Density bonuses in subdivisions
(Cyburbia Forums original post)
From Cyburbian maximov: I have asked in other threads about subdivision design standards, and partly thanks to your help, we are on the verge of adopting a new subdivision ordinance. We have decided to use density incentives to encourage clustering and protection of open space, since we are in a scenic corridor to a national park, and in the desert where there are few trees to hide our oopses. The current draft offers the options below. Some of them we just dreamed up, without ever having seen them used anywhere else, which makes me a little nervous, since we don’t know what we’re doing. Any comments about these, or suggestions for others? Thanks!
a. The base development yield may be increased if the parcel complies with the Performance Standards for Conservation Subdivisions of this chapter and development complies with one or more of the following standards. Each standard provides a development yield bonus of 5% in addition to the base development yield. The maximum bonus permitted is 20%.
1. creating an endowment where the principal would generate sufficient annual interest to cover the conservation easement holder’s yearly costs (taxes, insurance, maintenance, enforcement, etc.);
2. providing for access by the general public to trails, parks, or other recreational facilities, excluding golf courses;
3. reusing historical buildings and structures, including those sites inventoried by the State Historical Society of Utah. The U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties shall apply;
4. implementing approved professional grazing management plan on open space designed to maintain natural vegetation while reducing noxious plant populations;
5. maintaining an approved agricultural use under a permanent approved professional management plan on open space;
6. implementing approved permanent, enforceable policies of strict xeriscaping and water conservation throughout the development;
7. implementing innovative low impact wastewater treatment (requires Town-approved professional plan and specs); or
8. implementing trails improved and connected as preferred by Town.
You may want to add something about us of Low Impact Development principles [beyond watsewater] in the design and construction. An example - infiltration basins so no stormwater leaves the site (assuming that works with your soils). Otherwise it looks pretty solid.
In my experiences, I would also limit the bonus to 15%.
LOL, well, I only made up #s 4-8; you probably wrote the others (we may not know much, but we can 'research', too). Okay, thanks, I will look for more low impact development principles. I think we already require no stormwater leaves the site. I will talk to the others about reducing to 15%; I guess it would still look more attractive to the developer that way than a grid subdivision, which is our foremost aim. I thought about solar power, but was afraid that suggestion might create a human explosion you could hear from your neighborhood. The water conservation one had me on very thin ice...
It sounds good -- I'm not sure how you'd do this, but what if a developer came in who had some "green" concepts that you didn't include in your list? Would they still be able to receive some bonuses for these measures?
See if you can work some transportation-related green/sustainable concepts into your plan. These can make a big difference!
This page has links to some "green planning" documents that you may want to borrow ideas from to incorporate into your standards
http://www.gvrd.bc.ca/buildsmart/design-practices.htm
PM me your email and I can send you our PUD which does what you are trying to do -
Thank you for the tips; DPP and luckless pedestrian, your info was very helpful, and I am going to paste in info about LEED for future people like me. Here is a link, I hope: http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CategoryID=19
Question
Would any increase be apporved as part of a public hearing process?
Youmay want to add a last bit along the lines of "And any other feature or amentity as approved by [Insert Approving Body Name Here]." This will leave the door open for something you guys didn't think of.
Will increased height be permitted?
Will zero lot lines be permitted?
Yep, a public hearing would be required before the preliminary plat is approved. Increased height, I doubt it, as we are trying to draft a height ordinance but can't seem to agree on how it should be done. We are trying to remove as much discretion from the process as possible, so I think we would be more likely to amend the ordinance to allow a new idea than to write in a catch-all clause. Zero lot lines; now I like that idea, and will suggest it. Thanks!
we empower the Planning Board in a PUD to allow modificaitons to all lot standards except the overall lot coverage of the application parcel must meet the requirements for that zoning district.
This thread isn't particularly fresh, but there's something I want to mention.
Have a land-use attorney look over the document, not just any lawyer. The words you use will be open to interpretation by future officials and the courts. Big developers can afford to hire fancy pants lawyers, and it behooves you to clearly define your terms in a document like this.
I realize that the political processes that these kinds of proposals have to go through sometimes create "grey areas" to acheive consensus on controversial elements, but do your best to be clear and comprehensive.
Good luck!
[ot]Holy crap. I either wrote those or stole them in writing them for the Town next door. I'm guessing the later, given my history with ordinance construction. Remeber folks.... stealing from one is plagarism. Stealing from many is research!
You may want to add something about us of Low Impact Development principles [beyond watsewater] in the design and construction. An example - infiltration basins so no stormwater leaves the site (assuming that works with your soils). Otherwise it looks pretty solid.
In my experiences, I would also limit the bonus to 15%.[/ot]