Planning theory (planlama teorisi)

ADVOCACY PLANNING
 Dahl, banfield and polsley (1960) introduced the pluralist theory
 Davidoff and reiner (1962-1965) questioned the existence of a single consensual public interest and assumed that there are many diverse interest groups competing for the limited resources available.
 Davidoff advocacy and pluralism in planning (1965) rcp does not go far enough to deal with the unfairness of cities.
Advocacy planning has been developed taking into consideration of the pluralistic nature of contemporary society.
 Attempts to create a link between technical expertise and participatory democracy
 Advocate planner can theoretically work for any social group, planner is responsible to his or her client and express only the client’s interests
 But interpreted to mean advocate for the poor
Main assumptions of advocacy planning
 Traditional planning approaches too narrowly address issues of physical planning, separating the physical from the social and thereby neglecting social conflict and inequality in the city.
 Comprehensive planning presumed a common public interest but in effect gave voice to only one interest (in fact represent merely the interests of the privileged.)
 Planning commissions are undemocratic and poorly suited to represent the competing interests of a pluralist society.
The basic steps in advocacy planning
 Identification of various interest groups each with it’s own preferences and values
 Mapping their values and then every group should have access to planning experts who can safe guard their interests.
 Establish a dialogue with all the the groups through their ‘advocates’ and these advocates carry out their task independently of the planning authorities. Promote of the the particular interests of the disadvantaged of excluded interests.
 While it generated a lot of academic dialogue and professional interest it could not be implemented in practice as it lacked institutional structure.
EQUITY PLANNING
 Norman Krumholz, the name most associated with equity planning
 1982 : ‘A Restrospective View of Equity Planning Cleveland, 1969-79 Krumholz presented his experiences of equity planning
 Followed the tradition of Davidoff’s advocacy planning attempted to find a common ground of public interest
 Shift the emphasis towards problems of contemporary cities such as problems of equality, poverty and mobility.
 Social equity main objective of the plan was to address the needs of those most in need in the city planner is responsible to advance the interests of the disadvantaged groups.
 A polar example of the application of local planning efforts to issues of social equity.
 The approach used by many in the planning profession.
a. cut- back planning by Professor Herbert Gans
b. opportunity planning by Antony Downs
EQUITY PLANNNING – CLEVELAND REPORT
 the report was perhaps the first planning document to shift the emphasis from traditional planning approaches to a more dynamic process and to shift towards problems of contemporary cities such as problems of equality, poverty and mobility.
 Main objective of the plan was to address the needs of those most in need in the city.
 Planner is responsible to advance the interests of the disadvantaged groups.
 Planners begin with the overarching goal of increasing equality; who determines the means and the intermediate goals depends on the situation.
DEMOCRATIC PLANNING
 Godschalk stress on the importance of constant communication between planners and the public.
 Bring governmental planners face to face with citizens in a continuous cooperative venture.
 Not only educate and involve the community in planning but also educate and involve the planners in their community.
 Influence on
a. John Friedman (social transformation) and
b. John Forester (development of community relations strategies)
ADVOCACY-EQUITY-DEMOCRATIC PLANNING
 Advocacy model is based on the legal system in which the planner is responsible to his or her client and express only the client’s interests.
 Equity planning sought to return planning to a more progressive path of both promoting the larger public interest and directly addressing urban inequalities equality planners have a particular responsibility to advance the interests of the poor and racial or ethnic minorities even when opposed by popular majorities.
 Democratic planning attempts to plan for the society as a whole. Democratic planners rely on the public as the ultimate authority in the formulation of plans and take a populist view that differentiates between special interests and the public interest.
Planning theory since 1980s
 Globalization
 Post-Fordism
 Post-Modernism
STRATEGIC PLANNING
 1960’s Strategic planning originated in the private sector by the need of rapidly changing and growing corporations to plan effectively for and manage their futures in case of uncertainty.
 Kaufman and Jacobs
 1980’s; began widely used in publicly traded companies.
 Based on the critique that the rational planning model fails to consider external conditions and that it does not gain agreement from the actors with the necessary power to implement its recommendations.
 A way to privatize the style of public planning without privatizing public ownership.
In comparison to RCP planning, strategic planning
 Is short or middle ranged, around 5 years
 Instead of long analytical undertakings it is based on external and internal scanning on specific and selected critical issues.
 Narrows the task of more comprehensive analysis.
