Zoning for Universal Design and Visitability

ZONINGPRACTICE April 2006 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION

ISSUE NUMBER FOUR PRACTICE UNIVERSAL DESIGN

4 Zoning for Universal Design and Visitability

By Jennifer S. Evans-Cowley, AICP

According to the 2000 U.S. Census, 20 percent of the American population reported some type of disability.

Of t h ose over the age of 65, 28 perce n t ha ve bu ild i ngs and pro d u c t s t ha t p ro m o te equal Visi ta bil i t y is another term ass o cia te d a physi ca l d isa bil i t y. As the ba by b o o m e rs o p p o r tun i t y for use by i n d i vi d u a ls, whether with un i ve rsa l d esign. Visi ta bil i t y is a move- a ge, these figures will i n crease. As bu ild e rs or not t h e y ha ve a disa bil i t y. The Ce n ter fo r m e n t to cha nge co nstruction sta n da rds s o s e e k to acco m m o da te them, the idea of co n- U n i ve rsa l Design, loca ted in the College of t ha t new housi n g is d e signed to all o w people st r u c t i ng homes so tha t p e o ple can age in Design at N o rth Ca rol i na S ta te Unive rsi t y, with mobil i t y i m pa i r m e n t s to live in the un i t s pla ce is g row i ng in popula r i t y. Pla n n e rs ge n- l ist s s e ven princi ples : and visi t o t h e rs. The ke y fea tu res o f visi ta bil- e ra ll y l i ke the idea of a g i ng in pla ce, bu t o n l y i t y i n c lude wide doorways, at least a ha l f 1. Equitable use a ha n d ful o f ci t i es a re active l y usi ng their bath on the main floor, accessi ble pla ce m e n t d e ve l o p m e n t co d es to ma n da te un i ve rsa l 2. Flexibility in use o f e le c t r i ca l co n t rols, and at least one ze ro - d esign and visi ta bil i t y. 3. Simple and intuitive step entra n ce to a bu ild i ng. Visi ta bil i t y d o es n o t e nsu r e co m ple te access in a home, bu t i t WHAT IS UNIVERSAL DESIGN AND 4. Perceptible information e nsu res t h a t pu bl i c spa ces, su ch as t h e VISITABILITY? 5. Tolerance for error e n t ra n ce, ha ll ways, and ba t h room are acces- The te r m s universal design and v i s i t a b i l i t y si ble to someone in a wheelcha i r. T h is m i n i- 6. Low physical effort a re un fa m il iar to ma ny pla n n e rs. Unive rsa l ma l le ve l o f a ccessi bil i t y a l l ows for a pers o n d esign is the design and production of 7. Size and space for approach and use with a disa bil i t y to access a home, even if t ha t p e rson does n o t l i ve there, and all o ws a n o n - d isa bled person to continue resi d i ng in a home in the eve n t t h a t the person deve l- o ps a disa bil i t y. The Americans with Disabilities Act requires that buildings be accessible to those with disabilities. Planners have incorporated its requirements into zoning codes, such as a specific number of parking spaces to be reserved for those with disabilities. This has typically meant that a ramp was added on the side of a building or an elevator was tucked into a corner. However, those zoning requirements have not been extended to apply to single-family homes. Universal design promotes the idea of creating places that are designed for everyone to access, rather than being retrofitted for accessibility. Some examples include providing no-step ground entryways (to assist those in wheelchairs) with textured U n i ve rsi t y Neighborhood Apa rt m e n t s in Be r ke le y, Ca l i fo r n ia, bu il t by H ea r th Homes, is surface (to assist the blind), and providing the na t i o n ’ s f i r st a f f o rda ble housi ng bu il t with Unive rsa l Design princi ples. The 27- un i t wide interior doors and hallways, bright light- d e ve l o p m e n t opened in Jul y 2 0 0 5 . ing, handles with a lever rather than a twisting knob, and light controls operated with large

