The URL can be used to link to this page

Bluffland Protection ResearchMEMORANDUM March 13, 2003 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager Research on Bluffland Protection Measures The City Council had requested information on bluffland protection measures. Planning Services Manager Laura Carstens has collected the enclosed information. Should the City Council determine that this issue should be further considered, I respectfully recommend that it be included in the scope of work for the update of the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance as budgeted in FY 2004. C. Van Milligen MCVM/jh Attachment cc: Barry Lindahl, Corporation Counsel Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager ME MOR AND UM March 6, 2003 TO: Michael Van Milligen, City Manager FROM: Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager SUBJECT: Research on Bluff]and Protection Measures At their February 17th meeting, the City Council asked that City staff collect information about bluff]and protection measures. The bluffiand overlay concept in Dubuque County's land use plan was mentioned, along with the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation and the American Planning Association (APA). I contacted Jim Gonyier, Urban/Regional Planner at ECIA, who prepared the County's land use plan. I also contacted Anna O'Shea, Dubuque County Zoning Administrator; Darrel Mills, Land Conservation Specialist at the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation; and the American Planning Association's Planning Advisory Service about bluff]and protection measures. I researched the Internet as well. The information that I have gathered is attached. If the City Council wishes to study bluffiand protection measures further, this could be added to the scope of work for the update of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances in FY 2004. LC/mkr Attachments Laura Carstens From: Sent: To: Subject: Jim Gonyier [JGonyier@ecia.org] Tuesday, February 18, 2003 11:40 AM Icarsten@cityofdubuq ue.org Re: blufflands oveday Hi Laura, The County's Bluff Land Overlay District, as far as I now, only exists on the new County Future Land Use Map so far. Following adoption of the Plan, the County was to investigate possible development standards to protect the bluff area (primarily to preseve the view). Check with Anna, I don't think they have gotten to any ef this yet. The County's "Bluff Land Protection Area" as shown on the Future Land Use Hap, is located between the edge of the Mississippi River and a line that is located one-half mile west of the Great River Road. The APA - PAS Report %429, "Preserving Rural Character" (1990), was reviewed with the County P&Z and Supervisors as an example of simple control mehtods that could be put in place. I know I also passed this report out at one of our Fringe Area Group meetings with you. I will put a copy in the mail to you today. Darrel Mills, Land Conservation Specialist, Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation, dmills@omnitelcom.com (home phone 641-749-6009, he lives in Nora Springs, IA), showed up at some County P&Z meetings and indicated they could help the County do some detailed investigations on the views looking from the river. Again, talk to Anna about this, though I don't think they've done anything. Also, the County P&Z wanted to investigate applying the LESA system for evaluating potential developments, and such a system would/could take view-sheds into cosideration as a criteria - again ask Anna. It would take atleast a year, if everything went perfect, to start applying the LISA system in the County. Let me know if I can be of any further help. Also, please keep me informed of any Joint City/County Planning Committee meetings, I might be able to attend. I did get notice of the cancelled Feb 17th meeting and reschedule for March 17th (but I didn't get the first notice that there was one on Feb. 17th!) - THANKS >>> "Laura Carstens" <lcarsten@cityofdubuque.org> 02/18/03 01:28PM >>> Jim, At last night's meeting, the Dubuque City Council asked that City staff collect information about bluffland protection measures. The bluffland overlay concept in the County's land use plan was mentioned, along with the Iowa Natural Herit%ge Foundation and the American Planning Association. I would appreciate getting a copy of what you have collected and prepared for the County plan, and any other relevant information that can be shared with Council members. Thanks! Laura Fred Heyer, AICE is a principal of the firm of Harvey S. Moskowitz. located in Florham Park, New Jersey. The author presently serves as planning consultant to a num- ber of muntcipalities throughout Lhe state, including several rural communities in Warren and Sussex counties. The graphics in this report were prepared by William C. Denzler and Cenzino V. Cacchione. Thanks go to Har- vey S. Moskowitz for his review and comments. Thanks also go to Robert Guerin and Glen Klenz, Esq., for their insights into "making it work" and "keeping it legalY Spe- cial thanks go to the members of the Hardyston Town- ship Planning Board for their input and their commitment to this approach. A version of this report was published by the New lersey Federation of Planning Officials as a Federation Planning Information Report in Fall 1990. Cover design by Tony Thanasouras Ellis. Planning Advisory Service is a subscription research service of the American Planning Association. Eight reports are produced each year Sub- scribers mso receive the PAS Memo each month and have use of the Inquiry Answering Serv/ce. Israel Stollmau. Executive Director F~ank S. So Deputy E~ecuiive Director: Sylvia lewis Publications l~rector, Plannin8 Advisory Serv/ce Reports are produced at AFA. lames Hecimovich and ~arnes Schwab. Editors: Marya Morris and Paul Thomas Assistant Editors © Copyright December 1990 by the American Planning Association, 3.313 E. 60th St., Chicago, IL 60637, APA has headquarters offices at 1776 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20036. Preserving Rural Character Fred Heyer, AICP Rural character is a bit like pornography--it's v~ry dif- ficult to define, but you know it when you see it. Web- ster's dictionary defines rural as "relating to or character- istic of the country;' Other words such as pastoral or bucolic are often used to describe rural character. The problem lies in the fact that such a simple concept is enor- mously difficult to define. This report will focus on an approach through which rural character can be distilled into its basic components and preserved. Almost invariably, the master plans of developing municipalities include the preservation of rural character as a basic goal and objective. There are variations on this theme, including "to preserve the townships natural fea- tures;' "to preserve the agricultural character of our com- munity;' and "to preserve our town's visual environment:' Unfortunately, many of the same municipalities that es- pouse these lofty goals have attempted to attain them via conventional, large-lot residential zoning and strip com- mercial districts. The results are obvious to anyone who has driven along the rural roads in many of our country's exurban areas. There are the ever-present frontage lot sub- divisions and the fanta field cul-de-sac subdivisions with houses sprouting like so many "modular mushrooms." How is it possible to agree almost universally on a goal An increasingl~/ common sight--the farm field subdivision. and yet be disappointed so often with the results? This re- port will examine methods of attaining the objective of protecting a community's rural character, using-the "con- ventionaI arsenal" of planning tools. These include the master' plan, the land development ordinance, and, perhaps most important, the development review process itself. While the planning literature is replete with innovative regulatory techniques; such as transfer of development rights (TDR), full-spectrum impact fees; and voluminous performance standards that attempt to account for every conceivable contingency, a more basic approach can yield surprisingly good results. The first step in the community planning process is to acknowledge that some develop~ent is inevitable. Like it or not, as development pressures rise, all developing com- munities will be confronted by a steady stream of medium- sized projects as well as the occasional "whopper:' While we would ail like to pull up the drawbridge behind us, the fundamental question is not development versus no devel- opment but rather How much7 Where? and How? DEFINING RURAL CHARACTER: THE ROLE OF THE MUNICIPAL MASTER PLAN The first and most difficult task in preserving rural character is to define very specifically which elements of the community's rural character are most desirable and to focus on methods of preserving them. Which charac- 1 Conventional development uses wide streers, rigid uniform setbacks, extensive lawns, and structures located in oven fields. teristics should be preserved? Obviously, these will vary from community to community. Some might include dis- taut views, rolling topography, country roads, open space, stone rows and tree lines, barns and silos, ponds, and other specific attributes that merit preservation. The idea is to distill the general goal of preserving rumI character into its most basic and specific elements. The compila- tion of this "wish list" is not as simple a task as it might appear. As part of the master plan process, these goals are often given short shrift. To be truly effective, these goals should be carefully studied and debated. Board members should analyze what they like about their towns. They should visit existing de- velopments to determine which characteristics they find 2 desirable and which are offensive. In this way, they can reach consensus on specific objectives. The resulting lists will and should vary widely from community to community. For example, although both are "rural towns;' a community consisting largely of roll- ing agricultural fields will have distinctly different objec- tives from those of a town whose undeveloped land areas are primarily steeply sloped and wooded. In agricultural communities, a distinction should be made between the preservation of agriculture and of agricultural character. The former requires that agricul- ture continue as a viable economic activity; the latter im- plies an effort to retain the appearance or feeling of agri- culture. Both are distinct and desirable goals; however, TABLE 1. DEVELOPMENT TYPE: SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT LANDFORM--FARM 'FIELDS Implementation Techrdques Minimize visual impact Retain rural features Minimize site disturbance 1. Structures should not be placed in open fields. 2. Residences should be located adjacent to tree lines and ~ooded field edges. 3. Residences should not front directly on off-site streets 4. Where dusterlng wilI'yield open space that can remain in active agriculture, its use should be explored and possibly required. 1. Existing farm roads should be incorporated into subdivision design. 2. Stone rows and tree lines should be preserved. 3. Existing agricultural structures such as barns and silos should be preserved where feasible. 1. Roads should follow existing 2. Disturbance for the COnstruction of roads, basins, and other imp.royements should be kept at 3. Disturbance on individual lots should be limited. preserving farming as a way of life is considerably more difficult to achieve. ' Goals and objectives should be grouped by develop- ment type and landform. Single-family development goals should be separate from those of multifamily and non- residential development. Goals for watying landforms should be separated. For example, development around lakes, farm field development, and development of sloped woodlands should each be considered separately. (See tables.) Tables 1, 2, and 3 help to provide a focus that enables goals and objectives to be as specific as possible. These goals and techniques should then be incorporated into the various master plan elements, including the land-use plan, circulation plan, and open space plan. If the master plan is to be truly useful, these goals should be guiding principles when planners review ap- pliCmtions for development. While many members of lo- cal boards have a strong working kno~vledge of their zon- ing ordinances, the master })lan should be used more frequently in their day-to-day business. THE LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE The land development ordinance is the. legal tool through which community goals are implemented. There must be a direct relationship between the master plan goals and the development ordinance. Envision' the type of development permitted as a matter of right under your community's ordinance; visit recently approved projects. Is it what you had in mind? Land-use ordinances range from "brown bag basic" to the high-tech, "I need a decoder ring" type. To be effective, ordinances should lie s6me- where b~tween these two extremes. ": ' A philosophy of "pliable rigidity" in creating the land development ordinance cmn yield good results. This means that relatively few, but key, development parameters should be included within the ordinance's zoning section. TABLE 2. DEVELOPMENT TYPE: SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT LANDFORM--LAKEFRONT DEVELOPMENT Goals Implementation Techniques Minimize visual impact 1. Retain water quality 1. 2. 3. Minimize site disturbance 1. 2. 3. 4. A rhinlmum setback from lakes or ponds should be consistently maintained. The maximum linear disturbance per lot should be l~mited. Disturbances include docks, bulkheads, decks, walkways, and beach areas. A lake management plan should be prepared to control chemical pollutants, such as hydrocarbons and fertilizers. High-quality waters should be identified and monitored to maintain and enhance water quality. On-site wastewater treatment facilities should be designed to effectively protect surface water and groundwater. Total disturbak~ce, especially within buffer areas, should be limited. Roads should .follow existing contours. Disturbance for the construction of roads, basins, and other improvements should be kept to a minimum. Disturbance on individual lots should be limited. TABLE 3. DEVELOPMENT TYPE: SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT LANDFORM--WOODED SLOPES Goals Implementation Techniques Minimize visual impact of development Retain woodland features Minimize site disturbance 1. Structures should not be plac~d on ridge lines. 2. Trees on ridges should not be removed. 3. Water t6wers should not be placed on top of ridge lines. 4. The height of water towers should be limited to an elevation below the crown line of mature'on-site trees. 1. Stone rows and tree lines should be preserved. 2. Treed areas beba, een the principal structure and the drive or roadway should be retained. 3. The creation of extensive lawn areas should be discouraged. 3.. Roads should follow existing contours. 2. Disturbance for the construction of roads, basins, and other improvements should be kept to a minimum. 3. Disturbance on individual lots should be limited. 4. Building envelopes should be limited and located in the most suitable areas for development. 5. Areas beyond reduced envelopes should be restricted against devek, pment. 6. Building envelopes should not be drawn into steep dope areas. 7. The maximum amount of natural vegetation on each site should be preserved. These parameters include use, density, floor area ratio, coverage, and critical setbacks. Other parameters should be placed in the site plan, subdivision, or design standard sections of the ordinance for strategm purposes and to al- low flexibility on the part of the reviewing agency. Since people often view a variance from the zoning or- dinance as a mortal sin, they will accept design standard waivers, perhaps grudgingly, as far less grievous offenses. These waivers should be granted after careful thought, and where the deviations would result in a superior design. A zoning ordinance is not and should not be an inflexi- ble code but, rather, a mechanism by which the commu- nity is afforded basic protection against the adverse im- pacts of development while it still encourages flexibility and innovation. 'Regulating Use and Densities A long list of factors should be considered in establish- ing residential densities and nonresidential intensities in rural areas. These include physical factors such as slopes, wetlands, floodplains, aquifer recharge areas, rare and en: dangered species' habitats, prime agricultural soils, groundwater availability, and septic suitability. Additional considerations include the road network, infrastructure availability, historic character, existing land-use pattern, and community facilities. Some communities have adopted a "carrying capacity"~ 1. Carrying capacity from '~ Quantitative Approach to Determin- ing Land Use Densities;' Peter Pizor and George H. Nieswand, Rutgers University, 1983. 4 approach to density, which applies density adiustment factors to a tract based upon the presence or absence of environmental constraints. A drawback to this approach is evident when this formula is applied to a remote but developable farm field. Although this property can ab- sorb more development from an environmental perspec- tive than its constrained counterpart, a distinction must be made between "carrying capacity" and an "appropri- ate planning capacity:' The mere fact that a tract can be developed at a given density does not mean that it should be. Appropriate densities should be established based upon the full spectrum of planning criteria. While a great deal of emphasis has been placed on the creation and expansion of "central places" such as villages and hamlets, the hinterlands surrounding these areas will continue to be subject to development pressure. In fact, development proposals for these areas tend to consume much of the meeting time of rural boards. The generally accepted and appropriate approach to ru- ral zoning is to create higher-density centers that may in- clude nonresidential uses. These are then surrounded by assorted large-lot residential "block zones;' typically rang- ing from one to five acres in size. Regardless of the methodology used to Fstablish den- sity, there appears (o be a consensus that permissible ru- ral densities outside central places should be kept relatively tow. However, low density alone does not ensure the pro- tection of the environment and the preservation of rural character. In fact, the opposite is often the case. Anyone who has seen a major subdivision of two-acre lots on a farm field is intimately aware of the visual impact of this type of development. Many ordinances require wide streets (30 feet or more) and road frontages of 200 or more feet. These requirements tend to increase site disturbance, creating additional impervious coverage and requiring ex- tensive stormwater management facilities. . Many communities have attempted to mitigate this im- pact by adopting cluster option ordinances that allow in- dividual lots to be smaller'than the minimum allowed un- der conventional subdivision requirements; however, the total number of lots remains the same. For example, in a three-acre,zone, jnc~v~dual lots may be permitted to be one acre or less, y~eldmg common open space. However, the siting of the homes on the lots, the roadway design, and the stormwater management systems are virtually in- distinguishable from those that are obviously suburban. (See Figure 1.) Additionally, many duster ordinances base a ia'act's den- sity on the submission of a qualifying conventional plan. This provision frequently causes prolonged debate over the number of lots permissible. The applicant winds up completely engLneering a conventional plan befor6 the lot yield is agreed upon. Any site development savings are often lost because of the increased time it takes to get a cluster approval. While there is agreement that cluster- lng is a good thing, the complexities involved often dis- coui'age its use, creating a "cluster if you dare" attitude. Low densities, even when coupled with clustering pro- ..v_~'_'ons, do n.ot protect a co.m. munitfs rural character. What i~ necessary is a more sensitive and site-specific approach. Designing the Site FIGURE I. CONVENTIONAL, CLUSTER, AND CREATIVE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS lZO0', ~o~ Once the questions of how much and mhere have been most difficult issue of how must be addressed. This is where most conventional approaches fall short. While it is relatively easy to agree on the types of uses or the num- ber of units permissible on a tract; the physical arrange- often,runs counter to the basic objective of pres ervin a towns rural character, g As long as the maximum number of lots or units has been agreed upon, the challenge is to arran,ge them in the best possible manner while respecting'a site s unique char- octet. A major objective should be to minimize the total opment can result in considerable site disruption--long, .wide roads, large detention facilities, and excessive build- mg envelopes alt encourage unnecessary disturbance. On a two-dimensional subdivision plat, large, regular, rectangular lots are readily understood, but it should be remembered that When the development is built, these site plan or subdivision will look like upon completion. ran.gement of. drive, ways. Which naParal features will re- it appears on plans. Ownership lines should be permitted to follow exist- lng features on the site, such as tree lines, stone rows, or 5 BUILDING ENVELOPES IN CONVENTIONAL LARGE - LOT ZONING ACRE (40,OOOsf) B UI:I~ G EHVELOPE 39% OF LOT AREA 2 AcRE (8o,0oosf) 200* BUILDING ENVELOPE 54% OF LOT AREA 3 ACRE ( 120,000 40, 200' BUILDING ENVELOPE 60% OF LOT AREA REDUCED BUILDING ENVELOPES TO MINIMIZE SITE DISRUPTION FIGURE 2. BUILDING ENVELOPES, CONVENTIONAL AND CREATIVE even contour lines. This avoids the cookie~cu[ter approach and encourages a more natural and sensitive design. Using Building Envelopes as a Tool The building envelope is defined as that portion of a lot located within the minimum prescribed front-, rear-, and side-yard setback distances. I.f one examines typical setback requirements, the building envelope for a one-acre lot rep- resents nearly 40 percent of its total ai-ea. (See Figure 2.) As lot sizes increase, the percentage of a lot within the building envelope increases. For instance, on a typical three-acre lot, the building envelope defines roughly 60 6 percent of the lot's total area. While it is necessary, partic- ularly in a rural setting, to provide for ample flexibility in siting a home on a lot, there is no reason to permit a de- velopment that would theoretically allow for disturbance to take place within an area constibating 60 percent of a three-acre lot. This creates excessive discretion in the sit- ing of structures and their accompanying site disturbance. In the design process, these building envelopes should be more narrowly defined, and the most suitable areas for development should be shown. Areas beyond these reduced building envelopes should be restricted against develop- ment. Building envelope lines should not be drawn into wetlands or steep slope areas that need not be disturbed. The use of prototypical plot plans showing the general location of structures and driveways is often invaluable in evaluating subdivisi6n design. A community can use individual tot grading plans to assess the extent of dis- turbance on a lot. .Conservation Easements and Deed Restrictions A conservation easement is defined as a restriction against further development of a portion of a tract. Many municipalities are already using conservation easements for wetlands protection. This technique has promise in other sensitive areas, including floodplairis, ridge lines, and sloped areas outside the building envelope. This method should be 8oupled with reduced building enve- lopes when one deals with subdivisions. Sensitive a~eas .outside the reduced building envelopes should be placed in conservation easements. Occasionally, the use of clustering on small tracts pro- duces small pieces of open space that do not relate to a community's open space plan. In these situations, lot lines can be extended so that there is no common open space. These areas can then be deed-resbdcted against f~rther de- velopment, keeping the property open without creating a homeowners association. (See Figure 3.) A DESIGN MANUAL APPROACH When it comes to zoning ordinances, a picture may be worth more than a thousand words. One technique that has considerable merit is a design manual2 approach to site plans and subdivisions. The design manual outlines, in graphic and narrative £orm, the differences between conventional and creative development alternatives. Ex- amples of "good plans" and "bad plates" for the same tract can be placed side by side, affording board members and developers alike a clearer vis/on of the physical results that a zoning ordinance can produce. 2. A fine example o~c this approach is the publication "Dealing with Change in the Connecticut River Valley: A Design Manual for Conser- vation and Development;' Lincoln Institute of Land Pdiicy, 1988. The design manual puts the specific master plan goals into ordinance form. The manual should include proto- typical sketches for various types of tracts and develop- ment techniques. For example, alternative development scenarios for farm fields and hillsides can be included. The following is an example of some of the principles that may appear in a design manual for subdivisions~ There are separate sections f6r zoning requirements and. design standards. While this example focuses ~)n single- family subdivisions, the technique is equally applicable to multifamily and nonresidential development. The following list is not intended to be comprehensive or all-inclusive. The author strongly cautions against the wholesale use of the specific standards set fro:th in this design manual. Each community must carefully set its own standards. .. Purpose The purpose of this district is to preserve the township's rural character and to provide a regulatory mechanism th. rough which development can occur with minimal en- wronmental impact. The ordinance promotes creative de- .velopment and provides flexibility not generally found in conventional subdivision' ordinances. The underlying assumptions and rationale for tiffs ordinance can. b~ found in the township% master plan revision. Preliminary Design Assessment In addition.to those items required for submiision in accordance with the townsiffp's preliminary major subdi- vision checklist, all applicants for major subdivisions within tiffs district must also provide a preliminary de- sign assessment in accordance with the preliminary de- sign assessment checklist. This assessment shall consist of a grapiffc and narrative site feature inventory. Ail sig- nificant site features should be included: critical areas, vistas, ridge lines, wetlandsr floodplains, slopes, tree lines, 3. The list and diagrams are based in part upon a preliminary draft of a design manual being prepared for Hardyston Township, Sussex County, New lersey FIGURE 3. COMMON OPEN SPACE (LOWER LEFT); OPEN SPACE IN iNDIVIDUAL LOTS WITH CONSERVATION EA?EMENTS (LOWER RIGHT) OPTION WHIERE_O~IE_N.$pA_ CE_ Plan LS NOT ACCEPTABLE 7 SITE SIZE: 104 ACRES 104 X 0,2 = 20.8 = 20 LOTS SITE SIZE: 14.62 ACRES 14.62 X 0.2 -- 2.92 -- 2 LOTS FIGURE 4. DENSITY CALCULATION stone rows, significant rock outcrops and tree masses, rare and endangered species habitats, trout maintenance and trout-production streams, and any additional features uniquely affecting a site. Wildlife Management Plan 1. In projects in~'olving ~LO0 or more acres, a wildlife management plan shall be submitted in accordance with the wildlife management plan checklist require- ments. This plan shall address measures taken to pre- serve 'and improve on-site wildlife habitat. Rare and endangered species habitat protection shall be ad- dressed, if applicable. FIGURE 5. MAXIMUM BUILDING ENVELOPES 8 2. Open space and conservation easement areas shall be designed with massing and linkage as guiding prin- ciples. Open space and conservation areas shall be contiguous both on site and off tract. Stream cor-. ridors and contiguous wetlands can provide linkage. Zoning Requirements 1. Permitted uses: Single-family detached housing, agricultural uses, and wood lot management. 2. Density: Themaximumpermitteddensitywithi~t the FIGURE 6~ TOTAL SITE DISTURBANCE CALCULATION' CALCULATION INCLUDEE ALL DISTURBED AREAS INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE BUILDING ENVELOPE SUCH AS PRINCIPAL AND ACCESSORY BUILDIBGS, /,/ ,' BUILDING ENVELOPES / FIGURE 8. MIN.~MUM DISTANCE B~N BUILDING ENVELOPE AND TRACT BOUNDARY OR OFF-SITE STREET district shall be .2 units per acre. In order to calculate the maximum permissible number of lots, the total gross tract acreage is multipl/ed by .2. (See Figure 4.) 3. Minimum lot size with indiv~duaI well and septic sys- tem: 40,000 square feet. 4. Minimum lot size with central water: 30,000 square feet. 5. Maximum building envelope size: 40 percent of lot ar~a or 20,000 square feet, whichever is less. (See Fig- ute 5.) 6. Maximum total lot disturbance: Fifty percent of lot area or 25~000 square feet, whichever is less. Site dis- turbance shall include all areas disturbed for the pur- pose of constructing buildings and strCmtures as well as ail graded areas and lawns. The total shall include disturbed areas both inside and outside the building envelope. (See Figure 6.) 7. Maximum total tract disturbance for public improve- ments including streets and stormwater management facilities: seven percent of tract area. All improvement-related disturbance shall be included in this calculation, including areas of grading and veg~- ration removal as well as the cartways artd basins. 8. Minimum.spacing between building envdopes c~n ad- jacent lots: 50 feet. (See Figure 7.) 9. Minimum spacing between building envelopes and tract boundary or off-site public street: 50 feet. (See Figure 8.) 10. No building envelope shall be placed closer than five feet to any lot line. (See Figure 7.) 11. Minimum spacing of building er~velope from on-site public streets: 35 feet, (See Figure 8.) 12. Minimum setback of building envelope from lakes or ponds: 100 feet. (See Figure 9.) Design Standards The following criteria shall be considered design stan- dards. It is recognized that not all these standards may be achievable in every subdivision; for this reason, 'each application shall be carefully considered, and waivers shall. be granted where appropriate. Lot Frontage. Where a lot abuts a public street, the minimum lot frontage shall be 50 feet. Lots usin'gprivate FIGURE 9. WATER FEATURES BUFFER REQUIREMENT 9 Top: Siting structures directly atop ridge lines, combined with substantial clearing, produces very conspicuous development. Bottora: Struc~ares sited below the ridge line with trees retained. FIGURE I0. LOCATING BUILDING ENVELOPES drives for access shall not be required to have frontage on a public street. Locating Building Envelopes 1. Building envelopes shall be selected that do not in- dude the tops of ridge lines. (See Figure 10.) 2. Building envelopes shall avoid open fields. (See Fig- ure 10.) 3. Building envelopes shall be located on the edges of fields and in wooded areag to minimize the visual impact of development. (See Figure 103 4. Building envelopes shall not include wetlands, tran- sition areas, and floodplains. 5. Building envelopes shall not include areas with slopes in excess of 35 percent. (See Figure 10.) Clustering 1. Clustering shall be permitted upon the submission of an acceptable open space management plan. 2. The minimum tract area for the use of the duster option shall be 25 acres. 3. The minimum common open space shall be 10 con- tiguous acres. 4. Each area of common open space shall have at least two 15-foot-wide pedestrian access points accessi- ble from a public roadway. 5. If an open space management plan aCCeptable to the planning board is not possible, the building lots shall be increased in size to include the entire tract area, and conservation easements will be used to restrict the area identified as open space on the duster plan. (See Figure 3.) 6. No increase in density shall be permitted when us- ing the cluster option. FIGURE 11. CONSERVATION EASEMENTS 7. In subdivisions where some of the resultant individ- ual tots exceed 10 acres, no further subdivision of these lots shall be permitted. This restriction shall be included in the lot's deed. Conservation Easements/Deed Restrictioias ~-, Conservation easements shall be required for all wet- land areas and required transition areas. (See Fig- ure 11.) 2. Critical areas located outside building envelopes shall contain conservation easements. These critical areas shall include slopes in excess of 35 perCent; flood- plains, and open water bodies. (See Figure 11.) 3. All subdivision plals shall contain a reference to any required conservation easement. 4. If lots are created that exceed 10 acres or more in size, these lots shall include a deed restriction against further subdivision. 11 ON-SiTE ROAD :/ USE OF COMMON DRIVES FOR FRONTAGE LOTS IS ENCOURAGED FIGURE 12. SPACING OF ACCESS POINTS TO OFF-SITE ROADS Design Stand,ds for Public Roads. It is the intent of this ordinance to minimize the amount of site disruption caused by roadways and the associated grading required for their construction. 1. Right-of-way width: 50 feet. 2. Cartway width: 24 feet. 3. Maximum number of units per public dead end street: 25. 4. Minimum distance between access points on bff-site public roads: 200 feet. Access points shall include individual and common driveways and on-site pub- lic roadways. (See Figure 12.) 5. Curbing: Curbing shall be used only where neces- sary to provide for stormwater management. Where curbing is required, Belgian block or equivalent ma- terial shall be required. 6. Roadways shall follow existing contours to minimize the extent of cuts and fills. 7. Where sites indt~de linear features such as existing access roads, tree lines, and stone rows, roadways shall follow these features to minimize their visual impact. 8. Roadways shall not be located in open fields. Driveways 1. The number of driveways accessing off-site public 12 / :,/// CONVENTIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF FRONTAGE LOTS WITH INDIVIDUAL DRIVES FICUR~F 13. DRIVEWAYS, COMMON COMPARED ~ IND[VIDUAt' streets shall be kept to a minimum. 2. The appropriate use of common driveways is en- couraged. Where lots wi11 access an off-site public street, common driveways shall be used where ap- propriate to minimize the number of curb cuts re- quired. (See Figure 13.) 3. The maximum number of units served by a corn- mob driveway shall be four. (See Figure 14.) 4. Minimum common driveway width: 12 feet with two-foot graded and stoned shoulders. 5. Paving shall be required in areas where driveway grade is in excess of six percent. MAXIMUM LENGTH: 1,000' MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS: 4 PUBM WHEN COMMON DRtVEW~f'S ARE USED, THE ]:~ORTION OF THE COMMON DRIVEWAY LOCA'~ED ON A LOT IS TO BE iNCLUDED IN THE SITE DISTURBANCE TOTAL FOR THAT LOT. HGURE 14. COMMON DRIVEWAYS SCENARIO 6. Maximum length of common driveway: 1,000 feet. (See Figure 14.) 7. All driveways in excess of 500 feet shall provide a 10' X 30' turnout. The exact location of the turn- out shall be determined by the board with the re- view of the fire department. (See Figure 15.) 8. Ail driveway areas shall be included in the total lot disturbance calculation for the lot on which the driveway is located, 9. All lots using common driveways shall provide a driveway maintenance agreement to be reviewed and approved by the board attorney. Stormwater Management 1. Existing natural drainage ways shall be retained. 2. Where stormwater management facilities are re- quired, they shall be designed in as small an area as possible. The ratio of the basin's area to volume FIGURE ~5. DRIVEWAY TURNOUT FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT VEHICLES SHOULDER 2' DRIVEWAY 2' SHOULDER 2' 120'~ TURNOUTS REQUIRED WHERE DRIVE3NAy LENGTH EXCEEDS 500' 3_3 Top: The number of driveways With access to off-site public streets should be kept to a minimum. Multiple drive- ways in close proximity create needless disturbance. Bottom: The appropriate use of common drive'ways and shared curb cuts is encouraged. WATER TOWERS SHALL NOT BE LOCATED OH TOP OF RIDGE WHERE REQUIRED, WATER TOWERS SHALL BE I~OCATED BELOW THE RIDGE TOP AND BELOW THE CROWN LINE OF MATURE TREES. FIGURE 16. LOCATION OF WATER TOWERS shall be minimized. 3. Retention basins shall be used where basins are re- quired. 4. Ail basins shall require landscaping plans. The ba- sins shall resemble natural ponds to the maximum extent practical. FIGURE 17. PERMISSIBLE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN WATER FEATURE BUFFER ®® DECK (400 S.F. 100' BUFFER LAKE 5. Basin landscaping materials that enhance wildlife habitat shall be selected. Central Water Facilities 1. Where central water facilSties are used, their visual impact shall be minimized. The overall size, height, and location shall all be considered. ~' ;; 2. Water towers shall not be placed on t8l:;'of ridge lines. (See Figure 16.) 3. The height of water towers shall be limited to an ele- vation below the crown line of mature on-site trees. (See Figure 16.) 4. Where a tract contains barns or silos, these struc- tures may be used to conceal a water storage facility. Permissible Development Within the Water Feature Buffer 1. Not more than 25 linear feet of shoreline per lot shall be disturbed. This includes docks, bulkheads, and beach areas. 2. Structures permitted in the buffer area: d6cks, bulk2 headsr patios, terraces, decks, and pathways. (See Figure 17.) 3. Patios, terraces, and decks shall be Unroofed and shall not exceed 400 square feet. The maximum height above grade shall be limited to 24 feet. (See Figure 17.) 4. The total maximum disturbance within the buffer area shall not exceed 1,000 square feet. (See Figure 17.) Landscaping and Lawns 1. Existing vegetation'shall be preserved in areas where disturbance is not necessary outside the building envelope. (See Figure 18.) 2. The creation of lawn areas in excess of 10,000 square feet is prohibited. Lawn areas shall be included in the total site disturbance calculation. In instances where a lot includes open field areas, these areas may be seeded without being included in the FIGURE 18. LANDSCAPING AND LAWNS . ;'-/':C':~ ~i~.i'~ lC: :-~: MAXIMUM DISTURBANCE,WITHIN BUFFER: 1,000 s.f. A treed area should be retained behoeen the building envelope and street: Note the siting of homes on the edge of the field, varied setbacks, and minimal lawns. 10,000-square-foot total or the total site disturbance calculation. 3. Where Iandscaping is proposed, native species shall be included in the design. 4. Where building envelopes are located in woodlands, a treed area of at least 30 feet between the building envelope and the common drive or roadway shall be retained. (See Figure 18.) FIGURE 19. LOCATION OF FENCING FENCING ON OR WlTHtN BUILDING ENVELOPES 16 Fencing 1. Perimeter fencing of lots is not permitted. (See Fig- ure 19.) 2. Fencing may be constructed on the perimeter of or within the building envelope area of lots. (See Fig- ure 19.) 3. The fencing restriction shall not apply to agricul- tural uses as defined in the zoning ordinance. 4. Critical areas located outside building envelopes shall not be fenced. Signage 1. Permanent on-site development identification signs are prohibited. 2. Where the board determines that a development identification sign is appropriate, its area shall be limited to eight square feet, its constructior[ shall be of natural materials (i.e., wood and stone), and the base area shall be appropriately landscaped. 3. Resident identification signs are permitted at en- trances to driveways. The maximum height of resi- dent identification signs shall be eight feel. Each in- dividual name sign shall not be more than one square foot. (See Figure 20.) Lighting 1. Lighting shall be provided only where site-specific safety conditions warrant. 2. Where street lighting is required, its location and in- tensity shall be subject to the board's review. I s.f.~ each JO#5$ FIGURE 20. RESIDENT IDENTIFICATION SIGNS ON COMMON DRIVEWAY Concrete Engineered Structures 1. Visible structures such as curbing, culverts, walls, and outlet structures shall not be stark white. The use of dyed and textured concrete as well as of other natural materials is required to minimize the visual impact of these structures. Accessory Buildings a~d Structures 1. Accessory buildings shall be located within the build- ing envelope areas. 2. Accessory structure~ shall be located within build- ing envelopes except as otherwise permitted by this ordinance. 3. Septics, wells, and driveways_may be'.10cated out- side building envelopes. -' ~' Existing Structures 1. When a tract contains existing structures deemed to be of historic or architectural significance, and where these· structures are suitable for rehabilitation, the structures shall be retained. 2. Adaptive reuse of existihg stru(tures for residential use or permitted accessory residential uses shall be permitted. Guardrails 1. Where guardrails are necessary, they shall be con- structed o£ wood. THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS Boards often find themselves in the uncomfortable po- sition of having to review completely conforming but unimaginative and poorly designed applications. Even the most carefully crafted ordinances cannot ensure the desired result when applied to a specific tract. The time to suggest a "better way" is long before the developer has invested considerable time and expense in the-'hard engi- neering of a set of plans. At that point, the project has lA/here practical, existing structures should be preser-oed. Development can be concentrated on a portion of a tract preserving the character of the site while accommoda2tlng some development. 3.7 Top mad bottom: The use of natural materials for engineered structures is encouraged, Top: GuardraiIs should be constructed of wood. Curbing where necessary should be belgian block. Bottom!t The use of bright metal guardraits is discouraged. gained considerable inertia and will continue to move un- der its own weight. Although the submission of sketch plans and the in- formal review of site plans and subdivisions is often per- mitted by planning enabling legislation, the procedure is not used as often as it should be. Using this process has real possibilities for helping a community achieve many of its master plan goals, including preserving rural char- acter. The developer should be encouraged to comk be- fore the board or its subcommittee4 and it~ professionals long before any hard engineering drawings have been completed. Generalized sketches of multiple alternatives can be evaluated in the field before formal submissions are made. At this stage, the developei' can make adjust- ments relatively painlessly. The net result of this approach when coupled with a somewhat flexible ordinance is to encourage creativity and irinovafion, while at the same time allowing the comm3mity to achieve its specific goals and objectives. CONCLUSION Preserving rural character need not be the frustrating pursuit of an elusive goal. Accept the fact that some de- 4. Subcommittees go by a 'variety of names--DRC (Development Re- view Cornmit teet. 'iCC (Technical Coordinating Committee), TRC (Tech- aical Review Committee). The committees may include the board's profes- sionals--attorney, engineer, planner--in addition to the board secretarg, board members and other staff. velopmant is inevitable, define exactly what you want, and use the extensive set of tools available to you like a craftsman. The master plan, land development ordinance, and development review process can prod¢ce the desired result--but it takes effort. Selected. Bibliography Moskowitz, Harvey S., and Carl G. Lindbloom. The B- lustrated Book of Development Definitions. New Brun- swick, N.J.: Rutgers University, Center for Urban Policy Research, 1983_. Rutgers University. Current Planning Capacity: A Prac- tical Carrying-Capacity Approach to Land-Use Plan- ning. Extension Bulletin 413. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rut- gers, The State Urdversity of New Jersey, June 1977. Thurow, Charles, William Toner, and Duncan Erley. Per- formance Controls for Sensitive Lands: A PracticaI Guide for Local Administrators. Report Nos. 307/308. Chicago, Ill.: American Planning Association, June 1975. Yaro, Robert D. et al. Dealing with Chknge in the Con- necticut River Valley: A Design Manual for Conserva- tion and Development. 3rd printing. Cambridge, Mass.: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, June 1989. 20 RECENT PLANNING ADVISORY SERVICE REPORTS 377 Flexible Parking Requirements. August 1983.38 pp. $16; PAS subscribers $8. 378 Working With Consultants. October 1983. 33 pp. $16; PAS subscribers $8. 379 Appearance Codes for Small Communities. Oc- tober 1983.26 pp. $16; PAS subscribers $8. 380 Analyzing the Economic Feasibility of a Develop- ment Project: A Guide for Planners. November 1983. 38 pp. $16; PAS subscribers $8. 381 Increasing Housing Opportunities for the Elderly. December 1983. 16 pp. $16; PAS subscribers $8. 382 Planners' Salaries and Employment Trends, 1983. February 1984. 18 pp. $16 (photocopy). 383 How To Set Up a Planning Agency Library. April 1984. 38 pp. $16; PAS subscribers $8. 384 Regulating Radio and TV Tower~. June 1984. 38 pp. $16; PAS subscribers $8. 385 Affordable Single-Family Housing: A Review of Development Standards. August 1984. 117 pp. $24; PAS subscribers $12. 386 State and Local Regulations for Reducing Agricul- tnral Erosion. September 1984. 42 pp. $16; PAS sub- scribers $8. 387 Traffic Impact Analysis. October 1984. 34 pp. $16; PAS subscribers $8. 388 Planning Software Survey. November 1984. 32 pp. $16 (photocopy). 389 Tax Increment Financing: Part 1. What Is TIF? Part 2. Determining Potential Gains and Losses of TIE December 1984. 3.9 pp. $16i PAS subscribers $8. 390 Infrastructure Support for Economic Development. September 1985. 38 pp~ $:[6; PAS subscribers $8. 391 Home Occupation Ordinances. October 1985. 38 pp. $16; PAS subscribers $8. 392 Innovative Capital Financing. December 1985. 38 pp. $16; PAS subscribers $8. 393 Managing Municipal Information Needs Using Microcomputers. 'April 1986. 22 pp. $16 (pho- tocopy). 394 Regulating Satellite Dish Antennas. ~as/1986.30 pp. $16; PAS 'subscribers $8. 395 Planners' Salaries and Employment Trends, 1985. June 1986.18 pp. $16; PAS subscribers $8. 396 Standards for Self-Service Storage Facilities. Sep- tember 1986. 22 pp. ~,16; PAS subscribers $8. 397 Siting Group Homes for Developmentally Disabled Persons. October 1986.46 pp. $16; PAS subscribers $8. 398 Regulating Manufactured Housing. December 1986. 38 pp. $16; PAS subscribers $8. 399 Aesthetics and Land-Use Controls. December 1986. 46 pp. $16; PAS subscribers $8. 400 The Planning Commission: Its Composition and Function, 1987. May 1987. 11 pp. $16; PAS sub- scribers $8. 401 Transferable Development Rights Programs: TDRs and the Real Estate Marketplace. May 1987. 38 pp. $16; PAS subscribers $8. 402 Seven Methods for Calculating Land Capabil- ity/Suitability. July 1987. 22 pp. $20; PAS sub- scribers $10. 403 Computer Applications in Economic Devei~pment. August 1987. 38 pp. $20; PAS subscriber~ $10. 404 How to Conduct a Citizen Survey. November 1987. 24 pp. $20; PAS subscribers $10. 405 New Standards for Nonresidential Us~. December 1987. 26 pp. $20; PAS subscribers $10. 406 Housing Trust Funds. December 1987. 25 pp. $20; PAS subscribers $10. 407 Planners' Salaries and Employment Trends, 1987. December }987. ~_5 pp. $20; PAS subscribers $10. 408 The Calculation of Proportionate*Share Impact Fees. July 1988.38 pp. $20; PAS subscribers $10. 409 Enforcing Zoning and Land-Use Controls. August 1988. 30 pp. $20; PAS subscribers $10. 410 Zoning Bonuses in Central Cities. September 1988. 30 pp. $20; PAS subscribers $10. 4~[1 The Aesthetics of Pa~king. November 1988.42 pp. $20; PAS subscribers $10. 412/413 Protecting Nontidal Wetlands. December. 1988. 76 pp. $36; PAS subscribers $18. 414/415 A Planners Review of PC Software and Tech- nology. December 1988. 102 pp. $36; PAS sub~ scribers $18. Responding to the Takings Challenge. May 1989. 40 pp. $20; PAS subscribers $10. Reaching Consensus in Land-Use Negotiations. July 1989. 14 pp. $20; PAS subscribers $10. Designing Urban Corridors. September 1989.38 pp. $20; PAS subscr/bers $10. Sign Regulation for Small and Midsize Communi- ties: A Planners Guide and a Model Ordinance.' November 1989.42 pp. $20; PAS subscribers $10. Community-Based Housing for the Elderly: A Zon- ing Guide for Planners and Munldpal Offidais. De- cember 1989. 30 pp. $20; PAS subscribers $10. 421 A Survey of Zoning Definitions. December t989. 36 pp. $20; PAS subscribers $10. 422 Zoning for Child Care. December ~.989. 30 pp. $20; PAS subscribers *423 Planners' Salaries and Employment Trends, 1989. December 1989. 22 pp. $20; PAS subsc~ribers $20. 424/425 Solid Waste Management: Planning Issues and Opportunities. September t990. 71 pp. $36; P_AS subscribers $18. *426 Private Funding for Roads. October 1990. 30 pp. PAS subscribers $10. 427/428 Planning Software Survey, 1990. 55 pp. December 1990. $36; PAS subscribers $18. *429 Preserving Rural Character. December 1990.20 pp. PAS subscribers $10. *Available only to subsc~bers of Plat'mlng Advisory Selw'ice, '416 '417 418 419 *420 PEPIN COUNTY ZONING OFHCE 740 7TH AVE WEST DURAND, WISCONSIN 54736 PHONE 715-672-8897 FAX 715-672-8677 CO MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE BLIJFF2.DOC I 11/17/98 B:~MSOFFICEXWINWORD SUMMARY November 18, 1998 1. History. Initial response to propoied state legislation on slopes Ereater than 12%. Bo County Zoning Committee approached towns and asked if development patterns on blufflands were an issue, and ifso~ what the county should do. Two townships firmly stated they were not interested in state legislation on the issue and that the county should look at the issue. This ladd to a number of meetings with citizens of the area and local government units from 1991 through mid-1993. With input from these meetings~ a code was developed which was ready to take to the county for adoption and then back to the township for adoption. 2. CONTENT OF CODE. A. Defined purpose of the code. Basically, the purpose of the Bluffland Code is somewhat the s~me as the Shoreland Code. Both. codes are intended to preserve natural aesthetics of an area. The Blufiland Code also controls the plaesment of structures and conflicting land uses by setting minimum lot sizes and widths, estabBshtnE allowable uses of land, and setbacks of buildings. In addition to deflnin~ lot size and setbacks~ the Bluffland Code protects the unique aesthetics of the bluffs by r~strictin~ removal of woody vegetation and controlling excavation. B. General Provisions Jurisdiction of the code is listed by township~ section, then by forty (40}. Dimensions of building sites - 5 acres minimum lot size with 300 feet of frontage requirod~ and there is lan~age for substandard lots. 3. Division of districts. BLUFF AREA - within the listed forty (40), slopes greater than 30% and stopinl~ toward Lake Pepin. TT~is ts a ver~ restricted ~rea. B:kMSOFFICE\WrNWORD 2 l 1/l 7/98 be BLUFFTOP SETBACK AREA - Area which lies between the bluflline (line connecting slopes greater than 30%) and forty feet back. Uses ~llo~ed: sm~, lo~ dee]~; a~.~culture, etc. ee BUILDABLE BLUFFTOP AREA - area forty feet back from bluffllne and extending 460 feet inland. Uses ~llo~ed: $~gle a~'amEy Residence-teJgtt restrictions o[ 32 leer, e~/summ~ ;egeta~o= TOE SLOPE AREA - Area within 100 feet of toe slope of bluff with slopes greater than 30%. Uses ~llo~ed: CondtHonM use $~]e Fam~J.y ~es~Ee~e~. NOTE: Code than has significant language defining each area in detail. GENERAL ZONING PROVISION - Permit require- ments, administrative provisions, condition use. VEGETATIVE CUTTING PROVISIONS - No more than 20 feet in 150 feet~. NONCONFORMING USE8 - existing structures allowed additions up to 50% of current fair market value as long as addition does not encroach further upon bluffs. m ADOPTION. The code was adopted by Pepin County in June, 1993. The townships of Stocl~l~olm and Pepin (both along Lake Pepin) adopted the code the same year. EFFECTS OF THE CODE. Decks New developments - property owner awareness. BLUFF2.DOC 3 11/17/98 B:hMSOFFICE\WINWORD CHAPTER 19 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.01 19.02 19.03 19.04 19.05 19.06 19.07 19.08 19.09 19.10 19.15 Statutory Authorization, Finding of Fact, Statement of Purpose and Title General Provisions Dimensions of Building Sites Use Regulations for Areas Within the Jurisdiction of this Chapter Detailed Definitions and Procedures for Establishing Bluffline Setbacks Administrative Provisions Conditional Use Vegetative Cutting Nonconforming Uses P~reexisfing Parcels Enforcement and Penalties PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19,01 19.01 STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION, FINDING OF FACT. STATE- MENT OF PURPOSE AND TITLE. (I) STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION. This chapter is adopted under the authorization in Ch. $9. Wis. Stats. (2) FINDING OF FACT. The County Board and Townships of Stockholm and Pepin have recognized uncontrolled use of the bluffiands of the Mississippi River within the County could adversely affect the environment, public health, safety and impair the tax base of the County. Having recognized these facts, the County Board has taken the responsibility through this chapter to further the maintenanc~ of safe and healthful conditions; prevent groundwater contamination and soil erosion; control building sites, placement of structures and land uses; protect unique wildlife habitat and natural aesthetics of County bluff area overlooking the Mississippi River. (3) STATEMENT OF PURPOSE. Through the administration and enforo~ment of this chapter, the County Board intends to: (a) Further the maintenance of safe and healthful conditi°ns; prevent groundwater contamination and soil erosion by: 1. Limiting structures to those areas where soil and geological conditions will provide a' ~afe foundation. 2. Establishing minimum lot sizes to provide a,dequate area for private sewage systems. 3. Control filling and grading to prevent serious soil erosion problems. (b) Control building 'sites, placement of structures and land uses by: 1. Separating conflicting land uses. 2. Setting minimum lot sizes and widths. 3. Establishing setback requirements for building sites. (c) Protect unique wildlife habitat and natural aesthetics of the bluff area by: 1. Restricting the removal of woody vegetation. 2. Controlling excavation and other earth moving activities. PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.01(3)(c)3. 3. Limiting building and development encroachment upon blufflines. (4) TITLE. This chapter shall be known as and referred to as the "M~ississip~ 'River Bluffland Zoning~rdinance". 19.02 GENERAL PROVISIONS. (1) REGULATED BLUFFLAND AREA. The provisions of this chapter apply to all lands listed below. (a) Township of Stockholm: T24N-RI6W T23N-RI6W Section 26 S~efion 35 Section 2 Section t NW 1/4, NE 1/4: NE 1/4, NW 1/4: NW 1/4, NW 1/4: SW 1/4, NW 1/4: SE 1/4, NW I/4: NE 1/4, SW 1/4: NW 1/4, SW 1/4: SW 1/4, SW 1/4: SE 1/4, SW '114: NW 1/4, NE 1/4: NE 1/4, NW 1/4: NW 1/4, NW 1/4: SW 1/4, NW 1/4: SE 1/4, NW 1/4: SW 1/4, NE 1/4: NW 1/4, SE I/4: NE 1/4, SW 1/4: NW 1/4, SW 1/4: SE 1/4, SE 1/4 SW 1/4, SE I/4 SE 1/4, SW 1/4 NE I/4, NE 1/4: NW 1/4, NE t/4: NE 1/4, NW 1/4: SE 1/4, NW 1/4: SW 1/4, NE t/4: SE 1/4, NE 1/4 NE 1/4, SE 1/4 NW I/4, SE 1/4 NE 1/4, SW 1/4 SE 1/4, SE 1/4 SW 1/4, SE 1/4 SE 1/4, SW 1/4 SW 1/4, SW 1/4 SE 1/4, SW 1/4 SW 1/4, SE 1/4 SE 1/4, SE 1/4 Section 36 SW 1/4, SW I/4 T2.3N-RISW Section 6 SW 1/4, SW 1/4: SE 1/4, SW 1/4: Section 7 NE 1/4, NW 1/4: NW 1/4, NW 1/4: SW 1/4, NW 1/4: SE 1/4, NW 1/4: NE 1/4, SW 1/4: NW 1/4, SW 1/4: SW 1/4, SW 1/4 SE 1/4, SW 1/4 SW 1/4, SE 1/4 SE 1/4, SE 1/4 Section 12 NE I/4, NE 1/4: NW 1/4, NE 1/4: NE 1/4, NW 1/4: SE 1/4, NW 1/4: SW 1/4, NE 1/4: SE 1/4, NE 1/4: Section 18 NE 1/4, NE 1/4 NW 1/4, NE 1/4 SW 1/4, NE 1/4 SE 1/4, NE 1/4 NE 1/4, SE 1/4 SE 1/4, SE 1/4 PEPIN COUNTY Supp. No; 1 Section 8 SW 1/4, SW 1/4: MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.02(1)(b) Section 17 Section 17 Section 20 NE 1/4, NW 1/4: NW I/4, NW 1/4: SW 1/4, NW 1/4: SE 1/4, NW 1/4: b,P',V 1/4, SW 1/4: NE I/4, SW 1/4 NW I/4, SE 1/4: SE 1/4, SE 1/4: SW 1/4, SE 1/4: SE 1/4, SW 1/4: SW 1/4, SW 1/4: NW I/4, NW 1/4 NE 1/4, NE 1/4 NW 1/4, NE 1/4 NE 1/4, NE 1/4 SE 1/4, NE 1/4 (b) Township of Pepin: T23N-RISW Section 15 Section 22 Section 23 Section 24 SW I/4, SW 1/4: Section 16 ' SE 1/4, SE 1/4: Section 21 NE 1/4, NE t/4: $]E 1/4, NE 1/4: NW I/4, ~ 1/4: SW 1/4, NW 1/4: SE 1/4, NE 1/4: SW 1/4, NE 1/4: NW 1/4, NW 1/4: SW 1/4, NW 1/4: SE 1/4, NW 1/4: NW 1/4, SW 1/4: NE 1/4, SW 1/4: NW 1/4, SE 1/4: NE 1/4, SE I/4: NE 1/4, NE 1/4: NW 1/4, NE 1/4: SW 1/4, NE I/4: SE 1/4, NE 1/4: NE 1/4, NW 1/4: SW 1/4, NW 1/4: NW 1/4, SW 1/4: NW 1/4, SE I/4: NE 1/4, SE 1/4: SW 1/4, NE 1/4 NE 1/4, NW 1/4 NW 1/4, NW 1/4 SW 1/4, NW 1/4 SE 1/4, ~ 1/4 NE 1/4, SW 1/4 NW 1/4, SW 114 SE 1/4, SW 1/4 NE 1/4, SE 1/4 NW 114, SE 114 SW 1/4, SE 1/4 SE 1/4, SE 114 T23N-R14W Section 19 Section 30 NW 1/4, SW 1/4 SW 1/4, 5W 1/4 SE 1/4, SW 1/4 SW 1/4, SE 1/4 NW 1/4, NE 1/4 NE 1/4, NW 1/4 NW 1/4, NW 1/4 (2) COMPLIANCE. The use of any land; size, shape and placement of lots; use, size, type and location of structures on lots; installation and maintenance of water supply and waste disposal facilities; filling and grading of lands; cutting of woody vegetation and subdivision of lots, shall be in full compliance with the terms of this chapter and other applicable local, State or federal regulations. (However, see §19.09 for standards applic- PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.02(3) able to nonconforming uses.) Buildings,~ns. se. walg~disoosai systems and changes in chapter. Property owners, builders and conTfietors are respofi~ible ordt'fi'~-c~ compliance and reasonable care in construction. (3) STATE AGENCIES AND MUNICIPALITIES REGULATED. Unless speci- f fieally exempted by law, all cities, villages, towns, County and State agencies are required to comply with this chapter and obtain all necessary permits. (4) ABROGATION AND GREATER RESTRICTIONS. (a) Regulations Super- sede. Other County Land Use Re~.ulations, The regulations contained within this chapter are in addi~fio0 t~..zegulations~y.I~h ~p~p~y~ such~~e town, Coun.~__~te~o_r fed~er~l land u_se ordinances, administrative codes.~o~r laws. If the"~egu-~-: Iatio~s .wi~n_Ihh chapt~flict~.t~,2~/~~~fl~ o"b'Y-the conflicti~ shall apply. Co) Town Board Approval Not Required. Town board approval s~ali not b~e required for~x~-:g permit 'activ~s-or--texL_o~ ma_.~o amendments to th .e..ze.__regulations. However, the County Board shall consider the towns' opinion and position when delibe- rating on a conditional use permit, variance or other permits required under this chapter. (c) This chapter is not intended to repeal, abrogate Or impair any existing deed restrictions, covenants or easements. However, where this chapter imposes greater re- strictions, the provisions of this chapter shall prevail. (5) INTERPRETATION. In their interpretation and application, the provisions of this chapter shall be held to be minimum requirements and shall be construed in favor of the County and shall not be deemed a limitation or repeal of any other powers granted by. Wisconsin Statutes, (6) SEVERABILITY. If any portion of this chapter is adjudged unconstitutional or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this chapter shall not be affected thereby. 19.03 DIMENSIONS OF BUILDING S~TES. (1) LOT AREA AND WIDTH. '"~ (a) Minimum Area and Width for Each Main Bnildin_~. ,The minimum lot area shall be 5 acres and the~verage lot width shall be 3.09. with at least 300' of frontage on the blufflin~. - - -- - ..... Co) Side Yards. There shall be a side yard for each main building. The minimum width of one side yard shall be 25'. Side yards for accessory buildings shall be 10'. PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.03(2) (2) SUBSTANDARD LOTS. A substandard lot which is at ieast 20,000 sq. ft. in area and 100' in width at the bluffline may be used as a building site for a single family dwelling upon issuance of a land use permit by the~ning Administrator, if it meets all of the following requirements: ~ ...... (a) Such use is permitted in the zoning district. (b) The lot was oh record in the Register of Deeds office prior to the effective date of this chapter. (c) The lot was in separate ownership from abutting lands prior to the effective date of this chapter. If abutting lands and the substandard lot were owned by the same owner as of the effective date of this chapter, the .substandard lot shall not be sold or used without full compliance with the terms of this chapter, including minimum area and width requirements found in sub. (1) of this section. (d) Ail the dimensional requirements of this chapter (including side yard and setback requirements) will be complied with in so far as practical. (3) OTHER SUBSTANDARD LOTS. Except for lots which meet the requirements of sub. (2) of this section, a building permit for improvement of a lot having lesser dimensions than those stated in subs. (1) and (2) above shall be issued only after the issuance of a conditional use permit by the County Zoning Committee. 19.04 USE REGULATIONS FOR AREAS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THIS CHAPTER. (I) DIVISION OF DISTRICTS INTO LAND FORM AREAS. Use regulations within the district are geared to the slope and location of lands. Subsections (2), (3), (4) and (5) of this section state a brief definition of separa~eqand form areas and list the use regulations which apply to each. Section 19.05 contains more elaborate and precise rules for defining the land form areas. (2) USE RESTRICTIONS IN BLUFF AREAS. Bluff areas are all lands within the district which have a slope 30% or-greater and~ope toward Lake Pepin or the Mississippi River. (a) Permitted Uses. 1. Agricultural uses, not including structures. 2. Sustained yield forestry (thinning and selective cutting only). PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.04(2)(a)3. 3. Hiking trails. 4. Nonstructurat recreational uses. 5. Soil conservation work which meets Soil Conservation Service standards and specifications. (b) Conditional Uses. Utility transmission services including 0nly lines, _ca~bles or conduits used to transport large blocks of power or material or to conve~l~igen~. In the ease of electrical -power, this applies only to transmission lines operating volts or more. (c) ~ 1. No use may be'established within the bluff area which is not ~fi_z~mi.~, or listed as a conditional use. 2. In addition, the following activities are specifically prohibited within the bluff area: any grading or filling or other alteration of the land form which may result in erosion, sedimentation, impairment of the natural ecosystem of.bluff except for those listed under subpar. (2)(a)5. above. 3. 'No'roads, public or private, local utility lines or services shall be establish~ in binff areas except as needed to serve structures located in the bluff area on the date this chapter is enacted and then only as a conditional use. 4. No signs of any character may be established in bluff areas. · (.3) (B~I~FTOP SETBACK ^REA-~. infftop setback areas are all lands within the dlstnct~;~i~e~Lhe ~Hh,e;-~hich is a line connecting points at which slope of a bluff becomes less than 30%) and a bluffline setback line lying 40' parallel to and inland from the bluffline. Section 19.05(5) specifies how the bluffline setback line shall be determined for each parcel. The use restrictions for the blufftop setback areas shall be as follows: (a) Permitted Uses. 1. Decks less than 400 in total square feet including walkway and less than 7' in total height from original grade to highest structural point including the railing. 2. Agricultural uses, not including structures. 3. Sustained yield forestry· (Thinning and selective cutting only.) PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.04(3)(a)4. 4. Hiking trails. 5. Recreational uses. 6. Soil conservation work which meets Soil Conservation Service standards and specifications. (b) Conditional Uses. Utility transmission services including only lines, cables or conduits used to transport large blocks of power or material or to convey intelligence. In the case of electrical power, this applies only to transmission lines operating at 69,000 volts or more. (c) Special Prohibitions. 1. No use may be established within the bluffiine setback area which is not an authorized permitted use or is listed as a conditional use. 2. In addition, the following activities are specifically prohibited within the blufftop setback area: any grading or filling or other alteration of the land form which may result i~ erosion, sedimentation, impairment of the natural ecosystem of bluff except for those listed under par. (a)6. above. 3. No roads (public or private) or local utility lines or services shall be established in the bluffiine setback areas except as needed to serve structures located in the bluff or bluffline setback area on the date this chapter is enacted and then only as a conditional use. 4. No signs of any character shall be established in bluffiine setback areas. (4) BUILDABLE BLUFF'fOP AREA. Buildable blufftop areas are all lands within the district which are inland 460' from the bluffiine setback line and not included within either the bluff area or the bluffiine setback area. (a) Use Regulations. 1. Permitted Uses, All uses listed as permitted uses in par. (2)(a) and par. (3)(a) above. a. Single family residences and uses accessory to single family residential structures which shall be in compliance with a bluffiine setback line located 40' from the bluffiine. PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.04(4)(a) 1.b. b. Agricultural structures not used for human occupancy provided that all such structures shall not be located within the blufftop setback area. Grading or filling of the natural topography which can be viewed from the river in excess of that normally required for construction of a structure or for normal yard maintenaffe~. ~ -'--------- d. Multi-family residences and uses accessory to the multi-family development. 2. Conditional Uses· a. Utility transmission services as defined and limited in par. (2)(b) and par. (3)(b) above. · b' Single family residences, uses accessory to single family residential structures~'~ and agneultural structures not used for human occupancy, When any of such uses are pro- pos.e~:l~, to be located closer than 40' from the blufflinc but not closer than 20' from the bluffllne. O) Setbacks. 1. No residential structure shall be allowed within the 40 foot bluffl~ area unless a .conditional use permit has been issued by the Zoning Committee. in?no ease-shall any residential structure or enclosed.structure be located closer than 20' to the '~,~7, t bluffiine. ~ ./--~. 2. The highway setback provisions of the County Zoning Code shall be '-~...--~maintaloed. u._ // 7 ~r~ (e) Height of Residential Structures. 1. Residential buildings (single and multi-family) dwellings allowed as permitted us~..~es under this chapter shall be no more than 32' in height, with~height n~.a~urements commencing at the level of the lowest usable floor. +--- q ~ >.(~'~_ ~r-~ age'? - ~ 2. Residential buildings (single and multi-family) approved as conditional use I~d~,~ ( or granted variances shall not exceed one story in height, provided that up to 25' in t~j~ ~,?./ structural height be allowed if measured from the level of a basenient oo - l~ ~_~0% of the basement story is, for its entire perimeter, below the natural ground level. (d) Color of Structures. The exterior color of structures, including roofs, shall be in earth or summer vegetation tones. PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.04(5) (5) TOE SLOPE AREA. The toe slope of a bluff area is defined as the area of land within 100' of the convex part of the slope where the percent of slope relaxes to less than 30%. The following use restrictions shall apply to this area: (a) Permitted Uses. 1. Agricultural u. ses, not including structures. 2. Sustained yield forestry. (Thinning and selective cutting only.) 3. Hiking trails. 4. Nonstructural recreational uses. 5. Soil conservation work which meets Soil Conservation Service standards and specification;. (b) Conditional Uses. 1. Those condition~aLuse~ l-~stcA ~. (2)Co) and (3)(b) of this section. 2. ~The drafters of this chapter reco n_.~gnize~erm~tted uses as allOwed under pars. (3)(a) and (4)~a) of this sect~ may-'o~'~lowed on slopes of greater than 30% at the toe of the slope. It is also recognized that each proposed development at the toe slope of a bluff area must be considered on a case-by-ease basis and treated as a conditional use. The Zoning Committee in considering a conditional use permit under this section shall consider, but is not limited to, the following: a. Topo~logy. 'Percent, length and direction of slope. ? b. Structure Design. Proposed structure's physical characteristics such as overall dimensions and design, siding type and color;-roof covering type and color. c. Visibility. Overall location of structure in respect to the structure visibility. d. Site Alteration. The extent of alteration of the ground sUrface which must be completed to phjtsica31y--a[low the proposed development to occur and the possibility of erOsion. The gh~erning bpdy of this chapter, When considering a conditional use permit under this section,~of~equire the applicant to Obtain a construction site erosion plan which must be approved by County staff. PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MissIssIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.04(5)(b)2.e. e. Vegetation. The alteration, removal or addition of natural vegetation. f. Lighting. The use of artificial lighting in association with the proposed development. 3. Special Prohibitions. a. No use may be established within the toe slope area which is not authorized, permitted or listed as a conditional use. b. No signs of any character may be established in a toe slope area. 19.05 DETAILED DEFINITIONS AND PROCEr~IrRES FOR ESTABLISH- lNG BLUFFLINE SETBACKS. ~ .... "~z-'-- . '~ ! ~ //a~u~£ Are ~ Ar~ ~ ara~n6o ~ -/~ ~ '30% or more ~ .... , . ,f ~p I Blue,top ~ B/uffl tries ~6a~ Area OR lilY.AY , · ~re~ ~ (I) PURPOSE. This section supplements subs. 19.04(2), (3), (4) and (5) in stating more detailed definitions of the land form sub-areas and setback lines used in this district. (2) BLUFF AREAS DEFINED. Bluff areas are lands having a slope of 30% or greater and slope toward Lake Pepin or the Mississippi River. There may be.more than one-bluff area on a parcel of land. PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.05(3) (3) BLUFFLINE DEFINED. Bluffiines are lines connecting points along the top edge of a bluff area at which the slope becomes less than 30%. (4) BLUFFTOP SETBACK AREAS DEFINED. Blufftop setback areas are lands lying between bluffiines and bluffiine setback lines. (5) BLUFFLINE SETBACK LINE DEFINED. Bluffiine setback lines are lines established parallel to and inland from a specified distance from a bluffiine. (a) Setback Line Established. Unless a lesser distance of SeParation between a bluffline and its parallel setback line is ordered under-subpars. I. or 2. below, the bluff- line setback line shall be located 40' from a bluffiine. 1. Following review of a variance application requesting such changes, the Board of Adjustment may direct that a reduced setback distance be applied to a parcel. I'h-h'~no case, h-o ~ver, may the setback be reduced to less than 20' from the bluffiine. Reductions for preexisting parcels shall be governed by §19.03(2). Reductions for other parcels may be ordered only upon findings by the Board of Adjustment that: a. To maintain the standard 40 foot setback will produce severe, hardship because of ~nique physical characteristics of the land. b. Construction which would be allowed because of the reduced setback will be no more visually conspicuous as viewed from the water edge 200 yards from the ordinary high watermark under summer vegetative conditions than would a building constructed in compliance with the 40 foot standard setback. c. Structures allowed to be located closer than the 40 foot standards setback shall not exceed one story in height. Reductions in setbacks ordered under the above procedure shall be the minimum amount needed to overcome the hardship if such hardship can be reduced consistent with par. (b) and in no case shall the setback be less than 20' from the bluffiine. (b) Eshablishin~ Bluffiine Setback Lines for Areas With Notched Bluffs. Coves ~ntt Other Unusual Land Forms. Certain areas within the Mississippi River Bluffiine have unusual land forms which are not appropriate to the strict application of the above standards. In areas within this district in which there are notched bluffs, coves, inlets or other similar land forms involving bluffs descending to or near the high water elevation of the Mississippi River but in directions not parallel to the direction of flow of the Mississippi River, an artificial bluffiine shall be allowed to be established by the Zoning Administrator. Persons desiring to challenge the lines so established may appeal the PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.05(5)(b)1. determination to the Board of Adjustment, which shall hear the matter under its rules and bylaws and affirm, modify or reject the determination of the Zoning Administrator. Deci- sions by the Zoning Administrator and the Board of Adjustment on such an artificialline shall be based upon the following standards: 1. An artificial bluffiine may be established only where use of the bluffiine definition provided in sub.. (3) would result in buildings being required to be set back far more than is necessary to achieve the purposes of the district. 2. Artificial bluffiines shall be placed in such a way as to result in a bluffiine setback line that will ensui'e that construction inland thereof will be no more visually · conspicuous or capable of erosion or subject to the hazards than would construction that is allowable on nearby lands having unusual land forms; and, 3. In no case shall an artificial bluffiine be established in a manner which Would result in greater restrictions being imposed upon land usage than would application of the standard bluffiine. Diagram (6) BUILDABLE BLUFFTOP AREA DEFINED. Buildable blufftop areas are areas within the district which are not within the bluff areas or the bluffiine setback areas. These areas are characterized as "buildable~ in the sense that they are outside of the 2 landform areas (bluff and bluffiine setback areas) which are subject to special provisions by terms of this chapter. A buiidable blufftop area will be truly eligible for new construction only if it meets all terms of this chapter and other County and local ordinances. The buildable blufftop area shall extend 460' inland from the bluffiine setback area. Beyond the limits of the buildable blufftop area the provisions of this chapter shall not apply. PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.05(7) (7) TOE SLOPE AREA DEFINED. The toe slope of a bluff area is defined as the area of land within 100' of the convex part of the slope where the percent of slopes relaxes to less than 30%. 19.06 ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS. (1) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR. The Zoning Administrator shall have the following duties and powers: (a) Advise applicants as to the provisions of this chapter and assist them in preparing permit applications and appeal forms. (b) Issue permits and certificates of compliance and inspect properties for compliance with this chapter. (c) Keep records of all permits issued, inspections m~de, work approved and other official actions. (d) Have access to any property between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. for purposes of performing these dufiea with proper notification, if requested. (e) Investigate and report violations of this chapter to the appropriate County Zoning C6mmittee and the District Attorney or Corporation Counsel. (f) Issue County citations under §25.04(4) of this Code of Ordinances. (2) LAND USE PERMITS. (a) When Required. Except where another section of this chapter specifically exempts certain types of use from this requirement, a land use permit shall be obtained from the Zoning Administrator before any new development is initiated. "New development" is defined as any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to: construction of buildings, structures or accessory structures; construction of additions or substantial alterations to buildings, structures or accessory structures; placement of mobile homes; filling grading, paving or excavation; and deposition or extraction of earthen materials. (b) Aoolication. An application for a land use permit shall be made to the Zoning Administrator upon forms furnished by the County and shall include, for the purpose of proper enforcement of these regulations, the following data: 1. Name and address of applicant and property owner. 2, Legal description of the property and type of proposed use. PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.06(2)(o)3. 3. A sketch of the dimensions of the lot and location of buildings from lot lige, centerline of abutting highways and locations of any easements. 4. Location of sanitary system and well on property. 5. TwO foot contour map of lot and distances of any structure from 20% slope area. This information miry be waived at the discretion of the Zoning AdminiStrator. 19.07. TI A E. (1) APPLICATION. In addition to requirements otherwise contained in the ordinances of Pepin County, an application for a conditional use permit as listed under this chapter shall include the following if applicable: (a) A plat or map of the property and its immediate surrounding area showing; 1. Location. 2. Boundaries. 3. Dimensions. 4. Utility and roadway corridors. ~ 5. Ordinary high water elevation. 6. Regional flood elevation if within the floodplain district. 7. General elevations. 8. Specific locations of ail bluffiines on the property, certified as to accuracy by a registered land surVeyor. 9. Location of existing or proposed structures. 10. Location of existing and identification of proposed alterations of vegetation and topography. 11. Adjoining land and water uses. (O) Written information on: · 1. Soil test/soil profile description for the private sewage system to serve the structure if applicable. PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.07(I)(1))2. 2. Anticipated demand to be generated by the proposed use for services such as police, fire, school and other public services. (2) REVIEW AND DECISION ON CONDITIONAL USE. (a) Upon receipt of a completed application and pursuant to procedures of the County Zoning Committee, Zoning Administrator, on behalf of the Board of Adjustment, shall transmit the complet- ed application along with request for comments and recommendations to concerned town boards. (b) The Zoning Committee shall hold a public hearing on the proposed conditional use, under the guidelines. Such hearing shall be held no sooner than 20 days after the mailing of the transmittals provided for under subpar. 1. of this subsection. (e) Following the hearing, the Committee shall issue a decision whether to grant, grant conditionally or deny the application. The decision shall be based upon the follow- ing factors and standards which other sections of this chapter require be applied to the proposal: 1. Impact of the proposed use upon the scenic and recreational qualities of the Mississippi River. 2~ Prevention of soil erosion based upon consideration of slopes, soil types and vegetative coverage. 3. Ability of existing or future access roads to accommodate traffic demands. 4. Compatibility with uses on adjacent lands. 5. Decisions by thc Committee on establishment of bluffline setback lines shall be governed by the standards of §19.05(5)(b). (3) GRADING AND FILLING. Applicants-for a conditional use p~rmit to allow grading and filling shall submit detailed plans for proposed earth moving activities. Approval of such plans shall be conditioned upon the following: (a) No filling or grading shall be allowed on slopes greater than 30% and which fall under the jurisdiction of this chapter except as part of a Soil Conservation Service practice under §19.04(2)(a)5. and (3)(a)6. Co) The smallest amount of bare ground shall be exposed for as short a time as possible. PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19.07(3(c) (¢) Temporary ground cover shall be used and permanent ground cover shall.be planted as soon as practicable. (d) Diversions, settling basins, terraces and other methods to trap sediment shall be used if applicable. ~ (e) Fill shall be stabilized according to acceptable engineering standards. (f) A site inspection by the Zoning Administrator shall be made prior to the consideration oft he application by the Zoning Committee and after completion of grading and filling. 19.08 VEGETATIVE CUTTING. Tree and shrubbery cutting in a strip paralleling the bluffiine shall be limited with the following provisions: · (1) No more than 20' in any 150' as measured along the bluffiine shall be clear cut. (2) Natural shrubbery shall be preserved as far as practical and, where removed, it shall be replaced with other vegetation that is equally effective in retarding runoff, preventing erosion and preserving natural beauty. 19.09 NONCONFORMING USF. q. (1) LAWFUL USE. The lawful use of a building, structure or property existing at the time this chapter or an amendment to this chapter takes effect, which is not in conformity with the provisions of this chapter, including the murine maintenance of such a building or structure, may be continued subject to the following conditions: (a) No structural alteration or additi°n to any nonconforming building or structure, over the life of the building or structure, shall exceed 50% of its current estimated fair market value, unless it is permanently changed to a conforming use or falls under the provisions of par. (l)(c)l. or sub. (2) below. (b) No structural alteration or addition to a nonconforming building or structure may encroach further upon the bluffer bluffiine than the existing nonconforming building or structure. (c) If the alteration or addition of an existing noncon forming building or structure s prohtblted because it is ~n excess of 50% of the current fair market value, the property owner may still make the proposed alteration or addition if: PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 MISSISSIPPI RIVER BLUFFLAND ZONING CODE 19,09(1)(c)1, 1. A building or structUre with a nonconforming use is permanently changed to a conforming use; 2. The property owner appeals the determination of the Zoning Administrator and the County Board of Adjustment reverses the decision of the Zoning Administrator. (2) DESTRUCTION OR REPAIR OF NONCONFORMING BUILDING OR STRUCTURE. If nonconforming building or structure is destroyed in excess of 50% of its current fair market value, the structure may be rebuilt subject to the following conditions: (a) The replacement building or structure shall be located in the same location as the original structure or toward the bUildable blufftop area if possible. The replacement building or structure shall not exceed 32' in total height. (c) All other provisions of this chapter shall be complied with as applicable. 19.10 PREEXISTING PARCELS. Parcels of record in the Register of Deeds Office ontbe effective date of this chapter which do not allow the project to meet the standards of. this chapter may be allowed as building sites as a conditional use provided that lands abutting the parcel in question are not under ownership or control-of the applicant and the setback from the bluffiine, which must be set by the Zoning Committee, will only be reduced if a hardship is found on the parcel Justification for a relaxation of the standards of this chapter shall be based on limitations imposed by the physical characteristics of the property, not on the economic or other conditions of the applicant. 19.15 ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES. Any development, any building or structure construeted~ moved or structurally altered, or any use established after the effective date of this chapter in violation of the provisions of this chapter by any person (including building contractors or their agents) shall be deemed a violation. The Zoning Administrator or the County zoning agency shall refer violations to the District Attorney or Corporation Counsel, who shall expeditiously prosecute violations. Any person who violates or refuses to comply with any of the provisions of this chapter shall be subject to a forfeiture of not less than $10 nor more than $200 per offense, together with the taxable costs of action. Each day of continued violation ~shall constitute a separate offense. Every violation of this chapter is a public nuisance and the creation thereof may be enjoined and the maintenance thereof may be abated by action at suit of the County, the State or any citizen thereof under §87.30(2), Wis. Stats. PEPIN COUNTY 01/01/94 Visibility Ranking from the Great River Road ~2 ~3 ~6 ~8 Great River Road Visibility Analysis, Dubuque County Rivers and Streams Great River Road ~ 10 1 0 I 2 Miles , r 33 12 28 DUBUQUE COUNTY ZONING 13047 CITY VIEW DRIVE, DUBUQUE, IOWA 52002~9~ (563) 589-7827 FAX: (563) 589-7868 E-MAIL: zoningadmin @ dbqco.org PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ANNA M. O'SHEA Administrator February 21, 2003 Laura Carstens Pbnnlng Services Manager City of Dubuque 50 West 133 Street Dubuque, IA 52001 RE: Bluff Land Protection Dear Laura: Enclosed is the information you requested regard~g bluff land protection. The first packet is a study conducted in the City ofMuskego, a suburb of Milwaukee. The consultant does an in depth study of the area and creates a future development plan for the city. The second and third packets are from National Heritage Foundation. They are examples of zoning regulations created for bluffland protection in Pepin County, Wisconsin. The last map in the packet is a view shed created by the National Heritage Foundation. It shows the potential view of the tiver from Highway 52 and includes the City of Dubuque. This is all the farther we have progressed on the bluffland protection area for Dubuque County. Hopefully, the Board of Supervisors will become interested in this issue in the near future. Ifthere is anything the county can do to assist you with this project, please let us know. We will be more than happy to help in any way we can. Anna M. O'Shea Zoning Adminigtrator Enclosures Page I of 1 Laura Carstens From: Anna O'Shea [zoningadmin@dbqco.org] Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 10:25 AM To: Laura Carstens Subject: ire: LESA system Laura, ! have received information from INRCOG, in the Btackhawk County area, on the LESA. So far the Zoning Board ~s very interested in pursuing this but the Board of Supervisors has not approved the project and may not approve it. Discussion on this topic has stopped and we will not be investigating it further until we have approval from the Board of Supervisors. The LESA could include information on viewsheds and other issues pertinent to the Bluff Land Protection Area but we will have not collected any information regarding this as yet. I am still looking for the info from National Heritage Foundation. When l have located it I will send it to you. Anna --- Original Message -- From: Laura Carstens To: zo nine7 admi n ~..d bq co .o rq Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 4:18 PM Subject: LESA system Anna, Jim Gonyier suggested that I visit with you about the LESA system, in relation to the bluffland overlay concept. Any info you can send me? Laure 3/5/2003 Page i of 1 Laura Carstens From: Anna O'Shea [zoningadmin@dbqco.org] Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 3:03 PM To: Laura Carstens Subject: Re: bluffiands overlay Laura: Dubuque County has not studied the bluffiand protection issue at this point. During discussions of placement of the protection area on the Future Land Use Development Map, issues such as cluster development, building placement and protection of the river vistas were discussed. Jim Gonyier, ECtA, has provided the commission with a copy of the PAS report on building on hillsides. I can't find my copy at this time, but Jim has distributed it several times. The Heritage Foundation has provided information from Wisconsin entities that have adopted policies that protect the bluffs, l will look for that info. J also have information from the APA Conference in Chicago regarding a consultant that has done some of the environmental assessments and view shed analysis for other entities in Wisconsin. I wilt forward that information to you. If there is any other way the county can assist you, please let me know. Good luck on your project. Anna --- Original Message ---- From: Laura Carstens To: igo nyie r(~rr ecia. erg. Cc: zo nincladmin~.dbqco.orq Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 1:28 PM Subject: bluffiands overlay Jim, At last night's meeting, the Dubuque City Council asked that City staff collect information about bluffland xotection measures. The bluffiand overlay concept in the County's land use plan was mentioned, along with the Iowa Natural Hedtage Foundation and the American Planning Association. I would appreciate getting a copy of what you have collected and prepared for the County plan, and any other relevant information that can be shared with Council members. Thanks! Laura 3/5/2003 CONSERVATION ON THE URBAN FRINGE 2002 American Planning Association Conference Session #S124 Brign Turk DOstin Wolff City of Muskego Planning POB 749 Muskego WI 53150 262.679.4 t36 phone 262.679.5614 fax www.