Land Use Ordinance (Performance Zoning) Volume III: Administrator's Guidebook-1983

TOWN OF
ORIENTAL, N.C.
LAND USE
ORDINANCE
(PERFORMANCE ZONING)
Volume III:
Administrator's Guidebook
z�
DCM Copy DCM Copy
lease do not remove!!!!!
Division of Coastal Management
77.
. ............
7 A Coastal Area Demonstration Project by:
PLANNING & DESIGNASSOCIATES, P.A.
3515 Glenwood Avenue Raleigh, North Carolina 27612 Telephone[phone]

VOLUME III
TOWN OF ORIENTAL
ORIENTAL, N. C. 28571
IUSE ORDINANCE
(Performance Zoning)
Prepared by:
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND PLANNING BOARD
Harold Loyd Stephenson, Mayor
John Borden, Dennis Barkley, Brantley Norman
Marvin Jennings, Town Administrator
Ed Bailey, Former Mayor
WITH TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FROM:
Planning and Design Associates, P.A.
3515 Glenwood Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27612 [phone]
Terry W. Alford, President
Consultants: Rex H. Todd, MRP, AICP, Project Manager; Michael V. Butts, MUP;
Michael Brough, Consulting Municipal Attorney;
Debbie Tant, Administrative Assistant; Janet Roberts, Word Processing.
Special Assistance: Philip P. Green, Institute of Government
The preparation of this ordinance was financed in part through grant provided
by the North Carolina Coastal Management Program, through funds provided by the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, which is administered by the
Office of Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. The Town of Oriental contributed cash and in -kind services.
October, 1983

VOLUME III: ADMINISTRATOR'S GUIDEBOOK
Preface
This document is designed with two purposes in mind: (1) to share with other
communities the experiences of Oriental in developing one version of a
performance zoning ordinance and (2) to present specific steps through what
administration should work in using the ordinance.
It is the third of three volumes which compose the full set:
Volume I. The Oriental Land Use Ordinance
Volume II. Appendices to the Oriental Land Use Ordinance
Volume III. The Administrator's Guidebook.
Questions related to how the three relate or any particular application we
referred to Planning and Design Associates, P.A., 781-9004.

VOLUME III
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1
A. What is performance zoning? 1
B. Why are the Office of Coastal Management and the Town of Oriental
interested in the concept? 2
C. Pros and Cons of Performance Zoning: The Experience in Oriental 3
and Other Municipalities
1. Selected strengths and weaknesses of Performance Zoning 4
a. Selected strengths 4
b. Selected weaknesses 5
2. Opportunities and Obstacles other Coastal Towns may face when
they choose to use performance zoning. g
a. Opportunities g
b. Obstacles 10
D. Selected Methodologies for Preparing Your Own Performance Zoning
Ordinance (or incorporating select performance standards into your
current ordinance). 14
II. HOW TO USE THIS DOCUMENT 30
A.
What
.makes this document a "Performance Zoning Ordinance?"
30
B.
What
Will the Development of This Ordinance Achieve?
32
C.
User
Instructions and Recommendations
33

I. DEMONSTRATION VALUE FOR COASTAL COMMUNITIES
A. What is Performance Zoning?
"Performance zoning" refers to a wide range of methods of regulating the use
of land based upon analysis of the carrying capacity of natural systems and
the impacts of proposed man—made developments. It reflects CAMA's concern
for the environment while providing flexibility for the developer in how he
responds to the constraints presented by a site. It reduces the rigidity of
control of traditional provisions such as minimum lot sizes, setbacks and
housing types, which often prevent the developer from using the most
efficient or environmentally sound design for a tract of land.
Performance zoning allows any one of a variety of considerations to govern
the use of the land —depending on the site and how it is designed.
Performance standards deal with the land use intensity measures, site
variables, design variables and facilities capacities.
Performance zoning places the responsibility for sound design on the
developer and bis land planner. It forces much more consideration of site
capacity and ask more of developers before permits are let, while striving to
work to seek the workability of a site rather than restrict it.
It is through this spirit and the provisions applied in this ordinance that
both the developer and the community can succeed together.

B. Why are the Office of Coastal Management and the Town of Oriental
interested in the Concept?
The development of this ordinance grew from the genuine concern for the
Office of Coastal Management to be on the cutting edge of innovative land use
planning in coastal North Carolina, and the dissatisfaction of the Town
Council of the Town of Oriental with traditional zoning. Having just
finished its CAMA Land Use Plan, it was prime time for an alternative method
of regulating land use in this coastal village and its yet unestablished
extraterritorial area.
As referenced above, CAMA was interested in the use of natural resource
information in the development of land management tools. Few ordinances have
attempted to use even soils information as a basis for density or minimum lot
size, much less water quality issues. The state has a full array of
requirements which are seldom brought into play in a coordinated fashion
during zoning permit decisions. Harder economic times also stimulated
concern for supportively regulating development instead of taking a more
rigid approach. People today are looking for sensible development which
stimulates the economy but protects community identity and the environment.
Oriental is no exception. Then Mayor Ed Bailey described performance zoning
best when he said that the people in Oriental didn't care what it was next to
them as long as it behaved. In zoning jargon, one would say that adjacent
uses are compatible as long as they are similar in intensity and perform well
on a set of reasonable indicators. People really are concerned about what's
next to them and, as Mr. Bailey emphasized, they are indeed concerned about
how it behaves. This mixture of viewpoints led to the mixing of traditional
zoning and performance zoning concepts in this,'the Oriental Land Use
Ordinance.
2

C. Pros and Cons of Performance Zoning: The Experience in Oriental and
Other Municipalities.
This section strives to better prepare other communities to develop their own
performance zoning regulations through demystifying the concept. The first section
lists selected strengths and weaknesses, and then lists opportunities and
obstacles which other coastal communities may face in using performance
standards.
To broaden the experienal or demonstration base, this section draws from the
evaluation of the concept's application in several places (Pennsylvania,
Connecticut, and Oregon), and assesses the manner in which the Oriental, N.C.
Demonstration Project exemplies a particular strength or overcomes a
particular weakness noted in that literature (Exhibit Cl is a bibliography).
Finally, two articles are included as Exhibit C2 and C3 to not only broaden
the experiential base but to emphasize that performance zoning is different
things to different communities; it has different forms, techniques, levels
of sophistication and administrative ease, and must be molded to specific
issues in different communities.
With this introduction, we turn to selected strengths and weaknesses
discovered during the Oriental Demonstration Project.
3

1. Strengths and Weaknesses of Performance Zoning.
a. Selected Strengths
Performance zoning may take a number of forms. It may consist of a simple
set of rules that apply across the board in the community. Second, perform-
ance standards may be used in a traditional zoning ordinance to regulate
certain kinds of uses, such as industry or conditional uses. Third, it may
establish two or three intensity zones, based on the neighborhood
characteristics of a community. Each zone may permit various uses, but the
standards would vary between zones to promote the desirable character of the
neighborhood. (Oregon State University Extension Service, See Exbibit Cl).
The Town Council of Oriental rejected an across
the board appplication of a set of rules,
choosing to rely on districting to indicate
dissimilarity among neighborhoods and the need
for different regulations in each district.
On the second point, the Oriental Ordinance
adopts many traditional concepts (such as minimum
lot size and set back requirements) but attempts
to tie their application to some functional or
performance base (see Section 601.2 on setbacks
and 601.3 on heights.)
The Oriental Ordinance uses intensity as the
basis for districts rather than simply density as
do many traditional ordinances. (See Section 503
for standards discussion and Section 300 for
establishment of intensity districts).
Thus, there are simple applications of performance standards (that do not
require• quantitative analysis, are frequently inexpensive and do not require
special data systems or staff (Brower, et al, p. 130).
The Oriental Ordinance uses a range of standards
to accommodate this simpler approach, striving
for the "quantitative standards" where feasible,
and otherwise relying on "subjective standards."
Performance zoning challenges the planner and the administrator to first
determine much more precisely what the community should be and then to
develop an actual ordinance to implement that concept.
See Section D below for methodologies for
collecting data and establishing regulations on
natural and man—made systems.
4

The concept of performance brings flexibility to zoning. Performance.
Standards are concise, measurable, and objective criteria which identify
acceptable levels of nuisances or permitted side —effects from development
(Wickerson). Coupled with zoning, performance standards can be used to
regulate the effects of development activities on the environment, open
space, traffic, appearance, infrastructure, public facilities, budget, and
degree of lot coverage. For example, Bay City, Oregon, retains districting
in the form of three "development intensity zones," but regulation is based
on permitted impacts, rather than a list of permitted uses. (Pease).
The Oriental Ordinance found it more acceptable
to use a generic "permissible uses list" (Section
501) to complement the use of standards. The
advantage of the list is that it keys the
developer to zones; it shows what types of
permits are required; and it groups uses in
general impact categories. Uses are
"permissible" only to extent that their impacts
meet the performance standards of their zone.
Performance zoning techniques allow any one of a variety of considerations to
govern the use of the land -- depending on the site and how it is designed.
Section 503.6 shows the composite of several
performance standards. Any one site may be more
or less restricted by one of the indicators with
the most strict governing.'
Performance zoning influences many of the characteristics of growth in much
the same way as conventional zoning, in that standards for a particular area
can be developed to favor some types of development over others (Browner,
pages 131 and 132).
The flexibility of performance zoning can contribute to more efficient land
use, better integration of commercial, industrial, and residential uses, and
provide incentive for better development and more creative design. At the
same time land —use conflicts can be reduced and undesirable impacts
controlled.
W

b. Selected Weaknesses.
Performance zoning cannot substitute for the real protection of sensitive
environmental areas. It is only a means for determining specific levels at
which such areas should be protected and a regulatory format for using that
information.
Similarly, it cannot remove intuitive and informed judgement from zoning
decisions.
The quantitative information obtained in measuring carrying capacity is at
least, one more source of information upon which to base regulations. At
most, it become adopted as the dominant factor in zoning decisions.
The Oriental Ordinance provides several caveats
which call upon the informed judgement of the
Zoning Administrator, the Board of Adjustment and
the Town Council (see Section 501 for table of
permissible uses and Section 503.1.D Flexibility
in Administration (of performance standards)
authorized.
Performance zoning will not automatically include "qualitative" assessments
in addition to "quantitative" evaluation. Noting that every site is unique
and that different development plans, even at the same density, have varied
impacts on the land, the North Connecticut Regional Planning Authority states
that "it is unclear that performance zoning systems include mechanisms
capable of recognizing this variation" (page A-3).
The Oriental Ordinance recognized this variation
explicitly with two creative techniques; one is
found in Section 503.6, in which the minimum lot
size is smaller than what would normally be
calculated by dividing the density (such as 6
units per acre) into 43,560 sq. ft. In other
words, a traditional ordinance with a density of
6 units per acre would equate to 7260 sq. ft.
minimum lot size. The Oriental Ordinance zone
with a density of 6 (the MMU zone) has a smaller
minimum lot size requirement of 6000 sq. ft.
Thus, the developer is provided the opportunity
to cluster to one side of his site on 36,000 sq.
ft., leaving up to 7560 sq. ft. for open space.
Or he can use dispersed lots, as long as none
falls below 6000 sq. ft.
The second creative way in which the Oriental
Ordinance overcomes this criticism is found in
Section 503.7 which provides a formula for
calculating an intensity (or density) transfer
from portions of the site with poor soils (Class
II and III) to the portion with good soils (Class
I). This calculation is based upon the use of an
overlay district (Section 407 and 408.3) which,
by definition, addresses the variation of natural
systems (in this case, soils) within a site.
6

Like others, if the performance zoning ordinance is not designed to be easy
to work with, it can be costly and time consuming for public officials and
developers alike. Generally, in order to obtain a permit a developer must go
through review by a number of local agencies besides the planning department;
often the legislative body is directly involved in the final decisions on
each case. This review process requires time and expertise on the part of
the developer, the municipal planners, and the elected officials.
The Oriental Ordinance is admittedly large and
will take some time getting used to. However, it
has been designed well within the grasp of the
local administrator and the Council. All
performance zoning applications rely on outside
technical assistance, more at the beginning than
later. Oriental has already committed funds in
its next budget and applied for a match grant for
study assistance.
The political viability performance zoning would seem to be questionable if
performance standards are applied to an entire jurisdiction due to the
resultant uncertainty as to whether a use will be allowed. (Brower, et al,
page 130).
This is why only two zones in the Oriental
Ordinance (the Light -Intensity Mixed Use (LMU)
and the Medium Intensity Mixed Use (MMU)
Districts) rely purely upon performance
standards. Other Districts are predetermined,
stipulating types of uses permissible. Also,
this is why the convention of a "permissible use
list" (Section 501) was added, grouping uses
according to likely impacts and narrowing the
field to which performance standards are to be'
applied, whatever the zone.)
Like any new application of a new concept, problems might result from
distrust or lack of faith in the ability to set standards objectively and
accurately, due to a lack of understanding of the methods and criteria. As
Thurow, Toner and Duncan articulate, the critical factor in determining the
feasibility (and thereby the acceptability) of performance standards ... is the
technological feasibility of getting precise numerical measurements on the
process (page 97).
In both the Oriental and Bucks County cases, "it is critical that the open
space ratios, densities, impervious surface ratios and minimum housing
standards do not conflict."
7

