Designing Planned Communities
By Daniel R. MandelkeriUniverse, Inc.
Copyright © 2010 Daniel R. Mandelker
All right reserved.ISBN: 978-1-4502-0923-6Contents
Preface and Acknowledgments..............................................................................xvChapter The Design Problem in Planned Communities........................................................1What Planned Communities Are and Why We Have Them........................................................1The Design Focus.........................................................................................4Defining Design Standards for Planned Communities........................................................7How Design Standards Should be Used......................................................................8Marketing Decisions and Product Mix......................................................................12Design Frameworks for Planned Communities................................................................12 Natural Resource Preservation Areas and Common Open Space...............................................13 Carrying Capacity Studies...............................................................................14 Landscaping.............................................................................................15 Circulation Systems, Streets, Roads, and Other Infrastructure...........................................16Streetscapes and Parking.................................................................................18Social Programs in Planned Communities...................................................................18Conclusion...............................................................................................19Chapter 2 Creating Designs for Planned Communities.......................................................20The Planned Community Project Level......................................................................20The Town or Village Center...............................................................................25Neighborhood and Village.................................................................................28Sites, Buildings, and Streetscapes.......................................................................32The Architectural Pattern Book...........................................................................34Conclusion...............................................................................................36Chapter 3 Design Standards in Comprehensive Plans, Guidelines, and Manuals...............................37Design Policies in Comprehensive Plans...................................................................38 Design Concepts Plan in Franklin, Tennessee.............................................................38 Character Areas in Gilbert, Arizona.....................................................................41 Resource Management Area System Plan in Sarasota County, Florida........................................41Subarea Plans with Design Policies.......................................................................47 Houghton Area Master Plan in Tucson, Arizona............................................................47 North City Future Urbanizing Area Plan in San Diego.....................................................48Specific Plans...........................................................................................51Design Guidelines and Manuals............................................................................53 Design Guidelines in Scottsdale, Arizona................................................................53 Guidelines for Building Sites, Buildings, and Streetscapes..............................................54 Design Manuals..........................................................................................56Conclusion...............................................................................................58Chapter 4 Design Standards in Zoning Ordinances..........................................................60Design Standard Categories...............................................................................61Statements of Purpose....................................................................................62Regulatory Design Standards..............................................................................64 Basic Design Themes.....................................................................................64 Detailing Design Standards for Planned Communities......................................................66 Superior Design Requirement.............................................................................69 Compatibility with Surrounding Area.....................................................................69Consideration Design Standards...........................................................................70Pattern Books............................................................................................71Site, Building, and Streetscape Design Standards.........................................................74Administration: Requiring Information for the Review of Design Plans.....................................80Conclusion...............................................................................................81Chapter 5 The Constitutionality of Design Standards in Planned Community Regulations.....................82The Constitutional Problem...............................................................................82Challenging Design Standards in Court....................................................................85Standards in Planned Community Regulations Held Valid....................................................87Standards in Planned Community Regulations Held Invalid..................................................92Design Standards in Appearance and Design Review Codes...................................................93Conclusion...............................................................................................97Bibliography.............................................................................................99
Chapter One
The Design Problem in Planned Communities
Planned communities are a dominant form of development, both in suburban areas and as infill in urban settings. Planned communities can be clusters of homes with common open space or master-planned communities covering thousands of acres, but in any form they provide opportunities for excellent design. This book reviews the concepts and ideas that go into the design of planned communities, and explores how local governments can encourage and provide for their good design through land-use regulation.
What Planned Communities Are and Why We Have Them
The compositional form of most planned communities defines their development structure. They became popular because of development problems that arose under traditional zoning and subdivision regulations, which did not originally include this concept. The zoning ordinance regulates land uses and lot sizes. The subdivision ordinance regulates street and block layouts and requires developers to provide public infrastructure such as streets, sewers, and other utilities. There is a gap here. Neither ordinance gives designers or developers the flexibility to design a planned community that includes common open space, resource protection, and better and varied design. Worse, these ordinances penalize the developer who seeks to provide open space or to preserve natural resource areas.
Zoning and subdivision regulations provided adequate control so long as development occurred at fairly high densities, one block at a time, in the grid pattern then typical of cities. This pattern determined the design of new development. Public agencies provided open space. This pattern changed when large-scale developers began to appear early in the twentieth century who prepared master plans for the early streetcar suburbs. Development patterns changed even more dramatically after the Second World War as individual builders of single homes gave way to large-scale builders who built large projects planned as an entity, often with hundreds of dwellings. Zoning and subdivision ordinances in place at the time were insufficient and could not be used to review the design and character of these new, large-scale developments.