ZONINGPRACTICE 4.06 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION | page 2 ASK THE AUTHOR JOIN US ONLINE! About the Author From May 9 to 20, go online to participate in our “Ask the Author” forum, an interac - Jennifer S. Evans-Cowley, AICP, is an assistant pro- tive feature of Zoning Practice. Jennifer S. Evans-Cowley, AICP, will be available to fessor of City and Regional Planning at Ohio State answer questions about this article. Go to the APA website at www.planning.org and University. This research has been funded by a follow the links to the Ask the Author section. From there, just submit your questions grant from the National Endowment for the Arts about the article using an e-mail link. The author will reply, and Zoning Practice will Universal Design Leadership Project. If your com- post the answers cumulatively on the website for the benefit of all subscribers. This munity has passed a visitability ordinance or is feature will be available for selected issues of Zoning Practice at announced times. considering one, please e-mail Jennifer Evans- After each online discussion is closed, the answers will be saved in an online archive Cowley at [email protected]. available through the APA Zoning Practice web pages.

panels rather than a toggle switch. In the If we know that there is a change in the 2000 law, re q u i res a ll h o m e s bu il t on a bathroom, grab bars are an important addi- demographics of our communities, planners sp e cula t i ve basis to include visi ta bil i t y tion. These allow a person in a wheelchair to should be actively seeking ways to help peo- sta n da rds. transfer from the chair to the toilet or bathtub. ple age in place. At least 24 cities also have passed visitability legislation modifying their building WHY IS UNIVERSAL DESIGN IMPORTANT? code, including: The number of people in the United States It is more expensive ■ Atlanta (1992) who have disabilities is growing. One reason is that better health care has allowed people to retrofit a ■ Freehold Borough, New Jersey (1997) with disabilities to live longer lives. In addi- ■ Austin, Texas (1998) tion, the portion of the population over the nonaccessible house ■ Irvine, California (1999) age of 65 has been growing, and aging pro- duces a higher likelihood of disabilities. The than to have the house ■ Urbana, Illinois (2000) number of disabled veterans has also grown. ■ Fort Worth, Texas (2000) For those with physical disabilities, made accessible to buildings can serve as a major obstacle to ■ Visalia, California (2001) mobility. Providing for accessibility reduces begin with. ■ San Mateo County, California (2001) those obstacles, but does not eliminate them. ■ Albuquerque, New Mexico (2002) Even if a disabled person lives in an accessible building, it is still difficult for people with BUILDING CODES, UNIVERSAL DESIGN, ■ San Antonio, Texas (2002) disabilities to access the homes of the non- AND VISITABILITY ■ Onondaga County, New York (2002) disabled. This inaccessibility makes it difficult Across the nation, ci t i ze ns g r o u ps ad vo ca t- for those with disabilities to visit friends and i ng for the disa bled ha ve been effe c t i v e in ■ Southampton, New York (2002) family. wi n n i ng passa ge of sta te and loca l leg isla- ■ Naperville, Illinois (2002) Homes accessible to people with disabil- tion tha t i n co r p o ra tes sta n da rds for visi ta bil- ities are just as convenient for the non- i t y. Acco rd i ng to the Unive r si t y o f Bu f fa l o, 14 ■ Pima County, Arizona (2002) disabled. A wide level entrance to a home sta tes ha ve passed su ch leg islation. In ■ Long Beach, California (2002) makes it easier to move furniture into and out 1992, Georg i a passed the first visi ta bil i t y ■ Iowa City, Iowa (2002) of a building, maneuver a stroller, or get leg islation, crea t i ng the Eas y L i vi ng Home around if a household member has a sprained ce rt i f i cation pro g ram for priva te homes. T h is ■ Pittsburgh (2002) ankle, for example. Almost everyone has vol un ta ry ce r t i f i cation pro g ram re q u i res n e w ■ Syracuse, New York (2003) experienced a situation where an object had h o m es to ha ve a ze ro -step entry and wi d e to be disassembled in order to move it i n terior passa ge doors, a full ba t h room wi t h ■ Bolingbrook, Illinois (2003) through a doorway. ma n e uve r i ng spa ce, and a bedroom on the ■ Escanaba, Michigan (2003) Many people with disabilities and sen- main floor. iors want to age in place, rather than have to Texas and Ka nsas ha ve passed leg isla- ■ Chicago (2003) move to an assisted living facility or nursing tion re q u i r i ng visi ta bil i t y for homes re ce i vi ng ■ Houston (2004) home. It is more expensive to retrofit a non- pu bl i c fun d i ng. Florida passed leg isla t i o n ■ St. Petersburg, Florida (2004) accessible house than to have the house re q u i r i ng tha t a ll new homes ha ve a ba t h- made accessible to begin with. room on the gro und le ve l. Vermont, in a ■ Arvada, Colorado (2005)

