Posted June 25, 200816 yr Cincinnati delegation sees form-based codes in action http://www.soapboxmedia.com/devnews/fbc0624.aspx Late last week, a twenty-five member delegation of Cincinnati city staff, members of the Urban Land Institute (ULI), neighborhood leaders and local developers went to Nashville to see first-hand how form-based codes have accelerated that city's economic development. In her recent budget policy motion, Cincinnati City Councilmember Roxanne Qualls proposed the development of a comprehensive plan that capitalizes on the city's historically dense and pedestrian friendly core and neighborhood business districts. Form-based codes regulate development's physical form, relationship and scale, rather than using conventional zoning's focus on the segregation of land uses. While in Nashville, the delegation learned how the city successfully moved from conventional zoning to form-based codes and how citizens were involved in the process. "To see the thoughful creation of a built environment that creates a sense of place was very powerful," says Scott Golan, a member of the ULI executive committee. One of the projects they toured was the Icon in the Gulch, a 400-unit condominium development that sold out in 48 hours. "It's hard to see the impact of form-based codes and not be persuaded," Golan says. "The quality of what they do is higher. You could tell which buildings were developed under form-based codes, and which were not." Qualls and city planning staff convened a Form-Based Code Collaborative Group to explore the next steps, including assembling project partners and communicating to the public the importance of using form-based codes to create "places that matter". "The city leadership seems to be engaging this in the right way," Golan says. "Roxanne Qualls has been working hard to educate people about form-based codes. They're definitely not ignoring the issue."
June 25, 200816 yr This whole effort has been a major point of Council member Roxanne Qualls. She has publicly stated that she will not approve any text amendments, to the current zoning code, unless they are amendments for a form-based code. This is her baby and I wish her the best of luck. It would be a bold move/statement to the rest of the country and place Cincinnati among the more progressive Planning cities once again.
June 25, 200816 yr You can learn more about form-based codes here: http://smartcodecentral.org/ Andres Duany is essentially the man with the plan so to speak regarding form-based codes (aka SmartCode). Andres Duany is often associated with the New Urbanist movement in modern Planning.
September 9, 200816 yr Can form-based codes restore Cincinnati's urbanity? http://www.soapboxmedia.com/features/30formbasedcodes.aspx City of Cincinnati staff, in conjunction with several local groups including the Cincinnati chapter of the Urban Land Institute, is exploring the use of form-based codes (FBCs) as an alternative to the traditional zoning process. The collaborative group, spearheaded by Cincinnati City Council member Roxanne Qualls, has made two trips to Nashville to study how their localized use of FBCs has led to rapid redevelopment. "They're a really powerful tool building strong neighborhoods and spurring business development," Qualls says. So what exactly are Form Based Codes and why are they important? The codes are essentially a community's legal document that sets controls on building form to ensure communities are developed with an eye towards a more cohesive relationship between facade and street, steet and block, block and neighborhood. Communities following FBCs boast a healthy mix of uses. The Code uses simple and clear graphic prescriptions and parameters for height, sitting and building elements to address the basic necessities for forming good public space. "It provides a framework for physical development, while preserving aspects of the community like walkability, compactness, and quality of life," Qualls says. Form based codes commonly include: A regulating plan designating where different building form standards apply Public space standards that specify elements such as sidewalks, on-street parking, and street trees Building form standards that control the form, features and functions of buildings A clear application and project review procss A set of definitions that spell out the code's technical terms FBCs can also include elements of design overlay districts such as signage and landscaping standards, but, unlike overlay districts which can be circumvented, they are regulatory, meaning that they are a matter of municipal law rather than advisory. "Form-based codes can address entire neighborhoods, business districts, corridors, or whatever level of focus the community needs," Qualls says. Seaside and the birth of FBCs The first attempt at modern FBCs is widely credited to Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk of DPZ, who designed the Florida resort town of Seaside in 1982. As pioneers in the New Urbanism movement, the architects were faced with the challenge of creating an entire 80-acre town that could revive