 Oriented more towards action, results, and implementation
 Emphasizes assessing a community’s Strengths and Weaknesses in the context of Opportunities and Threats
 Promotes broader and more diverse participation in the planning process.
 Structure plan/regional development strategies /local development strategies.
The basic steps in strategic planning
 Scan the environment
 Select key issues
 Set mission statements or broad goals
 Undertake external and internal analyses
 Develop goals, objectives and strategies with respect to each issue
 Develop an implementation plan to carry out strategic actions
 Monitor, update and scan.
NEGOTIATIVE PLANNING
 Developed as an alternative to advocacy planning
 After 1970s individual projects became the focus of urban planning and the coordination between projects occurred through a series of adjustments and agreements between various participants.
 Based on the critique that the rational model deos not recognize the disputes inherent in plans and planning and thereby sets the stage for either conflict over planning proposals or rejection of the legitimacy of the plan when it fails to deal with the interests of affected parties.
 Emerged in the form of negotiating techniques for resolving disputed goals and conflicts.
 Creates a dialogue among interested citizens, business and public authorities in order to appreciate better one another’s preferences and actions.
 Planners became negotiators seeking compromises among the differing goals of the several involved parties.
 A majority of researches associate the concept of collaboration between public authorities and market actors in order to negotiate an argument on a specific development project. Such cooperation excludes the public, some researches however contend that negotiative planning includes both private business and spontaneously organized citizen groups.
 In this approach there exist a strategic interdependence between negotiating partners; negotiations are preferred in areas where negotiating partners want to avoid operating though formal channels where a system of rules exists; each negotiating partner successively adjust their actions and ambitions in order to obtain the best possible result.
 The final product of negotiative planning usually includes verbal agreements, mutual pledges and undertaking.
CONSENSUS BUILDING
 Another version of negotiative planning:
 The method of consensus building:
 A method of group deliberation that brings together for face-to- face discussion a significant range of individuals chosen because they represent those with differing stakes in a problem.
 The process requires that participants have common information and that all become informed about each other’s interests a wide range of groups have representatives who can speak knowledgeably for their interests, create options, develop criteria for choice, and make th decisions on which they can all agree.
 It uses the tools of alternative dispute resolution such as mediated negotiation.
 Various planning efforts carried out using this approach after 1990s.
 Developed as a method of plan making based on the idea of communicative rationality.
 The aim is a collective search for common ground and the opportunities for mutual benefit.
 A method of searching for a unitary public interest that, according to Meyerson an Banfield, may be either the set of ends share among the individuals making up the public, or the unique interests of the body politic.
– Consensus building’s results can often be regarded as approximating the public interest as conceived in the unitary version favored by planning theorists, rather than an aggregation of individual interest.
COMMUNICATIVE-COLLABORATIVE PLANNING
 Based on communicative rationality planned action is explained and understood as being socially constructed that is, the outcome of interactions, relations and exchange between actions in the policy process.
 Considered as essentially a theory planning practice describes, interprets and explains what planners actually do and also explains what an ethical and socially critical form of planning should be (normative purpose)
 Views planning as a communicative process involving multiple interacting actors, emphasizes both interaction and iteration which takes place in an extensive institutional context and aims to obtain commitment and consensus among all stakeholders.
 Critics point out that it does not reflect reality that is collaborative planning takes insufficient account of power differences expressed in diverse interests and relations of domination and in which planning practices are embedded.
 Planned action is explained and understood as being socially constructed that is, the outcome of interactions, relations and exchange between actors in the policy process.
 A normative dimension of planning assumed, in which no affected partly is excluded from discourse and its premise is arriving at collaboratively chosen decisions.
COMMUNICATIVE PLANNING
Healey: developed ten propositions about communicative planning as;
– It is an interactive and explanatory process which focuses on decisions and actions in various policy areas but at the same time acquires knowledge from the real world.
– Interaction takes place between several fluid and overlapping discourse groups: each of these groups have their own value and knowledge system and their own way.
– Intercommunicative planning involves thoughtful dialogue between discourse groups, considerateness implies appreciation and attention to each other’s views and action space.
– Planning results not only consist of programs and policies but also the creation of arenas where programs are formulated and conflicts identified and resolved.
– Within the framework of argumentation all dimensions of knowledge, appreciation, understanding, experience and judgment are mobilized.
– Communicative planning upholds a reflectiveness and a critical understanding by exhibiting the requirements of rational communication.
