1

DESIGN 6: CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS

POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES
COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE OF FINE ARTS
CITY OF MANILA

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN 7
A DESIGN STUDY ON

CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS

SUBMITTED BY:

SUBMITTED TO:
ARCH. JOCELYN RIVERA-LUTAP
JUNE__, 2014


2
DESIGN 6: CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS




TABLE OF CONTENTS:
I. RESEARCH
INTRODUCTION
USERS VIEW OF CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS
STANDARDS OF CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS
CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS CAN BE GREEN
ACCORDING TO THE NATIONAL BUILDING CODE
ACCESSIBILITY LAW
EXISTING CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT







3
DESIGN 6: CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS




INTRODUCTION TO CLUST DEVELOPMENT
ARCHITECTURAL MEANING OF CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT
What is Cluster Development?
Cluster development is a development arrangement in which all buildings allowable on a site are concentrated on a portion of
the site, leaving the remainder of the site undeveloped. This contrasts with the conventional land development and subdivision
approach, which is to divide an entire site into lots, each of which meets minimum zoning lot size requirements and may be used
for building construction.
By clustering buildings together on smaller lots rather than spreading development throughout the site, a developer has greater
flexibility to design around environmental and other constraints, without having to reduce the total number of developable lots.
As a result, cluster development can provide a win-win approach for communities and developers to protect and buffer
environmentally sensitive areas, to preserve important site features, or to provide recreation areas or natural open space. It also
provides the flexibility to conserve or buffer natural resource lands, such as farmlands. Maintaining the undeveloped lands in
productive uses, such as orchards or pastures, can contribute economic value to the project.
Cluster provisions in rural areas tend to focus more on securing expanses of open space consistent with rural character, or
protecting environmentally sensitive areas and natural resource lands. In urban areas, cluster development's greatest value may
be to provide site design flexibility, although it may also provide for recreation, open space and resource protection. The open
space tracts in cluster developments are generally permanently preserved. Clustering also can reduce infrastructure costs for
developers and communities since the length of roads and utility lines are reduced. Cluster development generally refers to
residential developments, although they are sometimes defined to include commercial or industrial development.
Benefits of clusters
he nature of interconnectedness enables firms within the cluster to be more productive and competitive. Firms can have access
to stable sources of inputs, and market and technical information. The linkages facilitate dealings and lower transactions costs.
Although the linked enterprises may be competitors, they are better able to deal with common problems, such as tax issues, for

4
DESIGN 6: CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS

example, collectively. The complementarities within a cluster may increase the success of the entire clusterthis is more
evident in a tourism cluster where the efficiency of shopping outlets, restaurants and hotels, and tourist attractions enhance the
quality of the whole cluster.


ORGANIZATIONAL AND FUNCTIONAL STUDIES









5
DESIGN 6: CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS
















6
DESIGN 6: CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS











PROVISIONS






7
DESIGN 6: CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS






EXSISTING CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS
Location: Lake Elmo, Minnesota (latitude: 45 01 N; longitude: 92 52 W)
Lake Elmo includes a diversity of wastewater management systems. Of primary interest are:

Privately owned and operated systems serving new subdivisions. One system in particular, the Fields of St. Croix, is
highlighted in this case study.

City-owned collective septic tank systems that replaced inferior systems in two established areas in the city.

Individual sewage treatment systems serving residences and businesses.


8
DESIGN 6: CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS

Regional sewer service in the southwestern of the city.
Collection: Septic-tank effluent pump (STEP) and septic-tank effluent gravity (STEG) systems (Fields of St. Croix
subdivision only). Most of the other residential cluster system designs consist of a gravity sewer collection system flowing to a
communal septic tank to settle solids prior to additional treatment.
Treatment: Phase I for 49 homessubsurface-flow constructed wetlands composed of two 836 m 2 (9,000 sq ft) cells;
Phase II for 88 homesvertical-flow wetland with forced-bed aeration composed of two 465 m 2 (5,000 sq ft) cells (Fields of
St. Croix only). Most other cluster systems use similar wetland treatment systems.
Product disposition: Soil dispersal. At the Fields of St. Croix, dispersal is accomplished using at- grade unlined wetland
infiltration beds and an Infiltrator gravel-less chamber drainfield.
Flowrate: Approximately 606 m 3/d (160,000 gpd), total, for ten residential engineered wetland cluster systems and
another roughly 61 m 3/d (16,000 gpd), total, for city-owned offsite septic systems serving between one and six connections.
Residential engineered wetland cluster systems range in size from 11 m 3/d (2,800 gpd) to 170 m 3/d (44,875 gpd). Fields of St.
Croix is sized for a 127 m 3/d (33,589 gpd) design flow.
Photos licensed under Creative Commons 2.0 License. Photo credit: www.flickr.com/photos/s4xton/2956338904/
When to Consider Distributed Systems in an Urban and Suburban Context
Service Area: Area is defined by city limits. Cluster system service areas are defined by subdivision boundaries. City-
owned and operated systems are restricted to two loosely- defined service areas: the Old Village area and the Tri-Lake area.
After much discussion and a lawsuit, the City is extending regional sewer service to the southwest part of the City (I-94
Corridor) as well as the Old Village area.
Case Study Type: Independent community using cluster systems for new residential developments.
Management Type: City owns and manages public offsite systems; homeowner associations manage subdivision
systems. The city is planning to extend sewer service and eliminate city-owned commercial cluster systems in the village
district; however privately owned systems outside of the sewered areas will remain, and new development outside of the
proposed sewered areas will continue to use cluster systems.
Cost: Approximately $5,700 on average per home (for residential cluster systems).
DESCRIPTION

