Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Utilizamos tu perfil de LinkedIn y tus datos de actividad para personalizar los anuncios y mostrarte publicidad más relevante. Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de publicidad en cualquier momento.
Hosted by:
WhatYou Need to Know:
Best Practices in Form-Based Coding
1
Daniel Parolek

Principal, Opticos Design, Inc.

da...
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Euclidean Zoning is an Out-of-Date Operating System
2
1
Comparing Different Approaches to Zoning Urban Form
What is a Form-Based Code
3
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | 4
"Form-based codes foster predictable built results and a high-
quality public realm by usi...
Not Adding Another Layer of Regulations
Rule #1:You Have to ReplaceYour
Use-Based Zones with Form-Based
Zones
5
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Form Intent is Clear: Based on Unique Patterns of a Place
6
Small Footprint Urban Neighborho...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 7
Compact	
  &	
  
Connected
Sustainable	
  
Water
Workforce	
  &	
  
Educa/on
Green	
  
Inf...
© 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. |
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Same Use but Not Same Kind of Place
8
SF-3 SF-3
© 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. |
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
The Response: Add Layers of Form Regulations
9
Use Based Zone
...
© 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. |
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Use Based Zone
New
Form
Based
Zone
Form
Form
Form
Historic
A M...
All Regulations Must Tie Back to This Hierarchy of Form
Rule # 2:

Hierarchy of Form is the Organizing
System
11
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Form Hierarchy Should be Clear: Cincinnati, OH Transect
12
Less Urban
T5 Neighborhood 2 (T5N...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Form Hierarchy Should be Obvious: Cincinnati, OH Transect
13
Less Urban
T5 Flex (T5F)
T5 Mai...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 14
All Components of the Code Tie Back to Form not Use
Form
Signage
Parking
Variances

and W...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
This is Not Form-Based: Staff Confused
15
Should a development provision within this Specifi...
Need All the Elements to Regulate Good Urban Form
Rule #3: 

Its Not Just about Zone Standards. 

It is an Entire System o...
© 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. |
FBC Components are Like a Proven Recipe
17
1. Regulating Plan
2. Building Form Standards
3. ...
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Regulating Plan: Map of Form Hierarchy not Use
18
NBEAVERST
NLEROUXST
NSANFRANCISCOST
W BIRC...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
How to Effectively Implement this DetailedVision?
19
Aerial view of Turning Basin Edge
Along...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Smaller the Project Area, More Detailed Regulating Plan
20
13Petaluma Station Area Master Pl...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Regulating Plan is Much More Than Mapping of Zones
21
Copeland
Street
Lakeville Street
New
S...
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Close UpCountywide
10-40.40.080
10-75Flagstaff Zoning Code
T4 Neighborhood 2 (T4N.2) Standar...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Regulations to Blend Compatible Form, Not Separate Uses
23
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Numbers within Tables Are Carefully Tested
25’ x 100’ 50’ x 100’ 100’ x 100’
24
© 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. |
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Not Just About Mixed-Use: Diverse,Walkable, Neighborhoods
25
u...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
© 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Salt Lake City’s Missing Middle Housing
26
Duplex Triplex
Fore...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
© 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. |
New Orlean’s Missing Middle Housing
27
Townhouses
Duplex
Small...
© 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. |
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
High/Medium Density Housing: 35-40 DU/Acre
28
© 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. |
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Impossible to Blend Densities if You Regulate by Density
29
To...
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
10-40.40.080
10-75Flagstaff Zoning Code
T4 Neighborhood 2 (T4N.2) Standards
ROW/Property Lin...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
This Transition isVery Important to Regulate!
31
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
5.01.070Building Types
5-13Livermore Development Code
B. Lot
Lot Size
Width 50' min., 75' ma...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Kit of Parts for Neighborhoods: Cincinnati, Ohio
33
Cincinnati Citywide Form-Based Code
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
10-70.10.030 Civic Space Types
70.10-4 Flagstaff Zoning CodePublic Review Draft
Table 10-70....
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Open Space and Civic Space Regulating Plan
35
51
4.50.050 - Open Space and Civic Space
Regul...
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Close UpCountywide
7.01.110 Thoroughfare Types
7-12 Livermore Development Code
Neighborhood ...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Thinking Big:Transforming a Primary Corridor
37
Richmond Livable Corridors Master Plan and F...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Thinking Big:Transforming a Primary Corridor
38
Richmond Livable Corridors Master Plan and F...
2
Comparing Different Approaches to Zoning Urban Form
Not All Approaches are Equal
39
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 40
Comparing Different Approaches to Regulating Urban Form
ZONING PRACTICE MAY 2013
AMERICAN...
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Typical Approaches to
Zoning Urban Form (from
least to most effective)
What
Should this
Appr...
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Typical Approaches to
Zoning Urban Form (from
least to most effective)
What
Should this
Appr...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 43
No Clear Form Intent!
LAGUNA NIGUEL GATEWAY SPECIFIC PLAN
industrial, business park, offi...
3
Comparing Different Approaches to Zoning Urban Form
Plugging the FBC into 

Your Overall Code - MakingYour
Code an Effec...
Parallel Form-Based Code
Option I: Create a Separate FBC
Chapter or Division - FBC is the
Exception
45
© 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Mesa Zoning Code TOC
46
1. Introductory Provisions
2. Base Zones
3. Overlay Zones
4. Develop...
Citywide Form-Based Code
Option II: Use FBC Components as
Major Structure of the Table of
Contents - Urbanism is the Defau...
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
FBC Framework: Code Defaults to Walkable Urbanism
48
1. Preamble
2. Part 1: Introduction
3. ...
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | 49
10-1Flagstaff Zoning Code Administrative Draft
Chapter 10-40: Specific to Zones
Division ...
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
2. If the inspection determines that there are changes to the final landscape
plan, the Dire...
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Study the Table of Contents Closely:This is Important!
7. Part 6: Specific to Uses
a. Chapter...
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Thoroughfares Remained in Citywide Dev. Codes!
52
7.01.050 Thoroughfare Types
7-6 Livermore ...
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
SLST
S
LIVERM
O
RE
AV
COLLEGE AV
EJ
PD
PD
T3N
E
E
PD
PUD-153-86
PD
PUD-111-81
PD
PUD-40-85
P...
4
Form-Based Zones as the Ingredients of Place Types
Effectively Using Place Types
54
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 55ulti-Jurisdictional Form-Based Code
ign, Inc.
July 19th, 2010
Up LandsLow Lands
RuralUrban...
Cincinnati, Ohio
Citywide Scale
56
Winner of the 2013 APA Burnham Prize for a Comprehensive Plan
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
T6
T1T2T3T4T5T6
StreetCar
Neighborhoo
Urban
Neighborhood
UrbanCenter/
Downtown
57
Form Based...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
City of Cincinnati: Urban Design Element Consulting
© 2010 Opticos Design, Inc.
Created by: ...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
ples | 90
Walnut Hills
Oakley
Corryville
Roselawn
Hartwell
Northside
Carthage
Clifton
East P...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Geographic Principles | 91
Walnut Hills
Oakley
Corryville
Roselawn
Hartwell
Northside
Cartha...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
4 Focus Neighborhoods: 42 Total Will Have FBC
61
Madison Road
Beaufort County, South Carolina
Countywide Scale
62
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 63
Countywide Close Up
Place Type Designations
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 64
5
Non-Profit Think Tank: Leading Practitioners in FBCs
Who is the 

Form-Based Code Institute?
65
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 66
Our Mission
© 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | 67
© 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Nationally Recognized Thought Leader in FBCs
1. Ex. Director: Joel Russel
2. 18 Board Member...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 69
Thought Leaders in FBC Practice
ZONING PRACTICE MAY 2013
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION
IS...
6
National Leaders in Form-Based Coding Practice
Overview of Course Structure
70
© 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | 71
© 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | 72
© 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | 73
7
A Few Closing Thoughts
Conclusion
74
Developing Countries
Dialing a Code Up or Down
75
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 76
Simplified System Based on Administration Capabilities
T4
Allowed Building Types (select o...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 77
Simplified System Based on Administration Capabilities
Standards (comply with all)
Lot wid...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 78
Series of New Community Types as Framework
Stade
De L'Amitie
Special District 1
400m Walk...
Relate to Form Hierarchy
Don’t Forget Sustainability
79
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Considering Sustainability Along the Transect
80
T3: Single Family and Carriage House
Strate...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |
South 23rd Street
Incorporating sustainability in ancillary unit design2012 APA National Con...
Market Demand is Waiting
Providing Predictability: 

Getting Quick Results
82
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 83
Predictable, Clear Process is The Goal
DRAFT IN PROGRESS 03.16.07 DIAGRAM 11 PERMITTING P...
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 84
Mesa, AZ: Less Than 6 MonthsYear after Adoption
dan@opticosdesign.com
85
www.formbasedcodes.org

Form-Based Codes
A Guide for Planners, Urban Designers,
Municipalities, a...
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Welcome to the 21st Century
86
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. |
Regulating Plan
87
END
Próxima SlideShare
Cargando en…5
×

What You Need to Know: Best Practices in Form-Based Coding

2.491 visualizaciones

Publicado el

Daniel Parolek of Opticos Design offers best practices in Form-Based Coding.

