Paul Schumann, profile picture
Uploaded byPaul Schumann
1,354 views

Form Based Code 101

This document provides guidelines for building placement in a form-based code for an area called Bayfront Boulevard Main Street. It specifies requirements for build-to lines, setbacks, lot sizes, building heights, ground floor dimensions, and distances between entries. Build-to lines define how close to or far from the right-of-way buildings must be placed. Setbacks define required distances from property lines. Lot sizes, building heights, and ground floor dimensions have minimum requirements. Distances between entries are also specified. Diagrams and some exceptions to the requirements are also included.

Embed presentation

Downloaded 40 times
Form-Based Code 101 1 05.27.08 Building Placement Build-to Line (Distance from Right of Way) Bayfront Boulevard 0' A Civic Space1 / Secondary Street 0' B Bayfront Promenade1 10' min.; 20' max.2 C Side 0' D BTL Defined by a Building Bayfront Boulevard 100% min. Secondary Street / Civic Space1 80% min.3 Bayfront Promenade1 80% min. 1 The Bayfront Promenade is treated as its own frontage distinct from the Civic Space frontage within this zone. 2 The BTL for the first building to receive planning department approval becomes the set BTL (must be within this range) for this zone. All subsequent buildings must match the first building's BTL. 3 60% min. on Block J Setback (Distance from Property Line or ROW) Rear 0' min. Lot Size Width 100' min. E Depth F North of Bayfront Blvd. 100' min. South of Bayfront Blvd. 50' min. Building Form Height Building 2 Stories min.; 4 Stories max. H Ground Floor Finish Level 6" max. I Ground Floor Ceiling 14' min. clear J Upper Floor(s) Ceiling 8' min. clear K Footprint Depth, Ground-floor Commercial Space Bayfront Boulevard 50' min. Bayfront Promenade 30' min. Secondary Street 30' min. Miscellaneous Distance between Entries To Ground Floor 50' max. All upper floors must have a primary entrance along Bayfront Blvd. Service entries may not be located on Bayfront Boulevard. Building Placement (Continued) Miscellaneous Buildings must be built to BTL along each facade within 30' of a corner. G See the Streets and Circulation Regulation Plan on page 4-3 for the determination of Primary and Secondary Streets. T5-MS: Bayfront Boulevard Main Street Standards Cont'd. 1-12 HWDMP Sub-District Amendments Opticos Design, Inc. Chapter 1: Building Form Standards Sidewalk Bayfront Boulevard Bayfront Promenade / Rear SecondaryStreet CivicSpace BTL, ROW Line BTL,ROWLine BTL,ROWLine A C EF D BB I ROW Line Street K K K J H G G G G G G G G ROW / Property Line Build-to Line (BTL) Setback Line Building Area Key A Guide for Planners, Urban Designers, Municipalities, and Developers Form-Based Codes Daniel G. Parolek, AIA Karen Parolek Paul C. Crawford, FAICP Forewords by Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk and Stefanos Polyzoides E RO UT E 6 E BUTLE R AVE NBEAVERST S MIL TO N RD NLEROUXST N PI NE CL IF F DR NSANFRANCISCOST W BIRCH AVE N THORPE RD NBON ITO ST W ASPEN AVE N SW IT ZE R CA NY ON DR W CHERRY AVE S BA BB ITT DR N AZ TE C ST E DA VI D DR KN OL ES DR N TU R Q U O IS E D R W BE AL RD NHUMPHREYSST S O'L EA RY ST S SA N FR AN CIS CO ST SBEAVER ST W ELM AVE E CHERRY AVE W CLAY AVE E FRANKLIN AVE NKENDRICKST N NAV AJO DR W RO UT E 66 SLONETREERD NAGASSIZST SLEROUXST N FO RT VA LL EY RD N LO CU ST ST W CO CO NI NO AV E W KA IB A B LN E SAW MIL L RD W FO RE ST AVE NPARKST E BIRCH AVE W SANTA FE AVE E PO ND ER O SA PK W Y W PHOENIX AVE W LO W ER C O C O N IN O AV E NVERDEST W RIOR DAN RD W DALE AVE N BE RT RA ND ST N GE M IN I DR NSITGREAVESST N RO CK RID GE RD E ASPEN AVE NMOGOLLONST W BUTLER AVE E ELM AVE W CH AT EA U DR W NAVAJO RD W DUPONT AVE S WIN DS OR LN W OA K AVE NELDENST N HO PI DR NO ELL E LN W FINE AVE E BR AN NE N AVE E DALE AVE WMET ZWAL K N RIM DR W HUNT AVE S EL LI O T ST W MA RS HI LL RD S MI KE S PI KE S SP RI NG ST E COTTAGE AVE NKINLAN IRD N KIT TR ED GE RD SAGASSIZST E ELLERY AVE W SULLIVAN AVE N FO RE ST VIE W DR S VE RD E ST N CU RL ING SM OK E DR N JA ME S ST W GR AN D CA NY ON AV E W BENTON AVE E PAY TO N WA Y E PHOENIX AVE N M OR IA H DR W PIU TE RD S FO UN TAI NE ST N W IL LI AM RD W TUCSON AVE W APACHE RD SPARKST E DUPONT AVE W TOMBSTO NE AVE S RIV ER RU N RD W HA VAS UP AI RD W SU M M IT AV E W COTTAGE AVE E FINE AVE E JAC KS ON DR N EN TE RP RI SE E JON NY LP S CA MB RID GE LN DESILVA AVE S ELD EN ST SHUMPHREYSST NTOLTECST W TOLC HACO RD OSBORNEDR S BL AC KB IRD RO OS T S MA LPA IS LN E HIL LTO P AV E S SY CA M OR E ST E TE RR AC E AV E S ER NE ST ST SFLOREN CEST E KEN SIN GT ON DR E BENTON AVE E APPL E WAY PA YT ON WA Y W ELLERY AVE E FO RE ST AVE E HUTCHESON DR N MC MIL LA N RD S W AL NU T ST PIN ON CT SPAS EO DEL FLA G W WH IPP LE RD NAPOLLOWAY E PA SE O DE L RI O TORMEY AVE E PIC CA DIL LY DR MO UN TAI N VIE W DR E CR ES TV IEW DR S W IL SO N LN W WH ITIN G RD SKINGMAN ST E WO OD LAN D DR S BR AN NE N CIR N HE ML OC K WA Y W COLUMBUS AVE S SE VIL LE LN N CH AR LE S RD N MA NZ AN ITA WA Y S CA LL E RE PO SA N CLA RK CIR E AS HU RS T AV E MC CR EA RY E SH ER W OO D LN N EV ER GR EE N DR SW ITZ ER DR SMAR ICO PA ST N OTT O DR W HOG AN DR N GE OR GE ST N CA NY ON TE RR AC E DR S RE GE NT ST S GA BE LST W MO NT VA LE AV E S BU CK ING HA M LN N CIR CL E DR N LOM ALA ILN E HUNT AVE E CAL LE CON TEN TA S PI N N AC LE ST MCMULLENCIR E OL IV IN E W AY SGLOBE ST N CO NIF ER RD NHILLSIDEST E CA NY O N VI EW DR N CI RC LE VI EW DR HO SK INS AVE S NO ELL E LN SKENDRICKST W MCMULLEN CIR SLUMBERST S CO LO RA DO ST E CHU RCH ILL DR E BAR RO W AVE E TUR NE Y DR NCLE AR VIEW DR N SU NS ET DR W AN DE RS ON RD G R EE N BR IA R LN E COLUMBUS AVE S TR AIL OF TH E WO OD S E ST O N E R ID G E D R W CE DA R AVE E HAT CH ER DR W LAV A LN E TRE VOR WAY EIVY LN BLO ME DR NKUT CH DR N MA GM A W AY N HIL LTO P DR W BAS ALT LN EOLD CAN YON CT E JA CO B W AY W DE AN NA DR E RU SS WA Y S CA RR IAG E LN E MC CR AC KE N ST E HE LEN WA Y E CH UB S WA Y E MA KAY LA WA Y SLON ETRE ERD S BEA VER ST NAZTECST WROUTE66 T2 T1 T3 T4 T5 T6 Civic E ROU TE E BUTLE R AVE N BEA VER ST INT ER STA TE 40 S MI LT ON RD N LER OUX ST N PIN E CL IFF DR N SAN FRA NCI SCO ST W BIRC H AVE N THOR PE RD NBONITO ST W ASP EN AVE N SW ITZ ER CA NY ON DR W CHE RRY AVE SBABBITTDR E DA VI D DR KNOLESDR N TUR QUO ISE DR N HUM PHR EYS ST SO'LEARYST SSANFRANCISCOST SBEAV ER ST W ELM AVE E CHE RRY AVE W CLA Y AVE E FRA NKL IN AVE N KEN DRIC K ST W RO UT E 66 S LON E TRE E RD N AGA SSIZ ST S LER OUX ST NLOCUSTST W COCO NINO AVE W KAIB AB LN E SAWMILL RD N PAR K ST E BIRC H AVE W SAN TA FE AVE E PO ND ER OS A PKW Y W PHOE NIX AVE W LOW ER COC ONI NO AVE N VER DE ST W RIO RD AN RD W DAL E AVE NBERT RAND ST N GEMI NI DR N SITG REA VES ST E ASP EN AVE N MOG OLL ON ST W BUT LER AVE E ELM AVE W CHA TEA U DR W NAV AJO RD W DUP ONT AVE SWINDSORLN N ELD EN ST NO EL LE LN W FINE AVE E BRANNEN AVE E DAL E AVE W ME TZ WA LK W HUN T AVE S ELL IOT ST WMARS HILL RD S MIK ES PIK E SSPRIN GST E COT TAG E AVE NKINLA NIRD S AGA SSIZ ST E ELLE RY AVE W SUL LIVA N AVE N FO RE ST VI EW DR SVERDEST N JA ME S ST W GRAN D CANY ON AVE W BEN TON AVE E PA YT ON WA Y E PHO ENIX AVE N MO RIA H DR SFOUNTAINEST N WI LL IAM RD W TUCS ON AVE W APA CHE RD SPARK ST E DUP ONT AVE W TOMB STON E AVE SRIVERRUNRD W SUMM IT AVE W COTT AGE AVE E FINE AVE E JACKSON DR NENTE RPRIS ERD E JO NN Y LP SCAMBRIDGELN DES ILVA AVE SELDENST S HUM PHR EYS ST N TOL TEC ST OSB ORN E DR SBLACKBIRDROOST SMALPAISLN E HILLTOP AVE SSYCA MORE ST E TER RA CE AVE SERNESTST SFLOR ENCE ST E KENSINGTON DR E BEN TON AVE E APPLE WAY PA YT ON WA Y W ELL ERY AVE E HUT CHE SON DR SWALN UT ST PINON CT S PA SE O DE L FL AG N APO LLO WAY E PASEO DEL RIO TOR MEY AVE E PICCADILLY DR MOUNTAIN VIEW DR E CRESTVIEW DR SWILS ON LN SKINGM AN ST E WOODLAND DR S BR AN NE N CI R NHEMLOCKWAY W COL UMB US AVE SSEVILLELN N CHAR LES RD NMANZANITAWAY S CA LL E RE PO SA E ASHURST AVE MCCREARY E SH ER WO OD LN SWITZER DR SMARICOPAST NOTTODR NGEORGEST NCANYO NTERRA CEDR SREGENTST SGABELST W MONT VALE AVE SBUCKINGHAMLN N CI RC LE DR E HUN T AVE E CA LL E CO NT EN TA S PIN NAC LE ST MCM ULL EN CIR E OL IVI NE WA Y SGLOB EST N HILL SIDE ST E CA NY ON VIE W DR N CIR CL E VIE W DR HOSKINS AVE S NO EL LE LN S KEN DRIC K ST W MCM ULL EN CIR S LUM BER ST SCOLORADOST E CHURCHILL DR E BARROW AVE E TU RN EY DR NCLEARVIEWDR GR EEN BRI AR LN E COL UMB US AVE STRAILOFTHEWOODS E STO NE RIDG E DR E HA TC HE R DR E TR EV OR WA Y E IVY LN BLOME DR N MA GM A WA Y NHILLTOPDRE OL D CA NY ON CT E JAC OB WA Y E RU SS WA Y SCARRIAGELN E MCCRACKEN ST E HE LE N WA Y E CH UB S WA Y E MA KA YL A WA Y SLONETREERD SBEAVERST N AZT EC ST W ROU TE 66 0 200' 400' 1 Acre¼ Acre Regulating Plan Flagstaff, Arizona October 9, 2009 © C o p y r i g h t 2 0 0 8 Opticos Design, Inc. 1285 Gilman Street Berkeley, CA 94706 510 - 558 - 6957 0 200' 400' Sound Check Dan Parolek Principal, Opticos Design, Inc. Brown Bag Lunch November 17, 2015
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Euclidean Zoning is an Out-of-Date Operating 2
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. Conventional Zoning Summarized 95. Physical culture institution 109. Potato chip manufacturing 127. Tombstones, retail sales 135. Turkish bath 19. Baths,Turkish 25. Boxing arena 28. Chinchillas, retail sales 41. Eleemosynary institutions 42. Embalming business • Emphasis on regulation by use • Disconnect between land use, urban form, and design • Exceptions become the rule 3
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Well, more process will fix it Zoning Code 4 Then
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | 5 Well, the PD process will fix it PD 4 PD 19 PD 3 PD 8 PD 1 PD 9 PD 12 PD 7 C1 PD 6 PD 10 PD 2 R1 R1 R2 R2 C2 R3 R1 PD 11 PD 13 PD 5 PD 14 R1 PD 15 PD 16 PD 17 PD 18R1 Zoning Code +
Different zoning tools for difference types of places The New Operating System 6
What’s in common? © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. |
3 at 3 stories and 1 at 12 stories 2 story building on 2/3 of site © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Conventional zoning says they’re the same 0.60 FAR 0.60 FAR
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | The 21st Century Operating System is Form Form-Based Approach Lower parking requirements 
 (More walking, access to transit) Public realm = Public space Blended density (variety of types) Mixed use environments Conventional 
 Use-Based Approach Higher parking requirements 
 (Less walking and access to transit) “Podded” densities and uses Larger public and private open space required due to isolation Uses more flexible based on operational characteristics Specific Uses allowed Walkable Urban Places Drivable Suburban Places
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | 10y Multi-Jurisdictional Form-Based Code Design, Inc. July 19th, 2010 Up LandsLow Lands RuralUrban Rural Crossroads Hamlet Village City Town Different Neighborhoods Require Different Solutions Beaufort County, South Carolina Multi-Jurisdictional Code: Place Types
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | 11 Different Types of Places in Austin SuburbanTransitionalWalkable Urban
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Conventional/Euclidean Zoning: Suburban Places 12
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form-Based Coding: Existing Walkable Urban 13
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Hybrid Code is Selected Approach • • How one city overhauled its zoning code while combiningform-based and conventional elements. By Roger E. Eastman, AICP, with Daniel Parolek and Lisa Wise LAGSTAFF, ARIZONA, entered an exclusive club in November. It is now one of the few cities in the U.S. that have adopted a hybrid zoning ordinance with both fom1-based components and conventional Eu- clidean elements as part of a complete code rewrite. "Simplified, streamlined, predictable" raved an edito- rial in the Arizona Daily Sun while praising both the code and the process used to adopt it. Getting the new code adopted wasn't easy, but many city residents think the effort will be repaid in a more efficient, more equitable, and easier-to-use zoning system. The adoption of the new zoning code also caps offa successful public engagement process that has changed the generally negative perception ofcity plaImers. TIME FOR AN UPDATE An im.portant first step in approaching a new code W,1S differentiating between what Clu'istopher Leinberger caBs "walkable ur- ban" areas from "drivable suburb,m" areas (Tbe Option ofUrbrl7Zism, Island Press, 2008). By making this distinction, Flagstaff could apply a form-based code in the walkable areas of the city wIllie generaBy leaving the existing conventional code in place in the drivable suburban areas. Thus, a new u'ansect-based hybrid code resulted that defaults to promoting and al- lowing for walkable urbanism wIllie seam- lessly incorporating refined yet otherwise conventional Euclidean zoning tools for the drivable suburban areas. Because the regula- tions for the two different types of areas are not muddled together, the form-based code could be kept intact-and development op- poruU1ities could emerge in a manner con- sistent with the city's general plan. Flagstaff (pop. 62,000), at an elevation of about 7,000 feet, is the regional hub of northern Arizona. Established as a stop on the early u'anscontinental railway in 1882 and later Route 66 and Interstate 40, Flag- staff quickly grew as a logging and ranching town, and as a gateway for tourists visiting the Grand Canyon and other national parks and monuments. Residents appreciate the natural beauty ofthe area and enjoy outdoor pursuits such as hiking, skiing, hunting, fish- ing, and camping. T he downtown and oldest neighbor- hoods were plmmed with sm,111 blocks and lots, and today are valued for their historic buildings and inherently walkable urban character. Typical of many American cities, Flagstaffs urban form changed after vVorld vVar IT as auto-oriented suburban develop- ments were' added to tile periphelY of tile city. Until recently Flagstaffs zoning ordi- nances have actively promoted tllese drive- able suburbml development patterns. The need for a comprehensive update of tile city's land development code had been apparent for some time as developers, con- u'actors, desigll professionals, and residents complained about tile code's complexity and inconsistency. Some even blamed tile CLllll- bersome namre of tile code for conu'ibuting to the high cost ofdevelopment and tile fail- ure of big projects and economic develop- ment opporuU1ities. American Planning Association 25
