the Preservation of Open
Space. Ohio Conservation Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio.
Section VII-A
Anderson, J. R., E. E. Hardy, and J. T. Roach. A Land-Use Classification
System for Use with Remote-Sensor Data. Geological Survey Circular 671 ,
1972.
Bel knap, R. K., J. G. Furtado, R. R. Forster, and H. D. Blossom. Three
Approaches to Environmental Resource Analysis. Washington, D. C., The
Conservation Foundation, 1967.
81
-------
Billings, W. D. Plants, Man, and the Ecosystem. 2d ed. Wadsworth Pub.
Branch, M. C. City Planning and Aerial Information. Cambridge, Massa-
chusetts, Harvard University Press, 1971.
A Comparative Study of Resource Analysis Methods. Department of Land-
scape Architecture Research Office, Graduate School of Design, Harvard,
1969.
The Costs of Sprawl: Executive Summary and Detailed Cost Analysis.
Prepared by the Real Estate Research Corporation. Washington, D. C.,
U.S. Government Printing Office, April 1974.
Critical Environmental Areas. Prepared by the Division of State Plan-
ning and Community Affairs, State of Virginia, December 1972.
Environmental Study of Proposed Avon-Beaver Creek Development Alterna-
tives. For Vail Associates, Inc. Rocky Mountain Center on Environment,
Denver, Colorado, June 1974.
Flawn, P. T. Environmental Geology. New York, Harper and Row, 1970.
Kirwin Environmental Study. For American Metal Climax. Rocky Mountain
Center on Environment, Denver, Colorado, July 1973.
Lake Tahoe: An Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared by Theodore J.
Wirth and Associates, Billings, Montana and Chevy Chase, Maryland,
January 1972.
Leopold, L. B., F. E. Clarke, B. B. Hanshaw, and J. R. Balsley. A Pro-
cedure for Evaluating Environmental Impact. Geological Survey Circular
645, 1971.
Lewis, P-. H., Jr. Upper Mississippi River Comprehensive Basin Study.
University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin.
Litton, R. B. Forest Landscape Description and Inventories - A Basis
for Land Planning and Design. U.S.D.A. Forest Service Research Paper
PSW-49.
Lynch, K. Site Planning. 2d ed., 1974.
A Model Land Development Code: Synopsis and Comment. Submitted by the
Model Land Development Code Subcommittee, Urban Environment Committee,
Section of Local Government Law, American Bar Association.
National Forest Landscape Management. Vol. 1, Forest Service, Agricul-
ture Handbook #434. February 1973.
Planning Considerations for Winter Sports Resort Development. U.S.D.A.
Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region.
82
-------
A Program Design: Comprehensive Environmental Planning Program for the
Colorado Olympic Region. For the Denver Olympic Organizing Committee.
Rocky Mountain Center on Environment and Charles Gathers and Associates,
Inc., Denver, Colorado, December 1972.
The Public Costs of Private Development. Summary of proceedings. Spon-
sored by Center of Engineering Research, University of Hawaii. January
1973.
Public Land Policy and the Environment. Public Land Law Review Commis-
sion. Vol. 4. U.S. Department of Commerce, December 1970.
Thompson, W. R. A Preface to Urban Economics. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins
Press, 1965.
Toth, R. "Criteria in Land Planning and Design." Landscape Architecture,
October 1971, pp. 43-46.
Warner, M. L. and E. H. Preston. A Review of Environmental Impact
Assessment Methodologies. Office of Research and Development, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D. C. U.S. Government
Printing Office, EPA-600/5-74-002, April 1974.
Where Not to Build—A Guide for Open Space Planning. Technical Bulletin
1, Bureau of Land Management. Washington, D. C., U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1968.
Genera I
An Approach to Regional Services: The Colorado Service Authority Act of
1972. An analysis by the Denver Regional Council of Governments, May
1972.
Bolan, R. S. "Emerging Views of Planning." Journal of the American-
Institute of Planners. July 1967, pp. 233-245.
Carter, S., M. Frost, C. Rubin, and L. Sumek. Environmental Management
and Local Government. Office of Research and Development, Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D. C. U.S. Government Printing Office
EPA-600/5-73-016, February 1974.
Chiara, J. D. and L. Koppelman. Planning Design Criteria. School of
Architecture, Pratt Institute. New York, Canada, Van Nostrand Reinhold
Company, 1969.
Cike, J. G. and J. J. Gargan. Fragmentation in Land-Use Planning and
Control. Prepared for the National Commission on Urban Problems, Re-
search Report No. 18. Washington, D. C., U.S. Government Printing Office,
1969.
83
-------
Cities, A Scientific American Book. New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1966.
Clawson, M. Suburban Land Conversion in the United States: An Economic
and Governmental Process for Resources for the Future. Baltimore, Johns
Hopkins Press.
Coker, R. E. Streams, Lakes, Ponds. New York, Harper and Row.
Colorado Land Use Commission papers:
Interim Land Use Plan, vols. 1 and 2, December 1972.
A Handbook on Senate Bill 35, June 1972.
Model Subdivision Regulations for Counties, June 1972.
Preliminary List of Subdivisions 500 Acres and Over, November 1972.
Commoner, B. Science and Survival. Viking Press.
Degler, S. E. State Air Pollution Control Laws. SNA
Degler, S. E. and S. C. Bloom. Federal Pollution Control Problems:
Water, Air and Social Wastes. SNA
DuBos, R. So Human an Animal. New York, Scribner.
Ehrlich, P. R. The Population Bomb. Ballantine.
El dredge, H. W. Taming Megalopolis, V. 1: What is and What Could Be.
Taming Megalopolis, V. 2: How to Manage an Urbanized
World. Doubleday.
Environmental Plan for New York State. Preliminary edition, Department
of Environmental Conservation, June 1973.
The Exploding Metropolis. By the Editors of Fortune. Garden City, N. Y.,
Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1958.
Farb, P. Face of North America: The Natural History of a Continent.
New York, Harper and Row.
Final Conference Report for the National Conference on Managing the
Environment. Prepared for the Office of Research and Development, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D. C., 1973.
The Freeway in the City. A Report to the Secretary, Department of Trans-
portation, by the Urban Advisors to the Federal Highway Administrator,
Michael Rapuano, Chairman. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
D. C. 1968. -n
Gottman, J. Megalopolis. Cambridge, Massachusetts, TheM.l.T. Press,
1961.
Gruen, V- The Heart of Our Cities. New York, Simon and Schuster, 1964.
84
-------
Havlick, S. W. The Urban Organism. New York, Macmillan, 1974.
Herfindahl, 0. D. and A. V. Kneese. Quality of the Environment: An
Economic Approach to Some Problems in Using Land, Water and Air.
Baltimore, Johns Hopkins.
I sard, W. and others. Ecologic-Economic Analysis for Regional Develop-
ment. New York, Free Press, 1972.
Land and Water Use. W. Thome (ed.). Publication No. 73, American
Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, D. C., 1969.
Land Use and the Environment, an Anthology of Readings. V. Curtis (ed.).
Prepared by the American Society of Planning Officials, Chicago, Illinois,
under the auspices of the Environmental Studies Division of the Office
of Research and Monitoring, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
D. C., 1973.
Land Use Planning for Air Quality in the Pikes Peak Area. Prepared for
the Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments by Kaman Sciences Corporation,
August 1972.
Mayer, A. The Urgent Future. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1967.
Mumford, L. The Culture of Cities. New York, Harcourt, Brace and World,
Inc., 1938.
National Land Use Policy. Background papers on past and pending legis-
lation and the roles of the executive branch, Congress, and the states
in land use policy and planning. Compiled at the request of Senator
Henry M. Jackson, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, U.S. Senate,
April 1972, 92nd Congress, 2nd session.
One Third of the Nation's Land. A Report to the President and to the
Congress by the Public Land Law Review Commission. U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D. C., June 1970.
Perspectives on Conservation: Essays on America's Natural Resources.
Hr Jarrett (ed.). Baltimore, Johns Hopkins.
Quality of the Urban Environment: Essays on "New Resources" in an Urban
Age. H. S. Perloff (ed.). Baltimore, Johns Hopkins.
Quo Vadis Colorado, Planning Priorities for the State. Proceedings from
the 15th Annual Institute for Planning Officials, University of Colorado,
September 13-15., 1972, edited by Thomas R. Kitsos, Bureau of Governmental
Research and Service, Boulder, Colorado.
Resources and Man. Report of the Committee on Resources and Man of the
National Academy of Sciences. W. H. Freeman.
85
-------
Robinson, J. Highways and Our Environment. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1971,
Rudofsky, B. Streets for People: A Primer for Americans. Garden City,
N. Y., Doubleday, 1969.
Strahler, A. N. The Earth Sciences. New York, Harper and Row, 1963.
Trzyna, T. C. Environmental Impact Requirements in the States: NEPA's
Offspring. Prepared for the Office of Research and Development, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D. C., U.S. Government
Printing Office, April 1974.
Urban Life and Form. W. Z. Hirsch (ed.). New York, Holt, Rinehart and
Winston, Inc., 1965.
Urban Planning in Rural America. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, 1965, study analyzing the effectiveness and role of plan-
ning in rural areas.
Von Eckardt, W. A Place to Live: The Crisis of the Cities. New York,
Delacorte Press, 1967.
86
-------
SECTION VII
APPENDICES
Page
A. Environmental Resources Inventory and Analysis 88
B. Model Land Use Code for Local Units of Government ill
C. Model State Land Use Code lU2
D. Testing the Proposed System 170
87
-------
APPENDIX A
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS
A. INTRODUCTION
The major premise of the land use decision-making system is that environ-
mental ly responsible land use decisions are based on valid scientific
information and an understanding of human and non-human ecological sys-
tems. In recent years, there has been some progress in new techniques
and methodologies for relating such information to planning. Real re-
sults in terms of environmental quality have been demonstrated in some
situations. Many environmental planning approaches have been triggered
by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or the few "little NEPA"
state acts. Since most land use decisions are not affected by the
requirement for environmental impact analysis, many involved in land use
planning and control have not had an opportunity to study or apply
scientific interdisciplinary team planning processes. Even where such
methods have been applied, the environmental information has often not
been translated into actual decisions.
The Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) must analyze and communicate the many
aspects of the environment which are related to land use decisions. The
role of the professional in the environmental arts and sciences is criti-
cal to environmentally responsible decision making, but it has not been
properly structured in land use. The approach presented here has been
developed and used over a period of years by ROMCOE and others.
In developing this process, a number of approaches have been examined.
Some have severe deficiencies. This process is intended to be a "middle
ground" with adequate depth and breadth, oriented toward the principles
of ecology, but avoiding excessive complexity and cost which may render
it unacceptable at local levels of governmental application.
Most environmental resource and inventory analysis (ERIA) methodologies
developed to date have several major deficiencies:
(1) They are independent of the decision-making system. Results and
data can be ignored whether or not relevant to decisions being made.
88
-------
(2) They are multidlsclpl inary but are not interdisciplinary. Various
experts will analyze separate environmental components but may not
deal with the ecological interrelationships between these compo-
nents.
(3) They do not achieve a balance between complexity and simplicity.
Some studies are so complex with such enormous amounts of data (and
perhaps with computer programs and mapping) that they become unin-
telligible to public officials or citizens for whom they are in-
tended .
On the other hand, some planning efforts oversimplify the environment by
ignoring important components and interrelationships.
In the research for this report, various approaches were considered.
"Regional carrying capacity," "ecological zoning" and other concepts were
among these, but it was felt that more experimentation and research is
needed on these more exotic techniques.
The IDT must be involved in communications with public officials and the
public which is affected by land use decisions. The IDT must listen to
the citizens to learn of their values, aspirations, -concerns, and know-
ledge of the community. The IDT must also help the public understand
how environmental systems work. How does groundwater become polluted,
and how does this affect people and their environment? How do the dynam-
ics of ecological succession affect man's use of the environment? How
does revenue from development flow into government over a period of time,
and how does this affect present residents? What is "carrying capa-
city"? What are "economies of scale"? The public must have a better
understanding of many factors such as these. Sound decision making must
rely on fact and reality, not on myths, fantasies, whimsy, or arbitrary
or capricious value-setting which characterizes much existing land use
controI.
The IDT processes and outputs are intimately related to the other com-
ponents of LUDMS. Significant alterations of one part of the system will
affect other parts. It is recognized, of course, that all ecolegists,
urban designers, economists, sociologists and earth scientists have their
own methods and thought processes; there is flexibility in the LUDMS
process to accept these variations.
A philosophical perspective of the ERIA process is appropriate. The IDT
analysis is predicated on the belief that man and nature must live in
harmony, and that man is not separable from other organisms and the total
environment. The goals of the National Environmental Policy Act express
this belief. But sensitivity to change and disturbance of the environ-
ment does not mean that all growth and development must be stopped. It
is a basic principle of environmental planning that man and nature can
live harmoniously, that man's activities can occur as though he were a
part of nature, which in fact he is.
89
-------
B. OBJECTIVES OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS
In land use decision making which seeks to maintain a harmonious rela-
tionship between man and his environment and to restore and enhance
environmental quality, there are several basic objectives:
(1) To conduct a valid inventory of the existing environment which can
be affected by, or which will affect, the use of land.
(2) To understand key ecological and social processes operating in the
existing environment and the interactions between various components
of the environment.
(3) To understand the values of human communities, as manifested by pub-
lic participation in decision making.
(4) To assess alternative courses of action and their relationship to
the environment, i.e., how they may impact the environment, and the
nature and extent of environmental constraints and opportunities.
(5) To determine the location, design, and operation of land use changes
so as to avoid or minimize adverse environmental effects.
These general objectives are at the heart of LUDMS.
The land use/environment relationship involves two fundamental questions.
First, what constraints and opportunities does the existing environment
pose to land use? Second, what impacts and alterations will land use
changes have on the environment? The second question includes considera-
tion of the ability of the environment to absorb impacts. An example of
the first question is an unstable hillside; any development on it will be
subject to hazard from downhill creep. An example of the second question
could be increased urban runoff from changing a natural area to a sub-
division; the runoff could carry pollutants into wetlands or an aquifer,
thereby damaging both natural communities and possible human uses. The
sum of the answers to these two questions can be called land use suita-
bility.
It is apparent that to determine land use suitability both the possible
land uses and character of the existing environment must be considered.
In the second example, urban runoff, a third variable enters the question:
can the proposed subdivision be designed to avoid adverse effects of in-
creased runoff? This is relevant to the fifth objective, that the
environment must guide land use changes.
The land use suitability questions which each IDT member must ask are:
•T .' '
. Does a component of the environment, or a basic interrelationship be-
tween components, indicate some limiting factors, constraints, or
opportunities for environmentally responsible land uses? Can develop-
ment of some kind proceed or not?
90
-------
. If change Is environmentally acceptable, how should it occur, and
what performance standards are needed to avoid or minimize adverse
impacts?
Although numerous criteria can be established for land use suitability,
in general a land use would be unsuitable if:
. it would jeopardize human health, life, or property;
. it would bring about the irretrievable loss of ecosystem components
and processes necessary to the maintenance of ecosystem stability and
diversity;
. it would bring about the loss or deterioration of major or unique
ecological, cultural, wildlife, historic, scenic, open space, or
recreational resources;
. it would increase beyond acceptable limits the hazards to human and
non-human species of air, water, noise, radiation, solid waste,
pesticides, and other environmental pollutants;
. it would cause non-recoverable economic and social burdens or undue
social and psychological stresses on the community affected.
C. ERIA TASKS
The basic tasks of the environmental resource inventory and analysis
process are:
(1) Select the Interdisciplinary Team.
(a) Enlist qualified individuals from the biological, physical, and
social sciences and the environmental design arts.
(b) If at all possible, enlist individuals with practical experience
in land use decision making or with experience in ERIA.
(2) Develop a Study Design.
(a) Determine that the Interdisciplinary Team is well organized and that
the subsequent activities are properly structured in sequence,
methods, etc.
(b) Identify the geographic scope of potentially significant effects of
land use decisions.
(c) Obtain public involvement from the very beginning.
(3) Inventory the Existing Environment.
(a) Inventory components of the existing environment; develop a data
base.
(b) Work with the public in articulation of public concerns as related
to the existing environment.
91
-------
(c) Identify the critical environmental components and what ecological
principles and time dynamics are most important.
(d) Provide an "Early Warning Report" for the community to assist in
statements of goals and policies, to assist in formulating alterna-
tive futures.
(4) Report on Environmental Resource Inventory and Analysis and Land
Use Suitability.
(a) Identify limiting factors and constraints which restrict or pro-
hibit land uses, and how and where these factors operate, for com-
ponents and for interactions between components.
(b) Identify opportunities for land use which meet community goals and
enhance the community.
(c) Correlate the scientifically acquired information with possible
policies.
(5) Develop Alternative Futures and a Policy Plan.
(a) Working with the planning staff and CAC's, identify alternative
policy/land use patterns for the future.
(b) Develop an understanding of relationship of land use suitabilities
with the alternatives for the community, and of the social, environ-
mental, and economic impacts of futures; assist staff in writing a
"programmatic environmental impact statement."
(c) Assist citizens and public officials in the development of the
policy plan.
(6) Design Implementation Programs Based on Design Criteria.
(a) Develop standards and findings on which permission for development
and conditions for development should be based.
(b) Assist public officials and citizens in formulating programs and
projects for community.
D. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
(1) Geographic Scope.
This particular ERIA methodology is developed for either regional or
local planning and decision making. This does not.mean that statewide
or even regional studies covering parts or all of several states could
not be undertaken. But the acquisition and analysis of information and
the articulation of public concerns must be on an appropriate scale.
Therefore, environmental studies must cover an entire planning region.
92
-------
Where It appears that constraints or impacts may exceed the boundaries
of the region, the study must assess these extra-regional conditions.
Examples could be a river basin or air shed which crosses planning
jurisdiction boundaries. Water or air quality considerations may re-
quire information on areas outside the planning region. Habitat of wild-
life or a commercial fishery may exceed the artificial boundaries of
planning regions, so habitat studies must not artificially stop at a
geopolitical border.
A second aspect of the geographic scope is to correlate study area size
with level or intensity of detail. Regional and most local planning
necessarily involves a rather "coarse-grained" or "broad-brush" inventory
and analysis. This may seem to pose a real problem to decision making
for many environmental professionals who are used to studying small
ecosystems. However, if broad-brushed analysis indicates an apparent
land use constraint, further analysis is required by a developer before
a decision can be made. If the broad-brush mapping indicates no con-
straint, or a minimal risk of a constraint, then the decision can be
made without further analysis. The level of detail can vary within a
planning region.
(2) Data Hand I ing.
A key ingredient to responsible land use decision making is the presen-
tation of data in a usable form; especially important are the communica-'
tions considerations of information presentation. It is important,
therefore, that every aspect of data handling in this process must
emphasize clarity. Terminology must be transcribed" from scientific to
more readily understood terms. The relationship between the data ac-
quired and its communication is primarily one of map making and other
graphics. Spatial locations of characteristics of the environment are
essential. Computer mapping is one technique which is gaining some popu-
larity and value. However, for LUDMS, computer mapping is not specified.
A word of explanation may be in order. Basically, computer mapping has
several problems which affect its usefulness and value. First, it is
not a good means of communicating with the layman; computer maps will
confuse many people. Second, computer equipment and trained personnel
are not readily available to many planning bodies in most cases, or if
they are available, they may be expensive and not in a convenient loca-
tion. Third, there is a tendency to become more concerned with data
handling per se than with sound analysis of the environment and the
interaction of an interdisciplinary team with laymen. Fourth, method-
ologies in computer mapping and data manipulation are still rather
experimental, and planning offices may become diverted into studying
what computer system to use.
LUDMS does not exclude computer mapping, but it does not rely on it.
Manual mapping is presumed. In communications, not only maps but other
graphics including photographs, sketches (such as transects or geological
sections), charts and graphs are essential.
93
-------
(3) Level of Complexity and Detail.
The professional involved in the application of the LUDMS may have
experience in extremely sophisticated research. The relative simplicity
of the LUDMS may, in comparison, seem irresponsible or unsophisticated.
But the scientist must bear in mind that this system strives to balance
a number of considerations: cost, availability of talent, communication
with laymen, utility of information to decisions, the time frame of the
planning process, the behavior of ecosystems and human systems, the
built-in complexity of government, legal matters, politics, and other
factors. The net result of the balance tends more toward simplification
than oversophistication.
(4) Maps and Graphics.
The IDT must define, with certainty, what it is striving for and what it
intends to produce. Basically, the following output is sought:
. Maps which display the components of the existing environment, with
accompanying text and graphics; the data base.
. Maps which display basic interactions, with accompanying texts and
graphics; the analysis and "environmental response units."
. Texts and graphics which display social, institutional and physical
development conditions and trends of change.
. Maps, text and charts or tables which describe the suitability for
various land uses.
. Descriptions of performance standards which must be met if changes
are made which affect components or interactions, and which should
guide design; this may be in the form of text, tables, and graphics.
(5) Interdisciplinary Team (IDT).
The process described herein is created to mandate interactions between
the members of a team and between the team and the public. However, no
forcing of the interactive communications will occur unless the team
members have the capabilities and desires to interact. The mutual
sharing of information and sorting out of its significance to others is
essential. The urban designer must understand the hydrologist, the
sociologist must understand the engineer, etc. There is no formula for
such human dynamics. But it is critical for the team manager to bring
about good internal team relations.
