Trend Favoring Zoning Develops

[ricco67]

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/m...politan/2931324

Dec. 4, 2004, 11:39PM

Trend favoring zoning develops

More areas are weighing rules as others are still adjusting to new restrictions

By ERIC HANSON

Copyright 2004 Houston Chronicle

If Dietra "Dizzie" Smith's house in Manvel had burned down four years ago, she probably would have been able to replace it with a mobile home.

But because her neighbors pushed for a zoning ordinance three years ago, the small Brazoria County city of 3,000 people joined a list of suburban cities that adopted zoning

[Talbot]

Well good for those that got zoning.

[Subdude]

It's not perfect, but in pretty much every other city in the US people have figured out that zoning can help protect property values. You don't see a lot of cities following Houston's example and dropping their zoning ordinances.

[MidtownCoog]

This would be like putting a band-aid on a major wound. Too little, too late.

I don't think we need zoning per se. What we do need are some guidelines that all new development must follow. Sidewalk sizes, driveway requirements, etc. So much of that is an afterthought today.

I like the quirkiness of Houston, having a record store, restaurant, Dr. Office, Universities, etc. all mixed into together.

I'd hate to see Houston become a place with "Restaurant Rows", "Furniture Rows", "Apartment Rows", etc. Plano and Far North Dallas is an excellent example of the blandness I am talking about.

[ricco67]

I think we can have zoning that be put in place, Allow current establishments be 'grandfathered' in. The only problem with this is the fact that it would take years, if not decades, for the plan to be fully utilized.

Ricco

[Subdude]

This would be like putting a band-aid on a major wound.  Too little, too late.

I don't think we need zoning per se.  What we do need are some guidelines that all new development must follow.  Sidewalk sizes, driveway requirements, etc.  So much of that is an afterthought today. 

I like the quirkiness of Houston, having a record store, restaurant, Dr. Office, Universities, etc. all mixed into together.

I'd hate to see Houston become a place with "Restaurant Rows", "Furniture Rows", "Apartment Rows", etc.  Plano and Far North Dallas is an excellent example of the blandness I am talking about.

I don't think zoning necessarily implies blandness, although there is always a risk of being overly restrictive. Zoning commercial districts doesn't mean specifying restaurants or whatnot all be clumped together in "rows". Where zoning can be effective is disallowing businesses like sex clubs from being established in the middle of districts that are trying to revitalize, such as Midtown. I'll bet residents there would much prefer a little less quirkiness and a little more protection of the neighborhood and their property values.

[MidtownCoog]

Visit Chantilly, VA (near Dulles) for the most bland and zoned place in America.

THAT is what I think of when I think of zoning. Same thing with Plano.

And you can outlaw sex clubs with city ordinances. But considering Houston still allows bars next to Day Cares.......go figure.

[Subdude]

Yes, but just because some places come out extremely bland doesn't mean that is an inevitable result of zoning. Again, zoning is far from perfect, but most cities manage it without becoming overly bland. The trick must be to identify neighborhoods that may require greater restrictions, viz. residential, and commercial districts that may need less specific regulation. Where zoning often fails is in things like forbidding commercial buildings to incorporate residences, requiring too much parking, etc. Despite the potential flaws, I suspect that lack of zoning has hurt Houston's image.

[MidtownCoog]

The trick must be to identify neighborhoods

That's a great texbook analysis, but hard to do in a city run by developers looking to turn a quick buck.

And one way or another, I don't think the average John Doe American is worried about Houston's lack of zoning.

Image is only half of the game.

[Subdude]

Of course it's hard to do. Cities struggle with it, but that doesn't mean it's not a worthwhile goal. Just because you can't get it perfect doesn't mean you throw up your hands and give up. And no, the average John Doe American isn't worried about it, but if a business is looking at relocation possibilities it is the kind of thing that is bound to come up. Image may be only half the game, but that's not to say it isn't important. Weren't you saying earlier that a glut of apartments could threaten Midtown? Well, that is the kind of case where zoning could help the situation. No, not make it perfect, but at least establish enforceable guidelines for development.

[MidtownCoog]

I am a native, and actually like a lot of the lack of zoning for the reasons I mentioned above.

It's actually park of Houston's charm IMHO.

[zoner]

I am a native, and actually like a lot of the lack of zoning for the reasons I mentioned above.

It's actually park of Houston's charm IMHO.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I should not be saying this, as I make a living from the fact zoning exists, but I sometimes wonder how relevant zoning is in a city as large as Houston. Someone once told me about a study that was done where maps of houston and dallas were made, with color-coding for the different land uses. When overlaid or placed side by side, the maps looked nearly identical. Anybody else hear about that or have a link?

