Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/04/1995

Home

Page Three THE ZONING REPORT The model performanc~ based. buffer-screen system ~ What it is and how it works. In the original Kendig concept, a buf~eryard and screen is in- terposed between an ~applicant's proposed use ahd all adjoining diss~nilar uses. 'All uses are classified within eleven classifications: The classifications for pr~.posed uses are matched with those for existing uses in an 11 by 11 table or matrix. Eae~ cell in the matrix--the match of proposed an~ existing uses--is assign- ed one of twelve buff~ryard types. Vacant lots ad~oin.[ng a proposed use also require bufferyards. ISince the future use of the lot is unknown, the bufferyard type is as- signed based on theI zoning of vacant land. Thus, a second matriX, in the original Kendig concept matches the ~roposed use through the eleven use classifications with the eight zones in his model code, fo~ming an 1i by 8 matrix showing which of thei twelve bufferyard types is assigned each cell ib the matrix. ,; The bufferyard types~differ from one another by the width 'of the ~ufferyard and number of plants per 100 lineal f~et in th~ buff~ -- ~ each bufferyar~ type, the developer is offered three or four optional bufferyard.s., each option varying ~y width and number of plants per 100 lineal leet. A standard buffer- yard width is imposed~ with a prescribed num- ber of plants per ~00 !ft. Each optional buffer is wider but allows le~s plants per i00 ft based on a "plant unit mul.~iplier," which multiplies the number of plants irequired in the standard buffer by a decimal af~ount less than .one. For example, a wider buffer with a multiplier of 0.5 provides half the ~lants required under the narrower standard buf~eryard. Intense commer- cial/industrial uses, w~th wide standard buffers and a large density 9f plants, offer narrower buffers and a lesser~number of plants if an opaque wood fence o{" masonry wall of s~ fled height is installe~. Plants required are ~lassified into four cate- gories, which, taken t~g~ther as prescribed for ~ bufferyard, can !visually create a screen of intended opacity. The-four categories are: canopy or large trees,, which are tall slow- growing full-size shade trees with a large high leaf canopy; understory or. smaH"trees, whose leaf canopy fills the visual space below the canopy.of large trees and above shrub height; and shrubs and evergreens as the two other plant categories. Specified substitutions are allowed among the four categories. Kendig as- signs plant species to the four categories in a comprehensive list of most species found na- tionwide for all climates. Fences or walls provided in buffers are posi- tioned on the edge of the bufferyard closest to the more intense use~ with the required plants interposed in the bufferyard between the fence and the less intensive use. For two adjoining vacant lotst the first to de.- velop provides the buffer and plants for the bufferyard type required for the zoning of the adjoining vacant lot assigned in the vacant-lot table. The second developer provides any addi- tional width and plants if a wider bufferyard type is assigned in the table of buffers for ad- joining uses. The Kendig model code has many other rules governing installation and maintenance of buf- fers for new development and for existing de- velopment whose buffers are nonconforming to the new provisions. The system retains conven- tional zone yards for residential lots in con- ventional subdivisions. Bufferyards are required for all lots adjoining streets, the type of buf- feryard determined by the class of use.' How communities have modified the model performance based system Communities that have enacted the Kendig bufferyard concept modify and .simplify it to retain its merits while reducing its complexity and increasing its ease of understanding. All of the codes enacting the Kendig'concept come close to maintaining the density of plants per 100 lineal feet of bufferyard in the model concept, by category of plant. All of the codes March 24, 1995 Issue