2. Opportunities and Obstacles Other Coastal Towns Face When they Choose to
Use Performance Zoning.
a. Opportunities.
When used as an overlay to conventional zoning, performance standard zoning
generally places additional restrictions on the development options of a
particular site and further protects the natural environment. (Brower, page
131).
Also, by setting standards on other side effects
such as glare (shadow and vibration, see Oriental
Ordinance, Section 601.3), and vibration,
performance zoning gives the community a way to
control these undesirable qualities of
development which cannot generally be controlled
by conventional zoning (Brower, page 131).
Performance controls do present an ecologically acceptable compromise between
full scale development of sensitive lands and banning of development on these
lands altogether (see Section 503.7).
Under performance controls it is up to the developer to prove that his
project is compatible with the natural processes before the project is
approved (Brower, Carraway and Pollard, page 129).
Performance zoning is legal. In Bucks County, Pennsylvania, no community
that has adopted the entire performance zoning package has been challenged by
a developer. Because performance standards are objective they may be more
legally defensible than arbitrary use categories under conventional zoning.
They substitute the requirement for objective findings of fact for the
subjective, or discretionary judgements that may characterize traditional
zoning hearings.
The Oriental Performance Zoning Ordinance can be adapted to your community.
Depending on the community's philosophy, some municipalities may calculate
the permitted number of dwelling units on the basis of the entire site (as if
100% of the site was appropriately developable) and others can apply the
permitted density to the buildable portion of the site after land has been
set aside for resource protection (Frank, p. 22).
The Oriental Ordinance uses a method of weighting
the portions of a site which are developable to
different extents (see 503.7), thereby creating a
solution more politically feasible for coastal
North Carolina than the Bucks County approach
offers.
As noted in Frank's article (page 22), "The particular protection standards
(will) vary from town to town. We have found that both the standards and the
mechanics of the system are easily adapted to the characteristics, needs, and
planning philosophy of widely different communities."
a

Performance zoning will be comparable to conventional zoning and subdivision
regulations in ease of administration DEPENDING ON HOW MANY OF THE
REGULATIONS IN YOUR ORDINANCE ARE PERFORMANCE ORIENTED, WHETHER THOSE
REGULATIONS ARE THEMSELVES COMPLEX OR SIMPLE, THE FAMILIARITY OF YOUR TOWN
STAFF/COUNCIL WITH ZONING. In the Bucks County application, not one
community has a full—time planner or engineer on its staff. Instead, the
towns hire consulting engineers to do technical analysis during development
review.
The Oriental Ordinance goes to great lengths to
minimize the type of site capacity calculation
that the Bucks County Ordinance uses. Uses are
matched with zones which base intensity levels on
simple percentage of acre calculations (see
503.6) and only in the case of the overlay
districts (particularly soils (Section 407) are
there based site area calculations. Thus, the
information needed is much the same under the
Oriental method of performance zoning as under a
conventional system (which often uses performance
type controls for industrial areas).
Franks makes the following assertion about the Bucks County Ordinance whicb.
we think is true of the Oriental Model: "Any planner, engineer, or landscape
architect can handle this system. In fact, some experienced lay planning
commissioners can go through the calculations faster than professionals who
are unfamiliar with the system (page 23).
9

b. Obstacles.
Legal issues center around the vagueness of standards, reasonableness of the
restrictions on development, and the uniformity of their application. Not
unlike other zoning techniques, due process, the taking issue, and equal
protection would be the major challenges (Brower, p. 131).
For North Carolina, the power to zone -by use of performance standards is not
explicitly granted by state zoning enabling legislation, and there are not
court cases dealing with the technique. It may be argued that performance
standards, if rationally devised and consistently applied, could qualify as a
comprehensive plan, and zoning in conformance to those standards could be
upheld under the broad grant of zoning power for the public health, safety
and welfare (Brower, et al, page 130).
It is important to remember that although environmental performance standards
offer many benefits to regulating sensitive environmental areas, they are
still in the early stages of development. In many cases, the difficulty of
establishing precise measures for land functions has hampered their
development. Nevertheless, as Thurow, et al repeatedly emphasize, the need
for scientific studies cannot be overemphasized.
One major lesson in the Oriental experience was
that the state of the art of scientific analysis
of the environment is still developing. EPA and
State governments are still struggling with the
reliablity and validity of measures of environ-
mental quality and the costs and utility of doing
so. Regulations at both levels are based on the
best of the experts judgement (after passing
through the acceptability of a legislature). For
locality to spend thousands of dollars for
scientific studies may be beyond the savings
accrued the community by using performance
zoning.
After ranking priority natural systems and
man-made systems for Oriental, the consultants
interviewed experts at the Division of Environ-
mental Management to determine the extent to
which special (additional) environmental studies
must be undertaken in order to develop
regulations.
After learning the point at which state and
federal regulations stop short of detailed
studies, and with consideration of the
Jurisdictional questions of enforcement, etc.,
the decision was made to reference state and
federal regulations rather than refine them (see
Section 400 for use thereof in the Overlay
Districts).
10

Other communities may he advised to pick the most
severe (or most constraining) natural system
(such as soils) and do detailed studies if need
be. The bottom line however, is to base whatever
regulations you call "performance oriented" on
some level of scientifc analysis.
"Technical viability depends on the comprehensiveness with which standards
are applied and whether or not the entire jurisdiction is subject to them.
Performance of certain processes may be measured readily, while techniques to
measure others are still crude." (Brower, et al, page 130).
The Oriental Ordinance applies performance
standards comprehensively through the overlay
technique and only on a few selected priority
issues (groundwater, soils, etc.). This makes
their use more manageable. Efforts were taken to
propose such measures only in cases where the
information upon which to regulate is available,
measurable, or already published by the state,
etc.
Wickersham cautions against planners writing performance standards
that read a list of 'buzz words.' The application of such standards is left
completely to the discretion of the decision makers, or even to staff;
understandably, the results of the process are unpredictable." Instead,
. the developer should he told what result, or impact, the community
wants and then asked how he will achieve what the community wants and then
asked how he will achieve that result. The clear statement of the
community's goals gives the developer the direction he needs to be
successful. (See Section 500).
Often the acceptability of a new technique such as performance zoning dwells
upon the ordinance itself, upon its methods, and the specifics of its
administratability. With insight, an article in Planning magazine,
reflects upon another set of variables — the users (the planners and hence
the town councilmen and administrators and developers) -- which determine the
extent to which it will he applied in coastal N.C.
First, performance zoning represents a truly major change and the average
citizen usually opposes a change in land use, whether the projected switch
takes the form of a landfill or a simple reduction in lots size. Second,
local attorneys often fear new techniques. Third, communities are hesitant
to undertake a major ordinance overhaul. Most places are unlikely to revise
their codes twice within a decade unless they face a crisls or have reason to
start over under new mandatory state legislation. Fourth, many communities
are reluctant to undertake the required detailed understanding of the
community's planning objectives as well as substantial research to translate
those objectives into ordinance language (Kendig, Planning, 1982, p. 24).
11

Use of the Oriental Ordinance by Oriental itself
overcomes several of these user problems because
the town has never found purely traditional
zoning acceptable and is looking for a workable
alternative; it did a land use plan with the
intentions of following it with performance
standards, and pushed for clear statement of
community land use objectives so that they could
he translated into ordinance language; and the
Town Council has been willing to experiment with
new concepts in the design of the ordinance and
is willing to devote funds and time to improving
the administrability of the ordinance.
With all its strength, weaknesses, opportunities, and obstacles, performance
zoning cannot he everything to all towns. The great strength of performance
zoning is that it challenges the planner (and administrator) to first
determine much more precisely what the community should be and then to
develop an actual ordinance — not merely an ad hoc zoning review process to implement that conception (Kengi, p. 3, 24).
One obstacle which is not unique to performance zoning but nonetheless
significant, is the lack of adequate base mapping in many smaller
communities. (Base maps typically come in three types: Base A is simply a
map of street right-of-way lines, railroads, water courses, lakes and civil
division lines; Base B is Base A with property and easement lines added; and
Base C is Base B with structures added).
Fortunately, in Oriental, Base A had been
prepared at a scale of 1"=400' during the
preparation of the CAMA Land Use Plan. This
was constructed from scratch using aerial photos
and early street maps the county and town had.
The Washington, N.C. office of NRCD prepared the
initial Base A, with Planning and Design
Associates, P.A. providing information collected
from the Town. PDA later revised Base A as
needed during the plotting of land use, land
classification, and zoning data to produce
appropriate scales and readibility.
Plotting data on a large scale, however, is
expensive. Thus, Base A was reduced to 1"=800',
the data plotted, and then reduced to 1"=1200'
for incorporation into the document. This scale
was used for the overlay districts and for the
underlying districts. A larger scale map (the
official map) of the underlying district was
prepared at 1"=400' for the Town Hall.
12

In preparation of the official map, the scale was
photographically matched to the scale of the
aerial photos the tax office uses to record
parcel information. This makes it much easier to
plot parcels accurately and to establish the
district boundaries based upon actual property
lines.
13

Exhibit Cl
Bibliography
1) Brower, David J., Candace Carraway, Thomas Pollard, Developing a Growth
Management System for Rural Coastal Communities, Center for Urban and
Regional Studies, UNC-CH, Chapel Hill, N.C. December, 1981.
2) Frank, Micbael J., "Performance Zoning: How It's Doing in the Place
Where it Began," in Planning, APA, Chicago, ILL, Vol. 48, No. 11
December, 1982, pages 21-23.
3) Kendig, Lane with Susan Connor, Cranston Byrd, and Judy Heyman,
Performance Zoning, Planners Press, APA, Chicago ILL, 1980.
4) Kendig, Lane, "The Bucks County Technique is Slowly Catching On," in
Planning, APA, Chicago, ILL, Vol, 38, No. 11, December, 1982, page 24.
5) Pease, James R., "Performance Zoning Comes to Oregon," Planning, Aug.
1980; James R. Pease, "Performance Zoning: An Option for a Small
Oregon City," Community Growth Management, Corvallis: Oregon State
University Extension Service, March 1979.
6) Northwestern Connecticut Regional Planning Agency, Using Soils
Information in Zoning, March, 1981.
7) Thurow, Cbarles, William Toner, and Duncan Erley, Performance Control for
Sensitive Lands, A practical Guide for Local Administrators, Planning
Advisory Service, Report Nos. 207, 308, Washington, D.C., 1975.
8) Wickersham, Jr., Kirk, "An Alternative to Zoning: Permit Systems Based
on Impact," in Alternatives to Zoning, The Breckenridge Development
Code," Urban Land (January 1979); Kirk Wickersham, "Breckenridge
Colorado: An Experiment in Regulatory Simplification," in Thirteen
Perspectives on Regulatory Simplification, Annette Kolis, ed., 1979;
Kirk Wickersham, "Reform of Discretionary Land Use Decision -making:
Point Systems and Beyond," Zoning and Planning (July -August 1978).
Lane Kendig, "Performance Zoning: An Update on Euclid," Planning,
Nov. 1977; John Stockham, Performance Standards. . . a Technique for
Controlling Land Use, Corvallis: Oregon State University Extension
Service, November, 1974.

