CITY OF TITUSVILLE

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION/LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY

NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING
August 19, 2020
Council Chamber at City Hall
555 South Washington Avenue, Titusville, FL 32796
5:00 PM

Notice
All persons who anticipate speaking on any Public Hearing item must fill out an Oath Card to be heard on that agenda item
and sign the oath contained thereon. These cards are located on the table near the entrance to the Council Chamber or
may be obtained from the Recording Secretary. This meeting will be conducted in accordance to the procedures adopted
in Resolution #24-1997
Those speaking in favor of a request will be heard first, those opposed will be heard second, and those who wish to make a
public comment on the item will speak third. The applicant may make a brief rebuttal if necessary. A representative from
either side, for or against, may cross-examine a witness.
Anyone who speaks is considered a witness. If you have photographs, sketches, or documents that you desire for the
Commission to consider, they must be submitted into evidence and will be retained by the City. Please submit such exhibits
to the Recording Secretary.

The Planning and Zoning Commission meeting may be conducted by utilizing communications media technology (CMT), as
provided in section 120.54(5)(b)2, Florida Statutes. In order to help prevent the spread of the COVID-19 (Coronavirus) and
to comply with all local, state, and federal laws and guidelines regarding social distancing and social gatherings,
designated seating shall be provided for the public within City Hall. Individual speakers shall, when directed to do so, be
given the opportunity to speak on agenda items at City Hall during the meeting in accordance with Resolution No. 16-2020.
Signs held by speakers are permissible, but no tripods, easels, props or other demonstrative aids shall be brought into City
Hall. In addition to the regular broadcasts of the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting via closed circuit television and
livestream YouTube video, which may be accessed through the City's website, video and audio of the meeting will also be
provided within City Hall for the public in attendance. As an additional method for public participation, the public may submit
written comments, via email to planning@titusville.com or by regular mail to Planning and Zoning Commission's attention at
City Hall, 555 S. Washington Ave, Titusville, FL 32796. Written comments must be received by noon (12:00 p.m.) prior to
the start of the meeting and include the senders name, address and the subject line must specify the agenda item being
addressed. All comments will be disseminated to the Planning and Zoning Commission members and made a part of the
public record prior to any action being taken. Speakers who appear in person will be subject to screening for symptoms of
COVID-19 and any persons exhibiting symptoms of COVID-19 will not be permitted to enter City hall.

1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL

Page 1 of 21
 3. DETERMINATION OF A QUORUM
4. BUSINESS WHICH IS THE SUBJECT OF THE SPECIAL OR
CALLED MEETING
A. Pocket Neighborhoods (Tiny-homes)
Discuss staff's recommendations for tiny-homes as part of a
pocket neighborhood development.
5. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS FROM PUBLIC PRESENT
6. ADJOURNMENT
Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission with respect to any matter
considered at this meeting will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose, may need to ensure that a
verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to
be based.
The City desires to accommodate persons with disabilities. Accordingly, any physically handicapped person, pursuant to
Chapter 286.26 Florida Statutes, should at least 48 hours prior to the meeting, submit a written request to the chairperson
of the meeting that the physically handicapped person desires to attend.

Page 2 of 21
P and Z Special - August 19, 2020 - 5:00 PM

Category: 4.
Item: A.
City of Titusville

To: Planning and Zoning Commission Members

From: Peggy Busacca, Community Development Director
Subject: Pocket Neighborhoods (Tiny-homes)
Department/Office: Community Development

Recommended Action:
Discuss staff's recommendations for tiny-homes as part of a pocket neighborhood
development.

Summary Explanation & Background:

On July 10, 2018, the Titusville City Council recognized tiny-homes as a viable and affordable
development option and provided advisability to staff to draft an ordinance amending the
minimum living area requirements for residential units and allow tiny homes. The staff is
recommending allowing tiny-homes as part of a pocket neighborhood concept.

Alternatives:

Item Budgeted:

Source/use of funds/Budget Book Page:

Strategic Plan:
No. 1 – Quality of LifeNo. 2 – Efficient and Effective ServicesNo. 3 – Financial StabilityNo. 4 –
Economic Development

Strategic Plan Impact:

ATTACHMENTS:
Description Upload Date Type
Draft criteria 7/28/2020 Backup
Material
Backup

Page 3 of 21
P and Z Special - August 19, 2020 - 5:00 PM
Pocket Neighborhood info 7/28/2020 Material
Target Area 7/28/2020 Backup
Material
Infill ppt 7/28/2020 Backup
Material

Page 4 of 21
P and Z Special - August 19, 2020 - 5:00 PM

ORDINANCE NO. XX-

XX-2020
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TITUSVILLE, FLORIDA AMENDING THE CODE OF
ORDINANCES TO AMEND THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS RELATED
TO MINIMUM LIVING AREAS, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 33, “DEVELOPMENT
OPTIONS”, ARTICLE I, “PLANNED DEVELOPMENT”, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING
SECTION 33-
33-6 “INTERNAL YARD AND BULK REQUIREMENTS”; AND ADD ARTICLE X
“POCKET NEIGHBORHOOD”; AND BY AMENDING CHAPTER 37 “DEFINITIONS”,
SPECIFICALLY AMENDING SECTION 37- 37-1 “DEFINITIONS”; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY, REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND
INCORPORATION INTO THE CODE.

