Laserfiche WebLink
13-26 THE LAW OF ZONING AND PLANNING § 13.04 <br /> • <br /> tern may be weighted to encourage one or more of the above factors. <br /> Accrual of a specified number of points would then be required to <br /> approve rezoning and/or development approval. <br /> [4] Subdivision Controls <br /> Subdivision controls ensure that on-site improvement"and link- <br /> age to off-site facilities and services's are adequate to meet growth <br /> demands created by approved buildout. By linking density of sub- <br /> divisions to zoning16 and to the provision of facilities and services, <br /> local government can assure that infrastructure is either provided at <br /> demand levels or that excess capacity of existing facilities is utilized. <br /> Approvals for higher density development may be conditioned on <br /> the provision of adequate facilities and services to the subdivision. <br /> The requirement of developer-provided facilities can be linked to <br /> density provisions in the zoning ordinance or comprehensive plan.l7 <br /> For example, attainment of higher densities within the allowable <br /> range can be made dependent upon the developer demonstrating <br /> that facilities and services are available to the subdivision, and are <br /> within the permissible density limits of the zoning code. By linking <br /> subdivision approvals to the capital facilities .ro• am, develo.ment <br /> can be timed to coincide with the •rovision of ade.uate facilities. <br /> S <br /> The Capital Improvem • <br /> ents Program (CI?) can provide guidance as <br /> to ow muc ca.aci must be available for ade.uatel servicin• <br /> future development - <br /> • <br /> [5] Planned Unit Developments <br /> Planned unit development'8(PUD)is a planning and zoning tech- <br /> 14 See §§ 62.01[3],62.04,65.01[1], 65.02[3][a],infra. <br /> 15 See §§ 65.02[3][b), [c],infra. <br /> 16 See §§ 64.02.,65.02[1][a],infra. <br /> 27 See §§ 65.02[1][al. [b),infra. <br /> 18 See §§ 63.01 to.04,infra. <br /> • <br /> See,e.g., <br /> Colorado:Dillon v.City of Boulder, 183 Colo. 117,515 P.2d 627(1973);Moore v. <br /> City of Boulder,29 Colo. App.248, 251, 484 P.2d 134, 135 (1971). <br /> Illinois:Haws v. Village of Hinsdale,68 III. App.3d 226,386 N.E.2d 122(1979); <br /> Continental Homes of Chicago,Inc.v.County of Lake,37111.App.3d 727,346 N.E.2d <br /> 226, 227 (1976); Cable v. Village of Hinsdale, 87 Ill. App. 2d 123 230 N.E2d 706 <br /> • ' . ' • (1967). <br /> � 1 1 <br />