Florida’s building tradition without creating a project that looked too manufactured. Rather than using conventional, or Euclidean zoning, Duany and Plater-Zyberk developed a set of guidelines, dubbed "SmartCode", that allowed developers to build within a certain set of forms, rather than on land uses. The master-planned community was built at higher densities than typical suburban communities are allowed which resulted in a walkable, intimate small-town feel that has served as its strongest selling point. Lessons from Seaside have grown into today's FBCs, with cities such as Toronto, Nashville, Louisville, and Arlington, Virginia adopting some form of the code. Problems with 'Euclidean' zoning Euclidean zoning tends to focus on the segregation of types of land use and the regulation of arbitrary parameters such as the number of units allowed per acre, setbacks, and parking ratios. What often results is development that elevates the ease of automobile access over the safety of the pedestrian. "Conventional Euclidean zoning is what has produced sprawl and has led to the sad deterioration of our historic neighborhoods and the neglect of walkability," Qualls says. "We can see the consequences. We see the shopping centers and auto-oriented development, or what some would call 'monodevelopment'." Qualls says that separate and isolated land uses, going hand-in-hand with an auto-dependent transportation network, have made it difficult for people to enjoy spur-of-the-moment activities like dining, shopping, or entertainment. "It challenges most peoples' ability to meet their daily needs, and it undermines the traditional, vibrant neighborhoods that people like to live in," she says. And in an era of rising energy prices, Qualls believes that such development practices cannot continue. "It's not a sustainable practice," she says. "It's totally based upon the category of land use, and it's not concerned about urbanity." Community support crucial FBCs fold zoning, subdivision regulations, urban design controls, and public works standards into one unified document. Because of this, Qualls says that bridging the learning curve for people that are used to Euclidean zoning requires the participation of residents, community councils, business associations, and other stakeholders. "The heart of the development of form-based codes is a very open, very robust public participation process," she says. One of the common misconceptions about FBCs is that, without strict land use controls, they will allow dirty and dangerous factories to be built next to peoples’ homes. "Form based codes don't throw land use out the window," Qualls says. "They recognize that there are appropriate contexts for heavy industry that may not be appropriate for mixed-use areas." She adds that these are exactly the kind of issues that the public process is meant to identify, and that the identification of these issues will be codified when the FBC is adopted, eliminating any possible gray areas. "It is not an open-ended process," Qualls says. "It's a nine-month, interactive process. Once the community has signed off on it and council approves, it's done." Development quicker During the trip to Nashville, the collaborative group was stunned at the pace of development occurring in areas that had adopted FBCs such as The Gulch, East Nashville, Lenox Village and Hills Center. "We saw tremendous development in neighborhoods where form-based codes were adopted," Qualls says. "Not only that, but the quality of what’s being built. You begin to see a level of specificity in the look of the projects." Once FBCs are in place, the developer is free to go to work as long as he agrees to abide by the code. Qualls says that, because the various levels of city approvals are eliminated, approval times can be slashed from several months to several weeks. "It's remarkable to see the speed in which you start to see development occur," she says. "And it's a predictable development environment, knowing that if they conform to the code, their neighbor will as well." The result of FBCs is a diversity of architecture, materials, uses, and ownership, creating a more organic end-product. And because they regulate development at the scale of an individual building or lot, they lessen the need for large land assemblies and megaprojects and make redevelopment more attractive to smaller developers. Next steps Several city neighborhoods have expressed interest in implementing FBCs, including College Hill, Madisonville, Pleasant Ridge and Westwood. This week, Qualls will introduce a council motion directing the city to begin exploring the feasibility of exploring FBCs on a limited basis. And in early October, an informational conference is planned to introduce the idea to people involved in community development. "This is not a simple concept,” Qualls says. "There is definitely a learning curve. We’re not at a stage where we can give a great visual presentation, so that’s what we’re working on." NOTE: A future article will address lessons learned from Nashville and some of the ideas for how FBCs can be applied in Cincinnati.