WHEREAS,
WHEREAS pursuant to Article VIII, Section 2, The Florida Constitution, and Chapter 166,
Florida Statutes, the City of Titusville is authorized to protect the public health, safety and
welfare of its residents and has the power and authority to enact regulations for valid
government purposes that are not inconsistent with general or special law; and
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS protection of the public health, safety and welfare is a legitimate public
purpose recognized by the courts of Florida; and
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS the City of Titusville recognizes tiny-homes as a viable and affordable
development option; and
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS on July 10, 2018, the Titusville City Council provided advisability to staff to
draft an ordinance amending the minimum living area requirements for residential units.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TITUSVILLE, FLORIDA as follows:

SECTION 1.
1. That Chapter 33 “Development”, Article I “Planned Development”, Section 33-6
“Internal yard and bulk requirements” of the Code of Ordinances, City of Titusville is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Sec. 33-6. - Internal yard and bulk requirements.

(a) The following shall be required for development in a PD:

(1) Minimum lot size. Within the boundaries of the PD, no minimum lot size shall be
required. In an Area of Critical Concern, the maximum impervious surface for the
entire development area shall be forty (40) percent of the site, excluding the thirty-
five (35) percent open space requirement, public rights-of-way, wet retention areas
and wetlands. In the case of residential subdivisions, the total amount of maximum
impervious surface for each lot will be noted individually on the final plat.
(2) Frontage. In no instance shall any one (1) building extend more than three hundred
(300) feet in length without being separated by a break of at least twenty (20) feet,
or a difference in facade treatments.

Pocket Neighborhood Ord. Page 1 of 4

Page 5 of 21
P and Z Special - August 19, 2020 - 5:00 PM

(3) Minimum living areas.

a. Single-family: Nine hundred (900) square feet.
b. Town homes: Eight hundred (800) square feet.
c. Condominiums: Eight hundred (800) square feet.
d. Multifamily apartments: Six hundred (600) square feet.
e. Tiny homes: Three hundred (300) to six hundred (600) square feet if approved
as a Pocket Neighborhood as described in Article X Pocket Neighborhood.
(4) Maximum building height. Building height must comply with any design standards
or other plans or policies provided for in the area of the development, or must be
compatible with the surrounding existing development patterns in the area. In all
instances, the maximum building height shall be fifty (50) feet.
(5) Dedication and construction of public rights-of-way. Upon recommendation from
the Administrator, City Council may additionally require a time schedule and
appropriate surety for dedication and construction of public rights-of-way at time of
need within and surrounding the proposed PD.
(6) Maximum residential density and floor area ratio shall not exceed the maximums
of the designated Comprehensive Plan future land use category.

SECTION 2. 2. That Chapter 33 “Development Options”, of the Code of Ordinances, City of

Titusville is hereby amended by enacting a new Article, to be numbered Article X “Pocket
Neighborhood”, which said section shall read as follows:
ARTICLE X. – POCKET NEIGHBORHOOD

Sec. 33-131. - Purpose and intent.

The intent of this article is to provide for minimum construction and installation standards
for tiny houses that are intended to be used as permanent residences in a pocket neighborhood
setting. Said construction and installation standards are established to protect the public health,
safety, and welfare of the citizens of the city. The purpose of a pocket neighborhood is to
provide a unique opportunity to create a residential development on infill lots consistent with
the policies of the comprehensive plan.
Sec. 33-132. - Applicability.

A Pocket Neighborhood is permitted in the Community Development Block Grant Action

Plan South Street Target Area as illustrated in Article I Planned Development (PD), Section 33-
4(a) South Street Target Area map.
Sec. 33-133. - Submittals.

Pocket Neighborhood Ord. Page 2 of 4

Page 6 of 21
P and Z Special - August 19, 2020 - 5:00 PM

A conceptual plan must be submitted in compliance with the Master Plan Procedures set
forth in Chapter 34 Procedures, Article II Legislative and Qausi-Judicial, Division 3 Master Plans.
Sec. 33-134. - Minimum Pocket Neighborhood standards.

(a) Three hundred fifty (350) square feet to six hundred (600) square feet of living space per
residential dwelling unit on a permanent foundation (e.g. poured footers, stem walls and
poured piers or engineered slabs) and not on wheels. Units are to be designed, built and
inspected per the Florida Building Code.
(b) Homes may be on individual platted lots as part of a subdivision.
(c) Parking consolidated in one common area and screened from view.
(d) Minimum building separation of ten (10) feet.
(e) Minimum of five (5) residential dwelling units with front doors facing and abutting a centralized
common area of at least 6,500 square feet. The centralized common area and any required
landscape yards may count toward any minimum open space requirement.
Sec. 33-135. - Review criteria.

The proposal shall meet the criteria set forth in Article I Planned Development (PD), Section
33-8, and Chapter 34 Procedures, Article II Legislative and Qausi-Judicial, Division 2 Rezonings,
Section 34-40.
Sec. 33-136. - Approval process.

A Pocket Neighborhood shall shall conform to the standards and procedures set forth
in Article I Planned Development (PD), Section 33-9.
Secs. 33-137—33-142. - Reserved.

SECTION 3.3. That Chapter 37 “Definitions”, Section 37-1 “Definitions” of the Code of
Ordinances, City of Titusville is hereby amended to add the following definitions which read as
follows:
Sec. 37-1. - Definitions.

Pocket Neighborhood: A unified development of individual, detached residential units

surrounding a centralized common area.

Tiny house: A detached residential unit home with a living area less than the minimum required
in a zoning district.

SECTION 4.4. SEVERABILITY. If any provisions of this Ordinance is for any reason held
invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed
a separate, distinct, and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of
the remaining portions of this Ordinance.