Publicado en: Empresariales
  • Sé el primero en comentar

What You Need to Know: Best Practices in Form-Based Coding

  1. 1. Hosted by: WhatYou Need to Know: Best Practices in Form-Based Coding 1 Daniel Parolek Principal, Opticos Design, Inc. daniel.parolek@opticosdesign.com March 5, 2014 Salt Lake City, Utah Austin,Texas Solicitation Number: CLMP122 05.27.08 Building Placement Build-to Line (Distance from Right of Way) Bayfront Boulevard 0' A Civic Space1 / Secondary Street 0' B Bayfront Promenade1 10' min.; 20' max.2 C Side 0' D BTL Defined by a Building Bayfront Boulevard 100% min. Secondary Street / Civic Space1 80% min.3 Bayfront Promenade1 80% min. 1 The Bayfront Promenade is treated as its own frontage distinct from the Civic Space frontage within this zone. 2 The BTL for the first building to receive planning department approval becomes the set BTL (must be within this range) for this zone. All subsequent buildings must match the first building's BTL. 3 60% min. on Block J Setback (Distance from Property Line or ROW) Rear 0' min. Lot Size Width 100' min. E Depth F North of Bayfront Blvd. 100' min. South of Bayfront Blvd. 50' min. Building Form Height Building 2 Stories min.; 4 Stories max. H Ground Floor Finish Level 6" max. I Ground Floor Ceiling 14' min. clear J Upper Floor(s) Ceiling 8' min. clear K Footprint Depth, Ground-floor Commercial Space Bayfront Boulevard 50' min. Bayfront Promenade 30' min. Secondary Street 30' min. Miscellaneous Distance between Entries To Ground Floor 50' max. All upper floors must have a primary entrance along Bayfront Blvd. Service entries may not be located on Bayfront Boulevard. Building Placement (Continued) Miscellaneous Buildings must be built to BTL along each facade within 30' of a corner. G See the Streets and Circulation Regulation Plan on page 4-3 for the determination of Primary and Secondary Streets. T5-MS: Bayfront Boulevard Main Street Standards Cont'd. 1-12 HWDMP Sub-District Amendments Opticos Design, Inc. Chapter 1: Building Form Standards Sidewalk Bayfront Boulevard Bayfront Promenade / Rear SecondaryStreet CivicSpace BTL, ROW Line BTL,ROWLine BTL,ROWLine A C EF D BB I ROW Line Street K K K J H G G G G G G G G ROW / Property Line Build-to Line (BTL) Setback Line Building Area Key A Guide for Planners, Urban Designers, Municipalities, and Developers Form-Based Codes Daniel G. Parolek, AIA Karen Parolek Paul C. Crawford, FAICP Forewords by Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk and Stefanos Polyzoides E RO UT E 66 E BUTLE R AVE NBEAVERST S MIL TO N RD NLEROUXST N PI NE CL IF F DR NSANFRANCISCOST W BIRCH AVE N THORPE RD NBON ITO ST W ASPEN AVE N SW IT ZE R CA NY ON DR W CHERRY AVE S BA BB ITT DR N AZ TE C ST E DA VI D DR KN OL ES DR N TU R Q U O IS E D R W BE AL RD NHUMPHREYSST S O'L EA RY ST S SA N FR AN CIS CO ST SBEAVER ST W ELM AVE E CHERRY AVE W CLAY AVE E FRANKLIN AVE NKENDRICKST N NAV AJO DR W RO UT E 66 SLONETREERD NAGASSIZST SLEROUXST N FO RT VA LL EY RD N LO CU ST ST W CO CO NI NO AV E W KA IB A B LN E SAW MIL L RD W FO RE ST AVE NPARKST E BIRCH AVE W SANTA FE AVE E PO ND ER O SA PK W Y W PHOENIX AVE W LO W ER C O C O N IN O AV E NVERDEST W RIOR DAN RD W DALE AVE N BE RT RA ND ST N GE M IN I DR NSITGREAVESST N RO CK RID GE RD E ASPEN AVE NMOGOLLONST W BUTLER AVE E ELM AVE W CH AT EA U DR W NAVAJO RD W DUPONT AVE S WIN DS OR LN W OA K AVE NELDENST N HO PI DR NO ELL E LN W FINE AVE E BR AN NE N AVE E DALE AVE WMET ZWAL K N RIM DR W HUNT AVE S EL LI O T ST W MA RS HI LL RD S MI KE S PI KE S SP RI NG ST E COTTAGE AVE NKINLAN IRD N KIT TR ED GE RD SAGASSIZST E ELLERY AVE W SULLIVAN AVE N FO RE ST VIE W DR S VE RD E ST N CU RL ING SM OK E DR N JA ME S ST W GR AN D CA NY ON AV E W BENTON AVE E PAY TO N WA Y E PHOENIX AVE N M OR IA H DR W PIU TE RD S FO UN TAI NE ST N W IL LI AM RD W TUCSON AVE W APACHE RD SPARKST E DUPONT AVE W TOMBSTO NE AVE S RIV ER RU N RD W HA VAS UP AI RD W SU M M IT AV E W COTTAGE AVE E FINE AVE E JAC KS ON DR N EN TE RP RI SE RD E JON NY LP S CA MB RID GE LN DESILVA AVE S ELD EN ST SHUMPHREYSST NTOLTECST W TOLC HACO RD OSBORNEDR S BL AC KB IRD RO OS T S MA LPA IS LN E HIL LTO P AV E S SY CA M OR E ST E TE RR AC E AV E S ER NE ST ST SFLOREN CEST E KEN SIN GT ON DR E BENTON AVE E APPL E WAY PA YT ON WA Y W ELLERY AVE E FO RE ST AVE E HUTCHESON DR N MC MIL LA N RD S W AL NU T ST PIN ON CT SPAS EO DEL FLA G W WH IPP LE RD NAPOLLOWAY E PA SE O DE L RI O TORMEY AVE E PIC CA DIL LY DR MO UN TAI N VIE W DR E CR ES TV IEW DR S W IL SO N LN W WH ITIN G RD SKINGMAN ST E WO OD LAN D DR S BR AN NE N CIR N HE ML OC K WA Y W COLUMBUS AVE S SE VIL LE LN N CH AR LE S RD N MA NZ AN ITA WA Y S CA LL E RE PO SA N CLA RK CIR E AS HU RS T AV E MC CR EA RY E SH ER W OO D LN N EV ER GR EE N DR SW ITZ ER DR SMAR ICO PA ST N OTT O DR W HOG AN DR N GE OR GE ST N CA NY ON TE RR AC E DR S RE GE NT ST S GA BE LST W MO NT VA LE AV E S BU CK ING HA M LN N CIR CL E DR N LOM ALA ILN E HUNT AVE E CAL LE CON TEN TA S PI N N AC LE ST MCMULLENCIR E OL IV IN E W AY SGLOBE ST N CO NIF ER RD NHILLSIDEST E CA NY O N VI EW DR N CI RC LE VI EW DR HO SK INS AVE S NO ELL E LN SKENDRICKST W MCMULLEN CIR SLUMBERST S CO LO RA DO ST E CHU RCH ILL DR E BAR RO W AVE E TUR NE Y DR NCLE AR VIEW DR N SU NS ET DR W AN DE RS ON RD G R EE N BR IA R LN E COLUMBUS AVE S TR AIL OF TH E WO OD S E ST O N E R ID G E D R W CE DA R AVE E HAT CH ER DR W LAV A LN E TRE VOR WAY EIVY LN BLO ME DR NKUT CH DR N MA GM A W AY N HIL LTO P DR W BAS ALT LN EOLD CAN YON CT E JA CO B W AY W DE AN NA DR E RU SS WA Y S CA RR IAG E LN E MC CR AC KE N ST E HE LEN WA Y E CH UB S WA Y E MA KAY LA WA Y SLON ETRE ERD S BEA VER ST NAZTECST WROUTE66 T2 T1 T3 T4 T5 T6 Civic E ROU TE 66 E BUTLE R AVE N BEA VER ST INT ER STA TE 40 S MI LT ON RD N LER OUX ST N PIN E CL IFF DR N SAN FRA NCI SCO ST W BIRC H AVE N THOR PE RD NBONITO ST W ASP EN AVE N SW ITZ ER CA NY ON DR W CHE RRY AVE SBABBITTDR E DA VI D DR KNOLESDR N TUR QUO ISE DR W BEAL RD N HUM PHR EYS ST SO'LEARYST SSANFRANCISCOST SBEAV ER ST W ELM AVE E CHE RRY AVE W CLA Y AVE E FRA NKL IN AVE N KEN DRIC K ST NNAVAJODR W RO UT E 66 S LON E TRE E RD N AGA SSIZ ST S LER OUX ST NLOCUSTST W COCO NINO AVE W KAIB AB LN E SAWMILL RD W FOREST AVE N PAR K ST E BIRC H AVE W SAN TA FE AVE E PO ND ER OS A PKW Y W PHOE NIX AVE W LOW ER COC ONI NO AVE N VER DE ST W RIO RD AN RD W DAL E AVE NBERT RAND ST N GEMI NI DR N SITG REA VES ST E ASP EN AVE N MOG OLL ON ST W BUT LER AVE E ELM AVE W CHA TEA U DR W NAV AJO RD W DUP ONT AVE SWINDSORLN N ELD EN ST NHOPIDR NO EL LE LN W FINE AVE E BRANNEN AVE E DAL E AVE W ME TZ WA LK NRIMDR W HUN T AVE S ELL IOT ST WMARS HILL RD S MIK ES PIK E SSPRIN GST E COT TAG E AVE NKINLA NIRD S AGA SSIZ ST E ELLE RY AVE W SUL LIVA N AVE N FO RE ST VI EW DR SVERDEST GSMOKEDR N JA ME S ST W GRAN D CANY ON AVE W BEN TON AVE E PA YT ON WA Y E PHO ENIX AVE N MO RIA H DR W PIUTE RD SFOUNTAINEST N WI LL IAM RD W TUCS ON AVE W APA CHE RD SPARK ST E DUP ONT AVE W TOMB STON E AVE SRIVERRUNRD W HAVASUPAI RD W SUMM IT AVE W COTT AGE AVE E FINE AVE E JACKSON DR NENTE RPRIS ERD E JO NN Y LP SCAMBRIDGELN DES ILVA AVE SELDENST S HUM PHR EYS ST N TOL TEC ST OSB ORN E DR SBLACKBIRDROOST SMALPAISLN E HILLTOP AVE SSYCA MORE ST E TER RA CE AVE SERNESTST SFLOR ENCE ST E KENSINGTON DR E BEN TON AVE E APPLE WAY PA YT ON WA Y W ELL ERY AVE E FOREST AVE E HUT CHE SON DR MILLANRD SWALN UT ST PINON CT S PA SE O DE L FL AG N APO LLO WAY E PASEO DEL RIO TOR MEY AVE E PICCADILLY DR MOUNTAIN VIEW DR E CRESTVIEW DR SWILS ON LN SKINGM AN ST E WOODLAND DR S BR AN NE N CI R NHEMLOCKWAY W COL UMB US AVE SSEVILLELN N CHAR LES RD NMANZANITAWAY S CA LL E RE PO SA N CLARK CIR E ASHURST AVE MCCREARY E SH ER WO OD LN NEVERGREENDR SWITZER DR SMARICOPAST NOTTODR NGEORGEST NCANYO NTERRA CEDR SREGENTST SGABELST W MONT VALE AVE SBUCKINGHAMLN N CI RC LE DR NLOMALAILN E HUN T AVE E CA LL E CO NT EN TA S PIN NAC LE ST MCM ULL EN CIR E OL IVI NE WA Y SGLOB EST FERRD N HILL SIDE ST E CA NY ON VIE W DR N CIR CL E VIE W DR HOSKINS AVE S NO EL LE LN S KEN DRIC K ST W MCM ULL EN CIR S LUM BER ST SCOLORADOST E CHURCHILL DR E BARROW AVE E TU RN EY DR NCLEARVIEWDR GR EEN BRI AR LN E COL UMB US AVE STRAILOFTHEWOODS E STO NE RIDG E DR E HA TC HE R DR E TR EV OR WA Y E IVY LN BLOME DR N MA GM A WA Y NHILLTOPDRE OL D CA NY ON CT E JAC OB WA Y E RU SS WA Y SCARRIAGELN E MCCRACKEN ST E HE LE N WA Y E CH UB S WA Y E MA KA YL A WA Y SLONETREERD SBEAVERST N AZT EC ST W ROU TE 66 0 200' 400' 1 Acre¼ Acre Regulating Plan Flagstaff, Arizona October 9, 2009 © C o p y r i g h t 2 0 0 8 Opticos Design, Inc. 1285 Gilman Street Berkeley, CA 94706 510 - 558 - 6957 0 200' 400' Austin,Texas Solicitation Number: CLMP122 05.27.08 Building Placement Build-to Line (Distance from Right of Way) Bayfront Boulevard 0' A Civic Space1 / Secondary Street 0' B Bayfront Promenade1 10' min.; 20' max.2 C Side 0' D BTL Defined by a Building Bayfront Boulevard 100% min. Secondary Street / Civic Space1 80% min.3 Bayfront Promenade1 80% min. 1 The Bayfront Promenade is treated as its own frontage distinct from the Civic Space frontage within this zone. 2 The BTL for the first building to receive planning department approval becomes the set BTL (must be within this range) for this zone. All subsequent buildings must match the first building's BTL. 3 60% min. on Block J Setback (Distance from Property Line or ROW) Rear 0' min. Lot Size Width 100' min. E Depth F North of Bayfront Blvd. 100' min. South of Bayfront Blvd. 50' min. Building Form Height Building 2 Stories min.; 4 Stories max. H Ground Floor Finish Level 6" max. I Ground Floor Ceiling 14' min. clear J Upper Floor(s) Ceiling 8' min. clear K Footprint Depth, Ground-floor Commercial Space Bayfront Boulevard 50' min. Bayfront Promenade 30' min. Secondary Street 30' min. Miscellaneous Distance between Entries To Ground Floor 50' max. All upper floors must have a primary entrance along Bayfront Blvd. Service entries may not be located on Bayfront Boulevard. Building Placement (Continued) Miscellaneous Buildings must be built to BTL along each facade within 30' of a corner. G See the Streets and Circulation Regulation Plan on page 4-3 for the determination of Primary and Secondary Streets. T5-MS: Bayfront Boulevard Main Street Standards Cont'd. 1-12 HWDMP Sub-District Amendments Opticos Design, Inc. Chapter 1: Building Form Standards Sidewalk Bayfront Boulevard Bayfront Promenade / Rear SecondaryStreet CivicSpace BTL, ROW Line BTL,ROWLine BTL,ROWLine A C EF D BB I ROW Line Street K K K J H G G G G G G G G ROW / Property Line Build-to Line (BTL) Setback Line Building Area Key A Guide for Planners, Urban Designers, Municipalities, and Developers Form-Based Codes Daniel G. Parolek, AIA Karen Parolek Paul C. Crawford, FAICP Forewords by Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk and Stefanos Polyzoides E RO UT E 66 E BUTLE R AVE NBEAVERST S MIL TO N RD NLEROUXST N PI NE CL IF F DR NSANFRANCISCOST W BIRCH AVE N THORPE RD NBON ITO ST W ASPEN AVE N SW IT ZE R CA NY ON DR W CHERRY AVE S BA BB ITT DR N AZ TE C ST E DA VI D DR KN OL ES DR N TU R Q U O IS E D R W BE AL RD NHUMPHREYSST S O'L EA RY ST S SA N FR AN CIS CO ST SBEAVER ST W ELM AVE E CHERRY AVE W CLAY AVE E FRANKLIN AVE NKENDRICKST N NAV AJO DR W RO UT E 66 SLONETREERD NAGASSIZST SLEROUXST N FO RT VA LL EY RD N LO CU ST ST W CO CO NI NO AV E W KA IB A B LN E SAW MIL L RD W FO RE ST AVE NPARKST E BIRCH AVE W SANTA FE AVE E PO ND ER O SA PK W Y W PHOENIX AVE W LO W ER C O C O N IN O AV E NVERDEST W RIOR DAN RD W DALE AVE N BE RT RA ND ST N GE M IN I DR NSITGREAVESST N RO CK RID GE RD E ASPEN AVE NMOGOLLONST W BUTLER AVE E ELM AVE W CH AT EA U DR W NAVAJO RD W DUPONT AVE S WIN DS OR LN W OA K AVE NELDENST N HO PI DR NO ELL E LN W FINE AVE E BR AN NE N AVE E DALE AVE WMET ZWAL K N RIM DR W HUNT AVE S EL LI O T ST W MA RS HI LL RD S MI KE S PI KE S SP RI NG ST E COTTAGE AVE NKINLAN IRD N KIT TR ED GE RD SAGASSIZST E ELLERY AVE W SULLIVAN AVE N FO RE ST VIE W DR S VE RD E ST N CU RL ING SM OK E DR N JA ME S ST W GR AN D CA NY ON AV E W BENTON AVE E PAY TO N WA Y E PHOENIX AVE N M OR IA H DR W PIU TE RD S FO UN TAI NE ST N W IL LI AM RD W TUCSON AVE W APACHE RD SPARKST E DUPONT AVE W TOMBSTO NE AVE S RIV ER RU N RD W HA VAS UP AI RD W SU M M IT AV E W COTTAGE AVE E FINE AVE E JAC KS ON DR N EN TE RP RI SE RD E JON NY LP S CA MB RID GE LN DESILVA AVE S ELD EN ST SHUMPHREYSST NTOLTECST W TOLC HACO RD OSBORNEDR S BL AC KB IRD RO OS T S MA LPA IS LN E HIL LTO P AV E S SY CA M OR E ST E TE RR AC E AV E S ER NE ST ST SFLOREN CEST E KEN SIN GT ON DR E BENTON AVE E APPL E WAY PA YT ON WA Y W ELLERY AVE E FO RE ST AVE E HUTCHESON DR N MC MIL LA N RD S W AL NU T ST PIN ON CT SPAS EO DEL FLA G W WH IPP LE RD NAPOLLOWAY E PA SE O DE L RI O TORMEY AVE E PIC CA DIL LY DR MO UN TAI N VIE W DR E CR ES TV IEW DR S W IL SO N LN W WH ITIN G RD SKINGMAN ST E WO OD LAN D DR S BR AN NE N CIR N HE ML OC K WA Y W COLUMBUS AVE S SE VIL LE LN N CH AR LE S RD N MA NZ AN ITA WA Y S CA LL E RE PO SA N CLA RK CIR E AS HU RS T AV E MC CR EA RY E SH ER W OO