Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-02-2013 ac SS1 Johnsoncouncil j aGEnda nEpont CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director Prepared By: James David, Associate Planner Meeting Date 07/ 02/ 13 Item Number SS1 SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION ON FORM -BASED DEVELOPMENT CODES (GPI 91-13). RECOMMENDATION Receive a presentation on form -based development codes. DISCUSSION This study session will provide information regarding form -based codes and application to existing and proposed development. The study session will feature information related to how these codes have evolved over recent years and how they differ from traditional zoning approaches. The three attachments to this report provide both a graphical and narrative overview of form -based codes. Form -based codes were first used in the 1980s and have evolved over the last 30+ years to develop a regulatory approach that focuses on future urban form for both existing and proposed developed areas. Form -based codes are an alternative regulatory method that concentrates on achieving a specific urban form. Form -based code if properly designed can create a predictable public environment primarily through regulating and controlling physical form that has urban design benefits for surrounding private development. While separating uses is still important, less emphasis is placed on use. Form -based codes address the relationship between building facades and the public street, the bulk and mass of buildings in relation to one another, and the scale and types of streets and blocks. Moreover, this approach offers a powerful alternative to conventional zoning in providing predictably for both the public and applicants. Form -based codes foster foreseeable built results and a high-quality public realm by using physical form (rather than separation of uses) as the organizing design principle. They are regulations, not mere guidelines, adopted into city or county law and provide greater clarity compared to traditional zoning. Form -based codes are presented in both words and clearly drawn diagrams and other visuals. They are keyed to diagrams that clearly provide the appropriate form, scale, and character of development, rather than only distinctions in land -use and prescriptive development standards that offer little flexibility. This approach contrasts with conventional zoning's focus on the micromanagement and segregation of land uses, and the control of development intensity through abstract and uncoordinated parameters (e.g., FAR, dwellings per acre, setbacks, parking ratios, traffic LOS), to the neglect of an integrated built form. SS1 - 1 Form -Based Code Study Session (GPI 91-13) REFERENCES 1. Katz, Peter. [2012]. Eight Advantages to Form -Based Codes. Chicago: Form -Based Codes Institute. 2. Crawford, P., Parolek, D., Parolek, K. [2008]. Form -Based Codes. New Jersey: Wiley & Sons, Inc. T.•ICounc°il Agenda lienortxl2Ol3i2013-07-0211, orm Based Codes (Johnson-David)IGPI 91-13 (FBC" Study Session) SS1 - 3 n the two years since the Local Government Commission's Smart Growth Zoning Codes: A Resource Guide was first published, the movement to reform zoning codes has gained. momentum. Today, form -based codes have become an increasingly popular approach to achieve these reforms and create conununities where people want to live, work and play. The old adage "form follows function" describes the common approach behind land use regulation as it has been practiced in the past. Form -based codes turn that relationship on its head. Since the primary basis for regulation is the buildings, not the uses, "function follows form." These codes concentrate first on the visual aspect of development: building height and bulk, facade treatments, the location of parking, and the relationship of the buildings to the street and to one another. Simply put, form -based codes emphasize the appearance and qualities of the public realm, the places created by buildings. As with other smart growth concepts, form -based codes have been applied in new growth areas, in existing neighborhoods, in limited situations to special districts, and in wholesale code revisions for entire communities. Forni-b,tsrd codes place a printar%, emphasis on building tr, pe, diniellsions, � p.rkinl; location and t.i4adc features. acrd less ernphasis cin uses. �l1l�ty � stress the sappeamnct of the strecLscape, or public, realm. over long lists 6 of different use types. These codes have the following characteristics: 4 Zoning Districts — Form -based codes are defined around districts, neighborhoods and corridors where conventional zoning districts may bear no relationship to the transportation framework or the larger area. E Regulatory Focus Form -based codes de-emphasize density and use 1 regulation in favor of rules for building form. They recognize that uses may change over time, but the building will endure. Uses — Form -based codes emphasize mixed use and a mix of housing types to bring destinations into close proximity to housing and provide housing choices to meet many individuals' needs at different times in their lives. Design — Greater attention is given to streetscape and the design of the public realm, and the role of individual buildings in shaping the public realm. B Form -based codes recognize how critical these public spaces are to defining and creating a "place." Public Participation —A design -focused public participation process is essential to assure thorough discussion of land use issues as the code is created. This helps reduce conflict, misunderstanding and the need for hearings as individual projects are reviewed. 