9
DESIGN 6: CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS

Lake Elmo is an incorporated municipality on 62 km 2 (24 sq mi.) in the MinneapolisSt. Paul Twin Cities metropolitan
area. The city consists of rolling farmland, woodlands, 12 lakes, wetlands, and a 890-ha (2200-ac) regional park reserve. A
declining number of farms remain in operation, and development throughout the city is sparse.
The city of Lake Elmo, Minnesota, owns and manages eight individual and cluster systems that serve 30 commercial
businesses in the village area of the city. These systems may be eliminated in the future to accommodate a new sewer
extension planned for the greater metropolitan Minneapolis-St. Paul area.
In addition, there are 10 privately owned and maintained residential cluster collection, treatment and dispersal
systems that serve subdivisions in various parts of the city. The subdivisions range from 14 to 135 homes and are served by
"performance-based" wetland treatment systems. These systems operate by passing septic tank effluent through rock media
that supports growth of wetland plants. The pretreatment reduces nitrates, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), and fecal
coliform levels. Treated effluent is dispersed to the soil using conventional drainfields.
PROJECT GOALS
The goal of this project was to reduce need and costs for centralized sewers throughout city, allow the costs of new
growth to be borne by developer and users as much as possible, reduce nutrient loading to sensitive lake environments, and
promote conservation development patterns that protect 50% of the site as open space.
When to Consider Distributed Systems in an Urban and Suburban Context
TIMELINE
The eight city-owned septic systems were constructed in the late 1980s to replace failing septic systems. In addition,
123 household systems were upgraded in 1985 at a cost of $1.9 million.
In 1996, Lake Elmo adopted a cluster development ordinance. The ordinance maintained residential development
density at 16 units per 40 acres (since amended to allow 18 units per 40 acres), but allowed houses to be clustered as long as
50% of the total buildable area was permanently preserved as open space, and cluster wastewater systems were used to
treat wastewater at each development site.
Developers began developing private cluster systems in 1998 after the city decided to allow "performance-based"
sewage treatment systems per Minnesota Rule 7080. In the case of the Fields of St. Croix subdivision, located on
approximately 98 ha (241 ac), Phase I for 49 homes was operational in 1997, and Phase II (86 homes) was completed in 2000.

10
DESIGN 6: CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS

In the fall of 2002, the Metropolitan Council, the Twin Cities regional planning authority and regional wastewater
service provider, declared that Lake Elmos draft comprehensive plan, including its reliance on cluster development, did not
conform to regional development and infrastructure goals. The dispute climaxed in 2004 with a Minnesota Supreme Court
decision, which supported the council's right to force Lake Elmo to grow. As a result, the city's comprehensive plan changed
in 2005 to support sewers in the central village area and along the regional sewer main in the southern portion of the city,
while continuing to use onsite and cluster systems in other areas. The new regional sewer extension is in Lake Elmos Capital
Improvement Program for 2011 and is planned to replace the eight city-owned systems in the village area, but not the
residential cluster systems.
DECISION MAKING
The planning commission, city council, and engineers worked with individual property owners and developers to
decide to implement a distributed approach to wastewater treatment. The city did not want the dense urban growth and
resulting changes to the small-village character of Lake Elmo that they feared would come with a public sewer. City officials
and residents
Photos licensed under Creative Commons 2.0 License. Photo credit: www.flickr.com/photos/
24229970@N06/2648389998
When to Consider Distributed Systems in an Urban and Suburban Context

historically resisted sewers for fear that the community would lose its rural character to high- density development and
strip malls.
As a result, city staff, council, and committees worked together to develop comprehensive plans and zoning
regulations that supported community consensus growth and land use goals. The community was involved in creating the
zoning regulations, and the developer worked with local building officials in creating the development plan. In 1996, the city
passed a zoning ordinance requiring new development to set aside 50% of the land as permanently protected open space.
The city ultimately selected a cluster treatment approach rather than individual onsite systems for several reasons,
including a preference for a single system rather than many individual septic systems. In addition, this configuration helped
avoid problems associated with the regions variable glacial moraine deposits, which has led to a high rate of individual
sewer treatment failures in the metropolitan area. Finally, clustering allowed for the use of smaller lot sizes and enhanced
open space protection.

11
DESIGN 6: CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS

In selecting specific technologies for the cluster systems, city officials worked with North American Wetland
Engineering (NAWE), a firm specializing in the use of constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. A key concern of city
officials was whether the engineered wetland treatment systems could treat wastewater in the cold Minnesota winters.
Community meetings were convened to answer questions and concerns about using wetlands for wastewater treatment for
future developments in Lake Elmo. Many officials noted that the natural aesthetics of the treatment wetlands matched well
with open-space preservation and contributed to their overall appeal. Developers worked directly with NAWE and University
of Minneapolis (UMN) engineers to design cluster systems. Designers coordinated with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA) regulators to develop cold-climate wetland treatment and dispersal systems.
CHALLENGES
The experience of Lake Elmo illustrates how a lower density, semi-agricultural city, adjacent to a large municipality, struggles to
maintain desired growth, low-density development, and its autonomy through decentralized cluster systems. Met Council, which
oversees regional planning in the Twin Cities area, disputed Lake Elmo's draft 2000 to 2020 comprehensive plan. Met Council
contended that cluster systems for wastewater management did not conform with regional development and infrastructure
goals and that such systems eventually would create environmental and financial problems for Lake Elmo. The council voted to
require Lake Elmo to change its development plan. Lake Elmo refused, and the dispute climaxed in 2004 with a Minnesota
Supreme Court decisionsupporting the council's right to force Lake Elmo to grow. The city changed its comprehensive plan in
2005 to support sewers in the central village area and along the regional sewer main in the southern portion of the city, while
continuing to use onsite and cluster systems in other areas.








12
DESIGN 6: CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS