Citation
Land-use control methods

Material Information

Title:
Land-use control methods traditional zoning ordinances and planned unit development (PUD) ordinances
Creator:
Ogbonna, Livinus A
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
39, [2] leaves : ; 28 cm

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Zoning ( lcsh )
Zoning law ( lcsh )
Zoning -- Nigeria ( lcsh )
Zoning ( fast )
Zoning law ( fast )
Nigeria ( fast )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 40-41).
General Note:
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree, Master of Planning and Community Development, College of Design and Planning.
Statement of Responsibility:
Livinus A. Ogbonna.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
13503124 ( OCLC )
ocm13503124
Classification:
LD1190.A78 1986 .O37 ( lcc )

Full Text
OS 60A//V//?
LAND-USE CONTROL METHODS
Traditional Zoning Ordinances and
Planned Unit Development (PUD) Ordinances
Livinus A. Ogbonna Planning/CD Thesis Directed by Professor D.J. Schler
Spring Semester 1986
£NVtRONr'-lFMTr I nr-..
AiiOAr Q8S-IGN HUKAhuA LIBRARY



LAND-USE CONTROL METHODS
Traditional Zoning Ordinances and
Planned Unit Development (PUD) Ordinances
Livinus A. Ogbonna Planning/CD Thesis Directed by Professor D.J. Schler
Spring Semester 1986
Date Due
I


INTRODUCTION
Land is a precious and scarce resource. When land is used, its use should satisfy the most pressing needs of the society.
People use the land, and they should bring out the beauty of the land. In order to do this, careful planning is needed. It is planners who plan how land should be used through land-use ordinances.
In the United States, Traditional zoning and Planned Unit Development (PUD) have been used to enforce land-use control in the cities. This study will investigate and analyze the advantages and disadvantages of Traditional zoning and Planned Unit Development (PUD).
The researcher will examine the problems of these land-use control approaches, find out the people's perception of Traditional zoning and Planned Unit Development. From this analysis I would apply the better land-use control approach in developing any country or city that has no land-use control ordinances.
During my years as a planning student, I have learned that many developing countries are facing the need to provide guidance and controls in the processes of urbanization. A question of major concern is, what are the best techniques or tools to use for guiding urban development?
In the U.S., Traditional zoning and Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinances have been used effectively as land-use control. This study investigates and analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of Traditional zoning and Planned Unit Development in the American context, and evaluates these techniques for application to urban growth in developing countries, e.g. Nigeria.
Chapter I describes the methodology that was used in doing the research. Most of the information was secured from library research. Major use was also made of newly published articles on both subjects.


Information was also obtained from city planners and fellow students on the subject. A review of class notes was also helpful in preparing the thesis.
In Chapter II of the thesis, a presentation is given on planning and the responses to Planned Unit Development (PUD) in the early sixties when the concept was first introduced in the United States. Also, the results of what happened with the concept during the years that Planned Unit Development ordinances were implemented is briefly reviewed.
Chapter III deals with Traditional zoning ordinances. The early stages of Traditional zoning ordinances is discussed and evaluated in terms of how effective these were as means of land-use control. Some court cases are presented to illustrate effects of zoning on land-use controls.
Chapter IV describes the national background of Nigeria, the climate, languages, religion and the national flag. It briefly gives the history of Nigeria and the legislative structure. It also explains the existing land-use controls in Nigeria and how the ordinances came into existence. The chapter also describes the resources and staff that are available in Nigeria to implement the researcher's ideas. It demonstrates how a concept from American setting could be applied into a developing country like Nigeria. It discusses the planners in Nigeria and what they do.
Chapter V explains peoples' perspection of Traditional zoning and Planned Unit Development. This chapter makes comparisons of how people perceive and evaluate the two approaches of land-use controls. It also stresses the strengths and weaknesses of the two concepts. The researcher would make a conclusion of the concept that would be applicable in the developing countries, e.g. Nigeria.
Chapter VI applies Traditional zoning and Planned Unit Development (PUD) to the Nigerian context. It analyzes the two approaches to ascertain which


would best fit Nigerian lifestyle and environmental conditions.
In Chapter VII, conclusions and recommendations are presented. An explanation of why every city should have land-use control and what should be considered in developing land-use controls is presented.


CHAPTER I
Methodology:
In order to assess the progress of any system, the study of the system should begin from the start of the system. That is exactly what the researcher did here in the study of Traditional zoning ordinances and Planned Unit Developments (PUD's) as a means of land-use controls.
Traditional zoning came about as a means of controlling nuisance activities. Nuisance is anything that interferes with the use or enjoyment of property, endangers personal health or safety, or is offensive to the senses. Zoning has been existence for more that sixty (60) years.
Planned Unit Development (PUD's) ordinances are another means of controlling nuisance activities. They offer some development incentives and advantages that traditional zoning does not offer.
The research on Traditional zoning and Planned Unit Development was secured mainly from library research. The researcher had some discussion on the subject with city planners. A review of classroom notes on both subjects was also helpful. In preparing this thesis, the researcher also has had first hand experience from the developing countries, e.g. Nigeria that he visited recently. Those countries have different land-use control ordinances .
It was the researcher's recent visit to Nigeria that motivated him to do this thesis on land-use controls. When he came back from Nigeria, he started reading about the two land-use control approaches used here in the U.S. At the same time, he was making comparisons of Traditional zoning and Planned Unit Development ordinances and analyzing which one would be better in a Nigerian setting.
In the research, he found out that the Planned Unit Development approach


to land-use control would be better for a Nigerian setting. It has a number of advantages over conventional lot-by-lot developments including: mixing building types and uses to create more heterogeneous and "alive" communities; combining often unusable yard space on individual lots into larger common open spaces; offering greater opportunities for incentives to building lower-cost housing, lower street and utility costs resulting from reduced frontage; the possiblity of increasing the density of a development while keeping desired amenities. I also found out that not only has PUD been most commonly used for housing development, it has also been frequently applied to other forms of development such as shopping centers, industrial parks, and to mixed-use developments which may be any combination, depending on the local ordinances.
This type of land-use control seems to be what Nigerians would need because of their lifestyle. Nigerians live in an environment that provides them with what they want without having to travel a long distance. Another interesting thing about their lifestyle is an extended family structure, where members of the same family live within a stone's throw of one another. A PUD type of development would be ideal for them.
In the research, I found out that Traditional zoning is "A police power, enacted primarily by general purpose units of local government, in which the community is divided into districts or zones within which permitted and special uses are established as are regulations governing lot size, building bulk, placement, and other development standards". Often Traditional zoning has had the effect (in combination with other factors of course) of segregating land uses into district geographic areas (e.g. "commercial district" or "manufacturing district") and discouraging downtown residential development in favor of other "higher and better uses".
Traditional zoning ordinances have very often been challenged in court.


