HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Environmentally Sensitive Lands Task Force - 3/11/2010 \ R
fit P.
ENVIRONMENTALLY
(.
�,ft;t;:iA�: Draft Agenda
Environmentally Sensitive Lands (ESL)
Public Advisory Committee (PAC)
Thursday, March 11, 2010
4 p.m.
Hopi Conference Room
Development Services Building
11000 N. La Canada Dr.
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of 2-25-10 Meeting Summary
3. Update and Timeline Regarding Technical Advisory Committee Map Review
4. Section D. Design Requirements
• Continued Discussion from the March 4 Meeting
a. Mixed Use District As Incentive
b. Multi-Family Incentive Standards
c. Commercial Development and Incentives
• Cluster Development
• Other
5. Section G. Hillside Regulations
• Existing Oro Valley Zoning Code
• Proposed Section G. Hillside Regulations
6. Schedule
• Are weekly meetings as productive as bi-weekly?
• March: Viewsheds
• April: ESL Map Review and Open Space Maintenance.
• April/May: Cultural Resource
7. Adjourn
Posted:
The Town of Oro Valley complies with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If
any person with a disability needs any type of accommodation, please notify the
Clerk's office at 229-4700.
"Notice of Possible Quorum of the Oro Valley Town Council: In accordance
with Arizona Open Meeting Law A.R.S. X38-431 et seq, a majority of the Town
Council may attend the above referenced meeting as a member of the audience
only."
DRAFT
MEETING SUMMARY
Town of Oro Valley
ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LANDS (ESL)
PUBLIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING # 14
March 11, 2010
4-6p
HOPI CONFERENCE ROOM
11000 N. LA CANADA DR.
PAC Members Present:
Bill Adler
Susan Simms
Philip Kline
Doug McKee
Steve Solomon
Steve Ta i l l i e
Don Chatfield
Oro Valley ESL Team Members Present:
Karen Berchtold
Bayer Vella
David Williams
1. Call to Order
Meeting called to order at 4:05 pm.
2. Approval of PAC Meeting Summary of February 25, 2010
The February 25 meeting summary was accepted.
3. Update and Timeline Regarding Technical Advisory Committee Map Review
Bayer Vella provided an update on the Technical Advisory Committee progress. The group
reviewed the revised Multiple Use Management Area criteria and map, but more revisions
are needed so they will be convening again shortly.
4. Section D. Design Requirements
The group reviewed the memo on incentives provided by David Williams.
Bill Adler noted he does not see the utility in the requirement for additional open space,
beyond ESL requirements. Bayer Vella noted that there is utility since more ESL could be
preserved.
F:\SR OFFICE SPEC\Projects for COMMUNICATIONS\ESL\ESL PAC\ESL PAC 19 3-11-10 draft meeting summary.doc 1
The group discussed the incentive of reduced processing time, and agreed that this could be
advantageous but is difficult to implement. One option is to allow administrative approval
instead of board approval. The group agreed that it is less a matter of reducing time than
process. For instance, if a submitted development plan is consistent with an approved
tentative development plan, administrative approval could be allowed.
Bill added that it needs to be emphasized that standards would not be compromised.
The group discussed the concept of low density, "wildlife permeable" development. David
Williams noted that staff defines this at about one unit per acre, as long as wildlife friendly
features are incorporated. Don Chatfield commented that this is his least favorite option: it
may not be supported by science and homeowners can easily eliminate permeability by
adding fences.
Bayer referred the group to the "Standards subject to modification" section on page 3. Bill
reminded the group he supports deleting recreational requirements. The group finds the
wording of a. and b. acceptable. The group discussed the parking provision and alternative
compliance process. All agreed parking can be important factor in designing incentives. Don
Chatfield said Sonoran Institute has been working with communities to reduce parking
standards. The goal is to reduce parking area to promote conservation.
The group discussed the issue of building height. Bill noted that if more natural open space
is preserved, seems clear that increased building height should be allowed. The group
agreed this is appropriate for townhouse and multifamily; two-story is clearly acceptable, and
more discussion on the topic is needed.
The group discussed recreation area and types of active recreation facilities that should be
allowed in natural open space areas. The existing draft allows for golf facilities in open space
areas. Most agreed that ball fields present impact comparable to golf courses.
Steve Solomon suggested Native Plant Preservation requirements might be considered for
exemption.
Bayer said staff will meet with Pima County staff to understand how incentives function
under their ordinance.
The group discussed Randall Arendt's work in defining cluster concepts.
Doug observed that in Arendt's analysis, he compares traditional and cluster lots; they are
not comparable; the lots in traditional subdivisions included more amenities.
Bayer said staff is proposing to conduct property value comparisons: is be helpful? Steve
thought that the factors are too variable — a well-designed cluster will retain value, others
perhaps not.
Don noted that some of the best cluster designs incorporate small lots, and cited the Milagro
project, Goret Road, Tucson. The properties have stunning views but are moderately priced.
Bayer will develop a tour of cluster sites.
F:\SR OFFICE SPEC\Projects for COMMUNICATIONS\ESL\ESL PAC\ESL PAC 19 3-11-10 draft meeting summary.doc 2
a ► •
5. Section G. Hillside Regulations
Review of this section is postponed.
6. Schedule
The group will meet next Thursday. The issue of meeting schedule will be discussed at that
meeting.
7. Adjourn
Meeting adjourned at 6 pm.
Prepared by:
Karen Berchtold
Acting Principal Planner
F:\SR OFFICE SPEC\Projects for COMMUNICATIONS\ESL\ESL PAC\ESL PAC 19 3-11-10 draft meeting summary.doc 3
r
Section 24.2 Hillside Development Zone
A. Introduction
This ordinance seeks to implement the adopted planning goals of this community with regard to
public safety, conservation of resources, community design and open space and recreation.
Oro Valley is surrounded by mountains. These mountainous areas exhibit steep slopes which
may contain unstable rock and soils. Development on potentially unstable soils or rock can be
hazardous to life and property. Development in these areas should utilize construction methods
which ensure slope stabilization and minimize soil erosion.
Further, Oro Valley's rolling desert terrain, containing peaks, ridges and drainageways, is a
valuable scenic resource which should be preserved. Significant peaks and ridges should be
protected in order to preserve the Town's unique visual setting, promote its economic well-being,
and encourage tourism. Regulating the intensity of development according to the natural
characteristics of hillside terrain, such as steepness of slope, significant vegetation and
landforms and soil stability and existing drainage patterns, will allow for sensible development in
hillside areas while minimizing the physical and visual impact of such development.
B. Purpose
This zone provides for the reasonable use of hillside areas and related lands while protecting the
public health, safety, and general welfare by:
1. Determining whether certain types of soil conditions exist (such as loose or easily eroded soils,
or rocky soils), and utilizing appropriate engineering technology to result in stable slopes during
and subsequent to development.
2. Reduction of water runoff and changes in the natural drainage patterns, soil erosion, and rock
slides by minimizing grading and requiring revegetation.
3. Permitting intensity of development compatible with the natural characteristics of hillside terrain,
such as steepness of slope, significant landforms, soil suitability, and existing drainage patterns.
4. Preservation of the scenic quality of the desert and mountain environment through the retention
of significant peaks and ridges in their natural state.
5. Reduction of the physical impact of hillside development by encouraging innovative site and
architectural design, minimizing grading and requiring restoration of graded areas.
6. Provision of safe and convenient vehicular access by encouraging development in the less
steeply sloped terrain.
7. Promoting cost-efficient public services by encouraging development in the less steeply sloped
terrain, thereby minimizing service extensions and utility costs, and maximizing access for all
necessary life safety services.
P
C. Applicability
The provisions of the Hillside Development Zone (HDZ) apply to development in the areas listed
below:
1. Sloped Areas
a. Any parcel with an average cross slope of 15 percent or containing slopes of 25
percent or greater. Methods of analyzing slope are given in Section 24.2.K.
b. Any parcel containing sloped areas of 25 percent or greater where the sloped area is
greater than 50 feet in any horizontal direction or greater than seven and one-half(7
1/2)feet vertically.
2. Previously Approved Subdivisions
Any recorded subdivision plat approved in compliance with the Pima County Hillside
Development Zone regulations may be developed in compliance with the conditions and
stipulations as approved. If the plat is resubdivided after the effective date of this
ordinance, September 17, 1993, it must comply with all provisions of the Oro Valley HDZ
currently in effect.
3. Exceptions
a. The HDZ regulations shall apply to all property described in Section 242.0 except
where the development standards prevent the reasonable utilization of property as
determined by the Board of Adjustment through the approval of a variance. All HDZ
applicability appeals shall be heard by the Board of Adjustment in conformance with
the variance procedures established in Section 21.6.
b. The HDZ regulations do not apply to the paving of an existing driveway located on
property with HDZ applicability.
c. Lots within existing, approved subdivisions on the effective date of this ordinance,
and subdivision plats which have been submitted prior to the effective date of this
ordinance shall not be subject to the provisions of this ordinance.
D. Permitted Uses
Any use permitted by the underlying zone is allowed.
E. Review Required
All development will require subdivision plat or development plan approval, in accordance with
the Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised, prior to the granting of a permit for grubbing, grading,
excavation, or construction.
F. Development Criteria
The following development criteria apply to all parcels that are affected by this zone. Any parcel
created must meet slope/size requirements of Table 24-1. All development is subject to the Oro
Valley Grading Ordinance.
1. Single-Family Residential Development
a. This paragraph applies to an existing parcel where no land division has occurred, nor
is land division proposed, since the adoption of this ordinance. The average cross
i
slope (ACS) is calculated for the entire parcel. If the ACS is 15 percent or greater,
Columns A and D of Table 24-1 apply.
b. This paragraph applies to any parcel of property or lot where land division is
proposed or has occurred since the adoption of this ordinance. The average cross
slope is calculated for the parcel prior to land division. If the ACS is 15 percent or
greater, columns A and C of Table 24-1 apply. Natural open space may be
designated on the parcel in accordance with Section 24.2.G, to reduce the ACS
percentage. Such natural open space will be excluded from the ACS calculation, but
will be included in the land area for the parcel.
i. If a subdivision plat is required, all 25 percent or greater slopes (as defined in
24.2.C.1.b)within the proposed lots, except for those within natural open space
areas, are delineated. These sloped areas then determine the design of the
development according to the following criteria.
a) Where the areas of 25 percent or greater slope are located outside the
buildable area, the minimum lot size requirements of the underlying zone
apply. The buildable area may be redefined by the applicant to exclude
areas of steeper slope in order to comply with this requirement. Grading
may occur only within the buildable area and access to the buildable area.
Grading for roadway or driveway access shall not cross a 25 percent or
greater sloped area unless no alternative routes exist. Driveway clearing
and grading may be no wider than 30 feet.
b) Where the buildable area contains areas of 25 percent or greater slope,
the minimum size required for that proposed lot is 43,560 square feet
unless a greater size is required by the underlying zone. The amount of
grading permitted is the amount indicated in Column D of Table 24-1,
based on the area of the lot, Column B.
ii. If a subdivision plat is not required, the land area of each parcel created must
comply with Columns A, B and D of Table 24-1.
2. Multi-Family Residential Development
a. All grading is subject to the provisions of the Oro Valley Grading Ordinance.
b. The ACS is calculated for the entire parcel. If the ACS is 15 percent or greater,
columns A, B, C, and D of Table 24-1 apply.
c. Natural open space may be designated on the parcel, in accordance with Section
24.2.G to reduce the ACS percentage. Such natural open space will be excluded
from the ACS calculation, but will be included for density calculation. If the ACS of the
remaining portion of the parcel, after natural open space designation is:
i. Less than 15 percent and contains no areas of 25 percent or greater slope,
100 percent of that portion may be graded.
ii. Less than 15 percent, but contains areas of 25 percent or greater slopes, no
more than 80 percent of that remaining portion may be graded.
iii. Fifteen percent or greater, columns B, C, and D of Table 24-1 apply, based on
the entire area of the parcel.
3. Non-Residential Development
a. All grading is subject to the provisions of the Oro Valley Grading Ordinance.
f
b. The ACS is calculated for the entire parcel. If the ACS is 15 percent or greater,
columns A, B, and D of Table 24-1 apply.
c. Natural open space may be designated on the parcel, in accordance with Section
24.2.G, to reduce the ACS percentage. If the ACS of the remaining portion of the
parcel is:
i. Less than 15 percent and contains no areas of 25 percent or greater slope,
100 percent of that portion may be graded.
ii. Less than 15 percent, but contains areas of 25 percent or greater slope, no
more than 80 percent of that remaining portion may be graded.
iii. Fifteen percent or greater, Columns B and D of Table 24-1 apply, based on
the entire area of the parcel.
4. Mixed Development
When a mix of development is proposed, i.e., a combination of residential, commercial, office, or
industrial land uses, each use must meet all criteria for that development, as required by this Section.
TABLE 24-1: SLOPE DENSITY REQUIREMENTS
A B C D
Minimum Area* Density* Maximum Grading
Average Cross Slope (Acres/Dwelling or (Dwellings/Acre) (Percentage)
Structure)
Less Than 15 as Permitted by Underlying Zoning
15.0-15.9 1.00 1.00 40.0
16.0-16.9 1.00 1.00 40.0
17.0-17.9 1.25 .80 32.0
18.0-18.9 1.37 .73 29.2
19.0-19.9 1.50 .67 21.3
20.0-20.9 2.00 .50 20.0
21.0-21.9 2.25 .44 17.7
22.0-22.9 2.50 .40 16.0
23.0-23.9 3.50 .29 13.3
24.0-24.9 4.50 .22 11.9
25.0-25.9 6.00 .17 9.3
26.0-26.9 7.00 .14 9.3
27.0-27.9 8.60 .12 9.3
28.0-28.9 10.40 .09 9.3
29.0-29.9 12.80 .08 9.3
30.0-30.9 16.00 .06 8.8
31.0-31.9 23.50 .04 6.7
32.0-32.9 31.00 .03 6.7
33.0 and Greater 36.00 .027 4.0
*Or as permitted by underlying zoning,whichever density is less.
G. Natural Open Space
Natural open space (see Chapter 31 for definition) may be designated on any parcel, subject to
the following criteria:
1. Development other than hiking trails will not be permitted within the legally described boundaries
of natural open space in the Hillside Development Zone. Access roads, other than driveways, are
not permitted within natural open space.
2. Natural open space will be delineated in a surveyable manner on the preliminary and final plats
of a subdivision, or on the development plan, and shall be designated by legal description on a
document recorded with the Pima County Recorder.
3. Natural open space may be designated as a deed restricted portion of a privately owned lot, or
as a separate land parcel. This parcel may be under the ownership of a homeowner's
association, or deeded to any organization willing to accept responsibility for the perpetual
preservation of the natural open space, subject to approval and acceptance by the Town of Oro
Valley.
4. To protect natural open space, covenants which run with the land will be provided in favor of the
Town of Oro Valley and all owners with record interest in the natural area.
5. If natural open space is designated on parcels four (4) acres or more, at least one (1) such
natural open space area shall be a minimum of one-half(1/2)acres in size.
H. Hillside Site Improvement Standard
1. Building Height
a. As permitted by the underlying zone. If the building also falls within the boundaries of
other overlay zones, the more restrictive of the requirements applies. In order to
eliminate large amounts of cut and fill, segments of buildings may be designed at
varying elevations according to the slope of the land. For parcels with HDZ
applicability per Section 24.2, building height shall be measured, using a building
height contour line(as defined in Chapter 31, Building Height Contour Line).
b. A variance to maximum building height may be approved by the Board of Adjustment.
Additionally, the Development Review Board shall review any structure over 18 feet
in the HDZ and may approve said structure if such approval provides a better method
of building to the land and is no more detrimental to adjacent properties than strict
adherence to the development standards of the underlying district would allow. Such
variance, as granted by the Board of Adjustment, shall be in compliance with the
provisions of Section 21.6 of the Oro Valley Zoning Code Revised. Development
Review Board review and approval shall be required prior to the issuance of any
grading or building permits in accordance with Section 22.5.
2. Site Improvement Standard
All proposed site work (see Site definition in Chapter 31), including grading, shall comply
with the Development Standards contained in the Grading Ordinance.
3. Color
All exposed exterior walls and roofs of structures, retaining walls and accessory structures
shall utilize the predominant natural colors found on the parcel. Satellite dishes shall be
earth tone or black. White is not permitted. Color approval by the Planning and Zoning
Administrator shall be required for all HDZ development. Appeals of the Planning and
Zoning Administrator's decision may be filed by the applicant and will be heard by the
Development Review Board within 35 days from the date of appeal. The decision of the
Development Review Board shall be final.
I. Maintenance and Protection
The Planning and Zoning Administrator may, prior to recordation of a subdivision plat or issuance
of building permits, require measures, such as covenants, assurances, or homeowner's
associations, as are necessary to ensure the long term maintenance of slope control measures.
. ). 3
•
J. Enforcement
1. The developer and/or property owner shall be responsible for the following:
a. Submitting average natural cross slope and sloped area analyses, certified by a
qualified registrant, for review and verification by the Town Engineer or his/her
designee.
b. Surveying, staking, and inspection of the property by a qualified registrant to
determine compliance with the provisions of this Section.
c. On-site enforcement by certifying to the Town Engineer that the development
complies with Section 242 Hillside Development Zone during the period of
development.
2. If violation of any provision of the Hillside Development Zone occurs, the property owner shall be
responsible for bringing the violation into compliance with the requirements of this zone. This
may require restoration of the site as closely as possible to its original undisturbed condition,
topography, and vegetation, in order to remove the violation.
K. Slope Analysis Standard
1. Average Cross Slope Analysis
The Average Cross Slope (ACS) of a site shall be determined by a qualified registrant in
the following manner:
a. The site is depicted on a topographic map of the existing terrain, prior to any grading,
grubbing, clearing, excavation, or modification, utilizing a scale no smaller than one
(1) inch equals 100 feet,with the following contour intervals:
i. For sites less than five(5)acres, a contour interval of two(2)feet;
ii. For sites five (5) acres and greater, a contour interval of two (2) feet or five (5)
feet.
b. The length of each contour line contained within the site boundaries on the map is
measured by means of a mechanical device such as a map wheel or digitizer. This
actual length is converted to scale length in feet. For example, at a scale of one (1)
inch equals 40 feet(1" =40'), a contour line with an actual map length of six and one-
half(6 3/) inches represents a line 260 feet long (6.5 x 40=260).
c. The sum of the lengths (L) of all contour lines is multiplied by the contour interval (I)
in feet.
d. The result is multiplied by the factor .0023, which converts the square footage of the
scale map to acres.
e. This result is then divided by the area (A)of the site in acres.
f. This process is mathematically represented by the formula
ACS= (I) (L) (.0023)
(A)
g. The answer is the percentage of the ACS for the site.
2. Sloped Area Analysis
In addition to ACS requirements, any parcel containing areas with a slope of 25 percent or
more shall have HDZ applicability as stated in Section 24.2.C. A sloped area analysis,
which must be prepared by a qualified registrant, shall identify individual slopes for design
and review purposes. A detailed methodology for performing sloped area analysis is
available from the Planning and Zoning Department.
i;g01
t
ENVIRONMENTALLY
SENSITIVE LANDS
Environmentally Sensitive Lands (ESL)
Memorandum
To: Oro Valley ESL Public Advisory Committee
From: David Williams, ESL Manager(dwilliams@willdan.com;520-360-5790)
Date: August 5, 2009
Re: Practical Analysis of Incentives and Tools for the ESLO
As a follow up to a specific PAC inquiry, and as support for drafting the ESL Ordinance,
an assessment of various incentives and planning tools used in site design for
development has been initiated and are summarized in this draft memo. Additional input
is still being pursued.
Scottsdale Experience
The Scottsdale ESLO includes four distinct tools or mechanisms to encourage alternative
site design; three of them are called `Sensitive Design Options'. According to City of
Scottsdale staff, the use of these options can be dictated by individual project timing; i.e.
where the project is in the review process. Density transfers and Open Space incentives
can only be taken advantage of in the early design stages. At platting or construction
stages, amended development standards are the most often used incentives/option.
1. Density Transfer: This option allows the developer to move construction away
from sensitive areas on the site to more easily developed areas. This is commonly
utilized as opposed to off-site transfers, which have not been used. Amended
development standards are typically employed to facilitate the transfer across the
site. This is a key concept for the Scottsdale ESLO. Amended development
standards are the most popular incentive in the ordinance.
2. Cluster Option: Cluster design options are essentially not used under
Scottsdale's ESLO. As in Tucson, common-area based cluster design has not had
a demand.
3. Amended Development Standards: This is the most popular option in
Scottsdale. Amended standards can provide the flexibility needed to accomplish
private development objectives. Lot size reduction is the most common amended
standard. Could include building height, setbacks and other standards. Changes
to cut and fill limits and building height(limited to 24' in ESL areas) have
Draft 1 8/5/09
•
141P,
'007:t,J...:?.•r.� 4 ENVIRONMENTALLY
SFbSITIVb LAP DS
frequently been sought. Visual impacts are the key determinant in review and
approval of building height cases.
4. Open Space Incentive: If additional natural open space (NAOS in Scottsdale
terms) is set aside in accordance with several provisions, a density bonus of 20%
(possibly 25%) can be obtained. The additional units are calculated based on the
area of the additional open space. This has been used on several projects.
Developer/Builder Input
Several local developers and builders-members of the Tucson development
community- were contacted regarding potential ESLO tools and incentives. Below is
a summary of the information gathered to date. These suggestions, along with any
PAC input will be used in drafting Oro Valley ESLO incentives.
1. Maintenance of density. This may be the most important concern,that
ESLO compliance does not cause a loss in density of development.
2. Relaxation of 15% slope grading requirements. These slopes are generally
viewed as not very sensitive with regard to erosion and instability, allowing
their safe use would be an incentive.
3. Amendment of development standards including reduced lot sizes, setbacks
and increased height(Most expressed a view that increased height would not
be supported in OV. Scottsdale employs this on very low density custom lots
predicated on impacts to surrounding properties' views.) Other development
standards could be included such as parking.
4. Reduced processing time. Time is expensive (due to interest costs for
example) in the development industry and this consideration is important.
Certainty in processing time is also important. A developer may be willing to
employ ESLO protections, if it ensures certainty and/or reduction in
processing time. If ESLO carries additional processing time, it is a strong
disincentive.
5. Trade-offs for voluntary (non-required) protection in the form of relaxation
of other provisions such as vegetation salvage or revegetation.
6. Density Transfer(Donor and Recipient parcels). Seems to be viewed as
overly complex and having limited utility for only larger land holders.
Political difficulties with recipient areas were noted. Not much experience
with this in Tucson.
7. Density Bonus. This is a powerful incentive from the development
community perspective, but the uncertainty of additional processes (rezoning)
and time is a concern.
Draft 2 8/5/09
I
* •
,;"cop
PAvi*,
V§44,4*,/,
1
ENVIRONMENTALLY
SFNSITtVE 1.ANDS
8. Very low density is compatible with certain sensitive resources.
Sometimes, low intensity development can be compatible in sensitive habitat,
slope or geologic areas.
9. Timing of fee payment. Again related to the expense of financing, if impact
fees or other Town development fees can paid later, perhaps at the time of
closing, a significant incentive would be created.
Draft 3 8/5/09
r •
DRAFT 3/1/10
Section D Table of Contents
1. Use Restrictions
2. Design Incentives
3. Design Standards
D. Use and Development Standards
1. ESOS Use Restrictions
A. Applicability
Areas reserved as ESOS upon completion of a rezoning are subject to
use restrictions and standards. Each must be recorded when land is
reserved by ESOS zoning, easement, and/or deed restriction.
B. Permitted Uses
1 Natural Open Space,
2 Trails,
3 Identification, use restriction, and/or interpretive signage,
4 Wildlife friendly protective fencing or walls subject to Planning and
Zoning Administrator review and approval,
5 Cultural Resource Exhibition,
6 Golf Courses within the Multiple Use Management Category
meeting the criteria listed below and subject to Town Council
approval:
i. Natural drainage patterns are maintained, and
ii. Golf course best environmental management practices
for irrigation, fertilizer use and pest control are
required.
C. Prohibited Uses
1. Structures
2. Waste Disposal
3. Motorized vehicle access
4. Recreational activities not contained within the confines of a
designated trail.
5. Off leash domestic animals
6. Establishment of non-native species
7. Removal of native vegetation unless approved for flood control
purposes by the Planning and Zoning Administrator.
Draft 3.1.1 O 1 ENVIRONMENTALLY
SPkiITtVF t.AVbS
D. Use Standards
1. Trails
Trails and associated amenities such as benches must conform to
standards established by the Oro Valley Parks and Recreation
Department.
2. Signs
a. Permanent signs shall be posted in ESOS areas indicating
the use restrictions contained in this Section.
b. Signs must conform to standards established by the Oro
Valley Parks and Recreation Department.
2. Development Balance and Incentives
A. Purpose
Achieving or exceeding base zoning densities and implementation of
conservation objectives are both supported. This section includes more
flexibility for site planning, lot sizes and dwelling types than permitted
under conventional, base zoning districts. Limited density increases may
be approved if additional open space is provided beyond required
minimums.
B. Applicability
The following design options may be applied to property or portions of
property reserved as ESL.
...........................................................
1. When ESOS is applied to 25% or more of a project site, the
remaining areas are eligible to utilize the design options included
in this Section.
2. When ESL open space is applied to 66% or more of a project site,
the remaining areas are eligible to utilize the design options
included in this Section, and additional lot size reductions as
. .. ..... ............
.................................................
provided in Section D 2.D.3.d.
C. Flexible Development Standards
1. Process. Development standards may be modified to allow
flexibility by Town Council as a part of the rezoning process.
2. Review Criteria. The determination to permit a modification is
subject to the following findings:
Draft 3.1.10 2 ENVIRONMENTALLY
(.EN%1TIVG,ANDS
a. Open space conservation is assured and there is a
measurable reduction in development area as a direct
result of the modification.
b. Enables development to the base zoning density, at a
minimum, for the entire site.
c. Compatibility with adjacent land uses is achieved through
architectural design, transition of density, buffers, and
placement of structures and improvements to reduce view
impacts.
d. Statutes, development agreements, appeal processes, or
other provisions of this code are not violated.
3. Standards Subject to Modification
a. Building Setback and Landscape Bufferyard. Minimum
required distances may be reduced up to 20 percent
subject to the following limitations:
i. Side yards shall not be less than five feet, unless
a zero lot line design is utilized,
ii. Setback reductions shall not result in on-lot
driveway lengths that are less than 20 feet.
b. Minimum Lot Size. Minimum lot sizes in all R1, R-4, R-S
and SDH-6 districts may be modified subject to Cluster
Design requirements in Section D.
c. Off-Street Parking. Off-street parking requirements may
be modified in accordance with Section 27.7.C.
d. Building Height. Building heights may be increased by no
more than 12 feet and one additional story. .
D. Cluster Design
1. Purpose
Cluster design concentrates residential development on a portion
of the available land in order to maximize protected open space,
improve the efficiency of infrastructure systems and offset the
reduction in development yield. Cluster options include potential
increases to development density.
2. General Requirements
a. Development shall be arranged in a manner to preserve
identified resources.
(Insert graphic)
Draft 3.1.10 3 ENV€RONMELA WS
b. The area to be developed must be consolidated to a
greater extent than permitted in Section 23.4 and provide a
concomitant increase in ESOS.
Insert Graphic: Traditional layout vs Cluster
c. The length of residential streets, driveways and utility lines
shall be reduced in comparison to a design that complies
with zoning standards identified in Section 23.4. The
length of collector streets shall not be considered in
assessing overall roadway reductions. (add graphic).
(Insert graphic)
d. Compatibility with adjacent land uses through architectural
design, transition of density, buffers, and placement of
structures and improvements must be achieved as follows:
i. Architectural Design. Structures shall include
architectural design features and a color palette
that is compatible with an adjacent subdivision(s).
Design compatibility is subject to Development
Review Board review and approval.
ii. Transition of Density. In perimeter areas
adjacent to residential development, a density
transition shall be provided utilizing base zoning
lot sizes. Reduced lot sizes shall not be placed
within 150 feet of adjacent residential uses or
ESOS areas.
(Insert graphic)
iii. Placement of Structures—cluster development
lots immediately abutting a residential subdivision
zoned R1-144, R1-43, or R1-36 shall meet base
zoning minimum lot size requirements.
(Insert graphic)
e. Cluster designs may employ any dwelling unit type
permitted by OVZCR, except site-delivered housing as
defined in Chapter 31. Building heights must comply with
base zoning, or building heights modified by an ESL
rezoning approval.
Draft 3.1.10 4 ZNTTZ TA`LY
r�stx}�+� ns
f. The sum total of square feet by which the area of each lot
in the subdivision is reduced shall not exceed the total
square footage of the preserved area.
(Insert graphic)
g. Any proposed increase in cluster density must be specified
on the tentative development plan required for rezoning.
3. Compact Development
a. Compact development without an increase in density may
occur by reducing minimum lot sizes while retaining the
overall base zoning density as defined in Chapter 31.
Definition: Base Zoning Density: An expression of
residential land use density calculated by dividing the area
of the site or parcel, before any required dedications for
right-of-way or drainage, or designations for open space or
other OVZCR requirements, by the base zoning minimum
lot size. (See formula below)
b. Residential lots may be reduced in size by 40 percent, but
shall not be smaller than the minimum lot areas set forth In
Table 111-4.
c. When ESOS is applied to 66 percent or more of a project
site, residential lot size may be reduced by up to 80
percent, but in no case be less than 5,500 square feet.
Table 111-4
Allowable Lot Size Reductions
District Minimum Base Zoning Lot Area Minimum Cluster Lot Size
R1-144 144,000 86,400
R1-43 43,000 24,000
R1-36 36,000 21,600
R1-20 20,000 12,000
R1-10 10,000 6,000
R1-7 7,000 5,500
SDH-6 6,000 5,500
Draft 3.1.10 5 trgTm�° �,Lg
4flvs!'�IV :.ttNf3S
4. Compact Development With Density Increase
a. A density incentive up to 20 percent of the base zoning
density is permitted if ESOS requirements are exceeded
by 10 percent or more.
b. This density bonus provision may be applied when utilizing
the flexibility and modifications permitted in Section D.2.D,
Cluster Design.
c. The increase in density is calculated by multiplying the
area of additional ESOS times the density of the base
zoning district. Maximum density increases for
development are listed in Table 111-5.
Formula to Calculate Density Bonus
Step One:
Base Zoning Density (expressed as dwellings per acre) =
Site Area _ Minimum Lot Area of Base Zone
Additional Dwellings Permitted =
Additional ESOS Area X Base Zoning Density
Step Two:
Additional Dwellings + Base Zoning Dwellings + Project
Acres
= Allowable Density Bonus
d. The additional ESOS must meet the following criteria:
i. Meet the standards in Section III.C.3, Open
Space Requirements.
ii. Be natural, undisturbed desert area and cannot
include revegetated areas.
#40
Draft 3.1.10 6 '� ' 3
ENSET VF. A3dt3S
iii. The additional ESOS shall be provided in
common area or separate tracts and cannot be
located on an individual single-family lot.
Table 111-5
Maximum Density Bonus
Zoning Minimum Area Base Density Maximum
District per Dwelling (D.U.'s/acre Density with
Bonus
.. .. .,. ..•;. ,.. ., ..��,�z•>r' •t r+.f.•s••••�.� •:�c�r c y.,.}., f}�. ,.,k•�s`��`':y4, ":ifi•� it;';.• •:k' ;:�: �'• k.
,....}• ,.,:k; S J`G,. ?..,'x- : yq •Yd.771..};n::,<3`.,,. A ...,k. �r.��%' o'�.o'>:,:;P. ,.
•ry;. .-.,Y,..`Sr• '�l .'?k:,;r•S.� ..}t;. {•4{•• :+`'v.. \i;Y.{.,•', •'. ii,•�i(+ •:.{"'';' jP
-.,..- .: +.t'.:7jt•-i.- '• 2 i�rh�' •.iv ..} 4-.�r�'•,.'•2 � �%•','• .hi
:}•;:1ht> ,,C� ..,t.. �..;':'7ti:r�':;1•' {y• •�k:'•ti•:� .+.i. '•��:x•{}.'`• SKi
+2, V , �.){+;�"�,
.'k4 � •{,-v'i�l:�' hG •r wg� 1�.{k.k ar.�. .•� :}ti• `;J,:•''�'•.� :7�:. Y.`: •.. k g.
'i.}Fv'r kfgkC i:•'Nt, 4,i ^.2•v ".J,i p r ]�: ..A. '
•;-�. J. G:�•J:2k�,.:'ti,:�r, .:•b r{':, •.t•�• :i�.#•}i? .'.�'{ i}:Ux����-.,•'•,:
.i V:}}':.••..+:�.....:r... ...`�f>.. ...:......:4F;;. .. '+.:...,:k:o:7k'r ..yr... :::'})..,.: ...n:.. ��`�^?-:`... r.r.....):..i3'r�.;r:..>............. ........"........""'............
R1-300 300,000 0.15 .17
R1-144 144.0000.3 .36
R1-72 72,000 0.6 .72
R1-43 43,0001.0 1.2
R1-36 36,0001.2 1.44
R1-20 20,000 2.64
2.2
R1-10 10,0004.4 5.28
R1-7 7,000 6.2 7.44
SDH-6 6,0007.3 8.76
R-4 5,4508.0 9.6
R-4R 4,250/rental 10.2 12.24
15,000/dwelling 2.9 3.48
R-S 5,4508.0 9.6
R-6 3,500 12.4 14.88
..QkgwaJ.�:;�.:.::;:'?.....:':{..,..3n:::: C',�:�:kfi.•...;.��.,•k.t.•....ti�,;.�}.{....;:>�.•;..t,.,v'.,G�:.�.<:•,{w�.':.'k�:,:r..:.:..:`t7�:,-AR-.:d.,7.,,-::..� <:.}:....:--,1�.,;.;.::{:+:i�•�{.,., ''^4�.:5'�^�•.•.'.R+��R.'7�`�•:jkJ.'•'k•;;z:,;,v.A}:::.''`•{'c.;''r`•.;}'{..{`>{.,:-...::,4.:aky.k.',`.J)•.:,r.':4j�4$•i\res:,:faNti
+ :WAR
2'141, .:.S,�:'•vf':v::x.'}`�,•�•..b;,M-':;.;..,.w..•"b•...r°}X.•,k:�:?•};.':J�.}t+.ky'{'.:FJi'Y.c^ti..,•:.:?..'�-.>)•{.'`•W{J.2:7.;..'::.,'�.7..3.C.".f;��:•;.?c.;•:{t•`y.pxJ...�+
,t{}J`i.•s:.t�,.,.
�'�:::x•:tr?k.k,:.4•,•v•.t,:�..,,
Z',•:.A itA.•.•.46::.,v•.
