Category: form-based codes

Progressive zoning plans – not here

The city of Miami last night adopted a zoning code overhaul, called Miami 21. Here’s the Miami Herald article on it. Why should folks around here care? Here’s why:

The new zoning overhaul is what’s called a “form-based code.” Raleigh is about to write one. Cabarrus County already has one. So does Davidson. Miami is the largest city, so far, to adopt one, but Denver is likely to adopt its own comprehensive form-based code in a matter of months, says blogger Mike Lydon. It’s an approach to zoning that many progressive cities are taking on. Should Charlotte?

A form-based code bases rules that govern planning and zoning on buildings’ form, not their use. In other words, what goes on inside a building (residence? office? store?) is less important than how the building fits in with what’s around it.

For instance, it says parking lots have to be behind new buildings, and the buildings have to sit at the sidewalk – which makes walking down the sidewalk more attractive, thus encouraging people to walk instead of drive.

Form-based codes also generally use an approach with a weird-sounding name that makes plenty of sense – a “transect.” It means you look at which areas are intensely urban, or completely rural, or somewhere in between and design things such as streets, sidewalks, even storm water management, based on how urban or suburban or rural an area is. It prevents, for instance, plopping a highway designed for intercity travel (think I-277) into a dense urban core. To move traffic there, it would say, use a high-capacity boulevard. (Think Champs-Elysee.)

Just as important, when adopted, a form based code is a plan with teeth. It overlays the city’s expectations for urban density or suburban density or rural density onto the whole jurisdiction, complete with the zoning rules that govern those areas. So the “plan” isn’t just a guideline but is a legal requirement. Imagine that!

One of the leaders of Miami’s effort was the dean of the University of Miami School of Architecture, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, a luminary in the New Urbanism movement.

Here’s a link to the Web site for the code itself. And if it rains today and you’re looking for some meaty reading, here’s the pdf for the code itself.

Charlotte pols lack guts?

It’s obvious Charlotte-Mecklenburg isn’t the only place slammed by growth that’s outpacing its ability — or at least its willingness to raise property taxes enough — to pay for building the schools needed for all the newcomers.

A total of 46 — FORTY SIX — bills in the General Assembly would give local governments across the state new authority to levy taxes beyond property taxes. Other places want permission to enact land transfer taxes, which adds a fee to real estate transactions. Or they want permission to levy impact fees on new residential construction. Or they want permission to raise sales taxes to help pay for building schools.

WakeUp Wake County, a group that advocates more limits on growth, recently hired a well-known lobbyist to push a fee of up to 1 percent on real estate transfers. At least three Wake County legislators have sponsored bills to let Wake enact some new taxes, if voters approve.

What’s Mecklenburg County asking for? Nada. Zip. Zilcheroonie. (OK, to be fair, I think they passed a resolution supporting an N.C. Association of County Commissioners’ attempt to get broad permission for all counties. But that bill’s going nowhere, and other counties have been far more assertive about asking the Leg for what they need.)

What’s Charlotte asking for? Nada. (Nope, the city doesn’t pay for schools. It does pay for road and street improvements made necessary by new development. Why not ask for an impact fee for street improvements?)

Here’s a roundup story from the Raleigh News & Observer. It mentions the massive campaign being sponsored by the N.C. Association of Realtors, to “Stop the N.C. Home Tax.”

How disingenuous. Let’s see. Right now, school construction is paid for mostly through bonds or other debt, which is repaid with, hmmmm, let me get this right — property taxes. So a real estate transfer tax — which would apply to every transaction, not just homes — is a “Home Tax.” And the tax you pay because you own your home is NOT a “Home Tax”?

The thing is, when you ask representatives of the N.C. Association of Realtors, “Well, how do you propose that counties find money to build schools? Shall we infer that this means you support raising property taxes?” they just hem and haw.

Or, they say, governments should trim their budgets. Oh, for pity’s sakes. That’s like saying Americans should exercise more and watch less TV and parents should teach their kids better manners. In other words, yes they should, but they haven’t done it yet and are most unlikely to do it in the future, because there’s no way to make them.

Furthermore, I don’t think county governments can cut enough to find the billions needed to build the schools they need. What are they going to do, stop paying for social services that they’re legally required to provide? Stop running public health departments? People who say “just cut the budget” either don’t know much about local government budgets or are among the tiny minority who believe that virtually no government services are really needed. And the majority of voters don’t agree with them. Which is why it’s hard for elected officials to cut services enough to find the money to build schools.

Why are Mecklenburg’s local officials so much more passive about proposing impact fees or land transfer taxes than those in Wake? Any ideas?