Critics of Traditional zoning argue that it imposes too much authority over the land owners making it hard, if not impossible, for them to use their lands the way they would want. Despite criticism, traditional zoning remains the corner stone as a land-use control device in American big cities.
At the same time, I found out in the research that many cities are experimenting with the Planned Unit Development land-use approach as an alternative to Traditional zoning in the future.
CHAPTER II
Planned Unit Development (PUD)/Traditional Zoning, An Approach for Future Development? Let's Hear What People Say About Them.
Definitions:
Planned Unit Development (PUD) is a large scale, unified subdivision design where buildings, residential or combined residential and commercial/in-dustrial are grouped in accordance with an approved "Master Plan" of development for an entire subdivision or tract. Planned Unit Development normally creates an open space that can be used by private citizens or by the public.
In the early sixties, when Planned Unit Development movements got under way, there was widespread feeling that that form of development was in conflict with Traditional zoning and site planning concepts. It is a "challenge" to traditional ideas and requires a "departure" from them.
In 1964, the Urban Land Institute thought that it was a good idea to analyze the legal problems posed by PUDs under the Traditional zoning and site planning concepts. This analysis provides the basis for the Model State Enabling Act legislation authorizing governmental units under state jurisdiction to undertake certain action or to exercise certain authority.
PUD has been encountering some obstacles as seen in 1964 because of the


absence of any agency on the local level with power to deal with all, at least the main elements of development; an agency that could decide both "zoning" and "subdivision" matters. One major reason why courts tend to recoil from flexible case-by-case land control was the absence of any strict procedural setting for these decisions, coupled with the immunity from any extensive judicial scrutiny with traditional legislative characterization would accord them.
Standard zoning would remain simple, as it would continue to segregate different house types into discrete districts and the only way to arrive at PUD would be to approach it as an option departure from standard zoning base.
Memphis, like many other cities, found rampant development to be troublesome as well as a tax boon. The Memphis solution has taken the form of extremely flexible Planned Unit Development ordinances, irrespective of the pros and cons of Planned Unit Development. Memphis adopted its PUD ordinance in 1974. The American Society of Planning Officials (ASPO), which has been hired to evaluate the regulations, found mixed results.*
The City and County governments were stuck with an inventory of more than 12,000 vacant serviced lots and were committed to costly sewer and road extensions. Furthermore, tens of thousands of acres had been speculatively zoned and subdivided by owners and developers who, more often than not, wound up in the bankruptcy courts. The developers were also concerned about (1) rambant speculative zoning, (2) the need to involve community groups in the development process and avoid bitter public debates, and (3) potential delays that slowed down development approvals and so on. Meanwhile, the planning staff fought a good fight for environmental quality, provisions of open
1. John M. Dugan "Memphis Cottons to PUD", American Planning Association, January 1981, Vol. 47, No. 1, Pg. 19
4


space, time-phase development, and design standards to guide the staff and
2
planning commissions (now called the land-use control board) .
The attorneys also noted that Tennessee law prohibited contract and conditional zoning and would permit an individual PUD project to be implemented only by special or conditional use permit, not by means of zoning district amendment.
The counties' zoning regulation posed a problem here because counties
were not authorized to adopt PUD type ordinances. The city attorneys raised
questions that resulted in referendum on the entire PUD concept. By spring
1974, everyone except the planning staff was quite pleased with the drafted
PUD ordinance. Even the planners were thankful that some ordinance seemed
within the reach of approval. Voters approved the PUD concept by a three to
3
two margin in August 1974.
ASPO asserted that the draft ordinance threw the entire development process open to negotiation. This essentially provided a blank check for developers and burdened the staff, planning commission and legislative bodies with making all the design decisions. The momentum behind the PUD ordinance was too great to be stopped.
Between January 1975 and April 1978, 36 PUD applications were submitted and the results were much less drastic than ASPO had predicted. "While it is true that crucial design decisions were left to the city council, county court and planning staff, disaster was averted. Further, most of the PUD committee's goals were achieved and the concept of the special permit PUD gained substantial acceptance among developers and neighborhood associa-
2. Ibid; Pg. 19.
3. Legal Aspects of Planned Unit Development in Theory and Practice by Krasnowiek by Balling Pub. Co., 1977, Pg. 20.


tions." Findings: At the same time, the Memphis experiment with a very flexible PUD ordinance was less than successful as a means of developing problem properties that could not be profitably developed under pro land-use regulations or that had been denied because of neighborhood opposition or planning concerns.
Analysis of PUD applications during the 40 months in question showed
that: 1. The PUD option was used by few potential developers, as less than
four percent of those applying for land-use changes took the PUD route. 2.
Only about 14 percent of the applications used the PUD to develop the
innovative clustering and mixing of uses that the ordinance called for as its
primary purpose. 3. Most PUD application approvals took longer than the
standard two to three months. 4. Only 60 percent of the PUD requests were
granted, contrasted with 75 percent for zoning applications and 98 percent
for subdivisions. Not all the finds were negative. In general, the design
quality of the PUD proposals were better than average, and most approved PUDs
4
found a favorable financial and development market.
The objectives of Planned Unit Developments are:
1. To achieve flexibility.
2. To provide a more desirable living environment
than would be possible through the strict application of zoning ordinance requirements.
3. To encourage developers to use more creative approaches in their development of land.
4. To encourage a more efficient and more desirable use of open land.
5. To encourage variety in the physical development pattern of the City.
4. Dugan (1981) Pg. 21



The Planned Unit Development is not without problems. The districting questions did come up in different ways in Rudderow V. Mount Laurel. Here
the township had made the PUD approach available in every district in the
township." Opponents of the project which was approved under the ordinance
challenged the project and the ordinance on various grounds; among them, the
ground that PUD must be districted relying in part on the New Jersey Constitu-
_ tion which states that in exercise of their zoning powers municipalities may
divide the municipality into districts. The court read the "may" as a
"shall". The appellant division reversed the trial court on this point.^
Most Pennsylvania municipalities which are operating under the same
Model Statute have not limited the PUD to specific districts nor have they
made PUD itself into districts a la East Windsor Township. There is a
growing tendency to limit densities permissible in the PUD to the same or
close to the densities permissible under the standard zoning applicable to
the land for which the PUD proposal is made. The reason for this is that
municipalities are scared that PUD represents an open field day on growth.
An example of a case that resulted from this was Cheney v. Village 2 at
New Hope, Inc. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1968 ruled that the
enactment of Ordinance 160 and the placing of a PUD district on a ranch tract
by Ordinance 161 was not "in accordance with the comprehensive plan" as
required by the Zoning Enabling Act.7 The ruling of the court was based on
the reasoning that once a comprehensive plan is established it cannot be
changed.**
5. Ibid., Pg. 22.
6. American Planning Land Use and the Police Power, by Norman Williams, Jr., Pub. by Callaghan and Co., 1974, Pg. 468.
7. Ibid., Pg. 479.
8. Public Planning and Control of Urban and Land Development Cases & Materials, second edition by Donald G. Hagman by West Pub. Co., 1980.
7


"Spurred by the desire of the appellant developer to contruct a Planned Unit Development in Borough of New Hope, in December of 1964 Borough Council began considering the passage of new zoning ordinances to establish a PUD district in New Hope." After extensive consultation with appellant, council referred the maatter to the New Hope Planning Commission for further study. This body, approximately six months after the project ideas were first proposed, formally recommended to council that a PUD district be created.
After reading both sides of arguments on PUD projects, I felt that PUD was a lot better than Traditional zoning which leaves us and the developers with little choice. PUD offers many advantages as listed in the previous pages. Alternative solutions: Planned Unit Development is going to be an alternative to Traditional zoning. It has received favorable comments in law reviews in all parts of the country. The efforts of those seeking imaginative, flexible and creative results from planning, zoning and land-use control have recently concentrated on Planned Unit Development.
Although opponents of PUD say that the principle is wrong, it is the better alternative to Traditional zoning. They argue there are possibilities for favoritism and/or corruption. The establishment of such a system is a step away from government by rule of law and back to the system of government by deal.^
Recommendations: It is true that PUDs have received favorable comments throughout the country, but there must be regulations set forth to prevent PUDs from going overboard. 1. PUD could be used as a means of involving citizens and neighborhood residents in land-use decisions. The Memphis PUD ordinance permits design changes up to the very last vote the legislative bodies take. However, neighborhood groups must be thoroughly briefed about
9. Dugan (1981), Pg. 22.