ZONINGPRACTICE 4.06 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION | page 3 ■ Auburn, New York (2005) The ord i na n ce appl i es to all si ng le - fa m- building codes, see the October 2002 issue of il y and duplex h o m es bu il t in a group of Zoning News, “Visitability Issues Drive ■ Scranton, Pennsylvania (2005) s e ven or more un i t s and re q u i res a ste p - f re e Building Code Changes.”) ■ Toledo, Ohio (2005) e n t ra n ce, wider interior doors on the gro un d floor le vel, wider ha ll ways, and accessi ble ZONING FOR UNIVERSAL DESIGN IN Most of the ordinances are restricted to f i rst -floor ba t h ro o m s for a minimum of 1 5 HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND publicly funded housing projects. However, p e rce n t o f the un i t s bu il t. An add i t i o na l 1 5 The last decade produced many changes in the legislation in Pima County and p e rce n t o f the homes co nst r u c ted must p ro- local building codes. However, zoning codes Bolingbrook requires all new houses to be vide a ste p - f ree entra n ce, a ma ximum sl o p e can also play a role in promoting universal built with visitability standards. Bolingbrook o f 1:12, and an entra n ce door at least 3 2 design. Howard County, Maryland, requires worked with developers to promote the ordi- i n ch es in width. The ci t y has a lso deve l o p e d universal design features to be incorporated nance. The city found that the average price a fee-in-lieu of visi ta bil i t y. The deve l o p e r in age-restricted adult housing units through increase per home would be no more than 1.5 m ust pay $ 2 ,500 for ea ch un bu il t visi ta ble its zoning ordinance. The county’s General Plan 2000 indi- cated that, over the next 25 years, the county’s population over the age of 55 would increase from 19 percent to 31 percent of the total population, or 46,000 people. This will result in significant changes in the county’s housing needs as more residents age in place or decide to “downsize” to reduce their home ownership burdens and as larger numbers of older adults move into the county to be closer to their families. The plan identified three goals related to housing for seniors:

■ Provide housing for older adults within sta- ble and attractive communities through maintenance, renovation, and modification of existing homes;

■ Produce new housing that meets the needs of older adults while not detracting from the existing neighborhoods; and

■ Provide affordable and diverse housing to meet the needs of low- and moderate- income seniors.

T h is home with a un i ve rsa ll y d esigned entra n ce has f la t g rad i ng to the fro n t door and no ste ps . In an effo rt to meet t h ese goa ls, the co un t y co un cil d i re c ted the De pa rt m e n t o f P la n n i ng and Zo n i ng to wo r k with the depa rt m e n t s o f H o usi ng percent. According to researchers Claar and home and $10,000 if the model home is n o t and Co m m un i t y De velopment; Insp e c t i o ns , Bowen (see Resources box), this reduced the visi ta ble. The fun ds will be used to provi d e L i ce ns es and Permits; Ci t i zen S e r vi ces; and the fears of the local homebuilders. f i na n cia l assista n ce to people seeki ng assis- Co m m ission on Aging to develop a S e n i o rs Arvada, Colorado, which adopted a vis- ta n ce in ma ki ng exist i ng housi ng sto ck vis- H o usi ng Master Plan, which was co m ple ted in itability ordinance in 2005, recognized a chang- i ta ble . Arvada ’ s goa l is to ha ve 30 perce n t o f De cember 2004. A co un t y wide su rve y fo und tha t ing demographic in the community. The a ll new homes in Arvada bu il t to inco r p o ra te 70 perce n t o f older resi d e n t s wa n t to re main in Comprehensive Plan for the City of Arvada visi ta bil i t y p r i n ci p les . their homes or nea r by. specifically mentions universal design. As part For the most part, builders have The county planning department created of the objectives the plan states, “The city will accepted these new regulations, but Pima a committee to decide which universal design explore how to include universal design princi- County was sued twice by the National features should be required. The county ples in new development projects.” Assistant Association of Home Builders and the Pima wanted to balance affordability and adaptabil- city manager Vicki Reier says, “People like to County Home Builders Association, once on ity. Howard County recognized that housing live in Arvada, and we want to build so people the local and once on the federal level. The costs were already high and wanted to deter- can age in place and not have to move for city’s ordinance was upheld in both cases. mine which universal design features have the accommodations.” (For more information on universal design in highest cost/benefit ratio.