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. |© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form-Based Code Definition 15 "Form-based codes foster predictable built results and a high- quality public realm by using physical form (rather than separation of uses) as the organizing principle for the code. They are regulations, not mere guidelines. They are adopted into city or county law. Form-based codes are an alternative to conventional zoning." Form-Based Code Institute
Place-based operating system The Rural to Urban Transect as the New Operating System 16
Historic Humboldt-Chimborazo
 This first transect was conceived by Alexander Von Humboldt in 1793. It is taken across the southern tip of South America, from the Atlantic to the Pacific and is vertically exaggerated. This curious document has notations on the surface of the earth, beneath the surface, and also, apparently, the atmospheric conditions. 1790’s 17 © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc.
18 Geddes’ Valley Section 
 A century after the Humboldt transect, the Scotsman Patrick Geddes drew the “valley section,” taken from ridgeline to shoreline. It is the first transect to show natural conditions with their associated human presence, presented only in terms of exploitation—a 19th century conception. 1909 © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc.
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Transect Concept’s Initial Use in the Natural Environment 19 1969 Ian McHarg, Design with Nature
 The famous landscape architect documented the variety of distinct environments and their individual components and species that needed those environments to thrive.
20 2000 © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc.
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | In 2000 It Was Adapted to the Built Environment 21 T1 T6 SDT5T4T3T2
22 © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc.
23 © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc.
24 © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc.
25 © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc.
26 © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc.
27 © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc.
28 © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc.
Salt Lake City 2014 Conventional Zoning vs Form-Based Zoning © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | New York, NY T2, T4 – T6 4 Environments
Salt Lake City 2014 Conventional Zoning vs Form-Based Zoning © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | 3 Environments Downtown Salt Lake T4 – T6
Salt Lake City 2014 Conventional Zoning vs Form-Based Zoning © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | 4 Environments Salt Lake DT Neighborhoods T2 – T5
Salt Lake City 2014 Conventional Zoning vs Form-Based Zoning © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | 5 Environments Park City T1 – T5
l. TRANSECT ZONES © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Base Zones Based on a Hierarchy of Form Primarily 33
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Hierarchy of Form & Scale Should be Clear in Base 34 Less Urban T5 Neighborhood 2 (T5N.2)T3 Neighborhood (T3N) T3 Estate (T3E) T4 Neighborhood 2 (T4N.2) T4 Neighborhood 1 (T4N.1) T5 Neighborhood 1 (T5N.1) T3 T4 T5 More Urban From Cincinnati, Ohio
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. |© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Hierarchy of Form & Scale Should be Clear in Base 35 Less Urban T5 Flex (T5F) T5 Main Street (T5MS) T6 Core (T6C) T6T5 (continued) More Urban From Cincinnati, Ohio
The initial calibratin to Austin How is the Transect Being Applied in Austin? 36
© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Close UpCountywide 10-40.40.080 10-75Flagstaff Zoning Code T4 Neighborhood 2 (T4N.2) Standards ROW/Property Line Building Setback Line Encroachment Area Key ROW/Property Line Parking Setback Line Parking Area Key G. Required Parking Spaces7 Residential Uses Studio/1 Bedroom 1 space/unit min. 2+ Bedrooms 2 spaces/unit min. Retail Trade, Service Uses ≤2,000 sf No spaces required >2,000 sf 2 spaces/1,000 sf min. above first 2,000 sf 7 Use types not listed shall meet the requirements in Table 10-50.70.040.A (Automobile Parking Spaces Required). Location (Setback from ROW/Property Line) Front Covered/Attached 30' min. Uncovered Match front facade min. Side Street/Civic Space 5' min. Side 0' min. Rear 0' min. Miscellaneous Linear feet of front or side façade that may be garage 35% max. See Division 10-50.70 (Parking Standards) for additional parking regulations. M N O P F. Encroachments and Frontage Types Encroachments4 Front 5' max. Side Street/Civic Space 5' max. Side 3' max. Rear Property Line 0' max. Rear Lane or Alley 3' max. Galleries may encroach in to street ROW, all other encroachments are not allowed within a street ROW. 4 See Section 10-50.35 (Encroachments) for allowed encroachments. Allowed Private Frontage Types5 Stoop Forecourt Gallery6 Terrace/Lightwell6 Shopfront6 Porch 5 See Division 10-50.30 (Specific to Private Frontage Types) for private frontage type descriptions and regulations. 6 Allowed only in open sub-zone(s). I J K L Street I J SideStreet N P O SideStreet Street M K L 10-40.40.080 10-74 Flagstaff Zoning Code T4 Neighborhood 2 (T4N.2) Standards D. Building Placement Setback (Distance from ROW/Property Line) Principal Building Front1 5' min.; 12' max. Front facade within area 50% min. Side Street/Civic Space 10' min.; 15' max. Side2 3' min. Rear 3' min. Outbuilding Front 20' min. Side 0' min.; 3' max. Rear 3' min. 1 Setback may match an existing adjacent building as follows. The building may be set to align with the facade of the frontmost immediately adjacent property, for a width no greater than that of the adjacent property's facade that encroaches into the minimum setback. 2 No side setback required between townhouse and/or live/work building types. Miscellaneous Upper-floor units must have a primary entrance along a street or courtyard façade. Ground-floor residential units along a street must have individual entries. A B C D E. Building Form3 Height Principal Building Stories 4 Stories max. To Eave/Parapet 40' max. Overall 52' max. Outbuilding 2 Stories max. To Eave/Parapet 18' max. Overall 28' max. Ground Floor Finish Level 18" min. above sidewalk Ground Floor Ceiling 9' min. clear Upper Floor(s) Ceiling 8' min. clear 3 See Division 10-50.100 (Specific to Building Types) for additional building form regulations. Footprint Depth, ground-floor residential space along primary street frontage 30' min. Lot Coverage 80% max. Miscellaneous Mansard roof forms are not allowed. E F G H ROW Line Street ROW/Property Line Building Setback Line Building Area Facade Area Key Street D SideStreet H GA min. A max. B min. B max. C F E Building Form Standards 37
l. TRANSECT ZONES © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form-based Zones being considered for Austin
l. TRANSECT ZONES © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form-based zones broken down further 39 Neighborhood   General Neighborhood   Edge
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | T3 Neighborhood–Edge 40 Characteristics/Form Intent Building: Detached, Semi-attached Footprint: Medium to Large Footprint Front Setback: Medium to Large Setback Height: Up to 2½ Stories House
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | T3 Neighborhood–Medium 41 Characteristics/Form Intent Building: Detached, Semi-attached Building Footprint: Medium to Large Footprint Front Setback: Medium to Large Setback Height: Up to 2½ Stories Building Types Carriage House; House; Cottage Court Cottage Court House Has T3 Edge been purposefully excluded? Building types list only the Type family, not the size variations in order to save space in the table. (Ex: “House” rather than “House: Compact, Small, Medium”)
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | T3 Neighborhood–High 42 Characteristics/Form Intent Building: Detached, Semi-attached Footprint: Small to Medium Footprint Front Setback: Small to Medium Setback Height: Up to 2½ Stories House Cottage Court Duplex
l. TRANSECT ZONES © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form-based zones broken down further 43 Neighborhood   General Neighborhood   Center/Main   Street
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | 44 Characteristics/Form Intent Building: Detached, Semi-attached Footprint: Small to Medium Footprint Front Setback: Medium to Large Setback Height: Up to 2½ Stories House Cottage Court Duplex Tri/Fourplex T4 Neighborhood–Low
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | T4 Neighborhood–Medium 45 Characteristics/Form Intent Building: Detached, Semi-attached Building: Small to Medium Footprint Front Setback: Small to Medium Setbacks Height: Up to 2½ Stories House Cottage Court Duplex Tri/Quadplex Rowhouse Multiplex
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | T4 Main Street 46 Characteristics/Form Intent Building: Attached, Semi-detached Footprint: Small to Medium Footprint Front Setback: Small to No Setbacks Height: Up to 2½ Stories Mid-Rise Rowhouse Live/Work Main Street Multiplex Stacked Flats
l. TRANSECT ZONES © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form-based zones broken down further 47 Neighborhood   General Neighborhood   Center/Main   Street
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | T5 Main Street 48 Characteristics Building: Attached Lot Width: Medium to Large Lot Building Footprint: Medum to Large Footprint Front Setback: Small to No Setbacks Height: Up to 5 Stories Primary Frontage: Arcades, Galleries, Terraces & Shopfronts
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | T5 Neighborhood 1 49 Characteristics Building: Detached, Semi-attached Lot Width: Medium to Large Lot Building Footprint: Medium to Large Footrpint Front Setback: Small Setbacks Height: Up to 3½ Stories Primary Frontage: Porches, Stoops & Terraces
l. TRANSECT ZONES © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form-based zones broken down further 50 Neighborhood   Center/Main   Street
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | T6 Core 1 51 Characteristics Building: Attached, Detached Lot Width: Medium to Large Lot Building Footprint: Medium to Large Footprint Front Setback: Simple Wall Plane along ROW, none Height: Up to 12 Stories Primary Frontage: Arcades, Galleries, Terraces & Shopfronts
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | T6 Core 2 52 Characteristics Building: Attached, Detached Lot Width: Medium to Large Lot Building Footprint: Medium to Large Footprint Front Setback: Small to No Setbacks Height: Number of Stories TBD Primary Frontage: Terraces, Stoops
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | If You Want More Detail See Draft Transect Matrix in Studi 53 A poster, which will be on the wall, includes setbacks, heights, which zones likely will be translated to the new zones, etc.
Not just new base zone districts-An entire system Other Components 
 of a Form-Based Code 54
