Loading...
Unified Development and Land Use Code 2008_Documents from 10 5 09Follow-Up to City Council Public Hearing -Unified Development Code page 2 requested, Assistant City Attorney Tim O'Brien has noted concerns with this approach for a specific site like the Mystique Casino electronic message sign in his enclosed September 24, 2009 memo (Enc. A). By Iowa Code, the Zoning Board of Adjustment may grant a variance from the strict interpretation of the zoning regulations based on satisfying hardship criteria. In Dubuque, we have streamlined the ZBA review to a matter of about 3 weeks from application to decision. We cannot shorten this timeframe due to publication and notification requirements. A PUD, or planned unit development, rezoning, allows for customized regulations for a property to be approved after review and recommendation by the Zoning Advisory Commission and approval by the City Council. In Dubuque, we have streamlined this process from its 90-day timeframe 20 years ago to about 45 days from application to approval today. Again, the timeframe cannot be shortened due to publication and notification requirements. Land use decisions, and land use regulations, have along-term impact of years, decades, even centuries. While 21-45 days can seem like a long time to an applicant, these timelines often seems like a rush to neighbors. 2. Park land dedication versus donation. The question was raised about park land dedication versus donation. The concern of two developers was that if park land dedication is a requirement, the donation of land would no longer be eligible for a tax deduction. These developers said this would increase the overall cost of development. The original language for Park Land Dedication in UDC Section 11-9 is the crossed out red type on pages 265-267. This first option was replaced with the revised language shown in bold red type on pages 264-265. This second option was staff's initial attempt to meet the Zoning Advisory Commission's goal to make developers aware up front of the City's desire to include parkland in new subdivisions, while providing for private donation of parkland as a charitable tax deduction. This revision also allows for the provision of park land in County subdivisions within the City's 2-mile jurisdiction through a property owners association (which already are in place in County subdivisions for street maintenance). The City Council asked for review of this second option by a tax attorney. The tax attorney for one of the developers has provided the opinion that Option 2 still appears to require that a certain amount of land be set aside as a park, so the developer will not be able to take a deduction for any donated land unless it is in excess of the amount required. 2 Follow-Up to City Council Public Hearing -Unified Development Code page 3 Staff then asked the tax attorney to review the enclosed Option 3, a proposal to treat the provision of Recreational Open Space as a guideline and include it as a sustainable subdivision development tool (Enc. B). In UDC Section 11-10 Sustainable Subdivision Development Tools on pages 267-268, we have a "score card" of development tools for subdividers to select from to meet a minimum score of 40 points for a major subdivision. Staff's recommendation is to place the following item in the chart with a point range of perhaps 20-25, as follows: The development includes recreational open space provided at the ratio of 500 square feet per proposed detached single-family home and 300 square feet per proposed multi-family unit. With this approach, Recreational Open Space becomes a guideline, rather than a requirement, necessitating revision of UDC Section 11-9 on pages 264-265 to establish Recreational Open space as a guideline. The tax attorney provided the following opinion on this third option: He first explained that the Internal Revenue Code does not specifically address the tax treatment of subdivision development; rather, this is done through a series of rulings and tax court decisions which have come down over the years. He then explained that "the general interpretation is that if it is required to meet zoning or permitting requirements the expense is a cost of development and deductible against the selling proceeds in determining the amount of income to be subject to tax at ordinary income." The tax attorney has indicated that with this latest proposal, "it would seem that if the City approves and permits the subdivision WITHOUT the requirement to donate a specific amount of land as a park to the City a donation later of a track of land might qualify as a long term charitable donation provided it meets the other requirements in terms of holding period and being held as an investment vs. inventory. If it would otherwise qualify, then it should also be allowed to be valued at it Fair Market Value - as opposed to its development cost. The option outlined appears to allow for this to possibly occur." Based on the tax attorney's opinion on Option 3, Planning Services and Legal staff have reached this conclusion: Option 1 and Option 2 aren't deductible; Option 3 may or may not be deductible. Staff differs on how we interpret the latest opinion; some read it favorably, some read it unfavorably. Ultimately, the decision will be made by the IRS. Legal staff says that the more it looks like a developer is getting a quid pro quo, the less likely it is to be considered a charitable deduction. Staff recommends that the City Council refer the three options for park land dedication versus donation to the Zoning Advisory Commission for their consideration, and request that the Commission provide a recommendation for the City Council's third reading of the UDC on October 19, 2009. 3 Follow-Up to City Council Public Hearing -Unified Development Code page 4 3. Costs of and incentives for sustainable design and conservation subdivisions. The question was raised by the City Council about the costs of and incentives for sustainable design and conservation subdivisions. While traditional subdivision design is still allowed, it is now the exception in the UDC. Subdivision regulations have been extensively revised to promote sustainable measures. Information from several sources on costs of and incentives for sustainable design and conservation subdivisions is described below, and supporting documentation is enclosed. 2007 Dubuque SDAT Final Report The 2007 Dubuque SDAT (Sustainable Design Assessment Team) Final Report recommends: "Sustainable design criteria should apply across the board, covering building and site as well as both greenfield and infill projects." The report describes the Sustainable stormwater Toolkit: "Unlike traditional stormwater management which rapidly conveys stormwater through a system of drainage structures, pipes, and sterile detention basins, a sustainable system focuses on using natural features to improve infiltration, treat stormwater, remove suspended solids and phosphorus, and create green amenities that improve property values while lowering costs. The report lists the Toolkit benefits: "A sustainable stormwater system is often referred to as a low impact development (LID) approach which attempts to mimic the natural infiltration and groundwater driven hydrology of historic landscapes. LID, which disperses flows and manages runoff closer to its point of origin, has the following advantages over a traditional stormwater system: protects sensitive areas, increases wildlife habitat, protects water quality by reducing sediment and nutrient loads, minimizes erosion by reducing surges of storm sewer flows, reduces high and low stream flows by restoring groundwater discharges to streams, reduces flooding, improves community character and quality of life, creates pedestrian-friendly open space, reduces land development and infrastructure costs, balances growth needs with environmental quality, reduces infrastructure and utility maintenance costs, and improves property values." AES Report Enclosed is a 2007 report by Applied Ecological Services (AES) that delineates the cost savings of conservation development over traditional subdivision design. AES studied 10 conservation developments, their costs, and sales (Enc. C). All 10 are in the Midwest and were completed in the since 1997. On page 2, AES states that the conservation subdivisions can save money and can make money. AES found average savings for these developments was 24%. The chart on page 3 provides an itemized breakdown of costs and savings for the 10 projects. 4 Follow-Up to City Council Public Hearing -Unified Development Code page 5 On page 3, additional information on increased property values and sales prices for lots in clustered/open space developments incorporating sustainable design. Paving Cost Comparison The City Council, at their last UDC work session in June 2009, asked how permeable paving compares in terms of cost to concrete and asphalt. Associate Planner Kyle Kritz has prepared the enclosed September 24, 2009 memo in response (Enc. D). While the cost of permeable paving is higher than asphalt or concrete, these costs can be offset with savings on stormwater management . NAHB Report In the enclosed July 23, 2007 memo from the City Manager, information on green building and conservation design from the National Association of Homebuilders (NAHB) is summarized (Enc. E). Additional information from the NAHB referenced in this memo is enclosed as well. The conclusion of the NAHB is that the costs of green building, conservation design, and smart growth are offset by the value added to the development. The memo references six case studies from the NAHB that describe conservation design benefits. Also referenced is a NAHB report on Smart Growth; this report describes the benefits of clustered development, or conservation design. This memo from the City Manager led to the formation of the Green Subdivision Committee. Green Subdivision Committee The enclosed December 10, 2007 memo from Public Health Specialist Mary Rose Corrigan provides the recommendations of the Green Subdivision Committee (Enc. F). The evaluation tool described in this memo was adapted by the UDC Technical and Citizen Advisory Committees to create the chart of Sustainable Subdivision Development Tools found on UDC pages 267-268. The possible incentives described in the memo are: state revolving fund loans for sanitary and storm water infrastructure, special assessments for infrastructure, conservation easements, technical assistance and DMASWA grants for homebuilders, shorter setbacks, no curb and gutter required, partnerships with local banks, pre-development review/assistance, alternatives to storm water detention and management, assist with public promotion, and the economic and environmental benefits of green development. The education for green development recommendations listed in the memo are intended to train City staff, provide information to developers and builders, and help create a market for green development. Other Possible Incentives In the UDC, a density bonus for Conservation Subdivision design is provided. This incentive is an enhancement of the "smaller lot", clustered development provisions we have in the current subdivision ordinance. 5 Follow-Up to City Council Public Hearing -Unified Development Code page 6 Planning and Legal staff identified other possible incentives could include a reduction in Planning fees and offering a fast track process for preliminary grading and final grading and construction work (see UDC Section 11-7 A. 2. and 3., pages 256-257) only for subdivisions that score 40 points in the Sustainable Subdivision Development Tools chart referenced above. These incentives would be intended to encourage sustainable design for the benefit of the general health and welfare of the community. REQUESTED ACTION The requested action is for the City Council to consider the recommendations. Enclosures cc: Kyle Kritz, Associate Planner Guy Hemenway, Assistant Planner Wally Wernimont, Assistant Planner James O'Brien, Assistant City Attorney 6 can be done as quickly as three weeks depending on the timing of the Board's meetings. The Board of Adjustment is an independent body and there is no guarantee that the Board of Adjustment would approve the request because it is bound by statutory and ordinance limitations. 2. The PUD or the Zoning Ordinance text amendment approaches would be a longer process (45 days) and under this approach the City Council would have to consider whether it is willing to allow this type of sign as a permitted use. Allowing this type of sign as a permitted use would open the door to other users to place this type of sign in the comparable locations throughout the community. The constitutional requirements prohibiting limitations on speech would require equal treatment for other users. JAO:tIs F:\USERS\tsteckle\O'Brien\Memos\Carstens_MystiqueSig n_092409.doc subdivision. Green Building Code compliance for 50% of dwelling units throughout the 5 subdivision. Native and regionally appropriate trees and vegetation are preserved or planted 5 which limits turf grass, limits water demand, improves infiltration or filtration, and enhances the natural environment. Such vegetation is phased so denuded areas are quickly vegetated. Turf grass should not exceed 30% of the landscaped area. Specify the planting of trees on private property to increase site shading and 5 reduce energy needs for houses. Place trees that lose their leaves in the fall on the south and west sides of the house to provide shade to lower cooling costs. Evergreen trees planted on the north and west sides protect against winter winds, which can help reduce heating costs. The development implements innovative infiltration or filtration techniques such 5 as rain gardens, bioswales, French drains, etc. Parkway/street trees are planted at approximately 35-foot intervals to reduce wind 5 speeds, help stabilize the soil, and improve air quality. No curb and gutter on city streets with appropriate bioswales and sidewalks. The 5 development incorporates detention basins for property on-site stormwater management. Retention basins can be used as an open water amenity feature for on-site storm water management. Use of any pavement that reduces the heat island effect throughout the 5 subdivision, such as light-colored concrete. Other best management practices, as per City Planner or City Engineer. 5 Savings of Conservation Development over Traditional Subdivision Design {P=Project) Positive numbers are savings of Conservation Development over Traditional. Negative numbers are costs of Conservation Development over Traditional. Project: P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 Average ITEM Grading -$214,740 $257,832 $1,813,726 $2,215,025 $1,856,206 $1,862,988 $796,705 $291,957 $302,497 $2,852,312 51.00% Roadway $84,702 $18,754 -$16,477 -$130,230 $1,464,599 $1,187,386 $205,168 $9,231 -$9,963 $801,484 18.00% Storm Sewer $181,611 $31,220 $6,648 $89,676 $974,689 $547,184 $210,289 $65,501 $110,021 $678,302 40.00% Sanitary Sewer $41,614 -$4,365 $0 -$203,064 $850,962 $224,776 $72,436 -$15,502 $5,960 $423,458 6.00% Water $44,483 -$4,671 -$63,680 -$215,881 $905,157 $240,064 $76,815 -$16,257 $5,973 $451,084 5.00% Ecological -$56,500 -$74,857 -$277,472 -$400,321 -$407,131 -$625,084 -$160,341 -$93,954 -$264,513 -$380,992 -154.00% Amenities $17,572 -$16,202 -$94,399 -$226,216 $552,667 $221,666 $7,825 -$15,749 -$39,274 $266,982 6.00° Contingencies $132,055 $51,928 $342,087 $282,247 $1,549,287 $914,745 $302,225 $56,307 $27,675 $1,273,157 24.00% TotalSavin s $660,277 $259,639 $1,710,433 $1,411,235 $7,746436 $4,573,725 $1,511,124 $281,534 $138,377 $6,365,787 Total Percent Savings 19.00% 20.00% 33.00% 15.00% 43.00% 32.00% 25.00% 15.00% 4.00% 37.00% 24.30%* Cost Savings Per Lot $8,725.00 $6,978.00 $147,012.00 $29,012.00 $7,904.00 $20,077.00 $7,346.00 $4,078.00 $4,959.00 $67,676.00 $30,376.70 `Total Savings Percentage is not the percentage savings of all individual Items added together, because dollar-values of Items are different. Visit www.appliedeco.com for more detailed info. Making Money A recent study in Washington County, Minneso- ta, showed houses near public woods, fields and water are worth $15,000 more than those that aren't. Another study found higher prices in clustered developments with permanent open space ver- sus conventional developments. For example, in a clustered/open-space development in Con- cord, Massachusetts, average lot size was 7,232 sq. ft. and sold for $136,894, while a nearby con- ventional development had an average lot size of 33453 sq. ft. for $102,046. Appreciation for the clustered/open-space development was also greater, averaging 167.9% over eight years, ver- sus 146.8% for conventional developments.2 Realtors are less scientific but just as enthusias- tic. Said Eve Lee of Grayslake, Illinois, "It's easier to sell ahalf--acre lot with access to a hundred acres of permanent recreational open space than a three-acre lot without the open space for the same price." Transcending Housing Markets Changing a"No"to a"Yes" Finally, there is the story of a developer in the Twin Cities of Minnesota. The municipality gave him a firm "NO!" because previous develop- ments had overstressed the mum's watershed and ecology. The developer turned to Apfelbaum and AES. After redesign as a true Conservation Development, the project was approved by the municipality and went on to be a success and a showcase for the municipality. So What Does It All Mean? It means developers can build Conservation De- velopmentswith more open space and preserved natural features, yet fit in more lots and poten- tiallyincrease their profits over traditional devel- opments. Conservation Developments can weather slow markets better than traditional housing. In municipalities that are passively resisting or have active moratoriums on development, devel- opers can change minds with Conservation De- velopments. Conservation Developments often attract a dif- ferent kind of buyer. Their value systems are dif- ferent and it shows in the prices they are willing to pay for a lot or home in a true Conservation Development. Add the limited number of true Conservation Developments and you can see how sales can be less volatile. AES's experience in designing and creating Con- servation Developments, permitting, and work- ing with municipalities and governmental units can make everyone involved -developers, in- vestors, municipalities, environmentalists and home-buyers and their families -very happy. 