ZONINGPRACTICE 4.06 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION | page 4 UNIVERSAL DESIGN FEATURES FOR SR-I DISTRICT IN HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND tively expensive to retrofit in the future are Required Desired Optional classified as desirable or optional. De ve l o p e rs o f senior housi ng fo un d Accessible path between the un i ve rsa l d esign guidelines h e l p ful i n parking and the dwelling units Visual smoke detectors Security system and visual crea t i ng new housi ng pro j ects. The co un t y for apartments identification of visitors pla ns to st re ngthen the un i ve rsa l d esi g n All common areas must meet Smooth vertical transitions Handrails on both sides g u i d e l i n es as the ma r ke t d e ma n ds m o re ADA standards for apartments between rooms of all stairs fea tu res. The co un t y re co g n i zes t ha t n e w co nstruction will be re la t i ve l y l i m i ted co m- No-step entrance to Maneuvering space at pa red to the 97,000 exist i ng housi ng un i t s community buildings and all entrance, between main living Grab bars in bathrooms and tha t t h e re is st ill a need to re t ro f i t a n d dwellings areas, and in front of re n ova t e older homes . appliances As a step toward more housing with universal design features, the county is educat- Front door must be 36 inches ing residents, real estate agents, and remod- wide with exterior lighting of Low-maintenance exterior Curbless shower elers about using universal design features to the entrance materials renovate existing homes. They are also edu- All interior doorways at least Covered main entry Multilevel or adjustable cating residents and homebuilders about the 32 inches in width kitchen counters value of visitability in all new residential construction. Lever handles and anti-scald The county is also working to educate Hallways at least 36 inches in devices on all plumbing Pull-out shelves in residents about universal design features and width fixtures kitchen base cabinets the likelihood that they will be disabled in the future. The county recognized that many Complete first floor living area adults over 55 don’t perceive themselves as with master bedroom and bath Slip-resistant flooring Hand-held showerhead seniors that need universal design features or (or elevator if multistory that their needs will change over time. apartment) Education will be critical in helping ensure Task lighting in kitchen, that adults demand features that will allow Lever handles on interior and Five-foot turning radius or T bath, and other work them to age in place. exterior doors turn in kitchen and bath areas H owa rd Co un t y was a ble to su ccess- full y i m p le m e n t the co un t y ’ s G e n e ra l P la n Switches, doorbells, thermo- Structural blocking for grab by crea t i ng a S e n i o r s H o usi ng Master Pla n stats, and breaker boxes no Lighting in closets and bars in bathroom walls near and amending the zo n i ng ord i na n ce. T h e more than 48 inches above pantries toilet and shower resul t is t ha t new housi ng sp e ci f i ca ll y the floor d esigned for seniors will i n co r p o ra te un i ve r- Electrical receptacles at least Adjustable closet rods sa l d esign and visi ta bil i t y p r i n ci ple s . 15 inches above the floor and shelving S e n i o rs in Howa rd Co un t y will be able to a ge in pla ce more easil y.