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | 10-40.40.080 10-75Flagstaff Zoning Code T4 Neighborhood 2 (T4N.2) Standards ROW/Property Line Building Setback Line Encroachment Area Key ROW/Property Line Parking Setback Line Parking Area Key G. Required Parking Spaces7 Residential Uses Studio/1 Bedroom 1 space/unit min. 2+ Bedrooms 2 spaces/unit min. Retail Trade, Service Uses ≤2,000 sf No spaces required >2,000 sf 2 spaces/1,000 sf min. above first 2,000 sf 7 Use types not listed shall meet the requirements in Table 10-50.70.040.A (Automobile Parking Spaces Required). Location (Setback from ROW/Property Line) Front Covered/Attached 30' min. Uncovered Match front facade min. Side Street/Civic Space 5' min. Side 0' min. Rear 0' min. Miscellaneous Linear feet of front or side façade that may be garage 35% max. See Division 10-50.70 (Parking Standards) for additional parking regulations. M N O P F. Encroachments and Frontage Types Encroachments4 Front 5' max. Side Street/Civic Space 5' max. Side 3' max. Rear Property Line 0' max. Rear Lane or Alley 3' max. Galleries may encroach in to street ROW, all other encroachments are not allowed within a street ROW. 4 See Section 10-50.35 (Encroachments) for allowed encroachments. Allowed Private Frontage Types5 Stoop Forecourt Gallery6 Terrace/Lightwell6 Shopfront6 Porch 5 See Division 10-50.30 (Specific to Private Frontage Types) for private frontage type descriptions and regulations. 6 Allowed only in open sub-zone(s). I J K L Street I J SideStreet N P O SideStreet Street M K L 4.03.050 Frontage Standards 4-30 Livermore Development Code 4.03.050 Porch: Integral Description The main facade of the building has a small setback from the property line.The resulting front yard is typically very small and may be undefined or defined by a fence or hedge to spatially maintain the edge of the street.An integral porch is part of the overall massing and roof form of a building. With an integral porch it is not possible to remove the porch without major changes to the overall roof form. Size Width, clear 8' min. Depth, clear 8' min. Height, clear 8' min. Finish level above sidewalk 18" min. Furniture area, clear 4' x 8' min. Path of travel 3' wide min. Miscellaneous The porch may be one or two stories. Integral porches may be enclosed on up to two sides and have a roof. A B C D E F ROW / Property Line Setback Line Key Setback ROW Walk Street Setback ROW Walk Street Partial-length integral porch integrated into the overall massing. Full-length integral porch integrated into the overall massing. E E D B A C F Frontage Type Standards 55
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | This Transition is Very Important to Regulate! 56
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | 5.01.070Building Types 5-13Livermore Development Code B. Lot Lot Size Width 50' min., 75' max. Depth 100' min., 150' max. C. Pedestrian Access Main Entrance Location Primary street On corner lots each unit shall front a different street. D. Frontages Allowed Frontages Porch Stoop E.Vehicle Access and Parking Parking spaces may be enclosed, covered, or open. F. Open Space, Usable Width 15'/unit min. Depth 15'/unit min. Open Space Area 300 sf min. Required street setbacks and driveways shall not be included in the open space area calculation. G. Building Size and Massing Main Body Width 36' max. Secondary Wing Width 24' max. Detached Garage Width 36' max. Depth 25' max. H. Miscellaneous Both units shall have entries facing the street no more than 10' behind, the front façade. Primary Street Alley SideStreet Primary Street Rear SideStreet ROW / Property Line Building Area Key Typical Alley Loaded Plan Diagram Typical Front Loaded Plan Diagram 5.01.070 Building Types 5-12 Livermore Development Code The entry to the right opens to a stair leading to the upper unit, which takes up the entire upper floor.The door to the left opens directly into the lower unit, which takes up the entire lower floor. The scale of this duplex makes it compatible with adjacent single-family homes. 5.01.070 Duplex, Stacked General Note: the drawings and photos below are illustrative. A. Description This Duplex building type consists of structures that contain two units, one on top of the other. This building type has the appearance of a medium to large single- family home. This type is typically integrated sparingly into single-family neighborhoods or more consistently into neighborhoods with other medium-density types such as bungalow courts, fourplexes, or courtyard apartments. This building type enables the incorporation of high-quality, well-designed density within a walkable neighborhood. This is the preferred type of duplex on 50' wide lots in Livermore neighborhoods not zoned for single-family because it is capable of accommodating two units in a smaller footprint, thus maximizing compatibility in size and privacy to the rear of adjacent units. Building Type Standards 57
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Kit of Parts for Neighborhoods: Cincinnati, Ohio 58 Cincinnati Citywide Form-Based Code
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. |© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | 10-70.10.030 Civic Space Types 70.10-4 Flagstaff Zoning CodePublic Review Draft Table 10-70.10.030.A Civic Spaces (continued) TRANSECT ZONE T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Civic Space Type Square Plaza Pocket Plaza Illustration Description An open space available for unstructured recreation and civic purposes. An open space available for civic purposes and commercial activities. An open space available for civic purposes and commercial activities. Size and Location Size Minimum 1/2 acre 1/2 acre 4,000 sf Maximum 5 acres 2-1/2 acres 1/2 acre Frontage Independent Independent/Building Frontage Building Frontage Character Formal Formal Formal Typical Uses Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Paths, Community Gardens, Playgrounds Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Commercial Uses, Community Garden, Playground Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Commercial Uses, Community Garden, Playground Stormwater Management French Drains, Porous Pavements, and Landscaping French Drains, Porous Pavements, and Landscaping French Drains, Porous Pavements, and Landscaping Key T# Allowed T# Not Allowed 10-70.10.030Civic Space Types 70.10-3Flagstaff Zoning Code Public Review Draft Table 10-70.10.030.A Civic Spaces TRANSECT ZONE T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Civic Space Type Park Greenway Green Illustration Description A natural preserve available for unstructured recreation. A linear space in largely natural conditions for unstructured recreation. An open space, available for unstructured recreation. Size and Location Size Minimum 8 acres 8 acres 1/2 acre Maximum - - 8 acres Frontage Independent Independent/Building Frontage Independent/Building Frontage Character Natural Natural Natural Typical Uses Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Paths and Trails, Woodland and Open Shelters, Community Gardens, Playgrounds Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Trails for Bicycles and Pedestrians, Community Gardens, Playgrounds Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Community Gardens, Playgrounds Stormwater Management Integrated Runoff, Bioretention, Extended Detention Basins, Porous Pavements and Landscaping Integrated Runoff, Bioretention, Extended Detention Basins, Porous Pavements and Landscaping French Drains, Porous Pavements and Landscaping Key T# Allowed T# Not Allowed Civic Space Standards 59
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. |© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Close UpCountywide 7.01.110 Thoroughfare Types 7-12 Livermore Development Code Neighborhood Street II Edges Drainage Collection Type Curb and gutter Planter Type 17' continuous Landscape Type Medium trees @ 35' on center average Lighting Type Low, pedestrian oriented lighting Walkway Type 5' sidewalk Intersection Curb Radius 15' max. (bulb-outs recommended) Distance Between Intersections 600' max. Miscellaneous Requirements Transformations to existing streets shall match the designations set forth in the General Plan. E F 7.01.110 Retrofit: 18' Wide Planter Strip Application Movement Type Slow Anticipated Design Speed 20 mph Pedestrian Crossing Bulb-outs encouraged to decrease pedestrian crossing time. Transect Zones T4 N-O T4 N T3 N Overall Widths Right-of-Way (ROW) 80' Face-of-Curb to Face-of-Curb 36' Lanes Traffic Lanes 2 @ 10' (2-way travel) Bicycle Lanes None Parking Lanes 2 @ 8' parallel Medians None A B C D B A FC B A CD DEF E 7.01.060Thoroughfare Types 7-7 Livermore Development Code 7.01.060 Neighborhood Main Street Application Movement Type Slow Anticipated Design Speed 20 mph Pedestrian Crossing Bulb-outs encouraged to decrease pedestrian crossing time. Transect Zones T4MS T4MS-O Overall Widths Right-of-Way (ROW) 60' Face-of-Curb to Face-of-Curb 36' Lanes Traffic Lanes 2 @ 10' (2-way travel) Bicycle Lanes None Parking Lanes 2 @ 8' parallel Medians None A B C D Edges Drainage Collection Type Curb and gutter Planter Type 4' x 4' tree grate, min. Lighting Type Low, pedestrian oriented lighting Walkway Type 12' sidewalk, 1 Where gallery frontage is used, street trees are not required or allowed. Intersection Curb Radius 15' max. (bulb-outs recommended) Distance Between Intersections 400' max. Miscellaneous Requirements Transformations to existing streets shall match the designations set forth in the General Plan. E F N eighborhood Street I B A C B A CD D F EE F Thoroughfare Standards 60
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Regulating Plans/Zoning Maps 61 Madison Road
Market Demand is Waiting Providing Predictability: 
 Getting Quick Results 62
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | 63 Predictable, Clear Process is The Goal DRAFT IN PROGRESS 03.16.07 DIAGRAM 11 PERMITTING PROCESS PERMITTING PROCESS DIAGRAMPERMITTING PROCESS DIAGRAM Applicant Preapplication Preapplication Preapplication Preapplication Zoning Department Warrant Exception Variance Zoning Change File with Hearing Board * Building Permit Preapplication Building Permit Waiver File with Planning * Building Permit Building Permit City Commission CRC - Coordinated Review Committee PZAB – Planning Zoning and Appeals Board By Right CRC PZAB PZAB Building Permit PZAB Planning Director Appeal City Comm. Appeal City Comm. Appeal PZAB Planning Director Planning Director Planning Director Planning Director File with Planning * File with Hearing Board * File with Hearing Board * Building Permit Appeal PZAB * All applications shall include required notice CRC
Providing Consistency Across the LDC The Transect as the Framework for a Majority of Regulations 64
© 2014 Opticos Design, Inc. | Considering Sustainability/Green Infrastructure Along the Transect 65 T3: Single Family and Carriage House Strategic Shading. Glazing. Design glazing to heat the structure from the south, and cool through cross-ventilation. Water Infiltration. Allow water to percolate in sub-surface conditions. Greenway. Use the greenway as a stormwater capture, conveyance and treatment feature. South-Side Planting. Consider solar access on the south side of buildings when planting landscape. Public/Private Portal. Compost Bins. Require compost bins with instructions for homeowners. Urban Farming. Encourage small-scall cultivation. No Hose Bibs. Exclude external hose bibs from home design, thereby irrigating only by rain barrel or reuse water. Rain Garden. Provide lot treatment rain gardens. Flow-Through StormwaterTreatment Planter. ABCDEFGHIJK B C A D E J H K G I F B D E A C G J H K F I T4: Live/Work Building Active Space. Allow some portion of outdoor space to be used for public open-space, potentially active space. Retractable Awnings. Encourage the use of retractable awnings in storefront design, to protect from the summer sun. Outdoor Seating. Encourage establishments to provide outdoor seating and outdoor spaces. Car Charging Stations. Provide electric charging stations to promote the use of alternate-fuel vehicles.. Recycling and Compost Bins. Encourage establishments to have an area for compost and recycling bins, in addition to trash bins.. Vegetated Roofs. Promote vegetated roofs, skylights or directed sunlight to improve the quality of life in interior apartments. Residential Access. Provide residential access to flat rooftops, creating usable open space. Private Driveway. Require minimal curbcuts and curb return radii. Roof Materials. Use high SRI roof materials where PV or vegetated roofs are not practical. Covered bicycle storage. ABCDEFGHIJ T5: Mid-Rise Building Type Urban Rooftop Farming/Gardening. Roof Access. Encourage rooftop access to maximize value of views and open space. Outdoor Seating. Activating sidewalk space in front of mixed-use development encourages community vitality.. Awnings. Awnings provide street-level shading and rain shelter. Diverse Rooftop Usage. Encourage both commercial and residential use of roof space. Urban Gardening. Garden space available for residential tenants.. Bioswales. Bioswales improve stormwater quality, mitigate urban flooding, and give opportunity for infiltration where subsurface conditions allow.. Bike Racks. Encourage tenants and patrons to cycle by providing regular amenities for bike parking. StreetTrees. Tree boxes/wells improve thermal comfort and street character.. ABCDEFGHI C D B A E H G I F
eet Incorporating sustainability in ancillary unit designConference-Los Angeles, CA © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | stainability Overlay to Inform Form-Based Code 16 Flow through treatment planter Lot Treament Rain Garden No External Hose Bibs No Irrigation Except by Rain Barrel or Reused Water Urban Farming Compost Bins Strategic Shading ssive Heating from uth-Facing Glazing-Cross ntilation Cools as Needed Where Allow It Winds west in Greenway as a Stormwater Caputre Conveyance & Treatment Feature Solar Lighting Along Greenway Utilize Summer Winds from the Southeast to Passively Cool Buildings Sustainability and Urban Agriculture in Different Contexts © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | 66 B D E A C G J H K F I C D B A E H G I F B D E A C G J H K F I
67 Form-Based Codes A Guide for Planners, Urban Designers, Municipalities, and Developers Daniel G. Parolek, AIA • Karen Parolek • Paul C. Crawford, FAICP Forewords by Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk and Stefanos Polyzoides www.formbasedcodes.org
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Welcome to the 21st Century 68
© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | 69 http://austintexas.gov/event/code-next-listening-sessions

