Context Based Zoning

CONTEXT-BASED ZONING AND OTHER
INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO PLACEMAKING
A Status Report from New England

SNEAPA Conference
September 20, 2012

SNEAPA Conference – September 20, 2012 Context-Based Zoning and Other Placemaking Tools

THE WORKSHOP PANEL
Ted Brovitz
• Howard/Stein-Hudson, Manager of Community Planning and Design
• Experience: Urban Planning, Design and Regulations
• Recent Projects: W. Springfield Merrick Neighborhood, Amherst Villages FBC,
Manchester CT FBC, Buzzards Bay FBC, West Concord Village Center

Donald Powers, AIA CNU-A, LEED AP
• Principal, Union Studios, Inc.
• Experience: Architecture , Urban Design, Planning
• Recent Projects: Jamestown, RI , Southfield, MA

George Proakis, AICP
• Director of Planning, City of Somerville
• Experience: Urban Planning , Design and Regulations
• Recent Projects: Lowell, MA and CNU FBC Review Committee

Matthew Lawlor, CNU-A
• Robinson & Cole LLP
• Experience: Land Use Lawyer and Urban Planner
• Recent Projects: Tri-Town and Lowell, MA


AGENDA AND SESSION OBJECTIVES
• Context-Based Zoning and Placemaking Toolbox
• Common Principles and Best Practices
• Typical Elements of Context-Based Zoning
• Where Form-Based Codes and Other Tools are being
Applied in the Region
• Advantages & Challenges Going Forward


CONTEXT-BASED ZONING/PLACEMAKING TOOLS
Some Common Tools
• Form-Based Code (Used to Facilitate Other
Placemaking Tool)
• Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND)
• Transit Oriented Development (TOD)
• Strip Commercial Corridor Retrofit Planning
• Smart Parking Standards
• Complete Street Design
• Civic Spaces, Livable Streets, the Outdoor Room
• Tactical Urbanism


FORM-BASED CODE AND TND/ The Origins
Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU)
• Founded in 1993 and dedicated to promoting traditional mixed-use
neighborhood development and healthier living conditions.

Seaside Florida and Other Planned Development
• 1981 Seaside Development Code first modern day application of FBC.

Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND)
• Late 1980s/early 1990s several cities in SE US adopted FBC variants::
– Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) ordinances.
Mashpee Commons, MA – Early TND
– Unified Development Ordinances (UDO) Cavendish Partnership/Cornish Assoc.

The SmartCode©
• Released by Duany Plater-Zyberk (DPZ) in 2003
• Model transect-based development code applied to all scales of planning
• SmartCode Version 9.2 - Open source with new modules

From “Greenfields” to Existing Built Environments
• Over the past 10 years, FBC has been applied city-wide as well as districts
targeted for revitalization and redevelopment.

FORM-BASED CODE BASICS/Common Principles
Context-Based Zoning
• Focus on existing or desired context and spacial patterns of
development and the surrounding environment (The Transect).

Public-Private Relationships
• Address the relationships between buildings and the “public
realm” (such as streets, open spaces, and civic buildings and
places).

Hierarchy of Purpose and Scale
• Buildings form, mass and scale
• Street types, purpose and treatments
• Active civic and open spaces

Physical Form vs. Land Use
• Focus on positioning of buildings and spaces rather than
separation of uses


FORM-BASED CODE BASICS/ The Transect
• System of ordered human habitats in a range from the most natural to the most urban.
• Defined by common physical characteristics of place, scale, density and intensity of land use.
• FBC is Transect Based Zoning integrating the elements of existing or intended habitats.

From the SmartCode©
Duany Plater-Zyberk


FORM-BASED CODE BASICS
Differences Between FBC and Conventional Zoning

• Integrated (Unified) Development Ordinance vs.
separate regulations (zoning, subdivision, site plan)
• Uses (Separation vs. Mix of Uses)
• Dimensional Standards (Simple numerical vs.
calibrated to shape public and private relationships.
• Building Placement, Orientation and Frontages
• Street Design Standards (to fit the context)
• Parking Standards (for shared uses)
• Civic and Open Space Standards (for active use)
• Design Standards vs. Guidelines TND vs Conventional Development
Example - Pittsford, NY


FORM-BASED CODE CALIBRATION
Process of Creating Context-Based Zoning
Evaluate Existing/Desirable Development Patterns
• Key dimensional, design and use characteristics of
existing/desirable development patterns
• Parking demand, distribution and occupancy trends
• Existing street “livability” characteristics
• Potential integration of desired civic and open space
• Identify performance standards for desired uses and street
activities

