Add Comment

Open Space Residential Design (OSRD, also known as Conservation Subdivision Design) is a development approach that combines land preservation with clustered development.  It operates on a four step process: identify conservation areas; locate home sites; align streets and trails; and draw in lot lines.  Development is generally concentrated on a portion of a parcel of land, with the balance preserved as open space for recreation, conservation, agriculture or forestry.  By focusing on site planning flexibility rather than dimensional requirements, OSRD allows development to be arranged on a site for maximum economy, character, and preservation of environmental resources.  

Currently, just over half of the Commonwealth’s 351 communities have some type of cluster provision in their zoning by-law.  Currently, many of these provisions go unused or are severely underutilized.  The Pioneer Institute notes: “Since cluster development’s introduction in the 1970s, 80 percent of the municipalities in eastern Massachusetts have adopted some kind of cluster provision. The cluster regulations, however, are often written in ways that inhibit their use. Many require larger parcel sizes than are typically available for development in the locality (for example, 25 acres in Lynnfield, and 10 acres in Burlington). The vast majority requires special permits.  There are even towns that require town meeting approval of any cluster-zoned development. The risky permitting processes can drive up the cost of this kind of development and make conventional design more appealing to the developer.  Many of the provisions are crafted to give the developer very little flexibility in design; the provisions actually serve as alternative types of conventional zoning, still requiring large lots per unit, wide setbacks, excessive frontage, etc.  Finally, the provisions are often structured so that the special permit granting authority has little ability to negotiate increased density in exchange for benefits for the municipality, such as greater open space protection.”

The use of OSRD in Massachusetts may also be constrained by land ownership and legal barriers.  Some legal entity is needed to maintain resources held in common, such as common driveways, open space, wells, or wastewater treatment facilities.  However, conventional homeowners’ associations do not have the standing or assets that many municipalities expect for such legally responsible entities.  Meanwhile, the condominium model (in which homeowners own the structure but the association owns the underlying land) may be too unfamiliar to developers and purchasers.  Additional research is necessary to understand the various approaches that are currently used and to develop best practices and models. 

29)    Permit Open Space Residential Design “as of right” and require its use in sensitive resource areas
Developers will be much more inclined to use Open Space Residential Design (OSRD) if they trust that the permitting process will be predictable and efficient.  If municipalities require a special permit, developers will be less likely to spend the time and money on developing a plan that is not certain to be approved.  Municipalities can create this predictability by adopting OSRD bylaws that allow cluster developments “as of right,” with a detailed and rigorous design site plan review process.  Conventional subdivisions would be permitted by special permit.  The zoning requirements for cluster would have to be fully described in the bylaw so that a subdivision plan could reasonably be drawn there from.  A methodology would be needed to calculate basic underlying density for the whole parcel, then a process to locate houselots juxtaposed with a required area of open space.  This "area allocation" formula is also more cost-effective because it does not require preparation of a conventional subdivision plan to determine lot count. 

29.a    Municipalities should adopt zoning bylaws/ordinances that permit OSRD “as of right”

29.b    MAPC should seek funding to assist municipalities with the development and adoption of “as of right” OSRD bylaws

30)    Improve design of Open Space Residential Developments
Recent research into Open Space Residential Design (Hamin, 2007) found that OSRD developments generally result in designs that provide more ecological and open space benefits than do conventional subdivision plans.  However, other goals are not achieved as well, including creative design, housing diversity, and other public goods.  

Well-trained planning boards are key to successful implementation of OSRD. New regulatory approaches might also be considered, including stronger design requirements and more robust evaluation criteria to support planning board negotiations.  Greater ecological and recreational benefits might also achieved by incorporating municipal and regional open space plans into site designs, in order to form habitat corridors or trail connections. 

30.a    MAPC should collaborate with allied organizations to provide additional training opportunities for planning boards on the evaluation of OSRD

30.b    MAPC and allied organizations should collaborate to disseminate a “next generation” of OSRD bylaws with stronger design requirements and evaluation criteria