Give and take on unified code

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS MERIT DISCUSSION

FUNKY OR JUNKY. It’s a fine line in Memphis, and one that a wellcrafted Unified Development Code can help define.

Unfortunately, the good-faith effort of Memphis and Shelby County planning director Josh Whitehead to get the details of the 17-month- old unified code just right has hit some speed bumps.

Neighborhood groups and some architects have complained publicly that Whitehead’s proposed adjustments to the code lean too far in the direction of developers. As a result, the Memphis City Council last week delayed a final vote on the amendments until July 17 to allow more public meetings on the issue.

That worry about the code becoming a tool for unbridled, unplanned growth is understandable from a historical perspective in Greater Memphis.

Too many blah subdivisions and ugly runs of development already spill across the urban landscape here, evidence of an often shortsighted focus on growth at the expense of visual appeal and sustainability.

But critics of the amendments need to be careful and realistic. The unified code, even with the proposed revisions, isn’t a big cupcake for developers.

To the contrary, the UDC is the first real effort to define a path to help Greater Memphis get a handle on expensive urban sprawl while giving developers a clear road map for how they can reinvest in the urban core.

The challenge in Memphis is clear. We have a funky, jumbled urban landscape just about everywhere — tattoo parlors in the same block as churches, nail salons and payday lenders next to thriving neighborhoods. No magic wand will change that cityscape overnight to something that’s all trimmed and proper.

But the city can and should take steps to make this place more livable, less trashy and better thought out. That’s what the new Unified Development Code does.

Evidence abounds that even modest steps toward improving the Memphis urban landscape pay big dividends — the bike lanes in Midtown, requirements for new commercial buildings to have some windows, rules that allow small businesses to move into residential neighborhoods on a case -by-base basis.

To change the direction of growth here, everyone has to come to the table. And that means the planning director has to walk a fine line. He must find ways to keep all parties — developers, urban planners, architects, neighborhood groups — engaged in give and take as part of the movement toward better planning.

Recently, developers have come forward with suggestions for how they believe the new code can be improved. Some of their ideas are logical. For example, developers probably are right to say they need more flexibility when it comes to being able to get a hearing and ask for exceptions to various zoning requirements through a board of adjustment.

More problematic is their request that some of the special zoning designations for parts of Greater Memphis be eliminated. These special districts, including Midtown, the University of Memphis district and the Medical District, must be carefully planned. Further discussion of that issue is needed.

But the big picture here is that Memphis has taken an important step for its future by trying to better plan for growth and development. That positive direction must not bog down because the process, while inclusive and good, isn’t perfect to anyone. All parties should keep in mind that the goal is to ensure better planning for future development.