1 �Woetr Icti f4WI derbiifit)ra f)h Pazd C:rsait,fi)rd, AICT �M SS1 - 5 R U R A L 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 ill I I T R A N S E C T l l i 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 U RBAN I RURAL URBAN DISTRICTS B I 1 4 1 I I yI 1 I I I 1 I I .1 rl Ui f —YJ f.. —Ir IN! 1 T1 PPE$ERLE RURAL1 �� RESERVE T �}IAL 13 URBAfI T4 GENERAL �% GENTER G T6 CORERBAN ` D QST�RIGS z 111�r dPUf'IO��Vllell.t cind Zo/1111 C0(CS ils 1)M7 Of 0 Itllid i -IAC' C019tiIIIII1111 — t7n III'/),IVI/1'11',11 `11011�eCt" Oi" CIV S-Sfft oII -- /IC' ns herrn 1111dcr,tand tviicrc ditterrn.t I1scs alul Imildim, tYpcs (lelnrl��, nm iciirrc thcy 1niallll hr illappropriaic. The Transect: orlrmmilties differ gre-ady in siZC, tupOgrlplz ; LIC17sity, %Alff andgrowth rAWS. Ill soill areas, the primary concerns are about new development taking place on previously undeveloped land or "greenfields" Other com- munities are mostly built out, and focus more on codes that guide infill or reshape and revitalize neglected neighborhoods. Still others need new codes to address development opportunities around new transit sy.sterns. One of the beauties of form -based codes is that they can be applied in so inanv different conununities and situations. Andres Duany, one of the Ahwalinee Principles' authors and a founder of the Congress for New Urbanism, has taken the idea of the "transect" from natural science and applied it to land use planning. The transect, as used in ecological studies, draws a cross- section through different habitats to better understand their inter- relationships along a continuum. Seeing land uses in context Applied to an urban/rural culitin- uum, the transect helps its better understand where different uses and building types fit well or where they are inappropriate. Seen from this perspective, we learn that a controversial use or development Project is not inherently bad, but may simply have been proposed for the wrong location. Duaiy codes all the features and concepts that guide communities, neighborhoods and development into six different districts along the transect (T1 to T6), from rural preserve districts to those in the urban core. He also includes a special district for uses such as a university campus, airport or stadium. Setbacks, for instance, shrink as development progresses from the rural to the more highly urban. Likewise, there is less area devoted to greenery in the urban core than in the rural districts. Building heights, however, increase. This unified development ordi- nance, or "SmartCode," links all conunonly regulated d1111enS1o11S and features, building bulk, street lighting, sidewalks, parking and landscaping to the different districts. This framework allows for a com- mon understanding that relates development characteristics to places within the urban fabric. This common language allows developers, planners and residents — even u1 dif}trent cities — to readily comprehend the context For different uses and building types. In Petaluma, California (see next page), this shared compreliension overcame the confusion and con- flicts that stood in the way of good intentions, and all too often, good projects. The graphical nature of the transect fits very well �� ltli form -based codes. Duany Plater-Zyberk & Comp has been instrumental in brin€ this classification methodology into real-world application inij form -based code projects acro the country. ! i ! ! 9 I 1 I I ! I I I I j Form -based codes: Good vintage for wine country F i ■ Sonoma, California j 0 ne of Californias oldest cities and located in the scenic wine country, the city of Sonoma had � seen post-war suburbia grow into older neighborhoods built around its old pueblo that dates t back to Spanish colonial times. This jumble:, ofneighborhoods and building; types represented a � ! significant challenge to those developing a new code. ! E I Adopted in 2001, the new form -based code covers the entire city. To break the daunting task of a wholesale I code revision into more readily understood pieces, the city was divided into 13 planning areas in four care- -) ' —residential, commercial district, conuiaercial corridor and open space. Within each area, the existing l situation was inventoried and compared to the desired future state. This allows the code to recognize existing development while ivaposing a new regulatory trame-�,vork on future development. Areas of special t concern such as rural roads, the urban edge and creeks are highlighted, and subject to specified guidelines. I Code prepared by Crala!Ford, lhlltari and Chir l I ssociates 1 i urban (T4), urban center (T5), urban core (T6) and special districts such as schools, civic centers or industry. 