More Related Content

PDF
Office Design - Ad Agency Interior Design
byrajensen00
 
PDF
02 Ecological Design2
byJill Watkins
 
PDF
Designed to Thrive: creating salutogenic environments
byFarrow
 
PPT
Bernard tschumi design style
byAnkit Singhal
 
PDF
Impact of renaissance & industrial revolution on city forms & Concepts of utopia
byAnoushka Tyagi
 
PDF
260123296 landscape-architecture-by-john-simonds
byMasroor Ansari
 
PPT
Cayuga Clubhouse Presentation
byseaz
 
PPT
RWDI Consulting and Engineers - Wind, Microclimate, Energy and Thermal Comfor...
byMaRS Discovery District
 
Office Design - Ad Agency Interior Design
byrajensen00
 
02 Ecological Design2
byJill Watkins
 
Designed to Thrive: creating salutogenic environments
byFarrow
 
Bernard tschumi design style
byAnkit Singhal
 
Impact of renaissance & industrial revolution on city forms & Concepts of utopia
byAnoushka Tyagi
 
260123296 landscape-architecture-by-john-simonds
byMasroor Ansari
 
Cayuga Clubhouse Presentation
byseaz
 
RWDI Consulting and Engineers - Wind, Microclimate, Energy and Thermal Comfor...
byMaRS Discovery District
 

What's hot

PPT
The role of building materials in architectural design
byHafedh Yahya
 
PPT
GreenStudio - Chapter 4 2 7 Shading Devices
byGalala University
 
PPTX
Manitoba Hydro Place
byDeb Bee
 
PDF
00 haedo 2012- libro final
bypfiarquitectura
 
PDF
Natural ventilation in High-rise office buildings
byDania Abdel-aziz
 
PPTX
Smart buildings powerpoint, the future of sustainability. Building services
byPatricNgotho
 
PDF
King's Cross Station - A More Human Design
byDavid Watts
 
PDF
Sustainable Community Design Project
byCleantechPoland
 
PPTX
Modernism & postmodernism in architecture
byHarshita Singh
 
PDF
El Legado de Le Corbusier y Mies van der Rohe en la Arquitectura Moderna
byMariangelUrrieta
 
PPTX
Medieval cities
byVibhuti Pathare
 
PPTX
Energy efficient building
byShivani Singh
 
PDF
case study highline
byAnjith Augustine
 
PPTX
Site Planning and Site Analysis for Architectural Projects
byJIT KUMAR GUPTA
 
PPTX
Sustainable architecture and green design (passive design)
bycagrihank
 
PPT
Sustainable Design Part Three: The Basic Principles of Passive Design
byTerri Meyer Boake
 
PDF
Contemporary Concepts - Urban Design Studio
byZehra Wazir
 
PPTX
Renzo Piano Presentation
byChetan Siddhartha
 
PPTX
LEED Certification
byJonathan James
 
PDF
edgesmartbuilding-1609201bbbbbb92609.pdf
byashnoorsinghsodhi27
 
The role of building materials in architectural design
byHafedh Yahya
 
GreenStudio - Chapter 4 2 7 Shading Devices
byGalala University
 
Manitoba Hydro Place
byDeb Bee
 
00 haedo 2012- libro final
bypfiarquitectura
 
Natural ventilation in High-rise office buildings
byDania Abdel-aziz
 
Smart buildings powerpoint, the future of sustainability. Building services
byPatricNgotho
 
King's Cross Station - A More Human Design
byDavid Watts
 
Sustainable Community Design Project
byCleantechPoland
 
Modernism & postmodernism in architecture
byHarshita Singh
 
El Legado de Le Corbusier y Mies van der Rohe en la Arquitectura Moderna
byMariangelUrrieta
 
Medieval cities
byVibhuti Pathare
 
Energy efficient building
byShivani Singh
 
case study highline
byAnjith Augustine
 
Site Planning and Site Analysis for Architectural Projects
byJIT KUMAR GUPTA
 
Sustainable architecture and green design (passive design)
bycagrihank
 
Sustainable Design Part Three: The Basic Principles of Passive Design
byTerri Meyer Boake
 
Contemporary Concepts - Urban Design Studio
byZehra Wazir
 
Renzo Piano Presentation
byChetan Siddhartha
 
LEED Certification
byJonathan James
 
edgesmartbuilding-1609201bbbbbb92609.pdf
byashnoorsinghsodhi27
 

Viewers also liked

PPT
Oslo-Denver Initiative on Urban Design and Climate Change
byCongress for the New Urbanism
 
PPTX
Today's Best Form-Based Codes -- Madden CNU 17
byCongress for the New Urbanism
 
PDF
Introduction to Form Based Codes
byOrange County Section of the American Planning Association
 
ZIP
Achieving Sustainability Using Form-Based Codes and the Transect - Parolek CN...
byCongress for the New Urbanism
 
PDF
Form-based Codes: When and How They are Useful
byThe Cecil Group
 
PPTX
Step By Step To Create A Form Based On Google Docs
byNuno Nunes
 
Oslo-Denver Initiative on Urban Design and Climate Change
byCongress for the New Urbanism
 
Today's Best Form-Based Codes -- Madden CNU 17
byCongress for the New Urbanism
 
Introduction to Form Based Codes
byOrange County Section of the American Planning Association
 
Achieving Sustainability Using Form-Based Codes and the Transect - Parolek CN...
byCongress for the New Urbanism
 
Form-based Codes: When and How They are Useful
byThe Cecil Group
 
Step By Step To Create A Form Based On Google Docs
byNuno Nunes
 

Similar to Form Based Code 101

PDF
What You Need to Know: Best Practices in Form-Based Coding
byOpticos Design, Inc.
 
PDF
Form based codes intro
byTrailnet
 
PDF
ALDC Transect Matrix (Draft_092515)
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
Form based codes huntington
bypingme1x
 
PDF
Form Based Code
bytsalmieri
 
ZIP
Today's Best Form-Based Codes: Blue Springs - Parolek CNU 17
byCongress for the New Urbanism
 
PDF
Zoning Revisions Committee Presentation, 02-16-2011
byAdam Cohen
 
PDF
Zoning Revisions Committee Presentation, 02-15-2011
byAdam Cohen
 
What You Need to Know: Best Practices in Form-Based Coding
byOpticos Design, Inc.
 