Define and Translate Community Vision
• Visual (Image) Preference Surveys
• Public Visioning, Scenario Building, and Design Charrettes
• Preparing a Strategic Conceptual Development Plan


Defining the Land Use Transect


Comparing Existing Regulations to Existing/Desired Context


Visioning, Scenario-Building and Design Workshops


Visual Preference Surveys

Purpose
• Public direction and preferences
• Range of design and development
characteristics for a given district
Common VPS Categories
• Building Design, Density, and Use
• Building Frontage and Façade Treatments
• Parks, Open Space and Public Amenities
• Streetscape and Pedestrian Treatments
• Traffic Circulation and Parking

Visual Preference Survey Example – Manchester, CT
Highest Rated Images - Part 1 - Building Design, Density and Use
1.2 Commercial/Mixed Use Buildings

1.1 Adaptive Building Reuse


Visual Preference Survey Example – Manchester, CT
Highest Rated Images Part 3 – Parks, Open Space and Amenities
3.1 Parks and Open Space 3.2 Public Art and Focal Points


Strategic and Illustrative Development Plans


FORM-BASED CODE ELEMENTS
Typical Elements of Form-Based Codes
• Regulating Plan (or Zoning District Map)
• Building and Lot Types with Character Examples
• Frontage Types
• Allowable Uses and Functional Standards
• Dimensional and Placement Standards
• Building Design Standards
• Thoroughfare Design Hierarchy
• Public and Private Open Space Types
• Flexible Parking Standards
• Administration and Review Process
• Definitions
• Optional Components:
– Architectural Design Standards
– Landscape Design Standards
– Signage Standards
– Environmental Resource Standards


Regulating Plan

Common Elements
Transects or Zoning
Subdistricts
Street Types by
Location
Building/Lot Types
Civic and Open Space
Types and Location
Frontage Zones
Ground Floor
Limitations


Building and Lot Types


Frontage Zones and Ground Floor Limitations

Example from Broad Street Area FBC, Manchester, CT


Complete Street Network and Design Hierarchy


Smart Parking Standards

Common Requirements
• Parking Placement (to side and rear of
buildings)
• Minimum and Maximum Requirements
• Public On-Street/Off-Street Off-Sets
• Shared Parking/Access Reduction Factors
Share Parking Reduction Table, SmartCode© DPZ • Remote/Satellite Parking Allowances

• Public Parking Contribution In- Lieu of
On-Site
• Landscaping and LID Standards


Public and Civic Open Space Types
Common Types
• Parks and Open Spaces
• Greens and Commons
• Plazas and Civic Buildings
• Playgrounds and Common Gardens
• Community Gardens

A Public Green, The SmartCode©, DPZ


FORM-BASED CODE AND TND EXAMPLES
Historic Downtowns, Village and Neighborhoods
Location Description Status
Buzzards Bay, MA FBC for older village center Adopted
Simsbury Center, CT FBC for historic downtown Adopted
Jamestown, RI FBC for Historic small coastal village Adopted
Amherst, MA FBC for two small rural centers Pending
Newport, VT FBC for historic village center Adopted
Dover, NH FBC for historic downtown core Adopted
Damariscotta, ME FBC for historic coastal island community Pending
Stratham, NH FBC for historic downtown Area Adopted
W. Springfield, MA. FBC for historic Merrick Neighborhood Under Review


Targeted Redevelopment Areas and Greenfields
Targeted Redevelopment Areas
North Eastham, MA New village center on major arterial (Rt. 6) Under Review
Manchester, CT Strip development redeveloped to mixed use Adopted
Hamden, CT Commercial highway corridor overlay Adopted
Lowell, MA Older mill redevelopment district Adopted
Newport, VT Older village center Adopted
Tri-Town Area I-93 Interchange Initiative with 3 towns Under Review
Malta, NY Replace strip development with new Town Center Pending
Mashpee, MA Mashpee Commons – TND on 1970s strip shopping plaza Phased

Greenfields
S. Weymouth/Southfield MA Mixed use TND on former Naval Air station Adopted
Windsor, CT Great Pond mixed use TND Adopted
Londonderry, NH Woodmont Commons TND Under Review


New FBC and TND is the Works
York, ME FBC for corridor redevelopment In process
Tiverton, RI FBC for corridor redevelopment In process
Dover, NH FBC for corridor redevelopment In process
Shelburne, VT FBC for corridor redevelopment In process
S. Burlington, VT FBC for new Town Center and corridor In process
redevelopment
St. Albans, VT FBC for historic downtown In process
Claremont, NH FBC for historic downtown In process
Goffstown, NH FBC for Pinardville village center In process


FORM-BASED CODE/CASE STUDIES
Merrick Neighborhood, W. Springfield MA
Traditional Settlement Patterns


