A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Zoning Incentives
Incentive zoning provides bonuses to developers (e.g., increased density or height) in return for public amenities (e.g., affordable housing or green buildings). We surveyed and interviewed local officials to investigate a) the adoption rate of incentive zoning across the United States, b) the bonuses offered to developers and the amenities sought by governments, c) whether municipalities conduct a cost–benefit analysis between bonuses and amenities, and d) the relationship between local autonomy, growth, public participation, and incentive zoning. Forty-one percent of surveyed communities reported having incentive zoning. The most common bonus offered to developers was density. The most common amenities sought by municipalities were mixed-use development, open space conservation, walkability, affordable housing, and public parks. Most communities did not conduct a cost–benefit analysis while developing or applying incentive zoning, which we found was correlated to lower utilization. Some communities used incentive zoning to entice developers to provide benefits (e.g., affordable housing or green buildings) that state legislation prohibited them from requiring.
Planners can use incentive zoning to induce developers to provide public amenities as part of their projects, especially when the political, market, or legal environment is not conducive to requiring desired amenities. Our findings suggest that planners and local officials frustrated by state preemptions in certain land use areas can investigate incentive zoning to achieve local goals. Also, practitioners must find ways to make the incentives attractive to developers while maximizing community benefit.
Zoning Incentives
Incentive zoning provides bonuses to developers (e.g., increased density or height) in return for public amenities (e.g., affordable housing or green buildings). We surveyed and interviewed local officials to investigate a) the adoption rate of incentive zoning across the United States, b) the bonuses offered to developers and the amenities sought by governments, c) whether municipalities conduct a cost–benefit analysis between bonuses and amenities, and d) the relationship between local autonomy, growth, public participation, and incentive zoning. Forty-one percent of surveyed communities reported having incentive zoning. The most common bonus offered to developers was density. The most common amenities sought by municipalities were mixed-use development, open space conservation, walkability, affordable housing, and public parks. Most communities did not conduct a cost–benefit analysis while developing or applying incentive zoning, which we found was correlated to lower utilization. Some communities used incentive zoning to entice developers to provide benefits (e.g., affordable housing or green buildings) that state legislation prohibited them from requiring.
Planners can use incentive zoning to induce developers to provide public amenities as part of their projects, especially when the political, market, or legal environment is not conducive to requiring desired amenities. Our findings suggest that planners and local officials frustrated by state preemptions in certain land use areas can investigate incentive zoning to achieve local goals. Also, practitioners must find ways to make the incentives attractive to developers while maximizing community benefit.
Zoning Incentives
Homsy, George C. (author) / Kang, Ki Eun (author)
Journal of the American Planning Association ; 89 ; 61-71
2023-01-02
11 pages
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
Unknown
Planning, Zoning and Financial Incentives for Ecoroofs in Portland, Oregon
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2003
| Engineering Index Backfile | 1919
| Online Contents | 2009
| Engineering Index Backfile | 1925