3 Bringing the science of ecology to all land-use decisions. ~~ Applied Ecological Services, Inc. TO: Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager FRONT: Kyle L. Kritz, Associate Planner SUEJECT: Cost Comparison between Permeable Paving, Concrete and Asphalt Paving ®ATE: September 24, 2009 The City Council at their last work session on the Unified Development Code in June 2009, raised a question about how permeable paving compares in terms of cost to concrete and asphalt. The Engineering Department has provided a cost comparison between the types of paving based on costs obtained during recent ~rojects including the City's use of permeable paving in the alley between 13t" and 11t Streets. The cost comparison is for base stone and pavement surface only since the subgrade stabilization and curb and gutter should be the same in all cases. For permeable pavers with 16" of clean stone, the cost is $7.25/square foot. For 7" of hot mix asphalt with 16" of base stone, the cost is $3.92/square foot. For 7" of Portland concrete cement with 16" of base stone, the cost of $3.82/square foot. Using a 400 foot long street with a typical residential cross section, the following costs are obtained: Permeable pavers = $75,400 7" Hot mix asphalt (HMA) _ $40,768 7" Portland concrete cement (PCC) = 39,728 The engineers point out that the costs are subject to the bidding climate at the time of the project. While the permeable pavers are more expensive than either the HMA or PCC, staff point out that by utilizing the permeable pavers, the developer could avoid installing a storm water detention basin, which if the detention basin is even the size of one single- family lot, would save the developer approximately $40,000. The $40,000 would be Comparison of cost between permeable paving, concrete and asphalt paving Page 2 realized as the property can be sold as a building lot rather than in perpetuity be occupied by a storm water detention basin, which because it is a requirement the cost of the land is not tax deductible. The Engineering staff also pointed out that with the use of permeable pavers, the developer would save on the installation of underground storm water reinforced concrete pipe. Please let me know if you need additional information or clarification of the information in this memorandum. cc: Gus Psihoyos, City Engineer KLK/mkr f:\users\mrettenb\wp\cost comparison for paving Ic memo.doc A February 12, 2007 NAHB article (Attachment I) says, (Jack) "Hebert who serves as a National Representative of the National Association of Home Builders, said that the nation's homebuilders support green building and energy efficiency legislation that is voluntary, market-driven and cost-effective for builders and consumers." Attached is a 170 page document titled, "National Association of Home Builders Model Green Home Building Guidelines" (Attachment II) This includes a point system that provides for three levels of Green Buildings; Bronze, Silver and Gold (Page #7). The guidelines contain six primary sections: ® Lot Preparation and Design ® Resource Efficiency ® Energy Efficiency ® Water Efficiency and Conservation ® Occupancy Comfort and Indoor Environmental Quality ® Homeowner Guidance and How to Optimally Operate and Maintain the House Taking this a bit further the City could consider expanding on their first principle "Lot Preparation and Design" to a principle called "Conservation Design" A "Reason Public Policy Institute" document (Attachment III) that I obtained off the NAHB web-site describes Conservation Subdivision Design as "..... also referred to as "open space design" is basically a "green" version of an approach to subdivision design known as "clustering". With CSD, developers ,are allowed to build homes on smaller lots, it they leave a portion of the land undisturbed as protected open space." The Reason Policy Institute is described as "a public policy think tank promoting choice, competition, and a dynamic market economy as the foundation for human dignity and progress." Attachment IV is a case study describing a four step process involved in Conservation Design. One very important point that I learned in St. Cloud is that this method is density neutral and is described in the case study as, "...the density permitted by right within a particular area is not affected by this method." In other words the number of housing units allowed is not decreased, just how those units are placed on the land. I have included five additional case studies (Attachment V). Attachment VI from the NAHB titled Smart Growth-Building Better Places to Live, Work and Play seems supportive of Conservation Design. The Executive Summary says on page #2, "within this publication you will find the National Association of Homebuilders Statement of Policy on Smart Growth. The statement generally defines smart growth as meeting the underlying demand for housing created by an ever-increasing population by building a political consensus and employing market-sensitive and innovative land-use planning concepts. It means understanding that suburban job growth and the public's overwhelming desire to live in single-family homes will continue to necessitate growth in suburbia. At the same time, Smart Growth means meeting that housing demand in smarter ways by planning for and building to higher densities; revitalizing our nation's cities and older suburbs; and preserving meaningful open space and protecting environmentally sensitive areas. Page 3 gives the NAHB six guiding principles of Smart Growth. On page 10, the publication says, "Smart Growth Mean Efficient Land-Use Techniques." They then describe cluster development, which I believe fits Conservation Design. They say, "Cluster Development groups homes or lots tightly on the more buildable portions of a site, leaving more open space to preserve natural features such as trees, streams, valleys and steep slopes. For example, if zoning allows one unit per acre, a typical 50-acre site would permit 50 homes on one-acre lots. With clustering, homes could be built on half-acre lots, leaving 25 acres of permanently protected open space. Cluster development is often opposed and misinterpreted as including higher densities and concessions to developers. In recent years, the cluster concept has come to be known as Open Space Development or Conservation Development because of its increasing tendency to preserve larger, more valuable open spaces." In addition to the concept of Green Building and Conservation Design we may want to discuss the donation of land for parks, requirements for fiber optic conduit and a requirement for radon protection an issue that has long caused Public Health Specialist Mary Rose Corrigan concern. I will ask Office Manager Juanita Hilkin to arrange a meeting to discuss this concept. ~~ Michael C. Van Milligen MCVM/Iw Attachment cc: Barry Lindahl, City Attorney Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager Teri Goodmann, Assistant City Manager Cori Burbach, Management Intern I'inalh, assi~rnin~ a parrirular dc_.rec of intporra:ncc t:o dif- ferent criteria nniloubt:cdl`~ im~oh-is a cr,T7:ain amount of pc•rsima.l or ]Heal t•ahac jurh~l'nt•m:. l.ii'e-cpcac assi;ssrn.en.t. (L(;A j tools are l~,e~~innin~ ii) ~m-I out slTCh qucst:n:ms.. but thi: tools sri]] remain in their infant}. Theri;fore. this set: of ~Ti:ell hoinc lnailrlin~~ ~t,iilclinis sltoldd be ~•ic~~~i•.d as a d`-naattic doctamcnt that ~clll i•han;~c aril i eoh~e as new inf,lrma.tir_,n l:,ecomee. ai~ailal-,lc; itnproci:ments arc rna.de to ezistin_• tr;chniglaes and teiatnologlcs. and T1C1P resrxirr_h roof aa•c. rlc~•i,lol,cd. HOW TO USE THE GUIDELINES The uuiilelincs arc or~anizcil l:,v the `~uirlin= l:,rinciples listi:d ahovc. I-lo~c•e~~e.r., t:here are t„-i1 unilerh-in~~ ideas that c~~i•rrrnte should. keel:] in mind brfr:,ri• tmdimlalring a ~mrn horru;. l:,rojcct, hirst. encironmcnr.31 considerariim5 shintld I:,e incarliorated intro thr.. l,r•ojcct. from t:he cer~- lie_mmiattr• It is ]mach Hardier to ~~-ca~~e ~rcr•.n homi; amr..ta-,t:: into a project after.' the lTOI>~c plans art, finishi;d. tii•eotul, the house should hr.. looked at as a ~tihole as the bnilikr deter- ,nines which of the' ~recTa Nano; `ruidcline iti;m; ro I:nlt rotor t]IC ]rouse. Igor esanTplc; ma.hin`r a home':, 1:,nililirtrJ enve- 1Dl:,e ti~lTter thrnnalt air scaling an+-l rll,alit}~ liuildinc tech- niilucs caaT affcr:t. tlar ~~-a~° irl Which the bnililcr dc~imts the homr..'s ~•i:ntilation sti stem. It is thr•ouLrh such a farts>ard- tllinlan« pr~rccs~ th_it hnililcrs can _ain rest afficienciis. r ~ - € e E ~ F - - i F Parl Chtc c,1' tlTisi• ;,'nidc]inrs contains the chr..cklist of lin.c Itrrns. h~acaT t91t:r1° mi:hldcs the line itc;rn ntlc, the poutr. ~•alnc. atua the iii•lns t-hat should f-,c Iiri,~irlcd l~i~' the builder to ~-erifi= that t:hr.. hnc iri:m ~c•ati irnl_Ilcmenti;d. 'I'hc rerilicAition rolunin atstnnes rlTCre is a ;Yrefn I;tailrJin' l;ru~ram covrdin:itiar or other third parr-. I lu~~•ccer; the ,~nidclinrss and pr»nt s~st+:rln can l:,r: user] indr:pr;ndenth, eri•u if a i•rirm:al ,rrei;n l:ntililin~ pro~'raan does not exist in a laaa•t:irulaa• rep on. It is a_~ain recomntcnded that a bl.lildcr fir.;t: hecanne fantiliar• ~~•ith t:l~li: lir,i; items prior to ilrsi_rnin_~ a ]route io hr:lp intro dil1:C GOnCCpts that a I:niilc)rr can incarlicrritc int~:a thi: hotni:'s ilrsi,~Tt• rtnTarrnrtiDn, and ul,cration. `lb hi•Ili a builder holi~ticallp incorl,oran• «rrcn liuililin4r into hl:nuc;s, the 1\;11i.Fi team cstilali4hed iliii'c;ri:nt ]:,Dint. le~~cls t:o arhic~~c 1`rir i:ach `miilirr~ principle at earl] k~rrl of ~treen -,,,1l llltln,. •1 I7i•-l:~Otttt Sl:5tl;tTl 15 rlcsi:rihcd hr~ID~~•. I'~~Hli r•."i~7de GREEN He:rn~ ?.i dir:r; ~auc!•_!ine: POlrvT svsTEr-n "I'lx;.rc. are tlll'eC i]ifi`c:rcTlt lcccls of `wren huililirh* availal.,lt: ra l:luildcrs ~~-ishil~ to use tl,c.~c ~~,uidr:lira:s to rare their pruject~-13rDUZC, 5ih•cl•. and t;uld. At all lccels.. tllerc ar•c a Inininnnu nl.uTrht:r of ],Dint.; rcdnircd fur each of the sceun ,-uidiu~r hrincilales to atiun: that all asl:,a:t~ u1' :,'T'een hutkhn~; arc addressed artd that there: is ., l.,a.laalexd. ~~-hule-}°stcrns al:,proaclt. ~,tter read»n;; t:lu:. tllriahulds; a.n adcaitiunal l UU point; must Le at?hie~~ed by iulplenlcni-in~; aT>1• of the rcanainin`+. lice itcuis. lhr, t.al.,lc hclojt• uutliucs talc rariuus !~-recu buildiu~ le~~el threallul+l;. Points Required for the Three Different Levels of Green Building Bronze Silver_ Lot Design, Preparation, and ~~ 10 ~ =7 ~ Development 8 . _ :. Resource Efficiency ~ ~~ :77 Energy Efficiency 37 ~~'-- ~=~~D Water Efficiency 6 3g } '79 _ Indoor Environmental Quality 32 = 39 _ ~_' Operation, Maintenance, and _ Homeowner Education 7 _ 7. '~-•- Globallmpact 3 -. .S' _=fr=_>~z Additional Points From Sections ``- 1 D:0 t= ~< ~t~D r of Your Choice 1 DO _ : _ :• ~ Lhr. htunr: dncF unl knnr n r$n•!ad di;lribu/r:o» ,+;r:etrani_(iu s~,ur.N larrtt- in_ and r'nn/irz,~, drrGrc! I:i ponds ~•rim l/u~ nuuiber rer~uirvd in Ihr Furor,+' l/f irirn r;l • srction. ,~ a'i`illac'77UI7 lla The rec)ttu•rd l.,viitt- i'iir a hoax:' n-itlTDnt durt- ~.-urlc for tJTr.. spai:r heatilt<<:+ttd r.ucrlilr~ s~~sterns refk~cas the fat;t rllat tltr..rr qua tuore hclint az•aiJah]e fin' hulnes that do I~;a>,•i- ihu:rnrorh. It is not intendri] as an inilicarion of prrfea-- i?nc;, fin' uuc t1~.,e of s}•sterat acct auotl'aea•. 1i, rleterntiue hiaint: s•ahirs fur each ;ruiilnl~r l,rnu:iple; a l:ntilrier ~ianpl}- tiriils rite piiuTts for earh liar. ithnt ahl,lied to rlte hunae fur rack ~ntiriiu~* 1'niTii:ilile. Cc»rthaaiu;~ the l:,rc,jiaa:~ ]:,Dints filr the ittili~~tlual _nirlvt~~ 1.,1•iui•ihle.~ R1r1't tlae. chat•r alum=e ~•ill drternaine ~~hi•tlter the I'u•ojec:.t is d+~iatlc•d a 13ruuze-. Sih~er-, i;r t;r_,li.l-level ,r,rei;u hcretae• ;._ l~ -~- • "~ -' „a ,~: a ,.~ `' -, ~_ ; t : r~• ,. INTRODUCTION !` Attachment III Reason Foundation free minds and free markets ( mentary Reason Public Polic Institute is a ublic olic think tank romotin choice competition, and a dynamic market econom as the foundation for human dignity ar progress. Reason.org ,~------ _ _ - August 6, 2002 ~ ~ ~" - ~ - ~'~ Conservation Subdivision Design: AMarket-Friendly Approach to Local Environmental Protection By Leonard Gilroy Some new and unique residential subdivisions in the Atlanta metro area are offering what many home buyers would consider as the best of both worlds -- modem suburban homes surrounded by woods, wetlands, and other undisturbed green spaces. A recent article in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution discussed the increasing popularity of "conservation subdivision design" (CSD) in several metro Atlanta counties. Developers, consumers, and environmentalists alike are finding CSD increasingly appealing, and it offers a flexible, market-oriented approach to local environmental protection worthy of greater attention. CSD represents a subtle, but significant, twist to the traditional subdivision design Related Links and review process. In amore "traditional" subdivision design -- often referred to as the "cookie cutter" approach -- all of the developable land within a tract is Atlanta Regional Commission. 2001. divided into roads and house lots, typically subject to minimum lot size of the undevelopable portions of ists onl ll i Cons_ ervation Subdivisionr y y cons ca requirements. Open space typ such as wetlands and steep slopes. In other words, most of the land is the tract Orcliirarrces. , either built upon, apportioned to individual lots as yards, or surfaced for roads. Foth and Van Dyne Consultants- „ ~~ Engineers-Scientists. Carservatiorr. Ill contrast, CSD, also referred to as "open space design," is basicall a e n _ ~~..,.,..fori„R ~~ w;th ran . v1 lll L1J 1 1 Design/Clresterin~ Fact Sheets. b . ,1 version of an approach to subdrvrsron design own a~ developers are allowed to build homes on smaller lots if t ey leave a portion of the " " Metropolitan Area Planning Council. traditional land undisturbed as protected open space. For example, if a uires a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet, a di 2000. Derr Since Resiclerrtirll ner~t: Four Cure S'tuclies. l nance req residents zoning or 50-acre parcel could yield roughly 200 houses. In contrast, aCSD-friendly zoning onr Deve ordinance might allow a developer to build the same 200 houses on 5,000 square National Association of Home foot lots if the other half of the land is left undeveloped. Some communities have Builders. 