D LN N EV ER GR EE N DR SW ITZ ER DR SMAR ICO PA ST N OTT O DR W HOG AN DR N GE OR GE ST N CA NY ON TE RR AC E DR S RE GE NT ST S GA BE LST W MO NT VA LE AV E S BU CK ING HA M LN N CIR CL E DR N LOM ALA ILN E HUNT AVE E CAL LE CON TEN TA S PI N N AC LE ST MCMULLENCIR E OL IV IN E W AY SGLOBE ST N CO NIF ER RD NHILLSIDEST E CA NY O N VI EW DR N CI RC LE VI EW DR HO SK INS AVE S NO ELL E LN SKENDRICKST W MCMULLEN CIR SLUMBERST S CO LO RA DO ST E CHU RCH ILL DR E BAR RO W AVE E TUR NE Y DR NCLE AR VIEW DR N SU NS ET DR W AN DE RS ON RD G R EE N BR IA R LN E COLUMBUS AVE S TR AIL OF TH E WO OD S E ST O N E R ID G E D R W CE DA R AVE E HAT CH ER DR W LAV A LN E TRE VOR WAY EIVY LN BLO ME DR NKUT CH DR N MA GM A W AY N HIL LTO P DR W BAS ALT LN EOLD CAN YON CT E JA CO B W AY W DE AN NA DR E RU SS WA Y S CA RR IAG E LN E MC CR AC KE N ST E HE LEN WA Y E CH UB S WA Y E MA KAY LA WA Y SLON ETRE ERD S BEA VER ST NAZTECST WROUTE66 T2 T1 T3 T4 T5 T6 Civic E ROU TE 66 E BUTLE R AVE N BEA VER ST INT ER STA TE 40 S MI LT ON RD N LER OUX ST N PIN E CL IFF DR N SAN FRA NCI SCO ST W BIRC H AVE N THOR PE RD NBONITO ST W ASP EN AVE N SW ITZ ER CA NY ON DR W CHE RRY AVE SBABBITTDR E DA VI D DR KNOLESDR N TUR QUO ISE DR W BEAL RD N HUM PHR EYS ST SO'LEARYST SSANFRANCISCOST SBEAV ER ST W ELM AVE E CHE RRY AVE W CLA Y AVE E FRA NKL IN AVE N KEN DRIC K ST NNAVAJODR W RO UT E 66 S LON E TRE E RD N AGA SSIZ ST S LER OUX ST NLOCUSTST W COCO NINO AVE W KAIB AB LN E SAWMILL RD W FOREST AVE N PAR K ST E BIRC H AVE W SAN TA FE AVE E PO ND ER OS A PKW Y W PHOE NIX AVE W LOW ER COC ONI NO AVE N VER DE ST W RIO RD AN RD W DAL E AVE NBERT RAND ST N GEMI NI DR N SITG REA VES ST E ASP EN AVE N MOG OLL ON ST W BUT LER AVE E ELM AVE W CHA TEA U DR W NAV AJO RD W DUP ONT AVE SWINDSORLN N ELD EN ST NHOPIDR NO EL LE LN W FINE AVE E BRANNEN AVE E DAL E AVE W ME TZ WA LK NRIMDR W HUN T AVE S ELL IOT ST WMARS HILL RD S MIK ES PIK E SSPRIN GST E COT TAG E AVE NKINLA NIRD S AGA SSIZ ST E ELLE RY AVE W SUL LIVA N AVE N FO RE ST VI EW DR SVERDEST SMOKEDR N JA ME S ST W GRAN D CANY ON AVE W BEN TON AVE E PA YT ON WA Y E PHO ENIX AVE N MO RIA H DR W PIUTE RD SFOUNTAINEST N WI LL IAM RD W TUCS ON AVE W APA CHE RD SPARK ST E DUP ONT AVE W TOMB STON E AVE SRIVERRUNRD W HAVASUPAI RD W SUMM IT AVE W COTT AGE AVE E FINE AVE E JACKSON DR NENTE RPRIS ERD E JO NN Y LP SCAMBRIDGELN DES ILVA AVE SELDENST S HUM PHR EYS ST N TOL TEC ST OSB ORN E DR SBLACKBIRDROOST SMALPAISLN E HILLTOP AVE SSYCA MORE ST E TER RA CE AVE SERNESTST SFLOR ENCE ST E KENSINGTON DR E BEN TON AVE E APPLE WAY PA YT ON WA Y W ELL ERY AVE E FOREST AVE E HUT CHE SON DR LLANRD SWALN UT ST PINON CT S PA SE O DE L FL AG N APO LLO WAY E PASEO DEL RIO TOR MEY AVE E PICCADILLY DR MOUNTAIN VIEW DR E CRESTVIEW DR SWILS ON LN SKINGM AN ST E WOODLAND DR S BR AN NE N CI R NHEMLOCKWAY W COL UMB US AVE SSEVILLELN N CHAR LES RD NMANZANITAWAY S CA LL E RE PO SA N CLARK CIR E ASHURST AVE MCCREARY E SH ER WO OD LN NEVERGREENDR SWITZER DR SMARICOPAST NOTTODR NGEORGEST NCANYO NTERRA CEDR SREGENTST SGABELST W MONT VALE AVE SBUCKINGHAMLN N CI RC LE DR NLOMALAILN E HUN T AVE E CA LL E CO NT EN TA S PIN NAC LE ST MCM ULL EN CIR E OL IVI NE WA Y SGLOB EST RRD N HILL SIDE ST E CA NY ON VIE W DR N CIR CL E VIE W DR HOSKINS AVE S NO EL LE LN S KEN DRIC K ST W MCM ULL EN CIR S LUM BER ST SCOLORADOST E CHURCHILL DR E BARROW AVE E TU RN EY DR NCLEARVIEWDR GR EEN BRI AR LN E COL UMB US AVE STRAILOFTHEWOODS E STO NE RIDG E DR E HA TC HE R DR E TR EV OR WA Y E IVY LN BLOME DR N MA GM A WA Y NHILLTOPDRE OL D CA NY ON CT E JAC OB WA Y E RU SS WA Y SCARRIAGELN E MCCRACKEN ST E HE LE N WA Y E CH UB S WA Y E MA KA YL A WA Y SLONETREERD SBEAVERST N AZT EC ST W ROU TE 66 0 200' 400' 1 Acre¼ Acre Regulating Plan Flagstaff, Arizona October 9, 2009 © C o p y r i g h t 2 0 0 8 Opticos Design, Inc. 1285 Gilman Street Berkeley, CA 94706 510 - 558 - 6957 0 200' 400' Austin,Texas Solicitation Number: CLMP122 05.27.08 Building Placement Build-to Line (Distance from Right of Way) Bayfront Boulevard 0' A Civic Space1 / Secondary Street 0' B Bayfront Promenade1 10' min.; 20' max.2 C Side 0' D BTL Defined by a Building Bayfront Boulevard 100% min. Secondary Street / Civic Space1 80% min.3 Bayfront Promenade1 80% min. 1 The Bayfront Promenade is treated as its own frontage distinct from the Civic Space frontage within this zone. 2 The BTL for the first building to receive planning department approval becomes the set BTL (must be within this range) for this zone. All subsequent buildings must match the first building's BTL. 3 60% min. on Block J Setback (Distance from Property Line or ROW) Rear 0' min. Lot Size Width 100' min. E Depth F North of Bayfront Blvd. 100' min. South of Bayfront Blvd. 50' min. Building Form Height Building 2 Stories min.; 4 Stories max. H Ground Floor Finish Level 6" max. I Ground Floor Ceiling 14' min. clear J Upper Floor(s) Ceiling 8' min. clear K Footprint Depth, Ground-floor Commercial Space Bayfront Boulevard 50' min. Bayfront Promenade 30' min. Secondary Street 30' min. Miscellaneous Distance between Entries To Ground Floor 50' max. All upper floors must have a primary entrance along Bayfront Blvd. Service entries may not be located on Bayfront Boulevard. Building Placement (Continued) Miscellaneous Buildings must be built to BTL along each facade within 30' of a corner. G See the Streets and Circulation Regulation Plan on page 4-3 for the determination of Primary and Secondary Streets. T5-MS: Bayfront Boulevard Main Street Standards Cont'd. 1-12 HWDMP Sub-District Amendments Opticos Design, Inc. Chapter 1: Building Form Standards Sidewalk Bayfront Boulevard Bayfront Promenade / Rear SecondaryStreet CivicSpace BTL, ROW Line BTL,ROWLine BTL,ROWLine A C EF D BB I ROW Line Street K K K J H G G G G G G G G ROW / Property Line Build-to Line (BTL) Setback Line Building Area Key A Guide for Planners, Urban Designers, Municipalities, and Developers Form-Based Codes Daniel G. Parolek, AIA Karen Parolek Paul C. Crawford, FAICP Forewords by Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk and Stefanos Polyzoides E RO UT E 66 E BUTLE R AVE NBEAVERST S MIL TO N RD NLEROUXST N PI NE CL IF F DR NSANFRANCISCOST W BIRCH AVE N THORPE RD NBON ITO ST W ASPEN AVE N SW IT ZE R CA NY ON DR W CHERRY AVE S BA BB ITT DR N AZ TE C ST E DA VI D DR KN OL ES DR N TU R Q U O IS E D R W BE AL RD NHUMPHREYSST S O'L EA RY ST S SA N FR AN CIS CO ST SBEAVER ST W ELM AVE E CHERRY AVE W CLAY AVE E FRANKLIN AVE NKENDRICKST N NAV AJO DR W RO UT E 66 SLONETREERD NAGASSIZST SLEROUXST N FO RT VA LL EY RD N LO CU ST ST W CO CO NI NO AV E W KA IB A B LN E SAW MIL L RD W FO RE ST AVE NPARKST E BIRCH AVE W SANTA FE AVE E PO ND ER O SA PK W Y W PHOENIX AVE W LO W ER C O C O N IN O AV E NVERDEST W RIOR DAN RD W DALE AVE N BE RT RA ND ST N GE M IN I DR NSITGREAVESST N RO CK RID GE RD E ASPEN AVE NMOGOLLONST W BUTLER AVE E ELM AVE W CH AT EA U DR W NAVAJO RD W DUPONT AVE S WIN DS OR LN W OA K AVE NELDENST N HO PI DR NO ELL E LN W FINE AVE E BR AN NE N AVE E DALE AVE WMET ZWAL K N RIM DR W HUNT AVE S EL LI O T ST W MA RS HI LL RD S MI KE S PI KE S SP RI NG ST E COTTAGE AVE NKINLAN IRD N KIT TR ED GE RD SAGASSIZST E ELLERY AVE W SULLIVAN AVE N FO RE ST VIE W DR S VE RD E ST N CU RL ING SM OK E DR N JA ME S ST W GR AN D CA NY ON AV E W BENTON AVE E PAY TO N WA Y E PHOENIX AVE N M OR IA H DR W PIU TE RD S FO UN TAI NE ST N W IL LI AM RD W TUCSON AVE W APACHE RD SPARKST E DUPONT AVE W TOMBSTO NE AVE S RIV ER RU N RD W HA VAS UP AI RD W SU M M IT AV E W COTTAGE AVE E FINE AVE E JAC KS ON DR N EN TE RP RI SE RD E JON NY LP S CA MB RID GE LN DESILVA AVE S ELD EN ST SHUMPHREYSST NTOLTECST W TOLC HACO RD OSBORNEDR S BL AC KB IRD RO OS T S MA LPA IS LN E HIL LTO P AV E S SY CA M OR E ST E TE RR AC E AV E S ER NE ST ST SFLOREN CEST E KEN SIN GT ON DR E BENTON AVE E APPL E WAY PA YT ON WA Y W ELLERY AVE E FO RE ST AVE E HUTCHESON DR N MC MIL LA N RD S W AL NU T ST PIN ON CT SPAS EO DEL FLA G W WH IPP LE RD NAPOLLOWAY E PA SE O DE L RI O TORMEY AVE E PIC CA DIL LY DR MO UN TAI N VIE W DR E CR ES TV IEW DR S W IL SO N LN W WH ITIN G RD SKINGMAN ST E WO OD LAN D DR S BR AN NE N CIR N HE ML OC K WA Y W COLUMBUS AVE S SE VIL LE LN N CH AR LE S RD N MA NZ AN ITA WA Y S CA LL E RE PO SA N CLA RK CIR E AS HU RS T AV E MC CR EA RY E SH ER W OO D LN N EV ER GR EE N DR SW ITZ ER DR SMAR ICO PA ST N OTT O DR W HOG AN DR N GE OR GE ST N CA NY ON TE RR AC E DR S RE GE NT ST S GA BE LST W MO NT VA LE AV E S BU CK ING HA M LN N CIR CL E DR N LOM ALA ILN E HUNT AVE E CAL LE CON TEN TA S PI N N AC LE ST MCMULLENCIR E OL IV IN E W AY SGLOBE ST N CO NIF ER RD NHILLSIDEST E CA NY O N VI EW DR N CI RC LE VI EW DR HO SK INS AVE S NO ELL E LN SKENDRICKST W MCMULLEN CIR SLUMBERST S CO LO RA DO ST E CHU RCH ILL DR E BAR RO W AVE E TUR NE Y DR NCLE AR VIEW DR N SU NS ET DR W AN DE RS ON RD G R EE N BR IA R LN E COLUMBUS AVE S TR AIL OF TH E WO OD S E ST O N E R ID G E D R W CE DA R AVE E HAT CH ER DR W LAV A LN E TRE VOR WAY EIVY LN BLO ME DR NKUT CH DR N MA GM A W AY N HIL LTO P DR W BAS ALT LN EOLD CAN YON CT E JA CO B W AY W DE AN NA DR E RU SS WA Y S CA RR IAG E LN E MC CR AC KE N ST E HE LEN WA Y E CH UB S WA Y E MA KAY LA WA Y SLON ETRE ERD S BEA VER ST NAZTECST WROUTE66 T2 T1 T3 T4 T5 T6 Civic E ROU TE 66 E BUTLE R AVE N BEA VER ST INT ER STA TE 40 S MI LT ON RD N LER OUX ST N PIN E CL IFF DR N SAN FRA NCI SCO ST W BIRC H AVE N THOR PE RD NBONITO ST W ASP EN AVE N SW ITZ ER CA NY ON DR W CHE RRY AVE SBABBITTDR E DA VI D DR KNOLESDR N TUR QUO ISE DR W BEAL RD N HUM PHR EYS ST SO'LEARYST SSANFRANCISCOST SBEAV ER ST W ELM AVE E CHE RRY AVE W CLA Y AVE E FRA NKL IN AVE N KEN DRIC K ST NNAVAJODR W RO UT E 66 S LON E TRE E RD N AGA SSIZ ST S LER OUX ST NLOCUSTST W COCO NINO AVE W KAIB AB LN E SAWMILL RD W FOREST AVE N PAR K ST E BIRC H AVE W SAN TA FE AVE E PO ND ER OS A PKW Y W PHOE NIX AVE W LOW ER COC ONI NO AVE N VER DE ST W RIO RD AN RD W DAL E AVE NBERT RAND ST N GEMI NI DR N SITG REA VES ST D E ASP EN AVE N MOG OLL ON ST W BUT LER AVE E ELM AVE W CHA TEA U DR W NAV AJO RD W DUP ONT AVE SWINDSORLN N ELD EN ST NHOPIDR NO EL LE LN W FINE AVE E BRANNEN AVE E DAL E AVE W ME TZ WA LK NRIMDR W HUN T AVE S ELL IOT ST WMARS HILL RD S MIK ES PIK E SSPRIN GST E COT TAG E AVE NKINLA NIRD S AGA SSIZ ST E ELLE RY AVE W SUL LIVA N AVE N FO RE ST VI EW DR SVERDEST RLINGSMOKEDR N JA ME S ST W GRAN D CANY ON AVE W BEN TON AVE E PA YT ON WA Y E PHO ENIX AVE N MO RIA H DR W PIUTE RD SFOUNTAINEST N WI LL IAM RD W TUCS ON AVE W APA CHE RD SPARK ST E DUP ONT AVE W TOMB STON E AVE SRIVERRUNRD W HAVASUPAI RD W SUMM IT AVE W COTT AGE AVE E FINE AVE E JACKSON DR NENTE RPRIS ERD E JO NN Y LP SCAMBRIDGELN DES ILVA AVE SELDENST S HUM PHR EYS ST N TOL TEC ST OSB ORN E DR SBLACKBIRDROOST SMALPAISLN E HILLTOP AVE SSYCA MORE ST E TER RA CE AVE SERNESTST SFLOR ENCE ST E KENSINGTON DR E BEN TON AVE E APPLE WAY PA YT ON WA Y W ELL ERY AVE E FOREST AVE E HUT CHE SON DR NMCMILLANRD SWALN UT ST PINON CT S PA SE O DE L FL AG N APO LLO WAY E PASEO DEL RIO TOR MEY AVE E PICCADILLY DR MOUNTAIN VIEW DR E CRESTVIEW DR SWILS ON LN SKINGM AN ST E WOODLAND DR S BR AN NE N CI R NHEMLOCKWAY W COL UMB US AVE SSEVILLELN N CHAR LES RD NMANZANITAWAY S CA LL E RE PO SA N CLARK CIR E ASHURST AVE MCCREARY E SH ER WO OD LN NEVERGREENDR SWITZER DR SMARICOPAST NOTTODR NGEORGEST NCANYO NTERRA CEDR SREGENTST SGABELST W MONT VALE AVE SBUCKINGHAMLN N CI RC LE DR NLOMALAILN E HUN T AVE E CA LL E CO NT EN TA S PIN NAC LE ST MCM ULL EN CIR E OL IVI NE WA Y SGLOB EST CONIFERRD N HILL SIDE ST E CA NY ON VIE W DR N CIR CL E VIE W DR HOSKINS AVE S NO EL LE LN S KEN DRIC K ST W MCM ULL EN CIR S LUM BER ST SCOLORADOST E CHURCHILL DR E BARROW AVE E TU RN EY DR NCLEARVIEWDR GR EEN BRI AR LN E COL UMB US AVE STRAILOFTHEWOODS E STO NE RIDG E DR E HA TC HE R DR E TR EV OR WA Y E IVY LN BLOME DR N MA GM A WA Y NHILLTOPDRE OL D CA NY ON CT E JAC OB WA Y E RU SS WA Y SCARRIAGELN E MCCRACKEN ST E HE LE N WA Y E CH UB S WA Y E MA KA YL A WA Y SLONETREERD SBEAVERST N AZT EC ST W ROU TE 66 0 200' 400' 1 Acre¼ Acre Regulating Plan Flagstaff, Arizona October 9, 2009 © C o p y r i g h t 2 0 0 8 Opticos Design, Inc. 1285 Gilman Street Berkeley, CA 94706 510 - 558 - 6957 0 200' 400'
  2. 2. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Euclidean Zoning is an Out-of-Date Operating System 2
  3. 3. 1 Comparing Different Approaches to Zoning Urban Form What is a Form-Based Code 3
  4. 4. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | 4 "Form-based codes foster predictable built results and a high- quality public realm by using physical form (rather than separation of uses) as the organizing principle for the code.They are regulations, not mere guidelines.They are adopted into city or county law. Form-based codes are an alternative to conventional zoning." Form-Based Code Institute
  5. 5. Not Adding Another Layer of Regulations Rule #1:You Have to ReplaceYour Use-Based Zones with Form-Based Zones 5