Planning Practice
Performance
Zonin,g By Michael J. Frank
Exhibit C2
How it's doing in the place where it began
Performance zoning was born of
necessity. The concept was developed
by the Bucks County Planning Com-
missionstaff in the early 1970s as a way
to protect certain natural features and,
at the same time, accommodate housing
growth. The staff, under the supervi-
sion of Lane Kendig (then director of the
community planning section) came up
with a method of protecting natural
features on a site -by -site basis while per-
mitting more flexible standards for
residential zoning. (Kendig and his
associates have developed the system
further in Lake County, Illinois, where
he serves as planning director. The
details were explained in Performance
Zoning, published by APA in 1980;
hardcover 539.95; APA members and
PAS subscribers, 537.95.)
Bucks County proved to be a good
area in which to test the developing per-
formance zoning system. The county is
physically, socially, and politically
diverse. The southwestern portion, ad-
jacent to the city of Philadelphia, is on
a flat part of the coastal plain. The cen-
tral area is characterized by the rolling
landscape of the piedmont, and the up-
per portion is steep and heavily wooded
in some places.
The 620-square-mile county is equal-
ly diverse in its development pattern
and population characteristics. Lower
Bucks County is urban in character,
with large industrial plants, regional
shopping malls, and the 17,000 homes
of Levittown. The central part of the
county is suburban, and the upper part
predominantly rural. Both working
farms and country estates are scattered
throughout the central and upper por-
tions. The total 1980 population was
479,211, with density ranging from 150
to 7,000 people per square mile.
The county planning commission
first published a report on performance
zoning in 1973. Since then, 26 of its 54
communities have included the perfor-
mance zoning approach in their or-
dinances in one form or another. The
fact that the 26 communities range from
rural to suburban to urban indicates
that the technique is adaptable to dif-
ferent situations. The county en-
courages the performance approach
through the planning commission staff,
which serves as consultant to the local
governments (there are no unincor-
porated areas).
After nine years of experience with
the technique, a number of comments
can be made as to how performance
zoning has worked in Bucks County.
(See "Performance zoning: An update
on Euclid," November 1977.]
The basics
In brief, performance zoning permits
a full range of housing types in all zon-
ing districts rather than relying on rigid
lot size, setback, and housing type
regulations. Intensity of development is
controlled by standards that set max-
imum density and impervious surface
coverage and minimum open space.
Planning and zoning systems in most
other communities rely on an intuitive
approach to protecting natural
resources. That is, environmentally sen-
Bucks County Environmental
Protection Standards
Percent of
development
Type of area
allowed
Floodplains and alluvial soils
Ogo
Lakes and ponds
0
Wetlands, swamps, bogs
0
Natural retention areas
10
Steep slopes-25% or greater
15
Steep slopes-15-25%
30
Steep slopes-8-15%
40
Forests
20-40
Pond and lakeshore areas
20-30
Prime agricultural soils
—Class 1
5
—Class 11
15
—Class 111
20
—Class IV
40
sitive areas and prime farmland are
designated for large -lot, single-family
zoning, with more intensive uses per-
mitted only in areas with relatively few
constraints. Since no area is entirely free
of environmental constraints, housing
is still built on floodplains, and prime
farmland is divided into large chunks.
Properties large enough for efficient
farming are lost.
Setting limits
Under performance zoning, the
amount of intrusion allowed on any site
is limited by the site's specific mix of
natural features. No filling or encroach-
ment is permitted on floodplains or
alluvial soils or in streams, lakes,
ponds, wetlands, swamps, or bogs. In
Bucks County, flooding is a particularly
serious problem, so it is important to
maintain the natural drainage systems
in suburban and rural communities that
don't have municipal storm sewers.
In addition to the floodplains and
alluvial areas, parts of the county are
characterized by broad, flat, natural
retention areas, which do not drain
because of the soil conditions and
topography. Altering these areas to im-
prove drainage for development would
direct water onto public roads or
neighboring properties. The county's
solution was to require that 90 percent
of every site lying within a natural
retention area be kept in open space. .
Limits were also set for other natural
features (see table on this page). On
the basis of the environmental stan-
dards, each site that is considered for
development is assessed and a portion
of it designated as undevelopable.
Clustering
Sometimes, large areas of a site must
be set aside to meet the environmental
protection standards. Clustering hous-
ing on the unrestricted portion of the
site is a way of dealing with a second
major concern in Bucks County —the
shortage of housing.
December 1982 21

i ;j /T!Iii 3
Ipw Lj! j j I
• ! N
Site plan 1. The before view
Site plan 2. Tract size: 25.51 acres; open
space: 69 percent; total units: 17.
How it worked in one township
These four site plans are for
developments in Buckingham
Township, a 33-square-mile urban
fringe area with a population of 8,839.
During the 1970s, the number of hous-
ing units there grew 77 percent —from
1,609 to 2,849.
Site plan 1 could be called the before
picture. It shows a subdivision that
already had gone through the ap-
proval process when this community
was working on a performance zoning
ordinance. The old ordinance required
a one -acre minimum lot size for single-
family detached houses in this par-
ticular zoning district.
Because the soils on this site are
mostly unacceptable for on -site septic
systems, the builder was required to
construct a community septic system
in an appropriate location —an open
Under performance zoning, a full
range of housing types —from single-
family houses to . apartment
buildings —is permitted on the buildable
portion of a site. In order to achieve
allowable density, the builder often
chooses compact, attached, or closely
spaced dwellings. Allowing clustering
and a variety of housing types has en-
couraged a broader range of housing
prices. Clustering also permits the effi-
cient use of small and irregularly shaped
sites, and, in the long run, helps
minimize road and utility costs for the
developer and maintenance costs for the
community.
Clustering also addresses the sensitive
issue of landowner equity. Enacting a
zoning ordinance with only the en-
vironmental protection standards could
mean that land is taken out of develop-
ment without dealing with the overall
value of the property. Under our
system, using clustering, the intensity of
development that would have been ac-
ceptable on the entire site under conven-
area between the wooded spot and the
lots shown at the top of the
illustration.
With a community septic system,
sewage is collected from individual
residences and delivered to a large
tank or series of smaller tanks, where
it is aerated and transferred into a
large, subsurface tile field. In this
development, two pumps were
needed —one in the area of the cul-de-
sac and another near the main road —
to lift the sewage to the tank and
distribution field at the high point of
the site.
Coincidentally, the performance
zoning ordinance was adopted before
site work began, and the builder
decided to go through the approval
process again. Under performance
zoning, he could build on the same
tional zoning is now permitted on the
unrestricted portion. Therefore, the
same number of units can be built.
Although the weak economic climate
has depressed residential development
in Bucks County, as elsewhere, a
number of interesting developments
have been built under performance zon-
ing. (See the site plans above.)
Q&A
After nearly a decade of experience
with this system, we have fielded
numerous questions about it:
Is it legal?
In Bucks County, no community that
has adopted the entire performance
zoning package has been challenged by
a developer. However, one municipal-
ity was challenged because its ordinance
required that land be set aside under the
environmental protection standards but
permitted no clustering on the buildable
portions of developable sites. Rather
than go to court, the community
Site plan 3. Tract size: 50.40 acres; open
space: 93 percent; total units: 12.
number of lots as before, but —as
shown in site plan 2—they were about
a quarter -acre in size.
In addition, the builder needed on-
ly one pump for his sewage system.
Road specifications were reduced
from the previously required 50-foot
rights -of -way with 30-foot cartways
to 20-foot cartways without curbs. For
a number of years, the homeowners
association rented a portion of the
open space on this site to a local
farmer.
The development shown in site plan
3 is a cluster of single-family houses.
It has the same types of sewage, road,
and stormwater systems as number
two. Eighty percent of the site was set
aside in open space that was subdi-
vided, deed -restricted to farm use, and
put on the market.
This open space was snatched up by
a plant nursery —not exactly what
dropped the environmental protection
standards and returned to a more tradi-
tional system.
Can it be adapted?
The model ordinance recommended
by the Bucks County Planning Com-
mission is extremely flexible. It includes
a step-by-step calculation of the capac-
ity of the site based on its mix of en-
vironmental features. Some com-
munities require the calculations and
performance standards for all develop-
ments in all zoning districts. Others re-
quire them only for planned residential
developments or in high -intensity zon-
ing districts.
Depending on the community's phi-
losophy, some places calculate the per-
mitted number of dwelling units on the
basis of the entire site; others apply the
permitted density to the buildable por-
tion of the site after land has been set
aside for resource protection.
The particular protection standards
vary from town to town. We have
22 Planning

Site plan 4. Tract size: 11.91 acres;
open space: 82 percent; total units: 34.
town officials had in mind when they
specified farm use, but still meeting the
definition in the ordinance and the
covenant restrictions.
Site plan 4 shows a development of
townhouses on a sloping site located
in the zoning district with the highest
density in the township. Regulations
for the district require a minimum of
30 percent open space, but —because
of the topography and the forest land
on the site-82 percent open space was
required here. As in the other
developments, no public sewage
system was needed.
It should be noted that this
township is taking affirmative steps to
maintain its groundwater resources.
The use of on -site community septic
systems, along with the resource pro-
tection standards and the open space
requirements, helps to replenish the
groundwater taken for domestic use.
found that both the standards and the
mechanics of the system are easily
adapted to the characteristics, needs,
and planning philosophy of widely dif-
ferent communities.
Is it too complex?
Performance zoning is not hard to ad-
minister. Not one community in Bucks
County has a full-time planner or
engineer on its staff. Instead, the towns
hire consulting engineers to do technical
analysis during development review.
The information they need is the
same under performance zoning as
under a conventional system.
Floodplains, slopes, forested areas, and
other landscape features must be
mapped and measured. The measured
areas then are plugged into the site
capacity calculation to determine the
permitted number of dwelling units (or
floor area ratio for nonresidential uses),
the required open space, and the
allowable impervious surface coverage.
Any planner, engineer, or landscape
architect can handle this system. In fact,
some experienced lay planning commis-
sioners can go through the calculations
faster than professionals who are un-
familiar with the system.
Will costs go up?
The only extra costs that occur dur-
ing development review are those for
site capacity calculations. Planners and
consulting engineers report that the
calculations take no more than one hour
to complete. Thus, the extra cost is in
the range of $20 to $40.
More critical is the possibility that
housing costs will go up because part of
each site has been set aside. The answer
is that land has not been taken out of
development; development merely is
rearranged on the site.
Site plans 2 and 3 are good examples
of how both moderately priced and ex-
pensive housing can be built under the
same performance standards. These
developments are located in similar
areas of the community. They share the
same road, sewage, and stormwater
systems, and the houses within them
began selling at about the same time.
The houses shown in site plan 2 are
small, modestly equipped houses on
quarter -acre lots. Their base price was
$49,900. The houses shown in site plan
3 are large and handsomely appointed;
they were built on half -acre lots at
a base price of $130,000. Here, the
developer chose to build fewer houses
on larger lots in order to sell to a
wealthier clientele. Performance
zoning did not affect the price of the
houses.
Who maintains the open space?
Open space can be cared for in many
ways. The residents can own the land
jointly. It can be dedicated to a local
agency or conservancy group, or a deed
restriction can require that it be sold
for agricultural purposes.
Depending on the land, the open
space can be used for recreation or
farming or as a buffer. Some
homeowners associations fund a com-
munity trust to make sure that the open
space is professionally maintained.
Maintenance costs are affected by what
is provided (swimming pools versus
lawns) and the layout of the open space.
What about infrastructure?
As indicated by the three develop-
ments described above, clustered
houses and even attached housing can
be served by on -site septic systems in
most areas. In these developments, the
tile fields that were part of the septic
systems were located on the most ap-
propriate soils.
What about design quality?
Performance zoning does not ensure
that development's will be attractive. It
has only two aims: protecting features
of the land that are affected by develop-
ment and increasing housing oppor-
tunities. Appearance still depends on
the builder and the designer.
Are the numbers important?
It is critical that the open space ratios,
densities, impervious surface ratios,
and minimum housing standards do not
conflict. Any good designer can devise
a workable set of standards.
Failing that, use Kendig's Perfor-
mance Zoning or the publications from
Bucks County. Its 1973 report, Perfor-
mance Zoning, is available for $6. (Its
logo opens this story.) Performance
Zoning: Technical Appendix is $10.50,
and Performance Streets: A Concept
and Model Standards for Residential
Streets is $8.50. (All from Bucks County
Planning Commission, 22-28 S. Main
St., Doylestown, PA 18901.)
How about unpopular dwelling
types?
In places where it is impossible to
convince anyone that perfectly nice
people live in townhouses and apart-
ments, the fallback position is to allow
a cluster of single-family detached
houses on very small lots.
We also suggest that mobile and
modular homes be treated like any
other form of residential development
and governed by comparable density,
open space, and impervious surface
standards. This approach has calmed
outraged residents in a number of
communities.
The upshot
Performance zoning is thriving in
Bucks County. The community plan-
nirg staff is working with other
municipalities that are interested in
adopting performance standards. Like
their predecessors, these communities
will find that performance zoning —as
well as traditional zoning —can change
with the times.
Michael Frank is the director of community planning
for the Bucks County Planning.Commission.
December 1982 23