Pocket Neighborhood Ord. Page 3 of 4

Page 7 of 21
P and Z Special - August 19, 2020 - 5:00 PM

SECTION 5.5. REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES. All ordinances or parts of ordinances,

and all resolutions and parts of resolutions, in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent
of such conflict.
SECTION 6. 6. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall become effective upon adoption by the
City Council in accordance with the Charter of the City of Titusville, Florida.
SECTION 7. 7. INCORPORATION INTO CODE. This Ordinance shall be incorporated into the
City of Titusville Code of Ordinances and any section or paragraph, number or letter, and any
heading may be changed or modified as necessary to effectuate the foregoing. Grammatical,
typographical, and like errors may be corrected and additions, alterations, and omissions, not
affecting the construction or meaning of this ordinance and the Code may be made.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of _______, 2020

_____________________________
Walt Johnson, Mayor
ATTEST:

___________________________
Wanda F. Wells, City Clerk

Pocket Neighborhood Ord. Page 4 of 4

Page 8 of 21
P and Z Special - August 19, 2020 - 5:00 PM
BROADENING HOUSING CHOICES
of alter-
This chapter describes and illustrates a number
natives to standard market rate housing, such as modest
in "pocket
bungalows and other types of houses found
neighborhoods"; rural and urban cohousing, and their
subset senior cohousing; accessory dwelling units; and
various types of affordable homes, including detached,
semidetached; and fully attached housing. As in other
chapters, the intent is to encourage residents and officials
to increase the choice of housing types available by wid-
ening perspectives and sharing information about various
alternatives that might not yet be permitted or encouraged
in their communities.
POCKET NEIGHBORHOODS
A pocket neighborhood is "a cohesive cluster of homes
gathered around some type of common ground within a
larger surrounding neighborhood" where a dozen or so
neighbors may interact daily around a shared garden,
quiet street, or alley, according to Ross Chapin, an archi-
tect from Langley, Washington, and a leading designer of
numerous such housing groups. They are built at a scale
"where meaningful 'neighborly' relationships are fostered
• . . (They are) the physical basis for creating community
with one's neighbors" (Chapin 2011). The first contempo-
rary example, Third Street Cottages in Langley, designed by
Chapin, is further described in chapter 20.
Chapin's work has been influenced by the writings of
Christopher Alexander, particularly Pattern 37, referring
to housing clusters in A Pattern Language (Alexander et
al. 1977). As Chapin recalls, "Alexander's ideas helped
me understand how buildings and outdoor spaces can
become 'real' and 'alive,' and how they can support or
hinder our relationships as human social beings." These
small groups of homes exemplify Alexander's precept that
'the basic building block of community is the cluster of
a few houses gathered together to foster neighborly rela-
tionships" ("Pocket Neighborhoods: Creating Small Scale
Page 9 of 21
Chapter 9
Community in a Large Scale World," http://www.pocket
-neigh borhoods.net/beginni ngs. html).
The history of pocket neighborhoods is long and var-
ied; one might argue that the layout of Plimoth Plantation
in Plymouth, Massachusetts, with its central pedestrian lane
often used for gathering and conversing, is the first exam-
ple in this country. The summer colonies created by reli-
gious groups in New England during the mid-19th century
provide more fine early examples, such as the northern end
of the 1849 retreat in Northport, Maine, known as Bay-
side, where multiple greens enhance 187 neighborhood
homes (see Figure 9-1).
Within an urban context, developers in the 1870s cre-
ated remarkable pocket neighborhoods with alley-loaded
homes facing onto walkways (instead of streets for vehicu-
lar traffic) in Louisville, Kentucky, and Brooklyn, New York.
Although the Louisville example (see Figure 8-18) was
designed for upscale living, at Cobble Hill in Brooklyn,
Alfred Tredway White, a Unitarian deacon and housing
reformer, built two rows of 15 dwellings (plus two more at
each end) each just 11 feet wide, in three-story structures,
specifically for workingmen and their families. Called War-
ren Place Mews, its rear lanes are currently landscaped
with shade trees and used as informal sitting areas, while
the garden in the center is formally landscaped with shrubs
and fountains bordered with footpaths providing front door
access to each home (Chapin 2011).
The pocket neighborhood form reappeared on the
West Coast 40 years later, continuing as multifamily worker
housing with two rows of very modest cottages facing each
other across small internal greens, often called "bungalow
courts." Rediscovered and restored by local architects 20
years ago, the 1915 Pine Street Cottages in Seattle inspired
the region's planning community to adopt new single-
family land-use codes meeting the objectives of the state's
Growth Management Act. These codes have allowed inno-
vative single-family infill developments that serve as models
for alternative housing types. It is important to note that this
approach, as commonly practiced in western Washington,
P and Z Special - August 19, 2020 - 5:00 PM

