SITE PLANNING DEFINED

Site planning is a broad term that embraces selection of sites; location of buildings in
functional relation to each other, to the shape and topography of the sit, and the environment;
provision within the site of suitable circulation provision within the site of suitable circulation
routes well related to existing or proposed streets and walks; determination of land use to
complement the buildings, such as private yards, parking space and recreation areas. These and
many other things are included within the scope of its planning.

The site plan is a complex thing and any underestimation of its importance risks the
success of a project. The site plan is shaped by climate, by local housing customs, economic
conditions, and laws; by the location of the site with respect to employment, transportation,
utilities and social institutions; by the cost of the land, the relative cost of various forms of
construction and the cost of utilities and maintenance; by habits, incomes and compositions of
the families to be housed. It is influenced by the area, shape and topography of the site; the
number of dwelling units proposed and whether these are to be apartments, flats, tow or town
houses; the orientation and spacing of the buildings; the method of waste collection and disposal
and the landscape development and preservation of existing trees. All these factors must be
correlated to produce a simple, livable, economical patter of land use in which the land and
buildings are integrated and so organized as to serve the needs of the families to be housed. The
organizations of the plan if satisfactory will also harmonies not conflict, with the character of the
land.

The physical site characteristic contained here fall into five general groups. They include
natural characteristics orientation, circulation, parking and utilities. The first group contains the
major constrains vis-a-vis grades and soil conditions. Availability of potable water, energy
supplies, and adequate municipal services for waste disposal are not included in this discussion,
although they certainly act as constraints to site development.

Orientation is an important consideration for aesthetic and practical reasons. Despite

controlled atmosphere within the dwelling unit, proper attention to placement and orientation
can add greatly to the efficiency and comfort of the inhabitants.

Circulation and parking are increasing in importance as integral parts of site design for
residential communities, including the higher-density urban communities, because of the trend
toward heavier reliance on the private automobile.

The location of utilities is also receiving increased attention commensurate with the rise
in energy consumption. Placement of equipment, lines and generation facilities is of aesthetic
concern and related directly to reliability of service as affected by storm conditions.

1
 Every housing site represents a special situation and should be approached and designed
with this mind. It is meaningless and even harmful, therefore, to try to establish rigid rules for
universal application.

A SITE AND ITS IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD

Initial site selection involves many factors, an important one being location with respect
to the general neighborhood. Frequently, the recommendations of professional planners who
have assisted in the preparation of long-range development plans and zoning maps aid in site
selection. Such recommendations consider land-use compatibility, availability of community
facilities, etc.

There are no hard and fast rules regarding mixtures of land uses. Where rules have been
formulated (as in most zoning ordinances), they exist to protect residential areas from the
nuisances commonly associated with nonresidential uses. A more realistic approach to mixing is
to evaluate each proposed use on its merits. For example, a nonresidential area is not a priori an
acceptable or nonacceptable neighbor to a housing site. The compatibility or noncompatibility of
the two uses should be carefully examined. If they conflict, a generous buffer between the two
is called for. If they do not conflict, there is no cause for alarm. In zoning this reasoning has
resulted in the adoption of performance standards to replace conventional use districts. These
performance standards set measurable maximum limits for certain nuisance factors associated
with many uses. Among these are noise, smoke, and traffic. Some of these problems can be
alleviated, if not entirely eliminated, thorough knowledge of existing off-site conditions in
advance of their work. They cannot, of course, anticipate all problems and future changes.

Generally sources of noise are easy to predict. Large playgrounds or other public
recreation places, commercial and industrial complexes, and transportation facilities are the
most common ones. Buffers of open space and sound-absorbent plant materials can help to
control such noises. In the case of smoke and other annoying atmospheric pollutants, two choices
are open. One is simply not to build housing on a site which is downwind of a known air-pollution
source. The second is to force the offender to install air-pollution control devices. The latter is
not a job for housing site planners alone, although they can contribute to public awareness of
the menace.

Traffic hazards are associated with high speed, heavy circulation, and dangerous roads
and intersections. Again, these factors are usually predictable for any site in a built-up portion of
a city or in sections that are in transition. If traffic hazards cannot be eliminated through external
controls, they can at least be substantially reduced by careful internal planning of a site.