Historic Mill Neighborhood



Existing Land and Building Use


Existing Character Examples



Current Zoning Compared to
Existing Settlement Patterns


Development Scenarios Under Current Zoning

Residential C Zoning District

Development Scenarios Under Current Zoning

Neighborhood Business Zoning District

Illustrative Conceptual Master Plans


Redevelopment and Reuse Scenarios Under
Illustrative Master Plan and New Regulating Plan

Existing Apartment Building Cottage Court at Same Density



Proposed Regulating Plan
Merrick Neighborhood Residential Zone (MNRZ)
To replace portions of:
• Residence A-1 (RA-1)
• Residence B (RB)
• Residence C (RC)
Merrick Neighborhood Business Zone (MNBZ)
• Neighborhood Business (NB)
• Business A (BA)
• Business A-1 (BA-1)
• Business B (BB)
Mixed Use Employment Zone (MUEZ)
• Industrial (I)
Merrick Natural and Civic Zone (MNCZ)
• Recreation (REC)



Complete Street Design Hierarchy


Complete Streets Hierarchy Design and Standards
Street and Thoroughfare Types
• Neighborhood Business Street
• Mixed Use Street
• Neighborhood Residential Street A and B
• Business Park Street
• Access Street and Alley
• Multi-Purpose Pathway
Design and Development Standards
• Description
• Zone Applications
• Street Design Standards
• Movement, Traffic Flow, Design Speed
• ROW and Pavement Width
• Travel Lane and Parking Lane
• Curb Radius and Type
• Bike and Pedestrian Facilities
• Transit Facilities
• Streetscape Characteristics


Building and Lot Design Standards
Building Types
• Detached Home
• Cottage Court, Carriage House Unit,
• Multi-Family Building
• Live/Work Unit and Rowhouse
• Multi-Use Building (Small to Large)
• Flex Commercial Building
• Civic Building and Space
Design and Development Standards
• Description
• Character Examples
• Lot Standards (Frontage, Depth Area)
• Building Placement on Lot (Setback and BTZ)
• Parking Placement on Lot
• Open Space Types on Lot
• Building and Street Activation Standards


Residential Building and Lot Types


Mixed Use and Commercial Building and Lot Types


Residential, Mixed Use and Commercial Lot Types


Open Space Types (Public and Private)
1. Lawn
2. Garden
3. Terrace/Outdoor Dining Area
4. Pocket Park
5. Playground
6. Plaza or Square
7. Park
8. Common or Green
9. Ballfields
10. Community Garden


FORM-BASED CODES/CASE STUDIES
Broad Street Redevelopment Area, Manchester CT

Existing Conditions Analysis



Conceptual Redevelopment Plan Regulating (Zoning District) Plan


Building Placement/Frontage Types Building and Lot Types


Building and Lot Types


Street Design Types Civic and Open Space Types


Great Pond TND, Windsor CT

653 Acres Total Site
365 Acres in Open Space
4,010 Residential Units
85,000 SF Neighborhood Comm.
640,00 SF Comm. Office
128,000 SF Civic and Institutional



Regulating Plan



Complete Street
Network and
Design Hierarchy



Parks, Open
Space and
Conservation Plan



Phasing Plan – 8
stages over
several years


Village Centers, Amherst, MA
Process
• Existing Zoning Evaluation
• Stakeholder Interviews
• Visioning Workshops
• Conceptual Master Plans
• Preparation of Form-Based Zoning
• Integration into Existing Regulations



North Amherst Village
Center
• Graphics prepared by
The Cecil Group


Amherst Village Center Conceptual Development and Circulation Plans
Graphics prepared by The Cecil Group


FBC Residential Building Concepts for Amherst Village Center


FBC Mixed Use Buildng Concepts for Amherst Village Center



FBC for Amherst Village Centers


The Form-Based Code vs. “Hybrid” Approach
Challenges of Blending Conventional Zoning and FBC

• Calibration - Meshing New and Existing Development Patterns
Accurately.
• Zoning Map/Districts vs. Regulating Plan/Transects.
• Dimensional Standards vs. Building Form Standards (Minimum and
Maximum Requirements).
• Strict Use Regulations and Flexible Performance Standards.
• Design Guidelines vs. Design Standards.
• Incorporating Public Space and Infrastructure Design Standards.
• Streamlined Review Process – Facilitating administrative review.
• Public Education - Initial Confusion and time needed for
understanding.


TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT (TOD)
LEED Neighborhood Development Rating System

• LEED-ND Version 9.0 Adopted 2009, Updated 2011
• Collaboration of USGBC, CNU and NRDC
• Rating system prerequisites/credits address 5 topics:
– Smart Location and Linkage (27 possible points)
– Neighborhood Pattern and Design (44 possible points)
– Green Infrastructure and Buildings (29 possible points)
– Innovation and Design Process (6 possible points)
– Regional Priority Credit (4 possible points)


Neighborhood Development and Design Criteria (44 possible points)
Number Criteria Credits
prerequisite 1 Walkable Streets Required
prerequisite 2 Compact Development Required
prerequisite 3 Connected and open Community Required
¨ Credit 1 Walkable Streets 12
¨ Credit 2 Compact Development 6
¨ Credit 3 Mixed-Use Neighborhood Centers 4
¨ Credit 4 Mixed-income Diverse Communities 7
¨ Credit 5 Reduced parking footprint 1
¨ Credit 6 Street Network 2
¨ Credit 7 Transit facilities 1
¨ Credit 8 Transportation Demand management 2
¨ Credit 9 Access to Civic and public Spaces 1
¨ Credit 10 Access to recreation facilities 1
¨ Credit 11 Visitability and Universal Design 1
¨ Credit 12 Community outreach and involvement 2
¨ Credit 13 Local food production 1
¨ Credit 14 Tree-Lined and Shaded Streets 2
¨ Credit 15 Neighborhood Schools 1


Smart Location and Linkage (27 possible points)
Number Criteria Credits
prerequisite 1 Smart Location Required
prerequisite 2 Imperiled Species and Ecological Communities Required
prerequisite 3 Wetland and Water body Conservation Required
prerequisite 4 Agricultural Land Conservation Required
prerequisite 5 Floodplain Avoidance Required
¨ Credit 1 Preferred Locations 10
¨ Credit 2 Brownfield redevelopment 2
¨ Credit 3 Locations with reduced Automobile Dependence 7
¨ Credit 4 Bicycle Network and Storage 1
¨ Credit 5 Housing and Jobs proximity 3
¨ Credit 6 Steep Slope protection 1
¨ Credit 7 Site Design for habitat or Wetland and Water body Conservation 1
¨ Credit 8 Restoration of habitat or Wetlands and Water bodies 1
¨ Credit 9 Long-term Conservation management of habitat or Wetlands 1
and Water bodies


CORRIDOR RETROFIT PLANNING AND ZONING
Changing Patterns of Development
Common Characteristics
• Expanding the Mix of Uses
• Infill Development, Redevelopment, Re-purposing
Buildings and Sites (Higher Density)
• Improving Connectivity with Surrounding Area
• Internal Circulation and Shared Access
• Complete Street Design (Improve pedestrian, bicycle
and transit facilities) State Highway Poses Challenges to
Creating Supportive Public Realm for New
• Reduced and Shared Parking Standards Town Center, Route 9, Malta, NY
• Integrating Civic and Open Spaces


CORRIDOR RETROFIT PLANNING AND ZONING
Changing Patterns of Development

Alternative
Development
Scenarios


LIVABLE STREETS
Common Techniques
• Implement a Community Vision
• Achieve Traditional Development Patterns
• Supportive Public-Private Relationships
• Facilitate Diversity and Mixed Uses
• Create an “Outdoor Room” and Attractive Street Enclosure Ratio Standard 1:25
Pedestrian Environment (Height to Width) Rochester, NY

• Facilitate Intermodal Transportation with
“Complete Streets”
• Create Vibrant Civic Spaces
• Improve Property Values
• Create/Enhance a “Sense of Place” The “Outdoor Room” - Hyannis, MA


COMPLETE STREETS
Hierarchy and Design Standards


TACTICAL URBANISM
Common Tactics
• Open Streets and Play Streets
• Build a Better Block
• Guerilla Gardening
• Pop-Up Retail and Cafes
Pop Up Cafe
• PARK(ing) Day
PARKing Day
• Food Carts and Trucks
• Mobile Venders
• Chair Bombing
• Pavement to Plazas
Mobile Vendors
• Street Fairs
Solar Powered Kiosk/Pop Up Store
• ETC

FORM-BASED CODE
Case Studies - Narragansett Avenue, Jamestown, RI
Jamestown Vision:
Team:
DPA – Lead.
Cornish Associates, (Buff Chace, Russ Preston) –
Financial / Market Analysis
Sandy Sorlien-Smart Code Specialist.
New Commons- Community Outreach
Asked by Town to help preserve the
character, scale, walkability, and affordability
of the Village through charrette, FBC, and
Design Guidelines
Restore and protect the character of the
village.


Step 1: Establish Community Vision – Online Surveys

“walking to shops and restaurants and keeping East Ferry waterfront
accessible“

“don’t want to loose the small town character”

“Affordable housing for those whose families were born here.”