.
..a�.\.�•:
.,,,kk•<.X.}:.,,:..t...:.:,:,........,.,..,,.... .,.t?4...x.....,....2:.,.:k.. .. .............. c..JY.�., 4 6xC.��.�.�,: „ ,. ,.........�.•:2.-': '-•�•}:{, ....,.....,...�'�•+,.,�••-.' .
Base (FAR) Maximum FAR
with Bonus
CN .20 .24
C-1 .30 .36
C-2 .40 .48
PS
T-P .50 .60
POS .15 .18
Draft 3.1.10 7 ENVIRONMENTALLY
SENSITIVE',ANDS
3. Design Standards
A. Development Envelope
1. Development envelopes are required when ESOS is proposed on
individual lots. All impervious surfaces and other improvements
requiring ground disturbance shall be contained within
development envelopes.
GRAPHIC: Development Envelope
2. No clearing, grading, grubbing, or disturbance may occur outside
of the approved development envelopes or within ESOS areas.
Exceptions for underground utility corridors, roads, or regional
drainage improvements may be authorized by the Planning and
Zoning Administrator subject to the following findings and
standards:
a. There is no alternative location outside of an ESOS that can
accommodate the improvement.
b. Improvements are required to insure public safety.
c. Disturbance for underground utility lines must be mitigated as
required in Section NPPSM
d. Additional ESOS areas shall be designated at a ratio of 1:1 to
offset disturbances for drainage or road improvements within
ESOS areas.
3. The specific location of a development envelope shall be shown
on the development plan, subdivision plat, improvement plan, and
Type 1 grading permit. The method of delineating the envelope
boundary must enable precise field verification.
4. A field survey to determine the location of development envelope
boundaries is required at the discretion of the Planning and
Zoning Administrator.
5. The boundary of ESOS or the development envelope shall be
delineated by a temporary, protective fence. Fencing must be:
a. Six foot high vertical posts that are spaced in a manner to
support and connect wire or a similar material as approved
by the Planning and Zoning Administrator.
b. Established prior to construction and remain in place until
construction is complete as determined by the Planning
and Zoning Administrator.
Draft 3.1.10 8uu
riEtvs71VF:.,an
B. Trample Zones
1. Trample zones are required as a horizontally measured area
adjacent to ESOS which permits access for the installation of
permanent walls or other improvements.
GRAPHIC: building setbacks, envelope, ESL feature with
trample zones
2. The following standards apply to trample zone width:
a. Decorative and perimeter walls: 15 feet
b. Retaining walls and Accessory structures: 20 feet
3. Upon completion of construction of the structure adjacent to the
trample zone, the area must be restored in compliance with
Section (NPPSM).
C. Rock Outcrops and Boulders
1. The perimeter of a rock outcrop is defined in Section III. .2,
Standards for Rock Outcrops and Boulders.
2. Rock outcrop and boulders that do not meet the criteria contained
in Section 4 below may be disturbed.
3. If a construction envelope includes a rock outcrop or boulder
feature, the following standards apply:
a. A trample zone shall be included in calculating the
permissible amount of encroachment.
b. A mitigation plan shall be submitted as prescribed by the
Planning and Zoning Administrator.
c. Encroachment shall be minimized and in no case exceed
20% of the areal extent of the feature.
d. The rock outcrop or boulder feature shall be mitigated
through the replacement of rock materials to the impacted
feature at a ratio of 1:1.
e. Replacement materials shall be native to the site or the
immediate environs as approved by the Planning and
Zoning Administrator.
Draft 3.1.10 9 Edit€Rt1i,MENTAi LY
f. Cut or newly exposed rock surfaces shall be treated to
simulate pre-development conditions.
4. Rock outcrops and boulders shall not be encroached upon when
they contain the following characteristics:
a. The rock outcrop or boulder is 20 feet or greater height as
measured from the lowest adjacent natural grade.
(additional M. Goode input pending on ht. criteria).
b. The rock outcrop or boulder is an isolated feature, located
1,000 feet or more from other rock outcrop or boulder
features as defined in Section III.C.2, Rock Outcrops and
Boulders (additional M. Goode input pending on spacing
criteria).
D. Driveways and Access Roads
1. Driveways and access roads must be designed to minimize
grading and disturbance of environmentally sensitive areas.
Shortest distance, direct alignments must be used, unless
avoiding or minimizing impact to Critical or Core Resource
features.
2. No parking or additional circulation areas are permitted outside
the approved construction envelope.
3. Restoration of all disturbed areas is required in accordance with
the standards of Section NPPSM.
E. Structures
1. For structures on residential lots adjacent to ESOS, or non-
residential and multi-family structures within 200 feet of ESOS,
building materials must meet the following standards:
a. Glass surfaces shall not exceed a reflectivity of_%.
b. Exterior finishes shall not exceed a reflectivity of 60%.
c. Materials used for exterior surfaces of all structures shall
match in color, hue, and tone with the surrounding natural
desert setting.
d. Surface materials of walls, retaining walls or fences shall
be similar to and compatible with those of the adjacent
main buildings.
2. All equipment appurtenant to underground facilities, such as
surface mounted utility transformers, pull boxes, pedestal
cabinets, service terminals or other similar on-the-ground facilities,
Draft 3.1.1.0 10 ENVIRONMENTALLY
SENSITIVE;_ANDS
shall have an exterior treatment that has a reflectivity not to
exceed 60%.
F. Wash and Drainage Crossings
1. Roadway, pathway, fence and utility crossings of natural
watercourses shall be wildlife friendly.
a. (specifications pending)
2. Fences crossing natural watercourses shall be designed in
accordance with the standards and policies specified in the
Town's Drainage Design Criteria.
G. Permanent Walls and Fences
1. No walls, fences, or other barriers may be located so as to impede
wildlife movement through designated ESOS. Walls or fences
shall not enclose or disconnect contiguous ESOS.
2. Fences shall be wildlife friendly and designed in accordance with
Section 24.7.D (RHOD)
3. Walls are not permitted to cross washes of fifty (50) cfs greater
flow in a 100-year event.
4. Walls can be in the form of a view fence that combines solid wall
elements with wrought iron or other open material to permit
unobstructed views.
5. Walls shall satisfy the following criteria:
a. Walls shall not require the removal of protected native
plant specimens and rock outcrops;
b. Walls shall contain ground level openings of at least nine
(9) square feet in area with a dimension of three (3) by
three (3) feet, and be spaced no more than two hundred
(200) feet apart, including openings for drainage ways, in
order to allow wildlife movements and passage of localized
stormwater flows; and
c. Walls shall be built of materials that blend into the rough
textures and rustic character of the vegetation, rocks and
other features of the natural desert setting.
Draft 3.1.10 11 ENn?,3}4,fl1£i1A,U
Draft 3.2.10
G. Hillside Area Category
1. Purpose
The Hillside Area category is intended to protect public safety,
conserve scenic sloped and mountainous areas and, when
developed, ensure compatibility with the distinct hillside
topography which is important to the visual and scenic character
of the Town.
2. Applicability
a. The Hillside Area requirements apply to any parcel
containing sloped areas of 15 percent or greater where the
sloped area is greater than 150 feet in length and no less
than 50 feet wide and greater than seven and one-half(7
1/2) feet vertically. (add graphic).
b. Areas of less than 15 percent slope are not restricted by
these Hillside Area requirements.
.....................
c. Rock outcrops and boulders, as defined in Section II .
....................
Conservation System, are excluded from this Section. See
Section III.0 and 111.x, 3, Design Standards.
3. Sloped Area Analysis
a. When the minimum dimensions and percent of slope as
described above are present, a sloped area analysis shall
be prepared.
b. When land division, subdividing, development plan or other
development approval is requested, all areas of 15% slope
or greater shall be identified by the sloped area analysis.
c. The sloped area analysis, which must be prepared by a
State of Arizona, licensed and registered engineer, shall
identify and map all "Percent Slope" categories in Table III-
5.
d. Digital topographic information meeting a minimum
standard as defined by the Town Engineer, shall be used
to prepare the sloped area analysis. Alternative
information or methodologies may be approved by the
Town Engineer.
4. Conservation Standards
Hillside Areas shall be conserved in the following manner:
Draft 3.2.10 1
a. Sloped areas from fifteen (15) to less than twenty-five (25)
percent slope may be developed in a limited manner in
accordance with the standards of this Section, Section III.D
and the OVZCR.
b. In accordance with the Critical Resource designation,
ninety-five (95) percent of sloped areas of twenty-five (25)
percent and greater are to be conserved as ESOS.
.....................................
Exceptions may be approved in accordance with Section
....:::...:: . ..::.:......:.::
11I.0 3.D, ESOS Flexibility.
5. General Requirements
a. A development envelope shall be delineated on the
subdivision plat, development and site plan when sloped
areas of 15 percent or greater are present on the plat,
development or site plan. The development envelope shall
be treated as specified in Section IIID3A.
b. When lots or development plans include sloped areas over
15 percent, the areal extent of grading or other ground
disturbance of 15 percent but less than 25 percent, sloped
areas is limited in accordance with Table 111-5.
410
Draft 3.2.10 2 rk.nENTR�Y
<'r.•'4ES1'3'i�F i.ANt3S
s '
TABLE III-5: SLOPE DENSITY AND GRADING LIMITS
Percent Slope Minimum Lot Size Maximum % Maximum
(acres) Graded Building Height(ft)
15<20 1.00 40.0 Per Base Zoning
20<25 2.00 20.0 18
25<33 8.00 5.0 18
33.0 and Greater 36.00 4.0 18
*Or as permitted by base zoning,whichever lot size is larger.
c. In determining the areas to be developed, maximum
disturbance limits and specific design criteria must be
considered. Table 111-5 indicates the maximum amount of
disturbance to sloped areas. Prioritized criteria for site
planning and the delineation of hillside ESOS and/or
Hillside Conservation Areas are included below.
(1) Subdivision design shall meet the following:
i. Contiguous location of hillside open space to
established open space areas or other ESL
features,
ii. Minimize disturbance of ESL features as prioritized
in Section Ill. . ,
...........................:...
iii. Conservation of the largest sloped areas of 15
percent or greater on the site,
iv. Consolidation of hillside and other open space
areas, and
v. Minimize disruption to natural drainage patterns.
(2) Development envelope design on individual lots shall
meet the criteria as listed above, however, replacing
Criteria iii, above, with:
i. Exclude the areas of steepest slope from the
development envelope.
d. After delineation of permissible development areas, all
remaining areas of 25 percent and greater slope shall be
designated as ESOS in accordance with the provisions of
Section III C 3,
Open Space Requirements (nate: meaning
it has to meet the minimum size and maintenance
requirements of that section) Areas of 25 percent slope
that do not meet the minimum requirements for ESOS shall
be designated as Hillside Conservation Area.
Draft 3.2.10 3 cY,r>r ENIAN L,
e. Open space identified during individual residential lot
development or open space not meeting the minimum
requirements for ESOS must be designated as Hillside
Conservation Area.
Hillside Conservation Area: Shall mean land area set aside for
conservation of natural slopes greater than 15 percent.
f. If an existing (at the time of adoption of this Ordinance) lot
or parcel does not meet the minimum size requirements of
Table 111-5, grading limitations based on percent of slope
from Table 111-5 still apply.
g. For property composed entirely of 25 percent or greater
slopes, any proposed lot shall meet the minimum lot size
and maximum grading requirements of Table 111-5.
h. Calculations shall be provided indicating the percent of
disturbance, if any, to each slope category described in
Table Ill-5.
6. Hillside Area Design Standards
a. Development must be in compliance with Section I I I.D.3,
Design Standards, Subsections A, B, D, E, F and G.
