4.3 Consistency Assessment Flashcards
Consistency Doctrine
The “consistency” doctrine is a legal requirement that your regulations or capital improvements comply with the comprehensive plan. If the doctrine applies, ordinances departing from the mandates of an adopted comprehensive plan are subject to invalidation under the zoning enabling legislation, or as lacking a rational basis or valid public purpose. Some state statutes also require plans to be internally consistent—i.e., that the policies not conflict with each other
__________ of 1924 gave birth to the consistency doctrine
The Standard State Zoning Enabling Act (SZEA)
Consistency Models
- Unitary View. Some courts have ruled that the zoning regulations are the “comprehensive plan.” No separate, written plan is required, but the zoning regulations must provide a rational scheme for land use. This approach generally applies in SZEA states. In Missouri, separate written plans are considered “guidelines” that inform, but do not control, subsequent zoning decisions.
- Planning Factor. Under this view, state law authorizes or requires a separate written plan. This plan be comes a factor in judging the legality of zoning decisions. However, it is not strictly binding. North Carolina has an interesting twist, where the local government must make a statement of whether a rezoning is consistent and why its decision is reasonable—but this finding does not require consistency and is not reviewable in the courts.
- Consistency Applies if There Is a Separate Written Plan. Under this rule, no separate written plan is required. However, if one exists, at least partial consistency applies. This view applies in some SZEA states (such as Arkansas), although some (such as Oregon) now have comprehensive legislation that requires a separate written plan.
- Separate Comprehensive Plan Required, But Not Consistency. Some states require local governments to adopt a separate comprehensive plan, but do not require consistency. In Virginia, for example, local governments are required to have a separate written plan. They must give the plan “reasonable consideration” in their zoning decisions, but are not strictly bound by the plan.
- Separate Comprehensive Plan and Legislative Consistency. Some states (such as California and Min nesota) have reformed their planning enabling legislation to require a written plan and to require local zoning and land development regulations to conform to the plan. However, these states may or may not allow the community to use plan policies as criteria for land-use decisions. Instead, the plan guides local legislation (such as zoning regulations), which in turn is used to guide permitting decisions.
- Separate Comprehensive Plan and Administrative Consistency. A few states not only require legislative consistency with a written plan, but also require permitting decisions to conform to the plan. For example, the state planning legislation may tie plat approval to the plan. In Florida, a development with built and occupied town homes was ordered demolished when the rezonings and permits were determined to be inconsistent
___________ ensures that zoning and day-to-day land-use decisions are made in harmony with a community’s comprehensive (or general) plan.
Consistency
Consistency was originally a product of ____________, which focused on ensuring that outward growth was consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan, but the tool is relevant in any context.
Growth management