– Interaction is as inclusive as possible so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to participate and thereby communicative planning serves democratic pluralism.
– It is a mutual learning process where the participants learn new approaches about themselves, their relations with others and their own and others values.
– In communicative planning attention is paid to the power of language, metaphors ideas, imagination and storylines in a common attempt to change the material conditions and the established power relation.
– Communicative planning does not adhere the goals as rational planning does in the sense that given goals must be followed in a certain way, rather, it is a process with a direction of travel that is accepted by those involved and can be changed if so needed.
CONCEPTS
 Plan/urban plan
 Planning/urban planning
 Planner/planner
 Theory
 Planning theory
 Planning practice
Urban plan/physical plan / spatial plan
 a kind of planning with a spatial or geographical component in which the general objective is to provide for a spatial structure of activities or of land uses; it is necessarily multidimensional and multi- objective in its scope.
THEORY
 the origin of the word ‘theory’ comes from an ancient Greek word ‘theoros’ which means ‘observer’
 the word ‘theoria’ derived from theores means to observe examine the events carefully’
 definitions:
 propositions scientifically testable
 abstraction of reality
 explanations based on empirical and experiential knowledge
 propositions for reasons behind the events and processes
 methodological and ethical concerns of the issues.
MAIN TASKS OF A THEORY
 explanation
Provide a method for understanding the events and the logic behind the events- past, in progress, future .
(explanatory aspects)
 prediction forecast the possible developments in the future
 prescription
Provide normative guidelines that will be of help to direct the objected action, tell practitioners what to do and how to do it (normative aspects)
EVOLUTION OF PLANNING THOUGHT AND PRACTICE
 preindustrial period
 ancient
 medieval
 renaissance
 industrial period
 industrial revolution-20th century
 modern
 postmodern
18TH C. – 20TH C.: DOMINANT PLANNING APPROACHES OF THE PERIOD:
 Historicists – Culturalists
 Utopian socialists – Progressists
 Reformers – Remedialists
 Urban Restructuring
 City Beautiful
 Garden City
EARLY 20TH C. – 2ND WORLD WAR
 Fordist mode of production
a. Search for markets
 A new world order
a. World wars
b. New states
 Institutionalization of modernism
a. New institutions
b. New professions
 Dominant Planning Approaches
I. City Functional/City practical
II. Empirical studies of Chicago School
III. Scientific method
IV. Comprehensive planning
V. Regional/ nationwide plans /development plans
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING
 The word comprehensive is used in terms of
– The size of the space to be planned or,
– The factors to be considered in the planning process
 Comprehensive plan, general plan, master plan, development plan: an official public document, adopted by a local government as a policy guide to decisions about the physical development of the community
 Physically it covers the entire community
 Long-term have time horizons in the range of 20 to 30 years
 The plan is generally drawn up by:
– Municipality is planning agency in larger city
– A planning consultant and approved by the municipality
The elements of a comprehensive plan
 Land use
 Transportation
 Infrastructure network:
– Utility
– Community facilities
 Policies on special concerns such as economic: development, conservation, recreation, housing….
The process of comprehensive planning
1. Research
2. Formulating of community goals and objectives
3. Plan formulation
4. Plan implementation
5. Review and revision
NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE POSTWAR ERA
 1945-end of 1960s : welfare state period; development approach
 International organizations
 Development countries (urban renewal, decetralization9/developing countries (migration, rapid urbanization)
 New technological innovations
– Information flow globally (television, computers)
– The collection of and ability to process huge amount of data.
 Anything that could not be expressed in numbers was inherently suspect
This was a heavy bias in favor of efficiency, which could be measured in terms of time and money , and against equity and intangibles which could not.
 The possibilities of better decisions making by the help of these developments: development of techniques based on rationality.
 Systems approach: general systems theory
PLANNING IN THE POSTWAR ERA; GOLDEN AGE OF PLANNING
 1945-end of 1960’s: the ‘golden age of planning’ ; planning was seen to be an important element of the Welfare State.
 The concern of planning shifted beyond the city boundaries to design motorways, high-rise buildings and renewal of the central places.
 Comprehensive planning became an important tool to serve these aims.
RATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING
 An advanced version of comprehensive planning includes methods of decision theories and techniques of data collection, measurement and analysis planning was argued to be based on rational choice among alternatives using quantified techniques.
 The Roots of RCP Geddes, synoptic plan
 Until 1950s, physical planning approaches dominated the practice of planning.