ementation Techniques
102 Part 3: Impl

Morris Park

Ruggles Park

ring expan
two streets, offe
rg e gr ee n bordered by ial bord
ne, include a
la ssages. Perenn
ie w, in Northport, Mai str ee ts by pedestrian pa
at Ba yv ar by
d open spaces nnected to ne right)
Neighborhoo at are well co ndall Arendt,
Figure 9-1: sm al le r in te rior parcels th nd s Tr us t, left, and Ra
y and l La
Penobscot Ba ource: Natura
views down to amenities. (S
tre es prov id e additional
shade
benches, and e
tached ga rages on the sit
tyard with de
e gr ee n/ garden cour
since th orhood is o
ch project, pocket neighb
ire re zo ning for ea re gi on is e of a
does not re
qu the Seattl e
The defining
sp ac e house, the
ne ig hb or hood type in g an ot he r n th e pr iv at e realm of th
rt use, providin nd betw ee public realm
cottage-cou conditional middle grou t po rch, and the
d as a e fr on
typically clas
si fie living. ace of th neighbor-
ng le -fa mily detached or ho od semipublic sp al pa rk . "I n our pocket
code option
fo r si et neig hb or munic ip additional
ts ar e th e type of pock m m on of the street "w e w or k to create five
co ,
Garden cour ter, where
the
ods," Chapi
n says
e courtyard
and the
cu se d on in this chap Fi gu re s 9-2 and ho al sp ac e between th e edge of
most fo in rs on th
l gr ee n, as illustrated e bu ilt la yers of pe re nn ia l pl antings at
centra ted here w er border of pe ; the frame
ground is a us se d and illustra fr ont door: a pr iv ate front yard
di sc al -u se th e
9-3. The exam
ples condition a low fenc e; railing and
ne s un de r innovative ho m e th e sidewalk; ith a lo w , 'p erchable'
in single-fam
ily zo at each covered po
rch w e occif
, provided th one of the h itself. Thes
lo w in g m edium density t ta lle r th an w er bo xe s; and the porc
codes al space, is no of flo
finished floor on a band
is limited in pe d ar ou nd a comm
d is gr ou
lf stories, an
and one-ha

enjoy PI
cupants
e ya rds, their oc
im al sid d, vvat
sely, with min in Redmon
ty pi ca lly sp aced very clo C on ov er Commons e:
en courts are and photo of room." (Sourc
2: Al th ou gh homes in gard , as sh ow n in this sketch s: a pe rfe ct "outdoor
Figure 9- mm on fro nt
rches into the co tween house
windows and po th 70 feet be
from their front ng an d 50 feet wide, wi
feet lo
Page 10 of 21 oximately 130
courtyard is appr
P and Z Special - August 19, 2020 - 5:00 PM
: The community greens enclosed by homes at Danielson Grove (left) and Greenwood Avenue Cottages (right), in Kirkland and
Washington, respectively, are well suited and right sized for enjoying outdoor meals with neighbors and kids frolicking with each
d pets. At Danielson, the courtyard measures about 40 by 140 feet, with approximately 60 feet between opposing front porches.
Ross Chapin)
within a span of about 18 feet" (Chapin 2011). The trick
is to arrange everything so residents can easily see into the
common areas from their homes, but others cannot see
into their rooms, including next-door neighbors.
Chapin believes that "humans are gregarious by
nature and, given the opportunity, will socialize. We also
need some degree of personal space. Good design can
achieve a balance between the two." Because of its loca-
tion and design, "the shared open space fosters casual
interaction among neighbors which, in time, may grow into
deeper long-term friendships" (Chapin 2011). The key is an
ttractive, relaxing social space through which one walks
very day—a place where people can hang out casually on
benches or toss Frisbees with their children or dogs.
For the optimum number of social interactions to
occur, the best range in size is said to be between five and
homes, with the eight to 12 range considered ideal.
is range has ancient origins in human settlement design.
At Chysauster, a 2,000-year-old Iron Age hamlet in Corn-
wall, England, eight stone dwellings described by English
Heritage as "courtyard houses" are arranged in pairs
along a street, each with its own garden plot (http://www
.english-heritage .org .uk/daysout/properties/chysa uster
-ancient-village). The earliest intact settlement in Britain
exists at the opposite end of the UK, at Skara Brae in the
Orkney Islands, where 10 clustered stone dwellings were
discovered in 1850. Recent studies estimate it dates from
about 3000 BC, during the Neolithic period (http://www
.orkneyjar.com/history/skarabrae). Christopher Alexander
incorporated this concept in A Pattern Language, where
he noted, "People will not feel comfortable in their houses
unless a group of houses forms a cluster, with the public
land between them jointly owned by all the householders.
Page 11 of 21
Chapter 9: Broadening Housing Choices 103
Therefore arrange houses to form very rough, but identifi-
able clusters of eight to 12 households around some com-
mon land and paths. Arrange the clusters so that anyone
can walk through them, without feeling like a trespasser"
(Alexander et al. 1977).
In most pocket neighborhoods, home sizes tend to be
modest, typically ranging from 900 to 1,800 square feet,
sufficient for couples or small families. Parcel sizes depend
on the number of homes and can vary from less than an
acre to several acres. At Greenwood Avenue in Shoreline,
Washington, for example, eight cottages and a common
house were built around a compact central green, achiev-
ing a density of about 11.5 dwellings per acre on a three-
quarter-acre parcel that had formerly been two adjoining
flag lots behind two lots with full street frontage (see Fig-
ure 9-4). The relatively high densities achievable in pocket
neighborhoods reduce the amount of runoff per dwelling,
a primary goal of watershed planning.
Home prices in pocket neighborhoods can vary from
affordable housing to upscale homes, as evidenced by the
contrasting case examples of the Poplar Gardens commu-
nity cohousing in Boulder, Colorado, and the Chico Bay
Cottages along the waterfront in Silverdale, Washington
(see chapter 20).
At the Cottages on Greene, located one block from
the main street of East Greenwich, Rhode Island, built in
2011, five deed-restricted affordable units were incorpo-
rated into a mixed income neighborhood of 15 dwellings,
the first bungalow court to be built in New England (see
Figure 9-5). At first glance, the neighborhood appears to
consist entirely of single-family homes, but clever archi-
tectural design of two duplexes and one three-family resi-
dence enables them to blend in completely. Altogether, the
P and Z Special - August 19, 2020 - 5:00 PM

s
menta tion Technique
104 Part 3: Imple

T1
IiL I
" ——-ii
L —1
l '7:
_---\\ L1
r--1 Itil \
,, 1.1
IG,,,,
1 —I
L
Li-I
1
II :III/ Iin [2r-
Ili A
I__
a i di 1-5 -
fi Lii L---
1