the details of specific application and the procedure for processing and hearing. 2. Planned Unit Development could be used when an applicant requests only minimal change in bulk regulation or proposes a specific use rather than the whole range of uses in a zoning district. 3. A flexible PUD ordinance requires diplomacy as well as technical efficiency from planning staff. In this flexible process, the planning staff must understand the city's objectives in general and the political and land-use implications of each project in particular. Finally, pay attention to policies.^
Strengths of Planned Unit Developments (PUD) in the American Setting:
1. PUD accommodates a combination of zoning and subdivision regulations allowing large scale development. This involves a mixture of land and building uses which are integrated into an overall plan to provide a balanced development, which compliments an existing community.
2. It is used to promote flexibility in the design and type of development and to promote a mixed use development.
3. It encourages the clustering of buildings on the site to preserve open space and lower construction cost.
4. Planned Unit Development is designed for large scale development to
t
promote variety in new developments.
5. It is used to allow for lower construction costs, thus encouraging lower cost housing.
6. It lowers street and utility costs resulting from reduced frontage.
7. PUD increases the density of a development and at the same time keeps desired amenities.
8. It mixes building types and uses this to create heterogenous and "alive" communities.
10. Dugan (1981), Pg. 22.
Q


desired amenities.
8. It mixes building types and uses this to create heterogenous and "alive" communities.
9. Planned Unit Development is used for housing developments, and it is also applied to other forms of developments such as shopping centers, industrial and office parks.^
Weaknesses of PUD in the American Setting:
1. Development may be delayed or prevented by arbitrariness of the PUD ordinances and vague criteria, making it difficult and time consuming for the developer to comply.
2. Open space maintenance and cost of that maintenance are also a problem.
3. The flexibility allowed may be applied arbitrarily by the community if it is not backed by design criteria or performance standards.
4. The decision making and review of PUD proposals is split between the board of adjustments, zoning administrator, the planning and zoning commission, and the city council.
5. Procedural safeguards are needed to protect both the community and the developer.^
CHAPTER III
Definitions:
Zoning is the demarcation of a city, town, or county (in the case of Hawaii, a state) by ordinance (or legislative act) into land-use catagories and zoning districts, (residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural,
11. The Language of Zoning: "A Glossary of Words and Phrases" by Michael J. Meshenberg.
12. Meshenberg, Pg. 25
10


Some critics say that "Fifty years of zoning experience strongly
suggests that legislators will often serve their own best interests by
responding to the demands of their constituents, even if this appears to be
contrary to the law". People greet Traditional zoning with mixed reactions.
It is something many do not like. On the other hand, it is something many 13
cannot do without.
During the research, I found articles that were in favor of Traditional
zoning and those that were against it. Bernard H. Siegan's article says that
many reasons have been advanced over the years in support of the imposition
of land-use regulation in the 1970's. It would seem that laws to regulate
the use of land should recognize at least three objectives. He stated those
objectives as: First, land is a precious and scarce resource and should not
be wasted. Second, when land is used, its use should satisfy the pressing
needs of society. Third, land should be used for the benefit of all people,
as distinct from any special class or group.
The oppositions to zoning say that it is very hard to conceive of any
system of incentives that could overcome the serious damage such zoning
14
policies inflict on society. They say that the research goes on for that certain special zoning system that will remove the errors and evils of the existing one. Despite the vehement opposition to zoning practices on the part of many planners, lawyers and writers, most critics reject an outright scrapping of the system and instead want some new variety of regulation.
Critics of zoning are worried by the way local zoning ordinances still treat manufactured homes as "trailers". They either exclude them altogether
13. "Zoning Incentives: Do They Give Us What We Really Want?" by Bernard H. Siegan, pub. by American Planning Association, 1983, Pg. 4.
14. Siegan (1983), Pg. 4
11


or regulate them to undesirable areas. Changes are being made in some countries. For example, Montgomery County, Maryland, has modified its zoning ordinance to permit permanently sited, multisection manufactured homes in any residential zone, provided the units have pitched roofs. California recently enacted legislation that prohibits local jurisdiction from excluding manufactured houses, although the state does not allow the application of various "appearance" provisions to ensure that units conform with prevailing housing style. Other states, such as Vermont, New Hampshire, and Florida, have similar nondiscriminatory zoning status.
An estimated 250,000 manufactured homes were built and occupied last year, up nearly 13 percent from 1980. Manufactured homes comprised over 20 percent of all 1981 housing starts. Many of the manufactured home owners seeking permanent homes in which to raise their children are placing their units on individual permanent foundations.^
Oregon is one of the states that understands the potential buyers of manufactured homes. "Betty Nievens, who chairs the State Housing Council, says that the state has provided financing guarantees for purchases and is devising a bond program to finance new parks, and purchases of units by the elderly".
The Oregon Department of Veterans Affairs already has housing bond programs. Presently 6.5 percent of its outstanding loans are for manufactured homes. Of these, 9,537 loans, four-fifths, are for units that are "legally considered real property".
"A manufactured house is a generic term for housing built in a factory". As such, it is distinguished from site-built housing. There are two types of
15. "Mobile Homes Are Getting Easier" by Thomas E. Nutt-Powell, pub. by American Planning Association (1982), Pg. 23.
12


manufactured housing. The first type is built to conform to local or state codes, which typically are based on model codes like those written by the Building Officials and Code Administrators International, Inc. The second type and the one talked about here is built to a single, preemptive national code administered by HUD and is known, by congressional act, as a manufactured home. A manufactured home is defined as having as its integral structural element a chassis, which is attached to axles, wheels, and a towing hitch.^
Top officials in the manufactured home industry are concerned with what they call "unequal treatment before the law". They blame their unequal treatment to planners. They call it "scandal to planners". The zoning status they perpetuate for manufactured homes is a blatant form of housing discrimination. "The bluntness of this statement conveys the frustration that people in the industry have experienced with local planning and zoning officials", they said.
This type of attitude that top officials in the manufactured home industry has toward local planners and zoning officials is similar to the one the city developers have toward planners and zoning officials. Zoning commissioners are at odds with zoning officials.
Strengths of Traditional zoning ordinances:
1. It has been and will still be an effective means of land-use control.
2. It has been effective in controlling population growth.
3. Transportation networks are better in zoned areas.
4. Air polution may be reduced by Traditional zoning ordinances.^
Weaknesses of Traditional zoning ordinances:
16. Nutt-Powell (1982), Pg. 20.
17. Meshenberg, Pg. 1.
13