Managing an interdisciplinary team is no easy task. The team must stay
on schedule, interact with officials and the public, communicate within
and outside of the team at the proper times, and produce written/mapped
data in the proper format and at the proper times. The team leader is
the one person most responsible for the thought processes of an environ-
mental study team.
The IDT must include professional specialists capable of dealing with
each component. At a minimum it should include:
-------
. Environmental geologist, competent In bedrock geology, soils, geo-
morphology.
. Climatolegist, competent in environmental aspects of climate, air
pollution measurement and modeling.
. Hydrologist, competent in surface and groundwater, water quality, and
comprehensive aspects of environmental and civil engineering hydrology.
. Plant ecologist.
. Animal ecologist, competent in animal ecology, and familiar with
herpetology and invertebrate ecology.
. Aquatic biologist, competent in aquatic ecosystems; if both fresh and
oceanic systems exist, a limnologist and a marine biologist may be
needed.
. Regional planner.
. Sociologist.
. Economist.
. Urban designer.
. Landscape architect or scenics and recreation specialist, competent in
visual analysis and recreation planning.
Additional team members may include:
. Invertebrate ecologist.
. Herpetologlst.
. Civil engineer (urban infrastructure and utilities).
. Acoustical engineer.
. Health faciIities
. Demographer.
. Archeologist.
. Historian.
. Lawyer.
E. THE INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM PROCESS IN POLICY PLANNING
This section describes the process which the IDT should follow. A
delineation of where the team must interface with the planning commission
and the Citizens1 Advisory Committee has been given earlier in this re-
port. (See p. 29.) The: poI icy planning steps referred to are in paren-
theses.
(1) Preplanning (Steps 3, 4, 9, 11, 12, 13)
(a) The planning commission selects the project manager who must be ex-
perienced in interdisciplinary studies, have a familiarity with
roles of other professions, and have administrative and managerial
abilities. He must be a good communicator. He may be a specialist
in one discipline on the team. The project manager should be
selected by a small committee of planning commission members, the
chief planning officer, and key citizens.
(b) Initial Reconnaissance. The project manager, a planner and a
natural resources expert should tour the region by air and on the
ground, and conduct research on existing information.
95
-------
(c) Develop Interdisciplinary Team. With the Citizens' Advisory Com-
mittee, the project manager would discuss regional characteristics,
needs, problems, composition of the interdisciplinary team. He
would locate possible members (from universities, agencies, private
consulting practice) with expertise to cover all components.
(d) Initial Team Meeting and Reconnaissance. The IDT should conduct an
aerial and ground tour of the planning jurisdiction and possible
geographic extensions of the study area beyond the jurisdictional
boundary. It should discuss the study purposes, objectives, method-
ology, logistics, etc., with the project manager, and should meet
with citizens to discuss community concerns and the study approach
and schedules.
(e) Preparation of the Study Design.
. Each investigator should do limited research on existing data.
. Each investigator would develop a component study design stating:
Objectives: what he intends to accomplish in inventory and
analysis;
Methods: how he intends to do his work, what existing data he
will use, what field work is needed;
Budget, logistics, and special considerations.
. A composite study design would be developed by the project manager
from the component study designs.
(f) Finalize the Study Design Contract.
1. The project manager, team, and CAC would meet to discuss the
study design, revise and refine it. An overall IDT contract is
completed; contracts would be negotiated with each investigator.
2. Environmental Resource Inventory (Step 13). The IDT should
develop base maps, locate all existing information, commence
field work, and develop liaison with agencies and the CAC. It
should also take photographs and establish techniques for com-
municating environmental information to officials and public.
3. Early Warning of Critical Components (Step 15). After an
initial amount of field work, the IDT would identify the com-
ponents and their locations which are most critical to the
environment, or are most sensitive to impact, and which relate
and interact most strongly with other components. It would
provide a report on these components, with maps.
4. Analysis of Land Use Suitability (Step 18). Component analysis:
Each team member would identify and map limiting factors, con-
straints, and opportunities for each component. It is essential
to recognize that a single' factor can constitute a limitation to
the use of land. Define terms for each component for the follow-
ing, which are only examples of the types of rati-ngs which might
be ut? I ized: ,'
P = Prohibited to development due to extreme hazard or constraint
or high value conservation area which could be severely and ir-
retrievably impacted and should be preserved.
96
-------
R = Restricted to development due to hazards or constraints to
certain kinds of land uses, or where special criteria are
needed for design to avoid or minimize adverse impacts, or
which should be developed with restrictions due to the presence
of high value environmental characteristics.
0 = No special environmental values, no constraints for develop-
ment for specified land uses.
D = Desirable, no prohibitions or restrictions; strong compli-
ance with community policies if developed. Especially propi-
tious for development.
If constraints relate to certain land uses, a table which re-
lates locations to land use would be useful in ratings:
Area
Low Density
Residential
High Density
Residential
Etc., Etc.
1
2
3
P
P
P
0
R
0
R
0
5.
The listing of land uses, or their categorization, has not been
developed in this report. It is not feasible to universalize
this categorization, and one must be developed to meet local
situations. The IDT should participate in formulating the land
use categories, and some may be described in ecological terms.
Interrelationship analysis (Step 18): Using the techniques of
the Strength-of-Relationship Matrix and the Environmental
Response Unit (described in detail below), the IDT would analyze
significant relationships between the components of the environ-
ment, and would rate the units for suitab!Iity/impact resis-
tance. It should also describe general policies and programs
which relate to the concerns and the inventory/analysis of the
community.
Implications of Alternatives (Steps 22-23). As described in
the section on policy planning (Section IV), alternative policy
plans should be developed, and the IDT should help assess their
implications. Some of this can be done with maps, some will
need texts or charts for good communication. Where specific
features of the region might be impacted by an alternative, it
could be so indicated (e.g., continuing expansion of an existing
industrial area would impact wetlands, would cause potential
chemical explosion hazards to the existing residential area,
etc.). The report would be comparable to a "programmatic"
97
-------
Environmental Impact Statement conducted under the guidelines
of the Council on Environmental Quality for the National
Environmental Policy Act. However, it should be simple, clear
and concise. It should portray as clearly as possible what the
regional land use and environmental futures are for basic broad-
brushed policy alternatives. ,
6. Inventory and Analysis. The environmental resource inventory
and analysis methods developed and used by ROMCOE in the past,
and those used by most applied and pragmatic land studies, are
based on the resolution of the environment into biophysical and
soci©cultural components. The process of inventorying compo-
nents and analyzing interrelationships is much more critical
than developing a "shopping list" approach. The basic break-
down of components which is recommended is flexible to an ex-
tent, especially in the human systems. Here, the final compo-
nent array must be determined by public involvement in the pre-
planning (study design) phase of work.
Following is a component description, with a general description
of the inventory for the component. The descriptions are delib-
erately kept general here; the entire process requires the IDT
to expand the inventory in the study design phase.
Biophysical Components (the Natural Environment):
. Bedrock Geology. Describe the bedrock geological formations
of the region. Specifically note aspects of the bedrock
geology which are relevant to land use, such as constraints
(faults, mass movement, mineral resources, expansive shales,
subsidence, etc.) and opportunities (soil structure, hydrol-
ogy, etc.).
. Surficial Geology. Describe.soiI associations and their
characteristics such as thickness, origin, permeability,
credibility, stability in terms of movement, commercial re-
sources, etc. Determine agricultural land classes.
. Geomorphology and Physiography. Describe and map landforms,
characteristics, origins, and processes causing rapid (human
time scale) change, such as alluvial fan formation. Note
conditions of special scientific interest. Describe water-
related physiography. Map topography as a base map. Map
topographic.hazards such as avalanche paths, river bank
erosion, etc.
. Climatology. Describe macroclimate conditions, major weather
characteristics, extremes, growing season. Describe afr
quality, pollutant patterns and characteristics which affect
a!r quality (inversions and air movement). Relate to state
air quality regional plans and implementation strategies.
98
-------
(Note: These is a broad range of air quality studies and
models, and no one approach is recommended. For many situa-
tions, fairly simple box models should be adequate. This
component inventory should be worked out with technicians
from the state air quality control agency, and could relate
to Air Quality Control Region studies,.)
Hydrology. Describe and map surface water characteristics.
Include flows, yields, high water lines of flowing and
fluctuating standing water, of natural and man-made features.
Describe water quality and pollution characteristics. De-
scribe and map surface and groundwater characteristics. De-
scribe water usage in the region and water supply functions
of watersheds and wetlands. Discuss status of planning under
the 1972 Amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act (e.g., Sections 101, 208 and 303). Discuss special fea-
tures of concern, such as groundwater table changes, salt-
water intrusions, etc. Emphasize land-related aspects of
water, as contrasted with water resource development.
(Note: As with air quality, water quality studies can be
exceedingly complex. It is not the intention of this report
to suggest a complete river basin study or Section 208 plan-
ning process, although for some regions this may be desirable
in integrating such studies with land planning. Again, sim-
pler approaches may serve in .most instances, and this study
should be developed in conjunction with state water pollution
control officials.)
Vegetation. Map vegetative ecosystems. Describe the eco-
logical and human use conditions and limiting factors which
determine vegetative types and status. Discuss special fea-
tures such as soil relationships, unique ecosystems, diseased
vegetation, ability of vegetation to recover from disturbance
and unusual conditions such as invasions by new species. In-
clude agricultural and livestock aspects of vegetation, and
commercial timber resources. Identify forest and brush fire
hazard areas.
Animal Ecology. Inventory animals, including large mammals,
small mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians. Note rare and
endangered species. Discuss habitat characteristics, limit-
ing factors, community structure, and roles of significant or
unusual species (including manipulators, indicator species,
etc.).
Aquatic Biology. Inventory aquatic (fresh and marine) flora
and fauna; study and map significant aquatic habitats, espec-
ial ly commercial and sport fisheries and beds, and anadromous
fishery. Describe physical characteristics of water which
affect biological productivity. Discuss indicator organisms,
limiting factors and community structure.
99
-------
Sociocultural Components (The "Human" Environment):
. Land Resources.
Land use inventory—Inventory existing land use and map land
use patterns, including zoning.
Land ownership—inventory public and private ownership pat-
terns. (In private ownership, aggregate holdings under
given acres into "small holdings.") Map jurisdictional
boundaries of units of government, Including special dis-
tricts.
. Recreation Resources. Using Bureau of Outdoor Recreation
land classification system, inventory and map recreation
land classes; determine recreation activity and use capa-
bility by land classes. Assign relative values to recrea-
tion land classes based on ability to meet needs and provide
opportunities. At specific sites, assess on-site use con-
sistent with use categories of the state outdoor recreation
plan.
. Scenic Resources. Map visual absorptive capacity. Map
visual corridor inventory. Map special and unique scenic
features and vistas.
. Archeology and History.
. Service Infrastructure.
Transportation—-Inventory existing transportation facili-
ties, using data from traffic engineer, highway department.
Describe facilities needing improvements due to condition or
capacities. Define needs as perceived by the community, and
potential for transit. Identify areas where transportation
facilities cause adverse environmental impacts. Discuss
costs and revenues if appropriate.
(Note: This is not intended to be a total transportation
systems analysis and plan, but rather an overview and gen-
eral survey. Again, as with air and water quality planning,
a major transportation study is possible. It is presumed in
the LUDMS that this would grow out of the policy planning;
such an approach would ensure that transportation plans are
developed from land use plans'. The "Highway Action Plan"
required by FHWA PPM 90-4 should be related here.)
Water supply—Describe existing facilities and general char-
acteristics of water supply/treatment system, including
future capabilities for forecasted growth. Discuss costs
and revenues.
100
-------
Wastewater management—Inventory and map major wastewater
facilities (sewage plants, interceptor sewage lines, lagoons).
Describe capabilities to handle growth. Relate to facility
planning under 1972 Amendments, FWPCA. Describe sludge
disposal, discharges, etc. Discuss costs and revenues.
Power facilities, energy supplies—Inventory power stations
or sources, gas/oil supply systems, etc. Rel.ate capabilities
to growth forecasts.
Solid waste disposal — Inventory locations, types of solid
waste management facilities. Inventory problems (odor, water
pollution, etc.). Discuss costs and revenues.
Storm drainage—Inventory urban drainage and storm water
facilities. Identify problems, such as water pollution, over-
loaded facilities. Discuss costs and expenditures. Relate
to requirements of 1972 Amendments, FWPCA.
Social Services and Public Health.
Health facilities—Inventory health facilities, hospitals,
outpatient clinics, psychiatric, physical therapy facilities,
etc. Discuss community needs, statistics, and conditions of
health. Describe costs to community.
Police and fire protection—Inventory facilities and services.
Discuss needs, apparent problems, costs.
Library, cultural and similar facilities—same as above. Dis-
cuss adequacy, locations vis-a-vis population, access by
transportation.
Day-care, youth centers, and similar facilities—same as above.
Employment centers.
Courts, legal services, public buildings.
Education—Inventory all facilities, including vocational-
technical. Discuss community perception of needs, relate to
statistics.
Religious faciIities.
Health Hazards and Noise. Indentify potential problems such
as chemical storage or manufacturing. Identify areas of high
ambient noise levels.
Demography, Employment and Commerce.
Population—Inventory age groups, income stratification and
101
-------
other demographic characteristics, including population
densities.
Employment—Inventory primary and secondary employment char-
acteristics and trends of change.
Government—Discuss finances, tax structure, municipal bond-
ing, etc.
Religious facilities—Inventory churches, cemeteries, etc.
. Urban Design and Social Groups.
Social groupings—Inventory basic social groupings and com-
munity perceptions of problems, such as unsafe neighborhoods,
rapid transition zones, etc.
Urban design—Map relatively homogeneous areas (neighborhoods,
central business district, commercial strips, etc.); describe
visual character, blighting features, functional features in
general (such as degree of self-containment, social places,
etc.)
7. Analysis of Component Suitability. There are a number of tech-
niques and methodologies for identifying and mapping land use
suitability based on the sensitivity of various environmental
components to man-made changes. Such a map might be called a
"land use suitability map" or an "environmental constraints and
opportunities map." What is important is that citizens and pub-
lic officials understand the data. Colors .and patterns can be
utilized to show some of the characteristics of the following
components:
. Geology. Indicate areas of unstable geology (fault zones,
subsidence areas, avalanche zones, rock slide areas, etc.)
as well as areas particularly suited to development.
. Soils and Geomorphology. Map soil types, topography, degrees
of slope, etc.
. Climate. Map precipitation, airshed, areas of critical air
pollution potential, wind directions.
. Hydrology. Map flood plains, 100-year flood data if avail-
able, water table, springs, man-made water developments, and
other conditions.
. Vegetation. Map vegetative types as a 'guide to sensitivity to
change. Identify unique ecosystems, productive forage, prime
agricultural lands, etc. ,.
. Wildlife. Identify ecologically significant habitat, such as
winter range. If possible, map species of particular public
concern.
. Fishery. Indicate habitats for anadromous fishery, rare and
endangered species, and habitats particularly sensitive to
change from thermal effects, etc.
102
-------
The above list is by example only. It is not all-inclusive
and some obvious components are omitted or will be much more
important in one part of the country than another. With the
exception of recreation resources, scenic resources, and
archeological and historic sites, mapping of sociocuIturaI
characteristics will not lend itself to the same techniques.
By combining the characteristics of these and other components,
it is possible to "rank" the sensitivity of areas of the plan-
ning unit by "environmental response units." These units
really summarize the relationships of various components. One
way is to rank these results of such an analysis from "lowest
potential for high negative impact" to "highest potential for
high negative impact." The simpler system previously described
in this Appendix which uses the "P" (prohibited), "R" (re-
stricted), "I" (improvement) is acceptable and more under-
standable to laymen. There is no magic formula. One impor-
tant thing is to show graphically where certain kinds of develop-
ment can and cannot occur based on an analysis of scientific
data. The second important thing is that the definitions and
maps must directly relate to policies and types of technical
evidence which will be written into ordinances for legal controls.
8. Analysis of Interrelationships of the Existing Environment. One
of the more difficult yet most important portions of any inter-
disciplinary study is the identification of interactions and
significant relationships between the components of the environ-
ment. A study which is ecologically responsible must concern
itself with interrelationships and with triggering effects.
The LUDMS analysis is not proposed as a true ecological study;
complete descriptions of energy flows, trophic levels, detailed
food chains, population and community dynamics, material cycles,
and similar matters are not proposed. A methodology is proposed
in this report which is a simplified, workable approach to
developing a basic understanding of interrelationships. This
method depends on field research, mapping of information, strong
interaction between the various disciplines, and a matrix analysis
of basic interrelationships. The method described has been de-
veloped by Dr. Howard Alden, an outdoor recreation specialist at
Colorado State University, and has been used in various resource
and land use planning studies by ROMCOE and Thome Ecological
Institute of Boulder, Colorado. It is related to other approaches
used by the Lake Tahoe Regional Planning Commission, U.S.G.S.,
Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Northern Great Plains
Resources Program and others.
It is recommended that this analysis be limited only to critical
components and relationships. Complete analysis of all relation-
ships is prohibitive in terms of time, money and complexity.
This system proposes that ecological or "environmental response
103
-------
units" might serve as technical information for legal control
of proposed actions.*
A number of jurisdictions have adopted policies which refer to
"related areas" or interrelationships. Florida is concerned
with the Big Cypress region because of its watershed relation-
ship to the Everglades National Park. The proposed Big Cypress
includes "such contiguous land and water areas as are ecolog-
ical ly linked with the Everglades National Park, certain of the
estuarine fisheries of South Florida, or the fresh water aquifer
of South Florida." After a proposed 1,568,000-acre "buffer
zone" was legislatively quashed, planners had to re-examine the
proposal to see what areas could be supported with hard facts
as being "ecologically linked." The next proposal was for
855,000 acrgs, which included only the most sensitive and
critical areas.
New Castle, New York, in its wetlands ordinance, warns of
"encroaching upon, despoiling, polluting or eliminating many
of the town's wetlands, water bodies, water courses and other
natural resources and processes associated therewith." It
states that wetlands "and other related natural features of the
terrain" shall be protected. The question, scientific and legal,
of what are "other related natural features" is of great impor-
tance. These features contribute or limit sediment, pollutants,
water yield, and so forth. They can be considered, along with
the wetlands, as part of the wetland "environmental response
unit." However, to reiterate, the environmental response unit
analysis should be limited to those relationships which are
critical to environmental quality or community concerns.
The basic component inventory consists of a record describing,
quantifying and evaluating the various components of ecosystems
in their present conditions (environmental baseline data).
These inventory characteristics should be mapped on working
maps for spatial location. Overlays should be made, both for
working purposes and for citizen/agency information purposes.
For the purposes of assessing the strength of relationships
among components of the environment, and comprehending how the
dynamics of the environment function in a given area, the
environmental components should be arranged into a "Strength-
of-Relationship Matrix" (SOR). The SOR matrix, with supporting
studies, arrays environmental components on the horizontal axis
Environmental Response Unit is a term for those areas of
land and water due to their environmental and ecological ,
characteristics (soils, vegetation, hydrology, scenic attri-
butes, etc.) respond with various degrees of sensitivity to
man-induced modifications or to natural changes.
10U
-------
against the same components on the vertical axis so that sub-
sequent primary and secondary impact assessment can be more
fully understood. (See Figure "y".)
The horizontal axis of the matrix is assumed to be "active"
and the vertical axis is assumed to be "passive." Any force
on the horizontal axis can have a relationship to a passive
element on the vertical axis. A perturbation to an active
force can then be related to the components on the vertical
axis to which this perturbation will extend. The first order
will be primary effects; a second run-through of the matrix
could display secondary effects. Only the most rigorous effect
of the primary or secondary need be identified. The example
shown uses arrows for conceptual purposes; in real use the
strength should be -indicated by the number corresponding to:
0 = none
1 = low
2 = moderate
3 = high
The definitions for the terms for each component must be
developed as indicated in Figure "x". The summations for each
component will then indicate those components of most critical
significance. Not all of these relationships are significant
at a given area; nevertheless all relationships should be con-
sidered.
It is essential that the IDT determine how far to disaggregate
their components. For example, some disaggregations might be
as follows:
Componejvt Significant Elements
SoiIs Erodible soiIs
Mass failure risk
Agriculturally productive soil
Expansive soiIs
Animal Ecology Major game
Bighorn sheep
Predators
B.irds, game
Raptors
SmaI I mamma Is
Reptiles and amphibians
Figure "z" indicates how the SOR Matrix is used with the
definitions of interrelationship strength.
Next, knowing what the primary relationships between components
are and where they occur for each degree of interaction (high,
105
-------
TERM
DEFINITION
NONE
Not an element of the visual landscape or not a
measurable interactor.
LOW
May or may not be present in the landscape, but when
present enhances the landscape—not critical or
necessary as a major element.
MODERATE
Always present and always contributes to the makeup
and quality of the landscape—presence is not critica
or not necessary as a major element.
HIGH
(Significant)
Force always present and always contributes to the
makeup and quality of the landscape—absence would
constitute a major significant detraction.
Figure x. Strength of Relationship Definitions Example (for Scenics).