  6. 6. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form Intent is Clear: Based on Unique Patterns of a Place 6 Small Footprint Urban Neighborhood Zone Cincinnati Form-Based Code
  7. 7. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 7 Compact  &   Connected Sustainable   Water Workforce  &   Educa/on Green   Infrastructure Crea/ve   Economy Household   Affordability Healthy  Aus/n   Development   Regula/ons Not adding layers of additional regulations- replacing
  8. 8. © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Same Use but Not Same Kind of Place 8 SF-3 SF-3
  9. 9. © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | The Response: Add Layers of Form Regulations 9 Use Based Zone Form Form Form Historic Problem: Never Got Rid of Ineffective Foundation
  10. 10. © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Use Based Zone New Form Based Zone Form Form Form Historic A More Direct and Effective System Based on Form 10 Use
  11. 11. All Regulations Must Tie Back to This Hierarchy of Form Rule # 2:
 Hierarchy of Form is the Organizing System 11
  12. 12. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form Hierarchy Should be Clear: Cincinnati, OH Transect 12 Less Urban T5 Neighborhood 2 (T5N.2)T3 Neighborhood (T3N) T3 Estate (T3E) T4 Neighborhood 2 (T4N.2) T4 Neighborhood 1 (T4N.1) T5 Neighborhood 1 (T5N.1) T3 T4 T5 More Urban
  13. 13. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form Hierarchy Should be Obvious: Cincinnati, OH Transect 13 Less Urban T5 Flex (T5F) T5 Main Street (T5MS) T6 Core (T6C) T6T5 (continued) More Urban
  14. 14. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 14 All Components of the Code Tie Back to Form not Use Form Signage Parking Variances
 and Waivers Nonconformities Administration
 and Procedures
  15. 15. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | This is Not Form-Based: Staff Confused 15 Should a development provision within this Specific Plan be inconsistent with any development provision found elsewhere in this Specific Plan, the Community Development Director shall determine which provision is applicable. 4.2 REGULATING PLAN AND ZONES This section establishes five unique zones that are applicable to the properties within the Specific Plan area and include: ■ Retail Commercial (RC) Zone ■ Business Park (BP) Zone ■ Community Service (CS) Zone ■ Mixed-Use (MU) Zone ■ Open Space (OS) Zone The Regulating Plan (Figure 4-1) defines the boundaries of these zones and assigns a specific zone to each individual property within the Specific Plan area. The location of the zones is based on the desired distribution and mix of uses, development densities, and urban form characteristics identified in Chapter 3 (Policies and Development Plans). The zones are intended to accommodate the development of multiple new mixed-use districts where the placement of buildings, form and scale, orientation to sidewalks and the public realm, location of parking, and architectural character
  16. 16. Need All the Elements to Regulate Good Urban Form Rule #3: 
 Its Not Just about Zone Standards. 
 It is an Entire System or Code 16
  17. 17. © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | FBC Components are Like a Proven Recipe 17 1. Regulating Plan 2. Building Form Standards 3. Frontage Types 4. Thoroughfare Types 5. Civic Space Types 6. Building Types 7. Architectural Standards 8. Landscape Standards 9. Green Building Standards 10. Alternative Energy 11. Urban Agriculture 12. Stormwater Management 13. Etc.
  18. 18. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Regulating Plan: Map of Form Hierarchy not Use 18 NBEAVERST NLEROUXST NSANFRANCISCOST W BIRCH AVE W ASPEN AVE W CHERRY AVE NHUMPHREYSST SBEAVERST E CHERRY AVE NKENDRICKST NAGASSIZST NPARKST E BIRCH AVE W SANTA FE AVE W PHOENIX AVE NVERDEST W DALE AVE NSITGREAVESST E ASPEN AVE NELDENST E DALE AVE S M IKES PIKE E COTTAGE AVE E PHOENIX AVE W COTTAGE AVE NHILLSIDEST WROUTE66 T3 T4 T5 T6 Civic Regulating Plan Flagstaff, Arizona October 9, 2009 S PIN N AC LE ST G R EE N BR IA R LN T3 T4 T5 T6 Civic Flagstaff, Arizona: Development Code Update
  19. 19. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | How to Effectively Implement this DetailedVision? 19 Aerial view of Turning Basin Edge Along the turning basin, there will be a variety of public spaces. To the west, Live/Work or Flex units will face onto a small landscaped area. A small boardwalk will provide access to the existing boat docks that will serve as a secondary path of travel. Along the northern edge, a hardscaped plaza will transition to a boardwalk over- look that projects over the shoreline and into the turning basin. Just to the east of the overlook, a series of grand stairs cascade down to the water’s edge providing an op- portunity to interact with the water. The public building at the southern end of the Neighborhood Square provides a focal point in this area. The public building has indoor and covered outdoor space providing a view of the turning basin and further down the Petaluma River. The building could provide space for public meetings, receptions, or art exhibitions. Two-story galleries on buildings provide a covered walkway as well as private outdoor space with dramatic views of the river and downtown for upper floor users. 2-25Petaluma Station Area Master Plan Draft: April 2012 2.4 Public Space FrameworkChapter 2: Vision Petaluma, CA SMART Station Area Plan and SmartCode
  20. 20. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Smaller the Project Area, More Detailed Regulating Plan 20 13Petaluma Station Area Master Plan Draft: January 2013 Section 2. Regulating Plan 2.20 - Regulating Plan Downtown Station Area Detail Transect Zones Urban Core (T6) Urban Core - Open (T6-O) Urban Center (T5) Urban General (T4) Historic Agricultural Services District (D1) Railroad District (D2) River Dependent Industrial District (D3) Key Corner Element Required Public Structure Special Building Notes: 1. The Open overlay (T6-O) allows additional ground floor uses. See Section 3 (Building Func- tion Standards) for additional allowed uses. All other regulations shall be per the regulations of the base zone (T6). 2. The dimensions shown on this plan indicate the maximum and minimum distances from the ROW where the transition between two adjacent transect zones can occur. Washington Street New Riverfront Street GreyStreet BaylisStreet Copeland Street Copeland Street Lakeville Street New Station Access Street Vertical Element 50’ tall min. Future SMART Platform 25’ min. corner chamfer (x) Public Meeting Hall 1,500sf min.; 5,000sf max. Special Building (Public/Restaurant/Cafe) 30’ min. clear to top of bank; 2,000sf min.; 5,000sf max.; 1 story max./25’ min. building height. W eller Street New TransverseStreet W ashingtonStreet D Street 50’ min.; 80’ max. 50’ min.; 80’ max. 50’ min.; 80’ max. 50’ min.; 80’ max. 50’min.; 80’max. 50’min.; 80’max. 50’min.; 80’max. 50’min.; 80’max. 50’ min.; 80’ max. 50’ min.; 80’ max. 50’ min.; 80’ max. 50’min.; 80’max. 50’min.; 80’max. 50’ min.; 80’ max. 50’ min.; 150’ max. x x x x 25’ min. corner chamfer (x) Petaluma, CA SMART Station Area Plan and SmartCode
  21. 21. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Regulating Plan is Much More Than Mapping of Zones 21 Copeland Street Lakeville Street New Station Access Street Vertical Element 50’ tall min. Future SMA Platform 25’ min. corner chamfer (x) D Street 50’min.; 80’max. 50’min.; 80’max. 50’min.; 80’max. 50’ min.; 80’ max. 50’ min.; 80’ max. x x x x 25’ min. corner chamfer (x) Petaluma, CA SMART Station Area Plan and SmartCode
  22. 22. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Close UpCountywide 10-40.40.080 10-75Flagstaff Zoning Code T4 Neighborhood 2 (T4N.2) Standards ROW/Property Line Building Setback Line Encroachment Area Key ROW/Property Line Parking Setback Line Parking Area Key G. Required Parking Spaces7 Residential Uses Studio/1 Bedroom 1 space/unit min. 2+ Bedrooms 2 spaces/unit min. Retail Trade, Service Uses ≤2,000 sf No spaces required >2,000 sf 2 spaces/1,000 sf min. above first 2,000 sf 7 Use types not listed shall meet the requirements in Table 10-50.70.040.A (Automobile Parking Spaces Required). Location (Setback from ROW/Property Line) Front Covered/Attached 30' min. Uncovered Match front facade min. Side Street/Civic Space 5' min. Side 0' min. Rear 0' min. Miscellaneous Linear feet of front or side façade that may be garage 35% max. See Division 10-50.70 (Parking Standards) for additional parking regulations. M N O P F. Encroachments and Frontage Types Encroachments4 Front 5' max. Side Street/Civic Space 5' max. Side 3' max. Rear Property Line 0' max. Rear Lane or Alley 3' max. Galleries may encroach in to street ROW, all other encroachments are not allowed within a street ROW. 4 See Section 10-50.35 (Encroachments) for allowed encroachments. Allowed Private Frontage Types5 Stoop Forecourt Gallery6 Terrace/Lightwell6 Shopfront6 Porch 5 See Division 10-50.30 (Specific to Private Frontage Types) for private frontage type descriptions and regulations. 6 Allowed only in open sub-zone(s). I J K L Street I J SideStreet N P O SideStreet Street M K L 10-40.40.080 10-74 Flagstaff Zoning Code T4 Neighborhood 2 (T4N.2) Standards D. Building Placement Setback (Distance from ROW/Property Line) Principal Building Front1 5' min.; 12' max. Front facade within area 50% min. Side Street/Civic Space 10' min.; 15' max. Side2 3' min. Rear 3' min. Outbuilding Front 20' min. Side 0' min.; 3' max. Rear 3' min. 1 Setback may match an existing adjacent building as follows. The building may be set to align with the facade of the frontmost immediately adjacent property, for a width no greater than that of the adjacent property's facade that encroaches into the minimum setback. 2 No side setback required between townhouse and/or live/work building types. Miscellaneous Upper-floor units must have a primary entrance along a street or courtyard façade. Ground-floor residential units along a street must have individual entries. A B C D E. Building Form3 Height Principal Building Stories 4 Stories max. To Eave/Parapet 40' max. Overall 52' max. Outbuilding 2 Stories max. To Eave/Parapet 18' max. Overall 28' max. Ground Floor Finish Level 18" min. above sidewalk Ground Floor Ceiling 9' min. clear Upper Floor(s) Ceiling 8' min. clear 3 See Division 10-50.100 (Specific to Building Types) for additional building form regulations. Footprint Depth, ground-floor residential space along primary street frontage 30' min. Lot Coverage 80% max. Miscellaneous Mansard roof forms are not allowed. E F G H ROW Line Street ROW/Property Line Building Setback Line Building Area Facade Area Key Street D SideStreet H GA min. A max. B min. B max. C F E Building Form Standards 22
  23. 23. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Regulations to Blend Compatible Form, Not Separate Uses 23
  24. 24. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Numbers within Tables Are Carefully Tested 25’ x 100’ 50’ x 100’ 100’ x 100’ 24
  25. 25. © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Not Just About Mixed-Use: Diverse,Walkable, Neighborhoods 25 urban living, has been poignantly defined by recent research and publications by the likes of Christopher Nelson and Chris Leinberger and most recently by the Urban Land Institute’s publication, What’s Next: Real Estate in the New Economy. Now it is time to stop talking about the problem and start generating immediate solutions! Are you ready to be part of the solution? we have been building. Rather, we need a complete paradigm shift in the way that we design, locate, regulate, and develop homes. As What’s Next states, “it’s a time to rethink and evolve, reinvent and renew.” Missing Middle housing types, such as duplexes, fourplexes, bungalow courts, mansion apartments, and live-work units, are a critical part of the solution and should be a part of every architect’s, planner’s, real estate agent’s, and developer’s arsenal. Diagram of missing middle housing types illustrating the range of types and their location between single-family homes and mid-rise buildings Well-designed, simple Missing Middle housing types achieve medium-density yields and provide high-quality, marketable options between the scales of single-family homes and mid-rise flats for walkable urban living. They are designed to meet the specific needs of shifting demographics and the new market demand and are a key component to a diverse neighborhood. They are classified as “missing” because very few of these housing types have been built since the early 1940’s due to regulatory constraints, the shift to auto-dependent patterns of development, and the incentivization of single-family home ownership. Medium density but lower perceived densities. As a starting point, these building types typically range in density from 16 dwelling units/acre (du/acre) to up to 35 du/acre, depending on the building type and lot size. It is important not to get too caught up in the density numbers when thinking about these types. Due to the small footprint of the building types and the fact that they are usually mixed with a variety of building types, even on an individual block, the perceived density is usually quite lower–they do not look like dense buildings. A combination of these types gets a neighborhood to a minimum Missing Middle Housing
