Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Cluster development

  1. #1
    Cyburbian Plus Whose Yur Planner's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Dixie
    Posts
    5,846

    Cluster development

    Another question for the throbbing brain.

    Are there any good examples of a cluster development. Pictures/layout would be helpful.
    When did I go from Luke Skywalker to Obi-Wan Kenobi?

  2. #2
    Cyburbian jmello's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Clayobyrne, CB
    Posts
    2,581
    The Town of North Kingstown, Rhode Island has been very sucessful at encouraging cluster/conservation subdivisions within the last few years.

    See: http://www.northkingstown.org/planningdept/Default.htm

  3. #3
    moderator in moderation Suburb Repairman's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2003
    Location
    at the neighboring pub
    Posts
    5,279
    http://www.landchoices.org/Linkstoco...tiondesign.htm

    I used some stuff from the site above when I made a presentation to my Commission about conservation & cluster design in subdivisions. The link includes site plans as well as photos for each example.

    "Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

    - Herman Göring at the Nuremburg trials (thoughts on democracy)

  4. #4
    Cyburbian jread's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    739
    What exactly is a cluster development?
    "I don't suffer from insanity... I enjoy every single minute of it!"

  5. #5
    Cyburbian jmello's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Clayobyrne, CB
    Posts
    2,581
    Quote Originally posted by jread
    What exactly is a cluster development?
    Instead of developing ten homes on 1-acre parcels, a developer will instead develop ten homes on 0.25-acre parcels and leave the remaining 7.5 acres as open space. The same number of house get built on one quarter of the land.

    I personally do not care for cluster/conservation subdivisions. I would rather see all of these homes built in or at the fringes of an existing village, town or city not on a green field surrounded by open space in the middle of nowhere with little or no relation to existing settlement patterns.

  6. #6
    moderator in moderation Suburb Repairman's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2003
    Location
    at the neighboring pub
    Posts
    5,279
    Quote Originally posted by jmello
    Instead of developing ten homes on 1-acre parcels, a developer will instead develop ten homes on 0.25-acre parcels and leave the remaining 7.5 acres as open space. The same number of house get built on one quarter of the land.

    I personally do not care for cluster/conservation subdivisions. I would rather see all of these homes built in or at the fringes of an existing village, town or city not on a green field surrounded by open space in the middle of nowhere with little or no relation to existing settlement patterns.
    I'm not a huge fan either, but they can be quite useful for addressing environmental issues such as aquifer recharge. You just have to be careful in your application of them.

    "Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

    - Herman Göring at the Nuremburg trials (thoughts on democracy)

  7. #7
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Jan 2004
    Location
    montana
    Posts
    336
    without thinking too deeply about it or digging for examples, two books by Randall Arendt address this directly:

    Rural By design, and

    Conservation subdivisions.

  8. #8
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Jan 2004
    Location
    montana
    Posts
    336
    Okay- I've tried something new: I've attached an image to this. NO idea if it will come up or not. If it does, the image will show a subdivision that we just did that clustered the lots in a decent conservation design.
    Attached Files Attached Files

  9. #9
    Cyburbian jread's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    739
    Thanks for the info

    So it's like sprawl with less homes?
    "I don't suffer from insanity... I enjoy every single minute of it!"

  10. #10
    Member CosmicMojo's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2006
    Location
    I'm not sure where I am...or where I want to be
    Posts
    543
    Quote Originally posted by jread
    Thanks for the info

    So it's like sprawl with less homes?
    No, it's the same # of homes 'regular' development would allow, so the developer doesn't lose profit with this approach: it just distributes the same number of homes over a smaller area so the impact of clearing, grading, filling, paving is greatly reduced. Much more area can be left natural, which is prettier and better for the health of the ecosystem. Homeowners like having a forest behind their house intead of someone else's back yard. They're not perfect, but they sure beat the alternative.

  11. #11
    Cyburbian jread's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    739
    Quote Originally posted by CosmicMojo
    No, it's the same # of homes 'regular' development would allow, so the developer doesn't lose profit with this approach: it just distributes the same number of homes over a smaller area so the impact of clearing, grading, filling, paving is greatly reduced. Much more area can be left natural, which is prettier and better for the health of the ecosystem. Homeowners like having a forest behind their house intead of someone else's back yard. They're not perfect, but they sure beat the alternative.
    I see. Do they create an even higher level of automobile-dependence since they are so spread out, though?
    "I don't suffer from insanity... I enjoy every single minute of it!"

  12. #12
    Member CosmicMojo's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2006
    Location
    I'm not sure where I am...or where I want to be
    Posts
    543
    Quote Originally posted by jread
    I see. Do they create an even higher level of automobile-dependence since they are so spread out, though?
    They are less sprawled out than 'regular development.'
    They require few roads, less paving.

  13. #13
    Cyburbian jmello's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Clayobyrne, CB
    Posts
    2,581
    Quote Originally posted by jread
    Thanks for the info

    So it's like sprawl with less homes?
    Same number of houses. It is sprawl with more open space between adjacent subdivisions, rendering an even more automobile dependent environment. As I said above, at a minimum all of the homes from adjacent conservation subdivisions should be clustered together to form a somewhat cohesive village or town. But, of course this is not usually the case. And, most of the time the open space is not linked between subdivisions.