106
-------
H
O
Environmental
Component
PROJECT
1 Vegetation
2 Mammals
•r"
X
3 Birds
•^ 4 Fisheries
o
^ 5 Hydrology
6 Limnology
7 Scenic
Vegetation Mammals
Birds
Fisheries
Hydrology
Limnology
Scenic
Active Forces (Horizontal Axis)
Arrows are examples of how an active (or Independent) variable on the
horizontal axis affects a passive (or dependent) variable on the vertical axis,
Figure y. Composite Strength of Relationship Matrix—Conceptual
-------
Project
Environmental
Component
^
X
CO
o
4-
(D
1 Vegetation
2 Mamma 1 s
3 Birds
4 Fisheries
5 Hydrology
6 Limnology
7 Soils
1
High
High
Mod
High
Mod
High
Vege-
tation
2
Mod
Low
Low
None
None
Low
Mam-
mals
3
Low
Low
Low
None
Low
None
Birds
4
None
Low
Low
None
Low
None
Fish-
eries
5
High
Mod
Mod
High
High
High
Hy-
drol-
ogy
Act ve Forces (Horizonta
6
None
Low
Low
High
Mod
None
Lim-
nology
7
High
High
High
Mod
High
Mod
Soi Is
Axis)
Figure z. Composite Strength of Relationship—Conceptual.
108
-------
moderate, etc.), a map can be made of landscape units of these
Interactions. These can be called "Environmental Response
Units"; they are homogeneous units of land area that, .due to
their environmental makeup, respond in a more or less predict-
able way to modifications generated by man or nature. For
example, if there is a high strength-of-relationship between a
subalpine meadow, elk and subsurface water, and the areas where
this high relationship occurs have been mapped, these areas can
constitute a high-relationship environmental response unit. It
may be found that in some locations several basic ERU's overlap;
these then constitute a multiple-relationship ERU by and in them-
selves. The spatial relationship should indicate the entire
geographic scope of the strength-of-relationship. For example,
if a soil erosion-limnology relationship could exist, and if a
disturbance to soils could cause erosion which impacts a given
length of stream, the entire length would be part of the ERU
with the area of erodible soils.
To illustrate the concept, let us assume that we are dealing
with three components of soils, hydrology and vegetation; these
are mapped in a generalized way as:
^Hydrology/'
s
Where the Strength-of-Relationship (SOR) shows a strong inter-
relationship between S and H, we have areas where this creates
an Environmental Response Unit (ERU):
ERU based on S-H
relationship
\
Combining all three, we have:
"N
109
-------
General interpretation of the matrix which follows is important
to identify those components which consistently have a high
strength-of-relationship relative importance as an active
force, and -sensitivity to active forces. Since a matrix is a
simplistic representation of the environmental dynamics of an
area, key descriptions and narratives are provided to allow
examination of relationships in greater depth and to provide
investigators with a better feel for the environmental dynamics
of the area.
Describe Impacts of the Policy Alternatives. The final task
of the IDT in planning is to describe the impacts and impli-
cations of the policy alternatives which should be presented
as land use pattern alternatives. This research has examined
several methods used by others, but has no specific recom-
mendations. The Mammoth Lakes, California, study conducted
by the University of California at Los Angeles and the Colorado
Regional Transportation District are two good examples. These
studies lay out alternative growth and density configurations,
their effects on the biophysical and sociocultural environment,
and their effects on other policy-related matters such as
ability to implement transit systems.
After policy planning is completed, the IDT would be involved
in the technical/legal implementation. Policies must be
expanded into findings, standards and evidence. The IDT must
be involved in this process. Also, it should be involved in
action programs and projects in various ways. For example,
if the policy plan contains a policy on improving transit, a
program to conduct a more detailed transit study may be
developed. The IDT should be involved in the environmental
studies. If the transit study develops specific projects,
these would involve the IDT in the environmental information
for project decisions.
110
-------
APPENDIX B
MODEL LAND USE CODE SUGGESTED
FOR LOCAL UNITS OF GOVERNMENT
Containing provisions for both a "permit system" and a "zoning system"
of controlling and guiding land use.
NOTE: The common provisions of both ordinances and the special provi-
sions for the permit system are set forth in normal type, while the
special provisions for the zoning system are set forth in italics. The
code has been written for an elected "Regional" Planning Commission
which adopts the policy plan, and elected local government bodies (the
"Board of Commissioners") which implement the policy plan through deci-
sions on land development proposals. With slight modifications, it can
be adapted for use by any jurisdiction—or combination of them—with any
kind of planning commission and any kind of local or regional juris-
diction.
ORGANIZATION
CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
CHAPTER 2. DEFINITIONS
CHAPTER 3. PERM ITS REQUI RED (ZONING PROVISIONS)
CHAPTER 4. PREAPPLICATION PROCEDURE
CHAPTER 5.
CHAPTER 6.
CHAPTER 7.
CHAPTER 8.
PROPOSAL REVIEW PROCEDURE
POLICY REVIEW PROCEDURE
PERMIT PROCEDURE
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
111
-------
CHAPTER 1
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1.10 Title. This ordinance is entitled, and may be cited as, the
(.jurisdiction) Land Development Code of (year).
1.20 Authority — Board of County Commissioners. The Board is author-
ized and empowered to adopt and enforce this code pursuant to (state
statute).
1.30 Authority — Regional Planning Commission. The Commission is
authorized and empowered to perform all functions of regional plan'ning
commissions pursuant to (state statute).
NOTE: This draft model ordinance presumes that the planning and advisory
function is performed by a regional planning commission and that deci-
sions on land use are made by local level elected city and county govern-
ing bodies in the region, all of whom adopt the common set of policies
adopted by the regional planning commission.
1.40 Jurisdiction. The geographic jurisdiction of this code shall be
a I I of the territory of (local or regional governing body) as established
by (state statute).
1.50 Purpose* Interpretation. The provisions and requirements of this
code are founded upon the (name of region) Pol icy Plan of (year), as
amended, and the purpose of this code is to implement that plan. Ambi-
guities in interpretation shall be resolved so as to substantially imple-
ment the provisions and policies of that Plan.
1.60 Control. No person or other legal entity shall undertake, conduct,
or use, or cause to be undertaken, conducted or used, any land develop-
ment activity within the jurisdiction, except in conformance with the
provisions of this code. Violation of this provision, upon conviction,
is punishable by (insert language from state statute). In addition, the
Board may, in its discretion, apply to the district court for such civil
and equitable relief as is authorized by (state statute).
1.70 Severability. A finding that any section or part of this code is
illegal or unconstitutional shall have no effect on the enforcement of
any other section or part-
1.80 Scope. Repeal of this resolution does not abrogate or annul any
building permit, certificates of occupancy, variance or other lawful per-
mit or any easement, covenant or other private agreement issued or
effective before the effective date hereof.
Any policies, standards, criteria, technical review procedures or other
requirements governing or affecting land development activities adopted
112
-------
by the (state legislature), or the (state land use commission), which
are more restrictive than those contained herein, are included herein by
reference and are made substitute for the provisions hereof. All require-
ments for land development activities adopted before the effective date
of this code are repealed.
1.90 Effective Date. This code shall take effect immediately upon
passage.
113
-------
CHAPTER 2
DEFINITIONS
2.10 General Rules of Interpretations. When used in thfs code, certain
words should be interpreted as follows: the masculine includes the
feminine and neuter gender; words in the present tense include the future
tense; words in the singular number include the plural number; and the
word "shall" is mandatory and not permissive.
2.20 Definitions. When used in this code, the following words shall
have the following meanings:
2.21 Accept — in reference to a proposal: to certify that the contents
of a proposal are complete, according to the provisions of this code, and
to acknowledge receipt therefor. It does not connote approval.
2.22 Adequate Public Notice — of a meeting, shall mean publication of
the time, date, place and subject under consideration, and where a copy
of the subject may be obtained or studied in the official publication of
the (jurisdiction) at least once a week for the two consecutive weeks
before the meeting; and, if the subject is a proposal, one sign on the
site of the proposal at least three feet by four feet, at least three
feet from the ground, for every two hundred feet of boundary of the site
along a public right of way, posted continuously for at least two weeks
before the meeting and containing the same information as the published
notice.
2.23 Aggrieved — an aggrieved person or other legal entity is one with
standing to sue as such is defined in the laws of (state).
2.24 Approval — in reference to a proposal: to find that the proposal
implements all adopted policies.
2.25 Best Available Technology — such materials, equipment, technique,
process or method or combination thereof, which, when applied to a
specific land development activity or use, produces the result which
enables it to approach most closely, in terms of quantity or quality or
combination thereof, the implementation of a policy.
2.26 Board — The Board of Commissioners of (jurisdiction).
2.27 Citizens' Advisory Committee — a voluntary citizens1 committee
organized in each neighborhood pursuant-to section of the (model
state legislation), and officially recognized by the Commission as such.
2.28 Code — the (jurisdiction) Land Development Code.
2.29 Commission — the Regional Planning Commission of (jurisdiction).
-------
2.30 Condition — a development schedule, use restriction or covenant,
conveyance, construction guarantee, or commitment letter, or any combina-
tion thereof, deemed necessary or desirable by the Board in order for it
to make a finding. Conditions attached to a finding become conditions
on approval of a proposal.
2.31 Constraint — a policy and the information associated with it which
limits the type, size, density or design of possible uses on a site. The
Constraints Maps, when adopted, show the type and location of each con-
straint.
2.32 Criterion, Criteria — the result or results required of a proposed
land development activity to implement a policy. Compliance with criter-
ia is determined by technical review procedures.
2.33 Evidence and Testimony — statements, documents, photographs,
graphics, etc., relevant to the subject, made by any person or their
legal entity on the subject. Evidence and testimony need not be taken
under oath.
2.34 Finding — a motion which, when adopted by the Board, indicates
that a policy is implemented by a proposal.
2.35 Guarantee — a condition on a finding which requires that, a bond,
other surety or collateral, or improvements agreement be posted before
a permit is issued, to ensure implementation of the. policy pursuant to
the find ing.
2.36 Impact Statement — a form which, when completed by a proponent,
sets forth the impact of the proposed land development activity on a
particular policy and the measures which the proponent has undertaken or
will undertake to implement that policy. The impact statements for each
policy, taken together, comprise the impact statement for a proposal.
2.37 Improvement Agreement — a promise, by a proponent, to compensate
the (jurisdiction) for all its expenses in monitoring required con-
struction, and correcting such construction if not according to the
applicable standards and criteria and terms of the condition.
2.38 Interdisciplinary Team — the experts in ecology, economics, soci-
ology, earth sciences and urban design, and such others as may be added
from time to time, in the employ of the Commission.
2.39 Land Development Activity — either of the following:
2.39.1 Any change in the actual use of land or improvements thereon, in-
cluding but not limited to the construction of improvements and buildings,
or a change in the type or intensity of activity therein, which affects
one or more adopted policies. Notwithstanding the provision, the follow-
ing are not land development activities:
115
-------
2.S9.11 Any change from one agricultural use or crop to another which
does not constitute a significant change in environmental impacts;
2.39.12 Construction of a residence on a lot in a subdivision which was
platted prior to the effective date of the code, or which was platted
pursuant to a permit issued pursuant to this code;
2.39.13 Construction of fences, outbuildings, etc. associated with an
existing use (but not a nonconforming use), where permitted;
2.39.14 Normal maintenance and repair, additions, and reconstruction
after loss of existing uses (but not nonconforming uses);
2.39.15 Land development activities undertaken by the United States
Government or by a contractor working directly therefor on land owned by
the United States Government;
T
(NOTE: construction of a post office, or activities on a military base*
are exempt; construction of an Interstate Highway or an Urban Renewal
Project^ although undertaken with Federal funds3 is not exempt.)
2.39.16 Home occupations.
2.39.20 Any change in the legal ownership of a site or sites, or the
governmental jurisdiction over a site or sites, which may reasonably be
expected to create a demand for a change as set forth in subsection
2.39.1. Such changes shall include, but not be limited to:
2.39.21 Subdivisions;
2.39.22 Creation of, or annexation to, any municipal corporation or
special service district;
2.39.23 Assembly of contiguous, smaller land parcels into a resulting
parcel over one-half square block in size, if in a municipality, or over
twenty acres in size, if not, by a person or other legal entity, for the
purpose of conducting an activity as set forth in subsection 2.39.1; but
no other real property transaction.
2.39.30 The Board may exempt a proposal from the definition of a land
development activity upon review and comment by the Commission, and find-
ing by the Board that the proposed land development activity will have
Iittle or no affect on the achievement of the goals or implementation of
the policies of this code, and that no public purpose would be served by
requiring an impact statement and permit for the proposal. The Board
shall exempt any proposal from the definitipn of a land development
activity which is the result of a court order.
2.40 Legal Entity — a partnership, joint venture, corporation, asso-
ciation, organization; the state and any agent, agency, instrumentality,
116
-------
or subdivision thereof; a school district, county, municipal corporation
or special service district and any agent, agency, instrumentality, or
subdivision thereof.
2.41 Nonconforming Use — any use of a parcel of land, including but not
limited to structures and human activity thereon, in existence on the
effective date of this code, which does not implement one or more of
the adopted policies, or with the Zoning Map and use districts, but which
does not pose a policy constraint on any proposed land development activ-
ity on another site, or on the beneficial use and enjoyment of another
site.
2.42 Opportunity — the information associated with a policy which,
when applied to a particular proposal on a particular site, creates a
rebuttable presumption that the policy will be implemented by the pro-
posed land development activity.
2.4S Permit — a legal document issued by the Board upon approval of a
proposal and finding that conditions have been satisfied, authorizing a
proponent to proceed with his land development activity.
2.44 Person — a natural person or a corporation.
2.45 Policy Plan — an interrelated set of goals and policies adopted
by the Commission on (date) and contained in Chapter 7 of this code,
which guides and controls all land uses and land development activities
in (.jurisdiction).
2.46 Policy Review — the process of reviewing the impact statement of
a proposed land development activity, the comments and recommendations
of the Commission, and evidence and testimony, by the Board, pursuant to
adopting one or more findings for each policy pursuant to a proposal.
2.47 Proponent — a person or other legal entity which sponsors and
promotes a proposal, and which will be responsible for developing the
land development activity, meeting alf conditions, and otherwise ensuring
that all policies are implemented, if a permit therefor is issued.
2.48 Proposal — a statement containing various information, maps and
reports as set forth in Chapter 6, for the purpose of notifying the Board,
the Commission, the Citizens' Advisory Committees and the public of the
proponent's intentions, and to enable the staff to render him assistance.
2.49 Public Agency — the state, a municipal corporation, county, school
district or special service district; and any agent, agency, instrumen-
tal ity or subdivision of any of them, including but not limited to the
Board and the Commission.
2.50 Required Construction — any physical improvement, or feature
thereof, of a proposed land development activity which must be con-
117
-------
structed, or must be constructed according to adopted standards and cri-
teria, in order for the proposed land development activity to implement
one or more adopted policies.
2.51 Staff — the professional employees of the Commission, but not
including the interdisciplinary team.
2.52 Standard — specifications of materials, techniques, processes,
methods, size, shape, etc., which, when employed in the development of a
land development activity, or in its use, will result in the implementa-
tion of one or more adopted policies.
2.53 Submission Requirement — specifications of evidence required of a
proponent which, when complied with, create a prima facie case for (or
against) a proposal regarding the adoption of a finding.
2.54 Subdivision.
2.54.1 The division of any parcel of land into two or more parcels,
separate interests, or interests in common, unless exempted under sub-
section 2.54.2 or subsection 2.54.3.
2.54.2 The term "subdivision" shall not apply to any division of land
outside a municipality which creates parcels of land each of which com-
prises thirty-five or more acres of land, none of which is intended for
use by multiple owners.
2.54.S Unless the method of disposition is adopted for the purpose of
evading this code, the term "subdivision" shall not apply to any divi-
sion of land:
2.54.31 Which creates parcels of land outside a municipality such that
the land area of each of the parcels, when divided by the number of
interests in any such parcel, results In thirty-five or more acres per
interest;
2.54.32 Which is created by a lien, mortgage, deed of trust or any other
security instrument;
2.54.33 Which is created by a security or unit of interest in any in-
vestment trust regulated under the laws of this state or any other inter-
est in any investment entity;
2,54.34 Which creates an interest or-interests in oil, gas, minerals or
water which are now or hereafter severed from the surface ownership of
real property; or
2.54.35 Which is created by the acquisition of an interest in land in
the name of a husband and wife in joint tenancy, or as tenants in common,
and any such interest shall be deemed as only one interest.
118
-------
2.55 Use — the physical improvements, human activity, and effects
thereof on adopted policy, located on a site or parcel of land.
2.56 Use Posing a Policy Constraint — a use, whether in existence on
the effective date of this code or not, which does not implement policy
or the Zoning Map and use districts, and thus renders it more difficult,
in terms of time or monetary expense, for a proposed land development
activity on another site to implement one or more policies, or restricts
the beneficial use and enjoyment of another use on another site.
2.57 Variance — a statement accompanying a finding that a proposal
implements a policy, which indicates that the proposal implements only
the spirit, and not the letter, of the policy; granted by the Board after
find.ing that the failure to implement the policy is only of insignificant
proportions and the expense of time or money necessary to implement the
letter of the policy would be unreasonable under the circumstances.
2.58 Zoning — the process of defining and adopting districts in the
jurisdiction, and then defining and adopting uses in each which are ir-
rebuttably presumed to implement all adopted policies ("uses by right");
other uses in each which are irrebuttably presumed to implement some,
but not all, adopted policies and are subject to limited policy review
("special review uses"), and still other uses in each which are subject
to full policy review ("prohibited uses").
NOTE: Following are other definitions which pertain only to the examples
in Chapters 7 and 8. Terms in all policies, findings, standards and
criteria, submission requirements, and zoning use districts (if used)
must be defined.
* Cluster Housing — a housing development designed so that the houses
are grouped together in one or more relatively small areas on the site,
and separated from other uses and each other by relatively large areas
of private yards or commonly owned space.
* Home Occupation — any use conducted principally within a dwelling and
carried on by the residents thereof, which use is clearly incidental and
secondary to the use of the dwelling for dwelling purposes and does not
change the character thereof.
* Family — an individual or two or more persons related by blood or
marriage; or a group of not to exceed five persons (excluding servants)
living together as a single housekeeping unit in a dwelling unit.
119
-------
CHAPTER 3
PERMITS REQUIRED
(Zoning Provisions)
3.10 Permits Required — Land Development Activities. No person or
other legal entity shall undertake, conduct or use, or cause to be under-
taken, conducted or used, any land development activity within the juris-
diction without having first obtained and filed with the clerk of
(jurisdiction) a permit for such land development activity, pursuant to
this code.
3.11 Nothing in this code shall release the proponent of a land develop-
ment activity from the provisions of the (jurisdiction) Building Code.
3.20 Burden of Proof — Essoeptions.
3.21 In all decisions pertaining to acceptance of proposals, findings
and the sufficiency of evidence and testimony pertaining thereto, appro-
val or denial of proposals, and any conditions attaching to an approval,
and in all reports, comments and recommendations pursuant to the above,
the burden shall be on the proponent to prove compliance with the pro-
visions of this code by a preponderance of the evidence, except for the
fo11ow i ng c i rcumstances:
3.22 In the adoption of findings by the Board pursuant to the question
of approving a proposal, the Board shall consider the findings and recom-
mendations of the Commission as rebuttable presumptions.
3.23 In the case of a public agency which is proposing a land develop-
ment activity which was included in the policy plan, and planned for
accordingly, following procedure shall apply:
3.23.1 Upon acceptance of the proposal, the Commission shall determine
whether there is any substantial difference between the proposal and the
land development activity included in the policy plan.
3.23.2 If so, the proposal shall be considered as any other proposal
pursuant to the provisions of Chapters 6 and 7.
3.23.3 If not, the Commission shall forward the proposal to the Board,
together with its finding that the I and.development activity has been
included in the policy plan and is presumed to implement all adopted
policies, and its comments and recommendations.
/
3.23.4 According to the weight of the evidence and testimony, the Board
may, at its next regular meeting, adopt the finding of the Commission,
with such changes or conditions as it may deem necessary or desirable,
instead of the procedure set forth in sections 7.30 et seq.; and approve
120
-------
or conditionally approve the proposal; or it may reject the statement of
the Commission and return the proposal to it for further proceedings.
3.24 If the site of the proposal is indicated as being free of a policy
constraint on the adopted Constraints Map, there shall be a rebuttable
presumption that the proposal implements that policy.
3.25 If the site of the proposal is indicated as being within the area
of a policy opportunity on the adopted Opportunities Map, there shall be
a rebuttable presumption that the proposal implements that policy; how-
ever, nothing contained herein shall alter the duty of the Board to
attach conditions, as they see fit, to any finding made pursuant to this
subsection.
3.30 Opportunities Map and Constraints Map. The Opportunities Map and
the Constraints Map and other reference material attached hereto are
hereby adopted and made a part hereof. The Board may, by resolution,
from time to time, as policies are added or deleted or new evidence and
testimony are brought forth, amend the Opportunities Map or the Con-
straints Map pursuant to Chapter 9.
(These subsections should replace subsections 3.24, 3.25 and 3.30 if the
code is to be a Zoning Code:)
3.24 Upon acceptance of a proposal, the Commission shall determine
whether the proposed use is a use by right on the site of the proposal,
pursuant to the adopted Zoning Map and use districts therein.
3.24.1 If not, the Commission shall -proceed to the determination set
forth in subsection 3.25.
3.24.2 If so, the Commission shall forward the proposal to the Board,
together with its finding that the proposal sets forth a use by right,
and is entitled to an irrebuttable presumption that it implements all
adopted policies, and its comments and recommendations.
3.24.3 According to the weight of the evidence and testimony, the Board
at its next regular meeting may adopt the finding of the Commission, with
such changes or conditions as it may deem necessary or desirable, instead
of the procedure set forth in sections 7.30 et seq., and approve or con-
ditionally approve the proposal; or it may reject the finding of the Com-
mission and return the proposal to it for further proceedings.
