Residence and residential Community Design

The primary objective in residence and residential community site planning is to provide a site that is a
desirable place to live for the intended users. House size, lot size, common spaces, and recreation
facilities would all be quite different, but there are some commonalities found in quality residential
development. The most desirable communities are most often those that allow a maximum of
pedestrian access to the necessaries of life—schools, work, shops, and the like—but also provide for
easy transit in and out of the neighborhood. Other characteristics of such communities are the presence
of human-scale streets and buildings, lots of well-developed trees to soften and temper the streetscape,
and diversity in the social and architectural makeup of the community. While security and safety are
often cited as important. Local streets should be designed in such a way that a coherent pattern of
circulation can be recognized. Houses or residential units should be arranged to provide variation and
visual interest. After the style and affordability of houses, the lot layouts and character are the most
important elements of the typical residential development project. Valuable lot amenities may include
the presence of trees, lot shapes and sizes, views, and accesses to water. At the early stages of the site
analysis, it is important to begin to identify home sites. Generally, this is done using topographic
mapping of the site and walking the entire site to identify valuable locations or site features. The
identification of home sites and the related issues will drive the planning and design of the site. Home
sites are found by determining where it would be nice to live; it is fundamentally a simple process. A
good location is a combination of its surroundings, access, and amenities, as well as more subjective
attributes. the sites and layout are designed to minimize impact and maximize site value. The layout of a
residential development is part of an overall community design that also includes recreation facilities,
schools, shops, offices, and religious institutions. The larger community thus forms a context into which
any new development project must fit, and fit well. Site planners and developers need to consider how a
proposed project will relate to existing or future features within the lifestyle choices of the future
inhabitants as well.

Lot layout alternatives

The key to a successful residential design regardless of the cost of the housing lies in how effectively the
design creates a sense of place and relates to the end user. These objectives are achieved in many ways.
Some sites have certain natural features that will automatically connect the site to its users and that
may be worked into the design. Other projects must rely on the combination of the housing type and
landscape architecture to create the feeling on the site that attracts and holds residents. Design
professionals should expect the push for development to continue in response to the growth and
resettlement of our population. They should also expect the concerns over the environment, sustainable
development, and the character of a community to continue and grow

The familiar grid layout as shown in Fig. 8.3 is an efficient way to subdivide property, but it can be
monotonous, especially for residential areas. Grid layouts are familiar forms of development to most
people and provide a certain level of comfort for many people. The key advantage of the grid layout is
the relative ease it provides for finding one’s way and the maximization of lots it allows per linear foot of
street. However, the straight streets of the familiar grid layout often invite higher vehicle speeds than
are desirable, especially where wide cartways are used. In contrast, curvilinear streets are far more
interesting visually and may help to manage vehicle speeds. However, this design is somewhat less
efficient with regard to lot count. Also, the degree to which streets curve and the way they are laid out
make finding one’s way through some communities confusing and difficult. This may be of concern in
particular in communities designed for older residents. There are alternatives to the traditional grid
layout, however, as shown in Figs. 8.4 and 8.5, which depict several versions of alternative grid designs.
As higher house-lot densities have become more common, a variety of different lot configurations have
evolved to accommodate the smaller lot sizes and traditional or familiar housing types. Some projects
use a combination of these lot arrangement strategies while others design around a single lot and
housing type. For the most part, these small-lot single-family home strategies are of one of five types:
deep narrow lots, wide shallow lots, alley lots, Z lots, and clustered lots

As higher house-lot densities have become more common, a variety of different lot
configurations have evolved to accommodate the smaller lot sizes and traditional or familiar housing
types. Some projects use a combination of these lot arrangement strategies while others design around
a single lot and housing type. For the most part, these small-lot single-family home strategies are of one
of five types: deep narrow lots, wide shallow lots, alley lots, Z lots, and clustered lots.

Deep narrow lots. The deep, narrow lot configuration allows for a familiar lot and house pattern with
the garage and front of the house facing the street (Fig. 8.6). Lots typically range from 3000 to 4800 ft2,
about 6 to 8.5 lots per acre. The typical 40-ft-wide lot allows for a total of about 10 ft of side yard, which
leaves 20 ft for the garage and 25 ft for the house. Garages are often designed close to the front of the
lot, often in front of the house façade to maximize the amount of yard space behind the house. This
tends to create an unattractive street view of all garage doors. Also, the deep, narrow lot provides for
only minimal backyard privacy, especially in housing with two or more floors. This may be offset if
special attention is paid to the location of windows in adjacent units and if visual landscape barriers are
used, but it is difficult to anticipate the location of windows and site lines in projects where different
housing models are possible.