1. It does not allow clustering of buildings on the site to preserve open space and lower construction costs.
2. It encourages more use of utilities and other facilities that lead to greater use of automobiles.
3. Traditional zoning ordinances create legal and political problems.
4. It creates much more of a problem for people to use their property other than what property was zoned for originally.
5. Traditional zoning ordinances requiring height, bulk, etc., make it impossible for mobile homes to be accommodated into the zoned area.
6. It does not add new housing to a downtown and, as a result, does not broaden the tax base.***
Here are some court cases on zoning and rezoning ordinances:
These cases were brought to court because some people felt that zoning ordinances were becoming very powerful. Others argue that they should be allowed to use their land the way they see fit.
Some critics had doubts about the effectiveness of Traditional zoning ordinances and were ready to challenge it in court. I researched and presented these cases in writing to illustrate that Traditional zoning is not without trouble, despite the great work it has done in controlling nuisance activities.
City of Eastlake v. Forest City Enterprises Supreme Court of U.S., 1976
The question is whether a city charter provision requiring proposed land-use changes to be ratified by 55% of the voters violates the due process right of a landowner who applies for a zoning change.
Respondent, a real estate developer, acquired an eight acre piece of
18. Meshenberg, Pg. 15
14


real estate in Eastlake zoned for "light industrial" uses. The Respondent applied for a zoning change to permit construction of multi-high family, high-rise apartment buildings.
The Commission rejected the application on grounds that the City Council's rezoning action had not yet been submitted to the voters for ratification.
Respondent filed an action in State Court. While the case was pending, the City Council's action was submitted to a referendum, but the zoning change was not approved by the requisite 55% margin.
The Ohio Supreme Court found that the City Council's action in rezoning respondent's eight acres from light industrial to high-density residential use was legislative in nature. Distinguishing between administrative and legislative acts, the court separated the power to zone and rezone, by a passage or amendment of zoning ordinance, from the power to grant relief from unnecessary hardship. The former function was found to be legislative in nature.
The Ohio court concluded that the amendment of the City Charter constituted a "delegation" of power violative of Federal constitutional guarantee because the voters were given no standards to guide their decision by.
The Ohio Supreme Court's concurring opinion stated: "There can be little doubt of the true purpose of Eastlake's Charter provision. It is to obstruct change in land use, by rendering such change so burdensome as to be prohibitive. Any zoning change, regardless of how minor: and regardless of its approval by Planning Commission and the City Council, must be approved by a city-wide referendum. The proposed change must receive, rather than a
15


19
simple majority, at least a 55% affirmative vote".
Moore v. City of East Cleveland, Ohio Supreme Court of the United States, 1977 Justice Powell announced the judgment of the court, and delivered an opinion which Justice Brennan, Justice Marshall and Justice Blackmun joined.
East Cleveland's housing ordinance, like many throughout the country, limits occupancy of a dwelling unit to members of a single family. But the ordinance contains an unusual and complicated definitional section that recognizes as a "family" only a few catagories of related individuals. ISSUE/PROBLEM:
Appellant, Mr. Inez Moore received a notice of violation from the city
of East of Cleveland, Ohio stating that her grandson was an illegal occupant
of her home where her son and 2 grandsons reside. The two grandsons are
cousins. Her second grandson, John Jr., came to live with her after his
mother's death. Mrs. Moore did not comply with ordinance whereby committing
20
a criminal act. She was convicted and fined $25 plus 5 days in jail.
The City of E. Cleveland, different from the ordinance of unrelated individuals in the Bella Terre v. Boraas, has chosen to regulate the housing occupancy by slicing deeply into the family itself. The City selects certain categories of relatives to live together. These categories exclude Mrs. Moore's case.
The city ordinance section 1341.08 permits any family (husband, wife and unmarried children) to live together. It seeks to justify overcrowding, minimizing of traffic and parking congestion, and to avoid undue financial
19. Hagman (1980), Pg. 562
20. Hagman (1980), Pg. 474


burden on East Cleveland's school system. Arbitrary lines were drawn by the city to limit due process. The concern here in this case is the liberty of marriage and family life protected by the due process clause of the 14th Amendment.
Findings and conclusion of the Court:
Justices Brennan, Marshall and Blackmun concurred that the arbitrary drawn is myopic; that out of economic stress the poor and minority ethnics are forced to relay on the extended family to survive. The appellee city has
intruded into family rights that historically remain central to a large
%
portion of our population.
Justice Stevens has questioned Ms. Moore's right to live as she sees fit and not be restricted by Cleveland's housing ordinance. The court did not review the substance of the zoning ordinance.
Justices Stewart and Rehnquist rejected the contention that rights of privacy and association by zoning land for single family exclusive involved no fundamental guarantee by constitution. "Association" in this case is not related to promotion of speech, assembly, press or religion. Judges argue that it's not the court's decision to judge if a case in inequitable. It is legislative, not judicial. Equal protection was argued by Mrs. Moore.
The city has undisputed power to ordain single family occupancy and thus has the power to define family. Justice White states that liberty in the meaning of due process is not the issue; the issue being that more than one set of grandchildren live in Mrs. Moore's home.
The court concluded that the normal goal of zoning regulations are present here and that the ordinance serves these goals by limiting the number of people who can occupy a single household.
Young v. American Mini Theatres, Inc.
Supreme Court of the United States, 1976


Supreme Court of the United States, 1976 Justice Stevens delivered the opinion of the court ISSUE/PROBLEM:
Respondents to the court opinion delivered by Justice Stevens are the operators of the two adult picture theaters who claim that the adult theaters ordinances are too vague.
The 1972 ordinances were amendments to "Anti-Skid Row Ordinance" which had been adopted 10 years earlier. At that time the Detroit Common Council made a finding that some uses of property are especially injurious to a neighborhood when they are concentrated in limited areas. Apart from a special waiver, adult theaters and bookstores could not be located within 1,000 feet of two other "regulated areas" and/or within 500 feet of a residential area. These ordinances were to limit the undesirable quantity and quality of transients which adversely affects property value, increases crime and encourages residents and businesses to relocate.
The respondents argued that they could not determine how much of the
described activity may be permissible before the exhibition is "characterized
by an emphasis" on such a matter. In addition, that the ordinances did not
specify adequate procedure or standards for obtaining a waiver of the 1,000 21
foot restriction.
The ordinances were not challenged on the basis that they imposed a limit on the total number of adult theaters which may operate in Detroit. Instead, they are challenged as being invalid as prior restraint of freedom of speech.
The question in this case is whether the 1st amendment prohibits suppressing sexually oriented materials on the basis of their character. The state
21. Hagman (1980) Pg. 483


different classification from motion pictures. Does the line drawn justify the city's interest in high preservation?
Findings and conclusions of the Court:
The court concluded that the city is justified in preserving its neighborhoods and that the ordinance simply requires the adult theater business to be located elsewhere not in conflict with the law.
Fasano v. Board of County Commissioners of Washington County Supreme Court of Oregon 1973 Justice Howell
ISSUE/PROBLEM:
The plaintiff, homeowners in Washington County, unsuccessfully opposed a
zone change. The defendants are the Board of County Commissioners and A.G.S.
Development Company. A.G.S., the owner of 32 acres, had zoned R-7 (single
family residential) and applied for the zone change to P-R (planned
residential), which allows for construction of a mobile home park. The
change failed to receive a majority vote of the Planning Commission. The
Board of County Commissioners approved the change and found, among other
matters, that the change allows for "increased densities and different types
of housing to meet the needs of urbanization over that allowed by the exist-22
ing zoning". According to the briefs, the comprehensive plan of
development for Washington County was adopted in 1959.
Facts: The land was designated "residential" by the comprehensive plan, was zoned R-7 classification which is single family residential. Washington County established a Planned Residential (PR) zoning classification in 1963. P-R is known as a floating zone because it is not placed in the zoning map until it's use at a particular location is approved by the governing body.
22. Hagman (1980) Pg. 515