  26. 26. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | Salt Lake City’s Missing Middle Housing 26 Duplex Triplex Forecourt ApartmentDuplex/Mansion Apartment
  27. 27. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | New Orlean’s Missing Middle Housing 27 Townhouses Duplex Small Lot, Small Unit Single FamilyFourplex
  28. 28. © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | High/Medium Density Housing: 35-40 DU/Acre 28
  29. 29. © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Impossible to Blend Densities if You Regulate by Density 29 Townhouse
 18 du/acre Single Family 9-13 du/acre Courtyard 30 du/acre Mews House
 15 du/acre
  30. 30. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | 10-40.40.080 10-75Flagstaff Zoning Code T4 Neighborhood 2 (T4N.2) Standards ROW/Property Line Building Setback Line Encroachment Area Key ROW/Property Line Parking Setback Line Parking Area Key G. Required Parking Spaces7 Residential Uses Studio/1 Bedroom 1 space/unit min. 2+ Bedrooms 2 spaces/unit min. Retail Trade, Service Uses ≤2,000 sf No spaces required >2,000 sf 2 spaces/1,000 sf min. above first 2,000 sf 7 Use types not listed shall meet the requirements in Table 10-50.70.040.A (Automobile Parking Spaces Required). Location (Setback from ROW/Property Line) Front Covered/Attached 30' min. Uncovered Match front facade min. Side Street/Civic Space 5' min. Side 0' min. Rear 0' min. Miscellaneous Linear feet of front or side façade that may be garage 35% max. See Division 10-50.70 (Parking Standards) for additional parking regulations. M N O P F. Encroachments and Frontage Types Encroachments4 Front 5' max. Side Street/Civic Space 5' max. Side 3' max. Rear Property Line 0' max. Rear Lane or Alley 3' max. Galleries may encroach in to street ROW, all other encroachments are not allowed within a street ROW. 4 See Section 10-50.35 (Encroachments) for allowed encroachments. Allowed Private Frontage Types5 Stoop Forecourt Gallery6 Terrace/Lightwell6 Shopfront6 Porch 5 See Division 10-50.30 (Specific to Private Frontage Types) for private frontage type descriptions and regulations. 6 Allowed only in open sub-zone(s). I J K L Street I J SideStreet N P O SideStreet Street M K L 4.03.050 Frontage Standards 4-30 Livermore Development Code 4.03.050 Porch: Integral Description The main facade of the building has a small setback from the property line.The resulting front yard is typically very small and may be undefined or defined by a fence or hedge to spatially maintain the edge of the street.An integral porch is part of the overall massing and roof form of a building. With an integral porch it is not possible to remove the porch without major changes to the overall roof form. Size Width, clear 8' min. Depth, clear 8' min. Height, clear 8' min. Finish level above sidewalk 18" min. Furniture area, clear 4' x 8' min. Path of travel 3' wide min. Miscellaneous The porch may be one or two stories. Integral porches may be enclosed on up to two sides and have a roof. A B C D E F ROW / Property Line Setback Line Key Setback ROW Walk Street Setback ROW Walk Street Partial-length integral porch integrated into the overall massing. Full-length integral porch integrated into the overall massing. E E D B A C F Frontage Type Standards 30
  31. 31. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | This Transition isVery Important to Regulate! 31
  32. 32. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | 5.01.070Building Types 5-13Livermore Development Code B. Lot Lot Size Width 50' min., 75' max. Depth 100' min., 150' max. C. Pedestrian Access Main Entrance Location Primary street On corner lots each unit shall front a different street. D. Frontages Allowed Frontages Porch Stoop E.Vehicle Access and Parking Parking spaces may be enclosed, covered, or open. F. Open Space, Usable Width 15'/unit min. Depth 15'/unit min. Open Space Area 300 sf min. Required street setbacks and driveways shall not be included in the open space area calculation. G. Building Size and Massing Main Body Width 36' max. Secondary Wing Width 24' max. Detached Garage Width 36' max. Depth 25' max. H. Miscellaneous Both units shall have entries facing the street no more than 10' behind, the front façade. Primary Street Alley SideStreet Primary Street Rear SideStreet ROW / Property Line Building Area Key Typical Alley Loaded Plan Diagram Typical Front Loaded Plan Diagram 5.01.070 Building Types 5-12 Livermore Development Code The entry to the right opens to a stair leading to the upper unit, which takes up the entire upper floor.The door to the left opens directly into the lower unit, which takes up the entire lower floor. The scale of this duplex makes it compatible with adjacent single-family homes. 5.01.070 Duplex, Stacked General Note: the drawings and photos below are illustrative. A. Description This Duplex building type consists of structures that contain two units, one on top of the other. This building type has the appearance of a medium to large single- family home. This type is typically integrated sparingly into single-family neighborhoods or more consistently into neighborhoods with other medium-density types such as bungalow courts, fourplexes, or courtyard apartments. This building type enables the incorporation of high-quality, well-designed density within a walkable neighborhood. This is the preferred type of duplex on 50' wide lots in Livermore neighborhoods not zoned for single-family because it is capable of accommodating two units in a smaller footprint, thus maximizing compatibility in size and privacy to the rear of adjacent units. Building Type Standards 32
  33. 33. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Kit of Parts for Neighborhoods: Cincinnati, Ohio 33 Cincinnati Citywide Form-Based Code
  34. 34. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | 10-70.10.030 Civic Space Types 70.10-4 Flagstaff Zoning CodePublic Review Draft Table 10-70.10.030.A Civic Spaces (continued) TRANSECT ZONE T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Civic Space Type Square Plaza Pocket Plaza Illustration Description An open space available for unstructured recreation and civic purposes. An open space available for civic purposes and commercial activities. An open space available for civic purposes and commercial activities. Size and Location Size Minimum 1/2 acre 1/2 acre 4,000 sf Maximum 5 acres 2-1/2 acres 1/2 acre Frontage Independent Independent/Building Frontage Building Frontage Character Formal Formal Formal Typical Uses Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Paths, Community Gardens, Playgrounds Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Commercial Uses, Community Garden, Playground Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Commercial Uses, Community Garden, Playground Stormwater Management French Drains, Porous Pavements, and Landscaping French Drains, Porous Pavements, and Landscaping French Drains, Porous Pavements, and Landscaping Key T# Allowed T# Not Allowed 10-70.10.030Civic Space Types 70.10-3Flagstaff Zoning Code Public Review Draft Table 10-70.10.030.A Civic Spaces TRANSECT ZONE T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Civic Space Type Park Greenway Green Illustration Description A natural preserve available for unstructured recreation. A linear space in largely natural conditions for unstructured recreation. An open space, available for unstructured recreation. Size and Location Size Minimum 8 acres 8 acres 1/2 acre Maximum - - 8 acres Frontage Independent Independent/Building Frontage Independent/Building Frontage Character Natural Natural Natural Typical Uses Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Paths and Trails, Woodland and Open Shelters, Community Gardens, Playgrounds Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Trails for Bicycles and Pedestrians, Community Gardens, Playgrounds Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Community Gardens, Playgrounds Stormwater Management Integrated Runoff, Bioretention, Extended Detention Basins, Porous Pavements and Landscaping Integrated Runoff, Bioretention, Extended Detention Basins, Porous Pavements and Landscaping French Drains, Porous Pavements and Landscaping Key T# Allowed T# Not Allowed Civic Space Standards 34
  35. 35. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Open Space and Civic Space Regulating Plan 35 51 4.50.050 - Open Space and Civic Space Regulating Plan Downtown Station Area Pedestrian Priority Design Area. The streets and sidewalks in this area shall be designed to feel like a continuation of public pavers or street print and rolled curbs and areas where the streets may be closed off Linear Park. The linear park shall contain a central sidewalk and regularly spaced Neighborhood Square. Pocket Plaza. Potential Future Pocket Park. (on existing vertical element should be used to terminate Future Promenade Expansion. Future redevelopment of the parcels between Weller Street and the Petaluma River shall include and expansion of the promenade Amphitheater or other Civic gathering/ River Overlooks. Boardwalks constructed that project over the Turning Basin and have Plaza. bank to the face of the Special Building at Promenade.3 General Waterfront Open Space. Public Docks Access Points to Water. A B C D E F G H I J K M B C D E G H H I M A F K A 50’min. 30’min. 30’min. 75’min. New Riverfront Street GreyStreet BaylisStreet Copeland Street Lakeville Street New Station Access Street W eller Street New TransverseStreet D Street
  36. 36. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Close UpCountywide 7.01.110 Thoroughfare Types 7-12 Livermore Development Code Neighborhood Street II Edges Drainage Collection Type Curb and gutter Planter Type 17' continuous Landscape Type Medium trees @ 35' on center average Lighting Type Low, pedestrian oriented lighting Walkway Type 5' sidewalk Intersection Curb Radius 15' max. (bulb-outs recommended) Distance Between Intersections 600' max. Miscellaneous Requirements Transformations to existing streets shall match the designations set forth in the General Plan. E F 7.01.110 Retrofit: 18' Wide Planter Strip Application Movement Type Slow Anticipated Design Speed 20 mph Pedestrian Crossing Bulb-outs encouraged to decrease pedestrian crossing time. Transect Zones T4 N-O T4 N T3 N Overall Widths Right-of-Way (ROW) 80' Face-of-Curb to Face-of-Curb 36' Lanes Traffic Lanes 2 @ 10' (2-way travel) Bicycle Lanes None Parking Lanes 2 @ 8' parallel Medians None A B C D B A FC B A CD DEF E 7.01.060Thoroughfare Types 7-7 Livermore Development Code 7.01.060 Neighborhood Main Street Application Movement Type Slow Anticipated Design Speed 20 mph Pedestrian Crossing Bulb-outs encouraged to decrease pedestrian crossing time. Transect Zones T4MS T4MS-O Overall Widths Right-of-Way (ROW) 60' Face-of-Curb to Face-of-Curb 36' Lanes Traffic Lanes 2 @ 10' (2-way travel) Bicycle Lanes None Parking Lanes 2 @ 8' parallel Medians None A B C D Edges Drainage Collection Type Curb and gutter Planter Type 4' x 4' tree grate, min. Lighting Type Low, pedestrian oriented lighting Walkway Type 12' sidewalk, 1 Where gallery frontage is used, street trees are not required or allowed. Intersection Curb Radius 15' max. (bulb-outs recommended) Distance Between Intersections 400' max. Miscellaneous Requirements Transformations to existing streets shall match the designations set forth in the General Plan. E F N eighborhood Street I B A C B A CD D F EE F Thoroughfare Standards 36
  37. 37. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Thinking Big:Transforming a Primary Corridor 37 Richmond Livable Corridors Master Plan and FBC
  38. 38. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Thinking Big:Transforming a Primary Corridor 38 Richmond Livable Corridors Master Plan and FBC
  39. 39. 2 Comparing Different Approaches to Zoning Urban Form Not All Approaches are Equal 39
  40. 40. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 40 Comparing Different Approaches to Regulating Urban Form ZONING PRACTICE MAY 2013 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION ISSUE NUMBER 5 PRACTICE FORM-BASED ZONING GUISH BETWEEN CODE AND ITS 55