Wide shallow lots. An alternative to the deep narrow lot is the wide shallow configuration that allows
for a standard-width house and garage and conveys the feeling of a traditional neighborhood (Fig. 8.7).
The wide shallow lot creates a feeling of a larger lot and space between units by presenting its longest
dimensions along the street frontage. These lots generally yield about 6 to 7 units per acre with lot sizes
from 3500 ft2. In general, wide shallow lots are not as desirable as deep narrow lots because the wider
lots are more expensive and there is less useful yard space. Development costs may be higher since
there are fewer units per linear foot of road and utilities. An increase in lot width of 20 ft will result in an
increase of almost 50 percent higher utility costs per unit over the deep narrow plan. The backyard of
the wide shallow lot offers little privacy, especially if two-story homes are constructed. However, the use
of fencing and appropriate landscaping can increase privacy

Alley lots. Another small-lot layout alternative returns to the use of alleys behind the house (Fig. 8.8).
Alleys were common in cities many years ago. Garages were located in the back of properties, and
access was over a common alley. The alley design allows for lots of 3300 to 4500 ft2 yielding 4 to 8 units
per acre. Many older, desirable neighborhoods built in this configuration exist in cities throughout the
United States. By locating the garage in the rear, the streetscape is all house fronts—no driveways and
no garage doors. The alley is usually 16 to 18 ft wide. The paved alley increases development costs
somewhat, but many of the traditional neighborhoods using the alley layout have narrower streets and
lots that offset the additional cost of the alley. Some municipalities resist the alley arrangement because
of increased maintenance, but in other cities, the alleys are not public rights-of-way but are held in
common by the neighbors through a common access easement and maintenance covenant. Projects
with alleys provide ideal utility corridors. Z lots. The term Z lot is used to refer to a layout in which the
house is placed on or very near to one property line and is called a zero-lot line. In some configurations
the lot on lines may jog around the building to create a more interesting space. Such lots are said to
resemble a Z—hence its name. The Z lot is often slanted relative to the street to increase the
appearance of lot width. Houses are designed to increase light and maximize privacy with the use of
strategically located windows and entranceways. Some Z-lot developments provide special maintenance
easements or even contractual arrangements like condominium agreements to provide access to
buildings for maintenance. Easements along lot lines may be difficult for Z-lot configurations.

Clustered lots. Cluster designs have become more common in recent years because they work with,
rather than against, the planning goals of communities (Table 8.3). In general, the principle behind the
cluster design is to allow the same number of units on a tract as would be there normally but to group
the units into clusters of greater density (Fig. 8.10). A density bonus is sometimes allowed to encourage
the preservation of open space. Cluster development can reduce the visual impact of new development
on a community as well as reduce the amount of negative environmental effects. It allows developers to
utilize the land and preserves valuable natural areas, agricultural land, riparian zones, and so on. Cluster
developments are usually welcome because they minimize the impact of the development and are
sensitive to rural character, the nature of the site, and the community. Effective and successful cluster
developments may also serve to establish a quality threshold for other future projects

Easements and rights-of-way

Allowances for easements and rights-of-way in higher-density developments may require more planning
and thought than they would in less dense projects. With smaller front and side yards, easements may
take a significant portion of the street side of individual lots. Utility easements may restrict the planting
of large trees or fences. Some utilities prefer easements outside of the cartway to reduce the cost of
maintenance and repair. In other cases, the proximity of one utility to another may require
extraordinary construction methods and increase development costs. Easements along the back
property are possible for some utilities, but access is required, which may have a negative impact on the
use and enjoyment of the lot. Many small-lot projects are designed to allow utilities to be installed
within the public right-of-way on the street, usually between the curb and sidewalk. Still other projects
provide a utility corridor easement across front lawns and restrict the amount and type of landscaping
that can be used.
Affordable housing site design

The cost of new development is a concern for many communities and many have found that key people
in the community can no longer afford to live there. Zoning and land development ordinances are
prescriptions for development. Development costs are a function of many factors, but among them are
the local development standards, which ultimately are passed on to new-home buyers. All the while that
communities have been trying to find ways to increase the number of affordable homes, they have been
learning that the developments produced by their local standards are not only inconsistent with the
character of their communities, they are also contributing to unwelcome sprawl. At the same time
homes in many older communities continue to be considered valuable and command high market
prices. A visit to some of these older communities too often reveals that many of the features that
contribute to their continuing appeal and market value would not be allowed under current ordinances
and practices. Many of the standards for community development that were in place up to World War II
were revised shortly afterward. Street widths, lot sizes, setbacks, and many other aspects of postwar
community development were enlarged and modeled on the grid type of street and lot layout. Wider
streets and larger lots reached their peak in the 1980s and 1990s. The growing awareness of the
negative environmental impacts as well as the increased cost of the initial development and life cycle
costs of unnecessary pavement and oversized lots have encouraged a shift toward a more affordable
and lower impact design that does not sacrifice public safety or environmental function. Increasing the
number of affordable housing units remains a priority in many communities. Affordability can be
improved dramatically by specific changes in local development standards and practices (see Tables 8.4
and 8.5).