There are some very good things zoning does for a community--uniformity of aesthetics, protection of property values, etc.--but zoning also has its drawbacks, too. Mid-size Cities, as they grow, are starting to popularize the development concept of "PD's"--planned development districts with multi-use buildings and higher-density development (think the new town centers in the Woodlands and Sugar Land), because their zoning restrictions created sprawl, encouraged disconnection, and would not grow with their increasingly urban character. Once a City gets as big as a Houston or a Chicago or a Dallas, does it really make anything better if you keep like uses clustered together? It's a big noisy, smelly, messy, fast city--that's what makes it great. And every city has areas where property values are higher and residences are nicer, and it has areas where neighborhoods are deteriorating and prices are going down--whether they have zoning or not. Houston has found a way to deal with this in part through sort of a privitized version of zoning--the developers are in the drivers seat, and through large-scale development projects, market demands, and extensive residential deed restrictions, a certain amount of predictability of uses and values is maintained.

Other posters had a good idea with the middle road approach in Houston--regulating the design and location of certain elements, but not instituting zoning regs. Actually, Houston already does this to some extent. Certain types of businesses and structures (bars, billbords, cell towers, etc.) cannot be certain distances away from residences, public schools, etc. The city could expand these regulations to include other types of uses, or further restrict the distances and types of uses these businesses must stay away from. Also, the city does have some regulations of setbacks, parking, driveways, etc., and has established some districts where more urban-oriented design standards exist. These sorts of things could be expanded without the need for zoning.

[Guest danax]

Once a City gets as big as a Houston or a Chicago or a Dallas, does it really make anything better if you keep like uses clustered together? It's a big noisy, smelly, messy, fast city--that's what makes it great.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

God help you if you live in a neighborhood with no zoning, no deed restrictions and low-moderate income residents. That is a potentially ugly combination due to residents opening rinky-dinky businesses like restaurants and tire shops, out of their houses which, in some cases, permanently converts the property into commercial. Once that happens, the "entrepeneurs" get the aesthetic upper-hand and the neighborhood turns dumpy and will have an uphill fight to regain it's pure, residential character since a lot of these homes are altered past the point of no return. A small percentage shift in land use changes the whole neighborhood's appearance.

It makes the city noisier, smellier and messier. Interesting and "dynamic" in a wild sort of way perhaps, but not my idea of great.

[N Judah]

I am a native, and actually like a lot of the lack of zoning for the reasons I mentioned above.

It's actually park of Houston's charm IMHO.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Heck, I'll take it one step further: taking into account all of the positive side effects of no zoning (cheap cost of living, entrepreneurial atmosphere, architectural diversity), I'd say the absence of zoning is probably the *only* thing that makes Houston desirable.

And I really don't see how zoning ordinances would make Houston more desirable for corporate relocations. There are other cities that probably do the zoning thing better than Houston realistically could. A company that wants a well planned and aesthically pleasing home probably isn't going to come to Houston no matter what happens.

If I were in the business of making Houston more desirable to outsiders I'd probably just aggressively expand transit options. Some rail over here, some rail going in that direction, buses ok, something commuter-y for the suburbs, etc etc.

[kzseattle]

Heck, I'll take it one step further: taking into account all of the positive side effects of no zoning (cheap cost of living, entrepreneurial atmosphere, architectural diversity), I'd say the absence of zoning is probably the *only* thing that makes Houston desirable.

And I really don't see how zoning ordinances would make Houston more desirable for corporate relocations.  There are other cities that probably do the zoning thing better than Houston realistically could.  A company that wants a well planned and aesthically pleasing home probably isn't going to come to Houston no matter what happens.

If I were in the business of making Houston more desirable to outsiders I'd probably just aggressively expand transit options.  Some rail over here, some rail going in that direction, buses ok, something commuter-y for the suburbs, etc etc.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have one question. If lack of zoning were such as neat idea, why is Houston the ONLY major city to not have zoning?

[N Judah]

Well, zoning's a great way to increase your property's worth. If no one's allowed to build anything new near you, and you are in a great location, then you are made in the shade. On the other hand, it makes it more expensive for someone new to move in, but most people don't care about that.

I just got through reading an article about Hunter S. Thompson and his activist efforts to prevent development in Aspen. I can't help but think how his efforts turned the place from what was supposedly once a rollicking artsy mountain town into an overpriced yuppie haven that he probably wouldn't be able to live in, were he to move there now. But that's an extreme example. And I'm no expert - this is just how I see things. I don't see Houston really losing out from adding zoning, but in Houston's case I see absolutely no benefits either.