The co un t y crea ted the R-SI Dist r i c t A s pa rt o f the R-SI zo n i ng dist r i c t ZONING FOR UNIVERSAL DESIGN IN ( Resi d e n t ial: S e n i o r- I nst i tu t i o nal). T h is d is- re q u i rements, deve l o p m e n t s m ust i n co r p o- OTHER LOCATIONS t r i c t a ll ows a ge - rest r i c ted ad ul t h o usi ng and ra te un i ve rsa l d esign fea tu res f r om the Andres Duany’s SmartCode incorporates vis- other us es su ch as h e alth ca re fa c il i t i es , g u i d e l i n es o f the De pa rt m e n t o f P l a n n i ng itability standards. The SmartCode requires a n u r si ng homes, re l i g i o us us es, day t rea t- and Zo n i ng, which identify re q u i red, re co m- zero-step entrance from an accessible path at m e n t fa c il i t i es, and gove r n m e n t us es. T h e mended, and optiona l fea tu res. “Plan su b- the front, side, or rear of each building; all d i st r i c t re q u i res t ha t a t least 10 perce n t o f m i t ta ls m ust i n clude descr i p t i o ns o f t h e interior doors to be at least 32 inches in width the dwe ll i ng un i t s be for modera te - i n co m e d esign fea tu res o f the pro p osed dwe ll i ngs to and there must be a bathroom on the main p e rs o ns. In addition, the co un t y crea ted a d e m o nst ra t e their app ro p r ia t e n ess for the floor of each building. Sarasota, Florida, has PS C ( P lanned Senior Co m m unity) Dist r i c t a ge - rest r i c ted population,” the guidelines adopted the SmartCode. t ha t a ll o ws a ge - rest r i c ted housi ng, assiste d say. Before passing a zoning ordinance that l i vi ng fa cil i t i es, and nursi ng homes. The dis- Howard County chose to require features requires modifications to the building code, a t r i c t a ll ows a densi t y o f e i g h t un i t s per acre that are critical and relatively inexpensive as community should review state legislation on si tes t ha t can acco m m o da te at least 5 0 part of initial construction, but which would related to the building code. If your state has units. be costly to retrofit. Features that are rela- a uniform dwelling code, this may prevent

ZONINGPRACTICE 4.06 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION | page 5 municipalities from creating and enforcing us e ful i n fo r mation on the princi ples o f un i ve rsa l d esign and links to area bu ild e rs who integ ra te stricter standards for buildings except in cer- d esign and sa m ple ord i na n ces f rom across t h e un i ve rsa l d esign into housi ng co nstruction. tain situations. Some states prohibit any U n i ted S ta tes. Another source for helpful i n fo r- Before drafting an amendment to the changes to building codes at the local level, mation about un i ve rsa l d esign is the U n i v e r s a l building or zoning code, planners should while others prohibit reducing code require- Design Handbook (see Res o u rces ) . include housing for seniors as part of the ments below standards set by the state. For T h e re are a va r i e t y o f ways in which pla n- housing element of their community’s com- example, New York, California, and Wisconsin n e rs can become enga ged in pro m o t i ng un i ve r- prehensive plan. This should then translate all have uniformity clauses in their building sa l d esign and visi ta bil i t y p r i n ci ples. Ba l t i m o re into requirements in the zoning ordinance. code requirements that prohibit cities from Co un t y, Ma r y land, developed a bro ch u re, “Yo u r Howard County illustrates how goals related making any changes. In California, disability New or Re m o d e led Home Be co m es Visi ta ble to senior housing can be translated success- advocates are working to create state-level When You Choose T h ese Top 10 Options.” T h e fully into zoning requirements. After the plan enabling legislation that would allow local ci t y o f I rvine, Ca l i fo r n ia, developed a web pa ge and ordinance are in place, it is important to governments to enact visitability laws. t ha t p rovi d esi n fo r mation about un i ve rsa l evaluate the success of the ordinance. It is important to determine if a visitability ordinance is a planning ordinance or a RESOURCES building ordinance. One could reasonably argue that visitability ordinances are planning ordinances, not building codes. Planning ordi- Websites nances routinely deal with the interior of Center for Universal Design: www.design.ncsu.edu/cud homes, including height, materials, number Concrete Change: www.concretechange.org of bedrooms, and house size. If the code requirements are placed in the zoning ordi- State-level building codes: www.firstsourceonl.com nance, as in the case of Howard County, then it is clearly a planning ordinance. If it is Other Resources viewed as a planning ordinance, then the City of Arvada, Colorado. 2005. Chapter XI, Visitability Municipal Code. state-level building codes are irrelevant as www.municode.com/resources/gateway.asp?sid=6&pid=10370. long as the visitability requirements exceed the state building code requirements. City of Arvada, Colorado. 2005. Arvada Comprehensive Plan. www.arvada.org/ community/plan.php. P la n n e rs ha ve a va r i e t y o f other options to i n co r p o ra te visi ta bil i t y i n to the zo n i ng code. Fo r Casselman, Joel. Winter 2004. “Visitability: A New Direction for Changing Demographics.” exa m ple, the zo n i ng code co uld include densi t y Practicing Planner. or other deve l o p m e n t b o n us esto deve l o p e rs Claar, Roger C., and James S. Bowen. January 2005. “Visitability: The Way of the Future in who inco r p o ra te visi ta bil i t y p r i n ci ples. Another Home Building.” Illinois Municipal Review. option is to re q u i re an impa c t fee for accessi bil- Howard County, Maryland. 2004. Seniors Housing Master Plan. i t y, si m ilar to the method used by H owa rd www.co.ho.md.us/DPZ/DPZDocs/SHMPWebVersion012805.pdf. Co un t y. Howard County, Maryland. 2004. Section 113.2 R-SI Zoning Regulations. www.co.ho.md.us/DPZ/DPZDocs/ZoningReg100205.pdf. CONCLUSION While a number of communities have passed City of Irvine, California. 2005. Universal Design Program. legislation, planners are still largely unaware www.ci.irvine.ca.us/depts/cd/buildingsafety/accessibility_universal_design.asp. of the concepts of visitability. Planners need Preiser, Wolfgang, and Elaine Ostroff. 2001. Universal Design Handbook. New York: to increase their knowledge of disability McGraw-Hill. issues. If visitability and other forms of access SmartCode. 2005. SmartCode Version 7.0. www.dpz.com/pdf/SmartCodeV7.0-6-06- legislation are to be effective, planners and 05.pdf. other design professionals must be aware of U.S. Census. 2000. Characteristics of the Civilian Noninstitutionalized Population by Age, the problems that people with disabilities Disability Status, and Type of Disability. www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/ face in accessing the built environment. censr-23.pdf. Co n cre te Cha nge, an inte r na t i o na l ass o ciation tha t p ro m o tes visi ta bil i t y for the disa ble d , University of Buffalo. 2004. RERC on Universal Design at Buffalo. is a c t i ve l y m obil i zi ng su pp o rtfor basi c a ccessi- www.ap.buffalo.edu/idea/Visitability. bil i t y to dwe ll i ng units. Their websi te provi d es