Flexible Development Standards or Cluster Design
standards may be applied in accordance with the
provisions and limitations in Section III.D.
b. Where sloped areas include ridge features, building
rooflines shall not protrude above the height of the ridge,
unless approved by the Town Council in accordance with
the criteria below.
(1) Structures are single story, and no more than 14 feet,
including parapets, above the pre-development grade
of the site,
(2) Roof design is limited to a slope of no greater than '/2
inch rise per 12 inch horizontal run.
(3) Approved plant materials are installed along exterior
walls of 15 feet or more in length.
New Definition- Ridge: Shall mean a topographic feature
associated with the top of hillsides and mountains having a
continual elevation crest of 150 lineal feet or more and
height of at least 20 feet.
Draft 3.2.10 rNRO1N3AAfYS
Discussion Point: if stronger ridge line conservation is
desired, the following alternate language might be
considered. However there is a concern with °p hing"
construction off the ridge and creating more significant
hillside impacts with cutting/filling.
"Conserve the ridge line silhouette of significant
topographic features by locating all improvements below
the ridge line and using a finished height that does not
protrude into the silhouette as viewed from nearby public
roads."
c. Cut and fill slopes shall be shielded by structures so as to
not be visible from adjacent properties or public roadways,
or shall be colored or otherwise treated in a manner to
blend with surrounding native soils and rocks.
d. All structures and appurtenances thereto such as a
satellite dishes, shall be earth tone and shall comply with
Section D.3.E, Structures. Colors and exterior finishes
exceeding a reflectivity value of 60% are not permitted.
e. Outdoor storage shall be located within an entirely opaque
barrier designed to match the materials, color, and finish of
the primary structure. Storage may not be visible from
private or public streets or adjacent residential areas.
f. Roof mounted equipment is prohibited unless fully
screened from all neighboring properties. Screening
devices may not exceed permitted building heights as
measured in hillside areas.
7. Building Height
a. As permitted by the underlying zone.
b. For buildings located within identified slope areas of 15
percent of greater, building height shall be measured in the
following manner:
(1) Where building pad elevation is the same or higher
than predevelopment grade due to engineered fill, the
building height contour line method shall be used (as
defined in Chapter 31). Small areas of rugged terrain
shall not increase or reduce building height. Small
areas are those features with a maximum width of
twenty-five (25) feet.
GRAPHIC_ building height contour line
Draft 3.2.10 5 tz'r."7"TAVY
(2) Where building pad elevation is lower than
predevelopment grade due to cut conditions, building
height is measured from finished grade.
c. Additional building height of 12 feet may be approved in
accordance with Section III.D.2.C, Flexible Development
Standards, if the additional building height does not
protrude above adjacent ridge lines as viewed from public
streets and abutting residential property. Adjacent ridge
lines include ridge features on site or within 150 feet of the
proposed building.
t7.4
Draft 3.2.10 6vE °tfE.atY
Appendix A
SUMMARY OF CONSERVATION STATISTICS
FOR THE SEVEN SITES DESCRIBED IN CHAPTER 7
Schematic graphics and summary statistics are provided here for the seven conser-
vation
111,4111111411!°'
subdivisions detailed in Chapter 7.The purpose of this appendix is to offer a 14111 Eli
brief overview of the results obtained on these seven very different sites and to en- Iiirtr17 ,;
able readers to compare them more easily,
Site A: GENTLY SLOPING SITE IN THE \\IIIIIdb
PIEDMONT REGION is, a Ali u
Land'type Percentage Acreage
\\
Primary Conservation Area 2196 17.0 acres
Secondary Conservation Area 4496 36.5 acres
. .
Total conservation land 65% 53.5 acres
Developed area 3596 28.5 acres . .
4:Sli
Density Calculations:
82.0 acres total 414
'k4it • ' • i•s
-17.0acres Primary Conservation Area
',77.1ti ‘- • .„,./.--
65.0 acres remaining(buildable) \ IL. ,Afilf. , •
IkNo
-6.5 acres for streets(10%) Iiitl
58.5 acres net
. . . .., ,
,
58.5 acres divided by 80,000 square feet per dwelling equals 32 lots
* Total developed area comprises 28.5 acres(consisting of 32 lots @ 30,000 square
feet,plus 6.5 acres for streets),or 3596 of the site.
127
< .
128 Appendix.A
Site B: MOSTLY WOODED SITE AT THE BASE
OF THE FOOTHILLS
Ind Type Percentage Acreage
Primary Conservation Area 21% 15,0 acres
Secondary Conservation Area 31% 22.0 acres
Total conservation land 53% 37.0 acres
Developed area 47% 33.0 acres
Density Calculations:
70.0 acres total
-15.0 acres Primary Conservation Area
55.0 acres remaining(buildable)
-5.5 acres for streets(10%)
49.5 acres net
49.5 acres divided by 60,000 square feet per dwelling equals 36 lots
6 The developed area comprises 33 acres (consisting of 36 lots @ 35,000
square feet plus 3 acres for streets), or 47%of the site.
/
x.... 1
a
i *
0 4 AI'
7/
likek' I 0 . 4 \
, 411IF a '
*hp-11,b,*A
: ,..::%7 . 11
,... e,k
-,,,,,•t'..5::, ..,*:,!,,,:a5...,:,:z.,;.;.f..,:,Fs,, 1111
'',tI'.Z;;;-:•'5S:'.^sd:-..,:;;•':•;t.',,,,;1:;:,::.::
, , t,z,••••••,,,.., ,,,,,
'',''''''-,..<''',44...f.i,s' .:,.•.,•:?'-,
,,.,,,.,....,... ...• .:,.•,.,,,......,,,
r;P:::‘ ',Es,s,‘.1:??,...:',;:,\:::5iW.::•'-:',.,...:'.;%'3:pplk 11
,
1:
it 1.......L......,.............„...................„....„,..111 Illik
1---------- -"--- i 61.
lik411-,i;0;;;Isii.
•,.:•?",;"•'',; ,;•:;;.:,•?,,,..• a- 4..7S.,,, ,.2,,,Ili
1111
,"_._.........._._................._..=._...,......_..
._.__----------'
„.. •
Appendix A t29
Site C: ADJACENT TOASSHALLOW BAY
W
AND TO TIDAL CREEK
*Land Type Percentage Acreage
Primary Conservation Area 31% 18.0 acres
Secondary Conservation Area 48% 27.7 acres
Total conservation land 79% 45.7 acres
Developed arca 21% 12.3 acres
Density Calculations:
58.0 acres total
-18.0 acres Primary Conservation Area
40.0 acres remaining(buildable)
-4.0 acres for streets(10%)
36.0 acres net
36 acres divided by 20,000 square feet per dwelling equals 72 lots
The developed area comprises 12.3 acres (consistingiof 72 lots @ 5,000
square feet, plus four acres for streets), or 21% of
the site.
•••
,,,)........_,,,........................_#,,---------„,„,,...,,. . ......, ,,.-.. s ..„._
H. ....',:-... ' - '\:‘.:'s-.:l;s...c '-'744;..._',,,,:::',H"-'1.:
1111111111 .
9 siw ...3
.tfll.' i ,
\ - . - i .-,.,-• : ::::,-,, . -...-- 7. „-Ato,----
It ..- ,.:',' . - ' ,`... .1. ‘:::-., It -:,- ,, : .-:::,. ,i,. a --• i
, ' s 1113 A 1111,, ,'s.,:•,..s' . ,,,,,,
• • •
. .
' 17 ' ' ,It''•4ill A ff.7 la ill”N/'‘ .„ s,,, ,
,,„ .... , , „k, , 3.. , • ••
fa .. , • ... ..., •,
/).
i •,,,, .„ ,,,,,,,, ,•••....„: 4,,,,,,,,,..,... _,, ,,,,,. .„,: ,,,,,,.,,, ,, _„ .5
i,--'.,.-2. ,-.‘.:a..1ji..7:4-s,-1',,-',,::,.....,,.---:.:.:.,--,,..,..isi:.::,,,--...-',...';',.,..virelth°14—$:.',..:,'-',1:',',,-;',:";:,•:1.1'—'-z---,:',:::.:','---.::::
ii''" .4 * TrfitIFI - 4
la,
,,T-) ,., .... , ... ., ... . .,. .. .. . , ....... „„
..... .. ..
. ., , • . ..,.. , .
.. ... . . •.. ........„,,,
•. ... ,., .
. . " . ..
.. .. .. .. . .... ., ,
.... .
,,, .. . ,., , ..... ..
..., .
130 _ Appendix.A
Site D: UPLAND PASTURE, WATER MEADOWS,
AND SMALL CREEK
Land flype Percentage Acreage
Primary Conservation Area 30% 19.0 acres
Secondary Conservation Area 33% 21.0 acres
Total conservation land 63% 40.0 acres
Developed area 37% 23.0 acres
Density Calculations:
63.0 acres total
-19.0Primary Conservation acres Area
44.0 acres remaining(buildable)
-4.4 acres for streets(10%)
39.6 acres net
19.6 acres divided by 82,000 square feet per dwelling equals 21 lots
The developed area comprises 73 acres(consisting of 21 one-acre lots plus
two acres for streets), or 37% of the site.
-----r-----------A! :::f,;..,::1.i;..i,...:,..:.:'::;;:.ifs,...A.,%h\zp„..,...„,..../...,..:4rt':.k itf.g.::::;•ig:"..?"4$4
....„.„,;,„..,,„:„.
,...................., •.•.,..,,:...,
.•..,.....•_,.. _.
'.'',.4'..4*. ..::::t....5:.,.t..,—;;;;; .••••::;;;.7...1,............,..---
•,..;_• 4,---,....,_,,,........,,4.,...;•.%,,,,,....
..... .
.4......
Iv, '.;::.,101,iii....:.,,,4,.
.Vt Icr47,..... ::7:4,3117::::::: tgt, :: :< :).:"'..k*;;;;;tti:';:.;;:.:5;.::.::7:::;':;,:'::;;:
tS12 /
..... . ..., 5:.0.1. .. . ..,........4,:,:,-...04:i74,-;:i
aft".:.-'4,f41.*:',;:"04:*4V,:::"A„,;..;;:t45;'''''''''''"A Wifti;v4-:`:.:t-•
Witiciff" .t.?:::tki..f.,.:4 kill. .... a att,
• ........ ,,,, a
.....r i b— itt.2gi.4:::!:f.1*Zi$:44.:C ... ' 71 1111120
tsfts.:fisti-M1111011 tap ,-44.-.
' ..
2,- I ....,,........kv, _.........,
tabligil 0
i . ....*„.....*,
______.----------0141
it
-...- .*------9-----
...
Appendix
A
-
1/4
.
,
131
Site r: LAKEFRONT SITE INTHp NORTHERNWOODS
Land TYPe Percentage Acreage
Primary Conservation Area 11% 5.0 acres
Secondary ConserationA Area 53% 24.5 acres
Total conservation land 64% 29.5 acres
Eewelopedara36% 16.5acres
Density Calculations:
46.0 acres tota
_5.0 acresPn.mary _niservation Area
41.0acrcsrem:ining(buildable)
-4.1 acres ,olmet8( uu )
36.9 acres net
36.9 acres divided by 2 acres per dwelling equals 18 lots
Total de elopedarea compn,s-s1:5acres consisting of 18 lots 30000
square feet, pins 4.1 am-es for ne:sneets), or 36% of the site.
-----1111111Es.-,„,,..!.":.,-,:',L...fi•,.:A;s-.,.-"-::.-...i!.--:•;,-c.:.;::::::.2.:•;‘,r:2.-4i-..f:..,,,s:,1:.y!„..4:-:4':':.ti.ii.,_..1j.t,4,',-.:.<,.,-'•.41.
''',,-S:-!'.--)•:',:''''''''''' ”-',k'E'ii
1111 s sz
0 ti
at . , • •..