September 26, 200816 yr New zoning method could rewrite local development Business Courier of Cincinnati - by Laura Baverman Narrow sidewalks prevent restaurants from offering outdoor patio seating in College Hill’s business district. In Pleasant Ridge, a parking lot in front of Burger King breaks up the pedestrian-friendly atmosphere of the neighborhood’s retail district. And in Springfield Township, scattered stand-alone fast food restaurants and strip malls prevent the community from establishing its own unique character. A new zoning code gaining the support of community planners across the U.S. could set a new building standard for developers in these neighborhoods, one focused on the aesthetics, design and function of a space rather than its end use. Called form-based code, it can make the development process faster and more profitable. Some of its biggest proponents include Cincinnati City Council member Roxanne Qualls, local community councils and the Cincinnati chapter of the Urban Land Institute. Read full article here: http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2008/09/29/story11.html
September 27, 200816 yr Look for another feature in Soapbox on Tuesday. Also, there is a major conference here October 3-4. I'm surprised the Courier didn't mention it. Read all about it and register here: http://www.cincycharacter.com/
September 30, 200816 yr Creating places that matter http://www.soapboxmedia.com/features/33placesmatter.aspx This weekend, the City of Cincinnati and the Cincinnati chapter of the Urban Land Institute (ULI) will convene the Building Valued Neighborhood Conference at the Duke Energy Center, a two-day open exploration of government, community, and development imperatives for implementing form based codes (FBCs) to develop "places that matter". As reported in an earlier Soapbox feature story, FBCs are a unique combination of regulations that create a predictable public realm by dictating the form and scale of the built environment, as well as the relationships of buildings to the street and their surroundings. J. Scott Golan is on the executive committee of ULI Cincinnati, whose group is working to facilitate discussion and educate stakeholders about FBCs and reports they can be a useful tool in returning Cincinnati’s historic business districts to the thriving nodes that they were built to be. "The reason form based codes work is because they create walkable neighborhoods," he says. "They emphasize how buildings relate to pedestrian traffic -- first-floor retail, the position of the building to the street and sidewalk. It's a place-creating framework." Best seen in person In addition to sponsoring the upcoming conference, Golan and ULI representatives are part of a group of more than two dozen individuals on a FBC steering committee. "We're looking for ways to actualize opportunities and continue the conversation," he says. The group, which includes representatives from the City of Cincinnati, planners, developers, architects, and financiers have made two trips to Nashville to see the codes in action. "It's one thing to hear about it," Golan says. "It's quite another to see it in person." Areas within the city of Nashville that have FBC overlay districts were readily distinguishable from those that weren't, and they made quite an impression on Golan. "The impression on me is that it has increased awareness of the importance of zoning on development," he says. "For example, the project in the Gulch, which is in an area roughly equivalent to Queensgate, has $100 million put into it. It's all been driven by zoning." The Icon in the Gulch is a 22-story, 424-unit residential tower that includes 26,000 square feet of street-level retail with most units in the Icon priced below $300,000. The project sold out within 48 hours. "The Icon is a beautiful development, and it sold out at prices we don't see in this market," he says. "And what's interesting about it is that the parking garage is wrapped by affordable housing." Developers have jumped at the chance to add infill development into areas that were no longer suffocated by outdated land use constraints. "The Gulch development was the most impressive because, literally, it was $100 million based entirely on conviction," he says. "And the market supported that conviction." Not just for inner cities In South Nashville, Lenox Village, a 208-acre project comprised of approximately 1,200 residential units surrounding a commercial village square, is a more suburban yet traditionally-styled New Urbanist development. "Its distance to downtown Nashville is approximately the same distance as Forest Park or Fairfield are from downtown Cincinnati," Golan says. "But it's designed to be more walkable than what's typically built that far away from the city center." Golan believes that there’s no reason that such projects can thrive in our suburban areas as well. "It allows you to design and build at a pedestrian scale, and to develop a place that matters," he says. "It just goes to show you that if you develop in that way, people will come, and the market will respond." Golan also left impressed with the way the Nashville government worked together to allow new development to happen. "The other thing that struck me was the talent and the vision of the planners in their government," he says. "Because they have a metro government, they're able to share resources at the city and county level. There's a lot of wisdom among those people." The making of a magnet Communities and buildings following FBCs are said to be magnets for talents and energy. "This is one of those subtle sounding issues that’s one of the most important that our community needs to consider," Golan says. "It's not sexy, and it doesn't grab you. But it's very important, and very impactful." The City of Cincinnati is considering an update to its comprehensive plan that could include the implementation of FBCs, and neighborhoods such as College Hill, Madisonville, Pleasant Ridge and Westwood have expressed interest in having overlay districts established. Golan believes that FBC overlays will allow Cincinnati's neighborhoods to prosper, one building at a time. "With form based codes, you don't have to tackle the whole neighborhood at once," he says. "It opens up the market to smaller developers." The codes also set standards that everyone is expected to abide by, meaning less risk to developers. "Developers know what's going to happen around their properties," Golan says. "They know that their investment will be matched because of the code. That's so important." The Friday afternoon portion of the conference should be of particular interest to developers. "On Friday, we'll talk about the economic imperatives for form based codes," Golan says. "A speaker from ULI will talk about placemaking. The development community from Nashville will talk about how form-based codes have allowed them to make more money and have more success." On Saturday morning, the discussion will focus on how governments and communities can nourish community character by emphasizing neighborhood spaces. "Part of what we're trying to do is to connect neighborhoods to the development community and to the people who write and enforce the building and zoning codes," Golan says. "We'll be bringing in a lot of people from Nashville to talk - people from (planning) and developers. We just want to make sure that the decision makers are engaged in the process." In addition to future education efforts, ULI Cincinnati plans to apply half of its profits from the conference to an actionable neighborhood FBC project. "This will not be just a 'one and done'," Golan says. To register for the Building Valued Neighborhoods Conference, visit www.cincycharacter.com or call (800) 321-5011.