L----1 _,--
Public Street

11-2 Clj

=-1) rter-acre site wit

pying a three-qua
I11 co ho us ing ne ighborhood occu Ch apin)
ttages (right), a house lots (left).
(Source: Ross
n of the Gr ee nwood Avenue Co of su rro un din g
Figure 9-4: Site
pla thin a context
e, Washington, wi
tio na l ne igh bo rhood in Shorelin
conven
r the
e - Congress fo
ho us e" ("C ot tages on Green s/ pr oj ec ts/
g a town org/resource
ua re fe et (0 .8 95 acre), creatin U rb an is m ," hilp://www.cnu.
39,000 sq was generated
New
15 units sit on -201 1).
.7 5 un its per acre. Value cottages-greene bedded neighbo
r-
a density of 16
de ta il, an d m ai nt ai ni ng th at
e "p oc ke t" na ture of these em qu ad ra nt of
attention to h- Th per left
through careful su pp or t in th is upscale neig ca n ea sil y be seen in the up
to n, wh ere
to building the proposal
hoods
k Diamond, W
ashing
value was key rally welcomed 9-6 from Blac
ig hb or s ge ne ge Fi gu re rn al gr ee n are served by
borhood. Ne in g au to repair gara on to a small inte sion
ed a nonc on fo rm
s homes fa ci ng nt onto subdivi
because it replac itio n to m ai n street businesse hi nd co nv en tional lots that fro ne igh bor-
softer trans alleys be e pocket
and provided a ct D on al d Po wers, "The cot- an d fo rm th e outer edge of th d do ts, link
ar by . Ac co rd ing to archite el lin g ty pe , wi th streets
nn ec tio ns , sh ow n by colore
ne smaller dw strian co ross the
s fil l an un met need for a sp ac e, wh ich hood. Pede en ab le re siden ts to walk ac
ta ge munal op en and stem.
private and com the two together the street sy
access to both of a sm al l ho use rather than ig hb or ho od in dependently of
miliar image larger ne
expresses the fa t building or
itu tio na l im ag e of an apartmen
the more inst

"gree
ode Island, is its
jec t in Ea st Greenwich, Rh the green
Greene infill pro e unit facing
tab le as pe ct of the Cottages on e tw o- fam ily dwellings, with on lef t; Ro
Figure 9-5: One
no d buildings ar Union Studio,
k in the tow n's street grid. The en s ar e sin gle family. (Sources:
lin t all the home
restores a pedestrian the impression tha
Street, maintaining
other facing Greene
Page 12 of 21
P and Z Special - August 19, 2020 - 5:00 PM
,• 111:' ;7111, • *fir
folk,;:fike •
• II\ 10.
-
;AL - 0
Figure 9-6: A pocket neighborhood (in the upper left corner) nests
within a larger conventional pattern of streets and blocks in this early
sketch for a major development in Black Diamond, Washington,
demonstrating how this concept can be employed to increase design
'versify in standard new urban neighborhoods. This is accom-
Olished by designing the alleys to serve homes fronting onto streets
and also those fronting onto internal greens. The line of brown dots
indicates a continuous footpath crossing several streets, linking mul-
tiple neighborhood parks (See also Figure 12-4). (Source: Lauri
Fehlberg, Yarrow Bay Holdings)
As defined by Chapin, pocket neighborhoods charac-
terize the 1927 plan for Radburn in Fairlawn, New Jersey,
and the 1975 plan for Village Homes in Davis, Califor-
nia (both described in chapter 20). In Radburn, homes are
alley-loaded and face each other across footpaths lead-
ing to the long central green, while at Village Homes, the
houses back up to small neighborhood greens through
which run footpaths leading to a multiplicity of parks and
garden areas. For a Midwestern example, see Figure 5-3.
Pocket neighborhoods and community greens help
reduce suburban sprawl by making urban living more
inviting and enjoyable, particularly for families with chil-
dren. Neighbors tend to know one another and look out
for each other, improving public safety. As Chapin states, if
you are six and your parents are all right with your ventur-
ing beyond the garden gate into the space just beyond it,
you probably live in a pocket neighborhood.
HOUSING: A COMMUNITY-BASED
TERNATIVE
Cohousing is a term for intentional, self-planned com-
munities occupying a small but growing market segment.
Many cohousing designs follow the pocket neighborhood
approach. These neighborhoods are planned and cre-
ated by their future residents in a highly participatory way,
Page 13 of 21
Chapter 9: Broadening Housing Choices 105
Figure 9-7: Winslow Cohousing, the first cohousing neighborhood
on Bainbridge Island, Washington, was built in 1992 and consists
of 30 homes, a common house, a barn, an allotment garden, and
a small woodland with walking trails. Unlike many pocket neighbor-
hoods, all the homes are attached as twins or multifamily, including a
carriage house with six flats. Located in town, it is within walking dis-
tance of schools, a library, a medical clinic, shopping, parks, a pool,
and the Settle ferry (Arendt, 1994). (Source: Randall Arendt)
characterized by collaboration and consensus. In a typical
cohousing community, all homes are individually owned
but are surrounded by commonly held open space often
consisting of children's play areas, community gardens
with individual allotments, and recreational facilities.
A common house serves as the heart of these neigh-
borhoods and typically includes activity rooms, a large
kitchen, and a dining room where meals are usually shared
by about half the residents several times a week. The com-
mon house sometimes includes offices and guest accom-
modations, which allows individual homes to be smaller.
Two cohousing projects are described in chapters 20 and
21: East Lake Commons in Atlanta, and Heartwood in
LaPlata County, Colorado.
The cohousing concept, which originated in Denmark
in the late 1960s, was brought to North America by archi-
tects Charles Durrett and his wife Kathryn McCamant. The
couple visited numerous cohousing communities in Den-
mark during the mid-1980s, coined the term cohousing,
and wrote the definitive book on the subject, which first
appeared in 1987: Cohousing: A Contemporary Approach
to Housing Ourselves (McCamant and Durrett 1994).
According to Durrett, among the defining character-
istics of cohousing communities are "a balance of privacy
and community, a safe and supportive environment for
children, a practical and spontaneous lifestyle, intergen-
erational neighborhoods, and environmentally sensitive
design that provides pedestrian access and optimizes
open space. Residents take responsibility for ongoing
P and Z Special - August 19, 2020 - 5:00 PM