• , . , .
,$r•'. :•' —'
'''.;'.4'.,,, ,. •
.,.a, ....<,•,...;•';
ks a
a
•.,• ,•... . , ,
•.,„.. , .,„ ....,
gi
11
. .c. ,;.,=,-:•`.:F)::;?..', s•
Z 1 IA
',_, •.:'• '—', ...`,...,-'<•,. ,.:.,
'Id sKsi..1;:``.1.;(.;::.;:ii;::, .:i'-,:••-•:.•:::''''''''''
.• , , ,,.,•„
,.•.•.
.... •/ i 0 ..
0 i
....,
st,
j
....
132
Appendix A
Site F: FARM WITH CIVIL WAR BATTLE—RELAActi.e-aEgeD
Land Type Percentage
8% 10 acres
71 acres
55%
81 acres
Developed Primiaidr3arrCyocnosneise7ar‘tTiaotnioAnrAearea
62%
49 acres
Secunda
conservation land o
38%
Density
D e n 130.0
cla
Calculations:acl:le..eas
acrestotai
, ^'
-10.0Primary Co,03,tnvtosu,oeilrad)vcaarbteiloset;peArrea
dwelling equals 9
1-100 acres remaining 0-182...00 acres for streets 1 %
prises 49 acres(54 lots of 30,000 square feet each,
om The developed area comprises 108.0 acres
divided by eq 54 lots
or 38% of the site.
plus 12 acres for streets),
........,,...„ '':''.'-s' ::•.:
,.....,-.,..,......- ,.. .,, 7100....
..• ... .... .....• ,
,. --...;:s:•-.1." ' ''',"2,--:::,-..
s r .
... . . :. e , „.... . .1. . . ... „..„..........,
• -.. . • ..... . • , . .., ,
4 I 4
,,,,...:......,,„..,,,..,..,...................„........,.,.........,:... .. ...... ... ..:..; ...,.. . ..., ... . ...,.
9 C
Akio,4,,\',.. ::,;"...,:',,,,.:.:.....,•.,:.2....';'..s...;.:::,.:1::':::::.:.:.:. 1::.".v.:111.. . . ..„,....„:,:.::....,
_ mutt 1 te
•. u 4 11
all ;.:,:::::::,i':.::',,„•2::.:,,.:::,',',:",..: ':,.:•','2.-... :: ,., ', .:.: ,, .. : :.... ..,. .,:::,.•:,..
•
, ....., ,
. ... . .. s
. , ., . ..,..,.
" .• , .
. ,
e
.-.7.
. ..
w 4'
--,
IIIIII:: :!..4.."'.:41d.7...:-.,..:;:::i',...........',.:.:'..:'...:1,.:...;:'.,':-.....i.....'..:....:1,:‘,....'...,....1:11....1:':.:1:1.*:.;'......i.::_:s.,:::•0,-..:',:;',;:i:.,.: .s.. .%..:11111111, '.,2.1;...c.'"::...;..1...:.:1'..:'.::":::".4.\.:6,...,.,e,.:_ :...:;:•...s•.::,...1'.....:1
.,,..,,....„,,,,.......;.....1'.1.1.1...:,‘,..2:4_,''....::::::.......•,,..•...... , , . ....‘. ,,,, .' -
• ; '.: : .,... • •- , .....• .. -.' ' ... , •
... ,.._,. ...„ .
• • •• • • •.. -
.,
. .. ..... .,., .5 , .,.,
,• " • •-' .r.*:;,',,::::-•,;•i.,•;.:•)::*::`••••",:' ,.' ')..':. •• 4 4.1 ....2,...::„......,.....
,. ,, ,, ,,.\,,-...,,.,::.,....:.‘f.:„:„::.,,::.,...::,..:,.:„...>::.' ..:*..„,,-:—.c_,............._._______.„.._..._„.. . ' -‘ •
, ... . .,„,..„::::::„........;.,....,.......:.)...„......,.:„.„ , ,,. ..
.• ,,, . .,,,:i.::,,...,........,:,..),..,.....,..,,:..:......s.,„.,,, . . , ,
, i(-----.................. 4 1 .
.. ,................,..,...,...........:,....„...
. ..,.-s. ........::::,..:..ii.:::-..,:;,..::::...;.-ff•?>f-::..........,?,,,,::,,--.:: -v.
i; I
:
• - ; ' --,-••••': ',,,-:..":;:,::':.,.:::::-..-.:.::,:::-.•::._,', -
t
.......----''
• •- .:-.'....,.:::-: ;',i::4::;.,:-.''''' '......:i;,..-:?.:.::.::,:•::';',40' ..1
.,...,"
... , .
Appendix A 133
Site G: OLD FIELDS, SWAMP FOREST, AND
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES ON THE SOUND
Land Type Percentage Acreage
Primary Conservation Area 28% 14.4 acres
Secondary Conservation Area 37% 18.6 acres
Total Conservation Land 65% 33.0 acres
Developed Area 35% 17.7 acres
Density Calculations:
50.7 acres total
-14.4 acres Primary Conservation Area
36.3 acres remaining(buil.dable)
-3.3 acres for streets(10%)
33.0 acres net
33.0 acres divided by one acre per dwelling equals 33 lots
* The developed area comprises 17.7 acres, or 35%of the site.
1 , 0
::-'1. ‘.:::''''''''',....":' .,',"..,--.:f*..-s:::,:•..... ,,,''''.::.:': ::1.**"—,;' •:\
' '.7) i.it IF ,•',f,,.. .-/. .- - ...,r , „
, . . .. . . ,. ...,
•• , - ' •
$ • . ,. . ,,,. .
1 41' '°....-:ii./114'''':.• s::':,-;-::::-.',,-4110 Illra'''s ' '•'„
. ,
2.-'‘..",•.,. 4r';iiiiiii,::•::... :',,''.:•;:-1 ..'s:.;:.I:..,.1r 'e""s '' s
2,':::...".."..,:::',1),1';:::.:',...:::?..:-.3:.":''''''''"s .'s f s- s-:;;;;:',11°P.;;;',';4,7.:::..1111::::;:.,...:,,,,,,:.i•,,:*„...: 1 z,'..•!,-:::',..;
•-, ' ;
V, '..*::-,,..:.;'''.•::,,,:':':;,'::',;.;2;::'?::;.1,:Z:.;21:-:,;'.;W:;',':',,:',..;.;,,,, ,,,,. ,.i,-':„.2..:-':::•:•:::,.,';‘..t
, • , , ,...- . e,',,,
IA •. „. ';',:‘:•;.:;.'::.:.; •':
S . ..i *...L.,,,..../\ '''s '..,:,:";:',,'' ......•.op....a......„...........„
,.:';I. .:•:
. .. t
1
I,
co-.-:-- n 1.. se-:. r...
_•. t. .. -i-oi-: n.. . •.:
Designf:'..
or
S
u".
bd 1
v
..
i
sion
s
Ar1Ac11cAL GUIEELto : CREATING OPEN SPACE NETWORKS
.1;:::7:- .k77.':!F..F.a§..::,r,gk.;, ..4.!...;...,..,1.:,,,„.,..„:,:„..,:„:.....,.,„:„....„,7,; ;::„.4,,:,?...it!:-.4.:tor:E'.:'37,.,,,,l,,,::li,:.,. ,E::::::,.:,::....;..,..„;:. ,.„: •,,::.::::,,;,,,. .
.,*'1.'-.,,J:..;i1" .:"5;:::..7::::-::::'.:::::.:'::::::::::......17....,...'i:..111,,,..:...ii::::",. ,!.,..: .::: 7;':7:' -•I
<1•=;,!:;:.:6nV::'ll.f•-:-:,.;,...'" ...:4c•':-::.':::: -...::'..1!;:.1:'„.-..'.:-.,illkiftr',"......i: :..;
r.- ..* •:'`....)--lift:FF:#:!'-'i23''?:.!':.':i'Z'ii:: :'.7:;4°`;:::::: ),7:::'-'-', ::;:"..:;.::-''-'--,,:,,,,A:,,.,:t,..;:14:742t.'i.-34,,,::i.."....ff'.. .. '7' ' .i,.,,,,,....‘"t-4..-5,::;;Itit:71,,,.'iFi.-.......
..........,......4:..•,..,'.7:..,.:..:'...,-..,..7,i.,._,,,„,:.-.s'„,.',,.,:
:-,i-,;,.,:.,•::,,,,i:,g7,..::0i-,.,.4:.:f::..,l.,.::.;”10A7:..c::,,.i4„:.,i.:,,i.,:i::i::1::;., 4.
',.i:‘i,:'..:':'.,'-::: „.-';.•..‘:).;.,,::-,',z,-,.r.,.,.-.“-,.'.....„.:.'.,'..,:,f,,:5:.-,,.,:.,--.,......'.7.!.*',,.;?,:A'!i'..,,,';,,.,,.,.t.T,'...t.i:zt.7„.,7t..,,,.,',:,,•';,.,,::i.,I'i.,:.o.,.z.,n,il,•i,,.i.-r:.i;..!,..:g,„..!,t7',i7.'---,:7,,::7:-:,..,.:,.,.:i:.,-,t:,:-.:,;,\:-;,,i:..:.°.,,:i,,:.:'3.::..(4-,,,..'.....:",,'-,1:;.--::,5'r.7,,-,:!.*eE,-,.t.:,.i,.,,!,.:4,!.....,g...7:::..i,il,'..e0,:i,,,,;'le:l,:;-.4,....,.,,;<114i.„,::ijz;,,,:;,:-t:,::.::„i.-:i.7,t:1-.
:.7..•.;".%-•.,T„•-•:•-t'-0•I..
'-4'•
,.....:i,'::;i„,i.4.:,:t.:,'7„--.:•,•,;,.:,,:.c1!t*,,,v:...rE':....:,
i-,,:,.,_,
i7,,,:'„,,•,,,,,2.:,:-:i•-,i:.i,.-t..'.L::..i.;7..,f.,i-i7.7?.:!..,-;-,:„!..!”,,i-,,c:-o:-;-4...,-:i—.;.--.t:--.-,:::,i,:ThA;,,i-"',-,..,-..-':t::
..,,..i,:o',:,.,: 4-...E„'.,.':„„:„',,:.',t:.,4;i,1:„':.,„.'4:,„„:F7,i,-H1i.,„,:,:-,:,,i..,i„,,o-.-4-,.::..:,,-„,;--:5:_,,--,:,,"-.,.._.,-..,4ii-;.,'-..,„;"„•„.,',4.-.:,:.-:.-..,:,i,.7-,:,:-,..:.,..:,,-,:,•L.-",.
*
. , i,:::.,:•:„-4:":,::,ss!-4:-N.-i-iz,.:,.-i..;:t.,.ta:w.,.:,..I"i„it-,k ,,.,,!4„..„;!14„i:,ik:,t:,i:,:,,;,ii:
..,t
"e ‘ !ii,.:i .k,,,:,:,..,.,.1t.--,-i:*.1n:,,.,:.,f,.r..,,„.,.*..,.:::,,.1i----n..,,--,,,,,,1.,0.,,,,,n,:,A.:.,,:-,,1'•1-,,,,g,,ir4o,,„':-,!:b-„:,o„N.,.--„,„.„,,:,:„„i„„-,,„-::-„,:„--:--.,.
;--
-.,!..i
.-..-
!..
..:„.,::..,::ii.060.:„.;..'s<i.,';?.-7e,-;:::::::. ...:•t::::::::,,Or .... ' .:.:,::::H,.:,,.:--,..
- ':.!..!•!::,,,:,:,:l!,,,i7111111•1!.gii„.„;... .,,:''''
TOWN
—
F
ORO VALLEY
-
Planning&zoning Library
BC0<CAlu .