3.25 If the use is found not to be a use by right, the Commission shall
determine whether the proposed use is a special review use on the site
of the proposal, pursuant to the adopted Zoning Map and use districts
therein.
3.25.1 If not, the proposal shall be subject to the provisions of
Chapter 7.
121
-------
3.25.2 If so, the Commission shall forward the proposal to the Board,
together with its finding that the proposal sets forth a special review
use, the policies for which it is entitled to an irrebuttable presump-
tion of implementation, and the policies for which the proponent must
develop an impact statement, and its comments and recommendations.
3.25.3 According to the weight of the evidence and testimony, the
Board at its next regular meeting may adopt the finding of the Commis-
sion, with such changes or conditions as it may deem necessary or
desirable.
3.25.31 If it does so, the proposal shall be returned to the Commission
for further proceedings pursuant to Chapter 7, but only for those poli-
cies for which impact statements must be developed.
3.25.32 If it rejects the finding of the Commission, the proposal shall
be returned to the Commission for full proceedings pursuant to Chapter 7.
3.30 Zoning Map — Use Districts; Uses by Right, Special Review Uses,
Prohibited Uses. The Zoning Map attached hereto is hereby .adopted and
made a part hereof. The Board may, by resolution, from time to time, as
policies are added or deleted or new evidence and testimony are brought
forth, amend the Zoning Map pursuant to Chapter 8.
NOTE: following is one example of how a use district might be desig-
nated .
3.31 Single Family Residential District
3.31.1 Uses By Right. The following are uses by right in the Single
Family Residential District:
3.31.11 Single family residences on a preexisting lot;
3.31.12 Agriculture, Forestry, Conservation.
3.31.2 Special Review Uses. The following are special review uses in
the Single Family Residential District, followed by those policies which
require impact statements prior to the acceptance of a proposal:
122
-------
Use
Permit issued pursuant to Chapter 7 after
submission of an impact statement and adop-
tion of a finding for these policies.
3.31.21 Church
"Offstreet Parking,, " "Traffic Generation, "
"Setbacks," "Signs," "Bulk and Height Re-
strictions "
3.31.22 School
"Offstreet Parking," "Traffic Generation,"
"Adequacy of Water and Sewer Facilities, "
"Noise Pollution Emissions," "Setbacks"
3.31.23 Home Occupation
"Offstreet Parking," "Traffic Generation,"
"Adequacy of Water and Sewer Facilities, "
"Air," "Water," "Noise Pollution Emissions, "
"Signs," "Setbacks"
3.31.24 New Residential
Subdivisions
All policies except "Incompatibility of Land
Uses"
3.31.25 Etc.
Etc.
NOTE: policies are designated here by title; in the adopted code they
should be referred to by subsection number (see Chapter 7). Policies
requiring impact statements for special review uses should be limited to
those which could be of concern. "All Policies" (for new subdivisions)
should include such provisions as destiny, clustering, dedication of
open space, percentage of low-cost housing, street, sewer and water main
specifications, hazards, conservation areas and, in general, everything
contained in a good set of traditional subdivision regulations.
3.31.3 Prohibited Uses. All uses not specifically set forth as uses by
right or special review uses are prohibited in the Single Family Resi-
dential District, and subject to all the provisions of Chapter 7.
3.32 Multi-family Residential District. Etc.
3.40 Areas of State Concern. The following areas are designated as
Areas of State Concern, and proposals covering sites contained in them
are subject to such additional policies, standards, criteria and techni-
cal review procedures as are indicated. To the extent that such poli-
cies, standards, criteria and technical review procedures cover subjects
set forth in Chapter 6, and are more restrictive than those in Chapter 6,
they shall supercede those in Chapter 6.
NOTE: following is one example of how an Area of State Concern might
have been designated by the state's Land Use Commission (see Model State
Legislation, Appendix C).
123
-------
3.41 The Big Bog. (Cite applicable Land Use Commission rule.) "Pur-
suant to sections (pertaining to unique, fragile ecosystems and habitat
of game animals or birds) of the (state statute), the Land Use Commis-
sion finds and declares that the following area, to wit: that portion
of Townships , , and , Range south of the Meridian,
situated in (jurisdiction), lying below the elevation of 50 feet above
sea level in the drainage of the River, commonly known
as the 'Big Bog,' is hereby declared to be an Area of State Concern for
the following reason, to wit: it is a unique and fragile ecosystem to
wit: a bog; and it is the habitat of game birds, to wit: ducks and
geese; and that in order to implement state goals and policies, it is
hereby ordered that: NO LAND DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY SHALL BE PERMITTED
therein."
NOTE: the use of the "environmental response unit" should be explored
in the legal implementation, but as It has not yet been used as a legal
definition, it is not herein utilized.
3.42 Mammoth Mountain. Etc.
3.50 Matters of State Concern. Proposals concerning the folLowing shall
be designated as Matters of -State Concern by the Commission upon accep-
tance of a proposal. Thereupon, any proposal so designated shall be
subject to the additional policies, standards, criteria and technical
review procedures as are indicated. To the extend that such policies,
standards, criteria and technical review procedures cover subjects set
forth in Chapter 6, and are more restrictive than those in Chapter 6,
they shalI supercede those in Chapter 6.
NOTE: following is one example of how topical Matters of State Concern
may have been designated by the state's Land Use Commission (see Model
State Legislation).
3.51 Open Pit Mines. (Cite applicable Land Use Commission rule.) "Pur-
suant to sections (pertaining to open pit mines) of the (state statute),
the Land Use Commission declares that, in order to implement state goals
and policies, it is hereby ordered that open pit mines are subject to
the following standards, criteria and technical review procedures, to
wit:
(A)
(B) Etc.
3.52 Shopping Centers. Etc.
12U
-------
CHAPTER 4
PREAPPLICATION
4.10 General Provisions. Prior to the submission of any proposal, or
undertaking, conducting, or using any land development activity, the
proponent shall confer with the staff to obtain information and guidance.
The purpose of such a preapplication conference is to permit the pro-
ponent and the staff to review the proposal: the site, areas of potential
conformity or conflict with adopted policies and their refinements, and
the process by which the proponent may proceed to seek a permit for his
proposal pursuant to this code.
4.20 Topics to be Discussed. The preapplication conference shall con-
cern, but not be limited to, discussion of the following:
4.21 The Site.
4.21.1 The location.
4.21.2 The surrounding type of development and land use.
4.21.3 The size of the site.
4.21.4 The accessibility of the site.
4.21.5 Any areas subject to natural hazards or other special conditions.
4.21.6 The existing zoning.
4.22 The Development.
•
4.22.1 The type of development proposed (residential, commercial, indus-
trial or combined), land use, and the placement of existing and proposed
buildings and other improvements on the site.
4.22.2 The density of the development.
4.22.3 The necessity for, quantity and location of parking areas.
4.22.4 The location, type and method of maintenance of open spaces and
preservation of natural features.
4.22.5 Proposed landscaping or other treatment of the tract.
4.22.6 Proposed internal circulation system, including bicycle and
pedestrian ways.
4.22.7 Area of ground coverage of roads, parking and buildings.
125
-------
4.22.8 Types of water and sewage systems proposed.
4.23 Community Policy Considerations.
4.23.1 The review process set forth In this code.
4.23.2 Whether the proposal might be a matter of state concern, or in
an area of state concern.
4.23.3 Likely conformity of the proposed development with the policies,
criteria, and standards set forth in Chapter 6.
4.23.4 The nature of the information, technical analysis, reports and
certifications which are likely to be required of the applicant.
4.30 Preapplication Conference Procedure.
4.30 (A) The preapplication conference shall be held by the applicant
and the staff at a mutually agreeable time during normal working hours.
4.30 (B} The staff or the applicant may, at their discretion, notify any
members of the interdisciplinary team with expertise or potential inter-
est in factors affecting the proposal, its site, or its impact on
adopted pol ides.
126
-------
CHAPTER 5
PROPOSALS
5.10 Proposal — Submission Requirements. The proposal shall consist
of eight clear copies of the completed application form, maps and report
described in the following sections, plus a fee in the proper amount.
5.20 Application Form. The application form shall provide for the
following information:
5.21 Name, address, phone number of proponent (if proponent is a legal
entity other than a natural person, principal officers or partners shall
be similarly identified, as well as the person acting as agent for the
proponent).
5.22 Name, address and phone number of designers or engineers of the
proposed land development activity, if different from proponent.
5.23 Legal ownership of site (including easements, covenants, leasehold
interests, remainder interests, security interests, and the like).
5.24 Present land use of site.
5.25 Present Zoning of Site
5.26 Detailed description of proposed development to, and subsequent
use of, the site.
5.27 Permission requested: rezoning (to what density and use); sub-
division plat; planned unit development; special use; conditional use.
NOTE: provisions in italics are to be used only in the zoning-subdivi-
sion-P.V.D. ordinance. They are not necessary in the "permit system"
ordinance.
5.28 Date and signature of proponent, or agent of proponent.
5.30 Information Map. The information map shall be drawn at a scale of
one inch to two hundred feet, shall contain the information required in
subsections 5.21 and 5.22, and shall indicate the location and type of
all opportunities and constraints to development on the site and for one
quarter mile surrounding it shown on the adopted opportunities and con-
straints maps. The dimensions of each and every map submitted shall be
twenty-four (24) inches by thirty-six (36) inches. In the case of mul-
tiple sheets, a key map showing the relationship of the individual sheets
shall be provided on each sheet.
5.40 Site Plan. The site plan shall be drawn at an appropriate scale,
not less than one inch to one hundred feet, shall contain the information
127
-------
required in subsections 5.21 and 5.22, and shall indicate the location
of all existing improvements, the type and location of all features for
which policy has been adopted, all opportunities and constraints to
development shown on the adopted opportunities and constraints maps, and
the location and type of all improvements proposed to be demolished or
constructed on the site.
5.50 Report. The report shall contain a brief discussion of the method
to be undertaken to implement each policy, including, where possible,
disclosure of the specific finding which the proposal will meet to im-
plement a policy. Particular attention should be paid to those policies
which are indicated as constraints to development of the site. No repre-
sentation in the report is legally binding at any later stage in the
proceedings under this code, but the proponent must affirm, in it, that
it represents the best information at his disposal at the time of sub-
mission, and that representations are made in good faith.
5.60 Fee Computation.
NOTE: no fee schedule is suggested. Fees should be set at a vote which
will cover the costs of review of the proposal by the interdisciplinary
team., staff. Commission and Board.
5.70 Action Procedure — Staff.
5.72 The proposal shall be submitted to the staff during normal working
hours.
5.72 The staff shall immediately stamp the date of its receipt of the
proposal on the application form.
5. 71 The staff shall, within 30 days of the date of receipt:
5.73.1 Review the proposal for conformity with the proposal submission
requirements. If the proposal is not in conformity with those require-
ments, the staff shall return it to the proponent with a written state-
ment of the deficiencies of it.
5.73.2 If the proposal is found to be in conformance with the proposal
submission requirements, the staff shall:
5.73.21 Review the proposal with regard to the adopted policies and
opportunities and constraints maps to identify potential compatibility
or conflict with policies which should receive particular consideration
in the impact statement.
5.73.22 Make a written report to the Commission including:
5.73.22 (A) Certification of compliance of the proposal with the proposal
subm i ss i on requ i rements.
128
-------
5.73.22 (B) A statement of the staff's evaluation of the proposal
against the policies.
5.7S.22 (C) Notation of any special information, reports or certifica-
tions which should be included with the impact statement.
5.75.22 (D) Certification that the site map and information map ade-
quately reflect the information on the adopted opportunities and con-
straints map.
5.75.22 (E) Indication of how the proponent should provide for public
use areas within the proposal. Any dedication of land or the contri-
bution of funds in lieu of land dedication shall be indicated so that
the proponent may conform to that policy.
5.73.22 (F) (If applicable) an estimate of the cost of those studies
and services rendered by the (jurisdiction) in consideration of the
proposal.
5.73.23 Arrange for publication of notice of filing the proposal in the
official paper and posting notice thereof on the site.
5.73.24 Transmit three copies of the proposal and its report to the
Commission.
5.80 Act-ion Procedure — Commission. Upon receipt of the proposal and
staff report thereon, the Commission shall, at its next regular meeting,
review the same. It shall make such changes in the staff report as it
deems advisable and after such changes, adopt the staff report as its
own, and accept the proposal. Within three days, the Commission shall
transmit one copy of its report to the proponent, a copy of the proposal
and its report to the Board, and shall file a copy of the proposal and
its report in its office for availability to the interdisciplinary team,
staff and pub Iic.
5.90 Appeal — Report Requirements. Any person, aggrieved by the
Commission's report or any requirement thereof, may request that it be
reviewed and changed at the next meeting of the Board. Upon good cause
shown, the Board may change the report at such meeting.
129
-------
CHAPTER 6
POLICY REVIEW PROCEDURES
NOTE: The policy on "Compatibility with Agricultural Land and Opera-
tions" will be used to indicate how the impact statement for each policy
should be developed.
6.10 General Application. The Board shall find that a proposal imple-
ments each policy before a permit is issued. Unless otherwise noted,
one, but only one, finding by the Board need be adopted to indicate the
implementation of the policy. The proponent shall submit an impact
statement for each policy, indicating on each which finding he wishes
the Commission and the Board to adopt, and attaching thereto all sub-
mission requirements necessary for the Commission or Board to adopt such
finding. All impact statements shall be submitted, together, within six
months of acceptance of the proposal.
6.21 Revised Proposals. Proposals may be revised after they are
accepted to reflect changes necessary to implement a policy or policies.
Any such changes shall be noted on the'revised proposal.
6.20 Compatibility with Agricultural Lands and Operations. It is the
goal of the county to preserve the economic viability of agricultural
lands and operations within the county to ensure that large tracts of
land now committed to or capable of agricultural uses shall not be ii—
revocably committed to high intensity development.
6.21 Agricultural Lands Policies. To meet the goal, it is the policy
of the county to:
6.21.1 Ensure that development surrounding agricultural lands or near
such lands shall not make continued agricultural operations impractical
or economically infeasible by reasons of divisions of agricultural land
into parcels of unworkable sizes, shapes, or composition (e.g., loss of
grazing land associated with meadows).
6.21.2 Avoid development or development patterns that will require or
result in expenditures by or necessitate higher taxes or special assess-
ments on agricultural lands or uses.
6.21.S Avoid development of development-patterns that will require
water to be taken out of agricultural uses.
6.21.4 Encourage the preservation of agricultural lands and uses within
the undeveloped portions of proposed or approved development sites
wherever possible.
6.21.5 Protect agricultural operations from disruptions associated with
neighboring non-agricultural development.
130
-------
6.22 Standards and Review Procedures. The Planning Commission shall
not recommend for approval and the Board shall not approve any develop-
ment proposal unless the Commission or the Board finds:
6.22.1 That the proposed development or development pattern does not
require the division of agricultural lands into parcels of a size,
shape, or composition which would result in a significant loss of lands
capable of food production, feed production, irrigated or sub irrigated
pasture, or dry pasture and range I and.
6.22.2 That the proposed development or development pattern will not
result in the imposition of significant taxes or special assessment
levies on agricultural uses or lands.
6.22.S That the proposed development will not require s gnificant
changes in agricultural water uses.
6.22.4 That the proposed development preserves agricultural uses and
lands wherever possible.
6.22.5 That the proposed development will:
6.22.51' Provide access to and from the development that will minimize
interference with stock movement or other agricultural operations.
6.22.52 Not result in damage or obstruction of irrigation headgates and
ditches.
6.22.5S Not result in damage to crops and livestock by dogs.
6.22.54 Not result in trespass by persons, vehicles or animals without
the permission (consent) of the owner.
6.23 Evidence. The applicant shall submit adequate evidence that the
proposed development uses are compatible with agricultural lands and
operations. Such evidence may include:
6.23.1 Staff certification of conformance with applicable standards and
reference materials.
6.23.2 A statement from the Soil Conservation
District or the Soil Conservation Service based on review of the develop-
ment proposal and concerning the productivity of lands to be preserved.
6.23.3 A report on agricultural productivity.
NOTE: seventy-nine policies — more than any community would need —
could be contained in section 6.21 - 6.99.
131
-------
CHAPTER 7
PERMIT PROCESS
7.10 Impact Statement — Staff Action.
7.11 The proponent or his agent shall submit eight copies of all the
impact statements for the proposal together, within six months of the
Commission's acceptance of the proposal, to the staff during normal
working hours.
7.12 The staff shalI:
7.12.1 Immediately stamp the date of its receipt of the impact state-
ments on the cover sheet therefor.
7.12.2 The staff shall then review each impact statement for conformity
with the applicable submission requirements for each policy within ten
days of receipt. If an impact statement is not inconformity with those
requirements, the staff shall return it to the proponent with a written
statement of its deficiencies.
*
7.12.3 If each impact statement is found to be in conformance with the
applicable submission requirements — for a finding for each policy, the
staff shall indicate that all of them together comprise the "impact
statement" for the proposaI, and:
7.12.31 Distribute copies of the Impact statement to the Commission and
relevant Citizens' Advisory Committees, and make available to the public,
for review and comment, suggestions and recommendations.
7.12.32 Coordinate review and comment by the public for review by the
Commission, the Citizens' Advisory Committees, and the Board.
7.12.33 Review the impact statement with regard to adopted policies,
the indicated finding requested pursuant to each, and standards, criteria
and technical review procedures.
7.12.34 Within 60 days of its certification of the impact statement,
make a written report including:
7.12.34 (A) Certification of compliance of the impact statement with all
the requirements for impact statements.
7.12.34 (B) A statement of the staff's evaluation of the proposal's con-
formity with a finding pursuant to each of the adopted policies. I
7.12.34 (C) Recommendations concerning the specification by the Board of
any further information, technical analyses, reports or certifications
to be included before final consideration of the proposal in addition to
the Impact statement.
132
-------
7.12.24 (D) Review and recommendations concerning improvements to be
guaranteed by the applicant and the types of guarantees proposed.
7.12.34 (E) The report shall include, verbatim, the comments and recom-
mendations of the interdisciplinary team and any Citizens' Advisory
Committee.
7.20 Proposal and Impact Statement — Commission Action. The Commission
shall consider the proposal, the impact statement, the reports by the
staff, interdisciplinary team, and Citizens' Advisory Committees, and
such further evidence and testimony as may be offered at a meeting within
30 days of receipt of the staff report, and at such subsequent meetings
as may be necessary or desirable. Within 60 days of receipt of the staff
report, the Commission shall recommend to the Board that it approve, dis-
approve, or conditionally approve (stating the conditions) the proposal,
and its reasons therefor; and transmit its recommendation to the propo-
nent, to the Board, to any Citizens' Advisory Committee which offered
evidence, testimony or comment on the proposal, and to the public. The
Commission shall only recommend that the Board approve the proposal after
adopting a finding pursuant to each policy, and shall only recommend con-
ditional approval after finding that the conditions recommended would, if
adopted, permit the adoption of a finding.
7.30 Proposal and Impact Statement — Board Action. -
7.31 Upon receipt of the recommendations of the Commission, the Board
shall give at least fifteen days' public notice of a hearing on the pro-
posal and hold such hearing or hearings as may be necessary to afford
the public the opportunity to offer evidence and testimony.
7.32 Thereupon, at a meeting held within sixty days of the first public
hearing, the Board shall consider all the evidence and testimony, the
proposal and impact statement, 'the report of the planning staff and the
recommendations of the Commission, and shall pass upon the proposal.
7.33 The procedure for passing upon the proposal shall be as follows:
the chairman shall read the title of each policy and ask for a motion.
The motion shall be to adopt a finding pursuant to the policy, and con-
taining the essential terms of any conditions, including but not limited
to conveyances of property, schedule of completion, covenants to attach to
the property, bond or other surety agreements, or other guarantees which
qualify or modify the finding. Only members of the Board may discuss
the motion. If the motion should fail, the chairman shall ask for
another on that policy. If no finding is adopted pursuant to a policy,
or if a finding is adopted to the effect that the proposal fails to com-
plement a policy, the chairman shall declare that the proposal fails to
implement the policy and that the proposal will be rejected. Neverthe-
less, each policy shall be considered in this fashion.
7.34 If a finding has been adopted for each policy, the chairman shall
announce that the proposal has been approved, and shall state the terms
133
-------
of any conditions which were attached to each finding and thus to the
approval of the proposal. If findings indicating that a policy is not
implemented or no finding has been made for a policy, the chairman shall
announce that the proposal has been rejected and state which policies
the proposal fails to implement.
7.40 Rehearing — Proposal. The proponent shall have thirty days to
request a rehearing and submit to the staff revised impact statements
for each policy which the proposal fails to implement. The procedures
of this Chapter shall apply to rehearings, except that the only consider-
ation in the actions of the staff, interdisciplinary team, Citizens'
Advisory Committees, public, Commission and Board shall be those policies
which the proposal failed to implement, and the effect of the revised pro-
posed finding and method of implementing the policy on the other policies.
7.50 Rehearing — Conditions. Within ten days of the approval of a
proposal, the proponent may request a hearing of the Board to reconsider
conditions placedupon the acceptance, and the Board shall hold such hear-
ing, upon adequate notice, within thirty days of such request. At such
hearing, the burden shall be on the proponent to indicate that the policy
or policies will be implemented by the proposed new conditions, or pro-
posed lack thereof.
