Re: "Cohousing Overlay" as Zoning Regulation | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: R Philip Dowds (rpdowdscomcast.net) | |
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 08:26:45 -0700 (PDT) |
Lots of different rules apply to how far apart buildings must be, and they tie back to technical definitions of, What¹s a ³building²? Firefighter access is only part of it. Another part is the ³fire separation distance², which is intended to prevent one building in flames from igniting its neighbor. Codes vary substantially across the country, but one common version takes the position that either (a) ³buildings² shall be at least 30 ft apart, or else (b) shall have their proximitous facing walls protected to a certain standard or rating (which may preclude windows). And so on. So the fire chief is not making this up. Philip Dowds (AIA) Cornerstone Cohousing Cambridge, MA On 3/10/11 1:58 PM, "Richart Keller" <richart.keller [at] gmail.com> wrote: > > > Seems to me that 20' is much too wide though the curves should accommodate > reasonably anticipated emergency vehicles. (E.g. unless you have a high rise > development, designing for a full size hook and ladder truck sounds a bit > excessive...). Strategically-placed, hard surface pulloffs could be used to > avoid the problem of temporarily parked vehicles blocking the road/walkway. > The fire chief is not always the best source of advice on road > configuration... I would suggest working with the town planner. > > Rick > > Richart Keller, AICP > Pioneer Valley Cohousing > 120 Pulpit Hill Road #25 > Amherst, MA 01002 > 413-835-0011 > 401 486-2677 (cell) > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Barrett [mailto:mbarrett [at] toast.net] > Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 1:31 PM > To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org > Subject: Re: [C-L]_ "Cohousing Overlay" as Zoning Regulation > > > > In the building of Liberty Village in Maryland the width of the > streets/pedways within the community was an issue. They were actually > built (I think) to 10 feet. Years after they were built when the fire > chief came around he said that would never happen again and they would > be far wider, maybe 20 feet or more? And it was true there was one > bend that required care when "Santa Claus" came through on top of a fire > truck, with siren blaring, before each Christmas (and scared the > b**j*sus out of many residents thinking a emergency existed). There was > also a reasonable requirement that the pedways needed to be built to > take the weight of the very occasional heavy traffic, i.e. moving vans > and emergency vehicles. > The streets to the parking lots were of usual "wide" width. > > "Street" width (and front and side setbacks) is a big factor in the > "intimacy" factor, whether you can converse with your neighbor across > the street from your porch. Duplex front porches that are not divided > are friendly. A local _non_-cohousing retirement community has duplex > homes with _separate_ front porches and two long ramps (for wheelchairs) > to a huge wide parking lot. In that community you need to be in good > physical shape if you want to chat face-to-face with your neighbors > > At Shadowlake Village, where I now live, there was a requirement to > define a specific rectangle on the plot within which the house would > sit. This was _in addition_ to a maximum square footage _and_ setback > requirements _and_ town review of any exterior changes. (Talk about belt > and suspenders!). I wanted to make a 76 sq. foot extension to my house > which lay within both the maximum sq. footage and the setbacks but which > fell (a little bit) outside the arbitrary rectangle. It took some > trouble and cost to get that finally allowed - including deluging the > deciding body with letters from most every one of the 33 households here. > > Some things had to be "given away" or "accepted" at the beginning of the > community just to get permission to proceed. > > Good luck > > Michael Barrett > Shadowlake Village, VA > > > On 3/9/2011 6:40 PM, VAN DEIST wrote: >> > I want to learn what kinds of >> > provisions the readership would like to see in a "cohousing zoning >> > overlay." Suncoast Elder Cohousing Community is working with the Sarasota > County Planning Department to >> > define a "cohousing overlay" to permit the unique, architectural, >> > spacial, and construction aspects of cohousing which might ordinarily >> > run afoul of current regulations. These would be specific to >> > cohousing developments and would not effect any other current >> > regulations. >> > >> > The only topics >> > which we're currently promoting is 1) for density to be increased >> > with the use of cottages 600 ft2 or less (counting as 1/2 of a dwelling > unit) >> > and cottages between 600 ft2 and 800 ft2 (counting as 3/4 of a dwelling >> > unit) and 2) eliminating the restriction on clustered housing that >> > mandates that all homes lined up on any side be similar in design. >> > We're all for variety; have five, basic models; and don't want to be >> > told what house goes where. We planning only 24 cottages and a common >> > house on five acres. >> > >> > What other issues would you like to see included in a "cohousing >> > zoning overlay?" We'd very much appreciate your input. >> > >> > Thank you, >> > >> > Van Deist, Organizer >> > Suncoast Elder Cohousing Community >> > Sarasota, FL >> > vandeist [at] msn.com >> > 941.223.5880 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > _________________________________________________________________ >> > Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: >> > http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/ >> > >> > >> > > _________________________________________________________________ > Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: > http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/ > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: > http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/ > >
- Re: drivable emergency access. was RE: "Cohousing Overlay"asZoning Regulation, (continued)
- Re: drivable emergency access. was RE: "Cohousing Overlay"asZoning Regulation Wayne Tyson, March 16 2011
- Re: drivable emergency access. was RE: "Cohousing Overlay"asZoning Regulation R Philip Dowds, March 17 2011
- Re: drivable emergency access. was RE: "Cohousing Overlay"asZoning Regulation Wayne Tyson, March 22 2011
- Re: drivable emergency access. was RE: "Cohousing Overlay"asZoning Regulation Wayne Tyson, March 22 2011
- Re: "Cohousing Overlay" as Zoning Regulation R Philip Dowds, March 15 2011
- Re: "Cohousing Overlay" as Zoning Regulation Brian Bartholomew, March 10 2011
- Re: "Cohousing Overlay" as Zoning Regulation John Beutler, March 11 2011
- Re: "Cohousing Overlay" as Zoning Regulation Brian Bartholomew, March 11 2011
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.