¢i.muskego.wi.us Presented by: Michael Slavney, AICP Vandewalle & Associates 120 E. Lakeside Street Madison, WI 53715 608.255.3988 phone 608.255.0814 fax www.vandewaJle.¢om ~ ~ Vandewafle & Associates Planning · Creating · Rebuilding Dr. John Larson Applied Ecological Services 17921 Smith Rd Brodhead, .WI 53520 608.897.8641 phone 608.897.8486 fax www.appliedeco.com APPLIED ECOLOGICAL SERVICES I N C. 3 10 14 l? Planning Advisory Service Amedcan Planning Association 122 South Michigan Avenue, Sure 1600 Chicago, IL 606036107 Phone: 312.431.91 O0 Fax: 312,431.9985 Email: pasinquiries@planning.org I,l,l,,,I,IIl,,,ll,,,,,,ll,l,,ll,,I,,l,,I,l,l,,,,lll Laura Carstens Dubuque City Planning Services 50 West 13th Street Dubuque, IA 52001-4845 M/ffi 3 2003 CIIY OF DUBUQUE PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTIVtENT Planning Advisop/Service - Packing Ust 2/27/2003 FD/27993 Note: Dear Laura - Herewith the information you requested regarding the protection of ridgelines and bluffs I hope it's helpful. This inquiry was completed by Fay Doluick The enclosed materials are provided as examples of planning practice in other communities. We hope they are helpful in inspiring good planning in your community. These materials are not endorsed by APA nor are they considered by g-PA to represent prescriptive solutions to all local planning problems. Selected Articles Page 1 of 13 ~ Publications / Land Use Law and Zoning Digest / Selected Articles Subscribe Overview Selected Articles Browse the Abstracts Purchase LULZD Articles October 2001 Enabling Legislation for Traditional Neighborhood Development RegulationM By Robert 3. $itkowski, Anna M. Breinich, and Brian W. Ohm Many communities around the country are exploring ways to encourage new development to embrace traditional neighborhood design principles.2 TND regulations have been enacted by local governments in several states without express enabling legislation, including North Carolina, Florida, Texas, Virginia, and Ohio. The question remains: Is express enabling authority for such regulations necessary? This article examines some of the legal issues surrounding TND regulations and describes the relatively new enabling legislation passed in Connecticut, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, which provides support for local TND regulations. Legal Issues Up until recently, the common wisdom was that support could be found for all manner of land-use controls, including TND regulations, within the broad language in most state enabling statutes, such as zoning, subdivision, or planned unit developments. To a large extent, this is likely still the case. The legislatures of two states, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, however, have determined that express enabling legislation was required to prompt their local units of government to enact TND regulations. Another legislature, Connecticut's, promulgated a wide- ranging community character regulation that could be used to support TND regulations. In addition, the American Planning Association's Growing Smart program has recognized this trend, including model enabling legislation for TNDs in its Legislative Guidebook under the section on planned unit developments.3 Andres Duany of the Florida architecture and town planning firm Duany Plater- Zyberk & Company, the renowned leader of the new urbanist movement, appears to have taken an interest in this trend, drafting a model enabling act.4 Expressly enabled or not, local governments must successfully balance the right of the community to determine how it wants to appear versus the right of individuals to express themselves through architecture and to use their property as they see fit within the reasonable strictures of the law. This is where the tension begins, notwithstanding the deference accorded by the courts to decisions of local land- use decision-making bodies. Perhaps the starting point for the argument that TND regulations should be expressly enabled is the fact that the overt design emphasis inherent in TND regulations, over and above the conventional use, bulk, and other zoning and subdivision standards, necessarily raises the specter of= "aesthetic" or "community character" regulation. TND regulations, like all land-use regulations, must satisfy the requirements of substantive due process. Since they are exercises of the police power, TND regulations must advance legitimate government interests that serve the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare. A majority of jurisdictions in the United States now accept aesthetic considerations, either alone or in conjunction with other legitimate objectives, as a proper goal in the exercise of the state's police power. A minority of the states follow the "traditional view:" aesthetic considerations alone are not a sufficient justification for the exercise of the police power, in these "aesthetics-plus" jurisdictions, the courts may strike a regulation whose sole purpose is to protect aesthetic values unless express enabling legislation exists? http://www.planning.org/LULZD/oct01 comm.htm 2/21/2003 Selected Articles Page 2 of 13 Aesthetic regulations generally come in two varieties. "Anti-look-alike" regulations provide that a new building may not be too similar to existing dwellings in the area. Other regulations, on the other hand, provide that new buildings may not be too dissimilar from existing buildings, adopting a "look alike" requirement, a variant of the now-familiar "compatibility" standard. Both types of regulations have increasingly been upheld, with many cases citing the U.S. Supreme Court's pronouncement in Berrnan v. Parker, 348 U.S. 26 33 (1954): The concept of the public welfare is broad and inclusive. The values it represents are spiritual as well as physical, aesthetic as well as monetary. It ia within the power of the legislature to determine that the community should be beautiful as well as healthy, spacious as well as clean, well balanced as well as carefully patrol]ed. TND regulations create a wrinkle in the established anti-look alike/look-alike continuum because the primary focus of the regulations is not on individual buildings, but on the "Public Rea]m," the tout ensemble of the facades of "fabric" and "focus" buildings and the design of all manner of the public spaces in between. The Supreme Court's decision in The Members of City Council of the City of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for Vincent, 466 U.S. 784 (1984), cemented the Court's view that aesthetics are a proper focus of governmental regulation, which could arguably include the design of the public realm. Still, TND regulations, like all other land-use controls, must find support in each respective state's enabling legislation. This might, however, be a tall order given the present status of enabling legislation: In part, the inefficiency and ineffectiveness of contemporaw land-use regulations is attributable to the history of land-use controls in this country and to our collective inability to reform the basic rules on which the controls are based. With a few exceptions, the state enabling laws that control land-use planning and regulation are anachronisms from the mid-Z920s when the challenges of planning and land-uae control were far different than they are today. It is hard to believe that we try to manage the complexities of our modern world (with uses and conditions unimaginable when the planning and land use regulations first developed) on the basis of rules and laws that are unchanged in sixty years.6 In the absence of specific enabling authority for TNDs (which is likely the case in 48 states), one must look for guidance in the general zoning enabling statutes and the statutes governing the delegation of the exercise of the police power from the states to their localities. Some of these statutes literally speak to the promotion and protection of "character" or "appearance" of the community as a legitimate public purpose, and such language can conceivably serve as support for TND regulations. Accordingly, typical zoning enabling language, for the most part derived from that contained in the Standard State Zoning Enabling Act, if used creatively, could serve as the legal basis for TND regulations. This is the most likely scenario in a state such as North Carolina, where state enabling legislation is very typical, but numerous TND regulations have been enacted. In North Carolina, the legislature directs that zoning regulations "shall be made with reasonable consideration as to, among other things, the character of the district and its paFcicular suitability for particular uses ..."7 Virginia and South http://www.planning.org/LULZD/oct01 corem.btm 2/21/2003 ~Selected Articles Page 3 of 13 Carolina, however, go a bit further. ]-he Virginia statutes provide that zoning ordinances shall be designed to give reasonable consideration, where applicable, to, inter alia, "facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community.''8 Likewise, the South Carolina legislature enables its localities to create zoning ordinances that must be made with reasonable consideration of, inter alia, "the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community.''s Florida is another example, perhaps the leading state in terms of TND projects. There is an explicit provision in the section of the Florida Growth Management Act related to land development regulations that "it]his section shall be construed to encourage the use of innovative land development regulations which include provisions such as transfer of development rights, incentive and indusionary zoning, planned-unit development, impact fees, and performance zoning.''10 In much the same way, the Rhode Island legislature provides a rather exhaustive list of "general purposes of zoning ordinances" which, inter alia, includes "the need to shape and balance urban and rural development;" "the use of innovative development regurations and techniques;" and "promoting a high level of quality and design in the development of private and public facilities.''11 The general consistency requirement contained in many enabling acts also could be used to support the establishment of TND regulations that find their basis in sound planning.12 TND regulations also must comport with the principles of fundamental fairness, i.e., they must contain sufficiently detailed and meaningful standards in order to alert applicants to what is expected of them, while allowing sufficient discretion in the decision-making body to determine the approval of an application. This is easier said than done, especially so given the demands of some TND proponents for design specificity. These types of standards are not much of an administrative problem in the "codes" promulgated by Duany Plater-Zyberk & Company, as these codes are privately enforced. But the same standards, if contained in a duly- adopted set of regulations, may be so detailed as to run afoul of fundamental fairness,is In some extreme cases, these standards may rise to the level of a prior restraint on expressive activity, in derogation of the First Amendment. One way to avoid such problems may be to focus on the TND as a tool to shape public space, rather than as a "mere" architectural design regulation, After all, one could argue, government has a duty to promote and maintain a healthy and safe public realm. Consideration also must be given to the type of administrative body tasked with evaluating applications made under TND regulations. The body logically best equipped to deal with such applications would be an Architectural Review Board. These bodies, however, have been assailed throughout the country as pretty committees and, more importantly for the purposes of this article, have their own enabling problems. There are also issues concerning the danger of abuses of discretion given the subjectivity inherent in administering any type of design- based regulation,z4 Underlying all of this analysis, of course, is the Big Policy Question: "Can (or should) the tenets of a movement that necessarily requires an emphasis on design in land-use regulation be legislated?" Three states, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, have weighed in on this question. THE CONNECTICUT APPROACH: THE VILLAGE DISTRICTS ACT15 We begin with an approach that lands squarely in the middle of the continuum anchored on one end by an apparent lack of enabling authority and on the other by express enabling authority for TND regulation. On Play 22, 1998, Connecticut Gov. John G. Rowland signed into law Public Act 98-116, "An ACt Authorizing the Establishment of Village Districts." Effective October 1, :7.998, the Village Districts Act enables local zoning bodies to protect the distinctive character, landscape, and historic value of the areas under their jurisdiction. This amendment to Connecticut's zoning enabling legislation has, thus far, spawned only two local village districts, in the towns of Brooklyn and Middletown, but many other towns http ://www.planning. org/LULZD/oct01 comm .htm 2/21/2003 Selected Articles Page 4 of 13 are engaged to one extent or another in the development of such regulations. Why a Village Districts Act? According to John Filchak, executive director of the Northeast Connecticut Council of Governments, the genesis of the act was not an overt attempt to create ground- breaking zoning enabling legislation, but rather a desire to address the needs of the towns of Brooklyn and Canterbury, Connecticut. Brooklyn, a town of roughly 7,000 people located in northeast Connecticut, had no local regulatory means at its disposal with which to address road improvements proposed by the Connecticut Department of Transportation (DOT) that would directly affect the rural town's historic green. A different type of challenge confronted Canterbury, a larger town of roughly 43,000 residents, discovered that current zoning laws would not adequately address many of the issues it had identified while updating its Plan of Conservation and Development. The primary concerns of each town fell into the following four categories: Desire to preserve character. Brooklyn's historic green is listed on the National Register of Historic Places as the Brooklyn Green Historic District. While this distinction is noteworthy, National Register listings ara primarily honorific and therefore do not provide any legal protection for historic resources outside the National Historic Preservation Act.z6 This small rural town, therefore, found itself powerless to protect its existing character against actions contemplated by the DOT. Canterbury is bisected by Connecticut Route 169, a state and national scenic highway named by a national publication as one of the l0 most beautiful roads in America. The challenge faring Canterbury was how to maximize the benefits inherent in an area with commercial potential, while at the same time preserving its beautiful viewsheds and distinctive architectural character. Recognition that present zoning was not working. In Brooklyn, the town green is located at the convergence of a number of residential and commercial zoning districts. The zoning regulations establishing these districts failed to address the preservation of their rural character. Canterbury, on the other hand, had a Rural Agricultural Zone in place, where all development was permitted by special exception, but the special exception criteria did not sufficiently address character preservation concerns. No desire to enact historic districts. Each town had, in the past, investigated establishing a local historic district under the state's enabling legislation for historic districting. Both efforts failed, for two reasons: (1) neither community could obtain the two-thirds vote required to establish such a district under the Connecticut General Statutes; and (2) neither community could overcome the perception that Historic District Commissions amount to nothing more than another layer of bureaucracy associated with stopping development and/or are driven by the goal of "freezing the town in time." Growth v, quality of life. Both towns wanted to protect their rural image, but at the same time wished to enhance their future economic development potential. How the Act Became Law The bill that would become the Village Districts Act, House Bill No, 5485, sponsored by State Rep..lefferson B. Davis, (D-Brooklyn, Chaplin, Eastford, Hampton, Kingley, Pomfret), was the first attempt in Connecticut to explicitly consider non-historic district-based aesthetic regulation. At the time, it may very well have been the only legislative initiative of its type in the U.S. The initial draft of the bill and the accompanying legislative history identified two primary purposes for its introduction in the state legislature: the preservation of rural character and the regulation of sprawl. As discussed below, it became necessary to broaden the bill's scope to encompass the preservation of the distinctive character of any municipality. http://www.planning.org/LULZD/oct01 comm.htm 2/21/2003 Selected Articles Page 5 of 13 The people most closely involved in the passage of House Bill No. 5485 consistently register surprise at the ease with which this bill became a law. Those who were not involved with the passage of the bill and became aware of it only after its enactment variously referred to it as a "stealth bill." The bill remained virtually intact from the beginning of the process to the end, with two exceptions. The floor debate on the bill was minimal, and amendments centered on one passage and one word. Removal of local control of DOT. The initial bill contained a provision that "[el ach State agency, department or institution undertaking a project impacting a village district, including, but not limited to, the construction, alteration or maintenance of roadways and the erection, repair, modification or demolition of structures shall consider the provisions of the regulations established under this section. Any municipality aggrieved by a decision of a state agency, department or institution under this subsection may appeal such decision in accordance with Section 4-1.83 of the General Statutes." Predictably, the DOT lobbied to have this provision removed from the bill, because it would allow localities to influence the DOT's decision-making powere.17 Expansion beyond rural character. The most critical amendment coming out of the floor debate was an expansion of the jurisdiction of the act. Tnitia[ly, the bill was proffered as a rural character preservation measure. In order to garner support from urban legislators, however, the word "rural" was removed and replaced with the word "distinctive" as a modifier of the word "character." This change makes the act applicable to all towns and cities in Connecticut. Thus, a "Village District" can be established in a neighborhood in Hartford or New Haven as well as in areas of rural towns such as Brooklyn or Canterbury. What Does the Act Require? The ViE[age Districts Act authorizes zoning commissions and planning 8. zoning commissions to establish "village districts" as part of the regulations adopted under their general zoning enabling legislation or any special act so that municipalities can protect the distinctive character, landscape, or historic value of the areas so identified in the municipal Plan of Conservation and Development. The act is divided into three main sections: (1) Zoning Regulations; (2) Compatibility Objectives; and (3) Review by the Village District Consultant. Zoning regulations· Under the act, commissions may regulate new construction, substantial reconstruction and rehabilitation of properties within the district and in view from public roadways. The scope of such regulations includes the design and placement of buildings, the maintenance of public views, the design, paving materials, and placement of public roadways, and other elements that the commission may deem appropriate to maintain and protect the character of the district. 18 Simply put, commissions are granted broad discretion in regulating a wide variety of aesthetic concerns, be it in the idiom of a TND or otherwise. In establishing zoning regulations for the adoption of a village district, commissions are required to consider the design, relationship, and compatibility of structures, plantings, signs, roadways, street hardware, and other objects in public view.19 Specifically, the act requires that the regulations: (1`) "shall establish criteria from which a property owner and the commission may make a reasonable determination of what is permitted within" the district;2° (2) "encourage the conversion, conservation, and preservation of existing buildings and sites in a manner that maintains the historic or distinctive character of the district;''21 (3) ensure that "the exterior of structures or sites" in a village district are "consistent with the Connecticut Historical Commission, The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic http://www.plarming.org/LULZD/oct01 comm.htm 2/21/2003 .Selected Articles Page 6 of 13 Buildings... or the distinctive characteristics of the district identified in the Plan of Conservation and Development;"22 (4) provide that: (a) proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings be harmoniously related to their surroundings, and to the terrain in the district and to the use, scale, and architecture of existing buildings in the district that have a functional or visual relationship to a proposed building or modification; (b) all spaces, structures, and related site improvements visible from public roadways be designed to be compatible with the elements of the area of the village district in and around the proposed building or modification; (c) the color, size, height, location, proportion of openings, roof treatments, building materials and landscaping of commercial or residential property and any proposed signs and lighting be evaluated for compatibility with the local architectural motif and the maintenance of views, historic buildings, monuments and landscaping; and (d) that the removal or disruption of historic, traditional, or significant structures or architectural elements shall be minimized. Compatibility objectives, The Village District Act also requires that all development in the village district shall be designed to achieve the following compatibility objectives:23 (1) the building and layout of buildings and included site improvements shall reinforce existing buildings and strestscape patterns and the placement of buildings and included site improvements shall assure there is no adverse impact on the district; (2) proposed streets shall be connected to the existing road district network, wherever possible; (3) open spaces within the proposed development shall reenforce open space patterns of the district, in form and siting; (4) locally significant features of the site, such as distinctive buildings or sight lines of vistas from within the district, shall be integrated into the site design; (5) the landscape design shall complement the district's landscape patterns; (6) the exterior signs, site lighting, and accessory structure shall support a uniform architectural theme if such a theme exists and be compatible with the surroundings; and (7) the scale, proportions, massing, and detailing of any proposed building shall be in proportion to the scale, proportion, massing, and detailing in the district. Review by the village district consultant· Once a municipality has properly established a village district, any application for new construction and substantial reconstruction in VieW from a public roadway "shall be subject to review and recommendation" by the "Village District Consultant." This consultant can be an architect or an architecture] firm, landscape architect, or AICP member selected by and under contract to the regulatory body.24 The commission may, in the alternative, designate as its consultant the municipality's Architectural Review Board but only if that board has at least one member who is an architect, a landscape architect, or an AICP member. Alter reviewing the application, the consultant may submit a report to the commission within 35 days of receipt of the http ://www.pl arming, org/LULZD/oct01 corem.btm 2/21/2003 Selected Articles Page 7 of 13 application. The repor~ and recommendation are merely advisory, since they are to be "considered by the commission in making their [sic] decision.''25 In addition, the act provides that the commission may seek the recommendations of "any town or regional agency or outside specialist with which it consults.''26 Examples of organizations that may be consulted include the regional planning agency, the local historical society, the Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation, and The University of Connecticut College of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Finally, the act provides that if the commission grants or denies an application, it is required to state upon the record the reasons for the decision. In the event of a denial, the commission must cite the specific regulations under which the application is denied. The act provides for publication of the decision and that a decision will not become effective until it is recorded in the land records of the town in which the premises are located.27 While the Village Districts Act does not expressly enable TND regulations, as Pennsylvania's and Wisconsin's acts do, the Village Districts Act can conceivably accommodate TND regulations given its broad mandate to protect the distinctive character of an area. Aside from the manner in which these types of regulations can be written and how the compatibility objectives can be made into enforceable and predictable regulations, there is the issue of the degree to which the provisions in CONN. GEN. STAT. § 8-2 (Connecticut's general zoning enabling legislation), which allow that "regulations shall be made with reasonable consideration to the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for pacticular uses and with a view to conserving the value of the buildings... throughout such municipality" and that "regulations may be made with reasonable consideration for the protection of historic factors"2s relate to the provisions of the Village Districts Act. Such an examination is well beyond the ken of this article, but this issue may provide substantial grist for the mill as the Village Districts Act is implemented by Connecticut municipalities, and ultimately, by its courts. PENNSYLVANIA'S APPROACH TO TRADTTrONAL NETGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT ENABLING LAWS29 On June 22, 2000, Pennsylvania Gev. Tom Ridge signed into law Pennsylvania Act 68 of 2000, a major reform package concerned with updating the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, Act 247 as amended (MPC), to promote smart growth in the Commonwealth. Article VII-A of the act contains TND enabling legislation and is every bit as detailed in certain aspects as Connecticut's is broad. Pennsylvania seems to be taking a highly prescriptive, "top-down" approach to enabling its municipalities to enact TND regulations, What Precipitated the Interest in TNDs? Over the past several years, Pennsylvania residents have expressed a growing level of frustration over sprawl and its consequences. This groundswell is especially focused in the growing areas of the Commonwealth, where residents are coping with increasing levels of traffic at the same time they are losing farmland and open space. Increasingly, residents are making their voices heard by the members of the General Assembly. In the mid-1990s, Pulitzer-prize winning journalist and author Thomas Hylton documented the steady change in the living environments in and around his community and decided to showcase the problem of sprawl in the award-winning book, Save OutLand, Save Our Towns. This provocative book captures Pennsylvania's past and present in a strikingly visual manner. HyKon illustrates the growing concern that Pennsylvania's communities, exemplified by the tradition of small crossroad villages with center squares and a mix of businesses and residences, are losing their sense of place at an alarming rate. By the late 1990s, the legislature and governor were ready to focus on the issue of land-use. A new commission, the "21st Century Environment Commission," was http://www.planning.org/LULZD/oct01 comm.htm 2/21/2003 .Selected Articles Page 8 of 13 appointed by the governor to develop a vision for what Pennsylvania should be in the future. The commission was charged by Executive Order 1997-4 to "recommend methods and policies to improve the environmental qualities of the commonwealth and measure the results, while allowing for enhanced economic and social progress."3o Promoting responsible land-use became one of five main recommendations of the commission, recognizing that "our sprawling patterns of growth are not" good for Pennsylvanians. Furthermore, better land-use tools are needed for local government, including "authorizing and facilitating ... traditional, mixed-use neighborhood development ...,,31 The recommendations of the 21st Century Environment Commission set the stage for a comprehensive amendment to the MPC. Through the perseverance of Representative Robert Freeman, (D- Northampton County) language enabling the creation of TNDs was included in Act 68 of 2000. TNDs were arguably authorized under the general language contained in the 1'4PC before the 2000 Amendments, but few communities, if any, drafted such regulations. Through the dominant regulatory scheme in those communities that had enacted zoning and subdivision regulations, the building community was encouraged to continue to build what its members thought the suburban-oriented public wanted. Consequently, most of the communities in the Commonwealth with zoning and subdivision regulations did not promote alternative development patterns. Representative Freeman wanted to highlight TND as a viable alternative to building suburban single-family houses on one-acre lots. TNDs in Pennsylvania Rep. Freeman based his legislation on the "TND Checklist" contained in Andres Duany's book Suburban Nation. He intended to not only bring more attention to the form of TND, but to ensure that development was actually executed in this When developing the TND language for inclusion in what was then House Bill 14 (introduced by Rep. David Steil of Bucks County), Rep. Freeman chose not to include TNDs with provisions enabling Planned Residential Development (PRD). This decision made sense since both the general public and municipal officials view PRDs negatively. PRDs differ from Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) in that emphasis is placed upon residential uses to the virtual exclusion of commercial uses. Due to past practices, PRDs are associated with higher density development, usually allowing for townhouses and apartments in areas where only single-family residences could be located. This public perception has resulted in many municipalities removing PRD regulations from their zoning ordinances. The TND language was intended to stand alone in a separate article of the MPC so as to avoid confusion or linkages with PRDs. The language outlines the characteristics of a TND. It is a new development tool, providing an option to create new communities or enhance existing villages within a municipality through either an overlay or separate zoning district. The TND language was not included in the original draft of House Bill 14 but was instead proposed during the lengthy review and discussion process. The legislation met with some resistance by a few legislators, one paraphrased comment being: "We are now living in the 1990s, not the 1940s and we moved away from that type of development ... why should we go backwards?" The Pennsylvania Builders Association also had concerns regarding how a TND could be enacted, and preferred an overlay zone rather than by a district designation. These concerns were addressed through compromise language. Where Are We in Pennsylvania? Interest in the creation of TNDs is materializing, due in part to it being highlighted in the legislation and due in part to the interest surfacing for more compact, pedestrian, community-oriented development. Municipalities in Pennsylvania are http://www.planning.org/LULZD/octO 1 corn m btm 2/21/2003 Selected Articles Page 9 of 13 now developing TND ordinances. For example, a model TND ordinance is under development in the State College area. A TND district is also being developed to enhance and preserve the Village of Linglestown, near Harrisburg. A fast-growing Western Pennsylvania community, Cranberry Township, is utilizing the legislation to create a new town center, in cooperation with a private builder. It is far too early to tell how the TND enabling legislation will translate on the ground. However, the regulations developed under this legislation will allow for the needed flexibility to develop TNDs in keeping with the small town character prevalent throughout Pennsylvania. At the same time, the regulations will need to be strong enough to obtain the desired results -- to allow for continued growth of our communities in a more pedestrian-oriented environment. The TND tool exists now for communities, and, in turn, developers. Now the issue will be acceptance. WISCONSIN'S APPROACH TO TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT ENABLING LAWSa2 In perhaps the most progressive effort to promote traditional neighborhood developments, Wisconsin law now mandates that every city and village with a population of at least ).2,500 adopt a traditional neighborhood development ordinance by January 1, 2002.33 The requirement is part of the state's recent "smart growth" and comprehensive planning law signed into law in October 1999 by then-Governor (and current U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services) Tommy Thompson as part of the state budget bill, i999 Wisconsin Act 9.34 Wisconsin's "smart growth" and comprehensive planning law is the first step in an effort to update the state's seriously antiquated local land-use enabling laws. The requirement for TND ordinances affects approximately 60 cities and villages in the state, based on the latest population estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau. Cities or villages that reach a population of at least 12,500, after January 2., 2002, must enact a traditional neighborhood development ordinance within ll months of the time the population of the city or village reaches at least 2.2,500.35 The law defines traditional neighborhood development as "a compact, mixed-use neighborhood where residential, commercial, and civic buildings are within dose proximity to each other."aa The law also specifies that the ordinance is not required to be mapped.37 The traditional neighborhood development requirement is meant to provide an option for developers seeking an alternative approach to conventional development. While the legislature did not require cities and villages to map the ordinance, local communities may, at their option, map traditional neighborhood development districts. Cities and villages therefore may treat the ordinance requirement as a zoning district designation, an overlay zone, a floating zone, or as a modified approach to planned unit developments. To provide further guidance to cities and villages in meeting this mandate, the law required that the University of Wisconsin Extension prepare a model traditional neighborhood development ordinance.3a In an attempt to influence the content and quality of the local ordinances, the law requires that local ordinances must be "similar" to this model ordinance.39 Language that would have required local ordinances to be "substantially similar" to the model ordinance was vetoed by the As required by the law, the model ordinance was dreffced by the end of 2000 and presented to the chief clerk of each house of the Legislature for referral to the appropriate standing committee of the Senate and the Assembly.4° The ordinance would be considered approved if the committee did not schedule a meeting for the purpose of reviewing the model ordinance. The Democratic-controlled Senate did not schedule any meetings, thereby giving approval to the ordinance. In the other house, controlled by Republicans, the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources scheduled a hearing for late February 2001. The model ordinance and the mandate received virtually no opposition at the hearing, however, some minor modifications were made to the model ordinance as a result of the hearing. Following some http://www, planning, org/LULZD/oct01 comm.htm 2/21/2003 Selected Articles Page 10 of I3 delay, the Assembly Committee finally approved the ordinance on 3uly 25, 2001. With the mandate and the model ordinance now firmly in place, many cities and villages in the state are working to adopt traditional neighborhood development ordinances. What Precipitated the Act? Wisconsin's approach was not based on the premise that Wisconsin's enabling laws did not authorize traditional neighborhood developments. Tt was assumed that the broad delegation of authority under the various local planning and zoning enabling laws gave local governments the authority to adopt ordinances that allow traditional neighborhood developments.41 Rather, the Jaw is the outcome of efforts to ensure that local governments do not use conventional zoning and subdivision ordinances to discourage traditional neighborhood developments. :[000 Friends of Wisconsin, a land-use advocacy organization modeled after ~.000 Friends of Oregon, developed the idea to have the state mandate the local adoption of traditional neighborhood development ordinances. The impetus for ~-000 Friends of Wisconsin was the growing concern in the state about suburban and rural sprewl. The organization worked successfully with State Sen. Brian Burke (D-Milwaukee), to introduce the legislation as an amendment to the new comprehensive planning provisions in the state budget bill. Ultimately the legislation received support from a broad coalition of interest groups including builders, Realtors, local government organizations, and environmentalists. Support for the legislation was strengthened by experiences related to the approval process for a traditional neighborhood development called "Middleton Hills" located in Middleton, Wisconsin, a suburb of Madison. Middleton Hills was developed by Marshal Erdman & Associates and designed by Duany Plater-Zyberk & Company. Middleton Hills was proposed in 1993 as a planned development district (much like a planned unit development) as provided in the city's ordinances. The city, however, wanted to apply many of its conventional standards, such as street widths and minimum lot sizes, to the project. Ultimately, the project overcame these hurdles. NeveCcheless, many developers would have walked away from the project because of the added costs associated with the approval process. Accordingly, the Wisconsin law is intended to remove some of the difficulties developers encounter when they propose TNDs by changing the permitting processes of local governments which discourage traditional neighborhood developments. Only time will tell whether the Wisconsin approach is successful in promoting traditional neighborhood developments. CONCLUSZON State enabling legislation for TND regulations can take many forms, in some states, the need for express enabling legislation may not be an issue at all. Many states have planned unit development enabling legislation as well as zoning and subdivision enabling legislation that would allow for TNDs, but many municipalities are still apprehensive about enacting TND regulations. Accordingly, some state legislatures are beginning to promote TND patterns through new enabling laws. State legislatures can encourage TND through broad character protection enabling legislation, as in the State of Connecticut, or through express enabling for TNDs, as in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Whether a local community enacts TND regulations under these enabling schemes is left to the local community. State legislatures also can require that certain local governments adopt TND regulations, as in the case of Wisconsin. The recent legislation in all three states raises the broader issue of the state role in trying to legislate design issues. How much should the state legislature get involved and how much flexibility should be left to local governments? For many advocates of TND, the issue is how to persuade local governments to accept and http://www.planning.org/LULZD/oct01 comm.htm 2/2 t/2003 Selected Articles Page 11 of 13 promote the principles of TND. Indeed, the task may be to persuade local governments to change their local ordinances to remove the disincentives or prohibitions that discourage TND. Another issue is whether TND regulations are the next evolution of planned unit development ordinances. Planned unit development ordinances were initially developed in part as a way of introducing flexibility in light of the shortcoming of conventional Euclidean zoning. Local planned unit development ordinances, however, often incorporate standards from conventional zoning and subdivision ordinances that are inconsistent with principles of TND. APA's model enabling legislation promotes the idea of planned unit development ordinances dedicated to TND standards. The model ordinance developed by the University of Wisconsin Extension does much the same thing. Robert 2. Sitkowski, Esq., AICP, is a lawyer with Robinson & Cole LLP in Hartford, Connecticut, where he practices land-use and construction law. Anna Al. Breinich, AfCp, is the Director of Community Planning for the Pennsylvania Environmental Council in Harrisburg. Brian W. Ohm is an Associate Professor in the Department of Urban and Regional Planning at the University of Wisconsin-Mad/son. Footnotes 1. This article is largely based on the authors' presentation at the 200:1 National Conference of the American Planning Association. 2. Traditional Neighborhood Development--A development that exhibits several of the following characteristics: alleys, streets laid out on a grid system, buildings oriented to the street, front porches on houses, pedestrian-orientation, compatible, mixed land uses, village squares and greens. Neotreditional development--An approach to land-use planning and urban design that promotes the building of neighbors with a mix of uses and housing types, architectural variety, a central public gathering place, interconnecting streets and alleys, edges defined by greenbelts or boulevards. The basic goal is integration of the activities of potential residents with work, shopping, recreation, and transit all within walking distance. Michael Davidson and Fay Dolnick (eds.), A Glossary of Zoning, Development, and Planning Terms, PAS REPORT Nos. 49/,/492. 3. Chapter 8, GROWING SMART LEGISLATIVE GUIDEBOOK: MODEL STATUTES FOR MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING OF CHANGE, Stuart Neck, Principal Investigator (Chicago: APA, January 1.5, 200:1 Draft Final Edition). 4. Posted on the PRO-URB listserve, June 12, 2000. 5. See e,g., Lee R. Epstein, Where the Yards are Wide: Have Land Use Planning and Law Gone Astray? 21 WM. & MARY ENVTL. L. & POL'Y REV. 345 (1.997); Douglas C. French, Cities Without Soul: Standards for Architectural Controls with Growth Management Objectives, 71. U. DEl'. MERCY L. REV. 267 (I_994); Shawn G. Rice, Zoning Law: Architectural Appearance Ordinances and the First Amendment, 76 MARQ. L. REV. 439 (1993); James P. Karp, The Evolving Meaning of Aesthetics in Land Use Regulation, :15 COLUMBIA J. ENVTL. L. 307 (:1990); Kenneth Regan, You Can't Build That Here: The Constltutionafity of Aesthetic Zoning and Architectural Review, 58 FORDHAM L. REV. :101.3 (1990); Samuel C. Poole and Ilene Katz Kobert, Architectural Appearance Review Regulations and the First Amendment: The Constitutionally Infirm 'Excessive Difference' Test, :12 ZONING AND PLANNING L. REPORT No. :1. (Jan. :1989). 6. Charles L. Siemon, Some Issues for Zoning for Neo-Traditional Villages, Paper for Planners Training Service American Institute Of Certified Planners, n.1.5 (1.989). Mr. Siemon's paper is one of only a handful of examinations of the legal implications of TND regulation. Some others are F. Mark White and Dawn Gourdan, Neo-Traditional Development: A Legal Analysis, 49 LAND USE L. & ZONING DIG., http ://www. p 1 arming, org/LULZD/oct01 camm.btm 2/21/2 0 0 3 Selected Articles Page i2 of 13 No. 8, Page 3 (August :1_997); Robert J. Sitkowski, The New Urbanism for Municipal Lawyers, Paper for the International Municipal Lawyers Association (April 12, 1999); and Eric M. Braun, Growth Management and New Urbanism: Legal Implications, 31 URB. LAW. 817 (1999). The American Planning Association has recently published two PAS Reports that may help municipalities craft these challenging types of regulations. Randall Arendt, Crossroads, Hamlet, Village, Town: Design Characteristics of Traditional Neighborhoods, Old and New, PAS REPORT Nos. 487/488 (1999); Christopher J. Duerksen and R. Matthew Goebel, Aesthetics, Community Character and the Law, PAS REPORT Nos. 489/490 (1999). The most ambitious effort on this front is the Congress for the New Urbanism's "New Urbanist Land Development Regulations Project," which is presently compiling TND regulations from around the country and will in the future produce a set of publications devoted to the issues surrounding TND regulations. See 7. N.C. GEN. STAT. § 153A-341. 8, VA. CODE ANN. § 15.2-2283. 9. S.C. CODE ANN. § 6-29-710. :LO. FLA. STAT. ch. 163.3202. 11. R.I, GEN. LAWS § 45-24-30. 12. Although it is beyond the scope of this article, there is also the question of what happens in "home rule states" and the extent to which enabling legislation limits the home rule powers of municipalities to enact regulations not in direct conflict with enabling legislation. 13. The trade journal New Urban News reports that Duany Plater-Zyberk & Company is negotiating with the IV]unicipal Code Corporation to distribute DPZ's "Smart Code," a model TND regulation targeted for adoption by local governments. The 'smart code' Is Coming, NEW URBAN NEWS, lune 2001, at 1; see also www.smartcode.org. It will be interesting to see how successfully the DPZ private codes translate into a local regulatory regime. :1_4. See e,g. Brian Blaesser, DISCRETIONARY LAND USE CONTROLS: AVOIDING INVITATIONS TO ABUSE OF DISCRETION, Chapter 8 (West, 2000}. 15. CONN. GEN. STAT. § 8-2j 16. 16 U.S.C. § 470 et seq, But see, Connecticut Environmental Protection Act, CONN. GEN. STAT. § 22a-14 etseq., provides a mechanism to protect against the "unreasonable destruction" of historic structures, including properties determined by the State Historic Preservation Board to contribute to the historical significance of a National Register Historic District. 17. There was, however, a companion act to the Village Districts Act, entitled "An Act Concerning Alternative Design Standards For Roads And Bridges," P.A. 98-:1.18. This Public Act requires that "loin or before January 1, ~_999 the Commission of Transportation shall establish alternative design standards for bridges, principal and minor arterial roads, collector roads and local roads and streets." The commission is required to solicit and consider the views of "chief elected officials in organizations, including, but not limited to, the Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation, Regional Councils of Governments, the Connecticut Council on the Arts, the Federal Highway Administration and the Rural Development Council." The result of the mandate contained Jn P.A. 98-118 is very important to localities because most of the subdivision road standards promulgated by the various towns rely on DOT standards. The implementation of this Public Act warrants close scrutiny. 18. CONN. GEN. STAT. § 8-2j(b). http://www.planning.org/LULZD/oct01 comm.htm 2/21/2003 .Selected Articles Page 13 of 13 19. Id, 20. Id, 21. Id. 22, Id, 23. CONN, GEN, STAT, § 8-2j(c). 24. Id. 25. Id, However, as noted Connect]cut land-use authority Robert A, Fuller observes, the role of the village district architectura~ consultant should not be underestimated because it "allows one person, with the concurrence of the zoning commission, or the commission itself, to dictate architectural design and impose their subjective tastes on Fuller, kAND USE LAW AND PRACTIC5 § 4~47 (1999), 26. CONN, GEN, STAT. § 8-2j(c). 27. Id, 28. CONN, GMN. STAT. § 29. Act 68 of 2000, 30. Report of the Perlnsy~vania 21st Century 5nvironment Commission, p. 10. 31. Id~ 32. 1999 Wisconsin Act 9, 33. WIS. STAT. § 66.034(3). 34. For a discussion of the genesis of Wisconsin's smart growth and comprehensive planning law see Brian W. Ohm, Reforming Land Planning Enabling Legislation at the Dawn of the 21st Century--The Emerging Influence of Smart Growth and Livable Communities, 32 URB. LAW. 181. (2000). 35. WIS. STAT. § 66.034(3)(b). 36. WIS. STAT. § 66.034(1)(c). 37. WIS. STAT. § 66.034(3)(a). 38. WIS. STAT. § 66.034(2)(a). 39. WIS. STAT. § 66.034(3)(a). 40. WIS. STAT. § 66.034(2)(b). The model ordinance is available at www.wisc.edu/urpl/people/ohm/projects/tndord.pdf. 41. Aesthetic-based regulations were strongly endorsed by the Wisconsin Supreme Court many years ago in the landmark case State ex rel. Saveland Park Holding Corp. v. Wieland, 69 N.W. 2d 21.7 (1.955). http ://www.planning.org/LULZD/oct01 comm.htm 2/21/2003 THE ZONING REPORT For Planning and Zoning Professionals {SSN 0748-0083 VOL 10, NO 6 -- JUNE 5, 1992 -- Charles Reed, AICP, Editor/Publisher -- $58/year/subscription [~Tr.r.q ~'[~_ _ D~ (Part One of thre~ parts) We take three issues ~o discus~this topic. This issue, Part One~ discusses the purposes and polie~ies of hillside regulation and the three typ~s of .li~llside zoning controls. Part Two, wh/ch you receive in two weeks, on June 19th, discusses the basic~reg~atory concepts and definitions for hillside re~:gniation, and sl6pe- density reqnirements.~ Pa~ Three, which you receive a mont.h later on'July 17th, discusses bulk envelupe regulation for hillside zoning~ provides hillside site and d~sign standards found in zoning and subdivision codes and spe- cial design standards for hillside streets. In each of the three parts, we provide ideas, sug- gestions and commentary, then we illustrate our discussion with selected sample text. Hillside regulations can apply to other sensi- tive environments. They are adaptable t~o regu- lating development involving rock outcrops, river bluffs s nd banks, occasional steep slopes in flat terrai{g mesas, canyons, arroyos, areas of shallow soils~and high water table areas. In this issue, we discuss broadening hillside regu- lations to include these other sensitive envi- ronments. Hillside regulations are particularly adaptable to n~ounItain res'ort~ and to mountain vacation-home subdivisions. Past issues of The Zoning Report that relate to this topic include these 13 topics within 21 issues: March 9 & 23, 1984 (two parts): How to red pencil preliminary subdivision plats--check- list of what to look for; Nov 11 & 25, 1985 (two parts~): How to red pencil site plans--a checklist of what to look for; Jan 4, 1986: Zoning and subdividing f}ag l(~ts~ June 19 & July 3, 1987 (two parts): Cluster housing and subdivisions; April 22, 1988: New ideas and recent trends for defining subdivisions} May 20, June 3 & 17, 1988 (three parts): Recent trends and new techniques for PUD zoning regnia- tions--a complete checklist of PUD regulat4ons you can use now; Sept 23, 1988: Cross-section standards for~loeal streets in your subdivision c~de; May 19, 1989. Recent trends in the de- si~gn of cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets ~n s~bdivisions; Dec 15~ 1989 and Jan 12 & 26, ].990 (three par~s): Checklist of environmental and natural resources provisions to be included m zoning codes; Feb 23, 1990: Earth grading requirements in sub¢livision codes and site plans; Aug 24, 1990: Regulating private streets in development codes; Feb 15, 1991: Zoning for seeuic highway corridors and viewpoints; and Dec 20, 1991 & Jan 4, 1992 (two part): Site design and construction standards in subdivision codes.~ The~e 2~'issues are available from us for $3 each. Purposes and policies of hillside regulation Take the purposes section seriously for hillside zoning provisions for two reasons. The first reason is that suburban-oriented zoning regulations shaping post-World-War-Il © 1992 by Charles Reed ........ 1404 N. State Road 7, Suite 269; Margate, Florida 33063 -- Mailing address: PO Box 6529; Margate, Florida 33063 -- TRE ZONING REPORT Page Two tract subdivision development assumed that project§ eYere built on relatively flat terrain. Projects built on hillsides conformed to these ~g~uiations, leading to disastrous results: de- nuded hft~sides, erosion, landslides, mudstides, flooding and'loss of natural beauty. Thereafter, deve1~pment-' standards applying to hillsides were st}ing~ntly revised to recognize the spe- cial prSblem's of developing on steep slopes. The s~i0nd reason is'that c0fir~ and~.~a~ law in rec'ent years have begun to take written zo. ning tD~t purpos~e~s~t f~._¢e y~a~.!p~?p~pses in hillside :prOVisions~ j~s~if~ng ~t{~'§ti~ingeney of standards appiying to hillsides tend to be re- viewed carefully in litigation challenging this stringe ney. Thereby, your hillside purposes statements should first recognize that there is a need to regulate hillsides differently from flat terrain. Then, your purposes s~atement lists the pur- poses, which we find are simple and obvious. Many codes then list a series of Policies that apply to hillside standards of development. Purposes of hillside regulation are as follows: -- promote safety of the design and con- ~trfiction of development; -- minimize flooding and ponding, landslides, muds]ides and danger from avalanches: -- minimize soil instability, erosion and downstream siltation; -- protect rare and critical environments, such as acquifers and recharge areas, wildlife, fragile soils and geologic structures; -- provide safety from seismic activity; -- provide for safe vehicular and pedestrian ~ cir cula tion; -- preserve the scenic character of hillside areas. Policies for hillside regulation can include the following: -- adapt the density of development to the terrain~ as hillside slope increases, dwelling density decreases, and as lot area increases the percentage area of the lot that can be graded for development decreases; June 5, 1992 issue -- preserve unbuildable rugged and steeply sloping terrain as much as possible, protected from future development as permanent open ~pacg identified on maps either distributed on the lots in ~{he project or as separate outlots under common ownership; -- minimize the disturbance of the land- scape, bY retaining trees and natural vegeta- tion as much as possible; proyiding a minimum of e~ts a~nd fills and earth grading; blending graded areas with undisturbed natural terrain by the design or,graded s~lopes min~imizing the amount Of exposed raw earth at any time in the project by careful phasing of the stages of development and requiring immediate replanting of areas disturbed by development; and reduc- ing the depth of cuts and fills on hillsides; -- provide a buildable dwelling.site on each lot~ by identifying a sufficiently sized, rela- tively tevei building area with enough stability and bearing capacity of geologic structures and softs ~o~snpport a prlnciphl building, juxta- positioned oh:~he lot to be reasonably acces- sible from public streets; ~- provide for fire safety, to reduce the. spread of wildfire and reduce opportunity of ignition~ by providing fire lan~, fuel breaks, and non-combustible roofs and building materi- als and spark arrestors; by clearing of under- brush and excess vegetation near dwelliags and by use of fire-resiStant local plant species; -- encourage a rustic-appearing architecture of dwellings and buildings to blend with the undisturbed natural hillside vegetation and ter- ~$i'b~ ~f/d't$~/u~-'~;'i~ jux~ap°sition of buii~ngs, parking and service areas on lots, by discour- a~ng l~ge land-consuming facilities not con- ducive to the setting, such as tennis courts, and by reducing views of .utilita~an non-aes- thetic items such as utility lines and parking areas; -- preserve the scenic quality of hillsides, by preserving local natural landmarks such as an unusual rock formation or canyon, preserv- ing the cover of native vegetation as much as possible, by intensive replanting to hide or ob- scure manmade development, and by preserving ?~Page Three ? TItEZONiNG REPORT natural drainag~ channels with devices, fix- tures, swales and retention areas to reduce excess storm runoff; =:r provide infrastructure to rural rather than urban standards as much ,as feasible with- out reducing safety or performance for vehicu- lar and. peckestrian circulation, and fo~'drain~ge and storm runoff; -- provide legal and financial mechanisms that assure future maintenance, repair and re- placement of hillside infrastructure whos~e~_ cost is usually more expensive than simi½ar facilities provided in. eo.n_~ntion~l flat'and devel?pment; and,that assure are~s~set aside in subdivisions as perman~ent open space are not developed. There,a~e three typeSs ef ~ ~ hill~ide zofling contrQls~ ~ The three types .are a b-nsc zone district, an overlay zone or. areas qualifie0 by definition 0~ a minimal steepness of slope. ~There is no spe- cial preference by zo~ir~g c~)des among the three types, but there is a slight trend toward o~eriay zones. - Each type of conzrol has strengths ~nd weak- arff~nded,,by, ordinary romp rezonings to remove the prot.ection o{-hillside regulatienJ Amending a base hillside-zone changes not only the uses allowed but ~lso deletes the stringent enyiron- me ntal constraints on developing hillside tracts. Rezonlng a tract to delet~the~overlay hillside zoning does xiot change .the underlying uses allowed in the base zone but is an obvious a~emp~_~o rempve the environmental hon- straints on develbpment. Rezoning a non-hill- side base zone covered by a,hillside overlay that is not deleted changes the underlying environmental constraints of the overlay still apply to the new zone. A~eas qualified by definition of minimal slope beyond which special standards and en¥iron- mental constraints~ apply to development are difficult ~o amend, delete or obtain variances for a single tract. To allow variances and spe- rial exceptions for genuine h~ai'dsh{p in defini- tionaily qualified hillside arenas, hillside devel- opment standards ~h0~ld n~ot b~ ~inetiided as qualifications in t~e de~initions. Othei-~i~&,(~the basic definition applyiffg to all ;hilrs~e d~9~iop- ment is amended or~ deleted to re~dlv~- ~d~ip for a single-applicafl~, .~, Definitional~qualification is Uselul':fn com- manities - that' ~o' not ~h~qe~ hill~, ~h~ orca~ no. mai area~:, OT st'a~ ;~lop~ -~d~ '~utcrOpg, ca~yons, a~mesa ~b~ o~af~' 0ec~ionaI~{eh*~ure can ~e regula:t~ ~ ..... ~ ' = - But base ~or o~eri~' zones are probably more usef~l~n co~n~4~' h~ving geo~aphicaIly concent-rate~ IOof~hl~I~ i~ilis a'nd mountains distinct' ~rom .flatIand a?ea-s. Base and overl'ay zones are shown on zone maps ~d have a chapter in the ~One cod~-te,~t, unlike definitionaIly qualified co~rolg ~ic~ have'-~o areas displayed on zone maps a3nd might be scattered throu~Oat the zone co~e text: with no coherentl~identifiable set' oI regulatidns. ' ~'~' Or'her;enVironmentally ~nsitiv~ areas are ~robably best r~solv~t~rough~an ;0Qer~ zone t~hat is broadened to include: hillsides. ~The overlay imposers envfrO~mental safeguards' on all development 'in underlying zones. Some of these sensitive arenas, .suc~h as:"-Sl~l!~q~' and problem soils and hi~h; water t'abl~-ai,~aS, .are not visible nor readily'perceived by-tile as environmental' ~ problems, [{~,i~g (:t~¥isibIe; ~b~re are few olJjeetiot~s to proposals to rezone · base zones regulating ,sensitive ~,n;vir~6nmenvs tO othe~ zones .to ~llow conventional deve$o~p,ment. Moreover, ~he public~',does n~.t ~el'eeive the cUmul~rl~-,of negative inipacts.by :a seties af zomng changes t~rat remove protectio~from not-so-ol~vious sensitive -e.nvironmen~$. Legally nonconforming lots a,nd subdivisicSns 'in hillsi'de zones that cannot meet hiilside~,zoning development standards can be' developed by r~aiver of some of the standards. The standa, rds are waived administratively by ~a process set forth in zoning and subdivision codes, for spe- cifically listed standards. Ail other walvers' are approved as variances in th~ zoning code through the BZA and as waivers in the subdivi- sion code. If nonconforming subdivisions are June 5, i992 Issue TH~ ZONIN~ REPORT Page Four resubdivided after the date of enactment of th~ hillside text amendment or re. zoning, the standa~ds cannot be waived for proposed new lots an~l for any remaining portion of the par- ent lo~, Nor can .the s,tandards be waived for l~ts g~rea.ted~ on tracts by lot splits and minor subdivisions, by multiple lot splits allowed on a tract for any remainirlg lots entitled to be cre- ated, by _farm d~ision~and partitions.o.r by any non-subdivision pr. oces~~ (~.g,,-contract for sale, lon~g-~term !ease or metes and bounds sales) that ~A~~e waivers listed in the zoning and sub~vi~,n code typically include reduclng the reqffired depth of hffiside zone yards, al- lowifig c~ and fHis .ia zone yar~, a~nd aHow- ~: off-*treet parking in .zone yards; reducing the height a~d slope angle of specif~ cuts and fiils~i~ com~nsating slope su~ace treatment or ret~i~d~g wails are provided[ increasing the ~ximum percentage of the surface area of a lot aHo~ed to be graded; and) in a few codes, reduc~g loi area :r~ffired By s!op~-density tables, but not below the minimum lot area req~red by,the base zone. Correlate hillside zoning regulations with other develqpment codes. These include the subdivi- sion and land development c~de, building code, fire safqty~ e_o~le, fire insurance rating regula- rio:ns and po/i~ies, health ~cede and speci, fiea- tions of the public engineeri~qg agency for ero- s/on c~ntrol, earth grading, Cuts and fills, and storm runo/~, kike the zoning code, the under- lying assumption of other codes is to regulate deYelo~pment on relatively level terrain. These codes, especially the sub~y~i~n and ,~p~d: de- velopment code, need to be modified to be consistent with the zoning code... Most common hilisi~e standards appearing in several codes are the minimum percentage slope beyond which the special regulations apply, density and lot-area requirements for different steep- ness of slopes, location of exclusion areas and building site areas on zoning development plans and subdivision plats, standards for grading cuts and fills, and standards for hillside street ROW and cross sections. Variation of hillside zomng standards from those applying to fis tland areas involve more engineering expertise, of civil engineers, soils engineers, engineeri.ng geologists and hydrolo- gists. Accordingly, slate plans for lots in hillside zones submitted fo} building permit approval must have a sign-off'by the public engineer prior to approval by the building official. Sam ple~t ext We di~ide,.the saP~ple t'e~l int~ ~w a parts: (1), definit}o~as of hHiside terns; and (2), hillside- zoning pu~o~s. Parts Two and Three divide [he sample text into these five additional parts: Hilisid e regula- tory standards; maximum percentage' of~hil}side lots that can be graded;: slope-density ~gul;a- tio~; required background stu~es; and special street d~g~-~a,n~_~dS. ~ , Definitions o~ hillside ~t:e~ms "Steep slopes. 'Steep slopes' ,means ~any land haying an a~'erage cross slope of '15% or more. A steep slope shall be determi~ned'by, measure~ men~ of the a~erage slope perpendie~/l~r to th~ proposed street l/n~ between the pi'op~$ed rear line and the center of the street. ~ny block frontage ~shall be considered a'steep slope if the slope of 30% or more of its length equals or exceeds 1 [Subdivision code, Churchill CO, F&llon NV'] "Average slope. 'Average slope'~..~ha~l, be d~- term/ned by the following form~}l~:- Average slope = .0023 x.I x L A Where: .OOM3 = A factor for the conversion of square feet into acres. ! = contour interval {in feet) of a top~graphieal ma p ~f the parcel. L = combined length {in feet} of or along contour lines measured on the parcel. A = parcel area in acres. June 5, 1992 issue Page FiYe THE ~NIN(] REPORT "Buildable area. The 'buildable area' shall be that portion of the platted lot exclusive of the required front, rear and side yard setbacks, as established by the base zone for the lot, and all designated undevelopable area. "Engineering geologist. 'Engineering geolo- gist' shall mean a graduate in geology, or engi- neering geology of an accredited university, with 5 or more full years of professional post graduate experie~nce in ~he application of~ the geological sciences, or which at least 3 full years shah be in the field of engineering geol- ogy that has required the al~lication of geo- logical data, techniques and principles to engi- neering problems dealing with ground water and naturally occurring rock and soil, for the purpose of assuring that g~ological factors are recognized and adeql~atel~ interpreted and pre- se,ted. "Fuel break. 'Fuel ~ore~' shall mean a stra- tegically located strip or ~tock of land, varyl g in width, on which vegetation has been modi~ fled to provide a safer place~or fire fighters to work and to help reduce the rate of fire spread. J'L_.evel building site. A 'lev~_ b~ildin~g site' shall be a site contained wholly within the Buildable Area, of a dimension not less than 30 ft by 40 ft, to accommodate the main struc- ture, required off-street parking, and drainage resulting from'said improvements. Slope of the Level Building Site shall not exceed 16%. "Natural d~_inage. 'Natural drainage' 'shall mean water ~l{lch flows by gravity in channels by th~ ~s~ur_f~.ce.,~topqgr. a. ph~y._o~ th_~_ ea_r.t~h_py~o.r..tq changes made by the efforts of man. "Percent of slope. 'Percent of slope' shall mean the slope o~f a designat~:d'~}e~& of label determined by dividing t.he horizontal run of the slope into the vertical rise of the same slope and converting the resulting figure into a percentage value. "Site development. 'Site development' shall mean altering terrain and/or vegetation. "Slope classification map. A map prepared by a registered professional engineer or surveyor~ on a contour map, showing at a minimum, those areas with a slope less than 10% and greater than or equal to 40% as calculated between every contour interval vn said map. "Soils engineer. 'Soils engineer' shah mean registered civil engineer of the State of Utah, specializing in soil mechanics ~nd foundatio,n engineering, familiar with the application of the principles of soils mechanics in the investi- gation and ~nalysis of the engineering proper- ties of earth material. "Transition slope. The 'transition slope'~ shall be a slope ~ontained wholly w~thin t-he Build- able Ares used to transition from t}~e grade of the Level Building' SRe~o th~' ~a~i~ral Or e~gi- neered finished grade of the yard area." [Site Development Regulations, City of Salt Lake City' UT] "Building envelope: The area to be occupied by any structure and associated development. "Building site slope: The average natural slope of the area designated as the building ~e~velope measured at right angles to the nat- ui~'al contours along a line passing through the c~.~nter of the building envelope; such line shall terminate at the opposite edges of ~he pro- posed building, ~)r at the ot~posite edge~ 9~f the proposed cu~ or fill, whichever distance is greater. "Exposed slope: All the face of a cut or fill, from the toe to the toI~, whether the surface is retaining walls, rip-rap, natural vegetation or other materials. "Hillside building height: The vertical dis- tance from the lowest finish floor elevation of t~e b~g to t~e. high~e~.t ele~vati?n p_oint (~f the building or roof. "Natural area.'. A land area, unimproved and not occupied by any structures or ~ia~{~a'de elements, set aside for the conservation of permanent, undisturbed open space. "Peak point: The single highest elevation spot of a peak. "Ridge line: A ground line connecting the series of highest elevational~ points of a ridge, running center and parallel to the long axis of the ridge. "Slope plan: A plan for development, clearly depicting all proposed grading including the June 5~ 1992 Issue THE ZONING I~PORT PageSix location, extent and treatment of aH exposed slopes." [Pima Co, Tucson AZ] Hillside zoning purposes "Purpose. The purpose of the Residential Can- yon 'R-lC' District is to promote the health, safety and the general public welfare .of the City and the inhabitants thereof, by establish- ing s'tandards for the canyon and hillside areas within Salt Lake C{ty. Whereas the canyon and hillside areas of Salt Lake City possess differ- ent characteristics than the City's flatland, it is ~necessa?y to impose special regulations to minimize soil and slope instability, erosion, sedimentation and water runoff and to protect the water quality ~nd ~aturui character~ of canyon and hillside ~area$, The purpose of the district shall be to ~rom~_~te the following City. objectives whmh shall be conmdered as gtude~. lines and standards by which ali developme~ shall be measured: ~ "(1.) Planning of development shall fit the topography, soils, geology, hydrology and other conditions existing o,n. the proposed site}~ "(2) Orientation of ali development to site specific details so that grading and other site preparation shall be kept to an absolute mini- mum~ "(3) Concentration of dwellings, and other structures by.clustering or planned unif devel- opment in st~ a manner as to preserve.-large areas of open Space and the natural ch~aracter- isties of the terralnl "(4) A' safe means of ingress and egress for vehicular and pedestrian traffic shall be 'pro- ~: ~ Vided t° and within areas suitable for develop- ment while at the same time minimizing the scarring effects of hillside street construction{ "(5) Development shall be allowed only in those areas well suited for development and construction as evidenced by competent solls~ geology, and hydrology investigationg and re- ports. All other areas shall be reserved for open space and recreation areas; '!(6) Preservation and enhancement of the natural beauty; and, ' "(?) The prevention of flooding and deterior- ation of water' quality by protection of streams, drainage channels, absorption areas, and flood plains from substantial alteration of their natural functions." [Salt Lake City UT] [Polieies governing hillside regulations]: ". . . The policies to b~.~achieved by.~this [zoning code] chapter shall include but not be limited to the following: "(1) Encourage only minimal grading which re- lates to the natural contour of the land and which will round off~ in a natural manner~ sharp angles at the top and ends of cut and fill slopes, and which does not result in a 'stair-. case' or 'paddy' effect. ~(2) Require retention of trees and other vege- tation which stabilize steep hillsides, retain moisture, prevent erosion, enhance the natural scenic view and where necessary, require addi- ~.ti~onal landscaping to enhance the scenic and s~fety quahtles of the hillside. "~3) Require immediate planting wherever ap- propriate to maintain necessary cut and fill .slopes, to stabi'llze them with plant roots, to conceal the raw soft from view and to minimize erosion. "(4) Preserve natural drainage channels. "(5) Encourage retention of natural landmarks and prominent natural features, wildlife habitat and open space. "(6) Preserve and enhance the visual and envi- ronmental qualit~ through the use of natural vegetg~i-6~.and prohibition of excessive excava- tion and terracing. "(y) Protect the public from natural hazards of storm 'water runoff and erosion by drainage facilities. "(8) Minimize the threat of fire damage by es- tablishing fire protection measures. "(9) Establish land use management that will encourage protection of natural elements while allowing a harmonious and s~tisfying residential environment. "(10) Encourage a regard for the view of the foothills as well as view from the foo$hills." [Subdivision regulations, Prove UT] June 5, 1992 issue THE ZONING REPORT For Planning and Zoning Professionals ISSN 0~48! ~/OL 10, NO 7 -- JUNE 19, 1992 -- Charles Reed, AICP, Editor/Publisher -- $58/year/subscrip H/r.r~q~DE Dk~ELDPI~q~ (Part Two of three parts) This is the seeond of three ~ssuns discussing this topic. This issue, Part Two, continues our discussion of hillside regulations by discussing the basie~ ~egulatory concepts and definitions for hiilside regulation, and slope-density re- quirements. Par~ Thre~, w~ch you receive next month on July 17th,~ dis~lsses bulk envelope regulation for hillside zo .~ g, provides hillside site and design standards '~{~ound in zoning and remainder of the tract as buildsble. An entire tract conceivably could be unbuildable in terms of zoning standards, apart from relief offered by appeals, waivers and variances to build at least minimally safe and accessible develop- ment on sueh a tract. The unbuildable portion is called the exclusion area~ natural area, open space area or similar subdivision codes and special ~design standards~ .J~erminology. I~ is reserved as permanent open for hillside streets. Sl~ce upon which development is never allow- Part One~ which you received two weeks ago on June-Sth, discussed the purposes and poli- cies of h~!lside regul~ation and the three types of. zoning controls. In each of the three parts, we provide ideas~ suggestions and commentary, then we illustrate our discussion with. selected sample text. Basic regulatq~ concepts for h~ll2~ ide regula-t~on Hillside zoning divides aH of the tract into buildable and unbuildable areas. These areas are identified at ~he outset ~g :f£tihg for liminary and sketch plans and plats. They are identified thereafter on every development plan and site plan, and are shown at survey quality on the final plat and development plan and on individual lot survey plat maps. The unbuildable parts of s tract are first identified on development plans, leaving the e___d~ It is defined to exceed a specified slope, ranging from 25-40%, usually a.t least 30% in most codes. Ownership of exclusion sreas can be appor- tioned among adjoining lots in the plat or be platted as a separate outlot owned in common by the homeowners association. It can be dedi- cated to the public if accepted by the com- munity upon review and recommendation by the ~t ~forget . . . to include us in your next annual budget starting October 1st or any time ii~"r19~92~ · . . Budget us for $58 We're keeping our rates the same for new subscriptions and renewals starting any time in 1992 or 1993. 1992 by Charles Reed ........ 1404 N. State Road 7, Suite 269; Margate, Florida 33063 -- Mailing address: PO Box 6529; Margate, Florida 33063 -- THE ZONING REPORT Page Two parks department. Mechanisms for liability and maintenance of this open space lodge with lot owners or the homeowners associa~i0n. Its per- manence is assured by deed restrictions for individual lots and covenants for hillside plats. Exclusion areas might not count toward maxi- mum'gross density allowed on the tract, a pro- vision required in about 30-50% of hillside · codes, especially in locales with extensive hill- side terrain. These portions of the tract are deleted from the calculation of allowable den- - ~ity. Even.if excluded !ro~ t~_h~ ~atlowa_ble d~n- sity, these areas are always allowed to count toward m~nimum lot area of individual lots in a plat if excluSion areas are distributed to the lots. Almost all codes do not allow exclusion areas to count toward subdivision parkland dedication requirements. The buildable per,ion of a tract excludes zone yards and the exclusion area. Within the build- able portion on each lot in a hillside subdivi- Sion ~s an area identified as the buildable site area, defined by many hillside codes with a special term, such as the buildable site area, level site-area or building~dweiling sit~ area. It /s juxtapositioned on each lot to provide rea- sonable accessibility by a logical location of its driveway at a slope of no greater than about 15%. The buildable area has a minimum size and maximum slope level enough upon which a dwelling can be constructed without excessive resor~ to pier foundations with little or no cantilevering. The rainimum s/ze is -typically 40% of the buildable area allowed by the mini- mum lot area required in underlying base zones or a minimum dimension of about 30x40 ft, whichever provides the greater area. The maxi- mum slope ranges in zoning codes from 10-16%, typically about 15%. The boundaries of the buildable site area are shown on both the pre- liminary and final plat for each lot. Development of that portion of the lot be- yond the buildable site area and outside the exclusion area is prohibited by lot deeds and plat covenants, although many codes allow grading and cuts and fills in this area for the building site. No structure or paved area is ~l- lowed in this area other than for drainage, slope retention and the driveway. Development, perhaps, can be allowed in this area as a spe- cial exception sought from the BZA upon ap- proval by the public engineer, where such de- velopment is an enlargement or extension of the principal building or construction of an accessory structur_e. ~ The buildable site ~rea ~s differentiated from ~.~tl~e,~pt~aL~.~di~g ~a~r~e~a,_~which i~ ~hown on the sitO<pla{l submitted for building permits. The buildir/g area is the ground floor of the pro- posed dwelting and garage to be built on the lot. It excludes land set aside on the lot for personal ree'r~ational facilities such as tennis courts ah/] ~wiYnrning pools. Some codes prohibit these facilit}es-~xcept by conditional use per- mit. These facilities require s large flat area subject to extensive cut and fill and extensive removal of vC~getation, which, in hillside areas, greatly amplifies problems of controiling runoff onto adjoining lots, creates a scarred appear- ance and a loomihg effect viewed from adjoin- ing lots due to high fills and deep cuts. Several terms are defined that are used to cal- culate the buildable and unbuildable parts of a tract and to locate their boundaries on devel- opment plans. Average cross slope defines the slope of the tract to be subdivided to identify the exclusion area and to derive gross den~ity~. It also 'applies ~ indivi~lual. ~ot.~s n9~ part of, a plai~gd .subdivi- sion developed under the hillside regulations. Average cross slope is derived from the for- mula': S-~ .0023 IL/A. Where S is the average slope of the tract in percent, I is the contour interval in feet shown on the tract map, L is the combined length of aH the contour lines on the tract, in feet, °0023 converts acreage to square feet, and A is the area of the tract in acres. The combined length ("L') is measured by rolling a planimeter wheel along the mapped contours, then multiplying this length in inches times the map scale, to ·feet. The largest pre- ferred map scale is one inch equals 100 ft, June 19, 1992 issue Page Three ~ ZONI!NGREP~RT with a larger scale of 50 ft or 20 ft preferred to obtain a more accurate planimeter reading on tracts with rugged terrain having very steep (20-25% or more) slopes. Many q~c!e~ ;~alsb define building sit. e slope ,in addit.iQ~ to.average cr~ss siope. ~It is* the aver- age~atural slope:measured along a line located near,the cen~ter oi~ the area set 'aside for the principal buildin~t and perhaps parking areas, ~rom one side of this area to the ~ther,_locat- .ed oa :the map t~inter~e_ .~t ~,~h~ ~_~_tour l~nes,in this ~i-ea at. right .a-n~les. Other terms defined in hillside codes might include,'~uel break' and 'fire lane' as forest regulations applying to hillside areas. A .fuel break is a strategicYally ~plaeed portion oL the lot or strip whose veget~ion is thinned or re- placed to provide safer a~ees~ for f, ire fighting and t~o reduce fire spread~. Fue~ break are~ and fire lanes a. re often iden{ified on prelimi- nary, pl~ts and plat~ and are mapped on the £inal p~t .~easement~s ~o ass,~ure emergency .acee~a onto pFi~ate property to suppress fires .anglo'to clear trees a~nd veg, etation and b~ulldoze earth while ~ighting wildfire~s. These eas~ements need not be shown on plats if state law allows such access and bulldozing anywhere bn private pr0~rty to s~ppress wildfires. Or ~uch aecess and bulldozing anywhere on a lot might 'be p~ro- vided~. ;by dee~ restrictions, l~!at covenants and perhgps, even ~et forth in sales contracts so that. buyers are aware of She possibility~ of thei4~ peopi~rt-y q~e}ng t-o~ -up t(r-fight forest fires. Slope-density regulations For hillside regulation, lot ~rea ,increases as slope increases, or conversely, gross dwelling unit density decreases as the percentage of average cross slope increases. Zoning codes show this relationship as a slope-density table. For each range of steep'- ness of slope, a minimum lot area or maximum gross dwelling unit density is imposed on a tract to be subdivided or on a lot predating the hillside rega]ations or rezoning. The.lQwest average cross slope requiri.n,g hill- side regulation ranges from 10-20% with 15% most typical. Slopes,of 10~,20% allo~w lot :si~es at densities~of 4-6 dwelling units per acre; 20% slope allows 0.5 to 4 units per acre, or a min~- mumAot area of about 10,000 sq ft,to 25% slope alld~s 0.165 {l'/6Tt0 $ unit~ per .ac- re,. or a lo~ ~rea ~f about,. ~0 ~q ~t~ acres; 30% slppe aH~ws 0;.0~25 (t/16): to 2.units ~o~-l~t ~,~a ~f about 2O,'O~O sq ft ~o 16 acres; and 30-40% slope a.~lows 1/32-to, 1 unit per .a~cre or a loose,ea.,of I to 32 acres, where development is aR~ed ~Y codes. No development allowed by a~y code on slopes over 30-40%. Wit~n these ranges, minimum lot area tends to be smarter for sem4-a,~d and desert areas and larger for forested Hill~de co~ enhourage concentration ~{ ~he ~'~ngs tqgethfir on the m~t leyel and b~ild- ~bl~ portio~ of a ~ract so that the most rug- ~d and steeply sloped ter~in remains undis- turbed as permanent open spac,e. M~s~-zoni~ codes allow -dwelling units {o be'ira~sferred within the tract as a housing cluster ~lan or a PUD. Averaging the ares of lots is req~red ~or use of slope-density tables that are based on gross dwe~ing de~ity on a tract but is not neeessa~ if slope-density is b~ed a mi~mum req~red ~rea of each loi for steepness of ~ope. Clu~r hou~ng and PUD plans are encour- aged 4n~l]s~ p~je~s '~y granting -density bonuses, through ~he CPC and elected board, of 5-15%. Hillside.-use~ regul~(io~ that a,llow only detached dwellings might allow attached sin- gle-family dwellings (2-6 units per buil~ng) in clusters and PUDs. Common recreational facili- ~es can be prodded, since they are c.ritical to the success of cluster and attached-housing projects. The percentage of bulling site area on the tract should be increased ~o accommo- date these recreational facilities. Most codes allow a project developed in phases to develop the most level and buildable parts June 19, 1992 Issue T~iZONING REPORT of a tract first, to provide cash from lot sales to finance development of la~er phases. The number of units need not 'be'bai!t ~p~oportionate to the numlYer of phases ('e.g.~ one-third units built in each of '~hree ~phases)'. Up to 10-33% more unitS' can be bailt in cartier~ phases, so l~)ilg as at least a mi-nimum number (50-67%) of .'un~ouilt units remain in all later phages; this percentage could decline in'- all remaining phases to, perhaps as low as~83% of unbuilt o~qits remaini~g ~n~he test pt~se where at ~:-4-~; p~ias~ :(~f ~pp~o~i~eq{ -eq~r~i= ~- bee ~f' u~it~ p~'ph~s~) ave planned. This avoids ha, ring, ~11 Units' bfl~lt~'' iff the first' phases then the project ~ei~g abandoned by the developer. Sample te:~t We divide the sample text into [wo parts: ~ti~lside regulatory standarffs; .an~l m~i~um p~reentage of hillside }ors that~ :The O{her two parts, One atilt Th~e~l~ide the sample text' into these five parts:' d~fi~i- ti0ns-of {qi'~lside terms~ hillside zoning purposes and p~olieies; slope-density regulations;-reqUired background studies; and special /$treet 6~ign standards. Select, ~dit and shift the parts of those text samples best meeti, ng- your needs. Rewrite them~ a~id your own written ~ext~ revise bther related sections of your zoning and subdiVsi-on codes to fit your specific situd~t~n. Write your matei-ials c}early. Show your {lraft · o your bailding and zoning 'officials, eXaminers and public engineer'-~or their ~e~ri- tique, and show your draft' to ~nvifonmental planners and ~o planners in .your CO6, RPC or sub-state planning ~ge~cy. You9 materials might be debated i~ public .h'~arings and you want them to be understood by Iay persons. Review your final drafts with your legal counsel. Legalisms in this report may not hold in your situation or state. 8y first thinking through and writing your "planner's draft~" you can discuss questions raised by your counsel from a logiced planning viewPOint. Hillside regulatory standards '~1) Grad~ng. "(a) No grading, filling or excavation of any kind shall be accomplished without first having ob.t~ained:~d~g~ermit ~from' ~he: City Engi- neeP W}~o s]ihll bdt issue such-p~rm'it u~tii the final gra~ug plan, endorsed 'by a registered civil engineer, ~bmitted asa part o{ the pre- ~minary plat, is approved ~y ~he C~mmnni~y Development Director. ~:' be graded and must $e~al~n"ils' hat~F{F si~ie except that natural vegetation may be supple- me,ted b~ other plantC~ate~al. "(c)' Ev~ Irt or,parcel s~all"have one-build- able ar~a eqffaI t:~at~least 40% df the minimum lot -size required by the zone in which it is located. · ~('d) FRI areas s~H-be prepar~ by removing organi~ -material, s~h' as vegetali~'n, ~uSbiSh and othe~ toast, rial which is det~inefl :by ~he Civil En~ineSr {o b~ detrimental ~ib pr,oper come,ion oFotherwlsq not. cOn~i~ ~oI ~ta- bility. No rock 6~':gimilar'irreducible lna~te~al with a ~aXimUm~i~eter greater t~'~ i~eh- es gh~l} be used-as a' fill matevi~l 'in ~lls that are intended'to provid~ Struct.uP~ ~t~ength. "(e) All rough st~ and~ site grading shall be ~o~pteted~;pPior t~ ~hCe {nstall~on o~ Utilities; '(,f) Fills ghall be compacted to at'least'95% of AAS~HTO T180 density fo~ those areas intended as structural -f6unda~tiohs, including roadways. ~(g~ CUt siOpe~s.!Shal] he'=tic steeper than one -and one-half~ ½o~izo~l: to one vertical. Subsur- face drainage shall be provided as necessary for stability "(h) Fill slopes shall be no steeper than ~wo horizontal to one vertical. "(i) Tops and toes of cut and fill slopes shall :be 'sL~t badk from property -boundaries' ~ dis- ta~of- 3 ft. ~(j) B~c~rrowing for fill shall be prohibited unless the material is obtained fr6m a cut permitted under' an approved grading plan' ol~tained for some purpose other than to produce fill mater- iai, or imported f~om out~i~e the hillside area of Provo City. June 19, 1992 issue Page Five THE ZONING REPORT "(k) Cut slopes shall be constructed to elimi- nate sharp angles of intersection with the ex- isting terrain and shall be rounded and con- toured as necessary to blend with existing to- pography to the maximum extent possible. The City will not accept the dedication and main- tenance of cut and fill slopes exc,ept those within the required street ROW. Where a cut or fill slgp~ occurs b~ween two lots, th9 slope shall normally be a part of the downhill lot. "(2) Drainage. "(a) Required storm water runoff collection fd'dilities '~h~ail ~' ffesi~n~ed'~so'' ~.S t'o retain storm water runoff on-development sites for a sufficient length of time so as to prevent flobding and erosion during storm water runoff flow periods. "(b) Required storm 4~uno~f collection facilities shall be so designed as t~ divers surface w~ater away from cut faces or ~loping surfaces of a ~ ~ ~ -~re no[~acceptable. "(c) Curb, gutter and pavement designs shah b~- such that water'on roadways f§ prevented from rfiowing off the roadways. "(d) Natural drainage shall be riprapped or oth- erwise stabilized to the satisfaction of the Ciiy Engineer below drainage and c{/l~l~{ dis- charge points for a distance sufficient to con- vey the discharge without channel erosion. "(e) Waste material from construction, includ- ing soil and other solid materials~ shall not be deposited within a natural or manmade drain- age course n_~r within irrigation channels. "(f) Sediment ~atehment ponds shall be eon- str~c~ted downstream from each development, unless sediment retention facilities are other- wise provided. "(3) ¥~getation ~nd Revegetation " .... n(a) Every effort shall be made [o conserve topsoil which is removed during construction for later use on areas requiring vegetation or landscaping, e.g., cut and fill slopes. "(b) Areas not contained within lot boundaries shall be protected with adapted, fire-resistant species of perennial vegetal cover after ail construction is completed. A list of acceptable speeies is available from the Community Devel- opment Department. · "(c) New planting shall be protected with or- ganic cover. "(d) Ail disturbed soil surfaces s~all be stabil- ized before final acceptance of the subdivision by the City. "(e) In all areas under the ownership and con- trol of the subdivider, he shall be ~uliy re- sponsible for any destruction of native vegeta- tion which is required to_ be re{aine~d. [to shall carry the responsibility for such areas both for his own employees and for all subcontractors from the first day of construction until final acceptance of tt~e~subdi~sion by the City. The subdivider shall be responsible for replacing such destroyed vegetation. "(f) At the termination of the bonding period, any dead plant materials required to be instal- led by the subdivider shall be replaced and a new bond ~ssued to assure esta,blishment of the replaced materials. "(4) Fire Protection ~i'~) Lot size ~nd potential placement of build- ~i}igs thereon shall be such that adequate clear- a~ee of hazardous, flammable vegetative cover may be accomplished. "(b) &l] easements for firebreaks for sa~ety~ ~f ~ built-up areas shall encnmpass access for fire- fighting personnel and equipment and such easements shall be dedicated for this specific purpose by being recorded. ~(c) The inability to provide fire line water pressure consistent with the standards set by the Insurance Service Organization shah be justification for denial of a subdivision re- quest.