7.60 Satisfaction of Conditions. Within thirty days of the approval of
the proposal or rehearing pursuant to section 7.50, whichever is later,
the proponent shall submit to the Board such evidence as may be necessary
to indicate that the proposal meets all of the conditions imposed upon
it. The staff and (.jurisdiction) legal staff shall, within thirty days,
review the evidence and submit their comments and recommendations to the
Board. At the next regular meeting after receipt of the staff reports,
the Board shall determine whether the proposal meets all of the condi-
tions imposed upon it and, if so, issue a permit for the proposal. The
permit shall be transmitted to the proponent and the Commission.
7.70 Permit — Filing and Recording. No permit shall be valid until
filed and recorded on the property in the records of the (Jurisdictional
clerk). It is the responsibility of the proponent to accomplish this.
13k
-------
CHAPTER 8
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
8.10 Nonconforming Uses. Nonconforming uses shall be permitted to
continue until discontinued for a continuous period of two months; sub-
stantially destroyed by fire, act of God, or demolition; or until such
time as they may have their Certificates of Occupancy revoked pursuant
to the Building Code, whichever occurs sooner. Ordinary repairs and
maintenance of nonconforming uses shall be permitted. A nonconforming
use shall not be changed except by the provisions of this code.
NOTE: This is an important provision, since most single family housing
and platted but undeveloped residential subdivisions (to name only two
examples) probably would not comply with "common open space" and "cluster
housing" policies, if the community has adopted them, but yet do not pose
a policy constraint on the beneficial use and enjoyment of another site.
8.20 Uses posing a policy constraint. A use posing a policy constraint
shall be subject to the following procedure:
8. 21 Any one of the following may complain to the Board:
8.21.1 The Commission.
8.21.2 Any proponent of a land development activity whose proposal was
denied by the Board because the proposal could not implement a policy
because it was located in a policy constraint area, and the constraint
is substantially caused by the defendant.
8.21.3 At least fifty percent of the people who reside or work in a
policy constraint area, and the constraint is substantially caused by
the defendant.
8.21.4 Any Citizens' Advisory Committee, the jurisdiction of which lies
wholly or in substantial part in a policy constraint zone, and the con-
straint Is substantially caused by the defendant.
8.22 The complaint shall allege:
8.22.1 The name(s) of the complainant(s), and their standing.
8*22.2 The name(s) of the defendant(s).
8.22.3 The policy or-policies violated by the defendant(s).
8.23 Within twenty days, the defendant(s) may answer the complaint as
follows:
8.23.1 Admission of the facts in the complaint.
135
-------
8.23.2 Denial of the facts, or any of them in the complaint.
8.23.3 Demurrer of the facts in the complaint, and allegation that the de-
fendant has made use of, or intends to make use of, the best available
technology to mitigate or eliminate the policy constraint. The best
availabie technology shall include but not be limited to the standards
and criteria and submission requirements sufficient to adopt a finding
pursuant to the applicable policy as set forth in Chapter 7.
8.24 Within thirty days of receipt of the defendant (s) ' answer, and
after adequate public notice, the Board shall hold a hearing on the com-
plaint. At such hearing the Board shall accept such evidence and testi-
mony as may be relevant, and shall find for the complainant(s) or defen-
dant(s), and may make such orders as are necessary and proper to imple-
ment their finding, as follows:
8.24.1 Alteration of the policy constraint areas on the Constraints Map.
8.24.2 Order the defendant to develop and present, within a reasonable
time, his plan for implementing the policy; or
8.24.3 If it appears technologically or physically impossible for the
defendant to implement the policy, order him to present, within a
reasonable time, his plan for employing the best available technology.
8.24.4 Such conditions as may be necessary or desirable to ensure com-
pliance with the finding or other orders.
8.25 In all such proceedings, the burden shall be upon the complainant
to show that the defendant is the substantial cause of the.relevant
policy constraint; but thereafter the burden shall be upon the defendant
to show that the complainant(s) do not have standing, that the relevant
policy is being implemented, or that the best available technology is
being or wiI I be employed.
8.26 Upon presentation of the defendant(s)' plan and adequate public
notice, the Board shall hold a hearing, accept such evidence and testi-
mony as may be relevant, and find that either:
8.26.1 The plan, if implemented, would implement the relevant policy or
policies.
8.26.2 The plan, if implemented, would represent the employment of the
best available technology.
8.26.3 The plan is unacceptable.
8.26.4 If finding 8.26*1 or 8.26.2 is adopted, the Board shall Issue its
order to the defendant to implement the plan, with such conditions as it
may deem necessary or desirable to ensure its implementation.
136
-------
8.26.5 If finding 8.26.3 is adopted, the Board shall issue its order to
the defendant to develop and present another plan and may, if it deems
necessary or desirable, apply to the (court) for equitable relief pur-
suant to section 1.40.
8.30 Variances. A proponent may request a variance from a policy in
his impact statement. The Commission in recommending such requests, and
the Board in granting them, shall first find that a variance is necessary
or desirable, then adopt the finding on the policy, noting that a vari-
ance has been granted.
8.40 Conditions on Findings. The Board may place conditions upon its
findings made pursuant to Chapter 7 or sections 8.20 et seq. which it
deems necessary and proper to ensure that the policy will be implemented.
Upon approval of the proposal and issuance of the permit, the conditions
placed on any finding shall become conditions on the permit.
8.41 Development Schedule. The conditions may place a reasonable time
limit on the construction activity associated with the proposed land
development activity, or any portion thereof, to prevent speculation in
permits or to implement other policies.
8.42 Use — Covenants. The conditions may restrict the future use of
the proposed land development activity to that indicated in the proposal,
and if the land development activity is intended for resale and further
construction,
(NOTE: such as a subdivision where vacant lots are sold for others to
build upon)
the Board may require covenants to be attached to the deed
limiting the use to that indicated in the proposal.
8.4S Conveyances — Homeowners' Association. The conditions may require
that if a homeowners' association is required to hold and maintain common
property that it be legally created prior to issuance of a permit, and
that any required conveyances to the (.jurisdiction) or the homeowners'
association be effected prior to the issuance of a permit.
8.44 Construction Guarantees. The conditions may require the posting
of a bond, other surety or collateral, or an improvements agreement, to
ensure that all construction features required to implement a policy are
in fact constructed to the applicable standards and criteria.
(NOTE: such as screening, soundproofing or setback to implement a "Noise
Emissions" policy.)
8.44.1 Contents of Guarantees. Such guarantees shall specify the period
within which the proponent shall complete all construction work required
by the finding and shall provide that if he shall fail to complete such
work within such period the (.jurisdiction) may complete the same and re-
cover the full cost and expense thereof from the proponent and may employ
the bond, other surety or collateral for such purpose. The guarantee
137
-------
shalI provide for reimbursement of the (jurisdiction) Engineer or his
representative. The guarantee may also provide for the required con-
struction to be completed in units or phases and for the termination and
return of a portion of the guarantee upon the successful completion of
such units or phases.
The guarantee may also provide for extent ions of time to complete the
required construction, or any unit or phase thereof, for good cause
shown.
8.44.2 Release of Guarantees. From time to time as the required con-
struction in a unit or phase of the land development activity is com-
pleted, the proponent may apply in writing to the Board for a partial or
full release of the guarantee. Upon receipt of such application, the
(jurisdiction) Engineer shall inspect that unit or phase of the required
construction which has been completed. If the Board determines from
such inspection that the construction thus far completed has been suc-
cessfully completed according to the applicable standards and criteria
and terms of the condition, that portion of the guarantee covering that
unit or phase shall be released.
If the Board determines that any of the required construction is not
constructed according to the applicable standards and criteria and terms
of the condition, it shall furnish the proponent a list of specific
deficiencies and shall be entitled to withhold a portion of the guaran-
tee sufficient to ensure such successful completion. If the Board
determines that the proponent will not construct any or all of the re-
quired construction according to the applicable standards and criteria
and the terms of the condition, the Board may withdraw and employ from
the guarantee such funds as may be necessary to complete the required
construction according to the applicable standards and criteria and
terms of the condition. Where the guarantee is insufficient to complete
the required construction according,-to the applicable standards and
criteria and terms of the condition, the Board may elect to do so and
recover all costs in excess of the col lateral from the proponent.
8.45 Commitment Letter. The conditions may require a letter from a
utility company, municipality, special service district, county, or
other public agency confirming that services to the proposed land develop-
ment activity can and will be provided.
8.50 Appeals. Any aggrieved person or other legal entity, any aggrieved
Citizens' Advisory Committee, any aggrieved proponent, or the Commission,
may appeal any finding of the Board to (the Court of Genera\ Jurisdiction)
pursuant to (state statute) within thirty days of such finding.
8.51 If the (court) determines that a Citizens' Advisory Committee has
standing to appeal, or twenty days after a Citizens' Advisory Committee
files an appeal, whichever is sooner, the Commission shalI make available
to the Citizens' Advisory Committee at no charge to it such technical and
legal assistance as it may reasonably require to conduct its appeal.
138
-------
Legal and technical assistance shall consist, at a minimum, of one 'lawyer
and one staff planner not assigned to any other aspect of the relevant
appeal.
8.60 Amendment. This code may be amended pursuant to the following
procedures:
NOTE: Section 8.61 sets forth an amendment procedure for any sect-Ion of
the code. If it is used to amend goals and policies, the result will be
an "evolution" of policy over the years as the concerns and goals of the
community change. Section 8.62 sets forth an optional process for making
amendments to goals and policies which3 in essence, mandates the commu-
nity to redo the entire planning process set forth in the Policy Planning
section before and during the election for members of the Regional Plan-
ning Commission. The thought is that the goals and policies (but not
necessarily the findings, standards, criteria and submission requirements
adopted pursuant to them) should remain constant for the term of office
of the members of the Regional Planning Commission, that new goals and a
new community inventory and analysis would permit the development of
another integrated, coordinated set of policies to be adopted together
as a new policy plan. The alternative futures would be developed by
September of the election year, so they would become the subject of
political debate among the candidates, while the new policy plan would
be adopted in December or January by the successful, candidates.
8. 61 Amendments to all sections but those setting forth goals or poli-
cies.
8.61.1 An amendment may be proposed by any member of the Board, by the
Commission or by any Citizens' Advisory Committee and presented at a
regular meeting of the Board.
8.61.2 The Board shall refer the proposed amendment to each Citizens'
Advisory Committee and to the Commission, which in turn shall refer it
to the planning staff and the interdisciplinary team. The comments and
recommendations of each shall be transmitted to the Board within thirty
days of receipt.
8.61.3 After adequate public notice, the Board shall conduct a hearing
on the proposed amendment to consider the evidence and testimony, and the
comments and recommendations of the agencies and groups to whom it has
been referred. Thereupon, at its next regular meeting (if the hearing is
held in conjunction with a meeting, at that meeting) the Board shall make
such changes in the amendment as it may deem necessary or desirable.
8.61.4 If no changes are made, the Board shall proceed to adopt or re-
ject the proposed amendment.
8.61.5 If changes are made, the Board shall submit the proposed amend-
ment as changed to the processes set forth in subsections 8.61.2 through
8.61.4.
139
-------
8.62 Amendments to sections setting forth goals or policies. No pro-
posed amendments to sections setting forth goals or policies shall be
considered, except pursuant to this process:
8.62.1 (At. appropriate intervals, such as every four years) the Com-
mission shalI adopt any necessary changes in the neighborhood jurisdic-
tions and ensure that a Citizens' Advisory Committee is formed and oper-
ational in each neighborhood. The Citizens' Advisory Committee shall
report their concerns and goals for the community to the Commission on
or before August 1 of that year.
8.62.2 During the same period, the interdisciplinary team shall conduct
a community inventory and analysis and report thereon to the Commission
on or before August 1 of that year.
NOTE: this provision is for the purpose of obtaining a monitoring and
updating of the Environmental Resources Inventory and Analysis.
8.62.S The planning staff shall develop alternative sets of policies,
each set being suitable for adoption as a policy plan and each charting
a different future course and direction for the (jurisdiction), based on
the concerns and goals, and the interdisciplinary team shall analyze
each, noting its comments and recommendations, and the alternative sets
of policies and the analysis of the interdisciplinary team shall be made
public on or before September 15 of that year.
8.62.4 The Commission shall consider the alternative sets of policies
and move to adopt one as the policy plan at its first meeting in January
of the following year. Thereupon, the Commission shall make known its
decision and the policies to each Citizens' Advisory Committee and each
Board.
(NOTE: This code anticipates that there will be several local government
jurisdictions within the jurisdiction of a Regional Planning Commission.)
The comments and recommendations of each shal I be transmitted to the Com-
mission within thirty days of receipt, and the staff and interdisciplin-
ary team shalI report to the Commission the effects of implementing any
recommended changes.
8.62.5 After adequate public notice, the Commission shall conduct a
hearing on the proposed policy plan to consider the evidence and testi-
mony, the comments and recommendations of the agencies and groups to whom
it has been referred, and the staff report. Thereupon, at its next regu-
lar meeting, the Commission shall make any changes to the proposed policy
plan deemed necessary or desirable, and proceed to adopt or reject the
proposed policy plan. ,
8.62.6 After a policy plan has been adopted by the Commission, the staff
and the interdisciplinary team shall develop findings, standards and cri-
-------
teria, and submission requirements for each policy therein, and report
thereon to the Commission. The process for adoption of findings, stan-
dards and criteria, and submission requirements shall be the same as that
for the adoption of the policy plan.
8.62.7 After the Commission has adopted the policy plan and all relevant
findings, standards and criteria, and submission requirements, the Board,
at its next regular meeting shall delete all old provisions and insert the
the new ones in this code.
8.6S Effect of Amendment on Pending Proposals. Proposals approved
before the adoption of a new policy plan by the Commission pursuant to
section 8.62.5 or before the adoption of any amendment to this code pur-
suant to sections 8.61 et seq. shall be issued permits. Proposals pend-
ing at those times, whether accepted or not, shall be subject to the new
policy plan or amendment; provided, however, that during the time between
the adoption of a new policy plan by the Commission, and the insertion of
it and all applicable findings, standards and criteria, and submission
requirements into this code by the Board, any and all time limits on
development and presentation of proposals and impact statements shall be
suspended.
8.70 Safety Clause. This code is necessary to promote and protect the
health, safety and welfare of the citizens of (.} ur i sd i ct ? onj.
lUl
-------
APPENDIX C
MODEL LAND USE CODE SUGGESTED
FOR STATE GOVERNMENTS
1. Introduction.
This model legislation is designed to be a discrete article in the state
statutes, replacing the enabling legislation for planning, zoning and
subdivision regulation by cities and counties. It establishes a new
jurisdiction for land use decision making — the "region" — which cor-
responds to the boundaries of regional councils of government in the
states, and hopefully represents an area of social, economic, and environ-
mental interrelationships. It establishes a new body for land use deci-
sion making — the "regional planning commission." For this reason, any
bill drafted in reliance on this model must begin with a clause repealing
the enabling legislation for local government planning, zoning, and sub-
division regulation.
Although localities no longer would be performing the comprehensive plan-
ning function, they should continue to be enabled to plan for the provi-
sion of the multiplicity of public services which they will continue to
provide.
Every state has a different system for organizing and enumerating its
statutes, although most states have a three-tiered enumeration system
that breaks down by broad topic, specific subject, and then specific pro-
vision. In Colorado, the breakdowns are called respectively "chapters,"
"articles," and "sections." Major groupings of sections in a comprehen-
sive article are called "parts," and are delineated by the first digit of
a three-digit section number. This system of enumeration has been used
in this model, with the chapter number omitted and the article number
represented by "X". The drafting of a bill would, of course, follow the
statutory enumeration system of the state in question.
-------
2. Model Legislation
PART I. GENERAL PROVISIONS
X-101 Title. This act is entitled, and may be referred to as, the
"(name of state) Land Use Planning and Control Act of (year)."
X-102 Legislative Declaration. It is the intention of the (state legis-
lature) to secure the implementation and effectualization of the goals,
objectives, and policies set forth in this article. It is also the in-
tent to both enable and ensure the development and implementation of
goals, objectives, and policies, consistent with the goals, objectives,
and policies contained in this article, by the people of the various
regions of the state, to the end that such further development of thj
land and natural resources of the state, and the provision of public
services, conforms to the wishes of the people of the state.
It is the intent of the (state legislature) to ensure that, henceforth,
the sociocultural, economic, environmental, and public facilities impacts
resulting from natural resources or land development be made known, and
that such impacts conform with public policy, as a condition of under-
taking development. The (state legislature) finds that these impacts
have occurred, and in the future will likely occur, without regard to
the jurisdictional boundaries of local government. It further finds
that the most direct impacts and effects of development activity are
likely to occur in the neighborhood of the location of the development
activity, and further that the impact of some major development activi-
ties may affect all the people of the state.
It is the intention of the (state legislature) to aid and assist the
people of the various regions of the state in the development and imple-
mentation of public policy relating to the development of land and
natural resources, and in the implementation of those policies.
The (state legislature) hereby finds, determines, and declares that this
act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace,
health, and safety.
X-103 Definitions. (1) As used in this article, the following words
have the following meanings: (to be completed in the development of the
legislation).
PART II. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES
X-201 Function, Interpretation, and Amendment. (1) The following
goals, objectives, and policies, which are of statewide concern and
affected with a public interest, will be used in all state, regional,
and local government decision making, in the continuous state and
1U3
-------
regional planning programs, and shall be used by the land use commission
and the regional planning commissions in administering this article.
(2) The goals, policies, and objectives shall be interpreted liberally,
and in a way which avoids conflicts between policies. In cases of con-
flict, due consideration shall be given to public testimony, except that
in no case shall goals, objectives, and policies relating to hazards to
life or property, or housing for the poor and the elderly, be violated.
(3) Goals, objectives, and policies may be amended, deleted, or added
from time to time by action of the (state legislature), but at all times
there shall be objectives and policies governing each and every topic
set forth in sections X-203 through X-207 inclusive.
X-202 Goals.
(1) To fulfill the responsibility of each generation as trustee of the
environment for succeeding generations;
(2) To assure for all Americans a safe, healthy, and productive environ-
ment and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings;
(3) To attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment
without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable or
unintended consequences;
(4) To preserve important historic, cultural, natural aspects of our
national heritage and maintain wherever possible an environment which
supports diversity and variety of individual choice;
(5) To achieve a balance between population and resource use which will
permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life's amenities;
(6) To enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maxi-
mum attainable recycling of depletable resources.
These goals are taken directly from the National Environmental Policy
Act of 19693 and govern all Federal agency decisions. They are recom-
mended, as a minimum^ in any state legislation.
X-203 Objectives and Policies Relating to the Natural Environment.
(Examples)
(1) Prevention of loss of life and property due to natural hazards;
(2) Elimination of air, water, and noise pollution: elimination of dis-
charge of pollutants into the waters of the state before 1985, establish-
ment of water quality which provides for the protection and propagation
of fish, shellfish, and wildlife, and provides for recreation in and on
the waters of the state by 1983, elimination of the discharge of toxic
pollutants in the air by (year), prohibition of new indirect sources of
11*
-------
air pollution, achievement of ambient air quality standards sufficient
to protect the public health by 1975, and achievement of ambient air
quality levels sufficient to protect the public welfare by (year);
(3) Preservation and enhancement of the scenic qualities of the state
and scenic vistas from the public roadways, elimination of billboards
and flashing or revolving signs by (year), elimination of lighted signs
larger than 4 ft. by 6 ft. by (year);
(4) Preservation of the recharge capacity of underground aquifers and
adequate provision for runoff, minimization and prevention where possi-
ble of soil erosion caused by construction or development;
(5) Protection of significant archeological sites;
(6) Preservation of unique or fragile ecosystems, preservation of
ecosystems necessary to support regionally or nationally unique or en-
dangered species, game species, and species of economic value, protec-
tion, to the extent possible, of the balance of nature in construction,
extraction, and development activities;
(7) Preservation and protection of wetlands, water bodies, water
courses, and of terrain and natural features necessarily related to wet-
lands, water bodies and water courses;
(8) Etc.
X-204 Objectives and Policies Relating to the Man-Made Environment,
Culture, the Society, and the Economy.
(1) Conservation and enhancement of buildings and sites of historical
and cultural value;
(2) Reversal of the trends toward physical, social, economic, and cul-
tural stagnation and decay in rural areas and inner cities;
(3) Provision.of physically adequate housing for all residents of the
state by (year), elimination of low and moderate cost housing shortages,
elimination, to the extent possible, of residential .patterns which are
segregated by race;
(4) Elimination, to the extent possible, of unemployment and under-
employment, preservation and enhancement of a healthy economy, and stim-
ulation of economic development to resolve current socioeconomic dis-
locations and prevent anticipated future socioeconomic dislocations;
(5) Etc.
-------
X-205 Objectives and Policies Relating to Growth Configuration and
Dynamics, Socloeconomlc Stagnation, Transfer of Growth Pressure, Urban
Sprawl, and New Communities.
(1) Elimination of further urban sprawl development and strip develop-
ment, whether commercial or otherwise, along the approaches to towns and
cities, along mountain valleys, shorelines, and highways, and elimination
of development which tends to fill in the land between existing communi-
ties;
(2) Preservation of open space between existing communities;
(3) Separation of incompatible land uses;
(4) Transfer, to the extent possible, of growth pressure from such
regions as may wish to moderate the rate or amount of future growth, to
such regions as may wish to stimulate growth, and within regions from the
fringes of urban areas to new or existing modal centers, as may be desig-
nated in the regional plans and designed to accommodate such growth;
(5) Etc.
X-206 Objectives and Policies Relating to Development, Conservation, and
Use of Renewable and Non-Renewable Natural Resources, Recreation Re-
sources, and Agriculture and Forestry.
