Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/06/2013

Home

Fortunately, this is changing as senior planning staff members learn more about the best prac- tices of form -based coding, schools begin to teach more courses in smart growth planning and form -based coding, and people continue to educate themselves on these topics. The form -based coding approach and methodology presented in the articles men- tioned above represent a paradigm shift in the way we write zoning codes, not just an attempt to add an additional layer of form -based regu- lations on a use -based system. The intent of this two-part series is to give communities the knowledge to know what to ask for and what to request of their consultants, and for con- sultants to understand how to select the most effective form -based code approach. These two articles will address common form -based coding misconceptions and highlight com- mon mistakes to avoid based on up-to-date best practice standards learned from the most recent applications. They will also compare different approaches for regulating urban form and give them appropriate labels so they are not confused or used interchangeably. COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS Even with the growing application of FBCs to neighborhoods, cities, and regions across the country, many communities remain hesitant to embrace form -based coding. Undoubtedly, some of this hesitation is rooted in common misconceptions related to FBCs. Form -Based Codes Are Relatively Untested Contrary to popular belief, FBCs have been tested in the marketplace. Here are statistics from just two projects to summarize the poten- tial economic benefits of an FBC. First, along the Columbia Pike corridor in Arlington County, Virginia, more than 1,30o units and almost 25o,000 square feet of nonresidential space have been built in eight different projects with complex infill conditions under the Columbia Pike Form -Based Code since its adoption in 2004. Second, from 2005 to 2008, the taxable value of properties subject to FBCs in Nashville, Tennessee, increased in value by an average of 75 percent and one area, Ridgeview, showed a z,000 percent increase in vlue. This was compared to a 27 percent increase in value in COMPONENTS OF A FORM -BASED CODE Communities should analyze how effective the entire FBC system, not its individual compo- nents, is for responding to planning trends and goals. FBCs are more than just mixed use zon- ing districts. Here is an overview of standard and optional components: • Building Form Standards: Building form standards are form -based zone standards that replace the existing zone standards. They are the core component of an FBC and typically regulate the configuration, features, and functions (uses) for buildings that define and shape the public realm. To be the most effective, their content should be generated primarily by community character documentation as opposed to the preexisting zone standards for each area. 4 Regulating Plan: A regulating plan is the map assigning the code's various standards to physical locations, including the form -based zone standards. It replaces the zoning map in a form -based code. In a citywide form -based code it is the same as the zoning map and will have form -based and non -form -based zones on it. It is usually applied in a more fine- grained manner than a zoning map, taking existing and intended form into account. • Frontage Type Standards: Frontage type standards regulate the appropriate transition from the private realm to the public realm. The ultimate intent of frontage standards is to ensure, after a building is located correctly, that its interface with the public realm and the transition between the two are detailed appropriately. 4 Public Space Standards: Public space standards are specifications for the elements within the public realm, including thoroughfares and civic spaces. Thoroughfare standards incor- porate detailed requirements for sidewalk, parking lane, and travel lane widths and street tree locations. Civic space standards regulate parameters, such as maximum and minimum size, and introduce a range of nonsuburban civic space types into a city or town. • Building Type Standards: Many FBCs include building type standards that are supplemental to the building form standards. They introduce an appropriate range of building types that are allowed within each form -based zone and regulate form characteristics specific to each type. To be effectively regulated, especially when applied at a larger scale, building type standards should be tied back directly to zone standards. ZONINGPRACTICE 5.13 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION I page 3