Introduction

• Library: The Zoning and Land Use Handbook (ABA) (2016 Ed.)

Welcome to the world of zoning. It is a world filled with passion, intrigue, and mystery. It is a world of warring factions and battles galore. It is also a thoughtful world where philosophy and science mix with economics, politics, and sociology. It is a world of federal, state, and local government laws. It is a world that witnesses the best and worst of local government. There is a rough and fundamental democracy at work where the outcome of a zoning petition is often determined by the sentiments expressed by local residents who pack a hearing room and make their voices heard. In large municipalities or counties, it is often a single ward boss or alderman who makes the real decision. Everything that follows from that decision is nothing but fluff to satisfy the appearance of due process. In those circumstances, the zoning decision has all the characteristics of a 12th-century feudal baron presiding over his court.

For those of you who are new to the "zoning game,"² it is important to recognize that meeting with local politicians and local zoning officials is a fundamental part of the zoning process. These meetings can prove critical. Zoning is, for the most part, a creature of local government, and local government may well mean local politics.

As a newly minted local government attorney, the very first village board meeting I attended had, as its centerpiece, the issue of whether to grant a rezoning to allow for the construction of an eight-story condominium building in an area of single-family homes. To say the least, this was a matter of great controversy in that community and brought out almost every single-family homeowner in the vicinity of the proposed project.

The senior partner of the law firm I worked for, who was the village attorney, asked me to attend the meeting in his place. As I drove up to the small brick building that housed the village hall, I was surprised to find that the parking lot was full of cars and even the parking spaces on the street were taken. 1n my naivete, I thought, "what civic-minded people live in this community." I was duly impressed.

I finally did find a place to park and walked back to the village hall. I found that the crowd was overflowing onto the sidewalk leading to the entrance and that there were police on duty to help maintain order. When I advised one of the police officers that I was an attorney from the village attorney's office, two rather large police officers took me under each arm and guided me through the crowd right up to the dais where the village board sat. I was plunked down next to the acting village president. The village president had taken the opportunity to be on vacation this particular evening.

To say that there was tension in the room would have been an understatement. It was reminiscent of the old cowboy movies where a lynch mob gathers outside the local jail and someone in the crowd yells, "Get a rope." It seems that the residents were under the impression that the village attorney and the mayor were in cahoots with each other to ensure the construction of the condominium building: the crowd believed that each owned an interest in the project. That, of course, was a false rumor but, nevertheless, it had its effect on the mood of the crowd.

Ultimately, the village board members were not swayed by the epithets hurled at them by various speakers who were there objecting to the project. The board voted to approve the zoning. All these years later I still remember the tension in that room.

Not surprisingly, as often happens in these cases, once the project was approved and constructed, it was found that the condominium could live peacefully with the single-family residences and, indeed, some of the residents of the village who owned homes in the vicinity eventually bought apartments in that building.

That evening provided me with a valuable lesson. 1t introduced me to the NIMBY syndrome ("not in my backyard"). It also taught me that zoning decisions similar to the one concerning the condominium development cannot be made based on the passions of well-intentioned citizens, but must be made based upon hard facts, good planning, and zoning law. One of the critical rules that I have emphasized when speaking to local government officials is that their decision should not be made based upon the passions of the audience at a zoning hearing. Certainly, people who attend these hearings and object to a development believe that they are protecting what are probably their most valuable assets, the investments that they have in their homes. N1MBYs are not always wrong. Quite the opposite: they are certainly experts on their neighborhood and can often provide valuable insights not known to the plan commission or zoning board. While NIMBY has become a term of derision, the local residents' views should be respected and carefully considered. Hidden behind the anger and hyperbole may well be important facts.

It is important that you know about the community or neighborhood in which the proposed development is to take place as well as know the people who are...