The Bucks County technique
is slowly catching on a.Lane �ndi,
Many communities are using perfor-
mance zoning, but I will describe only
those that I know have stayed close to
the concept as developed in Bucks
County and outlined in Performance
Zoning. Besides Bucks County's 26
communities, other places that are
moving forward with the system in-
clude: Kettering, Ohio; Largo, Florida;
San Antonio, Texas; North Chicago,
Illinois; and Lake County, Illinois.
Officials in Largo, Florida (pop.
52,556), expect to adopt an ordinance
by the end of this year. They have made
substantial modifications to deal with
a subtropical environment and city
rather than suburban problems.
Most notable is the fact that Largo's
zoning ordinance is subject to the
Florida requirement that zoning deci-
sions be consistent with a community's
comprehensive plan. In Largo, the or-
dinance defers locational decisions to
the plan but uses performance stan-
dards to govern design.
A performance zoning ordinance also
is in the works in Kettering, Ohio (pop.
61,222), an almost fully developed
suburb of Dayton. Like Largo, Ketter-
ing has made substantial adaptations to
deal with the problems of an older,
close -in suburb.
The development and redevelopment
of properties along major arterials and
the problems of infill development are
critical issues in Kettering. Thus the city
has sought to simplify the performance
concept while keeping its flexibility.
San Antonio, Texas (pop. 798,195),
is proposing to set up a performance
district that is generally residential. All
housing types are allowed at a density
of eight dwelling units per acre, and up
to 15 percent of the land can be devoted
to nonresidential uses. The ordinance
establishing this district was developed
cooperatively by the city planning com-
mission and the Greater San Antonio
Builders Association; it is expected to be
adopted this winter.
A draft ordinance under considera-
tion in North Chicago, Illinois (pop.
41,436), would make extensive use of
buffer yards, that is, strips of landscap-
ing between incompatible uses. Most of
the buffer yards in this industrial suburb
would be located in infill or redevelop-
ment areas. This project appears to be
on hold until after next spring's local
elections.
Lake County, Illinois (unincor-
porated population about 90,000), has
adapted performance zoning to apply to
existing districts and has instituted en-
vironmental controls. In addition, the
county has tested suburban perfor-
mance standards in planned unit
developments along a development cor-
ridor containing a 36-inch sewer line
and two four -lane highways.
Constraints within the
profession make it difficult to
change our local zoning
systems.
The adoption of a new county com-
prehensive plan last July has cleared the
way for a complete revision of existing
zoning ordinances. Thus, performance
zoning may find even wider application
in this county.
If performance zoning is an improve-
ment on the conventional way of doing
things —as I believe it to be —then why
have so few communities tried it? The
answer is that constraints within the
profession and elsewhere make it dif-
ficult to implement profound changes in
our local zoning systems.
Consider the concept of clustering,
which is inherent to performance zon-
ing. Clustering dates back to the Rad-
burn, New Jersey, plan of the 1920s.
Planners, landscape architects, ar-
chitects, and developers all have
vigorously supported the idea, yet
clustering is still the exception rather
than the rule.
More important, performance zoning
represents a truly major change, and the
average citizen usually opposes a
change in land use, whether the pro-
jected switch takes the form of a land-
fill or a simple reduction in lot size.
In addition, while most leading land -
use attorneys would strongly support
major changes in conventional zoning,
local attorneys often fear new tech-
niques. The initial reaction of municipal
attorneys in Bucks County was
negative.
Most of them said performance zon-
ing was illegal. One attorney had the
courage to acknowledge that the con-
cept, while untested, appeared to have
as good a chance of surviving litigation
as the existing scheme.
As it turned out, he was proven cor-
rect. Many communities in Bucks
County decided to adopt performance
zoning in part because they had been in
court numerous times to defend the ex-
clusionary nature of their conventional
zoning ordinances. Lake County has
brought in outside legal experts to avoid
this risk of uninformed advice.
Another retarding factor is the infre-
quency with which communities under-
take a major ordinance overhaul. Most
places are unlikely to revise their codes
twice within a decade unless they face
a crisis or have reason to start over,as
they might in the case of new state
legislation, for example.
Above all, however, the planning
agency must be willing to undertake a
controversial program if it seeks to im-
plement performance zoning. I know of
several communities where planning
directors have stifled moves toward this
form of zoning to avoid being caught up
in disputes.
They also may have felt that perfor-
mance zoning is antiplanning. Yet look
at the goals of the communities that
have developed performance or-
dinances. Largo, Florida, turned to per-
formance zoning in part because state
law made its conventional zoning ob-
solete. Kettering, Ohio, found that per-
formance zoning required a detailed
understanding of the community's plan-
ning objectives as well as substantial
research to translate those objectives
into ordinance language.
But that is the great strength of per-
formance zoning. It challenges the plan-
ner first to determine much more
precisely what the community should
be and then to develop an actual
ordinance —not merely an ad hoc zon-
ing review process —to implement that
conception.
Lune Kendig is the planning director of Lake County.
Illinois. and coauthor. with Susan Copmor. Cranston
Byrd. and Judy Heyman. of Performance Zoning.
24 Planning

COMMUNITY
Performance
Zoning
An Option For A Small Oregon City
Most citizens are concerned with the "livability"
of their community. As Oregon's population con-
tinues to grow at a pace well beyond the national
average, local officials and concerned citizens are
looking for ways to cope with rapid change. Land
use regulations, especially zoning, are important
tools to gain some control over the effects of change
and growth.
Communities apply zoning regulations to re-
duce conflicts between land uses, protect property
values, and promote desirable community charac-
teristics. A traditional zoning ordinance divides the
community into various zones, such as single-
family residential, multi -family residential, com-
mcreial, and industrial. Each zone establishes rules
and procedures for any development that occurs
within the zone.
Performance zoning, a variation of traditional
zoning, uses performance standards to regulate
development. Performance standards are zoning
controls that regulate the effects or impacts of an
activity on the surrounding neighborhood, instead
of separating uses into various zones. In other
words, single-family residential, multi -family resi-
dential, stores, and offices may be permitted in the
same neighborhood, if certain standards of per-
formance are met. The standards are designed to
regulate traffic, visual impact, noise, lights, or
other emissions, overall density, water run-off, and
other environmental concerns.
Performance zoning may take a number of
forms. It may consist of a simple set of rules that
Exhibit C3
apply across the board in the community.' (Num-
bers refer to source citations at the end of this
circular.) Second, performance standards may be
used in a traditional zoning ordinance to regulate
certain kinds of uses, such as industry or con-
ditional uses.' A third approach is to establish two
or three intensity zones, based on the neighbor-
hood characteristics of a community. Each zone
may permit various uses, but the standards would
vary between zones to promote the desirable
character of the neighborhood.'
This third approach is utilized in Bay City, Ore-
gon, a small, rural community of 1,000 persons
located on Tillamook Bay on the northern Oregon
coast. In some ways, Bay City is reminiscent of a
European or New England village, with its com-
pact village center, sloping hillsides with views
over the bay, and the picturesque mixture of early
20th-century homes and small farms.
Bay City is also a community on the verge of
I "discovered." Land sales, building permits,
and subdivision activity are at record levels. In
1978, the city received two subdivision requests
totaling 70 lots; the last previous subdivision was
in 1972. In response to this recent growth pres-
sure, the city council and planning commission
asked the local council of governments planning
staff and the Oregon State University Extension
Service, through its land resource management
program, for assistance. The city wanted to de-
velop a plan and a land -use ordinance that would
maintain the traditional mixture of uses, respect
the environment of the area, and attempt to lessen
the negative effects of new development rather
than restrict the type of development. The steep
slopes of the unbuilt portions of the city made
Prepared by James R. Pease, Land Resource Man-
agement Specialist, OSU Extension Service, and 'Mike
Ntorgan, senior planner, Clatsop-Tillamook Intergovern-
mental Council, Cannon Beach, Oregon.
Oregon State University Extension Service

2
protection of views said control of storm run-off
important.
Because of the city's small size, local officials
were concerned with administrative simplicity.
In the words of Jim Richards, the city council
president, "We needed an ordinance that could
pretty much be administered by the planning
commission itself rather than a professional plan-
ner. Alo, we wanted to combine the zoning and
subdivision ordinances and streamline the ap-
plication process, to provide a one -stop permit
process at the local level. We think that encour-
aging developers to do a good job, through the
clustering of homes, through common open space,
and other techniques, will benefit everybody."
The development ordinance divides the city
into three intensity zones: High Intensity, Mod-
erate Intensity, and Low Intensity. These zones
are based on physical characteristics, the existing
land use pattern, and the presence of public
facilities such as sewer and water lines and streets.
INTENSITY ZONES
C3SHOREIANDS
Q I.Ow
Q MODERATE
HIGH
The new zones generally conform to the previous
zoning categories of commercial, residential, and
rural residential —but the important difference is
that the intensity zones are aimed at controlling
the intensity of development and its impact on
the neighborhood, regardless of the type of de-
velopment. Several performance standards in each
'zone are designed to accomplish this purpose.
The standards cover density, lot coverage, com-
mon open space, setbacks, traffic, buffers and
screens, noise and other emissions, water nun -off
and erosion, and hazards such as flooding or
landslides.
Each zone is assigned a density for residential
development and a lot coverage figure, in place
of a minimum lot size for each dwelling unit. This
approach permits the developer to place build-
ings in any site design that meets the density, lot
coverage, and other standards. The design can
include clustering, mobile homes, planned unit
development, a mixture of single families and
multi -families, or even business or commercial
uses. A subdivision application submitted to the
planning commission shortly after the ordinance
was adopted requested that duplexes be permitted
on all lots over a certain size. Since the overall
density of the development was within the density
standard of the zone, the request was allowed
under the ordinance. The developer may build
duplexes on the individual lots, or sell the lots and
the buyer can retain that option.
Another developer was startled to learn from
the planning commission that a six -unit apart-
ment complex would be permitted as readily as
six individual homes on a 1-acre parcel in the
Medium Intensity Zone. However, other parts
of the site would need to be designated as open
space. The city council and planning commission
felt that this approach would implement the goal'of
preserving open space and the character of the
community, and achieve other purposes such as
lower housing costs, more efficient use of public
facilities, and a diverse community.
The lot coverage standard regulates the
amount of area of the lot or parcel that can be
covered by buildings, driveways, or other im-
pervious (paved) surfaces. The standard regu-
lates building intensity, thereby controlling site
disturbance as well as influencing neighborhood
character. In the High -Intensity Zone, lot cover-
age is higher for commercial structures (75 per-
cent) than for residential uses (50 percent). The
difference in the standard encourages commercial
uses in this zone, and insures that multi -family
and other housing developments provide a reason-
able amount of open area. The High -Intensity
Zones are the relativelv level downtown- and
highway -oriented areas of the city, with a storm
drainage system in place and access to major
streets. No geologic or flood hazards are present
in this zone.

3
In the Moderate -Intensity Zone, lot coverage
for all uses is limited to 40 percent. This standard
would permit a builder to cover 2,000 square
feet of a 5,000-square-foot lot with buildings,
driveways, patios, and decks. Under the previous
zoning code, the builder was required to remain
within a 20-foot front yard setback, a 15-foot rear
yard setback, and 5-foot setbacks on either side.
On a 5,000-square-foot lot, the previous code per-
mitted lot coverage of more than 50 percent ex-
cluding the driveway and other impervious sur=
faces. While lot coverage is reduced by approxi-
mately 10 percent on standard residential build-
ing lots in the new code, developers can build up
to the lot lines with planning commission ap-
proval. City officials felt that this coverage was
generous, considering the amount of steep slopes
and lack of storm sewers in most of the city. By
building two stories, a builder could still con-
struct a dwelling or other structure larger than
2,500 square feet on a 5,000-square-foot lot.
The larger the parcel of land, of course, the
larger the building could be. A small farm on two
or three acres of land or a small manufacturing
firm on several acres would have no trouble
locating all their structures within these limits.
With proper buffers and screening, the impact
on adjacent property would be minimized.
MODERATE
INTENSITY
ZONE
RESIDENTIAL
STRUCTURE
MAX. LOT
COVERAGE-40%
In the Low -Intensity Zone, lot coverage for all
uses is limited to 10 percent. This area, which
contains several farms and forested hillsides, is
intended to be maintained in its present character
until the growth of the community requires ad-
ditional land for development. Most of the parcels
in this area are more than 1 acre in size. As the
need develops, the ordinance provides for zone
changes if certain conditions arc met.
Common open space is required for all sub-
divisions of more than six units. For example,
the Medium -intensity zone requires 15 percent
of the site to be available to residents of the
subdivision as common open space.
The use of buffers and screens is an important
part of the ordinance. Buffers are defined as
horizontal distances between certain uses in-
tended to maintain existing vegetation, block
noise and glare, or maintain privacy. A screen is
defined as a vertical barrier in a limited space
designed to reduce visual or noise impacts.
Because the ordinance permits non-residential
uses in residential neighborhoods, buffers and
screens provide necessary protection between
adjacent uses. For eample, to protect a subdivision
or a mink ranch from the visual impact, noise, or
lights of a small factory or commercial use,
standards were adopted to require that a buffer,
a screen, or both be constructed between the uses,
and that the use be located on a major street.
The more potentially incompatible the adjacent
uses, the larger or wider the buffer or screen re-
quired. Although certain size buffers were in-
cluded in the ordinance, the planning commis-
sion was empowered to vary their size depending
on the situation.
Buffers may be required between new sub-
divisions and major streets, between subdivisions
and less intensive uses such as schools, farms, or
parks, or between new subdivisions and more in-
tensive uses such as factories or commercial ac-
tivities. The obligation to provide the buffers is
that of the most recent developer. For example
a new factory may be required to provide a 50-
foot buffer or more on its property and demon-
strat;; that the buffer is sufficient to reduce unde-
sirable effects on an adjacent housing area. A
screen may be required in addition to a buffer.
If the factory were adjacent to other high -
intensity uses, such as a commercial or industrial
activity, the buffering and screening requirements
could be waived.

4
RESIDENTIAL FROM MAJOR STREETS
SCREENING OPTIONS
FENCING
HEDGES
BERMI
RESIDENTIAL FROM LOW INTENSITY USES
In the design of new subdivisions, buffers are
a means of satisfying the requirement to provide
common open space within the development. By
spacing lot lines 25 or 50 feet from an adjacent
arterial, and by providing a single access road,
subdividers can create a more secluded develop-
ment and enhance the marketability of the road-
side houses or lots. The community benefits by
the maintenance of green or open areas along
major streets.
Buffers are required adjacent to streams and
Tillamook Bay for all uses that do not require
RESIDENTIAL FROM HIGH INTENSITY USES
EXISTING
TREES
water access. This standard varies depending on
the size of the stream or the type of use or stream -
bank, but is not less than 25 feet, and is intended
to protect riparian ( waterfront) vegetation, to
enhance wildlife habitat, and to provide scenic
corridors. Stream or bay buffers can, of course,
be used as part of the common open -space re-
quirement, and can provide the community with
valuable recreation areas, such as a trail system.
For example, a recent subdivision deeded to the
city, as its open -space requirement, approximately
5 acres adjacent to a stream and a city park.