ues
ntation Techniq
106 Part 3: Impleme
et neigh.
it. As in pock
ho m es ar ra nged around ss foot-
ci- attached ch other acro
to share in de pically face ea
or gani zi ng cooperatively t borhoods , ho m es ty ile
believes that wh the
management
by s" (McCaman space. Durrett
m ee t th ei r changing need paths or m od es t op en
tablishes the initia
l
sion makin
g to
ry de ve lo pm ent process es ins
rett 1994). munities is participato e physical desig
n that susta
and Dur
cohousing com munity, it is th
form of most sense of com
The physical ard, with sin
gl e- family or
de st ria n st reet or courty
the pe

s a common house a
-fa mi ly ho me s and two twins, plu d
e, with 20 single from 1998, it is locate
ru ra l ex am ple in Brunswick, Main rve d fie lds an d forest. Dating rh
o Echo cohousing
is a rmanently prese a pocket neighbo
Figure 9-8: Tw of which are pe of a hamlet than
It is sit ua ted on 92 acres, 72 e De W an As sociates, is more Associates)
various farm bu
ilding s.
. Its for m, de signed by Terre nc
lef t). (S ou rce : Terrence DeWan
unsw ick the
m downtown Br (see site plan on
minutes by car fro open meadows
e eit he r int er nal woodlands or
s fac
as half the home

Ross Chapin
oc ke t Neighborhoods by
n Keys for P s if they flOil
Essential Desig an d can then notify em
ergency service
irr eg ul ar
d personal
ide well-define something amiss
. nce, porkii
igh bo rh oo ds, which prov e the fol- ce car domina
Pocket ne
g se ns e of co m m un ity , ut iliz
Co rr al lin g the Car. To redu fro m the c
space fostering
a stron d located away
sc re en ed fro m the street an m m on s to the
ments: is rough the co
lowing key ele ts and visi- ts must walk th
Pu bl ic to Pr ivate. Residen tag es so re sid en rly int er action
Layering from ee n th ro ug h "implied g op po rtu nities for neighbo
semipublic com
mon gr
front doors, crea
tin central gree
tors enter the rk in g areas. This Th e fo cal point is the
mailbox kiosk
or th e pa
The Comm on s. abutting it on
gates"—near the re nn ial bo rd er and a pa th s, wi th ho use fronts directly d to
a pe bounded by foot cts) is locate
is edged with rch edge e (for small proje
shared garden hedg e, an d th e po wo rk sh op sp ac rde n
r fence or low all sides. The for small parties
. Shared Cla
low split-ceda igh t rig ht fo r perching. a ro of te rra ce
a he one side, with
railing built at ce feelings
is defined by a territory and redu in the toolshed. height to
fin e pe rs on al tools ore stored 1.5-story
Thes e ele m en ts de
d th e co m m on ar ea . Th e
Sc al e. Co tta ges are built at ood
en using porche
s an Cottage g neighborh
of exposure wh nt inu e to "p rotect" personal tiv e im pa cts on the surroundin igh bo rs but
of co tta ge interiors co te ar ea s in reduce nega ge is sim ila r to its ne
ou ts iva ch co tta
lay s in front and pr Individuality. Ea landscape
ing public area creates its own
garden
territory by plac ch ho us eh old
unique. Ea aterials.
back and abov
e.
tween cottages, le and plant m to func-
us es . To en sure privacy be wi th gr ea t variations in sty la rge enough
Nested Ho of on e ho us e es sh ou ld be enter
e "open" side Porch Rooms.
Porch with off-c
ho us es "n es t" together: th the ne xt, wi th g th e ce nt ra l green,
th e "closed" side of overlookin rch.
ows) faces the tion as rooms ect the po
(with more wind an d no ne on the opposite. so tra ffic pa tterns do not bis us e can feet:
ub le- siz ed ya rd on one side gh ts to en su re front doors,
al l Ho us e. A small ho
a do owsills and skyli in a Sm light ond
have high wind Living Large ere is ample
The closed sides n lik e a la rg er one when th ce ilin gs with
. se fo r pe r- and functio ne -fo ot an d higher
priva cy t line of de fen ge space. Ni tread
mmons. The firs adequate stora with light,
Eyes on the Co o kn ow an d gh ts fil l ro om s
k of neighbors wh large window
s and skyli
ere should
be orn
a strong networ k onto shared er space. Th
sonal security is ho us es loo se ns e of la rg d
her. Because the ily noticed.
a perceived
ts, built-in sh
elves, an
care for one anot often more read th walk-in close
str an ge rs ar e sto ra ge wi
common areas, tterns are
whether doily pa
, ne igh bo rs ca n easily notice
Al so

