Twentieth Century Land Use Planning

- Seattle Planning Commission 1993 During the twentieth century, community physical development plans have evolved from elite, City Beautiful designs to participatory, broad-based strate

124 Classic Readings in Urban Planning

Twentieth Century Land Use Planning

How a city's land is used defines its character, its potential for development, the role it can play within a regional economy and how it impacts the natural environment.

- Seattle Planning Commission 1993

During the twentieth century, community physical development plans have evolved from elite, City Beautiful designs to participatory, broad-based strategies for managing urban change A review of land use planning's intellectual and practice histo-

ry shows the continuous incorporation of new ideas and techniques The traditional mapped land use design has been enriched with innova- tions from policy plans, land classification plans, and development management plans Thanks to this flexible adaptation, local governments can use contemporary land use planning to build consen- sus and support decisions on controversial issues about space, development, and infrastructure If this evolution persists, local plans should continue

to be mainstays of community development

poli-cy into the twenty-first century.

Unlike the more rigid, rule-oriented modem architecture, contemporary local planning does not appear destined for deconst ruction by a post- modem revolution Though critics of comprehen- sive physical planning have regularly predicted its demise (Perin 1967, Perloff 1980, Jacobs 1992, Friedmann 1993); the evidence demonstrates that spatial planning is alive and well in hundreds of United States communities A 1994 tabulation found 2,742 local comprehensive plans prepared under state growth management regulations in twelve states (See Table 11.1.) This figure of course

significantly understates the overall nationwide total, which would include all those plans pre- pared in the other thirty-eight states and in the noncoastal areas of California and North Carolina.

It is safe to assume that most, if not all, of these plans contain a mapped land use element: Not only do such plans help decision makers to man- age urban growth and change, they also provide a platform for the formation of community consen- sus about land use issues, now among the most controversial items on local government agendas This article looks back at the history of land use planning and forward to its future It shows how planning ideas, growing from turn-of the- century roots, culminated in a midcentury consen- sus on a general concept-the traditional land use design plan That consensus was stretched as planning branched out to deal with public partici- pation, environmental protection, growth man- agement, fiscal responsibility, and effective imple- mentation under turbulent conditions To meet these new challenges, new types of plans arose: verbal policy plans, land classification plans, and growth management plans These in turn became integrated into today's hybrid comprehensive plans, broadening and strengthening the tradi- tional approach.

Future land use planning will continue to evolve in certain foreseeable directions, as well as

PartIL Comprehensive Planning,Land Use andGrowth Management 125

inwaysunforeseen Among the foreseeable opments are even more active participation byinterest groups, calling for planners' skills at con-

sensus building and managing conflict; increaseduse of computers and electronic media, calling forplanners' skills in information management andcommunication; and continuing concerns overissues of diversity, sustainability, and quality oflife, calling for planners' ability to analyze andseek creative solutions to complex and interde-pendent problems

THE LAND USE PLANNING FAMILY TREE

We liken the evolution of the physical ment plan to a family tree The early genealogy isrepresented as the roots of the tree (Figure 11.1)

develop-The general plan, constituting consensus practice

at midcentury, is represented by the main trunk

Since the 1970s this traditional "land use designplan" has been joined by several branches-theverbal policy plan, the land classification plan, andthe development management plan Thesebranches connect to the trunk although springingfrom different planning disciplines, in a way rem-iniscent of the complex structure of a Ficus tree.The branches combine into the contemporary,hybrid comprehensive plan integrating design,policy, classification, and management, represent-

ed by the foliage at the top of the tree

As we discuss each of these parts of the

fami-ly tree, we show how plans respond both to socialclimate changes and to "idea genes" from the lit-erature We also draw conclusions about the sur-vival of the tree and the prospects for new branch-

es in the future The focus of the article is the planprepared by a local government-a county,

TABLE II.1 Local comprehensive plans in growth-managing states and coastal areas as of 1994

Number of Comprehensive PlansCities/

97

7Florida

Rhode IslandVermontVirginiaWashington

426

Department of CommunityAffairs

2

Planning Office0

567

Community AffairsDepartment0

90

Division of CoastalManagement1

278

Department of LocalCommunity Development1

0

39

235

94 211

0 23

126 Classic Readings in UrbanPlanning

municipality, or urban region-for the long-term development and use of the land'

ROOTS OF THE FAMILY TREE: THE FIRST 50

YEARS New World city plans certainly existed before this century They included L'Enfant's plan for Washington, William Penn's plan for Philadelphia, and General Oglethorpe's plan for Savannah.

