PG
411-12 is a local zoning authority bill that would devolve Prince George's
County zoning authority to a municipal level.[1] Sponsored
by Delegate Geraldine Valentino-Smith of Bowie, it would grant county manipulates
with populations greater than 20,000. This would limited the authority to Bowie
(54,727), College Park (301,413) and Greenbelt (23,068) allowing these three
cities to join Laurel (25,115) which has the authority as a historic anomaly.[2]
For the
record. some version of this bill has been introduced since I first joined the
Prince George's Chamber of Commerce in the late 1990s, I recall testifying
against the legislation on behalf of the Chamber as a member, and later co-chair
of the legislative committee. Zoning on
a local level is a not a recent idea. This November just past marked the 85th
anniversary of the landmark United States Supreme Court case Village of Euclid
v. Ambler Realty Co. Realty, which upheld the basic constitutionality of local
zoning.[3] One often hears the argument that that there
is no need zoning and that land use planning is somehow a definition of socialism
implying that socialism is somehow criminal and therefore so is zoning. Planning,
however, according to Ed McMahon, in Urban Land Magazine, "...is the
multi-faceted process that communities use to prepare for change. It is an
activity as old as humankind itself. In most realms of endeavor, failing to
plan, simply means planning to fail. Try to imagine a corporation without a
business plan. It would have a hard time attracting investment. The same is
true of communities. In America, land use planning is primarily the
responsibility of local government. Zoning is considered the quintessential
tool of plan implementation."[4]
Zoning
as practiced in Prince George's County tends to be a is a limited tool. It is sometimes
good at protecting what is already in place and pretty good at preventing
nuisances. Because of political pressures that favor short terms interests of
the few over long terms interests of the many, zoning in this county is not
particularly good at defining, shaping,
or improving the future quality of new
development. Because most zoning codes are proscriptive in nature. They try. in
Mr. McMahon's words, "...to prevent bad things from happening without
laying out a vision of how things should be."[5]
Allowing
multiple communities their own zoning may create an mosaic of design which
could reflect the diversity the county. It may also lead to additional planning
costs for developers restricting the small businesses because of the additional
costs. Some may claim that city zoning authority will be more responsive because
it is smaller an closer to the community affected. Other may ask where the
money will come to support the professional staff needed to administratively
handle the increased responsibilities that now are spread out across the entire
county through the services of PG-MNCPPC's planning department.
Why do
the larger municipalities need the additional layer of zoning is a question we
should be asking? Why does Bowie et al. think the planning system in
place is broken? What successes has Laurel had that Bowie and the others wish
to emulate? What are the measureable benefits to both Bowie and the County in
enacting this legislation? Who bears the additional governmental costs? How
will the varying local zoning plans connect when it comes to the single
ecosystem upon which we all depend? Who will knit together the wider effects of
local zoning on connecting infrastructure?
16 years
ago this bill would have had strong supporters on both sides debating the
proposal; today there is a strange silence - maybe this legislation's moment
has come through anodyne apathy to regulatory process changes.
Meet the 27 Historic Municipalities of Prince George's County, Maryland - Ready for Adaptive Re-use
[1] PG
411-12 Prince George's County - Qualifying Municipal Corporations - Land Use
Decisions [accessed January 6, 2012] http://www.princegeorgeshousedelegation.com/legislation/bill-history?local=PG%20411-12
[2]
2010 US Census data
[3] SUTHERLAND,
J., Opinion of the Court, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. 272 U.S. 365. Village
of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO. No. 31 Argued: January 27, 1926 --- Decided: November
22, 1926 [accessed January 6, 2012] http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0272_0365_ZO.html
"Building zone laws are of modern origin. They began in this
country about twenty-five years ago. Until recent years, urban life was
comparatively simple; but with the great increase and concentration of
population, problems have developed, and constantly are developing, which
require, and will continue to require, additional restrictions in respect of
the use and occupation of private lands in [p387] urban communities.
Regulations the wisdom, necessity and validity of which, as applied to existing
conditions, are so apparent that they are now uniformly sustained a century
ago, or even half a century ago, probably would have been rejected as arbitrary
and oppressive. Such regulations are sustained, under the complex conditions of
our day, for reasons analogous to those which justify traffic regulations,
which, before the advent of automobiles and rapid transit street railways,
would have been condemned as fatally arbitrary and unreasonable. And in this
there is no inconsistency, for, while the meaning of constitutional guaranties
never varies, the scope of their application must expand or contract to meet
the new and different conditions which are constantly coming within the field
of their operation. In a changing world, it is impossible that it should be
otherwise. But although a degree of elasticity is thus imparted not to the
meaning, but to the application of constitutional principles, statutes and
ordinances which, after giving due weight to the new conditions, are found
clearly not to conform to the Constitution of course must fall."
[4] Ed
McMahon. Happy anniversary, zoning! From Zoning at 85 in Urban Land Magazine. November 23, 2011. [accessed January 6, 2012]
"Successful communities
think beyond conventional zoning. They use education, incentives and voluntary
initiatives, not just regulation. They also use design standards, form-based
codes, density bonuses, transfer of development rights and other innovative
techniques that foster walkable, mixed use neighborhoods."
[5] ibid.
No comments:
Post a Comment