  41. 41. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Typical Approaches to Zoning Urban Form (from least to most effective) What Should this Approach be Called? Organizing Principle New Components Created and Included Is the Overall Code Reorganized for Usability? Likely Cost Range Considerations for this Approach 1. Adding graphics to a Euclidean, use-based code Graphics- Based Code Use Primarily additional graphics and tables, content has minor changes only Not in this example Low; Primarily because it is a graphic design- usability exercise only This is completely ineffective and should be avoided. This is what you will often get if your budget is too low for a true FBC: Will look good, but will not produce predictable results. Does not address obstacles for good development or process- related issues inherent in most zoning codes. 2.Adding design guidelines/ site planning guidelines to a Euclidean, use-based code Design Guidelines or Design Standards Use Components similar to FBC components may be created, but they do not replace the code so they do not need to be as carefully vetted and many times create conflicts within the zoning code No Low; Primarily because it does not address the problems with underlying zoning Mostly ineffective due to typical issue inherent in existing code that are not addressed and may even contradict zoning. Adding another layer of regulations that confuses intent and negatively impacts usability and administration 3. Adding mixed use zones to to a Euclidean, use-based code Targeted Mixed Use Zone Application Use typically, sometimes form New base zones and zone standards only No Low; Primarily because this approach entales crating only new base zones Effectiveness depends highly on quality and clarity of existing code and development review process. If administration and the code document structure is good, and detailed visioning is completed, and the mixed use zones are not over-simplified this can begin to show good results. Existing parking, use tables, landscape standards, etc. must be vetted 4.Adding graphics, reorganizing code, cleaning up administration, and minor changes to development standards Code Clean Up and Re- organization Use Mostly just translating existing information into tables and creating drawings to support existing code information Yes Medium to high depending on scale of city or county Addresses many of the issues above, but ultimately still has use as an organizing principle, which limits the effectiveness of the code and stops it short of being an FBC. Does not typically complete documentation and analysis of place to extract the DNA that becomes the basis for the code but rather uses existing zone standards as starting point and makes changes to those Form-BasedCodes 5. Optional Form-Based Code overlay Form-Based Code Overlay Form All typical FBC elements included, process rethought for FBC application No Low to Medium, depending primarily on extent of visioning completed Administration, parking, landscape, and all other elements within code must be vetted and coordinated with intent of the FBC and potentially included in the FBc and replaced when the overlay is triggered 6. Integrating a complete Form-Based Code within a pre-existing zoning code Parallel Form-Based Code Form for FBC section, use for the rest of the pre-existing code All typical FBC elements included, process and all general standards (parking, landscaping, etc.) rethought for FBC application Sometimes Medium; Primarily due to the fact that a complete, parallel code is being created to replace the exising code in targetted areas Administration, parking, landscape, and all other elements within code must be vetted and coordinated with intent of the FBC Division. If you are doing a complete code rewrite and you choose this approach, you are writing two complete, parallel code documents which is not a good use of resources. This approach is still sending a message that the default is drivable suburban development and that FBCs are the exception Form-BasedCodes 7. Using Form as an organizing principle for the entire zoning code and using Form-Based Code components as the driver for your Table of Contents Citywide Form-Based Code Form All typical FBC elements included, process and all general standards (parking, landscaping, etc.) rethought for FBC application, admin and procedures, variances, etc. are all rethought to support the FBC Yes High; Slightly higher than #4. Due to charrettes for FBC Focus Areas, and extensive documentation and analysis phase completed, and that all standards are carefully vette In this approach, the structure of the entire zoning code is completely rethought, a new operating system is established, and thus the entire table of contents of code document is structured with a form-first philosophy. Every last bit of content from the pre-existing code is vetted for it applicability to the form-first operating system before it is transferred so that it does not compromise the intent. This approach is perfect for a city that has made a strong commitment in its city policies to promote smarter, more sustainable growth. Let Euclidean zoning regulate drivable suburban contexts, and the FBC regulate walkable urban contexts. It is called citywide Form-Based Code not because the entire city has Form-Based Coding applied, but rather the entire city has been assessed, FBC aplied to where it make sense, and the FBC application can easily spread LESSCOMPREHENSIVE&EFFECTIVEMORECOMPREHENSIVE&EFFECTIVE Classifying and Clarifying Different Approaches 41 In upcoming Zoning Practice May 2013
  42. 42. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Typical Approaches to Zoning Urban Form (from least to most effective) What Should this Approach be Called? Organizing Principle New Components Created and Included Is the Overall Code Reorganized for Usability? Likely Ran 1. Adding graphics to a Euclidean, use-based code Graphics- Based Code Use Primarily additional graphics and tables, content has minor changes only Not in this example Low; Pri because graphic d usability e onl 2.Adding design guidelines/ site planning guidelines to a Euclidean, use-based code Design Guidelines or Design Standards Use Components similar to FBC components may be created, but they do not replace the code so they do not need to be as carefully vetted and many times create conflicts within the zoning code No Low; Pri because not addr problem underlying 3. Adding mixed use zones to to a Euclidean, use-based code Targeted Mixed Use Zone Application Use typically, sometimes form New base zones and zone standards only No Low; Pri becaus approach crating on base z 4.Adding graphics, reorganizing code, cleaning up administration, and minor changes to development standards Code Clean Up and Re- organization Use Mostly just translating existing information into tables and creating drawings to support existing code information Yes Medium depending of city or odes 5. Optional Form-Based Code overlay Form-Based Code Overlay Form All typical FBC elements included, process rethought for FBC application No Low to M depen primar extent of v compl LESSCOMPREHENSIVE&EFFECTIVEIVE Classifying and Clarifying Different Approaches 42 3. Adding mixed use zones to to a Euclidean, use-based code Targeted Mixed Use Zone Application Use typi sometim form 4.Adding graphics, reorganizing code, cleaning up administration, and minor changes to development standards Code Clean Up and Re- organization Use Form-BasedCodes 5. Optional Form-Based Code overlay Form-Based Code Overlay Form 6. Integrating a complete Form-Based Code within a pre-existing zoning code Parallel Form-Based Code Form FBC sec use for rest of pre-exis code Form-BasedCodes 7. Using Form as an organizing principle for the entire zoning code and using Form-Based Code components as the driver for your Table of Contents Citywide Form-Based Code Form LMORECOMPREHENSIVE&EFFECTIVE Typical Approaches to Zoning Urban Form (from least to most effective) What Should this Approach be Called? Organi Princi 1. Adding graphics to a Euclidean, use-based code Graphics- Based Code Use 2.Adding design guidelines/ site planning guidelines to a Euclidean, use-based code Design Guidelines or Design Standards Use 3. Adding mixed use zones to to a Euclidean, use-based code Targeted Mixed Use Zone Application Use typi someti form 4.Adding graphics, reorganizing code, cleaning up administration, and minor changes to development standards Code Clean Up and Re- organization Use des 5. Optional Form-Based Code overlay Form-Based Code Overlay Form LESSCOMPREHENSIVE&EFFECTIVEVE Zoning Practice May 2013
  43. 43. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 43 No Clear Form Intent! LAGUNA NIGUEL GATEWAY SPECIFIC PLAN industrial, business park, office, commercial and auto service uses. This zone also provides for auto sales and services. Properties may also be used for surface or structured parking for the Metrolink Station. Densities are limited to a FAR of 0.5. Hotel and supporting uses such as restaurants, conference meeting room and banquet facilities may also be developed in this zone. Mixed-Use (MU) Zone The Mixed-Use (MU) Zone is intended to encourage development of an active urban environment that exhibits the character of distinct and a vibrant pedestrian friendly ―village‖ and transit corridor where residents live, work, dine, are entertained, and recreate, with easy access to Metrolink transit. It allows for the intermixing of a diversity of land uses that will reduce vehicle trips and facilitate walking. Any property may be developed exclusively for office, multi-family, or
  44. 44. 3 Comparing Different Approaches to Zoning Urban Form Plugging the FBC into 
 Your Overall Code - MakingYour Code an Effective Hybrid 44 Move this to the end? Take out?
  45. 45. Parallel Form-Based Code Option I: Create a Separate FBC Chapter or Division - FBC is the Exception 45
  46. 46. © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | Mesa Zoning Code TOC 46 1. Introductory Provisions 2. Base Zones 3. Overlay Zones 4. Development Regulations 5. Signage Regulations 6. Form-Based Code Regulations 7. Administration
  47. 47. Citywide Form-Based Code Option II: Use FBC Components as Major Structure of the Table of Contents - Urbanism is the Default 47
  48. 48. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | FBC Framework: Code Defaults to Walkable Urbanism 48 1. Preamble 2. Part 1: Introduction 3. Part 2: General to All a. Site Planning and General Subdivision (Design-based) b. TND & TOD Site Planning Standards 4. Part 3: Specific to Zones (Building Form-Standards) a. Chapter 3.02 Transect Zones b. Chapter 3.03 Non-Transect Zones 5. Part 4: General to Zones (Frontage Type Standards) 6. Part 5: Building Types Standards
  49. 49. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | 49 10-1Flagstaff Zoning Code Administrative Draft Chapter 10-40: Specific to Zones Division 10-40.10: Purpose 10-40.10.010 Purpose 10-5 Division 10-40.20: Establishment of Zones 10-40.20.010 Establishment of Zones 10-7 10-40.20.020 Zones 10-7 10-40.20.030 Map of Zones 10-9 10-40.20.040 Interpretation of Zone Boundaries: 10-9 Division 10-40.30: Non-Transect Zones 10-40.30.010 Purpose 10-11 10-40.30.020 Applicability 10-12 10-40.30.030 Residential Zones 10-13 10-40.30.040 Commercial Zones 10-20 10-40.30.050 Industrial Zones 10-28 10-40.30.060 Resource and Open Space Zones 10-35 10-40.30.070 Sustainability Features of All Non-Transect Zones 10-40 Division 10-40.40:Transect Zones 10-40.40.010 Purpose 10-43 10-40.40.020 Applicability 10-44 10-40.40.030 T1 Natural (T1) Standards 10-45 10-40.40.040 T2 Rural (T2) Standards 10-49 10-40.40.050 T3 Neighborhood 1 (T3N.1) Standards 10-55 10-40.40.060 T3 Neighborhood 2 (T3N.2) Standards 10-61 10-40.40.070 T4 Neighborhood 1 (T4N.1) Standards 10-67 10-40.40.080 T4 Neighborhood 2 (T4N.2) Standards 10-73 10-40.40.090 T5 Main Street (T5) Standards 10-79 10-40.40.100 T6 Downtown (T6) Standards 10-85 10-40.40.110 Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) Standards 10-91
  50. 50. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | 2. If the inspection determines that there are changes to the final landscape plan, the Director may approve an as-built landscaping plan that reflects all changes if the Director determines that the intent of this Division is achieved. 10-50.60.040 Landscape Location Requirements Landscaping shall be provided in all areas of a site that are subject to development with structures, grading, or the removal of natural vegetation, as identified in this Section. Table A (Application of Landscaping Location Requirements in Zones) provides a summary of applicability and identifies exceptions to areas within transect zones. Table 10-50.60.040.A: Application of Landscaping Location Requirements in Zones Transect ZonesNon-Transect Zones T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Residential Zone Buffers  NR NR   NR NR Non-Residential Zone Buffers Street Buffer Peripheral Buffers   NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR Parking Areas  NR     NR Other Landscaped Areas  NR   NR NR NR Key  = Required NR = Not Required A. Residential Zone Setbacks 50 Carefully Assessing All Standards for Applicability
  51. 51. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Study the Table of Contents Closely:This is Important! 7. Part 6: Specific to Uses a. Chapter 6.02 Applicable to All Zones b. Chapter 6.03 Applicable to Non-Transect Zones Only 8. Part 7:Thoroughfare Types 9. Part 8: Civic Space Types 10. Part 9: Permitting & Approvals 11. Part 10: Subdivision 12. Part 11: Definitions 51
