By Connie O’Connor, Board Supervisor

Residents of Batavia Township recently petitioned to put two issues on this November’s ballot. One was a referendum to reverse the approval of a particular planned development. The other was an initiative to remove Article 36, which guides Planned Developments (PDs), from local zoning regulations. Both of these efforts are an attempt to curb residential growth.

My goal was to be curious, not judgmental as I investigated the history, purpose, and design of these type of Planned Developments. What I learned is that PDs can be a valuable tool in preserving green space if citizens, developers, and public officials work together for the common good.

PDs are permitted when encoded in a municipality’s zoning ordinances. Zoning plans are put in place to promote orderly development, ensure compatibility between land uses, protect property values, public health and safety, and preserve the overall quality of life in a community. A zoning plan maps out which parcels of land are acceptable for agriculture, business, industry, and different kinds of residential use. There are two ways that land gets developed for housing: through standard zoning or through PDs.

Standard zoning requires a builder to follow strict rules about lot dimensions, building placement and density (homes per acre). If developers comply with these, they are pretty much guaranteed to get their plans approved. A parcel of land developed with standard zoning sort of looks like a grid of equal portions, with a house in each square of the grid. No land is set aside to shelter displaced wildlife. No forests or fields remain, except in areas that are too difficult to develop.

But some of the features that give our rural and semi-rural communities their distinctive character can be preserved when subdivisions are designed as a Planned Development. PDs began popping up across the country in the 1950’s to promote flexibility and creativity in land use, allowing for a mix of housing types along with a variety of open spaces and community facilities like pools and clubhouses. In PDs, the cost and responsibility to maintain shared amenities falls to residents through their Homeowners Association (HOA).

PDs allow developers to maintain their return on investment while proposing more flexible designs that can better serve the community and environment. They may build in a less land-consumptive way by building fewer homes on larger lots, or they might build on smaller lots while agreeing not to touch other parts of the land. Conservationists see the potential to preserve agricultural land, green space, and areas like wetlands, streams or hillsides with PDs. The undeveloped portions of the land are permanently protected by the HOA.

A conservation-minded community can negotiate with developers to design PDs where the open spaces connect, resulting in large swaths of forests and fields criss-crossing the community. This kind of conservation-based planning is available anywhere PDs are permitted, if only citizens voice their desires.

Eliminating Planned Development Zoning will not necessarily reduce the number of new homes built in subdivisions—but it will limit the ability of public officials to negotiate with developers for better subdivisions. Once a PD ordinance is removed from a zoning plan, it may be hard to put it back in. If residents want to protect the beauty and quality of their communities, there are likely better ways to go about it. Communication, especially from a respectful, open-minded and organized group of residents, can make a big difference. Residents can ask for a review of zoning plans/ordinances with opportunities for public input. If elected and appointed officials don’t know that residents care about things like green views, bike trails, connected green space, walkable communities, stream setbacks to protect water quality, stronger environmental safeguards, or native plants, they won’t advocate for them or write them into code.

Perhaps the most important thing residents can do is seek first to understand the perspectives, powers, and rights of everyone involved in the complex system of land use planning. Through compromise and by centering conversations around common ground, residents might just protect the ground they love.