~[~bdivision regulations, Provo UT] "Parking. A minimum of two parking spaces p~r dwelling shall be provided. Parking spaces must be enclosed within s garage or, if not so en- closed, screened by landscaping such that no parked vehicles are visible from any public street. Unenclosed parking cannot occupy fron{ or side yard areas. Vehicle access shall be de- mgned ~n such a manner as to minimize the number of intersections with the major canyon road." [Salt Lake City UT] June 19, 1992 Issue ZONING REPOI~T Page Six Maximum percentage of hillside lots that can be graded "The total area of all grading [on a lot] (other than the enclosed area of dwelling units) for driveways, parking areas~ yards, swimming pools, walls, and accessory structures shall conform with the following requirements: "For chist~r-attached development in ~R-.1, CR-2 zones [single-family zones, 36,000 sq ft and 16,000 sq ft lot area]--maximum grading is 50% of the proposed site remaining after ex- clusion of natural areas. '~For single-family detached dwelling uni~ts: --on sites of 20,000 sq ft or less; maximum grayling is {50% of the project site remaining after exclusion of natural areas. --on sites over 20,0~0 sq}ft to i acre; 50% of first 20,000 sq ft or greater. --on sites over 1 acre to less than 4 acres; 36% of first acre or 10% of lot, whichever is~ greater. --on sites of 4 acres to less than 15 acres; 10% of first 4 acres or 7% of lot, whichever is greater. --on sites of 15 ae~es ~ less than 36. acres; 7% of first 15 acres of 5% of lot, whichever is greater. --on sites of 36 acres and over; 5% of first 36 acres or 3% of lot, whichever is greater. "For multiple dwellings/business offices/ existing eomn~reial and industrial: 80% of the project Site rer~aining after exclusion of natur- al areas. "Natural areas: "A. Natural areas set aside in any division of land shall'i~t~be {ncluded in the average cross slope analysis. The total acreage of the project site may be used for dwelling unit density cai- culations; provided, that all other applicable provisions of this section are met. "B. Development shall not be permitted within the legally described boundaries of a natural area. However, if utility or service trenche~ cannot reasonably be provided without crossing natural areas of the site, such trenches may be permitted, provided they are revegetated . . . "C. Natural areas shall be clearly deIineated~ in a surveyabla manner, on aH final plats and development plans. "D. Natural areas shall be incorporated into the subdivision plat as either a portion of privately owned tots or; as land parcels under the owner- ship of a homeowners association. Deed restric- tions which prohibit development in natural areas shall accom~pany the plat.~_~here D~tural areas are located adjacent to major public parks, such areas may be deeded to Pima County, subject to approval by the county parks and recreation department and by accep- tance of the board of supervisors. 'F. Land parcels which include a natural area designation shall not be further divided.. He- corded subdivisions within project sites that include relocated densities due to natural area designation shah not be further divided." [Pima County, Tucson AZ] ~ . . . * . , I~THE NEXT FEW ISSUES . . . .... Next month, for August 21st, we provide zoning formulas to regulate spacing between buildings in multi-building development plans. For September 18th, we discuss how to inter- pret and classif~ new and unlisted uses. For October 23rd, accessory off-site business park- ing allowed in residential zones. For November, zoning for new and used car sales. ~, for December, recent trends for regulating front porches. We make every effort to present accurate in- formation and sound opinion in this report. However, we do not guarantee results, accu- racy, or assume liability for errors, omissions, or for information you may act upon. This pub- lication does not purport to be engaged in the practice of law or give legal advice, but is.the opinion of the editor and publisher solaly as a professional urban planner. June 19, 1992 issue THE ZONING REPORT For Planning and Zoning Professionals ISSN 0748-0083 VOL 10, NO 8 -- JULY 17, 1992 -- Charles Reed, AICP, Editor/Publisher -- $58/year/subscription (Part Three of three ports) This issue concludes our three-port discussion of hillside ~eguiations. It discusses bulk envel- ope regulation for hillside zOning~ provides hill- side site and design s$andards found in zoning and subdivision code~ an~speciai design st~an- dards for hillside struts. ~ Lost month, Part Once,ur June 5th issue, zone yards if ~' more suitable location is not available on a site; trenches must be covered and revegetated with local species. The depth of zone yards in hillside zones is not especially great, typically, 5-15 ft for side and rear yards, and 20-35 ft for front yards. Usually since lo~s in hillside subdivisions are discussed the purposes and policies of hillside large, 1-32 acres in size, these depths impose regulation and the three type~ of ~sid.e zen~ ~li}~tle constraint on hillside development. lng controls. Part Two, which ybu received two weeks later on June 19th, discussed the basic regulatory concepts and definitions for hillside regulation~ and slope-density requirements. In each of the three parts, we provide ideas, sug- gestions and commentary, then we illustrate our discussion with selected sample text. Bulk envelope regulation for hillside zoning Zone yards in hillside areas in most codes must remain as permanept open space except for driveway gccess. No accessory' buildings, park- ing areas, refaces o~r retaining walls are allowed in zone yards. Curs and fills are not allowed in zone yards except+ for driveway access, and some codes require ~cuts, fills and retaining wails to be no e~oser Lhan several feet to set- back lines of all~z~ne: y~rds~ Drainage struc- tures and (~her site infrastructure are allowed in zone y~rds Where other locations are im- practical. Codes allow utility trenches to cross ~aximum building height in hillside zones for principal buildi~ngs often differs from height limits in conventional zones.': Measuring building height eon be complicated and .time consuming for architects designing dwellings and for plans examiners checking. conformance ~o zoning regulations offered as an apparently simple provision, especially with special rules for height planes. Zoning codes avoid this problem and allow some over-height by a foot or two on portions of a dwelling by descril~nff~uilding height as measured from the finished ground floor. Conventional regulations applying on flat terrain measure building height from the ground grade. Hillside zones allow the same height as conventional single-family zones (25-35 ft), but buildings in hillside zones can be higher due to the additional height allowed between ground grade and the finished ground floor. Otherwise, the height plane is fixed on hill- side lots~ parallel to the building site slope of 1992 by Charles Reed ........ 1404 N. State Road 7, Suite 269; Margate, Florida -- Mailing address: PO Box 6529; Margate, Florida 33063 -- 33063 THE ZONING REPORT Page Two the buildable site area. A lower maximum height 0~ ~bout 20 ft might be imposed at the SetbaCk line of aR zone yards, with an inter- vening height-~plane slanting upward at a 45 degree angle to intersect with the primary height plane. The slant reduces a visual loom- ing effect of a building of as much as 45-60 ft to its r0ofline to occupants V~wing it from dwellings on~ adjoining lots. A few cod~s provide for an unobstructed view of the valley below from specified major hi~l~id~ roads b~ impo~ng-a~re(luoe~eigJ~t lim- it on downslope lots. Maximum building height is only 10~20 ft at the setbac]~line, intersect- ing with the height plane for the lot, which slopes downward toward the rear of the lot by several degrees. If this produces hardship to build on a reasonably level lot, administrative waivers are granted to allow construction up to 25 ft high with the ;dwelling oriented on the buildable site area to minimally obstruct the view from the road. Appeal for the waiver is heard by the BZA as a variance, which if it is denied, hardship can be snbsSantial. Off-street parking hillside provisions often al- low subdividers to shift of~,street spaces re- quired on streets to adjoining lots; This elimi- nates parking lanes from streets, which reduces the paved street bed from a conventional width of 24n36 ft to a width as narrow as 16-15 fi, and correspondingly reduces ROW width. Les- ser street and ROW width increases flexibility to design a better plat layout to create more desirable lots and building sites ably reduces construction eos~ to build ~arrow- er streets. The extra off-street spaces might not be paved since they are seldomly used. Reducing the need to pave them reduces rUnoff demand and the need to provide drainage swa- les or catchments. Many codes require all parking on forest hill- side single-family lots not to be visible from the street, if possible. All parking spaces must be located in garages, behind berms and cut areas or in the rear yard behind the dwelling. No p~rking spaces are allowed inside the set- back area of side and rear yards. Hillside site and design standards in zoning and subdivision codes There are two basic types of grading restric- tions on hillside lots, a maximum area of the lot that can be graded and special standards imposed on the design of cuts and fills. The first ~estriction imposes a maximum per~ centage of the area of lot that can be graded. This percentage decreases as lot area increas- es. The percentage excludes portions of lots wit~hi~q~ designatpd e~chision areas or excludes a percentage of the exclusion area. A typical standard is, for smaller lots up to an acre in area~ 50% of the first lial~-acre or 30% of the buildable area of the lot, whichever is greater, can be graded; for 1-2 acre lots, about 20-40% of the first acre or about 10% of the buildable lot area can be graded; for 2-15 acre lots, about 10~20% of the first two acres or ~% of the bniidable lot area; and for lots larger that~ about:!~5 acres, about 5-7% of the first 15~36 acres or 3-5% of the bhiidable lot~ area can be ~graded~ The ~eeon~ grading restriction imposes spe- cial standards .on ~he design of:.euts and fi}Is. ~ese standsrds include: siopes greater than 20-25% might not be graded and must remain undisturbed, except for, perhaps, driveway ac- cess; fills must b~ compacted to conventional engineering standards; cut and fill slopes are limited to a specified lower slope angle; cuts and fills are limited to a lower depth or height than allowed in conventional development;· or- gahic ma~terial (t~e~s, shrubs~ a~d, stum~ps) and ro~ks (~t g~24~ from fill; on-site ~ills borrowing earth from offksite cuts must be from approved cuts; earth from on-site cuts used off-site cannot he pro- vialed primarily for sale at retail as earth fill or topsoil; tops and toes of cut and fill slopes must be rounded to create the appearance of a natural slope; cuts and fills must be located up to three f~eet inside Setback lines of all zone yards; and the toe of cuts must beset back a specified distance from dweRings, which might be increased on slopes with avalanche potential or subject to muds;;de. July 17, 1992 issue ?~ Page Three THE ZONING REPORT Environmental reports and plans might be re- quired to be submitted with preliminary devel- opment plans and plats for five topics: softs, geology, grading, preservation of vegetation and fire safety. Most hillside codes only re- qulre a professional engineer certify that the proposed d~valopment plan mitigate~ or elimi- nates any problems, hazards or unsafe situa- tions, created by development on the site~ Miti- gation usually does-not include .offsets. A few codes, especially in locales with extensive hill- sides., and ~mo_untaln_~ar_ea~ report prepared by qualified ~pealalists in each of the subject areas. ~The soil, s report is prepared by a qualified soils expert, using classifications and maps of local soils acceptable to the community. The soils report must lo,ate ~vamps, springs, a~equi- fers, wetlands and d~termine~ their underground sources affecting the sit~ determine accepta- bility of soils to support footings and founda~ tions of buildings, determine ~and mitigate so~ problems, such as bearing capacity, settlement, shrink-swell and frost aetion~, deterralne depth of the water table and how site gPading and drainage would af-fe~t it. The geology report is prepared by a qualified geologist to determine the geology of the site and its behavior on the proposed development.. The report must describe and locate surface geology and infer subsurface strata and forma- tions, estimate the depth and type of bedrock, ts depth fr .o~h~ground surface and ~ts effect on the ~tabi!ity of foundations and footings. The~grading and drainage.plan shows, existing and proposed site contours at a sufficiently large scale for ~larity, usually 100 scale, and perhaps 50 or 20 scale for steep slopes with closely spaced contours. The grading plan must meet hillside grading and cut and fill require- ments and provide a drainage system that ac- commodates runoff within the local 100-year design storm. Construction plans and methods for runoff control and stormwater retention must be provided or described. Some codes re- quire a plan showing the phasing of site con- struction for subdivisions, to minimize the amount of disturbed surface area during each phase of construction and to identily transfers of cuts and fills to and from phases. A vegetation preservation and restoration plan shows the location and species of trees, large shrubs, groves and dense undergrowth and ground cover to be destrpyed, removed, thinned and transplanted and the proposed restoration of vegetation on ground surfaces proposed for grading. This plan must-address how ¥~etation and wildlife species listed as.r-are, tl~reatened or endangered will be protected or preserved and preserve vegetation during construction are to be indicated, including temporary stabil- ization of graded raw earth slopes. Many codes require use of native fire-resistant species. Performance bonds are recli~ired~ a bond post- ed to carry out the vegetation plan, followed by a maintenance bond for replacing dead, dis- eased or stunted plant material for one or two years after accepting the final plat. ~ A fire protection report is prepared, showing ~ocation of fire lanes, fuel breaks, and pro- [~)~sed areas to clear excess vegetation and undergrowth from the perimeter of the pro- Dosed dwelling.~' .This report must be approved by the fire chief for proposed projects locaSed in municipalities or in fire districts in rural outlying areas. If a rural area does not have an established fire district, the report must indi- cate who will provide fire protection, how and by what' agreements. Sp eci~t~sig n standards for hillside streets These standards are provided for ROW width, grades and cross-sections. ROW width can be reduced substantiall~ by as much as 20 ft from the conventional 50-ft ROW width by eliminat- ing some street elements from the ROW cross section or by reducing their width. Street-bed width can be reduced by eliminat- ing parking lanes where off-street parking is provided on adjoining lots and by eliminating them from street segments not adjoining lots. One or both sidewalks might be eliminated for July 17, 1992 Issue THE ZONING REPORT Page Four hillside subdivisions, which is a standard waiver allowed by subdivision codes for subdivisions with toss having an average area larger than an acre to two; ~iillside plats commonly meet this requirement due to alope-density require- ments~ Shoulders graded as part of the street croS~{section profile beyond pavement edges, curb~ or sidewalks might be reduced in width. Ma~y subdivision codes require ~vertical curbs on hillside stre~ets. Grading easements are usually provided .on adjoining lot~ to ~eeomrnodate large,street cuts and fi]is s'd deep that they begin orend outsid~ the ROW, The community is allowed to enter the easement tO maintain 1he cut/fill slope, its vegetation and the drainage channel at the foot of fills. But some commt~nlties require the ROW to be widened to accommodate these cuts and fills. Grades for hillside streets can be Steeper in short segments than allowed by general code standards. The grades can be 12-18% for 50- 150 ft segments in each 400-800 lineal feet of street, with some rural counties allowing up to 20%~for 50-75 ft in rural subdivis~ons~ ~ Maxi- mum grade for minor and collector streets in conventional terrain is 6-8%. Continuous long downhill runs of grades are allowed in hillside subdivisions, up to 2000 ft. The grade must be interrupted by short uphill benches of at least 6-20 ft every 300-700 feet, having appropriate transitional vertical curva- ture to and from the downhill grade. The benches are designed W~th.su~fieient drainage capacity of curbs, shoulders and swales to re- duce the volume and velocity of runoff built up during the long downslope run, to avoid flood- ing the street and adjoining lots at the foot of the grade. The angle of intersection might, be relaxed from the conventional standard of 90 degrees to 60 degrees in hillside areas. Street horizon- tal and vertical curvature might be reduced slightly in individual locations upon approval of the public engineer, to allow sharper and steeper curves on local streets if conventional curvature is impractical for street layout. Street layout in hillside subdivisions can be modified by allowing spilt directional lanes where streets cress over slopes and by allowing shared driveways ~or small numbers of lots in certain situations. Codes encourage hillside streets to be locat- ed parallel to contours, but some streets might need to cross over contours. These streets are allowed t~) have the ~treet bad,split into two lanes, one in each direction. This reduces the depth of a single cut or fill for a full width street ~bed to- {~we half-deep c~_~i~_o~_.f_il~l-~_f~o~ the two street lanes. This considerably reduces erosion, scarring of hillsides and loss of vege- tation and reduces street drainage capacity since runoff per street bed is reduced, Each lane is reduced in width t~) 12-16 ft, driveways are allowed off split lane segments, streets must have vertical curbs and through lots might be att~owed to be platted in especial- ly wide medians between the two lanes. Some codes aIlow shared driveways and pri- vate streets to serve a few lots where access by conventional public streets is impractical. The driVeway is a perpetual access easement requiring a 10-12 ft pavem~ent up to ~00~50 ft long if the driveway serves,~ two lots, and a 16-18 ft pavement up to 2~)0-400 ft long serv- ing up to six lots. A turnaround is required at the end of the driMeway, at a reduced standard that allows s tee or hammerhead design; a sign must be posted at the driveway entrance signi- fying a private dead-end street. Maintenance and liability is shared by abutting lot owners or by the home,where9 association and not by the locality, by agreements approved by the public attorney prior to acceptance of ~the-f-i- nal plat. Sample text We divide the sample text into three parts: (1), slop~-density regulations; (2), required back- ground studies; and (3), .special street design standards. The other two parts, Parts One and Two, divide the sample text into these four parts: July 17, 1992 issue Page Five THE ZONING REPORT definitions of hillside terms, hillside zoning purposes and policies; hillside regulatory stan- dards; and maximum percentage of hiIlside lots that can be graded. Slope-density regulations "Slope-Density Reduction '~in sloping terrain, the overall residential density of a subdivision shall be reduced with ulations. This may be done ]~y increasing the size of the lots or by designating a sufficient arena for pgrmanent open space. The open space shall be ~either dedicated to the city or pro- tected by a perpetua] open space agreement, at the option of theleity.~ "Increasing lot size~is t~e preferred approach in areas of uniform top(~raphy. In areas of variable topography, the preferred approach is_ to have substantially larger lo~.s or open spae~ use for the steepest areas, drainage swales, rock outcrops, o~ shallow soilsJ Approval of the scheme of lot sizes and open areas shall be at the sole discretion of the city. Open.space areas to be maintained for density reduction shall not be counted towards fulfillment of parkland requirements, nor shall the city or subdivider be obligated to provide or maintain any recreational facilities in such areas." [Subdivision code, San Luis Obispo CA] [In HR llillside Residential District]: hillside residential district, overall density shall be based Ul~On the average slope ~(~f~ .the land to be devel({ped~ in accordance with the following table: Category % of slope Density A 0--15 I du/acre B 16--25 I du/2 acres C 26--35 1 du/4 acres D 36 and over 1 du/5 acres "USGS seven and one-half minute quadrangle mapping (with 40-ft Contour intervals and eh- larged to one inch equals 1000 ft if available) shall serve as the standard criteria [or deter- mining slope categories. As an alternative to using the published maps, specific mapping by a professional land surveyor, with contour inter- vale of 40 ft or less, may be submitted. Such mapping shall be certified as having e~ntours based on an actual field survey, and the con- tours ~shail be [ie~t~ National-Geodetic Verti ..... cai Datum if [he furnished data is inadequate.~ [Chelan Co, Wenatchee WA] [For Residen~ai C~'~iC Distrie~t]: "Sec. 51-138-3. Area Regulations. The area for each dwelling will be der ermined from the fonowing table which relates density to the percentage of average cress ~tope: Percent Average Dwellings or Lots Cross Slope Per acre 0-10 4 1'~-20 2 2~-25 1 25-30 0.5 (2 acre lot) '30-35. 0.33 (3 acre lot)~ *35-40 0.20 (5 acre lot) *40-50 0.10 (10 acre lot) *50+ 0.0625 (16 acre lot) * = Notwithstanding said .formula, ail sites with soils indicated as "exclusive ~rea" on the composite land suitability maps by the Salt Lake County Council of Governments' 208 Water Quality Plan and having an average cross ~f~exceeding 30%, onrsite density shall be limited to one dwelling per t6 acres. '"fhe contour, interwals, maps and calculations~.. required below to determine the average cross slope percentage shall be prepared in a report by a professional civil engineer registered ~n the State of Utah which shall be submitted with applications for permits or subdivision approvals. Each report shall bear said engi- neer's verification as to the accuracy of the report. The average cross slope shall be com- puted by the following formula: [in June 5th issue, Part One, in sample text, definitions]." [Salt Lake City UT] July 17, 1992 Issue THE ZONING REPORT Page Six _~ Required background studies '!Land having an average natural cross slope over 40% shall be preserved'as Open space or shall be added to a legal building site. On all steep slope situations, all construction plans and specifications are to be approved by the county engineer, who may require such reports from spediali}iS 'regardiHg drainage, 'soil me'- chanies, or engineering geology as necessary." [Churchill Co, Fallon NV] '~t{e-~ ~ ~ ~a]i require the~ f0~l~Wing r~Por~s" and pians to be provided by the aPplicant. Un- less the applicant is notified of deficiencies in said reports and plans within 30 days of their submission to the CPC, the reports and plans shall be deemed adequate for the CPC to com- plete the processing of the application. The CPC may waive any reports and plans it deter- mines are not necessary to determine whether the development meets the requirements of this ordinance. "(1) Soils Report. The soils report shall be prepared by a qualified soils engineer and must ' eOntaln at i~a~t the ~ollo~ing information: : "(a) A slope analysis. '(b) An estimate of the normal highest eleva- tion of the seasonal high water table. "(c) The location and size of swamps, springs? and seeps which shall be shown on the site plan and the reasons for the occurrence of these underground water sources. An analysis of the vegetative cover or other surface infor- mation may be used ~o show the presence of underground water. "-'(d)~A ua]fi'ed soil classification for the major horizons or layers of soil profile or of the zone of the footing foundation. ~(e) Appropriate accepted soils engineering tests to determine bearing capacity, settlement potential, and shrink/swell potential of the site soils. "(f) Potential frost action based on the depth to the water-table and the Unified Soils Classi- fication. "(g) An analysis of the soil suitabiHties~ con- straints and proposed methods of mitigating said constraints in implementing the proposed develOpment plan. "(h) A written statement by the person or firm preparing the soils report identifying the means proposed to minimize hazard to life, property, adverse effects of the safety, use or stability of a public ROW or drainage channel, and ad- verse impact on the natural env~onment. "(2) Geology Report. A geology report shah be prepared by a person or firm qualified by training and :e~peri~n~e to have expert know- ledge: 6~the S~bj~ct: A geologic m~p shall ac' company the report, MapPing should reflect careful a:tte~tion to the ~Ock comPOSitiOn, structural ' elements~ surface and subsurface distribution Of the earth materials exposed or inferred within both bedrock and surficia] de- posits, A eleaP distinction should be made be- tween observed '~d inferred 'features and/or relationshipm ~ · Th r e eport.shail contain at least the fonow- · lng info iva~a*tlo~: "(a) Location and size of subject area and its genera] ~e~ti~g WiSh respect to major geo- graphic'' ~nd geologic {eaiu~s,: ! "(b) Identification '(-including author and date) of the geologic mapping upon which the report is based. '(c) ToPography a~nd drainage in the subject "(d) Abundance, distribution and genera] nature of exposures of earth materials within the area. "(e) Nature and source off, available subsurface information. "(f) ESti~'~['ted dep~h~t6~'bed~ddk~ ~ "(g) Bedrock - igneous, sedimentary~ metamor- phic types. "(h) Structural features including, but not lim- ited to, stratification, stability, folds, zones of contortion or crushing, joints, fractures, shear zones, faults, and any other geological limita- "(i) Conclusions and recommendations regarding the effect of geologic conditions on the pro- posed development, and recommendations cov- ering the adequacy'el Sites to be developed. July 17, 1992 issue ~ ~,~Page Seven' / THE ZONIN~ REPORT "(j) A written statement by the person or firm preparing the geology report identifying the means proposed to minimize hazard to life or property, adverse effects on the safety, use' or stability of a public ROW or drainage channel, and adverse impact on the natural environment. "(3) Grading and Drainage Plan· ~ grading and drainage plan shall be prepared by a pro- fessiona] engineer registered ina the State of Utah. The plan must be sufficient ~to determine the erosion control measures necessary to pre- y~nt__.s~l~oss~ ~.rin~g _c?ns~tr~u~ction and. ~after project co~npletion. ~h~ p~r~ ~lfi{el~d-~,~gi least, the following information: "(a)' A map of the entire site showing existing de'ails a~d contours of the property and pro- posed contour modifications using a minimum of 10 ft contour ~nterv~ls a-~. a scale of 1"--100'. "(b) Map(s) of area(s) to.b~e graded showin~ ex- isting details and conto~'s at 5 ft intervals where terrain will not ~e modified and pro~ posed details and contours of 2 ft interva!~ where terrain modification is 'proposed, using a scale of 1"--20'. 'e) An investigation of the effects of high in.- tensity.Fain storm (100 year occurrence ac- cording to U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Bureau Frequency Curves) evaluating how the proposed drainage system will handle the predieted flows, including effects of drain- age areas outside the development, which drain [brough the subject area and the antieipated flow of the ~T~ainage leaving the developr~ent. ~(d) The hi~tor¥~ including frequency and dura- "(g)?roposed plan~s and locations of all surface and subsurface drainage devices: walls, dams, sediment basins, storage reservoirs and other protective devices to be constructed with or as part of the proposed work, together with a map showing drainage areas~ and the proposed drainageways which may be affected by the proposed project. Include estimated runoff of the areas served by the drainage plan. '(k) A schedule showing when each stage of the project will be completed, including the total area of soil surface which is to be dis- turbed during each stage and an estimate of starting and completion dates. The schedule shall be drawn go limit to the shortest possible period the time that soil is exposed and unpro- tected, In no event shall the existing "natural' vegetation or ground cover be destroyed, re- moved, or disturbed more than 15 days prior ~o commencing~gr.ading for ~de~/elopment a~, sched- uled. "(1) A written statement by the person or firm preparing the grading and drainage plan ider~tL- fying any grading and drainage problems of the development and further stating an opinion as to the ability of the proposed plan to mitigate or eliminate said problems in a manner as to prevent hazard to life, hazard to property, adverse effects on the safety, use or stability of a public way or drainage channel and ad- verse impact on the natural environment. "(4) Vegetation Plan. The vegetation plan and -~report s~al] ~e prepared by a person or firm '~q~alified by training and experience to have ~pert knowledge of the subject and shall in- elude at least the following: "(a) A survey Df existing trees, large .shrubs and ground covers. '(b) A plan of the proposed revegetation of the site detailing existing vegetation to be pre- served, new vegetation to be planted and any modifications to existing vegetation. n(c) A ~)lan for the preservation of existing vegetation during construction activity. "d) A vegetation maintenance program includ- ing i~.and continuing maintenance neces- sary. "(e) A writt~n statement by the person or firm preparing the-vegetation plan and repOrt xdent- ifying any vegetation problems, and further stating an opinion as to the ability of the pro- posed plan to mitigate or eliminate said prob- lems in a manner as to prevent hazard to life or property, adverse effects on the safety, use or stabilit~ of a public wa~ or drainage chan- nel and adverse impact on the natura] environ- ment. "Determination of CPC . . . Any area which is determined to contain natural hazards, geo- July 17, 1992 Issue St. Paul, Minnesota ARTICLE I. 65-100. RC-RIVER CORRIDOR DISTRICT Sec. 65.101. Intent and purpose. (a) The River Corridor District and its subclassifications, RC-1, RC-2, RC-3 and RC-4, are map overlay districts, designed to provide comprehensive floodplain and river bluff management for the City of Saint Paul in accordance with the policies of Minnesota Statutes (Chapters 104 and 116G), Minnesota Regulations (MEQC 54) and Governor's Executive Order No. 79-19. (b) It is the pm'pose of this chapter: (1) To protect and preserve the Mississippi River Corridor as a unique and valuable resource for the benefit of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the city and the state; (2) To prevent and mitigate irreversible damage to the Mississippi River Corridor; . · (3) To protect and preserve the Mississippi River Corridor as an essential element in the federal, state, regional and local recreation, transportation, sewer and water systems; (4) To maintain the River Corridor's value and utility for residential, commercial, industrial and public purposes; (5) To protect and preserve the Saint Paul Mississippi River Con'idor's biological and ecological functions; (6) To preserve and enhance the Saint Paul Mississippi River Corridor's aesthetic, cultural, scientific and historic functions; (7) To guide development of the floodplain so as to minimize loss of life, threats to health, and private and public economic loss caused by flooding; and (8) To guide floodplain development in order to lessen the adverse effects of floods, but not to reduce or eliminate flooding. (Ord. Bio. 16876, 1-28-82; Ord. No. 16931, 6-15-82; Ord. No. 17116, 3-22-84; C.F. No. 91-531, § 6, 5-6-93) Sec. 65.102. Establishment. (a) This ordinance shall apply to all lands within the City of Saint Paul shown on the river corridor overlay zoning district maps as being located within the boundaries of the RC-1 River Corridor Floodway District, RC-2 River Corridor Flood Fr'mge District, RC-3 River Corridor Urban Open Space District and RC4 River CorridorUrban. Diversified District. Co) The twenty-one (21) river corridor overlay zoning district maps, dated July 6, 1987, together with all matters attached thereto, are hereby adopted by reference and made a part of this Code as if the matters and information set forth therein were fully described herein. The attached material shall include: ARTICLE IV. 65.400. RIVER CORRIDOR STANDARDS AND CRITERIA Division 1. General Provisions Sec. 65.401. Objectives. The objective of standards and criteria is to maintain the aesthetic inte~ity and natural environment of the river corridor in conformance to the St. Paul Mississippi River Corridor Plan by reducing the effects of poorly planned shoreline and bluffline development; providing sufficient setback for sanitary facilities; preventing pollution of surface and groundwater; minimizing flood damage; preventing soil erosion; and implementing metropolitan plans, policies and standards. Division 2. 65.410. Standards and Criteria Sec. 65.411. Protection of shorelands, wetlands and bluffs. (a) Generally. Development. shall be conducted so that the smallest practical~ area~of,land ....... ~ .... be developed at any one time and that each area be subjected to as little erosion or flood damage as possible during and after development. (b) Placement of structures: (1) Reserved. (2) Reserved. (3) The following minimum setbacks for each class of public waters as described in Minnesota Regulations NR-82 shall apply to all structures except those specified as exceptions in subsection (9) below. a. For natural environment waters at least two htmdred (200) feet from the normal high water mark for lots not served by public sewer and at least one hundred fifty (150) feet from the ordinary high water mark for lots served by public sewers. b. For general development waters at least seventy-five (75) feet from the normal high water mark for lots not served by public sewer and at least fifty (50) feet from the ordinary high water mark for lots served by public sewer. (4) No commercial or industrial development shall be permitted on slopes greater than twelve (12) percent. (5) No residential development shall be permitted on slopes greater than eighteen (18) percent. (6) Bluff development shall take place at least forty (40) feet landward of all bluffiines. (7) Transportation, utility and other transmission service facilities and corridors shall avoid: a. Steep slopes; b. Intrusions into or over streams, valleys and open exposures of water; c. Intrusions into ridge crests and high points; d. Creating tunnel vistas; e. Wetlands; f. Forests by running along fringe rather than through them. If necessary, to route through forests, utilize open areas in order to minimize cutting; g. Soils susceptible to erosion, which would create sedimentation and pollution problems; h. Areas of unstable soils which would be subject to extensive slippages; i. Areas with high water tables; and j. Open space recreation areas. (8) At river crossing points, public facilities, crossing corridors and other tights-of-way shall be consolidated, so that the smallest area possible is devoted to crossing. (9) Exceptions: a. Location of piers and docks shall be controlled by applicable state and local regulations. b. Commercial, industrial or permitted open space uses requiring location on public waters may be closer to such waters than the setbacks specified in the standard set out in subsection (3) above. (c) Grading and filling: (1) A minimum amount of filling shall be allowed when necessary, but in no case shall the following restrictions on filling be exceeded. Furthermore, fill opportunities shall be fairly apportioned to riparian landowners. The developer shall evaluate ownership patterns, configuration and the bottom profile of each wetland basin before fill ': ~ opportunities are apportioned. (2) Grading and filling in shoreland areas (when allowable) or any other substantial alteration of the natural topography shall be controlled in accordance with the following criteria: a. The smallest amount of bare ground shall be exposed for as short a time as feasible. b. Temporary ground cover shall be used. c. Methods to prevent erosion and trap sediment shall be employed. 4 d. Fill shall be stabilized. (3) Reserved. (4) Only fill free of chemical pollutants and organic wastes shall be used. (5) Total filling shall not cause the total natural flood storage capacity of the wetland to fall below the natural volume of runoff from the wetland and watershed generated by a 100~year storm, as def'med by the National Weather Service. (6) Solid waste disposal and landfill shall not be permitted in the River Con'idor District. (7) Development shall fit existing topography and vegetation with a minimum of clearing and grading. (8) No rehabilitation slopes shall be steeper than eighteen (18) percent slope. (9) Dredging of a shoreland or wetland shall be allowed only when it will not have adverse effect upon the wetland. Dredging when allowed shall be limited as follows: m It shall be located in the areas of minimum vegetation. b. It shall not significantly change the water flow characteristics. c. The size of the dredged area shall be limited to the absolute minimum. d. Deposit of dredged material shall not result in a change in the current flow, or in destruction of vegetation or fish spawning areas, or in water pollution. (Ord. No. 17116, 3~22:84; C.F. No. 91-531, § 31, 5-6-93; C.F. No;.93-1718, § 88, t2~ 14- 93) Sec. 65.412. Protection of wildlife and vegetation. Development shall be conducted so as to avoid intrusion into animal and plant habitats. (1) No alteration of the natural environment or removal of vegetation shall b6 permitted when such alteration or removal would diminish the ability of dependent wildlife to survive in the River Corridor. (2) No wetland or bluffline vegetation shall be removed or altered except that required for the placement of structures. (3) Clear cutting shall be prohibited except as necessary for placing approved public roads, utilities, structures and parking areas. 5 (4) Natural vegetation shall be restored after any construction project. (5) Watering areas necessary for plant survival shall be maintained or provided. (6) Development shall not cause extreme fluctuations of water levels or unnatural changes in water temperature, water quality, water currents or movements which may have an adverse impact on endangered or unique species of birds or w'fldlife. Sec. 65,413. Protection of water quality. (a) Generally. Development shall occur so that surface and subsurface water is not adversely affected by contaminants. Water quality should meet or exceed state standards. (b) Contamination: (1) Development shall not be permitted on wet soils, very shallow soils, soils with high shrink-swell or frost action potential unless it is shown that appropriate construction techniques capable of overcoming the restrictive condition wilt be utilized. (2) Septic tanks and soil absorption systems shall not be permitted where public sewer systems are available. In areas where public sewers are not available¢ system shall be set back from the normal high water mark in accordance with the class of public waters.as prescribed in Minnesota Regulations NR-82: a. On natural environment waters, at least one hundred fifty (150) feet. b. On general development waters, at least fifty (50) feet. (3) Private wells shall be placed in areas not subject to flooding and up slope from any source of contamination. Wells already existing in areas subject to flooding shall be floodproofed in accordance with accepted engineering standards as defined in the Uniform State Building Code: (4) Commercial or industrial land uses requiring the storage or production of materials or wastes that may create a pollution hazard for groundwater or surface water shall be prohibited unless the quality of both the groundwater and surface waters can conform to all applicable state and federal standards, criteria, roles and regulations. (c) Runoff: (1) The phases of development shall be planned so that only areas which are actively being developed are exposed. Other areas shall have cover of vegetation or mulch. (2) Natural vegetation in shoreland and bluff areas shall be preserved to retard surface runoff and soil erosion and to utilize excess nutrients. (3) Sediment shall be retained within the development site area either by filtering runoff as it flows through the development area Or by detaining sediment-laden runoff in a sediment basin so that the soil particles settle out. (4) Water released to a drainage system shall be directed in such a.manner as to travel over natural areas rather than across established surfaces. (5) Stormwater runoff may be directed to wetlands only when free of silt, debris and chemical pollutants and only at rates which will not disturb vegetation or increase turbidity. (6) Development which takes place near slopes greater than twelve (12) percent shall not result in increased rtmoff onto those slopes sufficient to damage vegetation or structures thereon. (7) Plans shall be submitted to the planning commission for any development placed landward from dikes, floodwalls or levees which is below the flood protection elevation of the dikes, floodwalls or levees. The plans must provide measures to ensure that floodwaters do not back up onto the development from stormwater drainage systems. (C.F. No. 91-531, § 21, 5-6-93) ARTICLE V. 65.500. RIVER CORRIDOR SPECIAL CONDITION USE PERMITS Sec. 65.501. Application. Special condition use permits shall be issued by the planning commission, except that the planning commission may delegateauthority to issue special condition use permits to the planning administrator according to rules which the commission may prescribe. Such roles will be filed with the office of the city clerk. Applications shall be submitted to the planning administratortogether with application fee in the amount determined by the city council. Upon receipt of an application, the planning 7 administrator shall determine whether to require any or all of the following six (6) items of information supplied by the applicant as a prerequisite to the consideration of the application: (1) Plans in triplicate drawn to scale, prepared by and signed by a registered eng'meer, architect and/or land surveyor as applicable, showing the nature, location, dimensions and elevation of the land; existing surface contours, structures, streets and utilities; proposed surface contours, structures, fill and the location and elevations of proposed streets, water supply, sanitary facilities and other utilities showing the relationship of the above to the channel and to the designated River Corridor District limits. (2) Specifications for building constmct'lon and materials~ floodproofmg, f'flling;. ........ dredging, grading, channel improvements, storage of materials, water supply and sanitary facilities. (3) Typical valley cross-sections of areas to be occupied by the proposed development showing the channel of the stream, elevation of land areas, high water information, vegetation and soil types. (4) Plan (surface view) of the proposed development showing the proposed use or uses of the area and structures and providing location, relationships and spatial arrangements of those uses and related structures to pertinent elevations, fill, storage location, utilities and other features. (5) Profile showing the slope of the bottom of the channel and flow lines of the stream. (6) A written evaluation by a registered engineer or other expert~person or agency of the proposed project in relationship to flood heights and velocities, the seriousness of flood damage to the use, the adequacy of plans for flood protection and other technical matters. (C.F. No. 91-531, § 23, 5-6-93; C.F. No. 95-1444, § 5, 1-17-96) Sec. 65.502. Other permits. Applicable special condition use permits for lands in the designated River Corridor District must be obtained prior to application for all other permits required by law and ordinance. Zoning and special condition use permits for River Corridor areas are supplementary to other zoning and building permits. (C.F. No. 95-1444, § 5, 1-17-96) Sec. 65.503. Factors considered. In passing upon special condition use permit applications, the planning commission or planning administrator shall consider all relevant factors specified in other sections of this clmpter and: (1) The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and floodplain management program for the city. (2) The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community. (3) The compatibility of the proposed use with existing development and. development anticipated in the foreseeable furore. (4) The ability of the existing topography, soils and geology to support and accommodate the proposed use. (5) The compatibility of the proposed use with existing characteristics of biologic and other natural communities. (6) The proposed water supply and sanitation systems and the ability of those systems to prevent disease, contamination and unsanitary conditions. (7) The requirements of the facility for a river-dependent location, if applicable. (8) The safety of access to the property for ordinary vehicles. (9) The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner. (10) The dangers to life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities caused by encroachments. (11) The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the floodwaters expected at the site. (12) The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands or downstream to the injury of others. (13) The availability of alternative locations or configurations for the proposed use. (14) Such other factors as are relevant to the purposes of this chapter. (C.F. No. 95-1ddd, § 5, 1-17-96) 9 Sec. 65.504. Hearing. Within sixty (60) days from the date of application for special condition use permit, the planning administrator shall submit the application together with additional information obtained under section 65.501 to the planning commission. Unless the authority to issue the special condition use permit has been delegated to the planning administrator, the commission shall then fix a time for hearing and give the applicant at least ten (10) days' written notice thereof. At the hearing the commission shall hear the report of the planning administrator, and the applicant shall be given reasonable oppommity to be heard. (C~F. No. 95-14441 § 5, t-17-96) Sec. 65.505. Decision, permit. Based upon all the reports, recommendations and evidence presented to the commission, the commission shall render its written decision within a reasonable time following the hearing, and a copy of such decision shall be mailed to the applicant. In granting a special condition use permit the commission may prescribe any appropriate conditions and safeguards which are in conformity with the purposes of this chapter. (C.F. No. 95-1444, § 5, 1-17-96) Sec. 65.506. Subject to appeal. All decisions by the planning commission or planning administrator granting or denying a special condition use permit shall be final subject to appeal to the city council in accordance with section 64.206. (C.F. No. 91-531, § 22, 5-6-93; C.F. No. 95-1444, § 5, 1-17-96) Sec. 65.507. Notify commissioner of natural resources. A copy of the application for the proposed special condition use permit shall be submitted to the commissioner of natural resources sufficiently in advance so that the commissioner will receive at least ten (10) days' notice of the hearing. A copy of all decisions granting special condition use permits shall be forwarded to the commissioner of natural resources within ten (10) days of such action. 10 (C.F. No. 95-1444, § 5, 1-17-96) Sec. 65.508. Conditions imposed. The planning commission or planning administrator may attach such conditions to the granting of special condition use permits as each deems necessary to fulfill the purposes of this chapter. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) Modifications of design, site planning or site treatment. (2) Requirements for implementation of erosion and sediment control, vegetation management, wildlife management and other protective measures. (3) Modifications of waste disposal and water supply facilities or operations: (4) Limitations on period of use and operation, a flood warning system and an evacuation plan. (5) Imposition of operational controls, sureties and deed restrictions. (6) Requirements for construction of channel improvements, modifications, dredging, dikes, levees and other protective measures. (7) Floodproofing measures shall be designed consistent with state-established floodproofing standards and with the flood protection elevation for the particular area including flood velocities, duration and rate of rise, hydrostatic and hydrodynamic forces, and other factors associated with the regulatory flood. The commission shall require that the applicant submit a plan or docmnents certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the floodproofing measures are consistent with the regulatory flood elevation and associated flood factors for the particular area. The floodproofing measures that may be required include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Anchorage to resist flotation and lateral movement. b. Installation of watertight doors, bulkheads and shutters, or similar methods of construction. c. Reinforcement of walls to resist water pressure. d. Use of paints, membranes or mortars to reduce seepage of water through walls. e. Addition of mass or weight to structures to resist flotation. f. Installation of pumps to lower water levels in structures. g. Construction of water supply and waste treatment systems to prevent the entrance of floodwaters. 11 h. Installation of pumping facilities or comparable practice for subsurface drainage systems for buildings to relieve external foundation wall and basement floor pressures. i. Construction to resist rupture or collapse caused by water pressure or floating debris. j. Installation of valves or controls on sanitary and storm drainage which will permit the drains to be closed to prevent backup of sewage and stormwaters into the buildings or structures. Gravity draining of basements may be eliminated by mechanical devices. k. Location of all electrical equipment, circuits and installed electrical appliances such that they are not subject to the regional flood. 1, Location of any structural storage facilities for chemicals, explosives,..buoyant materials, flammable liquids or other toxic materials, which could be hazardous to public health, safety and welfare, above the flood protection elevation or provision of adequate floodproofing to prevent flotation of or damage to storage containers which could result in the escape of toxic materials into floodwaters. (8) Specifications for building construction and materials, filling and grading, water supply, sanitary facilities, utilities and other work or construction to be submitted to the city division of housing and building code enforcement for review and approval prior to any development. (Ord. No. 17116, 3-22-84; C.F. No. 95-1~.dn., § 5, 1-17-96) Sec. 65.509, Notice of increased insurance costs. The planning administrator shall notify all applicants who propose to construct a structure, other than an accessory structure, below the regulatory flood protection elevation, as specified in section 65.224(1 ), (2) or (3) that: (1) The issuance of a special condition use permit to construct a structure below the regulatory flood protection elevation will result in increased premium rates for flood insurance up to amounts as high as twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for one hundred dollars ($100.00) of insurance coverage; and (2) Such construction below the regulatory flood protection elevation increases risks to life and property. Such notification shall be maintained with a record of the special condition use permit. The planning administrator shall report such special condition use permits issued in the biennial report submitted to the administrator of the National Flood Insurance Program. (C.F. No. 91-531, § 24, 5-6-93; C.F. No. 95-1444, § 5, 1-17-96) 12 ARTICLE VI. APPEALS AND MODIFICATIONS Sec. 65.600. Reserved. Editor's note--Section 65.600, pertaining to appeals on floodplain matters and derived presumably from provisions enacted during the 1987 republication, was repealed by C.F. No. 91-531, § 25, adopted May 6, 1993. Sec. 65.650. Modifications. (a) The planning commission is hereby authorized to grant to the provisions of this chapter where it appears that by reason of exceptional circumstances the strict enforcement of this chapter would cause undue hardship and strict conformity with the standards would be unreasonable, impractical and not feasible under the circumstances. The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to demonstrate conclusively to the commission that such modification will not result in a hazard to life or property and will not adversely affect the safety, use or stability of a public way, slope or drainage channel, or the natural environment; such proof may include soils, geology and hydrology reports which shall be signed by registered professional engineers. Modifications granted by the planning commission shall be consistent with the general purposes of the standards contained in this chapter and state law and the intent of applicable state and.national laws and programs: Although modifications may be. used to modify permissible methods of flood protection, no modification shall have the effect of allowing in any district uses prohibited in that district, permit a lower degree of flood protection than the flood protection elevation for the particular area, or permit a lesser degree of flood protection than required by state law. Appeals from the decision of the planning commission may be taken to the city council in accordance with Section 64.206. Applications for modification shall be fried together with the required fee with the planning administrator. (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this river corridor code, modifications may be granted for the repair or rehabilitation of historic stmcmres upon a determination that the repair or rehabilitation will not preclude the structure's continued designation as a historic structure, the modification is the minimum necessary to preserve the historic character and design of the structure and the repair or rehabilitation will not cause a significant increase in the height of the regional flood. (c) A copy of the application for a modification shall be submitted to the commissioner of natural resources sufficiently in advance so that the commissioner will receive at least ten (10) days' notice of the planning commission hearing. A copy of all decisions granting 13 modifications shall be forwarded to the commissioner of natural resources within ten (10) days of such action. (Ord. No. 16956, 9-9-82; C.F. No. 91-531, § 26, 5-6-93) ARTICLE VII. 65.700. AMENDMENTS Sec. 65.700. Amendments. (a) All amendments shall be made in the manner set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.357. The floodplain designations established by this chapter shall not be removed from floodplain areas unless it can be shown that the designation is in error or that the areas are filled to an elevation at or above the flood protection elevation and are contiguous to other lands lying outside the floodplain district. Special exceptions to this role may be permitted by the Commissioner of Natural Resources if he determines that, through other measure, lands are adequately protected for the intended use. (b) All amendments to this chapter, including amendments to the River Corridor Overlay Districts maps, must be submitted to and approved by the Commissioner of Natural Resources prior.to adoption: Changes to the RC-1 and RC-2 maps must meet the-Federal.- Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) technical conditions and criteria and must receive prior FEMA approval before adoption. The Commissioner of Natural Resources must be given ten (10) days' written notice of all hearings to consider an amendment to this chapter and such notice shall include a draft of the ordinance amendment or technical study under consideration. (C.F. No. 91-531, § 27, 5-6-93) ARTICLE vm. 65.800. ADMINISTRATION Sec. 65.800. Administration. (a) Record of elevation of lowest floor and floodproofing. The zoning administrator shall maintain a record of the elevation of the lowest floor (including basement) of all new stmcturcs, altered structured or additions to existing structures in the 14 floodplain. The zoning administrator shall also maintain a record of the elevation to which all new structures and alterations or additions to structures are floodproofed. (b) State and federal permits. Applicants for special condition use permits, modifications and site plan review approval are responsible for obtaining all necessary state and federal permits. (c) Warning and disclaimer of liability. This chapter does not imply that areas outside the floodplain districts or land uses permitted within such districts will be free from flooding or flood damages. This chapter shall not create liability on the part of the City of Saint Paul or any officer or employee thereof for any flood damages that result from reliance on this chapter or any administrative decision lawfully made thereunder. (d) Severability. If any section, clause, provision or portion of this chapter is adjudged unconstitutional or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this chapter shall not be affected thereby. (C.F. No. 91,531, § 28, 5-6-93) 15 Goodhue County, Minnesota ARTICLE 4. BLUFF LAND PROTECTION SECTION 1. INTENT AND PURPOSE Goodhue County recognizes the historic and econon:dc values of the bluffs that line the many rivers and valleys of the County. These standards set out to protect and preserve the sensitive physical features of the bluffs by regulating development, preventing erosion and controlling the cutting of timber on the slopes and tops of the bluffs. SECTION 2. SCOPE These standards shall regulate the setback of structures, sanitary waste treatment facilities and row crops from bluff impact zones to protect the existing and/or natural scenic values, significant historic sites, vegetation, soils, water and bedrock from disruption by man-made structures or facilities. These standards will also regulate alterations of the natural vegetation and topography. Subd. 1. BLUFF. A high bank or bold headland with a broad precipitous sometimes rounded cliff-face overlooking a plain or body of water, especially on the outside of a stream or meander-river bluff, that rises or drops twenty-five (25) feet from the horizontal and the slope averages thirty (30) percent or greater. Subd. 2. BLUFF IMPACT ZONE. All of the land lying between the top of the bluff and the toe of the bluff. Subd. 3. SIGNII~ICANT HISTORIC S1TE. Any archaeological site, standing structure, or other property that meets the criteria for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places or is listed in the State Register of Historic Sites, or is determined to be an unplatted cemetery that falls under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 307.08. A historic site meets these criteria if it is presented listed on either register or if it is determined to meet the qualifications for listing after review by the Minnesota State Archaeologist or the Director of the Minnesota Historical Society. All unplatted cemeteries are automatically considered to be significant historic sires. Subd. 4. TOE OF THE BLUFF. The point on a bluff where there is, as visually observed, a clearly identifiable break in the slope, from gentler to steeper slope above. If no break in the slope is apparent, the toe of the bluff shall be determined to be the lowest end of the fifty (50) foot segment that exceeds twenty (20) percent slope. Snbd. 5. TOP OF THE BLUFF. The point on a bluff where there is, as visually observed, a clearly identifiable break in the slope, from steeper to gentler slope above. If no break in the slope is apparent, the top of the bluff shall be determined to be the highest end of the highest fifty (50) foot segment that exceeds twenty (20) percent slope. Subd. 6. VISUALLY INCONSPICUOUS. Difficult to be seen and not readily noticeable from any point on the river or valley during the time when the leaves are on the deciduous trees. SECTION 3. BOUNDARIES Subd. 1. The bluff land protection area shall include all areas with the following soil types as determined by the Goodhue County Soil Survey: A. FrE - Frontenac soils, steep. B. FrF - Frontenac soils, very steep. C. MaE - Marlean soils, steep. D. MaF - Marlean soils, steep. E. DuF - Dubuque silt loam. F. BaF - Bellechester sand 25-45% slope. G. BoE - Brodale-sogn flaggy loams, steep. H. BoF - Brodale-sogn flaggy loams, very steep. I. RaE - Racine soils 18-25% slope. J. SdE - Schapville-sogn complex 18-35% slope. K. SfE - Seaton silt loam, 18-25% slope. L. WsE - Whalan Silt loam, 18-35% slope. SECTION 4. GENERAL REGULATIONS Subd. 1. Structures, accessory facilities (except stairways and landings) shall not be placed within bluff impact zones. Subd. 2. Setback from top or toe of the bluff to any structure in any district shall be no less than thirty (30) feet. Subd. 3. The maximum height of any structure shall be twenty-five (25) feet from the highest natural grade touching foundation. Subd. 4. No person may begin a mining or quarrying activity or expand a mining or quarrying activity within three hundred (300) feet of the toe or top of a bluff without a conditional use permit. Subd. 5. No towers shall be located within one-fourth I1/4) mile of the bluff impact zone. Subd. 6. All stairways and lifts on bluffs and in shoreland areas shall be visually inconspicuous. Stairways and lifts shall meet the following design reqmremems: A. Stairways and lifts must not exceed four (4) feet in width on residential lots. B. Landings for stairways and lifts on residential lots must not exceed thirty4wo (32) square feet in area.. Landings larger than thirty-two (32) square feet may be used for public open space recreational properties. C. Canopies or roofs are not allowed on stmrways, lifts, or landings. D. Stairways, lifts, and landings may be either constructed above the ground on posts or pilings, or placed into the ground, provided they are designed and built in a manner that ensures control of soil erosion. E. Stairways, lifts, and landings must be located in the most visually inconspicuous portions of lots. as viewed from the surface of the public water assuming Summer, leaf on conditions, whenever practical. F. Facilities such as ramps, lifts, or mobility paths for physically handicapped persons are also allowed for achieving access to shore areas, provided that the dimensional and performance standards of sub-items A- E are complied with in addition to the requirements of Minnesota Regulations. Chapter 1340. Subd. 7. No grading, excavating or filling within the bluff impact zones, except for approved erosion control measures. Erosion control projects within the bluff impact zone shall comply with A. and B. below: A. Altered areas shall be stabilized to acceptable erosion control standards consistent with the field office technical guides of the Goodhue Soil and Water Conservation District and the USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. B. Plans to place fill or excavated materials in bluff impact zones shallbe prepared by qualified professional for continued slope stability, and approved by Land Use to be born by the applicant. Subd. 8. The top or toe of bluffs shall be certified by a registered land surveyor or Zoning Administrator. Subd. 9. Vegetation Alterations. Vegetation alterations shall be subject to the standards found in Article 3. Section 7 of the Goodhue County Zoning Ordinance. Village of Lake Bluff Zoning Code - Chapter 13 Bluff/Ravine Regulations SECTION: 10-13-1: Purpose and Intent 10-13-2: Application 10-13-3: Setbacks for Ravines and Bluffs 10-13-4: Buildings and Structures in Bluffs and Ravines 10-13-5: Construction Activity in Bluff and Ravine Protection Areas 10-13-6: Construction Activity on Bluff/Ravine Property 10-13 -7: Protection and Maintenance of B l~vine Property 10-13-8: Walkout Basements 10-13-9: Bluff/Ravine Nonconformities 10-13-1: PURPOSE AND INTENT: The Village of Lake Bluff's ravine and bluff areas provide a mfique natural resource to the Village and to its residents that must be preserved and protected. Bluffs and Ravines are inherently fragile and subject to erosion due to glacially formed soils containing unstable sediment, rock, and silt. Development and construction activity in and around Bluffs and Ravines could be hazardous to people and property and could accelerate the erosion process. The purpose and intent of this Chapter 13 is to accomplish the following goals through the establishment of reasonable regulations to protect and maintain Blu~s and Ravanes in the Village: A. Protect people and property against damage or destruction caused by accelerated erosion resulting from development and construction activities in or around Bluffs and Ravines. B. Protect Bluffs and Ravines against unnecessary damage or destruction caused by certain development and constructiun activities. C. Maintain proper water ranrflt'in order to decrease the effects of erosion on Bluffs and Ravines. D. Minimize the disruption or alteration of natural drainage occurring in or around Bluffs and Ravines. E. Protect the property values of preperties on which Bluffs and Ravines are located. F. Preserve and enhance the physical and aesthetic qualifies of Bluffs and Ravines by, among other things, minimizing the disruption or damage to existing vegetation. 10-13-2: APPLICATION: The provisions of this Chapter shall apply generally and uniformly to all areas and zoning districts within Village. The provisions of this Chapter shall also apply cumulatively and simultaneously with the other provisions of the Village's zoning, subdivision, and building codes, and no approvals or permits issued pursuant to such ordinances, regulations, or cedes shall be deemed to authorize any activity that does not also comply with the applicable provisions of this Chapter. Furthermore, if ever a provision of this Chapter and another provision in the Village's zoning, subdivision, or building codes are inconsistent, provisions resulting in the maximttm protection and preservation of Bluffs and Ravines shall govern, except where limited by law. 10-13-3: SETBACKS FOR RAVINES AND BLIJFFS: A. Setbacks For Ravines. Except as othervase expressly provided in Subsection C of this Section, no pnncipal structure or building, no accessory structure or building that requires the issuance of a building permit pursuant to the Lake Bluff Municipal Code, and no driveway shall be erected or altered on any lot so as to place any portion of any such building, structure, or driveway within 10 feet from any Top B. Setbacks For Bluffs. 1. Principal Structures and Buildings. Except as otherwise expressly provided in Subsection C of this Section, no principal structure or building, or driveway shall be erected or altered on any lot so as to place any portion of any such building, structure, or driveway within 40 feet from any Top BluffEdge. 2. Accessory Stmctares and Buildings. Except as otherwise expressly provided in Subsection C of this Section, no accessory structure or building that requires the issuance of a building permit pursuant to the Lake BluffManicipal Code shall be erected or altered on any lot so as re place any portion of any such building or strnctme within 10 feet from any Top Bluff Edge. C. Non-Impervions and Other Improvements. Notwithstanding the setback requirements in Subsections A and B of this Section, any non-impeavious Improvement including, without limitation, a paver patio, and any other improvement that does not require the issuance of a building permit pursuant to the Lake BluffMunic~Pal Code, including, without limitation, a swing set or similar apparatus, maybe located up to but no further than the Top Ravine Edge of a Ravine or the Top Bluff Edge of a Bluff, as the case may be; provided, however, that such tmprovement does not, as determined in advance by the Village Engineer, adversely effect storm water drainage or unnecessarily accelerate erosion of the Bluff or Ravine, or othenvise create a hazardous condition or public nuisance. 10-13-4: BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES IN BLUFFS AND RAVINES: A. General Prohibition. Except as expressly permitted pursuant to Subsection B of this Section, no principal or accessory building or strncmre, no permanent fence, and no other at-grade improvement of any kind shall be constructed, placed, or roalntained in any Bluff or Ravine. B. Permitted Structures. Notwithstanding the general prohibition set forth in Subsection A of this Section, the following improvements may be permitted in a Bluff or Raxane in accerdanee with the regulations set forth below and the other applicable regulations of this Chapter, provided such ireprovement would not, as determined in advance by the Village Engineer, adversely effect storm water drainage or unnecessarily accelerate erosion of the Bluff or Ravine, or otherwise create a haTardons condition or public nuisance: l. Paths and Steps at Grade. Paths and steps at grade of no greater than six feet in width shall be allowed in any Bluff or in any Ravine. 2. Decks. Decks and other similarly elevated structures shall be allowed to extend over the Top Ravine Edge of a Ravine; provided, however ilml no pier foundations or supports shall be placed or maintained an or beyond the Top Ravine Edge. 3. Benches. Benches shall be allowed to be located or maintained within a Bluff or Ravine. 4. Stairs. Stairs and associated landings shall be permitted in any Ravine or Bluff that is located on Bluff / Ravine Property that is at least 1.5 acres. 10-13-5: CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN BLUFF AND RAVINE PROTECTION AREAS: A. General. Except as expressly permitted pursuant to Subsection B of this Section, no construction activities, including, without limitation, grading, excavating, filling, terracing, or stockpiling or dumping of excavated material, shall be permitted in any Bluffer Ravine Protection Are~ B. Permitted Construction Activities. Notwithstanding the general prohibition set forth in Subsection A of this Section, the following construction activities shall be permitted in a Bluff or Ravine Protection Area, with the prior approval of the Village Engineer and in accordance with the regulations set forth below and the other applicable regulations of this Chapter: I. Eroslen control and slope stabilization activities. 2. Public utility and other public improvement projects. 3. Drainage improvements that are necessary to prevent or mitigate erosion. 4. General maintenance and landscaping, including the removal of diseased, dead, or damaged 5. Action neeessmy to remediate an unstable or unsecure slope that poses an imminent danger to persons or property. C. Protection Standards. All construction activities permitted pursuant to this Subsection shall be performed in a manner (i) to cause the least poss~le disruption of the nalural features of a Bluff or Ravine Protection Area, and (ii) to be consistent with the purposes and intent of this Chapter as expressed in Section 10-13-1 of this Chapter. Specifically, during any such permitted construction activities, natural drainage shall be maintained to the maximum extent possible. Ran-off from impervious surfaces shall be conveyed to existing storm sewers, wherever possible, or, if approved by the Village Engineer, channeled into the Bluff or Ravine in a manner to minlmi~e the impact er damage to the Bluff or Ravine Protection Area_ 10-13-6: CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY ON BLUFF/RAVINE PROPERTY: The following restrictions and requirements shall apply to all construction activities on Bluff / Ravine Property. A. Plat of Survey Required. U~less otherwise waived by the Village Engineer, any application for a building permit for any construction activity on any Bluff / Ravine Property shall include a plat of survey prepared within one year of the date of application for the subject permit. The plat shall be sealed by a licensed surveyor and shall include, at a minimum, the following elements and information: 1. The lot lines of the Bluff/Ravine Property; 2. The cmvilinear line defining the Top Ravine Edge, or Top BluffEdge, or both, as the case may be (See Illustrations 15A and 15B); 3. The total square footage of the Bluff / Ravine Property along with supporting calculations; 4. The location of all existing improvements on the Bluff / Ravine Property in relation to the Top Ravine Edge orthe Top BhiffEdge, or both, as the case may be; 5. The location of all proposed new improvements in relation to the Top Ravine Edge or the Top BhiffEdge, or both, as the case may be, clearly distinginshed from existing improvements (See Illustrations 15A and 15B): 6. The existing and proposed grades; 7. The existing and proposed top of foundation elevations, using the same elevation data as used for site grades; 8. Benchmark with elevation and location clearly defined; 9. The location of ail existing and proposed utility lines, including storm drainage facilities; and 10. A demonstration of the ways in which the applicant will ensure that all construction activities are in compliance with this Chapter and that all such activities will be performed in a rammer (i) to cause the least possible disruption of the natural features of a Bluff or Ravine Protection Area, and (ii) to be consistent with the purpose and intent of this Chapter as expressed in Section 10-13-1 of this Chapter. B. Fencing. A temponuy fence shall be erected along a line that is ten feet from the Top Ravine Edge or Top BluffEdge, or both, as the case may be, during any development or construction activity un Bluff / Ravine Property. For any construction activity that is permitted pursuant to this Chapter to be within said tan-foot area, such fencing as the Village Engineer shall determine is necessary to prevent adverse impacts on the Ravine or Bluff, or both, as the case amy be, shall be required. Any such fence shall be removed upon completion of the development or construction activity. C. Grading and Restoration. Upon completion of any development or construction activity on Bluff / Ravine Property, appropriate grading and restoration work shall be performed, as required by the Village Engineer, in order to ensure protection of the Bluff and Ravine Protection Areas 10-13-7: PROTECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF BLUFF / RAVINE PROPERTY: A. Filling and Dumping Prohibited. No garbage, construction debris, or landscaping materials shall be dumped or filled in any Bluff or Ravine Protection Area~ B. Drainage. Measures shall be required to control storm water runoff fi.om sumctures and other improved surfaces on Bluff / Ravine Properties. Wherever feasible, such runoff shall be collected and carded to municipal storm drainage facilities located away fi.om Ravines and Bluffs. If discharge directly into municipal storm drainage facilities is not feasible, drainage shall be collected and discharged directly into the base of the Ravine or Bluff channel via continuous, non-perforated drain lines designed to collect storm water runoff prior to the runoff reaching the Ravine or Bluff Area. Such drainage lines shall be buried on the slopes of the Ravine or Bluff and required excavations shall be located to minim damage to trees and the slope of the Ravine or Bluff. In no event shall the point source discharge of water be allowed on or near any side of any Ravine or Bluff. A complete site drainage plan shall be required as part of the site plan submittal required pursuant to Subsection 10-13-6A of this Chapter. C. Vegetation. Native vegetation shall be maintained to the greatest extent possible within all Bluff and Ravine Protection Areas. Illustration 16 to this Chapter is a non-exclusive list of native vegetation that Bluff / Ravine Property owners are encouraged to utili?e within all Bluff and Ravine Protection Areas. 10-13-8: WALKOUT BASEMENTS: Notwithstanding the otherwise applicable provisions of Paragraph 10-3-7B 1 of tiffs Title 10, for any ptinc~pal structure on Bluff / Ravine Property that has a walkout basement with a rear wall located in a Ravine or v~thin a Ravine Protection Area, a percentage of the flour area of the walkout basement shall be included in the gross floor area of the Bluff/Ravine Property. The total additional square footage to be included in the gross floor area calculation for any such walkout basement shall be 40 percent of the total ma, in square feet, of all portions of the finished floor that are enclosed by lines extending perpendicular from the basement wall facing the Ravine to the opposite basement wall across the full width of the exposed poxtiou of the basement wall at a height of two feet above grade. The resulting square footage shall be included in the gross floor area of the Bluff/Ravine Property. See fllustration 17. 10-13-9: BLUFF / RAVINE NONCONFORMITIES: A. Damage or Destruction. If all or any part of any structure, building, or any other type of at-grade improvement that is, as of March 9, 1999, being the effective date of this Chapter 13, nonconforming with regard to the provisions of this Chapter, is damaged, destroyed, ortom down by any means, whether or not within the control of the owner thereof; then the particular type of structure, building, or improvement may be repaired, restored, rehabilitated, or rebuilt; provided, however, that no such repair, restoration, rehabilitation, or rebuilding shall be made that would create any new nonconformity or that would increase the degree of any nonconformity existing prior to such damage, destruction, or tear as provided in Subsection C of this Section. B. Time Limit. Notwithstanding Subsection A of rids Section, all such repairs, restorations, rehabilitations, and rebuilding shall be in strict conformity with the applicable zoning district regulations and with the regulations of this Chapter unless a building permit is obtained and restoration is actually begun with one year after the date of such damage, destruction, or tear down and is diligently pursued to completion. C. Horizontal Extension; Change in Type of Structure. For purposes of this Section, the horizontal exte~ian of a nonconforming structure, or the change in the type of structure, shall be construed to increase the degree of the existing nonconformity of the structure unless such horizontal extension or such change xn the type of structure conforms to all applicable zoning regulations including the regulations set forth in this Chapter. (Ordinance 99-9 3-8-99) © 1999 Village of Lake Bluff All Rights Reserved. SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 17.80 RIDGELINE PRESERVATION AND HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE Section 17.80.040 Development Standards. The development standards shall apply to any use, development or alteration of land included in these regglations. A. Ridgeline Development Classlfication- Significant ridgelines are the ridgelines that surround or visually dom/cate the valley landscape either through their size in relation to the hillside or mountain terrain or which they are a part; their visual dominance as characterized by a silhouetting appearance against the sky; as a significant natural backdrop feature or separation of communities; through visual dominance due to proximity and view from existing development or major corridors; or as an area of significant ecological, historical or cultural importance such as those which connect park or trail systems. B. Significant Ridgeline Classification. Development use regulated on s~gnificant ridgelinas due to their aesthetic, visual, ecological, historical or cultural importance to maintain a sense of place and identity for the City and to protect the visual quality and natural environmental the important hills, canyons and valleys which compose the Santa Clarita Valley. Two categories of significant ridgelines have been identified. Significant ridgellnes shall not be altered by grading or improvements except as approved through a hillside plan review permit. I. Primary Ridgellnes. Primary ridgelines are those ridgelines which are characterized by any combination of significant ridgeline criteria as identified in Section A above. Such primary ridgelinas are identified on the official map entitled "Ridgeline Preservation Map, City of Santa Clarita, 1992" which is on file in the Community Development Departmant. 2. Secondary Ridgelines. Secondary ridgelines are those ridgelines which are characterized by any combination of significant ridgeline criteria as identified in Section A above, but are secondary in nature to primary ridgellnes due to the following features: a. Smaller size and prominence of a feature or branch of a primary ridgeline: b. Silhouette of a ridgeline against the open sky on a smaller size hill or silhouette of a ridgeline on a smaller hill which is back-dropped by a significant ridgaline. Secondary ridgelines are identified on the official map entitled "Ridgeline Preservation Map, City of Santa Clarita, 1992" which is on file in the Community Development Department. C. Significant Ridgellnes Map. Significant ridgelines are mapped according to their classification as described in this section. The map is herein incorporated by reference and is on file in the Community Development Department. D. Ridgeline Preservation. The Official Ridgeline Preservation Map identifies crests of significant ridgelines in the City. The precise area to be preserved will be designated on a case by case basis. No grading or improvements shall occur within these designated areas except as approved by a hillside plan review permit. Any development plan which touches, crosses, includes or affects any primary ridgeline shall include plans for the preservation for all or part of such primary ridgeline in its natural state. No engineered slopes, housing construction, streets, utilities or other man-made features shall be permitted within primary ridgellne areas. Encroachments may be granted if the Planning Commission finds that the encroachment onto a primary ridgeline will be in compliance with the criteria in this ordinance. Secondary ridgelines shall also be considered for hillside development proposals. Grading in these areas shall be reviewed for conformance with the design criteria of this ordinance as reviewed and approved by a hillside plan review permit. The following process shall be observed when reviewing plans for hillside development. 1. Ridgeline areas shall be reviewed in conjunction with the landform of which they are a part, pursuant to the provisions of hillside plan review. 1 2. Determination of significant ridgelines or areas of ridgelines where development will be permitted shall be determined for each applicable case through visual analysis by any combination of the following techniques as determined by the Director of Community Development: a. Project simulation using computer-aided, three-dimensional modeling coordinated with photography showing before and after conditions: b. Scaled. three-dimensional model showing before and after conditions; c. Scaled. sight-line analysis drawings with views from City-selected locations showing precise visual impacts of the development proposal. This visual analysis technique will be applied to projects having limited scope and low probability for significant impacts, such as construction of single dwellings not within a significant ridgeline area, additions to pre-existing development on significant ridgelines where similar encroachments have previously occurred and other similar situations. E. Innovative Applications for Significant Ridgellnes. Certain uses may be permitted on significant ridgelines to promote the public health, safety and general welfare. Such uses or development uray include but shall not be limited to the following: innovative development alternatives, apiaries, aviaries, historical landmarks, observatories, open space/conservation areas, parks and recreation areas, publicly and privately- operated transmission facilities, public street access (including utility extensions underneath the sa'eeO, public buildings, recreational camps, riding academies or stables, ttalls and water tanks (screened). 1. Criteria for innovative applications. Encroachment onto a significant ridgeline shall be permitted when the Planning Commission. foilc~wing a public hearing, issues written findings based upon the following evidence: a. The proposed use is proper in relation to adjacent uses. the development of the community and the various goals and policies of the General Plan. b. The use or development will not be materially detrimental to the visual character of the neighborhood or community, nor will it endanger the public health, safety or general welfare. c. The appearance of the use or development will not be different than the appearance of adjoining ridgeline areas so as to cause depreciation of the ridgeline appearance in the vicinity. d. The establishment of the proposed use or development will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property, nor encourage inappropriate encroach' merits to the ridgeline area. e. It has been demonstrated that the proposed use or development will not violate the visual integrity of the significant ridgeline area through precise illustration and depiction as required in subsection D above, "Ridgeline Preservation." 