2
Techniques such as locating dwelling units to focus on internal site spaces, using structures or
plants to protect the vulnerable edges, and separating the pedestrian paths and vehicular
roadway systems are all effective.

Performance standards in themselves can do little if anything to combat invasion of

privacy. Here again, a thorough examination of neighborhood characteristics is essential in order
to pinpoint any real or potential threats to privacy. From such a survey, it is possible to predict
natural traffic routes by examining their generation from points outside the site. A skillful site
design can do a great deal to prevent the unwarranted use of a site by nonresidents. A site is
used as a shortcut by outsiders, pedestrians and automobile drivers alike, this would indicate
that the plan itself is at fault, since it fails to discourage and may, in fact, encourage such traffic.
The all-too-frequently used sign “Trespassers Keep Out” is eloquent testimony to this failure.

The planner is faced with a more complex problem if the site is conceived as a
neighborhood focal point or if it to incorporate shops and other community services. In these
cases, loss of privacy can be prevented by designing separate public and private areas and laying
out communal paths and gathering places so that they are at adequate distances from dwelling
units.

In extreme cases, when it is almost impossible to regulate these neighborhood nuisances

or to abandon a site in favor of a better location, the only alternative may be to erect a physical
barrier that insulates the housing site from its surroundings. Even this alternative is ineffective
against air pollution.

SITE SIZE AND SHAPE

There are no meaningful maximums or minimums in the abstract that can be applied to
the size of a housing site. It is the choice of what is built upon the land and its relationship to the
total community that determines site size suitability. Unfortunately, site and program of
development are often chosen independently of one another, causing a misfit that could have
been prevented. A developer decides upon a specific type of housing in advance of land
acquisition, result in in either overcrowding or wasting of land and an inferior plan for designated
uses.

As is true for size, there are no abstract optimums of the shape of a parcel of land. Certain
shapes, particularly very narrow or irregular properties, will severely restrict the choice of
possible building types and/or placement on the site. Parcels that are square or possess sufficient
width for an arrangement of buildings in adequately spaced parallel rows permit a greater choice.
In practice the minimum width of a site is set either directly by zoning (40 ft., 50 ft., etc.) or

3
indirectly by setback requirements from lot lines. The effects of adjoining property and activity
often vary according to a site’s physical configuration. For example: the narrower the site, the
greater the influence that adjacent buildings have on its supply of light and air. Conversely the
wider the site, the weaker the influence.

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR LARGE SITES

As a result of economies of large-scale building and the current interest in planned
communities and new towns, bigger and bigger sites are being developed. Therefore, this facet
of planning warrants some special consideration. At the outset, it is necessary to distinguish
between composite sites and single sites. Composite sites consist of numbers of parcels that are
usually sold and developed as separate projects that may or may not be part of a coordinated
design. Single sites are planned and built according to a coordinated site plan. There is not always
a clear-cut line between the two types of developments – particularly when composite site
parcels are sold individually but are nevertheless subjected to review for conformity to an overall
development plan. In either situation, one of the most desirable attributes of a site is variety. It
follows that one of the least desirable characteristics is monotony. Monotony can have a
deadening effect. Even though great care may have been taken to develop a diversity of housing
types and site details, a large site often seems monotonous just by virtue of size alone. To
counteract this, several design techniques are possible. The shape of a site can be adjusted. The
massiveness of a large site is camouflaged somewhat if its shape is irregular or narrow. This serves
to prohibit site development which looks the same from all directions.

The visual field can also be broken up by exploiting a site’s natural amenities, such as rock
outcropping, water courses, varied topography, or attractive vegetation. Where such amenities
are lacking, it is imperative to avoid layouts whereby the whole site may be seen at a single
glance.

Allowance for visual breaks and contrast is a vital factor in site design. Even when building
designs must be repeated to hold down costs, as is necessary in the case of low-rent housing,
scattering the units throughout a community rather than grouping them together can relieve the
tedious sameness produced by masses of identical buildings.