  52. 52. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Thoroughfares Remained in Citywide Dev. Codes! 52 7.01.050 Thoroughfare Types 7-6 Livermore Development Code Edges Drainage Collection Type Curb and gutter Planter Type 5'-7' continuous Lighting Type Low, pedestrian oriented lighting Walkway Type 5' sidewalk Intersection Curb Radius 15' max. (bulb-outs recommended) Miscellaneous Requirements Transformations to existing streets shall match the designations set forth in the General Plan. E F 7.01.050 Neighborhood Street Planter Strip Application Movement Type Slow Design Speed 20 mph Pedestrian Crossing Time 6 seconds (w/ bulb-outs) 10 seconds (w/o bulb- outs) Transect Zones T4N-O T4N T3N Overall Widths Right-of-Way (ROW) Width 56-60' Pavement Width 36' Lanes Traffic Lanes 2 @ 10' (2-way travel) Bicycle Lanes None Parking Lanes 2 @ 8' parallel Medians None A B C D Neighborhood Street II C B A CD FC B A CD DEF E 7.01.060Thoroughfare Types 7-7 Livermore Development Code 7.01.060 Neighborhood Main Street Application Movement Type Slow Design Speed 20 mph Pedestrian Crossing Time 6 seconds (w/ bulb-outs) 10 seconds (w/o bulb- outs) Transect Zones T4MS T4MS-O Overall Widths Right-of-Way (ROW) Width 60' Pavement Width 36' Lanes Traffic Lanes 2 @ 10' (2-way travel) Bicycle Lanes None Parking Lanes 2 @ 8' parallel Medians None A B C D Edges Drainage Collection Type Curb and gutter Planter Type 4' x 4' tree grates Lighting Type Low, pedestrian oriented lighting Walkway Type 12' sidewalk 1 Where gallery frontage is used, street trees are not required or allowed. Intersection Curb Radius 15' max. (bulb-outs recommended) Distance Between Intersections 400' max. Miscellaneous Requirements Transformations to existing streets shall match the designations set forth in the General Plan. E F N eighborhood Street I B A C B A CD DF F
  53. 53. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | SLST S LIVERM O RE AV COLLEGE AV EJ PD PD T3N E E PD PUD-153-86 PD PUD-111-81 PD PUD-40-85 PD PUD-153-86 PUD-216-83 PUD-116-76 PUD-5-81 RL EPDR-03-007 25 RL E T4N E E PD PUD-153-86 PUD-153-87 PD NMU RL CN P RS RG-16 OS-A RG-16 E RG-16 E RG-16 CO RG-10 CP CP RS RG-12 RG-12 E PUD-57-88 CP CP PD-HP-H T3N-HP-H T3N-HP-H T3N-HP-L T3N-HP-H Zoning Map Has Form-Based and Use-Based Zones 53
  54. 54. 4 Form-Based Zones as the Ingredients of Place Types Effectively Using Place Types 54
  55. 55. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 55ulti-Jurisdictional Form-Based Code ign, Inc. July 19th, 2010 Up LandsLow Lands RuralUrban Rural Crossroads Hamlet Village City Town Different Neighborhoods Require Different Solutions Beaufort County, South Carolina Multi-Jurisdictional Code: Place Types
  56. 56. Cincinnati, Ohio Citywide Scale 56 Winner of the 2013 APA Burnham Prize for a Comprehensive Plan
  57. 57. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | T6 T1T2T3T4T5T6 StreetCar Neighborhoo Urban Neighborhood UrbanCenter/ Downtown 57 Form Based Zones = Ingredients for Place Types y of Cincinnati: Urban Design Element Consulting 010 Opticos Design, Inc. Created by: Opticos Design, Inc. CommunityPlanningProcess Working Draft: 121710 Intent PolicyElementsCommunity Type T1T2T3T4T5T6T1T2T3T4T5T6 T1T2T3T4T5T6 T1T2T3T4T5T6T1T2T3T4T5T6T1T2T3T4T5T6 Preserve/Maintain Evolve Transform/Create Civic Space Urban Neighborhood_Civic Space_Preserve/Maintain Urban Neighborhood_Civic Space_Evolve Urban Neighborhood_Civic Space_Transform/Create Preserve/Maintain Evolve Transform/Create Corridor Urban Neighborhood_Corridor_Preserve/Maintain Urban Neighborhood_Corridor_Evolve Urban Neighborhood_Corridor_Transform/Create Center Preserve/Maintain Evolve Transform/Create Urban Neighborhood_Center_Preserve Urban Neighborhood_Center_Evolve Urban Neighborhood_Center_Transform Preserve/Maintain Evolve Transform/Create Neighborhood Urban Neighborhood_Neighorhood _Preserve Urban Neighborhood_Neighorhood l_Evolve Urban Neighborhood_Neighborhood _Transform/Create Traditional Neighborhood FirstSuburb Neighborhood Village StreetCar Neighborhood Urban Neighborhood UrbanCenter/ Downtown Working Note: The Comprehensive Plan will establish general Community Character direction and policy, but the detailed policy shown above will be implemented in individual Neighborhood Plans
  58. 58. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | City of Cincinnati: Urban Design Element Consulting © 2010 Opticos Design, Inc. Created by: Opticos Design, Inc. PAGETITLE More UrbanLess Urban WalkableUrbanCommunityTypesOverview Key X = Not part of community type X = Primary part of community type X = Minor part of community type Key R = Rural Edge Treatment C = Curb Edge Treatment RB = Ribbon Curb (18") Working Draft: 121710 Traditional Neighborhood First Suburb Neighborhood Village Streetcar Neighborhood Urban Neighborhood Urban Center/ Downtown Illustration Description This community type is primarily composed of T3 neighborhoods, which are mostly single-family homes on small to medium-sized lots. This community type also has a small percentage (approximately 10-20%) of T4 with small footprint, medium-density housing types – such as duplexes, fourplexes, rowhouses, and small apartment buildings – that are either typically along a major corridor or in areas transitioning from the single-family homes into a neighborhood main street. The neighborhood typically includes one or more main streets (T5) or corners stores within a short walking distance from a large percentage of homes that are an important part of their walkability. There is typically an interconnected network of streets and small to medium block sizes, unless interrupted with topography constraints or other natural or infrastructure breaks. This community type is primarily composed of T3 neighborhoods, which are mostly single-family homes. The lots are likely larger or wider than those in a Traditional Neighborhood and some homes may have garage doors on the front. This community type also has a small percentage (approximately 10-20%) of T4 with small footprint, medium-density housing types – such as duplexes, fourplexes, rowhouses, and small apartment buildings – that are either typically along a major corridor or in areas transitioning from the single- family homes into a neighborhood main street. This community type is typically adjacent to a more auto-dependent development and the walkable portion is usually quite small. In many instances the walkable areas have been compromised by a newer auto- dependent development. The neighborhood typically includes a small main street (T5) within a short walking distance of a smaller percentage of homes. This community type is similar to a traditional neighborhood except that it has historically developed as an independent town before being annexed into the City. This means that it has more public infrastructure in place, such as a town hall or courthouse, post offices, etc. The civic uses are prominent and typically located within, or near, the T5 main street areas and at major intersections/ crossroads. This community type is similar to a Traditional Neighborhood, except that it has historically developed around a street car network and, therefore, was able to support larger/longer neighborhood main streets and a higher percentage of T4 neighborhoods along the corridors. This community type is primarily T4 neighborhoods, which are most commonly composed of attached and semi-detached rowhouse building types, and a high percentage of T5 main street areas. There is often as small percentage (less than 10%) of these areas that have a larger footprint and taller buildings within them (T6), frequently along major corridors. There is typically an interconnected network of streets and small to medium block sizes, unless interrupted with topography constraints or other natural or infrastructure breaks. This community type is primarily composed of T6 containing mid- to high-rise vertical mixed use buildings with ground floor retail and upper floor commercial or residential uses. This area serves as one of the primary employment and civic centers for the City and includes residential and institutional uses and entertainment venues, such as stadiums. The edges of this area may transition to T5 as it transitions into Urban Neighborhoods. Local Example Staff to fill in local examples Staff to fill in local examples Staff to fill in local examples Staff to fill in local examples Staff to fill in local examples Staff to fill in local examples Corresponding Transect Zones T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Activity Mix Residential, Retail, Service, Community /Civic Use Residential, Retail, Service, Community /Civic Use Residential, Retail, Service, Community /Civic Use Residential, Retail, Service, Community /Civic Use Residential, Retail, Service, Community /Civic Use Residential, Retail, Service, Community /Civic Use, entertainment 58 Linking Urban Neighborhoods to Planning and Coding
  59. 59. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | ples | 90 Walnut Hills Oakley Corryville Roselawn Hartwell Northside Carthage Clifton East Price Hill Clifton Heights College Hill OTR Main Street Madisonville West End OTRVine Street Mt.Washington EastWalnut Hills West Price Hill (B) Hyde Park Westwood (A) North Avondale Mt.Airy Pleasant Ridge Evanston (B) West Price Hill (A) Columbia Tusculum Kennedy Heights O'Bryonville Hyde Park East Mt. Lookout Avondale (A) Avondale (B) Bond Hill Evanston (A)Camp Washington Lower Price Hill Mt.Adams Westwood (B) Downtown I-75 I-71 I-74 SR 562 I-275 I-471 HIGHWAYRAMP I-75 I-75 RIV ER READING CO LUMBIA GLENWAY KELLO GG 6TH COLERAIN CENTRAL GILBERT MO NTGO MERY HAMILTON PADDOCK EASTERN 7TH 9TH SEYMO UR ELM LIN W OOD VINE PETE ROSE RIVERSIDE BEECHMONT MEHRING CARTHAGE 3RD EDWARDS PLUM STATE SMITH 5TH LUDLOWAVENUE EDMO NDSO N VINE SM ITH VINE BEECHMONT READIN G CENTRAL VIN E ERIE MADISO N 8TH QUEEN CITY HARRISON DAN A WINTON MCMILLAN DELTA STATE VIC TORY BEEKMAN MITCHELL 5TH SPRIN G GROVE RIDGE MONTANA WILLIAM H TAFT ROSS DELHI SEYM O UR WESTWOOD NORTHERN DALTON 3RD RED BANK LUDLO W CLIFTON MARTIN LUTHER KING JR MAIN HOPPLE LANGDON FARM WIN CHELL CARLL SA LEM MARBURG NORTH BEND WEST FO RK GALBRAITH WESTERN TOWNSHIP SYCAMORE TORRENCE 9TH WESTERN HILLS FREEMAN CUMMINS CLEVES WARSAW COLERAINAVENUE BANNING CAMARGO JEFFERSON GALBRAITH SPRINGGROVE NORTH BEND HARRISON GALBRAITH SALEM NORTH BEND VINE RIDGE ESTE 8TH KIRBY GEST WERK HILLSIDE BOUDINOT EASTERN W ILMER GRAY 4TH BALTIMORE DALY CLIFTON BURNET FOREST QUEBEC MEHRIN G W O O STER BRAMBLE ROSS GRAND CENTER HILL MCHENRY RAPID RUN RACE CORBLY W EST FO RK SUNSET WARSAW ERIE LINCOLN BROTH ERTO N ROBERTSON VICTORY ARGUS AN TH O N Y W AYN E TENNESSEE GROESBECK LINN SECTION WHETSEL AUBURN FOLEY ELBERON MCALPIN EUCLID ELMORE PLAINVILLE BURNEY 3RD LO SAN TIV ILLE SU MMIT DALTON MARKBREIT WOODBURN ASHTREE TOWNE WOOLPER OVERLOOK PEDRETTI PARK EDWARDS JEFFERSON MITCHELL DUCK CREEK STANLEY KEM PER SETTLE MONTANA SUTTO N RED BANK EDEN PARK JESSUP SH EPHERD ROSEMONT ERKENBRECHER PHYLLIS FRANCIS BER KSH IRE SHEPHERD CREEK FOLEY LINN EDEN PARK DUCK CREEK SUTTO N KEMPER CLIFTON SUMMIT FOLEY SUTTONSUTTON µ0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles Legend Neighborhood Centers Urban Center* Urban Neighborhood* Traditional Neighborhood* Compact Walkable Half Mile Cincinnati Municipal Boundary River Springfield Twp St. Bernard Elmwood Place Norwood Anderson Twp Neighborhood Center Type Sayler Park RIVER HILLSIDE OTR Main Street OTRVine Street Downtown I-71 I-75 HIGHWAYRAMP I-75 7TH 9TH ELM CENTRAL PETE ROSE MEHRING GILBERT 3RD 6TH PLUM REA DING SMITH 5TH COLUMBIA BROADWAY EZZARD CHARLES CENTRAL PLUM VINE 5TH 6TH 3RD MAIN SYCAMORE LIBERTY 9TH PETE ROSE BROADWAY BROADWAY 5TH 4TH RACE WALNUT EGGLESTO N MEHRING PIK E SYCAMORE 6TH Arlington Hts *Neighborhood Centers are classified as they are currently, not as the community may envision them in the future. d centers that rm to become o not address the nsistent pattern have a consistent cter, some e set farther back in front. ion varies he district but nt yard parking. consolidated lots . re not buffered nd do not feel safe o curb cuts or lawn, landscaping, re, or on-street e some d services and t they may not y diverse or ve to meet daily defined community ce in the NBD. ay be too large ts uses, has es not have visible nd pedestrians are walk to end to end The primary objective for the Transform neighborhood centers is to target major opportunities Cincinnati has 21 neighborhood centers classified as areas to Transform: Avondale (A),Avondale North Avondale, Roselawn,Walnut Hills,West End,West Price Hill (B), Westwood (A), and Westwood (B). 59 Classifying Different Types of Walkable Urban Neighborhoods