2002. Bt~ilrlirrg Gr•eener•. even adopted incentive-based ordinances that offer density bonuses to developers es on a given parcel than would h Builrii~ Better: The Ouiet om that utilize CSD, allowing them to build more Revolrction. have been allowed under traditional zoning. State of Utah. Governor's Office of CSD offers the full development Compared to traditional subdivision design, Planning and Budget. Conservation potential of a parcel while minimizing environmental impacts and protecting Design for Subdivisions: A Practical desirable open spaces. The developed portion of the parcel is concentrated on d areas or areas with well- l Guide to Creating Open Space an those areas most suitable for development, such as up ed portion of a conservation subdivision can include develo Th il Networks. p e un s. drained so such ecologically or culturally-rich areas as wetlands, forest land, agricultural Texas Center for Policy Studies. land buildings, historical or archeological resources, riparian zones (vegetated 2000. Dei~elopirrg Mcrr•b_etrrble crnr~l waterway buffers), wildlife habitat, and scenic viewsheds. ~ Environm_eir.tcell~~ Serrsitiye Consernation-Based S'tabdivision_. Typically, the open space is permanently preserved via easement or dedication and Word proceerlin~. 7/5/200 i http://www.reason. org/phprint.php4 managed through a homeowners association, land trust (or other conservation organization), or local government agency. In some conservation subdivisions, preserved areas have been leased to farmers for small-scale agricultural prop -tion, used for community gardens, and even used as community-owned bor.. _arms. From the developer's perspective, CSD offers lower development-related expenses with ahigh-quality, highly-marketable product as the end result. Having homes clustered on smaller lots reduces development costs since there are fewer trees to clear, less land to grade, and less road, water, and sewer infrastructure needed to serve the development. Conservation subdivisions also target the growing consumer market for homes in natural settings with less property to maintain. Even with smaller lots, housing prices and resale values in conservation subdivisions compare favorably to those in traditional subdivisions. In fact, consumers have shown a willingness to pay a premium for the environmental amenities and quality of life that conservation subdivisions offer. Many people would gladly trade lot size for proximity to natural scenery. Town of Cary, North Carolina. Consetl~ution Subdivision DesiUrt. University of Georgia. Institute of Ecology. Office of Public Service and Outreach. 1999. Cortretvntion Stchdivisionc~ Ecological. Landscn~e and Construction, ntad Le~a1,4. lications to Chcr-olcee County Georg ia. University of Illinois Extension Service. Local Government Information and Education Network. 2000. Local Government Topics: Cluster/Conservation Development. University of Wisconsin Extension. The community-at-large can also benefit from CSD. It can be a useful tool to help 2000. A Model Ordinance for a address local concerns regarding the loss of environmental resources, farmland Co~tsen~ation Subdivision. and community character. Local governments can also use CSD as a vehicle for creating community-wide open-space networks, reducing the need to purchase and maintain new tracts of public land. Establishing open-space networks and reducing impervious surface cover can benefit the community by providing new recreation opportunities, protecting wildlife habitat, maintaining the ecological and water filtration functions of wetlands an Marian areas, and reducing stormwater runoff and flooding. The Prairie Crossing development in Grayslake, Illinois is one of the more famous conservation subdivisions. It contains 337 single-family homes on 667 acres, with 350 acres of preserved prairies, farmland, wetlands and lakes and is the western anchor of the 2,500-acre Liberty Prairie Reserve. Theand n pricenfromf rou hly $250,0001 toe$400,000. It alsothat range in size from 1,100 square feet to over 3,400 square feet p includes a charter school, community horse stables, acommunity-supported organic garden, and a farmer's market. Golf course communities provide an interesting parallel to conse ation subdavisionssaslgo1f ourseecoinmun ties without leading proponent of CSD nationally, sometimes refers to conserv y p y g the golf courses." Surveys have shown that many homeowners in golf course communities do not actuall la olf; the high home values and rather, they enjoy the open space and park-like atmosphere that the golf course provides. Also, housing demand in these communities provide an example of the marketability and profit potential associated with open space designs. Since CSD seems like awin-win for developers, consimi rsdevelo ers are not allowed t build them in many parts of the conservation subdivisions in our cominumtles. Puts p y, p country. Outdated and inflexible local zoning and subdivision codes make it difficult, if not Impossible, for developers to utilize CSD and other innovative designs. In this type of regulatory eand ° sive app ov al p ocess for a nonnt ad t onale traditional subdlvlslon designs rather than navigate a long, dlfficul , p subdivision. To ~.ourage the use of CSD, local governments need to modify their comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances, and subu~~ision regulations to allow conservation subdivisions and to incorporate the flexibility into key development codes - http : //www.reason. org/phprint. php4 7/5/2007 rage ~ oz ~ ich as lot sizes, building setbacks, and road frontages and standards -needed to implement CSD. Providing incentives Bch as density bonuses to developers that incorporate CSD into their projects is further step that local governments can k,e ~ promote this type ofhigh-quality, ecologically sensitive type of development. he first step for local governments is to think strategically about what CSD offers for their community, what types of :sources are most desirable to target for protection, and how to most clearly define community preservation goals so that ;velopers can easily understand them and incorporate them into their designs. It is alsfl crucial for local governments to Zderstand that CSD is just one of many growth management tools and that it will not be appropriate for all locations and 1 types of residential development. ather, CSD should be thought of as an option that should be made available to developers and consumers interested in ;ologically-sensitive development. Communities may find CSD to be an effective tool in their efforts to balance local ~onomie growth with the preservation of environmental resources and community character. ~onard Gilroy is a senior fellow in urban and land use policy at the Reason Foundation age printed from: tp://www.reason. org/commentaries/gilroy_20020806. shtml opyright ©2007 Reason Foundation 7/5/2007 :tn: //www.reason. org/phprint.php4 Attachment IV ~l'i ~.~ Town of Cary Open Space and Historic Resources Plan ® 11 Description of the Process and A Case Study A recommendation within the Open Space and Historic Resources Plan is "Create Conservation Overlay Districts for Open Space Priority Areas. Ordinance would require conservation subdivision design to protect Significant Resource Areas identified in the OSHRP" (emphasis added). Conservation Subdivision Design (CSD) is a relatively simple, four-step process to identify the most significant natural and cultural resources on a given tract of land, and thereby determine the most suitable "building envelopes" from a preservation viewpoint. Description of the Four-Step Process'. The four-step conservation subdivision design technique can be applied within any residential zoning category, and is `density neutral'; i.e., the densit ermitted b ri ht within a articular area is~ not affected b this method. To illustrate, inure 1 shows a tract of land subdivided in the conventional manner. This 140-acre rural tract (located in Orange County, NC) is zoned R-80 (minimum lot size 80,000 ft2) and is located within a critical water supply watershed. After subtracting out unbuildable floodplains and steep slopes, this tract could yield 42 lots averaging 3.2 acres. This conventional pattern of development has achieved much success in the Triangle region, and rural subdivisions such as this one are highly sought-after as potential homesites. However, this layout does not offer permanent protection for the most significant resources of the property. Figure 2 is an aerial representation of this tract, a parcel rich in natural and cultural resources. The site borders the Eno River, a tributary, of the Neuse. The tract contains both gentle and steep slopes oriented generally to the southwest. The site is distinguished by large areas of mature hardwoods and smaller areas of mixed pine forest that are linked by several hay meadows associated with the farm, which is located at the lower left corner of the tract. The farmhouse, built in the Federal style around 1830, is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. At the opposite end of the tract, a rock outcropping atop a steep slope offers a spectacular view of the Eno. The first step in the CSD process is the identification of significant resources extant on the site. For sites within Town of Cary's planning jurisdiction, this information would be readily available through the Town of Cary's GIS (Geographic as derived from the ecological and landscape assessments conducted for the OSHRP. In this example, resource identification is shown in three phases for the sake of clarity: (a) Identifying Steep Slopes and Unsuitable Soils (Figure 3); (b) Identifying Land and Water Resources (Figure 4) and (c) Identifying Vegetation, Wildlife, and Cultural Resources (FiQUre 5)• ~ Excerpted from Arendt et al: Open Space Design Guidebook for the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuarine Region, NC Association of County Commissioners, 1996. ZFigures are shown beginning on page 6. The areas identified in Figure 3 represent the unbuildable portions of the tract, and would apply in either a conventional or CSD scenario. Continuing Step 1 of the CSD process, land and water resources are illustrated in Fi ure 4, Identifying Land and Water Resources. This includes stream buffers and moderate slopes (15- 25%). Figures 3 and 4 show resource areas that can be considered `primary conservation areas'; i.e., areas inherently unbuildable that should be removed consideration for determining building envelopes. Figure 5, Identifying Vegetation, Wildlife, and Cultural Resources, illustrates 'secondary conservation areas' that represent significant resources that could be preserved but exist on land that lacks constraints to development. It identifies the woodlands, meadows, and historic features that constitute both important habitat for species diversity, and provide character and context to the landscape. Identifying Potential Development Areas is Step 2 of the CSD process, as shown in Figure 6. It illustrates the extent of the preservation area that would be targeted for protection through one or more of the techniques described in. the OSHRP Preservation Toolbox. In this example, a decision was made to use the large hay meadow as a location for building envelopes, in order to maximize the amount of woodland to be left intact for wildlife and water quality benefits. This demonstrates how the conservation/development choice is sometimes an `either/or' proposition. In this case, a compromise was reached, whereby the most critical contiguous areas of woodland and stream buffer habitat were preserved, while conserving some of the meadows and fields as usable open space for the future residents. Preservation of the historic farmhouse was also a priority consideration. The farmhouse and accessory buildings, placed within the conservation area, could be marketed as a premier home location. The prestige and benefits of listing on the National Register, along with the conservation easements and other protective measures, would make this a desirable property for apreservation-minded buyer. As well, the complex could remain as the residence of the landowner/subdivider. Step 2 logically proceeds to include locating of the house sites with the development envelopes: Our objective is to accommodate 42 houselots, as determined from the Yield Plan of Figure 1. Figure 7 illustrates how these home sites are distributed evenly throughout the building envelopes. In this case, the central hay meadow provides a focal point around which a housing group could be situated. The meadow serves a central `green common', and provides both an active and passive recreation area for residents. Steps 3 and 4 of the CSD process are simple and straightforward. Now that conservation areas, building envelopes, and house sites have been located, a street and trail network to link the homes can be easily drawn. Streets and trails are planned in a manner that minimizes stream crossings and disturbance to the woodlands. Informal footpaths follow the existing trails and woods roads that crisscross the farm, conforming to the working structure of the landscape (Figure $)• In the final step of the CSD process, lot lines are added, with each lot having at least 32,000 ft2 to accommodate individual septic fields and wells (Fi ure 9). The farmhouse complex remains on its own large lot to protect the historic integrity and context of the site. Neighborhood access to the complex could be limited easily, since it is separated from the rest of the property by a small tributary stream and by existing woods. In the conservation subdivision design, just over 35 acres are taken by houselots, and the average lot size is 36,500 ft2 or 0.84 acres. Street rights-of-way consume an additional 7.3 acres, leaving 97.5 acres, or nearly 70% of the tract as undivided and permanently preserved open space. Aerial views of this development in the conventional manner (Fiaure 10) and with conservation design (Fiaure 11) illustrate the differences between these scenarios. Using conservation design, every houselot is enhanced by direct views and/or access to the open space. In addition, all residents are accessible to a network of informal neighborhood trails through woods or meadows. In essence, each resident is purchasing access to almost 100 acres of historic and scenic Piedmont landscape at a fraction of $1 million dollar price that an estate of this magnitude would command. From an investment standpoint, the initial value as well as the resale value of each lot is increased. From a natural resource and historic preservation viewpoint, the character and integrity of the property is well respected and largely preserved. Economic Aspects, Marketability, and Case Studies Conservation Developments typically cluster smaller lots on a tract of .land, instead of distributing them over the entire acreage. As a result, conservation subdivisions, neo-traditional villages, and other higher-density residential developments tend to be more cost effective to construct. The Smart Growth Network, a collaborative effort led by the International City/County Management Association, has published a report on the costs and savings of 'green' development. A summary of this report is attached. Despite its advantages, conservation development has not replaced conventional large-lot subdivision layout as the dominant form of residential development. This is partly because many local governments either have not allowed conservation or cluster development or have established administratively complex review and approval procedures that have effectively discouraged its use. In addition, local officials and the public have not readily understood the cluster concept and have often associated it with higher densities and a tower standard of living. For their part, developers may not be familiar with this development alternative, or they may not be convinced that there is a market for this type of development. Hovrever, there is evidence that buyers appreciate the value of a smaller lot near to permanently protected open space. A 1990 stud conducted b the Center for Rural Massachusetts compared the resale values of homes on lots in cluster developments in two Massachusetts towns with those of comparable homes in conventionally planned subdivisions in the same communities. In both towns, the value of homes in cluster developments appreciated at a faster rate than did the value of homes in conventional developments, in spite of the facts that the lots in the cluster developments were significantly smaller. A more recent (1995) study by the market research firm American LIVES found that