 Emerged as a comprehensive rational model of problem solving and decision making to guide state intervention
 The works of H.Simon, Braybrooke and Lindbloom on decision theories
 Weber and Manheim, social philosophers, the most influential proponents of rational planning
 Meyerson in collaboration with Banfield(1955) applied this approach in the field of physical planning
 The main assumptions on which Rational Comprehensive model of plan making is based.
 Comprehensiveness or a synoptic perspective : all data required for the study can be gathered and processes quantitative and Mathematical analysis abstracting from the ‘real world’ assumes that decision-makers have:
A well-defined problem
A full array of alternatives to consider
Full baseline information
Complete information about the consequences of each alternatives
Full information about the values and preferences of citizens
Full adequate time, skill and resources
 Unitary public interest: An elitist view in trying to
1960’S: A PARADIGM SHIFT IN THEORY AND PRACTICE OF PLANNING
 1950s the main concern shift from spatial arrangements to improving decision making process
 1960s
– Criticisms of welfare state policies
– Social movements in the world
 1960s : shift towards participatory and pragmatic approaches in rban planning:
– Shift from absolute rationality towards communicative rationality
– Shift towards more pragmatic planning attempts
– Shift from unitary public interest to a heterogeneous public understanding with many voices and interests
– Shift from top-down towarda participatory process
INCREMENTAL PLANNING
 Lindblom: The Science of Muddling Through (1959)
 Based on the critique of RCP that it required a level of knowledge, analysis, and organizational coordination which was impossible complex
 A modified version of rational decision making model that would reflect practice more accurately.
 Method of successive limited comparisons
Main assumptions of incremental planning
– Because of wide variations in human values, it would be hard to reach an agreement in defining either the ends of the means in a way that would be acceptable to all
– It ıs not technical but Political factors that determine how many alternatives shall be evaluated and analysis can never offset the need for acceptable and consensus.
– Policy makers come to decision by weighing the marginal advantages of more number of alternatives.
 Incremental planning itself has been criticized for being too conservative and as it tends to reinforce the existing order of society and ıts organization and neglecting the power of revolutionary social change.
MIXED SCANNING
– Etzioni ; Mixed Scanning A Third Approach to Decision Making (1967)
 An approach to social decision making combining the rational and the incremental models.
 It provides a particular procedure for the collection of information a strategy about the allocation of resources and guidelines for the relations between the two.
 Etzioni tried to integrate the positive aspects of both models while minimizing the restrictive parts of each
– He distinguished between higher order fundamental policy-making process which sets basic directions and an incremental process which prepares for fundamental decisions and revises them after they have been made.
– Incrementalism reduces the unrealistics aspects of rationalism by taking for details required in fundamental decisions.
– Rationalism helps to overcome the conservative slant of incrementation by exploring longer-run alternatives.
The Process of comprehensive planning
1. Research: data-gathering and forecasting
 Population: total population, age structure, household number and sizes, education levels, income characteristics: cohort survival method
 Economic development: labor force characteristics, employment by work and residence: economic base study
 Natural resources: coasts, slope characteristics, agricultural and forest land, plant and animal habitats, wetland, scenic view
 Cultural resources: historic building, major district, unique cultural values
 Circulation: traffic flow, transportation network
 Serves and facilities: infrastructures, education, health, cultural facilities
 Land-use inventory: existing land uses, undeveloped land , land ownership, infrastructure and characteristics: GIS
2. Formulating community goals and objectives:
 Requires a knowledge of essential facts of the situations, limitations, options
 Formulate a limited number of goals that do not contradict each other and that have enough public and political support , land ownership, infrastructure and characteristics: GIS
 Planning agency’s role: provide a forum for discussion, lay out options, synthesize and articulate the result of the discussions and deliberations
The goals of comprehensive planning
 Health : a land use pattern that protects the public health
 Public safety: access for emergency vehicles, distinctions of vehicular/pedestrian traffic, prevention from natural hazards, crime prevention
 Circulation: orderly, efficient and rapid flow of vehicular pedestrian traffic and adequate the public transportation
 Provision of Services and Facilities: determine the location of public facilities and the pattern of services
 Fiscal Health: relationship between pattern of development and fiscal situation of the community; cost of and revenues from the development
 Economic Goals: economic growth, maintenance of the existing level of economic activity, a pattern of land use for specific sites and good access to such sites
 Environmental Protection: restrictions on buildings, preservation of specific sites
 Redistributive goals: planning should be to distribute downward wealth and influence in political process
3. Formulating the plan:
 The plan is generally drawn up by:
-municipality’s planning agency in larger cities
-a planning consultant and approved by the municipality in smaller cities
 Laying out a variety of options
 Considering cost and benefits of various options: impact analysis
 Considering aesthetic and urban design issues
4. Implementing the plan:
 Tools of implementation
5. Review and updating:
 Need for review and replanning
London Plan, Abercrombie
 Patrick Abercrombie 1879-1957,British architect and town planner
 This plan was published by London Country Council in two documents,
Country of London Plan (1943)
 In 1943 Country of London Plan was created by Abercrombie and J. H. Forshaw. The authors saw London’s four “major defects”
 traffic congestion, proposed classifications of road (arterial roads, sub-arterial roads, local roads)
 depressed housing
 inadequacy and misdistribution of open spaces
 the jumble of houses and industry (indeterminate zoning)
The Greater London Plan (1944)
 The plan examines London and whole region.
