Clustering, Get it?

Anonymous said... C'mon U.B. let's keep the debate honest. The WP3 property was down zoned to 1 acre so that coupled with the clustering it would yield 1/4 acre zoning.
Just to clear up any misconceptions.

Okiedoke. Let's clear up the misconceptions. That way we can make room for you to bring in new ones.

First, with the exception of the senior housing in WP3, there will not be any 1/4 acre lots. None!

WP3's homes will be on lots larger than Don's 1/2 acre homestead, many at about 1 acre. Legacy Ridge, which has no special senior housing will be on larger lots than WP3.

But the central point that you miss is that clustering is the goal. Putting houses on 1 acre lots instead of 2 acre lots, allows the creation of large areas of undeveloped land around the homes. That's a good thing.

So, here is a somewhat lengthy (sorry) excerpt from The Planning Commissioners Journal. Have someone read it to you and maybe you'll finally get it.

Conventional zoning is essentially a blueprint for development, and development alone. Of course, zoning normally separates incompatible uses, and it does establish certain standards (such as maximum densities and minimum setbacks), but it typically does little to protect open space or to conserve rural character. The reason many subdivisions consist of nothing more than houselots and streets is because zoning and subdivision design standards usually require developers to provide nothing more. While many ordinances contain detailed standards for pavement thickness and culvert diameters, very few set any noteworthy standards for the quantity, quality and configuration of open space to be preserved.
Conventional zoning assigns a development designation to every acre of land, generally residential, commercial, or industrial. The only lands which are normally not designated for development are wetlands and floodplains. Conventional zoning has been accurately described as "planned sprawl," because every square foot of each development parcel is converted to front yards, back yards, streets, sidewalks, or driveways. Period. Nothing is left over to become open space, in this land-consumptive process.


[Editor's Note: The Center for Rural Massachusett's Web site contains excellent drawings comparing development under conventional zoning principles and development using open space/cluster principles].

A Better Solution
Local officials who are interested in ensuring that their communities will not ultimately become a seamless web of subdivisions, shopping centers and office or industrial parks now have a practical and effective alternative: compulsory open space zoning. This technique has been successfully implemented by a number of municipalities in New England and the Mid-Atlantic states, and by several counties in Virginia, Washington State and California.

In order to avoid disturbing the equity held by existing landowners, open space zoning allows the same overall amount of development that is already permitted. The key difference is that this technique requires new construction to be located on only a portion -- typically half -- of the parcel. The remaining open space is permanently protected under a conservation easement co-signed by a local conservation commission or land trust, and recorded in the registry of deeds.

As "open space zoning" is based upon the technique of "clustering," these two terms are used interchangeably throughout the rest of this article. It should also be noted that the cluster concept can be restricted to detached, single-family homes, each on its own down-sized houselot, in communities or in specific zoning districts where this is politically desirable. In other words, cluster housing is by no means limited to townhouses, apartments, or condominiums, as is typical in many PUDs (planned unit developments) and PRDs (planned residential developments). In fact, the classic rural village settlement pattern is a superb example of single-family clustering, sometimes with a central green constituting the permanently preserved open space.

Cluster Design
The basic principle of cluster development is to group new homes onto part of the development parcel, so that the remainder can be preserved as unbuilt open space. The degree to which this accomplishes a significant saving of land, while providing an attractive and comfortable living environment, depends largely on the quality of the zoning regulations and the expertise of the development designer (preferably someone experienced in landscape architecture).

Although the concept of clustering is fairly simple, this "new" form of development has raised concerns among some residents of rural or suburbanizing areas because it is quite different from the conventional, standardized subdivision pattern with which most of us are very familiar. Interestingly, the conventional suburban model, commonplace in many growing communities, is actually a pattern that is at odds with the otherwise traditional rural landscape. It looks "at home" only in our sprawling metropolitan post-war suburbs, where it has become the predominant building pattern.


for the rest go to: http://www.plannersweb.com/articles/are015.html