Page 14 of 21
P and Z Special - August 19, 2020 - 5:00 PM
364 Part 6: Case Examples
with him to see it through his eyes and to participate in the
conceptual sketch planning process.
Overall, Austurbruin includes more than eight acres
of public green space and walking trails. In addition to
a small neighborhood green, there is a two-acre park
planted with native shrubs and trees with a playground,
picnic area, nature hiking trails, winding paths, sitting
areas, and wildlife viewing areas. This park was deeded to
the City of Poulsbo in 1999 and is maintained by its Park
and Recreation Department for public use.
Austurbruin is a popular and well-loved infill neighbor-
hood for families needing housing assistance, and it has
been recognized with multiple awards, including the 1998
Best in American Living Award from the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development and the National Asso-
ciation of Home Builders; the Professional Builder Gold
Award; and the 1 999 Award of Excellence for Affordable
Housing from the National Association of County, Com-
munity, and Economic Development (NACCED). In addi-
tion, it received a Meritorious Achievement Award from the
Association of Local Housing Finance Agencies.
POCKET NEIGHBORHOODS
Third Street Cottages
The First Contemporary Bungalow Court
Location: Langley, Washington
Development Period: 1996-97
Site Designer/Architect: Ross Chapin, FAIA, Langley
Developer: Jim Soules, The Cottage Company, Seattle
ton, was the first Archite ct: Charles Wenzlau, Bainbridge Island
Third Street Cottages in Langley, Washing
contemporary bungalow court in the United States and
set the stage for other "pocket neighborhoods" that fol-
lowed. Built in 1997, it is significant for proving that market
demand exists for small cottages designe d for one- and
two-person households in a community-oriented setting.
The process was not an easy one for this pioneering proj- with
the involvem ent of even
ect, whose success was largely due to
a forward-thinking state government, a proactive city plan- average
ning director, an innovative architect, a sensitive developer,
an enlightened banker, and a supportive community.
In 1995, Langley, a small city of 1,000 on Whidbey and
Island, 35 miles north of Seattle, revised its zoning to allow
"cottage housing development" to promote housing diver-
sity and affordability and to encourage creative designers space
to produce distinctive neighborhoods. The zoning change
involves an overlay permitting density to be doubled in all
less than
single-family districts for detached homes with
975 square feet (and with no more than 700 square feet looks down
on the ground floor). Another key requirement is that all beach,
the cottages face onto a usable landscaped central area,
Page 15 of 21
with parking screened from the street. To avoid negative
visual impacts on existing neighborhoods, each project is
reviewed by the planning and design review boards.
The first project proposed under the new regulations
was Third Street Cottages, where eight homes were located
around a shared common on 31,000 square feet of land
(Figure 20-36). The project area merged four standard
house lots, located off a busy street five blocks from the
town center in the heart of this small island community.
New lots have 7,200 square feet (60 by 120 feet), with
homes averaging 650 square feet on the ground floor,
plus another 200 square feet in lofts, adequate for one.
and two-person households, the target market. The land
is jointly held in condominium ownership, as are the corn.
mons building and toolshed. Parking spaces are located
out of view, behind houses and along an outer boundary:
Sales at Third Street Cottages were brisk and gener-
ated widespread interest, including articles and reports in
the national media. The cottages appealed most to active
singles and couples (one with a young child) who owned
only one car and represented many walks of life, from
librarians, therapists, and attorneys to realtors, musicians,
and a secretary. Resale values were very strong, increasing
by as much as 200 percent within five years.
Chico Beach Cottages
A Pocket Neighborhood on the Sound
Location: Silverdale, Washington
Development Period: August 2010 to June 2011
Site Designers: Charles Wenzlau, Wenzlau Archite
Com,.
Bainbridge Island, Washington; and The Cottage
pany, Seattle
cot-
This small-scale, pedestrian-oriented enclave of seven
le (pop-
tage homes occupies a 1.1-acre site in Silverda
rhood of
ulation 19,204) on Puget Sound, in a neighbo
trating that infilling
large waterfront residences, demons
is possible,
smaller homes and common open space
Cottage lots
in areas where the opposite is the norm.
to pro-
2,800 square feet, and each is orientated
s enjoy
vide views of the sound and Mt. Rainier. Resident
the garden
growing their favorite herbs and perennials in
sunbathing and
using the courtyard's gazebo deck for
evening
seating around the fire-circle hearth for informal
shared open
gatherings. About half the site is devoted to
and the commons building.
for extended
A 537-square-foot commons building used
(with o cor
family stays, parties, and potluck dinners
end of thes
i te. i;
chargin g station) anchors the landwar d
community
the interior courtyard toward the
of water front
with its viewing deck and 150 feet se
launched. Becau
age, where kayaks and canoes can be
 Re sidential xampit
Chapter 20: In-Town
P and Z Special - August 19, 2020 - 5:00 PM

ntral
s around a long ce
su ffic ien t land to site eight cottage le
re feet each provid
ed ge tree in the midd
us e lots of about 8,000 squa is de sig n ap pro ach enabled a lar
r ho . Th ere
36: Combining fou is in much demand out 22 feet to alm
ost 40 feet. Wh
housing type that
a ne w inf ill ne ighborhood with a length an d va rie s in width from ab
tiny t in
measures 130 fee
. The courtyard
erty to be retained ap art . (So urc e: Ross Chapin)
t
are about 35 fee
e each other, they

Eliminat-
y front directly.
gre en, onto which the
across the central
er 35 feet apart
ee t Co tta ge s, ho uses face each oth e: Ro ss Ch ap in)
u '20-37: At Third Str (Sourc
se cottage courts.
design aspect of the
.rf q a standard street is an essential

toy
en
nd
ng
,en

led
ality design
(II- well due to their qu
size of the ir neighbors, they fit g super-
the (seen in the drawin
it about one-third central courtyard
h the ne w Ch ico Be ach Cottages are ter vie w do wn the
Figure 20-38: Althoug wa
e each one with a
arranged to provid
nt- d mater ials . Th e new units (right) are nz lau )
an urce: Charles We
oto on the left). (So
imposed on the aerial ph