 It is based on long-term process.
 Firstly, needs are considered in a certain time and they built upon the projections.
 Second, urban elements are started to adopt in plan. The plan examines wider geographical scope (a 50 km radius) than the other. In other words; it is hoped that it may make some contribution to the future state of this country and to enable it to settle down to a life of place.
 He carried forward the 1929 plan ideas and introduced a visionary proposal for creating a network of greenways to interlink open spaces in central areas.
 Abercrombie pointed roads, densities, communications and zones.
 Although, road hierarchies, applying the zone in different ways and services, green areas and infrastructures are different urban elements: they are discussed jointly.
 Housing and Industry
 Housing and Transport
 Road Improvements
 Use of Agricultural Land
 The Green Belt
 Public Services
 The Four Rings
 The Suburban Urban Ring
 The Green Belt Ring
 The Outer Country Ring
 The Inner Urban Ring
Assumptions;
 Assumption 1: the recommendation container in the Barlow Report, that no new industry shall be admitted to London and Home Counties except in special cases. This involves consideration of the industrial of London and its surrounding,
 Assumption 2: the questions of decentralization of persons and industry from the congested centre, already recommended in the County of London Plan, and this recommendation forms the second assumption.
 Assumption 3: as a result of the Barlow recommendation and in consonance with national trends, the population of the area will not increase, but on the contrary, will be somewhat reduced. The redistribution of population and industry will proceed up to and even beyond the physical limits of the area under discussion.
 Assumption 4: the future of London as a Port. If the port of London ceases to thrive, London will decay.
 Assumption 5: new powers for planning will be available, including powers for the control of land values.
Structure Plan
 A structure plan is a framework to guide the development or redevelopment of a particular area by defining the future development and land use pattern, areas of open space, and nature of infrastructure (including transportation links). And other key features for managing the effects of development
 The plan was prepared jointly by Leicestershire County Council, Leicester City Council and Rutland County Council.
 It provides a strategic planning framework for development and use of land consistent with national and regional policy.
 It covers important land use issues such as how many new houses are needed, creating major employment sites, new road proposal, providing for recreation, leisure and shopping, mining and the disposal of waste.
LAND USE PLANNING
 Different views of land
– Land as a property – a private commodity to be owned, used, bought, or sold for personal comfort and profit
– Land as a shared natural resource, much like air and water, to be conserved, and cared for with due regard for its effect on society as a whole and for the condition in which it will be passed on to future generations.
 Determinants of land value
– Accessibility
– Services and facilities
 Aland use plan as one component of a comprehensive plan, identifies areas that are to be devoted to various types, densities and intensities of use of categories.
 In so doing, the land use plan lays the groundwork for the details that are provided in many other aspects of the comprehensive plan.
 The nature of land use plans can vary with the type and size of the community its governmental structure and the state and local laws governing it.
 The recommended land use plan is evolved by matching the suitability of various areas with the demonstrated need and probable market.
 A land use plan usually consists of
– A text and
– A map or series of maps
THE TYPES OF INFORMATION USED AS INPUT TO A LAND USE PLAN
 Existing conditions
– Base maps
– Survey of land use
– Zoning ( legal obligations )
– Land ownership patterns
– Transportation
– Public utilities
– Public facilities and services
– Environmental conditions and constraints
– X- factor: land values, prestige levels
 Studies
– Population forecast
– Economic base study
 Plan
– Community goals, objectives and development or redevelopment policies
– Earlier land use plans
– Transportation plans
– Public utility plans
– Plans for public facilities and services
– Conservation plans
– Economic development plans and programs
– Regional and state plans
– Plans for other cities in the region
– Plans for individual neighborhoods, activity centers, corridors, or other sub- areas
– Public / private development and redevelopment project plans.