4 Develop urban standards (streets, blocks, building placement, height, land uses, etc.) The next step is to define and code the urban standards for the different parts of the community mapped in Step 3. The results will be a set of diagrams for each zone that clearly establish standards for sonic of the following key ingredi- V Stat 4: Forlm-based codes show Ivhcre parking rtntst be located. ---------------------------------- . t 1 Parking only allowed on i w rear half of lot t � i ,,. i i i f E t J u , --------------------------------- Bndilinr�lyps «401 W'd1h at SWeSt Frontage — 9 a 11-- �.a A Step ?: A simple lot -width table shoivs bots 1l'cwura's code regulates brtildirlk7 proFles. ents of an urban place: street and sidewalk widths, building placement, building height and profile, and, if relevant, location of on-site parking. CJ Develop architectural standards (building or frontage typologies, etc.) The inventory conducted in Step 1 and the public visioning and charrette process in Step 2, help to identify the different types of buildings and how they front the street to define the public realm. The form -based code builds on this information to define what types of buildings fit into different parts of the community. The form -based code for the City of Ventura, California, for example, identifies the following types of buildings as appropriate for differ- ent parts of the community: single family, carriage house, duplex, triplex, quadplex, mansion apart- ment, bungalow court, townhouse, sideyard housing, live/work, court- yard, stacked flats, commercial block, and blended development. The code then lays out very clearly which types of buildings are appropriate in the different districts for different lot widths through a table on the left. 6 Allocate and illustrate standards The final step in the process is to prepare the standards in a format that is graphic, well -illustrated, jar- gon -free, and easy to understand. This format should include all information and regulation relevant to a particular district (street type, neighborhood, etc.) in one concise piece. This avoids the confusion that cross-referencing, scattered requirements, and obscure terms can introduce. SS1 = 9 Code for e new town center ■ Hercules, California he "Regulating Cade,,' adopted for the small city of Hercules across the bay from San Francisco in the summer of 2001, is similar to another pre- pared by the same firm for the City of Winter Springs, in Florida. Intended to foster smart growth development in newly created town centers, both codes have been extremely successful, immediately triggering develop- ment projects conforming to the principles and details embodied in the code. The Hercules code covers four districts in the central part of town. It includes eight street types, though not all will appear in each zone. The use table is a mercifully short three pages, with a half -page of footnotes. Four times that number of pages are devoted to facade details and architectural standards. Attachment 2 A Attractive new homes in Hercules look out onto the San Francisco Bay. This architectural material features photographs and drawings of desired and unwelcome features, signs, porches, trim and so on. These details precede the use tables in the code, consistent with form -based codes' emphasis on building form and the public realm. One page is devoted to each street type, detailing streetscape features such as pavement width, curbs, on - street parking, landscaping, corner radii, sidewalks, building setbacks, eaves, awnings and balconies. This format allows the user to quickly access all the most relevant requirements and standards for a piece of property, just by referenc- ing the street type that fronts the property. Hercules' new Regulating Code has clearly been a success. Since its adoption, development has flourished in the area it covers. Several traditional -appearing residential projects have been built, with a total of 300 units, and construction is under way on the first phase of the main street area of the Waterfront District. That main street building includes fifteen 2,700 -square -foot owner- ship units with commercial space on the ground floor and two-story townhouse units above. The single- family projects -include a number of creatively designed duplex, triplex, and fourplex units that blend in very well with the sur- rounding housing. Building styles are varied. The structures, landscaping, street design, and even the street lamps have design details specified in the code. This thorough approach to the details can make all the differ- ence in the finished appearance and appeal of a project. Code prepared by Dover, Kohl & Partners How zoning defines a one -block parcel Density, use, FAR (floor -area rat: ,setbacks, parking requirements, and maximum building height(s) specified. How design guidelines define a one -block parcel Density, use, FAR (floor -area ratio), setbacks, parking requirements, maximum buildin€ height(s), frequency of openings. and surface articulation specified How form -based codes define a one -block parcel Street and building types (or mix types), build -to lines, number of floors, and percentage of built s frontage specified. ��. Attachment 3 SS1 - 13 02006 Peter Katz and Steve Price—Urban Advantage