(1) Design and location of new development in such a way as to encourage
and accommodate non-automobi le transportation modes.;
(2) Elimination, to the extent possible, of congestion on the public
highways;
(3) Development of recreation resources which does not deplete those
resources for future use and enjoyment;
(4) Preservation of prime agricultural lands and important agricultural
areas;
(5) Development and extraction of renewable resources on a sustained
yield and multiple use basis;
(6) Restoration, to the extent possible, or reclamation, of sites used
for mining, quarrying, or strip mining;
(7) Prevention, to the extent possible, of the erosion of topsoil
through wind or water;
(8) Etc.
-------
X-2Q7 Objectives and Policies Relating to Provision of Utilities and
Public Services, and Taxes Relating Thereto.
(1) All extraction and development activity after the effective date of
this article, except those types designated pursuant to subsection (2)
of this section, or the future occupants, users, purchasers, or bene-
ficiaries thereof, shall be directly responsible for all one-time and
continuing incremental public and quasi-publie costs associated with the
development activity, its subsequent occupation and use, and eventual
abandonment, to the end that the taxpayers of the region, or any particu-
lar jurisdiction in it, shall not subsidize development activities.
(2) Regional policies and plans may designate types of development
activities and particular development areas, including but not limited
to such topics as low-income housing, urban renewal areas, regional
growth centers, recreation or cultural facilities open to the public,
development of non-automobiIe transportation facilities, which, because
of overriding public policy in the region, may be subsidized by the tax-
payers of the region or any jurisdiction within it, provided, however,
that prior to the issuance of a permit for any development activity
which is to be subsidized, the amount and type of such subsidy shall be
publicized;
(3) Satisfactory and timely completion to regional standards and cri-
teria of any portion of a development activity which is intended to be
dedicated to a public agency shall be bonded or otherwise secured;
(4) The configuration of new development shall reinforce the efficient
provision of utilities and public services to the future occupants and
users thereof and shall minimize the congestion of highways and other
transportation facilities, schools, recreational and cultural facilities,
and other public and quasi-public facilities, and regional commissions
may require the dedication of a reasonable amount of land, or cash in
lieu thereof, from development activities, as such may be necessary to
implement this subsection, provided that no land development activities
shall be required to dedicate land or cash for public facilities in
excess of those required to service the land development and its sub-
sequent users and occupants;
(5) Regional plans shall be coordinated and compatible with the plans
of neighboring regions;
(6) The plans and decisions of agencies of the state government shall,
to the maximum extent feasible, reinforce the regional plans;
(7) Etc.
This list of policies is as complete as it can be for nonspecific model
legislation. They are broad (state)-level policies suitable for inclu-
sion in state legislation, and set forth a minimum level of public re-
sponsibility for land use decisions.
-------
Legislators in the various states will undoubtedly find that some of
these policies, at least insofar as the way they have been worded, are
irrelevant or inappropriate for their situation. Likewise, every state
has special conditions which must be included in the state policies in
order to be minimally responsible to their voters and taxpayers. For
instance, in 1973 the combined bipartisan leadership of both houses of
the Colorado General Assembly introduced a comprehensive land use con-
trol bill which included goals and policies similar to the above. They
specifically enumerated the rapidly sprawling urbanized area along the
Front Range of the Rocky Mountains as an area where the amount and rate
of growth is to be moderated. Modification of the recommended policies,
and inclusion of others of specific concern to the state, should receive
careful attention by the relevant legislative committees and the public,
because of the important position the wording and language plays in the
future development and growth of the state.
Many of the recommended policies appear to be simple or obvious. They
have been included because their articulation is necessary if they are
to be included in the process of making land use decisions.
PART III. LAND USE COMMISSION
X-301 Commission Created: Membership, Compensation, Removal from
Office.
(1) There is hereby created in the office of the Governor a commission,
to be known as the "Land Use Commission," to consist of nine members
appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of the Senate.
Members shall be qualified voters in the state over the age of 25 years.
(2) Members shall be appointed for a term of three years, except that,
in the case of those initially appointed, three shall be appointed for
terms of one year, three shall be appointed for terms of two years, and
three shall be appointed for terms of three years. Members may be re-
moved by action of the Governor for incapacity or nonfeasance, or for
malfeasance, but in the case of malfeasance the consent of the Senate
shall be required. Any vacancy occurring during the term of office of a
member shall be filled by appointment by the Governor of a qualified
person for the unexpired portion of the regular term.
(3) Each member of the Commission shall receive a per diem of $150 per
day for each day devoted to the performance of his or her duties, but
not to exceed $35,000 per year, and shall be reimbursed for all actual
and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of such duties.
No regional, political, or social viewpoint qualifications are set forth
for the members of the Commission, and no provision is made for existing
state officials with relevant expertise to serve ex officio on the Com-
mission. The state of Florida has opted for the latter, establishing
-------
tine Governor's cabinet as the land use overview agency. The other types
of criteria (so many representing this portion of the state and so many
representing that3 so many Democrats and so many Republicans, so many
minorities, environmentalists, land developers, etc.) are tempting 'be-
cause they tend to give the appearance of balance on the Commission. We
have avoided this approach. State officials serving ex officio already
have a fulltime job, and would be functioning at a disadvantage to the
members of the Commission who are substantially fulltime. We also feel
that the land use commission has some of the same kinds of responsibili-
ties as an appellate court, and for this reason, the representation of
any particular constituency is not as important a credential as the
possession of sound judgment. We would like to think of each member of
the Commission as representing all elements in the state and balancing
their interests in his own mind, rather than being a partisan for any
particular point of view. In addition, the normal political process of
appointing members of the Commission should tend to ensure that diverse
viewpoints from all areas of the state are represented, without the
necessity of spelling this out. A devious governor can always find
environmentalists and minorities who are willing to sell out, or, on the
other hand, businessmen who are fervent environmentalists and social
reformers.
The provision setting forth a per diem, rather than a salary, is to
indicate that the Commission should be appointed and serve through the
political process rather than the civil service process. If your state
permits members of regulatory agencies to be appointed through the
political process, and yet draw a state salary, this is preferable to
the per diem.
X-302 Coinmission: Rules, Meetings, Genera I Powers and Duties.
(1) The Commission shall be a body corporate and politic and may sue
and be sued.
(2) Annually, the Commission shall elect one of its members as chairman,
another of its members as secretary, and it may establish such other
officers and committees as it deems appropriate from time to time.
(3) The Commission shall meet at such times and places as may be deter-
mined by the chairman, or in writing by any three members of the Commis-
sion, for the efficient conduct of its affairs. Each member shall have
one vote and the affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the
Commission shall be required for action by the Commission. It shall
adopt rules for its conduct, provided that all activities and decisions
of the Commission and its staff shall be conducted in public. It shall
maintain a record of its activities and decisions, and keep this record
available to the public at its office during regular hours.
(4) The Commission may employ such staff, pursuant to the provisions of
(the state civil service law), as it may deem necessary and proper. In
addition, it may utilize the technical skills and disciplines found with-
1U9
-------
in the several state agencies, and among the various- institutions of
higher learning. For specific tasks outside the expertise of its staff,
the several state agencies, and the various institutions of higher
learning, the Commission may contract with consultants. The staff of
the Commission shall be available and accessible to regional planning
commissions, local government, or the staff thereof, upon request. Any
sharing of personnel between government agencies, or between units of
government, pursuant to this subsection, may be accomplished on a
straight assignment basis, cost sharing basis, or reimburseable basis,
at the discretion of the Commission and in cooperation with affected
state agencies, institutions of higher learning, regional planning com-
missions, or units of local government.
(5) The Commission may promulgate and adopt rules and regulations pur-
suant to the provisions of (the state administrative procedures act),
consistent with the provisions of this article, and when necessary or
desirable for the administration, enforcement, and implementation of
this article.
(6) The Commission may receive and utilize funds from the Federal or
other governmental agencies and grants and gifts from any other sources.
(7) The Commission may hold hearings, subpoena witnesses and documents,
administer oaths and affirmations, and issue such orders as may be
necessary or desirable to properly conduct its affairs and for the admin-
istration, enforcement, and implementation of this article, subject to
the provisions of (the state administrative procedures act).
Over the years* each state has developed legal language establishing its
various regulatory boards and agencies. In most instances3 this lan-
guage has been litigated in the state courts, and a body of law has been
developed surrounding it. Thus lawyers, legislators* and the courts
place great reliance on this language.
The language above is intended as a guide: it indicates what the general
powers and duties of the land use commission ought to be* and what the
language of any proposed state legislation ought to cover. It is not
exhaustive., and before a draft bill is developed, advice from state
legislators or the legislative drafting office, if your state has one,
should be sought concerning the wording of the provisions of the draft
legislation covering these matters.
X-305 Commission: Specific Powers and Duties.
(1) The Commission shall have the power and duty to:
(2) Collect and develop data, and develop and adopt a plan for land use,
natural resource extraction, and public capital expenditures in the state
consistent with its data, the goals, objectives and policies of this
article, and the wishes of the people of each region of the state. The
first of such plans shall be developed on or before (date), the capital
150
-------
expenditures plan shall be updated yearly thereafter, and the plans
shall be redone every four years thereafter.
(3) Certify that regional plans developed by regional planning commis-
sions are adequate in terms of development and articulation of public
policy by the residents of the region, development of reliable informa-
.tion and data associated with such public policy, and conformance with
the goals, objectives and policies of this article.
(4) Gather and develop information regarding Federal and state programs
to be conducted in each region of the state, the cost of such programs,
and the type and extent of impact which the programs may have on the
goals, objectives and policies of this article, the state plan, and the
regional plans, and communicate such information and data on Federal and
state programs to the regional commissions, and aid the regional commis-
sions in planning for such Federal and state programs.
(5) Designate matters of state concern pursuant to the provisions of
this article, and grant and deny permits for designated matters of state
concern pursuant to the goals, objectives and policies of this article
and the state plan.
(6) Designate areas of state concern pursuant to the provisions of this
article, and promulgate standards and criteria for land use decisions
within such designated areas of state concern by regional planning com-
missions, and monitor any such decisions made by regional planning com-
missions for conformance to the said standards and criteria.
(7) Hear and decide appeals pursuant to the provisions of this article.
(8) Enjoin any land development activity operating outside the provi-
sions of this article, pending any decision required by this article,
which has materially or substantially altered its land development or
natural resource extraction activities after a permit has been granted
pursuant to this article, or during the period of appeal either to the
Commission or the courts pursuant to this article. The Commission may
issue an injunction ex parte without notice or hearing upon a finding of
probable cause on its own motion, or upon the motion of any party with
standing, but any such injunction shall be valid only for a period of 30
days, or until a hearing can be held on the issue of a temporary injunc-
tion, whichever is shorter, except that, in case the enjoined party is
the one responsible for delay of such a hearing for a temporary injunc-
tion longer than 30 days, the ex parte injunction may continue until the
said hearing. Temporary injunctions shall be issued only upon notice
and hearing, pursuant to the provisions of (the state administrative
procedures act), and shall last only for a period of 90 days or until
such time that a hearing can be held on the merits of 1he case, whichever
is sooner, except that in case the enjoined party is responsible for
delay of the hearing on the merits past the said 90-day period, the
temporary injunction shall be valid until the said hearing. Permanent
injunctions shall be issued only after hearing and notice pursuant to
151
-------
the provisions of the (state administrative procedures act), and only
upon finding by a preponderance of the evidence.
(9) Borrow money at interest and repay the same, pursuant to the pro-
visions of this article; and utilize any and all monies made available
to it for such purpose to deal, as in its discretion it deems necessary
and proper, in real estate for the purpose of implementing the goals,
objectives and policies of this article and the state plan.
(10) Report to the Governor and the (state legislature) annually at the
beginning of the legislative session regarding the implementation of the
goals, objectives and policies of this article, and of the various re-
gional plans, by the Commission, the other agencies of state government,
the regional commissions, and local government; report problems and dis-
locations relating thereto, and its recommendations, and the recommenda-
tions of state agencies, regional planning commissions, and local govern-
ments, regarding amendments, additions, or deletions to the goals, ob-
jectives and policies of this article, or the various implementation
procedures of this article.
(11) Generally, ensure to the (state legislature) and the people of the
state that the goals, objectives and policies of this article are imple-
mented .
Obviously, this is an extremely powerful administrative body. Consider-
ation should be given to making this an elected body.
Power is centralized in the Commission to ensure the implementation of
the Act. Members of the Commission acre obviously responsible, and have
the power to see to it that state policy is carried out. This would be
impossible if land use questions were divided among various state agen-
cies with relevant expertise, or left to the judgment of administrators
responsible to departments of state government without any agency to
reconcile differences.
The question occurs as to whether the land use commission is responsible
for the capital expenditures budget of the various state agencies, in
particular agencies such as highway departments which have a significant
impact on land use. A distinction should be made between "plans" to be
developed and adopted by the land use commission, and on the other hand
"programs" to be developed by agencies and "budgets" which can be
developed only by the state legislature. The planning function would of
necessity be conceptual: it would not deal with either route alignments
or line item budget allocation. It would indicate, both to the regional
planning process and the state agencies, the emphasis and priority in
both budgeting and program needed to implement the goals, objectives
and policies, and the state plan. This is especially crucial if the
state adopts a program of transfer of growth pressure from one region
to another, because, to the extent that the trend can be bucked at all,
it will be bucked by transferring public overhead capital expenditures
away from the trend and into the planned growth area.
152
-------
The process does enable the land use commission to have an effective
veto over significant agency decisions which violate state goals, objec-
tives and policy, because public as well as private decisions are regu-
lated by the system, and significant public decisions are matters of
state concern to be regulated by the land use commission. This provides
added and probably sufficient impetus to agency decision makers to coor-
dinate their programs with adopted regional plans, as well as with the
goals, objectives and policies, and the state plan. Significant politi-
cal upheaval can be expected from jealous agencies and departments sig-
nificantly affected by the bill, and can be countered by indicating
(truthfully^ that such agencies have never been able to make decisions
in a political policy vacuum. Rather than the uncertainty of endless
public hearings, political pressure on elected state officials, and
generally irregular and unreliable decision-making review for such
politically hot agency decisions, this law gives the agencies the secur-
ity of knowing, in advance, state and regional policy governing their
decision, and a regular, aboveboard decision-making process to settle
disputes. It should not be difficult to convince them that their agen-
cies will be more effective in terms of serving constituents and tax-
payers, and less the subject of political finagling, as a result of
instituting the procedures in the bill.
Another duty of the state commission is to apply the state goals, objec-
tives and policies to the situation in each particular region to help
it develop its own regional plan.
PART IV. STATE CONCERNS
X-401 Areas of State Concern: Designation.
(1) The Commission, or any regional commission, acting concurrently or
separately, shall designate the following as areas of state concern.
Designation shall be by rule pursuant to the (state administrative pro-
cedures act), and shall set forth the physical limits of the area, the
reason for the designation, and a recitation of findings upon which the
designation is based. Designations made by the land use commission
shall be at meetings held in the region in which the area under consid-
eration is located.
(2) Areas of state concern are:
(A) areas of critical environmental concern;
(B) large-scale development;
(C) major land sales and development projects;
These three types of areas of state concern are taken directly from
S. 268, the Federal Land Use Policy and Planning Assistance Act of 1974,
which has been under consideration in Congress.
153
-------
(D) hazard areas, and suspected hazard areas;
(E) groundwater recharge areas, areas of high shrink-swell potentials;
(F) areas with high concentrations of air, water, or noise pollution;
(G) urban sprawl areas;
(H) areas suitable for development as recreation areas;
(I) areas likely to be subject to strip development;
(J) areas subject to chronic unemployment and underemployment, economic
stagnation, social dislocations;
(K) areas of historical, cultural, or scientific interest, including
but not limited to habitat, unique or fragile ecosystems, scenic areas
and vistas, areas of unique cultural heritage, natural and man-made
historic landmarks, shorelines, beaches, tundra, wetlands, continental
shelf.
(L) Wetlands, water bodies, water courses and ecologically linked
natural terrain and features.
X-402Areas of State Concern: Procedure.
(1) Upon designation, no permit for development activity shall be
issued by either the land use commission or any regional commission in
the area of state concern until the land use commission determines that
the provisions of this section are met.
(2) Upon designation of an area as an area of state concern, the land
use commission shall have 90 days in which to promulgate rules and regu-
lations to govern the area of state concern, which rules and regulations
shall satisfy the state concern and ensure the implementation of state
goals and policies in the area so designated. All hearings and deci-
sions pursuant to this subsection shall be held in the region where the
area of state concern is located.
(3) Upon the promulgation of such rules and regulations, the regional
planning commission shall enforce such rules and regulations over the
area of state concern. Nothing shall prohibit the enforcement of all
other regional policies or standards, criteria, and technical review
procedures pursuant thereto in effect at the regional level which are
not inconsistent with the state rules and regulations, and nothing here-
in shall prohibit the regional planning commission from adopting rules
and regulations governing an area of state concern which are more strin-
gent than those promulgated by the land use commission.
15U
-------
X-403 Matters of State Concern: Designation.
These would be analogous to "areas of state concern" but would deal with
-impacts or functions such as "major energy facilities" or "industries
employing 100 or more persons" for which the exact geographic location
does not exist.
X-404 Matters of State Concern: Procedure.
(1) Upon designation, all construction activity, if any, associated with
the matter of state concern, or such other land development activities
associated with it which may be designated peripherally pursuant to sub-
section ( ) of section X-403, shall cease.
(2) The proponent of the land development activity or activities which
have been designated a matter of state concern shall thereupon apply to
the land use commission for a state permit. Upon receipt of the appli-
cation, the land use commission shall notify all interested parties and
hold a hearing on the granting of the permit in the region where the
matter of state concern has been designated. The commission may grant,
conditionally grant, or deny a permit based on adopted state and regional
policy, the impact on such policy as indicated in the applicant's impact
statement, or in such other testimony as may be adduced at a hearing.
(3) The Commission, at its discretion, may establish such monitoring or
reporting procedures as may be necessary to satisfy the Commission that
the representations of the applicant, and any conditions on the permit,
are followed.
(4) The Commission may establish a reasonable schedule of fees, to be
based on costs incurred by the Commission for analyzing and decision
making on the permit applicat ion, and the reasonable expenses of hear-
ings, public notice, and other incidental expenses associated therewith,
and charge these fees to the applicant.
In subsection I3 the developer should be allowed to apply to the land
use commission for an advisory ruling as to whether he constitutes a
matter of state concern before construction begins.
X-105 Interagency Coordination.
(1) All state agencies, regional planning commissions, and units of
local, government shall coordinate their efforts, information and acti-
vities so as to minimize dislocations in the efficient administration
of this act. For the purpose of coordinating state agency programs and
decisions, the land use commission shall be the lead agency. For^the
purpose of coordinating local government plans, programs, and decisions
with each other and with various state and Federal programs, plans and
decisions, the regional planning commission shall be the lead agency.
Once a regional plan has been adopted, and approved by the land use com-
mission as being in conformance with adopted state goals, objectives and
155
-------
policies, the said regional plan shall be given great weight in the
plans, programs and decisions of the various state agencies and the land
use commission.
PART V. REGIONAL PLANN.ING
X-5Q1 Regions Created.
The boundaries set forth in (state statute or executive order) delinea-
ting the extent of councils (associations) of government, are hereby
established as the boundaries of the various planning regions of the
state.
This language presumes that: (1) boundaries for regional oounoils of
government nave been established in your state and (2) they conform
roughly with the notion of "impact areas" set forth in the introduction
to the planning process. No land development activity has the same
impact area as any other land development activity; nevertheless3 it is
possible to draw boundaries around areas of more or less natural ecor-
nomicy social^ and environmental interrelationships. These interrela-
tionshipss which are the cause of the impact function^ also create the
necessity for the jurisdictions based on them.
X-502 Regional Planning Commissions Created: Membership, Compensation,
RemovaI.
(1) Within 60 days after the effective date of this act, the Secretary
of State (or other responsible state official with such duties) shall
divide each region designated by Section X-501 and having a population
greater than lpQ-,000 into nine districts of substantially equal popula-
tion, and every 'region designated in Section X-501 with a population of
less than 100,000 into five districts of substantially equal population.
These districts shall serve as election and representation districts for
the members of the regional planning commission set forth in this sec-
tion. Thereafter, after every dicennial census, the regional planning
commission members shall redesignate their districts so as to maintain
them at a level of substantially equal population, and, should the di-
cennial census indicate that the population of the region has grown to
more than 100,000, or decreased to less than 100,000, the regional plan-
ning commission shall increase or decrease the number of members of the
commission according to the above formula. To the extent possible,
d i str?cts sha11 conform to soc ioeconomicaI Iy and env i ronmentaI Iy homo-
geneous areas first, and local government jurisdictions second.
- - . S,
Population statistics are examples only.
(2) Members shall be elected, one from each district, to serve on the
regional planning commission. The manner of election shall be that pre-
scribed in the (state election law), except thgt the Governor shaI I_ap-
point one member from each district to serve on each regional planning
commission until the next general election.
156
-------
(3) Members shall serve for a period of four years, and shall be remov-
able for cause pursuant to the (state Impeachment and recall laws).
(4) Members shall be entitled to reimbursement from the general funds
of the regional planning commission for all necessary and actual expenses
incurred in the performance of their official duties. In addition, the
regional planning commission may, by rule, establish a per diem for mem-
bers of the commission, not to exceed $50, for each day spent on the
business of the commission, or for attending meetings. Such per diem
shall be payable from the general funds of the regional planning commis-
sion, or from any fees which it may levy on applicants for land develop-
ment activities pursuant to its official duties.