Ordinances laying down general policies without regard to the specific piece of property are usually an exercise of legislative authority; a limited review that may be attacked upon constitutional grounds for an arbitrary abuse of authority. Specific property change is usually exercised by
judicial authority such as this case.
The plaintiff accused the county commission of being capricious and arbitrary in their determination to change the zone. The commission's action in accessing judicial authority, the burden of proof is placed upon the one seeking a change. The more drastic the change, the greater the burden.
The court states that the present amendments are the product of foresighted planning calculated to promote the welfare of the township. The town has imposed temporary restrictions upon land use in residential areas while committing itself to a program of development. It has utilized its comprehensive plan to implement its timing control and has coupled with restrictions provisions for low and moderate income housing on a large scale.
Meeks v. City of Bonner Springs Supreme Court of Kansas, 1974
ISSUE/PROBLEM:
This case deals with the denial of an occupancy permit, where a resident
chiropractor learned that his office was to be demolished by urban renewal.
Dr. Stith sought to convert his one-story frame house and lot into an office.
His house is located in an area zoned single-family residential.
The ordinance does not provide for home occupancy or office use without
a permit issued by the administrative office. Dr. Stith stated that he did
not file under the category of home occupancy but under office of profession-
23
al persons and he feels the ordinance does separate them.
23. Hagman (1980) Pg. 510
20


The Commissioners interpreted the ordinance. Based on their interpretation, they recommended that the City Council deny Stith's request. Stith went ahead and converted anyway and spent $3,000 on interior change and planned $2,000 for future changes. The exterior of the house was not altered at all except that his professional emblem, about the size of an automobile license, was fixed to his front door.
Stith again applied and did not notify the adjacent homeowner who opposed his first application. Although he did get 250-300 signatures, only 12 people signing it were residents of Bonner Springs, the rest presumably being out-of-town patients. He also talked with members of the City Council.
Facts: The city voted in favor of the second permit. The city clerk performed the duties of administrative officer pursuant to the city council authorization. The clerk issued a city license.
A suite was filed by homeowners alleging that the doctor's office will cause these plaintiffs irreparable harm and depreciate their property because of inconvenience and turn a residential area into a commercial zone.
The city council upon their approval of the license without an administrative office was accused of spot zoning and that the permit is identical in form to the occupational tax license. The city council did not intend for this document to serve as an occupancy permit or a dual function of tax license.
The city clerk performed the clerical duty when the city coundil was authorized to approve the issuance of the permit. The appellants argue the interpretation of the zoning ordinance that a professional person living in a residential district may use a portion of his or her residence as an office while a person desiring to have an office that is not a part of his residence is required to build and maintain an office in a commercial zone.
The appellant also contends they did not act within reason in allowing


the doctor's office in a residential area which constitutes a change in the ordinance, thereby omitting the due process of Section XXI of the ordinance. Appellants also contend the city coundil's action constituted a variance and/or invalid spot zoning.
Findings and conclusions of the court:
The court ruled in favor of Dr. Stith and stated they cannot base our decision on the fact, if the fact is that the appellants neglected to take a proper administrative appeal from the decision.
Lachapell v. Town of Goffstown Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1967
Plaintiff owns premises on which are stored several (5 to 20) unregistered vehicles. He had made use of his premises for a number of years prior to adoption of the ordinance in 1961.
The ordinance defines a motor vehicle junk yard as "any place of storage which is no longer intended or in condition or legal use on the public highways".
A motor vehicle junk yard is not a permitted use in a residential district in which the plaintiff resides. The ordinance in general allows the continuance of nonconforming uses existing on its passage; it has the following provision as junk yards:
No junk yard or motor vehicle junk yard, may continue as a nonconforming use for more than one year after the effective date of this ordinance, except that a junk yard may continue as a nonconforming use if within that period it is completely screened from public highway or adjaacent property. The
plaintiff has not screened his junk yard as provided in this article.
"Non-conformities may lead to reduced property values, a physical deterioration of neighborhoods, and general reduction in the desirability of
22


an entire area as a residential section".
24
There is a conflict in the decision on the power of municipality to terminate a non-conforming use after a definite period of time stated in the zoning ordinance. The greater weight of authority sustains the right to bring the nonconformer to its predestined terminal point, provided the termination provisions are reasonable as time and directed toward some reasonable aspects of land-use regulation under properly delegated police power. A one-year period for the termination of a use not situated in a building has been approved. A two-year period for the removal of autowrecking yards and junk yards has been upheld. The test is whether on balance, the public benefit outweighs the private injury, and the time allowed is reasonable.
It is impossible to treat this problem in the abstract or to apply the same time limitation to all nonconforming uses: this should not prevent reasonable attempts to discourage the continuation of nonconforming uses in the process of furthering an important public need without confiscatory damage to the landowner.
The court rules that zoning in this nature restricts the use of land and that is one of the reasons why this court has consistently placed a strict construction on provision under which attempts are made to expand, multiply or perpetuate non-conforming uses. Any conceivable statute enacted under the police power, and regulating the use of property, must necessarily affect injuriously individual rights.
The state and municipalities, in exercise of their police power, have considerable zoning flexibility in dealing with the problems presented by junk yards, motor vehicle junk yards and the storage of unregistered or junk
24. Hagman (1980) Pg. 580


motor vehicles.
Village of Euclid, Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co.
Supreme Court of the United States 1926 Sutherland, Justice
ISSUE/PROBLEM:
Euclid is a suburb of the City of Cleveland. Its population is between 5,000 to 10,000, and its area from 12 to 14 square miles, the greatest of which is unimproved acreage.
Appelle owns a tract of 68 acres, abutting on Euclid Avenue to the South and the Nickel Plate Railroad to the North. Adjoining this tract both on the East and West, there have been laid out restricted residential plats upon which residences have been erected.
In 1922, an ordinance established a comprehensive zoning plan for regulating and restricting the village.
The classes of use are denominated U-l to U-6, three (3) classes of height H-l to H-3, four (4) classes of area districts A-l to A-4. The use of districts are classified in respect to the building which may be erected with their respective limits, as follows: U-l is restricted to single family
dwellings, public parks, water towers and reservoirs, suburban and interurban electric railway passenger stations and right of ways, and farming, noncommercial greenhouse nurseries and truck gardening; U-2 is extended to include two-family dwellings; U-3 is further extended to include apartment houses, hotels, churches, and schools; U-4 includes banks, offices, studio telephone exchanges, fire and police stations, restaurants, theaters; U-5 includes billboards and advertising signs (if permitted), warehouses, ice and ice cream manufacturing; U-6 includes plants for sewage disposal and producing gas.
The classifications are as follows: In class H-l, buildings are limited


