1	Elmwood Township: A Community at the Crossroads A presentation for the Elmwood Township Planning Commission August 21, 2001 © Elmwood Citizens for Sensible Growth, 2001
2	A Community at the Crossroads Pressures for growth 124,000 people by 2015 (TC-TALUS) 190,000 by 2020 (TC Chamber of Commerce) Farms in crisis 1990: 62,402 acres of farmland 2000: 52,170 acres, down 16% Average age of Leelanau farmers: 58 yrs Result: Large amounts of land coming on the market The danger: Sprawl
3	What is Sprawl? “… a blight upon the land” (Former Gov. Wm. Milliken) “dispersed development outside of compact urban and village centers along highways and in rural countryside” “leapfrog development”
4	A Proactive Response PDRs, tax relief for farmers, etc. Outside the scope of this discussion A well-designed zoning ordinance The task at hand
5	The Master Plan Is Key Statutory foundation of the zoning ordinance “the basis on which the zoning plan is developed” (Michigan Township Planning Act of 1959) “The zoning ordinance shall be based upon a plan [ie, the Master Plan]” (Michigan Township Rural Zoning Act of 1943) Based on public input Community Attitude Survey of 1996 1,800 surveys distributed 715 returned and tabulated (rate of 40% -- very high) “The response rate alone indicates the residents intense interest in the future development of the Township”
6	Guidance from the Master Plan: Encourage Development Near the Center “Balance the rate of land development with the availability of public facilities and services such as adequate roads and public water and sanitary sewer systems. Encourage development where those types of facilities and services exist.” (Emphasis added) (p 33) “Encourage higher density housing on lands that have or are planned to have the capacity to support such development by means of public roads and utilities.” (p 35) “…provide that the layout of new residential developments to be logical extensions of existing neighborhoods.” (p 35)
7	Guidance from the Master Plan: The 2.5 Acre Density Limit “Recommended development densities are determined by considering a number of location elements. Most notable in Elmwood Township are the availability of public utilities and potential traffic impacts. It is the recommendation of this Plan that developments in areas that are not served with either public water or sanitary sewer system have a density of not greater than one unit per two and one-half acres.” (emphasis added) (p 40)
8	Guidance from the Master Plan: Summary Encourage development near: Water and sewer Other services Near existing neighborhoods Adequate roads Limit average density to 2.5 acres outside the center
9	Three Approaches to Density and Development in the AO district Gourdie Frasier plan of Feb 2001 (“GF”) Township Board revised version (current draft) (“TB”) A suggested, sensible alternative (“S”)
10	Crucial Questions For each approach: How does this approach implement the guidance of the Master Plan? What kinds of developments can we expect to see with these rules? Where will development take place? What will the consequences and effects of these policies be for the Township and its residents?
11	The AO District: Map
12	GF Plan: General Features Eligibility requirements Distinguishes between Level I (woody slopes) and Type II (cultivatable land) Point system
13	Level I Sample Parcel
14	Level II Sample Parcel
15	Elmwood as a Whole (33%)
16	Elmwood as a Whole (66%)
17	GF Plan : Summary Advantages Encourages preservation of cultivatable land Relatively low densities Encourages development close in and discourages sprawl Disadvantages ??
18	TB Plan: General Features = Current draft Point system No eligibility requirements Does not distinguish between Level I and Level II
19	Level I Sample Parcel
20	Level II Sample Parcel
21	Elmwood as a Whole (33%)
22	Elmwood as a Whole (66%)
23	TB Plan: Summary Advantages Point system encourages good design Disadvantages Encourages sprawl Leapfrog, dispersed development
24	S Plan: General Features Distinguishes between Level I and Level II developments Level I: Can hook up to existing water or sewer services Level II: No services currently available Respects 2.5 acre limit where no services are available
25	Point System for Level I Developments Top: 0.90 (as in GF Type I, TB) Bottom: 0.20 (as in 6.1.E)
26	Level I Sample Parcel
27	Point System for Level II Developments Top: 0.40 (= 2.5 acre limit) Bottom: 0.20 (as in 6.1.E) or 0.10 (underlying density)
28	The 2.5 Acre Limit Specified in Master Plan De facto consensus on Lincoln Meadows An appropriate upper limit for Level II developments
29	6.1.E Developments: A Special Case? Restrict to smaller (ie, less than 20 acres) parcels only? In any case, stronger specifics Landscaping Roads etc
30	Level II Sample Parcel
31	Elmwood as a Whole (33%)
32	Elmwood as a Whole (66%)
33	S Plan : Summary Advantages Encourages development close in and discourages sprawl Encourages growth from the center out Permits relatively low density developments in Type 2 area – does not shut such landowners out Matches the letter and the spirit of the Master Plan Acknowledges the rights and interests of the community Disadvantages ???
34	Conclusions Choices exist It’s up to you Plan for our future, following the letter and spirit of the Master Plan