5
MEDIUM INTENSITY ZONE
DENSITY RANGE:
4 UNITS/ACRE OUTRIGHT
6 UNITS/ACRE WITH BONUS POINTS
SIX DUPLEXES = 12 UNITS
(2 ACRE SITE)
BONUS POINTS
2 POINTS - RECREATIONAL
FACILITIES
2 POINTS - MINIMAL SITE
DISTURBANCE
4 POINTS TOTAL
= 2 ADD. UNITS/ACRE •
A hazard overlay zone is used to apply ad-
ditional precautions in areas subject to flooding
or landslides. The overlay zone cuts across the
three basic intensity zones and may reduce per-
mitted densities or require certain development
practices in order to reduce the risk of damage to
property or life.
Road access is regulated to reduce traffic con-
gestion, noise, and safety hazards. Certain ac-
tivities that generate high traffic are restricted
to sites that have adequate access to arterial roads.
While it is possible to regulate traffic through a
sophisticated set of traffic generation standards,'
the Bay City approach simply relates expected
traffic generation to the capacity of the access
road.
Finally, the Bay City ordinance provides an
incentive system for encouraging certain desir-
able development characteristics through a Bonus
Density System. Each intensity zone has a per-
mitted density range. For example, in the
Medium -Intensity Zone the density range is four
to six dwelling units per acre. This means that
a density of four units per acre is permitted out-
right. A developer can gain two more dwelling
units by including certain design characteristics
in his development: additional common space,
minimal site disturbance, provision of major
recreational facilities, architectural design merit,
or energy efficient construction. Each of these
factors is assigned a number of points on a quality
point scale. For example, providing recreational
facilities can contribute from one to two points.
Any combination of points can be used. Each set
of two points provides a "bonus" of one dwelling
unit up to the maximum density for that zone.
This quality -point system is another application
of the performance -zoning concept.
In summary, the performance -zoning ordinance
of Bay City is intended to meet the needs and
goals of a small community, while providing it
with the tools necessary to deal with increasing
change and growth. As a recent book on small
Performance
Zoning=
CONTROL OF
THE IMPACTS OF
DEVELOPMENT.
�c ENCOURAGEMENT
OF FLEXIBLE SITE
DESIGN. .

6
towns put it, "As the decentralization of American
business continues, more and more people will
be released from urban populations to find their
way into smaller communities . . . Times are
changing ... Small towns across the country are
beginning to feel the pressure . .. Since small
towns lack the resources or trained people to cope
effectively with large-scale pressures from outside,
they must either succumb or invent their own
defenses."
Performance zoning is a tool that can be used
in combination with others to manage growth.
Although there are many ways to apply per-
formance zoning, the central idea is to regulate
development by controlling its impact on its
neighbors, while encouraging flexibility of site
design. Since each community has its own
character and development problems, the use of
pe-rormance zoning by a city, county, or small
town would need to be designed carefully to fit
that particular character and needs.
The Oregon State University Extension Service
has collected research papers and ordinances on
performance zoning for several years. Information
is available from the Extension Land Resource
Management Specialist. Department of Geog-
raphy, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon
97331 or your county Extension office.
Citations
1. Lynch, Kevin. "Performance Zoning, The Small Town
of Gay Head, Massachusetts Tries It." Planners Note-
book, October, 1.973, and Philip B. Herr and Associ-
ates. Franklin County, Massachusetts: Performance
Zoning 11. Franklin County Planning Department,
Greenfield, Massachusetts, 1972.
?. American Society of Planning Officials. Industrial Zon-
ing Standards. Planning Advisory Service Information
Report No. 78, 1313 E. Sixtieth, Chicago, Illinois
60637, 1955.
3. Bucks County Planning Commission. Performance Zon-
ing. Doylestown, Pennsylvania, October, 1973, and
Pierce County Planning Department. Development
Regulations for the Gig Harbor Peninsula. Tacoma,
Washington, 1975.
4. Kaminsky, Jacob. Environmental Characteristics Plan-
ning: An Alternative Approach to Physical Planning.
Regional Planning Council, 701 St. Paul Street, Balti-
more, Marvland 21202, 1972.
5. Robertson, James and Carolyn. The Small Towns
Book: Show Me The Way to Go Home. Doubleday/
Anchor Press, New York, 1978.
Partial support for this circular was provided
through the allocation to the State of Oregon under .
Title V of the Rural Development Act of 1972.
•
EXTENSION DPROJECT
OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY
Extension Circular 963
OREOON STATE UNIVERSITY
EXTENSION
F-1 SERVICE
March 1979
Extension Service, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Henry A. Wadsworth, director. Produced and
distributed In furtherance of the Acts of Congress of May 8 and June 30, 1914. Extension work is a
cooperative program of Oregon State University, the U. S. Department of Agriculture, and Oregon
counties. Extension Invites participation in its programs and offers them equally to all people.

D. Selected Methodologies for Preparing Your Own Performance Zoning
Ordinance (or Incorporating Select Performance Standards into Your
Current Ordinance).
The following (Exhibit D1 and its own attachments) presents a methodology for
preparation of performance standards and other performance zoning, elements
used in the preparation of the Oriental Ordinance. It provides an outline of
seven steps which you may wish to consider in your decision to adopt
performance zoning techniques into your existing ordinance.
Those steps are:
1. System Identification and Inventory
2. Function Identification
3. Prioritization of Systems
4. System Analysis
5. Standards Development
6. Establishment of Zones (Districts)
7. Application of Standards to Districts
This material, as reviewed, with the Oriental Planning Board, is presented as
a procedural guide. Steps should be tailored to suit the need of your
community and its planning process.
14

Exhibit D1
OUTLINE OF METHODS
One of the first steps in development of the performance zoning ordinance is
establishment of the performance standards. Dennis O'Harrow, a pioneer in
the use of performance standards in planning, has suggested the following
description of what a performance standards should be:
The ideal performance zoning standards will
substitute a quantitative measurement of an
effect for a qualitative description of that
effect that we have used in the past. It will
not use the terms "limited," "substantial,"
"objectionable," "offensive." Instead, it will
establish definite measurements with standardized
instruments to determine whether the effects of a
particular use are within predetermined limits,
and therefore permissible in any particular zone.
The following is a step-by-step process which will guide a local jurisdiction
in their effort to develop a performance zoning ordinance. For clarity,
examples are provided throughout for the two principle environments, natural
and man-made. It is also recommended that background reading be conducted
prior to initiation of this planning process.
STEP 1. SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION AND INVENTORY:
The purpose of Step 1 is to identify and locate on a series of map overlays,
those natural and man-made systems which are present within the respective
planning area. Articulated on Exhibits D2a and D2b are a list of natural and
man-made systems from which the jurisdiction can select as appropriate.
Additionally, systems unique to the area not included on the exhibit should
be added to the list.
The local land use plan and background studies should provide the local
jurisdiction with the information necessary to identify these systems and
plot their location on overlay maps. Information relative to slope, soils,
waterways, and existing land use, plus the local knowledge of town officials
and representatives from the soil conservation service, U.S. Forest Service,
etc., should be sufficient for system identification.
STEP 2. FUNCTION IDENTIFICATION:
The next step is to identify and list the functions being performed within
each system applicable to the local area. Each system performs a number of
functions; as an example, vegetation functions to maintain.soil stability and
water quality, moderate temperature, improve channel stabilization, reduce
force winds, break rain force, reduce air pollution, help abate noise,
provide recreation and animal food and habitat, and more.
15

From lists of functions by system, a local jurisdiction must identify which
functions each system is serving within the area. If, for example, the
jurisdiction has few, if any,. slopes, then they would not list soil stability
as one of the functions being performed by the system of vegetation. Other
functions, however, such as channel stability (where waterways exist) and
noise abatement (where trees are planted along arterials) etc., would be
applicable.
It may be necessary in this step to articulate sub —systems; for example, a
transportation system has systems of streets, rail, air, water, and pipes.
One would then look at the sub —system such as streets and identify the
various functions that they serve such.as open space, movement of traffic,
easement for utilities, etc.
STEP 3. PRIORITIZATION OF SYSTEMS:
This step serves two purposes. One, it serves to exclude from further study,
those systems or functions of systems deemed unimportant to the community
(e.g., lands preseved for agricultural use or privacy as a function of
setbacks). Two, due to the time and cost requirements, a community can focus
its planning efforts on those issues identified as critical, and hence, save
issues of lesser priority for later study.
This step involves a simple process of prioritizing all the identified
systems and functions completed under Steps 1 and 2 above. This can be
accomplished through whatever means either town hall meetings, surveys, etc.
(e.g. a group identifies the most important issue, the least important issue,
the second most important issue, the second least important issue, etc.).
STEP 4. SYSTEM ANALYSIS:
This is the most technical step of the process and consequently will require
considerable literature research and assistance from experts knowledgeable of
the various systems.
The analysis of each system must be directed toward answering the following
questions relative to the measurement of the system's performance;
1. What is the system's present level of use?
2. What is the system's ultimate carrying capacity?
3. What is the remaining capacity of the system?
The capacity of roadways within the transportation system serves as a good
example for our analysis. Streets classified as a minor collector are
normally designed to accommodate a maximum daily traffic volume of about 3200
vehicles (depending upon the roadway width). Together with traffic counts
and (standard) average trrip generation rates by land u3e type (e.g.
single—family, multi —family, commercial, etc.), one can identify the
collector capacity, the existing load on that system and the remaining
capacity when compared to accepted standards. (See Exhibit D3 for conceptual
outline).
Ic

STEP 5. STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT
The purpose of this step in the process is to develop standards designed to
protect the specific functions that are important. The jurisdiction must:
Develop goals and guidelines for each system and sub -system;
Develop subjective standards; and '
Develop the performance standards.
See Exhibit D4 for example of this hierarchy of standards.
See also Exhibit D5 which discusses many aspects of developing standards that
were fundamental to the Oriental effort. Most significant is the third
paragraph on page 97(of Exhibit D5), which differentiates between industrial -type
performance standards and environmental performance standards.
STEP 6. THE ESTABLISHMENT ZONES (DISTRICTS)
Once all performance standards are developed, they are to be incorporated
into an ordinance format. At this step, the jurisdiction may wish to address
directly the issue of whether zones are to be used, what type of zones, and
what other elements inside each zone besides performance standards are
desirable (such as specification standards, incentives, bonuses, etc.).
Exhibit D6 is a preliminary worksheet of how the decision on types of zones
evolved in Oriental. Note that it presents two basic types of zones —
"predetermined (such as low intensity residential) and "non -predetermined"
(which we came to call "mixed", which permit a broad mix of use as long as
performance (intensity) levels are similar.
Given that most communities in Coastal North Carolina have traditional zoning
ordinances with "control zones" based upon types of use and density (R30,
B121, etc.), each community may wish to consider a "performance overlay"
technique. This essentially converts the inventory overlays complied in
Step I above into regulation overlays, as explained in the following
example from Columbus Ohio (Babcock and Banta, page 3), See Exhibit D7 for
"Notes on Overlay Districts."
STEP 7. APPLICATION OF STANDARDS TO DISTRICTS
Next, is the application of performance standards to districts. Exhibit D8
present a methodology which was used to determine density standards in the
Oriental Zoning Ordinance. Standards for Floor Area Ratio, Impervious
Surface Ratio and Open Space Ratio were determined in similar manner.
(Please See Section 500 of the Oriental Ordinance for the results of this
analysis, especially the table in Section 503.2 and 503.6).
17

CONCLUSION
It is hoped that the concepts and methodology presented above will serve as a
base for further discussion - a point from wbich to rethink and elaborate.
Although the concept of "performance standards" was developed many years ago,
to date it has not focused adequately on the (man-made) urban environment.
This effort is directed toward developing a performance zoning ordinance
applicable to both natural and man-made systems.
18

Exhibit D2a
SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION
1. Hydrology
Service water: streams, creeks, lakes, ponds, oceans, wetlands, shore—
lines, drainage ways, and aquacultural areas such as fish farms.
Groundwater: Acquifer (acquifer recharge areas), water supply, and
water quality.
2. Soils and Topography
3. Mineral Content
4. Agricultural Areas (prime, important, otherwise productive)
5. Dunes
6. Vegetation
Marshes, wetlands, forest and woodlands, grasses
Other
7. Atmosphere and Climate
Hurricanes
Air Pollution (quality)
8. Other: wildlife habitats
19

SYSTEMS IDENTIFICATION
Man -Made Systems
1. Community Facilities and Services
a. Transportation/Circulation
b. Surface drainage
c. Water supply
d. Sewage disposal
e. Solid waste disposal
f. Electrical, telepbone and gas utilities
g. Open space and parks (scenic views and sites)
b. Scbools
2. Design Elements
a. Building setback/orientation
b. Landscaping, buffering and screening
c. Exterior lighting
d. Signs and Graphics
e. Visual character (height, bulk)
3. Special (Pre -determined)
a. e.g. historic district
b. e.g. estate residential
c. e.g. man-made hazard areas
Exhibit D2b
20