Variety in design was not possible because statutes required uses to be uniform within zoning districts. This meant that lot sizes and site requirements had to be uniform for each development project because each was located in a single zoning district. Mixed-use developments were not possible unless different zoning was established for each section of a development, which is impracticable. Developers then adopted economic models for their developments that required building to minimum zoning and subdivision standards and provided residential projects with uniform lot sizes and site features. This approach created a monotonous style called "cookie-cutter development" in popular criticism. Planned communities appeared as an alternative that would allow local governments to achieve objectives they could not achieve under traditional land-use regulation, such as better and more varied design, though these terms, being subjective, are difficult to define. Form-based zoning codes and other innovations such as conservation subdivisions have also helped to modernize traditional zoning and subdivision controls, but they do not allow for the flexibility in the design of development projects that is possible under planned community regulations.
It will help to have a definition of a planned community:
A planned community is a development that has been approved through a comprehensive review of projects characterized by an integrated and unified design. It may include a variety of project types including infill developments, housing developments, mixed-use developments, and master-planned communities.
This definition describes a planned community both as a type of development and a process. It defines a process because it includes any type of development that cannot be built under conventional zoning and subdivision regulations, and which therefore requires a comprehensive review that results in the approval of a development plan. The definition also covers a variety of development types as planned communities. Three types of planned communities can be identified for purposes of considering design issues:
Cluster housing or cluster development. These projects are single-family residential developments whose principal characteristic is that housing is clustered in one area of the project in return for the provision of common open space in areas not taken by housing. Density is higher in the area of the project where housing is clustered, but there is no overall increase in density. The principal problem is the tradeoff between the clustering of residential units in the clustered area and the provision of common open space as a compensatory feature. These projects are usually limited in size. Design issues can arise when deciding on the design of the project as a residential neighborhood and on the design of sites and buildings. Mixed-use developments. These projects combine residential and nonresidential uses such as commercial and office uses. They often include multistory buildings and may attempt to achieve a main street character. They are usually of moderate size and are often built as infill developments in urban areas. Planned community villages that are recommended for rural areas are another example of a mixed-use development that may incorporate a village center with retail and office uses. Issues can arise in deciding on the design of a mixed-use development, the character of a village center, and the design of residential neighborhoods and their housing. Master-Planned Communities. A master-planned community is a planned community, usually on substantial acreage, that combines employment, office, retail, and entertainment centers, often mixed in use, with associated self-contained neighborhoods. A master-planned community can be a new town. Often, these communities are required to have a minimum size of between 600 and 1,000 acres. Their size and scale require a phased planning and development process. These communities raise complex design issues at the project level for the various types of centers within the project, and for residential neighborhoods and their housing.
"Planned unit development" has historically been the term used to describe all of the planned community types discussed here, and is the term most commonly used in statutes and ordinances. It is a bit archaic today, however, and this book uses the term "planned community" to describe any type of development that is comprehensively planned and developed as an entity with a single development vision. It may be built by a single developer or multiple developers. I use the term "planned unit development" only when ordinances and documents discussed in the text use this term.
The Design Focus
This book focuses to a great extent on the design problems raised by larger master-planned communities, including the overall design of the planned community along with the design of town and village centers and residential neighborhoods within these communities. Design standards for town centers and neighborhoods are also needed, however, in more limited planned communities. For example, design issues for residential neighborhoods and town centers must be addressed in mixed-use planned communities. Site and building design issues are present in all planned communities.
Cluster housing projects present somewhat different design issues because they are residential neighborhoods with a common open space feature, and it is difficult to think of them as "planned" communities. Nevertheless, cluster housing presents the same design issues as larger planned communities at the neighborhood and housing level. Some examples in this book are specifically based on cluster housing communities. The term "cluster housing" is used when this type of development is discussed.
Defining Design Standards for Planned Communities
At the outset, it should be recognized that design standards for planned communities present different regulatory and legal issues than the regulations created by zoning ordinances. The zoning ordinance establishes districts in which land uses are allowed as a matter of right. A planned community ordinance can also define the type of planned community that is allowed as of right, but this is not typical. Instead, the planned community ordinance usually establishes a discretionary review process that ends with the approval of a development plan for the planned community. Design standards can be included in the standards for the approval of a planned community, and the reviewing body will then consider design along with other standards when deciding whether to approve a planned community. These review and decision-making processes are vastly different from the establishment of zoning districts with as-of-right uses. The planned community ordinance requires the adoption of design standards that can produce the kind of design that is expected.
