|
A
Practitioner’s Guide to Conservation and
Limited Development Projects Page 4 of 7: Designing the development program and site layout |
||||
|
|
||||
|
Designing
the development component of a CLDP requires answering the questions: What type(s) of development?, How much?, and Where? What type(s) of
development?
CLDPs can derive revenue from any form of development. In practice, however,
most CLDP proponents have found upscale housing to be the most efficient way
to generate revenue with a minimum of impacts. The theory behind this
approach is that a small number of lots, like a limited edition print, will
command a price premium due to the laws of supply and demand as well as the
cachet of exclusivity. Upscale housing, especially in exurban and rural
areas, can also work synergistically with conservation areas: the natural
areas enhance the value of the housing lots while the housing lots, if
carefully designed, can provide a buffer of low-intensity human use next to
conservation areas. |
A Practitioner’s Guide to
CLDPs Page 1:
Deciding when to do a CLDP Page 2:
Selecting the right CLDP structure Page 3:
Forming a project team „ Page 4: Designing the development program and site
layout Page 5:
Minimizing financial risk |
|||
|
In
suburban and urban regions, however, where higher-density development is
often appropriate and locally acceptable, the best way to generate revenue
while minimizing impacts may be to create compact development such as
multi-family housing, townhouses, or “New Urbanist”
neighborhoods with small lots. These designs can help minimize the
development footprint and its associated ecological impacts. Of particular
interest are CLDPs that incorporate affordable housing, thus promoting social
equity as well as conservation. Incorporating affordable housing and other
community needs into CLDPs may add an additional challenge, but dozens of
successful projects of this type have already been completed around the
nation. (See, for example, the Greenways
project profiled in my study.) Such projects help silence the criticism
that CLDPs are an elitist phenomenon, channeling tax deductions and luxury
estates to the wealthy while displacing local residents of modest means. |
||||
|
At
the Diabase Farm CLDP in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, pre-existing dwellings were
subdivided from adjoining farmland, creating revenue without introducing new
development. |
How much development? When a land trust is
taking the lead on a CLDP, the goal is often to include as little development
as possible while still breaking even financially. Funding sources such as
bargain sales, public funding, and private donations can sometimes be
leveraged to reduce the amount of development necessary. In addition, the
value of a tract of land can sometimes be increased without allowing for new
development, but simply by reconfiguring it—for example, by subdividing the
various buildings and lands of an estate into several different residential
or agricultural parcels (see photo). When a private developer or conservation
investors are involved, a profit may be part of the project objective. In
this case, it is essential to make sure that the development does not cause
excessive harm to the site’s conservation values. |
|||
|
Where should
the development be situated? Conservation-based site planning is beyond the
scope of this guide, although there are several good books on the topic,
including Practical
Ecology for Planners, Developers, and Citizens. One issue worth
highlighting, however, is the degree to which a land trust should try to
control the development layout on land it sells. Imagine a CLDP where a land
trust protects 180 acres of a 200-acre site and sells the remaining 20 acres
to a private developer to build a subdivision. The developer then clearcuts
the tract, removes valuable gravel deposits, and builds a cookie-cutter
subdivision, complete with invasive species in the landscaping. Should a land
trust try to prevent such an outcome by imposing restrictions on the land
prior to selling it? The advantage of doing so is to prevent environmentally
insensitive development that may be associated with the land trust in the
public mind. The disadvantage is that, in many cases, the land trust will
have trouble selling a restricted development tract, or the tract will
command a lower price—translating, ultimately, to the need to sacrifice more
land to raise the same amount of money. While there is no easy answer to this
dilemma, a few guidelines may be helpful: §
Prior to selling off land for development, impose whatever
restrictions are necessary to protect the key conservation values on the CLDP
site. For example, if the development tract contains part of the same stream
that flows through the conservation land, require an adequate stream buffer. §
Consider controlling the aesthetics of the development to the
extent possible while still meeting the project’s financial and conservation
goals. The community is likely to notice a project’s appearance, and if the
project looks bad, it will probably be criticized even if it excels from a
conservation standpoint. §
One possible way to avoid the tradeoff entirely is to impose
restrictions that are likely to enhance the value of the development tract,
or at least not hurt it. Restrictions on cutting or clearing, or even
architectural controls, can provide mutual security for future homeowners,
making a development more desirable. |
||||
|
Where to now? |
||||
|
|
||||
|
Copyright © 2005, All Rights Reserved. |
|
|
||