2. Perimeter Protection. In recognition of the complex ridgeline system in Santa Clarita, which composed of numerous branches of secondary and tertiary ridges, development in areas of secondary ridgelines will be considered and may be approved where the following findings can be demonstrated and made by the discretionary body. Such findings shall be in addition to those required pursuant to Section 17.80.1M0.E.1. a through e. a. The visual impacts of the proposed use or development will be confined to the immediate local neighborhood and proposed new use or development area. b. The proposed use or development will be shielded from general public view by a perimeter ridgelina or perimeter ridgeline system. (Figure 1 below, shall be illustrative of a perimeter ridgeline shielding from public view areas.) Editor's Note: Because of the size and/or complexity of the graphics set out in this section, they have been removed from this electronic database. These graphics can be found in the printed code' ' currently on file in the clerk's office or in any recent printed version of the code. Figure 1 3. Corrective work. Nothing in this section shall prohibit the Director of Community Development from authorizing grading deemed necessary to correct natural, hazardous conditions that are brought to the City's attention, in which case the applicant will investigate possible alternatives with subsequent review by the Director of Community Development, Planning Commission or City Council. F. Hillside Classifications. Hillside categories have been identified by percentage of average slope in the following categories: 1. Average slopes under 10% are considered relatively flat and would not cause any conditions necessary for the implementation of the Ridgeline Preservation and Hillside Development Ordinance. 2. Projects with slopes which average 10% or greater qualify for hillside plan review. 2 G. Maximum Density -- Residential and Commercial/Industrial. For each of the slope categories identified, there shall be a conesponding maximum allowable density. The following chart. Figure 3, shows seven density categories which correspond to the mid-range densit~ of the General Plan. The necessary reduction in density to maintain a similar pad and product type as the slope increases has been shown on the chart. The densities identified in Figure 3 are the maximum allowable and conform with all other standards and criteria of this ordinance. The Ridgeline Preservation and Hillside Developmem Guidelines may cause further density reduction. All average slope calculations shall be rounded to the nearest whole number (i.e., 12.2% shall be rounded to 12%). For each of the slope categories identified there shall be a corresponding maximum allowable floor area ratio expressed as a percentage. Figure 3 on the following page shows maximum commercial and industrial flour area ratios for hillside development. These percentages represem typical intensities of commercial and industrial uses as identified in the General Plan, adjusted based on slope variations. The necessary reduction in percemage to maintain this similar pad and product type as the slope increases has been shown on the chart. All average slope calculations shall be rounded to the nearest whole number. Following is the formula used to determine density reduction by percentage of slope in Figure 3. The following graphics depict how five dwelling units per acre on a 10% slope reduce to three dwelling units per acre on a 25% slope pursuant to the provisioas of Figure 3, "Density and Floor Area Ratio Change per Percentage Slope." Figure 2 1. Criteria of innovative design applications. Notwithstanding the density provisions of this section, this ordinance shall not restrict density to less than 70% of the mid-point density established in the General Plan and corresponding zoning, provided that all of the following conditions are met. a. The hillside development plan shall be in substantial compliance with all applicable provisions of this ordinance and the Ridgellne Preservation and Hillside Development Guidelines. b. No development construction, activities or grading shall be permitted on slopes of 50% or greater except as provided in Section 17.80.040.E. c. The site plan shall be designed to locate or cluster development in slope areas of 25% or less; however~ clustering of development in slope areas of 25% to 50% may be considered and shall be subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. d. In no event shall any portion of a site proposed for clustering be developed in such a manner that it would exceed two times the mid-point density of the General Plan and zoning on said portion. e. In no event shall the overall density exceed 70% of the mid-point density of the General Plan and zoning or the density provided in Figure 3, whichever is greater. 2. For the purposes of this section, clustering shall be defined as the development of a portion of the project site exceeding the mid-point density designation or zoning for such portion of the project site. H. Average Slope Calculation. Average slope shall be calculated by utilizing the following formula: Average Cross Slope = I x L x 0.0023 A I = Contour Interval L = Contour Length 0.0023 = Constant to Convert Square Feet to Acres and Slope to Percent A = Acres in Site The average slope shall be calculat~ed as shown on the developmem plans certified by a California licensed Figure 3 Density and Building Floor Area Ratio Change with Percentage of Slope (all numbers in dwelling unit or commercial/industrial floor area ratio per gross acre) Density (in dwelling units/acrel Ave. Rlt RMtt RM RS RL RVL RE Ave. Coramer' cial Industrial Slope Slope F.A.R. F.A.R. 10% 28.00 20.00 11.00 5.00 2.20 1.00 0.50 10% 25.00% 50.00% 11% 27.30 19.50 10.73 4.88 2.15 0.98 0.49 11% 24.38% 48.75% 3 12% 26.60 19.00 13% 25.90 18.50 14% 25.20 18.00 15% 24.50 17.50 16% 23.80 17.00 17% 23.10 16.50 18% 22.40 16.00 19% 21.70 15.50 20% 21.00 15.00 21% 20.30 14.50 22% 19.60 14.00 23% 18.90 13.50 24% 18.20 13.00 25% 17.50 12.50 26°~ 16.80 12.00 27% 16.10 11.50 28% 15.40 11.00 29% 14.70 10.50 30% 14.00 10.00 31% 13.30 9.50 32% 12.60 9.00 33% 11.90 8.50 34% 11.20 7.00 35% 10.50 7.50 10.45 4.75 2.09 0.95 0.48 12% 23.75% 10.18 4.63 2.04 0.93 0.47 13% 23.13% 9.90 4.50 1.98 0.90 0.45 14% 22.50% 9.63 4.38 1.93 0.88 0.44 15% 21.88% 9.35 4.25 1.87 0.85 0.43 16% 21.25% 9.08 4.13 1.82 0.83 0.42 17% 20.63% 8.80 4.00 1.76 0.80 0.40 18% 20.00% 8.53 3.88 1.71 0.78 0.39 19% 19.38% 8.25 3.75 1.65 0.75 0.38 20% 18.75% 7.98 3.63 1.60 0.73 0.37 21% 18.13% 7.70 3.50 1.54 0.70 0.35 22% 17.50% 7.43 3.38 1.49 0.68 0.34 23% 16.88% 7.15 3.25 1.43 0.65 0.33 24% 16.25% 6.88 3.13 1.38 0.63 0.32 25% 15.63% 6.60 3.00 1.32 0.60 0.30 26% 15.00% 6.33 2.88 1.27 0.58 0.29 27% 14.38% 6.05 2.75 1.21 0.55 0.28 28% 13.75% 5.78 2.63 1.16 0.53 0.26 29% 13.13% 5.50 2.50 1.10 0.50 0.25 30% 12.50% 5.23 2.38 [.05 0.48 0.24 31% 11.88% 4.95 2.25 0.99 0.45 0.23 32% 11.25% 4.68 2.13 0.94 0.43 0.21 33% 10.63% 4.40 2.00 0.88 0.40 0.20 34% 10.00% 4.13 1.88 0.83 0.38 0.19 35% 9.38% Figure 3 (continued) Density/in dwelling units/acre) Ave. RH RMIt RM RS RL RVL RE Slope 47.50% 46.25% 45.00% 43.75% 42.50% 41.25% 40.00% 38.75% 37.50% 36.25% 35.00% 33.75% 32.50% 31.25% 30.00% 28.75% 27.50% 26.25% 25.00% 23.75% 22.50% 21.25% 20.00% 18.75% Ave. Commer' rial Industrial Slope F.A.R. F.A.R. 36% 9.80 7.00 3.85 1.75 0.77 0.35 0.18 36% 37% 9.10 6.50 3.58 1.63 0.72 0.33 0.16 37% 38% 8.40 6.00 3.30 1.50 0.66 0.30 0.15 38% 39% 7.70 5.50 3.03 1.38 0.61 0.28 0.14 39% 8.75% 17.50% 8.13% 16.25% 7.50% 15.00% 6.88% 13.75% 40% 7.00 5.00 2.75 1.25 0.55 0.25 0.13 40% 6.25% 12.50% 41% 6.30 4.50 2.48 1.13 0.50 0.23 0.11 41% 5.63% 11.25% 42% 5.60 4.00 2.20 1.00 0.44 0.20 0.10 42% 5.00% 10.00% 43% 4.90 3.50 1.93 0.88 0.39 0.18 0.09 43% 4.38% 8.75% 44% 4.20 3.00 1.65 0.75 0.33 0.15 0.08 44% 3.75% 7.50% 45% 3.50 2.50 1.38 0.63 0.28 0.13 0.06 45% 3.13% 6.25% 46% 2.80 2.00 1.10 0.50 0.22 0.10 0.05 46% 2.50% 5.00% 47% 2.10 1.50 0.83 0.38 0.17 0.08 0.04 47% 1.88% 3.75% 48% 1.40 1.00 0.55 0.25 0.11 0.05 0.03 48% 1.25% 2.50% 49% 0.70 0.50 0.28 0.13 0.06 0.03 0.01 49% 0.62% 1.25% 50%+ 0.50 0.40 0.25 0.10 0.05 0.03 0.01 50%+ 0.50% 1.00% I. Division of Area. Where there exists a dramatically different landform character in the topography of any one stte. the site may be divided into several distinct areas for purposes of slope determinations. An average density may be calculated separately for unique areas on site upon approval of the Director of Community Development. For example, each of the areas shown in Figure 4 (A, B and C) may calculate density requirements separately. Figure 4 J. Grading Design 1. No graded or cut embankment with a slope greater than two feet horizontal to one foot vertical shall be located adjacent to a publicly maintained right-of-way. The applicant shall provide suitable guarantees satisfactory to the reviewing authority for landscaping and perpetual maintenance_ at no cost to the City, of all slopes outside of the public right-of-way. Major public roads, such as those identified in the Genera] Plan Circulation Element, may require slopes steeper than 2:1. In such an event, slopes steeper than 2:1 may be allowed, provided that a georechnical study is prepared verifying the feasibility of such slopes. 2. The overall slope, height or grade of any cut or fill slope shall be developed to appear similar to the existing natural contours in scale with the natural terrain of the subject site. 4. Where any cut or fill slope exceeds 113 feet in horizontal length, the horizontal contours of the slope shall be developed to appear similar to the existing natural contours. 5. Grading shall be balanced on site whenever possible to avoid excessive cut and fill and to avoid import or export. 6. Grading shall be phased so that prompt revegetation or construction will control erosion. Where possible, only those areas which will be immediately developed, resurfaced or landscaped shaH.be disturbed. 7. No excavation or other earth disturbance shall be permitted on any hillside area prior to the issuance of a grading permit~ with the exception of drill holes and exploratory trenched for the collection of geologic and soil data. These trenches are to be properly backfilled and, in addition, erosion treatment shall be provided where slopes exceed 20%. 8. Retaining walls in the back of the pad on a lot shall be a maximum of eight feet in height. Retaining walls in the side yard of a lot shall be a maximum of six feet in height. If greater height is desired, two. four-foot walls may be used with planters in between the walls to soften the effect within a minimum horizontal spacing of three feet. Adjacent m any fight-of-way, retracing walls shall be a maximum of six feet high or a total of eight feet if two, four-foot wails are used in combination with a minimum horizontal spacing of five feet. (See Figures 5 and 6). FIGURE 5 FIGURE 6 K. Landscape Design. 1. Landscape coverage and stabil/zation of graded slopes shall be selected and designed to be compatible with surrounding natural vegetation. Plant material shall be selected according m compatible climatic, soil and ecological characteristics of the region. A City-approved irrigation system shall be utilized for plant establishment, but plant materials that require excessive water after becoming established shall be avoided. Native plant material or compatible, non-native plant material shall be selected. 2. The location of all eJdsting trees of four inch caliper or greater, as measured four and one-half feet from the ground, shall be shown on plans submitted for approval. The reviewing authority shall designate all trees to be saved or removed. Oak trees are subject to the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines. 3. All cut and fill slopes shall be planted and irrigated with an automatic irrigation system to prevent erosion. All cut or fill slopes exceeding five feet vertical height shall be planted with adequme plant material to protect the slope against erosion. Planting shall be in the ratio at least one shrub per 100 square feet of natural slope area and one tree per 150 square feet of actual slope area. with ground cover m completely cover the slope within six months from planting. All plants shall be drought-resistant and shrubs shall be a minimum one gallon size. unless hydroseeded. All trees shall be minimum five gallon size. Slopes less than five feet in height shall be planted with ground cover to cover the slopes completely within six months of planting. Figure 7 Figure 8 4. Privacy walls and fences not exceeding six feet in height are permitted adjacent to slructures in order to provide a private outdoor area. A minimum flat area from top or toe of slope of three feet shall be maintained to face of wall on common area maintenance slopes with slope heights of 30 feet or greater. All fences which are adjacent m or visible from public roads or major public spaces shall be of decorative masonry or other approved materials with minimum five foot landscape area on the street side of the wall or fence. The use of indigenous rock and colors or materials which blend with the surrounding natural landscape is preferred. (See Figures 7 and 8.) 5. Access easement areas a minimum of five feet wide shall be provided for uphill and downhill slope maintenance areas and should be located no more than 1,000 feet apart. 6. A fuel modification plan shall be required by the Director of Community Development for all hillside plans that abut natural open space. 7. The project shall be designed to incorporate fire prevention and safety measures pursuant to the prowsions of the Uniform Fire Code and the Ridgeline Preservation and Hillside Development Guidelines (Section II.B.3.). Figure 9 6 Los Altos Hills, California, Site Development Ordinance Article 7. Building Siting, View Protection, Ridgeline Preservation, Creek Protection Sec. 10-2.701. Purposes. Sec. 10-2.702. Siting. Sec. 10-2.703. Construction. Sec. 10-2.701. Purposes. The purposes of this article are to insure that the site, location and configuration of structures are unobtrusive when viewed from off-site; that scenic views are retained; that buildings do not dominate the natural landscape; that ridgelines and hilltops are preserved; and that the siting of structures is consistent with other provisions of this chapter concerning grading, drainage, and erosion control. (§ 15, Ord. 299, eft. December 11, 1985) Sec. 10-2.702. Siting. (a) Alternative locations. The location of buildings and structures shall be selected so as to minimize run-off from the site, the volume of off-site drainage created, the destruction or alteration of natural vegetation, and the ~mpairment of scenic views from off the site. (b) Preservation of ridgelines, hilltops, and highly visible lots. Ridgelines, hilltops, and highly visible lots shall be preserved by the siting of structures to take advantage of natural topographic or landscape features which would cause structures to blend with their natural surroundings. The Site Development Authority shall consider the following guidelines in approving the location of a structure: (1) Single story buildings and height restrictions may be required on hilltops, ridgelines, and highly visible lots. (2) Cut foundations should be used in place of fill on hilly terrain. (3) Native or naturalized vegetation should be used to conceal structures wherever possible. (4) Structures may be located on ridgelines or hilltops only when they can be rendered unobtrusive by one (1) or more of the following techniques. (i) The use of natural vegetation and/or added landscaping. (ii) The use of a Iow-profile house, with a sloping roofline and foundation, that follows the natural contours of the site. (iii) The use of exterior roofing and siding materials and colors that blend with the natural landscape. (5) Hilltops or ridgelines shall not be cut down, flattened, or similarly graded to create a building pad in excess of the actual area covered by the principal residence. (c) Disturbance to the site. The location of all structures should create as little disturbance as possible to the natural landscape. The amount of grading, excavation, or fill shall be the minimum necessary to accommodate proposed structures, unless grading is proposed to lower the profile of buildings. Additional grading may be allowed for the purpose of lowering the profile of the building provided that at the completion of the project the visual alteration of the natural terrain is minimized. The removal of vegetation and alteration of drainage patterns shall be the minimum necessary to accommodate the proposeG structure. (d) Passive solar energy conservation. Opportunities for passive solar energy shall be considered in the siting of buildings1 (e) Creek protection. Structures shall be set back a minimum of twenty-five (25') feet from the top of bank of all creeks. Greater setbacks may be required along major creeks in the Town; however, lesser setbacks may be allowed where approved by the Planning Commission. Improvements required to all creeks shall be accomplished to appear natural and to maintain the natural meandering course of the existing creek. C reeks and banks shall be protected so as to remain in their natural state as much as possible. They should not be disturbed by the building or grading process. No grading shall be allowed in creeks or within the required setbacks from top of bank. Siting of structures shall be done with safety as a primary concern. Safety concerns and preservation of riparian habitat are required to be simultaneously addressed when designing development and required mprovements to creeks. (§ 15, Ord. 299, eft. December 11, 1985; §§ 6, 7, Ord. 370, eft. May 20, 1994) Sec. 10-2.703. Construction. (a) Foundations. The types of foundation to be used for pdmary and accessory structures shall be selected to ensure that at the completion of the project the visual alteration of the natural terrain is minimized. Type II foundations -- step-on-contour, daylight, pole foundations, or a combination thereof -- shall be used on building sites with natural slopes in excess of fourteen (14%) percent. (b) Color and materials. For large or highly visible surfaces on buildings, special attention shall be given to the selection of exterior colors and construction materials that are not highly reflective. (c) Appurtenances. Dish antennae, freestanding solar panels, and similar appurtenances as defined in Section 10-2.301 may be approved by the Planning Director under the following conditions: (1) The appurtenance is the m~nimum size necessary to adequately serve its purpose. (2) The appurtenance can be suitably screened by landscaping, the use of colors or materials that blend with their surroundings, or by natural features of the site without adversely affecting its operation. (3) Landscaping shall be placed to screen appurtenances such as solar panels and dish antennae in such a manner as to not significantly affect the basic function of such equipment. These structures shall not be permitted unless they can function in the presence of such screening. (4) The appurtenance is not placed in a conspicuous position or on a hilltop or ridgeline. The Planning Director may impose additional conditions on the s~ze, location, and construction of appurtenances as the Planning Director deems necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter. (§ 6, Ord. 384, eft. October 18, 1996) PROPOSED RIDGELINE/WOODED HILLSIDE PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT REGULATIONS Approved by the Planning Commission on December 4, 2001 for a Public Hearing on January 15, 2002 Revised following Selectboard public hearing on March 28, 2002 Revised following second Selectboard hearing on August 15, 2002 This is a new Section 3.14, which is currently reserved. In addition to the new section, some minor revisions are to be made to sections 2.1 and 2.3. Changes made after August 15 are shown in underlined italics. SECTION 2.1 CLASSES OF DISTRICTS, Add: "RidgelinefWooded Hillside Protection Overlay SECTION 2.3 DISTRICT BOUNDARY DESCRIPTIONS, add: 2.3.13 2.3.13 Ridgeline/Wooded Hillside Protection Overlay district: the ridgeline/Wooded Hillside Protection Overlay districts shall be defined as the areas shown on the TOWN OF WILLISTON RIDGELINE/-vVOODED HILLSIDE PROTECTION OVERLAY MAP, adopted as a part of this ordinance. [Note: Prior to August 15, 2002 the Overlay District Map was revised so that the portion of the overlay district immediately south of 1-89 and immediately east of Route 2A was pulled to the east to fall just east of the row of residential lots fronting on Route 2A.] ~qew SECTION 3.14 SECTION 3.14 RIDGELINEJWOODED HII,LSIDE PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT: 3.14.1 3.14.1 Purpose: The Town of Williston has determined that a significant portion of the Town's unique visual character is created by its undeveloped ridgelines and wooded hillsides. In addition, the Town has determined that these areas frequently contain important wildlife habitat and soils that are fragile and prone to erosion. Thus, it is the purpose of the Ridgeline/Wooded Hillside Protection Overlay District to ensure that development in the overlay district does not have an adverse impact on the Town's visual character, does not result in excessive soil erosion, and does not interfere with significant wildlife habitat or corridors. 3.14.2 3.14.2 Description of the Overlay district: ^) B) A) The Ridgeline/Wooded Hillside Protection Overlay District is superimposed on all underlying zoning districts, and includes all lands which are identified on the Ridgeline/Wooded Hillside Protection Overlay Map, adopted as a part of this Ordinance. B) In cases where a property falls not only in the Ridgeline/Wooded Hillside Protection overlay District but also in one or more other overlay districts set forth in this Ordinance, the limitations of the overlay districts shall be cumulative. In cases where there are direct conflicts between requirements of multiple overlay districts, the most restrictive shall prevail. If it is unclear which provisions are most restrictive, the DRB shall determine which provisions shall prevail. 3.14.3 Permitted Uses: (note: These should be inserted in a new column on the use chart in Section 3.15) A) A) Agriculture B) B) Forestry C) C) One or two family residential structures existing in the overlay district onoT....u~. ........ ~ I, 2005 the effective date of this .amendment. D) D) Minor alterations or additions to existing one or two family residential structures as specified in Sub-Section 3.14.17. E) E) Private Outdoor Recreation not involving structures or extensive clearing F) F) Public Outdoor Recreation not involving structures or extensive clearing 3.14.4 Conditional Uses: -(Note: These should be inserted in a new column on the use chart in Section 3.15) A) A) New one or two family residential structures, not existing in the overlay district ono T....,.... ~ I, 2~m2~2 on the effective date of this amendment. B) B) Additions to existing one or two family residential structures not excluded by Sub-Section 3.14.7. c) c) D) D) E) E) F) F) G) G) Additions to any other structures in the overlay district. Accessory apartments Home Occupations Home Businesses Telecommunications Facilities 3.14.5 3.14.5 Issuance of Zoning/Building Permits: Except as provided in Sub- Sections 3.14.3 and 3.14.7 no zoning/Building Permit may be issued by the Zoning Administrator for development in the Ridgeline/Wooded I-Iiliside Protection Overlay District until the DRB has issued an approval for the development in accordance with the requirements of this Section. 2 3.14.6 3.14.6 Special Requirement For Development in the Overlay District: In addition to requirements for Site Plan Approval in Section 4.1 (for all uses except single family dwellings and duplexes) and for Conditional Use Approval in Section 4.3 (for conditional uses), the DRB shall not approve development in the RidgeHne/Wooded Hillside Protection Overlay District unless the following conditions are met. A) Prevention of adverse visual impacts: ""'~ '"":' If lop isible fro ~.-. ar ....... a proposed deve ment is not v m a public road, park, path or trail, the DRB may exempt the development from one or more of sub-paragraphs 3, 4, 5, and 6 of Sub-Section 3.14.6-A. The term "public road" as used in this sub-paragraph shall not include the public road serving the development within four hundred (400) feet of the drivewav leading to the proposed structure. 2) 2) With the exception of telecommunications towers, which must be also be approved under Section 4.24 of these Regulations, no structure shah penetrate the skyline when viewed from any public viewing point (excluding points on the road that provides prc~ng access to the development within 400 feet on either side of the driveway leading to the structure a~.n~ ..... · ...... ~. ..... ). The skyline is the line between the vegetation on top of a relevant landform and the sky. 3) 3) While it is not anticipated that development in this Overlay District will take place in existing meadows, if development in a meadow should be proposed, the DRB may waive one or more of items 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, or 12, below, if the DRB determines that the items waived are not applicable to the proposed development. 4) 4) Structures shall not be sited on top of high points, outcroppings, or prominent knolls within the site. 5) 5) Buildings located on sloping sites shall be built into the topography to the extent practicable. 6) 6) Exterior building colors shah be selected to blend with the natural background--preferably earth tones in the range from light beige to dark brown. 7) 7) Large expanses of glass shall be avoided (to prevent reflected glare and reduce light emission) 8) 8) While selective clearing of trees to create a building site may be undertaken, such clearing shall not disrupt the continuity of the skyline. 9) 9) Trees may be cleared to create a yard around a dwelling provided that: 3 a) a) The yard (including the footprints of all structures, waste water treatment facilities, swimming pools, tennis courts, parking and circulation areas, etc., may not exceed 0.5 acres or f'ffty (50) percent of the lot size, whichever is smaller; b) b) The yard shall not be clear cut; no less than six mature trees (at least 4" caliper at 42 inches above ground level, shall be left in the yard to add shade and screening. If the site does not contain an adequate number of existing trees, the developer shall plant trees of species similar to those in surrounding woodlands; c) c) All trees designated on an approved plan as being protected or retained, and all trees to be planted, shall be maintained continually, and replaced with similar species, of at least 4" caliper, if they die. 10) 10) A buffer of existing vegetation, at least fifty (50) feet wide, shall be maintained (except for a driveway and a single view corridor per item 11 below~ between the cleared yard and aH lot lines. 11) 11) Selective pruningh:utt/ng is allowed on the lot, including the buffer areas, to provide views through and between trees, provided that the narrowest point of any view corridor is no more twenty-five (25 feet in width at the structure facade. The corridor width may increase by up to 0.5 feet for every foot of distance away from the structure. a) a) The DRB mav allow a second view corridor if the sum of the narrowest points of the two view corridors does not exceed twenty- five (25) feet and the two corridors do not overlap on the site. b) b) Selective pruning is preferred to removal of entire trees. c) c) Clearcutting of the entire view corridor shah not be allowed. d) d) It is the intent of this Section that the vast majority of~the. facades of buildings in the overlay district will be screened from view from public roads, parks, paths or trails aH year round. 12) 12) Existing trees shah be saved in undisturbed groupings wherever possible. 13) 13) Tree protection measures must be taken during construction. Within the construction area specified in paragraph B)-I), below, trees to be protected must be encircled by snow fencing five feet outside of the drip line from the tree canopy. Construction work shall not take place inside the snow fence, or outside of the construction area def'med in paragraph B)-I), below. 14) 14) In addition to all requirements set forth in Section 4.16 of these Regulations, aH outdoor lighting fixtures shall be downward shielded and screened so that direct illumination from the fixture is not transmitted beyond the property line B) Protection of Fragile Soils and Prevention of Soil Erosion: Many soils in the Ridgeline/Wooded Hillside Protection Overlay District are characterized as being thin layers of soil over rock and/or having steep slopes, and thus very vulnerable to damage and erosion. It is the purpose of this section to ensure that appropriate measures are installed and maintained, both during and after construction, to prevent such damage. 1) 1) A construction area, the smallest area needed for the planned construction, shall be delineated on the plans, and the boundaries shall be marked on site with yellow tape or other clearly visible material. Soils outside of the construction area shall not be disturbed. 2) 2) Clearing of slopes with grades in excess of 20 percent should be avoided. 3) 3) Stormwater runoff shall be intercepted up-slope of the construction area and diverted into undisturbed areas, with silt barriers and sedimentation dams as needed. Runoff from within the construction area shall be controlled by diversion dams and treated with appropriate velocity and sedimentation controls. 4) 4) Unless otherwise specified by the DRBa the recommendations of the "Vermont Handbook for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control on Construction Sites", or its successor, shall be followed. 5) 5) Following construction, permanent erosion control and storm water management measures shall be installed and maintained to prevent erosion and ensure that the volume and velocity of runoff leaving the site does not exceed those prior to development. 6) 6) Total lot coverage, including building footprint, paved surfaces and compacted gravel surfaces, shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent of total lot area. 7) 7) Stormwater management and treatment provisions shall (at a minimum~ be designed to accommodate a two-year, 24 hour event, and ensure that post development discharge does not exceed predevelopment discharge in terms of quantity or velocity. 8) 8) The average grade of any driveway shall not exceed 12 percent, and appropriate culverts, ditches and drainage swales shall be provided to prevent flooding and erosion. 3.14.7 Review Procedures: A) Minor alterations to existing properties: Minor alterations to existing properties located in the Ridgeline/Wooded Hillside Protection Overlay District do not require DRB approval and may be approved by the Zoning Administrator, as described below. If, however, the Zoning Administrator feels that there may be adverse visual impacts from such minor alterations, the Administrator may require approval from the DRB in accordance with the provisions of Sub-Section 3.14.7 of these Regulations. 1) 1) Minor alterations to existing structures (e.g. new doors or windows, addition of decks of less than 200 square feet in area, and other alterations that do not change the existing building shape and volume. 5 2) 2) Additions to existing one or two family residential structures that add no more than 25 (twenty five) percent to the total existing enclosed floor area, or 500 square feet, whichever is less. No more than one zoning permit mav be issued for any one propert~ under 44.14.7-A-2 in any five year period. 3) 3) Construction of a single story accessory structure of less than 120 square feet in area and less than ten Il0) feet in height. B) New Construction: All new construction in the Ridgeline/Wooded Hillside Protection Overlay District (excluding that defined in sub-Section 3.14.7-A,-above) must receive Conditional Use Approval from the DRB in accordance with the provisions of Section 4.3 of these Regulations. 1) 1) In addition to the criteria set forth in Sub-Section 4.3.1 of These Regulations, the DRB shall apply the requirements of Sub-Section 3.14.6 to development in the Ridgeline/Wooded Hillside Protection Overlay District. 2) Development on pre-existing lots: The Development Review Board may relax requirements # 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 in Sub- Section 3.14.6-A, for development on lots that existed on the effective date of this section, if the DRB determines that the following conditions exist. a) a) The lot is of such a size, shape and topography that it is not possible to ~develop it in strict conformance with the requirements of Section 3.14.6-A; and b) b) The need for relief is not caused by any action of the developer other than the desire to develop the parcel; and c) c) The relief granted is the minimum amount needed to allow reasonable use of the property; and d) d) The development, with the relief, will not have undue adverse visual impact on the ridgeline~wooded hillsides in the overlay protection district. 3.14.8 3.14.8 Application Materials: Applications for approval of development in the Overlay district shall include, at a minimum, the following information: A) A) A plan of the site showing existing conditions, including contours at no more than 10 foot elevation intervals, existing vegetation (differentiating between hardwood forest areas, softwood 6 forest areas, brushy areas, and grassy areas), streams and water bodies, significant natural features, and soils information. B) B) A plan of the proposed development showing all roads, driveways, parking areas, finished grades, protected natural features, all structures and outdoor facilities, utilities, waste water treatment facilities, ail cleared yards (with trees to be retained), areas for selective pruning/clearing, and ail proposed landscaping/screening. c) C) Elevations of all structures showing exterior materials and indicating colors (if color rendered elevations are not provided, color samples-shall be provided, and keyed to the elevations). . · D) D) Cross-sections, sight lines, photographs, and/or similar evidence, demonstrating the degree to which the proposed building will be visible from public roads, parks, paths and trails. On reviewing an application for approval under this Section, staff may determine that additionai information is needed prior to scheduling a review with the DRB. 3.14.9 3.14.9 Review by the Williston Conservation Commission: When DRB approvai is required, after a complete application is received and before the proposed development is reviewed by the DRB, the proposed development shall be reviewed by the Wimston Conservation Commission. The Conservation Commission shall submit comments and recommendations, in an advisory manner, to the DRB. 3.14.10 Pre-Existing Structures: I.t is not the intent of thisSection to-require removal of pre-existing structure in the RidgeHne/Wooded Hillside Protection Overlay District. When reviewing applications for additions/alterations to pre- existing structures, the DRB shall ensure that any existing non-compliances are not exacerbated, and that any additions/alterations meet the requirements of this Section as much as possible. For example, it may not be possible, with a pre-existing structure, to meet requirements for minimum size of cleared yard, perimeter buffers, or view clearings. 3.14.11 Application: It is the intent that the provisions of this Section will be implemented as part of review subsequent to application for a Zoning/Building Permit in accordance with Section 5.3 of these Regulations. If, however, land within the overlay districl is proposed for subdivision, the provisions herein shah be considered in developing the subdivision layout and in specifying building envelopes. Where individuai building lots are partly inside of and partly outside of this overlay district, development on the part of the lot outside of the overlay district shail not be subject to the provisions of this Section. 7 Colorado Springs, Colorado Hillside Development Guidelines Manual City of Colorado Springs HZLLSZDE DEVELOPMENT DES~LGN MANUAL PREPARED BY: PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT, AND FINANCE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ZONING ADMINISTRATION PRO3ECT TEAM PAUL R. 1-iCE II, CITY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, BR~-~ I U. VELTMAN, PLANNER BONNIE L. OLSON, PLANNING TECHNICIAN LARRY C. LARSEN, PLANNING TECHNICIAN 3UNE 7, 1996 How to Use Manual This manual applies to lands within the hillside areas of the City of Colorado Springs that are characterized by significant natural features that include ridgelines, bluffs, rock outcroppings, vegetation, natural drainageways, wildlife habitat, geologic conditions, and slopes that contribute to the attractiveness of the community. The City has identified these areas and placed them within the HS -Hillside Overlay Zone. The Official City Zoning Map designates the specific properties which are included within the Overlay Zone. The HS overlay may be used in conjunction with any zone district in the City. The provisions of this manual shall apply to any and all of the following activities: · Any lands in which new or enlarged building activity will occur; · Any lands in which vegetation wil be removed; and · Any lands in which grading or any disturbance will occur. This Hanual is intended to be a valuable reference, providing all of the instructions and information necessary to allow developers, contractors, homeowners and other interested persons to develop and maintain hillside properties in an environmentally sensitive fashion. This Hanual incorporates code standards and requirements with recommended guidelines; it contains the Hillside Area Overlay Zone, as approved and found within the City's Zoning Code. (Refer to Appendix A.) Generally, the following presents a quick guide for the user to understand the questions that should be answered to comply with the City's development process for the hillside areas: HZLLSTDE DEVELOPMENT OVERV]~EW 1. What are the City's hillside design objectives? 2. What is the review process ? 3. What is req uired to be submitted? 4. How can a plan be developed? 5. How can City standards and guidelines be met? The answers can easily be found in this IVlanual. This Hanua is intended to be "user friendly" and comprehensive. If you have suggestions or comments we would be interested in hearing from you; please contact the City Zoning Administration Office, 10:t. West Costilla Street; Suite 2:[2, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80903 or telephone (7:[9) 578-6919. 2 Introduction The City has recognized that areas which are characterized by ridgelines, bluffs, view corridors, foothills, "nountain backdrop, excessive slope, unique vegetation, natural drainage, rock outcroppings, geologic conditions, wildlife habitats, and other physical factors, are significant natural features worthy of preservation, Performance standards for hillside development have been develoeed and are incorporated into the Zoning Code as an overlay zone, referred to as the "Hillside Area Overlay", This manual is intended to serve as the design guidelines for the development of hillside areas, The Manual provides all of the instructions and information necessary to allow developers, contractors, homeowners and other interested persons to effectively, sensitively and conscientiously develop hillside properties. The Manual incorporates code requirements with recommended design standards and guidelines. The user of the Manual will hopefully find it useful in understanding the City's objectives for regulating hillside development. The user will find particularly helpful information regarding hillside design issues that the City is most interested in promoting. Specifically, the Manual will show: * How to mJmm~ze the disturbance to the terrain; How to preserve and incorporate nature features and vegetation into site design; How to mitigate and enhance visual impacts and cpportunities; ~ How vehicular access and utilities placement must be considered to minimize destruction to hillside characteristics; * How to use supplement landsca ping to enhance hillside property; * How to use architectural features to conform to hillside characteristics; and How to enhance streetscape appearance. Hillside development on privately owned property is inevitable; how the hillside will be developed is a matter of communitywide concern. Tf development occurs in accordance with this Manual, it will be done in a manner sensitive to the natural functions of the land and preserve and protect one of the City of Colorado Springs most significant attributes -- its mountain gateway into the Rockies. 3 IntentJPurpose The purpose of the Manual is to provide all of the instructions and information necessary to allow developers, contractors, homeowners and other interested persons to effectively and conscientiously develop hillside properties. The Manual incorporates code requirements with recommended guidelines, The user of the Manual will hopefully find it useful to understand the City's objectives for regulating hillside development, The City of Colorado Springs desires to have development that occurs within the hillside areas adhere to specified review procedures, performance standards, and design guidelines which implement the following design objectives: :L.) To enhance the quality of life of existing and future residents by the preservation and protection of the City's most s~gnificant natural feature. 2,) To contribute to the natural hillside character of the existing neighborhoods and developments in the area by limiting the alteration to topography and natural drainageways, 3.) To preserve and protect the unique and special natural features and aesthetic qualities of the hillside areas. 4.) To ensure that new development is sensitive to the existing natural setting and that the protection design minimizes the removal of significant vegetation and natural features to the greatest extent possible. 5.) To preserve and protect wildlife habitat. 6.) To integrate natural features into project design. 7.~ To respect the existing views to tl3e mountains and foothills, and privacy of the adjacent homes. 8.) To avoid geologic conditions which may pose a threat to property and life. 9.) To encourage the use of innovative design techniques and solutions which minimize disturbance and protect sensitive areas. 10.) To recogmze community concerns related to development and its impact upon visually significant hillsides, ridgelines, bluffs, and landforms. 4 City Comprehensive Plan Conformity This Manual endeavors to implement numerous goals, objectives, policies, and recommendations of the City of Colorado Springs Comprehensive Plan, including, but not limited to the following: · Goal 5,1: · Policy 5,1.4: · Recommendation 5,1.R4: (F) & (L) · Goal 9.2: · Policy 9.2,2: · Recommendation 9,2.R2: · Goal 9.4: · Policy 9.4.3: · Goal 9,5: · Policy 9.5.3: · Recommendation 9.5. R, 1: · Goall6.1: · Policy 16.1.1: · Recommendation 16.1,R2: · Recommendation 16.1.R6: · Goal 16,4: · Policy 16,4,1: · Policy 16,4,2: Please refer Appendix K for the specific language on each of the noted Goals, Objectives, and Recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. Zan L. McHarg, teacher, landscape architect and planner~ writes in his book~ Desiqn with Nature. "When developments are built upon beautiful, dramatic or rich sites; their excellence often results from the preservation and enhancement of the natural features, rather than the obliteration of them." 5 Hillside Development Plan (HS/DP) Review Process Prior ta obtaining a building permit for a HS zoned lot, both a subdivision plat and HS development plan must be approved by the City. The development plan is the document which establishes the project design parameters while the subdivision plat formalizes the lot layout pattern, ano street and drainage designs. Applications for development plans are processed by the City's Development Services & Comprehensive Planning Division. Additional information regarding the HS development plan requirements, rewew procedures and appeal process is set forth in Appendix A. HS Site/Grading Plans submitted in conjunction with the building permit review process must act to implement the design parameters established with the approved development plan. Hillside Site Lot Grading Plan (HSS/LGP) Review Process OVERV~[EW This section provides persons WhO are contemplating constructing a new house or building an addition onto an existing home, the information necessary to allow them to be able to successfully submit and receive City approval of Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plans (HSS/LGP). The section includes: · Design review criteria · Required plan contents and information · Review process procedures · Post construction follow-up procedure CRTTERTA By ordinance, construction activity, including grading or removal of vegetation, sha occur on lots or parcels subject to the Hillside Overlay Zone until a Hillside Site Plan/Lot Grading Plan has been approved by the Development Services Division. Hillside Site Plar~/Lot Grading Plans will be evaluated for consistency with the underlying zoning district development standards, approved development plan standards, and in accordance with the following site design hillside overlay zone review criteria: Have the development standards of the zone or Development Plan setbacks, maximum height, lot coverage, drive grades, access points etc.) been met? · Is terrain disturbance minimized? · Have cuts and fills been minimized? · Has the natural land form been retained? · Have visually compatible stabilization measures been used for cut & fil slopes? · Have natural features such as slopes & rock formations been incorporated into the site design? · Is natural vegetation preserved and incorporated into the project design? Has emphasis been placed upon preserving Scrub Oak and pines within the front yard area as this has a major ~mpact upon the appearance of the streetscape and the character of the neighborhood? · Has emphasis peen placed upon preserving healthy and significant stands of Scrub Oak and pine trees? Have visual impacts upon off-site areas been avoided or reasonably mitigated? Has the structure been sited so that there is a mountain or hillside backdrop? Has the structure been sited off from the ridgeline? Has existing vegetation been preserved to soften the structural mass of buildings located in highly visible areas? Has supplementary native landscaping been used to soften structural mass of highly visible building sites? APPL'rCATTON CONTENTS AND REQUt*RED ZNFORMATTON Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan Applications consist of the following two components: · A Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan · A Hillside Building Elevation Drawing HILLSIDE SI-FE / LOT GRADING PLAN. A Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan is required for all persons desiring to construct, modify, grade, remove vegetation, and/or disturb properties located within the Hillside areas. Appendix C set forth all the information required to be illustrated on a Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan. HILLSIDE BUILDING ELEVAT/ON DRAWING. A Hillside Building Elevation Drawing is required for all persons desiring to construct and modify structures located within the Hillside areas. A checklist for a Hillside Building Elevation Drawing with all required information is included as part of the Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan Submittal Checklist. (See Appendix C.) REVZEW PROCESS PROCEDURES · Preapplication Conference: (Optional) Prior to planning and designing a project, the applicant should review the Hillside Development Design Manual and the Hillside Overlay Zone District section of the City Zoning Code, which establish the requirements and guidelines for acceptable hillside development. It is strongly suggested that the applicant contact and/or make an ... appointment with the City Zoning Administration staff to discuss the project. At that time the nature of the project should be described. Site visits may be appropriate during this stage. The City staff will clarify review procedures, design guidelines, and submittal requirements. Critical specific issues applicable to the project can be identified and preliminary consensus reached. Preliminary Design Review: (Optional - Preliminary review is an informal process enabling the applicant to receive written input from City staff on the basic concept of the development proposal.) This step is optional but is recommended for projects requiring extensive grading, or the removal or alteration of significant vegetation and natural features. Preliminary review allows the applicant to meet with the City staff to discuss basic intentions and plans prior to undertaking detailed design. At this step, site analysis and design, location of structures, grading, basic form of buildings, vegetation and significant feature protection and removal are important. Building elevations and other information may be discussed but kept in a preliminary form. Sites visits may again be appropriate during this stage. Formal Hillside Site / Lot Grade Plan Application: (Required) A complete Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan with a Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan Submitta Checklist must be filed with the City Zoning Administration Office. A Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan is required for all persons desiring to construct, modify, grade, remove vegetation, and/or disturb properties ocated within the Hillside areas. A Hillside Building Elevation Drawing is required for all persons desiring to construct and modify structures located within the Hillside areas. Plans and Drawings may accompany and be included with architectural drawings submitted to the Regional Building Department in pursuit of a building permit. See Appendix C. for a copy of the HSS/LGP Checklist and content requirements. Staff Review and Evaluation: (Required) Upon receipt of a Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan ano Submittal Checklist, City Zoning Staff will review the plan for corn pliance with content requirements, design guidelines, and hillside standards. During their review City Zoning staff will visit the site, and review the plan for corn pliance with following evaluation standards: · Underlying Zoning District Standards. · minimum lot area · minimum front, side, and rear yard setbacks · maximum lot coverage · Development Plan Standards. · building lots and envelopes · vehicular access · location of utility lines · retention of significant vegetation · specified hillside building height · location of preservation areas · geologic hazard avoidance and mitigation · Hillside Overlay Zone Standards and Design Standards · minimize terrain disturbance · preservation and incorporation of natural vegetation · mitigation of off-site visual impacts · maximum building height · access and utilities · architectural features · construction practices · revegetation · wildlife habitat preservatio~ · streetscape appearance Final Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan Decision. (Required) Upon completion of their review City staff shall do one of the following: approve the 9 plan, as submitted; approve the plan, subject to conditions; or deny the plan. All approved plans will be stamped and dated. Any conditions of approval will be clearly noted. Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan Amendments, Revisions & Modifications (Optional) An amendment, revision, and modification to a plan is considered a new application and must proceed according to the procedures as if it were a new application. Amendments should be clearly identified upon the plan either by highlighting, outlining the amended area, or providing text describing it. Appeals (Optional) Any administrative action or decision of City Staff under the provision of the Hillside Overlay Zone District or this Manual may be appealed to the City Hearing Officer in accordance with City Code Section :L4.1-4-204.B.5.b. CONSTRUCT:ZON FOLLOW-UP Znspections. The City Zoning Administration Office will follow-up and conduct inspections to determine compliance with the approved Plans and the provisions of the Hillside Overlay Zone District and other City Code provisions. Host sites will be visited twice after construction commences. · The initial inspection will be scheduled to occur shortly after the site has been cleared, foundation constructed, and while the framing is in process. The propose of the initial inspection will be to determine compliance and to prescribe mitigation or remedial actions which can be taken, at an early stage, to correct necessary violations. A fuels management inspection will occur at th~'same time. Required corrective actions will be forwarded to the applicant and full compliance is expected by final inspection. The final inspection will be scheduled to occur shortly after construction has been completed. The propose of the final inspection will be to evaluate the overall site and building design in relation to its impact upon the site, the streetsca pa, and surrounding area. Determination of compliance and the prescription of additional mitigation actions may be necessary. A final fuels management inspection will also occur at this time. Evaluation Letter. The City Zoning Administration Office will provide an evaluation letter to all applicants of hillside development. The letter will address plan and code provision compliance, provide the City staff's evaluation regarding the site and ~uilding's design, and City staff's opinions regarding its impact upon the hillside and surrounding area. A sample evaluation letter can be found in Appendix G. Enforcement. The City Zoning Administration Office is authorized to pursue enforcement actions including, but not limited to, the issuance of a Notice and Order for violations of the approved Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan and/or the prowsions of the Hillside Overlay Zone District, in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 14.1-4-1101 through :1.4.~.-4-1::[10 of the City Code. 11 Hillside Site Lot Grading Plan Design Primer OVERVIEW The purpose of this section is to provide the user with a "how to guide" to the development of a Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan (HSS/LGP) which will meet the City's standards and design guidelines. The section is not intended to prescribe the only method in which a HSS/LGP plan can be developed, but outlines the important steps and issues which should be considered. HOW TO PREPARE A HZLLSZDE S.TTE / LOT GRADING PLAN ....... INVENTORY SITE FEATURES ANALYZE SITE ISSUES EVAL UA TE CONCEPT AL TERNA TZVES CHOOSE FINAL DESIGN MEET CZTY OBSECTZVES SITE INVENTORY Inventory the natural and physical conditions of the site. Determine the suitability of the site for the project. [t is not necessary to study each of the conditions in detail. Rather, the applicant should understand which conditions the pro,lect's success depends upon. A Site :Inventory Feature Checklist is included in Appendix E. for your use and information. · Natural Features Does existing natural features provide opportunities or constraints to development? The existing natural features should be inventoried, in narrative and perhaps map formats, A complete overview of the natural features which may be impacted by the development should be reviewed. The natural feature's functions, possible hazards, unique significance, and their specific characteristics should be understood and respected. · Identification Of Geologic Hazards An ~mportant aspect of selecting the right lot for a home, or selecting the appropriate location to site a structure, is the knowledge of the possible existence of geologic hazards. STEPS TO BUILDING SUCCESSFULLY IN GEOLOGICAL HAZARDOUS AREAS · Review the Geologic Hazard Study commissioned by the developer. This should be done prior to the purchase of the ot if possible but certainly prior to determining where the structure will be located and how the lot will be graded. · Have a soils test performed; site the structure in the area with the best soil and the least amount of geologic hazards. ~2 · Have a foundation engineered which is designed to withstand the soil and geologic conditions existing on the site. · Make sure the foundation is constructed in accordance with the requirements of the soils report and the engineered design. · Insure that the foundation is well drained and that there is positive drainage away from the foundation. · Incorporate Iow-water/xed-scape plant materials into the landscaped design: especially near your foundation. Colorado Springs contains a variety of geologic hazards, including, but not limited to, the following: · Expansive soils and rock · Unstable or potentially unstable slopes · Landslide or potential landslide areas · Debris Flows · Rockfall · Subsidence · Shallow Water Tables · Springs · Flood prone areas · Collapsing soils · Faults Knowledge of whether any of these geologic hazards are present on a property is an important factor in determining: how, where and even if a project will be built. Host developers commission Geologic Hazard Studies prior to designing their subdivisions and selling lots. It is suggested that these studies be reviewed prior to the purchase of the ot or at the very least, prior to the selection of the building location and design of the Site/Grading Plan If no Geologic Hazard Study exists for the development under consideration, a geotechnical engmeenng firm should be hired to perform a site reconnaissance and geologic hazard rewew. A soils test wil be required to be performed prior to the issuance of a building permit. The foundation must be designed, by a registered civil engineer, to withstand the geologic forces anticipated to be exerted by the specific soil condition. In order to be sure that the structure is being placed in a location which has an acceptable level of geologic hazard risk, and the best soil conditions, it is recommended that a soils test be performed prior to the final design of the HS Site/Grading Plan This approach will not only provide the comfort of knowing the structure has been built in the safest location on the lot (in terms of exposure to geologic'hazards) it will also, save,money. - ..... Many geologic constraints can be overcome through special foundation designs or engineering techniques, but these can significantly increase the cost of your structu res. Tf a driveway needs to be graded vegetation removed in order to get a soils rig onto a lot, please contact the Zoning Office (578-69:L9) and we will review and pre- approve the preliminary grading and vegetation removal prior to submittal of a final Site/Grading Plan. However, under no circumstances should driveways be rough graded or Scrub Oak or pine trees be removed from the your lot prior to coordination with the Zoning Office even for the purpose of providing access for soils testing equipment. Facilities and Services Are adequate facilities and services available to serve the site and development? Consider where the utility service lines will be connected into the public system and how these lines will be brought to the new homesite, in terms of the grading required and the impact upon the existing vegetation. Whenever possible, driveways and utility services lines should Share the same cut. Assess the impact that wastewater service lines may have for downsloping lots where sewage must either be pumped up hill or through downhill adjoining lots. · Access How will vehicles access the site? Driveways must meet City and fire protection design standards for size, location, surface, grade, and access points. Can access be provided to the house site with minimal impacts to other site features? In general, the driveway should follow the natural grade of the lot to the extent possible. The City encourages access to utilities and to the street be included in the same genera] vicinity. Two cuts, one for driveways and the other for utilities, through hillside vegetation and topography is not an acceptable practice. · Land Use Is the proposed development compatible and consistent with the character of the area and neighborhood? For the most part, and use for a parcel in the Hillside zone is determined during the zoning classification and development plan review processes. SITE EVALUATION AND ANALYSZS Once the development program and site features have been inventoried the feasibility of developing and constructing on a specific lot or site can be analyzed and evaluated. As addressed previously, many natural and physical conditions could affect the success of the project. While all the factors have been inventoried, only a few will present constraints and opportunities to be mitigated or enhanced. "The process of inventory and analysis will suggest whether or not the site is suitable for the intended project, which area hold up best and which areas are most vulnerable..." Fawn Hayes Bell "Landscape and Site Zmorovements Desiqn Guidelines .... Prepared for: The Water Resources Department City of Colorado Springs First, determine whether a site feature is a constraint, an opportunity, both, or is of no consequence to the project. Next, evaluate the constraint to determine whether it can be mitigated or the opportunity enhanced. Does the mitigation or enhancement of one feature cause additional problems or added value to other features? Does the action render the project still feasible or present overwhelming economic ramifications? · Constraints Features that are constraints are those which restrict or limit the development potential of the property. Constraints should be analyzed to determine whether they can be minimized, mitigated, or altered to a degree which would allow development to occur. If the constraint can not be overcome or would be too costly to mitigate, then the project is not feasible and additional resources of time, energy, and money should not be consumed. If the constraint can be overcome or mitigated without too great of expense, then the project planning should continue. For example, if the potential site has shallow underlying depth to groundwater or free flowing springs, which could not be controlled without extensive collection systems and/or great costs, then the project is probably not feasible. · Mitigations Constraints that can be overcome by making them less serve or intense are said to be mitigated. Mitigative actions may include eliminating the constraint, utilizing design alternatives or engineered solutions which neutralize the constraint. [vlitigation actions need to be evaluated to determine whether a positive cost benefit relation exists, · Opportunities Opportunities are site features which provide favorable circumstances not enjoyed by other sites. Opportunities should be analyzed to determined whether they can be enhanced and used to benefit the project. Projects which utilize opportunities will certainly meet City Hillside objectives and add value to the property. For an example, the placement of a structure to preserve a stand of mature trees will enhance the natural setting of the site and maintain its hillside character. Maximizing solar gain by o rientating a structure to face south is an opportunity. · Enhancements By incorporating natural features and adding supplemental native landsca ping into a site design, the site can be enhanced. For example, the use of natural materials and earth tone colors on hillside structures is considered an enhancement. CONCEPTUAL ALTERNATZVES Tt is essential to evaluat~ and study several alternative site layout concepts. Alternative layouts can be generated inexpensively and need not be carefully drawn or detailed in the initial preliminary design process. It is enough, at first, to draft only the essentials of a scheme in a simple form. Tf one scheme lends itself to corn parison to another, it can be developed yet as another scheme and so on and so forth. Alternatives should always be reviewed prior to committing to a final plan. If a preconceived design exists, the evaluation can be used to test, verify, or modify the concepts. Tn general, initial concepts seldom work the best, but rather the third or forth scenario combines the best of each and will eliminates the problems. STRATEGZES FOR DEVELOPTNG ALTERNATZVE PLANS DO NOT ASSUME THERE TS ONLY ONE WAY TO MAKE A PRO3ECT WORK DO NOT BE SATZSFZED WZTH THE FZRST ATTEMPT QUESTZON EVERY ACTZON AND REACTZON A LOT OF IDEAS CREATE BETTER SOLUT/ONS LOOK FOR THE SECOND RXGHT ANSWER ASK "WHAT ZF" (~UESTZONS CHALLENGE THE RU LES · Evaluate As previously discussed, every site has both opportunities and constraints; it is now helpful to map and illustrate them. Once the prewous inventory information has been collected and the alternative design schemes drafted, this information must be organized to permit an easy evaluation of the best development solution. The evaluation should answer the questions, objectives, and requirements addressed n the already written development program. 1. The preferred development concept will emerge and synthesis reached as the developer weighs and evaluates the alternative concepts and answers the following questions: 2, Which plan best satisfies the development program's objective and requirements? 3. Which plan best fits the site? 4. Which plan best satisfies the City requirements and guidelines? 5. Which plan can be implemented with what degree of effort? 6. Which plan provides reasonable cost benefits? · Synthesis The result of the evaluation' produces a summary site analysis which illustrates the interrelationships of a site's spatial, natural and physical conditions with the objectives and requirements of the development program. The analysis should identify the portion of the pa rcel most suited to development as well as areas to be left undisturbed. Areas in need of more detailed evaluation also should be identified. · Selection At this point the right scheme for development for the site should be obviously clear. Now a preliminary HSS/LGP plan can be prepared. This plan incorporates all of the factors previously discussed with the additional information required by,the~Gity and other agencies. The plan represents the final draft prior to the preparing of the final plan. Often, it wil include architectural renderings and profiles. The homebuilder will now have a reasonably precise understanding of the project. Once a confidence level has been reached that the preliminary plan will fulfill the development objective for the site, then the detailed final plan with engineering studies and construction drawings can be prepared. HZNTS FOR HZLLSIDE STTE / LOT GRADING PLAN SUCCESSFUL APPROVALS ....... 1. Tf you have a difficult site, call the Zoning Office for a pre application conference and site visit. Working out tough solutions together is a good policy 2, Submit a complete application. A complete application includes: · A HSS / LGP plan with all of the required information. · A Hillside Building Elevation Drawing. · A HSS / LGP plan Submittal Checklist, signed and certified. 3. Always meet or exceed City re~ uirements or guidelines. 4_ Use this Manual, it is intended to make your job easier. 5. When in doubt ask the question or request an explanation. 6. And finally, D£$IGN ~,our project to maintain the Hillside character of the site by: · IVlinimize the disturbance to the terrain, avoiding no cuts or fills unless they are necessary. · Preserve and incorporate nature features and vegetation, save significant mature trees, rock formations, and stands of vegetation, particularly in the front yard. · Mitigate visual impacts, by keeping structures below ridgelines, stepping structures with the slope, and minimizing the height of structures. · Place utilities and driveways in the same cut. · Add supplemental natural landscaping to compensate for vegetation losses. · Design the building to fit the site, rather then modifying the site to fit the building, · Use architectural features to conform to hillside characteristics, use natura materials, earth tone colors, and broken roof and wall components. · Enhance the streetsca pe appearance by saving front yard vegetation, staggering setbacks, and use minimal sized driveways that take up grade. · Avoid slopes of 25% or greater. · ]identify and mitigate geologic and other hazards. · Use retaining walls as only the last resort, they should not be built to create flat lawns. · Take care during construction to minimize the destruction of natural features. · Control excess drainage, soil erosion and sedimentation during and after construction. I*NSTRUCTZONS: HOW TO CALCULATE HTLLS'rDE HETGHT FOR SZNGLE- FAMZLY HOM ES The following rs a step by step procedure for calculating the height of structures in the Hillside Area Overlay Zone, based upon the proposed method and standard: On the site plan, building g'ra~~ and finished grade contours shall be shown. Accurec¥ of the contour information is essential The plan scale should De a minimum of 1 inch is equal to 20 feet and the contour interval not less than two feet. It is encouraged that the site plan be drawn to meet "National Map Accuracy Standards". The City's FII~IS mapping system information ma'y be a reliable source of building grade contour information. If the site has been disturbed througfi the construction of streets or utility installation the disturbed contours will need to be re-surveyed. 1. On the site plan locate and determine both a site permanent benchmark and a proposed structure's benchmark with elevations identified and recorded. 2. The structure's benchmark should also be shown the building elevation drawing. Two benchmarks shall be identified at the actual site for verification by zoning personnel. Site benchmarks should be a ~? permanent monument such as a chiseled curb spot, top of fire hydrant or other fixed fixture. A structure's benchmark should be located to be above the proposed finished grade and easily identified such as top of slab on the garage floor, chiseled foundation spot, or other visible point. 3. On the site plan locate and determine the major corners of the proposed structure. 4. Major corners are the points where the structure's walls change directions for distances of eight (8) feet or more; including attached garages and additions, but not including decks, patios, bay windows, chimneys, or similar projections. 5. On the site plan at the major corners record the elevation where the structure intersects the building grade. 6. Remember "building grade" is simply the topography and elevafion of the lot immediately prior to your proposed construction. ]t may have been previously graded in accordance with a City approved grading plan or may still be in its natural condition. 7. On the building elevation drawing, draw front, rear, right, and left side profiles of the structure The preferred drawing scale should be 1/4 inch is equal to one foot. 8. Building eJevation drawings are required as part of the building permit plan application. Your architect will provide these. 9. On the building elevation drawing, indicate the building grade at each of the major corners and connect with a line. ~.0. From the site plan transfer, mark, and illustrate the building line where the structure intersects the building grade surface on the building elevation drawings. zz. On the building elevation drawing, from the major corners~ measure vertically to the maximum height specified on the approved Development Plan, or to 35' for a sloped roof or 30' for a flat roof, which ever is less, Connect these points for each side profile with a straight line. 12. The horizontal lines represents the maximum hillside building height 13. On the building elevation drawing, if all portions of the roof fall below the horizontal lines, the structure is in compliance with the height standard. Xf any portion of the roof exceeds the horizontal lines, the structure is not in compliance. 18 Design Guidelines OVERVTEW: LZVZNG AND BU'rLDZNG HOMES TN THE HZLLS~ZDES $o you decided to build a home in the City's hillside areas. You probably made this decision based on a lot of factors. The hills are where you can actually feel ike you have moved to the Colorado mountains. There are trees and nature and views that can mellow even the most stressful of workdays. This is where the City meets the forest. There is a cost to hillside living, however. Beyond the price of the real estate homeowners must contend with a delicate ecosystem, slippery steep hills in the winter, wind conditions and wildlife. Because the foothills are such a special area, there are a set of rules that apply to everyone who chooses to live there. Whether building a new home or you are n a house that has been around for 20 years, there are strictly enforced guidelines that regulate how you may treat your lot. These requirements are covered in the following pages. BEFORE YOU BU]LD... The question of how to build in the hillsides should be addressed by starting miles from your proposed home site. Looking toward the mountains it is easy to see how the ecotones change as you head up the sides of the foothills. Prairie gives way to Scrub Oak and this in turn is replaced by Ponderosas, Cedars and other trees. [t is not a smooth ascendance, rather hills top out in ridgelines and small peaks reach toward higher ones. Around here, all is ultimately capped by the grandeur of our most famous landmark, Pikes Peak. There is, however, an important factor to keep in mind, when placing a dwelling to maximize these views. When a house is sited for a breathtaking view, perhaps high on a hilltop or ridgeline, the folks down below have a breathtaking view of your house. With such prime real estate comes some ~mportant responsibilities. Homes n prominent locations must be sited and designed with the following in mind: · Homes need to be setback a far enough distance from cliffs or hilltops so that the structure does not appear to be perched on the edge. A mountain or other I~ ndform should act as the backdrop to the home. This is highly preferable to having the building project into a blue sky background like the parapet along the top of a castle. Tfthe house does break the plane of the natural backdrop, it should be designed to mimic the natural lines of the hillsides. Existing and new vegetation should be placed to soften the mass of the home from off site. An effective vegetative cover will veil most of the lower level of the house. · Dark or earthtone colors should be used to make the home less conspicuous as seen from off site. White and other light colors should be avoided. 19 · Outside lighting should be muted and directed so that it does not spill over on to neighboring properties. Dwellings should be placed far enough apart to reveal views of the Front Range and other significant ridgelines from the street and from the houses downhill. · Dwellings sited to maximize views at the expense of vegetation will be denied. As you approach the site, the potential house location should be viewed from a number of perspectives. Before placing a house on a lot there are many questions to be asked. Are the soil types suitable for drainage and have you addressed any geotechnical hazards? TS the slope appropriate for the style of the house and will it allow you to take advantage of the solar orientation while minimizing the impacts of the wind. TS the house set high enough to drain into the sewer system, yet Iow enough to allow you to make it up the driveway on a wintry day? Although these are all very important considerations, many are secondary to the need to save the natural features of the site and incorporate them into the site design. The right to live in the City's hillside areas goes hand in hand with the responsibility to build in a environmentally sensitive manner. If the street you have chosen had a woodsy feel when you selected the site, it is your obligation to see that this feel still exists when you are finished. The house will need to appear as if it was designed for the site when viewed from all sides, but particularly so from the street. This goal can be accomplished by incorporating the following: The driveway should not be the predominant feature of the front yard. Paved and structural areas must be softened by preserving the pre-existing vegetation. · Setbacks should be staggered to avoid a canyon effect, · Shared driveways are encouraged, when appropriate. · Cuts and fills are to be minimized and vegetation is to be preserved. BUTLDTNG MULTZ-FAMZLY, OFFZCE, TNDUSTRTAL AND COMMERCI'AL PRO3ECTS I'N THE HZLLS~rDES Single-Family homes are not the only pro.lects built in the Hillsides. Hulti-family, commercial, office and industrie projects can also be appropriate if care is taken in the design of these projects to insure that important hillside characteristics are maintained. The following is a list of design standards and guidelines which shou Id be addressed in siting multi-family, commercial, office or industrial projects within Hillside Areas: Multi-family buildings should be designed in such a manner to provide the greatest degree of privacy possible for the individual structures as well as to adjacent properties. 2O · Buildings placed upon downslope lots should be sufficiently screened by vegetation to avoid degrading views from off-site. Existing vegetation, especially mature trees and groves of Scrub Oak should be integrated into the project design. For building sites in proximity to ridgelines, additional height restrictions may be necessary to insure that rooflines wil be located below the natural ridgeline. Large expanses of flat areas for parking that require cuts, fills or the removal of existing significant vegetation or natural landforms should be avoided. Buildings should be sited with different floor elevations to achieve height variation. At site perimeters with high off-site visibility, buildings should be sited with a staggered arrangement and screened with mature vegetation to mimmize the "wall effect". For multi-family projects, stagger alignments of buildings both horizontally and vertically to create unit identity, privacy at entry and private outdoor space, and to share common open space. Building sites should be selected so that construction occurs below the ridgeline. The roofline, based upon maximum permitted height, should not extend above the line of sight between a ridgeline and any public right-of-way, whether the ridgeline is above or below the right-of-way. The slope of the roof should be oriented in the same direction as the natural slope of the lot. Significant views of the natural ridge silhouette from public rights-of-way and other public spaces should be retained. When a major building elevation will be visible from off-site, appropriate combinations of screening and design treatment should be taken to reduce the bu ~of the structure. Grading, Drainage, Cuts and Fills Mother Nature rarely offers us a site that fits the shape of a house. When the ti me comes to start construction, it is easier to change the terrain than it is to design around the slopes and imperfections of the land. There are two types of changes that can have a great impact on the natural contours of a site: cuts and fills. Cuts are made when the slope of a lot rises and the house doesn't. This is commonly seen on upslope lots, those that rise away from the street. Fills are made when the house is placed on a pedestal or a pile of dirt intended to hold the home higher than the natural terrain Both of these changes should be held to an absolute minimum. There are a lot of reasons given as to why cuts and fills on the lot are desired. They are used for all of the following: · To create basement walkouts. · To make flat yards for a play or recreation area. · To achieve drives with workable slopes. · To carry drainage away from the house. · To permit sewage outflow from the basement bath. · To improve views. · To reduce the building height calculation. To give structural support and frost protection to foundations. To make the building design compatible with the existing topography of the lot. Although some of these reasons are better than others, the City takes a dim view of excessive or unnecessary cuts and fills. Plans which make inordinate use of cuts and fills will be denied. Large cuts into a slope usually indicate that the wrong house design is being used for the conditions of a site. Building a flat house on an upward slope is akin to placing the proverbial square peg into a round hole -- it doesn't fit. If a lot runs uphill, then a house should be designed to match that flow. if a lot is mostly fiat, then it is not a good idea to dig a basement walkout. Even worse, however, is piling on the fill. The problem with fill is that it has a tendency to return to the natural grade. A house built on fill is generally less stable than one placed on natural soils. Unless proper compacting and retaining practices are followed, fill will continue to compress on its own. Fill around a house tends to settle or wash into the surrounding vegetation eventually smothering it. As a rule of thumb, it is safe to observe the following: "CUTS ARE BETTER THAN FZLLS AND NEZTHER TS BETFER THAN EZTHER" Design Objectives - Grading It is in the interest of all to create marketable homes which preserve the natural characteristics of the hillsides. These types of houses sell well, have less negative rnpacts on the environment and are pleasing to look at. From the perspective of good hillside development, these goals are met by adhering tc the following construction and design practices: 22 · Houses should be designed to fit the site rather than modifying the site to fit the house. · Foundation corners should match the natural grade as much as possible. · Limit grading to that which is necessary to construct the house, drive and a limited area for yard purposes. · Design to retain as much of the natural landform as possible, · Use foundation systems and home designs to take up grade. · Use driveways to take upgrade. · On a limited basis retaining walls are acceptable. They are not acceptable when their purpose is to create flat yards. · Drive-under and/or detached garages are encouraged on very steep grades. · Site the house and use construction techniques which allow wastewater services to be provided without the use of fill. · Hechanical solutions to solve wa stewater problems are preferable to site modifications. Standard house designs should only be used if they are designed to work with the existing topographic conditions of the lot Avoid an angular appearance of graded areas by smoothing out contours and sloping away from the foundation rather than using retaining walls. Graded slopes should be between 2:1 and 5::~. Grading Review Requirements it is difficult to set absolute limits on what is acceptable grading for a hillside lot. Sometimes an exceptional measure may be needed to work a house into a site and these proposals should be discussed with the plan reviewer as early in the design process as possible. In the majority of cases, however, certain limits should not be exceeded. The following standards are used by the Zoning Office as a basis for evaluating proposed grading plans · Retaininq Walls - If retaining walls are necessary, they should be limited to a 4' maximum height per wall with no more than two tiers. Tiers should be separated by at least 4'-6' and each tier should be screened from the street as follows; one 5 gal. shrub every 4' and one 6' tree every 15'. At least half of the trees should be evergreen. Relief may be granted for shorter (height and/or length) retaining walls and for walls which slope back and contain natural plantings. Retaining walls not seen from the street are of lesser concern. Builders are encouraged to use foundations as retaining walls to retain slopes. 23 Driveways - The maximum slope is not to exceed 20%. Consideration should be given to the placement of the house so that the driveway may be used to take up grade. Drives longer than 30' should be narrowed to 12' in width as quickly as possible. Walkouts - Builders should select sites for walkouts which have a natural fall of at least 8' through the building footprint area. Cuts or fills for walk outs should be designed to minimize the impact upon existing lVlountain Mahogany, Scrub Oak and Fines. Reveqetation - Fill and cut slopes shall be stabilized in a manner which prevents erosion. Acceptable slope treatments may include hydromulch seeding, netting, small retaining walls, and the planting of trees, shrubs and flowers or any combination of these. The appropriate treatment will be determined depending on the specific slope conditions. Cuts vs. Fills - Cuts are preferable to fills as they are more stable and have generally less impact on surrounding vegetation and off-site views. Fills greater than four feet are permitted only when there are unusual circumstances such as severe topography or restrictive soil conditions. Cuts and fills should be severely limited in areas with slopes of 25% or more. Front entryway walks are limited to the same fill constraints as the house. Tf there is a grade change of four feet or more between the driveway and the front entrance, the house design may have to be modified to use steps or decks rather than fill to take up the grade. Protectina Veaetation - Grading around the house should be limited to ten feet or less to minimize its impact on existing vegetation. Protectinq Natural Features - If a site has unique geological features such as mushroom rocks, significant rock outcroppings or cliff faces, extraordinary care must be taken when building on these lots. Tn order to preserve a sites special attributes, the house should be designed to fit around the significant features. Site Excavation - Construction equipment and stockpiled soils should be stored only in areas which are to be disturbed for the construction of the house. Recommended fill storage areas include driveway pad locations and previously disturbed street cuts. brai~age and Erosion Control Builders must direct the drainage from their lots so that it either flows into the public storm water system or maintains pre-existing lot to lot patterns. Roof and hard surface runoff should not be concentrated and improperly diverted onto downslope lots. During construction, drainage problems should be temporarily controlled by using straw bales and/or silt fences to slow and filter lot to lot drainage. In no cases should mud or sand be allowed to cross property boundaries. Erosion should be minimized on a site by revegetating the disturbed area of the lot as soon after construction as possible. Slopes exceeding 2: 1, must be protected immediately by straw netting, hydromulching, silt traps, riprapping along drainage channels or by using other similar methods. 24 Working with Vegetation The image usually associated with living in the foothills is one of homes nestled into a setting of mature pine stands and rolling hills covered in Scrub Oak and Mountain Mahogany. Tndeed this vision is so alluring that many of our hillside subdivisions; The Woodlands, Mahogany Vale, Woodmen Oaks and Point of the Pines, bear names that reflect their intended glory. [f the overall character of hillside areas is to be maintained, the emphasis must be placed on incorporating the existing vegetation into the site design. Some of the considerations which should be embodied when matching a home to a site are as follow: · Hillside characteristics help set the tOne for Colorado Springs' image and desirability as a place to live. · The streetscape within hillside developments should contain elements which reflect the City's natural hillside setting. · Maintaining the natural environment preserves wildlife habitat and migration corridors. Native vegetation is suited for Iow water landscaping since it has evolved to be drought tolerant and can exist on the historic natural levels of precipitation. · Hinimizing disturbance of existing plants prevents erosion and sedimentation problems. · Mature natural hillside flora has value which cannot be replaced. · Existing vegetation provides a privacy screen between neighbors and between the house and the street. · Vegetation which ~s preserved, offers a real dollar value in landscaping already in place and in improving a homes curb appeal for sales. There are bound to be conflicting ideas in attempting to reach a balance between the need to preserve natural vegetation and the desires or requirements of contractors and homeowners. Below are some conflicts which have been identified as inherent to building on vegetated lots. · Foundation excavation and over-digs in poor soil conditions require the removal of all vegetation within the dig area. · Vegetation must be removed for cuts ane fills. · Often, homeowners want to site houses in locations which are covered with significant vegetation. · Homeowners desire level awns, patios, and recreation areas. The demand for basement walkouts exceeds the supply of lots which can naturally accommodate this type of house. This results in houses with forced walkout designs and unnecessary cuts. Frequently, houses are sited on the highest point of a lot to achieve views without consideration of their effect on existing vegetation anc off-site visual impacts. · Vegetation is removed to improve wews. · It is easier to construct houses with overgrading versus incorporating existing vegetation into site design. · Vegetation is removed to reduce fire hazards and to limit ladder fuels. · Vegetation is removed with the installation of utility lines. · There is a perception that natural vegetation does not have as much a value as formal landscaping. Design Objectives - Working with Vegetation One of the main objectives in protecting the existing vegetation of a site is to screen the bulk of the house. Although a house can be beautiful in its own right, the nature characteristics of a lot can only be maintained if the home is designed to complement the site rather than the other way around. Tn designing this home, architects, builders and homeowners should assimilate the structure to the site it is placed on. The following design objectives should be addressed in the placement of houses on hillside lots: · Houses should be sited to incorporate existing vegetation into the design to preserve the natural hillside image and character of the area. · Emphasis should be placed upon preserving the vegetation in the front yard area to pro.iect a hillside appearance from the street. Existing vegetation should be used to soften structura mass and blend the house into the natural setting. A two or three level home should have most of the first floor screened by Scrub Oak and trees. Tn this way, the house almost appears to grow from the lot like the trees. Sma breaks in the vegetation can enhance this image as seen from the street. The amount of vegetation which can be removed depends on how much is existing in the first place. Lots which are heavily treed are bound to lose some, Sites with limited natural vegetation may have to be designed with extra care to retain as much as possible, · Cuts and fills should be designed to limit their impact upon areas containing Scrub Oak, Mountain Hahogany and pine trees. 