home buyers place a premium on having lots of natural open space and walking and biking paths - amenities that can best be achieved through the use of cluster development. In the survey, customers identified "lots of natural open space" and plenty of "walking and biking paths" as the second- and third-highest rated features (out of 39) critically affecting their decisions. According to the survey director, Brooke Warwick, these results demonstrate that consumers are becoming more selective and looking increasingly for the kinds of features that encourage informal social interaction among neighborhood residents. Interestingly, golf courses within developments ranked 29th on the list, just below tennis courts. Confirming this trend, Realen Homes found that lots adjacent to open space in its award-winning Garnet Oaks subdivision in Bethel Township Pennsylvania sold faster than other lots despite their premium prices. Realen also created a short trail system through one of its conservation areas and produced a simple but attractive trail guide brochure for distribution to all prospective buyers. In post-sales interviews, many of the homeowners said that the open space, trail system, and brochures all influenced their decision to buy in Garnet Oaks. In Farmview in Lower Makefield Township Pennsylvania, Realen Homes built 332 houses on lots averaging 22,000 square feet in a one-acre zone, enabling 51 percent of the site to be conserved (137 acres of farmland and 76 acres of woods). Farmview quickly became the fastest-selling development in its price range ($250,000- $325,000) in the county. Similarly, at Hawksnest, in Delafield Township, Wisconsin, Siepmann Realty has used its 100 acres of open space to great advantage in marketing lots in its 180-acre development. With an average development cost of $47,200 per one-acre lot, Hawksnest is producing an attractive return. It is also competing successfully against several nearby subdivisions offering lots three times larger but with no community open space. At Newpoint a traditional neighborhood in Beaufort Count, South Carolina, lot sizes have been reduced to provide for a system of public greens and commons. Newport's lots, at about 11,000 square feet, sell at twice the price of 38,500-square- foot lots in adjacent developments. Staff has found numerous examples of conservation subdivision developments on the World Wide Web, including a recent Charlotte Observer article describing a conservation development near Banner Elk, NC. Following are brief summaries and Web links to several others: The Preserve at Hunters Lake, Ottawa, WI. Southeastern Wisconsin's scenic rolling hills provide the setting for The Preserve at Hunter's Lake, developed by Siepmann Realty Corporation of Waukesha, WI, a project that includes 41 one-and-one-half-acre lots surrounded by over 185 acres of permanently preserved open space. The Preserve protects large areas of upland woods and prairies, steep slopes, wetlands, and lake shoreline. According to the project description on the National Association of Home Builders' website, "each lot sits within a cluster of six or fewer home sites that nestle up to woods. Each homeowner enjoys a sense of neighborhood, yet a walk out the back door=gives the impression that individual residents own several acres on undisturbed land. Buyers are encouraged to let their landscape naturalize and enhance it with native plantings, thus minimizing the area devoted to manicured lawns and respecting The Preserve's philosophy." Prairie Crossing Grayslake, III. Prairie Crossing is one of the most cited `success stories' of the conservation design concept. This development contains 337 single-family homes on 667 acres. The conservation land contains 350 acres devoted to prairies, pastures, farms, fields, gardens, marshes and lakes and includes acommunity-supported organic garden. Homes are constructed using energy-saving construction techniques and materials. The community is the western anchor of the Liberty Prairie Reserve, a 2,500-acre preserve of forest, marshes, prairies, and farmland. 4 Four different kinds of home sites are available at Prairie Crossing. Sixty Village home sites are located in a neo-traditional village, which features a Market Square and Village Green. Prairie Crossing offers more than a dozen different home styles, in either the Settler or Homestead Series, that range in size from 1,140 square feet to 3,428 square feet, with 2 to 5 bedrooms, and in price from $239,900 to $427.,900. Teton Farm Michigan City, IL. This project, located about. an hour from Chicago, contains a combination of new simple houses and lofts ranging in size from 400 to 3,500 square feet, grouped in seven settlements. The settlements are formed according to landscape characteristics. The first settlement to be completed, called the Farmstead, is adjacent to the old farmhouse, barns and sheds that made up the original dairy farm. Other settlements will be located amid meadows, woodlands, and dunes. Approximately 75% of the 170-acre landscape will be permanently preserved. Baxter Village Fort Mill, SC. This master-planned community is designed as a neotraditional village, complete with a mix of residential and commercial development. Projected fora 20-year build-out, Baxter. Village .will eventually contain an elementary school, a community center, a library, and an employment center. It was- recently cited by the Sierra Club as "an excellent example of smart growth that is committed to preserving open space and preventing sprawl." Homes will be built close to the streets creating walkable neighborhoods, and a range of commercial properties will be built within walking or biking distance. The entire development is planned around the 2,300 Anne Springs Close Greenway, which has 26 miles of hiking trails. Baxter Village contains 400 acres of green space, including woods, parks, and trails. The trail network links to a series of parks, fountains and playgrounds located throughout the community, including a village green and a 12-acre park for active recreation. Eventually, the trail network will extend to a planned park at the Catawba River southwest of Baxter. Attachment !/ ~n x sd~ 9 _ a .b ~•,J ~~k ~ lY ~ ~, Yk~ a'i~ 4'Y t1i ~ }~ ~ . w ~ ~2. ~ ' , ~~ U ~`+t~~."iIG:~~L ~'~~C>CjA,`~~C.Z~ t~F ~"sC~~•!~;= --*~~islL~~'~..s~- SMART GROWTH CASE STUDY: ABRAHAM`S LANDING _ Normal view A Green Building/Cluster Development Project St. David's, Pa. This 13-acre custom-home project in St. David's, Pa. provides a good example of taking measures to handle storm water runoff in a sensitive manner in order to protect adjacent wetlands. Pohlig Builders of Malvern, Pa., sought approval to construct seven high-end custom homes on a former estate in a highly desirable residential area near the historic community of Radnor. The builder ran into substantial opposition from adjacent landowners who raised several concerns about the project. Well regarded for developing environmentally sensitive custom-made home projects, Pohlig Builders agreed to respond to the landowners' concerns by taking special measures to protect a wetlands area on the site and a streamhead adjoining the property. Adopting a comprehensive approach to wetlands protection, the builder considered both the quantity and quality of the site's stormwater runoff in relation to the adjoining wetlands. Further, Pohlig retained the services of the Philadelphia-based firm of Tourbier and Walmsley, an organization noted for its considerable experience in designing nonpoint source pollution abatement systems. Tourbier and Walmsley developed a vegetative filter strip for the area between the homes and the adjacent wetlands to purify the project's storm water runoff before it reaches the wetlands. Vegetative filter strips use vegetable matter such as rough grasses and forest litter to remove solids suspended in storm water runoff, thereby preventing the solids from. reaching water courses. The 150-foot-wide filter strip at Abraham's Lane includes three distinct elements: a dense, grassy primary filter constructed of a mix of hydroseeded grasses and planted perennial and ornamental grasses; an expansive section of trees, including downy shadblow, red maple,.and willow oak, overplanted into the grasses with bare-root whip stock; and a rooted barrier of erosion-resistant woody shrubs to protect the bare-root whip stock until it becomes established. The filter strip was designed to grow over tune into a wooded area that will enhance the site. To ensure surface recharge of the fragile wetlands system with an appropriate water velocity, Toubier and Walmsley had to devise a method of managing storm water quantity. The consultants added a level spreader trench to the edge of the vegetative filter strip closest to the homes to alter the runoff from a concentrated to a sheet flow. Additional sediment and erosion control devices such as silt fences were deployed during active construction of the project. The total cost of all the nonpoint source pollution controls added $30,000 to the cost of the development. http://www.nahb.or~/generic.aspx?genericContentID=508R,sectionID=87&print=true 7/2/2007 r ~ J ~ ~ ~, t ~ L\S ~ 1 ik '~ I --~ ( t~~ .e'YF S vT ~Y i4. f 9 ~ r ~~ 3'? ~: '# 1 ` 1 ,. l~~.T I~t~J,~L ~~~~~~.~,TaON ~€ l-i~r~~ ~~~~~a~~~ SMART GROWTH CASE STU®V: THE PRESER!(ES AT HUNTER'S Normal View LAKE A Green Building/Cluster Development Project Ottawa, Wisconsin Southeastern Wisconsin's scenic rolling hi!ls provide the setting for The Preserve at Hunter's Lake, developed by Siepmann Realty Corporation of Waukesha, Wisc., a model project that features open space conservation. The Preserve permanently reserves large areas of buildable upland woods and prairies, steep slopes, wetlands, and shoreland for the enjoyment of its home owners. Aone-mile segment of the 1,000- mile-long Ice Age National Scenic Trail winds its way through the undulating terrain within the community's common area and connects to private subdivision trails. ocated in the town of Ottawa, in Waukesha County, Wisconsin, The Preserve at unters Lake includes 41 one-and-one-half-acre lots surrounded by over 185 acres f permanently preserved open space. The land, which was farmed in the mid- 850s by the Hunter family from Ireland, has a rich history. In addition to farming ie land, the Hunters built a beautiful small lannon stone mansion and established small stone quarry to serve the area building industry. u ~~-,~ By the early 1900s, the quarry closed and a prominent Milwaukee brewing fami'n g }'took over the farming operation. In the mid-1900s, the land was left fallow, g 9 way to native prairie flowers and towering hardwoods. The 285-acre site includes three-fourths of a mile of undeveloped shoreline on Hunters lake, a small stream- f fed lake. The shoreline encompasses over 65 acreas of wetlands marshes that are part of The Preserve. It was around these woods, prairies, and wetlands that The Preserve was designed and built in 1994. Planning and Design but the ~`" `-""`~ `j~- Not only did the site's terrain pose a challenge to the development's design, ,.location of the proposed community about 40 minutes farther west than most people awere believed to prefer. Accordingly, the goal was to create a community that would ~;; _i _ ,;~;~ ~ ~~~: i,~take advantage of the site's interesting natural features by preserving them an _~''-°`" surrounding them with homesites. In particular, the Kettle Moraine area, with its steep glacial hills, thick forests, and broad vistas, is an attractive setting for new homes. When planning and designing the home sites, the design team-Ron and Jim Siepmann of Siepmann Realty Corp., Nicholas R. Patera of Teska and Associates, Inc., of Evanston, Illinois, and engineer Jerry Wegner of Jahnke &Jahnke Associates of Waukesha, Wisconsin-carefully considered the site's large inventory of special landscape features. Under Wisconsin environmental law, the wetlands, wooded ridge, and steep slopes that make up a large portion of the site are designated a Primary Environmental Corridor. Surrounded by woods, the remaining small meadows and hayfields provided excellent building sites that did not require wholesale deforestation. Each lot sits within a small cluster of six or fewer home sites that nestle up to woods. Each home owner enjoys a sense of neighborhood, yet a walk out the back door,gives the impression that individual residents own several acres on undisturbed land. Buyers are encouraged to let their landscape naturalize and enhance it with native plantings, thus minimizing the area devoted to manicured lawns and respecting The Preserve's philosophy. The project's objective of low-density, http://www.nahb.org/generic.aspx?genericContentID=506&sectionlD=87&print=true 7/2/2007 clustered home sites and preserved open spaces serves as a model for regional and state officials who applaud The Preserve for preventing urban sprawl from destroying the countryside. Under most circumstances, landscaping is a primary issue for the developer. At The Preserve at Hunters Lake, however, the natural landscape stands on its own. Trees within rights-of-way were transplanted to common areas and cul-de-sac islands; in fact, a sumac grove became the center of one cul-de-sac. Where the development's main road crossed Scuppernong Creek, wetlands plants were stored in a wetlands nursery for transplanting after road construction. _ Roadways are lined with curb and gutter to reduce the need for ditches through the wooded area and to save a greater number of trees. The developer took great care during the tree-clearing operation to remove the minimum number of trees. Some roads were even realigned during construction to accomodate healthy or large trees within the right-of-way. In an effort to duplicate the original stone fences found throughout the farm, the entryway monuments are landscaped with native plantings. The Farmstead ~ The unique farmstead provided the developer with many special features to be ,___,~,^~~..,~,;,preserved as amenities for the home owners. A stone caretaker's cottage was '~ restored and converted into a neighborhood gathering place, complete with a ~~; children's play area. The Hunter family's original farmhouse, dating to the 1850s, r -"~.,,,:,;`;z~:~. __was entirely rehabilitated and meticulously finished. Road layouts were changed to save an old barn and silo, which became an aesthetic centerpiece for the neighborhood. Rustic split rail fencing and naturalized landscaping were added along many of the roadways to delineate the open s aces and emphasize the rural atmosphere. - ~-~,~.'.:~~. - `.Lengthy hiking trails connect home owners to other neighborhood c usters ~° v'~?~-~~~_ ~ within the development, to a large segment of the Ice Age National Scenic ~~,~; < ~~`.~~~~ :~ rail, and to a boardwalk that leads to the lake shore. The boardwalk -:~,:~ ~,~~~ provides access to paddleboats and canoes owned by the home owners' ~~ ~~ r *_ ~~,~;;r association. Aself-guided nature tour identifies many native plant species _ - ~- .along the boardwalk's meandering route through a sedge meadow, a ~: calcareous fen, and an aspen and tamarack marsh. Marketing and Management Architectural plans for proposed homes must meet the developer's criteria regarding floor space (minimum 3,000 square feet), design (traditional styling and materials), roofs (cedar shakes), and natural materials (wood, stone, brick, or stucco on exterior walls). Homes built in The Preserve at Hunters Lake range from 3,000 to 7,000 square. feet, typically with four to five bedrooms. Sales at The Preserve have been strong, considering that lot prices-ranging from $80,000 to $125,000-are comparable to prices for three- to ten-acre sites in the area. When purchasing a lot in. The Preserve at Hunters Lake, potential buyers are won over by the fact that they own over 185 acres, yet need tend only their own one-and-one-half-acre lot. The open spaces, amenities, and rural character of the development are strong marketing advantages, a philosophy used by Siepman Realty for many years. Private wells and on-site sewage disposal systems are necessary for each home site. ~~~"~"~fhe open space, clustered-lot philosophy translates into minimal maintenance of z ~~.. Y " 'natural areas and reasonable home owners' association fees. In addition, t e ,„Y~.preservation philosophy meant that widespread grading was unnecessary during construction. The compact pattern allowed street lengths and infrastructure runs `~°-~`'=`~'~~to be shortened. All of these factors are important in the approval process-not ~ ;, ' A~,~~rF__~,,.