Form based codes intro
byTrailnet
 
ALDC Transect Matrix (Draft_092515)
byPaul Schumann
 
Form based codes huntington
bypingme1x
 
Form Based Code
bytsalmieri
 
Today's Best Form-Based Codes: Blue Springs - Parolek CNU 17
byCongress for the New Urbanism
 
Zoning Revisions Committee Presentation, 02-16-2011
byAdam Cohen
 
Zoning Revisions Committee Presentation, 02-15-2011
byAdam Cohen
 

More from Paul Schumann

PDF
Liberty, Freedom and Rights
byPaul Schumann
 
PPTX
An Overview of CodeNext
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
CodeNext v3 Resolution
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
Lost Creek Blvd Proposed Speed Mitigation
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
Lost Creek Wildfire Adapted Community Plan
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
LCCO General Meeting 010418
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
What Goes In?
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
Household Affordability Code Prescription
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
A Tale of Two Cities (Austin and Seattle)
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
They Want Our Land
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
Fact Sheets on Fencing for Wildfire Mitigation
byPaul Schumann
 
PPT
Austin Resource Recovery: Lost Creek
byPaul Schumann
 
PPTX
Future Of Austin's Transportation
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
Wildfire Adapted Community Plan
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
Lost Creek Wildfire Assessment
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
Ready, Set, Go!
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
Be Embers Aware
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
Fire Resistant Materials
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
Firewise Landscaping in Texas
byPaul Schumann
 
PDF
Lost Pines Report: Too Little, Too Late
byPaul Schumann
 
Liberty, Freedom and Rights
byPaul Schumann
 
An Overview of CodeNext
byPaul Schumann
 
CodeNext v3 Resolution
byPaul Schumann
 
Lost Creek Blvd Proposed Speed Mitigation
byPaul Schumann
 
Lost Creek Wildfire Adapted Community Plan
byPaul Schumann
 
LCCO General Meeting 010418
byPaul Schumann
 
What Goes In?
byPaul Schumann
 
Household Affordability Code Prescription
byPaul Schumann
 
A Tale of Two Cities (Austin and Seattle)
byPaul Schumann
 
They Want Our Land
byPaul Schumann
 
Fact Sheets on Fencing for Wildfire Mitigation
byPaul Schumann
 
Austin Resource Recovery: Lost Creek
byPaul Schumann
 
Future Of Austin's Transportation
byPaul Schumann
 
Wildfire Adapted Community Plan
byPaul Schumann
 
Lost Creek Wildfire Assessment
byPaul Schumann
 
Ready, Set, Go!
byPaul Schumann
 
Be Embers Aware
byPaul Schumann
 
Fire Resistant Materials
byPaul Schumann
 
Firewise Landscaping in Texas
byPaul Schumann
 
Lost Pines Report: Too Little, Too Late
byPaul Schumann
 

Recently uploaded

PDF
Item # 9 - Legal Services Contract/Renewal
byahcitycouncil
 
PDF
Item # 12 - 2025 Racial Profiling Report
byahcitycouncil
 
PDF
Rapport du Congrès de novembre 2025 sur l'enrichissement personnel de Trump
bySociété Tripalio
 
PDF
PPT Item # 6 - PPT 518 Austin Highway final review
byahcitycouncil
 
PDF
ABIP ALTERNATIVE DV PROGRAM Facilitator Training MAIN PDF.pdf
byStephen Lasicka
 
PDF
PPT Item # 10 - May General Election Order & Designation
byahcitycouncil
 
PDF
EFOW Letter- to Planet Earth_Version UPDATED
byEnergy for One World
 
PDF
Estimating the Effects of Changes in Permitting Requirements on Private Inves...
byCongressional Budget Office
 
PDF
Human Rights Watch Full Report Year 2026
byEnergy for One World
 
PDF
PPT Item # 5 -- PPT 4820 Broadway Street
byahcitycouncil
 
PDF
EFOW Letter to the People of the World: Between Hope and Fear
byEnergy for One World
 
PDF
Item # 7 - Water & Wastewater Rate Study
byahcitycouncil
 
PDF
THE MEANING OF U.G.A.N.D.A. - MIKE SSENDIKWANAWA
byMIKE SSENDIKWANAWA
 
PDF
EFOW Letter- to Planet Earth Concept Note
byEnergy for One World
 
PDF
PPT Item # 7 - Water & Wastewater Rate Study
byahcitycouncil
 
PDF
Item # 6 - 518 Austin Hwy (ARB #1011F - Final Review)
byahcitycouncil
 
PDF
Why I Named My Nonprofit ‘Maximum Difference Foundation’
byMichael Amin
 
PDF
PPT Item # 11 - NOI 6801, 6900, 7000, 7101 Broadway
byahcitycouncil
 
PDF
Item # 5 - 4820 Broadway St (ARB #1004F - Final Review)
byahcitycouncil
 
PDF
PPT Item # 12 - 2025 Racial Profiling Report
byahcitycouncil
 
Item # 9 - Legal Services Contract/Renewal
byahcitycouncil
 
Item # 12 - 2025 Racial Profiling Report
byahcitycouncil
 
Rapport du Congrès de novembre 2025 sur l'enrichissement personnel de Trump
bySociété Tripalio
 
PPT Item # 6 - PPT 518 Austin Highway final review
byahcitycouncil
 
ABIP ALTERNATIVE DV PROGRAM Facilitator Training MAIN PDF.pdf
byStephen Lasicka
 
PPT Item # 10 - May General Election Order & Designation
byahcitycouncil
 
EFOW Letter- to Planet Earth_Version UPDATED
byEnergy for One World
 
Estimating the Effects of Changes in Permitting Requirements on Private Inves...
byCongressional Budget Office
 
Human Rights Watch Full Report Year 2026
byEnergy for One World
 
PPT Item # 5 -- PPT 4820 Broadway Street
byahcitycouncil
 
EFOW Letter to the People of the World: Between Hope and Fear
byEnergy for One World
 