September 30, 200816 yr Columbus, not known for progressive zoning, to say the least, has had a form-based zoning code downtown for 10 years, and it is a good thing. I wrote about it in the December 2004 issue of Planning magazine ("Designing a Downtown"), but can't post the article because I'm not an APA member and can't get into the archive.
March 23, 201015 yr If you're interested in Cincinnati's form-based code effort, you should visit the charette sessions in Bellevue this week for their Smart Code. A lot has already happened since the sessions began yesterday. Originally, only two parts of the city were going to get a form code overlay (shopping center area along I-471, and the riverfront), but the consultants are now considering doing a form code overlay for the bulk of the historical/walkable part of the city.
March 23, 201015 yr Even speaking from the skeptical perspective with respect to zoning as a concept, I like this idea as an improvement upon existing use-segregating codes, given that most existing systems have a "default assumption" against mixed-use development.
March 26, 201015 yr Bellevue presented the results of their Smart Code charette on Thursday. The overall long-term vision for the city looks great. It deals with the reality that the out-of-place riverfront condo towers aren't going away any time soon, but introduces a new plan for the areas where they currently have big box stores and drive-thru restaurants. (BTW, Party Source is not going away. The owners have actually been quite involved in this process and see this plan as a positive for them and the city.)
March 26, 201015 yr I agree that moving to a form-based code is a good thing, but I have to say that Cincinnati's current zoning code is really pretty good compared to a lot of other cities. They tried to account for as many variations in the built fabric of the city as they could, so that they didn't have to give whole neighborhoods exemptions or be grandfathered in. Basically, if you look at most areas of the city, you can still build today the kind of things that are already there. That's no small achievement. For instance, they have separate designations for pedestrian vs. auto-oriented commercial districts, mixed use, and many levels of density for residential construction. In single-family residential zones for instance, you have much smaller required setbacks for accessory buildings than for the main building. Thus, if you build a detached garage, it can be within 3 feet of the property line instead of the 10, 15, 20 foot or greater setback for the main house. That's a great way to keep garages from coming front and center in new houses where they can be kept in the back. I'm sure there's some exceptions, but overall it's pretty accommodating. It says something that they based it on what's already here, using real examples and photographs of neighborhoods that are typical examples. Many cities just buy their copy of the Municode and are done with it. Indianapolis has awful zoning, it's straight out of the 1960s. It's nice to see Cincinnati taking a more progressive approach, especially when they already have a pretty good foundation to build on in the first place.
March 28, 201015 yr Bellevue has been adopting one for the past few months and just finished their charette. Cincinnati is studying one, but is nowhere near that point in the process, as far as I know.
March 30, 201015 yr My understanding is that Qualls is leading an initiative to implement some Form-Based overlay districts in business districts that request it. She has been building grassroots support for this with a working group that consists of leaders from Westwood, College Hill and a few other neighborhoods.
March 30, 201015 yr The effort is moving along slowly in Cincinnati. I believe they are close to announcing who they selected through RFP. We just finished our code here in Bellevue. Check it out at codingbellevueky.org. I think Cincinnati has ample opportunity to use FBC. Specifically, FBC addresses things zoning does not such as the street corridor and creating a sense of place. If you look closely at the existing ordinance, Cincinnati only has one mixed use zone (the Brewery District). All other zones are primarily single use zones or Planned Districts. Planned Districts mostly allow for mixed use but tend to disregard and divorce new development from surrounding development. Additionally, the traditional zoning process takes a long time. Developing under a FBC allows desired urban and pedestrian friendly development by right, not by process or an endless string of variances. A difference that does impact how developers view working with a city. “All truly great thoughts are conceived while walking.” -Friedrich Nietzsche
March 31, 201015 yr That's great to see Bellevue this far along in the process. Now that the intent and the framework are in place, it'll be interesting to see how successful the end result will be. I've said before that Bellevue let recent developments happen for the sake of development and at expense of good urbanism. This code is a great first step, but they have to commit to good design and architecture even if it means that some developers walk away IMO. Easier said than done, even in a healthy economy. JYP, do you work for the city? If so, which is the more typical scenario? - Developers (or property owners) propose high-quality, context-sensitive projects that are either prohibited or watered down due to the existing code or - Developers submit template suburban-style projects that the city would like to improve, but has been limited due to the existing code. Just curious. Either are great reasons to adopt a form-based code.