ZONINGPRACTICE 4.06 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION | page 6 the vicinity of the urban growth boundary near o n - si te si g ns ( w h i ch don’t re q u i re a permit NEWS BRIEFS Portland. While only 13 percent of claimants or fee) and off-si te si g ns for which a permit M E A S U R E 37 UPHELD IN OREGON; wanted to build a single-family house on their and fee are re q u i red. Outdoor Media B I L L B OA R DS L AW OV E RT U R N E D property, 86 percent sought approval to sub- Dimensions, Inc. v. Department of By Lora A. Lucero, AICP divide in order to build multiple houses. T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , 2006 W L ___ (Ore. 2006). What does this mean for Oregon? As Ed The exa m ple the co u r t n o ted was “a gas sta- Measure 37, the initiative that requires gov- Sullivan explains in the April issue of Planning tion visi ble from a highway may, wi t h o u t a ernment to pay property owners if a land-use & Environmental Law: permit, ca r ry the messa ge ‘Gas for S a l e,’ bu t regulation reduces their property value, is Oregon’s land-use planning program still is i t may n o t ca r ry the messa ge ‘Ea t a t J o e ’ s : alive and well in Oregon. On February 21, the a national leader. Measure 37 is the anti- 10 Miles A h ead.’” The co u rt st r u ck the per- Oregon Supreme Court reversed the Marion thesis of that program. Nevertheless, the m i t and fee re q u i re m e n t for outdoor ad ve r- County Circuit Court judge who had ruled last two now coexist. Oregon’s experience in t isi n g si g ns, rather than decla re the entire October that Measure 37 was unconstitu- dealing with Measure 37 will also be an OMIA invalid. Oregon leg isla t o rs m ust n ow tional. For five months, planners and other example for the rest of the nation. With the go ba ck to the drawi ng boa rd and re fas h i o n crisis presented by Measure 37 will evolve opponents of Measure 37 hoped that this the sta te ’ s billb oa rd reg ula t i o ns or ris k l o s- a more resourceful response, one that will reckless assault on the state’s rational plan- likely be more accommodating to the vari- i ng fe d e ra l fun ds t h rough the Highway ning system would ultimately fail. ous regions and populations of the State. Bea u t i f i cation Ac t . Land-use regulations, such as zoning It is unlikely that the Measure will be com- Lora A. Lucero, AICP, is editor of Planning & and subdivision controls, are the focus of pletely repealed, just as it is unlikely that Environmental Law, and staff liaison to APA’s Measure 37 claims. Although they are impor- the state’s planning program will be amicus curiae committee. tant tools for implementing the community’s repealed. Out of the clash of thesis and antithesis will come a synthesis that will plans, voters in 2004 lost sight of the commu- reconcile these seeming opposites. The nity’s interest and were swept up in the fervor future of planning lies in this synthesis.