These plans, however, were blueprints for veloped sites, commissioned by unitary authori- ties with power to implement them unilaterally (Reps 1965).

unde-In this century, perhaps the most influential early city plan was Daniel Burnham's plan for Chicago, published by the Commercial Club of Chicago (a civic, not a government entity) in 1909 (Schlereth 1981) The archetypical plan-as-inspira- tional-vision, it focuses only on design of public spaces as a City Beautiful effort.

The City Beautiful approach was soon

ened to a more comprehensive view At the 1911 National Conference on City Planning, Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr., son of the famous landscape architect and in his own right one of the fathers of planning, defined a city plan as encompassing all uses of land, private property, public sites, and transportation Alfred Bettman, speaking at the

1928 National Conference of City Planning,

sioned the plan as a master design for the physical development of the city's territory, including "the general location and extent of new public improvements and in the case of private devel- opments, the general distribution amongst various classes of land uses, such as residential, business, and industrial uses designed for the future, twenty-five to fifty years" (Black 1968, 352-3).

Together, Olmsted and Bettman anticipated the development of the midcentury land use plan.

Another early influence, the federal Standard City Planning Enabling Act of 1928, shaped enabling acts passedby manystates However, the Act left many planners and public officials con- fused about the difference between a master plan and a zoning ordinance, so that hundreds of com- munities adopted "zoning plans" without having created comprehensive plans as the basis for zon- ing (Black 1968, 353) Because the Act also did not make clear the importance of comprehensiveness

or define the essential elements of physical opment, no consensus about the essential content

devel-of the plan existed.

Ten years later, Edward Bassett's book, The Master Plan (1938), spelled out the plan's subject matter and format-supplementing the 1928 Act, and consistent with it He argued that the plan should hale seven elements, all relating to land areas (not buildings) and for public buildings, public reservations, routes for public utilities, pier- head and bulkhead lines (all public facilities), and zoning districts for private lands Bassett's views were incorporated in many state enabling laws (Haar 1955).

The physical plans of the first half of the tury were drawn by and for independent commis- sions, reflecting the profession's roots in the Progressive Reform movement, with its distrust of politics The 1928 Act reinforced that perspective

cen-by making the planning commission, not the islative body, the principal client of the plan, and purposely isolating the commission from politics (Black 1968, 355) Bassett's book reinforced the reliance on an independent commission He con- ceived of the plan as a "plastic" map, kept within the purview of the planning commission, capable

leg-of quick and easy change The commission, not the

plan, was intended to be the adviser to the local legislative body and to city departments (Bassett 1938).

By the 1940s, both the separation of the ning function from city government and the plan's focus on physical development were being chal- lenged Robert Walker, inThe PlanningFunction in Local Government, argued that the "scope of city planning is properly as broad as the scope of city government (Walker 1941, 110) The central plan- ning agency might not necessarily do all the plan- ning but it would coordinate departmental plan- ning in the light of general policy considerations- creating a comprehensive plan but one without a physical focus That Idea was not widely accepted Walker also argued that the independent planning commission should be replaced by a department

plan-or bureau attached to the office of mayplan-or plan-or city manager (Walker 1941, 177) That argument did take hold, and by the 1960s planning in most com- munities was the responsibility of an agency with-

in local government, though planning boards still advised elected officials on planning matters.'

PartII Comprehensive Planning, LandUse and GrowthManagement 127

CONTEMPORARY DESIGN - POLICY - MANAGEMENT HYBRID PLANS

leg-ty of an independent commission to being a tion within local government Third, and very important, Section'701 of the Housing Act of 1954 required local governments to adopt along-range general plan in order to qualify for federal grants for urban renewal, housing, and other programs, and it also made money available for such com- prehensive planning5 The 701 ;program's double barreled combinations of requirements and finan- cial support led to more urban planning in the United States in the latter half of the 1950's than at any previous time in history (cited from Scott

func-1969, in Beal and Hollander 1979,159).

At the same time, the plan concept was pruned and shaped by two planning educators T.J Kent, Jr., was a professor at the University of California at Berkeley, a planning commissioner, and a city councilman in the 1950s His book, The

bits.I Planning staff worked both for the local overnment executive officer and with an pointed citizen planning board, an arrangement

eruption The plan addressed both public and vate'uses of the land, but did not deal in detail ith implementation.

THE PLAN AFTER MIDCENTURY: NEW

GROWTH INFLUENCES

al development planning grew rapidly in e1950s, for several reasons First, governments d'to contend with the postwar surge of popula-

on and urban growth, as well as a need for the ital investment in infrastructure and commum- facilities that had been postponed during the

128 ClassicReadings inUrban Planning

UrbanGeneral Plan (1964), clarified the policy role

of the plan.' R Stuart Chapin, Jr., was a TVA ner and planning director in Greensboro, NC inthe 1940s, before joining the planning faculty atthe University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in

plan-1949 His contribution was to codify the ology of land use planning in the various editions

method-of his book,Urban Land Use Planning(1957, 1965).7What should the plan look like? What should

it be about? What is its purpose (besides the cal purpose of qualifying for federal grants)? The

cyni-701 program, Kent, and Chapin all offeredanswers

The "701" Program Comprehensive Plan

Guidelines

In order to qualify for federal urban renewal

aid-and, later, for other grants-a local' government

had to prepare a general plan that consisted ofplans for physical development, programs forredevelopment, and administrative and regulato-

ry measures for controlling and guiding ment The 701 program specified what the content

develop-of a comprehensive development plan shouldinclude:

• A land use plan, indicating the locationsand amounts of land to be used for residential,commercial, industrial, transportation, and publicpurposes

• A plan for circulation facilities

• A plan for public utilities

• A plan for community facilities

T J Kent's Urban General Plan

Kent's view of the plan's focus was similar to that

of the 701 guidelines: long-range physical opment in terms of land use, circulation, and com-munity facilities In addition, the plan mightinclude sections on civic design and utilities, andspecial areas, such as historic preservation or

devel-redevelopment areas It covered the entire

geo-graphical jurisdiction of the community, and was

in that sense comprehensive The plan was avision of the future, but not a blueprint; a policystatement, but not a program of action; a formula-tion of goals, but not schedules, priorities, or costestimates It was to be inspirational, uninhibited

by short-term practical considerations

Kent '(1964, 65-89) believed the plan should

emphasize policy, serving the following functions:

• Policy determination-to provide aprocess by which a community would debate anddecide on its policy

• Policy communication-to inform thoseconcerned with development (officials,

developers, citizens, the courts, and others) andeducate them about future possibilities

• Policy effectuation-to serve as a general

reference for officials deciding on specific projects

• Conveyance of advice-to furnishlegislators with the counsel of their advisors in acoherent, unified form

The format of Kent's proposed plan included

a unified, comprehensive, but general physicaldesign for the future, covering the whole commu-

nity and represented by maps (See Figure 11.2.) It

also contained goals and policies (generalizedguides to conduct, and the most important ingre-

dients of the plan), as well as summaries of

back-ground conditions, trends, issues, problems, andassumptions (See Figure 11.3.) So that the planwould be suitable for public debate, it was to be acomplete, comprehensible document, containingfactual data, assumptions, statements of issues,and goals, rather than merely conclusions and rec-ommendations The plan belonged to the legisla-tive body and was intended to be consulted indecision-making during council meetings

Kent (1964, 25-6) recommended overall goalsfor the plan:

• Improve the physical environment of thecommunity to make it more functional, beautiful,decent, healthful, interesting, and efficient

• Promote the overall public interest, ratherthan the interests of individuals or special groupswithin the community

• Effect political and technical coordination

F Stuart Chapin, Jr.'s Urban Land Use Plan

Chapin's ideas, through focusing more narrowly

on the land use plan, were consistent with Kent's

Part II ComprehensivePlanning,Land Use and GrowthManagement 129

in both the 1957 and 1965 editions of Urban Land

Use Planning, a widely used text and reference

work for planners Chapin's concept of the plan

was of a generalized, but scaled, design for the

future use of land, covering private land uses and

public facilities, including the thoroughfare

net-work (Chapin 1957, 275-7,378)

