Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Attica officials move to modernize zoning with semi-custom UDO; mapping package estimated at $50,000–$60,000
Summary
HWC consultants told Attica’s APC and RDC that a semi-custom unified development ordinance (UDO) could speed an update to the town’s zoning code and deliver editable ordinance files plus GIS shapefiles; electronic mapping was estimated at $50,000–$60,000 depending on existing data.
Attica officials heard a presentation on modernizing the town’s zoning code and mapping on Wednesday, as consultants from HWC outlined a semi-custom unified development ordinance (UDO) and options to provide parcel-level electronic zoning.
Brian Stump, a planner and developer with HWC, told the joint Advisory Plan Commission (APC) and Redevelopment Commission (RDC) that the firm’s semi-custom approach produces a new zoning ordinance and map more quickly and at lower cost than a full custom rewrite. "We give you the Word file so you can change it in the future," Stump said, adding that HWC also supplies a searchable PDF and GIS shapefiles so the map can be layered on the county’s Beacon system.
The proposal would combine zoning and subdivision controls into one UDO, reorganize districts and uses into tables, and add property-maintenance standards and enforcement tools. Stump said those maintenance tools were workable because state law changes in the last seven or eight years expanded local options for citations and fines.
Why it matters: Attica’s zoning map and ordinance have not been comprehensively updated in years, participants said, leaving a patchwork of spot zoning and nonconforming uses that complicate permitting and financing for property owners.
Cost and timeline: Stump gave a top-line comparison: a full custom UDO can run roughly $100,000–$125,000 and take about a year; the electronic mapping and shapefile package was estimated at $50,000–$60,000 depending on how much base mapping already exists. "If you have the mapping files, it’s toward the lower end; if you have nothing, plan on the higher number," he said.
Funding and deliverables: Participants discussed potential funding sources, including RDC funds and food-and-beverage economic-development revenues. Stump emphasized that HWC’s deliverables include editable Word documents, a searchable PDF of the ordinance for public posting, shapefiles for Beacon, and short orientation videos to help staff and residents navigate the new code.
Local concerns and scope: Council members pressed whether the UDO would "clean up" historic anomalies. Stump said the UDO is primarily forward-looking—redefining districts to reflect desired future uses—while built-in maintenance and enforcement provisions and an updated electronic map would address many present issues. He noted that legally established nonconforming ("grandfathered") uses generally remain in place and that wholesale map revisions do not legally require notifying every affected parcel owner.
Next steps: HWC recommended forming a steering committee, circulating a survey to gather local priorities, and scheduling two focused workshops (districts/uses and improvements/enforcement) before drafting a code. Attendees asked HWC to prepare a contract and scope; members said they expect to review pricing and funding at the next meeting.