Exhibit D3
MEASURING SYSTEMS PERFORMANCE
From the literature search, interviews of experts, and assessment of
available technical studies, you must decide what special studies, must yet
be undertaken (if any) to measure the priority systems you have selected. It
is from these that levels of performance (function) can be identified,
quantified, standards established, and regulations promulgated.
To assist in this effort, we found it helpful to construct an outline
exemplified below stating the system, the priority function, quantitative
measures of that function, indicators which would be used to interpret the
measure, and the study which would take the measure and produce the
indicators. For example, applying this grid to the system of hydrology
produces the following:
system: Hydrology
subsystem: Groundwater
measure sought: type of aquifer
amount of recharge required
indicator: depth to water table
present yield per day
run—off recharge ratio
study required: high water table location
location of highly porous soils
max. boundary of primary aquifer recharge area
extent of salt water intrusion
ability of aquifer to replenish self etc.
This outline is best compiled through discussion with state and other
officials knowledgeable in the scientific aspects of the system which the
town wants to regulate. During this interviewing, direction can be gained
about the advisability of undertaking special studies or relying upon the
information upon which the state or federal government has based standards.
Invariably the issues of cost, administratability, and jurisdiction for
enforcement are issues that you will encounter during this research.
21

Exhibit D4
HIERARCHY OF STANDARDS
As an example, the system "hydrology", would likely have a goals as follows:
Goal: Avoid loss of property and personal injury due to severe stream
bank erosion.
This type of goal is traditionally found in the land use plan followed by a
set of policy statements to carry out the goal. These policies are usually
carried out in the zoning ordinance through a set of subjective statements
such as:
Subjective: Structures should be located far enough from protenially
eroding stream banks to avoid future property loss and risk of injury.
This kind of statement is quite common and relates to performance but fails
to be specific enough to administer without making discretionary judgements.
Most zoning ordinances go the next step and develop specifications sucb as
use desginations, setback requirements, density restrictions, etc.
Specficiations standards fall short of performance standards because they
refer to site design rather than to performance or effect. As an example,
using the potential eroding bank sitatuion noted above, one would anticipate
the following typical specification:
Specification: No structure shall be permitted within 100 feet of
any stream with a maximum flow over feet.
As noted above, it is the author's recommendation that the specifcation
standards be considered only after consideration of performance standards (if
the performance standard cannot be developed due to cost or state of the art,
or if it is administratively more desirable, then a specification standard
may be more appropriate).
The following is an example of performance standard relative to the bank
erosion:
Performance: In areas subject to severe stream bank erosion (see
Hazards Map) adequate setbacks must be provided for by considering the
rate of erosion together with the anticipated life of any structures. If
50 ft. is considered an adequate setback, then to obtain the difference
from the stream and structure should be placed one foot or the annual
increment of erosion, whichever is greater, for each year of anticipated
life of destruction. This total increment is added to 50 to obtain the
total setback distance.
22

Source: Performance Controls for Sensitive Lands
Exhibit D5
A Practical Guide for Local Administrators,
Charles Thurow, William Toner and Duncan Erley,
Planning Advisory Service,Report #307,308,
Washington, D.C., July 1977.
Chapter 1. Environmental
Performance Standards
THE NATURE AND CHARACTER OF ENVIRON-
MENTAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The work of translating what is known about the inter-
relationships of land use and environmental protection
into land control programs has concentrated on traditional
specification standards, whereby the desired pattern of
activities is determined by specifying locations and
development standards through zoning, subdivison
controls, building codes, and other devices. Specification
standards indicate what one can or cannot do based on the
li
existence of a feature or a com oration of features. For
example, since the integr y o a p sin must be main-
tained to protect lives and to store excess water, no
development should be allowed there. The object of
specification standards is to control man-made features,
ra er an to protect environmenta nctions or
processes.
e use of specification standards to make development
more compatible with environmental features has been
worthwhile; however, if experience with other regulatory
systems is any guide, there are inherent advantages in
moving away from specification standards towar per-
iormance sta s. Building codes that mandate what
Ra—tenal is to be used for a wall restrict innovation.
However, a building code using performance standards
will indicate how the wall should perform, in terms of fire
resistance and other factors. In short, the specification
code tends to stifle technologica r ess while the er-
ormAnr,e co a ten s to encourage it. A performance code
e iminates t e need or t e a ters of the code to know
about and test all available materials and processes.
Instead, the proponents of the new material or process
must prove that it does perform as required. _E=fgrjnance
standards are concerned with results and not w'
of matena
Early zoning ordinances were land must remain) strictly
specification standards. They consisted of long "use" lists
and maps which specified, for instance, that a steel mill
was a heavy industry and an electronics assembly plant is
a light one, and that each had to go into an appropriate
zone. This kind of ordinance required the drafters to list all
types of present and (if possible) future uses, and then
decide which ones were heavy and which ones were light.
Needless to say the task was difficult and frequently
resulted in arbitrary decisions.
In the 1950s ASPO developed a concept of Indus ' 1
performance standards tor zoning ordinances. -The perfor-
mance criteria were in terms of such measurable outputs
as air pollution, noise, vibration, and glare. Thus, a steel
mill that for some reason "performed" as a clean, quiet
industry would be permitted near residential uses
(ignoring for the moment other criteria such as traffic
generation). On the other hand, an electronics assembly
plant that, for some reason, generated air pollution above
a specified level would be segregated from incompatible
uses.
The history of zoning and land regulations has been one
in which there has been a slow but steady movement
toward replacinespecification codes with
ner
codes. Such techniques as planned unit development,
floating zones, special use permits, market east i it
studie�' s, and industria per ormance stan ards have all
been attempts to regulate a particular use or activity on
the asis of its performance._ The history of environ-
mentally oriented land -use regulations has essentially
followed the same pattern as building codes and industrial
zoning.
The goal of environmentally oriented land -use
regulations, such as those discussed in this report, is to
maintain or preserve natural processes as land undergoes
change for man's use. Under traditional Euclidian zoning,
this goal is implemented by listing land uses that. are likely
to have heavy impact on natural processes such as runoff,
infiltration, or erosion, and those uses which are likely to
have less impact. Then the natural resource functions of
the land are protected by zoning environmentally sensitive
areas for those particular uses which will have the least
impact. In practice, this approach has essentially
identified buildable and unbuildable land. Environ-
mentally sensitive areas are zoned for those uses that do
not require extensive construction, such as agriculture,
recreation, and conservation uses, while less sensitive
95

areas provide land for residential, commercial, and
industrial uses. Where building is permitted, it is
regulated by specifying requirements for drainage tiles,
culverts, or retaining structures.
Sipecifying land uses is, however, on a crude im le•
mentation o e goa o protecting natural processes. It
may not ac ieve its goal for several reasons:
(1) The permitted uses are not necessarily compatible
with the natural processes to be protected. Agriculture
and recreation uses can have tremendous impact on
natural resources if developed in the wrong way.
(2) The segregation of uses may keep some potentially
damaging uses away from critical resources, but it also
unnecessarily restricts the use of the land, reducing the
supply of residential, commercial, and industrial land.
These uses are often compatible if developed in the right
way.
(3) The segregation of uses assumes that the buildable
and the unbuildable land are separate systems, and that
the adjacent residential or industrial zones will not affect
the area being protected. This is not necessarily so. The
effects of development on erosion, runoff, and
groundwater recharge can cause damage to all areas in the
watershed.
In attempting to refine land controls so that they more
accurately implement the goal of preserving natural
processes, communities have shifted the emphasis from
the particular uses of the land to the way the land
functions or performs. As this report notes, they have
identified the functions of the land which provide
important public benefits and have designed their
regulations to protect these functions.
The development of performance controls for land use
has taken lace principally on a second level of zoning. The
communities aye in acne t e traditional Euclidian
zoning with a designation of permitted and prohibited
uses, but have then added another level of regulation
through special use provisions. Through these provisions,
a landowner may use his land for uses other than those
specified in the ordinance if he meets specific environ-
ments per ormance criteria. These criteria generally
e ineate the key functions that the community wishes to
preserve, such as the water retention capabilities of
wetlands. The landowner is allowed to develop the land
anyway he wishes if he can show that it will not adversely
affect these natural processes.
This system of providing for special uses that satisfy
performance criteria moves land controls closer to
achieving the goal of preserving and maintaining natural
processes, while allowing the land to be changed for man's
use. Specifically, it overcomes the second weakness of
traditional Euclidian zoning by not unduly restricting the
use of the land and thereby unnecessarily reducing the
supply of residential, commercial, and industrial land. It
does not, however, answer the other two problems. The
list of permitted uses does not have to meet the same
performance criteria as the special uses, and it still does
not regulate the effects of adjacent uses on critical natural
functions.
To remove these additional problems in implementing
the goal of protecting the natural process, it is necessary
to move to direct environmental performance standard
96
regulation. To develop this system. of r Qnlarion a rnm-
mun� entities the natural proc esseQ dw are closejy
associated with public health, safety, and welfare al2d that
provt e t e community important benefits ignored by thp
rivate market. Specifically, these are processes such as
ru o rdsion, and �g'ibun-dwateY`infiltratio which are
c ose y t o maintatntng pu lit water supplies, pre-
venting hazards fro floo and ug , and. preserving
M?tT9uatit3>in lakes and rive .The community then
establishes a specific (preferably numerical) level at which
the natural process should operate, and any development
of the land must be done in such a way that the natural
process continues to function at this level. In contrast to a
specification approach, this kind of regulation does not
require designating construction techniques or site
planning, but allows the developer to choose his own
system of guaranteeing that the natural processes
continue to operate.
(� hese Performance standards are simply applied to en-
v—ironmentally sensitive areas. such as wetland.-t-or-strPam
corn ors, then the regulation does not stipulate permitted
or prohibited uses. Leaving aside other considerations for
e moment, a andowner may use the land as he wants, as
long as it retains a minimum amount of water during
rains, releases the same quality and quantity of water into
adjacent water bodies, and recharges the groundwater at
approximately the same rate. With this direct
environmental performance regulation, all uses must meet
the same standards for preserving or maintaining natural
processes. The distinction between permitted uses and
special uses is removed.
More importantly, however such standards need Got
be tied to specific zones or districts. Since runoff, erosion,
nad infiltration are common to all land (although they
vary from site to site), the regulations can apply to all
d_evelo p m thin the 'unsdution. Thus, environmental
land controls are made distinct rom the questions of
districting or zoning and are administered as parallel or
supplementary regulations to the basic zoning controls
By separating out con- tro s or t ese natura processes. the
trial: pro em o t e uc inn a roac is so v e
contro s no longer epend on i entifying di eren tstricts
with different controls, but operate equally in all districts.
Using environmental performance standards as general
regulations for all development provides the most
important type of controls for resource management or
protection. As detailed in this report, all the
environmentally sensitive areas studied can benefit
substantially from controlling deve opmen a ec s that —
are essentially external to their Soundaries. art oche
inienl of providing special- districts fort ese areas is to
maintain water quality an reduce the problems of
increased runoff and siltation. These zones are important
for those purposes, but they can be substantially
augmented by minimizing these problems at the develop-
ment site.
Besides their particular importance to the protection of
environmentally sensitive areas, environmental perfor-
mance standards offer other advantages. Many of these
are similar to those for Performance standards in building
codes and in ustrial zoning:
(1) Environmental performance standards tend to

