Encourage New Forms of Community Design

• Establish urban limit lines with specific triggers for expansion

• Identify need and finance the extension of local infrastructure through Capital Improvement Plans

• Cluster development within a site to preserve agricultural and habitat values

• Coordinate clustering with adjacent development to expand protected areas

Case Study: Cluster Zoning

Why cluster development? Land use planner Randall Arendt has a simple answer: “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.” But clustering also maintains, sometimes increases housing density and potentially reduces developer costs.

Clustering options geared toward the creation and preservation of natural areas is usually realized through subdivision planning regulations and design guidelines. Subdivision regulations are a principal tool for shaping our communities. Through the subdivision review process, a community has the potential to design residential development in a manner promoting community objectives.

Clustered zoning refers to the grouping of home sites in a development onto adjacent compact lots while leaving the remaining land for open space, agricultural use, water quality preservation or some other passive, non-intensive use. Clustered zoning is usually used on lots of 40 acres or more and typically provides incentives to the developer for conserving developable land. From an economic perspective, providing the required services for clustered development becomes more affordable due to shorter distances to install water and sewer infrastructure and build the roads.

Permanent dedication of 40 percent or more of the total development is usually required for a clustered or conservation subdivision. Promotion of this type of development through a Comprehensive or General Plan is possible by offering incentives to the developer through development fees, expediting the review process, and density bonuses. Though, with proper education and market evidence, incentives are not always necessary.

Studies indicate that homes and property in close proximity to the naturally open area result in higher prices. A report from Portland, Oregon concludes that higher sale prices of residential properties are realized when they are located within a quarter-mile of wetlands and streams, parks and natural areas. Similar results of property appreciation were observed in Massachusetts.

When integrated with comprehensive plan and zoning provisions that encourage the preservation of open space, a community can – over a period of years – protect an interconnected network of conservation lands. Developers can easily take on roles as community conservationists, as each new subdivision adds another link to an area-wide open space system.

When using clustered zoning as a natural area preservation technique, it is not necessary to reduce the number of lots throughout a site. Conventional lot-by-lot subdivisions evenly spread home sites throughout the development parcel. On the other hand, clustering the residences in one portion of the developable site, on adjacent lots, respects and capitalizes on the natural, cultural or environmental attributes of the property. Some of the potential benefits of clustering include:

* Achieving a community goal of preserving open space at the same density standards as outlined in local ordinances
* Providing quality residential and recreational environments
* Establishing a series of interconnecting open space networks providing exponentially greater benefits to wildlife, water quality and recreation if done with other cluster developments.

This type of development does not depend on public financing, landowner charity, public access issues or a shift of development rights. A variety of options exist for ownership and management of the undeveloped land within the property. The landowner can retain ownership and continue to use it for its historical purpose, a homeowners association can take over ownership or management or the property can be donated or managed for conservation and recreation purposes by a local government or land trust. Overall, the quality of the land preserved will depend on the quality of the development design.

Case Study: Large Parcel Incentive Program

The Large Parcel Incentive Process (LPIP), part of the Gunnison County Land Use Resolution, provides an alternative to subdividing into 35-acre parcels. A landowner with at least 70 acres can cluster houses on smaller parcels and protect the remaining acreage as open space for agriculture, ranching and/or recreation. The purpose of LPIP is to provide landowners with a way to realize cash from their land without selling 35-acre parcels. LPIP also encourages compact development so the countryside retains its rural character, productive agricultural lands, scenic views and biological diversity.

By law, rural landowners are allowed to develop one unit per 35 acres without being regulated by a subdivision development process. However, by utilizing LPIP, a landowner can cluster three residences on the property rather than simply dividing the property into two residential pieces provided that at least 75 percent of the parcel is left open. This proportion is used for all LPIP parcels of land approved by the county.

So, using LPIP a landowner with 140 acres may cluster six homes on smaller lots, with 280 acres 12 homes can be built. An additional density bonus is given, if the landowner has 140 acres or more and the preserved land is 85 percent of the tract. One additional lot is permitted for each whole increment of 140 acres.

LPIP is beneficial to the landowner for generating cash while reserving the right to continue ranching or agriculture on most of the acreage. Or a landowner interested in development could use LPIP to cluster the home sites on the parcel thereby reducing infrastructure costs and increasing the number of saleable homes. In addition, the value of the properties will be increased by their proximity to the newly protected open space.

Under this agreement, a private landowner, a homeowner association, non-profit or government entity, may own the open space. Preservation must be accomplished by a land preservation agreement or a recorded deed with conservation covenants acceptable to Gunnison County. If the easement is given to a land trust, the trust is responsible for management of the property. But if the land is preserved with a deed covenant, the landowner is responsible for the property.

Case Study: Larimer County Rural Land Use Program

In response to its quickly changing landscape with agricultural lands changing to suburbs, Larimer County (Colorado) Commissioners created a task force with stakeholders such as agriculturalists, developers, and planners worried about development patterns in the County. The Larimer County Rural Land Use Process (RLUP) resulted in 1996. RLUP is a voluntary process initiated by the property owner in order to develop a portion of the land for housing while maintaining a majority of the land in agricultural production, as open space or as wildlife habitat. The parcel of land must be at least 70 acres and is required to preserve two-thirds of the land as open space for a minimum of 40 years. Colorado state law requires the time period. Using a cluster mentality and financial incentives of more density, RLUP projects containing nearly 10,000 acres have received final approval through March 2006. Nearly 7,400 acres in the 50 projects has been protected from further development for a minimum of 40 years.

The RLUP is designed to:

* Preserve open space and valuable agricultural lands
* Preserve scenic rural landscapes through sensitive design of roads, structures, and fences
* Preserve important wetland and riparian areas, critical wildlife habitats
* Reduce environmental impacts by minimizing tree, vegetation, and soil disturbance

Due to the extra effort and potential increased costs of preserving specific characteristics of the parcel of land, landowners are offered development incentives. Owners may be allowed an increased density without having to submit to a subdivision planning review. The development process has also been streamlined to offer a faster review and limits the amount of referral agencies that may review the project.