March 31, 201015 yr ^ Yep. I was heavily involved in the charrette last week. Typically developers come to the city with the project they have in mind. In the case of the riverfront, the area is zoned MLU which permits almost any type of big project with Planning Commission and Council approval. Projects like Harbor Greene actually started out very different than what is built today. It's unfortunate because some of the conceptual drawings would have been more integrated than what was built. The problem with the current zoning is that it has allowed both the types of development that don't fit with the city. Large scale condo towers and suburban style developments are both found in this zone. The very flexibility desired to allow development also allowed the possibility to create this mismatch. FBC's will allow for better integration where the current zoning does not. “All truly great thoughts are conceived while walking.” -Friedrich Nietzsche
August 23, 201014 yr Cincinnati officials impressed by results of Nashville’s form-based codes In late June 2010, 18 individuals from Cincinnati made a trip to Nashville, TN in order to learn more about that city’s form-based code efforts. While on the trip, local officials and community leaders toured three of Nashville’s most notable developments to see first-hand how such land planning initiatives have made a tangible impact there. The delegation attending the last of several trips to Nashville included Cincinnati City Councilmembers Laure Quinlivan, Charlie Winburn and Wendell Young; Hamilton Vice Mayor Rob Wile; leaders from Downtown, Walnut Hills, Mt. Auburn, Hyde Park, The Christ Hospital, the Cincinnati Form Based Codes Initiative, and UrbanCincy. See more at: http://www.urbancincy.com/2010/08/cincinnati-officials-impressed-by-results-of-nashvilles-form-based-codes/ “All truly great thoughts are conceived while walking.” -Friedrich Nietzsche
August 23, 201014 yr Step in the wrong direction.. zoning codes are already excessively restrictive and have led to the segregation of uses that we have today. Adding complexity and regulation to an already overly complex and regulated system is just asking for more problems. What the city/county should be doing to be truly on the leading edge is become much more liberal in the conditional use permitting process, while simultaneously chopping away chunks of the zoning code that have caused many of the problems form-based codes are attempting to forcibly fix. Form based codes lead to some ugly, sterile developments that have been popping up all over the place recently. The Utopian undertones of the entire concept are also striking, but that’s a discussion for elsewhere. What should be occurring is the relaxation of codes so that cities can develop naturally.
August 23, 201014 yr Completely disagree. What FBC's do is allow more freedom for development not hinder it. Under current zoning in most of the country, developments take years and are often diluted from involvement of special interest and obscure regulations from outdated subdivision regulations. FBC's allow for that. I do admit there are some bad FBC's out there, but a properly developed one like the one in Nashville would actually be helped by allowing development to meet market demand instead of the many abstract requirements found in most Zoning Ordinances today. As for sterile and ugly developments, a good FBC only regulates the form and placement of buildings. It's hard to regulate architectural features through design guidelines because most of the time they are only advisory and not enforceable. As someone once told me...you can't regulate ugly. “All truly great thoughts are conceived while walking.” -Friedrich Nietzsche
August 23, 201014 yr Completely disagree. What FBC's do is allow more freedom for development not hinder it. Under current zoning in most of the country, developments take years and are often diluted from involvement of special interest and obscure regulations from outdated subdivision regulations. FBC's allow for that. I do admit there are some bad FBC's out there, but a properly developed one like the one in Nashville would actually be helped by allowing development to meet market demand instead of the many abstract requirements found in most Zoning Ordinances today. The simplest, most obvious solution is most often the best solution. However, it’s never the one the government takes, for some reason. We agree that current codes across the country, Cincinnati in particular, are problematic and hinder development. The solution is to make code less restrictive. FBC does that in one sense, but what it also does is add even more restrictions. It might be easier to navigate, which is a positive change, but it hinders the natural development of cities for the sake of shaping urban form based upon the preconceived notions of a handful of urban designers. In doing so, it regulates creative freedom of designers and architects in the future more so than the existing code. My belief is that less codes = better urban form. OTR developed very nicely a century ago without them.
August 24, 201014 yr So, it's apples and oranges. That's like arguing for the streetcar solely on the basis of having it 100 years ago. The market conditions are a completely different animal now. Having no codes in the 21st Century would be an absolute disaster, having all kinds of development that disrupt normal business operations, leisure, and security. No code gets you what happened at Center of Cincinnati. No code is not a direct translation to walkable, 19th Century development.