Item # 7 - Water & Wastewater Rate Study
byahcitycouncil
 
THE MEANING OF U.G.A.N.D.A. - MIKE SSENDIKWANAWA
byMIKE SSENDIKWANAWA
 
EFOW Letter- to Planet Earth Concept Note
byEnergy for One World
 
PPT Item # 7 - Water & Wastewater Rate Study
byahcitycouncil
 
Item # 6 - 518 Austin Hwy (ARB #1011F - Final Review)
byahcitycouncil
 
Why I Named My Nonprofit ‘Maximum Difference Foundation’
byMichael Amin
 
PPT Item # 11 - NOI 6801, 6900, 7000, 7101 Broadway
byahcitycouncil
 
Item # 5 - 4820 Broadway St (ARB #1004F - Final Review)
byahcitycouncil
 
PPT Item # 12 - 2025 Racial Profiling Report
byahcitycouncil
 

Form Based Code 101

  • 1.
    Form-Based Code 101 1 05.27.08 BuildingPlacement Build-to Line (Distance from Right of Way) Bayfront Boulevard 0' A Civic Space1 / Secondary Street 0' B Bayfront Promenade1 10' min.; 20' max.2 C Side 0' D BTL Defined by a Building Bayfront Boulevard 100% min. Secondary Street / Civic Space1 80% min.3 Bayfront Promenade1 80% min. 1 The Bayfront Promenade is treated as its own frontage distinct from the Civic Space frontage within this zone. 2 The BTL for the first building to receive planning department approval becomes the set BTL (must be within this range) for this zone. All subsequent buildings must match the first building's BTL. 3 60% min. on Block J Setback (Distance from Property Line or ROW) Rear 0' min. Lot Size Width 100' min. E Depth F North of Bayfront Blvd. 100' min. South of Bayfront Blvd. 50' min. Building Form Height Building 2 Stories min.; 4 Stories max. H Ground Floor Finish Level 6" max. I Ground Floor Ceiling 14' min. clear J Upper Floor(s) Ceiling 8' min. clear K Footprint Depth, Ground-floor Commercial Space Bayfront Boulevard 50' min. Bayfront Promenade 30' min. Secondary Street 30' min. Miscellaneous Distance between Entries To Ground Floor 50' max. All upper floors must have a primary entrance along Bayfront Blvd. Service entries may not be located on Bayfront Boulevard. Building Placement (Continued) Miscellaneous Buildings must be built to BTL along each facade within 30' of a corner. G See the Streets and Circulation Regulation Plan on page 4-3 for the determination of Primary and Secondary Streets. T5-MS: Bayfront Boulevard Main Street Standards Cont'd. 1-12 HWDMP Sub-District Amendments Opticos Design, Inc. Chapter 1: Building Form Standards Sidewalk Bayfront Boulevard Bayfront Promenade / Rear SecondaryStreet CivicSpace BTL, ROW Line BTL,ROWLine BTL,ROWLine A C EF D BB I ROW Line Street K K K J H G G G G G G G G ROW / Property Line Build-to Line (BTL) Setback Line Building Area Key A Guide for Planners, Urban Designers, Municipalities, and Developers Form-Based Codes Daniel G. Parolek, AIA Karen Parolek Paul C. Crawford, FAICP Forewords by Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk and Stefanos Polyzoides E RO UT E 6 E BUTLE R AVE NBEAVERST S MIL TO N RD NLEROUXST N PI NE CL IF F DR NSANFRANCISCOST W BIRCH AVE N THORPE RD NBON ITO ST W ASPEN AVE N SW IT ZE R CA NY ON DR W CHERRY AVE S BA BB ITT DR N AZ TE C ST E DA VI D DR KN OL ES DR N TU R Q U O IS E D R W BE AL RD NHUMPHREYSST S O'L EA RY ST S SA N FR AN CIS CO ST SBEAVER ST W ELM AVE E CHERRY AVE W CLAY AVE E FRANKLIN AVE NKENDRICKST N NAV AJO DR W RO UT E 66 SLONETREERD NAGASSIZST SLEROUXST N FO RT VA LL EY RD N LO CU ST ST W CO CO NI NO AV E W KA IB A B LN E SAW MIL L RD W FO RE ST AVE NPARKST E BIRCH AVE W SANTA FE AVE E PO ND ER O SA PK W Y W PHOENIX AVE W LO W ER C O C O N IN O AV E NVERDEST W RIOR DAN RD W DALE AVE N BE RT RA ND ST N GE M IN I DR NSITGREAVESST N RO CK RID GE RD E ASPEN AVE NMOGOLLONST W BUTLER AVE E ELM AVE W CH AT EA U DR W NAVAJO RD W DUPONT AVE S WIN DS OR LN W OA K AVE NELDENST N HO PI DR NO ELL E LN W FINE AVE E BR AN NE N AVE E DALE AVE WMET ZWAL K N RIM DR W HUNT AVE S EL LI O T ST W MA RS HI LL RD S MI KE S PI KE S SP RI NG ST E COTTAGE AVE NKINLAN IRD N KIT TR ED GE RD SAGASSIZST E ELLERY AVE W SULLIVAN AVE N FO RE ST VIE W DR S VE RD E ST N CU RL ING SM OK E DR N JA ME S ST W GR AN D CA NY ON AV E W BENTON AVE E PAY TO N WA Y E PHOENIX AVE N M OR IA H DR W PIU TE RD S FO UN TAI NE ST N W IL LI AM RD W TUCSON AVE W APACHE RD SPARKST E DUPONT AVE W TOMBSTO NE AVE S RIV ER RU N RD W HA VAS UP AI RD W SU M M IT AV E W COTTAGE AVE E FINE AVE E JAC KS ON DR N EN TE RP RI SE E JON NY LP S CA MB RID GE LN DESILVA AVE S ELD EN ST SHUMPHREYSST NTOLTECST W TOLC HACO RD OSBORNEDR S BL AC KB IRD RO OS T S MA LPA IS LN E HIL LTO P AV E S SY CA M OR E ST E TE RR AC E AV E S ER NE ST ST SFLOREN CEST E KEN SIN GT ON DR E BENTON AVE E APPL E WAY PA YT ON WA Y W ELLERY AVE E FO RE ST AVE E HUTCHESON DR N MC MIL LA N RD S W AL NU T ST PIN ON CT SPAS EO DEL FLA G W WH IPP LE RD NAPOLLOWAY E PA SE O DE L RI O TORMEY AVE E PIC CA DIL LY DR MO UN TAI N VIE W DR E CR ES TV IEW DR S W IL SO N LN W WH ITIN G RD SKINGMAN ST E WO OD LAN D DR S BR AN NE N CIR N HE ML OC K WA Y W COLUMBUS AVE S SE VIL LE LN N CH AR LE S RD N MA NZ AN ITA WA Y S CA LL E RE PO SA N CLA RK CIR E AS HU RS T AV E MC CR EA RY E SH ER W OO D LN N EV ER GR EE N DR SW ITZ ER DR SMAR ICO PA ST N OTT O DR W HOG AN DR N GE OR GE ST N CA NY ON TE RR AC E DR S RE GE NT ST S GA BE LST W MO NT VA LE AV E S BU CK ING HA M LN N CIR CL E DR N LOM ALA ILN E HUNT AVE E CAL LE CON TEN TA S PI N N AC LE ST MCMULLENCIR E OL IV IN E W AY SGLOBE ST N CO NIF ER RD NHILLSIDEST E CA NY O N VI EW DR N CI RC LE VI EW DR HO SK INS AVE S NO ELL E LN SKENDRICKST W MCMULLEN CIR SLUMBERST S CO LO RA DO ST E CHU RCH ILL DR E BAR RO W AVE E TUR NE Y DR NCLE AR VIEW DR N SU NS ET DR W AN DE RS ON RD G R EE N BR IA R LN E COLUMBUS AVE S TR AIL OF TH E WO OD S E ST O N E R ID G E D R W CE DA R AVE E HAT CH ER DR W LAV A LN E TRE VOR WAY EIVY LN BLO ME DR NKUT CH DR N MA GM A W AY N HIL LTO P DR W BAS ALT LN EOLD CAN YON CT E JA CO B W AY W DE AN NA DR E RU SS WA Y S CA RR IAG E LN E MC CR AC KE N ST E HE LEN WA Y E CH UB S WA Y E MA KAY LA WA Y SLON ETRE ERD S BEA VER ST NAZTECST WROUTE66 T2 T1 T3 T4 T5 T6 Civic E ROU TE E BUTLE R AVE N BEA VER ST INT ER STA TE 40 S MI LT ON RD N LER OUX ST N PIN E CL IFF DR N SAN FRA NCI SCO ST W BIRC H AVE N THOR PE RD NBONITO ST W ASP EN AVE N SW ITZ ER CA NY ON DR W CHE RRY AVE SBABBITTDR E DA VI D DR KNOLESDR N TUR QUO ISE DR N HUM PHR EYS ST SO'LEARYST SSANFRANCISCOST SBEAV ER ST W ELM AVE E CHE RRY AVE W CLA Y AVE E FRA NKL IN AVE N KEN DRIC K ST W RO UT E 66 S LON E TRE E RD N AGA SSIZ ST S LER OUX ST NLOCUSTST W COCO NINO AVE W KAIB AB LN E SAWMILL RD N PAR K ST E BIRC H AVE W SAN TA FE AVE E PO ND ER OS A PKW Y W PHOE NIX AVE W LOW ER COC ONI NO AVE N VER DE ST W RIO RD AN RD W DAL E AVE NBERT RAND ST N GEMI NI DR N SITG REA VES ST E ASP EN AVE N MOG OLL ON ST W BUT LER AVE E ELM AVE W CHA TEA U DR W NAV AJO RD W DUP ONT AVE SWINDSORLN N ELD EN ST NO EL LE LN W FINE AVE E BRANNEN AVE E DAL E AVE W ME TZ WA LK W HUN T AVE S ELL IOT ST WMARS HILL RD S MIK ES PIK E SSPRIN GST E COT TAG E AVE NKINLA NIRD S AGA SSIZ ST E ELLE RY AVE W SUL LIVA N AVE N FO RE ST VI EW DR SVERDEST N JA ME S ST W GRAN D CANY ON AVE W BEN TON AVE E PA YT ON WA Y E PHO ENIX AVE N MO RIA H DR SFOUNTAINEST N WI LL IAM RD W TUCS ON AVE W APA CHE RD SPARK ST E DUP ONT AVE W TOMB STON E AVE SRIVERRUNRD W SUMM IT AVE W COTT AGE AVE E FINE AVE E JACKSON DR NENTE RPRIS ERD E JO NN Y LP SCAMBRIDGELN DES ILVA AVE SELDENST S HUM PHR EYS ST N TOL TEC ST OSB ORN E DR SBLACKBIRDROOST SMALPAISLN E HILLTOP AVE SSYCA MORE ST E TER RA CE AVE SERNESTST SFLOR ENCE ST E KENSINGTON DR E BEN TON AVE E APPLE WAY PA YT ON WA Y W ELL ERY AVE E HUT CHE SON DR SWALN UT ST PINON CT S PA SE O DE L FL AG N APO LLO WAY E PASEO DEL RIO TOR MEY AVE E PICCADILLY DR MOUNTAIN VIEW DR E CRESTVIEW DR SWILS ON LN SKINGM AN ST E WOODLAND DR S BR AN NE N CI R NHEMLOCKWAY W COL UMB US AVE SSEVILLELN N CHAR LES RD NMANZANITAWAY S CA LL E RE PO SA E ASHURST AVE MCCREARY E SH ER WO OD LN SWITZER DR SMARICOPAST NOTTODR NGEORGEST NCANYO NTERRA CEDR SREGENTST SGABELST W MONT VALE AVE SBUCKINGHAMLN N CI RC LE DR E HUN T AVE E CA LL E CO NT EN TA S PIN NAC LE ST MCM ULL EN CIR E OL IVI NE WA Y SGLOB EST N HILL SIDE ST E CA NY ON VIE W DR N CIR CL E VIE W DR HOSKINS AVE S NO EL LE LN S KEN DRIC K ST W MCM ULL EN CIR S LUM BER ST SCOLORADOST E CHURCHILL DR E BARROW AVE E TU RN EY DR NCLEARVIEWDR GR EEN BRI AR LN E COL UMB US AVE STRAILOFTHEWOODS E STO NE RIDG E DR E HA TC HE R DR E TR EV OR WA Y E IVY LN BLOME DR N MA GM A WA Y NHILLTOPDRE OL D CA NY ON CT E JAC OB WA Y E RU SS WA Y SCARRIAGELN E MCCRACKEN ST E HE LE N WA Y E CH UB S WA Y E MA KA YL A WA Y SLONETREERD SBEAVERST N AZT EC ST W ROU TE 66 0 200' 400' 1 Acre¼ Acre Regulating Plan Flagstaff, Arizona October 9, 2009 © C o p y r i g h t 2 0 0 8 Opticos Design, Inc. 1285 Gilman Street Berkeley, CA 94706 510 - 558 - 6957 0 200' 400' Sound Check Dan Parolek Principal, Opticos Design, Inc. Brown Bag Lunch November 17, 2015
  • 2.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | Euclidean Zoning is an Out-of-Date Operating 2
  • 3.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. Conventional Zoning Summarized 95. Physical culture institution 109. Potato chip manufacturing 127. Tombstones, retail sales 135. Turkish bath 19. Baths,Turkish 25. Boxing arena 28. Chinchillas, retail sales 41. Eleemosynary institutions 42. Embalming business • Emphasis on regulation by use • Disconnect between land use, urban form, and design • Exceptions become the rule 3
  • 4.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | Well, more process will fix it Zoning Code 4 Then
  • 5.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | 5 Well, the PD process will fix it PD 4 PD 19 PD 3 PD 8 PD 1 PD 9 PD 12 PD 7 C1 PD 6 PD 10 PD 2 R1 R1 R2 R2 C2 R3 R1 PD 11 PD 13 PD 5 PD 14 R1 PD 15 PD 16 PD 17 PD 18R1 Zoning Code +
  • 6.
    Different zoning toolsfor difference types of places The New Operating System 6
  • 7.
    What’s in common? ©2015 Opticos Design, Inc. |
  • 8.
    3 at 3stories and 1 at 12 stories 2 story building on 2/3 of site © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Conventional zoning says they’re the same 0.60 FAR 0.60 FAR
  • 9.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | The 21st Century Operating System is Form Form-Based Approach Lower parking requirements 
 (More walking, access to transit) Public realm = Public space Blended density (variety of types) Mixed use environments Conventional 
 Use-Based Approach Higher parking requirements 
 (Less walking and access to transit) “Podded” densities and uses Larger public and private open space required due to isolation Uses more flexible based on operational characteristics Specific Uses allowed Walkable Urban Places Drivable Suburban Places
  • 10.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | 10y Multi-Jurisdictional Form-Based Code Design, Inc. July 19th, 2010 Up LandsLow Lands RuralUrban Rural Crossroads Hamlet Village City Town Different Neighborhoods Require Different Solutions Beaufort County, South Carolina Multi-Jurisdictional Code: Place Types
  • 11.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | © 2013 Opticos Design, Inc. | 11 Different Types of Places in Austin SuburbanTransitionalWalkable Urban
  • 12.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | Conventional/Euclidean Zoning: Suburban Places 12
  • 13.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | Form-Based Coding: Existing Walkable Urban 13
  • 14.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | Hybrid Code is Selected Approach • • How one city overhauled its zoning code while combiningform-based and conventional elements. By Roger E. Eastman, AICP, with Daniel Parolek and Lisa Wise LAGSTAFF, ARIZONA, entered an exclusive club in November. It is now one of the few cities in the U.S. that have adopted a hybrid zoning ordinance with both fom1-based components and conventional Eu- clidean elements as part of a complete code rewrite. "Simplified, streamlined, predictable" raved an edito- rial in the Arizona Daily Sun while praising both the code and the process used to adopt it. Getting the new code adopted wasn't easy, but many city residents think the effort will be repaid in a more efficient, more equitable, and easier-to-use zoning system. The adoption of the new zoning code also caps offa successful public engagement process that has changed the generally negative perception ofcity plaImers. TIME FOR AN UPDATE An im.portant first step in approaching a new code W,1S differentiating between what Clu'istopher Leinberger caBs "walkable ur- ban" areas from "drivable suburb,m" areas (Tbe Option ofUrbrl7Zism, Island Press, 2008). By making this distinction, Flagstaff could apply a form-based code in the walkable areas of the city wIllie generaBy leaving the existing conventional code in place in the drivable suburban areas. Thus, a new u'ansect-based hybrid code resulted that defaults to promoting and al- lowing for walkable urbanism wIllie seam- lessly incorporating refined yet otherwise conventional Euclidean zoning tools for the drivable suburban areas. Because the regula- tions for the two different types of areas are not muddled together, the form-based code could be kept intact-and development op- poruU1ities could emerge in a manner con- sistent with the city's general plan. Flagstaff (pop. 62,000), at an elevation of about 7,000 feet, is the regional hub of northern Arizona. Established as a stop on the early u'anscontinental railway in 1882 and later Route 66 and Interstate 40, Flag- staff quickly grew as a logging and ranching town, and as a gateway for tourists visiting the Grand Canyon and other national parks and monuments. Residents appreciate the natural beauty ofthe area and enjoy outdoor pursuits such as hiking, skiing, hunting, fish- ing, and camping. T he downtown and oldest neighbor- hoods were plmmed with sm,111 blocks and lots, and today are valued for their historic buildings and inherently walkable urban character. Typical of many American cities, Flagstaffs urban form changed after vVorld vVar IT as auto-oriented suburban develop- ments were' added to tile periphelY of tile city. Until recently Flagstaffs zoning ordi- nances have actively promoted tllese drive- able suburbml development patterns. The need for a comprehensive update of tile city's land development code had been apparent for some time as developers, con- u'actors, desigll professionals, and residents complained about tile code's complexity and inconsistency. Some even blamed tile CLllll- bersome namre of tile code for conu'ibuting to the high cost ofdevelopment and tile fail- ure of big projects and economic develop- ment opporuU1ities. American Planning Association 25
