Cluster Subdivisions

AMERICAN SOCIETY OF PLANNING OFFICIALS 1313 EAST 60th STREET - CHICAGO 37, ILLINOIS lnfoTmation Report No. 135 June 1960 . CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS The typical postwar development operator was a man who figured how many houses he could possibly cram onto a piece of land and have the local zoning board hold still for it. Then he whistled up the bulldozers to knock down all trees, bat the lumps off the terrain, and level the ensuing desolation. Then up went the houses, one after another, all alike. John Keats, The Crack in the Picture Window1 In recent years there has been a search for alternatives to subdivision design practice, which ,l:1.as become conventionalized since World War II. Metropolitan· areas ·have burst forth onto the surrounding countryside, which has been con sumed in the wave of suburban development. The "look..:alike" pattern of these developments is familiar. Architecture, street pattern, setback, and yard spacing are unvaried. While the phenomenon has been the cause of much com ment, criticism, and despair, it has also been a boon to the nation's car- -~oonis ts . The whole problem has been well summed up by William L. Nelson; who observes: From the standpoint of community design, the scattered disorgan ization of subdivision development completely destroyed any sense of community cohesiveness; aesthetically even the gracefully curv ing streets with regularly set back ranch houses began to have a look of neatly landscaped sterility not much less monotonous than the rows of rectilinear streets of the past; the lots designed large enough to handle individual sewage disposal accentuated the sprawling, [ and] were often larger than the homeowner wished to maintain. • • . (Source: Letter to Planning Advisory Service) lFor complete information on the references given in the text, see the list at the end of this report. Prepared by Jon Rosenthal Copyright © 1960 American Society of Planning Officials It is in this context that the "cluster" subdivision has been heralded as a major breakthrough in suburban development. Planning Advisory Service has received a number of inquiries relating to the merits, the legal basis, and < the appropriateness of the custer subdivision. The publicity given to the "cluster" has aroused a great deal of curiosity, but it has left many ques- tions unanswered and has not spelled out the details. Several different kinds of schemes have been called "cluster subdivisions." As yet, few have actually been constructed. In exploring the problems involved, Planning Advisory Service has drawn on published plans and commentary and has supplemented this often sketchy information by getting in touch With planners and lawyers who were known to be actively concerned with this type of develop ment. The compilation of their responses has not proceeded along statistical lines, but is rather a presentation of varying points of view. This approach was necessary because each of the respondents has been faced with differences in the layout of the proposals that have come to his attention, the physical characteristics of the area, and the legal underpinning. What Is a Cluster Subdivision? _.,., I i There are two features that distinguish what is thought of as a "true" cluster 1 subdivision. The first is a characteristic of design and site planning in which several houses are grouped together on a tract of land. Each cluster of houses serves as a module, which is set off from others like it by an inter vening space that helps give visual definition to each individual group. The second characteristic of the cluster subdivision, as it is often proposed, is the presence of undeveloped land that is held for the common enjoyment of the neighboring residents or the community at large. ( The conventional method of laying out a subdivision to conform to the lot size requirements of zoning is illustrated in Figure la. The technique is, ubiqui tous and is equally applicable to a grid or curvilinear street system. Each lot is a module. Within it, the structures may be of varied design or virtu ally identical. When large lots are used it is easier to retain the original a a • a • m • • • ml • • • • Ill II 11!1 Ill Figure la Figure lb 2 lnformution Report No. 135 character of the land, and much of the open space can be preserved. With small lots, where coverage is greater, siting requirements are apt to be more critical, and may possibly result in drastic alteration of the natural land scape. There are no common areas except for publicly provided recreational facilities and streets, which are used for circulation, parking, and sometimes for play. Cluster design is illustrated in Figure lb. The structures are usually ori ented toward one another around a crescent, a square, or in an irregular fash ion. In many cases the realization of a cluster will necessitate the reduction of frontage requirements, as would happen when lots are wedge-shaped. Lot size has a bearing on the effeetiveness of the cluster itself as a module. With the same structures, the results obtained in using small lots or large lots are demonstrated in Figures 2a and 2b respectively. When small lots are used, the cluster design may be nothing more than a novel method ~f utilizing the land intensively, but it is hardly an improvement over conventional sub division design practice. Large lots, with the buildings placed close to gether, -will mean that each group of structures will be distinguishably dis tant from similar neighboring clusters. .... ., ~u- .. ~. ~. Figure 2a Figure 2b Common land is a feature of many of the proposed cluster subdivisions. In principle, it does not differ from cases where common land has been set aside at the rear of the individual parcels for the enjoyment and use of the owners of abutting property and possibly the community at large. Figure 3a illus trates this kind of scheme. The open space has the effect of separating a house from its neighbor immediately to the rear. But in this arrangement, the homes are not oriented to produce any sense of community, nor is there any reason to expect that such a layout would improve the streetscape. How ever, open space in the interior of a block may have its advantages. In the Far Northeast section of Philadelphia, this type of pattern results where row houses are permitted in what was formerly a 5,000-square-foot single family district. The zone change is conditional on the dedication of block interiors to form a continuous park strip along stream valleys. June 1960 3 In Figure 3b both characteristics of the cluster subdivision have been com bined: the siting of homes in a group so that they have a focus of orienta- tion, and the separation of each such cluster by common land for the use and ( enjoyment of nearby residents or the community. The opinion of the respondents to Planning Advisory Service's inquiries was that t~e use to which the common land is put is dependent on a host of factors. These include the characteristics of the site, its size and location, the needs of the future residents, and the community's need for public areas. The use that was most frequently mentioned was the preservation of the land in its natural condition, especially where there are prominent features such as stream valleys, ravines, and stands of trees. Other suggestions were parks and playgrounds, special recreational facilities, "buffers," and lawns. Most of these uses would also achieve distance between the groups of structures. • • _-,--.._ II • a D C II II II Figure 3a · Figure 3b Precedents The cluster concept is a contemporary adaptation of some old principles. The interplay of urban and rural life has been a recurring ideal from the days of the medieval village, when the agricultural base of the community had to be close at hand. Ebenezer Howard emphasized the desirability of having city and country in close proximity, although economic necessity was less compel ling than in an agrarian society. The cluster idea differs from these precedents in that it is the group of houses rather than the town that is enveloped by the natural environment. The greenbelt was the means by which this ideal was realized during the Middle Ages and according to the preaching of Howard. Now the principle is echoed in the cluster, which is a modern adaptation within the development pattern of the American metropolis. In the true cluster, an interlacing system of parks and natural areas can assure that each house lot is adjacent to unde veloped land. Even though there is no greenbelt in Radburn, park land is always close at hand. ( Information Report No. 135 The reservation of connn.on property is a tradition, almost taken for granted, which was inherited from the Old World, and practiced in the very earliest colonial period. The village "green" or llcommon" so frequently encountered in New England towns is a holdover from the days when these patches of ground served as a protected refuge for cattle or as a training ground for the militia. Today the New England common is often a useful and aesthetically splendid park that is sacred in the threat of possible encroachment. Other design features used at an earlier time are not found in the proposals for cluster subdivisions. One is the cul-de-sac, a means of access rather than a street for circulation, which is intended to serve a limited number of dwelling units. Some proposed clusters utilize this principle, even if the roadway is just a crescent resembling the customary turnaround of these access roads. Proposals - The cluster subdivision has been hailed as a possible solution to two problems that plague almost every rapidly growing community on the expanding fringes of our metropolitan areas.

Load more