August 24, 201014 yr Also, form-based codes are not intended to be used on top of already convoluted existing zoning regulations, they're a replacement. Form-based codes focus on the overall unity of the neighborhood, because mixed uses, even vastly different ones, are very compatible as long as they are all of a similar scale. A full scale hospital is not compatible with single-family residential or even a dense row house type neighborhood, but a small doctor's office, veterinarian, accountant's office, or funeral home is. The point of form-based codes isn't to say that those uses are specifically allowed or disallowed, but that any of those (or other) uses are ok if they fit within the same size buildings as everything else. Traditional zoning is about micromanaging things like floor area ratios, parking spaces per unit, dwelling units per acre, and specific occupancy uses. It's about restriction, preventing certain types of uses and levels of occupancy. Form-based codes turn the situation around and make it about the actual, well, form of the building. It's about saying the building shall front on the sidewalks, shall be between these heights, and must be so open to the street frontage, etc. Whatever happens inside is much more flexible however, without all the strict land use and other occupancy guidelines. You can of course still do less than what the zoning allows, but using the example of a bank branch for instance, instead of getting a small building surrounded by a parking lot, you get a small building pushed up to the sidewalk, maybe with some apartments above it and space in back to expand or to put some of that parking. It's much more conducive to development, since once the basic principles are met you're much more free to develop the programming to meet whatever the needs of the owner are. In essence, it prescribes the initial framework for the design of the building based on context and (again) form, rather than abstract dictates like the required number of parking spaces or rigorous minimum setbacks. All that said, like traditional zoning, form-based zoning can also be a tool to prevent growth and development if not implemented properly. By restricting the occupancy levels or the "form" of a neighborhood to what's already there, you severely limit the ability for the city to grow, and also for property owners to maximize its potential. Even as this discussion was starting, the city was down-zoning parts of Hyde Park and Mt. Lookout to prevent subdividing of lots. This is where property owners can be rather stupid, in that they think they're protecting "neighborhood character" (which is usually fancy talk for protecting property values). However, in such hot areas, these property owners are suppressing the value of their land significantly, and causing sprawl by artificially limiting its development potential through zoning. Form-based codes would still do this if they treat the status quo as the ideal form. However, it wouldn't prevent houses from being divided into apartments, renting out the basement or garage apartments, or being replaced with smaller multi-unit buildings that still have the appearance of single family houses, for example, so it's still an improvement.
August 24, 201014 yr Form-based zoning is an absolute no-brainer. exhibit A.) Paris http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haussmann%27s_renovation_of_Paris#Aesthetics_of_the_.22Street-Wall.22
August 24, 201014 yr Form-based zoning is an absolute no-brainer. exhibit A.) Paris http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haussmann%27s_renovation_of_Paris#Aesthetics_of_the_.22Street-Wall.22 Not really, in fact it's a pretty hotly debated subject amongst many. The goal may be a no-brainier, the methodology is highly debatable, seeing as how I was just debating it in previous posts.
August 25, 201014 yr Not really, in fact it's a pretty hotly debated subject amongst many. The goal may be a no-brainier, the methodology is highly debatable, seeing as how I was just debating it in previous posts. You debating it does not make it highly debatable. OTR developed without them (is this a fact btw?) because we hadn't thrown centuries worth of architectural progress away on designing big box retail or the latest Gehry-like blob building. That was how you built a city, and it was a major reason why areas like that were so desirable to live in for so long. I wouldn't force FBCs on downtowns or other economic centers (I'm thinking light industry in the West End), but they are absolutely appropriate for residential urban neighborhoods.
August 25, 201014 yr That's a very good point REK. While there wasn't any zoning or design standards written into law 100 years ago, there was a much greater understanding of the principles of good design, urban form, etc. among the builders and architects of the time. That knowledge took centuries to develop, and it was all chucked in the garbage come the 1950s. We're only just now starting to dig it all back up after realizing how important they are, and how completely ill-equipped we are without them.
August 25, 201014 yr Big boxes are a product of our current zoning regulations, zoning regulations brought forth by the previous generations because they thought it was the solution to all urban problems. In reality, all they did is create other problems. Now, with FBC, designers think they have solved all those problems with a newer system of codes. My opinion is that design solutions start with a concept, yet develop from the detail, and work their way up. FBC hinders this process, as it creates a preconceived notion of what a design should be. It takes unpredictability out of the equation (just as our current codes do, this is more of a critique of codes in general than just FBC), which is a shame because that is what has the potential to create a lively urban environment. To me, FBC's are heavily based upon a preconceived notion of what a perfect/ideal development is... and in my opinion, there is no such thing. Each and every lot has a different range of successful design solutions, and having to conform those solutions to specific codes takes away from them. I feel if you relax codes and allow for more (and more easily attainable) variances, you'll end up with development closer to whatever "ideal" is than through FBC. There's a value in the vernacular that just isn't attainable so long as a plethora of codes are dictating design and development.