to a height of 2\ stories or 35 feet; in class H-2, to 4 stories or 50 feet; in class H-3 to 80 feet. To all of these, certain exceptions are made, as in the case of church spires, water tanks, etc.
The classification of area districts are: in A-l district, dwellings or apartment houses to accommodate more than one family must have at least 5,000 square feet for interior lots and at least 4,000 square feet for corner lots. In A-2 2,500 square feet interior for lots and 2,000 square feet for corner lots. In A-3 district, the limits are 1,250 and 1,000 square feet, respectively. In A-4 districts, the limits are 900 and 700 square feet, respectively.
Facts: Appellee's tract of land comes under U-2, U-3 and U-6. The first strip immediately north of Euclid Avenue falls in class U-2, the next to the north in U-3 and the remainder in U-6. The zone map shows that the three overlap on another.
The enforcement of the ordinance is entrusted to the inspector of buildings under rules and regulations of the board of zoning appeals. Decision of the inspector of buildings may be appealed to the board by any person claiming to be adversely affected by any such decision. The ordinance is attacked by the appellee because it is in derogation of the 14th Amendment of the federal constitution which deprives the appellee of liberty and property without due process of the law and denies it the equal protection of the law.
The bill alleges the appellee's tract has industrial uses dominating other uses and has been held vacant for years. As industrial land, it has higher market value: about $10,000 per acre. The ordinance attempts to restrict and control the uses of appellee's land.
Findings and conclusions of the Court:
25. Hagman (1980) Pg. 468


The lower court found that the normal and reasonable to be expected use and development of that part of appellee's land adjoining Euclid Avenue is for general trade and commercial purposes.
A motion was made in the court to dismiss the bill on the grounds that, because appelle had made no effort to obtain a building permit or apply to the zoning board of appeals for relief, as it might have done under the terms of the ordinance, the motion was overruled. The effect of the allegations of the bill is that the ordinance of its own force operates greatly to reduce the value of appellee's lands.
Studying these cases on traditional zoning ordinances, I was able to understand that the law can go either way. Zoning a lot "residential" does not mean that people would take it for what it is without challenge in court. Any person who wants to establish commercial in a residential zoned lot would ask for rezone. If this request is not granted by zoning board of adjustment, the person would take the case to court. The court would not refuse to hear the case. In some cases, a person's request would be granted and there may be a change.
This is why some critics say that "fifty years of zoning experience suggests that legislators will often serve their own best interest by responding to the demands of their constituents, even if this appears to be contrary to the law".^
CHAPTER IV
NATIONAL BACKGROUND OF NIGERIA
Location: The Federal Republic of Nigeria is a West African coastal
state on the shores of the Gulf of Guinea, with Benin to the west, Niger to
26. Siegan (1983) Pg. 4


the north, Chad to the northeast, and Cameroon to the east.
Climate: The climate is tropical in the south with the average annual
temperature of 32 degrees C (90 degrees F) and high humidity. It is drier and semi-tropical in the north. Average annual rainfall is more than 3,800 mm (150 in.).
Language: The official language is English. Hausa, Ibo and Yoruba are the principal languages spoken in the north, east and rest, respectively.
Religion: Islam is the main religion in the northern part of western
Nigeria. The eastern part of Nigeria is Christian.
Flag: The national flag (proportions 2 by 1) has three equal vertical
stripes of green, white and green.
27
Capital: The capital is Abuja.
History of Nigeria: The British dependencies of northern and southern Nigeria were merged in 1914. In 1947, the United Kingdom introduced a new Nigerian constitution, establishing a federal system of government based on three regions: Northern, Eastern and Western. The Federation of Nigeria
became independent within the Commonwealth on October 1, 1960. In June 1961 the Northern part of the British-administered Trust Territory of Cameroon was incorporated into the Northern region. Legislation approved in August 1963 created a fourth region by dividing the Western region. In October 1963, Nigeria became a republic.
In January 1966, civil government was brought to an end by the overthrow and death of two Regional Premiers and the Federal Prime Minister, Alhaji Sir Abubaker Balewa. A Supreme Military Council was set up by the Army Commander, Maj. Gen. Johnson Aguiyi-Ironsi, who proposed to abolish the federal
27. The Europa Year Book 1985, Vol. 2, A World Survey by Europa Pub. Ltd., Pg. 2312


28
structure and to establish a unitary state.
Political parties were banned in May. Inter-communal violence, in which many Ibos living outside their homeland in the Eastern region were killed or forced to leave, resulted in dislocation of the country and breakdown of central authority. Aguiyi-Ironsi was killed July, 1966 and his successor, Lt. Col. (later Cren.) Yakubu Gowon, revived federalism.
Early in 1967 there was rapid deterioration in relations between the Federal Government and the Military Governor of the Eastern region, Lt. Col. Chukwuemeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu. In May, Ojukwu announced the secession of the Eastern region and its independence as Republic of Biafra. War between the Federal Government and Biafra broke out in July 1967 and continued until January 1970, when, after Ojukwu departed to the Ivory Coast, Biafra surrendered. Meanwhile, a twelve-state structure, proposed by the Federal Government to replace the four regions, came into effect in April 1968.
Internal stability and increasing economic prosperity derived from rapid expansion of petroleum output, gave Nigeria an influential voice in African affairs and allowed it to pursue an open foreign policy. After revoking a promise to restore civilian rule by 1976 and failing to curb widespread corruption, Gen. Gowon faced mounting opposition, which culminated in his overthrow in bloodless coup in July 1975 by Gen. Murta Ramat Muhammed. Since 1975, Nigerian government has not been stable in a western sense.
Structure and Legislation in Nigeria: Federal laws are made by Federal Military Government decree. State laws are made by the Military Governors of the state by edict. Subjects for legislation are divided into exclusive and concurrent subjects and federal decree prevails where there is a conflict. Existing laws remain in force unless entered by decree or edict.
The Federal Military Government of Nigeria is made up of nineteen
28. Europa (1985 Vol. 2), Pg. 2312


states. Each state has a military governor appointed by the Supreme Military
Council (SMC). Such appointments are changed from time to time. In each
state the Military Governor is chairman of the State Executive Council which
includes one senior officer from the Army, Navy and Air Force, the most
senior police officer, and commissioners (the state equivalent of ministers)
29
appointed by the Military Governor. The Military Governor may establish local government authority within his state. The nineteen states are divided into local government areas.
Land-use controls and developments in major towns in Nigeria: During
the 17th century, land in major towns in Nigeria was traditionally owned and
managed by individual natives and/or communities who derived the right of
inheritance through their fathers, grandfathers and great-grandfathers. Any
stranger or landless individual requiring land for permanent residence or
short-term use such as periodical farming, would approach the individual or
community owner for a grant to use a portion of land on terms agreed upon
between the parties. On performance of certain customary rights which
include presentation of drinks, Kolanuts, goats, fowls, etc., the applicant
is therefore given the right to inhabit or cultivate the specific portion of
land boundaries which were mutually agreed upon with life sticks or ridges.
With the advent of Western Civilization, colonization and establishment
of townships, the government enacted land laws such as the "Crown Land Ordin-
30
ances" and "Town and Country Planning Ordinances". By provisions of such laws, the government easily acquired lands from the natives by negotiation agreements and payment of money. Such lands automatically became crown and
29. Europa (1985 Vol. 2), Pg. 2322
30. Land Tenure System and Development in The Eastern States and Imo State of Nigeria in Particular, Pub. by Imo State in 1976


state lands under the control and management of the government.
These colonial laws on lands have been operated with slight amendments until 1978 when the Nigerian Military Government enacted the "Land Use Decree", placing all land in the country under the control and management of the government. But this is just on paper. Private citizens still own their lands. What government does when it needs any land is publish a Gazette notice stating why the government needs the land: it pays compensation for only unexhausted improvements on economic crops and trees still on the land.
Having acquired the land, the government proceeds to make regulations, rules, and plans for proper utilization of the lands. The land is designed
into layouts streamlining residential, commercial, and industrial locations.
31
Each plot has definite areas according to the need.
With the government takeover of all lands, an individual requiring lands in the major towns for any purpose simply applies to the government Ministry of Housing Authority for a grant. If the government considers the application necessary and proper, it will grant the applicant a Certificate of Occupancy spelling out the terms and conditions of the grant. The applicant will then prepare the relevant building plans and proceed to build, after getting the plans approved by the government. The plot holder pays
some fee and perpetual ground rent to the government. The applicant is compelled by law to comply strictly to the purpose for which the land layout was designed.
31. Land Tenure Imo State, 1976


