Articles | Case Studies | Concept Tour

As Conservation Development becomes more acceptable and more widely used in our region, it is tempting to consider the widespread use of it throughout a community. Conservation Development, which provides through zoning for partial land conservation on residential development project, while concentrating the allowable number of units on the remaining land, does often provide that “compromise position”, allowing land conservation and development to occur simultaneously. In communities where any restrictions on development are difficult to achieve, this compromise can be an excellent solution to the problem of retaining rural resources on development projects.

However, there are several drawbacks to using Conservation Development as a panacea, applied across the board in a community. Conservation Development provides for partial land conservation, where 40 or 50% of each parcel is conserved, and the remainder is developed. The result, if it is applied to several adjacent parcels, is a “patchwork” of development and open spaces. This partial land conservation can result in remaining open spaces that are too small, too irregular in shape, or too interwoven with residences to be useful for farm operations. It can also result in community-wide reduction of the critical mass of farmland necessary to support a local farm economy. Another impact can be the breaking up of large areas of habitat necessary for certain wildlife populations; and the elimination of hunting and other recreational sports due to the proximity of open spaces to residences. Furthermore, another long-term result is the large-scale spreading out of development over the landscape — one of the basic characteristics of suburban character, and a factor in the increased cost of providing services to residential areas — leading to higher taxes over time.

We believe that a logical approach to community planning will result in a land use strategy that balances conservation with development, and looks at the long-term economic viability, and quality of life in the community, as well. Such a logical approach will identify different areas of the community for different approaches:

• Areas where development opportunities will be enhanced to support the creation of concentrations of development, ideally near town and township centers. This can also result in a more lively, attractive, identifiable center that will enhance the perception of the community, and its quality of life.
  
• Areas where conservation opportunities will be maximized to encourage large blocks of undeveloped land that can support a long-term stable rural character, and farm economy, if applicable.
  
• Areas (often as a buffer between development and conservation areas) where partial land conservation is the solution to the need for residential development - the Conservation Development Zone.

Conservation Development is, indeed, a far better approach to residential development than the cookie cutter subdivision that has become the norm since World War II. It provides for retention of rural views and natural and historic features; it provides a buffer between residential development and sensitive areas such as streams, wetlands and floodplains; and it results in a greatly reduced impact to local streams and waterways when compared to traditional development methods. However, we need to understand Conservation Development in its context, and plan for a true balance of conservation and development across our communities that provides for areas of development enhancement, and conservation enhancement, as well. In future columns we will review some of the tools that are available to communities to make this happen.