August 26, 201014 yr There have been building regulations in cities since ancient times. Some old cities have gone through several different sets of regulations. Typical American zoning has two main features: density restrictions and separation of uses. If form-based zoning still uses the same density restrictions, it's really not all that different from the previous method.
August 26, 201014 yr But one of the primary mechanisms of FBC is to encourage higher density in key areas. The current solution to maintaining walkable, street-fronted business corridors is to establish overlay districts all over the place. FBC would simplify the process but also allow less room for exceptions. Variances are not part of FBC. It's not so formal and convoluted as the current zoning regulations, and is meant to replace current zoning entirely in neighborhood areas that prefer it.
April 17, 201213 yr http://www.wlwt.com/news/30907577/detail.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter So I'm not sure if WLWT was actually the FIRST news outlet to report this (they never are), but this is the first I've heard of it... Vice Mayor Qualls is promoting a plan that would eliminate parking requirements in DT/OTR. Seems like some city officials read UrbanCincy? "Cities are recognizing that allowing the market to function will produce a better result," Well, that's a very good way to word it. You could axe a lot of the zoning code and allow the market to achieve better results, but I don't know how she can say that with a straight face and then advocate form based codes. What the city really needs to try is a code diet. A form-based code is a code diet. It usually replaces land-use zoning codes that are not relevant anymore.
April 17, 201213 yr A form-based code is a code diet. It usually replaces land-use zoning codes that are not relevant anymore. It replaces a 3500 calorie diet with a 3500 calorie diet that is a bit more appetizing. We need a 2000 calorie diet. It depends on how the code is done; but if done correctly, the form-based code is the 2000-calorie diet. Eliminating a variety of different use restrictions, setback restrictions, height restrictions, etc., and replacing them with just a few transect zones. If that isn't a code diet, I'd like to know what is.
April 18, 201213 yr You know we won't be happy with just that. Where are the parking maximums? Most cities have parking maximums, Cincinnati does not. I recently worked on a building in a small North Carolina town and they had requirements for maximum allowable parking. A form-based code is a code diet. It usually replaces land-use zoning codes that are not relevant anymore. It replaces a 3500 calorie diet with a 3500 calorie diet that is a bit more appetizing. We need a 2000 calorie diet. As someone who has hand-crafted form base codes, this is terribly hard to do. It is often much more complicated and subjective to codify form than it is to codify use.
April 18, 201213 yr You know we won't be happy with just that. Where are the parking maximums? Most cities have parking maximums, Cincinnati does not. I recently worked on a building in a small North Carolina town and they had requirements for maximum allowable parking. A form-based code is a code diet. It usually replaces land-use zoning codes that are not relevant anymore. It replaces a 3500 calorie diet with a 3500 calorie diet that is a bit more appetizing. We need a 2000 calorie diet. As someone who has hand-crafted form base codes, this is terribly hard to do. It is often much more complicated and subjective to codify form than it is to codify use. Except that current Euclidian codes prescribe both use AND form. Such codes are loaded with setbacks, height limitations, floor area ratios, lot coverages, fire department accesses, and the like. You throw away the use-based stuff from a Euclidian code and what's left is form-based. It's crappy form, but it's form nonetheless. Still, that's half of the old stuff gone right there, and you take the form-based stuff that remains and tweak it to be not as crappy. What follows from that, ideally, is far fewer zones that correspond to the various transects you want to utilize. That's the real problem with zoning codes today, even here in Cincinnati that has what I consider to be a pretty good code (there's many form-based elements in the higher density zones, and for the most part few uses and building types have to grandfathered in compared to other places). Nevertheless, there's way way too many zones, and they're constantly micromanaged like some sort of land-use gerrymandering nightmare. When you have a block getting downzoned (whether with a traditional Euclidian or more clean form-based code) to prevent infill development, or when in general you use the code to mandate stasis, then you have a problem.