[zoner]

I have one question. If lack of zoning were such as neat idea, why is Houston the ONLY major city to not have zoning?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't get me wrong, I think zoning is a good thing. My aim with my post was to spark debate and discussion, and perhaps I chose provocative words to intentionally do that (seems it worked), but Houston, aside from some troubling problems, inspires me to question my own views of zoning. The previous poster was absolutely right about the dangers of buying a house in an older Houston neighborhood. I know people who right now are fighting the pending construction of a business going in on the one unrestricted lot in a beautiful 1930's residential neighborhood. This is a high-dollar, inner loop neighborhood, and the situation is a good example of the bad side of no zoning (although the lot has frontage on a busy section of Greenbriar, so one could question how much an impact it will have on values/character).

But on a broader scope, let's look at how Houston really differs from other big cities. Without the benefit of any zoning, Houston has managed to develop a theater district, a museum district, park areas, a medical district, multiple shopping districts, business districts and various ethnic districts. Residential neighborhoods, by and large, stay pretty much residential, except for along major streets where retail/commercial uses would make more sense, or in mixed areas where residential has recently been introduced. The city has sprawl, but not as bad as LA, and really no worse than any other large Southern city (even the ones that intentionally limit their city limit growth have the same kind of sprawl--it's just handled by other "bedroom" communities). Houston has distinct neighborhoods and areas with their own character and history. The downtown area is (finally) vibrant, with a brand new light rail system (late to the table, but still...). The cost of living is very good, traffic is just about the same as any other big city (and better than some), and the choices for food, entertainment, shopping, housing, career, recreation, etc. abound. At this point, what value will zoning add, other than perhaps a larger city planning staff (and therefore higher taxes) and slightly better protection of residential areas (some of which may actually find themselves zoned non-residential with the decision of a few)? I'd love to see some more great discussion. I love this site!

[kzseattle]

At this point, what value will zoning add, other than perhaps a larger city planning staff (and therefore higher taxes) and slightly better protection of residential areas (some of which may actually find themselves zoned non-residential with the decision of a few)? I'd love to see some more great discussion. I love this site!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As we have discussed it several times before, commercial properties, and not residential, are the main causes of ugliness that we see in Houston. That

[Subdude]

It is a valid point to question whether zoning is of value. Zoning is in many cases ineffective or too easy to change, and other cities do in many cases end up similar to zoning-less Houston. In other cases zoning regulations actually end up hurting neighborhoods by means of restricting mixed-uses or requiring too much parking. Of course, just because zoning isn't perfect doesn't mean that it is worthless.

I'm not sure that a "cheap cost of living and entrepreneurial atmosphere" are side effects of no zoning, although it may contribute to the former. You have to wonder sometimes if a cheap cost of living is perhaps a mixed blessing. Bangladesh has a really cheap cost of living, but it isn't perceived as a desirable place to live.

Is a good point that NO other major city has chosen to not zone, and you certainly don't see a rush of cities trying to follow Houston's example. Obviously, residents of other cities must perceive a benefit to zoning on the balance, while granting that it is never perfect. Most homeowners support regulations that will protect the value of their property.

For me it really gets down to an image issue. Every time you read something about Houston, they mention that we have no zoning, implying that something's wrong and that we just let developers run amok. Whether or not zoning is perfect, if for no other reason I think it would be worth it to help improve our reputation.

[N Judah]

However, the bigger question is, do zoning laws also dictate whether a structure must meet certain standards such as those for aesthetic uniformity, aesthetic quality, size/type of billboards/signage, size of parking lots, width of side walk, landscaping, lighting etc. If this is the case, then zoning can go a long way in removing ugliness and eyesores.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A lot of that stuff sounds like things that could be covered by the 'Planning Guidelines' that they were going to come out with (sidewalk width, landscaping, lighting, parking lots).

Other things, like billboards and signage, sound like an ordinance could cover them.

And as far as aesthetic uniformity and quality go, that sounds like something a design review board (not necesssariliy zoning) could deal with. On the other hand, plenty of other cities with zoning and design review boards are just as unsuccessful at keeping out ugly buildings, so I don't know if that will ever stop.

[Talbot]

Not to get off topic, but speaking of the "Planning Guidelines", has anyone heard anything new on it?

[kzseattle]

Not to get off topic, but speaking of the "Planning Guidelines", has anyone heard anything new on it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So do we already have "Planning Guidelines" for Houston or is it something that is going to be introduced?

[Talbot]

I thought new guidelines were being introduced.

[kjb434]

We already have extensive planning guidelines in the city. Every thursday when the planning commmision meets, they have to go over projects the try to vary the guidelines for their project. Sometimes the variance is good and voted in and sometimes the variance is not acceptable and voted down. Recently, Mayor White is proposing some changes to the planning commision to make them more effective.

The commision is a great forum for people opposed to projects to voice their opinions and concerns. Many of times the developer will have to strike a compromise with the residents. The planning commision is pro-development but not careless development.