Randall G
A
ren
dt
Natural Lands Tust, American PianningAssociation, and American Society of
LanehcaP
e
Architects
Advantages of Conservation Design
CQINZOMIC ADVAN'TAGES
Conservation subdivision designs offer distinct and measurable
economic advantages over conventional layouts in at least five dif-
ferent ways, reflecting various stages or periods in the life of a pro-
ject.
Smoother Review
The first advantage occurs during the review period, which is
likely to proceed more smoothly because site designers have an-
ticipated and taken into account many of the concerns that would
otherwise become time-consuming and costly issues to resolve.
While it might not be possible to avoid all potential problems or
conflicts, the chances of confrontation and dispute can certainly
be minimized by site planning that is sensitive to the conservation
objectives of township or county officials and interested residents.
There is a growing awareness among local leaders, realtors, de-
velopers, and other business people that an area's quality of life is
one of its chief economic assets, for few new businesses choose to
locate or expand in locales that do not offer enjoyable places in
which to live. Communities that have allowed all or most of their
9
10 CONSERVATION DESIGN FOR SUBDIVISIONS
natural lands to be sliced into houselots or paved over for parking and utility systems that often result from more compact layouts
facilities often suffer a competitive disadvantage when trying to at- can also reduce the public sector's long-term infrastructure main-
tract new employers. And rural areas that rely on outside dollars tenance costs.
from retirees and tourists to stimulate their economies ultimately Subdivisions designed in this conservation-minded manner are
depend upon the natural beauty of their farms, woodlands, hills, also much less expensive to create than another well-known kind
or water features (as the case may,be) for their continued pros- of development that features a specialized type of recreation:golf
perity, because few people choose to retire or vacation in corn- course communities. The costs of transforming fields, meadows,
munities that look as commonplace as the anonymous suburbs and woodlands into regulation golf courses are extremely high for
where they have spent most of their working lives, a number of reasons, chief among them being the typical need to
Luckily there are practical ways to develop land without eradi- move and shape two or three million cubic yards of soil.Added to
cating the natural features that give places their special character. this are the extra costs associated with meeting increasingly strin-
Because this more creative design approach minimizes the visual gent environmental regulations designed to prevent degradation
and environmental impacts of new development on critical re- of the groundwater or downstream surface waters from the fertil-
sources, and also provides crucial"building blocks"needed to crc- izers, herbicides, and pesticides that are usually applied to the
ate interconnected networks of open space throughout the corn- turf.Other concerns that applicants must address include erosion,
munity, it offers the potential for a mutually beneficial alliance sedimentation, habitat and species protection, thermal pollution
between.the development sector and conservation advocates. (from removal of woodlands that shade ponds and streams), and
the impact of heavy irrigation requirements upon local water sup-
plies.All of these costs and concerns are substantially lessened by
Lower Costs conservation subdivisions that leave 50 to 75 percent of a devel-
The second advantage of conservation subdivision design is the opment site relatively unchanged or intact as natural areas.
opportunity if offers to reduce infrastructure engineering and con-
struction costs. To the extent that single-family houselots can be
narrowed, or that multiple unit dwellings can be incorporated, Marketing and Sales Advantages
street and utility runs can be shortened. This reduction becomes The third advantage occurs during the marketing and sales period,
greater as the development pattern itself becomes more compact when developers and realtors can capitalize on the amenities that
and village-like,but it is also measurable even when houses are in- have been preserved or provided within the development.These
terspersed with open space to provide good views from the maxi- positive features can form the basis for an environmentally oriented
mum number of homes. Open space design can also reduce the marketing strategy highlighting the benefits of living in a commu-
number of costly or contentious wetland crossings needed by nity where upland forest habitat and/or productive farmland have
avoiding parts of a site where such conditions exist.And,to the ex- been preserved, along with riparian or wetland buffers and
tent that street pavement is reduced, the size and cost of stormwa- wildlife meadows.Sales brochures should be prepared to illustrate
ter management facilities can also be lessened. The shorter street and describe neighborhood trails through protected greenways
. .
3- Advantages of Conservation Design
ii
paralleling creeks or traversing ridgelines, and formal commons ence fbr buying homes that look out onto farmland or.oth. eiro7.piti
space,e
for passive recreation and specific facilities for certain active rather than houses where the only view is of their neighbors
sports should also be mentioned, window or backyard.
This technique has been used successfully by an increasing Homebuyers'general preference for houselots that abut or face
number of developers, including Siepmann Realty in Brookfield, onto protected
land is illustrated in Figure 3-1, showing that the
Wisconsin, whose sales agents point out to potential customers majority of the first lots sold in Realen's 'Garnet Oaks" develop-
that when they buy a one-acre lot in one of their conservation subdi- ment were those that adjoined the woodland preserve or the ecu-
visions, they are actually receiving the use of more than 80 acres:their
houselot plus 80 acres of woodland, meadows, ponds, trails, and
active recreation facilities (tennis courts and balifields). This has
proven to be a successful counter to the comment that lots in Ron
Siepmann's developments are not as large as those in competing
/-.44,471. ihel4Pitase i-->i 4--phase
subdivisions offering no special amenities. The logic and the ex- "s
4'
perience have been similar despite differences in density in some i' 9 41 it ilea
of his developments, such as the quarter-acre lots in Pebble Valley $ 4! w 11+ 001 4011bh.
* „rte. istilbr .
(in a half-acre zone) or the one-acre lots in Hawksnest(instead of
the three-acre lots prevailing in that area). With open space rang- 15 a—
a 4 1101111 itip ai
ine3:p I° Mink wairibk pr'
ing from 50% to 65%, sales strategies focusing on this kind of 1 ii"--- Ar,a
; , ,„ ,,,, 12 13 AI
Rio,
amenity strike a responsive chord among many homebuyers, par- / SW 1*-----4'.. •41Wilart 4 .
Pi'sic *1
ticularly when lots are laid out to maximize views of the causer- .._6 47.,.0c 6 0,1 \.
... I tb 1 ...4....1, .., .,........ur ....
vation land.
— ...
Such has also been the case in the noithern suburbs of Philadei. \''.? ....., ....,....\.....11 .3,041.,,44,p6acrs 4 , „:.,....... ... .......z,, 1
phia,where development is consuming Bucks County farmland at r---4-1 1
a rapid rate. In this context, where the conventional wisdom had . I I; 1 ."..: ,,
/
been that homebuyers would insist upon houselots of at least one ‘,„,.. L.....i L.... --
acre in size, Realen Homes thought differently, and has been en- ------7-,7f,---'' --T--,?0„,, 322 , e) 0 140 200.400
joyina record sales based upon its open space layouts.In its"Farm- U1.--.1-1 Peet
view' development, which is the fastest selling subdivision in its ufzcigtzet30-1,1k,s1:fouselots located next to conservation areas in the new
price range in the county, large homes are located on lots one- subdivision in Bethel Thwnship, Delaware County, Penn-
third to one-half the normal size. But because more than half the sylavianeia, generally sold more quickly than others, and at higher prices.
Numbers refer to the order in which lots in the first
Ph
land has been preserved, most homes command long views over
sold as of December 31, 1993.Single indicateasterisks
lots e had
land
protected fields,which have been donated to a local land trust. commoclate side-entry garages(a p?ptiiardesign feature),and.
ththe dou-
When given a choice, consumers have demonstrated their clear prefer- ble asterisk marks the largest lot without a premium price.
. .
1
12 CONSERVATION DESIGN FOR SUBDIVISIONS
tral open space (also wooded). These lots sold quickly, even next subdivision on their lists. The relatively rapid sales rate in
though most commanded premium prices, based on their adja- this subdivision is attributed, in part, to the unique parkland cx-
cency to the protected areas—which gave them more privacy and perience that these buyers encountered at Garnet Oaks.
more of a rural feeling(see Fig.3-2). Recognizing their customers' Confirming this information, a national survey of people who
desire for a rural setting, the developers emphasized the neigh- shopped for or bought a home during 1994 has revealed that, of 39
borhood open space in their marketing approach, and they even features critical to their choice, consumers ranked slots of natural
published a nicely designed interpretive guide to the trail system open space" and plenty of"walking and biking paths" as the sec-
that their landscape architect had laid out through the woodland ond-and third-highest rated aspects affecting their decisions(Hat-
preserve. ney 1995). According to the survey director, Brooke Warwick of
Copies of this guide were given to prospective buyers,who were American Lives, these results demonstrate that consumers are he-
encouraged to take a stroll along the trail before leaving to visit the coming more selective and are looking more and more for the
kinds of features that encourage informal social interaction among
neighborhood residents in relaxed parkland settings. Perhaps sig-
nificantly, golf courses within developments ranked 29th on the
t
rs—
z.,. 0,17.4g, -1 I7
Ph.ase I—41,4--Phase 2
1
iv RI aro 20, ,
...'' ii
(44'4. t'54411111A- /
0 0 -_ , .; 0 NO
/ list, just below tennis courts. (See The Washington Post article in
Appendix G.)
, Value Appreciation
/0 21 / °legit °.,... fa& Ago. A fourth advantage is that homes in conservation subdivisions
/
, , 6 0 "5 p.* 5 5 551 Nillailir167
/
I 4. /444
c,,,,,,,,y 00.}.-,..., ...,,,,, \...,.. , Nlry '
j tend to appreciate faster than their counterparts in conventional
developments. (This fact can also be used as part of one's market-
ing approach %Then selling or reselling homes where open space
\\N.,,,,..............
\\\N
,------ .--...t.E,L.:------. ...1-,....,•-t....0.4
I I
1.......... '........1 has been thoughtfully wnserved in the original layout.) One of
/
the more widely known studies of this type compared two subdi-
ivisions in Amherst Massachusetts, built at about the same time,
with very similar houses that originally sold for almost the same
price, at the same overall density (two dwellings per acre). The
7)c. ROUte 322
only real difference between the two developments is that homes
in the first were located on half-acre lots with little community
Figure 3-2. Lot premiums added to base price(in thousands of dol- open space, while those in the second were built on quarter-acre
lars),at the'Garnet Oakssubdivision in Bethel Township, l'ennsylva-
lots with 36 acres of open space, including mature woodlands,
ma.Most of these premium lots adjoin the open space.Asterisks indi-
cate sloping lots that could accommodate houses with walk-out trails, a large meadow, a swimming pond and beach, a picnic
basements. grove, a baseball diamond, and tennis courts that also serve for
3. Advantages of Conservation Design 13
basketball use. After twenty years the homes in the second(level- new County Comprehensive Plan identifies conservation subdivi-
opment sold,on average, for$17,000 more than their counterparts scion design as a recommended tool to help conserve public view-
in the other subdivision, where lots were actually twice as large. sheds of the cultural landscapes along scenic highways (as illus-
This 136 price differential is attributable to the neighborhood trated in Chapter 7, Site F).
open space amenities, with all other aspects being nearly equal
(Lacy 1991, also quoted in Arendt 1994).