“That it is an island with open space, active farms and easy access to water”


Step 1: Establish Community Vision –
Dotting Exercises / Visual Preference survey


Community Preference came down to choice between this:


And This:


Demonstrated to community that development will come and is
already happening. (Inventoried current development proposals)

Can’t avoid development altogether.

Question is what type and form?


Much more potential for development than they realized
Used simple, rapid visualization techniques.


Showed that despite a single “village commercial” zone,
character of Narragansett Ave varied greatly from one end to
the other.


“East Ferry” characterized by 2 to 3
stories, with retail frontage on the 1st
floor


West end of Narragansett distinctly
more residential and loose. No retail
frontage.


“Four Corners” area much more auto-
scaled. “Working” retail.


Observed and measured existing conditions. Presented this back to
the community to better understand what they wanted to preserve.



• Predominant 2-1/2 story form

• Primarily retail or office at first floor

• Second and third floor more residential in character

• Third floor primarily in dormers



• Lot parking at side or rear

• Variety of frontage
• Limited front setback


Repeated the exercise for each distinct area of the village.
Made explicit what community understood intuitively.


West end of Narragansett has a different pattern from East end

• Predominantly 2 – 2-1/2 story form
• Residential character at first floor.
•Looser spacing, hedging instead of fencing, etc.
•Third floor primarily in dormers


West end of Narragansett has a different pattern from East end
• Driveways predominantly
at front or side
• Deeper front setbacks
• Still maintains strong street
edge


“Four Corners” exhibits a post war, auto-centric pattern.


“Four Corners” exhibits a post war, auto-centric pattern.
•Very deep setbacks.
•Parking in front
•Contemporary architectural styles


STEP 2: Demonstrated how the current ordinance does not do enough to
protect what they have or ensure more of it.


Showed that Village was vulnerable to development along
patterns of stuff they said they didn’t like

Present Conditions


Showed that Village was vulnerable to development along
patterns of stuff they said they didn’t like

What if Hurricane of
‘38 struck again??


CURRENT ZONING ALLOWS (MANDATES!) VERY DIFFERENT
KINDS OF DEVELOPMENT

Residents were shocked!


For key sites demonstrated “risk” posed by current ordinance and
alternative vision which could be encouraged by FBC


Residents very anxious about future of 1 acre lot, zoned commercial, in
residentially scaled end of Narrgansett Ave


Gave specific design proposals to illustrate importance of “form” as
opposed to lot coverage, use, or setback alone.


Nothing in ordinance to prevent Self Storage units, for example.


With proper form and placement commercial could be fine


Showed how without “down zoning” currently permitted intensity of use
could be accommodated in sympathy with the neighborhood.


Showed how, without “down zoning,” currently permitted intensity of use
could be accommodated in sympathy with the neighborhood.


Showed how “most hated site” could be repaired over time by incremental
development guided by FBC


Different development scenarios explored to help community – and owner
– understand how it might build-out.


Different development scenarios explored to help community – and owner
– understand how it might build-out over time.


Very simple controls on form could transform this:


To this:


Had immediate effect. Town and local developer teamed up to flesh out a
master plan.


Advocated for different “visions” for different “zones”. One size does NOT
fit all. Not all of village, can or should be residentially scaled.


Needed a “working retail” location convenient to autos, but deferring to
pedestrians.


Proposal leveraged planned improvements (new post office, funded
streetscape work, branch bank relocation) to create “real” shopping.


Goals discovered by study, design, and community outreach translated
back into regulating plan.


A Single Commercial Downtown Zone redrawn as 3 “T-zones” reflecting
differing visions for each.


Civic buildings, civic spaces, recommended retail frontage, view
corridors terminated vistas, street and walkway types all identified.


Model “SmartCode” calibrated for each T-Zone.


Ordinance changes supplemented with Design Guidelines.


“Soft Ordinance” Serves to guide the willing (95%) without forcing the
unwilling (5%). “Objective” - wont change with changing personnel.


Adoption within Comprehensive Plan gives it legal standing… of a sort.
Since most projects require relief, it becomes effective bargaining chip.


Form Based diagrams can supplement conventional ordinance to great effect.


Somerville
by
Design:

The
Next Generation
of Land Use
Regulation

Presented by:
George J. Proakis, AICP

September 20, 2012

Somerville, MA
• 4.5 sq miles

• 70,000+ population

• North of Cambridge, MA

• Densest city in New England

• A city of squares

. . . And the community is preparing for it . . .