encourage inn v ti n to improve the compatibility of
eve opment with the natural functions of the land. This
exibilit is particularly important in the area of resource
protection, since there are a host of construction and site
design techniques which can be combined to make
development more sensitive to land functions. Allowing
the landowner to find the best techniques for his particular
site gives the community better protection of its resources
and the landowner a greater chance to maximize his own
benefits.
(2) Environmental performance standards eliminate the
need for the drafters of the code to know about and test all
available methods of development. The burden of proof is
shifted to the landowner, who may provide the necessary
technical evaluation from licensed engineers or
hydrologists to determine if the development will maintain
the natural functions at the specified levels.
(3) Environmental performance standards more ac-
curately separate uses that are compatible with the
natural systems from those that are no�_._7�f�a articular
site is unbuildable, it will be determined by t ee particular
character of that site an does not n to a pre eter-
mine�on a zonin map.
Environmental verformance standard regulations are
not, however, completely parallel to
standards for buildinz codes or industrial zon
cases, society Lis attem ting to create a perfo
from man's use of the land; in environmental
standards it is attempting to preserve or
it o nc of the land already there. As a consequence,
environmental performance s an ards have some
additional advantages not associated with general per -
The major advantage that these direct environmental
performance standard controls have is to disentangle one
thread of land controls —preserving natural functions or
processes —to handle them separately from the question of
the segregation of uses or traditional zoning. In the past
one objective of performance standard regulation has been
to increase the potential for multiple use of land. This is
especially true for industrial performance standards.
Regulating the location of industry by the way it performs
allows for greater flexibility in locating specific industries.
This may or may not be the case with environmental
performance standards. The protection of the natural
processes or functions of the land becomes independent of
the particular land use; all land must maintain these
functions. The question of where industry locates or what
areas are designated for residences is determined by other
criteria, such as the concentration or proximity of one use
to another, the costs of providing public services, the
effects of particular uses on traffic generation, and so on.
Environmental performance standards do not replace
standard zoning procedures; instead, they parallel or
supplement them by providing regulations maintaining
environmental systems. Their primary advantage is that
they remove one traditional element of the segregation of
uses so that those decisions can be made in terms of other
policy considerations independent of the uses' effect on
natural processes.
The same is true in terms of zoning for environmentally
sensitive areas. Many of these areas have land functions
that cannot b_ esggatifis d, so that it is impossible to
e e op re fable performance standards for these
functions. Consequently, the performance standard re-
gulations offer an important supplement to these other
land controls and do not represent an alternative to them.
Finally, the environmental performance standards
greatly improve the equity of environmental controls.
Often our attempts to provide a stable supply of clean
water have focused on requiring major pollutors to clean
up without requiring all land users to do the same. By
establishing environmental performance standards for the
major processes that affect a community, one sets up the
same standard for all land users, and each must share in
the process of protecting natural resources in proportion to
the problems he creates. Likewise, in the past, the solution
to the problem of increased runoff, erosion, and water
pollution focused on the critical points in the hydrological
cycle. Providing buffers around streams or requiring
limited use of land adjacent to wetlands was necessary
because they were seen as the prime way to reduce these
problems before they did serious damage to larger bodies
of water. These controls make sense, but, as much as
possible, the burden of controlling these problems should
rest with the landowner who initiates the problems and not
be shifted to the landowner who happens to own the
wetlands. Performance standards are a major step in
providing this equity in land controls since they move the
process of control back to the landowner who initiates the
changes.
DEVELOPING ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS
The critical factor in determining the feasibility of
performance standards for natural processes is the
tec no ogical feasibility of setting precise numeric mea-
surements on the nmrzss There has been su s antis
research into the definition of behavioral relationships of
these systems and the accumulation of data to support
these basic relationships. But there has been compara-
tively little effort directed toward extending L_ ' search
into the area of land -use controls. Th t��echni�nical resean: is
being conducted by specialists: soil scientists,een- zineering
geologists, hy-drologists, manne biologists, and forest
ecologists. Their concerns understandably tend to be
limited to the characteristics of the resource studied and
do not extend into the area of land controls. On the other
hand, few planners have attempted to establish the
necessary disciplinary crosswalk.
To evaluate what is necessary to establish performance
standard regulation, we have chosen two important
natural processes which seem the closest to being able to
be regulated through the performance standard approach.
They are .p p]Dnd ram A few attempts have already
been made to develop performance regulations for runoff.
A discussion of these ordinances give a clearer
understanding of possible methods of adapting perfor-
mance standard measures to a regulatory mechanism. For
erosion, there are no performance standard regulations at
present, but the Soil Conservation Sevice's Universal Soil
Loss Equation provides the necessary technical back-
ground to make regulation of these natural processes on
immediate possibility.
97

Exhibit D6
EXAMPLE OF DISTRICTING WORKSHEET
Preliminary Determination of Zones
Land r1. c_Q 192
Developed
Transition
Transition -Residential
Rural
Conservation
Zone
non -predetermined, medium intensity, mixed
use
pre -determined, medium density residential
water -based commercial
water dependent/based commercial/industrial
Medium density, residential, predetermined
Low -density mixed use, non -predetermined
Water -based commercial predetermined
Low density residential, pre -determined
General (or exclusive) Agriculture/forest
production
Rural area single family (non -production,
gentleman farmer)
(LAMA category, no zones districted or
mapped)
1Boulder Colorado uses three basic zoning districts: Established (areas
where the character of development is stable and few changes are anticipated
or encouraged; Developing - areas where most land is cbanging from vacant
or rural use to urban use and densities; Redeveloping - areas where many
buildings are likely to be rehabilitated or replaced and such action is to be
encouraged. (Regulatory Zones) are grouped in special sub -classes under each
of the basic heads (Babcock and Barts, p. 15). ...These allow for different
degrees and emphasis in land use control. Example of zones include: "med.
Density residential -established" and "multi -family residential -redeveloping."
20verlay zones would cross Boundaries, calling into play their provisions
as well, inclduing site plan review and design review. They may have the
power of modifying the underlying zoning selectively according to ad hoc
standards and a specific proposal. (If this requires the approval of city
council, it amounts to special use or floating zone techniques). May involve
Performance Mapping on the overlay with uses, bulk, and dimensions
controlled on the underlying "control" districts (zones).
23

Exhibit D7
NOTES ON OVERLAY DISTRICTS
The Overlay District mapping techniques used in Columbus, Ohio developed a
performance overlay concept permitting the department to map its floodplain
regulations from standards adopted by -the city council. It is not the
"flood —prone area" that is mapped, but the regulations (i.e., standards)
which relate to construction in those areas (given other factors) that.are
mapped. (Presumably, the mapped regulations look like a topo map, with
contour lines showing thresholds of level of performance required -- clearly
footnoted that this is a guide only, and that the text regs on the office
take precedence).
The idea in Columbus is not to rely on federal maps or especially commis—
sioned local survey, but to act on profiles of data and records of incidences
which are the "outer limits" of the protection needed. Columbus profiled the
highest recorded floods for the relevant rivers. (Using the 100—year flood
may be the imperative profile or limit however).
Thus, Columbus uses "overlay regulations," to show the geographic areas of
such regulations. Descriptive data standards are maintained in the zoning
office where indivdual applicants may determine the relationship of their
property to the system profile standards based on detailed information for
their.property which they must provide. This performance overlay approach
shifts the burden of generating the map to the applicant while ensuring the
identification of special qualifications needed to promote the welfare of the
comunity in sensitive areas.
It is likely that many towns and counties will have overlay maps encompassing
areas already zoned by use and density (such as in an R15 Zone). In these
cases, the overpay performance zones will also govern the uses in the R15
Zone, and will take precedence over the R15 provisions. The Performance
Overlays will likewise cross many other zones and will similarly, take
precedence over those zones.
As an example for a natural system performance overlay zone, say vegetation,
standards related to slope would apply in all areas of severe slope regard—
less of which "traditional zone" the slopes are in. For a man—made system,
the overlay may show a gradation of intensity zones (contours) which would
identify different levels of permitted noise based upon changes in neighbor—
hood character, etc. Thus, the overlay and accompanying text may state that
nosie shall not exceed 55 dba's in intensity zone A, 65 dba's in intensity
zone B, 80 dba's in intensity zone C, 65 ADT/acre in intensity zone B. etc.)
In communities where there is no "traditional zoning", the community may
elect to govern solely by performance overlays or may establish more
traditional zones and overlay performance overlays upon them.
24

METHODOLOGY FOR DETERNINING
LAND USE INTENSITY LEVELS
(MAN—MADE SYSTEMS)
I. DENSITY
Exhibit D8
Density is a measure of residential land use intensity which is expressed as
either the number of dwelling units per gross area or per net square feet.
The former is gross density; the latter, net density.
density g dwelling u`its)(d.u.)
(gross)
9#� ross acres (GA
Intensity is a measure of the extent to which land is used, which includes
factors like density, lot acreage, height, traffic generated, site design,
etc.
To identify appropriate intensity levels relative to density, the following
steps should be taken:
Step A. Buildable Land Inventory
1. Inventory all buildable vacant land by district.
2. Subtract unbuildable lands (e.g., lands in floodway, pro—
tected natural resource areas, reserved production areas,
etc.). To identify net buildable acres. AC.
3. Divide 10 year or 20 year projected population by the
average household size , times one plus the vacancy
rate to establish the 10 or 20 year projected housing demand.
4. Divide 10 or 20 year housing demand (i.e., # units) by the
total net buildable acres to identify the base density for
the urbanizing area.
5. Adjust densities by district as specified in the steps
below, making sure that the overall base density is not
exceeded.
Note: Most land use plans are based upon 10 or 20 year horizoning in which
communities typically over allocate lands for future development. If this
situation exists, the following step may not be necessary. However, if the
preservation of environmentaly sensitive and productive (agricultural,
forestry, and mining) areas is of value to the local community, amounts of
land set allocated as buildable for residential, commercial, and other
urbanized types of development, may be limited. In cases where buildable
(urbanizable) land is limited, communities may wish to undertake growth
management analysis. One such analysis is presented below.
1S

In order to counteract the extent to which zoning may artificially raise
prices (by limiting the amount of developable land) or to deminish the
tendency among some property owners to "hold out" for a higher price in
future years (again because of the lmited amount of developable land), the
following analysis may be desirable.
Add a 8% to 15% vacancy or "market factor" to the amount of developable land.
This will add competition in the community as developers will have ample
choice among lots and owners of lots for development opportunities.
Sensitivity analysis may be undertaken (varying the amount from 8% to 12% to
15%, say) to determine the intuitively appropriate level for your community.
Normally, it is assumed that before the 10 or 20 year horizon is reached,
additional lands will.have been allocated for urban development (in the plan
or through zoning changes) making the use of the vacancy or "market factor"
unnecessary. However, it is important to plan abead.
Step B. Market Analysis
1. Review existing reports, magazines, building permits, etc. at
a state, regional, county and local level to identify market
demand for your area by type and price of housing unit.
2. Examine income level characteristics of the existing local
population and the anticipated in -migration population and
their income levels.
3. Using a 25% or 30% factor of gross income, identify the month-
ly affordable rents/payments by income category.
4. Match the market demand ("1" above) with income analysis ("3"
and "4" above) to identify needed housing by type and price
range.
Note: This procedure will require a great deal of inituitive analysis as the
results will be only an estimate. It will, however, identify gaps in the
housing market. As an example, a need for low-income housing (e.g., mobile
homes or subsidized units) may be revealed in cases where all vacant lands in
the community are designated for large lot single family home development.
Step C. Analysis of Existing Densities.
Conduct a 10-20 percent (depending upon population size) random
sample of lots already developed or subdivided for development
within the planning area by district. This can be complied by
utilizing county subdivision maps.
Next calculate the range, mean and standard deviation of existing
densities. The analysis for the Oriental Planning Area follows:
26

Table E1
Town of Oriental
Existing Density Calculations
Low Intensity Residential District (LR)
20% random sample
Range 10,400 sq. ft. to 40,300 sq. ft.
Mean = 203,385 sq. ft.
Std. Deviation = 8,406
MH - 10,000 sq. ft./unit
68% of all lots are between 11,979 sq.
(less than an acre in size) or 84% of
than 11,979 sq. ft.
Medium Intensity Residential District (MR)
15% random sample
Range = 13,200 sq. ft. to 30,000 sq. ft.
ft. and 28,791 sq. ft.
all lots are greater
Mean - 21,558 sq. ft.
Std. Deviation = 4,873 sq. ft.
68% of all lots are between 16,685 sq. ft. and 26,431 sq. ft.
(less than an acre in size) or 84% of all lots are greater
than 16,685 sq. ft.
Low Intensity Mixed Use District (L-MU)
20% random sample
Range 4,050 sq. ft.
Mean = 17,057 sq. ft.
Std. Deviation - 89063
68% of all lots are
(less than an acre
than 8,994 sq. ft.
to 4
sq. ft.
between 8,994 sq. ft. and 21,120 sq. ft.
in size) or 84% of all lots are greater
Medium Intensity Mixed Use District (M-MU)
20% random sample
Range 4,400 sq. ft. to 22,100 sq. ft.
Mean 12,275 sq. ft.
Std. Deviation = 6,207 sq. ft.
68% of all lots (less than an acre in size) are between
6,068 sq. ft. and 18,482 sq. ft., or 84% of all lots are
greater than 6,068 sq. ft.
*77

Step D. Desired Densities
1. Using the above findings, establish, intuitively, a range of
alternative densities by district.
Example:
Medium Intensity Mixed Use District (M-MU) density alter-
natives for S.F. and M.F. units
a. 8 units per gross acre (UGA)
b. 12 (UGA)
c. 16 (UGA)
2. Photograph or conduct on -site visits (if possible) of residen-
tial developments either within the Town or neighboring areas
at the above density levels.
3. Make a selection of the desired density (utilizing various
group decision making processes). See Table E2 for applica-
tion to Oriental.
Table E2
Town of Oriental
Desired Density Alternatives
LR Density Alternatives
SF a) 12,000 sq. ft./unit or 3.6 u/na
b) 20,000 sq. ft./unit or 2.3 u/na
c) 30,000 sq. ft./unit or 1.5 u/na
d) MH parks (density - 101000 sq. ft./unit)
MF a) PUD
b) duplexes on corner lots only (same or more dense).
c) 15% multi -family, min. AC/project (same or more dense).
MR Density Alternatives
SF a) 10,000 sq. ft. or = 4 u/na
b) 15,000 sq. ft. or = 3 u/na
c) 20,000 sq. ft, or = 2 u/na
d) MH parks (density - 10,000 so. ft./unit)
MF a) PUD
b) duplexes (see (b) above)
c) same as above
no

L-MU Density Alternatives
SF a) 7,000 sq. ft.
b) 10,000 sq. ft.
c) 15,000 sq. ft.
d) MR narks (density = 7,000 sq. ft.)
MF a) PUD
b) 7,000 sq. ft./du or 6 u/na
c) 5,000 sq. ft./du or 8 u/na
d) 3,000 sq. ft./du or 14 u/na
e) Max. 4 unit cluster
f) Max. 8 unit cluster
M-MU Density Alternatives
SF
a)
b)
c)
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
b)
5,000 sq. ft.
7,000 sq. ft.
10,000 sq.ft.
PUD
5,000 sq. ft. or 8 u/na
3,000 sq. ft. or 14 u/na
2,500 sq. ft. or 12 u/na
graduated scale
Max. 4 unit cluster
Max. 8 unit cluster
Max. 12 unit cluster