A dozen other examples of the positive influence of open space ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECOLOGICAL
upon residential property values have been documented by the ADVANTAGES
National Park Service in its publication Economic Impacts of Pro- in addition to preventing intrusions into Primary Conservation
twang Rivers, Trails, and Greenway Corridors, excerpts of which ap- Areas such as wetlands and floodplairis, conservation subdivision
pear in Appendix E of this handbookdesign cllso protects upland buffers alongside wetlands, waterbodics,
and watercourses-areas that would ordinarily be cleared, graded,
and covered with houses, lawns, and driveways in a conventional de-
Reduced Demand for New Public Parkland velopment. Important terrestrial habitat in these "Secondary Con-
A fifth advantage of conservation subdivision design, from the servation Areas" is thereby preserved for wildlife to dwell in and
local governmental perspective, is that the natural areas that are travel through. The greenways that are one of the hallmarks of
preserved and the recreational amenities that are provided in such conservation subdivision design provide cover and naturally shel-
communities help to reduce the demand for public open space, tered corridors for various species to move through as they travel
parkland, playing fields, and other areas for active and passive from their nests and burrows to their feeding places or hunting
recreation. Current deficiencies with regard to such public ameni- grounds.
ties will inevitably grow larger as population continues to rise. To Conservation subdivisions shed less stormwater than conven-
the extent that each new development meets some of its own tional developments and also provide larger areas of natural vege-
needs for these amenities, pressure on local governments will be tation that act as buffers to help filter stormwater flowing into
lessened in this regard, a factor that may make such designs more lakes, ponds, rivers, and streams. This traps pollutants and execs-
attractive to local reviewing bodies (at least when this is pointed sive nutrients dissolved or suspended in storm nmoff. Leaf litter
out). and groundcover can also slow stormwater velocity, thereby re-
As mentioned earlier, communities also benefit economically clueing soil erosion and stream sedimentation. Reducing runoff ve-
from the environmental advantages associated with conservation locity allows stormwater to be more readily absorbed into the soil
designs: cleaner water, greater wildlife habitat, and more attrac- and taken up by the vegetation. Buffers also offer important infil-
tive natural surroundings are vitally important to the communi- tration and "recharge" benefits because they help maintain ade-
ties' quality of life, their economic competitiveness, and their quate flows of filtered,water to underground aquifers(upon which
recreation and tourism opportunities. In Spotsylvania County,Vii- local wells depend).Tree canopies provide shade that is especially
ginia, where heritage tourism associated with Civil War battle- important in maintaining cooler water temperatures needed by
fields adds millions of dollars to the local economy every year, the certain aquatic species during the hot summer months.
. .
14 CONSERVATION DESIGN FOR SUBDIVISIONS
The minimum effective greenway width for water quality els of the food chain—from aquatic organisms and fish to amphib-
buffering therefore depends on factors such as the permeability of ians and small terrestrial mammals (such as raccoons, muskrats,
the soils, the steepness of the slopes, and the amount and type of and otters) that link the aquatic system to the adjoining upland.,
plant material growing there, in addition to the volume and char- In addition, conservation subdivisions can include areas man-
acter of the pollutants likely to be found in the runoff. To filter aged as wildlife or wildflower meadows, cut once a year at the end
runoff from residential developments where a moderate amount of of the summer after flowers have bloomed and seeds have been
lawn fertilizer is used, wooded buffers 100 feet deep on slopes not ex- set—and after the young from ground-nesting species have
ceeding 8%should be adequate(compared with buffer requirements fledged and departed. These areas provide food and cover for
of 165 to 256 feet that have been recommended to filter nutrient- birds, insects, and small mammals and require the barest mini-
rich agricultural runoff in Maryland and North Carolina). mum of maintenance in terms of mowing, irrigation, and fertil-
While no such buffers are typically required in conventional de- ization. Such areas also help to slow storm runoff velocity, trap
velopments, true conservation subdivisions are designed with sediments, and absorb stormwater and the nutrients (and other
buffers at least 100 feet wide because the preponderant opinion in pollutants) contained in it. On the aesthetic side, they add visual
the scientific and planning communities is that this is the mini- interest for residents who enjoy observing seasonal changes in the
mum width that is necessary if basic environmental goals are to landscape and seeing wildlife at relatively close range.
be met. However, for development design purposes, it should be Conservation subdivisions also offer greater opportunities to imple-
noted that frill density credit is allowed for all otherwise buildable land ment environmentally sensitive sewage treatment and disposal sys-
located within the recommended greenway buffer teMS known alternatively as land treatment," spray irrigation,"and
Where these buffer areas are not currently wcocled they should "wastewater reclamation and reuse,'These terms describe variations
be planted with a variety of native-specie trees and shrubs and al- of a well-documented technology that are superior to conventional
lowed to revegetate naturally through a general "no-cut" policy mechanical sewage treatment systems in many ways because
(except for creating informal walking trails; removing invasive they produce only very small amounts of sludge by-products and
alien plants, vines, and trees; and selectively pruning lower limbs because they help to replenish local aquifers (rather than divert-
to allow water views from the developed areas). Providing such ing the treated water into rivers, bays, or oceans where it flows
buffers should also significantly reduce the size and number of into different systems, often carrying heavy nutrient loads that
stormwater detention basins needed on the development site, degrade the receiving waters and aquatic habitats downstream).
thereby lowering some infrastructure costs and freeing that land With spray irrigation, wastewater is heavily aerated in deep la-
for other uses. (Those basins could also be reduced by directing goons where it receives a "secondary° level of treatment, similar
roof runoff to lawns and into"French drains"in backyards or open to that provided by conventional sewage plants. It is then applied.
space areas,as 30 to 50 percent of stormwater runoff in cluster de- to the land surface at rates consistent with the soil's natural ab-
velopments typically comes from roofs.) sorption capacity. Nutrients in the treated wastewater are taken
Conservation biologists tell us that riparian woodlands along up by the vegetation(which may consist of forest trees, meadow
rivers, creeks, and streams offer our"best hope for creating a sys- grass, cropland, or lawns). This approach has a long and success-
tem of interconnecting corridors"for a variety of wildlife at all ley- flu l track record in twenty different states; those with the largest
• , .
Advantages of Conservation Design 15
.—.....--......................
number of operating systems are Pennsylvania Illinois, Flolida, septic systems are located 4off-lotn on the best soils within the
and Delawarecommunity open space (which may also function as a village
In New Castle County, Delaware,the Public Works Departinent green, playing field, or wildlife meadow).
has published a 15 nage booklet describing this technology in sim- In Wayne County, Ohio, where the local Board of Health ma-
ple layperson's terms.Some of that region's more environmentally tially did not allow lots smaller than one acre to be served by in-
sensitive golf courses, such as the one at Hershey's Mill in East dividual septic systems, exceptions are now being made to permit
Goshen Township, Chester County, Pennsylvania, are irrigated separate drainfields serving different homes to be located within
and fertilized with community wastewater treated with this tech- conservation areas designated on the Final Plan for such purposes,
nology. This practice is well-accepted by residents mad golfers in typically underneath wildflower meadows, playing fields, and
this upscale development because it is cost-effective, safe, odor- neighborhood parks adjacent to the more compact houselots.Con
-
less, and environmentally sound. Woodlands are inigated with cerns about system failure can often h met by requiring individ-
treated wastewater in the Kennett at Longwood retirement des el- ual septic tanks to be pumped every three years by the homeopment near Longwood Gardens in East Marlborough Thwnship, owners'associations so that sludge levels will never accumulate to
Pennsylvania, and wildflower meadows and farmland arc sprayed the point where they will flow into and clog the drainage fields.
with similarly treated effluent m The Fields, an expensive subur- Because of their favorable texture for filtration, these same soil
ban development in Long Grove, Illinois (where 7594 of the site types—where they occur in other parts of the subdivision—could
has been preserved as open space, including 45 acres of restored also be mdesigned around? to function as groundwater "recharge
prairie).In all these cases the treated wastewater is sprayed within areas' and as sites for stormwater retention ponds. Other areas
a few hundred feet of homes, without problems or complaints.. with coarser, sandy to gravelly soils should, if possible, be left in
Although conservation design approaches allo‘N for land treat- their natural state due to their poor filtering qualities.
meat systems to be implemented, they may of course also be
served by conventional sewage plants, by individual septic sys-
tems,or by a variety of an ground community septic systems.The SOCIAL AND RECREATIONAL
key point here is that the layout flexibility allowed with conservation ADVANTAGES
subdivisions makes it easier for site designers to locate subsurface sep- As mentioned earlier, the formal greens and commons typically
tic systems Oli those parts of the property that are best suited for such featured in conservation subdivisions present opportunities for
facilities. In conventional developments built without central sew- neighbors to meet casually and to get to know each other a little better
ers, septic systems are located on each lot, regardless of whether Whether they are walking the dog, enjoying a game of catch with
soils are excellent,good,moderate, fair, or just marginally approv- their children or grand.children,or just out on a stroll to see spring
able for such purposes. However, in subdivisions laid out accord- flowers, autumnal foliage, or local wildlife, neighbors have more
- . .
mg to the principles in this handbook,houselots can be located on opportunities to become better acquainted with one another when
the deepest, driest, or best-drained soils available on the 1)arcelthey are outside and on foot. In conventional developments most
Alternatively, if the area of superior soil is not very extensive, the people spend nearly all their time indoors or in their private back-
, development can be laid out so that either individual or community yards (where there is little possibility for neighborly contact)
.. • .
)
16 CONSERVATION DESIGN FOR SUBDIVISIONS
largely because there is nowhere else to go, except by stepping areas such as woodlands, meadows, beaches, and viewing points
into the car and driving away. Another advantage is that in con- over ponds, lakes, tidal marshes, creeks, and bays, as well as
servation subdivisions the more compact yards typically require human-made elements such as greens, commons, playing fields,
less maintenance, allowing people more free time to spend enjoy- landscaped gardens, orchards, and arboreta.
ing the greens, trails, and other features in these well-designed Community activities occur in a surprising number of conserva-
"natural neighborhoods.° tion. subdivisions, from annual picnics to summer sports events
When one Wisconsin developer of conservation subdivisions re- and races, to garden tours and winter skating parties. This is not
visited one of his earlier projects, he was told by one of the resi- •to suggest that such development forms always produce a great
dents that she had moved there a few years ago from a lakefront deal of social activity,but they do seem to foster more neighborly
house several Miles away. Since her new home had no water interaction and a stronger sense of community pride than often
views, nor really any long distance views of any kind, he was puz- exists in conventional developments, especially when the site de-
zled and asked her why she had relocated. Her reply was that her signers have provided attractive footpath systems connecting their
lakefront house, while very nice, was essentially "one-dimen- homes with interesting places to visit.
sional"—if she tired of the lake there was not much else to inter- Conservation subdivisions also make it easier for municipalities
est her On the other hand, she continued, her new home in the to implement community-wide greenway network plans, which
160-acre Woodfield Village subdivision abutted 75 acres of pro- may depend on developers to provide critical links along particu-
tected open space including woodlands, meadows, a creek for ca- lar stream valleys or hilltop ridges. Developers can generally be
noeing, several miles of trails for walking and riding, courts for persuaded to dedicate a portion of their subdivision open space to
tennis and paddle tennis, a stable, a ballfield, and several chil- the local, government for active or passive recreation. This may
dren's play areas. She added that she felt there was also much take the form of a"green ribbon" of public trails through the oth,-
more of a"sense of community"in her new neighborhood and that erwise private homeowner association open space. In Worcester
she frequently met people from other parts of the development Township, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, Natural Lands
when she used the trails or other recreational facilities, adding to Trust staff redesigned a proposed subdivision, which was bordered
her enjoyment and conviction that this type of subdivision pro- on two sides by township and state parkland, to include a green-
vides "a better place to live." way connection along the course of a brook that flows between the
Since numerous national recreational surveys have docu- two parks.
mented that short walks are one of the most frequent and popular Some jurisdictions are beginning to look at conservation subdi-
forms of recreation enjoyed by Americans, it is not surprising that . vision design as their principal tool for buffering existing public
many people do in fact take advantage of opportunities tp walk parkland from the incursions of development on adjoining parcels.
around their neighborhoods when that choice exists. The basic el- To achieve this objective, municipal zoning and subdivision ordi-
enlentS of pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods are inviting places to nances should specify parkland buffers as one of the required de-
walk and interesting destinations. Under the first category one may sign elements of open space systems proposed in new conserva-
list sidewalks(preferably along shady streets scaled for slow-mov- Lion subdivisions. Among many park professionals, this approach
ing traffic)and trails(preferably through woods or alongside water is known as the "adjoining lands strategy."
features). Under the second category one might include natural