(5) There are hereby created (number) units of local government, to be
called "regional planning commissions," whose jurisdiction is set forth
in section X-501.
X-5Q3 Regional Planning Commission: Rules, Meetings, General Powers
and Duties.
A section should be written conforming to state lows.
X-504 Community Planning Commission: Specific Powers and Duties.
(1) The regional planning commission shall have the power and duty :
(2) To designate neighborhoods, on the basis of economic, social,
environmental, and local jurisdiction interrelationships and homogeniety,
and from time to time alter the boundaries of such neighborhoods to re-
flect changing economic, social, environmental, or local government
jurisdiction conditions, and within each neighborhood so designated, to
establish and constitute a Citizens' Advisory Committee;
(3) To develop and adopt plans and programs as follows:
(A) A policy plan;
(B) A land use plan;
(C) A public facilities plan;
(D) Standards, criteria, and technical review procedures applicable to
land development activities.
(E) Submission requirements (impact statements); monitoring procedures;
(F) In the implementation of the subsection (3), the regional planning
commission shall utilize the services of the Citizens' Advisory Commit-
tees to develop public policy, and the regional planning teams, as such
may be made available to the regional planning commission by the land
use commission from time to time, and such other expertise on its staff
157
-------
or contracted for as it deems necessary and proper, to develop studies,
information and data as may be necessary to substantiate the public
policy. At a minimum, public policy developed and adopted pursuant to
this subsection (3) shall be consistent with, and implement, the goals,
objectives and policies contained in this article.
(G) Land use plans, public facilities plans, and standards, criteria
and technical review procedures developed and adopted by the regional
planning commission pursuant to this subsection (3) shall be consistent
with, and implement, the policies contained in the policy plan.
No plan developed and adopted pursuant to this subsection (3) shall be
operative until it is first submitted to the land use commission for
approval as being in conformance with, and implementing, the goals,
objectives and policies of this article. Such approval by the land use
commission shall be presumed if communication to the contrary is not
received by the regional planning commission 30 days after such plan or
plans have been submitted to the land use commission for approval.
(H) Plans developed and adopted by the regional planning commission
pursuant to this subsection (3) shall, in all manners, satisfy the
requirements of the Federal Air Quality Act of 1967, and the Federal
Water Qua Iity Management Act of 1972, as those acts may from time to
time be amended.
Other Federal acts or state versions could be referred to.
(4) To serve, in all respects, as the air pollution control agency for
the purpose of implementing the 1967 Air Quality Management Act and the
Water Quality Management Act of 1972, as those may be amended from time
to time, and shall serve as the reviewing agency for applications for
Federal assistance pursuant to Office of Management and Budget Circular'
A-95.
(5) To develop and adopt any and all such, ordinances, rules, and regu-
lations as may be necessary to conduct its own affairs, to implement the
goals, objectives and policies of this article, and to implement the
various plans set forth in subsection (3). Such ordinances, rules, and
regulations shall include, but not be limited to, a procedure to delin-
eate certain areas particularly affected by one or more adopted policies,
and, pursuant to that policy, specify land development activities which
may not be conducted there, special standards, criteria, and technical
review procedures which must be followedjn such areas, and the like;
procedures for granting, conditionally granting, and denying permission
to conduct land development activities, to create, enlarge, or decrease
in size local government jurisdictions; .
• '
In the planning documents, provision should be made for inclusion of
local3 Federal and state programs and capital expenditures.
158
-------
(6) To deal in real estate, and to condemn land by the power of eminent
domain, when such is necessary and proper for the implementation of the
plans set forth in subsection (3).
Permits are issued an the basis of impacts on policies and therefore
the regional planning commission should be empowered to require design
impact statements. Also, the land use commission should be empowered
to promulgate rules saying what should be in regional impact statements
to satisfy state concerns.
(7) To issue injunctions. . . .
Regional planning commissions should also be allowed to issue transfer-
able development rights.
X-505 Citizens1 Advisory Committees Created: Officers, Membership,
Meetings.
(1) Citizens' Advisory Committees shall be constituted and governed by
articles of incorporation, by-laws, and rules of procedure promulgated
by the regional planning commission. Such documents shalI include, at
a minimum, provisions governing the following: the initial appointment,
by the regional planning commission, of a chairman and secretary of the
Citizens' Advisory Committee; within two months after such appointment,
a provision for the members of the Citizens' Advisory Committee to elect,
on an annual basis, a chairman, secretary, and such other officers as
the regional planning commission, in its discretion, deems appropriate;
provisions ensuring that all registered voters who reside in the neigh-
borhood may become members of the Citizens' Advisory Committee, without
regard to payment of any special fee or dues, and in other ways ensuring
that the Citizens' Advisory Committee may have open and informal member-
.ship requirements; provisions ensuring that meetings of the Citizens'
Advisory Committee may be called by members, or groups of members, of
the Citizens' Advisory Committee in addition to call by the chairman or
secretary, and that adequate advance notice of all meetings of the Citi-
zens' Advisory Committee is given to the voting residents of the neighbor-
hood.
The Citizens ' Advisory Committe should be the forum for the "town meet-
ing 9 " and thus should be open to all voting residents of the neighbor -
hoods both legally and in practice. Assurance should be given that no
elaborate procedures or membership dues are .necessary for membership in
the Citizens ' Advisory Committee; in fact, the language indicates that
such voting residents as may be interested in the subject matter of the
meeting should simply be allowed to go, present their credentials as
voters and residents, and participate.
(2) When, in its discretion, the regional planning commission deems that
it is necessary or desirable to implement the intent of this article, it
shall establish a body comprised of representatives of Citizens' Advisory
Committees from all or part of the jurisdiction of the regional planning
159
-------
commission, the duties of which body shall be to coordinate the work and
advice of the Citizens' Advisory Committees, resolve conflicts to the
extent possible, and in other ways to aid in the communication of con-
cerns, goals and policies from the Citizens' Advisory Committees to the
regional planning commission, and to aid in the dissemination of such
information as may be desirable for the Citizens' Advisory Committees to
have.
The intention of this subsection is to permit the establishment of such
councils in large metropolitan areas or widely dispersed geographic
areas where3 because of complexity or logistics3 the members of the
regional planning commission would not be able to adequately handle the
citizen-policy input and need help. Care must be taken3 should such a
council be established* that it not act as a filter for citizen ideas to
the decision makers3 but rather as a facilitator. In general3 such
councils should probably be avoided, with the coordinating and compro-
mising function handled by the regional planning commission and its
staff directly.
X-5Q7 Citizen Advisory Committees: Powers and Duties.
(1) Citizens' Advisory Committees shall have the power and duty to:
(2) Develop goals, objectives and policies, consistent with this arti-
cle, regarding land development activities and boundary adjustments as
these may affect both the neighborhood and the region, and generally,
regarding the future of the neighborhood and the region, and communicate
their conclusion to the regional planning commission;
The land use commission and the regional planning commissions must have
the power and duty to replan periodically.
(3) To advise the regional planning commission, as from time to time
the Citizens' Advisory Committee deems necessary and proper, regarding
such proposals for land development activities and boundary adjustments
as these may impact the neighborhood, and their opinion and advice re-
garding the extent or degree to which such proposals may impact adopted
state or regional goals, objectives and policies;
(4) Upon affirmative vote of a majority of those present and voting at
a regular meeting, the Citizens' Advisory Committee may appeal any plan,
decision, or portion thereof, made by either the land use commission or
the regional planning commission, pursuant to the provisions of this
article. Immediately upon such a decision-to appeal, the secretary of
the Citizens' Advisory Committee shall notify the regional planning com-
mission, the land use commission, any applicable court, the proponent of
relevant permit applications, and the media. Upon receipt of such noti-
fication, the regional planning commission shall make available to the
Citizens' Advisory Committee such legal and technical advice, either as
members of the regional planning commission staff or consultants thereto
160
-------
hired for such purpose, as may be requested by the Citizens1 Advisory
Committee and may be reasonable and proper for the conduct of such
appeal.
X-508 Planning Procedure.
(1) In the process of developing the policy plan, the regional planning
commission shall utilize the services of the Citizens' Advisory Commit-
tees for developing regional goals, objectives and policies which are
consistent with the provisions of this article; it shall utilize the
services of the regional planning team for the purpose of developing
data and information relating to such goals, objectives and policies,
which data and information is sufficient in terms of quantity and quali-
ty and relevance to fully substantiate the policy plan; and it or its
staff shall be responsible for communicating policy from the Citizens'
Advisory Committees to the regional planning team, and data and informa-
tion from the regional planning team to the Citizens' Advisory Committee,
to the end that the goals, objectives and policies articulated by the
Citizens' Advisory Committees have foundation in fact, and that the data
and information developed are relevant to the goals, objectives and
policies of this article, and of the people of the region.
(2) In the development of the policy plan, the regional planning team,
the Citizens' Advisory Committees, and the regional planning commission
and its staff shall, where appropriate, develop alternative sets of
policies and, to the extent possible, scenarios postulating the impli-
cations of adopting each set of policies to guide the future growth and
development. Policy plans shall set forth one or more areas or cities •
within the region which are intended to absorb most or all of the ex-
pected future growth of the region.
(3) The regional planning commission shall take affirmative action to
ensure that each alternative set of policies and the scenarios indica-
ting the implications of each set of policies upon the future growth and
development of the region are broadly disseminated and made the subject
of widespread public debate. Citizens' Advisory Committees shall be
utilized as an integral part of this program, and citizens should be
encouraged to utilize Citizens' Advisory Committees for the expression
of their opinions on the policy plan. No policy plan shall be adopted
until this process has taken place, and, before any regional policy plan
is certified as being in compliance with this article by the land use
commission, the land use commission shall satisfy itself that the goals,
objectives and policies of the regional plan conform, as closely as pos-
sible, with the wishes of the people in the region.
(4) Upon adoption, and certification by the land use commission as
being in compliance with the goals, objectives and policies of this arti-
cle, the policy plan shall govern the regional planning commission in
the development of all other plans and all other decisions.
-------
(5) To the extent possible, the regional planning commission shall set
forth in the policy plan priorities for the implementation of policies,
and such other procedures as it may deem reasonably necessary and proper
to guide developers and citizens in resolving apparent inconsistencies
between poIi c i es.
(6) The regional planning commission shall establish standards, where
necessary and proper, to guide in the implementation of the policy plan.
For policies for which it is impossible, or undesirable, to establish
standards, criteria, and technical review procedures associated there-
with, the regional planning commission shall establish standards, cri-
teria and technical review.
(7) Each regional planning commission shall develop and implement a
system to monitor the construction and subsequent use of all land develop-
ment activities within its jurisdiction for the purpose of developing a
reliable data base for future planning, for determining the extent to
which the land development activity conforms to its proposal, and to any
conditions made a part of the permit for any land development activity,
to discover and rectify any violation of applicable standards, criteria,
or technical review procedures imposed by either the regional planning
commission or, if the development activity is in an area of state con-
cern or is a matter of state concern, as may have been imposed by the
land use commission, and to determine the extent to which the goals,
objectives and policies of this article, and the policy plan of the re-
gion are being implemented. The monitoring procedures shall also in-
clude periodic updating of environmental, social, demographic, public
facilities and public expenditures, and private economic data as, in the
opinion of the regional planning commission,is necessary and proper to
perform future planning functions with a minimum of disruption to the
governmental process in the future, and to implement the intention of
this article.
(8) The regional planning commission shall implement this planning pro-
cedure on or before (date), and every four years thereafter. On or after
(date), and on or after (date) every four years thereafter, no land
development activity shall take place, or be permitted by the regional
pa Inn ing commission within its jurisdiction, unless and until this pro-
cess has been complied with anew, and the resulting policy plan has been
approved by the land use commission pursuant to the provisions of this
article.
PART VI. COMMUNITY DECISION MAKING
X-601 Declaration of Intent.
(1) All persons intending to change the use of land, increase the inten-
sity of the use of a piece of land, or develop natural resources^ shall
file a declaration of intent with the regional planning commission.
162
-------
(2) The land use commission shall, by rule, prescribe the form and con-
tent of such declarations of intent. At a minimum, declarations of in-
tent shall include the following:
(A) The name of the developer, his address, his normal place of busi-
ness, and phone number. If the developer is a corporation, the officer
or other person responsible for the land development activity shall be
set forth.
If a government agency3 the name of the responsible official.
(B) The nature, extent, and location of the proposed change in land
use.
(C) A list of exemptions to the provisions of this article, as found in
this article, together with space for the proponent of the change in land
use to indicate whether he feels he is entitled to an exemption, and if
so, on what grounds.
In the planning --procedure, there should be provision made for the adop-
tion of maps of reference.
(D) Space for the proponent to set forth rough estimates of the demand,
if any, the proposed change in land use will have on water, sewer, muni-
cipal services, and utilities, and the means for satisfying the same,
the expected impact of the proposed change in land use on the regional
plan, and the goals, objectives and policies of this article, including
any opportunities or constraints to the proposed development activities
shown on the adopted maps of reference, including the existence of any
areas of state concern, and space for the proponent to request a deter-
mination from the land use commission as to whether the development
activity constitutes a matter of state concern.
(E) Any other information which the land use commission deems necessary
and proper for the enforcement of the provisions of this article, and
the implementation of the .goals, objectives and policies of this article.
(3) Any regional planning commission may prescribe that the declaration
of intent contain such other information as, in the opinion of the re-
gional planning commission, is reasonable and necessary to determine, at
a preliminary stage, impacts on adopted regional plans.
(4) The requirements of the declaration of intent shall not include
elaborate proof from the proponent of any of his representations thereon.
(5) The regional planning commission may specify a reasonable fee to be
included with the declaration of intent, which fee shall not be more than
the cost incurred by the regional planning commission in processing the
declaration of i-ntent pursuant to the provisions of this section.
163
-------
(6) Upon receipt of a declaration of intent, the regional planning com-
mission or its authorized representative shall issue a receipt therefor,
and proceed to determine whether an exemption from the provisions of
this article should be granted, a"nd if so, the grounds therefor, or
whether the proposed change in land use falls within the provisions of
this article, and notify the proponent of its decision within five
working days of receipt of the declaration of intent. No exemption from
the provisions of this article may be granted except by the regional
planning commission at open meeting with notice.
(7) If the proposed change in land use i.s a land development activity
under the provisions of this article, the regional planning commission
or its authorized representative shall, upon reasonable request from the
proponent, discuss with the proponent any and all policies which, from
the representations made in the declaration of intent, may reasonably
apply to the land development activity, and possible ways which the pro-
ponent thereof may wish to comply therewith.
(8) If the regional planning commission finds that the proposed change
in land use is not a land development activity within the meaning of
this article, it may nevertheless require compliance with such standards,
criteria and technical review procedures as may be necessary and proper
to implement the goals, objectives and policies of this article, or the
public health, safety and welfare. Upon compliance with any such special
provisions, the change in land use shall be monitored pursuant to the
provisions of this article.
X-602 Permits: Submission Requirements.
(1) All proponents of land development activities not exempted pursuant
to the provisions of this article shall submit to the regional planning
commission an impact statement pursuant to the provisions of this sec-
tion.
(2) Impact statements shall include:
In either the regional planning commission section, or the goals, objec-
tives and policies section, provision should be made to require regional
policy to govern specific items such as those contained in zoning ordi-
nances and subdivision regulations, governing road construction, setbacks,
signs, density, bonding of public improvements, dedication of land for
parks and schools, etc.
(A) Evidence, as may be required by the regional planning commission, by
rule or by regulation, which is sufficient in the opinion of the regional
planning commission to show the impact of the proposed land development
activity on adopted1 regional poIfcy (include here local public expendi^
ture and capital facilities planning) and the goals, objectives and pol I-
cies of this act.
-------
(B) The regional planning commission has set standards or criteria and
technical review procedures, and where it finds that a land development
activity meets either the standards or the criteria and technical re-
view procedures, such finding by the regional planning commission shall
constitute a presumption that the land development activity complies
with the policy, or so much of the policy as is covered by such stan-
dards or criteria and technical review procedures.
The regional planning procedures should develop maps of reference with
both constraint zones and opportunity zones shown on them.
(C) The evidence shall be presented in such form and format as the
regional planning commission may by regulation provide; however, nothing
herein shall create a presumption that by following such regulations,
the evidence provided by the proponent is either valid or sufficient.
(D) The regional planning commission shall prescribe that the form, con-
tent and format of the impact statement relate to adopted regional policy
and any standards, criteria and technical review procedures promulgated
pursuant thereto, to the goals, objectives and policies of this article,
to any special standards, criteria and technical review procedures appli-
cable in areas of state concern.
(E) If the land development activity is a matter of state concern, such
form, content and format as may be prescribed by the land use commission
for evidence relating thereto shall be followed.
X-604 Permits: Procedure.
(1) Upon receipt of an impact statement, the regional planning commis-
sion or its designated representative shall issue a receipt for and,
within ten working days, issue an advisory opinion as to whether the sub-
mission requirements of this article, and of the regional planning com-
mission,have been complied with in the impact statement. No impact
statement may be considered until the submission requirements are com-
plied with. Upon certification that the submission requirements have
been complied with, the substantive evidence required of, and permitted
to be Introduced by, the proponent of the land development activity is
complete. Thereafter, the proponent may explain, interpret, and debate
such evidence as is contained in his impact statement, but may not intro-
duce new evidence except upon motion of the regional planning commission,
upon good cause shown.
(2) Upon certification that the submission requirements have been com-
pleted, the regional planning commission or. its staff shall publish
notice, in the manner prescribed by law, of the time, date, and place of
the preliminary hearing to be held by the commission on the proposal.
Said hearing shall be not less than 30, nor more than 60 days after cer-
tification of compliance with the submission requirements.
165
-------
(3) Immediately upon certification of compliance with the submission
requirements, the regional planning commission or its designated agent
shall transmit a complete copy thereof to the following:
(A) To the land use commission for a determination as to whether the
land development activity is in an area of state concern, or is a matter
of state concern. Such determination shall be made within 15 working
days after the land use commission receives the impact statement, and
notice shall be given to the regional planning commission, the proponent,
and the public regarding any such determination by the land use commis-
sion.
(B) To the appropriate school district;
(C) To each county and municipality within a two-mile radius of any
portion of the proposed land development activity;
(D) To all applicable utility, local improvement or service districts,
or ditch company;
(E) To the state forest service, when appropriate;
(F) To any regional planning commission the jurisdiction of which ex-
tends to within five miles of any portion of the proposed land develop-
ment activity;
(G) To the state (Federal) geologic survey for an evaluation of geologic
factors which would have a significant impact on the proposed use of the
land;
(H) To the Soil Conservation District board or boards within the region
for explicit review and recommendations regarding soil suitability,
flooding and other natural hazards. Such referral shall be made even
though all or part of a proposed land development activity is not located
within the boundaries of a soil conservation district;
(I) To the (state or local) department of health, for review of the pro-
posed on-lot sewage disposal system, if applicable, or for review of the
adequacy of existing or proposed common sewage treatment facilities to
handle the estimated effluent, and, in addition, for a report on the
existing water quality of the proposed water supply to serve the proposed
land development activity and of the water quality downstream from the
proposed land development activity, and the impact that the proposed land
development activity will have on such downstream water quality.
(J) As appropriate, either to the (water board) for opinion regarding
the capacity of existing or proposed water systems to supply the proposed
land development activity water of a quantity necessary for the proposed '
activity, or to the (state water engineer) for an opinion regarding
material injury to water rights, historic use of and estimated water
yield, to supply the proposed land development activity, and any condi-
166
-------
tion associated with the proponent's evidence on water supply. The
(state water engineer) shall also report on the cumulative effect of
on-lot wells on water rights in existing wells;
The referral to municipalities and special districts should be specified
to include impact on waterworks3 fire and police protection3 road systems,
libraries, recreation, etc.
(K) To the state department of fish and game, if applicable, for an
opinion regarding impact on big game herds, rare and endangered species,
or sport or commercial fish or shellfish;
(L) To any state or Federal agencies owning land within a one-mile
radius of the proposed land development activity;
(M) To any other and a I I other agencies or persons who may, in the
opinion of the regional planning commission, be affected by the proposed
land development activity.
(4) The regional planning commission or its designated agent shall con-
tact each of the agencies which have not responded within 15 days, ask-
ing whether an extension of time is necessary for the agency to respond.
If, on or before the 24th day, the agency responds that such an extension
is necessary, the planning commission shall seek the consent of the
proponent.to grant such extension for a total period not to exceed 54
days from the date of original transmittal. Any agency which falls to
respond within 24 days, or within the period of an extension, shall, for
the purposes of the procedural requirements of this article, be deemed
to have waived its comment.
(5) Upon receipt of response by an agency, or upon default of response
by them, the regional planning commission shall make such information
known to the proponent, and to the public, and shall make such response
available to the public at its office during regular business hours, and
shall reproduce the same for cost for any person wishing a copy of it.
(6) At the hearing, any resident of the region, any corporation doing
business in the region, any non-profit corporation or foundation or
incorporated citizens' group with interest in the region, any agency of
state, Federal, or local government, shall have reasonable opportunity
to question the proponent of the proposed land development activity,
present evidence regarding the impact of the proposed land development
activity on the policies of the region or the goals, objectives and poli-
cies of this article, which evidence may tend to either support or refute
the evidence contained in the impact statement. The proponent shall have
the right to rebut any such evidence, or substantiate any evidence as he
sees fit.