II. HOW TO USE THIS DOCUMENT
A. What makes this document a "Performance Zoning Ordinance?"
In.this ordinance, you will notice that both subjective and specification
standards are used, that there is a table of permissible uses and setbacks
and other dimensional regulations, and there are zones which allow only one
primary use (like Low Intensity Residential (LR)). But there are also
several new performance features in this ordinance, some of which are
enumerated below.
1. This ordinance is based upon the impacts of uses upon each other and
upon the land (as well as districting and categorizing uses), rather
than simply the latter two considerations.
2. It makes use of published information about the environment in order
to establish "environmental performance standards" which interrelate
with regulations like those of traditional ordinances.
3. The table of permissible uses, while appearing traditional, has grouped
uses in terms of their anticipated impacts.
4. Mixed use districts are established for certain areas in which the
Town Council wishes to preserve the rich village mixture which Oriental
has, rather than segregated uses in those areas. This should minimize
the number of requests for zoning changes in those districts. On the
other hand, it uses districts which segregate residential (LR, MR) and
industrial (WRCI) from other uses in certain areas.
5. It establishes its districts upon "intensity of land use," which
considers the interaction of factors like density, amount of impervious
surface, and -open space, among others. Users are grouped and permit-
ted because of their similarity of performance on several indicators,
not just type.
6. It uses the concept of density transfer, in that it prorates density
to the net buildable portion of a site rather than penalizing a
developer for the unbuildable portion of that site. The latter would
simply eliminate the unbuildable portion from the calculation analysis
of permissible density.
7. It attempts to use traditional dimensional requirements (such as set
backs, minimum lot sizes, bulk and height restrictions) on an analysis
of the impacts of uses in terms of performance criteria.
8. Its design standards are set in performance terms.
9. It integrates several state and federal regulations related to erosion,
flood hazard, vista quality, etc. and attempts to use them system-
atically in regulating in a coordinated manner.
30

10. It uses a two -tiered approach, establishing a heirarchy of districts
(Overlay Districts and Underlying Districts) which highlight the
interrelationship between the natural systems and manmade uses in
zoning decisions.
11. It eliminates the need for the PUD provision, since it in essence makes
every zone a PUD if the developer can meet the performance standards
for that district.
12. It combines subdivision regulations with the zoning ordinance, rendering
the name "Land Use Ordinance."
31

B. What Will the Development of This Ordinance Achieve?
Hopefully, it will result in a more appropriate use of the land in the
Oriental planning area than could be achieved through traditional zoning, or
through no zoning at all. Hopefully, it will result in the application of
some of its performance concepts (or others stimulated by it) to other
coastal communities, thereby improving their regulatory capacity and
development patterns.
In the shortrun, this ordinance has provided the Office of Coastal Management
with an assessment of the applicability of performance zoning concepts to
coastal North Carolina, and has applied many of them first hand in one of its
communities.
Moreover, it has set forth many performance concepts which other towns can
now explore in their own right with available information. It has also
exposed the significant cost of undertaking detailed technical studies on
each natural and man—made system in a geographic area upon which the
usefulness and uniqueness of performance zoning rest.
The importance of the technical studies cannot be overstated. Use of
subjective regulations, specifications, and quantified performance —oriented
standards are equally artbitrary without the firm foundation of scientific
study upon which to establish them. Then, there's the limtation of science
itself to accurately measure the carrying capacity of a waterbody or the
depletion or contamination of an aquifer -- and similar information upon
which regulations can be promulgated with confidence.
Performance zoning is an expensive concept with a considerable administrative
challenge for the local community. Local communities may perhaps best use
this document by recognizing one or two techniques within which it could be
adopted to their situation and refining them to serve priority zoning needs
of their community.
With these points in mind, we now turn to the application of several
performance zoning concepts to the Town of Oriental, which until this time
has had no zoning ordinance or extraterritorial jurisdiction.
32

C. USER INSTRUCTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose of this section is to provide guidance to the person charged with
the administration ofthis ordinance. Needless to say, the circumstances
that may present themselves to the administrator are so varied that a
"Cookbook" approach cannot particularly be observed.
However, there is a logical way to proceed in working with this ordinance,
and the steps outlined below may help the administrator to develop a process
for evaluating development proposals. As familiarity with the ordinance
increases, the administrator will be able to short-circuit or combine several
of the steps in the evaluation process outlined below, but this offers a
useful place to begin.
The developer who walks into the administrator's office generally wants to
know two things: What can be done with a particular piece of land (i.,e.
what can be built upon it, at what density or intensity, and subject to what
environmental or design restrictions), and what sort of permission must be
obtained, and from whom, to develop the land. The outline below is broken
down into the steps necessary to answer each major question.
1. What Can I do With My Land?
Step 1. Underlying Zoning District. The developer usually has a
particular use in mind and seeks to determine whether that proposed use is
permissible on the land that he or she owns. (In many cases, the land•is not
yet owned by the developer, but for purposes of convenience, this section
refers to the developer as the owner). Occasionally, the developer has no
use in mind and simply wants to know how the property might be developed. In
either case, the first step is to identify the developer's land on the
Official Map of the Underlying Zoning Districts (Exhibit 308.1) to determine
its underlying zoning classification.
Step 2. Table of Perid.ssible Uses. Find the use classification from the
Table of Permissible Uses (Section 501) that most closely corresponds to the
proposed use and determine whether such use is permissible in the zoning
district where the developer's land is located. Most uses fall within use
categories 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000. If the developer simply wants to know
what is permissible on his or her land, check the column under the zoning
district that corresponds to the developer's property and note each use
classification that is permissible in that district. The developer should be
informed of course, that a use listed as permissible on this table is still
subject to other provisions, discussed below, which may make the use legally
or practically impossible on a particular lot.
Step 3. Overlay Zoning Districts.
Check each of the natural systems overlay district maps (Section 408) and the
regulations that correspond to each district to determine whether and to what
degree these regulations may limit the type of use, its location, permissible
densities, or design standards. (In many cases, reference must be made to
applicable regulations adopted under the Coastal Area Management Act). For
example, if the property is located within a wetlands and shoreline overlay
33

district, a seventy-five foot setback may apply (Section 405.4) and
residential buildings within flood plains must he elevated to or above the
base flood level (Section 406.4). Note particularly the impact of the soils
overlay district on residential density, especially if a proposed development
is to he served with septic tanks (Section 407.3).
Step 4. Density
Perhaps the most important concern for the property owner who wishes to
construct a residential development is bow many dwelling units can he
constructed on his or her property. (The analysis under Step 2 will already
have determined whether those dwelling units may or must be single family
homes, duplexes, multi -family residences, mobile homes, etc.) Of similar
concern to the potential developer of not -residential property is the amount
of floor space that may he constructed. Regulations governing these and
other measures affecting density — impervious surface ratios and open space
ratios — are found in the Table of Intensity Standards (Section 503.6).
Note particularly the interaction between the density standards established
in this table and the density limitations that may be imposed by one of the
overlay districts. Section 503.7 provides an illustration of how to
calculate permissible density with regard to property containing poor soils.
Step 5. Other Performance Regulations Affecting Intensity.
Sections 503.8 through 503.13 contain performance standards related to
traffic generation, noise, vibration, smoke, odor, electrical interference,
and light and glare that may affect whether a particular type of development
— especially non-residential development -- may he located on a lot. For
example, a cursory reading of the Table of Permissible Uses reveals that
virtually all of the use classifications are permissible in the low and
medium intensity mixed use districts. However, as indicated above, other
restrictions, including those listed in Sections 503.8 through 503.13, may
preclude a particular use on a particular lot. And so, a 1000 square foot
branch hank would not he permissible on a 15,000 square foot lot fronting an
arterial street in an LMU district since such a use generates 148 trips per
day (according to Table 503.8A) and the maximum permitted is 100 trips per
day (Table 503.8B). Similarly, a manufacturing use that would create noise
in excess of the levels set forth in Section 503.9 would not he permissible.
Step 6. Supple=entary Use Regulations
Section 504 should he consulted for provisions affecting particular types of
uses, over and above those applicable to all uses generally. Under the
present ordinance, only marinas and commercial docks and piers are covered.
Step 7. Design Standards
Having proceeded through steps one through six, the developer has now been
informed what may he developed on his.or her property and at what intensity.
The provisions contained in Section 600 should be reviewed to determine the
design standards that are applicable to the project, including requirements
governing building heights, and location on a lot, streets and sidewalks,
utilities, storm drainage, landscaping, signs, and parking.
34

Step 8. Subdivision Final Plat Approval
The ordinance integrates into one text all the provisions usually found in
separate subdivision ordinances. This is particularly appropriate given the
modern trend toward development that incorporates both subdivided and
unsuhdivided elements. The conditional use permit process corresponds to
what in Standard Subdivision ordinances is referred to as preliminary plat
approval, i.e. approval of the design of the project.
The only difference, then, between subdivided and unsuhdivided developments
in terms of the administrative process is that subdivisions must receive
final plat approval before plots can be recorded and lots sold. Section 806
sets forth the procedures for obtaining final plot approval. The essence of
this process is to make certain that (i) the plot contains those elements
required by the ordinance or state statute, (ii) the final plat does not
differ substantially from the plans, approved with the conditioned use
permit, and (iii) the required improvements have been completed in accordance
with the approval plans or satisfactory security bas been posted to ensure
their completion within the required time period (Section 805.15).
19

2. How Do I Get My Project Approved?
Step 1. Pre -Application Conference.
Before an application is submitted for any project of any substantial size,
the developer should consult with the administrator to make certain that the
requirements of the ordinance are understood. The analysis above concerning
what use may he made of a particular tract would he made at such a pre -
application conference. This consultation -is encouraged by the ordinance in
all cases (Section 805.5F) and required in the case of major subdivisions
(Section 805.13).
Step 2.. Determining the Permit Issuing Authority
The Table of Permissible Uses not only indicates what use classifications are
permissible in various districts but also specifies the type of permit that
must he assumed, and thereby the permit issuing authority. Zoning permits
are issued by the administrator, special use permits by the Board of
Adjustment and conditional use permits by the Town Council. The Planning
Board may be involved in making recommendations on special use permits
(Section 805.11) and shall he involved in the case of conditional use permits
(Section 805.12). Of course, other state and local agencies may have to give
approval with regard to one or more elements of a project including the
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development of the project
affects an area of environmental concern, the Department of Transportation if
a road is to be dedicated to the State, and those state and local agencies
concerned with water and sewer facilities designated in Section 605.
Note that in the case of major subdivisions, a two step approval process is
involved: design approval (authorizing construction of the improvements) and
final plot approval (authorizing sale of lots when the improvements have been
completed or their completion has been guaranteed by the posting of
security). See Section 806.
Step 3. The Application
Appendix A to the ordinance is a list of all the information that must he
submitted to enable the administrator to determine whether the proposed
development complies with the ordinance. At the pre -application conference,
the Administrator should go through the list with the developer and indicate
what items are needed and what items may be deleted. In that way, the
developer knows exactly what to submit and in what form. The administrator
keeps a copy of the completed checklist provided by the developer and can
check off in the space provided whether the requested information has been
received.
As provided in Section 805.4 (and exemplified by Appendix: A-9 of Volume II),
the Administrator should develop a simplified application for the most routine
types of development - e.g. single-family homes on pre-existing lots. Perhaps
a simple sketch plan on the back of the basic application form required of all
applicants (Appendix A-9) will suffice.
36

Step 4. Timetable for Permit Processing
The ordinance does not establish rigid timetables for the processing of
permit applications, although Section 805.21 does require the review process
to move "expeditiously." Obviously, special use and conditional use permit
approval will take more time than zoning permit approval. The administrator
should establish time schedules for the purpose of giving estimates to
developers, taking into account meeting schedules and agenda deadlines of the
various hoards as well as lead times necessary to post or publish notices of
required public hearings.
Step 5. Review for Ordinance Compliance
The difficult task of reviewing plans for compliance with the ordinance's
requirements falls on the shoulders of the administrator, even in those cases
where final approval is given by the Board of Adjustment or Town Council. In
this effort, there is no substitute for detailed knowledge of the ordinance,
which can only come with experience in reviewing projects. When the plans
are received and a determination made that all required information has been
submitted, then the administrator should proceed hack through steps one
through seven above, examining the plans in the context of the applicable
requirements. Any deviations from those requirements should he noted, and a
written copy of*a list of all such deviations furnished to the developer.
Post —application consultation with the developer is discussed in Section
805.6
Step 6. Consideration and Issuance of Permits
Section 805 contains the procedures for reviewing and approving permits, and
Section 808 discusses how hearings before the Board of Adjustment or Town
Council are to he conducted. Attachment A-10 to this section is a suggested
form for a zoning permit. Attachment A-11 is a worksheet to assist the Board
of Adjustment and Council in making decisions on permit applications, and
Attachment A-12 is a form that can he used for either the special use permit
or conditioned use permit.
37