 The recommended land use plan is evolved by matching the suitability of various areas with the demonstrated need and probable market
 A land use plan usually consists of:
– A text and
– A map or series of maps
Implementation tools of land use planning
1. Direct measures:
– provision of public facilities: public capital investment
– land acquisition
2. indirect measure: public control over the use of privately owned land: land use controls
 developments regulations:
 subdivision regulations
 zoning
 design review
 higher- level control
 tax policies
 provision of public facilities: public capital investment;
public bodies carry out many plans through their direct actions
 public investment in facilities such as schools, municipal buildings, hospitals, and parks determines the use of publicly owned land
 public capital investment of privately owned land
 unlike regulations, which are subject to legislative change and legal challenge, public capital investments exert their effects over very long time periods.
 Land acquisition:
 Public bodies: sell or rent
 Private bodies
 Public- private partnership
 Development regulations:
– Since government cannot directly compel anyone to invest or build, the control takes the form of permitting some things and forbidding others through:
 Zoning
 Subdivision regulations
 Subdivision regulations:
– Governs the ways in which land may be platted( or divided into building lots, streets, and other parcels) and the kinds of roads, utilities, and other improvements that must be installed.
– Proposed subdivisions are submitted to the local government for review, coordination, and final approval.
– The ordinance will require at a minimum that the map show streets, lot lines, and easements( right of way) for utilities.
 Zoning ordinance: The best known form of land-use control: consist of a map( or series of maps) and a text: the map divides the community into a number of zones, and the text lists the types of uses permitted in the each zone and sets forth regulations governing the way in which these uses may occur.
Among the items generally specified by the ordinance are the following:
– Site layout requirements: include minimum lot area: frontage and depth, minimum setbacks, maximum percentage of site that may be covered by structure, placement of driveways or curb cuts, parking requirements, screening requirements, and limits on the size or placement of signs.
– Requirements for structure characteristics: include maximum height of structure, maximum number of stories, and maximum floor area of structure(FAR)
– Uses to which structures may be put
– Procedural matters specify how it is to be determined whether building plans are in conformity to the zoning ordinance.
RECENT DEVELOPMENT IN ZONING
The following zoning techniques are designed to make land- use controls more flexible and more negotiable: the basic idea is that increasing flexibility allows parties of land use negotiations to bargain:
– Bonus (incentive) zoning
– Inclusionary zoning
– Cluster zoning
– Performance zoning
– Development agreements
– Planned unit development
– Transfer of development rights
– Exactions
Alternatives zoning techniques
Bonus or incentive zoning : permit additional height or stories above that if the developer will provide certain amenities at ground level.
Inclusionary zoning: to allow increased residential densities if developers will include some units for low- and moderate- income tenant. It is similar to incentive zoning however inclusion of low- and moderate- income units is mandatory in inclusionary zoning.
Cluster zoning: permit the building of houses on smaller lots, provided the space thus saved is used for community purposes.
Performance zoning: Stipulate what may or may not be done in terms of end results instead of giving detailed regulations on the exact form of development.
Planned unit development (PUD) : The entire area is zoned in a conventional manner, however, a property owner with a certain size has the option of applying to develop his or her holdings as a PUD:
– In this case the property is subject to a different set of controls:
 The density permitted may be different
 The uses permitted may be different
Transfer of development rights (TDR) : to concentrate development in areas where it is not, a sending and receiving area are designated: property owners in the sending areas who do not develop their properties to the full extend permitted by the law may sell their unused rights to property owners in receiving areas.
Development agreement: the municipality and the developer signs a contract to bypass the existing zoning, though the new proposal must be in conformity with the comprehensive plan.
 The developer benefits by being permitted to do things not permitted under the existing zoning and gets the security of knowing that zoning and other controls will not change during the development process.
 The municipality benefits by being able to require things of the developer as a condition for signing the contract.
Exactions : a variety of charges to pay the cost that the development is presumed to impose on the community:
 For permission to develop
 For rezoning or zoning variance
 For development within the existing zoning law