26 Lawn, patio and formal recreation areas should be limited if their construction will require the removal of significant vegetation or the creation of cut and fill areas. · Natural slope and vegetation should be incorporated in a manner which preserves the hillside characteristics. It is recognized that selective removal of natural vegetation is necessary to reduce the risk of wildfires. · Utility line installation should be designed to avoid the removal of natural vegetation where possible. On heavily vegetated lots where clearing is required, emphasis should be placed on removing smaller and diseased vegetation and sawng larger, healthier growth. · If decks are located close to trees, post and beam systems should be used rather than foundations, as this is far less destructive to the roots. · When siting a house for views, primary consideration should be given to the preservation of existing vegetation. The optimum coverage for a lot in terms of healthy trees, minimized fire hazard, ancJ maximum real estate value, is approximately :140 mature trees per acre, Tn the field, this has the appearance of a moderately forested lot with trees just touching each other. Vegetation Review Requirements The following review standards are to be used by the Zoning Office in evaluating the impact of house placement and construction upon existing vegetation: · Site plans should reflect any vegetation which is to be removed, replaced or relocated. All vegetation within 30' of the house perimeter and within the house structure should be shown n detail. Less detail is needed for vegetation beyond 30'. Show the anticipated location of utility service lines. When possible, these lines should be run under, or immediately adjacent to, the driveway location. Tf utilities are to be run on another part of the lot, the vegetation must be protected by using narrow trenches, laying lines to avoid significant trees and shrubs, and through other mitigation methods such as augering. Vegetation within 10' of the structure (with the exception of the deck area) may be removed if necessary to comply with the Fuels Management Ordinance. · No vegetation is to be removed within Preservation Areas except to comply with the Fuels Management Ordinance. 2? · Trees over 12" in diameter are considered irreplaceable and should not be removed from a lot unless there ~s no other location for the house. WHY SAVE SCRUB OAK? One of our most durable and hardy native shrubs, Gambel's Oak or Scrub Oak has evolved to nearly a perfect fit with the Colorado Spnngs environment. With a northern range limit around the Denver/Boulder area, Gambel's Oak is the predominate woody deciduous shrub of the Pikes Peak region. There are at least four forms of Scrub Oak that grow here naturally. These range from highly branched medium sized shrubs with extensive suckering to single stemmed trees of 30 feet or more. All forms tend to grow in thickets with intervening open areas. Scrub Oak is a slow growing shrub that does not take well to transplanting. Once established, however, the p~ant is a survivor. A deep and expansive root system is the key to Scrub Oak's success. A year old seedling may have no more that four leaves, but can have a 12" root. In the winter, the water absorbing portion of the roots are shed and all cell activities cease. As a result, no energy or moisture is lost to the soil. This, however, leads to an intolerance of excess moisture in the dormant seasons. In the spring time, Scrub Oak is one of the few plants that initiates new growth before it leafs out. This is one way that the Oak survives late Spring freezes while other less robust plants may die. Fall is the period for reproduction and preparation for the winter. While the Scrub Oak's acorns normally provide food for a wealth of animals and insects, in certain years the acorn production may be turned completely off. As a result, dependent animal populations go hungry and neighboring subdivisions see an influx of bears and other animals searching for alternate food sources. The year following a shutdown is usually an acorn bonanza, l'n this way the Scrub Oak plants insure that there will be plenty of acorns for reproduction and not as many consumers to eat them. The thicket growth nature appears to benefit Gambel's Oak in several ways. First, when the leaves fall during late autumn, they tend to be captured around the base of the Scrub Oak. This creates a natura mulch which leads to water retention and improved soils. In the winter, the thickets act as snow fences, capturing the snow which blows off the grassy gaps between stands. In effect, the Scrub Oak is harvesting the moisture from the snow For a Iow maintenance, self-sustaining landscape plant, Scrub Oak is hard to beat. It offers free shelter and food for wildlife and it provides a natural privacy screen for the house. At $30 or more for a new five gallon container, the Scrub Oak that you save can add up to thousands of dollars in landscaping not needed. And as can be appreciated by anyone who has ever endured the months it take to build a ~new.., home, with Scrub Oak, your landscape is already n. 28 Architectural Features While there s no one style that defines Colorado Springs, there are many building elements that make sense ~n the hillsides from both an aesthetic and a practical perspective. Quality design in a home makes it not only more livable, safer and attractive, it can add greatly to the expected resale value. Even though there are few architectural features that are required by the Hillside Ordinance, there are many aspects of home design which are greatly encouraged. A positive style element can make the difference in changing a borderline denial into an approved plan. If, for example, a home is placed out on a ridge further than necessity requires, a ow profile design with a highly articulated roof line might make the difference in getting the plan permitted. Although it is not the intent of the City to regulate individual tastes, it is ultimately impossible to se parate a homes design from the characteristics of the lot on which it is located. Design Objectives - Architectural The following architectural objectives are encouraged when designing a home for the hillside areas. Mass/Heioht - Homes should not appear overly prominent or obtrusive as seen from the street, neighboring properties or off-site. One story houses are encouraged, pa rticularly homes which are placed close to the street or which have locations which are highly visible from off-site vantage points. Use of Natural ADDearina Materials - The following building materials are encouraged; unpainted wood siding, exposed wood structural members, logs, bricks, stucco, and natural stone masonry. Roof shingles or tiles should consist of natural colored metals, class C or better wood shakes, concrete, fiberglass, asphalt or clay. For all of these materials, dark or earthtone colors are encouraged. [fa hillside home is to blend in to the site, it should limit the use of large expanses of glass, exterior plastic, vinyl siding or any reflective or shiny materials. Color - Color schemes for the both the building and roof should blend in with the natura landscape of earth toned soils, bedrock, and natural woodland, brush, and grassland vegetative growth. High contrast or bright colors should be avoided. White or other similarly bright colored homes can be seen from Ffl~ny miles off site and can make a house appeat'.m.uch larger or bulkier than it really ~s. Buildina Form - Building form should be planned to enhance to the site's natural features. The form, mass, profile, and architectural features of the structure should be designed to blend with the natural terrain and preserve the undulating profile of the hillside. Positive ratings are offered for avoidance of multi-story structures on ridgelines and on all sites lower profile homes are encouraged. Split level designs and stepped foundations which mirror the slope of a hillside are encouraged. Structures should be cut into the hillside to reduce visual bulk by being fully or partially below grade. 29 Long unbroken roof lines should be avoided. Instead, roofs should be broken into smaller components to reflect the irregular natural hillside patterns. The roof should be oriented in the same direction of the slope contour and large gable ends on downhill elevations and excessive cantilevers or overhangs should be avoided. Use varied and contrasting horizontal and vertical building planes to create various light, shade, and shadow patterns, Avoid large single form structures, Avoid large expanses of ~ wall in a s~ngle plane on downhill elevations. Detached parts of dwelling, such as the garage, are encouraged, when appropriate. Avoid using overhanging decks or decks elevated on poles. 30 Construction Practices The best possible landscaping plan for a hillside house is the one that was there before the house was built. Typically, when a homeowner moves into a newly constructed home, one of the first things to do is to start landscaping. This job can cost many thousands of dollars and requires years of growth and maintenance to bring the yard to maturity. Even when finished, the new landscaping may never be as well suited for the local environment as the indigenous trees and shrubs. It makes sense, therefore, for the City, developers, builders and homeowners to work to save as much of the initial site as they can. "A study by the U,S. Forestry Department showed that well placed trees can increase the value of a house by as much as 20o/0." From Good Design Pays, Grant W. Reid, ASLA Colorado Green, Winter 1995, vol. No. 4 Saving vegetation on a site takes more than bulldozing around a tree rather than through it. Assuming that the house desig nor and builder have incorporated the themes expressed in this manual, a plan will have been developed where the house fits the site and the surrounding vegetation will have been preserved. Now it is time to put all of the planning into action. The greatest disturbance to a site occurs during grubbing, excavation and home construction. A little extra care during this period will make the difference between a house that appears to belong on a lot and one that seems as if it were merely dropped from the sky. Building with Care The probability that existing trees and shrubs will survive in the face of construction project will be the highest if they are eft alone. This means keeping equipment, grading activity, dirt and materials away from the vegetation to be saved. The general contractor should inform the subcontractors of the note regarding the importance of saving vegetation. On some sites contractors have imposed fines for destroying vegetation that was supposed to be saved. Following are construction practices that should be followed at every job site. · Before grubbing or clearing a lot, the area to be preserved should be marked with ribbons or roped off for protection. Snow fencing should be placed around trees a distance equal to the size of the individual tree's drip zone, This area can be calculated by measuring the diameter of the tree at breast height. Each inch of diameter is equal to one foot of drip zone. For instance, a :~2" diameter tree will require a :t2' wide drip zone. Nothing should be allowed within this area, Avoid compacting the soil over a trees root zone. By driving or paving over roots the tree can be suffocated as it looses crucial air spaces in the soil. A tree is most vulnerable to compacted soils during soil drying periods, usually a day or two after heavy rain or irrigation. · If it is necessary to fill over the root zone, compacted soils can be avoided by sandwiching fabric, rocks and more fabric under the area to be filled. · Fill placed directly on the roots may not exceed a maximum of 6" in depth. If fill creates a tree well or depression around a tree or shrubs, this a rea needs to be drained so that the vegetation is not drowned by the pooling of rainfall or irrigation. If a tree's roots must be cut, the branches should be trimmed by an amount equal to the percent of roots that were lost. Roots should be prune~J cleanly prior to digging and not ripped off by heavy equipment. Cutting more than 30% of the roots endangers the health of the tree, and over 40% affects the tree's stability. · Utility trenches near trees should be avoided. If a line must be close to a tree, tunneling or augering should be used. · It is better to tie branches back from a house in order to erect scaffolding than it is to cut them. · Broken branches and trunk scrapes should be repaired promptly. Do not clean or dispose of paints, thinners, concrete or any other chemicals near trees. Spread heavy tarps over roots if sheetrock is to be cut or concrete is to be mixed in the area. These materials can change the pH of the soil, weakening or even killing the tree. 32 Final Landscaping Bluegrass lawns are expensive. They consume your time in maintenance, they have adverse impacts on the environment and they are expensive to water. In Colorado Springs we put 70% of our summer water on our landscaping and we use ten times as many pesticides and herbicides per acre as we do for farm]and. The fact is, we live in a semi-arid climate. Although we naturally receive an average rainfall of 15" of each year, we put two or three times that much on our lawns. Running a gasoline-powered lawn mower for an hour emits the same amount of air pollution as driving a car for 350 miles. In some places, sodded lawns make sense. No one would begrudge homeowners the use of small areas of grass. However, it is only sensible to landscape as much of our yards as possible with plants that have ower water needs. The good news is that there are a great many alternative water consuming plants to choose from. Designing with Nature A landscape plan for a hillside home does not have to be a complicated undertaking. Residential landscape planning can be done by anyone from horticulturists to novices who simply have the desire to work in the yard. The tools are simple and the costs of the plants and raw materials are within the reach of everyone. It is important to keep in mind that a homes landscape will evolve over years and it is not necessary to complete the entire project in the first summer. There are essentially three steps to a healthy yard; planning, preparing and planting. The first step is, perhaps, the most important. The time spent on preparing a good hillside landscape plan will pay off for years to come and in the resale value of the home. Colorado Springs has a natural environment that is tough on plants. With limited rain, unrelenting high altitude sunshine and strong seasonal changes, many plant types that work well in other areas of the country become a maintenance nuisance or even die if planted here. Plants should be selected carefully to ensure that they can survive with minimal water and maintenance cnce established. Soils preparation and planting are when you take your good ideas and make them work. Planning Any good plan needs to be written down. On a piece of graph paper or any scaled plan which shows the location of the house you should start by defining where things are. Chart the location of the existing vegetation and note the environmental factors or stresses which allowed these plants to live there. Consider the amount of sunshine exposure which is received in a given location and highlight areas which receive the bulk of the drainage. Indicate any other microclimate factors that will affect the types of plants to be selected. On this plan, show areas that you might have a special interest in adding your own individual touches. You might, for instance, wish to plant an everg teen tree to offer privacy in front of a bathroom window or perhaps you want to establish an informal flower garden. This is the time to set the 33 landscaping tone for the life of the house. In developing your plan k~ep the following factors in mind: Sizinc~ - Plants have widely differing growth rates and ultimate spread size. On your plan you should draw plant types at their mature size. Try not to overly bunch trees or they will end up competing with each other for water and sunshine. While sc me trees such as Aspen and Douglas Fir like company, others such as Ponderosa Pines need room to expand. Place trees far enough away from the house so that at their full size they will not create a fire hazard or make the house appear imposed upon, Water - You should strive to use plants that have the same water needs as those which grow naturally in the area. In most cases this means using Iow water plants or xeriscaping. There are a wide variety of Iow water plants available which have the same attributes of their thirstier cousins, but come with far fewer problems. A listing of Iow water trees, shrubs, perennials and other vegetation which thrives in the Colorado Springs environment is ncluded in Appendix F. of this manual. Irriqation - If an irrigation system is to be used, it should be planned to provide zone watering or differing areas of intensity depending on the needs of the located there. Group plants with like water needs together. Heavier irrigation, for instance, might be needed in turf areas, while a Iow output bubble system might work for flowering shrubs. Certain types of plants, such as pre-existing Scrub Oak, need no supplemental water. Sun - Plants have individualized sunshine requirements. Your local plant nursery can help you to select the best types of vegetation for the given conditions. Direct sun tends to dry out exposed soils through evaporation and increased heat. A vegetative covering in these areas will keep more moisture in the soil. In addition, trees and large shrubs can be located so that they work as a home energy saving system. Deciduous trees growing in front of south facing windows will block the hot summer sun with their leaves. Tn the winter, however, the suns rays will be able to pass the leafless trees and will warm the house. Slope - Sloped areas tend to lose water by increased run-off. Tn these areas, it may make sense to plant ground covers which are especially good at holding soils together and which have reduced water needs. Another option is to install a natural rock garden. Compatibility - The overall objective of the plan should be to concentrate plants with similar needs in areas where the optimum conditions exist. If you are going to irrigate a small area of lawn, then this is not a good location for Pinon Pine trees. The two plant types have greatly different water requirements and constant sprinklering may cause the Pinon's roots to rot. Keep plants with similar water needs together and those with unlike needs apart. Plants can also be compatible in the way they work together. Certain perennials work well in the shady understories of trees where they are protected from the direct sun and wind. In return, these plants help keep the ground around the trees roots from drying out. 34 Preparation There are two essential tasks that need to be completed in order to prepare bare ground for planting. You should shape the surface and amend the soils to consist of a high level of organic material. The first step, shaping, is the final procedure in your overall grading plan. Keeping in mind the points covered previously in this manual, your final grading should be done with an eye toward protecting the existing vegetation. Shaping the previously disturbed areas, however, is a necessary step ~n finalizing the fit of the house on the site, A lot should be shaped to achieve the following: · Do not disturb any areas other than those already impacted by excavation and house construction. · Hand groom excessive (over 6") accumulated soils off the roots of Scrub Oak or trees. Finalize the lot drainage so that water is carried away from the house foundation. Water which is allowed to permeate downward along the foundation can affect the sub-surface soil conditions, possibly leading to damage of your home. · Round sharp edges of cuts and fills so that the area to be planted will easily blend into the surrounding terrain. · Provide depressions and catch basins so that snow and rainwater can percolate into the ground rather than run-off unimpeded. Design swales to run across flatter areas (between 2% and 6% grade) rather than down ste6 p pitches.,This slows the velocity of the drainage and increases the amount of water filtered into the g round. · Direct roof and hard surface runoff into catch basins. · Tnstall an in-ground water cistern. Provide outlet holes to allow leeching of the collected water into the surrounding ground. The next step in preparing for planting is to amend the soils. This takes place in several forms; modifying the structure, augmenting with organic additives, and mulching. Some considerations in taking these approaches are as follow: Sandy soils easily lose moisture and should have a layer of topsoil and composted manure thoroughly mixed into the top 6" of natural soil. This encourages deep root growth and reduces the need for constant watering. A soil heavy in clay lacks air spaces and should be amended with coarser sands and organic materials. The ideal mix has as much as 50% pore spaces and a soil balanced with sand, silt, and clay. · Organic composts can be made of grass clippings, kitchen wastes (organic materials only), leaves, manure, peat, pine needles, sawdust and straw. This 35 corn post material can be turned into the soils at any stage of a yards development. A top layer of wood or bark mulch can be spread in landscaped areas to improve the water retention and to add additional organic material to the soil. Mulches should be between 3" and 6" deep to inhibit weed growth. In general, mulches should be applied soon after planting to encourage better root growth and to delay late season damage due to freezing. · Use fabrics which allow water and air infiltration instead of plastic under mulches. Plastic is impervious to water. Avoid rock mulches. These offer no organic supplements, are not as effective in preventing weed growth, and generate unhealthy levels of heat to your plants. Perha ps most importantly, rocks make it nearly impossible to remove weeds. Planting The final step, planting, may go on for years. It is better to take time in selecting the most appropriate plants for a site than it is to provide an instant landscape cover. The central idea when planting in the hillsides is to develop a Iow maintenance, ]ow water requiring vegetative cover. Once the major themes such as screening or wildflower gardens have been established, the homeowner can concentrate on infill planting and maintenance. A free street tree may be available for your new home through the City Forestry Office. For more information call 578-6698. General maintenance of a xeriscaped yard is far simpler than for bluegrass sod. Trees and shrubs can be trimmed for optimum growth and shape, and occasional fertilizing and weeding is needed. For the most part, however, xeriscaping takes very. Iow maintenance. In some areas such as wildflower gardens, no weeding is needed. Although any plant needs an initial season or two of watering to get established, once they take, the supplemental water needs drop drastically. The possibilities are endless when landscaping a home in the hillside. There are plants that encourage wildlife, and plants which offer an abundance of year round color. Some plantings are done to create privacy while others are intended to highlight the architecture of the home. With some imagination, planning and a shovel, it is possible to create a house that I fits the hillsides. For further information regarding the selection, care and maintenance of your landsca ping, you can contact the following: · Colorado Department of Agriculture Division of Plant ]Industry. Pesticide laws and information. (303) 239-4:~40. · Colorado Nurseryman's' Association. Publishes the Rocky Mountain Plant Guide which is available at most local nurseries. · Colorado Springs Parks and Recreation Forestry Division. 578-6698. · Colorado State Forest Service. Specializes in trees and shrubs. 36 · Colorado State University Cooperative Extension. 636-8920. · El Paso County Extension Service. 520-6450 · El Paso County Parks, 520-6375. · U.S. Forest Service. Pikes Peal( Ranger District. 636-1602. · Xeriscape Task Force and the City Water Resources Department. 448-8717, 37 Living with Wildlife When we put a house in the hillside, we are building in natures back yard. The deer, rabbits, squirrels and birds inhabited the forests and fields long before homes and residential neighborhoods showed up. Animals do not recog nize property boundaries. They live where there is habitat, food and water. Normally these are provided for by nature. When subdivisions are built where the woods once were, the animals will conti hue to live near by. [f the necessities for life are provided around our houses, wild animals and people will intermingle. This creates a conflict and an opportunity. The conflict arises because humans and wild animals do not necessarily make good neighbors. Tf pets and their food are left outside., these might prove to be an irresistible attraction to hungry bears or mountain lions. Bears will eat nearly anything including garbage, pet food and seeds and suet from bird feeders. Mountain lions and coyotes have been know to kill pets, and in rare instances, attack small children. If wildlife is being fed by homeowners, either by purposely or inadvertently leaving out pet food, the animals become attracted to our homes. Once animals lose their natural tendency to avoid people, a dangerous situation is created. Ways to prevent potentially dangerous interactions are as follow: Do not feed or keep your pets outside. At night time in particular, pets are subject to attacks by mountain lions, coyotes and foxes. Dogs which run wild may pack together and kill deer. · Clean the grease off BBQ grills and store them inside. · Hang bird feeders and suet between trees rather than off decks. A bear will climb on a deck or tear it down to get to this tasty snack. · Keep garbage cans out of the reach of animals and periodically clean them. Do not feed deer or other wildlife. Not only is deer feeding illegal in Colorado, but cteer coming up to your house may draw mountain lions. · Be aware that some types of plantings are more attractive to animals than others. Fruit trees and certain junipers may end up as deer food. Many animals such as skunks, raccoons and prairie dogs which are cute in the wild become pests when they move into your attic or window wells. For further information dealing with unwanted wildlife contact Division of Wildlife at 473-2945. By living in the hillsides, it is possible to observe animals in their natural state. Residential developments in Colorado Springs are planned to preserve animal migration corridors along heavily forested areas and drainage ways. These connections allow deer and other animals to travel relatively undisturbed from one forest stand to another and to protect the quality of our waterways and environment. Since we are in a sense inviting wild animals into our communities, however, it is doubly important that we observe the safety precautions noted above. Once we have 38 accepted the fact that man and nature can live side by side, there are many things we can do to make this condition more enjoyable. Learn more about the local wildlife by reading about it or visiting with any of the numerous local information agencies such as the Colorado Springs Parks and Recreation Department or the local Division of Wildlife office. Attract birds by providing bird houses, feeders and water. · Plant grasses, shrubs and trees which provide food and shelter for birds and small animals. Tf you see deer or other large animals in residential areas, leave them alone unless there is an immediate threat to your safety. Tranquilizing or capturing animals can be ife threatening to the animal. Even if the animal is not immediately affected, the Division of Wildlife has adopted a policy that any bear trapped more than once gets destroyed. In most situations, large animals will move away from people and houses if left alone. Watch and enjoy Through quite observation, it is ~ossible to find animals in any type of ecosystem whether it is a field or the woods. You can 'ncrease your chances of seeing wildlife by watching at dusk and dawn. Wildlife is most numerous along the forest's edges. Where Scrub Oak changes to grasses, and shrubs give way to trees, these are the places where the most animal interactions can be seen. 39 Wildfire Risk Management OVERVIEW Wildfire risk reduction techniques include monitored smoke alarm systems, sprinkler systems, fire resistant roofing materials which are rated Class C or higher, and fuels management measures. The City of Colorado Springs has adopted amendments to the City's Hillside Overlay Zone and Fire Prevention Code relating to fire safety measures in the Hillside areas. Within the Hillside fuel management measures shall be utilized within the safety zone of applicable 0ew hor0§:.~onstructipn. Fuels management is defined as the modification of natural vegetation within the safety zone to protect structures from approaching wildfire, as well as to reduce the potential for structure fire from spreading to the wildland. The safety zone is defined as the area within thirty (30) feet of the main structure, not to extend beyond the property line. It is the City's desire to provide an environment safe from wildfire while maintaining the aesthetics qualities of the native hillside. CRZTERZA Using the following guidelines, roof materials, system requirements, and fuels management requirements shall be determined by the CSFD and City Zoning Administration for each individual lot, as part of the building permit approval process. The following measures are required. Fuels Management: All lots within the Hillside Overlay zone illustrated on development plans approved on or after April 1, 1993, shall be subject to the following fuels management requirements: Brush patches or clusters may be left in the safety zone, but shall be separated by clear areas of ten (10) feet or more of noncombustible materials or grass mown to not more than four (4) inches in height. No brush shall be allowed within ten (10) feet of the main structure. Exception: When approved by the Fire Chief, small brush patches, not exceeding one hundred (100) square feet and fifteen (15) lineal feet in any direction, may be allowed to intrude, if the structure has fire-resistant siding. Large trees shall not have overlapping limbs and shall be pruned of dead limbs to a height of ten (10) feet above the ground. Tree clusters may be allowed if sufficient clear area is provided. 4O · Tree branches shall not extend over or under the roof eaves and shall not be within fifteen (:[5) feet of a wood burning appliance chimney. Fire Protection Systems: A monitored smoke alarm system or a sprinkler system is required for any new hillside zoned home built after April 1, 1993, id located on a lot which lies beyond one-thousand (:[,000) feet along a cul-de-sac or if located on roadways with grades in excess of ten (:[0) percent if said roadways are the only vehicular points of access to the home. Roofing I~laterials: After ~lune 15, 1993, a minimum of a Class C roof covering shall be installed in all roofing and re-roofing applications for buildings located within the Hillside Overlay Zone. Exceptions to this requirement may be approved by the Fire Depa,rtment when -" specified Iow hazard area criteria are met. APPLICATZON TO NEW DEVELOPMENT Fuels management measures shall be utilized within the safety zone of new homes upon lots within the Hillside Overlay Zone illustrated on development plan approved on or after April :[, :[993. [n addition, effective April 1, 1993, all new subdivision plats and development plans for Hillside zoned projects shall include a statement of the requirement for fuels management, minimum Class C roofing, and, if applicable, smoke alarm or sprinkler systems. See Section E., Wildfire Risk Mitigation, of the Hillside Overlay Zone Ordinance, contained within Appendix A. for the specific develcpment plan and subdivision plat note language and statements. APPLICATZON TO EXISTING DEVELOPMENT Fuels management and fire protection systems are not required for homes built prior to April 1, :[993. However, all new roofing and reroofing applications must use Class C rated materials. COMPLI'ANCE In addition to the above criteria, the following shall be undertaken to insure compliance: The Development Services Department shall ensure that the notes, as required by Section E., Wildfire Risk Mitigation, of the Hillside Overlay Zone Ordinance are included on all applicable development plans and subdivision plats. The Zoning Administration office shall ensure that the proper notes are included on all applicable Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plans. In addition, the Zoning Office shall inform the applicant of the ~equired fuels.management measures for each individual lot at time of HSS/LGP review. The Zoning office will identify the structures requiring Class C roofing materials and fire protection system installation and mark the HSS/LGP plan accordingly. The Fire Department will review all applicable building plans for homes required to install fire protection systems. The Department will review all plans, determine system requirements and issue appropriate permits. The Regional Building Department will review all applicable plans for roofing and reroofing applications to insure that Class C materials will be used INSPECTIONS 41 The City Zoning Administration office will follow-up and conduct inspections to determine compliance with the fuels management requirements and other City Code provisions. Most sites will be visited twice after construction commences. The initial fuels management inspection will be scheduled to occur prior to the Regional Building Department's framing inspection. Tt shall be the responsibility of the builder to request the inspection. The primary propose of the initial inspection will be to determine compliance and to prescribe mitigation or remedial actions which can be taken, at an early stage, to correct necessary violations. A HSS/LGP plan ~nspection will occur at the same time. Required corrective actions will be forwarded to the applicant and compliance expected by final inspection. The final inspection will be scheduled to occur shortly after construction has been completed and prior to the Building Department's final inspection. Again, it shall be responsibility of the builder to request the inspection. The primary propose of the final inspection will be to a determination of compliance and the prescription of additional mitigation actions which may be necessary. A final HSS/LGP plan inspection will also occur at this time. For homes that require a monitoring smoke alarm system or a sprinkler system. The Colorado Springs Fire Department shall conduct inspections. A visual piping inspection must be secured through the Fire Department prior to the framing inspection. Final inspection and approval of the system must be secured through the Fire Department prior to final inspection by the Building Department and/or occupancy of the reside nce." EVALUATZON LETTER The City Zoning Administration Office will provide an evaluation letter to all applicants of hillside development. Tn addition to other information the letter will include ~ fuels management requirements compliance evaluation. See sample letter found in the Appendix G. 42 Grading & Removal of Native Vegetation From Developed Lots Whether you have built from scratch or whether you have purchased an already existing hillside home, there are certain rules which govern your ability to change the site. ]f you live In an area covered by the City's hillside overlay zone, City approval may have to be obtained before you build, cut vegetation or grade. The intent of the City's hillside ordinance is to preserve the natural characteristics that make the hillsides a special place. Before making any exterior changes to your home or site, you should address the following concerns: ~ All house or deck additions must be approved by the Zoning Administration Office prior to any work being done. As with new home construction, additions should be designed to save the existing vegetation and to minimize cuts and fills. A checklist describing the required plan submittal information can be obtained from the Zoning Office. ' Site changes such as retaining walls most be approved by the Zoning Administration Office. Such changes may be denied if they do not comply with the purpose and intent of the Hillside Ordinance. Retaining walls over four feet high must be designed by a licensed engineer and require a building permit. * Normal maintenance and treatment of your yard's landscape cover may be conducted without any City approvals. If, for example, a section of Scrub Oak has died, it is acceptable to trim back the dead plants in order reduce the fire hazard and to give the new growth room to grow. It is not acceptable to remove Scrub Oak or trees to increase the size of grass play areas. * Tf vegetation is removed from a yard in violation of the Hillside Ordinance, an enforcement case will be opened by the Zoning Administration office and penalties will be imposed upon the homeowner. Vegetation within ten feet of the home may be removed without City review if necessary to comply with fire safety procedures. 43 Appendix A - Copies of Hillside Overlay Zone Ordinances and Resolutions (A-CFACH SIGNED & CERTIFIED COPIES OF MS ORDINANCES & RESOLUTION) Appendix B - Hillside Height Phase-In Policy ( Phase in Period expired ]une, 1997. All Code provisions apply to hillside development proposals.]) Appendix C - Hillside Site ! Lot Grading Plan Checklist HILLSIDE SITE / LOT GRADING PLAN SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST This application form sets forth the content and format of a Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan. Plans will be complete when all of the ~pplicable information has been provided. An incomplete or incorrect submittal will cause a delay in review. All Plans shall be C fawn at the minimum scale of One inch is equal to Twenty feet (1" = 20') and minimum contour interval of two (2) feet. The contour information shall be based upon a survey or "FIMS" data and shall meet "National Map Accuracy Standards". Site Address: Applicant: Telephone: Applicant's Certification Statement: I, , as Applicant and duly representative of the owner, hereby certify that the ~formation included upon the attached Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan is true and accurate; and that the development of the site will occur in accordance with the Plan. Signature Date Approval Statement: The attached Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan has been reviewed by the City Zoning Administration office and finds that the plan is hereby: APPROVED, ann the Applicant is permitted to proceed to secure other required permits. APPROVED, SUB.1ECT TO the following conditions, and the Applicant is permitted to proceed to secure other required permits: DENIED, based upon the following reasons: 45 City Staff Date If you have questions please call the City Zoning Office at 578-6919. The Hillside Site ! Lot Grading Plan shall include the following information: APPI TCANT REVIEWER 1.) Property owner's name, address and telephone number; 2.) Applicant's name, address and telephone number; 3.) Land Planner's name, address and telephone number; 4.) Land Surveyor's name, address and telephone number: 5.) Indication of the scale (numeric and bar) (minimum acceptable scale is 1" = 20~; 6.) North arrow; 7.) Vicinity map; 8.) Legal description; 9.) A Legend, which includes the following required information; A.) Site address, B.) Project name, C. ) Tax schedule number, E.) Zoning district classification, F.) Development plan name and number, G.) Size of the area of property~ H.) Total square footage of all existing &, proposed structure's footprints, including percent of lot coverage 46 I.) Total square footage of all existing & proposed structures .1.) Calculated maximum height of all existing, proposed, and/or expanded structures, K.) The following applicable "Hillside Protection Notes": Note 1: No disturbance, grading or significant natural, features and vegetation removal will occur beyond the "Limit of Disturbance" line, as shown on this plan. Note 2: The "Limit of Disturbance" line shall be delineated during construction with flags, roping and/or 4' tall orange construction fencing. 10.) Property lines location and dimensions; The Hi!!side Site / Lot Grading Plan shall include the following informatiom APPLICANT REVIEWER :[:[.) All existing and proposed public and private easements, "no build" areas, common areas, and preservation areas, indicating their type, location and dimensions; :[2.) Distance of all existing, new, and/or expansions of structures, including retaining walls and fences, to property lines; 13.) Location and dimensions of predetermined building envelopes, as shown on the Hillside Development Plan, if applicable; :[4.) Location and dimensions of the area designated as the "Limit of Disturbance"; :[5.) Location, dimensions, type, height of existing & proposed structures; :[6.) Location, dimensions, type, height, of all existing and proposed retaining walls; 17.) Location, grade, surface, curb cut, and size of driveway(s); :[8.) Location, name, and size of all adjacent street and alley right-of-ways; 19.) Location and extent of all existing and proposed sidewalk, walkway, street and alley improvements to center line, including: paved surfaces, curb and gutter, curb cuts and ramps, and other improvements; 20.) Location and type of all ~rivate proposed utility service lines, including: water, sewer, electricity, gas, telephone and catv; 2:[.) Location and type of all existing public utilities, including: water, sewer, electricity, gas, telephone and catv equipment and systems; 22.) Location, type, and general information regarding existing and proposed drainage patterns, and the improvements and methods to be used to channel flows into the public system; 23.) Indicate existing building graoe and proposed finished grade topography at a minimum of two (2) feet contour intervals, locate an existing permanent fixed benchmark and a visual foundation benchmark with elevations identified; 24.) Illustrate the building and finished grade adjacent to each of the major corners. 25.) Indicate the location, size, and type of all existing significant natural features, including: excessive slopes of 25% or greater, ridgelines, bluffs, rOCK formations, vegetation; natural 4? streams and drainageways, and limiting natural and geologic condition; 26.) Indicate all proposed significant natural features that will be protected during construction, preserved after construction, and all of the natural features that will be removed; The Hillside Site/ Lot Grading Plan shall include the following information: APPLICANT REVTEWER 27.) Indicate the location, size, and type of all proposed new landscaping; 28.) Indicate the temporary and permanent methods to be used to stabilize and prevent the erosion of soils; 29.) Indicate the area in which all equipment and material, including soil, will be stored and stockpiled; 30.) For Plan amendments, clearly delineate and indicate the area proposed for amendment by highlighting and/or outlining the changes. A Hillside Building Elevation Drawing shall be attached as part of the Plan and shall contain the following nformation: AppI TCANT REVIEWER :1.) The structure's front, rear, right, and left side profiles shall be shown. The preferred drawing scale should be :1/4 inch is equal to one foot. 2.) Tdentify the major corners on each side profile. From the site plan transfer, mark, and record the elevation where the structure intersects the building grade surface. 3.) Show the building (existing)grade and finished grades for each side profile with a horizontal line. 4.) From the major corners building grade intersection mark, measure vertically thirty-five (35) for a sloped roof or thirty (30) scaled feet for a flat roof and identify and mark the maximum hillside building height. Connect the maximum hillside building height control points for each side profile with a horizontal line. Applicant's additional information, notes, and comments: 48 49 Appendix D - Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan Checklist for Decks, Additions, Vegetation or Grading Modifications HILLSIDE SITE/LOT GRADING PLAN SUBMI]-I-AL CHECKLIST FOR DECKS, SMALL ADDITIONS, VEGETATION OR GRADING MODIFICAT[ONS This application form sets forth the content and format of a Hillside Site/Lot Grading Plan. Plans will be comptete when all of the applicable information has been provided. An incomplete or incorrect submittal will cause a delay in review. All Plans shall be drawn at the minimum scale of One inch is equal to Twenty feet (1" = 20') and minimum contour interval of two (2) feet. The contour information shall be based upon survey or "FINS" data and shall meet "National Map Accuracy Standards". Site Address: Applicant: Telephone: Applicant's Certification Statement: I, , as Applicant and duly representative of the owner, hereby certify that the information included upon the attached Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan is true and accurate; and that the development of the site will occur in accordance with the Plan. Signature Date Approval Statement: The attached Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan has been reviewed by the City Zoning Administration office and finds that the plan is hereby: APPROVED, and the Applicant is permitted to proceed to secure other required permits. APPROVED, SUBJECT TO the following conditions, and the Applicant is permitted to proceed to secure other required permits: DENIED, based upon the following reasons: 50 City Staff Date If you have questions please call the City Zoning Office at 578-69:19. The Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan shall include the following information; APPLICANT REVIEWER 1.) Property owner's name, address and telephone number} 2.) Applicant's name, address and telephone number~ 3) Indication of the scale (numeric and bar) (minimum acceptable scale is :1" = 20')i 4.) North arrowl 5.) Legal descriptionl 6.) A Legend, which includes the following required information; A.) Site address, B.) Project name, C.) Tax schedule number, E.) Zoning district classification, F.) Development plan name and number, G.) Size of the area of property, H.) Total square footage of all existing & proposed structure's footprints, including percent of lot coverage I.) Total square footage of all existing & proposed structures .1.) Calculated maximum height of all existing, proposed, and/or expanded structures, K.) The following applicable "Hillside Protection Notes": Note :L: No disturbance, grading or significant natura, features and vegetation removal will occur beyona the "Limit of Disturbance" line, as shown on this plan. Note 2: The "Limit of Disturbance" line shall be delineated during construction with flags, roping and/or 4' tall orange construction fencing. 7.) Property lines location and dimensions; 8.) All existing and proposed public and private easements, "no build" areas, common areas, and preservation areas, indicating their type, location and dimensions; 9.) Distance of all existing, new, and/or expansions of structures, ~cluding retaining walls and fences, to property lines; 10.) Location and dimensions of predetermined building envelopes, as shown on the Hillside Development Plan, if applicable; 11.) Location, dimensions, type, height of existing & proposed structures; The Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan shall include the following information: APPLICANT REVIEWER 12.) Location and dimensions of the area designated as the "Limit of Disturbance"; 13.) Illustrate the building and finished grade adjacent to each of the major corners. 14.) Indicate the location, size, and type of all existing significant natural features, including: excessive slopes of 25% or greater, ridgelines, bluffs, rock formations, vegetation; natural streams and drainageways, and limiting natural and geologic condition; 15.) Indicate al proposed significant natural features that will be protected during construction, preserved after construction, and all of the natural features that will be removed; 16.) For Plan amendments, clearly delineate and indicate the area proposed for amendment by highlighting and/or outlining the changes. A Hillside Building Elevation Drawing shall be attached as part of the Plan and shall contain the following information: APPLICANT REVIEWER 1.) The structure's front, rear, right, and left side profiles shal! be shown..The preferred drawing scale should be 1/4 inch is equal to one foot. 2.) Identify the major corners on each side profile. From the site plan transfer, mark, and record the elevation where the structure intersects the building grade surface. 3.) Show the building (existing)grade and finished grades for each side profile with a horizontal line. 4.) From the ma]or corners building grade intersection mark, measure vertically thirty-five (35) for a sloped roof or thirty (301 scaled feet for a fiat roof and identify and mark the maximum hillside building height. Connect the maximum hillside building height control points for each side profile with a horizontal line. Applicant's additional information, notes, and comments: 53 Appendix E - Site Inventory Feature Checklist SZTEZNVENTORY CHECKLZST REMARKS Elevation L~ POint ........ Slope Orientation Solar Radiation Wind Dire~ion 54 Slope Orientation Unique Features VEGETATe[ON Extent Buffering Erosion Control .SI0p~ Stabi!i~.ti0n Fuels Ma nagem~nt~~~I Unique Species Value Unique Species SZTE ZNVENTORY CHECKLZST REHARKS SENSZTZVE & SZGNZFZCANT LANDS Scenic Vistas Landforms .................................................................................. Surface Waters Eco-Systems Umque Features Hazards Landform Location Su.ace Materials Depth to Bedrock ~nique ~eatur~ Hazards ~DROLO~ Su~ace Waters Drainage Patterns Aquifer Recharge Floodplain ............. Hazards Types Characteristics E os,o Depth to Water Table Limitations Unique Features Hazards S3[TE LNVENTORY CHECKLI'ST REMARKS Streets Fire Protection 5'7 _e_erhone Catv Tele-Communication ACCESS Driveway Utilities ~ND USE Proposed Vicinity Compatibility Controversy OTHER FEATURES 55 Appendix F - Suggested Landscape Selections for Hillside Areas (Grasses & Ground Cover) evergreen shrubs and groundcovers Creeping Mahonia D Z AKA Oregon Grape Holly Bar Harbor .luniper Blue Chip .luniper Blue creeping Juniper Buffalo ]uniper Common : Moantain .~uniper D D - ~ 6"-12" i Hard to establish, · reddish in winter }r 6"-8" ] SOftn summerblUe foliage [ 8"-10" Blue slate foliage D i I 18"- :: Spreading or ....... i ................ t 24" mounde? f~[m D D 12"- : True spreader, 18" ; bright olive green !o!iage Native Iow spreading juniper iL 18" in winter Tammy .luniper D Hugo Pine '[ D - Hardy, dense, soft dark green ][ ~ foliage Penstemon, P ne- ' D leaf : varies Mushroom shaped, large shrub or small tree Pink orange or red flowers Vivid dark blue flowers, bluish green foliage Penstemon, D Needle-leaf 59 Iow water 1 :i dec:duous i i ~ shrubs ~:t i !I ii Barberry, Korean 1 ~L J~ thorny Buffaolberry, D 18-12 ! 6-8 Silver Cherry, Nanking D Z ! i 8'-20' Cherry, Sand [DZFG i4-5 [3- DFG Currant Cotoneaster D Z F G Ii vanes / vanes Currant, Alpine D Z I 5 ! 3 Elderberry, Blue 6'-10' '-15' { ' D ;3 4 Gooseberry, Slender ............................ L ............ -JL ......... J .............. - Lilac (Common, D Z F ~ 10' 15' Late, Persia ) Maple, Rocky ' D i 10' 20' Mountain ~ ':: Need male and female for fruit Crimson fall color Hardy, edible fruit. Can be trained as a tree Native, edible fruit, likes sandy Native, loose shape Good choice,' ~;. many varieties ', Dark glossy green ¢~ Hardy, edible fru it Erect hab t, Hulch delays bloom Multi-stemmed, good color Mahogany Ninebark [ Peashrub 15' 10' Hardy upright 4 6 Fall color, I shedding bark varies ; varies : Upright habit, , ;vew hardy, small 6O Potent a D Z F G ~ varies I varies Many varieties. '; I Yellow and white t blooms Privet New Mexico D 8 '- 10 8'-10' Native, very Iow i water, early ] bloom Rabbit Brush 3' :t 4' Many varieties, it ......... blue color Rose, Austrian Copper DFG D Rose, Shrub D Z F G Rose, Native D Fender Serviceberry D Spirea, Blue Mist : D Sumac, Cut Leaf D 4' ~ 5' t red and ; i yellow flowers 3' I 5' Long bloom time, native ~ 5' 15' Good choice, I berries 2' Late summer blue flowers. Cut back in Fall 6' 8' Does well in poor soil [ ' ' ~[ Glossy dark green Sumac, Smooth D I1 4'-6' i 3-$ Dwarf i ;] t leaves turn red in ~ fall ...............................Sumac, Three I D Z 15'i 116, iI Native spreader Leaf gro~d c°_v~rs. ~ · Ajuga, Carpet :ID .ug,e t I ...... t Better ,n shade, Flowers tBorder Jewel, D '~ ? 6"-8" t Good in dry areas Himalayan I . .................. Creeping Baby's ii D ~ 3"-6" F owers, will form Breath I I thick carpet Creeping I D 1"-2" Blue purple Penstemon , bloom early 6! Creeping Phlox ' D ..... Creeping Potentilla 1" summer Hardy Tce Plant ;t D i I :t"-2" L !L ....................!L_ Hens and Chicks D Z 2"-4" Moss like foliage. ~ a _r !Y b_! ~)_°;rn ,..,, Aggressive, direct sun, yellow flowers ~ i/6%12" Vinelike, prefers Hall's Honeysuckle D ,i shade Reddish winter color Will grow in poor soil Kinnickinnick D ii ,, 4 -6 Hard to establish, ,' use with Moneywort ' D i I 1"-2" Yellow Spring ~,~ '~i. it flowers ;~ ii 2"-6" Good year round Periwinkle i D ] ; plant. Blue or white flowers 4"-6" Jl Pussytoes D Snow in Summer I D Z 4'-5' 6"-12" Native. Good on rocky slopes Sedum (Dragons D Z Blood, Goldmoss, Oak-leaf, etc.) Snow On The :I* D Mountain Strawberry, Barren Strawberry, Mock D Z Popular choice, comes in many forms Hardy, woolly silver foliage, white flowers in May Aggressive. Green and white foliage 4"-6" Fru t ess, turns bronze in spring 2"-6" Ag.g ressive, for_ms ¸62 Thyme, Common Thyme, Creeping I-2"-6" Native, edible tart ~ fruit 7[ 4"-6" Vigorous, adaptable, fragrant foliage Small pink flowers in early spring Thyme, Woolly i D Veronia, ~![g Speedwell i, Wall Ge rmander -~ Iow water pere_n~ials Asters (Dwarf D ii 3'-4' Alpine, New England) 1/2" Good around stepping stones varies A diverse group with blue or pink blooms_ ................... Mounding, dark green leaves and pink flowers 4"-6" i ~[~ressive, good [ for drY shade 4"-8" Fernlike, mildly invasive 18" Prefer sun. Mostly blues, pinks and purples Blanket Flower D 3'-4' 3'-4' Native with orange red flowers. Tends to spread Butterfly Weed D 4' 3' / Orange flowers :i t attract butterflies :i D Z ~ 1' ' 1'-2' Colorado State Columbines ~ Flower Coneflower, "D F G 2'-3' 4' Native upright Purple with purple 63 Coreopsis, Lance D Ii 1'-2' 1'-3' Dependable i~ it native with yellow ! flowers Coreopsis, D il 2' 2 1/2' i Native upright Threadleaf ii i !! with yellow Daisies, Shasta D Z '~ :~' I 1'-2' :~ White with yellow i ! center, goof for ;i~ ~ cuttings Daylily D Hardy clumps ~'! ~j with many colors ~ ' 2 1/2' Yellow flowers. Fernlleaf Yarrow D Z ? 2 ~ It Can be invasive Flax, Blue D Z i 18" 2' White and dwarf i varieties available Fleabane D ~i 4' ~ 3' ' ..... pink and violet i I l flowers ;~ Gayfeather D , 18" 2' Spiked with purple blooms Iris (Bearded, D Z Dwarf, Siberian) iIMalteseCross ] D Pearly Everlasting ~ D 2" Native with blue flowers. Good in rocky areas 6" j Wide mounds of / red purple flowers -i [ 3' 2' Good cu~ings plant. Iqany ;L colors 18" t 2'-3' ::j" Tntense red color 4' 2 1/2' I Late white bloom. Good in dry areas Penstemon, Elfin D Z F G 2' I 2' ink flowers Pink Penstemon, ' D Z F G i 1' 1' ~[ Shrubby with red Pineleaf Penstemon, Rocky t D Z F G 2 :L/2' 3' Hardy with purple 64 :t Mountain Peony Polish Bell Flower 3' ', 3'-4' Old standby with many colors :~' 6" Drought Tolerant. Red purple flowers · ' ! 6" Orange flowers. 3 -4 I Can be invasive 2' Red purple flowers. Can spread varies varies Poppies, California Poppy Mallow D vines Clematis, Sweet Autumn Clematis, Western Clematis, Yellow Clematis, Yellow Lantern Ha's Honeysuckle Beautiful early season blooms Silver Lace Vine D Aromatic white flowers in late summer or fa bright green foliage, fragrant D Native, aggressive with bright green leaves Dense mass with lantern shaped flowers : A~romatic trumpet like flowers Aggressive, very hardy Shrubby, coarse f'oliage Trumpet Vine D Virginia D Z One of the best. Dense foliage, Creeper/Engleman ................. 65 Wintercreeper D Greenleaf ' Wintercreeper, D Purpleleaf ornamental grasses Blue Avena Grass D 2'-3' 2'-3' Bluestem, Big -[DFG i 3'-4' Bluestem, Little D F G Ii 12"- Feather Reed ~t~ D ~ 18"- Grass 'l' ~ 24" Fescue, B ue D F G i!8"-12" ': Fountain Grass, :D J 12"- 12"- · Dwarf ~'18" Grass Maiden Grass ~[ D 8"-12" Leaves turn bronze Powdery blue 3'-4' Native. Fuzzy seed heads 18"- One of the best. 24" Use on slopes Dramatic upright clump Blue-gray leaves Dense tuft of narrow arching leaves Wide blades are blood red on upper portion Many cultivars with different forms and colors Silver-white plumes above bright green foliage 24" 12"- 12"- 18" 18" 2'-3' 4'-5' 2'-3' 6'-10' 18"- ! 2'-4' :[ Stately fountain- 24" like columns L grasses Buffalograss D F G i Native shortgrass. How at 3" height '[ Use treated seed. 66 - Use below 6000' elevations lr Will form a sod if Crested D F G !i Wheatgrass seeded heavily and mowed occasionally Streambank D F G The name aside, Wheatgrass ~ this grass prefers ~ dry sany soils Thickspike ! D F Wheatgrass ii soil. Mow ,. periodically at 3" :t Mow periodically at 3" height Wheatgrass Appendix F - Suggested Landscape Selections for Hillside Areas (Trees) features spread height name Ash, Green D Z i 30 _ ' !l 50 Seedless var. many Ash, ,i 40' 50' Marshall's ! __._..__ i Ash, Patmore liD 40' ii 50' Ash, Summit ! D 30" 50' Ash, White 30" I Cottonwood, !IFG 40' Northwest i 40' American 50' Autumn Purple Ash Natwe ~n stream 40' ![ Beautiful tree, not ] ~ YePd~ly. aYa'l)able Elm, Hybrid 35' 50' Homestead Lincoln, .... , .. Reg~lj Sapporo : i il , Volunteer tree Beech American :~ t Drops seeds Linden, 40' 40' Redmond Fragrant flowers, Linden, 30' 50' Late leaf fall Silverleaf 68 L~nde .n, 30 50 ate leaf Silverleaf I ~ Hackberry D Z F G 30' 50' Gall psyliid food for :1 migrating birds Honeylocust, 40' 40' Thornless and Tmperial i~ seedless Honeylocust, D ii 50' i/ 50' Thornless and Shademaster , .~ ;~ ...... seedless Honeylocust, D 40' ~ 45' Thornless and Skyline ~ seedless Honeylocust, D 40' Thornless Many vadeties ][ 40' I 50' Has berries Japanese Zelkova London Plane ~ 40' I 50' Better than American Tree t ~ Sycamore Maple, 40' 50' Many varieties Norway i:[ Maple'schwedler ;] 40' Itt 50' i Large reddish-purplespring leaves -Map e, Silver Oak, Bur m~ ~u Decays when old D ii 40' 5 ' Good drought ~ [ tolerant tree Oak, Chestnut iF r ................. ¢ 40' I 50'_. Not readily ......... available [Oak, English - D Ii 40' ;ii 50' ~ ~.a.~!i?a~..~arie~'/ ..... Rea~, Northern[ 'i 40' "50' [ Late leaf falI ~ 40' ¢ Swamp , ,, 50' Tolerates poor drainage ~ White ak, White ~ ~ 40' ;~ 50' ~oplar, Z ~0' 50' Late leaf fall Often ,used as a 69 ~i Ii Poplar, Silver Z i 40' ~1 50' t Bolleana-columnar ........................ ~ !L variety Sycamore ~i 50 American Walnut, Black ; D i 40' ~!t 50' Difficult to Western ) ~) 30' 50' Larch Yellowwood · 30' 30' Sensitive to hand, seed litter 50' Drops twigs and fruit medium deciduous trees Ginkgo D 30' 30' Plant male tree only Honeylocust, D Sunburst ~i leaves tippe0 with gold Kentucky D 30' 30' Leafs out late Coffee Tree Linden, 25' 45' Hard nut-like fruit, Crimean seed litter linden, i 30' 45' Fragrant flowers; Greensp~re ~ narrow oval growth habit i 45 :l Heavy glossy fohage; Linden, 20' ' ' ~ ! I fragrant creamy~ Littleleaf ~ i) I white flowers Locust, Black 30' 50' Serious borer problem NorwayMaple' 25' ~i 50' Compact, narrow Colunmar Ohio Buckeye i! I Large leaves; seed 20' 35' growth habit 7O Western D 25' 50' t late Catalpa 50' Many species Yellow Buckeye small deciduous trees Amur Chokecherry 30' 40' Prefers moist soil; [ seed litter D ! 15' <30' Don't over water Amur D 20' I<30' i[ Fruit litter Corktree Apricot D i 20' / <30' :I Pink Spring flowers; dense, bushy tree _ , w/orange full color Ash, European Mountain Ash, Colorful ornamental D 10' <30' Singleleaf ] Ash, Wafer i: 10' / <30' ! Native to southwest (Hop Tree) Colorado Aspen,Quaking Z ii_ :[5' 60' ReproduceSroots from iCanada Red : D ': :1.5' ~30' Fragrant white Cherry flowers and red ..... :i cherries Cherry, Mont. D q 10' <30' Sour : .~L ~ __ Crabapple 15' <30' Choose disease resistant varieties (Malus; "Adams", "Centurian", "Zelkirk", "Henningi", "Indian Summer", 71 Goldenrain ;I D Z ~i 20' <30' Decorative Seed Pods White flowers 3apanese Tree D 15' / <30' Lilac D ~] 15' ! <30' Multi-stem common ?!_e.,_.A..m_,..L_ i .......... ! ...... iL ........... t Maple, D ,] 10' Tatarian L <30' L Samara red in summer '] 15' ~ Oak, Scrub D [ (Gambel) :ii <30' [ <30' Don't over water, native to foothills, extremely hardy Olive, Russian D F G !i 20' ! <30' Drought tolerant, invades drainage ~ areas Pear, I i 18 ii <30' White flowers; Bradford : maintains shape Pear, Callery D , 15' ?~0' Pear, D ! 20' <30' Ussurian ~J I ................. ! 15'~ <30' Plum, Double D :' 8' Flowering NewportPlum, i D _= ~ 15' ~j <30' 12' Double pink flowers; prefers rich, moist soil Serviceberry D ~' 20' <30' White flowers, ~: berries, very hardy I Sumac, D i Z0' <30'] 72 Sumac, Staghorn : T~;kisl~ ;ilbert 15' J <30' : D ! ~ large conifer trees Fir, Douglas Fir, White Pine, Austrian Spruce, Blue F G 50' Does well on shady sites 50' ][ Nice landscape tree tD 25' 50' More tolerant of urban sites than Ponderosas :~ 25' :t Beautifultreelandscape Spruce, 25' Engelmann medium [ conifer trees ~F Pine, Limber 25' Pine, 25' Lodgepole Pine, D F G ~i 25' Ponderosa _) Scotch :,~ 30' 50' High elevation tree 50' Light bluish-green, twisted needles 50' : High elevation trees 5o' :i I Native to foothills 50' ~ Fast growth rate, good screening small conifer trees 3uniper, D F G Rocky i Mountain Juniper, 15' <30' Native to foothills <30' Many varieties 73 Pine D 15' : <30' Ii Dense, bushy Br st econe t i branches Pine, Pinon D 15' <30 ii Don't overwater, : ......................... ~! edible seed ?4 Appendix G - Hillside Development Evaluation Letter Example HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION LEIS-ER EXAMPLE ZONING ADMINISTRATION DEVELC PMENT SERVICES [Date] [Contractor Name! [Company Name] [Address] [City], [State] [Zip] RE: Hillside Overlay Code and Design Guidelines Compliance and Evaluation Report:: [Site Address] Dear [Contractor Name] : This letter is intended to provide you with an evaluation regarding your project's compliance with the requirements of the City's Hillside Code Requirements and Design Guidelines for your new [project] located at the above address. It is the responsibility of the builder to implement the Hillside requirements of your approved Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan (HSS/LGP). The City Zoning Administration Office conducts follow-up inspections on all new projects which have been built in the hillside overlay zoned areas. Generally, the inspectors compare the submitted Hillside Site / Lot Grading Plan (HSS/LGP) with the actual development and determine compliance and evaluate the following criteria and/or elements: Compliance Criteria: I Vegetation Preservation I Retaining Wails I Cuts & Fills I Driveway Width I Structural Setbacks I Height I Fuels Management Practices Evaluation Elements: I Streetscape Appearance I Side/Rear Appearance I Incorporates Natural Vegetation I Structure Matches Grade I Mass/Height I Use of Natural Building Materials I Use of Compatible Colors I Building Form I Forced Walkouts and Retaining Walls I Hillside Character Maintained I Natural Grading Percent of Front Yard in Natural Vegetation Our evaluation of your project was as follows: The property and project was found to be in substantial compliance with the approved HSS/LGP plan, dated, and is in substantial compliance with City Hillside regulations and guidelines. or The property and project was found not to be in compliance with the approved HSS/LGP plan, dated, and is not in compliance with City Hillside regulations and guidelines. Specific actions which need to be taken to bring the site and project into compliance are listed below and/or illustrated on the attached drawing or report. Please notify me once you have corrected the 75 identified deficiencies and ! will perform an additional follow-up inspection. If you have any questions please feel free to contact our office. Your understanding and cooperation will be appreciated. We commend your actions and desire to express our appreciation for ,/our efforts to make the Hillsides a better place for all residents of the City of Colorado Springs. Sincerely Larrf Larsen Planning Technician 101 W. Costella; Suite 212 I Colorado Springs, Colorado 80903 I Telephone (719) 578-69:19 COLORADO SPRINGS HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT FOLLOW-UP ]NSPECTION REPORT HS NUM: ADDRESS: INITIAL INSPECTION: DATE INSPECTED:__ FINAL INSPECTION: DATE INSPECTED:__ REINSPECTION REQUIRED? SUSPENSE DATE: BUILDING STATUS COMPLIANCE WITH SITE PLAN No Work Done Futl Compliance Site Cleared/Foundation Substantial Compliance Framing Noncompliance (Enf. Case) Finishing/Interior Not Rated All Work Done Reasons for noncompliance: (1) Missing Trees Structure or Deck Missing Other Vegetation Bulk Standards Grading (Cuts/Fills) Retaining Wall Driveway Width Other or Multiple Fuels Management Practices -IILLSIDE DESIGN CRITIQUE (2) (Excellent, Good,Fair or Poor) Parcel Features - Site: Streetscape Appearance Incorporates Existing Side/Rear Appearance Natural Vegetation House Matches Grade Overall Rating RBD NUM: INSPECTOR: PHOTOS: INSPECTOR: PHOTOS: Architectural Features - Structure: Mass/Height Color: Use of Natural Materials Building Form OveraIt Rating Has the lot maintained it's hillside character?(3) Did the ot have any HS character to start with?(4) What % of the front yard contains native vegetation?(5) Does the grading of the site appear natural?(6) Is there a basement walkout? Was it forced? Is there a retaining wall?__Was it forced? Comments: ?? Appendix H - Geologic Hazard Evaluation Ordinance (A1-FACH SIGNED & CERTIFIED COPIES OF GEOLOGIC HAZARD MITIGATION ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION) Appendix I - Grading plan / Grading Enforcement Ordinance (ATTACH SIGNED & CERTIFIED COPIES OF GRADING PLAN / GRADING ENFORCEMENT ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION) Appendix J - Hillside Overlay Map (A'I-TACH HILLSIDE OVERLAY MAP) 78 Appendix K - Comprehensive Plan Goals, Policies and Recommendations CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONFORMITY The Hillside Design Manual endeavors to implement numerous goals, objectives, policies, and recommendations of the City of Colorado Springs Comprehensive Plan, including, but not imited to the following: Goal 5.1: Assure that the City's rand development regulations provide for efficiency, compatibility, compliance, variety, flexibility, and innovation. Policy 5.1.4: Incorporate performance standards, where appropriate, into land development regulations and criteria. Recommendation 5.1.R4: The City should prepare performance standards and criteria for ncorporation into the Zoning Ordinance. The areas for performance standards and criteria shall include: .... F. Preservation of natural and historic features .... ..... L. Land Suitability .... Goal 9.2: Preserve, enhance, and promote the significant features of the City's natural environment. Policy 9.2.1: In areas where both controlled development and preservation are possible, retain s~gnificant natural features in private ownership and protect them as part of a development plan review. _and suitabili~' studies shall be required prior to the approval of development in these areas .... Recommendation 9.2.R2: The City should establish design guidelines for those preservation areas that could be developed without harm to the significant natural features." Goal 9.4: Protect the environment from existing and potentially harmful conditions and activities. Policy (3.4.3: Carefully review development in suspected natural hazard areas. Land suitability studies may be required prior to the approval of development in these areas in order to avoid potentiaJ hazards. The land development review process is the appropriate vehicle for the earliest possible identification of ail environmentally sensitive land features. Site development glans should contain specific methods for handling limited development, or for maintaining environmentally sensitive land features. Goal 9.5: Preserve, 3romote and enlarge the urban forest to enhance air quality, noise abatement, wildlife habitat, community aesthetics, and general quality of life. The urban forest includes all the tree and shrubbery on public or private property within the City. Policy 9.5.3: Promote public and private tree planting, replacement and preservation progra ms to sustain and expand the urban forest. Recommendation (3 5.R.:[: The City should substantially increase the number of public and private trees in ten years. Goal 16.:[: Promote the application of urban design considerations which define e nd enhance the City's unique character. 79 Policy 16 1.1: Enhance and strengthen the overall image of the City by identifying its unique characteristics, promoting the urban design qualities of specifically designated areas, and defining unifying design elements within the community, Recommendation 16.i. R2: The City should initiate a process to identify unique areas of the community based on physical features and the character of existing development, and should examine methods to protect, preserve, and promote those areas. Recommendation 16.1,R6: The City should use the results of the Natural Features Inventory to identify significant landforms and develop appropriate design guidelines to preserve the physical character of those features, Goal 16.4: Ensure the continued protection, availability and accessibility of those distinctive natural, archaeological, paleontological and historic features Which contribute tc and reflect the City's character and heritage. Policy 16,4,1: Ensure that any development of the City's mountain backdrop and significant landforms such as ridgelines is conducted in a manner which protects the physical character of those features. Policy 16.4.2: Preserve and provide appropriate access to the existing landscape, archeological, paleontological and historic features of the City through sensitive development ant construction practices, and determination of preferred ownership." 8O VLCT Irt ~ S 2000 't'erla¥ City of Henderson Planning Depad~.ent 240 Water Street Henderson, Nevada 89015 _J~ly 1997 IHillside Development Plan O~zerlay t District , _ ' ~ ~l_e_as~ Return TO: ~Jmerican Planning Association. PAS ~22 S. Michigan Ave., Suite 1600 C. hicago, iL 60603-6107 ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HENDERSON TO AMEND THE HENDERSON DEVELOPMENT CODE BY ADOPTING HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PLAN OVERLAY DISTRICT REGULATIONS, HILLSIDE REGULATION MAP AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the need to establish regulations to protect the natural environment and property values on certain hillsides within the community, and the health, safety and welfare of its citizens living on or near such hillsides; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Henderson Municipal Code Chapter 19.12,006 AO. and CZ. are hereby amended, and new definitions added to Chapter 19.12.006, as follows: 19.16.006 Definitions Access Road: A road designated on an approved grading plan, and used during construction operations for the transport of grading equipment, hauling of fill material, and for other vehicular traffic movement to and from the grading site. O.1. Approval: Written notice by an authorized representative of the City of Henderson approving the design, progress, and completion of work. AA. 1 Community Vantage Point: A community vantage point is defined as the intersection of an arterial as identified on the City's Master Street and Highways Plan and Lake Mead Drive, the intersection of Lake Mead Drive and US 93-95, the intersection of an arterial as identified on the City's Master Street and Highways Plan and US 93-95 or the intersection of two arterial streets as identified on the City's Master Streets and Highways Plan. Major intersections have been selected as community vantage points because they are characterized by higher traffic volumes, they generally have clear views of the mountains and they are easy to identify. The intersections also allow for larger concentrations of residents and visitors to view the natural scenic beauty of the mountains. Z.1. Clearing: The substantial removal of vegetation. AH.1. Developer: The term developer includes any person subdividing or improving land and any person seeking to have the City accept or include in its maintained system any public facility. AO. Entertainment, Live: Regulations pertaining to live entertainment in this Title apply to the following activities where they occur on a scheduled basis three or more days during a calendar year on the site of a use other than a Public or Semipublic use. Live Entertainment activities in this context shal include: A musical, theatrical, dance recital, cabaret, or comedy act performed by one or more persons, regardless of whether the performers are compensateC; A fashion show, except when conducted within an enclosed building used primarily for the manufacture or sale of clothing. A change of performers shall not constitute a change in the type of live entertainment. ORDINANCE NO. 1752 Page 2 (ZOA-14'95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) AO.1, Erosion: The wearing away of the ground surface as a result of movement by wind or water. AC.2. Excavation: The mechanical removal of earth material. AP.1 Finished Grade: The final elevation of the ground surface conforming to the approved grading plan. AQ,1. Floodplain: A natural watercourse and adjacent Iow land areas that .would be inundated by flood waters which are generated from a 100-year storm. AY.l. Grading: The initial clearing, brushing, or filling, or combination thereof, of a site. AW.1 Grubbing: The removal of trees and other large plants by their roots. BW. 1 Natural Areas: Areas where density and site disturbance have been transferred from, per H.M.C. 19.49.010(B), to another portion of the same site. CX.I. Retaining Wall: A wall designed and constructed to withstand lateral earth and hydrostatic pressures. CX.2 Revegetation: The replacement of drought tolerant living plant materials or seeds on areas where the natural vegetation has been removed. The areas include disturbed natural areas and manmade cut and fill slopes. CZ. Sensitive Ridgeline: A sensitive ridgeline shall be defined as a line meeting all the following characteristics as viewed from two or more Community Vantage Points: {1) a series of points which when connected form an uninterrupted line with a definable starting and ending point; (2) two intersecting side slopes each having a minimum gradient of 15 percent; (3) a starting point which shall be a point at which three side slopes intersect at a definable point, which shall be a point at which the elevation,is a minimum of 200 vertical feet higher than the closest community vantage point and (4) an ending point of a sensitive ridgeline shall be the highest vertical elevation along the series of connecting points. A ridgeline shall not be considered for sensitive identification if all of the following pertain: (a) the intersecting side Slopes create a top on the ridgeline which has a slope of less then 15 percent; (b) the ridgeline has a minimum width of 200 feet and ~ the ridgeline has an average width of 400 feet and (d) the ridgeline has a minimum length of 1,000 feet. DH.l. Cut Slope: The exposed ground surface resulting from the excavation of material from the natural terrain. DH.2, Fill Slope: The exposed ground surface resulting from the placement of excavated material on the natural terrain, DH.3. Site Disturbance: The area on a lot or parcel, excluding streets, whiCh has been graded, excavated, cleared, grubbed or contain cut slopes or fill slopes. ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) Page 3 DH.4. Slope Analysis Map: A slope analysis map is a pictoral representation of the natural ground surface of property expressed in a series of percentages. For purposes of preparing a slope analysis map the map shall be prepared according to the following, .¸ Utilize a maximum contour interval of 10 feet. Include the subject parcel and extend outward 200 feet from all property lines and access roads. Be drawn at a scale of no less than 1:1 O0 (1 inch = 100 feet). Be printed on a maximum sheet size of 36 inches by 42 inches. Indicate the following slope categories: 15 - 19.9% Light Green 20 - 24.9% Yellow 25 - 29.9% Orange 30 - 34.9% Pink 35% + Red 5. In addition, the map shall contain: Legend which lists the area and percentage of the total site for each slope category. Scale. North arrow. Identification of adjacent parcel lines. Date the topographical data was gathered. Sufficient survey information to accurately locate the property. Name, address and phone number of the applicant. Name, address and phone number of the person/firm which prepared the slope analysis. Existing easements and rights-of-way, both onsite, and within the 200 feet adjacent to the site. A label on each 100 foot contour line. Source of topographical data. DH.4. Soil: All earth material of any origin that overlies bedrock and may include a decomposed zone of bedrock which can be excavated by mechanical equipment or blasting. ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 -Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) Page 4 DK.1. Street: A public or private thoroughfare, which provides vehicular access to two or more residential units. DK.2. Street, Private: A street for vehicular access to two or more residential units which is to be owned and maintained by parties other than the City. DK.3. Street, Public: A street for vehicular access to two or more residential units which is to be owned and maintained by the City. DK.4. Driveway: An improved surface giving access from a street to a building. DK.5. Undisturbed Areas: The area on a lot or parcel which has not been graded for access, building pad or driveways. Undisturbed areas may be fenced and landscaped. AY.1 Hillside Regulation Map: A Hillside Regulation Map is defined as a graphic display which establishes properties which have a slope of 15 percent or greater and are subject to the requirements of the Hillside Development Plan Overlay District, Community Vantage Points and Sensitive Ridgelines. AY.2. Hillside Development Plan: A Hillside Development Plan is defined as a series of written words and graphic plans describing the proposed development of property located within the Hillside Development Plan Overlay District. The plans may include but are not limited to a slope analysis map, grading plans, tentative and final maps, parcel maps, architecture of proposed structures as well as other written and pictoral concepts conveying the physical development of property located within the Hillside Development Plan Overlay District. SECTION 2. Henderson Municipal Code Chapter 19.50.054, Hillside Residential Development, is hereby repealed. SECTION 3. Henderson Municipal Code is hereby amended by adopting a new Chapter 19.49, Hillside Development Plan Overlay District and Hillside Regulation Map, as follows: CHAPTER 19.49 HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PLAN OVERLAY DISTRICT Sections: 19.49.002 19.49.004 19.49.006 19.49.OO8 19.49.010 19.49.012 19.49.014 19.49.016 19.49.018 Introduction Specific Purpose Applicability and Zoning Map Designator Land Use Regulations Development Regulations Homeowners Ass~ociation Waivers Sensitive Ridgeline Development Approval of a Hillside Development Plan ORDINANCE NO. 1752 Page 5 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) 19,49.020 Findings of Fact 19.49.022 19,49.024 19.49,026 19.49.028 19,49.030 Application Requirements Amendments Expiration and Renewal Exemptions Lot Development Standards 19.49.002 Introduction. Henderson is surrounded by mountains, foothills and mesas. These mountainous areas exhibit steep slopes which may contain unstable rock. Development on potentially unstable rock can be hazardous to life and property. Development in these areas should include construction methods which ensure slope stabilization and minimize soil erosion. Henderson's mountains, foothills and mesas are valuable scenic resources which should be considered for preservation to the maximum extent possible, while allowing for the development and beneficial use of private property located in and around the mountains, foothills and mesa's. Dominant peaks, ridges and mesas should be identified and developed with the goal of maintaining the city's unique visual setting, promoting its economic well being, and encouraging tourism. Regulating the intensity of development according to the natural characteristics of hillside terrain, such as degree of slope, significant landforms, and slope stability and existing drainage patterns, allows for development in hillside areas while minimizing the physical impacts of such development. 19,49.004 Purpose This zone provides for the reasonable use of hillside areas and related lands while protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare by: A. Determining whether certain conditions exist, such as loose or easily eroded soils or rocky soils which may require blasting; and using appropriate engineering technology to ensure stable slopes during and subsequent to development. B. Reducing water runoff, soil erosion, and rock slides by minimizing grading and by requiring revegetation. C. Permitting intensity of development compatible with the natural characteristics of hillside terrain, such as degree of slope, significant landforms, soil suitability, and existing drainage patterns. D. Preserving the scenic quality of the desert and mountain environment by identifying and considering sensitive ridgelines in development of hillside areas. E. Reducing the physical impact of hillside development by encouraging innovative site and architectural design, minimizing grading, and requiring restoration of graded areas. F. Providing safe and convenient vehicular access by encouraging development on the less steeply sloped terrain. ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) Page 6 Promoting cost-efficient public services by encouraging development on the less steeply sloped terrain, thereby minimizing service extensions and utility costs and maximizing access for all necessary life safety services. Providing specific design criteria for off-site improvements which will reduce grading and site disturbance. Recognizing the unique characteristics of the hillside terrain and promoting the placement of building pads which are compatible with the hillside terrain. 19.49.O06 Applicability and Zoning Map Designator The Hillside Development Plan Overlay District may be combined with any base district located within the area identified on the hillside regulation map. It may be initiated by the City Council or the Planning Commission or by a petition of property owners under the procedures established by H.M.C, 19.90: Amendments. If the City initiates the designation, the owners of property containing slopes of fifteen (15) percent or greater, as shown on the Hillside Regulation Map shall apply for approval under the provisions of to the Hillside Development Plan Overlay District and shall be required to submit a plan for development conforming to the standards of this section prior to applying for development approvals. Each Hillside Development Plan Overlay District shall be shown on the zoning map by adding an "-H" designator to the base district designation. 19.49.008 Land Use Regulations Land use regulations shall be those of the base district with which the H district is combined, provided that no new or expanded use may be approved unless a Hillside Development Plan has been approved by the City Council. 19.49.010 Development Regulations The hillside design guidelines end the following development regulations shall apply to the Hillside Development Plan Overlay District: A. Density Allocation and Maximum Site Disturbance For all areas of the lot or parcel with less than a 15 percent slope and outside a sensitive ridgeline, 100 percent site disturbance may occur. For areas of slope greater than 15_ percent the standards of this chapter shall apply. Property which is currently zoned UR (Urban Reserve) district, the location of density and site disturbance is specific to the slope category in which it is located. Density and site disturbance shalJ be determined based upon the following table: ORDINANCE NO. 1752 Page 7 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) TABLE 1 15 4 19.9% 1 unit/half-acre 50% 20 * 24.9% I unit/acre 40% 25 - 29.9% I unit/2.5 acres 30% 30 ~ 34.9% 1 unit/5 acres 25% 35% or greater 1 unit/10 acres 15% 2. Property which is currently zoned RS-2 (Single Family Residential) district may be developed at a maximum of 2 dwelling units per gross acre with a maximum of 50 percent site disturbance, prior to subdividing. 3. Property which is currently zoned RR (Rural Residential) district may be developed at a maximum of 1 dwelling unit per gross acre with a maximum of 50 percent site disturbance, prior to subdividing. 4. Site disturbance shall include all grading for the development of the property but, shall not include any public or private street. 5. A maximum of 10% increase in site disturbance shall be allowed for the construction of a driveway subject to staff level approval. Any increase in excess of 10% shall be subject to Planning Commission approval. Density and Site Disturbance Transfer Density and site disturbance may be transferred from portions of a lot or parcel with a slope greater than 15 percent to any area of the hillside development plan, regardless of slope. Areas from which density and site disturbance are transferred shall be designated as natural areas in accordance with this chapter. Density and site disturbance shall be transferred only within the boundaries of the hillside development plan. In no case shall the gross density exceed the base zoning of the property. C. Minimum Lot Area The minimum lot area shall be 4,500 sq. ~ft. ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) Page 8 D. Lot Width and Depth Lot width and depth of non flag lots shall not exceed a ratio of 3 feet of width/depth for I foot of width/depth, For flag lots the following shall apply: 1. The flag pole or panhandle portion of the lot shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide, and the depth of the flag pole or panhandle shall not exceed 150 feet as measured from the adjacent public or private street. The non flag portion of a flag lot shall be subject to the lot width/depth ratios for non flag lots. The flag pole or panhandle portion of the lot shall not be included in calculating lot size. o E. Sensitive Ridgeline Setback All development, excluding perpendicular road crossings, is subject to a 100- foot setback from each sensitive ridgeline as depicted on the Hillside Regulation Map. The 100 foot setback is measured horizontally on each side of the center of the ridgeline. F. Setbacks: Commercial, Industrial and Multiple Family Except for required sensitive ridgeline setbacks, commercial, industria and multiple family projects shall provide setbacks per the base district in which the project is located. G. Setbacks - Single Family Residential Except for required sensitive ridgeline setbacks, single family residential shall provide the following setbacks: Front: 20 feet Rear: 15 feet Side: 5 feet Corner: 10 feet However, in order to adjust for terrain and produce the optimum building area, setbacks may be provided as follows: The aggregate total of setback dimensions around a building shall be equal to the sum of the minimum setbacks. Corner side yard-setbacks may not be reduced. No setback, regardless of lot placement, shall be less than 5 feet. (For example this ordinance requires an interior side yard setback of 5 feet and a rear yard setback of 15 feet. Those two setbacks ma,/ be adjusted to 10 feet side and 10 feet rear.) ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) Page 8 D. Lot Width and Depth Lot width and depth of non flag lots shall not exceed a ratio of 3 feet of width/depth for 1 foot of width/depth. For flag lots the following shall apply: The flag pole or panhandle portion of the lot shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide, and the depth of the flag pole or panhandle shall not exceed 150 feet as measured from the adjacent public or private street, The non flag portion of a flag lot shall be subject to the lot width/depth ratios for non flag lots, The flag pole or panhandle portion of the lot shall not be included in calculating lot size. E. Sensitive Ridgeline Setback All development, excluding perpendicular road crossings, is subject to a 100- foot setback from each sensitive ridgeline as depicted on the Hillside Regulation Map. The 100 foot setback is measured horizontally on each side of the center of the ridgeline. Setbacks: Commercial, Industrial and Multiple Family Except for required sensitive ridgeline setbacks, commercial, industrial and multiple family projects shall provide setbacks per the base district in which the project is located. G. Setbacks - Single Family Residential Except for required sensitive ridgeline setbacks, single family residential shal provide the following setbacks: Front: 20 feet Rear: 15 feet Side: 5 feet Corner: 10 feet However, in order to adjust for terrain and produce the optimum building area, setbacks may be provided as follows: The aggregate total of setback dimensions around a building shall be equal to the sum of the minimum setbacks. Corner side yard .setbacks may not be reduced. No setback, regardless of lot placement, shall be less than 5 feet. (For example this ordinance requires an interior side yard setback of 5 feet and a rear yard setback of 15 feet. Those two setbacks may be adjusted to 10 feet side and 10 feet rear.) ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) Page 9 Front setbacks for the living area portion of a dwelling on a non-flag lot may be reduced to 16 feet, however, in no case shall the garage setback be less than 20 feet from the street or property line. On flag lots the dwelling may be located 5 feet from any two sides, but the garage shall remain a minimum of 20 feet from the street. Interior side and rear setbacks for non-corner lots shall be the cumulative total of the setbacks, so long as a minimum of 5 feet is maintained from a property line. H. Building Height No structure shall exceed a height of 35 feet. If the area is also subject to the AE (Airport Environs Overlay) District the more restrictive shalJ apply. Grading Standards. All development subject to the provisions of the Hillside Development Regulations shall have a grading plan approved by the Planning Director and the City Engineer. The review process for the grading plan shall coincide with the hillside development plan review process. The grading scheme shall be shown as a separate grading plan. All development shall meet the following criteria: The portions of the site or lot to be graded must be clearly shown on the grading plan. The site or grading plan shall be approved by the Planning Director and the City Engineer prior to any grubbing, grading, or clearing. Grubbing, grading, and clearing are to occur only within the areas identified on the approved grading plan. All portions of the site or lot to be left ungraded are to remain undisturbed areas and are not to be used for stockpiling of materials or excess fill. If natural areas are designated on a site or lot, temporary fencing shall be installed where they abut construction areas in order to prevent encroachment into the natural areas. The maximum height of an exposed vertical cut or fill shall not exceed 35 feet and the maximum length of an exposed vertical cut or fill shai not exceed 150 feet and; (a)The cut is either revegetated or varnished; (b)The backfilled area ~s compacted per the approved grading plan and revegetated/varnished in compliance with this section; and (c)The edges of the cut or fill are shaped to conform with the natural topography of the land. The vertical distance of retained material shall not exceed 35 feet and a width of 150 feet. Exposed cut and fill slopes shall be revegetated/varnished in accordance with this chapter. Prior to any cut or fill on slopes which encroach into a floodplain the cut or fill design must first be approved by the Planning Director and the City Engineer. ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) Page 10 9. The grading plan shall include a statement which certifies all finished floor elevations are 18-inches above the 100 year base flood elevation. 10. Excess material shall be hauled to an appropriate off-site disposal area. 11. All site revegetation/varnish shall be completed within 90-days of completion of work or prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first. J- Revegetation and Preservation of Desert Varnish All exposed cut and fill areas shall be revegetated and varnished according to the following: All disturbed areas shall be revegetated, landscaped or varnished. Seeds for trees, desert shrubs, and grasses shall be planted with a density adequate to control erosion and may use one of the following methods of planting: (a) Raked into the soil with appropriate mulch materials; (b) Hydroseeding; (c) Anchored mulches; (d) Established on jute, rolled straw, or similar material; or, (e) Any other method approved by the Planning Director: A temporary watering system shall be installed, activated and maintained until the revegetated materials are established. Desert Varnish Requirements. The desert varnish shall be restored in a hue similar to the surrounding undisturbed area using eonite, permeon or a similar approved process. K. Slope Stabilization All cut slopes steeper than a ratio of 3-horizontal-to, l-vertical, or as approved by a geotechnical report with the exception of retaining walls, shall be stabilized with properly engineered stone riprapping or sculptured rock as follows: (a) (b) (c) Stone riprapping shall be hand-placed on the slope. The stabilizing material used shall blend with the natural appearance of the site or lot and its surrounding terrain. Unless otherwise approved by the Planning Director, vegetation retention and revegetation shall be used in conjunction with riprapping~ ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) Page 11 All fill slopes steeper than a ratio of 3-horizontal-to-l-vertical, or as approved by a ge,technical report with the exception of retaining walls, shall be stabilized with properly engineered stone riprapping or sculptured rock as follows: (a) (b) (c) Stone riprapping shall be hand-placed on the slope. The stabilizing material used shall blend with the natural appearance of the site or lot and its surrounding terrain. Unless otherwise approved by the Planning Director, vegetation retention and Revegetation shall be used in conjunction with riprapping. Natural Areas The intent of natural areas is to provide for retention of hillside areas in their natural state. The density and site disturbance shall be transferred to other portions of a site. Specific criteria for natural areas includes: Natural areas shall be at least one half acre in size or immediately adjacent or contiguous to other land also designated as a natural area which, in the aggregate, totals at least one half acre in size. Site disturbance other than hiking trails shall not be permitted within the ge.graphical.area of a natural area· The natural area shall be delineated in a surveyable manner on the tentative and final plats of a subdivision or on any development plan required for development other than a subdivision, and shall be designated by legal description on a document recorded with the Clark County Recorder for lot division. Natural areas may be designated as a deed-restricted portion of a privately owned lot, or as a separate parcel. Such parcel may be under the ownership of a homeowner's association or deeded to any organization which accepts responsibility for the perpetual preservation and maintenance of the natural area, subject to approval and acceptance by the City of Henderson. To protect the natural areas, covenants which run with the land shall be recorded in favor of the City of Henderson and of all owners with record interest in the natural area. M. Walls Standards The intent of wall standards is to reduce the visual impact of screening and retaining methods used on hillside developments. Specific criteria for design includes: The maximum height of retaining walls is 36 feet. For each 6 feet of~ vertical height, a 6-foot horizontal offset shall be provided. Walls shall conform to the topography of the site. ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) Page 12 4. 5. 6. Color Walls with a change in alignment shall to the greatest practical extent incorporate the use of graduating steps rather than sharp corners. Walls shall either incorporate the use of native materials or be earth tone colors to match the native soils. The use of wrought iron or other similar open materials is encouraged for security walls, such as for pools. Perimeter walls shall be permitted around the entire lot or parcel. Perimeter walls shall not exceed a maximum height of 32~inches solid block and 40-inches wrought iron or a maximum of 72-inches wrought iron and no solid block. For land subdivided by a tentative map/planned unit development and final map, as well as multiple family, commercial, industrial, public and semi public uses, development within sensitive ridgeline setbacks and zoning approvals granted in accordance with H.M.C. 19.44 (Master Development Plan Overlay) district, all exposed exterior walls and roofs of structures, retaining walls, and accessory structures, except satellite dishes shall be colored to blend with the overall character of the desert environment. The intent of this requirement is that existing single family lots and single family lots created by parcel maps or tentative map (not planned unit development) and final map which are not within sensitive ridgeline setbacks be exempt from color requirements, O. Building Materials Reflective building materials (mirror finished glass and mirror finished doors) shall not be permitted. P. Building Pad Stepping floor elevations shall be utilized to avoid massive building forms and surfaces which contrast with the surrounding terrain. All single family detached lots within the Hillside Development Plan Overlay District shall be exempt from H.M.C. 18.32.030(b)(c) as it relates to usable yard area. Q. Mechanical Equipment:Residential All external mechanical equipment shall be ground mounted and screened. Additionally, required vents shall be architecturally ,compatible with the structure. ORDINANCE NO. 1752 Page 13 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) R. Mechanical Equipment:Commercial, Industrial All external mechanical equipment shall either be located in mezzanine or ground mounted and screened, Additionally, buildings utilizing a flat roof shall provide a parapet one foot above the highest required vent and the vents shall be architecturally compatible with the structure. S, Planned Unit Development Single family detached residential projects approved by a planned unit development shall be exempt from the common open space requirements of H.M.C. 19.62. T. Landscaping For land subdivided by a tentative map/planned unit development, as well as multiple family, commercial, industrial, public and semi public uses, development within sensitive ridgeline setbacks and zoning approvals granted in accordance with H.M.C. 19.44 (Master Development Plan Overlay) district, landscaping within the hillside development area shall be as follows: Plant materials shall be those per Exhibit 4. Turf areas shall not exceed 50% of the site disturbance area additionally, turf areas shall be located within an enclosed area and not be visible from a lower elevation; Parks public or private parks and golf courses shall be exempt from this requirement. Golf courses shall be subject to the following landscaping criteria: (a) A maximum of 5 acres of turf area per hole, to include a driving range shall be permitted. {b) Plant materials shall be those per Exhibit 4, (c) Site disturbance shall be calculated based upon Table 1. {d) Site disturbance may be transferred to areas of greater slope provided site disturbance in the higher slope area shall not exceed 50%. (e) Cuts and fills shall be regulated per this ordinance, The intent of this requirement is that existing single family lots and single family lots created by parcel maps, tentative map (not planned unit development) and final map which are not located within sensitive ridgeline setbacks be exempt from landscaping requirements. ORDINANCE NO. 1752 Page 14 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) U. Improvements All requirements and standards pertaining to public or private streets, driveways, drainage, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, curb cuts, water and fire hydrants, sewage, underground utility services, water supply, erosion control and street lighting shall be as prescribed by this ordinance. 1. Water (Public Works Department) Water System Design Except as noted, all water systems shall be designed in accordance with the Uniform Design and Construction Standards for Water Distribution Systems, Clark County and the Uniform Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, Clark County area. 2. Water (Fire Department) a. Water System Design Flow The water mains and the distribution system shall be designed to deliver a minimum residual pressure of 20 pounds per square inch (psi) at the fire hydrants in service during maximum day demand plus the required fire flow demand. Minimum fire flow shall be equal to 750 gallons per minute (gpm) for residential property classified as a Group R, Division 3 occupancy. All others occupancies shall be as prescribed by the Fire Code. The system shall be designed to provide a minimum of 40 psi during peak hour conditions without fire flow. A maximum pressure delivery at the point of service shall not exceed 120 psi. b. Building Fire Sprinkler Systems All buildings shall be provided with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system .in accordance with the Fire Code. The water system design shall accommodate the requirements for building fire sprinkler systems. The building fire sprinkler system shall meet City requirements, in addition to the Fire Code requirements. (Based upon steeper road grades, reduced roadway design speeds, reduced roadway width, longer dead ends and cul de sacs, reduced water system design requirements and relaxed secondary access requirements the response time for emergency vehicles is increased above that of conventional development patterns within the City. Given the increased response time, a waiver of the requirement for building sprinkler systems is subject to review and approval by the Fire Marshall.) ORDINANCE NO. 1752 Page 15 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Developmer)t Plan Overlay District Regulations) c. Water Main Sizes Residential water main sizes shall be a minimum of 6 inches in diameter or as required by the Public Works Department. If minimum fire flow requirements are met fire hydrant branch lines shall not be required to be looped, d. Fire Hydrant Branch Lines Fire hydrant branch lines shall be set at right angles to street mains. The hydrant shall be set at the end of the branch line and shall face the branch. No horizontal or vertical bends or reducers shall be used in installing fire hydrant branch lines unless specifically approved by the City. Under no circumstances shall any size or manner of tap be made on a fire hydrant branch line. e. Fire Hydrant Location and Distribution The number and spacing of fire hydrants shall meet the approval of the Fire Prevention Division. Fire hydrants shall be located adjacent to and accessible from fire apparatus access roads. Fire hydrants shall be located along fire apparatus roads as follows: (1) Spacing of fire hydrants shall normally start by placing fire hydrants at all intersections or; (2) In all residential areas, fire hydrants shall not spaced greater than 750 feet apart or; (3) The maximum distance from a Group R, Division 3 Occupancy to a fire hydrant shall not exceed 500 feet, as measured from an approved point on a street or road frontage to a fire hydrant. 3. Wastewater Collection and Treatment Wastewater collection systems shall be designed in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Wastewater Collection Systems, Clark County, 1991 and the Uniform Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, Clark County area. Septic systems shall not be permitted. 4. Drainage Design Drainage facilities shall be designed to maintain the natural runoff characteristics. Drainage facilities shall be designed in accordance with the Clark County Regional Flood Control District Hydrologic Criteria and Drainage Design manual. Private drainage facilities, cross lot drainage easements or rear lot drainage easements shall be privately maintained. ORDINANCE NO. 1752 Page 16 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) 5. Roadways Within the Hillside Development Plan Overlay District all roadways public or private shall be designed according to the standards of this ordinance as well as AASHTO requirements. The standards are also intended to supplement the Public Works Department Plan Review Guidelines. Roadways should be located such that impacts to the natural environment are avoided. They should follow the topography of the area to minimize grading cuts and fills. Curvilinear horizontal alignments and gently rolling profiles consistent with the natural topography will minimize unnecessary site disturbance. Significant features such as rock outcroppings should be avoided. For roadways serving 100 or fewer units, the following standards shall apply: Right of way: Travel Lanes: Face of curb dimension: ~urbing: 42 feet (no parking or parking on one side) see Exhibits 1 and 2. 45 feet (parking on both sides) see Exhibit 3. 2 24 feet (no on street parking) 28 feet (parking on one side) 36 feet (parking on both sides) Curbing shall be required. Curb type shall be as approved by the City Engineer. Design Speed: 20 miles per hour Stopping Site Distance: 125 feet Site Distance (intersections):200 feet Minimum Center Line Radius w/o Superelevation: 180 feet Minimum Center Line Radius w/2% Superelevation: Minimum Curve length: Minimum Grade: Maximum Grade: Maximum Grade Length: Vertical Clearance: Sidewalks: 140 feet 100 feet 0.4% 15% except that a fire apparatus road within 50 feet of a structure the grade shall not exceed 8%, In lieu of providing an 8% roadway grade within 50 feet of a structure, the structure shall have a full building fire sprinkler system per Fire Department requirements. 7-9%-1400 feet 9-12%-700 feet 12-15 %-350 feet 13.6 feet Minimum lot sizes less than 20,000 sq. ft. (4 foot walk on one side of the street). ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) Page 17 Cul de sacs: Vertical Curves: Roadway Aprons: Right of Way Slope: Cross Slopes: Street Lighting: Intersection SpaCing: Minimum lot sizes greater than 20,000 sq. ft. (none required) Radius (45 foot measured to the face of curb) Maximum Units Served 25 Required if grade difference exceeds 1 percent. 2 percent maximum slope measured 4 feet from the back of curb on both sides of the street. 3 feet horizontal for 1 foot vertical behind the roadway apron and within the right of way. 4 percent Intersections and other locations for public safety as required by Public Works, 200 feet, measured center line to center line. Within the Hillside Development Plan Overlay District, the design to include width and design speed of all roadways public or private serving greater then 100 residential units shall be reviewed on a case by case basis by the Public Works Department. V. Driveways Driveways in the Hillside area should be kept to one per residence. Additional driveways to include circular driveways shall be permitted provided they do not adversely disrupt the surrounding environment. The minimum driveway width is 14 feet. A single driveway may serve more than one residence, however the minimum width is 20 feet. In no case shall a driveway exceed 20 feet in width. In special cases, driveways with a maximum length of 400 feet may serve up to four single family lots. Driveways greater in length than 150 feet or with grades steeper than 12% must receive prior approval from the Fire Department. Driveways in excess of 150 feet in length and driveways which serve more than a single residence shall meet the requirements for Fire apparatus access roads. An exception to this requirement can be granted if turnarounds are provided and the driveway meets minimum width requirements. Driveways and parking areas shall be designed for adequate vehicle maneuvering and turn around for a Single Unit Truck (SU) as defined by AASHTO. Driveways must be located a minimum of 100 feet from the right of way line of the intersecting street and a minimum of 25 feet from the side property line except for flag lots which shall be 5 feet from the property line. 19.49.012 Homeowners Association ORDINANCE NO. 1752 {ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) Page 18 Each hillside development plan, which provides for private streets or improvements, common open space, perimeter landscaping or natural areas shall establish and maintain a Homeowners Association. The association shall be responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of all private streets and improvements as well as all common open space, perimeter landscaping and natural areas. 19.49.014 Waivers All requests for waivers of code requirements shall be made in writing by the applicant at the time of submittal of a hillside development plan. The request shall include the code requirement, from which the waiver is sought, the requested waiver, an explanation of the compensating benefit of the waiver being requested, and a justification for the waiver which shows how the requested waiver would further the purpose and intent of the Hillside Ordinance.' 19.49.016 Sensitive Ridgeline Development A. Transfer of Developmemt Outside Sensitive Ridgeline Setback Hillside development plans which include property within a sensitive ridgeline setback are permitted increased density and site disturbance outside the area of a sensitive ridgeline setback if no development occurs within the sensitive ridgeline setback area. Specifically, the following shall apply: 2. 3. 4. 5. Calculate density and site disturbance per 19.49,010 (A) for the area within the sensitive ridgeline setback. Double the permitted density and site disturbance within the sensitive ridgeline setback. Transfer all density and site disturbance outside the sensitive ridgeline setback. Designate the sensitive ridgeline setback area as a natural area in accordance with 19.49.010 (L). All transfers must occur within the subject property. Transfers cannot be to any other property that is not a part of a hillside development plan, B. Development Within Sensitive Ridgeline Setback Requests for development within designated sensitive ridgeline setbacks, shall be subject to review by the Planning Commission Hillside Development Committee. ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) Page 19 Following review by the committee, hillside development plans shall be processed in accordance with H,M.C. 19.49.018. Exemptions for existing single family lots and single family lots created by parcel maps as defined in H.M.C. 19.49.010 (N) and (T) shall not apply. In addition to the requirements of H.M.C. 19.49.010, the following shall apply: Split pad design shall be utilized. Maximum height shall not exceed 25-feet. Building material color to include walls shall match the natural colors found on the lot or parcel. The slope of all roofs shall be the same as the natural slope of the property. 19.49,018 Approval of a Hillside Development Plan Within the Hillside Development Plan Overlay District are s~x different options by which a Hillside Development Plan can be approved. The six options and corresponding processes are: Request for a single family home on a single lot or parcel of recoro; or the division of land into four or fewer parcels to include development within a sensitive ddgeline setback, the design of which meets all requirements of this ordinance: Approval is subject to architectural review/parcel map approval by the Planning Director. Request for unsubdivided multiple family which meets all requirements of the City's multi-family ordinance and this ordinance; request for commercial or industrial buildings which meet all requirements of this ordinance: Approval is subject to City Council approval of an architectural review. 3. · Request for subdivision of land into more than four lots; the design of which meets all requirements of this ordinance: Approval is subject to City Council approval of a tentative and final map. Request for a single family home on a single lot or parcel of record, the division of land into four or fewer parcels, commercial or industrial buildings; the design of which does not meet all requirements of this ordinance or golf courses, churches, schools and parks conforming and non conforming to this ordinance: Approval is subject to City Council approval of a variance and architectural review. ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 -Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) Page 20 Request for subdivided multiple family conforming and non-conforming to the City's multi-family ordinance and this ordinance or subdivision of land into more than four lots; the design of which does not meet all requirements of this ordinance: Approval is subject to City Council approval Of a tentative map/planned unit development and final map. Request for approval of development standards on property which meets the size requirements of H.M.C. 19.44 (Master Development Plan Overlay) district, including requests to deviate from this ordinance: Approval is subject to City Council approval of a zone change. 19.49.020 Findings of Fact In addition to the findings required by Chapter 19.62, 19.44 or 19.74, which ever is applicable and in order to approve a hillside development plan which includes waivers of this ordinance, the City Council must find that the proposed project: Preserves the integrity of and locates development with the least impact upon sensitive peaks and ridges; Minimizes grading and site disturbance; Locates development compatibly with the natural terrain; Provides for adequate drainage, protects downstream properties and minimizes erosion; Provides for development standards in excess or equal to those required by this ordinance. 19.49.022 Application Requirements Each application for approval of a hillside development plan shall be initiated by all property owners or their authorized agent. The form of the application and submittal requirements shall be as established by the Planning Director. 19.49.024 Amendment Any request for amendment to. an approved hillside development plan which increases the number of dwelling units, decreases or relocates common open space or natural areas, alters lot lines or road patterns, changes the types of structures, increases the building area, or results in a request for new waivers shall be initiated and processed as a new application. Minor amendments, including revisions to site plans or architecture proposed in response to conditions of approval, shall be approved administratively in accordance with H.M.C. 19.49.016. ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) Page 21 An application to approve additional area or annexation of property with a slope in excess of 15% for the Hillside Development Plan Overlay shall be initiated by the Planning Director or by property owners or an authorized agent. If the property is not under a single ownership and all owners agree to the proposed development, then all owners shall join the application, and a map showing the extent of ownership and the proposed area for inclusion within the H district shall be submitted with the application, Procedures for an amendment shall be initiated in the same manner as a new application for zoning. 19.49.026 Expiration and Renewal In order to maintain consistency with City development timing objectives, including but not limited to the Capital Improvement Program, Hillside Development Plans are required to be implemented and constructed within a reasonable time from approval. Approval of a hillside development plan may be renewed and the expiration date extended by a time period equal to or less than the initial approval period. Requests for renewal shall be made in writing by the applicant, prior to expiration. For an approval to be extended, the extension shall be extended in the same manner as the initial approval, At the discretion of the City Council, any extension approval may include additional restrictions or approval conditions, including but not limited to changes in Development Regulations adopted after the initial approval. 19.49.028 Exemption Any approved Master Development Plan Overlay as defined by H.M.C.19.44 (UMaster Plan") and any subdivision, as defined by NRS 278.330, et seq., that lies within all or part of the Hillside Development Plan Overlay District and has received City Council approval of development standards for the entire Master Plan through a zoning action or has tentative and final maps approved prior to enactment of this · ordinance, may be developed in compliance with the conditions and waivers as approved, without regard for this ordinance; Any application to rezone property within a Master Plan or to resubdivide, or to amend a tentative map shall comply with all provisions of the Hillside regulations in effect at that time; provided, however, that any application to rezone any property within a Master Plan, to resubdivide, or to amend a tentative map may include (1) a request that the approved development standards of the Master Plan or approved tentative map conditions be applicable to the property sought to be rezoned upon rezoning, or (2} a request that amended development standards be applicable to the property upon rezoning or amendment. If amended development standards are requested to be applicable to the property to be rezoned, resubdivided or amended, then the waiver requirements set forth in H.M.C. 19.49,014 shall apply. ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 - Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) 19.49.030 Lot Development Standards Page 22 LOT FEATURE I REQUIREMENT Minimum lot width 45 feet Maximum lot width 3 times the lot depth Maximum lot depth 3 times the lot width Maximum flag pole or panhandle depth on 150 feet flag lot Minimum flag pole or panhandle width.at street Minimum corner side yard setback Minimum side setback Minimum setback when yard sizes are transferred Maximum height Minimum dwelling and garage setback 24 feet 10 feet 5 feet 5 feet 35 feet * · unless otherwise restricted by development regulations in the base zoning district 15 feet for dwelling 20 feet for garage SECTION SECTION 5. All ordinances, or parts of ordinances, sections, subsections, phrases, sentences,clauses, or paragraphs contained in the Municipal Code of the City of Henderson, Nevada, in conflict herewith are repealed. If any section, subsection, paragraph, clause or provision of this ordinance shall for any reason be held invalid or unenforceable, the invalidity or unenforceability of such section or subsection, paragraph, clause, or provision shall not affect any of the remaining provisions of this ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 1752 (ZOA-14-95 -Hillside Development Plan Overlay District Regulations) Page 23 SECTION 6. A copy of this ordinance shall be filed with the office of the City Clerk, and notice of such filing shall be published once by title in the Henderson Home News, a newspaper having general circulation in the City of Henderson, at least one (1) week prior to the adoption of said ordinance, and following approval shall be published by title (or in full if the Council by majority vote so orders) together with the names of the Councilmen voting for or against passage and the ordinance shall become effective upon publication. PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED THIS 1 ST DAY OF JULY, 1997. ~AMES B. GIBSON, MAYOR Su~AN I~bBISdN, CITY CLERK The above and foregoing Ordinance was first proposed and read in title to the City Council on June 24, 1997, wh ch was a Regular Meeting and referred to a Committee of the following Counciimeri: "COUNCIL AS A WHOLE" Thereafter, said Committee reported favorably on the Ordinance on July 1, 1997, which was a Regular Meeting of the Henderson City Council, at which time the Ordinance was read in title and adopted by the following roll call vote: Those voting AYE: Those voting NAY: Those Absent: Those Abstaining: James B. Gibson, Mayor Councilmembers: Jack Clark Arthur "Andy" Hafen David A. Wood Amanda M. Cyphers None None ~/JAMES B. GIBSON, MAYOR HILLSIDL (NO PARKING) Nafe: Shoulder widfhs shown ore minimum. Wider should~A-s may be required. $idewoll;cs may be required in s.ome developments. HILLSIDE (PARKING ONE SlOE OF STREET) Nofe: $~aulder wid. fhs shown are minimum. Wider shoulders m~¥ be required. Sidew~Ik~ mc~y be required .in some developments. HILLSIDE (PARKING BOTH SLOES OF STREET) I Note: Shoulder widths shown ore minimum. Wider shoulders may be required. Sidewalks may b.e requlired in scrr~'e developments. EXHIBIT 4- PLANT PALETTE BOTANICAL NAME *Acacia spp. Brahea spp. Brahea Armata Mexican Fan Palm Bursera spp. Pindo Palm But. ia Captitata COMMON NAME Acacia/~Nat~le Pinus roxburghii Casuarina spp. Western Hackberry Celtis reficulata *Cercidium spp. Chamaerops Humilis Mediterranean Fan Palm Chilopsis linearis Desert Willow -Cupres~Qs 'arizonica Arizona Cypress Cupressus semj~ervirens Italian Cypress Cycus Revoluta Sago Palm Dalea spp.. Forchammeria Wats~nii ' Gleditsia triacanthos Honey Locust Leucaena retusa Golden Ball Lead Tree Lysiloma spp. Olea "swan Hill' Olive - Fruitless only Olneya tesota Ironwood Parkinsonia aculeata Mexican Palo Verde Pinus canariensis Canary Island Pine Pinus eldarica Afghan Pine Pinus hatepensis Aleppo Pine Pinus pinea Italian Stone Pine Chit Pine BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Pistacia spp, Pistachio Pithecellobium spp. Pi~osporum phitlyraeoides Witlow Pintos 3orum *Prosopis spp. Mesquite Quercus spp. Oak Schinus terebinthifolious Brazilian Pepper Sophora secundiflora Texas Mountain Laurel Tamarix aphytla Athel Tree (Natural Areas Only) Trachycarpus fortunei Windmill Palm Ulmus parvifoJia "sempervirens' Evergreen Elm Virex agnus-cas~us Chaste Tree Ziziphds jujuba Chinese Jujub~ BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Acacia spp. Acacia/Wattle Aloysia spp. Ambrosia deltoidea Triangle leaf Bur-sage Ambrosia dumosa White Bur-sage Atriplex spp. Saltbush Baccharis spp. Berberis haematocarpa Buddleia marrubifolia Caesalpinia spp. 'Calliandra californica Red Barberry Summer L.ilac Fairy Duster CeltJs pailida Desert Hackberry *Chrysothamnus nauseosus Rabbit Brush (Mate cuttings only) i C~stus spp. Bush Morning Glory Convolvulus cneorum Cordia boissieri Cordia parvifolia Little Leaf Cordia Datea spp. Encelia spp. Brittiebush Ephedra spp. Mormon Tea Eremaea beaufortioidss Eremea Eremaea pauciflora Snow Gum Eremaea violacea Violet Eremea Calliandra eriophytla Fairy Duster Calliandra peninsularis Fairy Duster Catlistemon citrinus Lemon Bottle Brush Callistemon phoeniceus Salt Resistant Bottle Brush Callistemon viminalis "Captain Hook" Dwarf Bottle Brush Catothamnus spp. *Cassia spp. Cassia BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Eriogonum spp. Buckwheat Forestiera neomexicana Desert Olive Genista hispanica Spanish Broom Grevillea rosmarinifolia varieties Hakea spp. Haplopappus laricifolia Hyptis emoryi Juniperus chinensis varieties Justicia spp. Kunzea spp. Juniper Bush Lantana Larrea tiedenta~a Creosote Bush 'Leucophyllum spp. Lycium spp. Mimosa biuncifera Wait a Minute Bush Mimosa dysocarpa Velvet Pod Mimosa Punica granatum varieties PomegranaTe Pyracantha spp. - Pyracantha _ Quercus spp~ Oak Rhus ovata Mountain Laurel Rhus trilobata Skunkbust; Rhus virens Evergreen Sumac Ruellia californica Ruellia Ruellia peninsularis Salvia spp, {shrub only) Sage Sececio cinerarm Dusty Mitler Simmondsia chinensis Jojoba Sophora arizonica Sorphora formosa Tecoma stans Yellow Bells BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Teucrium fruticans Bush Germander Vauquelinia spp. Rosewood Viguiera [omen~osa Golden Eye Ziziphus obtusifotia Greythorn ~: ~:~;:_',~.~:, ~:~?~::~: ?~i GROUND; cO.VERS~: H'E-RBAcEOUS. PLANTS SOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Acacia spp. Anigozanthos spp: Kangaroo Paw Artemisia spp. Asclepias subulata Desert MiIweed Asparaagus densiflorus cv. sprengeri ArtJple× spp. Baccharis spp. Sprenger Asparagus Carpobrotus edulis Ice Plant Centaurea cineraria Dusty Miller Cephalophytlum spp~ Red Spike Ice Plant Clianthus formosus Stuart's Desert Pea Convolvulus mauritanicus Ground Morning Glory Datea spp. --- . Gazania spp. Grevillea crithmifotia Kennedia coccinea Gazania Spider Flower Coral Vine Kenrfedia prostrat~ -- Scarlet Runner Lantana montevidensis Trailing Latana Malephora crocea Ice Plan~ Myoporum parvifolium Sandalwood Oenothera beriandieri Mexican Evening Primrose Pentzia incana Romneya coulteri Rosmarinus officinalis 'prostratus' *Salvia chamaedryoides *Salvia farinacea Karoo Groundcover Mafilija Poppy Prostrate Rosemary Slue Sage Mealy Cup Sage *Santolina chamaecypraissus Lavender Cotton *Santolina virens Green Santotina Sphaeralcea spp. Globe-Mallow HERBACEOUS PLANTS BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Verbena bipinnatifida Verbena Verbena peruviana Peruvian Verbena Verbena pulchelia False Sand Verbena Verbena rigida Verbena BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME *Agave spp. Century Plant/Agave Aloe spp. Aloe *Cacti (alt) Dasylirion spp. Desert Spoon *Fouquieria spp, *Hes>neraloe spp. Nolina spp. Bear Grass *Yucca spp. Yucca COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME Abronia villosa Sand Verbena Arctotis spp. African Daisy Argemone pleicantha Prickly Poppy Baeria chrysostoma Goldfield Bahia absinthifolia Bahia Baiieya muitiradiata Desert Marigold Cassia covesii Catharanthus roseus cu{tivars Madagascar Periwinkle Celosia spp. Cockscomb ;;!;~;~i~:_--~;~?.~.,~i~i~: ~: ?!i: :L:.;~ANNUAES/pERENNIALS Cosmos spp. Cosmos Dimorphatheca spp. African Daisy Dyssodia pen'~achae'~a Eschscholzia californica EschschotzJa mexicana Dyssodia California Poppy Mexican Gold Poppy Gilia leptantha Showy Blue Gilia Gomphrena globosa Globe Amaranth Helichrysum bracteatum Everlasting Daisy Hetipterum spp. Kallstroemia grandiflora Arizona Poppy Layia platyglossa Tidy Tips Lesquerelia gordoni Gold Crucifer Linaria spp. Toadflax Lupinus densiflorus - -- Lupine Lupinus sparsiflorus Matricaria grandiflora Pineapple Weed Melampodium leucanthus Blackfoot Daisy Mentzetia spp, Blazing Star Orthocarpus ptJrpurascens Owl's Clover Pectis papposa Chinch Weed Penstemon spp. Phacelia spp. Tagetes spp. Marigold Ursinia spp. Ursinia BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Aristida purpureza Red Three Awn Bromus rubens Red Brome ~'agrostis atherstone Cochise Lovegrass Eragrostis lehmanniana Lehmann Lovegrass Muhtenbergia dumosa Giant Muhle¥ Pennisetum se~aceum "cupereum" Fountain Grass - Purple Schismus barbatus Schismus BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME Antigonon [eptopus Mountain Rose/Queens Wreath Billard~ere ri_ng~ns Riverbell Flower CamPsis radicans Ciccus trifoliata Common Trumoet Creeoer Arizona GraDe Ivy Virgin's Bower Clematis drummondii Hardenbertia comp~oniana Wild Wisteria Kennedia -nigricans Black Yellow t/ine *Macfadyena unguis - cad Cat Claw Mascagnia liiacaena Lilac Orchid Vine Mascagnia macroptera Yellow Orchid Vine Merremia aurea Yuca Solanum jasminoides Potato Vine Grows well in this area. AVENUE rn ROBERT B O L S H A N S K ¥ American Planning Association Planning Advisory Service PAS ~po~ Iqumb~? ~6 Please remm to: American Plann/ng Association - PAS 122 S. Michigan Ave., Suite 1600 Robert B. Olshansky, AICE is an associate professor o£ planning at the Uiniversity of Illinois at Urbana- Champaioma. He teaches and does research in the areas of land-use and environmental planning, with an emphasis on natural hazards. He is the author of Landslide Hazard in the United States: Case Studies in Planning and Policy Development (Garland 1990). The research for this report was funded, in part, by the University of Illinois Research Board. The author thanks his two able research assistants, Robyn Bancroft and Sylvie Temperley, and Ray Bm:by and Gerry Uba for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this report. Finally, he thanks Jim Hecimovich and Jim Schwab of APA for their patience and help in bringing this report to successful completion. Cover design by Toni Thanasouras Ellis; cover drawing adapted from the Rancho Cucamonga, California. Hillside Development Regulations, page 174. This report is printed on recycled paper. The Plarming Advisory Service is a subscription service offered bv the Research Department of the American Planning Association. Eight reports are produced each year. Subscribers al~o receive tile PAS Memo each month and have use of the Inquiry Answering Service. Frank S. So, Executive Director; Sylvia Lewis, Publications Director; W/Him Kleir.. Director of Research. Planning Advisory Service Reports are produced in the Research Department of APA. James Hecimovich. Editor: Marya Morris, Assistant Editor; Lisa Barton, Design Associate © November 1996 by the American Planning Association. APA's publications office is at 122 S. Mictugan Ave., Suite 1600. Chicago, IL 60603. E-mail: past ep or ts~planning.or g. APA headquarters office is at 1776 MassachusetVs Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20036. Planning for Hillside Development ROBERT B. OLSHANSKY, AICP TABLE OF CONTENTS A Brief History of Hillside Development and Its Regulation .......................................................... The Role of Planning ..................................................................................................... '"' 7 Purposes and Functions of Hillside Regulation ................................................................................. 9 Conclusions ............................................................................... · ........ 19 .. 21 Appendix A. References ........................................................................................................................... .......... 23 Appendix B. List of Jurisdictions Submitting Hillside Documents .................................... Appendix C. Selected Excerpts from Hillside Plans, Ordinances, .. 27 and Guidelines ............................................................................................... . ... 27 C-1. Htmtsville, Alabama, Mountainside Development District Regulations ................. .. 27 C-2. Scottsdale, Arizona, Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance ....................................... ii. 30 C-3. Berkeley, California, Fuel Rednction and Management Plan ................................................ ~i... 30 C-4. Los Angeles, California, Hillside Regulations ............................................................ ...31 C-5. Los Angeles County, California, Zoning Ordinance ................................................................ 34 C-6. Oakland, California, Zoning Regulations .......................................................................... 34 C-7. Rancho Cucamonga, California, Hillside Development Regulations ...................................... C-8. San Clemente, California, Hillside Development Ordinance ....................................................36 C-9. San Diego, California, Hillside Review Overlay Zone and Hillside Design ..... 38 and Development Guidelines ................................................................................................ C-10. San Rafael, California, Applicant's Guide to Procedures for Hillside Residential Development; Planning Department Procedures for ............ 41 Geotechuical/Hazardous Soils Review ............................................................................. C-Il. Santa Clarita, California, Ridgeline Preservation and ...42 Hillside Development Ordinance and Guidelines ..................................................... C-12. A Hillside Protection Strategy for Greater Cindrmati, Ohio ........................................... 44 C-13. Ogden, Utah, Sensitive Area Overlay Zone, . .. 46 Ogden City Development Code ..................................................................................... C-14. p . ~ .. . 48 ark City, Utah, Sensitive Area Overlay Zone Regulations ........................................ Figures 1. Grading Guidelines, Los Angeles County, California ...................................................... 4 2. T ' ..6 errata-Adaptive Architecture ............................................................................................ ZiiiZiiii~.... 8 3. Slope-Density Concept ......................................................................................................... . .......... 8 4. Density Transfers, Clustering, and Slope Density ............................................................ 10 5. Describing Slopes ................................................................................................................. 6. Cut and Fill Slopes ....................................................................................................... ' ....... 11 7. Hilltop Architecture Guidelines, Santa Clarlta, California ........................................................ 15 8. Fuel Modification Section Diagram, Santa Clarita, California .................................................. 9. Fire Protection on Hillsides, Los Angeles County, California ............................................ 17 CPD - Economic Development - Brownfields Economic Development Initiative - HUD Page 3 of 3 and receive grants under the BEDI programs. If a non-entitlement corn receives a BEDI grant and applies for Section 108 loan guarantee assisl applicable state entity (or HUD, in the case of Hawaii and New York) wi required to pledge Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds security for the loan guarantee. Content updated November 1, 2002 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Priva~ Telephone: (202) 708-1112 ~: (202) 708-1455 Visit a local HUD officenear 1/27/2003 CPD - Economic Development - Brownfields Economic Development Initiative - HUD Page 3 of 3 and receive grants under the BEDI programs. If a non-entitlement eom receives a BEDI grant and applies for Section 108 loan guarantee assis~ applicable state entity (or HUD, in the case of Hawaii and New York) wi required to pledge Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds security for the loan guarantee. Content updated November 1, 2002 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ~ Privac 451 7th Street S.W., Washington, DC 20410 Home Visit a local HUD office near you 1/27/2003 Planning for Hillside Development Hillsides pose unique problems for the construction and maintenance of human settlements. They are prone to natural hazards, and they topographically constrain the design of developments, For these reasons, hillside lands often remain vacant long after adjacent valley fioors are urbanized. Despite the constraints, they are attractive places to live because of the views and because of the sense of being close to nature. But excessive hillside development can diminish the very views, idyllic surroundings, and wildlife habitats that residents value. Local governments regulate hillside development for a variety of reasons. These include the protection of: · lives and property from landslides and fires; · natural resources, such as water suppiy; · environmental features and systems, such as river corridors, wildlife habitat, and natural vegetation; · aesthetic or scenic quality; and · access for residents, v/sitors, and public service providers. In practice, these goals are often intertwined. Because of the variety of geologic settings for hillside development and because of the different purposes that may lead a local government to develop hillside regulations, there is no "best" or "model" set of regulations that can be recommended. Indeed, many tradeoffs and choices must be made when making decisions about hillside development policies. It is not enough to hope that a hillside ordinance borrowed from a neighboring community will solve all one's problems. Does your community want to safely provide a large number of housing units? Or would you rather limit hillside development to low-density, upscale custom homes? Do you want to preserve only the appearance of the hills? Or would you rather emphasize the natural environment and wildlife habitat? Do you prefer wider roads for fire safety purposes or narrower roads that minimize slope disturbance? Would you rather have dense native vegetation for aesthetic and enviroranental purposes, or irrigated landscaping for fire safety? The list of choices could go on. Hillside regtdation generally takes one of three philo- sophical approaches. The first approach is to use site design and engineering techniques to vixtually eliminate all hazards to public safety. This is often accomplished by means of complete reconstruction of slopes to established engineering standards. The second approach is to perform selective grading, drainage Lmprovements. and vegetation clearance in order to achieve public safety purposes while still retaining some valuable natural features of hillsides. The third approach is to prohibit hillside development because of the natural resource value of hillsides and because of mistrust of the dependability of engineering solutions. Communities need to choose carefully among these approaches: ailow/ng intensive hillside development can permanently change the character of a community. In practice, most plans and ordinances contain elements of all three approaches. This can be problematic because the rationales underlying these approaches can conflict with each other. Still, many communities have found that it is possible, though not easy, to selectively combine parts of all three. This report argues for being more cater-al in designing hillside plans and ordinances, and being more explicit about the goals, values, and tradeoffs inherent in those plans and ordinances. There are at least two reasons for this. The first is to help planners to be able to craft regulations that more precisely meet the purposes of the community and its leaders. The second is to present more consistent, legally defensible regulations to potential developers. Given the scrutiny that is being applied to Iand-use regulations by private property rights advocates and the courts, local governments need to pay special attention to the reasons for theft ordinances and in designing the solutions to fit the problems. A more comprehensive consideration of the full range of issues presented in the list of questions above would help to improve the hillside ordinances in many communities. This report draws upon documents gathered from 190 local governments in 22 states to offer up a variety of answers to a community's questions about how to achieve its goals in regulating hillside development. AppendLx C offers excerpts from the hillside regulations and guidelines of 13 jurisdictions and one nonprofit agency that should pro',,e useful to those attempting to compose or revise their hillside regulations. A BRIEF HISTORY OF HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT AND ITS REGULATION Settlements have been built on hillsides for centuries (Abbott and Pollit 1981) for reasons of defense, hygiene. religious significance, or necessity due to limited level lands. Lq some landscapes, hillside development has distinct advantages. In central Italy, for example, most medieval towns were built on hilltops. These locations were easily fortified and defended, provided views of sttrrounding transportation routes, were above the malaria-infested wetlands in the river bottoms, and had well water available from aquifers in the horizontal limestone layers. With no sewers or storm drains, these elevated sites also had an automatic waste disposal system, as all refuse washed down into the valleys --Because o~ the variety of geologic settings for hillside development and because of the different purposes that may lead a local government to develop hillside regulations, there is no "best" or "model" set of regulations that can be recommended, (Carver 1985). Despite their iocational advamages, Italian hill towns have suffered numerous landslides over the years/e.g., Montelupone (Alexander 1989): Pienza tGlasftrrd 1962)~ and damaging urban landslides Iviewed by the author in Perugia and Asstsi). Rouillard (1987) writes that, during the nineteenth century, interest grew in the advantages of the healthy air and euphoric views offered from hillsides. Slopes "gave the city dweller a feeling of expansiveness and isolation." According to Rouillard. architects were challenged by the constraints of hillsides to find ever more spectacular sites to satisfy the desire to be close to the elements. Indeed, he notes, hillside residences often are designed to soar above the slope, to accentuate the sense of danger and discovery, rather than to adapt to the hillside's constraints. Later. hillside development became more of a necessity because of the diminishing flat land available. The hillsides of Los Angeles. for example, did not begin to be populated until the 1910s and 1920s, after the flatlands became too crowded. Hillsides provided an attractive location for a growing upper middle class, and the automobile provided accessibility. Between 1946 and 1962, 37,000 hillside residential lots were developed in the City of Los Angeles (Scuilin 1983). The earliest forms of hillside regulation consist of grading ordinances, pioneered in the City and County of Los Angeles in the 1950s (Scullin 1983). These ordinances were designed for the sole purpose of protecting lives and property from unengineered development of hillsides. They were initiated as a response to numerous damaging landslides during heavy rains in the winter of 1951-52, most of them caused by poorly placed fills. The first ordinance was adopted in Los Angeles in 1952 and was soon imitated by several other southern California municipalities. Further landslide events resulted in revisions to the ordinance in 1956 and 1963. Grading ordinances have now become widespread (see Scullin 1983). The Uniform Building Code (UBC) in 1964 used the southern Cglifornia grading codes as the basis for creating Chapter 70, which regulates excavation and grading. Its use is now required in every municipality in California. The other two model code organizations in the United States, the Building Officials and Code Administrators, and the Southern Building Code Congress International, both have grading codes similar to UBC Chapter 70. Chapter 70 is designed to provide a flexible framework for regulating grading. It emphasizes a process that depends heavily on professional expertise and oversight. It establishes roles for geotectmical engineers, engineering geologists, and building officials, and it requires inspections and approvals at key points in the grading process. Although it emphasizes desired performance rather than detailed standards, the code recommends minimum standards for height, gradient, drainage terraces, and struct~rral setbacks for cut and fill slopes. These standards, such as the maximum steepness ratio of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical for both cut and fill slopes, have become widely accepted in mass-grading designs. Grading ordinances, typically administered by building or engineering departments, have been highly successful in improving the safety of hillside development. To be most effective, the process begins with areawide geological mapping to place individual sites within a regional geomorphlc context (Erley and Kockelman 1981). These maps identify areas with potentially unstable slopes and are highly valuable tools m assessing the landslide potential of a proposed parcel or subdivision. The information can then be used as a basis for site-specific regulation, including prohibition of development on active slides, requirement for detailed geotechnical analysis and mitigation, and specific grading regulations. Although implementation can be problematic when local governments are too flexible in their enforcement (Olshausky 1990), such systems, where they operate, can be remarkably successful in reducing property damage and life loss f-rom landslides (Scullin 1983). From the literature, it appears that local planning departments began to regulate hillside construction in the 1950s (Clark 1959). PAS Report No. 126, Hillside Development, describes provisions for hillside properties in subdivision ordinances. Most of the ordinances described were enacted in the early I950s. Typically, the hillside provisions allowed for narrower streets and sidewalks, private access agreements, odd-shaped lots, and steep roadway segrnents for subdivisions in hillside areas. Many planners and developers were concerned about street widths. In what appears to have been a rebellion ~gainst prevailing subdivision standards, there was a concern that the standard street widths of flatland subdivisions were inappropriately wide for hillsides (Bohannon 1959; Clark 1959; Schreiber 1960). Excessiveiy wide streets were seen as expensive. wasteful of space, requiring excessive grading, and encouraging speeding. Developers, too, were becoming interested in the pros and cons of hillside development. They were attracted by people's willingness to pay for panoramic views, but they also were aware of the difficulties and costs of hillside development (Bohannon 1959). Some subdivision ordinances further limited or prohibited development in hazardous areas. Matin County, California, in the 1950s may have been the first to have a slope/lot size provision (Clark 1959; Thurow et al. 1975). Its zoning ordinance increased minimum lot size on steeper slopes. Portola Valley, California. was a pioneer in the 1960s in relating overall density to overage slope of a parcel (William Spangle and Associates 1988) and was likely the' forerunner of most of the sophisticated slope/density ordinances of today. Slope/density ordinances arrived in the 1960s and were quite con:anon by the mid-I970s, as noted in the PAS Report 307/308, Performance Controls for Sensitive Lands (Thurow et al. 1975). By the early 1970s, hillside regulation had become widespread. Chewning (I974) gathered ordinances. with diverse purposes, from 11 places across the United States. The concerns of these ordinances include the protection of watersheds, scenic quality, agricultural lands, public safety, and sensitive river bluffs. A landmark 1979 study by the U.S. GeoIogical Suawey on land-use planning for slope stability considerations described how to integrate slope stability concerns into a number of common land-use planning tools:zoning ordinance, subdivision ordinance, site development ordinance, building codes, project review, environmental impact assessment, and public facility policies and programs (Nelsen et al. 1979). As environmental concerns began to be integrated into comprehensive plans in the 1960s and 1970s, many plans addressed hillsides as valued components of the landscape. Depending on local geolo~c and~ecologic characteristics, protection of hillsides sometimes coincided with other environmental protection goals. For example, in McHarg's Plan for the Valleys (1969), forested slopes and steep slopes were protected, valley bottoms were protected because of their aquifer recharge functions, and development was recommended for the unforested plateaus. Boulder. Colorado, as early as 1959, limited sewer line extensions above the 5,750-foot elevation in order to protect the foothills, which were an important part of the community's sense of identity. In later years, Boulder depended on a more complex system of growth management and land acquisition to protect the hills from development (Cooper 1986). The 1970s saw the birth of erosion and sedimentation control ordinances, which are often closely related to grading ordinances (Goldman et al. 1986). Erosion control ordinances have grown as a resuit of Clean Water Act requirements to reduce nonpoint source pollutants, to which sediment is a major contributor. Because of Section 319 of the 1987 Amendments to the Clean Water Act, federal water-quality laws increasingly mandate reduction of sedimentation pollution. Erosion and sedimentation control reqmrements are one way of promoting the use of best management practices to improve water quality, as detailed in Schueler (1987). They try to prevent erosion through controls on site disturbance or vegetation removal, and they address sedimentation by encouraging methods that trap sediments before they reach watercourses. Erosion and sedimentation control ordinances are often integrated with grading ordinances. Although grading and erosion control ordinances are not limited to hillside areas, erosion ordinances usually target hillside developments because these sites have the gn'eatest potential erosion problems. General guides for construction on hillsides (i.e. other than the specific regulatory requirements contained in ordinances) began to be appear only in recent years tAbbott and Pollit 1981; Dorward 1990; Levine 1991: Moser 1991 ). Most of these guides emphasize techniques to nunimize grading on slopes and to avoid disturbing slopes steeper than about 35 to 50 percent. Goldman et al. (1986) state that "the best way to minimize the risk of creating erosion and sedimentation problems by construction is to disturb as little of the land surface as possible." Although they argue that development should be "fit to the terrain." their model ordinance takes a pragmatic engineering approach to mitigating the effects of mass grading. s environmental concerns began- to be integrated into comprehensiV~ plans in the 1960s and 1970s~ many. plans addressed hillsides as valued components of the landscape. Depending oh local geologic and. ~ ~ ecologic characteristicS, protection of billaides sombtimes coincided ~th':! other environmental protection goals. The newer publications argue that it is possible to provide for both public safety and aesthetics in hillside construction. Mass-graded developments can be designed to appear more natural, by means of "contour grading," which creates rounded slopes and blends gently in with the adjacent natural landscape. Many engineers in recent years have supported the idea of contour grading. For example, civil engineer William Moser (1991). in his guidelines for successful hillside development, writes: "When completed, the development should not dominate the landscape. The development should instead appear to be a natural Figure 1, Grading Guidelines, Los Angeles County, California Plan View: Not this Elevation View: ~.~.~~Ridgeline Hill Ridgeline ' Bluff valley, trees Ridgeline Varied banks - Bluff and pads preserved Dothis Deep fill at valley - x~ingle access Not this A. Grading should ~e cl~sturbamce to the natural lancLform, not destroy visual quality and community character nor create conditions that result in landslides, flooding, or erosion. B. No g~acling shall take place in a known or suspected hazardous areas as deteraCnecl by the Department of 'Public Works without a geological sur~rey and/or other data and tests as requested. No grading shall take place m a Significant Ecological Area (SEA). unless an Environmental or Archaeological Repor~ is submitted .... Grading in an SEA area should generally be avoided. C. Good grading desig~ must be exercised for sMety as well as aesthetics and should incorporate die following 1. U~ization of land form or contour measures to produce cut-and-fill slopes compatible with ex/sting land character. Continuous unbroken slope surfaces tlmt are visible from offsite are discouraged, Figure 1. Continued 2. Graded slopes cotuourect by varying slope increments and undulating banl<s vertically and horizontally. 3. Varied cut-and-fill banks and drainage t6rrace ~pacing to alleviate monotony and allow random landscaping. 4. Berms at top of sIopes and other locations used te screen, vary profile, and insure drainage away from slopes.. · 5. A dsainage plan devised to d~ect flow to streets or approved collector systems that will be maintained b a public ag6mcy or maintenance district. 6. Varied pad elevations above street level to avoid appearance of monotonous flat, level pads. 7. Creation of views from tdllside sites. 8. Slopes less steep thaz~ 2-te-I are encouraged and ma' not requ/re drainage systems, if approved by the Department of Pubtic Works. 9. Cuts and ~ls in excess of 50-feet depth are discouraged. Landform Grading: \ ,.,,.,i,/,. ound afl cut e~ges Rounded 2:1 bank ~s 2:1 bank mom na~6ral' Typical brow ditch with A.C · '"~' . 'i'h: or concrete liner appropriate Varying contours Natural swale undulating bank Do this -- -- ~ Slope bank · · Level pads L CLLi i , Straight unbroksn contour Not this Figure 2. Terrain-Adaptive Architecture Develop terrain-adaptive amhiteoture for steep elopes. On steeply sloping sites, the propsed building should step down the hillside. Terrain-Adaptive Architecture Side garage access requires less site disturbance. Cross Section of Downhill Unit Unit design can take up grade within the buiding and provides easier access from the street. Drive-under garage provides easier access from the street. hillside, with homes randomly scattered." Brandes and Luzier (1991) use the term "terrain-adaptive housing" to describe housing that "steps with the landform and reduces the need for massive earth moving and retain/ng walls." (See Figure 2.) The most expensive approach is to custom desigu each structure to fit on its lot with minimal grading. Abbott and Pollit (1981) argue that hill housing even has advantages over flatland housing. It makes efficient use of available inexpensive hillside ]and and saves fertile valleys for agriculture. Hill housing can provide air and light to a great density of dwelling units, while, unlike high rises, providing ground-level access to all residences. They argue for dense tdlI housing as an aIternat/ve to the extremes of high rises or low-density sprawl. "The appropriate use of sensitively designed hill housing could do much to redeem the lack of human-scaled buildings and spaces...that is missing from so much contemporary housing." We need to examine the possibilities of industrialized hill developments in urban areas, they say. Their book makes a case for "stepped housing" as an industrial alternative to high rises. These are connected groups of hillside dwellings, arranged as stair steps on the slope. This argument seems persuasive in the European context but is less well-suited to the United States, with its continuing demand for detached single-family Probably the newest and most comprehensive study on hillside development was published in 1991 by The Hillside Trust, a nonprofit organization in Cincinatti, Ohio, dedicated to the thoughtful use and preservation of Cincinatti's l:fillsides. This study, supported by the U.S. Forest Service and performed in cooperation with faculty and students at the University of Cins/natti, looked at all aspects of hillside management: aesthetics, stability, and env/ronment. This was an interesting study because, not only are the hillsides along the Ohio River a valuable visual resource, but they are also among the most unstable in the country, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. The study surveyed existing ordinances from around the country in order to identify those most relevant for the Cincinatti area. (See Appendix C-12 for an excerpt from th0t study.) The emphasis of the recommendations, as is true of many of the plans and ordinances reviewed here, is on the preservation of the visual character of the hillsides and the minimization of hillside grading and terracing. What distinguishes the Hillside Trust study is the thorough research and data that form the basis for its conclusions. Despite the near unanimity of pleas in both the literature and local plans to minimize grading, the reality of hillside development in the United States is a prolLferation of mass-graded subdivisions with level building pads. There are at least three reasons for this. First, it is a much less expensive way to build. Large- scale developers can execute mass-produced designs on flat pads. It requires less customized engineering and design for each lot, and allows for contractors to use assembly-line construe°don techniques. It may not satisfy the aesthetic of an architect like Roulllard, but such housing is affordable to middie-dass families. Second, it follows logically from Abbott and Pollit's argument, but, in the American context, housing demand is so extreme in metropolitan areas that the hillsides are now being used for mass-produced housing. And, in America, that means detached single- family homes. Third, mass ,grading is the surest way to ensure stability of as many lots as possible in landslide- ridden terrains. Mass grading, if done properly, completely reconstructs the hillside, removes all potential landslide debris, and provides subsurface drainage to produce stable, geologicaily homogeneous (no surprises here) manufactured slopes. Even if the execution may occasionally have problems, it is the most efficient and least error-prone way to build large numbers of hifiside urdts. THE ROLE OF PLANNING From a planning point of view, as opposed to engineering or landscape design, what is the best form of hillside development? Is it better to have weE- designed, highiclensity development that respects natural features as Abbott and Polllt suggest? Such a system can meet housing needs, provide for safety in intensely developed zones, and protect natural qualities in open space areas. Is it best to have well-engineered mass grading? This is the optimal way to meet American demands for single-family homes and views in a manner that is safe and relatively affordable to the middle class. Or is it best to simply reduce density on slopes, thereby retaining their visual qualities for all the people who look at them from the valleys? Finally, is it possible to meet all the goals--provide for safety, protect the environment, maintain aesthetic quality, and provide affordable dwellings? Planners often devise multipurpose "hillside ordinances," not admitting the inherent contradictions of purpose some of these represent. If one of the fundamental qualifies of a good comprehensive plan is internal consistency, the 14ilside plan and its implementtng ordinances must have clear and consistent purposes. There must be an explicit connection between the plarming goals and the ordinance. Anything less holds the potential for conflict and litigation as controversial projects are proposed and approved. Hillside development was recognized as a planning problem in Chapter 7 of PAS Report 307/308, Performance Controls for Sensitive Lands (Thurow et al. 1975). The authors reviewed hillside regulations from 28 communities, and grading regulations from seven communities. The report found that hillside regulations could be classified as follows: Slope/Density Provisions. These reduce allowable densities on hillsides: the steeper the slope, the less the allowed density. This can be accomplished by (1) establishing mihimum lot sizes for steep slopes, (2) specifying a percentage of each hillside site to be retained in a natural state, or (3) reducing the number of allowable dwelling units on steep slopes. Soil Overlays. These provisions key development regxtlations to soil type, based on maps by the Soil Conservation Service. Figure 3. Slope-Density Concept Vegetation retained The Guiding Principles Approach. This approach creates hillside overlay distr~cts to cover all hillside lands in a jurisdiction. A set of guiding principles is applied to all proposed development in these areas. These regulations are usually flexible, allowing for tailoring of development to the characteristics of each site and encouraging innovative approaches to attain the desired ends. Slope/density regulations are perhaps the most common planning approach to killside development control, appearing in nearly half the documents we collected. One of the first communities to initiate this approach was Portola Valley, California, in the 1960s (William Spangle and Associates, Inc. 1988). This type of regulation has grown in popularity over the last 30 years because most communities want to reduce the negative impacts of hillside development: excessive cuts and fills, ugly scars, and erosion and drainage problems. It is logical to address these problems by reducing land-use intensity as slopes increase. In particular, slope/density reb~ilations were seen as a way to respond to the geometrical realities of hillside grading: the grading required to develop level Figure 4. Density Transfers, Clustering, and Slope Density Conventional Subdivision A-A Zoning: 24 Units Slope-Density Formula Cluster Development: 24 Unit ..... :.:.........-?~.::::.....~,...... ~~'::i.I~ ~'-T~."j.- ..... ~ ..:':::' In Hamilton County, Ohio, hillside zoning has required minimum lot sizes of one acre under the A-A Residence Zoning District, which often fosters the extdnsive modification of natural landforms and destruction of woodlands, ground cover, and natural drainage cover. More recently, innovative zoning schemes involving density transfer and clustering have been deveIoped to offset these problems. For example, the A-A residence requirements were changed by incorporating a slope- density formula into the regulations. surfaces increases dramatically with slope, until, at slopes of 50 percent (2 horizontal to 1 vertical), the required 2:1 cut or fill slope will theoretically extend limitlessly. (See the section on topography and geometry below, and Figures 5 and 6.) Thus, if a community wants to Limit the extent of grading, it can do so by limiting the amount of development on steep slopes. Slope/density regazlations have more purposes than just the limitation of grading. If grading were the oniy concern, communities could limif hillside grading more directly by limiting grading on steep slopes and encouraging the use of elevated structures and retaining walls that minim/ze major slope modifications. The fact that so many communities do not take this direct route is because slope/density regulations have other impl/cif goals. For instance, they clearly imply that steeply sloped hillside areas are inherently uusuited for development for reasons of pubEc safety, erosion, aesthetics, or general environmental protection. They aEow some hillside development so that property owners can retain some use of their land. But the ordinances assume that, if the mount of hillside development can be reduced as much as possible, the inevitable problems of hillside development will be similarly reduced. The Rancho Cucamonga, California, ordinance states that the goal of slope/density reslriction is to "minirnize grading, removal of vegetation, land instability, and fire hazards." Many planners and geologists believe that, even with the best exploration and analysis of a site, surprises often occur because the earth is natural/y heterogeneous. Gravity wants to pug slopes down and will do so if a weakness manifests itself, such as a thin slippery clay layer hidden at depth. Despite the best engineering intentions, design and construction errors do occur (Olshansky 1990), and slopes are iess forgiving of error than are level sites. These errors often end up being costly to the municipality. As observed even by hillside development advocates Abbott and Pollit (1981, 252), a hillaide client "should be made aware that there is frequently an element of risk involved with developing hillside sites." In short, slope/deusity regulations imply that it is best to reduce development on steep slopes because engineering solutions may fail. Even so, grading ordinances form a necessary complement to slope/ density ordinances: they ensure that the Iots that are developed are done so as safely as possible. Some of the ordinances recognize that there may be situations in which hillside development restrictions unduly burden property owners. Park City, Utah, lays out a detailed procedure whereby a property owner can petition for relief from econornic hardship. (See Appendix C-14.) If the hardship petition is approved, the city may recommend an appropriate solution, such as transfer of density, waiver of permit fees, duster development, or acquisition. Scottsdale, Arizona, has provisions for density transfer out of environmentally constrained areas into less constrained areas. (See Appendix C-2.) San Rafael, California, prohibits development w/thin 100 feet of ridgelines, except where the prohibition would deprive the property owner of all reasonable economic use of the land; construction is then allowed, subject to strict guidelines. Planning, of course, can play a significant role in creating a process that leads to a more appropriate and more intelligent plan and ordinance. Ideally, hinside planning should be a part of a comprehensive plamnng process. For example, the San Rafael, California, award- winning 1991 Hillside Residential Design Gu/delines Manual grew out of poetics in the 1988 General Plan. The manual itself was the result of a planning process involving a 15-member committee representing a range of community interests. A plan should be more than just a vehicle for slope/density regulation; rather, it should explicitly address the underlying rationale for any subsequent regulations. PURPOSES AND FUNCTIONS OF HILLSIDE REGULATION Communities choose to regulate hillside development for a variety of reasons. This part of the report outlines the various purposes and functions of hillside regulation. In 1993, we collected 274 hillside plans, ordinances, and guidelines from 190 local governments in 22 states. Some 'were explicitly written for regulating development on hillsides; others applied to all sensitive lands in the community. Some were stand-alone documents, and others were simply brief excerpts or tables from the subdivision ordinance. They varied in length from one page to more than 100 pages. Some were in legalese, whereas others were heavily illustrated with design do's and don'ts. In total, this collection shows recognition by planners of a variety of complex, and often conflicting, issues regarding development of hillsides. (Appendix C contains excerpts from 14 of the documents we received.) Topography and Geometry The most obvious characteristic of hillsides is that they are not level. This simple geometric fact leads to a number of concerns. Fundamentally, there are inherent problems in placing level human structures on sloping surfaces. Structures must be either excavated into the slope or protrude over the slope. It is nearly impossible to build structures and roads on a slope without disturbing the surface. And disturbed surfaces create loose materials, which tend to move downhill. Structures, too, w/Il experience a component of gravitational force that tries to move them downhill. This makes hillside structure design inherently more complicated than structure design for fiat, land buildings. Because of geometry, the act of grading a level building pad or roadway disturbs much more than just the resultant level area. The cut and fill must extend for some distance up and down slope before it meets the naroxal grade. The steeper the natural slope, the greater the area that must be disturbed. On very steep slopes, the solution is to n4nimize land disturbance by building roads and structures on piers. This is common highway engineering practice in Europe and Japan. Most jurisdictions with hillaide ordinances define "hillside' as any site exceeding a sped(led percent slope (60 percent of the ordinances we reviewed set the Figure 5. Describing Slopes The steepness of slopes can be described in degrees or as a percent or ratio. Planners typically describe slopes by the ra~in of elevation change to horizontal distance, ex-pressed as a percent. Civil engineers typically express slope as a ratio of horizontal distance to one unit of elevation change. Scientists generally express slope in degrees. 3~ne following example shows the three ways tc measure a slope. Although hillside regulatinns may be expressed in terms of percent slope, they may be based on scientific or engineering s~udies using degrees or ratio. The 100 = 0.5 = 50pemem 26.6 degrees (~ote that ~n (26.6~) = 0.5 conversion chart at the bottom of this page provides a simple means of quickly estimating eqnivalencies between the three scales. Note that it is possible to have a slope greater tlmu 100 percent. In reality, 100 percent (45 degrse,~ slopes are raze, and. because they are so difficult to climb, they appear to peopIeto be near vertical. When regulations prohibit subdivision or construction on steep slopes, they must define a m~nimum area. Clearly, if only a 10-square-foot area exceeds the regulatory slope threshold, it would not malco sense to prohibit construction. But how extensive does the steep slope need to be? It is easiest for the regulation to refer to the average slope of the parcel being regulated: if the regulation refers to siting within the parcel, the footprint of the proposed building should cover an area with average slope below the threshold, How stable are various slopes? The answer to this question depends on the type of geologic materials. soils, moisture content, and vegetative cover. A pile of dry sand will be stable at slopes up to 34 degrees (68 percent). Studies bv the U.S. Geological Survey in Calif')mia found that soll S~ps, which cause avalanche-like failures commonly initiate on slopes of 35 t~ 100 per~en~; slower-moving earth flows occur mos~ often on slopes of 30 to 66 percent. Serious erosion can occur on much shallower slopes. Because stability of slopes, d~pends so much on the geoingi~ material, it is.. important not to t commm~ities allow it. Figure 6. Cut and Fill Slopes lO0-foot pad 125 feet graded 166 feet graded 250 feet graded These diagrams illustrate the amount of grading necessary to create a level pad, lO0-feet wide, on natural slopes of 10, 20, and 30 percent. This assumes maximum 2:1 (50 percent) steepness of cut and fiII sIopes, as epecified in the Unifotm Building Code. Fhe amount of area disturbed by grading increases dramatically as slopes get steeper because it takes a greater distance for the 2:1 cut and fill slopes to meet back up with the existing grade. For very steep slopes, it becomes necessary to use retaining walls or piers in order to create level floor or pavement surfaces Lhreshold at 10 to 15 percent slope). Many commrrnJties. such as Berkeley and Los Angeles, Callfor~a, simply delineate a hillside overlay zone, encompassing the hilly area that req~es special treatment. Some communities req~re more r~gorous procedures or stricter stand~rds of review for steeper slopes. Rancho Cucamonga, California, allows staff review for projects on slopes shallower than 15 percent but requires planning commission review for projects on slopes of 15 percent or steeper. (See AppendLx C-7). Slope Stability Hillsides ~e ittherentiy unstable. The shape ~nd steepness of a slope represents an equiI~brium between the geologic forces uplLR~g potions of the earth's crust and the forces of wind and water wearing it down. Any changes in this system--uplLf~g or g~ounct shaking by earthquakes, unde~g of a slope by humans or flow~g rivers, unusually heavy rains, excessive landscape watering, or the focusing of storm runoff by human-built chatme]s or storm clzain oulleLs--can cause erosion or ~andslidi~g. Mass movement (landsliding). As With erosion, landsliding occurs frequently in hilly regions and oversteepened river bluffs and seacliffs all over the world. In certain landscapes, landslides are a common natural means of adjusting slopes oversteepened by uplift or weakened by weathering to a more stable conflgxtration. Landslides occur when the forces that instigate movement exceed the forces that resist movement. The ratio of these two forces is called the "factor of safety" (see, e.g., Sowers 1979). Resisting forces can decrease when: · materials lose strength because of the introduction of water (from increased rainfall, or human interference); · long-term weathering decreases strength of materials; or · removal of deep-rooted woody vegetaflon reduces root resistance to movement. Alternatively, destabilizing forces can increase because of: · removal of support (by excavation, or undercutting by flowing water); · loading (by human structures or fills, or by natural sediment accumulations); · accelerations (earthquakes, heavy traffic); or · rapid build-up of underground water pressures - (from heavy precipitation). Generally, these factors work together, cumulatively decreasing the stability of a slope, until one triggering event leads to a disaster. Tire most common triggering mechanism is water, usually by heavy rainfall. But human alteration of land surfaces can contribute to slope destabilizafion by: · placing fills on top of marginally stable slopes; · cutting slopes at too steep an angle or undermining the toe of a slope; · redirecting storm runoff so as to concentrate flows artificially onto portions of the landscape not prepared to receive them; · removing woody vegetation; · adding water by means of hillside septic systems; or · excessive landscape irrigation. The latter two are frequently overlooked causes of slope instability. They can often add water at rates that equal or exceed average annual rainfall, thereby effectively changing the "climate" at a site to one under which a slope is no longer stable. Creep. Slope materials creep slowly and inexorably downhill due to a variety of forces. It may be primarily by landsliding and erosion, or it may be more subtle: dist2rbed soil from rodent burrows gradually moving materials down slope or the annual expansion and contraction of expansive clays or frost heaves (Carson and Kirkby 1972). Gravity is a constant concern on hillsides. And, unlike its effect on structures on level ground, gravity has differential effects on structures as materials load against one side and undermine the other. As a result, hillside foundations must necessarily be more sophisticated and more costly than foundations constructed on level ground. Threats to lives and property. Landslides can range f-rom a few feet in width to greater than a mile. They can occur in a matter of seconds or creep for several months. They can engulf property from above or undermine it from below. The range of sizes and speeds means that landslides pose a variety of hazards to human settlements. Landslides in the United States cause annual economic losses estimated at up to 51.5 billion (Schuster and Fleming 1986). Landslides occur throughout the United States, especially in California, Washington, Oregon, Utah, Colorado. and the Appalachian states (Brabb 1989 ~. Landslides damage roadways, and long-term route closures can have major repercussions in an area's economy· As a hazard to public safety, landslides threaten people in residences, in businesses, and on roadways. For example, storms in the San Francisco Bay area in 1982 accounted for 25 landslide-caused deaths, and a single landslide in Mameyes, Puerto Rico. killed more than 100 people in 1985 (Olshansky 1990). Grading ordinances. This study specifically did not collect grading ordinances because they are widespread and have a commonly accepted format. Still, it is notable that many hillside ordinances are designed to coordinate with a grading ordinance or, in some cases, to supplement one. The City of San Rafael, California, requires reports for ail residential projects on slopes steeper than 25 percent, but the report requirements vary, depending on the site's rating on the official "relative slope stability maps." (See Appendix C-10.) Sites rated least hazardous require a preliminary geologic report, which is reviewed by a staff engineer. Sites rated most hazardous require a more detailed geotechnical investigation report, which is reviewed by a geotechnical review board of consultants· A set of guidelines clearly spells out the content requirements for each type of report. For development on designated potentially unstable lands, the City of Huntsville, Alabama, requires a report and statement by an engineer that the proposed development is safe. It also requires a signed statement by the owners that they are aware of the property's hazards. Often, however, the hillside engineering required to meet the prov~sinns of a grading ordirmmce is done at the expense of aesthetic and environmental concerns. Total reconstruction of hillsides by mass grading is often the safest approach, particularly if the goal is to provide mass-produced, affordable housing rather than expensive custom homes. Many communities adopt such regulations for the obvious public safety reasons and then later wonder whether they could have used a more sophisticated, site-specific approach that would also retain some of the natural qualities of their hillsides. D?ainage and Erosion Hillside drainage needs careful management. When rainfall strikes a slope, it runs off rapidly. Thus, slope runoff is greater in both quantity and velocity than it would be from level ground. The hydrologic system responds suddenly, with little warning. This means that, in a heavy rainstorm, flash flooding and gully erosion can occur suddenly and be very hard to alleviate in a timely fashion. Slight changes in topography or drainage systems can redirect this large quantity of fast-flowing storm rtmoff onto areas not equipped to receive it. Erosion is a natural process. Over the course of geologic time, hills are inexorably worn away by water and wind. But erosion that is accelerated over its natural rate can cause problems. It can deposit silt in streams and lakes, thereby damaging bottom habitats and affecting the entire ~quatic food chain. Silt deposition in streams can raise water levels, which causes additional streambank erosion and resultant silt deposition downstream, thereby triggering a cycle of erosion and deposition all the way down to the stream's mouth. Sediment deposition also can damage human structures, affect adjacent property owners, and create maintenance problems on roadways and in storm drain systems. The prime cause of accelerated erosion is vegetation removal. Vegetation removal increases sediment transport on a slope by a factor of about 1,000 to 10,000 (Carson and Kirkby 1972). Vegetation reduces erosion in four ways. 1) Roots increase infiltration, which reduces storm runoff volume over the slope. 