~~F;,,~just to the municipality, but also to surrounding home owners. ~'-~~~In a traditionally conservative area, the, notion of upscale homes on lots smaller ~`_'~~~' ~~ than three acres was risky, especially given the distance to downtown Milwaukee. ,..e., -~~ ~-`~ he success of The Preserve at Hunters Lake has demonstrated, however, that t e ;~ . market will accept smaller lots that enjoy access to permanently preserved open http://www.nallb.org/generic.aspx?genericContentID=506&sectionID=87&print=true 7/2/2007 areas. http://www.nahb.org/generic.aspx?genericContentID=506&sectionID=87&print=true 7/2/2007 ~ ItI {;% ¢ ~' .~i' r y . ~--. ~ .f i _ yy ` ~ ~ `'~ SMART GROWTH CASE BTU®Y: GARNET OAKS A Green Building/Cluster Development Project ~°i~~'1~ vUtL~~.r'~rJ°• Normal View Bethel Township, PA Garnet Oaks exemplifies the best use of cluster development techniques to preserve open space and environme tnelr sales wererbriskTand pricl esrrose sign/fhcantly durn g build ou~l of the development.ent to sales. Ra , Features: . 80 homes on 58 acres ® 51% of land preserved as open space ® Cluster development ® Preservation of•woodlands and specimen trees ® Preservation of structures from original estate. Consumer focus groups conducted by Raelen Homes, a builder and developer based in Ambler, PA. revealed nearly unanimous agreement that mature landscaping and the look of an established neighborhood are critical considerations in home purchase decisions. o compete more effectively with older, existing communities, Realen Homes devoting considerable effort to preserving trees, particularly specimen ~ees, thereby creating a more mature and established character in their new eighborhood. Realen believes that trees make an invaluable contribution to community's sense of stability and maturity. Realen's tree preservation ffort is a logical extension of the firm's goal to establish itself as a "green" wilder of national repute. .n developing the land plan design criteria for Garnet Oaks, Realen Homes focused onftat Realen's new com'mub tyes needed tmore treess open space fand~' natural ladndscaping". indicated t Garnet Oaks consists of 80 single-family home sites on 58 acres in Bethel Township, Delaware County, Pa. The original site-hilly and heavily wooded-featured trees at least 40 years old, five acres of forested wetlands with a variety of ferns and sedges, and remnants of a bank barn, silo, stone wall,ednon tree r~eservation,ea strategy that represents a dep rture from thecnorm for Realen. concentrat p 7/2/2007 http://www.nahb.org/generic. aspx?genericContentID=4938;sectionID=87&print=true _ _ __ _ tV _~_ "Y ^; ~ ~ f - rt~~~~Fr`iar~ - ;ter -~r_ ~ 11 ~. jri ~~4f t i J r~~~ yl~'~ j -... _ • t u ~ ,~ A ~ ..-..,._~ #-~ `j5~ ..~ ~I 1. ~ T,Y ~~,,~~-~, ri.4 ~~~ 4 >:T t ~ ~'4;'' >~ '" ~, fir: w~ r ~,r,....a 9~ f j ~~~3Et~ ~ -Y~~t ~•-•- + T ..r t C * ,? ti~ ~,. ~ } - ~ fz ~ _ .`.= .~ ~ ~~~_ ~ ~~ ~. ~ - ~. 7- .r ,,s ~ :a .-..,.;i.: ' eta ~-` - _ - Realen~~set out to maintain the site's character by. ® Obtaining a rezoning for the site to allow the clustering of homes, thereby preserving S1 percent of the tract in open space o Undertaking careful environmental planning and site analysis to design roadways, utilities, and home sites around the open space ® Preserving woodlands as well as specimen trees that once lined a 200-year-old farm lane ® Uncovering and preserving a stone wall and spring house from the site's original estate ® Protecting wetlands through coordinated permitting with state and federal regulatory agencies ® Developing a tree protection training manual and course in conjunction with the Morris Arboretum of Chestnut Hill, Pa. for subcontractors involved in the Garnet Oaks project. A site analysis identified the areas best suited for development as well as the sensitive areas to be left undisturbed, including steep slopes, buffer areas adjoining wetlands, prime recreation areas, perimeter buffer areas, and specimen trees. Home sites were clustered to capital rox mat I sone~-quarter unique open space features. Reduced lot sizes of app Y acre (minimum lot size 10,000 square feet) permitted what would typically have been excess private lot area to become common wooded open space, providing home owners with greater privacy. ~,~~- ~~` if ''''' '~ ~-Tree preservation was the guiding principle behind many of the innovative ~~~, ,.~`~ '~.~ , '~ land planning and construction techniques incorporated into Garnet Oaks. y ~'~°'` -~- ~ Before the design phase, the development team located specimen trees ~ti ~f~ ~, '"~~"'~ ~-~ ~, through aerial photography and field surveys and analyzed grading to minimize adverse effects on trees. Sequentially numbered clearing limit stakes were used to prevent accidental clearing while tree protection fences and signage throughout the site minimized dame tottrees slated forpreservation. All subcontractorsnwebe required todattend limbs to prevent damag the tree protection training course. Road alignment design during the planning stage respected topographic constraints and followed the old treelined farm lane. Township approval for tree islands within cul-de-sacs permitted increased island size and saved more trees. Sidewalks that follow a serpentine path through the open space saved still more trees. Negotiations with PECO Energy, the local utility, led to utility installation modifications that prevented damage to mature trees. Typically, the utility company installs gas lines on a particular side of the street behind the sidewalk. Field design changes moved the gas line to the other side of the street 7/2/2007 http://www.nahb.org/generic. aspx?genericContentID=493 &sectionID=87&print=true where it would not conflict with specimen trees. In addition, gas and electric lines were installed just behind the curb in some locations instead of behind the sidewalk. Further, a portion of one roadway was realigned to avoid any interference with tree roots. An in-stream storm water management system was designed to reduce the clearing requirements associated with a typical detention basin. The system allowed for the preservation of two acres of woodlands that would have otherwise been cleared. All construction encroachments into wetlands were avoided except fora .10-acre segment. In addition, a wetlands mitigation plan called for the dispersion of storm water into a woodland area to create forested wetlands and eliminate the need for additional clearing. Open space amenities within the development attest to the massive tree and site preservation effort . at Garnet Oaks. The plan includes as n areasrto a low pedestrialln tov fewoareas thatrwould oth~ w se area and include boardwalks in cert remain inaccessible. A local Boy Scout troop is building the trail. The history of the site is reflected in the preservation of an old stone silo foundation and spring house, which also function as unique landscape features. A large wooded area has been named the Rachel White Preserve in honor of the farm estate that once occupied the site. The site's natural and historic elements are highlighted in a nature trail guide that doubles as a marketing piece for Garnet Oaks. The relatively smaller lot sizes at Garnet Oaks as compared to competitors' offerings have not slowed sales. Since opening in January 1993, fifty-five homes have been sold. Sixty-five percent of the lots directly abut open space, giving them the appearance and privacy of a larger lot. In five cases, wide bands of treed open space dominate the streetscape and connect larger open areas with the neighborhood sidewalk system. A picnic grove and a tot lot featuring unique play equipment further enhance community open space. By late 1994, home prices ranged from $218.9COrrent lot preen ums range f~om $2 000 to $8 OOOase price offered during presales in January 199 and are based largely on the lot size and proximity to open space. 7/2/2007 http://www.nahb. org/generi c.aspx?genericContentID=493 &sectionID=87&print=true I __ ,~ -,11~ ~t` F F T_ ~ ~'~3+ ~ ~{'4~f ~ .~6~' Y ~ 1'i ~ . v:' 3``. ~L-e ... f~• _ ~~~ 1 _[e._~'.~.TI~S+IP.L ~,,~.~fl~~~iTI~R~: ~~ ~~3*1~ ~l3{L~€~:~ Normal View S(-~iART GROWTH CASE STUDY: THE FIELDS OF ST. CROIX _ A Green Building/Cluster Development Project Lake Elmo, Minn. The Fields of St. Croix is a conservation community located in the city of Lake Elmo, Minn. just 20 minutes northeast of the St. Paul central business district. The site plan preserves significant open space that includes farmland, organic farming, and restored native prairie. The "small town" atmosphere and services of the nearby lake Elmo Village Center, proximity to the historic city of Stillwater, and the natural beauty of the St. Croix River Valley make the Fields of St. Croix an exceptional place to live. Robert Engstrom Companies; the developer of the Fields of St. Croix, assembled the 226-acre site from three owners. Inspired by its recent completion of Cloverdale Farm, a 250-acre community of upper-bracket homes adjacent to the Fields, the Engstrom Companies set out to develop an environmentally sensitive alternative to the customary large-lot subdivision characterized by 2.5- and 10-acre lots. With Engstrom's submission of a concept plan that proposed cluster development at the Fields, the city of Lake Elmo took the cluster concept a step further and considered its application to a larger area. After 18 months of study and deliberation, Lake Elmo passed an open space development ordinance that governs 4,400 acres. The ordinance provides a base density of six dwelling units per 20 acres with a density bonus for features such as common greens, pathways, and historic preservation. i :_<_ 4 :~_ -~ iThe final development plan for The Fields of St. Croix allocates more than 60 percent of the community's land to permanent open space comprised of farmland, a *-~a ~ ,~ tree nursery, horticultural gardens, wooded slopes, two ponds, and restored native „~~~~ : _ '=prairie. The farmland along State Highway 5 is retained as permanent open space "`3.. ~` ~ that preserves the heavily trafficked highway view corridor. At the same time, ~= ~~ - home sites are clustered near a wooded ridge overlooking the site's ponds and ~~,Q _ ~ '=s; ~ ~ .open space. =x _ he first phase of 45 home sites underwent development during the summer of ~ ~~_1997, and the market response was excellent; 80 percent of the home sites sold within six months. A second phase with approximately the same number of housing units was completed in 1999. The lot sites are affordable, varying in price from $44,500 to $150,000. Innovative environmental and sustainable features that distinguish The Fields of St. Croix include the following: o The first large-scale cluster development in Minnesota that provides an example of an economically viable and marketable alternative to land-consuming and unattractive large-lot subdivisions. • A constructed wetlands wastewater system that provides central collection and environmentally compatible on-site treatment. • Natural Harvest CSA, a community supported agriculture farm that each week provides organically grown fresh vegetables, fruits, and flowers to resident and non-resident http://www.nahb.org/generic.aspx?genericContentID=507&sectionID=87Rprint=true 7/2/2007 subscribers. ® The preservation and restoration of an historic Civil War-era barn to be owned by the community association and used as a community center and gathering place; ® Energy-efficient homes built according to the standards of the Energy Star Program of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Premier Homes Program of Northern States Power, the local utility company. . Thirty acres of prairie restoration featuring native plants indigenous to the area. ® On-site recreational opportunities with miles of pathways, a soccer field-sized park, tot lots, ' tennis courts, and the historic barn; a public transit stop located at the community's entrance. • Architectural standards for designs that encourage the lasting values of the rural, Craftsman, and prairie styles; a stormwater management design that provides for on-site retention, evaporation, and percolation. ® The preservation of the existing wooded slopes, which are home to many specimen oak trees and provide excellent wildlife habitat. The open space owned by the community association and Robert Engstrom Companies is permanently guaranteed by a conservation easement granted to the Minnesota Land Trust. The easement provides both the municipality of Lake Elmo and The Fields' home owners with the perpetual protection of open space that they desired. While the statewide Minnesota Land Trust is well funded and has an endowment for continued operations, it is nonetheless important to ensure that all documentation associated with a conservation easement provides for possible successor entities, particularly when a newly formed local land trust is the recipient of the easement. Both the media's and the public's response to The Fields of St. Croix's environmental features has been overwhelming. According to Senn and Youngdahl, the primary home builder, potential home buyers have demonstrated a strong desire to be a part of a cohesive community that works with the natural environment. In April 1998, Wyn John, the mayor of Lake Elmo, announced the Fields of St. Croix was the 1998 recipient of-the Land Use and Community Development Award of the Minnesota Environmental Initiative (MEI). MEI promotes the continuous improvement and environmental performance of business, government, and advocacy organizations. http://www.nahb.orb/generic.aspx?genericContentID=507&sectionID=87&print=true 7/2/2007 > i ~ ~~.i /3, 't I t'3 t,I ~ L ILL+. ~ ~ ~ C ~ r'ti ~ a C~ 1~,; %3 F ~? tw7 ~ v 1,f 1 '~ c^.+ ~ ~ 5 Normal View SMART GROinlTH CASE STUDY: VILLAGE HOMES _ A Green Building/Cluster Development Project Davis, Califorina In 1973, Judy and Michael Corbett conceived of a unique development to be built on property adjacent to the University of California at Davis, 14 miles. west of Sacramento. Inspired by their academic work in ecology and by UC-Davis's commitment to conservation and reduced dependence on automobiles, the Corbetts sought to acquire 60 acres of tomato fields--located 15 minutes by bicycle west of downtown Davis--as the site for an ecologically sensitive, energy-efficient development. The Corbetts were motivated not only by issues of environment and energy but also by the potential of the site planning and land development processes to foster a sense of community and neighborliness. Together, they undertook construction of Village Homes, which has been referred to as "one of the world's best examples of sustainable development." or the Corbetts, the keys to environmental responsibility were perceived s maintenance of agricultural productivity, minimization of rainwater ~noff (and the piped systems commonly accommodating it), reduction of utomobile travel by promoting walking and cycling, and the .use of solar nergy. The key to a sense of neighborliness being frequent face-to-face articipation in activities of mutual interest, the Corbett's predicated illage Homes on the active involvement of residents in the planning and ngoing operations of the community, attraction of a community of =sidents--with wide-ranging incomes--committed to preservation of the nvironment and energy conservation, and development of a mutual take through common ownership of valued facilities and income- roducing properties. ,~~t! - .,,,t, Realization of the Village Homes concept was difficult. The proposal calle Y=.ror areas designated for permanent agricultural use, neighborhood commercial services, a broad range of housing prices, solar-heated __~,homes, and rental apartments as well- as single-family units. With,its unusual approach to land development, the project met with rejection by no less than 20 lenders. Finally, by failing to mention the experimental nature of their proposal and the somewhat controversial ecological basis for their design, the Corbetts obtained financing from Sacramento Savings and Loan and, in 1975, took title to the property and began construction. The result was an unprecedented, 60-acre, solar community featuring community gardens, orchards, vineyards, 220 single-family detached homes, and 24 rental apartment units. Village Homes is a single superbfock focused on a village green--a central open space with adjacent commercial, community, and recreational facilities. The commercial center consists of 21 businesses and a restaurant. The community center provides a daycare facility and a small suite of offices with rental apartments above. The recreation center includes asolar-heated swimming pool and meeting rooms. A home owners' association owns all three centers. The commercial facilities, together with apartments owned by the association and the space leased for the daycare center, provide the association with income to maintain and enhance neighborhood services and amenities. Arlington Avenue wraps around the Village Homes superbfock, bounding it on the north and east. This primary access street feeds into 20- to 26-foot-wide east/west cul-de-sacs that serve clusters of http://www.nahb.org/generic.aspx?genericContentID=510&sectionID=~7&print=true 7/2/2007 residences separated by greenbelts. Homes are located along the cul-de-sacs in groups of eight and focus on rear yards that open onto larger common areas leading to the village green. Forty percent of the 60-acre site is dedicated to agriculture and green space. Twenty percent (12 acres) comprises perimeter greenbelts used for gardens at the community's western boundary and for orchards abutting Arlington Avenue at the community's northern and eastern boundaries. Between and among the residential units another 20 percent (12 acres) of the site is dedicated to greenways and vineyards. Bicycle and pedestrian paths located in the internal greenways permit travel throughout Village Homes without crossing a street and connect with bikeways leading to the UC- Davis campus and downtown Davis. ~- - - -- ~ = ``The use of narrow residential streets held the land needed for streets r,~; - to just 20 percent, thus reducing construction and maintenance "'~ ~- ~"" eta ' " P'' costs, limiting summer heat buildup on the site, and minimizing runoff. In lieu of piped storm drains, the site uses natural swales, i~ ~~~ ~ - ~ with the land shaped to distribute excess water over the porous soils ~"` ~ ^, to irrigate agricultural areas. The city's planning review board was - originally so skeptical of this innovation that they required the "~ . ;~ `~ .