CHAPTER V
PEOPLE'S PERSPECTION OF TRADITIONAL ZONING
AND
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
Many people seem to favor PUD as a land-use control that offers what Traditional zoning does not offer. They say that the purpose of PUD regulation is to permit greater flexibility and consequently, more creative and imaginative design for development that generally is not possible under Traditional zoning regulations. It promotes more economic and efficient use of land and it gives the developer reasonable assurance of ultimate approval before expending complete design monies, at the same time providing city officials with assurance that the project will be an asset to the community's growth, both aesthetically and economically.
PUD can have a number of advantages over conventional lot-by-lot development including mixing building types and uses to create more heterogenous and "live" communities, combining often unuseable yard space on individual lots into larger common open spaces. It offers greater opportunities for incentives to building lower-cost housing; lower street and utility costs resulting from reduced frontage; and the possibility of increasing the density of a development while keeping desired amenities.
While Planned Unit Development (PUD) has commonly been used for housing developments, it is also frequently aplied to other forms of development such as shopping centers, industrial and office parks, and to mix-use developments which may be any combination, depending on local ordinances. Planned Unit Development allows the unified, and hence potentially more desirable and attractive, development area, based on a comprehensive site plan.
Some critics of Planned Unit Development (PUD) maintain that Planned


Unit Developments tend to be conceived in "two-dimensional, horizontal terms convenience shopping might be placed alongside a group of townhouses, but never above them". They also say that three-dimensional, vertical integration of uses is almost never a feature of PUD's, but it is a key to an ingredient of high density development. They maintain that "There is also a tendency in PUD ordinances to require comprehensive detailed project planning at every stage. This requirement may not square with changing market and financial conditions".
There are some critics who want the flexibility offered by Planned Unit Development, and the negotiations that virtually always accompany the approval process, permits communities to exert higher cost amenities from developers thereby using it as an exclusionary device. Other terms that Planned Unit Development include are planned development, unitary development, or community unit plans.
TRADITIONAL ZONING ORDINANCES
Traditional zoning came about as a means of controlling nuisance activities. Nuisance is "anything that interferes with the use or enjoyment of property, endangers personal health or safety, or is offensive to the senses".
Zoning for a long time has been the most effective use of land control despite some critics of zoning that see it as posing too much authority on peoples' land. Almost all the big cities are zoned and even formerly
resistant small and rural jurisdictions, recognizing that zoning is not all bad, are adopting zoning as a development management device.
There are some principal areas of zoning that have drawn most people's attention:
1. Exclusionary Zoning: "Zoning which has the effect of keeping out a community's racial minorities, poor people, or in some cases, additional


populations of any kind". Such techniques, like large-lot zoning, high floor area or minimum residential floor-area requirements which increase houssing costs, have been challenged for their potential exclusionary effects. Similarly, discretionary techniques have been subject to challenge. They may permit a community to deny certain applications and conceal the real reasons. "Exclusionary zoning, in all its subtle variations, is considered by many most effective as a persuasive tool used by many suburbs to maintain their homogeneous character. A growing number of state court decisions are invalidating exclusionary practices, whether intentional or unintentional, and in some cases are requiring affirmative, inclusionary practices. On the other hand, discretionary techniques, such as inclusionary zoning, can be an important part of an inclusionary land-use program".
2. Inclusionary Zoning: Inclusionary zoning is a positive and active policy and program of a community to attract racial minorities or low and moderate-income residents. "Such policies, analogous to affirmative action in job recruitmant, go certainly beyond the avoidance of techniques which discourage a certain type people from moving into that area; they actively seek to invite such groups". What inclusionary zoning does include is offering incentives or bounces to developers for building low or moderate-cost housing or exceptions to traditional controls. "Such practices are rare, but they are being experimented with in a number of places. While some courts have accepted the idea of inclusionary incentives, they have generally invalidated the techniques." Inclusionary policies are a response to the challenges being levied at exclusionary zoning.
3. Land Use: Some critics of Traditional zoning made the following comments: a) Land is a precious and scarce resource and should not be wasted; b) When land is used, its use should satisfy the most pressing needs of the society; c) Land should be used for the benefit of all of the people as


distinct from any special class or group.
Bernard H. Siegan made this statement, "It is hard to conceive of any incentive system that could overcome the serious damage such zoning policies inflict on society." Critics maintain that the zoning ordinance effects the economic development of the area. Often zoning has had the effect (in combination with other factors of course) of segregating land uses into district geographic areas (e.g. "commercial district" or "manufacturing district") and discouraging downtown residential development in favor of other "higher and better uses". They say it should be appropriate for planners to re-examine the economic effects of the existing zoning ordinance, especially in the central core.
Some critics maintain that fifty years of zoning experiences strongly suggests that legislators will often serve their own best interests by responding to the demands of their constituents, even if this appears to be contrary to the law.
In the Citizen's Guide to Zoning, there was a case of an elderly widow who has lived in her house for 50 years. She wanted to stay there but the cost of things was going up. Taxes and utility costs were also up. This widow could not convert her third floor into a rental apartment because her home was restricted to single-family zoning. Her problem could not be solved because of the single-family zoning where her property was located. This type of situation gives critics of zoning poor impressions about zoning ordinances.
Some critics say that the only meaningful solution for our zoning difficulties lies in dismantling the system and reducing the powers of the local legislators. They said the control of the economic marketplace is more efficient, more equitable, and more effective than that of the political
marketplace.