The Code:
Three Challenges of the SZO

The Code:
1. Code structure is unworkable:
• Language is unreadable and subject to wide interpretation
• Attempts to describe physical form through words
• Answers to basic questions are scattered across sections
• Additional districts are cobbled onto code structure

The Code:

2. RA/RB Districts don’t provide a predictable outcome:
• Nonconformity is used as a proxy for design review
• Large by-right lots have no design review
• Wide ranges of possible outcomes by special permit
• Larger mixed-income projects require much negotiation

The Code:


3. Transit station zoning is misapplied on the map
• Innerbelt and Brickbottom are in old industrial zones
• Gilman, Magoun and Ball Square have limited options
• Porter and Davis have select areas that are underzoned
• New Union Square and Broadway zoning need clarity

The Code:


3. Transit station zoning is misapplied on the map
• Innerbelt and Brickbottom are in old industrial zones
• Gilman, Magoun and Ball Square have limited options
• Porter and Davis have select areas that are underzoned
• New Union Square and Broadway zoning need clarity

4. Problems #2 and #3 cannot be fixed until we fix #1

The Appliance and The Grid

“If we know what the appliance is . . . .

- Christopher Alexander



We need to find the plugs to connect it to the existing power grids.”


• Board of Aldermen
• Zoning Board of Appeals
Goals of the • Planning Board
SomerVision Plan • Conservation Commissions
• DPW
• Fire Department
• State Regulators
• Etc.




• Board of Aldermen
The • Zoning Board of Appeals
Goals of the • Planning Board
Future
SomerVision Plan • Conservation Commissions
Somerville • DPW
Zoning • Fire Department
Ordinance • State Regulators
• Etc.




Form Based Codes • Board of Aldermen
• Zoning Board of Appeals
Transfer of • Planning Board
Goals of the Development
SomerVision Plan Rights
• Conservation Commissions
• DPW
Performance • Fire Department
Zoning • State Regulators
• Etc.
Pre-Permitted Sites

Special Districts




The • Board of Aldermen
Future • Zoning Board of Appeals
Goals of the Somerville • Planning Board
SomerVision Plan Zoning • Conservation Commissions
Ordinance • DPW
• Fire Department
Organized • State Regulators
Around a • Etc.
FBC strategy




The Lesson
of
Organization

The Somerville Zoning Ordinance (SZO):

1. Built on a conventional code from 1925

2. Additions have been cobbled on for many years

3. Definitions in text / regulation in definitions
(lacks performance standards for specific uses)

4. Many cross-reference sections

5. 90+% of lots nonconforming – nonconformity used for design review

6. New additions for Assembly Square, Union Square and Broadway

Like many local codes: The results are good – but the process is not

Conventional Zoning

“To say (conventional zoning) is cookie-
cutter is unfair to the cookie industry . . .

. . . there is actually some thought to
alternative forms of cookies”

- Strong Towns Blog

Zoning Tools:
Regulation of Allowed Uses

Paul Crawford, AICP

Zoning Tools:
19. Baths, Turkish

Paul Crawford, AICP

Zoning Tools:
19. Baths, Turkish
25. Boxing arena

Paul Crawford, AICP

Zoning Tools:
19. Baths, Turkish
25. Boxing arena
28. Chinchillas, retail sales

Paul Crawford, AICP

Zoning Tools:
19. Baths, Turkish
25. Boxing arena
41. Eleemosynary institutions

Paul Crawford, AICP

Zoning Tools:
19. Baths, Turkish
25. Boxing arena
42. Embalming business

Paul Crawford, AICP

Zoning Tools:
19. Baths, Turkish
25. Boxing arena
95. Physical culture institution

Paul Crawford, AICP

Zoning Tools:
19. Baths, Turkish
25. Boxing arena
109. Potato chip manufacturing

Paul Crawford, AICP

Zoning Tools:
19. Baths, Turkish
25. Boxing arena
127. Tombstones, retail sales

Paul Crawford, AICP

Zoning Tools:
19. Baths, Turkish
25. Boxing arena
127. Tombstones, retail sales
135. Turkish Baths

Paul Crawford, AICP

Zoning Tools:
Somerville: 291 use categories:
7.11.4.e Home Occupation (not including below)
7.11.4.f Office, within a primary residence, of an architect,
attorney, physician or dentist
7.11.8.6 Photocopying or commercial printing
7.11.8.10 Newspaper distribution agency
7.11.9.5 Store selling or renting goods such as books,
stationary, drugs, sporting goods including bicycles and
accessories, jewelry, photographic equipment and
supplies, flowers, novelties, cards, footwear, apparel,
fabrics, accessories, and the like that are typically of a size
a customer can carry by hand
7.11.9.6 Store selling or renting video tapes
7.11.8.8 Store selling hardware, paint, wallpaper, lawn and
garden supplies
7.11.11.11 Limousine rental and minor servicing
7.11.11.12 Bus and taxi rental

Zoning Tools:
Open Space

Baconsrebellion.com

Zoning Tools:
Parking Requirements

maps.live.com

Zoning Tools:
Parking Requirements

Zoning Tools:
Special Permits
• “designed in a manner that is compatible with the
existing natural features of the site and is
compatible with the characteristics of the built and
unbuilt surrounding areas.”

