Zoning classifications tied to future land use categories in master plan

[uprite citizen]

Has anyone ever heard of a community having their Future Land Use categories defined (named)the EXACT same as their Zoning Classifications. A client community has requested that we assemble language to address this and I have never heard of such a practice. I know that typically FLU categories are fairly broad in context, whereas Zoning classifications attempt to narrow the "focus" of differing land use types. Need some help...Thanks !!!

 

[Jerry Weitz]

Some communities goes so far as have a one-map approach, but I've never signed onto that practice myself. Making the land use map categories exactly match zoning categories may not meet state standards in places like Florida and Georgia. I guess it depends on how much the zoning categories make sense in terms of the land use plan. Because zoning classifications often allow multiple types of uses in one zoning district, it seems that everything in the land use plan would have to be classified as mixed use to truly be consistent with the zoning categories. Why not just name the categories in the land use map the same as zoning, if that's what your client wants, then make explanations in the text of the plan as to what that really means?

 

[Joe Iliff]

I would be concerned about naming the FLUP (Future Land Use Plan) categories the same as the Zoning Map categories because it might be construed to convey vested rights. You'll have people saying their entitled to a certain zoning because the FLUP shows that specific zoning district. The FLUP should be a general guideline, and not reference specific uses (within each category) or development standards. Zoning is where they are determined.

Maybe the Staff could prepare a policy that matches FLU categories with the zoning districts Staff is most likely to support, while still saying that each case needs to be reviewed on its own merit.