~~ Corbetts to place a performance bond on the stormwater system. _~., ~: _ _ _ hey got the bond back quickly, however, when a 100-year flood occured several years later and the system handled not only its own stormwater, but the run-off from several neighboring developments whose traditional stormwater systems backed up. All of the homes in Village Homes are solar heated through passive or active systems and most have solar water heaters. Wide but shallow single-family lots (many. 85 feet wide by 50 feet deep) line the east/west cul-de-sacs and provide narrow eastern and western exposures and a broad southern exposure. This arrangement permits the capture of winter solar heat in south-facing glass-enclosed solaria. Energy use at Village Homes totals one-third to one-half that of other developments of comparable size. Single-family units at Village Homes range from a few 600- to 1,000-square-foot units and a cooperative house for nine residents to accommodate low-income individuals, to homes that exceed 2,000 square feet. By 1980, 160 single-family units and ten apartments had been built, with single- family units ranging in price from $35,000 to $150,000, but the majority between $7Q000 nna999. $90,000. A 2,200-square-foot home built in 1980 and priced at $90,000 sold for $350, Most units at Village Homes sell for $11 per square foot more than homes of comparable size in surrounding areas. Not all of the original design premises and expectations of Village Homes have been realized. The Davis Department of Health rejected a plan to recycle gray water for irrigating orchards. A cooperative store idea fell by the wayside, as did a central cooperative elementary school. And when federal tax credits for alternative power sources were terminated by the Reagan Administration iri the 1980s, continued solar development on the Village Homes model experienced a major setback. Nonetheless, Village Homes has dealt effectively with reducing reliance on the automobile, creating community interaction, limiting infrastructure costs, using natural systems, and conserving energy. It has proved that provision of small-scale commercial and office space and integration of agriculture, rental apartments, and lower-income housing in asingle-family-dominant, 60-acre development designed for energy efficiency and ecological integrity is both functional and economically feasible. http://ww~v.nahb.org/generic.aspx?genericContentID=510&sectionID=87&print=true 7/2/2007 a~f '~ ~~' [ '?~ 1 _i - b' - - - . Normal View St~(ART GROi~ITN CASE STU®~': PRAIRIE CROSSING _ A Green Building/Cluster Development Projeet Grayslake, III. Prairie Crossing began as the dream of Gaylord and Dorothy Donnelly and other neighbors on the Liberty Prairie Reserve. They determined to build a community where people could enjoy the beautiful open landscape of Central Lake County, just as they did, and help to preserve it. Figures 337 single-family homes on 667 acres ardens, marshes and lakes ® 350 acres devoted to prairies, pastures, farms, fields, g Features ® 50% energy-saving construction techniques and materials o Community-supported organic garden Prairie Crossing is dedicated to preserving the distinctive open landscape of central Lake County and encouraging daily living in harmony with the environment. The communra ries,hand farmlandchor of the Liberty Prairie Reserve, a 2,500-acre preserve of forest, marshes, p sr~w,rY,~t~~_ac;a_ .a.~--- The Homes "' r T ~ ~ `~ °.~Four different kinds of home sites are available at Prairie Crossing. Sixty - - ~~}y~~'°~~b_ Village home sites are located in a neo-traditional village which features a r :.__ '_ _ ~~ Market Square and Village Green. Prairie Crossing offers more than a dozen `~ '~ ~~}^.'~' different home styles, in either the Settler or Homestead Series, that range in ~ :: size from 1,140 square feet to 3,428 square feet, with 2 to 5 bedrooms, and ~' _ m rice from $239,900 to $427,900. ~~ - =-- .. -;-:= p Charter Schoo t{ ,~~'-x~ Excellence in education is achieved by developing a ~:.~ „~,,.,,~.~~, , ~Y ~~~ ,~,~,~,strong bond between the school and the Y;,~,,,,~ :i ;x,*~ „ ~ , 'community. The Prairie Crossing Charter School ~~ ti~~z~~'~'°°° _~`'~ -~ ":blossomed forth in the midst of the Prairie Crossing ~ ~W~ ~l~ j f.~ .. ~" ~ ~~• ~ 'Development. The Prairie Crossing Community is . ~ ~_ = ~_ sharing many facilities with the school. It is _ ~ 4 t ~' important to instill respect for those facilities in all students and help students to find ways to give back generously to the neighborhood community. Students are also part of a much larger community. Each year the school is committed to either one long-term community project or several short-term ones. Ten guiding principles serve as the foundation upon which decisions are made at Prairie Crossing: 1. Economic viability 2. Aesthetic design and high-quality construction 7/2/2007 http://www.nahb.org/generic.aspx?genericContentID=512&sectionID=87 &print=true 3. Lifelong learning and education 4. Energy conservation 5. Convenient and efficient transportation 6. Economic and racial diversity 7. A sense of community 8. A sense of place 9. A healthy lifestyle 10. Environmental protection and enhancement http://wwvv.nahb.org/generic.aspx?genericContentID=512R;sectionID=87&print=true 7/2/2007 N~AHI;'s Smart ~~ : t'~ UILDING BETTER PLACES TO LIVE, WORK AND PLAY. That has always been the work of the 'py~ nation's home builders. And through the years, home '~ '~ builders have responded to changing definitions of . "a better place to live" as each generation's needs and aspirations have changed. For those families that raised their children in the years after World War I I, a better place to live meant asingle-family home in the suburbs. Today, with the nation's population on the rise and a strong economy creating and supporting unprecedented demand for housing, Americans are increasingly concerned about traffic, crowded schools, and the loss of open space. Across America, growth is fast becoming one of the na- tion's most pressing concerns. At the local, state and national level, politicians are recognizing that voters care about the way growth affects their communities. A poll con- ducted by the Pew Center for Civic Journalism found that Americans now rank "sprawl" as their greatest concern, ahead of crime and education. Nome builders are responding. We're responding with our own "Smart Growth" policy that calls for meeting the nation's housing needs in smarter ways. And we're responding as individuals seeking solutions to the unique conditions in our own markets. As a builder in suburban Maryland, just outside of Washington, D.C., I have been applying smart growth principles for years. My firm, Mitchell & Best Homebuilders, constructs new homes in the neotraditional Kentlands development in Gaithersburg, Md. The project incorporates Grov~Jth Report My firm recognized the benefits of smart growth years ago, and we've been learning from the experience and refining and improving our designs and construction technology to fit the changing needs of home buyers and the broader society. Despite the focus on the concept of smart growth, there is still debate over the~meaning of the term and how smart growth can fulfill the nation's housing demand and the desires of Americans for something "better." Within this publication you will find the National Association of Home Builders' Statement of Policy on Smart Growth. The statement generally defines Smart Growth as meeting the underlying demand for housing created by anever-increasing population by bwldmg a political consensus and employing market-sensitive and innovative land-use planning concepts It means understanding that suburban job growth and the public's overwhelming desire to live in single-family homes will continue to necessitate rowth in suburbia. At the same time, Smart Growth means meeting that housing demand in smarter ways planning for and buildin to hi her densities; rewtalizmg our nation s cities and older suburbs and preserving meaningful open space and rotecting environmentally sensitive areas. Smart Growth acknowledges that no single growth plan will work many of the best aspects of smart growth: mixed-use development; higher densities; a wide range of home prices; and traditional neighbor- •~~ ~ hood designs that emphasize walking, varied housing types, town ,_ , .~w centers and public spaces. The Kentlands development in suburban Maryland is a good example of smart growth design. I~AHB's Smart Growth Report Robert L. Mitchell 2000 President National Association of Home Builders for all communities. Every locality has unique housing, economic and ' environmental goals that are by no means mutually exclusive. The au- thority to determine land use is vested in local government, as it should be, and that's where Smart Growth strategies must begin. The challenge . for local governments is to devise, and have the willpower to 'implement, long-term, comprehensive growth plans that take consumer preferences into account along with other goals dictated by the factors of housing affordability, open space, infrastructure and the environment. Any comprehensive growth plan should also address means of reducing regulatory and discriminatory barriers to the amount and kind of hous- ing required to satisfy that plan. Many challenges remain. Our nation's growing population will need homes, and consumer choice will dictate that the majority will contin- ue to be single-family homes in the suburbs. The majority of families with children are unwilling to settle for anything other than asingle- family home in the suburbs. In one NAHB survey of consumer attitudes, 88 percent of respondents said they prefer tolive in asingle-family home. And they adamantly oppose the idea of living in, or near, higher-density single-family homes, townhouses or multifamily rental apartments. Given . these perceptions, how is Smart Growth to be achieved? Following are six quidinq principles that can help us achieve Smart Growth: Anticipating and planning for economic development and growth in a timely, orderly and predictable manner. Establishing in each local jurisdiction along-term, comprehensive plan that makes available an ample supply of land for residential, commer- cial, recreational and industrial uses, as well as land set aside for meaningful open space and to protect environmentally sensitive areas. Removing barriers to allow innovative land-use planning techniques to be used in building higher-density and mixed-use developments as well as infill developments in suburban and inner-city neighborhoods. Planning and constructing new infrastructure in a timely manner to keep pace with the current and future demand for housing, and finding a fair and broad-based way to underwrite the costs of this necessary infrastructure investment. Achieving a reasonable balance in the land-use planning process by using innovative planning concepts to protect the environment and preserve meaningful open space, improve traffic flow, relieve overcrowded schools and enhance quality of life. Ensuring that the process for reviewing site-specific land development applications is reasonable, predictable and fair. "~~n order to achieve Smart Growth, our nation's communities will treed to unite in a spirit of participation, cooperation, acceptance of change and compromise. We will need to focus on innovative solutions that accom- modate an expanding population of a differing demographic profile. The nation's home builders are committed to working with Americans of all persuasions to make Smart Growth achievable. And we're commit- ted to implementing these Smart Growth principles. Home Builders Care deeply about the communities that we help to create. The use of Smart Growth principles demonstrates our serious commitment to plan, build and re-build communities that accommodate population and economic growth, while at the same time preserving our inherited environment and the heritage of the generations that preceded us. -~~d ~~a,. ~~~ -~ - I~IAH~'s Smart Cro~~ih P.eport _ i~ . " Smart Gro Principles HE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION of Home Builders endorses the concept of Smart Growth as outlined in this statement. When used appropriate- ly and in concert with market forces, Smart Growth can serve as a blueprint for planning and building an even better America in the years ahead. To assist local communities in developing Smart Growth plans, NAHB supports and encourages imple- mentation of the following concepts: Meeting the Nation's Housing Needs As a fundamental part of any Smart Growth plan, a community must plan for and accommodate its anticipated growth in eco- nomic activity, population and housing demand as well as on- going changes in demographics and lifestyles. for example, when setting aside meaningful open space, a local community should rezone other land to assure that an ample supply of land is avail- able for residential development. For the nation, annual increas- es inpopulation mean that America's home builders will have to consvuct between 1.3 and 1.5 million new housing units per year to meet the underlying demand for shelter Meeting this de- mand for shelter and increasing homeownership opportunities are compelling national goals that must be addressed in every community's comprehensive growth plan. It is the responsibili- ty of every community to plan for and embrace the growth that is naturally viggered by economic prosperity. dices have a i to live. prefer- , when ie-fam- i market id clos- ~ective iunities ~ com- ~rowth ~ needs while g high- . unmen- tally-sensitive areas. And while recent gains in homeownership rates are commendable, the dream of owning a home or simply ItiAH~'s Smart Growth Report by mass fransii ar~d provYdes-mor - ~ompactdevelopmentcould lly homesan thesiiburbs higher, stops m .the inner suburbs •or. ir; :with mzeduses := local. zohmg codes often do velopment, and even when land welopmeni cltlzen;opposrtion Aft The ~followmg forms of;comF -fie encouraged by local commur Clusier-Development qri ly on the =more buildable pdrtion. - nen'soace `to presen!e :natural =. streams, valleys.and st _'<; `lows_one unit-peg acre == ~0 homes on one-acfE -;~- be builton half acre b - protectedropena~ac?_ ::= arad,misinterpreted as _` cessions to developers x :.v=, ving erivi GIs .cap >be:=° - ''=~ hydric roils > ~. ~ ~, _ - '-' -k ~ ~`~ ' ~ -- ° , ._ - - - ~ J- _... 4..-, -- - - - - - - ,.,.~ r.: :. ... ~~z - - _ - - a.- - _ - - -~i-~ - - -_ -' - - - - - - .,.,r :.:. z. ,, ~~.. - - ;~ r, . ..