• “consistent with the general purpose of this
ordinance”

• “where practical, new or infill building construction
should share the same orientation to the street as
is common in the neighborhood”

• “will not create adverse environmental impacts”

Zoning Tools:
Lots in Two Districts
Land in a more restrictive zoning district
may supply space for a use permitted in a
less restricted zoning district if the use of
the land in the more restrictive district
satisfies space and passive use
requirements (such as setbacks,
landscaping or parking) that are not
prohibited in the more restrictive district.

Zoning Tools:
Lots Abutting Other Districts

Where a lot in a business or industrial
district abuts a lot or district line in a RA,
RB, or RC district, no building in the
business or industrial district shall be
erected closer to the residential line than
one-third (1/3) the height of the said
building, but not less than fifteen (15) feet.

The Form Based Code:
Document Structure

Tools of Traditional Zoning: Tools of the Form-Based Code:
• Regulation of uses • Regulating plan
• Setbacks • Open Space Standards
• Open space • Thoroughfare Standards
• Parking requirements • Public Open Space Standards
• Subdivision standards • Private Open Space Standards
• Density • Functional Design Standards
• Site plan review • Building Form Standards
• Special permits • Site Configuration
• Design guidelines • Building Configuration
• Building Elements
• Uses
• Administrative Process
• Architectural standards (optional)

Livermore Development Code: Hybrid Model

Transect Zones have their own development regulation section

Livermore Development Code

The rest of the code is separate

Livermore Development Code

Use specific requirements are in
their own section, not a
footnote or definition

Document Structure

Structure of the SZO: Somerville By Design Code:
• Definitions • Definitions
• Process • Process
• Districts • SP Process
• Define some districts • Design review process
• Standards for others • Subdivision process
• Uses • PUD Process
• Table • Linkage and Inclusionary Rules
• Footnotes • Districts
• Clusters • Form Districts
• Dimensions • Allowed building forms and
• Table uses for each district
• Footnotes • Parking for each district
• Landscape • Landscaping for each district
• Parking • Special Districts
• PUD • Copy provisions of ASMD,
• Linkage Tufts and existing PUDs
• Inclusionary • Performance standards for specific uses
• Map • Map / Regulating Plan

Document Structure

• Districts
• Neighborhood Residential (RA/RB)
• Urban corridor (RC)
• Urban Square (future for Davis)
• Neighborhood Mixed Retail (NB etc.)
• Corridor Commercial
• Transit Oriented
• Brickbottom
• Reserved Sections for future station areas

• Special districts
• ASMD
• Tufts
• Approved PUDs
• Powder house school

What doesn’t change?

• All RA/RB stays in a neighborhood residential district

• Important procedural and legal language remains

• Special districts (ASMD, Tufts, approved PUDs) remain as is

• CCD and TOD districts remain, with graphical standards added

• Roles of Special Permit Granting Authorities remain

Conserving
Neighborhood
Character

Zoning tools in Somerville, MA

The RA/RB problem

Structure of the SZO: Somerville by Design Code:

• Nonconformity is used as • Base home additions on a
a proxy for design review pattern book of Somerville
homes
• Large by-right lots have
no design review
• Establish streamlined design
• Wide ranges of possible review
outcomes by special
permit • Reduce total units in mixed-
income projects to match
• Larger mixed-income existing neighborhood density,
projects require much SomerVision goals, and allow
negotiation buyouts for less than one unit

One District, or Many: The Denver Question

Building Type Codes: Livermore

Building Type Codes: Woodbury NJ

Streamlining
Permitting
For
Transit-Oriented
Districts

Transit-Oriented Strategies:

• Assembly Square
• Existing rules to remain

• Union Square and Broadway
• Conventional TOD and Corridor districts

• Brickbottom
• Streamlined FBC

• Innerbelt Industrial Park
• FBC based planned areas

• Gilman / Lowell / Ball
• The ‘Somerville by Design’ charrette

Union Square

Brickbottom

Codes for Innovative Districts: Nashville

Innerbelt

Innerbelt

High-value
commercial and
New connections to housing
Washington Station, development
Brickbottom

Park creating
distinct sense of
place

Codes for Master Planning: Lee County

Gilman Sq / Lowell Street / Ball Sq

The Extended Charrette: Lowell

Standard Charrette Phases:
• Research, Education and Preparation
• Charrette
• Plan Implementation