Chapin conceived of the land use plan as thefirst step in preparing a general or comprehensive

plan Upon its completion, the land use plan

served as a temporary general guide for decisions,

until the comprehensive plan was developed

Later, the land use plan would become a

corner-stone in the comprehensive plan, which also

included plans for transportation, utilities,

com-munity facilities, and renewal, only the general

rudiments of which are suggested in the land use

plan (Chapin 1957, 277, 388) Purposes of the plan

were to guide government decisions on public

facilities, zoning, subdivision control, and urban

renewal, and to inform private developers about

the proposed future pattern of urban

develop-ment

The format of Chapin's land use plan

includ-ed a statement of objectives, a description of

exist-ing conditions and future needs for space and

services, and finally the mapped proposal for the

future development of the community, together

with a program for implementing the plan

(cus-tomarily including zoning, subdivision control, a

housing code, a public works expenditure

pro-gram, an urban renewal propro-gram, and other

regu-lations and development measures) (Chapin 1957,

280-3)

The Typical General Plan of the 1950s and 1960s

Influenced by the 701 program, Kent's policy

vision, and Chapin's methods, the plans of the

1950s and 1960s were based on a clear and

straightforward concept: The plan's purposes

were to determine, communicate, and effectuate

comprehensive policy for the private and public

physical development and redevelopment of the

city The subject matter was long-range physical

development, including private uses of the land,

circulation, and community facilities The

stan-dard format included a summary of existing and

emerging conditions and needs; general goals; and

a long-range urban form in map format,

accompa-nied by consistent development policies The erage was comprehensive, in the sense of address-ing both public and private development and cov-ering the entire planning jurisdiction, but quitegeneral The tone was typically neither as "inspi-rational" as the Burnham plan for ChiLago, nor asaction-oriented as today's plans Such was thewell-defined trunk''of the family tree in the 1950sand 1960s, in which today's contemporary planshave much of their origin

cov-CONTEMPORARY PLANS:

INCORPORATING NEW BRANCHESPlanning concepts and practice have continued toevolve since midcentury, maturing in the process

By the 1970s, a number of new ideas had takenroot 8 Referring back to the family tree in Figure II.1,

we can see a trunk and several distinct branches:

• The land use design, a detailed mapping offuture land use arrangements, is the most directdescendant of the 1950s plan It still constitutes thetrunk of the tree However, today's version is morelikely to be accompanied by action strategies, alsomapped, and to include extensive policies

• Theland classification plan,a more generalmap of growth policy areas rather than a detailedland use pattern, is now also common, particular-

ly for counties, metropolitan areas, and regionsthat want to encourage urban growth in designat-

ed development areas and to discourage it in servation or rural areas The roots of the land clas-sification plan include McHarg's Design With Nature (1969), the 1976 American Law Institute(ALI) Model Land Development Code, the 1972Coastal Zone Management Act, and the 1973Oregon Land Use Law

con-• The verbal policy plan de-emphasizesmapped policy or end-state visions and focuses onverbal action policy statements, usually quitedetailed; sometimes called a strategic plan, it isrooted in Meyerson's (1956) middle-range bridge

to comprehensive planning, Fagin s (1959) policiesplan, and Perloff's (1980) strategies and policiesgeneral plan

-• The development management plan laysout a specific program of actions to guide devel-opment, such as a public investment program, adevelopment code, and a program to extend infra-structure and services; and it assumes public sec-

130 Classic Readings in UrbanPlanning

BERKELEY MASTER PLAN

(Note: That portion of the plan drawing showing schematic proposals for the development of the tidelands west of line A-A has been deleted.)