•~ -r .. . r-a_:_:-y '..._ .. .-.:_- - - .., ~ - - - a - - - - _- - __ - .. :ant - >. t ,..... ~ .. ^_ - - _ - - .. 'pre...- k .. . ....... :.. .:.... ... .. - _ ~;-'..5:c":^,~, _ - _ ~ .-...- - .r. ~,.. _ - - - c;' _ '_' _ - - ., - -. ~g~.. .. - .- -a v _> .~:~ e - r ~P.-Ids .: - :ri ~ ' .~;.• ,- y :{e _.. - -< ~ , - _ .a .. - - - - •~~i:h' -,ti"~"P ~~A!- sib.- _ - ..r..... , `' -- - $p. - - _ d i _ _~" _ _ _ t ~:_ a ~. .! - .r - - - - J_.'~_ .r ~- - -- - •, ..... .•- -'4 °' _. _,_ ,-.~..._, ~ .,.-_.. ,_ ,,. ,L „.,,~: :. ;_ ~ ~ y :ham -- _ "_-~'' - -- "~ f.~.:;t;: - --_ _ - -- - .._. .. y..--. ...~ :r _ .ti_. - 3.. .as- _~..,. i- -f4... ~ : .': :"i-. _ - =?'~?r'~_.:s,. =,-a_~..r.4'i: 1'- ,i'_L-~~ ~}, _ yy ~_ :r•.` ~' _ ~~ :" ' _ s4- i _ .^y.e~' ~~.-_ ~._ .. F.. - - - - -- -• - - - m ...._...A=r ,,,. .,~ ,-. . ~~ _ F' - `.+~. - "r~' ~ - .-~ . ::~ ~ - - .t ' f_= : - _ _ - - - _^?t`-- _ _ t rC - F e`. . «x h£~ ~. . - :ice- - - - " ~: - - __ ~ `~ , .rc~~..~+iRL. -''f9:!~::..~j, i.p.i} ._.~TJ - __ - - _ - _ -- _: , .;,- .: .-.. ... ,~., s,:.: Z - _ - i-r , - - ~~c- .. rt ' -'~•- - - - _ '_F _ '~' ~ - -- - - !. _ _ __ f r.~ ,: : ~~., `! J~ _Y ~:; _ y} - _ _ _ r~.u_v, .:. .. _ _. _ .. - -,. .~. ~:~ _ s - - - ~. - _ v - '3~: - Y - - r - - - _ - - Y::-.. tz~_ . _ _ _ .,~ - `°r, - ~a. - _ _ i - - - .:af _ - - ~_. - - _ >:;, _ - - - "sue y~;~... - - - ai- i~^ - - ~=s - - - ~n. - - i - e - :~~ - - ' - - ~., . - .v-~ - - - tea..-~ - - - r - - -- --- ~~~'~ - ,ter - _ - -" - .. . . ,...s.-~ _' - 3F . - - ~~~ - ....: ~.: . ' _ ~:' - .y~.' y_. _~ - - `t~ _ - - ~! :'s ._ .. -a .• - - _ - - A id° - - K~ + _ ~i ~ Y - - _ ~ A- _ _ - Ili, _ _ _ - '~ "" - - - _ ._. _. - ~ .. r' - _ _ _ - _ -J ~ _ - - '% ft __ - - -_ t __ J _ _ _ _' .:. i. 3 _' :. ~ry+- _ _ ~ _ ~.. ,:.. v .: ' =~~i. :. i. : l: ., - - S-• - ~.- -'Tt - - _ ~. 4, - _ - _ _ _ t~~- - _ _ _ _ _ _ - ~_'. - w ~ r :` -~. :~.~:co. , r.. :" ~~~u _ , :. v.`: -C ~ _ ~. _ e '-.I. - - - - 5] - - _ -4. _ _ 1 .sr - :> . - -.. ,.....,n y<- ., .. i. .....- I .. . •.:w ~..:,.'-.. 0.i _ y.°'ex. - - - _ _ - "'' ~. _ I q - - - a~ - - - _ -.L- - -~-y- - - ' il _ _ ~ '!-. _ _ - _ _ J.:i.~.- _ _ _ -. .:w., st ~,.. _ _ +~. - ,_; , ~~ 4' _ t:'~. ~~t- S+ - - 'Li .: kr2.. - - `r'~ ~,, W« - - ,. ... i"r'- =~%~=' ,,,.jCl 'p_ Vii' .., - - - - - ._:~:~... _ r. ., .... .. ~. .::. ..~:. ~ - :r- - `c .:>.° i . •;?ry, - ' ~k -_ - - t, i, :',~ .T: - ..X- ... .~ - -'- .a , ~. +':::a ;•1. ~...~_.:t ti.~:~5~.~t cT ~.,t t. F;°.t:. -C - - - a .~ . .. . .,:a . , i. n. ~~ - ~..: _ z, :~ ~t _ 'C~ - - - - - :.:::t: - - u'L~.,. - - - - _ + .x - - - - _'T`~~ -- -- _' _ - - _ - -- - __ _ -_ _ `::~. ,: -.: .. ~ ...r ,-.mss-„y_ ..~.:.,;:~- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -- _ _ _ __ - _ _ . .. . -. .. _ . _... .. ta. . _ ~ - - - `3 _ _ _ _ _ fi eve .9.. -- - - - ,y _ _ ~ C _ .a r - - - - -- - - ,t.. - - - ~,: ~ . . - 6 f . . 4 , .. ,. .- .,... -. -~--..-. ..~. -..- _ - - E - - - -. -..,. b ~~ - - - ct ; -._ :..----{,~ .. .. ... 1. t ~ -~, ,.~.. ,. .. ... _. ~r-'.~ _ _ a-r n ( ~? - ,.. ~-t ~ t ~...~f- ..L:, - - - _~ . - - - c.... ~ .__, ~~,.~'~ - 3..- .~.-. niied L1ni.Deve1= - _ - :,,.;~ inun _ - 'm - :"~ o ..-$:_ PI .~~. d C anne - -:, ; w..~. ;-Mast _ - .:~ .~:~= er ..:~ ,::. .~ ,-- C - - - . }. - . _ r .. - - . x ry,_,,...,. _.__. - -- - i 1 - - -- `r - --- - ~ ,l. .'Y" .{_ - h.,t .: ._, - -- ., ..~• '."!` - - -d. - - - 7 . z •~s - - r. - - 'rUr:.:: ..x 4: - ,,~,.... fi `: Fite"la _ ..-. ~,.wz,;~::~:.~,,...~~~~.u,...:~.•.~~a,.~.,,Fv.~u.-_. _ .... ,,.. -~_ ` flezbilit~ a d -_ - _ = a'~. :. -. ~:~::~,•~...~ ~_ _... ..o ~ meiitsallow reater_ °.~'-; -°._-...P - _ - - y~ _ _ _. __. : -...__. _ 9 - -- -__ - - - ..:.-P _ ... - .- .. = _° " ~' -`" ° °~ - ' ' °- - _ rnn and desi n than Es enerall ossible under oonventio has corneto_be~C _ . P :.. -f?a ..-. - P .. _ _,... -...:.: -_:.:::.. ~ .:.: ..::::..:: ;..... °. riownas0 ens ace'Develo mentorCon- _ .....9..-_. .-. Q..,:.-._:..:9...:.-:.:.Y.P.,::..:>_.;_:;....;.: .. - _: ,, . ,. .... _ .. -- - _ - - -- inurntEesocPlannedUnit: _,".- _ ' .=~ ._`.-~:_:=rte=~-. =: =- - servation= evelo meet tiecause:ol" iLs increasing tendency .:'. ' zonin a roaches::Master_ lanned_com _ _ _ -_... _.::..._.;: -. ..: ~_'_ ::_:_~°:_._=-____-:.:.:.:-:~.~'- ..... a1l;mcor rate_one:ormo. P_:_.. - .:,~ - _-_-= = to~eservelargerJmofevaluableopenspabes - Developmerrts{PUDs)typic y_ po _ _ _ ,,-',~,, `,: - - - ' ves -ore com act. ' develo' merit options such as cluster. development, mixed use or:: `_~ ~=.~ ,4 ,- :.:: : , -;,_ Hi tierDensit DeveJoprrient;achEe m P, . - _ _ _ __ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - __ ...._ __.._:...., ._:..:....-,:..-.:.., ... , .. ... .,.. '---_. _ -~-- -- ,.... ....... .._..::- ~ f shion'rathe~_=:=_'~1'.:`- _ _~`:-<:`==:`.~~;`-`~'; ' ~ ..development Haan` clustering because~t.places a higher overall hEgher densEtEes. ~y developing-land in a urnfed ,a _ _ _ _ .: - - - - - = - - - i "master ~ lar3ned commurnties. and PUDs .-; ; -: ~ _ ,::=`%'s '?,x<<:>, •-::-:,-J ' - - ' ' " n'. he-sameamougt of-land."_Hi her. densities; : than on a lot-by lot bas s,.- _ _ p. ,_ ,_ _ _ ,..,, . _ -_ - __ _ _- _ _ _ _ _ __ _ number of units o. t ,- 9 _ _. ,_ T- --:. _ _. - `can be.achieved by buildingfiomes on_smaHer lofs,_by,buElding ; :can achieve morevaned and appealEng neEghborhoods They also, : - - - = - _ _ -- - - i ofdifferenE#iousin roducts~etachedsira-::L;:-:~~: ~:~:.;>,-:~-.-:,:,_:~ = _ _ri7 s roivhouse_soctownhouses :or b.aiuildirigmul-. .-'typcallyvseamx. - _ _.:-=9P.,,__.:.~,:.: ;-.-; ,__-.- ........:....___ _ __ _ - ~ •uif diri s a-H~ her densit -makes , . - g1e family_homes, attached single-family, townhouses; sand"apait~ '. - tifamilj+structures (apartment b ..l" •..g_) _ g ., Y _ _ _ _ - - - - ~ ,~ _ - - - - - - - - ~ -indifferent-clusters within the-same communEty..Mixed--,- ;;- , := = ~":'-.~'_'' `-.._ , .. _ - •: it.easier to :create:more-walkable;,communities:iivEth neighbor-- _-. menu: _ _ _ -- _ _ -_ .. .:. >_ - - - `GUse Develo menu combine several Vises on oriesite in a co-.- : ~~ ~ _ - -_ _ _-~ = :•` - . hood shopping andschools,. end good Vansit servECe, The aver ;,__ _, _ , - , , . _p.. , -: .. _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - :. .: .. . - = - - - - _ -.wa ricludin~ offce, retail, hotel; aresidential.- : _: ®~:.~.--: `• _.,;` :.-.•' _' ., `:r °:.=. _ sEon- to.hi her` densities:~n. ttii5 country;._vrhich--lias its toots m .,..-_ .ordmated _ y, _ . g._ , : _ _ _ _ _ _ _ :: .... 9 ._.. :..- ._.. .: .. - - - - :_.;:- ..:> •_ •. -the:overcrowded workEng class and oor urban areas of theaate -. ' .: =•_ '- :- = =~ -'- ,:. -...:.; _ l-9th and earl~`20th.centucies; "must beovercome if coiiimurii-- := = - ,,,<-s, ~ - - tEes want to: _reservE=land;egdbwld mare affordable housing.: ;. =' .,:-:-_~ : ,:.:: ~- -.-: ~~ :~ ~ T ~- ~~_ ' `Traditional Neighborhood Developments (TNDs) _ _ _ _ _ _ d~'~ .. . - - _ ~.~. pct`-t - ~'~'$ y,), -v'?^ _ - ~~ _ _ _ -` ~IO~ mentS ~::".::"~_~' '.: ":.. _ :. ~':~:~:~y~;_{,'-_y~~:.u .. ~;. ,:..-. pis .. i4 _ ..,_.; L.___, .. :.:... ... also known: as Neo=traditional or New Urbanism deve _ _ - em hasizewalkin ;=a:mix=ofhousEng=types;andcornme[ciai uses, :`:=°_~ _ _y,_=,.;,_._w. -•y, ~ a_,.;,,T~:~._>_~,-~;_,._ . _.,._ town centers_and_PubFicspacw, More:than 100 traditional neigh -~~ ~----» - tiorhooiiprojects`Have=b'eenbuilt:.in:#he_l~:S."includirig_Disrieys= . ;} CelebratEOn communEt near Orlando, )•larbor Town in MemphES Y :. ~ _. J ,; and Kentlands in Gaithersburg,.Marylarid; another:100:are Erithe: =E .~~- ., _;,,,~ planning stages: Zoning often.~irotiitits this.rtype.of,.,develop=- ~ -~;- -71~,~y a~ 1 , ~::s rnent, but more LommurifUes are adoptEng codes to permEt it: - •=` Transit-Oriented, Developments:a~ewaditional neighbor-,-:= ~~ ~;~_~~=`:}~ goods burlt~round transit stops especially rail transit, The zon >.~.: ingconcep-ts.,employed`~byTNDs~-highertlensity,iv_alkablescale,_.:.~~;~„=;° .~rc~;~= mixed uses-t-~icall :resuli inhighertrarnsituse: ._ :~ .- _ ' ' .i.;~,`:,t_-~`.:~~r`':`:~:= .. yP Y finding decent, affordable housing is still an ongoing struggle for millions of American families. Any Smart Growth planning process, therefore, should provide for affordable housing at all income levels. A Comprehensive Process for Planning Growth NAHB supports comprehensive land-use planning that clearly identifies land to be made available for residential, commercial, recreational and industrial uses as well as land to be set aside as meaningful open space. Such plans should protect environ- mentally sensitive areas as well as take into account a commu- nity's projected economic growth rate, demand for new hous- ing and expanded infrastructure-roads, schools and other fa- cilities-required to serve a growing population. Builders, land developers and other industry members should be encouraged to lend their expertise and participate in the design and peri- ,,,~;.. ~o,,;o,.,,,f a rnmmi~nitv'S romorehensive planning process. Planning and Funding Infrastructure Improvements NAHB encourages focal communities to adopt balanced and re- liable means to finance and pay for the construction and ex- pansion of roads, schools, water and sewer facilities and other infrastnxture required to serve a prosperous community. Planning major infrastructure improvements-particularly vansportation- requires cooperation across governmental boundaries to resolve issues. Reducing traffic congestion, relieving overcrowded class- roornsand providing other public facilities and services are abso- lutelyessential components of any Smart Growth plan. Ensuring that the construction of schools, roads and other infraswcture . keeps pace with the anticipated growth in population and eco- nomicactivity isone of the biggest challenges facing local com- munities today. Appropriate government bodies should adopt capital improvement plans (with timing, location and funding elements) designed to fund necessary infrastructure required to support new development. Ensuring that infrastructure is fund- ed equitably and that the cost is shared equitably throughout all segments of the community-existing residents as well as newcomers-is an even greater challenge. Using Land More Efficiently NAHB supports higher density development and innovative land- use policies to encourage mixed-use and pedestrian-friendly developments with access to open space and mass transit, Generating greater public support for this type of development, however, will require a change in thinking by people opposed to higher density development in their own backyards, by local governments that have erected barriers to higher density de- velopmentand are easily influenced by citizen groups opposed to any new growth and by typical housing consumers who con- tinue to favor asingle-family home on an individual lot. Revitalizing Older Suburban and Inner-City Markets NAHB recognizes that revitalizing older suburban and inner city markets and encouraging infill development is universal- ly accepted as good public policy. But even under the best of conditions, infill development will satisfy only a small per- centage of a community`s demand for new housing. The joint effort announced on February 4,_1999 by Vice President AI Gore, the U.S. Conference of Mayors and NAHB to construct 1. million additional market-rate housing units in the nation's cities and inner-ring of the suburbs over the next 10 years is an achievable goal. But to reach that goal, the Administration and nation's cities will have to work closely with the housing industry to overcome major impediments, such as aging in- frastructure that makes redevelopment costly and difficult, and federal liability laws that increase risks for. builders in- volved in the redevelopment of "brownfield" sites. Making cities safe from crime, improving the quality of schools and creating employment opportunities are prerequisites for re- building the nation's inner cities and for encouraging people to return to them. As we prepare to enter a new millennium, our nation faces many challenges. One of the most significant is ensuring that, as our population grows and our economy prospers, growth and development occur in a smart, orderly and predictable fashion. The nation's home builders and the 197,000 members of the National Association of Home Builders are committed to pursuing reasonable and market-driven Smart Growth ow Local Go~erninentS C Encourage 111 Housing 'REJUVENATING AMERICA'S URBAN CORES and ~`~ inner-ring suburbs with new housing requires a joint effort on ,the part of local governments and home builders. If people don't want to buy close-in because of concerns about security, property values, or public schools, no amount of innovative housing will convince them otherwise. Likewise, if the costs associated with infill development are too high to allow for market-rate.homes, the only new housing going up in and around cities will be high-end homes. Cities can encourage infill housing and amplify its impact on existing development patterns by: Providing/rebuilding infrastructure. Cleaning environmentally tainted sites. ^ Revising liability laws for brownftelds sites. Increasing crime prevention. Improving inner-city schools. Promoting community support for projects. Increasing predictability and efficiency in the permitting process. Streamlining and expediting development approvals. Offering builder and buyer incentives, tax credits, financing, partnerships and contributing land. rr€~Yca. ~~ (~{T~ll~prt~t'if~'F~L c~~ 6i~i ~~'Ifet~~ ai"t~ f~t?~ C~r~~°~'~ df1 llVrr7f~r`? i'7s?s ~? ~~`: ~*=~f'CS Cyr? ~t"F7`; tau}.~/ ~~i~€~ ~~~~s. ~f~~e ~~~d ~o {~'6i~€r';'~' z;7GS°~a`~i;tE~S crl;F€f fsr'L ~'C3J {~~tfft~'~fa"~ ~~~ ~7 is"~1f~'~'? Ui~,f'e~t ~~~ ~O ~?eS~. rr Vice President AI Gore Remarks to the National Association of Home Builders February 1999 . strategies that will meet the nation's housing needs, expand homeownership opportunities, help revitalize the nation's cities and inner suburbs, and build attractive and livable neighborhoods and communities and an even more prosperous America in the Zlst Century. NAHB's S~r~art Grotvt}i f?epart ~. ,~ c ~,- ~, , _ ~ 1' TO: Michael C. Va~(OMilligen, City Manager FROM: Mary Ros~~~~rrtgan, RN, Public Health Specialist SUBJECT: Green Subdivision Committee -Initial Recommendations DATE: December 10, 2007 Dubuque All-AmaricaC'~y ~~ ~' ~ r~ ~~ ~'~ zoo? INTRODUCTION This memorandum presents the initial recommendations of the Green Subdivision Committee. The Green Subdivision Committee has been meeting over the past month to design a program that would encourage, but not require, developers to use "green practices" when creating new residential subdivisions. The program would apply to subdivisions over 20 acres. The Committee was charged primarily with creating incentives that do not cost the City money, along with policy and ascoring/evaluation system for determining if a green subdivision is created. BACKGROUND The Committee reviewed the NAHB {National Association of Home Builders Model Green Home Building Guidelines), along with Green Initiatives from McHenry County, Illinois and Boulder, Colorado. The Committee reviewed existing City subdivision regulations and standards. Members of the Committee also met with two local developers, Marty McNamer and Larry McDermott, to gain insight on their green development views. The Committee had a phone conference with Don Hickman, Program Manager for Planning and Preservation at the Initiative Foundation, from tittle Falls, Minnesota, who also provided insight on green development in Minnesota. RECOMMENDATION Based on the input from developers, staff, other cities, and NAHB materials, the Committee developed the following list of recommendations to be included in the program. Evaluation Scoring Tool The Committee determined that developing the scoring system would require further research and discussion. However, a draft evaluation tool is attached. The scoring tool was modeled after the NAHB Green Building Program. v Possible Incentives The following is a list of possible incentives developed by the Committee. It is important to keep in mind that not all incentives will be applicable or beneficial in the development of every subdivision. Offering multiple incentives should ensure that while developers will not benefit from all incentives, one or more of the incentives will appeal to them in the development of an individual subdivision. Use of SRF (State Revolving Funds) for sanitary sewer and stormwater infrastructure. City staff would apply for the loan on the developer's behalf to