2) Foliage reduces tlre velocity of raindrops, which reduces their energy when then strike the ground. 3) Vegetation increases the roughness of the ground surface, which slows the velocity of surface water 4) Roots bind the soil. Of these phenomena, the first is by far the most important (Carson and Kirkby 1972). Note that vegetation has relatively little effect on deep-seated landsliding, although, in some cases, deep roots of woody vegetation can help to retard shallow landsliding (Gray and Leiser 1982; Sidle, Pearce, and O'Loughlin 1985). Another siguiflcant cause of erosion is the artificial focusing of stormwater flows onto unprotected slopes. Human alteration of drainage patterns can increase and redirect flows onto slopes that are not prepared to resist the increased velocities or volumes of water. Hillside construction that does not respect the natural hydrologic processes can easily lead to erosion problems. Erosion has substantial direct and indirect costs. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in 1978 estimated that 8 percent of stream bank miles were experiencing erosion, at a cost of about $270 million annually (reported in Gray and Leiser 1982). The annual costs of sediment removal from streams, harbors, and roadways is much harder to estimate. Sedimentation has effects that go beyond costs of removal. It can permanently damage aquatic habitats in Iakes and streams, and it can dramatically reduce reservoir storage capacity. Drainage and erosion control often are handled by separate ordinances or by integration into a grading or subdivision ordinance. There are advantages to combining related topics into a single ordinance: internal consistency is easier to achieve with one ordinance than among several ordinances created at different times. Goldman et al. (1986), for example, provide a model integrated grading, drainage, erosion, and sediment control ordinance. Ogden, Utah, has a sensitive area overlay zone ordinance that integrates a broad range of hillside management issues. (See Appendix C-13.) It includes requirements for storm drainage improvements, setbacks from drainage channels, erosion control studies, and revegetation requirements for disturbed areas. The ordinance also addresses lot size, grading, fire safety, streets, and architectural design. Huntsville Alabama, regulates impervious cover and building footprint according to slope. Infrastructure Extending infrastructure up to hillside areas can be expensive. Water supply must have adequate pressure to reach upper elevations. Often, water must be pumped to tanks on the tops of the hills to then be able to provide sufficient hydraulic head to adequately service the hillside development below. Other service lines---sewage, electric- ity, telephone~must be extended along roadways that are akeady often difilcult to design and construct. Hillside roads entail considerably more expensive design and construction than do roads in more level terrain. They involve cuts on the upshipe side and fills on the down slope side. Not only does this type of construction cost money, but it also invites slope instability ff improperly done. Because of the geometry of hillsides, the cut and fill areas required are often much wider than the normal city or county right-ob way. On slopes greater than 20 percent, most of the fight-of-way is consttmed by the drainage ditch along the road (Dorward 1990). Often, costly retaining wails or even pier-supported roadways are the only solution. As hillside roads get wider, costs can increase dramatically because of the additional cuts and fills involved. Yet, for traffic safety reasons, hillside roads often need to have additional lanes, to allow for uphill passing of slow-moving vehicles or for added visibility on tight curves. Hillside roads reqtrire frequent maintenance. Eroded slopes must be repaired, sediment and fallen rock cleaned from the roadway, culverts kept free of sediments and other debris. Landshdes and road washouts must be repaired promptly in order to retain access. Because the utility rights-of-way usually are in the roadway, slope failure of a section of road can be more than merely an access problem. Hillside areas present problems of access for residents, visitors, and emergency service vehicles. Roads are steep, winding, and often narrow because of topographic constraints. Lack of visibility can pose safety problems w/th blind curves and steep accesses from driveways or at intersections. Access to a developed area is often, of topograptfic necessity, limited to a single road. Should the road get blocked by a landslide or fire, occupants can be trapped. For example, in the Oakland-Berkeley fire of 1991, most of the 25 fatalities were people trying to evacuate (Federal Emergency Management Agency 1992). And hillside roads are highly susceptible to precisely these types of events. Most developments try to provide more than one access road, but often this can be physically difficult to accomplish. Road systems on hillsides can be confusing and difficult for visitors. Changes of road direction can disorient visitors, and lack of turnoff or turnaround areas can make their task more difficult. Lack of adequate on- or off-street parking can create congestion when residents host several visitors. Nonresidential uses in hillside areas, such as entertainment or fairs, can cause considerable congestion problems. Lack of level areas for residential parking can be problematic. Driveways often are steep. Garages can be very costly, requiring either excavation into the uphill slope or elevation above the downhill slope. On-street parking on narrow hillside roads often is very limited and can dangerously interfere with traffic. Some cities recommend prohibition of on- street parking and provision of designated parking areas. Oakland, California, requires three off-street parking spaces on streets that prohibit parking, unless lots are too narrow (less than 55 feet) or too steep (greater than 20 percent slope) to accommodate so many spaces. (See Appendix C-6.) Narrow roads and steep grades reduce transit accessibility, which reduces the mobility of the elderly and the very young. The difficulty of walking up hills also reduces the mobility of these groups, particularly if sidewalks are absent. Hillsides are the domain of the automobile; one cannot survive in the hills without one. Furthermore, commercial areas are unlikely to be located in steep hillside areas, so one must usually drive down the hill to reach even neighborhood retail services. One of the most significant access problems is that of emergency vehicles, particularly fire trucks. Fires require rapid evacuation and ready access for fire trucks. But steep, narrow roads are often not up to the task, particularly if they are lined with parked cars, legal and othervwise. Narrow roads blocked with cars posed a major hindrance to fire fighters in the Oakland Hills fire of 1991 (National Fire Protection Association 1992). Many communities reg~Iate road widths and on- street parking in hillside areas in order to ensure adequate fire truck access. Because of continuing problems over the years, the City of Los Angeles now requires minimum pavement width of 28 feet for hillside streets. (See Appendix C-4.) Aesthetics and Visual Quality Hills are highly visible from surrounding areas. Therefore, whatever is done to them becomes known to a wide surrounding community. Aesthetic reasons were the most common stated purpose in the documents we selected (explicitly identified by 75 percent of the jurisdictions). The most frequent aesthetic issue has to do with the desire of neighbors, both near and distant, to not see new lffllside construction. This desire may llave a variety of underlying reasons. Distant neighbors may object to changes in the topographic appearance, upsetting the natural shape of the hill. This concern is most frequently manifested as prohibiilons against building on ridgelines, such as in Santa Clarita and Moraga, California, or prohibitions against mass grading. Some corrmnunittes, such as the City of San Diego, require graded hiEs/des to be contoured to a natural-appearing slope. (See Appendix C-9.) An increasingly popular concept, common in many of the ordinances developed in the 1980s, is the idea of "contour grading," in which graded hillslopes are to be rounded in appearance and blend in with the adjacent natural slopes. Taking this idea a step further is the notion of "landform grading," in which graded slopes have an undulating surface, similar to natural landforms. (See Fi~mare 1 above.) Citizens may also object to upsetting the natural qualities and vegetation patterns of tire natural hillside. Regulations to address this might be as simple as limitations on vegetation removal, or they might involve more complex design issues, such as limits on building bulk, shape, height, or color. Revegetation requirements can, in the long run, result in a natural appearance that masks the harsh outlines of new structures. Nearby neighbors share many of the concerns of distant neighbors. In addition, they do not want new buildings or trees to block their views. They may want landscaping to hide new buildings, but only so Iong as new trees do not block their views. Nearby neighbors are also concerned about privacy and do not want new neighbors to have a clear view of their own houses and yards. Hillsides also have more general aesthetic values to many communities. They create a sense of spatial enclosure as they define the boundaries of the urbanized area. They shape a community's sense of place (see Lynch 1976). They also contribute to a community's sense of identity; the hills form a cherished part of the landscape, a permanent visual presence that exemplifies what is unique about the community. The City of Santa Clarita, California, explicitly identifies "sense of place" as one of the goals of its hillside regulations. (See Figure 7 and AppendLx C-II.) In Lynch's urban design vocabulary, hills form important edges to the developed landscape, and prominent peaks have significance as identifiable landmarks to area residents. In highly urbanized areas, the importance of the hillside boundary is often in its role as an edge between city and nature; in such cases, it is not just the hies that are important, but rather their retention as natural open space. Figure 7. Hilltop Architecture Guidelines, Santa Clarita, California Overemphasized vertical structures disrupt the natttral silhouette of the hillside; therefore, structures should be designed so that the slope angle of the roof pitch is generally at or below the angle of the natrtral hillside or manufactured slope. Retention of hillside hilltop and hides cut and fill Additional building setback The use of natural materlais and window placement in small increments creates interesting small- scale patterns and is encouraged. Massing of structural elements such as large roof areas should be broken up to approximate the natural slopes. Natural Qualities Because hillsides are often the last undeveloped places, they are the last remaining natural areas and are the final refuges for many animal species, such as deer, coyotes, and raptors. But even if they are not the only remaining natural areas in a region, their topographic and geologic qualifies create a variety of unique vegetation communities and wildlife habitats: wood- lands, canyons, wild riparian commurdties, cliffside nesting areas, and springs. For these environmental reasons, many hillside areas are protected in order to preserve biodiversity as well as to provide human access to these natural areas. Some ordinances encour- age duetering, and some, such as Scottsdale, Arizona, have minimum percent open space requirements m order to preserve natural areas. (See Appendix C-2.j Note that ordinances oriented toward aesthetics, such as ridgeline protection ordinances, can run counter to goals of habitat protection. For example, many communities that prohibit ridgeline development must of necessity encourage the grading and filling of canyon bottoms, which are often valuable wildlife habitats. Fire Hazard Hillsides are fire-prone, particularly in the arid western states. The extensive natural vegetation in remote hillside areas means that fires can start undetected or undeterred and have plenty of fuel to Figure 8. Fuel Modification Section Diagram, Santa Clarita, California : The width of each fuel modification clearing zone should should be a wet ,z,~,n,e. Zone 'B sh~ld be 75 f~f; , be measwed from all dweKing structures and exhiVoifed on wide, and Zone ' C ' should be 50 feet Wide.. .. the Fuel Modification Zone Map. This map should be ii. On canyons and draws, Up-Slope Ccmditi~r~ Zoike "At' provided by the applicant as part of the landscape should be 100 feet wide, of whic~ the first 50 £eet ' development drawings. The {uel modification deering should be in a wet zone. Zone "B' should be 30 feel zone widths for specific areas should be determined on following bas~s. Where a fuel modification clearing zone coincides wi~zh an tmgatect wet zone, the plant spacing reclutrements within the wet zone may be superseded w~th app~ovel o£ the Director of Parks and Recreation and the FireMarsbaL (See [sculpV. u'ed slope plantin~ guidelines].) i. On ridges and spines, Down-Slope Condition Zone "A" should be 125 ~eet wide. of which the first 75 feet wide, and Zone 'C' should be 20 feet wide. iiL Where slopes are determined to be inaccessible du6 to extreme steepness or lands,Ii,de danger, v~getation sho~zld be modffied as per Zone 'A' standards in all areas which · cau be reached at the tops and toes ofsuch sIopeE. ' ~ ,,,~.~ [Guidelines list other modifications in the zgne relating to plant types and thinn~g. See Appendix C of th~ PAS Re~ort for full text.] . Existing grasses and native ~vegetation maintained at six inches or lower Seeded taw-tael plasting -- maintained at two feet or lower Typical existing chaparral ! P.L asd/or f-- shrubs heeded up lo six feet and cleared at spacing shown 1~ ~gstation ~Onunts~i~de ' fuel modification ~ / Undisturbed native vegetation outside of fuel modificatioL Typical existing chaparral zones shrubs headed up to six feet and cleared at spacin~ shown Seeded taw-fuel planting maintained at two feet or lower '~ six inches o[ lower ~ ~~~ Figure 9. Fire Protection on Hillsides,Los Angeles County, California A. Hillside areas are especiany prone to devastating rites. Each proposed development shall be evaluated for fire potential fire hazard. Vegetation types and the area's fire history sb, all be considered .... 1. Brush and hazard areas cleared and maintained .... 2. Open space areas maintained by establishing a Hc~meowners Association or Maintenance District. 3. New planting featuring fire- and drought- resistant species .... · 4. Buildings should be setback a minimum 6f 20 ~6et from downsIopes. Exceptions shall be considered for minimal downslopes, special building design features, and/or lack of vegetative fuel 5. Roofs, overhangs, and rmdersides of exposed balconies protected with fire-resistant materials:. 100 fl. All native growth over 18 inches removed Roof: Eaves and balconly: 20 fl. fire-retardant material -- Planting: fire resistant Native brush thinned, maintained grow. Fires, fanned by hot winds, move rapidly uphill, posing particular hazards for developments on steep hillsides. Fires spreading uphill move faster, burn hotter, and have longer flame lengths than fires spreading downhill or across level ground. Hillside fires are difficult to fight. Because of all the fuel, they can build rapidly and become huge comqagrafions by the time they meet the edge of urban development. Road access and water supply are limited, rugged terrain is difficult for fire fighters, and local winds can be unpredictable. Some architectural features, such as overhanging balconies or eaves, increase susceptibility to fire. Some communities require fire-resistant roofing materials in hillside areas. Rancho Cucamonga, California, in its hillside development guidelines, recommends noncombustible material for roofing, exterior walls, and ail overhangs. (See AppendLx C-4.) But even these proven public safety regulations can be controversial because of their effects on architectural styles and neighborhood appearance. Fire regulations may also regulate landscaping by vegetation type, height, and proximity to buildings. Santa Clarita, California, in its hillside development guidelines, specifies a 275-foot-wide "fuel modification clearing zone" adjacent to natural areas, progressing &om three zones of gradually thinner vegetation, to a 75-foot "wet zone" adjacent to the structure (but note that the irrigated wet zone has the potential to destabilize slopes). (See Figure 8 and Appendix C-11.) The City of Los Angeles requires new hillside homes to have fire sprinkler systems. (See Appendix C-4.) Many plans, like the one £or the County of Los Angeles, require minimum setbacks /rom the tops of slopes because of the hazard of being upslope £rom an active fire. (See Figure 9 and Appendix C-5.) The City of Berkeley, California. specifically designates its entire hillside overlay district as a hazardous fire area and has detailed vegetation management requirements. (See Appendix C~3.) But regulations that minimize vegetation can conflict with aesthetic goals to maximize vegetation near buildings; or regulations that discourage native vegetation can conflict with environmental goals of habitat protection or water conservation. Recreational Values Hillsides are valued by community members for their recreation potential. Hillside parks and pubIic open spaces are used for hiking, biking, nature observation, and looking at panoramic views. The community as a whole may believe that, to some extent, the hillside is a public resource and that some portions need to be retained in public ownership. These desires conflict with the goals of developers A Hillside Planning Informatio areas listed below. Following is a suggested list of tasks that ~ develop a comprehensive hillside plan. Ideally, hillside planrdng should be hatwould conslder broader commumty msues (e.g., attitudes regardmv growths. Topography 4. Prepare a detailed topographic map of hillside areas · Create a slope map · , Define "hillside" ~ M~ke inventory of structures on ~r adjacent to hillsides Slope Stability · Prepare maps of landsliding and erosion featozes ~ Use both geotechnical env~neers and en~eering geologists to analyze slope stability ~ Determine types of instability phenomena, their causes, and frequency of occurrence · Identify the potential consequences of slope instability ~ Identify possible effects of slope instability o~ . downkill a~d dowr~srream azeas beyond the hills ~ Identify methods of treatment amc[ their approximate costs ~ Determine maxzmum stahte steepness of cut slopes · Review model grading ordinances for possible adoption Drainage and Erosion · Identify major watersheds and drainage courses · Identify erosion features, their causes~ consequences, and methods of treatment · Identify existing storm drainage structures · Identify areas prone to flooding · Identify key facilities ~and structures downstream of hillside drainageways · Review model erosion and sedimentation control ordinances for possible, adoption · , Design prototype road sections for a range of sIopes ~ Determine maximum road grades · Consider issues of parking · Evaluate feasibility of extending transit service to hillside areas Aesthetics · Evaluate extent and quality of views to the hills · Evaluate extent and quality of views from the hills · Identify any peaks or hillsides of special symbolic significance · Surve) · Prepare maps requirements · Identify · Determine r~sponse · Asse~ · Identi~ and also with the privacy concerns of existing hillside residents. Adjacent Open Space For a variety of reasons, developed hllIside areas often abut open space. This may be because adjacent lands are too steep to be developed or represent unique natural areas. Or it may shxtply be the result of density, regulations that limit the intensity of hillside development and promote clustering of built areas. The open spaces may be on an adjacent parcel, or, in the case of clustering, contained within the development boundaries. Regardless of their owner, the natural- urban interface poses problems of fire, slope stability, and wildlife nuisances (when wildlife encounter a neighborhood, a variety of problems can result). Where open space is the result of clustering, it is in common ownership of the property owners in the cluster. Management of the open space usually is left to a homeowners association, which may not be capable of wildland management (Olshausky 1996). Some cities, such as San Clemente, California, require common open space or major sloped areas to be owned in common and maintained by a homeowners association. (See Appendix C-8.) CONCLUSIONS This report identified three general approaches to hillside development: large-scale engineering, selective engineering, and avoidance. In the end, the community's choice probably boils down to the age-old planning issue regarding whether it wants growth. If not, prohibiting development or open space acquisition may be the answer. If these options are too costly, then Iow-density, custom-built, terrain-adaptive housing is the way to go. For communities in favor of growth, well-regulated mass grading will provide the most homes for the least cost in a safe manner. A fourth alternative exists. Many communities successfully combine elements of the three approaches, using engineered mass grading of intensively developed clusters, use of contour grading, and protection of surrounding open spaces. This can provide for safe, affordable housing, while minimizing environmental disturbance. Overall gross density can be determined by a slope-density formula but with much higher net densities in dusters. In fire-prone regions, clusters enable the construction of buffer zones around the periphery. Roads connecting dusters can be free of parked cars and wide enough to pass fire trucks without requiring excessive grading. Clusters could be in any part of the landscape, depending on local conditions. In most cases, it is safest and cheapest to locate them in valley bottoms. Often, however, the base of a slope is more dangerous than the top. And, in areas of significant riparian habitat or bottom-valley flooding, for example, weE-designed developments can be sited on ridgetops or plateaus with views of the natural valley landscapes below. High-quality urban design on hilltups can provide for attractive additions to a community. In some cases, it might be optimal (though more costly) to site clnsters on carefully reconstructed side slopes. Management of the open spaces between the clusters can be provided by a combination of property owner associations, municipalities, and open space districts (Olshausky 1996). tn conclusion, successful hiliside development reqinres intelligence and care. Unforttmately, as shown in this report, the goals of safety, aesthetics, environ- mental protection, and affordabllity can conflict. Careful planning can play a significant role in developing an information base, analyzing the tradeoffs, and identify- lng the goals and values of the community. This report should be able to help you identify the range of issues that need to be considered in such an effort. And the process should result in an explicit, internally consis- tent, clear, and defensible plan and ordinance. Appendix A. References Abbott, Derek, and Kimball Pollit. 1981. Hill Housing: A Guide to Design and Construction. New York: Whitney Library of Design. American Institnte of Architects (AIA), Urban Design Committee, Southern California Chapter. 1964. Land Development Control in Hillside and Mountain Areas. Washington, D.C.: AIA. Alexander, David. 1989· "Urban LandsEdes.' Progress in Physical Geography 13, no. 2: 157-91. Boha~non, David D. 1959. "Hillside Development." Urban Land 18, no. 1: 3-5· Brabb, Earl E. 1989. "LandsEdes: Extent and Economic Significance in the United States·" In E.E. Brabb and B. L. Hotrod, eds., Landslides: Extent and Economic Significance. Rotterdam: A.A. Balkema, 25-50. Brandes, Donald, and Michael J. Luzier. 1991. Developing Difficult Sites: Solutions for Developers and Builders. Washington, D.C.: Home BuiIder Press· California Office of Local Government Affairs. 1988. Hillside Devdopment Standards. Sacramento, CallL: Office of Local Goverranent Affairs, Governor's Office, State of California. California Office of Planning and Research. 1993. The California Planners' Book of Lists. Sacramento, Calif.: Governor's Office of Plarming and Research, State of California. Carson, M.A., and M. J. Kirkby. 1972. Hillslope Form and Process. New York: Cambridge University Press. Carver, Norman F., Jr. 1985. Italian Hilltowns. Kalamazoo, Mich.: Documan Press Chewning, J.A. 1974· Hillside Studies and Legislation Across the United States. Cincinnati, Ohio: The Cincinatti Institnte. Clark, Robert A. 1959. Hillside Development. Planning Advisory Service Report No. 126. Chicago: American Society of Planning Offidals. Cooper, Sandra. 1986. "Growth Control Evolves in Boulder." In Growth Management: Keeping on Target?, edited by Douglas R. Porter. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institnte, 35-44. Dorward, Sherry. 1990. Design for Mountain Communities: A Landscape and Architectural Guide· New York: Van Nostrand R~mhold. Erley, Duncan, and William J. Kockelman. 1981. Reducing · Landslide Hazards: A Guide for Planners. Planning Advisory Service Report No. 359. Chicago: American Planning Assodation. Federal Emergewcy Manage~ment Agency. 1992. Hazard Mitigation Report for the East Bay Fire in the Oakland-Berkeley Hills. In response to the October 22, 1991, Federal Disaster Declaration Covering Alameda County, California, FEMA- 919-DR-CA. Washington, D.C.: FEMA. Fleming, Robert W., Dav/d J. Varnes, and Robert L. Schuster· 1979. "Landslide Hazards and Their Reduction." lournal of the American Planning Association 45: 428-39. GIasfurd, Alec. 1962. Siena and the Hill Towns. London: Ernest Berm Limited. Goldman, Steven J., Katharine Jackson, and Taras A. Bursztynsky. 1986. Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook. New York: McGraw-HiB Book Co. Gray, Donald H., and Andrew T. Leiser. 1982. Biotechnical Slope Protection and Erosion Control. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co. The Hillside Trust. 199I. A Hillside Protection Strategy for Greater Cincinatti. 3 vols. Cirdcinatti, Ohio: The Hillside Trust. Kockelman, William J. 1986. "Some Techrdques for Reducing Landslide Hazards." Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geologists 23, no. 1: 29-52. Krohe, James, Jr. 1988. "Saving Those Slippery Slopes·" Planning, July, 14-17. Landphair, Harlow C., and John L. Motioch. 1985· Site Reconnaissance and Engineering: An Introduction for Architects, Landscape Architects, and Planners· New York: Elsevier· Laurie, Michael. 1975. An Introduction to Landscape Architecture. New York: Elsevier. Levin, Arthur H. 1991. Hillside Building, Design and Construction. Santa Monica, Calif.: Arts and Architecture Press. Lynch, Kevin. 1976. Managing the Sense ora Region. Cambridge, Mass·: MIT Press· Lynch, Kevin, and Gary Hack· 1984. Site Planning· 3d ed. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Marsh, William M. 1991. Landscape Planning, Environmental Applications. 2d ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. McHarg, Ian. 1969· Design with Nature· Garden City, N.Y.: Natural History Press· Moser, William A. 1991. "Design for Successful Hillside Development." ASCE lournaI of Urban Planning and Development 117, no. 3: 85-94. National Fire Protection Association. 1992. The Oakland/ Berkeley Hills Fire. National Wfldland/Urban Interface Fire Protection Initiative. Boise, Idaho: Boise Interagency Fire Center Publications Management System. Nilsen, Tot H., Robert H. Wright, Thomas C. Vlasic, and William E. Spangle· 1979· Relative Slope Stability and Land* Use Planning in 'the San Francisco Bay Region, California. U.S. Geolog/cal Survey Professional Paper 944. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Prin~ing Office. Notestein, Lucy L. 1963. Hill Towns of Italy. B~stnn; Little, Brown and Company. Oishansky, Robert B: 1996. "Financing Landslide Hazard Mitigation in the United States." journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 39, no. 3: 371-85. · 1990. Landslide Hazard in the United States: Case Studies in Planning and Policy Development. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc. Rouillard, Dominique. 1987. Building the Slope: Hillside Houses I920-1960. Translation of 1984 French edition. Santa Monico, CaLif.: Arts and Arc~tectnre Press· Schueler, Thomas R. 1987. Controlling Urban Runoff: A Practical Manual for Planning and Designing Urban BMPs. Seattle, Wash.: Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. Schuster, Robert L., and Robert W. Fleming. 1986. "Econorrdc Losses and Fatalities Due to Landslides.' Bultetin of the Association of Engineering Geologists 23, no. 1: 11-28. Schreiber, William L. 1960. Hillside Deveiopme~t, Government Controls, Private Developers Policy. Oakland, Calif.: Assodated Home Builders of the Greater East Bay, Inc. Schwab, Jim. 1992. "Regulating Hillside Development." Zoning News, March, 1-3. Sculls, C. _Michael. 1983. Excavation and Grading Code Administration, Inspection, and Enforcement. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hail, Inc. Sidle, Roy C., Andrew J. Pearce, and Colin L. O'Loughlin. 1985. HiIlsiope Stability and Land Use. Water Resot~rces Monograph No. I1. Washington, D.C.: American Geophysical Union. Sowers, G.F. 1979. Introductory Soil Mechanics and Foundations: Geotechnical Engineering. 4th ed. New York: MacNlilian Publishing Company. Thurow, Charles, William Toner, and Duncan Erley. 1975. Performance Controls for Sensitive Lands. Flanning Advisory Service Report No. 307/308. Chicago: Assodation of State Planning Officials. WilYmm Spangle and Associates, Inc. 1988. Geology and Planning: The Portola Valley Experience. Portola Valley, Calif.: William Spangle and Associates Appendix B. List of Jurisdictions Submitting Hillside Documents We sought to collect as many hillside plans and ordinances as possible. We contacted every municipality identified in previous summary studies (Thurow, et al. 1975: Chewning I974), as well as ar[ides and news notes m past issues of Planning and other APA publications (e.g. Schwab 1992. Krohe 19881 In addition, we contacted Councils of Government in hilly metropolitan areas. seeking referrals to local hillside plans and ordinances. For California, we were able to use previous surveys done by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research California Alabama Arizona Alaska Huntsv01e Phoenix Anchorage Scottsdale Sedonla California Agoura I-{ffis Alameda County/Falrview Anaheim Arcata Belmont Bev. ida Big Bear Bradbury Brea Calistoga Camarillo CarlsBad Clayton Colusa County Concord Corte Mad~ra Cupertino Danville Duar te E1 Calon Enclnitas Fillmore Fremont Fullerton Glendora Grand Terrace Hayward Humboldt County Irvine Kern County La Quiata LaVerne Lafayette Larkspur Loma Linda Los Angeles Anderson Antioch Berkeley Beverly Hills Burbarck Calimesa Chula Vista Claremont Contra Costa County Corona Del Mar Diamond Bar Escondido Fair fax Gflroy Glendale Healdsburg Hemet La Canada-Flintridge La Habra Heights Laguna Beach Laomma Nigue] Los Angeles County Los Altos Hills Los Gatos Mariposa Couzaty Marthiez Monte Sereno Montebello Monterey Park Morgan Hill Morro Bay Napa Oakland Ocea~nside Orinda Palm Springs palmdale Balo Alto Paso Robles Petaluma Pittsburg Poway Rmncho Cucmmonga Rancho Mirage Redwood City Riverside Riverside County Ross San Anselmo San Bernardino San Diego San Dimas San Jacinto San Mateo San Mateo County San RafaeI Milpitas Mom:om Moraga Moreno Vall~y Napa County Norco -i Pacifica palm Desert - Palos Verdes Estates Pasadena , Pleasanton Portola Valley '- Rancho Palos Verdes ~dlanc~s ,'~'. RocldJn Roiling Hills San Carlos San Clemen{e San loan Capistrano San Luls Obispo San Ramon Santa Barbara Santa Barbara County Santa Clara County Sartta Ciarita Santa Rosa gantee Saratoga Sierra Madre Signal Hill Simi Valley St. Helena Tehachapi 12tousand Oaks Vallejo Ventura Victorvitie '~Vest Covlna Woodside Yucaipa Santa Cruz Scoffs Valley Solana Beach Vista Colorado Georgia . Hawaii Idaho Boulde~ Galnsville/Hall County Honolulu/City, Cormty Boise Jefferson Cotmty Ma~i Pocatello Manitou Springs Kauai Maryland Minnesota Montana Nevada Montgomery County Red Whig Gallatin County Sparks New Mexico North Carolina Ohio Oregon Santa Fe AshevBle Chicirmati Sugar Mountain Hamilton Portland Tennessee Washington Putnam County Everett ICing Co~mty Seattle Utah Virginia Ogden Clarke County Park City Findlay Township Provo Loudoun County Salt Lake City Sandy City Weber City Office of Planning and Research 1993; California Office of Local Government Affairs 1988) to identify 153 commun/ties claiming to have some form of hillside regulations. We identified a total of 234 locations with hillside plans or ordinances, and received documents from 190 of them (81 percent response rate). Our collection represents 22 states, though 145 of the 190 locations are in California. Of the 45 jurisdictions outside of California. only 10 of them are from nonWestern states, despite our efforts to find as many of these as possible. Many locations sent more than one document, including plans, hillside ordinances, and related ordinances. Many of the plans and ordinances are not explicitly for hillside development, but rather include hillsides as subsets of other ordinances, such as sensitive area ordinances or subdivision ordinances in general. Of the 190 jtuisdictions, 129 (68 percent) sent ordinances that explicitly focus on hillside or mountainside issues.The ordinances vary significantly, in their purposes, their approaches, and level of detail. In order to systematically describe these variatioas, we performed a content analysis of each document received. Analysis covered three general topics: purposes, ordinance characteristics, and implementation s~rategies. PURPOSES The statements of purpose were organized into the following seven categories: 1) health, safety, and general welfare; 2) avoiding geologic hazards; 3) fire protection; 4) natural resource protecSon (water supply, open space*: 5) natural phenomena proteedon (river corridors, vegetation, habitats, soils); 6) aesthetics; and 7) access. Of the 190 jurisciictions, 75 percent identified aesthetic purposes, amd 7~ percent identified natural phenomena protection. (See Table B1.) A majority also identified health and safety, geologic hazards, and natural resource protection. Of the seven purposes, the t~vo that were least frequently cited were fire protection (29%) and access (30%). We subdivided the purposes into 34 specific subpurposes. Of these, the ones identified by 40 percent or more of the jurisdictions were: Rare, unique, or special environments 111 (58%) Preserving overall scenic quality of site 107 (56%) - Erosion or siltation 93 (49%) Protecttng vegetation 93 (49%) Slope stability 82 (43%) Preserv~ug aesthetic character 79 (42%) Flooding, excess runoff 77 (41%) Table BI~ Statements of Purpose No. of Jurisdictions Purpose listing purpose Aesthetics 142 (75%) Natural Phenomena 134 (71%) Geologic Hazards 122 (64%) HeaJth, Safety, General Welfare 121 (64%) Natural Resources 114 (60%) Access 57 (30%) Fire Protection 56 (29%) ', Table B2. Length in Pages - of Hillside Documents Collected ~ · Length (Pages) Number of Documents 1-2 29 (10.7%~ 3-5 69 {24.4%) 6-10 60 f22.0%) 11-20 55 (20.2%) 21-50 38 f14.0%) 51-100 13 l 4.8%/ > 100 8 f 2.9%) Table B3. Slope Thresholds for ' Hills de Regulation ~ Number of Jurisdictions Threshold (of 150 total with thresholds) 40% 5 35% 30% 10 25% 16 20% 16 17% a 15% 31 12% 5 10% 54 5% 8 DOCUMENT CHARACTERISTICS The documents varied in size. style, and appearance, as well as tn readibliity. Two-thirds of them were between 3 and 20 pages long (see Table B2), although 1I percent were o~ly one or two pages tn lengLt~ One-third of the docnments used graphics to illustrate design concepts, and 18% contained maps of hillside areas. Nearly half (48%) of the documents were part of a zoning ordinance. The rest were plans (9%), guidelines (16%), or some unspecified par~ of a municipal code (19%). Some were difficult to classify. The documents define "hillside" a variety of ways. The most common is to specify a threshold slope steepness, above which hillside regulations apply. But there are other methods as well (some of them used in combination with the slope threshold method): Any site steeper than a threshold slope 150 (79%) Based on overlay district i08 (57%) Based on hazard areas or some other feature 42 (22%) Based on elevation 7 (4%) The amount of the slope threshold varies. Thresholds are shown in Table B3. For most (65%) of the jurisdictions. hillside regulations are triggered at slopes of 15 percent or less. For 62 (41% of those with thresholds) of them. the regulations are triggered at slopes of 10 percent or less. Thus. a slope does not need to be very steep to be considc~red a "hillside" in many communities. Erosion, runoff, and road grade problems can occur on slopes as shaliow as 10 percent, and many commzmities take a conservative approach tn order to prevent any such problems. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES Implementing strategies used by respondent jurisdictions were grouped into seven broad categories, as shown in Table B4. Nearly 90 percent of jurisdictions restricted site design tn hillside areas, and nearly 90 percent offered or required unique project approval procedures in hillside areas, tn addition. most jm'isdictions also used strategies addressing land use or lot size, building construction, vegetation, and road access. Frequency of use of the various strategies provides some clues as to which goals have the highest priority, it is one thing to list goals in the begunmng of the ordinance, but quite another to enact regulations aimed at those goals. The most frequently cited strategies were: grading controls (72%;) mandated replacement or planttng of vegetation (65%): requirements for tectmical studies by professionals (59%): limits on vegetation removal [57%): building setbacks (56%): restrictions on type or design of building (53%): and restrictions on maximum land-use intensity (47%). Generally, vegetation and land-use intensity appear to be the most important issues to these communities, and road access is of lesser importance. - Table B4. Implementing Strategies Used by Responding Jurisdictions Percentage Percentage Number of of Total Number of of Total Strategy Respondents Respondents Strategy Respondents Respondents 1. Land Use and Lot Size 138 73% 4. TreeA, egetation Restrictions 148 78% Specifying maximum densify or intensity 89 47% Mandated rec acement or planting 124 65% Specifying minimum lot size Limited removal 109 57% or dimensions 82 43% Fire safety as basis 68 36% Specifying permitted uses 68 36% Vegetation management mandated 53 28% Requiring no-build areas 5, Road and Parking Restrictions 116 61% (a minimum %) 19 10% Road standards 79 42% 2. Bite Design and Construction 166 87% Roads parallel to contours 72 38% Grading 136 72% Parking restrictions 67 35% Setbacks 107 56% Common access drives 27 14% Open space 74 39% 6. Other Design Regulations 53 28% Clustering 61 32% Lighting 42 22% Impervious surface coverage 50 26% Signage 23 12% 3. Building Restrictions 136 72% 7. Procedural and Policy Strategies 169 89% Type or design 101 53% Reouira technical studies by professionals 113 59% Maximum height 86 45% Variances or special eXCeDtions 79 42% Materials restricted 75 39% Grandparent[rig of existing uses 68 36% Fire safety as basis 50 26% Conditiona~ uses oermitted 56 29% Orientation/siting 40 21% 21% Maximum footprint 23 12% 10% Transfer development rights, densit~ bonuses 40 Homeowners' association 19 Appendix C. Selected Excerpts from Hillside Plans, Ordinances, and Guidelines Appendix C-1. Huntsville, Alabama, Mountainside Development District Reo~alations [Establishes a Mountainside Development District, by map] 65.1.1 The Mountainside Development District boundary has been established at the elevation contour immediately above or below which a 25-foot vertical span of mountainside has a slope of 15 percent or greater and the district is to include those contiguous parts of mountains or hills that exhibit at least 100 feet of relief as measured from the lowest elevation contour that bounds the 15 percent or greater slope to the highest contour of the district as defined herein, tn addition, the upper boundary shall be extended 50 feet (horizontal distance) beyond the elevation contour imar, ediately below which a 25-foot vertical span exhibits a slope of 15 percent or greater. 65.1.3 The Mountainside Development District boundary is shown and designated on a l:4800-scale map (one inch equals 400 feet) having contour intervals of five feet. Slope percentage is calculated perpendicular to contours over a 25-foot vertical span. The boundary is delineated perpendicular to slope on the five-foot contour lines and parallel to slope between contour lines. Local variations in slope that continue for horizontal distances of less than 200 feet parallel to contour lines are not shown by adjustments in the district boundary. 65.3 Levels of the Mountainside Development District The Mountainside Development District is hereby divided into levels based on the risk of instability and the decreasing safety factor associated with increasing slope as is recommended by the Slope Development Study, Huntsville, Alabama, prepared by Ground Engineering and Testing Service, inc., 1989. The levels are defined as follows: 65.3.1 Level 5. This level shall include aH areas of land lying within the boundaries of the Mountainside Development District that have a slope of less than 10 percent. 65.3.2 Level 10. TI~ level shall include ali areas of land lying within the boundaries of the Mountainside Development District that have a slope of 10 percent to 15 percent, inclusive. 65.3.3 Level 15. This level shall include all areas of land lying within the boundaries of the Mountainside Development District that have a slope greater than 15 percent, up to and including 25 percent. 65.3.4 LeveI 25. This level shall include all areas of land lying within the boundaries of the Mountainside Development District that have a slope greater than 25 percent. 65.3.5 Level K. This level shah include all areas of land lying within the boundaries of the Mountainside Development District that exhibit any or aft of the following geologic or man-made hazards: (1) Permington, shaley Upper Bangor, or Pride Mountain geologic formations; (2) Coliuvial deposits; or (3) Evidence of mining operations (mine or quarry tailings, or similar geologic conditions). 65.3.6 An area identified as LeveI K Appendix C-2. Scottsdale, Arizona, Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance, February 19,1991 [The original includes a companion document, Environmentally Sensitive Lands Ordinance Citizen's Guide] Section 7.810 Purpose A. The purpose of the Envirommentally Sensitive Lands regulations is to identify and protect environmentally sensitive lands in the City and to promote the public health, safety, and welfare by providing appropriate and reasonable conl~ols for the development of such lands. Specifically, the Environmentally Sensitive Lands regulations are intended to: 1. Protect people and property from hazardous conditions characteristic of environmentally sensitive lands and their development. Such hazards include rockfalis, rolling boulders, other unstable slopes, flooding, flood-related mud slides, · subsidence, erosion and sedimentation, range fires, radon exposure, soils with high shrink-sweil capacity, foundation instability, and air pollution. 2. Protect and conserve significant natural and visual resources. Such resources include major boulder outcrops, major ridges and peaks, prime wildlife habitat, unique vegetation specimens, and significant riparian habitats. 3. Protect renewable and noratenewable resources, such as water quality, air quality, softs, and natural vegetation from incompatible land uses. 4. IVILuimize the public costs of providing public services and facilities, such as streets, water, sewer, emergency services, sanitation services, parks, and recreation. 5. Conserve the character of the nataral desert landscape. The desert is an important tourist attraction that contributes to Scotisdale's economy. 6. Recognize emd preserve the economic, educational, recreational, amd cultural assets of the environment Lhat provide amenities and services for residents and visitors. These interdependent assets include preserving the natural environment for desert tours, horseback tiding, hiking, rock climbing, and western theme activities. In addition, the area contains historic and archaeological sites which reflect the [ives of cowboys, miners, pioneers, and native Americaas. 7. Ensu2ee that decisions regarding development in env±ronmentally sensitive areas are based on complete and accurate information about the environmental conditions and probable development Lmpacts. 8. MLrdmize the impacts of development by conlzrolling the Iocation, intensity, pattern, design, construction techniques, and materials of development and construction. 9~ Retain the visual character of Lhe natural landscape to the greatest extent feasible by regulating building mass, location, colors, and materials; gracllng tocation, design, and treatment; and landscaping design amd materials. 10. Maintain sign~cant open spaces that provide view corridors and land-use buffers, protect landmarks emd prime wash habitats, a~d maintain the city's unique desert setting. 11. Protect environmentally sensitive lands, while also recognizing the legitimate expectations of property owners and the city's overall economic goals. 12. Encourage irmovative planning, design, and cons~ction teclm~ques for development in envirommentally sensitive areas. Section .7.853 Open Space Requirements A. NAOS Requirements 1. In order to preserve sensitive enviromnental conditions, maintain visual amenities, and mitigate hazards, a percentage of theacreage containing specLfied conditions shall be set aside as natural area open space (NAOS). The minimum percentage of NAOS for each specified env]_ronmental condition is provided in TabIas A or B. a. Table A is the is the simpler method to use for calculations. NAOS requirements are determined by slope and landform that co~espond to the location of other environmental conditions, such as unstable slopes, undisturbed desert vegetation, boulder features, and watercorrrses. b. Table B provides a more detailed site analysis that may result in a reduced NAOS requirement ff the site contains fewer natural features than the average for its location. Where a portion of the parcel contains two envffonmental conditions, the more restrictive mLnSa~um percentage shall apply to that portion. c. The appllcant has the option of using Table A or B. ThemethodmustbeselectedandNAOSrequirementscalculated prior to development approval. The same me~hod must be used to calculate NAOS for the entire development project. 2. Land designated as NAOS shaIlbe permanently maintained as open space. The applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the city attorney that the entire NAOS area will be permanently maintained as natural area open space through easements, donation, or dedication to the city or other entity. If NAOS is located in a common tract owned by a homeowners association, the property shall be maintained through a common maintenance agreement Table A. [NAOS Open Space Requirements] Lower Desert Upper Desert Hillside Slope Landform Landform Landform 0-2% 20% 25% 50% Over 2% up to 5% 25 25 50 Over 5% up to 10% 30 35 50 Over 10% up to 15% 30 45 50 Over 15% up to 25% 30 45 65 Over 25% 30 45 80 Minimum NAOS After Reductions 15 20 40 Table B. Natural Area Open Space: Detailed Analysis Minimum Percent Environmental Cond[tionln Natural Area Open Space 1. Steep Slopes over 15% 50% 2. Steep Slopes over 25% 80% 3. Unstable Slopes 95% 4. Natural Landmark 90% 5_ Boulder Feature 80% 6. Minor or Major Watercourse 60% 7. Exposed/Shallow Bedrock 35% 8. Undisturbed Native Vegetation Based on Native Plant Densities a. Under 10 trees/cacti per acre 15% b. 10-19trees/cacti peracre 25% c. 20 or more trees/cacti per acre 35% [Se-oeral pages of detailed NAOS regalations follow. NAOS requirements are reduced for regional drainage facilities on the Froperty, revegetated areas, historical or archaeological sites, and improved open space. Density bonuses are available for applicants who ~rovide more NAOS than the minimum. Regulations are given for allowable dimensions and locations of NAOS.] Section 7.855 Density Trarmfer The density transfer option is intended to provide an incentive for developers to move construction from portions of their parcel with severe environmental constraints to less constrained areas. A density transer may be approved administratively through the use of amended development standards and the administrative approval process in Section 7.857 (A). if applicable. The benefits of transer decline as development in the most sensitive areas increases. The use of this option can lead to the preservation of significant areas of environmentally sensitive lands, including land slopes over 15 percent. A. Density Transfer for Conservation A~ea (CA) 1. In order to qualify for the ma;dmum rate of density transfer (1:1) the Severely Constrained Areas 'SCA) must be designated CA. The Severely Constrained Areas are those portions of the Hillside Landform containing or surrounded by any one of the following environmental conditions, provided that, for purposes of density transfer only, SCA shall not include areas of 10 acres or more that do not contain any of the enviromnental conditions specified below, even if the area is surrounded by one or more conditions, so long as any development proposed for the surrounded area is not visible from viewpoints established on the City's Special Features map: a. Land slopes over 25 percent; b. Unstable slopes as listed in Section 7.821 (B). c. Special features as listed in Section 7.821 (C). The rate of transfer for the parcel is reduced in proportion to reductions in the amount of SCA that is designated as CA. 3. Density Transfer Calculations. The base intensity for the existing zoning shall be determined using Table C [base intensity by zoning category, not reprinted here] and shall be permitted to be transferred to another area of the parcel as follows: a. Determine the acreage of Severely Constrained Area (SCA) on the gross pmrcel. b. DetarmJne the percent of SCA that is designated CA by dividing the CA acreage by the SCA acreage. This percentage is the rate of density transfer for the parcel. Only the arrea of iXTAOS to be designated CA may be included in the calculation of land eligible for density iTansfer. c. Determine the base intensity for the land designated CA by multiplying the CA acreage times the intensity in Table C for the applicable zoning district. Sensitive lands that are not SCA may also be selected by the applicant for CA in order to transfer density to less constrained areas. d. Determine the number of units eligible for density transfer by multiplying the percent of land designated CA (b- above) times the base intensity for the land designated CA (c. above). C. Eligible Receiving Areas The portionof the development project that can receive density transfer shah have less sensitive environmental conditions than the CA or COS land from which the density is transferred. Eligible receiving areas are any portions of the development project that do not contain slopes over 25 percent, unstable slopes, special feab. rres, minor watercourses, or major watercourses. D. Off-siteTransfers Density transfers to noncontiguous parcels may be approved in order to encourage the transfer of development rig~t~ tr~>m retire sensitive areas to those that are less sensitive. Noncontiguous transfers permit the owners of less sensitive lands to lorn m a single application with the owner of more sensitive areas and to transfer development potential from the more sensitive to the less sensitive areas, without the need for rezon~ng. An application to make a noncontiguous transfer must be signed by the owners of both parcels and must meet the procedrrral requirements of this Section and Section 7.857, and the following criteria: 1. On February 19, 1991, the parcel was a legally constituted lot on which development wou/d have been permitted under the terms of the ordinance in effect at the t/me the lot was created or was annexed to the city. 2. At least 80% of the parcel from which density wilI be transferred (the "Transfer Parcel') must c°nsist °f Severely Constrained Areas. 3. No development w/il be perwfitted on the Transfer Parcel. 4. The Transfer Parcel must be perma~nently secured as Conservation Area (CA) through easements, donation, or dedication to the city or other entity, by a means approved by the city attorney, or zoned Conservation Open Space (COS). 5. The parcel to which density will be transferred (the "Receiving Parcel") must be located within the ESL District, in the Upper Desert or Lower Desert Landform. 6. No permits will be issued for the Receiving ParceI, until the Transfer ParceI has been permanently secured as CA or rezoned COS. Appendix C-3. Berkeley, California, Fuel Reduction and Management Plan [Applies to Hillside District, the H Overlay District of Zoning Ordinance] Any person who owns, leases, controls, operates, or maintains any building or structure in, upon, or adjoining any hazardous fire area, and any person owning, leasing, or controlling any land adjacent to such buildings or structures, shall at all times: 1. Maintain mound and adjacent to such building or structure a firebreak made by remo-dmg and clearing away, for a distance of not less than 30 feet o~t either side thereof or to the property line, whichever is nearer, all flammable vegetation, or other combustible growth. This does not apply to single specimens of trees, ornamental shrubbery, or similar plants that are used as ground cover, provided that they do not form a means of rapidly transmitting fire from the native growth to any building or 2. Maintain around and adjacent to any such buildings or structure additional fire protection or firebreak made by removing structure or to the property line, whichever is nearer, as may be required by the Fire Inspector when he/she finds that, 3. Normal clearance from roadways of hazardous brush, dry grass, combustible rubbish, etc., shall be 10 feet with the distance 5. Maintain any tree adjacent to or overhanging any building free of dead or dying wood. 6. Maintain the roof of any structure free of leaves, needles, or other dead vegetation growth. 7. Each chimney or stovepipe that is attached to any fireplace, stove, barbecue, or any heating apphancein which solid or liquid bad is used, upon any buB. ding, structure, or premises located in the hazardous fire area shall be maintained with an approved 8. Brush and debris does not need to be completely removed but may be mulched in place provided that the resulting mulch is less than five inches deep. 9. The trunks of eucalyptus trees are to be swept so that they are free of hanging bark and debris. Appendix C-4. Los Angeles, California, Hillside Regulations, Ordinance No. 168159, September 14, 1991 Section 1. Section 12.03 of the Los Angeles MurdcipaI Code is hereby amended by adding the following definitions in proper alphabetical sequence, to read: Hillside Area. Any land designated as a Ffillside Area on the Bureau of Engineering Basic Grid Map, Map No. A-13372, excluding those areas specifically identified in Hillside Ordinance Exhibit A attached to Council File No. 91-1621. Major Remodel--Hillside. /May remodeling of a main building on a lot in the Hillside Area whenever the aggregate v~due of all alterations within a one-year period exceeds 50 percent of the replacement cost of the main building. Standard Hillside Lkvdted Street. An improved or unimproved street located in a Hillside Area, w~th at least 36 feet of dedicated right-of-way as determined by the Bureau of Engineering and paved to a minimum roadway width of 28 feet, consistent with Street Standard Dimensions of Standard Plan D-22549, ~nd adopted in accordance with Section 17.05 of this Code. Suhst~mdard Hillside Limited Street. An improved or unimproved street, private street, or private road easement located in a Hillside Area, with less than 36 feet of dedicated right-of-way or with a paved roadway width of less than 28 feet, as determined by the Bureau of Engineering. Section 3. A new Subdivision 17 is hereby added to Subsection A of Section 12.21 of the Los Angeles Mrmicipal Code, to read: 17. One-Family Dwallings, Accessory Buildings, and Additions. Hillside 1~eg~dations. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Code to the contrary, the following regulations shall apply to any Major Remodel Hillside or construction of or addition to any one-family dwelling or accessory- building on a 1or in the Al, A2, RA, RE, RS, R1 or RD Zones, which lot is located in whole or in part in a Hillside Area. (d) F~re Protection (1) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Code to the contrary, any new construction of a one-family dwelling or detached accessory building shall be protected throughout with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system in compliance with the Los Angeles Plumbing Code. (2) An approved automatic fire sprinkler system La compliance with the Los Angeles Plumbing Code shall be installed: (i) whenever an addition to an existing one-family dwelling or accessory building increases the floor area by 50 percent or more of the area of the existing dwelling or building; or (ii) whenever the aggregate value of any alterations within a one-year period exceeds 50 percent of Cae replacement cost of the dwelling or building and the dwelling or building is on a lot located on a Substandard Hillside Limited Street or located more than two miles fi.om a tire station housing a Los Angeles City Fire Department Truck Company or more than 1.5 miles from a fire station housing a Los Angeles City Fire Department Engine Company. (3) The sprinkler system required th (i) and (ii) above shall be sufficient to cover the entire dwelling or building, vmless otherwise determined by the Department of Building and Safety, and shall be installed in comphance with 0il applicable codes. (4) The provisions o£ Paragraphs (i) and (ii) above shall not apply to accessory s~ruciures, such as gazebos, pergolas, or storage sheds, provided these structures are not supported by or attached to any portion of a dwelgng or accessory building and do not exceed 200 square feet in floor aread (e) Street Access (1) For any new construction of, or addition to, a one-family dwell~g on a lot fronting on a Substandard Hillside Linfited Street, no building perrrfit or grading pern~t shall be issued unless at least one-half of the width o£ the street(s) has been dedicated for the full width of the frontage of the lot to Standard Hillside Limited Street dimensions or to a lesser width as determined by the City Engineer. The appellate procedures provided in Section 12.37 1 of this Code shall be available for relief from this subparagraph. (2) For any new construction of, or addition to, a one-family dwelling on a lot fronting on a Substandard Hillside Limited Street which is improved to a width of less than 20 feet, no building permit or grading permit shall be issued unless the construction or addition has been approved pursuant to Section 12.27 1 18 of this Code. Appendix C-5. Los Angeles County, California, Zoning Ordinance (Hillside Management Areas), Excerpts from Title 22 22.56.215 A.1. Permit required. Except as specified in subsection C, prior to the issuance of any building or grading permits, approval of a minor lm~d division or subdivision, or the commencement of any construction or enlargement of any building or strucVare on a lot or parceI which is in or partly in an area designated in the county General Plan and related maps as a significant ecological area or within a hillside m~nagement area as spedfled herein, a conditional use permit shallbe applied for and approved as provided by this section. 2. A conditional use permit is required in hillside management areas when: a. The property contains any area with a natuzal slope of 25 percent or more in ~m urban hillside management area proposed to be developed with residential uses at a density exceeding the midpoint of the range of densities established by an adopted areawide, commtmity, or specific plum covering the areas in which the proposed development is located. Where there is no adopted areawide, community, or specific plan, the applicable density range shall be established by the land- use element of the General Plan. b. The property contains any area with a natural slope of 25 percent or raore in a nonurban hillside management 0rea proposed to be developed, with residential uses at a density exceeding the low-density threshold established for such property pursuant to subsection E. E. Calculation of Thresholds in Nonurban Hillside Management Areas. Density thresholds for residenflal uses in nonttrban hillside management areas shall be calculated using the analysis of slope categories required by Subsection D2b as follows: 1. Low-density Threshold. The low-density threshold for a proposed development shall be determined by: a. Multiplying the number of acres in each of the following slope categories by the density threshold indicated as follows: i. One dwelling unit per five acres of land within the 0 to 24.99 percent natural slope category, ii. One dwelling unit per 10 acres of land within the 25 to 49.9 percent natural slope category, iii. One dwelling unit per 20 acres of land within the 50 percent and above natural slope category; b. The resulting total number of dwelling units obtained by adding ali three categories is then divided by the total acreage of the project, obtaining the low-density threshold applicable to such project. 2. Determination if Conditional Use Permit Required. If the density per acre of the proposed development exceeds the Iow- density threshold of such development obtained in subsection E1 above, a conditional use permit is required. 3. Maximum Density Permitted. The maximum density for a proposed development shall be that permitted by the adopted areawide, community, or specific plan for the area in which the proposed development is located. Where there is no adopted areawide, community, or specific plan, the maximum density shall be that established by the land-use element of the General Plan. However, in no event shafl the maximum overall density permitted for a proposed development exceed a total of one dwelling unit per acre for slopes of less than 50 percent, plus one dwelling unit per 20 acres for slopes of 50 percent or greater. F. Bttrden of Proof. The application for a conditional use permit--hillside management and significant ecological areas shall substantiate to the hearing officer the fo[lowing facts: 1. HilLside Management Areas a. That the proposed project is located and desigmed so as to protect the safety ot current and future community residents, and will not create sighiflcant threats to life and/or property due to the presence oi geologic, seismic, slope instability, fire, flood, mud flow, or erosion hazard, and b. That the proposed project is compatible with the natural, biotic, cultural, scenic, and open space resources of the area, and c. That the proposed project is conveniently served by (or provides) neighborhood shopping and commercial facilities, can be provided with essential public services without imposing undue costs on the total community, and is consistent with the objecfives and policies of the General Plan, and d. That the proposed development demonstrates creative and imaginative design, resulting in a visual quality that will complement community character and benefit current and future community residents; Conditions 1. Hillside Management Areas a. Open Space. Open space sha[l comprise not less than 25 percent of the net area of a residential development in an urban hillside management area, and not less than 70 percent of the net area of a residential development in a nonurhan hillside management area. Subject to the approval of the hearing officer, such open space may include one or more of the fo[lowing: i. Undisturbed natural areas ii. Open space for passive recreation iii. Private yards, provided that certain construction rights are dedicated iv. Pmeks and open recreational areas v. Riding, hiking, and bicycle trails vi. Landscaped areas adjacent to streets and highways vii. Greenbelts viii. Areas graded for rounding of slopes to contour appearance ix. Such other areas as the hearing officer deems appropriate Hillside Design Guidelines Project Design A. It is the objective of the General Plan to preserve significant natural features by encouraging design that minimizes disturbance to existing topographical forms. A development should be designed to fit into the killsides rather than altering the earth forms to create a flatiand type of devalopment. B. Proiect design should initially identify the existing geographic, topographic, and environmental features of the site (such as geological hazards, steep slopes, ridges, valleys, streams, views, existing drainage patterns, sigmiflcant biota, and outcroppings), then determine the impact the proposed project will have on these dements. C. A determination must be made as to how traffic circulation, fire protection and access, drainage, sound barriers, buffers, land alteration, and other measures will be employed to limit negative impacts. The final site plan should reflect how all of ~hese impacts are successfully solved or mitigated. D. Other elements that should be considered in a successfuI design are: 1. preservation of distinctive hat, faf features and the general existing topographical forms; 2. preservation of prominent skyline ridge silhouettes; 3 location of roads and stmctares below skyline ridges; 4. preservation of significant landscaping; 5. circulation related to exiting contours (undulating road patterns, cul-de-sacs, split roadways, and varying grades are encouraged); 6. incorporation of hiking, bicycle, walking, and equestrian trails, where appropriate; 7. variation in lot size, building placements, setbacks, and orientation; 8. variable changes in elevation and siting of buildings to ensure views and avoid monotony; 9. preservation of steep hillsides by clustering buildings or use of other innovative approaches; 10. use of flag Iot design where essential to reduce grading; 11. preservation of signff-icant trees and habitat, natural watercourses, wildlife corridors, and distinedve natural fealures; 12. sensitivity to tbe project's appearance from lower or adjacent devdopment; and 13. placement of water tanks and other unsightly forms below ridge lines and in a bermed and landscaped area. Grading [Also see the illustrations in Figure 1 of this PAS Report.] A. Grading should minimize disktrbance to the natural landform; not destroy visual quality and commtm/ty character nor create conditions that result in landslides, flooding, or erosion. B. No grading shall take place in a known or suspected hazardous areas as determined by the Department of Public Works without a geolo~cal survey and/or other data and tests as requested. No grading shall take place in a Sigrdficant Ecological Area (SEA), unless an Environmental or Archaeological Report is submitted as required by Zoning Ordinance Section 22.56.215. Grading in an SEA area should generally be avoided. C. Good grading design must be exercised for safety as well as aesthetics and should incorporate the following measures: 1. Utilization of land form or contour measures to produce cut-and-fill slopes compatible with existing land character. Continuous unbroken slope surfaces that are visible from offsite are discouraged. 2. Graded slopes contoured by varying slope increments and undulating banks vertically and horizontally. 3. Varied cut-and-fill banks and drainage terrace spacing to alleviate monotony and allow random landscaping. 4. Berms at top of slopes and other locations used to screen, vary profile, and insure drainage away from slopes. 5. A drainage plan devised to dkect flow to streets or approved collector systems that will be maintained by a public agency or maintenance district. 6. Varied pad elevations above street levd to avoid appearance of monotonous, flat, level pads. 7. Creation of views from hillside sites. 8. Slopes less steep than 2-to-1 are encouraged and may not require drainage systems, if approved by the Department of Public Works. 9. Cuts and fills in excess of 50-feet depth are discouraged. CErculation A. The following elements of road and sidewalk circulation should be incorporated in hiflside developments: 1. Roadway design generally to follow existing contours, minimizing grading and resulting in an informal, curving internal network. Provide two major points of access to principal roads when projects exceed 150 milts or when required by Fire Department due to fire hazard. 3. Preservation of existing trees and natural features by dividing or routing roads and sidewalks around these elements. 4. Employ cul-de-saes and common drives where practicable and desirable. 5. In areas of light pedestrian traffic, sidewalks may be i~stalIed on only one side of the street. 6. Provide for safe, convenient pedestrian access to schools, parks, and other recreational facilities. 7. Provision for safe drop-off points for buses and automobiles at ali schools. 8. Illumination of streets with low-intensity, unobtrusive lighting as specified by the Department of Public Works. Fh:e Pzotecthin [Also see the illustrations in Figure 9 of this PAS Report} A. lqJiiside areas are especially prone to devastating fires. Each proposed development shall be evaluated for the potential fire bazar& Vegetation types arid the area's fire history shall be considered. The design of developments shall incorporate the following form Title 32 (County Fire Code) and Title 26 (County Building Code): 1. Brush and hazard areas cleared and maintained as set forth under landscape Guidelines and County Fire Code Section 11.502 and 11.503. 2. Open space areas maintained by establishing a ~omeowners Association or Maintenance District. 3. New piax~ting featuring f-kre- and drought-resistant species as listed in the appendix included herein. 4. fittildings should be setback a minimum of 20 feet ffom downslopes. Exceptions shall be considered for minimal downalopes, special building design features, and/or lack of vegetative fuel. 5. Roofs, overhartgs, and undersides of exposed balconies protected with fire-resistant materkals in Fire Zone 4. [Also includes sections on Site Design Elements, Landscaping, Procedure, and Submission, plus a detailed table of suitable plant species.] Appendix C-6. Oakland, California, Zoning Regnlations, S-14 Zone PURPOSE AND INTENT. The S-14 Zone is intended to guide the construtcfion of residential facilities in the Fire-Damage Area in the City of Oakland. The S-14 Zone is intended to promote: reconstruction that will replicate, to the extent possible, the pre-fire conditions that contributed to the distinctive character and desirabEdty of the Fire-Damaged Area neighborhoods; design and construction that is responsive to the substantial vaxiations in topography, access, and parcelization both within and among the respective neighborhoods; faciJJtation and expediting of reconstruction to minkmize economic and emotional hardships for ffre victims; and prevention of conditions that pose threats to life and property. idi MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHTS To determ2ne the maximum allowable height, first determine the slope of the existing grade in the area to be covered by structure. Measure from outer edge to outer edge of the proposed building site. Measure from one side to another in the direction of the steepest slope. Based on the slope in this area, the following: [sic] 1. Level Lots. On lots where the site area to be covered by structure has a gradient less than 20 percent based on the existing grade, the maximum allowable height of the principal facility shall be 30 feet. 2. Up-Slope Lots. On up-slope lots where the site area to be covered by structure has a gradient equal to or greater than 20 percent based on the existing grade, the maximum allowable height of the principal facility shall be 3S feet, provided that the maximum height of buildings and other facilities located within 20 feet of the front property line shall not extend above a plane crossing the entire front 20-foot area of the lot at a level that is 24 feet above the edge of pavement adjacent to the front property line. 3. Down-Slope Lots. On dow2-slope tots where the site area to be covered by structure has a gradient equal to or greater than 20 percent based on the existing grade, the maximum allowable height of the principal facility shall be 40 feet, provided that the building or other facilities do not extend above a plane crossing the entire lot at a levelwhich is 18 feet above the edge of pavement adjacent to the front property 1Lne. MINIMUM YARDS (a) FRONT YARD. The minimum front yard depth shall be 20 feet except on lots where the street-to-setback gradieni is greater than 20 percent the minimttm front yard depth shall be five feet. The street-to-sethack gradient shallbe based on the existing grade as measured from the edge of pavement to the 20-foot front setback line. The measurement shall be taken at the midpoint of the front property line and perpendicalar to the edge of pavement. PARKING (a) WHERE P~G IS PROHIBITED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET. Three off-street parking spaces shall be required for a primary residence occupying a lot fronting on a street with parking prohibited on both sides of the street, except that: 1. Two off-street parking spaces shafi be required on lots with a2 average lot width of 55 feet or less; and 2. Two off-street parldng spaces shall be required on lots where the site to be covered by structttre has a gradient equal to or greater than 20 percent, or the street-to-sethack gradient as measured from the edge of pavement to the front setback line is equal to or greater than 20 percent. (b) WHERE pARKING IS ALLOWED ON ONE OR BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET. Two off-street parking spaces shall be required for a primary residence occupying a bt fronting on a street with parking allowed on one or both sides of the street. Appendix C-7. Rancho Cucamonga, California, Hillside Development Regulations, March 1990, Chapter 17.24 Municipal Code Section 17.24.020 Review Procedures A. City Planner Review. The City Planner shall review all site development applications and shah impose conditions deemed appropriate when one or more of the following activities are proposed: 1. Natttral slopes which are 8 percent or greater but less than 15 percent on ail or part of a subject site, or on tess steep land which may be affected by areas of greater slope (e.g., flat parcel between or adjacent to steep hiJ1side). 2. For fills or excavations equal to or exceeding three feet but less than five feet in vertical depth at their deepest point meas~tred from the natural ground surface. 3. For excavations or fills, or any combination thereof, equal to or exceeding 100 cubic yards, but less than 1,500 cubic yards. B. Planning Commission Review. The Planning Comndssion shall review site development applications and impose conditions deemed appropriate when one or more of the following activities are proposed: 1. Natural slopes equal to or greater than 15 percent on ail or part of a subject site. ~ 1 2. For fills or excavations equal to or exceeding five feet in vertical depth at their deepest point measured from the natura ground surface. 3. For excavations or fills, or any combination thereof, equal to or exceeding 1,500 cubic yards. 4. Any excavalion or fill that wfd encroach on to or alter a natural drainage charmel or watercourse. (Should be prohibited tmless alternate drainage is provided.) 5. Any other proposal referred to the Planning Commission by the Grading Committee or City Planner. Section 17.24.050 Hillside Designation The following shall serve as general standards for the five established slope zones to ensure that development wi~ complement the overall character of the landform, in order to permit the extension of a logical design concept, the standards for one zone may be applied to limited portions of the adjacent zone. Slope Zone % Natural Slope Standards I 5 or less This is not a hil~ide condition. Grading with conventional fully padded lots and terracing is acceptable. 2 5 to 7.99 Development with grading is permitted in this zone but existing landforms must retain their natural character. Fadded building sites are permitted; however, techniques such as contotrr grading, combined slopes, limited cut and fill, and split-Ieval architectural prototypes, or padding for the structures only, may be requh'ed to reduce grading. When, in conjunction with the techniques described above, and for a project within a master plan which includes special design features, such as a golf cottrse, extensive open space, or siguillcant use of green belts or paseos, as exemplified in the following cluster development, the Planning Commission may consider the use of mass grading techniques adjacent to these special design features as partial compliance with this standards. 3 8 to 14.9 This lsa hillside condition. Special hillside architectural and design techniques that miniralze grading are required in this zone. Architectural prototypes are expected to conform to the natural landform by using techniques such as split-leval foundations of greater than 18 inches, stem walls, stacking and clustering. In conjunction with the alternative teclmiques described above, and for a project within a master plan which includes special design features, such as a golf course, extensive open space or significant use of green belts or paseos, the Planning Commission may consider padded building sites adjacent to those special features when it is found that said grading creates a better relationship between that special design feature and the adjacent lots. 4 15 to 29.9 Development within this zone is limited to no more than the less visually prominent slopes, and then only where it can be shown that safety, environmental, and aesthetic impacts can be rniuimized. Use of larger lots, variable setbacks, and variable building structural techniques such as stepped or pole foundations are expected. Structures shall blend with the natural envizonment through their shape, materials, and colors. Impact of traffic and roadways is to be minimized by following natm'aI contours or using grade separations. 5 30 and over ~ is an excessive slope condition and development is prohibited. Section 17.24.070 (Development Standards) D. (Architecture) 7. Residential developments shallbe constructed in such a manner so as to reduce the potential for spread of brushfires through consideration of the following: (a) In the case of a conflict where more restrictive provisions are contained in the Uniform Building Code or in the Fire Management Plan, the more restrictive provisions shall prevail. (b) Roofs shall be covered with noncombustible materials, such as clay or concrete shake, or file. Open ends shall be stopped in order to prevent bird nests, or other combustible material, lodging within the roof and to preclude entry of flames. (c) Exterior walls shall be surfaced with noncombustible or Prre-reslstive materials. Except as otherwise provided herein. exterior walls sh~l extend to the ground. (d) Balconies, patio roofs, eaves, mhd other similar overhangs shall be of noncombustible constrttction or shall be protected by fire-resistant material on the underside or constructed with heavy timber members and nominal two-inch wood or 1.125-inch plywood decking. (e) plastic webbing, split or whole bamboo, reed or straw-like materials, corrugated plastic or fiberglass materials and similar flammable materials wU2 not be permitted for use on patio covers. (f) Vents for attics and underfloor areas must be desigmed and located to minimize the likelihood of spreading of tire. Individual vent openings should not exceed one square foot and shall be covered with a mesh metal screen having openings not exceecting 1 / 4-inch in any direction. Eave vents shall be positioned on the endosed eaves nea~ the roof edge rather than in or near the exterior wmll. (g) Chimneys shall be provided with approved spark arrestors. Section 17.24.080 Density Slope density regulations that correlate intensity of development to steepness of terrain will be used to mimmize grading, removal of vegetation, land instability, and fire hazards. The total allowable residential dwelling units shall be calculated based on the total (buildable) land area within each slope category multiplied by the capacity factor for each to the slope category. A. Calculation of density. I1~e maximum number of units that may be permitted in a proposed development shalIbe determined by multiplying that area of land in each "slope category" by the "capacity factor" shown in the following table, taking the products of these calculations converted to square feet, and dividing this figure by the required site area unit in square feet prescribed in the tmderlying zoning district (except the Hillside Residential District where there is no mizgmum lot size required). In the Hillside Residential District, the allowable amount of buildable area resulting from the Capacity Factor calculation will constitute the adjusted net bnildable area. B. Land Capability Schedule *Buildable area Capacity Adjusted Net Buildable Area Slope Category in square feet Factor (square feet) Under 10 percent X 1.00 : 10-14,9 percent X 0.75 = 15-19.9 percent X 0.50 = 20-24.9 percent X 0.25 -- 25-29.9 percent X 0.025 = 30+ percent X 0.0 *Buiidable area is a contiguous area of the lot that is less than 30 percent in natural slope, or in the area determined, through environmental studies and investigation, as buildabie. Appendix C-8. San Clemente, California, Hillside Development Ordinance No. 841, August 1982 [This ordinance has very detailed design requirements. Some excerpts follow.] 15.3 Definitions A. "Primary ridgelines' are those natural preservation ridgelines designated as such on the City General Plan Open Space/ Conservation Map. These ridgelines possess the greatest prominent public visibility from existing and undeveloped portions of the City. These ridgellnes shall be preserved in their natural state as a means of maintaining community character. Exceptions shall be granted only to accommodate General Plan-designated trails, General Plan-designated Circulation components, viewpoints, fuel moditication measures, or other requirements needed to implement the goals and objectives of the General Plan, or to meet the provisions of public health, safety, and welfare. B. "Secondary ridgalines' are those ridgellnes designated as such on the City General Plan Open Space/Conservation Map. These ridgelines possess a significant amount of public vlsibu2ty, but ~re tess prominent than primary ridgelines. 15.4 Considerations A. Views and the viewer 1. Hillside development is more visible than flatland (level terrain) development. Therefore, the hillside development regulations rare designed to make hillside development as visually pleasing as possible. 2. Panoramic views from hillside roads and public places are as important to the character and amenities of the commuinty as views facing the hillside development. The provision for view opportunities for all residents and visitors plays an important role in creating a positive character for hillside communities. 