RESIDENTIAL AREAS

NET RESIDENTIAL DENSITY

0.30 Persons Per Acre 30-50 Persons Per Acre

50-80 Persons Per Acre

80-150 Persons Per Acre Neighborhood Boundary and Number

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL AREAS

Central District Commercial Service District Community Shopping Center Neighborhood Shopping Center Special Industrial District Industrial District

Major Thoroughfare

smaso n Secondary Thoroughfare

- Feeder Street Rapid Transit Route

0 Rapid Transit Station

Figure II.2 Example of land use design map featured in the 1950s General Plan

Source:Kent 1991, 111

Part II Comprehensive Planning, LandUse and Growth Management 131

THE URBAN GENERAL PLANIntroduction: Reasons for G.P.; roles of council, CPC, citizens; historical background andcontext of G.P

Summary of G.P.: Unified statement including (a) basic policies, (b) major proposals,, and(c) one schematic drawing of the physical design

2 Social Objectives and Urban

Physical-Structure Concepts: Value

judgments concerning social objectives;

professional judgments concerning majorphysical-structures concepts adopted asbasis for G.P

3 Basic Policies of the G.P.: Discussion of the

basic policies that the general physicaldesign is intended to implement

General Physical Design

Description of plan proposals in relation to

large-scale G.P drawing and citywide drawings

of:

1 Working-and-living-areassection

2 Community-facilitiessection

3 Civic-design section

4 Circulation section

5 Utilities section

(Plusregional, functional, and districtdrawings

thatare needed to explain G.P.)

facts trends assumptions forecasts

These drawings must remain general They are needed

because single

G.P drawing is too complex to enable each element to be clearly seen.

This diagram also suggests the contents of the official G.P and publication as a single document

Figure 11.3 Components of the 1950s-1960s General Plan

Source: Kent 1964, 93

tor initiative for influencing the location, type, and

pace of growth The roots of the development

management plan are in the environmental

move-ment, and the movements for state growth

agement and community growth control

(DeGrove 1984), as well as in ideas from Fagin

(1959) and the ALI Code

We looked for, but could not find, examples ofland use plans that could be termed purely proto-

typical "strategic plans," in the sense of Bryson

and Einsweiler (1988) Hence, rather than identify-

ing strategic planning as a separate branch on the

family tree of the land use plan, we see the

influ-ence of strategic planning showing up across a

range of contemporary plans We tend to agree

with the planners surveyed by Kaufman and

Jacobs (1988) that strategic planning differs from

good comprehensive planning more in emphasis

(shorter range, more realistically targeted, more

market oriented) than in kind

The Land Use Design PlanThe land use design plan is the most traditional ofthe four prototypes of contemporary plans and is

the most direct descendent of the Kent-Chapin-701plans of the 1950s and 1960s It proposes a long-range future urban form as a pattern of retail,office, industrial, residential, and open spaces, andpublic land uses and a circulation system Today's

version, however, incorporates environmentalprocesses, and sometimes agriculture and forestry,under the "open space" category of land use Itsland uses often include a "mixed use" category,honoring the neotraditional principle of closermingling of residential, employment, and shop-ping areas In addition, it may include a develop-ment strategy map, which is designed to bringabout the future urban form and to link strategy tothe community's financial capacity to provideinfrastructure a nd services The plans and strate-gies are often organized around strategic themes

or around issues about growth, environment,

eco-132 ClassicReadings inUrbanPlanning

nomic development, transportation, or hood /community scale change.

neighbor-Like the other types of plans in vogue today,

the land use design plan reflects recent societal issues, particularly the environmental crisis, the infrastructure crisis, and stresses on local govern- ment finance.' Contemporary planners no longer view environmental factors as development con- straints, but as valuable resources and processes to

be conserved They also may question tions about the desirability and inevitability of urban population and economic growth, particu- larly as such assumptions stimulate demand for expensive new roads, sewers, and schools While

assump-at midcentury plans unquestioningly dated growth, today's plans cast the amount, pace, location, and costs of growth as policy choices to

accommo-be determined in the planning process.