  • 15.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. |© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form-Based Code Definition 15 "Form-based codes foster predictable built results and a high- quality public realm by using physical form (rather than separation of uses) as the organizing principle for the code. They are regulations, not mere guidelines. They are adopted into city or county law. Form-based codes are an alternative to conventional zoning." Form-Based Code Institute
  • 16.
    Place-based operating system TheRural to Urban Transect as the New Operating System 16
  • 17.
    Historic Humboldt-Chimborazo
 This firsttransect was conceived by Alexander Von Humboldt in 1793. It is taken across the southern tip of South America, from the Atlantic to the Pacific and is vertically exaggerated. This curious document has notations on the surface of the earth, beneath the surface, and also, apparently, the atmospheric conditions. 1790’s 17 © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc.
  • 18.
    18 Geddes’ Valley Section
 A century after the Humboldt transect, the Scotsman Patrick Geddes drew the “valley section,” taken from ridgeline to shoreline. It is the first transect to show natural conditions with their associated human presence, presented only in terms of exploitation—a 19th century conception. 1909 © 2014 Opticos Design, Inc.
  • 19.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | Transect Concept’s Initial Use in the Natural Environment 19 1969 Ian McHarg, Design with Nature
 The famous landscape architect documented the variety of distinct environments and their individual components and species that needed those environments to thrive.
  • 20.
  • 21.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | In 2000 It Was Adapted to the Built Environment 21 T1 T6 SDT5T4T3T2
  • 22.
    22 © 2014 OpticosDesign, Inc.
  • 23.
    23 © 2014 OpticosDesign, Inc.
  • 24.
    24 © 2014 OpticosDesign, Inc.
  • 25.
    25 © 2014 OpticosDesign, Inc.
  • 26.
    26 © 2014 OpticosDesign, Inc.
  • 27.
    27 © 2014 OpticosDesign, Inc.
  • 28.
    28 © 2014 OpticosDesign, Inc.
  • 29.
    Salt Lake City2014 Conventional Zoning vs Form-Based Zoning © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | New York, NY T2, T4 – T6 4 Environments
  • 30.
    Salt Lake City2014 Conventional Zoning vs Form-Based Zoning © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | 3 Environments Downtown Salt Lake T4 – T6
  • 31.
    Salt Lake City2014 Conventional Zoning vs Form-Based Zoning © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | 4 Environments Salt Lake DT Neighborhoods T2 – T5
  • 32.
    Salt Lake City2014 Conventional Zoning vs Form-Based Zoning © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | 5 Environments Park City T1 – T5
  • 33.
    l. TRANSECT ZONES ©2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Base Zones Based on a Hierarchy of Form Primarily 33
  • 34.
    © 2014 OpticosDesign, Inc. |© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Hierarchy of Form & Scale Should be Clear in Base 34 Less Urban T5 Neighborhood 2 (T5N.2)T3 Neighborhood (T3N) T3 Estate (T3E) T4 Neighborhood 2 (T4N.2) T4 Neighborhood 1 (T4N.1) T5 Neighborhood 1 (T5N.1) T3 T4 T5 More Urban From Cincinnati, Ohio
  • 35.
    © 2014 OpticosDesign, Inc. |© 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Hierarchy of Form & Scale Should be Clear in Base 35 Less Urban T5 Flex (T5F) T5 Main Street (T5MS) T6 Core (T6C) T6T5 (continued) More Urban From Cincinnati, Ohio
  • 36.
    The initial calibratinto Austin How is the Transect Being Applied in Austin? 36
  • 37.
    © 2012 OpticosDesign, Inc. | Close UpCountywide 10-40.40.080 10-75Flagstaff Zoning Code T4 Neighborhood 2 (T4N.2) Standards ROW/Property Line Building Setback Line Encroachment Area Key ROW/Property Line Parking Setback Line Parking Area Key G. Required Parking Spaces7 Residential Uses Studio/1 Bedroom 1 space/unit min. 2+ Bedrooms 2 spaces/unit min. Retail Trade, Service Uses ≤2,000 sf No spaces required >2,000 sf 2 spaces/1,000 sf min. above first 2,000 sf 7 Use types not listed shall meet the requirements in Table 10-50.70.040.A (Automobile Parking Spaces Required). Location (Setback from ROW/Property Line) Front Covered/Attached 30' min. Uncovered Match front facade min. Side Street/Civic Space 5' min. Side 0' min. Rear 0' min. Miscellaneous Linear feet of front or side façade that may be garage 35% max. See Division 10-50.70 (Parking Standards) for additional parking regulations. M N O P F. Encroachments and Frontage Types Encroachments4 Front 5' max. Side Street/Civic Space 5' max. Side 3' max. Rear Property Line 0' max. Rear Lane or Alley 3' max. Galleries may encroach in to street ROW, all other encroachments are not allowed within a street ROW. 4 See Section 10-50.35 (Encroachments) for allowed encroachments. Allowed Private Frontage Types5 Stoop Forecourt Gallery6 Terrace/Lightwell6 Shopfront6 Porch 5 See Division 10-50.30 (Specific to Private Frontage Types) for private frontage type descriptions and regulations. 6 Allowed only in open sub-zone(s). I J K L Street I J SideStreet N P O SideStreet Street M K L 10-40.40.080 10-74 Flagstaff Zoning Code T4 Neighborhood 2 (T4N.2) Standards D. Building Placement Setback (Distance from ROW/Property Line) Principal Building Front1 5' min.; 12' max. Front facade within area 50% min. Side Street/Civic Space 10' min.; 15' max. Side2 3' min. Rear 3' min. Outbuilding Front 20' min. Side 0' min.; 3' max. Rear 3' min. 1 Setback may match an existing adjacent building as follows. The building may be set to align with the facade of the frontmost immediately adjacent property, for a width no greater than that of the adjacent property's facade that encroaches into the minimum setback. 2 No side setback required between townhouse and/or live/work building types. Miscellaneous Upper-floor units must have a primary entrance along a street or courtyard façade. Ground-floor residential units along a street must have individual entries. A B C D E. Building Form3 Height Principal Building Stories 4 Stories max. To Eave/Parapet 40' max. Overall 52' max. Outbuilding 2 Stories max. To Eave/Parapet 18' max. Overall 28' max. Ground Floor Finish Level 18" min. above sidewalk Ground Floor Ceiling 9' min. clear Upper Floor(s) Ceiling 8' min. clear 3 See Division 10-50.100 (Specific to Building Types) for additional building form regulations. Footprint Depth, ground-floor residential space along primary street frontage 30' min. Lot Coverage 80% max. Miscellaneous Mansard roof forms are not allowed. E F G H ROW Line Street ROW/Property Line Building Setback Line Building Area Facade Area Key Street D SideStreet H GA min. A max. B min. B max. C F E Building Form Standards 37
  • 38.
    l. TRANSECT ZONES ©2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form-based Zones being considered for Austin
  • 39.
    l. TRANSECT ZONES ©2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form-based zones broken down further 39 Neighborhood   General Neighborhood   Edge
  • 40.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | T3 Neighborhood–Edge 40 Characteristics/Form Intent Building: Detached, Semi-attached Footprint: Medium to Large Footprint Front Setback: Medium to Large Setback Height: Up to 2½ Stories House
  • 41.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | T3 Neighborhood–Medium 41 Characteristics/Form Intent Building: Detached, Semi-attached Building Footprint: Medium to Large Footprint Front Setback: Medium to Large Setback Height: Up to 2½ Stories Building Types Carriage House; House; Cottage Court Cottage Court House Has T3 Edge been purposefully excluded? Building types list only the Type family, not the size variations in order to save space in the table. (Ex: “House” rather than “House: Compact, Small, Medium”)
  • 42.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | T3 Neighborhood–High 42 Characteristics/Form Intent Building: Detached, Semi-attached Footprint: Small to Medium Footprint Front Setback: Small to Medium Setback Height: Up to 2½ Stories House Cottage Court Duplex
  • 43.
    l. TRANSECT ZONES ©2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form-based zones broken down further 43 Neighborhood   General Neighborhood   Center/Main   Street
  • 44.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | 44 Characteristics/Form Intent Building: Detached, Semi-attached Footprint: Small to Medium Footprint Front Setback: Medium to Large Setback Height: Up to 2½ Stories House Cottage Court Duplex Tri/Fourplex T4 Neighborhood–Low
  • 45.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | T4 Neighborhood–Medium 45 Characteristics/Form Intent Building: Detached, Semi-attached Building: Small to Medium Footprint Front Setback: Small to Medium Setbacks Height: Up to 2½ Stories House Cottage Court Duplex Tri/Quadplex Rowhouse Multiplex
  • 46.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | T4 Main Street 46 Characteristics/Form Intent Building: Attached, Semi-detached Footprint: Small to Medium Footprint Front Setback: Small to No Setbacks Height: Up to 2½ Stories Mid-Rise Rowhouse Live/Work Main Street Multiplex Stacked Flats
  • 47.
    l. TRANSECT ZONES ©2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form-based zones broken down further 47 Neighborhood   General Neighborhood   Center/Main   Street
  • 48.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | T5 Main Street 48 Characteristics Building: Attached Lot Width: Medium to Large Lot Building Footprint: Medum to Large Footprint Front Setback: Small to No Setbacks Height: Up to 5 Stories Primary Frontage: Arcades, Galleries, Terraces & Shopfronts
  • 49.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | T5 Neighborhood 1 49 Characteristics Building: Detached, Semi-attached Lot Width: Medium to Large Lot Building Footprint: Medium to Large Footrpint Front Setback: Small Setbacks Height: Up to 3½ Stories Primary Frontage: Porches, Stoops & Terraces
  • 50.
    l. TRANSECT ZONES ©2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | Form-based zones broken down further 50 Neighborhood   Center/Main   Street
  • 51.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | T6 Core 1 51 Characteristics Building: Attached, Detached Lot Width: Medium to Large Lot Building Footprint: Medium to Large Footprint Front Setback: Simple Wall Plane along ROW, none Height: Up to 12 Stories Primary Frontage: Arcades, Galleries, Terraces & Shopfronts
  • 52.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | T6 Core 2 52 Characteristics Building: Attached, Detached Lot Width: Medium to Large Lot Building Footprint: Medium to Large Footprint Front Setback: Small to No Setbacks Height: Number of Stories TBD Primary Frontage: Terraces, Stoops
  • 53.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | If You Want More Detail See Draft Transect Matrix in Studi 53 A poster, which will be on the wall, includes setbacks, heights, which zones likely will be translated to the new zones, etc.
  • 54.
    Not just newbase zone districts-An entire system Other Components 
 of a Form-Based Code 54