15.6 Development Requixements A. Site planning 5. Slope maintenance a. No tentative subdivision map shall be approved unless conditioned upon the preparation and recordation of a declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions providing for the development and maintenance of slopes as required by the hillside development regulations. b. No tentative subdivision map shall be approved unless conditioned upon the subdivider's supplying a program and/or staff for preventive maintenance of major m0mufactured slope areas. Such program shall be approved prior to approval of a final map and shall include homeowner slope maintenance requirements and guidelines to be incorporated into the declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions. Every grading permit issued shall be conditioned upon the owner's 10-yeaz warranty of ali manufactured slopes. Circulation 1. General layout a. The following factors shall be taken into consideration prior to the approval of a tentative subdivision map: (1) Circulation shaJLl be aligned to conform to the natural gradbs as much as possible. Long stretches of straight road shall be avoided by utilizing gentle horizontal and vertical curves. (2) Roads that run either directly parallel or perpendicular to the slope shall ha avoided in order to reduce grading and to aid in drainage. (3) Bridges shall be considered for roads crossing drainage ways and ravines of exceptional environmental setting to eliminate excess fill when structoral requirements do not negate the intent of enviroranental preservation. (4) Proper sight distances shall be maintained, and, with approval by the City Engineer, three-way intersections at angles at less than 90 degrees shall be considered to reduce grading requ~ements. b. Pedestrian circulation traversing man-made slopes can be provided in the benches; on low slopes, vertical shortcuts can be developed with steps. c. Opporttmities shall be created for public views from roadways and public open space by selective placement of structures at key locations. d. Off-street parking shallbe provided for in a flexible way. Parallel parking can be eliminated to reduce road width in critical areas and then provided for in off-street bays at more suitable locations. e. Common drives in single-family developments shall be considered if grading is reduced by their use. 2. Roadway sections a. When provided, parallel parking shah be located on one side only and be limited to eight feet in width. b. The following factors shall be taken into consideration prior to the approval of a tentative subdivision map: (1) Road sections shall meet appropriate standards for hillside roads as fonnd in the City Subdivision Ordinance or adopted specific plans, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. (2) Four-foot waikways shall be located directly adjacent to the cuzb on one or both sides as needed for edequate pedestrian circulation. (3) All utilities shall be Iocated underground, wben possible, in a common trench in the parkway or under the sidewalk. (4) When placement of roeds near ridges and on slopes is proposed, acceptable placements shallindude a split roadway section to accommodate grade, knob removal to accommodate views from the road, and the rounding off of cut slopes to enhance appearance. C. Architectv-ral standards I. Bdilding form a. Structttres shall be designed to minimize creation of fiat pads. Single-family units shall be compact and split-level if possible. Multi.family units can be designed with two stories upslope and three stories downslope. b. Building forrns shall be scaled to the particulsnr environmental setting so as to complement the hillside character and to avoid excessively massive forms that fail to enhance the hillside character. Building facades shall change plane or use overhangs as a means to create changing shadow lines to further break up massive forms. c. Rooflinesshallrelatetotheslopeandtopography. TotallyflatrooElinesshallbeavoided. Appendix C-9. San Diego, California, Hillside Review Overlay Zone and Hillside Design and Development Guidelines, December 11, 1984 [Notable in that it was prepared by the Departments of Planning, Engineering and Development, and Parks and Recreation] Sec. 101.0454 HR (Hillside Review) Overlay Zone A. PURPOSE AND INTENT It is the purpose of the Hillside Review Overlay Zone to provide supplementary development regtflations to underlying zones to ensure that development occurs in such a manner as to protect the naVaraI and topographic character and identity of these areas, environmental resources, the aesthetic qualities and restorative value of/ands, and the pubhc health, safety, and general welfare by inswring that development does not create soil erosion, silting of lower slopes, slide damage, flooding problems, and severe cutting or scarring. It is the intent of this zone to encourage a sensitive form of development and to allow for a reasonable use that complements the natural and visual character of the city. Reference will be made to the community plan recommendations and the bJ23side design guidelines when making the required findings of fact. hi the case of conflict between the community plan and the guidelines, the plan shalf apply. E. 5. In reviewing an application for a ~IiIlside Review Permit, the P/atoning Director and/or the P/anning Commission shall make the following findings of fact in the review process: a. The site is physically suitable for the design and siting of the proposed development. The proposed development ~ result in mum disturbance of sensitive areas. b. The grading and excavation proposed in connection with the development will not result in soli erosion, silting of Iower slopes, slide damage, flooding, severe scarring, or any other geolog~caI instabi]Sty or fire hazard that would affeet health, safety, and general welfare as determined by the City Engineer. Disturbed slopes are planted with native and self- sufficient vegetation. c. The proposed development retains the visual quality of the site, the aesthetic qualities of the area, and the ncighborhood characteristics by utilizing proper structtrraI scale and character, varied architectural treafmen~s, and appropriate plant mater/aL d. The proposed development is in conformance with the Open Space Element of the General Plan, the Open Space and Sensit/ve Land Element of the community plan, any other adopted applicable plan, and the zone. An open space easement or dedication is taken on port/ons of the development site, as appropriate, after consultation w~th the Park and Recreation Department. e. The proposed development is in cotfformance w~h the qualitative development guidelines and eriteria as set for th in Document No. ILR-26219 "Hillside Design and Development Guidelines." [The Guidelines are heavily illustrated with dos and don'ts, and they provide guidelines for each of the required findings. They are divided into guidelines for Urbanized Communities (small, infili projects) and Urbanizing Communities (subdivisions and deselopments at the fringes).] Urbanized Communities EINDING. The site is physically suitable for the design and siting of the proposed development. The proposed development will result in mirdmum disturbance of sensitive areas. Guldefine 1: Design structures to fit into the hillside rather than altering the hillside to fit the structure. a. Standard prepared pads resulffng in grading outside of the building footprint and driveway area shall be discouraged. b. Use retaining structures as an alternative to banks of cut-and-fill, and design and site such structures to avoid adverse visualJmpact. c. Consider "unconventional structures" that will fit into the hillside. This would include: (1) stilt houses; (2) reduced footprint design; (3) multiple "step-up" or "step-down" structures; or (4) structures with open foundations, if landscaping screens the underside area of the building. d. Use a foundation type that is compatible with ex/ating hillside conditions. Guldefine 2: Development shall be sited on the least sensitive portion of the site to preserve the natural/andforms, geological fea~o_res, and vegetation. a. Design and locate structures so they tit into the contour of the hillside and relate to the form of the terrain. b. Locate development to minimize disturbance of the sensitive area. c. Minimize coverage by using multilevel struetures. d. Cluster de¥-elopment away from open space canyons as close to existing development as possible- e. Avoid disturbance of major rock outcroppings, major trees, waterways, ridge lines, natural plant formations, and known archaeological sites. f. Development should not overwhelm hillside vegetation to where the natm'al character of the hillside is destroyed. g. When eppropriate, place structure as elose to the street as possible to preserve the natural terrain. Iu some cases, this would require development on the steep portions to preserve the canyons or development on the flat portions to preserve the hiEsides. h. Avoid, wherever possible, development encroachment into slope areas of 25 percent or more. Guideline 3: A geological reconnaissance report shallbe required for all proposed projects located within a "moderate" (C), "high" (D),pr "variable" (BC or AC) Kisk Zone, as identified on the geotechnicai land-use capability maps referenced by the Seismic Safety Element of the General Plan, with only the foEowing criteria allowed: (as approved by the City Engineer) · a. Only low-density or open space uses should be allowed. b. Only allow grading that miplements the required stabilization devices needed in highly erodible and unstable FINDING. The grading and excavation proposed in connection with the development will not result in soil erosion, silting of lower slopes, slide damage, flooding, severe scan'lng, or any other geological instability or fire hazard that would affect health, safety, and general welfare, as determiued by the City Engineer. Disturbed slopes are planted with native and self-szffflcient vegetation. Guideline 4: Limit the amount of impervious surfaces. Desig~ and site such surfaces to support the nattrrai system of drainage. a. Design drainage systems away from neighboring properhes and into the existing water-flow pattern. b. Use wooden decks instead of concrete slabs for patios and parking. c. Reduce width of street improvements, reduce sidewalk requirements, use common driveways and cluster units, if open space will thereby be preserved. Guideline 5: The site should be replanted with self-sufficient trees, shrubs, and ground cover that is compatible with existing surrounding vegetation. a. Ail manufactured slopes shah be planted with erosion control, fire-resistant, and self-safflcient plantings. b. TransitionaI slopes should be planted to enhance the blending between manufactured and natural slopes. c. Landscaping plans should not require excessive irrigation needs. Guideline 6: Utilize the structural quaEty of the soil as a determinant of the type of construction. Assare hillside stabfity both during and after constraction by recognizing soil characteristics, hydrology, and the steepness of the terrain. (For further guidance refer to "Technological Guidelines for Soil and Geology Reports,' Engineering and Development Deparknent, City of San Diego). Guideline 7: In cases where cut-and-fill grading are required, the slopes shall avoid straight and unnatural slope £aces. a. All manufactured slopes shall be planted with erosion control, fire-resistant, and self-sufficient plantings. b. Transitional slopes should be planted tu enhance the blending between manufactured and natural slopes. FINDING. The proposed development retains the visual quality of the site, the aesthetic qualities of the area, and the neighborhood characteristics by utilizing proper strucfaral scale and character, varied architectural treatments, and appropriate plant material. Guideline 8: Employ a variation in architec~xral design. a. Design the garage space to be either under or over the siructare depending on whether the lot is uphill or downlxlll &om the street. b. Use deck areas, either on the roof of the garage, or the house, or extending from the house to reduce the amount of grading. c. Employ zero lot line developments where permitted by zoning if visual or open space qualities can be gained. d. Vary the treatment of rooftops to avoid the monotony of materials, forms, and colors. Rooftop utilities should be avoided except for solar-type improvements. Such improvements, however; should be an integral part of roof design. Guideline 9: Consider existing vegetation when landscaping the site. a. Protect existing resources from being trampled or destroyed. b. Keep new landscaping compatible with ex~sting vegetation and the scenic character of the area. c. Preserve the natu_rallandscaping on slopes adjacent to natural canyon areas. Guideline 10: Match scale and character of buildings with scale and character of terrain and the s~rrounding neighborhood. a. Keep the scale (height and bulk) of the structure compatible with the site and the neighborhood. b. Do not create development patterns that form visually protruding horizontal bands or vertical bulk. A mixture of shapes subordinate and compatible with the site and area should be achieved. c. Irregular architectural edges should be used to interlock structures with hillside contours and vegetation. d. Avoid visible construction cuts and permanent scarring. Guideline 11: Provide pedestrian walkways to visual overlook areas. a. Pathways should provide public access to natural and recreational open spaces and vistas. Urbanizing Communities [and subdivisions] FINDING. The site is physically suitable for the design and siting of the proposed development. The proposed development will result in minimum disturbance of sensitive areas. Guideline 1: Roadways should not be parallel to one another to avoid a shelving effect. Roadways should follow the natural contours to avoid excessive cut-and-fill and emphasize the existing hillside topography, existing significant trees, major rock outcroppings, and other significant physical constraints. a. Roadways should follow the natural contours. b. Reduce roadway width if the design minimizes cut and fill. City policy allows deviations from standard requirements in areas of difficult terrain where flexibility is required. c. When feasible, sidewalks should be on one side of the street only. d. Encourage cul-de-sacs, loop streets, and common driveways. Cul-de-sacs should contain sufficient turning radius to accommodate fire trucks. e. Route major streets around trees and major rock outcroppings. Guideline 2: Parking should be unobtrusive and not cause additional grading. Guideline 3: Place all utilities underground. Guideline 4: Design the development to adapt to the natural hiliside topography, terrain, and vistas. a. Keep development close to the street to minimize the need for long driveways. b. When feasible, orient lots toward views and vistas, at right angIes to contour lines. c. Allow for different lot shapes and sizes, with the prime determinant being the natural terrain. Encourage spht pads in large development projects. d. Allow for flag lots in areas where the available building area is limited by topography. Flag lots should be used if the end result is the preservation of topography by m/inmizing grading. Twenty-five percent grade driveways should be discouraged. Guideline 5: Significant hillsides in the urbanizing areas are defined as those areas unique to the particular site that deserve special attention and design consideration. These significant areas, which shall be given priority for preservation, include: 1) unique finger canyons, especially ones which are highly visible from public areas outside the project, 2) native tree stands or man-made groves which have matured into uulque visual characteristics or environments, 3) rock outcroppings of unique character, 4) ridgefines where they are highly visible from adjacent pubhc areas or neighborhoods, and 5) areas which are a part of or adjacent to an open space linkage system. While these areas may vary fTom site to site, project designs should give priority to their preservation. The hitent is not to stop development, but to dir ec~ it toward the least sensitive areas of the site. a. The project design should strive to preserve significant hillsides. Isolated pockets of 25 percent sloping land would not be classified as significant. b. A tentative map should strive toward a design that does not create lots which are in their entirety in significant ~ areas. Where creation of such lots cannot be avoided, such lots shall not be conventionally padded but shah be left in a natural slope. However, in certain cases where grading of the lots will result in a natural appearance, an overall grading plan will be considered on a case-by-case basis. c. Encourage development on areas of the site and lot with less than 25 percent natural grade. Guideline 6: Cluster development to emphasize the existing topography and conserve existing resources. a. Minimize coverage by using multistory structures. b. Identify all designated open space areas for preservation. Guideline 7: A geologic reconnaissance report shall be required for all proposed projects. If a geological problem is suspected, a more detailed geological report will be required. FINDING. The grading ~md excavation proposed in connection with the development will not result in soil erosion; silting of lower slopes, si/de damage, flooding, severe scarring, or any other geological instabil/ty or fire hazard that would affect healih, safety, and general welfare as determined by the City Engineer. Disturbed slopes are planted with native and seif-stifficient vegetation. : . Guideline 8: Identifygn grading plan which slopes shall be landform graded and which slopes shall be conventionally graded. "Landform Grading" shall mea~ a contour grading method that creates artificial slopes with curves and varying slope ratios in the horizontal plane designed to simulate the appearance of surrounding naturalterrain. The concept of Landform Grading incorporates the created ravine and ridge shapes with protective drainage control systems and integrated landscaping design. a. Slopes that shall be landform graded inchide slopes adjacent to scenic corridors and major and secondary highways; slopes subject to public view; slopes adjacent to open space areas; and slopes internal to the project that may be significant to public view. b. Slopes internal to the project may be conventionally graded, ff deemed compatible with "a' above. GuideEne 9: On slopes where landform grading has been deemed appropriate, the required grading plans shall be designed to accomplish the following: a. Curved slopes. Linear slopes are to be avoided. Instead, cut-and-fill slopes shall have curved configurations that reflect as closely as possible the forms and shapes of surrounding topography. The toe and the top of the slope shall be curved in a concave and convex manner, respectively. b. Transition with Natural Slopes. At the intersections of manufactured and natural slopes, abrupt angular intersections should be avoided, contours should be curved fo blend with the natural slope. GuideEine 10: Direct drainage into streets or separate drainage structures. a. Drain swales should be designed to rninimize their visibility. They should be angled along a slope rather than creating an abrupt 90-degree intersecLion with contour lines. b. The fin/shed surface of drain swales that are visible from major public ways should be constructed wtih aesthetic treatment. Guideline 11: Al1 graded or disturbed areas that are not other~vise developed or protected from erosion shall be permanently revegetated. A landscaping plan wilI be submitted with the application and will demonstrate that: a. The vegetation wilI, when mature, provide permanent erosion protection to the site. b. Plantings shall be fire-resistant and self-sufficient, and reduce erosion potential. c. Irrigation systems, If needed, shall be designed to last as long as required for the selected species to initiate and develop. Irrigation systems shall not be required if the selected species are capable of developing into permanent, self-sufficient vegetation. d. All slopes, which in the oph~on of the City Engineer have a potential for soil slippage, major erosion, landslides or other geologic hazards or instability, shallinclude a soils report with the irrigation and landscaping plan. e. Plant species at transition slopes should be of a type to barther enhance the blending between the manufactured and the natu~ral slopes. Plant trees in the transitional areas and group to give a more natural appearance. L Ali manufactured slopes shall be provided with a ground cover that willinsure 100 percent coverage within one year. g. Preserve the nab, tral landscaping on sfopes adjacent to naturaI canyon areas. Guideline 12: Utilize the structural quaifiy of the soil as a determinant of the type of construction. Assure hillside stability both during and after constraction by recognizing soil characteristics, hydrology, and the steepness of the terraLu. (For ~ther guidance refer to '~rectmological Guidelines for Soil and Geolog~ Reports,' Engineering and Development Department, City of San Diego). F]2XVDENG. The proposed development retains the visual quality of the site, the aesthetic q~kalities of the area and the neighborhood characteristics by utilizing proper structural scale and character, varied architectural treatments, and appropriate plant material Guideline 13: "Step" development on exisffng slopes to maximize views. Utilize rooftops for~ptivate outdoor spaces. Guideline 14: Use retaining sfructures when it significantly reduces grading or can eliminate long sliver cuts or fills. Guideline 15: Design project to maxim~e public access to canyons, overlooks, or open space areas. a. Provide an easement between lots or near the end of streets or cul-de-sacs. b. Designate public pathways to scenic vis~as. Appendix C-10. San Rafael, California, Applicant's Guide to P~ocedu~res for I-[illside Residential Development Planning Department Procedures for Geotechnical~-Iazardous Soils Review A. Purpose. The General Plan Health and Safety Element toque'es geotedmical studies for development proposals to determine the actual extent of geotechn~cal hazards, optimum location for structures, the advisability o£ special structm'al requ~ements, and the feasibility and desirability of a proposed facility at a specified location (Policy S-4). The requirements for geotechnical investigations are set forth in the Geotechnical Review Matrix (Appendix E). B. Processing Geotechnical Review (1) When handing out an application for a master plan zoning, subdiv~ion, conditional cerffd-lcate of compliance, design review, or use perrrdf/g~ading permit, the planner reviews the Relative Geoseisrnic Hazards and Relative Slope StabEdty Maps .... (2) (3) 4) Sites that are rated 3 or 4 (most hazardous) on either Geoseismic Hazard or Slope Stability map will require a Geotechnical Investigation Report as part of the materials needed for completeness. Geologic reports must be prepared by a Certified Engineering Geologist and soil engineering reports must be prepared by a Registered Geotechnical Engineer. Appendix E contains the specific report requirements. Sites that are rated 1 or 2 req,,dre a Preliminary Geologic Resert (as defined i~ AppendLx E) before the application is considered complete. A Geotechnical Investigation may be required if the use is I] considered to be critical use as defined in the Geotechnical Review Matrix, or (2) is downslope of possible debris flow avalanche areas 'areas rated as a category 4). The required report must be submitted before the application is deemed complete. A fee is charged for review of the repo~s. The report is referred to the Senior Engineer. Reports for high-hazard areas must be reviewed by private Geotechnical Review Board. The Public Works Department hires the geotechnical firms to review reports and additionalinformation or additional mitigation measures may be required. Eight to 12 weeks may be required for the review process. Reports in areas rated 1 or 2 are generally reviewed by the Senior Engineer. Appendix C-11. Santa Clarita, California, Ridgeline Preservation and Hillside Development Ordinance and Guidelines, March 24, 1992 [Santa Clarita' s Ordinance and Guidelines are very comprehensive, covering aesthetics, slope stability, erosion, slope-density, fire. and access. These exeeepts are only a small portion of the ordinance and guidelines.] Ordinance Section 17.80.010 Purpose and Intent A. Provide hillside development standards to maximize the positive impacts of site design, grading, landscape architecture and architecture, and provide development consistent with the goals and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's General Plan. B. Provide ridgeline preservation and development standards to protect certain ridges within the city and minimize the adverse impacts of development. C. Maintain the essential natural characteristics of the area, such as major landforms, vegetation and wildlife communities, hydrologic features, scenic qualities, and open space that contribute to a sense of place. D. Retain the integrity of predominant off-site and on-site views in hillside areas in order to maintain the identity, image, and environmental quality of the city. Section 17.80.030 Hillside Plan Review/Permit Requirements A. Plan Review All proposed development projects on land with an average slope of 10 percent or greater, as determJmed to be applicable by the Community Development Director, shall be subject to the issuance of a permit for Hillside Plan Review .... B. Application Submitlal ~nd Project Review 1. Commuxffty Development Director Review The Community Deveiopment Director shall review all site development applications and shallimpose conditions deemed appropriate when one or more of the following activities are proposed. a. Development activities on natural slopes which are greater than 10 percent average but less than 15 percent average on ali or part of the developable portions of a subject site. b. Grading excavations or fills or any combination thereof equal to or exceednig 100 cubic yards, but Iess than 1,500 cubic yards. 2. Planning Commission/City Council Review The Plam6~g Commission or City Council, as applicable, shall review site development applications 02ad shall impose conditions deemed appropriate when one or more of the foilowing occurs. a. Re proposed project is referred to the Planning Commission or City Council by the Community Development Director. b. Development activities on natural slopes which are greater than 15 percent average on ali or part of the developable portions of a subject site. c. Grading excavations or fills or any combination thereof exceeding 1,500 cubic yards .... Section 17.80.040 Development Standards A. Ridgellne Development Classification Significant ridgelines are the ridgelines that surround or visually dominate the valley landscape edther through their size in relation to the hillside or mountain terrain of which they are a part; their visual dominance as characterized by a silhouetting appearance against the sky; as a significant natural backdrop feature or separation of commurdties; through visual dominance due to proximity and view from existing development or major corridors; or as an area of significant ecological, historical, or cultural importance, such as those whicli connect park or trail systems. Significant Ridgeline Classification Development is regulated on significant ridgelines due to their aesthetic, visual, ecological, historical, or cultarral importance to maintain a sense of place and identity for the city and to protect the visual quality and naVoraI environment of the important h/J2s, canyons, and valleys that compose the Santa Clarita Valley. Two categories of sig~ficant ridgelines have been identified. Significant ridgelines shall not be altered by grading or improvements except as approved through a Hillside Plan Review Permit. 1. Primary ridgelines. Pffnnary ridgelines are those ridgellnes characterized by any combination of significant ridgeline criteria as ident~ed in Section A above. Such primary ridgellnes are identified on the official map entitled 'Ridgeline Preservation Map, City of Santa Clarita, 1992" which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Secondary ridgelines. Secondary ridgelines are those rldgelines characterized by any combination of significant ridgeline criteria as identified in Section A above, but are secondary in nature to primary ridgelines due to the following features. a. Smaller size and prominence of a fealure or branch of a primary ridgellne. b. Silhouette of a ridgeline against the open sky on a smaller size hill or silhouette of a ridgeline on a smaller hill that is backdropped by a sio~nifica~nt ridgeline. Secondary ridgelines are identified on the official map entitled "Ridgeline Preservation Map, City of Santa Clarita, 1992' which is on file in the Community Development Department. Ridgehrte Preservation Ti~e Official Ridgeline Preservation Map identifies crests of significant ridgellnes in the city. The precise area to be preserved will be designated on a case-by-case basis. No grading or improvements shall occur within these designated areas except as approved by a Hillside Plan Review Permit. Any development plan that touches, crosses, includes, or affects any primary ridgellne shall include plans for the preservation of all or part of such primary ridgeline in its natural state. No engineered slopes, housing construction, streets, utilities or other man-made features shah be permitted within primary ridgeline areas. Encroachments may be granted if the Planning Commission finds that the encroachment onto a primary ridgeline will be in comphance with the criteri~ in this ordinance. Secondary ridgelines shall also be considered for hillside development proposals. Gradkng in these areas shall be reviewed for conformance with the design criteria of this Ordinance as reviewed and approved by a Hillside Plan Review Perm/t. Maximum Density--Residential and Commercial/industrial [The chart, Figure 3, re/erred to in this section is a list of aliowabie densities and FA Rs broken down by average slope percentages (starting with 10 percent and moving in 1 percent increments up to 50 percent) for seven categories of development.] For each of the slope categories identified, there shall be a corresponding maximum allowable density. The following chart, Figure 3, shows seven density categories that correspond to the mid-range density of the General Plan. The necessary reduction in density to maintain a sintil~r pad and product type as the slope in,eases has been shown on the chart. The densities identified in Figure 3 are the maximum allowable and conform with ali other standards and criteria of this ordinance. The Ridgeline Preservation and HHlside Development Guidelines may cause further density reduction. Ali average slope calculations shall be rounded to the nearest whole number (i.e., 12.2 percent shall be rounded to 12 percent). For each of the slope categories identified, there shall be a corresponding maximum allowable floor area ratio expressed as a percentage. Figure 3 ... shows max&mum commercial and industrial floor area ratios for hillside development. These percentages represent typicalintensities of commercial and industrial uses as identified in the General Plan, adiusted based on slope variations. The necessary reduction in percentage to maintain this similar pad and product type as the slope increases has been shown on the chart. Ali average slope calculations shall be rounded to the nearest whole number .... 1. Criteria for Innovative Design Applications Notwithstanding the density proviff~ons of this section, this ordinance shall not restrict density to less than 70 percent of the mid-point density established in the General Plan and corresponding zoning, provided that all of the following conditions a. The hillside development plan shall be in substanfial comphance with all applicable provisions of this ordinance and the Pddgel/ne Preservation and Hillside Development Guidelines. b. No development consta*uction, activities, or grading shall be permitted on slopes of 50 percent or g~eater except as provided in Section 17.80.040 E. c. The site plan shall be designed to locate or cluster development in slope areas of 25 percent or tess; however, clustering of development in slope areas of 25 percent to 50 percent may be considered and shallbe subject to the approvaI of a Conditional Use Permit. d. In no event shall any portion of a site proposed for chistering be developed in such a marmer that it would exceed two times the mid-range density of the General Plan and zoning on said portion. e. In no event shall the overall density exceed 70 percent of the mid-point density of the General Plan and zonJ. ng or [he density provided in Figure 3, wl-dchever is greater. Ridgeline Preservation and Hillside Development Guidelines II. Design Guidelines Landscape Guidelines 3. Fnce Protection/Fuel Modification Fire protection and fuel modificafion measvxes ~re required where new development is proposed adjacent to ~mdeveloped natural open space. Total fuel modification mitigation measures involve an accumulation of zones which together sep0rate new development from fire-prone materials. All fuel modification proposals are to be reviewed ~md approved by the vegetation management section of the Los Angeles County Fire Department. a. Wet Zone In all areas of na~_ral vegetation adjacent to residential lots (in ail slope categories), a "wet zone" irrigated by a permanent, automatic overhead spray system should be created. This zone should be 50 feet w~de for an up-slope condition and 75 feet w~de for a down-slope condition, measured from the property line and/or edge of bulldfug pad, whichever is closer. The irrigated wet zone should be seeded with a low-fuel mLx of low-grow~ng plants with a variety of drought-tolerant and fire-resistant species, including a predominant use of natives. Refer to Fuel Modification Clearing Zone, Section d, Subsections i and ii...for distances. Wet zone plan materials should be planted per the Sculptured Slope Planting Guidelines and plant list for those ungraded slope areas that have been cleared of tmdesi~able materials per the fuel modification program. Ali irrigation systems should be separated by use areas, sun exposure, and rrmfutenance responsibility. Ali city-maintained areas and assessment district maintenance areas should be designed with a master control-type system. d. Fuel Modification Clearing Zone [Also see the illustration in Figure 8 of this PAS Report.] The width of each fuel modification clearing zone should be measured from all dwe]Jing structures and exhibited on the Fuel Modification Zone Map. Tl~s map should be provided by the applicant as part of the landscape development drawings. The fuel modification clearing zone widLhs for specific areas should be determined on the followhig basis. Where a fuel modification clearing zone coincides with an Lrrigated wet zone, the plant spacing requirements ~dthin the wet zone may be superseded with approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation and the Fire Marshal. (See... sculptured slope planting guidelines.) L On ridges and spines, Down-Slope Condition Zone "A' should be 155 feet wide, of which the first 75 feet should be a wet zone. Zone "B' should be 75 feet wide, and Zone "C' should be 50 feet w~de. ii. On canyons and draws, Up-Slope Condition Zone "A' should be 100 feet wide, of which the first 50 feet should be in a wet zone. Zone "B" should be 30 feet wide, and Zone "C' should be 20 feet wide. iff. Wlxere slopes are determined tu be inaccessibla due to extreme steepness or landslifie danger, vegetation should be modified as per Zone "A' standards in all areas which can be reached at the tops and toes of such slopes. Within the fuel modification area, the following modifications should be required. (a) A~~Scrub~ak(Quercusdum~sa)~SugarBush(Rhus~vata)~Live~ak(Quercusagrif~lia)~H~Ily-~eafCherry (Prunus ilicifolia), Thickleaf ceanothus (Ceanothus crassifolius), Elm-brush (Cercacarpus betuleldes), Lemonade Berry (Rhus integrifolia), Toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), or other ex~sting low-fl~mmability plant material should be thinned drip line to drip line 22 feet apar~ in Zone "A,' (20 feet apart in Zone "B," and 18 feet apart in Zone 'C') and headed up to 6 feet. Any other plant material should be cleared to the ground with a 12-inch maximum height stump. (b) One hundred percent of the above-ground portions of the following plant species in all Fuel Modification Clearing Zones should be cleared to a maximum 12-inch height stump, leaving the root system intact: Ckamise (Adenostoma fasicalatur), Red Shanks, Sage (Salvia and Artemesia), and Buckwheat (Erigonum fasiculatum) or any other high flammability plant material. (c) All above-grotmd portions to a maximum 12-inch height stump (of dead or dying plant material), regardless of species, size, or location, should be removed in aB Fuel Modification Clearing Zones. Root systems should remain in all cases. Prior to the removal of any Oak trees (Quercus Genus), a repor~ should be prepared by a qualified Oak Tree Special~t and any necessary permits first obtained from the City in accordance with the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance. (d) Where there is no sLx-foot or taller plant material existing for heading up, healthy specimens of a smaller size at 26 feet on center in Zone "A,' 24 feet on center in Zone 'B" and 22 feet on center on Zone "C' may be chosen and headed-up by two-thirds of their height. They should then continue to be headed-up proporfionete to their growth until the six-foot level is reached. (e) Conditions created by Zone "A" type clearfug on hain'al slopes steeper than 1.5:1 are difficult to adequately revegetate and irrigate. An unstable sob condition can be created, and the slope is susceptible to water and wfud erosion. Therefore, only the toe and top of the slope should be irrigated. Appendix C-12. A Hillside Protection Strategy for Greater Cincinatti, Ohio (by the Hillside Trust) [Excerpt from ChalTter 4, Volume 1, Local Government Responsibilities for Hillside Protection] 5. Adopt or 0a:aend IocalIand development ordinances to provide adequate protection of slopes in designated hillside protection districts. The following provisions, indicated as fi~tdamental guidelines..., constitute a bare minimum package of protective legislation. The community's subdivision regulations should include provisions for: · Severe restriction of development in the forested mid-slope portions of hillsides. Preservation of the natural character of the land to the greatest extent possible. Deep or extensive excavations and fills that sear the landscape should be prohibited. The practice of terracing hillsides in order to provide additional or larger building sites should not be permitted. Required submission, with ali applications for subdivision permits, of a report by a qualified soil or geotechnical engineer indicating the locations, character, and extent of all areas subject to landsliding. These areas should be prominently designated on subdivision plats, cerSfied site survey maps, and other public records. . Prohibition of buildings, roadways, or public works in designated slide prone areas. . Prohibition of on-site soil absorption sewage disposal systems or private water supply systems in designated slide prone areas. The community's zo ~ing ordinance should include provision for: · Overlay density limitations in designated hillside protection districts, which increase with the steepness of the average nab~ral slope. · Reductions in the proportion of a property which can be graded in designated hillside protection districts. These reductions should also increase ~vith the steepness of the average natural slope. A height limitation on buildings constructed bet~veen the foot and crest of slopes within hillside protection districts. A limit of 36 feet is recommended, hi highly urbardzed areas (e.g., slopes overlooking the downtown Cincinatti basiu), this limit might, on a . case-by-case basis, be relaxed slightly by the hillside development review board. In any case, buildings built on the steeper portions of hillsides should be sized and located so that they least disrupt the natural character of the hillside. Ensuring that buildings constructed on lots lying at the crest of a hill included in a hillside protection district are sited on the upland portions of the lot and held back from the crest of the hill. This will maintain a clear sense of the hillside brow in its natural condition when viewed from major roadways and other public viewing places off site. · Ensuring that high-rise buildings are not located on the slopes of a hillside or immediately at the foot of a hill. l-tigh-rise buildings in these locations obstruct views and mar the natural character of the hillside. High-rise buildings should be sited only on hilltop sites with slopes less than 10 percent and should be set back from the natural crest of the hill more than 50 feet. Protection of significant views of and from the hillsides as seen from major roadways and public viewing places. Provision should also be made for fair and reasonable protection of views from private hillside sites. Precise techniques for protecting views cannot be easily described here in a few words. A series of detailed view protection ~aidelines are included in Volume 3. · Maximum retention of existing trees on development sites in hillside protection districts. Slopes exposed in new hillside developments should be replanted with native trees and plants. Severe restrictions on construction or site development in, or immediately adjacent to, mreas determined to be prone to Iandsliding. ,, Within hillside protection distrlcts, a limit on grading for buildings, driveways, outdoor use areas, and underground utilities. When grading operations are necessary on hillside sites, the smallest practical areas of land should be exposed at any one time during development and the length of exposure should be kept to the shortest practicable amount of time. · Public works in hillside protection districts to be subject to the same zoning regulations as prlvate development. The community should enact earthworks or excavation and fill legislation, binding on both private property owners and public or quasi-public agencies, that includes provision for: Regulation of excavation and f-Ed operations during construction and for management of stormwater runoff and erosion control. These regulations should be made binding on public and quasi-public agencies as well as private property owners. ,, The community's excavation and fiil legislation to be administered by a qualified geotechnical or soils engineer or engineering geologist. · Issuance of excavation and fill perrrdta in designated hiilside protection districts only when it can be dc'monstrated by a qvmlified geotechnical or soils engineer that the operation can be accomplished without risk to life or property, including nearby properties that might be affected by the operation. No excavation or fill should be permit*ed that will cause any slope to become unstable; impose loads that may affect the safety of structures or slopes; interfere with adequate drainage for the site area and the drainage area of land tributary to the site; obstruct, damage, or adversely affect existing sewerage or drainage, public or private; cause a stagnant pond of water to form; or cause erosion or sedimentation. · The tops and toes of excavations and their slopes to be set back from property boundaries and structures as far as necessary for the safety of adjacent properties and adequacy of foundation support and to prevent damage as a result of water runoff. ~, Permissinn for excavation and fill operaiions to proceed only after the property owner signs a statement acknowledging that he/ she has been advised of any geotechnical hazards on the site, accepts the associated risks and liability, agrees to conform with all applicable geotechnical regulations, and relieves the local jurisdiction of liability. · Posting of a performance bond by the owner of a hillside site where excavation and fill operations are undertaken, when, in the opinion of appropriate local officials, the termination before completion of the operation would create an actual or potential hazard to the public. The amount of the bond should be sufficient to cover the estimated cost of restoration of the site or completion of the operation, whichever is greater. The community should enact an ordinance, binding on both private property owners and public or quasi-public agencies, regula ting forest cover and vegetation on hillsides. The ordinance should include provision for: · Regulation of the removal damage to~ cuUing or pruning of, and maintenance of trees and other vegetation within hillside protection districts. The ordinance should also include provision for installation and maintenance of new trees and other vegetation in the course of land subdivision, site alteration, and construction projects. The ordinance should be administered by a qualified professional forester or landscape architect. Appendix C-13. Ogden, Utah, Sensitive Area Overlay Zone, Ogden City Development Code, Chapter 27 19-27-1 PURPOSE AND hNTENT Certain areas of the City of Ogden are characterized by slope, vegetation, drainage, rock outcroppings, geologic conditions, and other physical factors which, if disparbed for the purposes of development, can cause physical damage to public or private property or both. Therefore, the development of such areas and adjacent land requires special care on the part of the public and private sectors. The standards, guidelines, and criteria estabhshed by this Chapter shall include, but not be limited to the following: A. The protection of the public from natural hazards of sturmwater runoff and erosion by requiring drainage facilities and the minimal removal of natural vegetation. B. The minimization o£ the threat and consequential damages of fire in hillside areas by establishing fire protection measures. C. The preservation of natural rearm'es, wildlife habitat, and open space. D. The preservation of public access to mountain areas and natural drainage channels. E. The retention of natural topographic featu_res, such as drainage channels, streams, ridge lines, rock outcroppings, vistas, trees and other natural ~51ant formations. F. The preservation and enhancement of visual and environmental quality by use of natural vegetation and the prohibition of excessive excavation and terracing. G. The assurance of an adequate transportation system for the total hillside area to include consideration of the approved Master Street Plan of the City. This system design will consider densities and topography with minimal cuts, tills, and other visible H. The establishment of on-site and off-site traffic facilities that ensure ingress and egress for vehicles, including emergency vehicles, into all developed areas at any time. I. The encouragement of a variety of development designs and concepts that are compatible with the natural terrain of the sensitive areas and will preserve open space and natural landscape. 19-27-4 DENSITY, LOT SIZE, WIDTH, Ab,rD CHARACTEKiSTICS A. Single-Family Dwelling Units 1. ~um Lot Size. The minimum lot sLze with respect to lots upon which singIe-family detached dwelling units are located in subdivisions or otherwise shall be determined by reference to the following table: 2. Planned Unit Development and Cluster Subdivision. The maximum density with respect to dwelling umits per gross acre for dwelling units in a planned unit development or cluster subdivision shall be the same as that allowed for single-family detached dwellings unless otherwise approved by the Planning Commas[on. Average Slope of Development Site 0-10% 10.01-20% 20.0~ -30% $0,01+% Minimum Lot Size Minimum Lot Widtl~ same as underlying zone same as underlying zone 15,000 sq. ft. at least 1 O0 ft. at front setback line 20,000 sq. ft. at [east 120 ft. at front setback line not permitted not permitte~ 3. Maximum Impervious Material Coverage. The maximttm impervious material coverage that shall be allowed upon lots upon which singIe-family dwelling units are located shall be 30 percent of the totallot mrea or 5,000 square feet, whichever is smaller, including accessory buildings, patios, and driveways; provided, however, that the maximum impervious material coverage may exceed 30 percent or 5,000 square feet upon approval of the City Council after review and recommendation by the Planning Commission. 4. Bnildable Area a. Single-family dwelling structures shall be located only upon areas constituiiug bulldable land, which area shall be fully contiguous and shall be at least 5,000 square feet in size, and shall have a minimum dimension, either length or width, of 50 feet; b. Single-family dwelling structures shall be set back no further than 250 feet from a public or private street except by approval of the Plarming Commission and subject to the following standards: (1) · the home is cormected to Ogden City water and sewer: (2) the access chive does not require substantial cuts or fill. but can be developed on exisl:ing topography and meet ali other requirements for access in this Chapter: and (3) the driveway layout follows natural openings and does not require removal of large amounts of vegetation. c. All accessory structures shall be located upon bulldable land. unless otherwise approved by file Planning Commission, upon a showing by the developer that such locaflon will not be contrary to the purposes of this ordinance. Multiple Units in R-2 through R-5 Zones 1. Maximum Lot Width and Maximum Density shall be determined by the following table: Average Slope of Development Site Minimum Lot Width Maximum Density 0-10% same as underlying zone 10.0%20% 100 feel 20.01-30% 100 feet 30.01+% no~ permitted some as underlying zone Maximum density of underlying zone x .70 Maximum density of underlying zone x .70 not permitted 2. Maximum Impervious Material Coverage. The maximum impervious material coverage that shall be allowed upon lots upon ~vfilch multiple-family units are located shall be 30 percent of the totallot area. 19-27-5 DEVELOFMENT STANDARDS [Contains very detailed development standards for all building and construction in the Sensitive Area zone. Ail sections are identified below. with selected excerpts] A. Drainage and.Erosion. The area of the watershed shall be used to determine Lhe amount of stormwater runoff generated before and after constraction. 1. The "Rational Method" or other method as approved by the City Engineer shall be used in computing runoff .... 2. Lots shallbe ~rranged so as to insure adequate setbacks from drainage channels. The 100-year storm shall be that basis for calcu]affug setbacks. No stractures shall be allowed in the 100-year floodplain 3. Facilities for the collection of stormwater runoff shall be reqrrLred to be constructed on the development site and according to file following requirements: a. Such facilities shall be the first improvements for facilities constructed on the development site. b. Such facfdties shall be designed so as to detsJau safely and adequately the maximum expected stormwater runoff for a 10-year storm of two-hour duration, and to release it at a contrulled rate equal to the runoff rate generated by the site in its natural condition. Said nattrral runoff rate shall not exceed 0.2 cubic feet per second per acre. The facilities shall be designed to detain runoff for a sufficient length of time so as to prevent flooding and erosion during storm rauoff flow periods. c. Such facilities shall be so designed as to divert surface water away from cut faces or sloping surfaces of a fill d. The existing natural drainage system will be utilized, as much as possible, in its unimproved state. e. Where drainage channels are reqtthted, wide shallow swales lined with appropriate vegetation shall be used instead of cutting narsow, deep drainage ditches. £ Flow-retarding devices, such as detention ponds and recharge berms, shall be used where practical to ~iz~ increases in runoff volume and peak flow rate due to development. Areas Lhat have shallow or perched groundwater or a~eas that are unstable must be given additional consideration. Each facility shall have an emergency overflow system to safely carry any overflow water to an acceptable disposal point. 4. Constraetion of the development site shalIbe of a nature that will mivdmize the disturbance of vegetation cover, especially between October 1 and April 15 of the following year. 5. Erosion control measures on the development site shall be required to minimize the solids in runoff from such areas. B. Vegetation and Revegetation [Regarding minimizing vegetation removal, except when absolutely necessary. Also addresses conservation oT removed topsoil and prohibition of vegetation removal on slopes steeper than 30%1 C. Fire Protection [Regarding adequate water supply, review of ail permits by City Fire Department. and requirement for spark arrestors for all fireplacesi D. Geology [Restricts construction near active earthquake faults, prohibits structures on active landslide areas and hzgh-hazard rock fall zones] E. Grading, Cuts, and Fill [Refers to and reiterates grading requirements of the Uniform Building Code] F. Streets and Ways. Streets, roadways and private access ways shall follow as nearly as possible the natural terrain. The following edditional standards shall apply. 1. At least two ingress and egress routes shall be provided for each subdivision or PRU-D unless the number of units served is less than 20 and Lf the likelihood of street blockages is deemed by the Planning Commission to be an acceptably Iow risk. 2. Points of access shall be provided to ali developed and nondeveloped areas for emergency and fire fighting equipment. Driveways located upon each lot extending from a public or private street shall have a maximum grade of 10 percent and shall be of a sufficient width and design to admit and accommodate fire fighting equipment. 3. Cul-de-sacs shall not exceed 600 feet in length, unless "dead-and" signs are posted at the entrance, and shall~tave a 50-foot radius right-of-way and a 40-foot radius improved ~maround. Stub-s~:eets that are longer tlmn 300 feet shall have a temporary turnaround at the end thereof. 4. Centerime curvatures shall be reviewed by the City En~neer for such things as design speeds, sight distances, and stopping distances. 5. Variations of the street design standards developed to solve special hillside visual and fanctional problems may be presented to the plain'ring Commission for consideration and approval. Examples of such variations may be the use of split roadways to avoid deep cuts, one-way streets, modifications of surface drainage treatraents, or sidewalk design. 6. Development sites that are located near canyon trails w/Il provide access to those trails. Parking areas may be required by the piarw&ng Commission at trail heads. 7. ' The maximum mount of impervious surface for streets and ways shall be 20 percent of the entire development site. All streets or rights-of-way for vehicular traffic shah be subject to the following l/mitations: a. The maxLmum grade of such streets or rights-of-way shallbe 10 percent except as hereafter provided. b. The Mayor, after receiving a recommendation from the Fire and Engineering Departments, may grant approval for a grade exceeding 10 percent. Grades shall not exceed the grade recommended by the City Engineer for private streets. c. The provisions for subsection (6) shall not apply to streets or tigris-of-way already constructed or which have heretofore been granted preliminary approval by the PLanning Commission. d. Roads shall be designed to meet the City road base, asphalt, and compaction standards. G. Architectural Design [Requires buildings "to be visually compatzble w~th the natural beauty of the hillsides and canyons," and provides for Planning Commission review of colors and materials for all structures other than single-family dwellings.] [An appendix details the required content ora Soil Characteristics Report, and Grading or Erosion Control Plan, a Geologic Investigation, a Vegetation Preservation and protection Report, and Hydrology and Storm Drainage report.] Appendix C-14. Park City, Utah, Sensitive Area Overlay Zone Regulations [From Introduction] The primary intent of the regulations included in tl~s document is to restrict development in aesthetically and environmentally sensitive areas. This is done by requiring open space on hillsides, prohibiting development on ridgeline areas and wetlands, and strictly regulating development in entry corridors. The intent is that these regulations will encourage large expanses of open space and the clustering of development while still allowing a reasonable use of property. 2.1.9 Open space and density on delineated portions of sites with steep slopes greater than 15 percent but less than or equal to 40 percent. In addition to the specific development r%mxlations set forth above, the following general open space, limits of disturbance, and density transfer regulations shal/apply: (a)' Open space. Seventy-five percent of the steep slope area shall remain in natural open space as defined in the Land Management Code. Twenty-five percent may be developed In accordance with the underlying zoning subject to the following conditions. [1) Maximum development density. Themaximumallowabledensityt]'~atmaybedevelopedontheporfionoftheeteep slope area not set aside for open space shall be governed by the underlying zoning. However, maximum allowable density shall be permitted only by approval of the Community Development Department pursuant to the visual and environmental analysis provided for in Sections 1.1 and 1.2, and a findirtg tlmt development at that density will not have a significant adverse visual or environmental affect on the community as set forth in Section 2.1.9(c). (2) Location of development witbdm sensitive areas. Any development permitted in steep slope areas pursuant to this section shah be located in such a manner to reduce visual and environmental impacts to the maximum extent feasible. To determine the most appropriate location for development, the Community Development Department shall require that the applicant conduct a visual and environmental analysis considering visual impact from key vantage points, potential for screening, location of natural drainage channels, erosion potential, vegetation protection, access, and siral/ar site design criteria. Based upon such analysis; the Community Development Department may require *my one or a combination of the follo-ering measures: (i) clustering of development with/m the sensitive area, or (ii) dispersal of development throughout the sensitive area, or 2.1.10 (iii) transferral of development density to nonsensitive or less sensitive portions of the site not su~ect to Section 2. In transferring development to less sensitive portions of the site, meadows must also be considered as important visual resources. A Iow-lying meadow area may not always be the most appropriate location for 031 the development on a site to occur. Development shallbe sited to preserve the open meadow vistas that are also desirable. CO) Density transfer. Up to 25 percent of the densities otherwise permitted in the underlying zone attributable to the 75 percent open space portion of the site may be transferred to other portions of the site. The density transfer shall be subject to a suitability determination as set forth in Section 2.1.9(c). In addition to density transfers permitted above, up to 100 percent of the remaining preexisting density as set forth in Section 2.1.9(a) is eligible for transfer. Open space and density on portions of sites with very steep slopes (in excess of 40 percent). (a) One hundred percent of the very steep slope area shall remain in open space. No vegetation within 50 feet of the very steep slope area shall be disturbed. Co) Up to 10 percent of the densities otherwise permitted in the zone may be transferred to othar portions of the site, including delineated sensitive areas. The density ti~msfer shall be subject to a suitability determination by the Community Development Department as set forth in Section 2.1.9(c). 3.4 Economic Hardship Relief Provisions 3.4.1 Hardship Relief Petition. Any applicant for development, after a final decision on its development application is taken by the City Council may file a Hardship Relief Petition with the Community Development Director seeking relief from the overlay zone regulation on the basis that the denial of the application has created a substantial economic hardship, depriving the applicant of all reasonable use of its property. 3.4.2 Affected Property Interest. The hardship relief petition must provide information sufficient for Community Development Director and the City Attorney to determine that the petitioner possesses a protectable interest in property under Article I, Section 22, of the Constitution of Utah ~md the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 3.4.3 Economic Hardship Standard. For purposes of this ordinance, a substantial economic hardship shall be defined as a denial aU. reasonable use of the property. Upon a finding that the denial of the application has resulted in a denial of all reasonable use of the property, the Park City Municipal Corporation may provide the petitioner with relief from the overlay zone reb~Iations. 3.4.4 Time for Filing Notice of Petition and Petition. No later than 10 calendar days from final action by the City Council on any development application, the applicant shall file a notice of petition in wriim§ with the City Recorder. Within 30 days of filing of a Notice of Petition, the applicant shall file a Hardship Relief Petition with the City Recorder. 3.4.5 Information to be Submitted with Hardship Relief Pefilion [This is a long list. It ssk~ for all financial information, including sales price, terms of purchase, appraisals, a~sessed value and tax records, information on loans, ali information on listings for sale or rent and offers received, development feasibili~ studies, and income statements.] 3.4.6 Failure to Submit Information. In the event that any of the information required to be submitted by the petifioner is not reasonably available, the petitioner shall file with the petition a statement of the information that cannot be obtained and shall describe the reasons why such L~dormation is unavailable. 3.4.7 Preliminary determination of substantial economic hardship. Prior to the appoiniment of a hearing officer, and based on a review of documents submitied by the applicant, the City Cotmcil, upon advice of the Community Development Director and City Attoraey, shau. make a determination whether the applicant has made a pr~xna facie case that the subject property has suffered a serious diminution of value or a denial of all reasonable use that amounts to a substantial economic hardship. I~ a determination is made that a prima facie case has been established, then the Community Development Director and City Attorney shall recommend whether the hearing shall be formal or informal under the Utah AdmJa~istrafive Procedures Act. Such determination shall be made within 30 days of the filhig of a Hardship Relief Petition and submission of all information required by the Community Development Director and City Attorney necessary to make such determination. Upon such showing, the City Council may appoint a hearing officer, elect either formal or informal administrative proceedings, and proceed with a review of the hardship petition. If, upon advice of the Commtmity Development Director and the City Attorney, the City Council finds that the applicant has not made a prima facie case of economic hardship as defined above, the petition for hardship relief shall be denied and no hearing officer shall be appointed. 3.4.8 Appointment of Hearing Officer. The Community Development Director shall, within 30 days following a preliminary determination of hardship by the City Council, appoint a Hearing Officer to review information submitted by the petitioner, to hold a hearing to determine whether there is an affected property interest and whether a substantial economic hardship has been created as a result Of the final action on the application, and to make a recommendation to the City Council concerning approval or denial of the Hardship Relief Petition. 3.4.9 Qualifications of the Hearing Officer. Every appointed Hearing Officer shall have demonstrated experience in either development, real estate finance, real estate analysis, real estate consulting, real estate appraisal, planning, real estate or zoning law, or in other real estate related diselpHnes sufficient to allow rmderstanding, analysis, and application of the economic h~rdship standard. Prior to appointment, the hem'ing officer shall submit a statement of no potential or actual conflict of interest. 3,4.12 3.4.13 3.4.14 3.4.15 3.4.16 (c) (d) (e) Application of the Economic Hardship Standard. In applying the economic hardship standard in Section 3.4.3 above the Hearing Officer shall consider among other items the fullowing hfformation or evidence. (a) Any estimates from contractors, architects, real estate analysts, qualified developers, or other competent and qualified real estate professionals concerning the feas~ility, or lack of feasibility, of construction or development on the property as of the date of the application, and In the reasonably near future; (b) /kny evidence or tasfimony of the market value of the property both considering and disregarding the Sensifive Area Overlay Zone designation; and (c) Any evidence or testimony concerning the value or benefit to the petitioner from the availabiltiy of opportunities to transfer density or cluster development on other remaining contiguous property owned by the petitioner eligible for such transfer as provided herein. Burden of Proof. The petitioner shall have the burden of proving that the denial of the application creates a substantia] economic hardship under the standard provided in Section 3.4.3. Findings of the Hearing Officer. The Hearing Officer shall, on the basis of the evidence and testimony presented, make the following specific findings as part of its report and reconunendations to the City Council: (a) Whether the petitioner has complied with the requJ.rements for presenting the ixfformation to be submitted with a hardship relief petition; Whether the petitioner has a protectable interest in property; The market value of the property considering the Sensitive Area Overlay Zone designation: The market value of the property disregarding the Sensitive Area Overlay Zone designation; The market value of, or benefit accruing from opportunities to, transfer density or cluster development on other remaining contiguous property owned by the petitioner eligible for such transfer as provided her~in: (f) Whether it was feasible to undertake construction on or development of the property as of the date of the application, or In the reasonably near fu~_tre thereafter; (g) Whether, in the opinion of the Hearing Officer, the denial of the application would create a substantial economic hardship as defined in Section 3.4.3. Report and Recommendations of the Hearing Officer (a) The Hearing Officer, based upon the evidence and findings, shall make a recommendation to the City Council concerning the Hardship Relief Petition. (b) IftheHearingOfficerrecommandsthattheCityCouncilapprovetheHardship ReilefPetitior then the report of the Hearing Officer shall discuss the type and extent of Incentives necessary, in the opirdon of the Hearing Officer, to provide an appropriate increase in market value or other benefit or return to the petitioner sufficient to offset the substantial economic hardship. The types of incentives that the hearing officer may consider include, but are not lin~ited to, the following: (1) An increase in the opportunity to transfer density or duster development on other property owned by the applicant outside the Sensitive Area Overlay Zone; (2) A waiver of permit fees; (3) Development finance aselstance on property outside the Sensitive Area Overlay Zone; (4) Approval of development on some portion of the property within the Sensitive Lands Protection District: and (5) Acquisition of all or a portion of the property at market value. (c) The report and reconm~endations shall be submitted to the City Council and mailed to the petitioner within 30 days following condusion of the public hearing. City Council Review and Consideration. The City Council shall review the report and recommendations of the Hearing Officer and approve or disapprove the Hardship Relief Petition within 60 days following receipt of the Hearing Officer's report. The City Council may hold a public hearing and provide notice as provided in the Land Management Code. Only new testimony and evidence shallbe presented at any public hearing held by the City Council. The City Council may adopt any Incentive reasonably necessary to offset any substantial economic hardship as defined in Section 3.4.3 and may condition such incentives upon approval of specified development pIans. RECENT PLANNING ADVISORY SERVICE REPORTS 410 Zoning Bonuses in Central Cities. SeptemlSer 1988. 30 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 411 The Aesthetics of Parking. November I988. 42 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 412/413 Protecting Nontidal Wetlands. December 1988. 76 pp. $32; PAS subscribers $16. 416 Responding to the Takings Challenge. May 1989. 40 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 417 Reaching Consensus in Land-Use Negotiations. July 1989. 14 pp. $26; PAS subscribers $13~ 418 Designing Urban Corridors. September 1989. 38 pp, $28; PAS subscribers $14. 419 Sign Regulation for Small and Midsize Communi- ties: A Planners Guide and a Model Ordinance. November 1989. 42pp. $28; PAs subscribers $14. 420 Community-Based Housing for the Elderly: A Zoning Guide for Planners and Municipal Officials. December 1989. 30 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 421 A Survey of Zoning Definitions. December 1989. 36 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 422 Zoning for Child Care. December 1989. 30 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 424/425 Solid Waste Management: Planning Issues and Opportunities. September 1990. 71 pp. $32; PAS subscribers $16. 426 Private Funding for Roads. October 1990. 30 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 427/428 Planning Software Survey, 1990. December 1990. 55 pp. $30; PAS subscribers $15. 429 Preserving Rural Character. December 1990. 20 pp. $26; PAS subscribers $13. 430 Reinventing the Village: Planning, Zoning, and Design Strategies. December 1990. 44 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 431 Preparing a Landscape Ordinance; December 1990. 26 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 432 Off-Street Parking Requh:ements: A National Review of Standards. May 1991. 27 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 434 Personnel Practices in Planning Offices. August 1991. 32 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 435 Electromagnetic Fields and Land-Use Controls. December I991. 20 pp. $26; PAS subscribers $13. 437 Airport Noise Regulations. May 1992. 16 pp. $26; PAS subscribers $13. 4,38 Innovative Tools for Historic Preservation. September 1992. 44 pp. $28; FAS subscribers $14. · 39 Plarmers' Salaries and Employment Trends, 1991. October 1992. 44 pp. $26; PAS subscribers $13. 440 Staying Inside the Lines: Urban Growth Boundaries. November 1992. 32 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 441 Affordable Housing: Proactive and Reactive Planning Strategies. December 1992. 76 pp. $30; PAS subscribers $15. 442 Capital Improvements Programs: Linking Budgeting and Planxdng. January 1993. 56 pp. $30; PAS subscribers $15. 443 Selecting and Retaining a Planning Consultant: RFQs, RFPs, Contracts, and Project Management. February 1993. 44 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 444 Industrial Performance Standards for a New Century. March 1993. 68 pp. $30; PAS subscribers $15. 445 Manufactured Housing Site Development Guide. April 1993. 46 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 446 Tree Conservation Ordinances: Land-Use Regulations Go Green. August 1993. 108 pp. $32; PAS subscribers $16. 447 Planning, Growth, and Public Facilities: A Primer for Local Officials. September 1993. 32 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 448/449 The Transportation/Land Use Connection: A Framework for Practical Policy. January 1994. 140 pp. $32; PAS subscribers $16. 450 Preparing a Historic Preservation Plan. March 1994. 58 pp. $30; PAS subscribers $I5. 451 Planning for an Aging Society. April 1994. 64 pp. $30; PAS subscribers $15. 452 Saving Face: How Corporate Franchise Design Can Respect Community Identity. June 1994. 72 pp. $30; PAS subscr/bers $15. 453 Presentation Graphics. January 1995. 80 pp. $30; PAS subscribers $15. 454 Design Review. February 1995. 34 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 455 Neighborhood-Based Planning: Five Case Studies. March 1995.34 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 456 Traffic Calming. July 1995. 28 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 457/458 A Guide to Wellhead Protection. August 1995. 104 pp. $34; PAS subscribers $17. 459 Bicycle Facility Planning. October 1995. 44pp. $32; PAS subscribers $16. 460 Preparing a Conventional Zoning Ordinance. December 1995. 61 pp. $34; PAS subscribers $17. 461 Performance Standards for Growth Management. February 1996.44 pp. $32; PAS subscribers $16. 462/463 Modernizing State Plaxming Statutes: The Growing SmartTM Working Papers. VoL 1. March 1996. 190 pp. $24; PAS subscafbers $12, 464 Planners Salaries and Employment Trends, 1995. July 1996. 25 pp. $28; PAS subscribers $14. 465 Adequate Public Facilities Ordinances and Transportation Management. August 1996. 80 pp. $34; PAS subscribers $17. 466 Planning for Hillside Development. November 1996. 50 pp. $32; PAS subscribers $16. Page 1 of I Laura Carstens From: Darrel Mills [dmills~omnitelcom.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 05 2003 10:51 AM To: Laura Carstens Subject: zoning e×amD[es Hi Laura. This is about the best summary of information I can provide dght now, Please let me know if this is in the realm of what the city is seeking. The county zoning folks will probably get the same from me soon as well, I'm speaking to the League of Women Voters in your town Saturday on this general topm. I did see where your city has Sections 42 43 on stormwater, grading, and erosion, but nothing specific on building-even though the comprehensive plan states a goat "to promote the protection, preserva~on, anc enhancement of the city's bluffs". Establishing specific zoning language to coincide with comprehensive plans is a struggle common to many. would be willing to help out in any way I am able. Thanks. DM 3/5/2003 Bluffiand Zoning Examples By Darrel Mills, ~ Fillmore Co. Minnesota: Ordinance purpose is to control certain bluff land area uses through permitting and regulations. The regulations are intended to control erosion and protect the visual integrky of the bluffland areas by regulating structure setbacks, septic system locations, and vegetation and land alterations in the bluffimpact zone Protection intent: 1) scenic qualities of the bluffs 2) sensitive natural features of bluff areas 3) preserve agricultural land by controlling erosion All structures must be located'outside the bluff impact zone. All residential structures must be 80 feet back from the top of the bluff. There is a 30 foot structural setback fzom the toe of the bluff All residential construction within 200 feet distal of the top of the bluff or within 100 distal of the toe of the bluff must have a site development plan certified by a licensed civil engineer. For all structures exceeding 25 feet in height, the structure must be 30 feet back of the bluff impact zone, plus 3 feet for each additional foot in height over 25 feet. All access drives must be constructed at 14% or less slope No access drive may be located in the bluff impact zone if another alternative exists. Soil erosion must be controlled on all access drives in the bluff impact zone. An erosion plan must be formulated on all access drives between 12% and 14%. All access drives must be no less than 12 feet in width. There shall be no structural construction in the bluffimpacr zone except for fencing. There shall be no filling or excavating of land in the bluffimpact zone except for permitted rock quarries and sandpits. Parking or placement of campers, recreational vehicles, or any form of temporary housing is allowed for one week. Removal or alteration of vegetation in a bluff impact zone, except for agricultural and forest management uses is allowed subject to the following standards: 1) Intensive vegetation clearing within the bluffimpact zone is not allowed 2) In bluff impact zones, limited clearing of trees and shrubs and cutting, pruning, and trimming of trees is allowed to provide a view. Removal of more than 30% of existing trees greater than 6" in diameter at 4 feet in height is prohibited. 3) Trees of any size that are diseased or unsafe may be removed 4) Restoration and management of natural commuinties in the blufflands is allowed. Pepin Co. Wisconsin Bluff areas are defined as all lands within the district which have a slope 30% or greater and slope to~vard Lake Pepin or the Mississippi River (tributaries?) There may be more than one bluff area on a parcel of land The blufftine is defined as lines connecting points along the top edge of a bluff at which the slope becomes less than 30%. The bluffline setback lines are lines established parallei to and inland from a specified distance of 40 feet from a bluffline. Bluffiand code is intended to preserve natural aesthetics of an area. It controls the placement of structures and conflicting land uses by setting minimum lot sizes and widths, establishing allowable uses of land, and setbacks of buildings. The bluffiand code also restricts removal of woody vegetation and controlling excavation. General provisions summarized: 1) Building sites minimum 5 acres in size, and minimum average lot width shall be 300 feet, with at least 300 feet of bluff frontage required. 2) Blufftop setback areas is that which lies between the bluffiine (line connecting slops greater than 30%) and 40 feet back. 3) Allowed uses within the blufftop setback area include: a) agricultural uses and selective woody vegetation removal~ b) forestry clear cutting of no more than 20 feet of any 150 feet as measured along the bluffline, c) biking trails, d) decks of less than 400 total square feet an less than 7 feet in height 4) Bulldable bluffcop area is 40 feet back from the bluffline and extending 460 feet inland. Single family residence height restricted to 32 feet, with eard~ summer tones. Toe slope area is defined as the area of land within 100 feet of the convex part of the slope where the per cent slope relaxes ro less than 30 %. Grading and filling uses are also regulated subject to approved plans. Redwing, Minnesota Comprehensive Guide Plan General language promotes bluffprotection by not allowing structures on slopes that measure 25% or greater over a horizontal distance of 50 feet. Height of building structures recommended to be equal to or less than distance to bluffline. Bluff impact zones are defined as those areas just above or below the noticeable change in slope at the top or roe of the bluff, respectively. Slopes of greater than 12% over 50 feet horizontal distance require soil protection plan Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation--What we do Page t of 3 Our Mission The Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation builds partnersh ps and educates Iowans to protect, preserve and enhance Iowa's natural resources for future generations. In other words, we protect Iowa's land, water and wildlife "for those who follow." About Us: Find the answers to frequently asked questions about the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation. The current priorities of this member-supported organization include: Permanent Land Protection The Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation has helped protect natura lands (prairies. woodlands, wetlands, key watersheds) in virtually every Iowa county, and we have touched every lowan through our land projects. Get an overview of INHF projects with our map of land projects or get more detailed descriptions of the projects nearest you by using our C lickable Land Projects Map. How do we do it? INHF staff members help landowners choose one of many ways they can be sure their woodlands wetlands prairies: and other natural lands remain natural always. INHF arranges donations and sales of natural lands which become county or state public lands. We also arrange conservation hrtp://www.inhf, orCwhatwedo.hUn 2/21/2003 Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation--What we do Page 2 of 3 easements, which protect land that remains privately owned. ~'~ Trail and Greenway Establishment INHF has helped establish more than half the conservation/recreation trails in Iowa - and Iowa ranks fifth in the nation in the number of such trails available for your enjoyment. Download the printable trail list and its companion trail map or request a copy by mail. (Online version requires Adobe Acrobat r). For even more trail information, order our 88-page trail book, ' ¢ Trail. Promotion of Improved Land Management INHF owns a handful of farms around the state that contain natural features--such as native, restored or reconstructed prairies; wetlands, woodlands or oak savannas. We try to be model land managers on these properties and open them for education and visitors on request. Though we don't have enough staff for individual consultations on best land management practices with every Iowa landowner, INHF develops land management plans with owners who have implemented Permanent protection. We also provide education to Iowa landowners through selected Ecology College articles and publications. ~ Leading with new ideas and opportunities To help Iowa's citizens become involved in · natural resource protection, the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation uses both the newest technology and good, old-fashioned contact and service. We reach out the general public, project partners and decision-makers. http://www.inhf, org/whatwedo.htm 2/21/2003 Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation--What we do Page 3 of 3 We provide education through this website, workshops for landowners and conservation professionals, publications and materials, our college internship program and media coverage of our projects and events. We develop diverse partnerships: from private landowners and individual donors to various levels of government to local watershed alliances to other private conservation groups. Though INHF avoids partisan politics, we provide leadership on policy issues affecting our work. ~Still have questions? ~ The news summary page will take you to recent news releases with even more details about current projects. ~ The Calendar of Events lists some opportunities for you to enjoy events hosted by INHF, plus workshops or activities scheduled at the great places INHF has helped to protect. (~ Learn about the people behind the organization! Meet our staff, board members and advisors. Please contact our staff with further questions. Top of Page [ Home I What We Do I ~ J Prelect News For Landowners I Explore iowa I Contact U~s t Join Us © Copyright 2003 Iowa Natura[ Hedtage Foundation Comments? Suggestions? Email INHF Webmaster http://www.inhf, org/whatwedo.htm 2/21/2003 iowa Natural Heritage Foundation--Frequently asked questions Page 1 of 2 Frequently Asked Questions What does the Foundation do? INHF protects Iowa's tand, water and wildlife for ourselves and "for those who follow." With its focus on Iowa, the Foundation provides private action and leadership to save our natural resources. Activities include wetland restoration, woodland conservation, trail development, prairie restoration, river and stream enhancement, sustainable agriculture, soil and water quality protection, regional resource planning, environmental education and permanent protection of Iowa land. INHF has protected or restored more than 70,000 acres of Iowa's wild pieces. We've helped establish about half of the hiking-biking trails for which Iowa is now noted. What has the Foundation done recently? Currently, INHF is working statewide on more than 60 land protection projects. See the news paqe to read about some of them, or e-mail us for a sample of our magazine. How is the Foundation supported? We are a orivate nonprofit organization with about 5,000 members. Their contributions ptus major grants from many competitive sources fund our work. About 84 cents of every dollar contributed is used to protect Iowa's natural resources, leaving about 16 percent for administration, fund-raising and education/communications. How can I get involved? You can support the Foundation by becominq a member or you can offer a helping hand by volunteering your time to Foundation projects. If you are interested in volunteering, please contact the Foundation and we l.ry to match your expertise to our project needs. Another great way you can help the Foundation is through planned giving. If you are a landowner interested in preserving your natural area. we can help you explore your options. Does the Foundation do historical preservation/restoration or assist landowners with prairie planting, wetland restoration, or timber management? INHF does not do historical building preservation or restoration. We can provide limited technical assistance for land restoration http ://www.inhf. or~faq2 .htm 2/21/2003 ~owa Natural Heritage Foundation--Frequently asked questions Page 2 of 2 and management. The Foundation also owns several demonstration sites. In addition, on areas we protect, we will work with the landowners to ensure high quality restorations. Would the Foundation be interested in buying my land? It depends on many factors - but if you have unique natural lands, please e-mail us or call us at (515)288-1846. When was the Foundation formed? The Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation was created in 1979 by a nucleus of business and community leaders who wanted to encourage and support private actions to protect Iowa's natural resources. More than 75 of Iowa's leaders now volunteer on our board of directors or serve as advisors. Top of Paqe I Home ] What We Do I How to Help Project News For Landowners I Explore Iowa Contact Us Join Us © Copyright 2003 Iowa Natura Heritage Foundation Comments? Suggestions? Email INHF Webmasmr http://www.inhf, org/faq2.htm 2/21/2003 Iowa Natural Heritage Fom~dation--Mississippi Bluffiands Alliance Page 1 of 3 Joining together to protect the Mississippi Blufflands In 1993, the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation led in the creation of the Bluffiands Alliance to focus on the protection and preservation of the bluffs along the Mississippi River. The alliance is a partnership of organizations, individuals and landowners working to inspire a common vision of the region. The five-year blufflands alliance initiative, funded in part by the McKnight foundation, began with a prioritization of the most scenic an important bluffs along 350 miles of the upper Miss ss~ppi, stretching north from Davenport to the St. Croix River. Multi-state partners in the alliance work directly with landowners and other organizations and agencies, with an emphasis on assisting stewardship in the blufflands area. By encouraging the voluntary actions of landowners, alliance members hope to protect the fragile region from the many forces that today threaten its continued existence. Threats to the bluffs come in many forms -from insensitive development and the destruction of valuable farmland, to construction on environmentally sensitive bluffland slopes and the fragmentation of wildlife habitat. The Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation, along with its partners ~n the alliance, is working to protect scenic bluffs and important natural, cultural, historical and agricultural resources in this corridor. The Blufflands Alliance focuses on direct land protection through acquisition, conservation easements, sensitive development planning, educating the public, promoting dialogue and initiating cooperative efforts. The Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation has joined with other partners to sponsor informal landowner workshops at which residents of the blufflands area may share their ideas about important aspects of the region Members of the blufflands community are invited to join with others who have taken steps to protect the natural resources and quality of life associated with the bluffs. The Blufflands Alliance needs your assistance, as well as your voice! For more http://wwwinhf, org/blufflands.htm 2/21/2003 }owa Natural Heritage Foundation--Mississippi Bluffiands Alliance Page 2 of 3 information about the Blufflands Alliance, call, write, or e-mail the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation, or any of the alliance partners listed below. Bluffiands Alliance Partner Roster Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation Mark C. Ackelson Darrel Mills 505 5th Ave., Suite 444 Des Moines, IA 50309 Phone: (515) 288-1846 Fax: (515) 288-0137 E-mail: mackelson@inhf, org dm ills@omnitelcom.com Jo Daviess Conservation Foundation Julie Bruser PO Box 6 Scales, Mound, IL 61075 Phone: (815) 777-4011 Fax: (815) 777-4428 E-mail: idcf@humus.com Web: www.jdcf, or¢;I Minnesota Land Trust Jane Prohaska 2356 University Ave. W.. Suite 400 St. Paul, MN 55114 Phone: (651)647-9590 Fax: (651)647-9769 E-mail: mnland@mnland.or,q Mississippi Valley Conservancy Cynthia Olmstead PO Box 2611 LaCrosse, WI 54602-2611 Phone: (608)784-3606 Fax: (608)784-0257 E-mail: mvc@centuryinter, net Web: www. centrytel.net/mvc http ://www.inhf. org/bluffl ands.htm 2/21/2003 iowa Natural Heritage Foundation--Mississippi Blufflands Alliance Page 3 of 3 National Audubon Society, Upper Mississippi River Campaign Dan McGuiness 26 E. Exchange Street, Suite 215 St. Paul, MN 55101 Phone: (651)290-1695 email: dmcquiness@audubon.org Natural Land Institute Jerry Paulson 320 South Third Street Rockford, IL 61104 Phone: (815)964-6668 Fax: (815)964-6661 E-mail: NLl@aol.com Web: www. natura land.corn Standing Cedars Community Land Conservancy Rick Hall PO Box 249 Osceola, WI 54020 Phone: (715)294-6245 or (615)222-8137 Fax: (651)222-8137 email: ¢~usclapp@wavetech.net West Wisconsin Land Trust Rick Gauger 500 East Main, Suite 307 Menomonie, WI 54751 Phone: (715)235-8850 Fax: (715)235-8910 E-mail: wwlt~wwlt.org Web: www.wwlt.orR Top of Paqe Home I What We _Dg How to Help i Proiect News For Landowners I Explore lows Contact Us Join Us © Copyright 2003 [orca Natural Heritage Foundatior Comments? Suggestions? Email [NHF Webmasmr http://www.inhf, org/bluffim~ds.htm 2/21/2003