The 1990 Howard County (Maryland) General Plan,winner of an American Planning Association (APA) award in 1991 for outstanding comprehen- sive planning, exemplifies contemporary land use design (See Figure 11.4.) While dearly a direct descendent of the traditional general plan, the Howard County plan adds new types of goals, policies, and planning techniques To enhance communication and public understanding, it is organized strategically around six themes/chap- ters (responsible regionalism, preservation of the rural area, balanced growth, working with nature, community enhancement, and phased growth), instead of the customary plan elements Along with the traditional land use design, the plan includes a "policy map" (strategy map) for each theme and an overall policies map for the years

2000 and 2010 A planned service area boundary is used to contain urban growth within the eastern urbanized part of the county, home to the well- known Columbia New Town.'0 The plan lays out specific next steps to be implemented over the next two years, and defines yardsticks for measur- ing success An extensive public participation process for formulating the plan involved a 32- member General Plan Task Force, public opinion polling to discover citizen concerns, circulation of preplan issue papers on development impacts, and consideration of six alternative development scenarios."

The Land Classification Plan Land classification, or development priorities mapping, is a proactive effort by government to specify where and under what conditions growth will occur Often, it also regulates the pace or tim- ing of growth Land classification addresses envi- ronmental protection by designating "nondevel- opment" areas in especially vulnerable locations Like the land use design, the land classification plan is spatially specific and map-oriented However, it is less specific about the pattern of land uses within areas specified for development, which results in a kind of silhouette of urban form.

On the other hand, land classification is more cific about development strategy, including tim-

ing Counties, metropolitan areas, and regional planning agencies are more likely than cities to use

a land classification plan.

The land classification plan identifies areas where development will be encouraged (called urban, transition, or development areas) and areas where development will be discouraged (open space, rural, conservation, or critical environmen- tal areas) For each designated area, policies about the type, timing, and density of allowable devel- opment, extension of infrastructure, and develop- ment incentives or constraints apply The planning principle is to concentrate financial resources, util- ities, and services within a limited, prespecified area suitable for development, and to relieve pres- sure on nondevelopment areas by withholding facilities that accommodate growth."

Ian McHarg's (1969) approach to lard ning is an early example of the land classification concept He divides planning regions into three categories: natural- use,-production, and urban.

Natural use areas, those with valuable ecological functions, have the highest priority Production areas, which include agriculture, forestry, and fish- ing uses, are next in priority Urban areas have the lowest priority and are designated after allocating the land suitable to the two higher-priority uses McHarg's approach in particular, and land classi- fication generally, also reflect the emerging envi- ronmental consciousness of the 1960s and 1970s.

As early as 1961, Hawaii had incorporated the land classification approach into its state growth management system (DeGrove 1984) The devel- opment framework plan of the Metropolitan

Part II Comprehensive Planning,Land Use and Growth Management 133

Figure II.4 Howard County, Maryland, General Plan, Land Use 2010

Source:Adapted from Howard County 1990Council of the Twin Cities Area defined "planningtiers," each intended for a different type and inten-sity of development (Reichert 1976) The concepts

of the "urban service area," first used in 1958 inLexington, Kentucky, and the urban growthboundary," used throughout Oregon under its

1973 statewide planning act, classify land ing to growth management policy (Abbott, Howe,and Adler 1994) Typically, the size of an urbangrowth area is based on the amount of land neces-sary to accommodate development over a period

accord-of ten or twenty years

Vision 2005: A Comprehensive Planfor Forsyth

County, North Carolina exemplifies the rary approach to land classification plans Theplan, which won honorable mention from APA in

contempo-1989, employs a six-category system of districts,plus a category for activity centers It identifiesboth short- and long-range growth areas (4A and4B in Figure 11.5) Policies applicable to each dis-trict are detailed in the plan

The Verbal Policy Plan Shedding the Maps

The verbal policy plan focuses on written ments of goals and policy, without mapping spe-cific land use patterns or implementation strategy.Sometimes called a policy framework plan, a ver-bal policy plan is more easily prepared and flexi-ble than other types of plans, particularly forincorporating nonphysical development policy(Perloff 1980, 233-8) Some claim that such a planhelps the planner to avoid relying too heavily onmaps, which are difficult to keep up to date withthe community's changes in policy (Hollander et

state-al 1988) The verbal policy plan also avoids

false-ly representing general policy as appfalse-lying to cific parcels of property The skeptics, however,claim that verbal statements in the absence ofmaps provide too little spatial specificity to guideimplementation decisions (Reichert 1976)

spe-The verbal policy plan may be used at anylevel of government, but-is especially common atthe state level, whose scale is unsuited to land use