TOPOGRAPHY AND CLIMATE

Topography and climate play most important part in determining the appropriateness of
the location and design of a site. Gently rolling land offers greater opportunities for variety in site

4
planning and architectural design than does flat land. Grade changes permit more imaginative
determinations of a building-to-building relationships, automobile storage, and outdoor passive
and active recreation areas than do sites lacking in irregularities. The latter are dependent on
excavations, manmade hills and water bodies, and architectural forms to create interest.

Today “view” lots are prized. A high site generally has more inherent possibilities for a
broad vista than a low site does. Also, a high site that can be seen from a distance – the easily
identifiable focal point of its surroundings – has a definite psychological attraction. From a
practical standpoint, high ground is also appealing because liquid wastes and unpleasant odors
do not collect there and because it is relatively secure from floods – all problems of low land.
However, low-land sites are not always a second choice. Those bordering water are often very
desirable. Usually a substantial investment, in the form of retaining walls, expensive drainage
systems, and landfill, for example, is required to make such land suitable for building. The costs
of these improvements are usually offset by the advantages a water site provides – spectacular
views, sports and recreation, permanent privacy on at least one side.

A low site can also be desirable in areas of climate extremes, for hollows tend to be
protected from both excessive heat and cold. This factor is becoming less and less important
since local climatic conditions can be influenced artificially through the use of vegetation,
structural barriers, manmade topography, and central heating and cooling systems. With
technological advances, the livability of low land versus high land is becoming more and more a
simple question of taste.

BUILDABLE QUALITIES
Three factors are of major concern under this general heading – soils, slopes, and
vegetation. For many regions of the United States, natural surveys identify and record soil types.
At specific sites, soils are examines by engineering surveys. They are tested for drainage, water-
table level, and load-bearing capacities – all of which should affect both the type and location of
buildings on any given site. A knowledge of soil conditions or test borings is necessary for all but
the most modest structures. Rock out-croppings can complicate initial site preparation, but if
they exist in limited amounts they may be exposed and become assets in site appearance. Soils
not well suited to the growth of plant materials can be treated or covered or replaced with others
that are.

Slopes are conducive to imaginative site planning. Gentle slopes are preferable to very
rugged terrain for most residential building purposes. Besides aiding in drainage they are less
costly to build on than steep slopes. The latter require elaborate footings and a great deal of

5
earth moving to create usable ground areas. The Federal Housing Administration requires a
minimum slope of 1 percent and a maximum of 8 percent around buildings. Where sites are flat,
considerable success has been achieved by the building of artificial hills. To be sure, many
examples can be found of spectacular housing built on the edge or down the slopes of very steep
hillsides. This raw land is cheap to buy but expensive to develop and may not allow for outdoor
recreation. When onsite parking is required, it must be built directly into the dwelling structure,
an additional complication and expense. Parking on such slopes is often dangerous and unsightly.
Yet the magnificent vistas and the possible proximity to the central city are compensating factors.

Serious erosion and drainage problems have resulted from poor handling of steep land –
improper terracing for building sites, careless placing of buildings, inadequate underground tiles
to augment natural seepage, and neglect of the banks of drainage channels that carry away water
during periods of heavy, seasonal rainfall. If the site is large enough and has varied topography,
it is best to leave the very steep portions in their natural state and build on the more gentle
slopes. These gentle slopes can be protected through the use of plant materials. Any remaining
flat land can be used for recreational purposes.

The value of vegetation as an aspect of site quality cannot be overestimated. There is no

question that trees and shrubs enhance the livability of housing areas. If an undeveloped site
contains healthy and attractive vegetation, it should be preserved. If a site lacks vegetation,
planting should be undertaken at the earliest possible date. In cases where soils or subsurface
conditions are not conducive to growth and the introduction of new soil is not feasible, an
alternative is to plant trees and shrubs in boxes. The task of creating and maintaining a green site
can be accomplished only if occupant needs are taken into account before a site is acquired, or
once it is acquired, before new structures are placed on it.

TOPOGRAPHIC CONSIDERATIONS

TOPOGRAPHY
Topography is an important element in determining the acceptability or value of a site. It
greatly affects the layout of buildings and how they can be placed upon it, and it affects the cost
of foundations and utility lines.

In order to make a proper judgment, detailed information in the form of accurate surveys
showing contours is necessary. Such information must be interpreted by architect and engineers.