NCI Charrette
• At least four consecutive days
• Allowing for at least three design feedback loops
• Open process including all interested parties
• Creates a feasible product with minimal work


• Lowell Charrette
• Same preparation and
implementation steps
• Four days of design and public
participation spread over four
months
• Feedback loops


• Lowell Charrette
• Months of outreach before first session
• Early listening sessions
• Cross functional collaborative team
• Feasible outcome that is embedded in the code
• Design as the basis for the shared vision
• No opposition to FBC and universal political support for
the plan

Benefits of the Somerville by Design Code

• Establishes Somerville as ‘open for development’ in transit
areas

• Conserves the character of core residential neighborhoods

• Continues our tradition of using best practices in municipal
government

• Implements over 100 recommendations of the SomerVision
plan in a regulatory structure that will produce long-term
impacts

• Provides predictable high quality outcomes

A new solution to the SZO?

Structure of the SZO: The SZO as a FBC:
• ddd • ddd

FORM-BASED CODE APPLICATIONS
The Legal Landscape in New England

Matthew Lawlor, CNU-A

Robinson & Cole LLP



• Legal authorization of FBCs has not been seriously challenged
• REPEAT: Legal authorization of FBCs has not been seriously challenged
• Multiple authors (Emerson, Sitkowski, Slone) have confirmed this reading
• Enabling statutes are not the problem
• Still need to confirm jurisdiction’s case law not a bar…
• …And beware of issues of application as follows



• First things first
• Plan and vision before drafting the FBC
• Otherwise, the FBC has no vision to which it is coding
• The overall goal: Plan, vision, and code to the maximum extent possible
• Seek diminishing discretion: Plan for the code, not each individual project.



• Specific implementation issues:

– Appreciate the potential for plan-based inverse condemnation (if you lay down too
many streets you don’t intend to take) [Tri-Town Example]
– Watch for regulatory schemes outside of zoning (state-mandated multi-
family/commercial site plan review, for example) [Dover Example]
– Sticking within the statutory scheme for zoning and building code review and permit
issuance (create a new scheme at your own peril) [Lowell Example]


Advantages
• Stronger Connections Between
Development Plans, The Community’s Vision
and Land Use Regulations
• Can be Calibrated to Existing Desirable
Conditions
• Predictable Physical Outcomes of
Development
• Encourages Diversity
• Higher Quality Development
• Effectively Replaces Design Guidelines
• Creates a Supportive Relationships between
Private Development and The Public Realm


DISCUSSION


OTHER CASE STUDIES


Buzzards Bay Village, Bourne MA
The Process
• Design Charrette and Visioning
Workshops
• Existing Conditions Analysis
• Downtown Master Plan
• Form-Based Code
• Design Guidelines


Buzzards Bay Village, Bourne MA

Existing Conditions

Proposed Under New FBC

Hamilton Canal District, Lowell MA


Hamilton Canal District, Lowell MA
Advantages to the Charrette
& Form Based Codes Process

Risk Reduction
Site Value
Feasibility
Cohesiveness
Collaboration
Efficiency
Balance
Certainty
Achievement of Objectives

Downtown Core Area, Dover NH

Code Development Process:
• Charrette followed by additional public review

Project Review Process:
• Varies: most projects require Planning Board Site Plan Review

Interesting details:
• Won Plan NH 2010 Merit Award and NH Planners Association
2009 Project of the Year Award


Downtown Core Area, Dover NH


Downtown Area, Newport, VT

Code Development Process:
• 2009 Rural Urban Design Assistance Team (RUDAT) from AIA led the
initial community discussions about future of downtown
• Town planner used local students to catalog existing conditions and
draft information for standards

Project Review Process:
• Code administrative process still being developed

Interesting details:
• Local planner is seeking to complete the form based code on a
$15,000 consulting budget
• Vermont state government seeking to replicate the model if it is
successful in Newport


Downtown Area, Newport, VT


Historic Town Center, Simsbury CT

Site: Historic town center & adjacent land

Size: Community of 23,000, 34 sq miles

Project: Town center and new development

Developed by: Consulting team hired by town

Type of code: Mandatory – Street Based
Attached to traditional town code

Project approval body: Zoning Commission

Adopted: April 5, 2011


Historic Town Center, Simsbury CT


TND Plan, Southfield MA
The Process
• BRAC Project Involving 3 Towns
• Former Naval Air Station
• Master Plan Prepared
• Greenfield Development
• Regulating Plan and FBC Adopted
• Residential Construction Underway


Context Based Zoning

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to Context Based Zoning

More from sneapa

Recently uploaded

Context Based Zoning