134 Classic Readings inUrbanPlanning

maps The plan usually contains goals, facts and (See Figure 11.6 for an illustrative page from theprojections, and general policies corresponding to Calvert County plan.)

its purposes to understand current and ing conditions and issues, to identify goals tote The Development Management Plan

emerg-pursued- and issues to be addressed, and to for- The development management plan features amulate general principles of action Sometimes coordinated program of actions, -supported-bycommunities doa verbal policyplan as;an interim analyses ar)d goals, for specific agencies of localplan or a-first step in the planning process Thus, government to, over a three-to-ten-yearverbal policies are included in most land use period The program of actions usually specifiesdesign plans, land classification-plans,and devel- the-cos tent, geographic coverage, timing, assign-opmentmanagementplans•

ment'of responsibility,-and coordination among

The Calvert-.,County MD Comprehensive Plan the parts Ideally,=the plan includes most or all of

(Calvert„County 1983), winner ot.:a 1985 APA the following components:

award,exemplifiestheverbalpolicyplan.Itspoli- - : Description ofexisting apdemerging

cies arecQncise, easyto'grasp, and grouped'in sec- development condition, with particular attention lions corresponding to the six divisions of county to development processes, the political-

government responsible for-implementation It institutional context, and acritical ieview;oftheremains a policy plan, however„because it does existing systems of development managementnot specify a program of specific actions for.devel-

Statement of -goals and/or legislativeopment management Though the plan clearly intent, including management-oriented goalsaddresses physical development, and discusses

specific spatial areas, it contains no land use map:.

3 URSAN AREA

4oNsERVATION AREA

(HOO41 ftS not m.ppedj

Figure 11.,5, Example of a landdassification plan.

Source:Adapted from Forsyth County City-County Planning Board 1988

Part II. ComprehensivePlanning, LandUse andGrowth Management 135

• Program of actions-the heart of theplan-including:

1 Outline of a proposed development code,with: (a) procedures for reviewing develop-ment permits; (b) standards for the type ofdevelopment, density, allowable impactsand/or performance standards; (c) site plan,site engineering, and construction practicerequirements; (d) exactions and impact feeprovisions and other incentives/disincentives;

and (e) delineation of districts where variousdevelopment standards, procedures, exac-tions, fees, and incentives apply

2 Program for the expansion of urban structure and community facilities and their

infra-service areas

3 Capital improvement program

Figure 11.6 An excerpt from a verbal policy plan

Source:Calvert County, Maryland 1983

4 Property acquisition program

5 Other components, depending on the munity situation, for example, a preferentialtaxation program, an urban revitalization pro-gram for specific built-up neighborhoods, or ahistoric preservation program

com-• Official maps, indicating legislativeintent, which may be incorporated intoordinances, with force of law-among them,goal-form maps {e.g., land classification plan orland use design); maps of zoning districts,

overlay districts, and other special areas for

which development types, densities, and other

requirements vary; maps of urban services areas;

maps showing scheduled capital improvements;

or other maps related to developmentmanagement standards and procedures

Industrial Districts

Industrial Districts are intended to provide areas in the county which are suitable for the needs ofindustry They should be located and designed to be compatible with the surrounding land uses.either due to existing natural features or through the application of standards

Recommendations:

1 Identify general locations for potential industrial uses.

2 Permit retail sales as an accessory use in the Industrial District

Single-Family Residential Districts

Single-Family Residential Districts are to be developed and promoted as neighborhoods free from anyland usage which might adversely affect them

Recommendations:

1 For new development, require buffering for controlling visual, noise, and activity impactsbetween residential and commercial uses

2 Encourage single-family residential development to locate in the designated towns

3 Allow duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes as a conditional use in the "R-1" ResidentialZone so bog as the design is compatible with the single-family residential development

4 Allow home occupations (professions and services, but not retail sales) by permitting the

employment of one full-time equivalent individual not residing on the premises

Multifamily Residential Districts

Multifamily Residential Districts provide for townhouses and multifamily apartment units Areas

designated in this category are those which are currently served or scheduled to be served by

community or multi-use sewerage and water supply systems