6
 The best type of topography for housing is generally considered to be level or gently
rolling terrain with slopes less than 10 to 20 percent. For single-family detached housing, the lot
size should be increased in relation to the slope. It should also be high ground with good drainage.

However, a site should not be discarded because of rugged contours. Such features may,
by careful study and imaginative design, be turned into an advantage and add features that would
not be available on a level site.

SOME COMMON TOPOGRAPHIC POSITIONS (Fig. 1)

Area 1 is a floodplain. It is subject to flooding during heavy storms.

Area 2 is an alluvial fan. The soil has been forming over the years as a result of water
eroding material from the watershed above and depositing it near the mouth of the waterway.
An alluvial fan can be hard hit by flash floods after heavy rains unless an adequate water-disposal
system has been provided to control the runoff from the watershed above.

Area 3 is an upland waterway where water flowing from the higher surrounding land will
concentrate. Natural waterways should not be used unless an adequate ditch or diversion terrace
has been constructed to divert water from the site.

7
 Area 4 is a low depressed area where water accumulated from higher surrounding areas.
These soils remain wet and spongy for long periods.

Area 5 is a steep hillside. Many soils on steep slopes are shallow to rock. Some are subject
to severe slippage. On all slopes, one must be careful of soil movement through gravity or by
water erosion. Yet some steep hillsides can be used safely as building sites. The problem can be
solved by studying the soils and avoiding the bad ones.

Area 6 is a deep, well—drained soil found on ridgetops and gently sloping hillsides.
Generally these areas have the smallest water management problems. They are the best building
sites, other things being equal.

HOUSING SITE
1. A gently sloping site is preferable to one presenting serious topographical difficulties. This will
be apparent by an examination of Figs. 2 and 3 in which the same area has been assumed in
both cases, the same access streets, and the same number of dwelling units, but with
different topography. A study of these plans will make it evident that in Fig. 2 there is a
greater likelihood of
expensive cut and
fill. The steep slope
also requires added
provision for
surface drainage to
prevent heavy
accumulation of
rain water. Culverts

8
 and large-sized storm sewers may be required to remove it.

If the buildings are on a steep slope, they may be more costly because of added exterior walls
(Fig 5). This is especially true where basements are omitted.

Where a long building runs perpendicular to the contours, it may be necessary to vary the
floor and roof levels (Fig 6). This means added costs of roof and finishing the stepped gable
ends.

A comparison of the two plans in Figs. 2 and 3 will also demonstrate the added flexibility of
planning in the level site due to the unrestricted possibilities of placing the buildings. The
difference in length and cost of road improvements to produce similar ease of access will also
be apparent.

2. Sites containing soft ground, heavy uncompacted fill, or outcroppings of rock should be
avoided (Fig. 7). Preparation of the site to obviate these objectionable features is expensive
and adds nothing to rental value.

9
3. Choose a site where heavy-duty road construction will not be required. The traffic tributary to
the average housing development is not heavy, and comparatively light hard-surfaced roads
of moderate widths will suffice. If the needs of urban or through traffic require the
construtions of heavy-duty roads, either boundary or internal, at th expense of the project,
an unproductive burden of cost is saddled on the enterprise.
4. Sites remote from public roads and utilities are less desirable than those where these facilities
are immediately available. If roads and utilities must be brought from a great distance, low-
priced land may prove to be prohibitive in final cost.

BUILDABLE AREA
No site should be given even tentative consideration unless the amount of buildable area
it contains is known. If the site includes steeply sloping land, at least a sketch topography should

10
be available. Data on soil conditions, particularly
where there are areas of poor bearing due to
natural conditions or to artificial fill, should also
be obtained. A site engineer should cooperate
with the planner in laying out topographically
difficult sites. Runs and depths of sewer cuts
constitute an important element of cost.
Unbuildable areas of poor-bearing soil may often
be used for parking or recreation areas, and thus
need not cause a serious loss of useful area. Land
that is unbuildable because it is so steep that
construction cost becomes excessive is ordinarily
of little use for other purposes, but all land may
be of value to the project in giving more light and
air to the houses. At the periphery of a project
open area may provide useful protection against
undesirable factors in the environment, acting as
a miniature “greenbelt”.