  14. #14
    Member CosmicMojo's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2006
    Location
    I'm not sure where I am...or where I want to be
    Posts
    543
    Quote Originally posted by jmello
    It is sprawl with more open space between adjacent subdivisions, rendering an even more automobile dependent environment.
    That might be true ideally, but in real life, the suburbanites are driving everywhere regardless of if their subdivisions are built standard or "clustered." At least with clustered there's a buffer between subdivisions.

    Remember, that given parcel is still 10 miles from the mall, whether it's developed with a standard sprawling layout or with a clustered layout, people still have to drive the same 10 miles to the mall. Building it one way or the other isn't going to change the location of that site compared to other destinations. The impact of clustered development isn't regional, it's localized because it reduces the impact of development on that given piece of land.

  15. #15
    Cyburbian jmello's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Clayobyrne, CB
    Posts
    2,581
    Quote Originally posted by CosmicMojo
    Remember, that given parcel is still 10 miles from the mall, whether it's developed with a standard sprawling layout or with a clustered layout, people still have to drive the same 10 miles to the mall. Building it one way or the other isn't going to change the location of that site compared to other destinations.
    Very narrow thinking. If all of the homes were clustered at the front of all of the subdivisions along the main street, you would have the beginning of a walkable urban/suburban thoroughfare. You could also link the conservation land in the rear into a linear park with trails leading to other areas of town, including the all important "mall" and maybe even schools...

  16. #16
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Jan 2004
    Location
    montana
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally posted by jmello
    Same number of houses. It is sprawl with more open space between adjacent subdivisions, rendering an even more automobile dependent environment.
    Hm...

    I think you might be a little harsh...

    The way I look at it, when you live in a place like I do, which has lots of open range land dotted with small, spread out towns, its a reality that rural landowners are going to come in and request to develop their land- especially if the market's hot, like it is where I live. An aging rancher doesn't always want to wait until his ranch is located immediately next to a municipality before he cashes in. Like we hear all the time- these guys are land rich and cash poor.

    So what do you do? Do you just allow anybody to divide their property up into cookie cutter lots? Of course not. You establish a Purchase of Development Rights Program, possibly a TDR program, and you try and encourage creative design through thoughtful regulation and a lot of persuasion.

    As much as I don't like it, it just isn't realistic to say that the only property that can develop has to be immediately adjacent to town. So, you turn to the next best thing- creatively designed development that protects wildlife corridors, reduces the amount of impervious surfaces, and preserves the more aesthetic elements like long views or historic structures.

    Sure, its still auto-dependent sprawl, but it doesn't have to be auto-dependent sprawl that also cuts off the wildlife corridor or flies completely in the face of historical development.

    C'mon, guys- we've been through this before. Suburban development is going to happen. We've had many threads about living in the 'burbs, sprawl, etc.. and I think everyone can agree that as long as people can drive their cars at a moderately cheap price, they're gonna want to live in suburbs. Might as well design it so that it works for the landscape.

  17. #17
    Cyburbian Plus Whose Yur Planner's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Dixie
    Posts
    5,846
    Quote Originally posted by vaughan
    Hm...

    I think you might be a little harsh...

    The way I look at it, when you live in a place like I do, which has lots of open range land dotted with small, spread out towns, its a reality that rural landowners are going to come in and request to develop their land- especially if the market's hot, like it is where I live. An aging rancher doesn't always want to wait until his ranch is located immediately next to a municipality before he cashes in. Like we hear all the time- these guys are land rich and cash poor.

    So what do you do? Do you just allow anybody to divide their property up into cookie cutter lots? Of course not. You establish a Purchase of Development Rights Program, possibly a TDR program, and you try and encourage creative design through thoughtful regulation and a lot of persuasion.

    As much as I don't like it, it just isn't realistic to say that the only property that can develop has to be immediately adjacent to town. So, you turn to the next best thing- creatively designed development that protects wildlife corridors, reduces the amount of impervious surfaces, and preserves the more aesthetic elements like long views or historic structures.

    Sure, its still auto-dependent sprawl, but it doesn't have to be auto-dependent sprawl that also cuts off the wildlife corridor or flies completely in the face of historical development.

    C'mon, guys- we've been through this before. Suburban development is going to happen. We've had many threads about living in the 'burbs, sprawl, etc.. and I think everyone can agree that as long as people can drive their cars at a moderately cheap price, they're gonna want to live in suburbs. Might as well design it so that it works for the landscape.
    I agree. I don't like sprawl myself. However, most of us can't stop it. The ecomonic/cultural/psychological reasons still work for most individuals. Part of land use planning is making the best of the situation until you can effect change. Cluster developments are a way of minimizing the negative aspects of sprawl while making the most of whats left.
    When did I go from Luke Skywalker to Obi-Wan Kenobi?

+ Reply to thread

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 2
    Last post: 27 Nov 2007, 3:09 PM
  2. Subdivision Cluster development
    Land Use and Zoning
    Replies: 6
    Last post: 09 Jan 2007, 1:48 AM
  3. Replies: 14
    Last post: 02 Dec 2005, 1:48 PM
  4. Subdivision Cluster development
    Land Use and Zoning
    Replies: 8
    Last post: 08 Dec 2004, 5:16 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last post: 29 May 2000, 11:38 PM