In its use of approval standards to guide decisions on project acceptability, the planned community ordinance resembles the subdivision control ordinance, which also contains standards that the reviewing body must apply in a discretionary review process that can result in the approval of a subdivision. The difference is that most approval standards in subdivision control ordinances are quantitative and require little or no discretion in their application. Standards for the width and paving of streets are an example. Design review standards for planned communities can be quantitative as well; for example, a standard may limit the length of building facades. Qualitative standards can also be included that require an exercise of judgment in their application. An illustrative, but not necessarily good, example is a design standard that requires "innovative design" in planned communities. Defining and developing good design standards for planned communities is a critical and somewhat difficult task.
Design standards cannot be adopted without a definition of what good design is. It is widely recognized that the depth of the term design makes its definition ambiguous. The word has many dimensions that cannot precisely be described. Deciding on what design means and what its scope should be is a critical issue. A decision must be made on whether design review should focus only on the visual qualities of the urban environment or, more broadly, on the organization and management of urban space (Carmona et al. 2003, 3).
Resolving ambiguities associated with the scope of design review is an important task. A narrow view of design would focus only on individual buildings and the design of neighborhoods. A narrow view would also focus only on appearance, such as the appearance of buildings, and not on the organization and management of space within a project. Translated, a narrow view would require only an appearance code in planned community regulations that would regulate the appearance of buildings and structures. A broad view of design would go further and include the organization and management of urban space. It would require design standards for the planned community and for each level in the development. This book takes both views. It examines the visual aspect of design as applied to planned communities, and the organization and management of space within these communities.
The scale at which design review is applied varies, with review for small-scale developments differing greatly from review for large-scale developments. At the smaller scale, the focus is on site design, impact on adjoining developments, connectivity, and combining many small developments over time to create a neighborhood. Cluster housing is an example. Design issues focus on residential forms.
For large-scale planned communities, the designer has control over an area sufficient to create an entire new town. Design must address large-scale infrastructure issues, and must focus on creating a community that works internally. Design must also address different levels in the planned community at different scales, beginning with the project as a whole and proceeding down through town center, village, and neighborhood. An important initial decision, though one seldom addressed, should be made at the regional level. Here, a planning framework should be established that integrates planned community planning policies with regional planning policies. A framework plan at this level can prevent the development of planned communities that are isolated, built at the wrong location or at the wrong scale, or that will not be served by adequate public services and facilities.
Similar planning issues arise for mixed-use planned communities, though on a lesser scale. A planning policy for these communities should be included in local comprehensive plans that can address density and public facility and service issues that are raised by these projects. Cluster housing does not create changes in density levels or service requirements, but plans should contain policies for the integration of these developments with adjacent neighborhoods and open space systems.
How Design Standards Should Be Used
Deciding on an approach to design standards for planned communities raises a number of issues. A preliminary issue is whether a standard should provide incentives for better design or whether it should be regulatory. An incentive design standard would offer a benefit for better design, usually as an increase in density. This approach is often used in cluster housing regulations. This discussion focuses, however, on regulatory design standards that must be satisfied as a condition for the approval of a planned community.
There are several approaches to the approval process that ensures that planned communities are in compliance with design standards. It can be an administrative process conducted by staff or the planning commission. Or, it can be a legislative process conducted by the legislative body with a preliminary review by the planning commission. There should be a strong public review process that invites public participation through high visibility.
Though discretionary review processes may vary, each is completed with the approval of a development plan in text and graphics that contains the guidelines for the planned community, including requirements for uses, densities and intensities, circulation systems, and open space. The development plan can specify the design of the planned community and may include drawings and digital renderings to indicate design features.
Design elements in the plans for planned community development are based on and reflect design standards contained in a comprehensive plan, design guidelines, or manuals, or regulations in the planned community ordinance. Design standards in these documents can be indeterminate or fixed. An indeterminate standard is a qualitative standard that specifies design objectives in qualitative terms such as creative or innovative. A fixed design standard is quantitative and contains an absolute rule. An example is a requirement that no more than 50 percent of a building facade may be a blank wall.
The standards that are adopted are interrelated with the type of process that is used. Ideally, there should be either a limited number of indeterminate standards counterbalanced by a strong and publicly visible review process that can add specificity, or fixed design standards with mostly administrative approvals on the assumption that the fixed standards protect the public interest. The first alternative is appropriate for larger projects where flexibility in providing design opportunities is important, while the second alternative can be used for more limited projects, such as cluster housing. Neither alternative is without problems. Indeterminate standards can lead to arbitrary decision making and present constitutional problems, while fixed standards can be too rigid. Many planned community regulations are hybrids that contain both types of standards.
(Continues...)
Excerpted from Designing Planned Communitiesby Daniel R. Mandelker Copyright © 2010 by Daniel R. Mandelker. Excerpted by permission.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