SITE CONFIGURATIONS
It will be evident from Fig. 1 that case
A will afford frontages toward which the
building units may be face, and little road
development inside the site will be necessary.
Case B, with a narrow frontage and a depth of
almost ½ mile, will of necessity require interior
roads.

In this connection, it may be stated as

a general principle that the narrow and deep
site presents problems of site planning similar
to the difficulties encountered in planning a
single dwelling unit on a narrow and deep lot.

11
 1. Where surrounding roads must be
constructed and paid for directly or by
assessment, the site most nearly
square is preferable. This is a simple
matter of geometry and is illustrated
by Fig. 2.
2. Utilities. The knowledge that utilities
are available to a given site is
insufficient evidence on which to
proceed. The adequacy of such
utilities to bear the added loads that
will be created by the proposed
project must be satisfactorily
determined. If water main and sewers must be replaced, the might as well not be there.
Where access to sewerage system is not possible and septic tanks are resorted to, the site
should be carefully studies to determine that:
a. There will be an available disposal field of adequate area.
b. The soil will absorb the outflow water from the tanks.
c. Public authorities will approve such installation.
3. Fire protection. Careful investigation should be made of the rate of fire insurance. If
nonfireproof structures have been contemplated, the sponsors should investigate
whether a differential in insurance cost would warrant the adoption of fireproof
construction, or whether a different site should be chosen.

SHAPE
The shape of a site is a critical factor
and influences usability of the site. Therefore,
in assessing a site’s usability, the following
factors must be evaluated as a consequence
of site shape:

1. Size
2. Accessibility
3. Visibility

To evaluate the effect of the shape of

the site on the size of potential building

12
locations, all applicable setback requirements in the local zoning ordinance must be defined and
located. The space which remains is the area on which the building may be designed. A site with
irregular proportions can sometimes be rendered useless after the setback requirements re
subtracted. For example, Fig. 3 shows a site with 70 ft. of frontage and 365 ft. of depth. Once the
setback requirements are taken into account, this site has greatly limited usability.

SLOPES AND GRADES

Figure 1 gives desirable limits for slopes on
different types of areas. Deviations may be
warranted by especially favorable conditions,
such as porous soils, mild climates, or light
rainfall; also if local experience indicates that
other gradients are satisfactory.

Failure to provide positive pitch away from

buildings and to give open areas adequate
slopes has necessitated costly regrading and
reconstruction to work on numerous
projects. The trouble has been due in part to
inaccurate construction, but incomplete or
poorly conceived plans have been a
contributing cause.

Of two basic design methods, one provides

for drainage mainly across grassed areas,
generally through “swales”, until the water
reaches streets, drives, or storm sewer inlets.
This scheme, requiring the flow of water from
walks onto lawns, is not altogether effective
when slopes are inadequate and finished grading is not accurately executed, or if the turf is above
the walk level. Swale drainage occasionally is carried under walks by small culverts (6-to-8-inpipes
or boxes). These are slight hazards and frequently become stopped. The other method employs
walks to a considerable extent as drainage channels. This scheme has met some objection;
nevertheless, it generally is more economical and practical than the use of swales, and it has been
used far more widely. Moreover, when walks have been given proper cross and longitudinal
slopes, with sewer inlets provided at points of concentrated storm-water flow, there has been
no serious inconvenience or complications.

13
14
15
SOIL CONDITIONS
A thorough investigation of soil conditions is essential. The soil must be such that it can
reasonably sustain the weight of the proposed buildings and not cause any other problems. A
rocky base will result in expensive foundation work, difficult site development, and drainage
problems. Installation of underground utility lines, such as water, gas, and sewers, would be
made extremely difficult and costly.

A swampy condition will result in the use of piles to support the buildings and possible
flooding conditions. Special waterproofing would be required for foundations, basements, and
underground garages. The nature of the soil will also determine the effectiveness of its ability to
grow grass, trees, and other vegetations.