  60. 60. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Geographic Principles | 91 Walnut Hills Oakley Corryville Roselawn Hartwell Northside Carthage Clifton East Price Hill Clifton Heights College Hill OTR Main Street Madisonville West End OTRVine Street Mt.Washington East Walnut Hills West Price Hill (B) Hyde Park Westwood (A) North Avondale Mt.Airy Pleasant Ridge Evanston (B) West Price Hill (A) Columbia Tusculum Kennedy Heights O'Bryonville Hyde Park East Mt. Lookout Avondale (A) Avondale (B) Bond Hill Evanston (A)Camp Washington Lower Price Hill Mt.Adams Westwood (B) Downtown I-75 I-71 I-74 SR 562 I-275 I-471 HIGHWAYRAMP I-75 I-75 RIV ER READING CO LUMBIA GLENWAY KELLO GG 6TH COLERAIN CENTRAL GILBERT MO NTGO MERY HAMILTON PADDOCK EASTERN 7TH 9TH SEYMO UR ELM LIN W OOD VINE PETE ROSE RIVERSIDE BEECHMONT MEHRING CARTHAGE 3RD EDWARDS PLUM STATE SMITH 5TH LUDLOWAVENUE EDMO NDSO N VINE SM ITH VINE BEECHMONT READIN G CENTRAL VIN E ERIE MADISO N 8TH QUEEN CITY HARRISON DAN A WINTON MCMILLAN DELTA STATE VIC TORY BEEKMAN MITCHELL 5TH SPRIN G GROVE RIDGE MONTANA WILLIAM H TAFT ROSS DELHI SEYM O UR WESTWOOD NORTHERN DALTON 3RD RED BANK LUDLO W CLIFTON MARTIN LUTHER KING JR MAIN HOPPLE LANGDON FARM WIN CHELL CARLL SA LEM MARBURG NORTH BEND WEST FO RK GALBRAITH WESTERN TOWNSHIP SYCAMORE TORRENCE 9TH WESTERN HILLS FREEMAN CUMMINS CLEVES WARSAW COLERAINAVENUE BANNING CAMARGO JEFFERSON GALBRAITH SPRINGGROVE NORTH BEND HARRISON GALBRAITH SALEM NORTH BEND VINE RIDGE ESTE 8TH KIRBY GEST WERK HILLSIDE BOUDINOT EASTERN W ILMER GRAY 4TH BALTIMORE DALY CLIFTON BURNET FOREST QUEBEC MEHRIN G W O O STER BRAMBLE ROSS GRAND CENTER HILL MCHENRY RAPID RUN RACE CORBLY W EST FO RK SUNSET WARSAW ERIE LINCOLN BROTH ERTO N ROBERTSON VICTORY ARGUS AN TH O N Y W AYN E TENNESSEE GROESBECK LINN SECTION WHETSEL AUBURN FOLEY ELBERON MCALPIN EUCLID ELMORE PLAINVILLE BURNEY 3RD LO SAN TIV ILLE SU MMIT DALTON MARKBREIT WOODBURN ASHTREE TOWNE WOOLPER OVERLOOK PEDRETTI PARK EDWARDS JEFFERSON MITCHELL DUCK CREEK STANLEY KEM PER SETTLE MONTANA SUTTO N RED BANK EDEN PARK JESSUP SHEPHERD ROSEMONT ERKENBRECHER PHYLLIS FRANCIS BER KSH IRE SHEPHERD CREEK FOLEY LINN EDEN PARK DUCK CREEK SUTTO N KEMPER CLIFTON SUMMIT FOLEY SUTTONSUTTON µ0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles Legend Neighborhood Centers Evolve Maintain Transform Compact Walkable Half Mile Cincinnati Municipal Boundary River St. Bernard Elmwood Place Norwood Anderson Twp Springfield Twp Neighborhood Center Degree of Change Sayler Park RIVER HILLSIDE OTR Main Street OTRVine Street Downtown I-71 I-75 HIGHWAYRAMP I-75 7TH 9TH ELM CENTRAL PETE ROSE MEHRING GILBERT 3RD 6TH PLUM REA DING SMITH 5TH COLUMBIA BROADWAY EZZARD CHARLES CENTRAL PLUM VINE 5TH 6TH 3RD MAIN SYCAMORE LIBERTY 9TH PETE ROSE BROADWAY BROADWAY 5TH 4TH RACE WALNUT EGGLESTO N MEHRING PIK E SYCAMORE 6TH Arlington Hts 60 Degree of Change for Neighborhoods is Important
  61. 61. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 4 Focus Neighborhoods: 42 Total Will Have FBC 61 Madison Road
  62. 62. Beaufort County, South Carolina Countywide Scale 62
  63. 63. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 63 Countywide Close Up Place Type Designations
  64. 64. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 64
  65. 65. 5 Non-Profit Think Tank: Leading Practitioners in FBCs Who is the 
 Form-Based Code Institute? 65
  66. 66. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 66 Our Mission
  67. 67. © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | 67
  68. 68. © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | Nationally Recognized Thought Leader in FBCs 1. Ex. Director: Joel Russel 2. 18 Board Members: 3 FAICP 3. 20 Resource Council Members 4. APA Resource:APA PTS Training, articles, 5. Driehaus FBC Award 6. 101, 201, 301-Level Courses taught across the country 7. Webinars 68 Form-Based Codes A Guide for Planners, Urban Designers, Municipalities, and Developers Daniel G. Parolek, AIA • Karen Parolek • Paul C. Crawford, FAICP Forewords by Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk and Stefanos Polyzoides
  69. 69. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 69 Thought Leaders in FBC Practice ZONING PRACTICE MAY 2013 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION ISSUE NUMBER 5 PRACTICE FORM-BASED ZONING 5 ZONINGPRACTICE AMERICANPLANNINGASSOCIATION 205N.MichiganAve. Suite1200 Chicago,IL60601–5927 103015thStreet,NW Suite750West Washington,DC20005–1503 ZONING PRACTICE JUNE 2013 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION ISSUE NUMBER 6 PRACTICE FORM-BASED ZONING DO YOU KNOW HOWTO CALLIBRATE A FORM-BASED CODE? 66
  70. 70. 6 National Leaders in Form-Based Coding Practice Overview of Course Structure 70
  71. 71. © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | 71
  72. 72. © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | 72
  73. 73. © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | 73
  74. 74. 7 A Few Closing Thoughts Conclusion 74
  75. 75. Developing Countries Dialing a Code Up or Down 75
  76. 76. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 76 Simplified System Based on Administration Capabilities T4 Allowed Building Types (select one) Zone Standards Flex Building (Page 5-23) 9m-18m wide x 27m min. deep lot Sideyard Building (Page 5-25) 12m-18m wide x 27m min. deep lot Courtyard Building (Page 5-27) 27m-36m wide x 30m min. deep lot General Form Intent: The T4 General Urban Zone consists of mixed-use (horizontal and vertical), primarily small to medium lot, attached and detached residential urban fabric. There are small or no front and side setbacks with walls or buildings defining the streetscape edge. Streets with curbs and sidewalks define small to medium sized walkable blocks. Thoroughfare layout is typically regular, except when addressing topography or natural features. DRAFT: January 2014 Angondje New Town SmartCode | 5-21 1 2 4 6 73 Article 5: Building Scale5 Transect Zone: T4 General Urban T4
  77. 77. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 77 Simplified System Based on Administration Capabilities Standards (comply with all) Lot width. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9m-18m Lot depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30m min. Building distance from side lot line . . . . . 0m or 2m Building height. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1-3 stories Floor to ceiling height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3m min. Courtyard (if provided) width . . . . . . . . . . 4m min. Eave depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.8m min. Parking (if provided) accessed from rear alley Front lot line defined by a street facade type; side and rear lot lines defined by a building or wall Dooryard PorchGalleryFlex Building Type Standards Allowed Street Facade Types (select one) DRAFT: January 2014 Angondje New Town SmartCode | 5-23 1 2 4 6 73 Article 5: Building Scale5 T4 Building Type: Flex Building T4 Front Sidewalk Rear Side Side (min.)(min.) (min.) 30m min. Lot Depth 3m 1to3stories BuildingHeight 3m 1.8m 9m-15mLot Width 4m (min.)Courtyard Awning or Balcony 2m deep (min.). Building 3m from Front Lot line. Dooryard defined by a wall that is solid for no more than 1.5m and no taller than 2m. Face of front wall at Front Lot line Line. Front Lot Line Sidewalk Street Front Facade 3m Building 3m from Front Lot line Face of porch at Front Lot Line Front Lot Line Sidewalk Street Front Facade 3m Building at Front Lot line. Face of Gallery .4m (max.) from curb. Front Lot Line SidewalkStreet Awning or Balcony 2m deep (min.). Building at Front Lot line. Front Lot Line Sidewalk Street
  78. 78. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 78 Series of New Community Types as Framework Stade De L'Amitie Special District 1 400m Walkable Catchments TRANSECT ZONES
  79. 79. Relate to Form Hierarchy Don’t Forget Sustainability 79
  80. 80. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Considering Sustainability Along the Transect 80 T3: Single Family and Carriage House Strategic Shading. Glazing. Design glazing to heat the structure from the south, and cool through cross-ventilation. Water Infiltration. Allow water to percolate in sub-surface conditions. Greenway. Use the greenway as a stormwater capture, conveyance and treatment feature. South-Side Planting. Consider solar access on the south side of buildings when planting landscape. Public/Private Portal. Compost Bins. Require compost bins with instructions for homeowners. Urban Farming. Encourage small-scall cultivation. No Hose Bibs. Exclude external hose bibs from home design, thereby irrigating only by rain barrel or reuse water. Rain Garden. Provide lot treatment rain gardens. Flow-Through StormwaterTreatment Planter. ABCDEFGHIJK B C A D E J H K G I F B D E A C G J H K F I T4: Live/Work Building Active Space. Allow some portion of outdoor space to be used for public open-space, potentially active space. Retractable Awnings. Encourage the use of retractable awnings in storefront design, to protect from the summer sun. Outdoor Seating. Encourage establishments to provide outdoor seating and outdoor spaces. Car Charging Stations. Provide electric charging stations to promote the use of alternate-fuel vehicles.. Recycling and Compost Bins. Encourage establishments to have an area for compost and recycling bins, in addition to trash bins.. Vegetated Roofs. Promote vegetated roofs, skylights or directed sunlight to improve the quality of life in interior apartments. Residential Access. Provide residential access to flat rooftops, creating usable open space. Private Driveway. Require minimal curbcuts and curb return radii. Roof Materials. Use high SRI roof materials where PV or vegetated roofs are not practical. Covered bicycle storage. ABCDEFGHIJ T5: Mid-Rise Building Type Urban Rooftop Farming/Gardening. Roof Access. Encourage rooftop access to maximize value of views and open space. Outdoor Seating. Activating sidewalk space in front of mixed-use development encourages community vitality.. Awnings. Awnings provide street-level shading and rain shelter. Diverse Rooftop Usage. Encourage both commercial and residential use of roof space. Urban Gardening. Garden space available for residential tenants.. Bioswales. Bioswales improve stormwater quality, mitigate urban flooding, and give opportunity for infiltration where subsurface conditions allow.. Bike Racks. Encourage tenants and patrons to cycle by providing regular amenities for bike parking. StreetTrees. Tree boxes/wells improve thermal comfort and street character.. ABCDEFGHI C D B A E H G I F
  81. 81. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | South 23rd Street Incorporating sustainability in ancillary unit design2012 APA National Conference-Los Angeles, CA © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | T3: Sustainability Overlay to Inform Form-Based Code 16 Flow through treatment planter Lot Treament Rain Garden No External Hose Bibs No Irrigation Except by Rain Barrel or Reused Water Urban Farming Compost Bins Strategic Shading Passive Heating from South-Facing Glazing-Cross Ventilation Cools as Needed Infiltration Where Sub-Surfaces Allow It Shield Winter Winds from the Northwest in Outdoor spaces Greenway as a Stormwater Caputre Conveyance & Treatment Feature Solar Lighting Along Greenway Utilize Summer Winds from the Southeast to Passively Cool Buildings Considering Sustainability Along the Transect 81
  82. 82. Market Demand is Waiting Providing Predictability: 
 Getting Quick Results 82
  83. 83. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 83 Predictable, Clear Process is The Goal DRAFT IN PROGRESS 03.16.07 DIAGRAM 11 PERMITTING PROCESS PERMITTING PROCESS DIAGRAMPERMITTING PROCESS DIAGRAM Applicant Preapplication Preapplication Preapplication Preapplication Zoning Department Warrant Exception Variance Zoning Change File with Hearing Board * Building Permit Preapplication Building Permit Waiver File with Planning * Building Permit Building Permit City Commission CRC - Coordinated Review Committee PZAB – Planning Zoning and Appeals Board By Right CRC PZAB PZAB Building Permit PZAB Planning Director Appeal City Comm. Appeal City Comm. Appeal PZAB Planning Director Planning Director Planning Director Planning Director File with Planning * File with Hearing Board * File with Hearing Board * Building Permit Appeal PZAB * All applications shall include required notice CRC
  84. 84. © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 84 Mesa, AZ: Less Than 6 MonthsYear after Adoption
  85. 85. dan@opticosdesign.com 85 www.formbasedcodes.org Form-Based Codes A Guide for Planners, Urban Designers, Municipalities, and Developers Daniel G. Parolek, AIA • Karen Parolek • Paul C. Crawford, FAICP Forewords by Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk and Stefanos Polyzoides www.formbasedcodes.org
  86. 86. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Welcome to the 21st Century 86
  87. 87. © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Regulating Plan 87 END

×