Despite some opposition of zoning, it remains the most widely used technique for controlling land-use development. There are new developmental tools, and there are growing communities using them; still, zoning is the cornerstone. Almost all of the big cities are zoned and more will be zoned in the future.
CHAPTER VI
APPLICATION OF TRADITIONAL ZONING AND
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) TO NIGERIA
Nigeria as a developing country is facing the need to provide guidance and controls on the process of urbanization. The question is what is the technique or method to be used for guiding urban growth?
Traditional zoning and Planned Unit Development (PUD) techniques have been used in U.S. cities. This study will investigate and analyze the advantages and disadvantages of Traditional zoning and Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) in the American context and evaluate these techniques for an application to a Nigerian setting.
Traditional zoning ordinances have been an effective means of controlling land-use in the U.S. for the past 60 years. Nuisance laws form part of the basis for zoning. For many years now, there have been all kinds of zoning ordinances designed to serve different purposes. They have reached a stage where people say that they do not have authority over their land and property anymore.
Critics of Traditional zoning seem to take a hard line view against Traditional zoning ordinances. There have been court cases challenging
Traditional zoning ordinances. Sometimes the courts would rule against the Traditional zoning ordinances. A lot of money is wasted in these court


cases. The politics of Traditional zoning ordinances, seem to overshadow the importance of zoning.
The separation of uses through zoning, e.g. industrial from residential, helps to foster the enjoyment of residential areas free from pollution, noise, congestion, and the other characteristics of industrial areas. Even though this may not be the case in every situation, it helps in some places.
Nigeria is a "young" country. From what I have read and documented in my paper, Traditional zoning ordinances would limit greatly the development of the country. So many people, mostly those in upper and middle classes, would like to challenge the ordinances in the court as it is being done here in the U.S. Planned Unit Development (PUD) is another form of land-use control. It offers new opportunities to build an urban environment more satisfying and relevant to human needs.
Nigeria has a Ministry of National Planning and Ministry of Housing. Many states have a housing corporation. Imo State Housing Corporation was created in 1976 during the Nigerian Civil War to house the people of Imo State who were driven away from Lagos and the Northern part of Nigeria. Since then, the corporation has built and is managing 1,283 housing units ranging from one to five bedroom bungalows and high-rises.
People that are employed by the Imo State Housing Corporation are Imo State planners. In any state that has a housing corporation, people that work for them are regarded as planners. They also employ engineers.
The federal government also has planners. Their job is mostly negotiating with foreign contractors to work on government projects like designing and improving airports, bridges, roads, water systems and telecommunications, to name but a few. They hire the contractors and work with them on those projects.
The Federal Ministry of Housing also employs planners and engineers who
36


draw plans and build houses for the federal government. Some of these houses are rented to government employees and some are sold.
The federal, state and local governments of Nigeria all have planners. They also have an annual budget for planners. In both the federal and state governments, the stage of planning now needs to be expanded. My idea would be to tell governments the areas in planning that need to be improved or expanded. As far as resources and staff are concerned, the federal, state and local governments have them. They would be available to implement my ideas.
Many educated Nigerians are schooled in the United States of America and Britain. Introduction of foreign concept into Nigeria has always been practical; however, careful steps should be taken.
Planners are known by the methods and approaches they use to "sell" or introduce their new concepts. I would approach local government planners and introduce the ideas to them. My research would be available for them. The outline of advantages and disadvantages of Traditional zoning and Planned Unit Developments would be available for them to study. After the ideas have been implemented on the local government level, they would be carried to the state government level. From the state government, the whole concept could be implemented to the federal government level.
In Nigeria, people need a housing development that will offer other forms of development such as shopping centers, industrial and office parks, and to mix-use development which may be any combination, depending upon the local ordinance.
In Nigeria, Planned Unit Development can have a number of advantages over conventional lot-by-lot development including mixing building types and uses to create more heterogenous and alive communities, combining often unuseable yard space on individual lots into larger common open space.


It offers greater incentives to building low-cost housing, lower street and utility costs resulting from reduced frontage, and the possibility of increasing the density of a development while keeping desired amenities. This is the type of approach that Nigerians would like to see in their development plans.
The most important thing is for planners to develop land control systems that are more compatible with the rural, small town setting. Nigerians need a form of development usually characterized by site design for a number of housing units, clustering buildings and providing common open space, density increases, and a mix of building and land uses. This design approach would permit Nigerians to maintain their extended family lifestyle. It is a tradition that Nigerians treasure so much.
CHAPTER VII
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Zoning is a police measure. It is enacted primarily by the general purpose units of local government. Nuisance Law forms part of the basis for zoning, in which the community is divided into districts or zones. Each zone or district has special uses established, as are regulations governing lot size, building bulk, placement, and other development standards.
Traditional zoning has been a major means of controlling land-use for over 60 years. It still remains the most widely used technique for controlling land-use in development.
Planned Unit Development (PUD) movement started in the early sixties. When the movement started, there were widespread feelings that this form of development was in conflict with Traditional zoning and site planning concepts. Since that time, many developers have used the Planned Unit Development concept. They have offered many features that are not offered in


Traditional zoning development. People are finding it more attractive. It offers some advantages that conventional lot-by-lot development does not offer; such things as lower-cost housing, lower street and utility costs, and the possibility of increasing the density of a development while keeping desired amenities.
RECOMMENDATION
Nuisance activities interfere with the use or enjoyment of property, endanger personal health or safety and can be offensive to the senses. The only way to control nuisance activities lawfully is through land-use regulations. Traditional zoning and Planned Unit Development ordinances have been effective methods of land-use.
I strongly recommend that every city have effective land-use ordinances. The ordinances will help regulate among other things the following:
a. Land-use
b. Housing Development
c. Transportation Network
d. Pollution
e. Maintaining Urban Sprawl
Planners should always bear in mind the development of land control systems should be compatible with the rural and small town setting. Inputs from the present and future residents will be a very valuable asset.


Bibliography
Africa Survey, by Best de Blij, Published in 1977, by John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Canada
American Planning Law and Use and the Police Power, by Norman Williams, Sr., Callaghan Publishing Co., 1974
Enchantment of Africa Nigeria, by Allan Carpenter, Published in 1978, by Regensteiner Publishing Enterprises, Inc.
Europa Yearbook, 1975, Published by Unipub New York, NY
Handbook of Zoning and Land Use Ordinances with Forms by Clan Crawford, Jr., J.D., Published by Prentice-Hall,
Inc., 1977
History of West Africa, by J.D. Face, Published in 1969, Printed in Great Britain
Land Tenure System and Development in the Eastern States and Imo
State of Nigeria in Particular, Published by Imo State in 1976
Land Use Control: Present Problems and Future Reform, by David
Listokin, Published by Center for Urban Policy Research, 1974
Look at Nigeria, by Colin FLatchem, Published 1975, by A & C Black Ltd., London
"Mobile Homes are Getting Easier", by Thomas E. Nutt-Powell,
Published by American Planning Association, February 1982,
Vol. 28, No. 2, Pg. 20-23
Modern Nigeria by Guy Arnold, Published 1977, by Longman Group Limited London
Nigeria, by Ernest Dunbar, Published in 1974, by Franklin Watts, Inc. London
Nigeria, by Walter Schwarz, Published in U.S.A. in 1968 by Frederick A. Praegers, Publisher
Public Planning and Control of Urban and Land Development Cases and Materials, Second edition by Donald G. Hagman by West Publishing Co., 1974
Take A Trip to Nigeria, by Keith Lyle, Published in 1983, by Franklin Watts Ltd., London
The Citizens Guide to Zoning, by Herbert H. Smith, Published by the American Planning Association, Chicago, Illinois, 1983
The Europa Yearbook 1985, Vol. 2, A World Survey by Europa Pub. Ltd.


"The Language of Zoning: A Glossary of Words and Phrases", by Michael J. Meshenberg, Pub. by American Planning Association
The New Zoning: Legal Administration and Economic Concepts and
Techniques, by Norman Marcus and Marilyn W. Groves, Published by the Center for New York City Affairs
The Zoning Dilemma, by Daniel R. Mandelker, Published by Bobbs-Merrill Co., Inc., 1971
The War of Nigerian Unity, by Sir Rex Niven, Published in U.S.A. in 1971 by Rowman and Littlefield
"Zoning Incentives: Do They Give Us What We Really Want?" Pub. by American Planning Association