Page 16 of 21
P and Z Special - August 19, 2020 - 5:00 PM
SouthStreetTargetA
rea
NH
YR
YJA
JA D

IG

S
N
H

O
W

W
A
Y1

YE
G R
ETD
NH

R
F
IG

S O
R
KE IN
H

D
W

LA HA
A

C
Y1

KINGMNR
A D
RD
NE
G
RA
LAG
O
LDD

O
AKG
R
IX

OV
ERD
NW
IEH

M
ARYL
A N
D
AS
Y

A
V
IN
T
ES

GTO
E

NA
ND

S
A

JES
S
S
L
E

V
A
IX

ER P HC
IS T
B

IL
S V AR
R
N
IEA

RR D
E
M

STA
S
T

A
T
V

N
A AD
N R
U

C
ityofT
itusville
F
FAL

U
B F
FAOR
L D
OR

DW
G KA
IC V
E
S
N
eighborhoodServices
LAV

R
A
E

A
ML D
IN N
AL
ILR S

D epartmen
t
R K

LIM
O
N
V

ST E
A
A
LL
ILL IE

D
D

V
LN
LK

EA
R

T
LIN E

NW 725D eleonA ven

ue
R

D
T

O
E

A
S
A

N
S

H
R
C

IN
C

G
E

T
H

O T
itusville, Florid
a3 27
80
M

NA
N

DY V
LE

EA

S A
H LN
ES (32 1 )5 67-3784
G

I
PN
N
V

JONESS
T
NDE

A
NA

R
V
NP

AG
NA
O

W
ATS
E

O NS
T
A

A
L
L
R

Y
KA

A
GRDENST
B
V

OR
ANGEST
LAV

B
LANT
O NS
T
V
A
V

TA
V

R
SR
ISA

NA

A
M T
INS
VE
IT
O

A
M
SD

R
T P
O T
ICS
B

T
ICS
P
N

R
T P
O TT
ICS RO
O
N

M
B

A
V
IA

IN
A

R
IX

IS C
U
A

KA
R

SB
D
T

VD
E

SA
IEA

SG

IN
P T
ES
T
DT

ITR
E

V
N

IC
V
S

KA

R
RA
AL

V
N
IN

T
OS
R

A
P M
L T
ET
KP
A

E
V

A
V
O

S
L
L

VH
SA

RA
A
E
H

O
C
P

SP
IG

R
N
N
V

TA
R

T
HS
H

T
G
NA

LLI

S O
S U
H
A

E
KNE
ND T
YC
O

E
VW

IT

R
O

W
P

O
O

O
T

DD
M

T
DS
E

IN

R O
R A
NL
RA

U
L
G

H
S

ILL TST
D

CR
E WES
E

S
IN

TAV
T

GE
T
SS

IAA

S
A
F
W

E
F
O

C
IR
U

OAK
O
V

S
N
T

RID
TA

GEB L
DA
HA
V

G
AA

P
IS R
E IN
V

H
EW
V

HILLSRD GILBERTSTP
N

RA
R

SPROUTLN L IR
A

N IE
B

NA
E

PH YRLN
HA

ZE
SD
O
T

GIBSONS
T
E

L
A B

D
AME
SC T WC
IZ

STA
FFOR
DST
L
VE
V

S
YCAMORES
T
EA
IGA
L
A
AY
R
G
C

0 0
.25 0
.5 1M
ile
s
1
2/2
0/2
018 C:\Users\djordan\Docum
ents\A
rcG
IS\P
roje
cts\N
eig
hbo
rho
odS
erv
ice
s

Page 17 of 21
 7/28/2020

REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES

• COMMUNITY HAS EXPERIENCED CHANGING LAND USE PATTERNS OVER THE YEARS
• MEET CHANGING MARKET TO IMPROVE COMMUNITY
• WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOODS COULD BRING BACK LIFE TO THE COMMUNITY
• NUMEROUS OPPORTUNITIES FOR INFILL DEVELOPMENT IN THE NRSA- VACANT LOTS

Page 18 of 21
1
 7/28/2020

WHAT IS APPROPRIATE INFILL DEVELOPMENT?

• TRADITION SINGLE-FAMILY ?
• OWNER-OCCUPIED VS. RENTAL?
• MIXED-USES?
• VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES AND STYLES? NEW CONCEPT DESIGNS?
• SMALL PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS- “POCKET NEIGHBORHOODS”?
3

DESIGN FEATURES
• CLUSTERS WITH DIFFERENT THEMES
• APPEAL TO FIRST-TIME HOMEBUYERS
• APPEAL TO DOWN-SIZERS
• APPEAL TO SENIORS
• APPEAL TO MILLENNIAL’S
• HOME’S THAT GROW WITH FAMILY (DESIGN WITH “ADD-ON” CAPABILITIES)
• PERGOLA/PORCH ELEVATIONS
• OUTDOOR LIVING ENHANCEMENTS
• UNIVERSAL DESIGN FEATURES FOR ACCESSIBILITY – AGE IN PLACE
4

Page 19 of 21
2
 7/28/2020

Homebuyers

Studio Home- Down-sizers

down-sizers Seniors

Millennial’s –grow w/family

Homebuyers

New Design
Concepts

Page 20 of 21
3
 7/28/2020

Pocket Neighborhood element-

Walkable Communities
Age-In Place

Page 21 of 21
4