  • 55.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | 10-40.40.080 10-75Flagstaff Zoning Code T4 Neighborhood 2 (T4N.2) Standards ROW/Property Line Building Setback Line Encroachment Area Key ROW/Property Line Parking Setback Line Parking Area Key G. Required Parking Spaces7 Residential Uses Studio/1 Bedroom 1 space/unit min. 2+ Bedrooms 2 spaces/unit min. Retail Trade, Service Uses ≤2,000 sf No spaces required >2,000 sf 2 spaces/1,000 sf min. above first 2,000 sf 7 Use types not listed shall meet the requirements in Table 10-50.70.040.A (Automobile Parking Spaces Required). Location (Setback from ROW/Property Line) Front Covered/Attached 30' min. Uncovered Match front facade min. Side Street/Civic Space 5' min. Side 0' min. Rear 0' min. Miscellaneous Linear feet of front or side façade that may be garage 35% max. See Division 10-50.70 (Parking Standards) for additional parking regulations. M N O P F. Encroachments and Frontage Types Encroachments4 Front 5' max. Side Street/Civic Space 5' max. Side 3' max. Rear Property Line 0' max. Rear Lane or Alley 3' max. Galleries may encroach in to street ROW, all other encroachments are not allowed within a street ROW. 4 See Section 10-50.35 (Encroachments) for allowed encroachments. Allowed Private Frontage Types5 Stoop Forecourt Gallery6 Terrace/Lightwell6 Shopfront6 Porch 5 See Division 10-50.30 (Specific to Private Frontage Types) for private frontage type descriptions and regulations. 6 Allowed only in open sub-zone(s). I J K L Street I J SideStreet N P O SideStreet Street M K L 4.03.050 Frontage Standards 4-30 Livermore Development Code 4.03.050 Porch: Integral Description The main facade of the building has a small setback from the property line.The resulting front yard is typically very small and may be undefined or defined by a fence or hedge to spatially maintain the edge of the street.An integral porch is part of the overall massing and roof form of a building. With an integral porch it is not possible to remove the porch without major changes to the overall roof form. Size Width, clear 8' min. Depth, clear 8' min. Height, clear 8' min. Finish level above sidewalk 18" min. Furniture area, clear 4' x 8' min. Path of travel 3' wide min. Miscellaneous The porch may be one or two stories. Integral porches may be enclosed on up to two sides and have a roof. A B C D E F ROW / Property Line Setback Line Key Setback ROW Walk Street Setback ROW Walk Street Partial-length integral porch integrated into the overall massing. Full-length integral porch integrated into the overall massing. E E D B A C F Frontage Type Standards 55
  • 56.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | This Transition is Very Important to Regulate! 56
  • 57.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | 5.01.070Building Types 5-13Livermore Development Code B. Lot Lot Size Width 50' min., 75' max. Depth 100' min., 150' max. C. Pedestrian Access Main Entrance Location Primary street On corner lots each unit shall front a different street. D. Frontages Allowed Frontages Porch Stoop E.Vehicle Access and Parking Parking spaces may be enclosed, covered, or open. F. Open Space, Usable Width 15'/unit min. Depth 15'/unit min. Open Space Area 300 sf min. Required street setbacks and driveways shall not be included in the open space area calculation. G. Building Size and Massing Main Body Width 36' max. Secondary Wing Width 24' max. Detached Garage Width 36' max. Depth 25' max. H. Miscellaneous Both units shall have entries facing the street no more than 10' behind, the front façade. Primary Street Alley SideStreet Primary Street Rear SideStreet ROW / Property Line Building Area Key Typical Alley Loaded Plan Diagram Typical Front Loaded Plan Diagram 5.01.070 Building Types 5-12 Livermore Development Code The entry to the right opens to a stair leading to the upper unit, which takes up the entire upper floor.The door to the left opens directly into the lower unit, which takes up the entire lower floor. The scale of this duplex makes it compatible with adjacent single-family homes. 5.01.070 Duplex, Stacked General Note: the drawings and photos below are illustrative. A. Description This Duplex building type consists of structures that contain two units, one on top of the other. This building type has the appearance of a medium to large single- family home. This type is typically integrated sparingly into single-family neighborhoods or more consistently into neighborhoods with other medium-density types such as bungalow courts, fourplexes, or courtyard apartments. This building type enables the incorporation of high-quality, well-designed density within a walkable neighborhood. This is the preferred type of duplex on 50' wide lots in Livermore neighborhoods not zoned for single-family because it is capable of accommodating two units in a smaller footprint, thus maximizing compatibility in size and privacy to the rear of adjacent units. Building Type Standards 57
  • 58.
    © 2014 OpticosDesign, Inc. | Kit of Parts for Neighborhoods: Cincinnati, Ohio 58 Cincinnati Citywide Form-Based Code
  • 59.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. |© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | 10-70.10.030 Civic Space Types 70.10-4 Flagstaff Zoning CodePublic Review Draft Table 10-70.10.030.A Civic Spaces (continued) TRANSECT ZONE T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Civic Space Type Square Plaza Pocket Plaza Illustration Description An open space available for unstructured recreation and civic purposes. An open space available for civic purposes and commercial activities. An open space available for civic purposes and commercial activities. Size and Location Size Minimum 1/2 acre 1/2 acre 4,000 sf Maximum 5 acres 2-1/2 acres 1/2 acre Frontage Independent Independent/Building Frontage Building Frontage Character Formal Formal Formal Typical Uses Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Paths, Community Gardens, Playgrounds Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Commercial Uses, Community Garden, Playground Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Commercial Uses, Community Garden, Playground Stormwater Management French Drains, Porous Pavements, and Landscaping French Drains, Porous Pavements, and Landscaping French Drains, Porous Pavements, and Landscaping Key T# Allowed T# Not Allowed 10-70.10.030Civic Space Types 70.10-3Flagstaff Zoning Code Public Review Draft Table 10-70.10.030.A Civic Spaces TRANSECT ZONE T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Civic Space Type Park Greenway Green Illustration Description A natural preserve available for unstructured recreation. A linear space in largely natural conditions for unstructured recreation. An open space, available for unstructured recreation. Size and Location Size Minimum 8 acres 8 acres 1/2 acre Maximum - - 8 acres Frontage Independent Independent/Building Frontage Independent/Building Frontage Character Natural Natural Natural Typical Uses Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Paths and Trails, Woodland and Open Shelters, Community Gardens, Playgrounds Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Trails for Bicycles and Pedestrians, Community Gardens, Playgrounds Passive/Active (Unstructured) Open Space, Civic Uses, Community Gardens, Playgrounds Stormwater Management Integrated Runoff, Bioretention, Extended Detention Basins, Porous Pavements and Landscaping Integrated Runoff, Bioretention, Extended Detention Basins, Porous Pavements and Landscaping French Drains, Porous Pavements and Landscaping Key T# Allowed T# Not Allowed Civic Space Standards 59
  • 60.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. |© 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | Close UpCountywide 7.01.110 Thoroughfare Types 7-12 Livermore Development Code Neighborhood Street II Edges Drainage Collection Type Curb and gutter Planter Type 17' continuous Landscape Type Medium trees @ 35' on center average Lighting Type Low, pedestrian oriented lighting Walkway Type 5' sidewalk Intersection Curb Radius 15' max. (bulb-outs recommended) Distance Between Intersections 600' max. Miscellaneous Requirements Transformations to existing streets shall match the designations set forth in the General Plan. E F 7.01.110 Retrofit: 18' Wide Planter Strip Application Movement Type Slow Anticipated Design Speed 20 mph Pedestrian Crossing Bulb-outs encouraged to decrease pedestrian crossing time. Transect Zones T4 N-O T4 N T3 N Overall Widths Right-of-Way (ROW) 80' Face-of-Curb to Face-of-Curb 36' Lanes Traffic Lanes 2 @ 10' (2-way travel) Bicycle Lanes None Parking Lanes 2 @ 8' parallel Medians None A B C D B A FC B A CD DEF E 7.01.060Thoroughfare Types 7-7 Livermore Development Code 7.01.060 Neighborhood Main Street Application Movement Type Slow Anticipated Design Speed 20 mph Pedestrian Crossing Bulb-outs encouraged to decrease pedestrian crossing time. Transect Zones T4MS T4MS-O Overall Widths Right-of-Way (ROW) 60' Face-of-Curb to Face-of-Curb 36' Lanes Traffic Lanes 2 @ 10' (2-way travel) Bicycle Lanes None Parking Lanes 2 @ 8' parallel Medians None A B C D Edges Drainage Collection Type Curb and gutter Planter Type 4' x 4' tree grate, min. Lighting Type Low, pedestrian oriented lighting Walkway Type 12' sidewalk, 1 Where gallery frontage is used, street trees are not required or allowed. Intersection Curb Radius 15' max. (bulb-outs recommended) Distance Between Intersections 400' max. Miscellaneous Requirements Transformations to existing streets shall match the designations set forth in the General Plan. E F N eighborhood Street I B A C B A CD D F EE F Thoroughfare Standards 60
  • 61.
    © 2014 OpticosDesign, Inc. | Regulating Plans/Zoning Maps 61 Madison Road
  • 62.
    Market Demand isWaiting Providing Predictability: 
 Getting Quick Results 62
  • 63.
    © 2014 OpticosDesign, Inc. | 63 Predictable, Clear Process is The Goal DRAFT IN PROGRESS 03.16.07 DIAGRAM 11 PERMITTING PROCESS PERMITTING PROCESS DIAGRAMPERMITTING PROCESS DIAGRAM Applicant Preapplication Preapplication Preapplication Preapplication Zoning Department Warrant Exception Variance Zoning Change File with Hearing Board * Building Permit Preapplication Building Permit Waiver File with Planning * Building Permit Building Permit City Commission CRC - Coordinated Review Committee PZAB – Planning Zoning and Appeals Board By Right CRC PZAB PZAB Building Permit PZAB Planning Director Appeal City Comm. Appeal City Comm. Appeal PZAB Planning Director Planning Director Planning Director Planning Director File with Planning * File with Hearing Board * File with Hearing Board * Building Permit Appeal PZAB * All applications shall include required notice CRC
  • 64.
    Providing Consistency Acrossthe LDC The Transect as the Framework for a Majority of Regulations 64
  • 65.
    © 2014 OpticosDesign, Inc. | Considering Sustainability/Green Infrastructure Along the Transect 65 T3: Single Family and Carriage House Strategic Shading. Glazing. Design glazing to heat the structure from the south, and cool through cross-ventilation. Water Infiltration. Allow water to percolate in sub-surface conditions. Greenway. Use the greenway as a stormwater capture, conveyance and treatment feature. South-Side Planting. Consider solar access on the south side of buildings when planting landscape. Public/Private Portal. Compost Bins. Require compost bins with instructions for homeowners. Urban Farming. Encourage small-scall cultivation. No Hose Bibs. Exclude external hose bibs from home design, thereby irrigating only by rain barrel or reuse water. Rain Garden. Provide lot treatment rain gardens. Flow-Through StormwaterTreatment Planter. ABCDEFGHIJK B C A D E J H K G I F B D E A C G J H K F I T4: Live/Work Building Active Space. Allow some portion of outdoor space to be used for public open-space, potentially active space. Retractable Awnings. Encourage the use of retractable awnings in storefront design, to protect from the summer sun. Outdoor Seating. Encourage establishments to provide outdoor seating and outdoor spaces. Car Charging Stations. Provide electric charging stations to promote the use of alternate-fuel vehicles.. Recycling and Compost Bins. Encourage establishments to have an area for compost and recycling bins, in addition to trash bins.. Vegetated Roofs. Promote vegetated roofs, skylights or directed sunlight to improve the quality of life in interior apartments. Residential Access. Provide residential access to flat rooftops, creating usable open space. Private Driveway. Require minimal curbcuts and curb return radii. Roof Materials. Use high SRI roof materials where PV or vegetated roofs are not practical. Covered bicycle storage. ABCDEFGHIJ T5: Mid-Rise Building Type Urban Rooftop Farming/Gardening. Roof Access. Encourage rooftop access to maximize value of views and open space. Outdoor Seating. Activating sidewalk space in front of mixed-use development encourages community vitality.. Awnings. Awnings provide street-level shading and rain shelter. Diverse Rooftop Usage. Encourage both commercial and residential use of roof space. Urban Gardening. Garden space available for residential tenants.. Bioswales. Bioswales improve stormwater quality, mitigate urban flooding, and give opportunity for infiltration where subsurface conditions allow.. Bike Racks. Encourage tenants and patrons to cycle by providing regular amenities for bike parking. StreetTrees. Tree boxes/wells improve thermal comfort and street character.. ABCDEFGHI C D B A E H G I F
  • 66.
    eet Incorporating sustainability inancillary unit designConference-Los Angeles, CA © 2012 Opticos Design, Inc. | stainability Overlay to Inform Form-Based Code 16 Flow through treatment planter Lot Treament Rain Garden No External Hose Bibs No Irrigation Except by Rain Barrel or Reused Water Urban Farming Compost Bins Strategic Shading ssive Heating from uth-Facing Glazing-Cross ntilation Cools as Needed Where Allow It Winds west in Greenway as a Stormwater Caputre Conveyance & Treatment Feature Solar Lighting Along Greenway Utilize Summer Winds from the Southeast to Passively Cool Buildings Sustainability and Urban Agriculture in Different Contexts © 2015 Opticos Design, Inc. | 66 B D E A C G J H K F I C D B A E H G I F B D E A C G J H K F I
  • 67.
    67 Form-Based Codes A Guidefor Planners, Urban Designers, Municipalities, and Developers Daniel G. Parolek, AIA • Karen Parolek • Paul C. Crawford, FAICP Forewords by Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk and Stefanos Polyzoides www.formbasedcodes.org
  • 68.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | Welcome to the 21st Century 68
  • 69.
    © 2015 OpticosDesign, Inc. | 69 http://austintexas.gov/event/code-next-listening-sessions