cover both the design and construction costs of the sanitary sewer and stormwater infrastructure for the subdivision. The City would also bid and oversee the construction of the infrastructure. An SRF loan typically has a 20- yearrepayment period. The City would repay the loan from receipts from the developer as lots are sold or at an agreed-upon repayment schedule. Budget impact $240/application via ECIA services Special assessment financing for infrastructure improvements. The City would finance some or all of the public improvements for the development with up to a 15-year debt. The developer would repay this loan at a low fixed rate which would include City administrative costs for tracking the project. Public improvements could include design, construction management, water, sewer, streets, fiber, parks, and trails. The City would design, bid and oversee the infrastructure developments as a public project. A developer who wanted to bid on aspects of the infrastructure for their own development, could do so (see attached Voluntary Special Assessment Policy and Voluntary Assessment Process for details). ® Percentage of undeveloped open space purchased through conservation easements (work with Iowa Heritage Foundation, Nature Conservancy, etc.). Providing technical assistance for designing homes including radon-resistant construction methods, minimizing residuals (waste) associated with development, and/or landscaping with green concepts. It is important to focus not only on land development, but also home and landscape design when encouraging green practices. This incentive may be more attractive to homebuilders than land developers. The DMASWA offers.funding of up to $25,000 to successful applicants whose efforts result in effective waste minimization and/or related education in Dubuque County. Waste minimization efforts for the purposes of this grant include, but are not limited to, source reduction, reuse methods, recycling, composting, and hazardous materials disposal and alternatives. A developer could apply for funds to assist in waste minimization practices for the subdivision development and for the residential construction. ® Allow shorter setbacks (shorter driveways, etc.). ® No curb and gutter required. This necessitates a rural street profile with drainage swales. The installation of sidewalks, which promote walking-a green alternative todriving-should continue to be required. ® Partnerships with local banks. Banks would offer better loan rates for financing a green subdivision and/or to individuals for building a green house. Some type of pre-development review/assistance from City staff to promote green practices, similar to or involving the existing interdepartmental Development Review Committee and expanding on the current requirement for a pre-application meeting with Planning Services staff for subdivision plats. The goal of the pre-development assistance would be to expedite the formal review process, assuming they could approve preliminary plats-administratively. ® Alternatives to storm water detention and storm water management. ® Assistance with promotion of Green Development and Green Practices to public (Repeat City Focus issue, City News, CityChannel 8, etc.). ® The "natural effects" of creating a green development (i.e. cost savings from having to put in fewer feet of storm sewer, streets, having less waste to dispose. of, etc. ). The Committee did study density incentives, a popular incentive, but concluded that they are not practical since Dubuque already allows smaller lot sizes than many communities. However, the above incentives may encourage developers to more often utilize smaller lot sizes, as few currently take advantage of this allowance. Education The Committee also agreed that education for green development was needed in order to provide information to developers and builders and to help create a market from citizens and consumers. City staff education is also necessary in order to provide technical assistance and review. ® City staff training (conferences, consultant, etc.) Budget impact - $2,500/conference ® Partner with Futurus Communications (http://www.futurus.biz/) to host a community and/or professional seminar/conference on green development and building. Offer scholarships for developers/builders to attend. Budget impact - $5,000 ® Create City of Dubuque Green Design Guidelines in handbook form. Budget impact - $1,000 ® Multimedia community information on Green Development and Green Practices (i.e., City Focus issue, City News, CityChannel 8). ® Development pre-application meetings with Planning, Engineering, Fire and Water Departments that could provide "green" education and information, once staff is appropriately educated on "green". Linkage with ®AT and U®C The development and implementation of incentives, evaluation scoring tools, educational efforts, and a pilot project should link with the SDAT (Sustainable Design Assessment Team) and Unified Development Code (UDC) processes already underway. This linkage will allow the Green Subdivision Committee and other City staff to take advantage of the expertise and input of the SDAT team members and the UDC consultant, JEO Consulting Group. The SDAT process involves amulti-disciplinary team of experts assembled by the American Institute of Architects (AIA) to deal with five major, critical land use issues: 1. urban sprawl vs. planned and managed growth 2. bluff development vs. bluff preservation 3. stormwater run-off vs. stormwater management 4. traditional development vs. sustainable design 5. neighborhood disinvestment vs. neighborhood revitalization SDAT Issues 1, 3, and 4 have relevance to the work of the Green Subdivision Committee. The Committee's research and initial recommendations can be shared with the SDAT team members prior to their Oct. 22-24 full team visit to Dubuque. The Committee members can participate during the full team visit in the small group sessions on these issues. The UDC process involves the update and consolidation of the City's zoning, subdivision, sign and historic preservation regulations. Again, the Committee's research and initial recommendations can be shared with JEO Consulting as they prepare updated subdivision regulations for the UDC. The Green Subdivision Committee can meet with JEO as these draft regulations are reviewed with the UDC Technical Committee. The Green Subdivision Committee would be happy to meet with you regarding our findings. MRC/cj cc: Green Subcommittee: Steve Brown, Engineering Department Cori Burbach, City Manager's Office Laura Carstens, Planning Services Manager Robert Fritsch, Leisure Services Department Rich Russell, Building Services Manager Paul Schultz, Solid Waste Coordinator Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager Aaron DeJong, Economic Development David Johnson, Planning Services/ Kyle Kritz, Planning Services Deron Muehring, Engineering Gus Psihoyos, City Engineer Bob Schiesl, Engineering Ken TeKippe, Finance Director Working Draft 12/7/07 City of ubuque Voluntary Special Assessment Policy For residential subdivision projects which will utilize sustainable development standards, a developer may submit to the City Council a petition on a form approved by the City Manager, pursuant to Iowa Code § 384.41, requesting that the City enter into an agreement with the developer that special assessments may be levied against the developer's property to pay the cost of infrastructure improvements for the project. The petition shall include a description of any and all necessary governmental approvals, including without limitation, approval of zoning and platting which may be necessary or desirable in connection with the sale; transfer and development of the property. The developer shall also submit with the petition the approved preliminary plat and the proposed infrastructure improvements. The agreement shall be subject to the following conditions and such other conditions as the City Council may determine appropriate: The City Council, in its discretion, may agree to include in or exclude from the special assessment agreement any required public improvements, including but not limited to, engineering (design, construction management, and inspection), fiber optics, water, sewer, storm water, grading, streets, parks and trails. Special assessments may only be levied for a maximum of fifteen years. The interest rate may be the rate charged to the City. for the borrowing on the special assessment bond or another rate within the statutory maximum, as determined by City Council A developer may not have special assessment agreements with more than $4 million in special assessments outstanding at any one time. A developer must agree to reimburse the City for any costs associated with the planning for or construction of the improvements that will be specially assessed, including, but not limited to, design, engineering, legal services, and preparation of bidding documents. As security for such obligation, at the time the developer submits a petition to the City Council, the developer shall submit with the petition a certified check, made payable to the City of Dubuque, in the amount of ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) to be held by the City until the City Council approves a contract for the construction of the improvements. If the petition is withdrawn, or if the City Council does not approve a contract for the construction of the improvements within 180 days after the petition is submitted to the City Council, the City shall be authorized to retain an amount equal to all expenses incurred by the City, and the balance of such funds, if any, shall be returned to the developer. If the expenses incurred by the City exceed $10,000, the developer shall reimburse the City for such additional expenses at the time of v-rithdrawal of the petition. If a contract for the construction of the improvements is approved by the City Council within such 180 day period and executed thereafter by the parties, the City shall return the certified check to the developer. ® The developer shall have furnished the City with evidence, in a form satisfactory to the City (such as a letter of commitment from a. bank or other lending institution or a subdivision bond), that the developer has firm financial commitments in an amount sufficient, together with equity commitments, to complete and maintain all improvements in this phase of the proposed development that will include the public improvements in conformance with the agreement or such other evidence of the developer's financial ability as the City requires. The developer must agree in the special assessment agreement to waive the following: o The public hearing on the adoption of the Resolution of Necessity and the mailing and publication of notice thereof, and all other legal formalities of whatsoever kind or character required by the laws of Iowa for the construction of improvements to be assessed against private property; o The limitation provided in Iowa Code § 384.62 that an assessment may not exceed twenty-five percent of the value of the property assessed; and o The right to request the deferment of special assessment installments against agricultural property provided in Iowa Code § 384.62. ® Special assessments will also include construction inspection fees and any City costs associated with the planning for or construction of the improvements including but not limited to design, engineering, legal services and preparation of bidding documents. F:\USERS\DHeiar\Voluntary Assessment.doc 12/7/07 Voluntary Assessment Process 1. Developer must utilize the major subdivision review procedures. 2. Following approval of the preliminary plat the developer shall have prepared a final plat and improvement plans that include specifications and cost estimates for the proposed public improvements, including but not limited to, engineering (design, construction management, and inspection), fiber optics, water, sewer, storm water, grading, streets, parks and trails. 3. The plans, specifications and cost estimates will be reviewed and approved by appropriate city staff prior to placing the final plat on the City Council agenda. 4. The Developer shall then submit a petition and waiver as part of the final plat, to the City Council requesting that the City enter into an agreement to special assess some or all of the public infrastructure improvements as detailed in the City's Voluntary Assessment Policy (see attached). 5. The City Council, in its discretion may agree to include or exclude from the special assessment agreement any required public improvements. The Council will also establish an interest rate for any authorized special voluntary assessments. 6. Based on the City Councils approval, the developer shall furnish the City with evidence, that the developer has firm financial commitments, (in the form of subdivision bonds or letter of credit) to complete'and maintain all improvements in this phase of the proposed development that will include the public improvements in conformance with the agreement. 7. After the financial assurances are in place, the City will proceed with a public bidding/award of the infrastructure improvements. 8. Upon acceptance of the project, the City Council will certify the voluntary assessments to the benefiting property per the agreement. F:\USERS\DHeiar\Voluntary Assessment Process.doc it I nnin n an l nt u i I si n 75 points needed Green Subdivision Eligibility Ranking Points Minimum Requirements Establish a knowledgeable team and communicate in writing Establish a "green development" mission statement Identify Goals and Objectives Required Have all onsite supervisors go through to be City's training on green development practices Considered Conserve natural resources that have been identified in a natural resources inventory that is used to drive and create the Select the Site Avoid Environmentally "Sensitive Areas" Medium Choose an EPA-recognized brownfield Hi h Choose a Greyfield (existing 50% impervious) Hi h Choose an infill site High the Site Create and implement a protection an maintenance plan for priority natural resources/areas during construction Medium Locate roads, buildings, and other built features to conserve high-priority natural features Hi h Participate in a natural resource conservation program Low Orient streets and configure lots to allow for the majority of homes to optimize energy conservation potential Hi h Minimize soil disturbance and erosion Hi h - Limit development footprint on steep slopes (>25%) Complete ahydrological/soil stability study for steep slopes, and use this study to guide the design of all - structures onsite Preserve and utilize natural water and drainage features Medium Develop and implement storm water management plans that minimize concentrated flows and seek to mimic natural hydrology Medium Minimize impervious surfaces and utilize permeable materials for Parking areas, walkways, and other non-street surfaces Medium Devise and implement landscape plans to limit water demand while preserving or enhancing the natural environment Low Formulate and implement a plan to restore or enhance natural vegetation and soil profile that is cleared during construction or development. Within this plan, phase landscaping to ensure denuded areas are quickly vegetated. Medium 6 8 7 8 5 9 1 8 8 6 4 5 2 5 Limit turf areas of landscaped areas by selecting native and regionally appropriate trees and vegetation in a way that complements the natural setting and improves infiltration. Specify planting of trees to increase site shading and moderate temperatures Preserve open space as wildlife corridors where possible Prepare and execute an operation and maintenance plan (manual) for Copy of the manual transfer of common open spaces, utilities (storm water, wastewater), and environmental management. Disassemble existing buildings, and reuse or recycle the building materials (deconstruction) instead of demolishing the Site Implement the Design of the Site by appropriate measures Innovative Medium 4 Medium 6 Low/Medium 3 Medium 4 Low/Medium 3 Cluster development to preserve meaningful open space Hi h 10 Share driveways or parking Low/Medium 3 No Curb and Gutter on City Streets with appropriate bioswales and sidewalks Medium 5 Incorporate hike/bike trails in site Hi h 10 Implementation of infiltration techniques (rain gardens, bioswales, etc.) 6 Incorporate detention basins for proper stormwater management Medium 4 20% of development committed to meaningful and continuous public open space High 10 Total Points 150