Cover photo courtesy of the Thomas Crane Property owners who acquired their property Public Library in Quincy, Massachusetts. The library was retrofitted to provide universal before the adoption of a land-use regulation access. may assert a claim against the government if

they believe the regulation has reduced the VOL. 23, NO. 4 Zo n i ng Pra c t i ceis a monthl y pu bl i cat ion of t h e value of their property. A m e r i can Pla n n i ng Ass o ciation. Su bscr i p t i o ns a re ava ila ble for $75 (U.S.) and $90 (fo reign). W. Pa ul Fa r m e r, FA I C P, Exe cu t i ve Dire c tor; Will iam R. of the private “property rights” campaign to A number of sta tes a re foll owi ng K lein, A I C P, Dire c tor of Res ea rch . pass the Measure. Now property owners who Orego n ’ s un fo rtuna te exa m ple. A Measu re Zoning Practice (ISSN 1548–0135) is produced at acquired their property before the adoption of 37 clone, the Pro p e r t y Fa i r n ess I n i t ia t i ve , APA. Jim Schwab, AICP, Editor; Michael Davidson, a land-use regulation may assert a claim will be on the ba ll o t t h is N ovember in Guest Editor; Julie Von Bergen, Assistant Editor; against the government if they believe the reg- Was h i ngton. Pla n n e rs in Georg i a are wo r k- Lisa Barton, Design and Production. ulation has reduced the value of their prop- i ng to keep a si m ilar measu re from passi ng Co pyr i g h t ©2006 by A m e r i can Pla n n i ng erty. The government will be required to pay or the leg isla tu re in tha t sta te. And most A ss o ciation, 122 S. Mich i gan Ave., Su i te 1600, waive the application of the regulation. The re ce n t l y, a petition was f i led to pu t a C h i ca go, IL 6 0 6 03. The American Pla n n i ng trial court thought this provision amounted to Measu re 37 clone on the ba ll o t in a boro u g h A ss o ciation also has o f ﬁ ces a t 17 76 a requirement that government “pay to gov- in Alas ka. Zoning Practice su bscr i b e rs Massa ch us e t t s Ave., N.W., Was h i ngt on, D.C . ern” or refrain from enforcing the land-use s h o uld keep their cu rsor pointed to APA ’ s 2 0 036; www. pla n n i ng .o r g. regulation. The state supreme court disagreed. websi te where we will t ra ck leg isla t i ve , All rights reserved. No part of this publication APA and its Oregon chapter filed an ami- legal, and ele c to ra l d e ve l o p m e n t s with su ch may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by cus brief to share with the court a short sum- m easu res. any means, electronic or mechanical, including mary of the history of land-use planning in On Ma rch 23, the Oregon Su p re m e photocopying, recording, or by any information Oregon and describe how it has changed after Co u r t d e c la red the sta te ’ s billb oa rd reg ula- storage and retrieval system, without permission one year of processing claims and granting t i o ns vi ola te Art i cle I, Section 8, of the sta te in writing from the American Planning waivers. The Department of Land Conservation co nst i tution beca use the Oregon Moto r ist Association. and Development found that an overwhelming I n fo r mation Ac t [O R S 3 7 7.700 to 377.840 and P r i n ted on re c ycled pa p e r, incl u d i ng 50 -70 % number of Measure 37 claims have come from 3 7 7.992 (1999)] dist i ng u is h es b e t ween re c ycled ﬁber and 10% postco nsumer waste .

ZONINGPRACTICE 4.06 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION | page 7 WHO HAS ACCESS IN YOUR TOWN? 4