April 18, 201213 yr You know we won't be happy with just that. Where are the parking maximums? Most cities have parking maximums, Cincinnati does not. I recently worked on a building in a small North Carolina town and they had requirements for maximum allowable parking. A form-based code is a code diet. It usually replaces land-use zoning codes that are not relevant anymore. It replaces a 3500 calorie diet with a 3500 calorie diet that is a bit more appetizing. We need a 2000 calorie diet. As someone who has hand-crafted form base codes, this is terribly hard to do. It is often much more complicated and subjective to codify form than it is to codify use. Except that current Euclidian codes prescribe both use AND form. Such codes are loaded with setbacks, height limitations, floor area ratios, lot coverages, fire department accesses, and the like. You throw away the use-based stuff from a Euclidian code and what's left is form-based. It's crappy form, but it's form nonetheless. Still, that's half of the old stuff gone right there, and you take the form-based stuff that remains and tweak it to be not as crappy. What follows from that, ideally, is far fewer zones that correspond to the various transects you want to utilize. That's the real problem with zoning codes today, even here in Cincinnati that has what I consider to be a pretty good code (there's many form-based elements in the higher density zones, and for the most part few uses and building types have to grandfathered in compared to other places). Nevertheless, there's way way too many zones, and they're constantly micromanaged like some sort of land-use gerrymandering nightmare. When you have a block getting downzoned (whether with a traditional Euclidian or more clean form-based code) to prevent infill development, or when in general you use the code to mandate stasis, then you have a problem. Yes, I agree the zones are ridiculous. Anyone who has taken a look at even a simple suburban zoning map probably walks away wondering what the f$&k they just looked at. Codifying form is so tempting. I worked with so many smart people on form based code, and in a wide variety of contexts...be it for a private developer trying to control his home builders, to municipalities who bought into New Urbanism. I will say that good form based code is better than Euclidian zoning. I've seen a lot of great stuff built under form based code, but a lot of crap too. Unfortunately it's hard to legislate good taste.
April 18, 201213 yr A form-based code is a code diet. It usually replaces land-use zoning codes that are not relevant anymore. It replaces a 3500 calorie diet with a 3500 calorie diet that is a bit more appetizing. We need a 2000 calorie diet. It depends on how the code is done; but if done correctly, the form-based code is the 2000-calorie diet. Eliminating a variety of different use restrictions, setback restrictions, height restrictions, etc., and replacing them with just a few transect zones. If that isn't a code diet, I'd like to know what is. The code may seem simpler from the perspective of the people legislating it, but it's far more complex and difficult to apply from the perspective of someone in the architecture field. A few sections of the current code (speaking of Cincinnati specifically) need to be axed, and a few need to be trimmed down, but it doesn't need to be replaced entirely. Form based codes almost always result in sterile, ugly environments.
April 18, 201213 yr Form based codes almost always result in sterile, ugly environments. Really? I, and most people on the forum, would argue the complete opposite. It results in walkable urbanism that has continuity and consistency in design. It doesn't have to mean superblocks of homogenous structures, though. Could you explain and possibly provide examples of where form-based code has resulted in "sterile, ugly environments"? I'm genuinely interested.
April 18, 201213 yr Form based codes almost always result in sterile, ugly environments. Really? I, and most people on the forum, would argue the complete opposite. It results in walkable urbanism that has continuity and consistency in design. It doesn't have to mean superblocks of homogenous structures, though. Could you explain and possibly provide examples of where form-based code has resulted in "sterile, ugly environments"? I'm genuinely interested. "Continuity and consistency in design" is one way of saying sterile and homogenous. I'm not challenging the fact that it provides for and encourages walkable, dense, urban communities, but they are far from attractive, aesthetically. Form-based codes are descendents of New Urbanism, and thus encourage very conservative, safe, and traditional architecture. That is fine for some people, but a lack of diversity is considered ugly by most in my field. To me, form based codes are in the same ballpark as HOA's and planned subdivisions, and will yield the same results, just at a denser scale. For buildings to really be attractive, they have to be designed with respect to surroundings. Form based codes restrict that, and in fact, they forcibly create artificial surroundings. You can regulate urban density, setbacks, etc. without transcending into the primary attributes of architecture (form, space, order, etc.).
April 18, 201213 yr For buildings to really be attractive, they have to be designed with respect to surroundings. My understanding of FBCs is that they are supposed to make sure of just that, and leave basically everything else up to the architect/developer.
April 18, 201213 yr I would argue that Over-the-Rhine is a perfect example of a continuity and consistency, yet is not homogenous or sterile in any way. I suppose it all depends on how you personally define the terms. I agree with natininja. FBC allow for specific streets to be treated individually of each other. There is no reason why Orchard Street in OTR should have the same land use planning as Vine street. Sure they are in the same neighborhood and require protection for historic preservation, but the nature of the streets are completely different. Under current zoning codes, these have the same exact zoning requirements. FBC can provide an easy-to-understand guide to push development to have specific design characteristics.
April 18, 201213 yr I would argue that Over-the-Rhine is a perfect example of a continuity and consistency, yet is not homogenous or sterile in any way. And it was all designed and built with only a handful of zoning codes. No one needs to be legislating what every street should look like. Form based codes don't result in neighborhoods that look like OTR, they result in things that look more like The Banks and University Park Apartments. OTR came about because nothing was legislating form and style.
Create an account or sign in to comment