(7) At this hearing, the planning commission shall make such recommenda-
tions as it deems necessary and proper to changes in the proposal which,
if such changes were made by the proponent, would enable the proponent to
167
-------
better implement the adopted regional policies and the goals, objectives
and policies of this article. Such recommendations may be made by any
member of the commission, but any recommendations made by the entire
commission shall be made by resolution and communicated to the proponent
and to the public within one week after the hearing. At this hearing,
a time, date and place shall be set for the final hearing on'the pro-
posal, and such notice shall be printed and publicized to the public.
(8) Any changes in the proposal made by the proponent therof, together
with the impact of such changes, shall be put on file, and public notice
shalI be made thereof at least 15 days before the next hearing. At such
hearing, the only evidence which may be presented shall be dealing with
the changes, if any, made by the proponent of the land development activ-
ity, and the expected impact thereof. At this hearing, the planning com-
mission shall decide whether to grant, or not grant, a permit for the
proposed land development activity, and if the decision is made to grant
the permit, any such conditions which may apply thereto. The adoption
of such a resolution granting a permit shall not be deemed to be an
acceptance of any land or improvements dedicated by the proponent as a
part of his proposal, in acceptance of bond or other guarantee or insur-
ance of the successful completion of such improvements.
X-605 Appeal: Goals, Objectives and Policies.
(1) Any proponent of a land development activity, any person or other
legal entity who participated in the regional planning commission hear-
ing, any entity of local government, or any Citizens' Advisory Committee
which participated in a hearing before the regional planning commission,
and which is aggrieved by a failure of the regional planning commission
to enforce or implement the goals, objectives and policies of the re-
gional plan, or of this article, in an action granting, conditionally
granting, or denying a permit for a land development activity pursuant
to this article, or the land use commission on its own motion, may appeal
such decision of the regional planning commission to the land use com-
mission within 30 days of any such decision by the regional planning
commission.
(2) Any such appeal shall be conducted pursuant to the (state admini-
strative procedures act), except that all such appeals concerning the
same regional planning commission decision shall be joined and heard at
the same time.
(3) In questions regarding the interpretation and balancing of the goals,
objectives and policies of this article, and as such may relate to goals,
objectives or policies adopted by a regional planning commission, the
decision of the land use commission shall be definitive, and binding on
all parties in the courts. In the interpretation of goals, objectives or
policies adopted by a regional planning commission, which are not in- ,
tended to implement the goals, objectives and policies of this article,
the decision of the regional planning commission shall be definitive and
binding on all parties, the land use commission, and the courts.
168
-------
(4) In its order affirming or reversing a decision of the regional
planning commission, the land use commission may attach such further
conditions to a permit as it, in its discretion, may deem reasonably
necessary and proper to enforce the goals, objectives and policies of
this article, or as adopted by a regional planning commission.
X-606 Appeal: Law and Precedure.
A section should be written conforming to standard state laws and
processes.
PART VII. PENALTIES
X-701 Penalties.
In addition to all other redress available under this article, any per-
son who willfully begins construction, or, in the case of a partnership,
corporation, joint venture, or other legal entity, the person or persons
who cause construction to begin on a land development activity without
first having obtained a permit from the regional planning commission
and, If applicable, a permit for a matter of state concern from the land
use commission, or who willfully fails to comply with conditions law-
fully attached to such permit or permits, is guilty of:
(A) a misdemeanor, if the assessed valuation of the land development
activity upon completion would be $ or less, and shall be pun-
ished by a term not to exceed one year in the county jail, and a fine
not to exceed the assessed valuation of the land development activity
if it had been completed; or
(B) a felony, in the case the land development activity would have an
assessed valuation greater than $ upon completion, and shall be
punished by a term not less than six months nor more than three years,
in the county jail or penitentiary, and a fine not to exceed the
assessed valuation of the land development activity if it had been com-
pIeted.
169
-------
APPENDIX D
TESTING THE PROPOSED SYSTEM
One task in the research project was to test the proposed LUDMS in a
simulation. The researchers had to consider what a test could accom-
plish. There were two choices. One, the test could have tried to eval-
uate the effectiveness of the LUDMS in achieving a more environmentally
responsible land use decision in a real jurisdiction confronted with a
real land use problem. Two, the test could evaluate the effectiveness
with which the project staff communicated the LUDMS process itself, and
the acceptability of this process by a real cross section of land use
actors. The second choice was utilized due to time and budget limita-
tions. To be valid, a real-life test would have required the adoption
of the LUDMS approach by a real jurisdiction, the application of the
process to a given*development proposal., and then at some reasonable •
time interval, the evaluation of the decision arrived at. Given the
one-year time frame of this project, and the budget available, such a
testing procedure was physically impossible.
In taking the second approach, however, the researchers believe that a
great deal of valuable information was produced. Further, a substantial
"reality check" was provided for anyone wishing to advocate or adopt a
LUDMS approach in a real land use decision process.
The test, then, sought to answer these questions:
— Could the basic approach of LUDMS be communicated in a relatively
short time to a group of interested land use actors (private citizens,
land planners, public officials, and representatives of land sales
and development interests)?
— What reaction would such a cross-sectional group have to this process
as compared to their existing land use decision process?
— How well could such a group utilize LUDMS in a simulated planning and
decision process?
— What suggestions would such a group have for improving the system,
having worked through the LUDMS process under simulated conditions?
— Would a basic premise of LUDMS—that land use is the root of many
social and environmental problems—be independently perceived by the
pa rt ? c i pants?
170
-------
Given the limited purposes and time frame for the testing process, the
researchers sought to conduct the test in a situation that met the
following criteria:
— a regional planning structure with staff capability
— an area with both urban and rural land use characteristics
— an area with a diverse cultural and racial population
— an area with at least 100,000 population
— an area which used the traditional zoning/master planning approach
— an area where at least some background data on environment, social
and economic conditions was readily available.
The Test
After the evaluation of six sites, the Pueblo, Colorado, area was chosen.
The excellent planning staff of the Pueblo Regional Council of Govern-
ments greatly faciI Stated the gathering of information of the test and
the involvement of a representative cross section of participants.
Further, the Pueblo COG met the above criteria, and, in addition, was in
the process of developing land use policy goals for the region.
The researchers met with members of the Pueblo Regional Planning Commis-
sion staff and the chairman of the Council of Governments. The entire
LUDMS approach was reviewed and suggestions for applying It to the
Pueblo situation discussed in detail. A two-day agenda was developed.
A. Communications of LUDMS.
A slide show depicting the LUDMS was developed, using the Pueblo area
for much of the visualization of the presentation. Background informa-
tion of the environmental components was reviewed. A development propo-
sal was drafted which would confront the test group with an issue invol-
ving conflicting priorities among the environmental components.
The test-moved from a general presentation of LUDMS to an intensive
policy planning process which ultimately resulted in a draft "Policy
Plan" for the region, to the presentation and resolution of the
development proposal. A group of five "elected" officials acted as
the Regional Commission for deciding on the development proposal.
The slide and sound presentation was followed by a detailed staff
description of the LUDMS process. The key components emphasized were:
— the criticalj.nature of the policy plan in the LUDMS approach
— the need for relating environmental data to traditional land use
criteria in the decision-making process
171
-------
— the role of the interdisciplinary team in the process
— the implementation of the policy plan in the decision-making process
involving a specific proposal.
The discussion which followed the presentation focused on what the basic
differences were between master planning and zoning, which the partici-
pants were familiar with, and the LUDMS process. The emphasis of the
staff presentation was that "policy planning" and the "permit" process
of LUDMS greatly simplified decision making and made such decisions more
responsive to community needs and environmental considerations. The
participants were told to operate for the two days of the test as if
there were no zoning regulations in their region; i.e., the Policy Plan
would be the sole determinant of any land use decision made by the
Regional Commission.
The discussion which followed the initial LUDMS presentation indicated a
high degree of understanding on the part of the participants of the pro-
cess they were about to simulate. This does not mean that there was
initial agreement as to the validity of the process as opposed to their
existing zoning system.
B. Development of the Policy Plan.
The participants were divided into five groups to develop policy compo-
nents of the plan. Each group was led by a member of the interdisci-
plinary team. This team was composed of the actual consultants who had
worked on LUDMS throughout the past year on the total land use project.
Their preparation included briefing on the environmental, social, and
economic data on the Pueblo area, as described in the LUDMS process.
The interdisciplinary team's key function was to relate broadly stated
citizen and public concerns to the data available that applied to the
areas of concern. The five groups proceeded from a general discussion
of "concerns" to- developing goals related to the concerns, and then
finally to making these goals into specific policies. Later, in a
plenary session the various policies were presented and by majority vote
either adopted into the Plan or rejected. The Policy Plan finally
adopted is Attachment 1 to this Appendix.
C. The Development Proposal.
The staff (including the researchers, Pueblo regional planning staff and
the land use project consultants) spent most of the evening between the
test meeting days refining the policy statements of the Plan and rela-
ting the Development Proposal to the adopted-poIicies. Attention was
given to drawing out conflicts within the Policy Plan through the sort
of development proposal that would be presented to the Regional Commis-
sion. The Development Proposal was for a proposed new industry, and If
included a "fact sheet" and an "impact statement." This was presented
by the researchers, who played the role of "developers." Following a
general discussion of the proposal, the group broke into five subgroups
172
-------
for detailed evaluation of the proposal against the criteria of the
Policy Plan and in terms of its impact and comparison with "technical
evidence." One member of each subgroup then presented the recommenda-
tions to the "elected" officials of the Regional Commission. After a
very lengthy discussion of each part of the Policy Plan in relation to
the proposal, the Commission unanimously voted to reject the proposal,
asking the developer to consider altering his development plan to bring
it into conformity with the Regional Policy Plan.
D. Evaluation.
The final hour of the test was devoted to the completion of a question-
naire by participants. In general, it was shown that the LUDMS approach
can be readily understood by both lay and professional land use actors,
and can be applied to specific land use decisions. The tremendous
energy exercised by the test group in staying with the process from
beginning to end is a good indication of the viability of this process
in real decision-making situations. Also, the professionals of the COG
staff wrote individual critiques of the test and the LUDMS as presented
at the test.*
The'most rewarding finding of the test was that the participants almost
unanimously voiced their approval of the involvement this approach to
land planning gave them in the total life and concerns of their com-
munity.
* These very lengthy comments are not included herein, but are on record
at the EPA Project Office, the Rocky Mountain Center on Environment,
and the Pueblo Area Council of Governments, 1 City Hall Place, Pueblo,
Colorado 81003.
173
-------
APPENDIX D - ATTACHMENT 1
LUDMS TEST: DRAFT POLICY PLAN
FOR
PUEBLO REGIONAL COMMISSION
1. Prime agricultural lands shall be protected from development (other
than agriculture).
2. Geologic hazards shall be identified and such information used for
protection of life, property, and stability of natural ecosystems.
3. Preserve aquatic and riparian ecosystems.
4. Avoid loss of life and property due to flooding consistent with
ecoIog i caI goaIs.
5. Development which forecloses the use of valuable minerals shall be
avoided.
6. Mineral development shall be conducted to avoid or minimize adverse
i mpacts.
7. Eliminate water pollution from all sources.
8. Eliminate air pollution from all sources.
9. Eliminate noise pollution from all sources.
10. Provide for a diverse parks, recreation and open space system to
meet human needs and preserve ecosystem values.
11. Preserve historic sites and encourage rehabilitation of historic
structures.
12. Improve visual image of city through abatement of commercial strip
development, adoption of proposed sign code, development of down-
town mall, and related programs with emphasis on environmentally
degraded areas.
13. Revitalize and strengthen downtown core area.
t4. Adopt and apply landscape treatments that are compatible with
surrounding ecosystems.
15. Develop balanced transportation system, including pedestrian and
non-motorized transport.
IT1*
-------
16. Encourage self-determination of neighborhood design.
17- Create opportunities for participation by diverse populations of
community in local decision making.
18. Reflect diverse community needs in private housing development;
particularly, require a percentage of low-income housing in each
new development, based on community need.
19. The City and County of Pueblo shall seek all funds available for
low-income housing based on community need.
20. Allocate educational resources to meet the needs of the total com-
munity; particularly, develop expanded opportunities for vocational
education.
21. Expand employment base to meet needs of community; particularly,
expand employment opportunities for chronically unemployed and
underemployed.
22. Provide a diversity of employment opportunities.
23. Promote economic stability through a diversified industrial base.
24. Develop and apply an urban services plan that"optimizes existing
facilities and minimizes expansion costs.
25. The economic, racial and social diversity within neighborhoods of
Pueblo shall be encouraged.
26. The City and County of Pueblo shall develop efficient and ecologi-
cally acceptable methods of waste disposal and shall encourage re-
cycling of waste products.
175
-------
APPENDIX D - ATTACHMENT 2
SUMMARY OF QUESTIONNAIRES USED AT LUDMS TEST, PUEBLO, COLORADO
Participants in the test of the LUDMS conducted at Pueblo, Colorado, were
asked to indicate what their position was in the land use planning/deci-
sion-making system. The breakdown was as follows: public agency staff
(12), appointed officials (2), commissioners or members of planning and
zoning board (4), interested citizens (10). Many staff members also
identified themselves as interested citizens.
In analyzing responses, it is important to keep in mind that participants
knew about the LUDMS only what was included in the oral presentation.
The system had not been designed to be understood completely without
benefit of the written material. Also, these participants were trying
to compress into two days a method which in reality would take the better
part of a year to operate. The participants viewed the primary purpose
of the LUDMS as being a more rational method of creating land use poli-
cies and establishing controls over land development. It was seen as a
better way of integrating the technician, citizen and government official
into the planning process.
The participants were asked what they liked about the proposed permit
system, particularly in comparison to the existing zoning process. Some
of the responses indicated a preference for a shorter process than
zoning provided, a more flexible program for urban development. The per-
mit system would have more control over changes and give specific cri-
teria for change of use* They liked the requirement for the public to
rethink their planning status and philosophy and felt that the public
input was an important element (unified participation of all segments of
the society). Better control of land use on a long-term basis and more
systematic decisions on critical land use choices was another positive
response. One respondent felt that the LUDMS and the permit system could
force consideration of factors not included in zoning decisions. The
scope of the data was considered beneficial, and also the fact that it
included many phases of life which were often excluded from zoning deci-
sions and provided definite standards to measure against.
Some of the elements which the participants criticized included the
difficulty of maintaining citizen Involvement: "Overwhelming citizen
input would vanish after a one-shot crisis situation," "citizens won't
necessarily present the 'right' ideas," "a lack of interest or dedication
would doom its effective quality." The makeup of individuals on the com-
missions concerned would of course be the key to success of either ap-
proach, zoning or permit system; a method is only as good as the people
who put it into operation. Some respondents felt that so many criteria
were involved in the policy that development would be slowed and the
process would be more cumbersome to both developers and reviewing agen-
cies. The need to spend large amounts of money and time to administer
better land use was seen as a pitfall of the new approach. Many re-
sponses indicated the feeling that except for the presence of the IDT
and the CAC (social/economic concerns and citizen input), zoning could
176
-------
be implemented with the same process of goals and policy statements
and a similar result could be obtained through mandatory planned unit
development processes using traditional zoning procedures.
A large number of negative responses came from the public agency staff
members and appointed officials in answer to the question: "Would
concerned citizens be willing to consistently attend public meetings
over a lengthy period of time in order to develop a 'policy plan1 for
Pueblo?" The majority of interested citizens, planning commissioners
and the consultants were more optimistic and felt there was a good
chance, or at least a fairly good chance, that citizens would be willing
to participate over an extended period of time. One note indicated that
it all depended on leadership, composition of the groups and their
potential for influence. Several other respondents remarked that there
are always certain citizens willing to participate in order to try to
improve the community.
There was strong support for using a combination of appointed citizens
and volunteer citizens on the CAC's. There was no clear breakdown in
preference among staff, citizens, officials or commission members.
Several notes indicated that citizens who volunteer and come consistently
should automatically be appointed by the regional body. One staff
respondent indicated there was no need for citizen input, and one con-
sultant felt the CAC's should be strictly volunteer. (This question
was particularly relevant to the revision of the LUDMS because the
authors had originally recommended that only volunteer CAC's should be
used.)
About a third of the staff respondents favored reliance on staff
"experts" for the IDT. Otherwise, there was strong support for a
combination of outside consultants to provide objectivity and new
ideas, and "in-house" expertise to provide familiarity with the locality
and the existing system.
In answer to a question about the workability of the system, the
respondents seemed to feel that it could be implemented. There was
not strong support for the possibility of immediate workability, but
a moderately strong feeling that the bugs could be worked out in order
to put the system into effect. Many people did feel that several
important aspects of the permit system and planning process could be
attached to the existing zoning process. This point also provides
significant support against the criticism that the LUDMS represents
too drastic a. change from current planning and zoning to be feasible.
Many participants saw the potential for using bits and pieces of the
LUDMS and permit system to strengthen the existing process of planning
and zoning. This fact could provide the mechanism for a smooth tran-
sition to a wholly new method of creating public policy for land use
and development.
177
-------
Almost all of the respondents felt that development decisions should be
made on a regional rather than a county basis. The major obstacle was
the difficulty of defining a region. (Pueblo is currently in the throes
of a public debate about creating a region with city/county consolida-
tion.) Some stress was put on the need for the state to designate areas
of state concern. Also, concern was expressed by one participant that
regional government would just create one more level of bureaucracy.
The next section seems to apply more to those who presented the system
than to the system per se, but it might be informative to include some
of the comments here. The question was: "Which concepts did you find
most difficult to comprehend?"
Staff: Why an elected official could be "held accountable"
under this system and not under zoning since the legal
basis of zoning is also technical information.
The policy plan (i.e., the end product) should be de-
scribed more thoroughly at the start.
The transition between the policy making and the actual
decision making on the land is not clearly described.
How do you establish a consensus on what is a goal and
what is a policy?
Why switch from one marginal system to another marginal
system; not enough advantages are apparent.
The replacement of existing systems (particularly sub-
divisions) is not clear.
Too massive a collection of scientific data seems to be
necessary for adequate decision making.
Officials: How do you get agreement on a policy statement acceptable
to a majority of the community, and who is responsible
for poIi cy controI?
Citizens: The mechanics to formulate citizen involvement are con-
fusing.
Alternative policies, alternative futures and policy
plans are not clear.
1 •
It's hard to believe that people would be willing to
lose a dollar on land development for the benefit of
others.
Continuity of the CAC's concerns by the elected decision
makers is not guaranteed.
178
-------
Consultants:
What's the d
ive?
ifference between goal and policy and object-
In answer to the question: "Which aspects of the process seem as though
they would be too difficult to apply?":
Officials: Enlisting help of citizens who are not directly affected.
Staff: Strict compliance with adopted policy.
Exacting community pressure when needed and for the right
reasons. Who bears their expense?
Developing goals and objectives in reference to all the
data generated and the subsequent analysis of that data.
Commissioners: Sociological aspects likely to be too idealistic and
therefore perhaps not what the majority likes.
Citizens: Convincing COG that it is a system worth replacing
zoning.
Generating a viable community policy statement through
citizen groups, and maintaining continual citizen parti-
cipation.
Gathering and communicating scientific and technical
data.
The changeover to a permit system; the replacement of
traditional zoning.
The final decision on a permit being made on a "factual
and analytical" basis rather than on a politicaI-economic
influence basis.
Consultants:
The major components of land use decision making which appeared to have
been omitted from the LUDMS were identified as:
. policies and regard for political development;
. some vehicle for involving public officials in interface with CAC's;
. based on regional government which is currently nonexistent;
. phasing system: concrete steps as to how to implement;
. evaluation process to determine effectiveness;
. no recognition of existing regulation and laws;
. need more input and a system of checks from other official bodies.
The respondents were almost equally divided on the question of whether
the proposed system would improve the quality of the environment. It
must be remembered that this judgment was based only on the basis of an
oral presentation. Most of the techniques for making environmentally
179
-------
responsible decisions included in the LUDMS document were not able to
be included in the presentation.
A strong bias exists in the questionnaire results toward specialized
local situations rather than an understanding of universal problems.
The result is a biased "Puebloese" slant to all the answers; that is,
all the answers depend on the respondents' experience in Pueblo. This
is perhaps most strongly represented in answers from the staff.
180
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/5-75-008
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
A Land Use Decision Methodology for Environmental
Control
5. REPORT DATE
March 1975 Date of Approval
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
Kirk Wickersham, Roger P. Hansen, Albert G. Melcher
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Rocky Mountain Center on Environment
4260 East Evans Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80222
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1HA098
NO.
R802423
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Washington Environmental Research Center
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
This report proposes an ecologically responsible land use decision-making
system for local, regional and, to an extent, state governments. Referred to as
LUDMS, it is based on conclusions that local governments have not dealt effec-
. tively with land use problems because traditional planning and land use control
devices are unecological, unresponsive and unsystematic. The fundamental premise
of LUDMS is that environmentally responsible land use planning and control must
be based on valid ecological information combined with enlightened and informed
public opinion.
LUDMS makes use of several basic concepts, including policy planning (a
process for combining public opinion with scientific and technical information
to create community policies); use of an interdisciplinary team; public partici-
pation; an environmental resources inventory and analysis; a staff which under-
stands and can communicate about ecology; legal devices for land use control;
and positive community programs. "Model" state and local codes for implementing
LUDMS are provided.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
COSATI Field/Group
Land Use; Environment;
Model Legislation; Water
Resources Planning, Analytic
Techniques; Zoning
Land Use Controls;
Environment; Model
Land Use Legislation
06F
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (TliisReport)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
185
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
------- |