16
17
SITE EVALUATION
In considering the visual assets of a site,
extensive field observation is necessary. Features
observed in the field can be mapped (see Fig. 1)
and considered along with the site’s physical
features in compiling the development plan.
Visual characteristics to be considered include
ridge tops and valley bottoms, brooks and
streams, ledges, stone walls, views and viatas,
significant vegetation (such as hemlocks and
other evergreens, wetlands plants, and
wildflower), and other aesthetic assets such as
waterfalls ad historic buildings.

The remainder of the analysis is conducted by considering each of the major natural resource
characteristics of the site in relation to land uses proposed for the site. For a typical subdivision,
the major land uses would be:

 Water supply
 Septic systems or sewers
 Buildings and dwellings
 Roads and parking areas

The primary natural resource

factors affecting (and affected by) the
land uses are:

 Depth to water table

 Earth material characteristics
(i.e., soil percolation rates,
susceptibility to erosion, etc.)
 Slope
 Depth to bedrock
 Flood-prone and storm-prone
areas

Depending on the site, its proposed use, and the level of detail of the analysis, additional
natural resource factors can be considered. These include vegetation, wildlife value, wetlands,

18
drainage areas, availability of groundwater, bedrock type, agricultural capability, and other
factors.

Figures 3 through 8 evaluate two of the proposed land uses – septic systems and buildings
– in terms of four resource factors – depth to bedrock, depth to water table, earth materials, and
slope. The degree to which a natural resource factor limits the proposed land use will vary from
location to location. For example, in areas where bedrock is more than 10ft below the surface,
bedrock usually will not limit or make special design necessary for dwellings and septic systems.
In areas where bedrock is somewhat closer to the surface, some special design measures may be
required. The most severe limitations will be imposed where bedrock is shallow and outcrops are
frequent. These varying conditions are designated on the charts as optimum, marginal, and
critical, respectively.

The site has been mapped for each of the four major resource characteristics, with shaded
areas designating portions of the site where design or development restrictions are imposed.
When these maps are combined (Fig. 9), overall development opportunities and limitations are
revealed.

One of the greatest limitations to conducting an analysis of this type is lack of data. Even
in mapped areas, information may not be detailed enough to be useful in site analyses. However,
these inventory maps can be used to determine the specific resource concerns that should lead
to further site investigation. Field observation at the site can provide information that is not
otherwise available; field work is also important in confirming existing data and compiling
information on unmapped features such as vegetation.

The site is a tract of approximately 600 acres in rural Connecticut that contains many
features typical of suburban and rural areas. A stream runs through the southeastern portion of
the site and is fed by a spring and a small red maple swamp. The areas immediately adjacent to
the streambanks are subject to occasional flooding. The land was formerly farmed, and consists
primarily of second-growth forest. Elevation varies from 325 to 600 ft. above sea level.

19
20
DEPTH TO WATER TABLE
This information is not commonly
available on maps. An indication of water
table depth can be obtained from soils maps
compiled by the Soil Conservation Service
(SCS). Soils maps are available from SCS Field
Officers and DEP’s Natural Resources Center.
Soils maps showing regulated inland wetlands
may be obtained from the Water Resources
Unit, DEP, SCS publications include tables
which indicate saturated soils and soils with
groundwater within 3ft. of the surface. These
tables can be used along with soils maps (and
a field testing where necessary) to complete a
general map of groundwater characteristics
for development sites.

Earth Materials: Percolation Probability

Percolation rates can be estimated from
information compiled by the SCS. Detailed soils maps can
be used in conjunction with SCS keys which indicate
percolation rate probabilities for the various soil types.
Each soil type has been placed into one of four categories:
fast, probability fast, probably slow, and slow. Field
testing will be necessary at possible septic system sites to
provide more accurate data. The cross-hatched portions
of the map represent areas where other resource
characteristics (wetlands and shallow bedrock) preclude
the use of percolation probability.

21
22
Slope
Maps showing steep slopes can be compiled from
topographic maps, SCS maps, and observations in the field.
The Natural Resources Center offers technical assistance in
the compilation of these maps. For smaller sites, field
observations may be adequate for delineating areas with
steep slopes.

Depth to Bedrock
Bedrock outcrops can be mapped through field
observations and may be visible in some aerial
photographs. SCS maps and surficial geology maps
can be used to generally determine shallow
bedrock areas. Surficial geology maps show areas
where bedrock is within 10 ft. of the surface; SCS
soils maps can be interpreted to show areas where
soil is rocky or where bedrock is 2 ft. or less below
the surface.

THE COMPOSITE MAP

The most important use of the composite map is the identification of the specific types of
problems that exist on various parts of the site. Knowing these problems early in the planning
stage allows the developer to use the characteristics of the site to best advantage and to avoid
the necessity of making expensive changes later in the planning or construction processes.

23
 Figure 3 through 8 outline the limitations imposed by individual resource factors. In the
final analysis, however, all the factors will have to be considered together. Listed below are the
combinations of resource characteristics that occur most frequently at the site, and the
engineering measures required for development of areas with those characteristics.

1. Conditions: Bedrock 10 ft. or more

below surface, soil percolation
probably fast, slope less than 15
percent, water table 10 ft. or more
below surface.
These areas present the best conditions
for development. Conventional
construction methods and design can
be used for buildings and septic
systems, and little or no grading is
required for roads and driveways.
2. Conditions: Bedrock 10 ft. or more
below surface, soil percolation slow,
slope less than 15 percent, high
groundwater 1 to 2 months per year.
Seasonally high groundwater will
require special septic system design, possibly
including the use of curtain drains or fill. Shallow
foundations may be necessary for buildings;
basements should be adequately drained.
3. Conditions: Bedrock 10 ft. or more below surface,
soil percolation fast or probably fast, slope 15 percent
or greater, water table 10 ft. or more below surface.
Grading for buildings and roads could cause erosion problems; proper fill should be
used to prevent slumping or settling of foundations. Restrictions on septic systems
are severe: elaborate leaching field design and fill may be necessary, and machine
operation may be unsafe.
4. Conditions: Bedrock 10 ft. or more below surface, soil percolation slow, slope less than
15 percent, high groundwater 1 to 2 months per year.
Buildings should be properly drained; shallow foundations may be necessary. Septic
system design requirements are complex and expensive, requiring increased leaching
galleries to compensate for slow percolation, and the use of curtain drains or fill to
prevent failure of systems due to seasonal high groundwater.

24
 5. Conditions: Bedrock near surface with numerous outcrops, slope 15 percent or
greater, water table 10 ft. or more below surface.
These areas are unsuitable for septic systems and impose severe restrictions on
building foundation with blasting, grading, and/or fill required.
6. Conditions: Bedrock near surface with numerous outcrops, slopes less than 15
percent, seasonally high groundwater.
Very severe restrictions are imposed upon septic systems with fill and subsurface
drainage system probably necessary for buildings with care taken to ensure that
buildings rest on the same material (such as gravel backfill) throughout to prevent
uneven settling.
7. Conditions: Bedrock 10 ft. or more below surface slope less than 15 percent,
permanently high water table (wetlands).
Wetlands are unsuitable for septic systems without extensive excavation, filling, and
drainage. Restrictions on buildings are severe, with removal of organic material and
replacement with clean and compacted soil is necessary. Wetlands permit required.

A SUGGESTED DEVELOPMENT PLAN

The composite map identified portions of the site where conditions for development are
optimum. Buildings and roads were concentrated in these areas, leaving sensitive areas such as
wetlands and steep slopes largely undisturbed. This serves the dual purpose of minimizing
environmental disturbance and preserving the visual quality of the site, since these areas are
often of the greatest scenic value.

Clustered single-family dwellings, townhouses, and walk-up apartments are included in

the plan to illustrate the various options open to the developer. (This plan is intended to give a
general indication of how a site of this type could be developed, and the exact types and positions
of buildings and roads are not important.) Although lot sizes are somewhat smaller than normal,
adjacent open space increases land area available for recreational use by residents.

25
 A continual ribbon of open space – in
areas where soil types pose
limitations on development –
provides pedestrian circulation that is
separated from vehicular traffic. A
buffer of open space on the
southwestern portion of the site
increases privacy and shields
residential areas from traffic noise.

Roads, instead of being in conflict

with the topography, are parallel or at
an oblique angle to the site’s
contours. Residential development is
located on loops and cul-de-sacs
where traffic is light; and road layout
discourages outside through traffic.

BUILDING ORIENTATION/SUN

26
27