ZONING TYPES

FORM –BASED
CODE
 FORM- BASED CODE
• A form-based code (FBC) is a means of regulating development to achieve a
specific urban form. Form-based codes create a predictable public realm by
controlling physical form primarily, with a lesser focus on land use, through
city or county regulations.
• Form-based codes are a new response to:
• The modern challenges of urban sprawl,
• Deterioration of historic neighborhoods,
• And neglect of pedestrian safety in new development.
• Tradition has declined as a guide to development patterns, and the
widespread adoption by cities of single-use zoning regulations has
discouraged compact, walkable urbanism. Form-based codes are a tool to
address these deficiencies, and to provide local governments the regulatory
means to achieve development objectives with greater certainty.
 SCOPE
• Form-based codes address the relationship between building facades and the public
realm, the form and mass of buildings in relation to one another, and the scale and
types of streets and blocks. The regulations and standards in form-based codes,
presented in both diagrams and words, are keyed to a regulating plan that designates
the appropriate form and scale (and therefore, character) of development rather
than only distinctions in land-use types. This is in contrast to conventional zoning's
focus on the micromanagement and segregation of land uses, and the control of
development intensity through abstract and uncoordinated parameters (e.g.,
floor area ratios, dwelling units per acre, setbacks, parking ratios) to the neglect of an
integrated built form. Not to be confused with design guidelines or general
statements of policy, form-based codes are regulatory, not advisory.
• Form-based codes are drafted to achieve a community vision based on time-tested
forms of urbanism. Ultimately, a form-based code is a tool; the quality of
development outcomes is dependent on the quality and objectives of the community
plan that a code implements.
 HISTORY
• Form-based codes are part of a long history of shaping the built landscape for
public benefit. Such efforts go back to the urban designs of Hippodamus of
ancient Greece, the planning of cities in ancient China, and Roman town planning.
The Laws of the Indies, promulgated by the Spanish Crown starting in the 16th
century, established some basic urban form requirements for colonial towns in
the Americas. William Penn when planning Philadelphia in the 17th century did
not shy from precise urban form requirements when he said, "Let every house be
in a line, or upon a line, as much as may be."
• During the 18th century, Baroque urban design commonly brought buildings to
the fronts of their lots with common facade treatments. Baron Haussmann,
appointed by Napoleon III to oversee the redevelopment of Paris in the 19th
century, stipulated precise ratios of building heights to street widths; disposition
and sizes of windows and doors on building facades; consistent‫ منسق‬planting of
street trees; and standardization of material colors to bring unity and harmony to
the public environment.
 Emergence of modern form-based codes
• But regulating urban form is a challenge in modern democracies.
Design guidelines adopted by municipalities, without legal
enforceability, often invite capricious ‫ نزويه‬observance, thus
failing to produce the comprehensive changes required to
produce satisfying public places. When public planning exercises
fail to produce predictable results, citizens often rebel ‫يتمرد‬
against any development. In addition, from early in the twentieth
century to the present, attempts at regulating the built landscape
have usually been done for reasons that neglect community
form, that are more concerned with the uses of property and
impacts of scale than the form that development takes. And a
planning profession that in recent decades has focused on policy,
neglecting design, encouraged an abstract intellectual response
to problems that are largely physical in nature.
 Emergence of modern form-based codes

• The development of modern form-based codes was started by architects, urban

designers, and physical planners frustrated by the ineffectiveness of past
criticisms of sprawl development and the failure of critics to propose realistic
alternatives. These professionals, used to thinking physically about community
problems, began the search for systematic physical solutions in the 1970s.
Architect Christopher Alexander published A Pattern Language in 1977, a
compendium ‫خالصة‬of physical rules for designing humane buildings and places.
Ian McHarg developed systematic mapping tools to encourage deliberate‫مدروس‬
development patterns sensitive to local environmental conditions. Traditional
Neighborhood Development ordinances‫ قوانين‬were drafted beginning in the early
1990s as sets of development regulations to promote‫ يؤسس‬traditional
neighborhood forms in new development projects. TND (traditional
neighborhood development) ordinances were typically adopted as an optional
regulatory procedure that developers could request in place of conventional
zoning . But their design regulations were not mapped to parcels or streets in
advance, so lacked predictability of outcomes; TND ordinances proved to be an
instructive effort, but showed few results.
 Emergence of modern form-based codes

• Meanwhile, the accelerating scale of worldwide urban growth and the

rapid expansion of the extent of cities heightened the need for
regulatory tools better equipped to deal with such growth. The first
serious attempt at creating a modern form-based code was done in
1982 to guide the development of the Florida resort town of Seaside by
the husband and wife design team of Andres Duany and Elizabeth
Plater-Zyberk. Realizing that designing an entire town would be an
overwhelming task and would in the end lack the visual serendipity that
only comes from myriad creative minds at work, they created a design
code that established basic physical standards mapped to parcels‫مجموعات‬
, and then invited developers and architects to put their own distinctive
stamp on their projects—but operating within those standards. The
Seaside Code proved very successful; the resulting development of the
town of Seaside is widely recognized as one of the most important and
appealing‫ جذاب‬planning efforts of the post-World War II era.
 Emergence of modern form-based codes

• Duany/Plater-Zyberk's codes and the work of

subsequent form-based code practitioners are not
top-down mandates from imperial designers as in the
baroque era or the wishful thinking of design
guidelines that lack enforceability, but are instead
legal regulations adopted by units of local
government. As regulations they possess police power
; violators of the regulations can be cited, and their
invocation or retraction must go through a legislative
process. As such, the community plays a more forceful
role in shaping its physical future.
Form-based codes produce more consistent and predictable patterns
of development in relationship to the public realm than typically
achieved through conventional zoning regulations.

Emergence of modern form-based codes

 Recent developments
• Although the Seaside code was commissioned‫ مفوض‬by a
private developer, most current codes are commissioned by
counties ‫ اقاليم‬and municipalities. Since Seaside, the scale of
form-based coding projects has grown. Form-based coding can
be applied at many scales, from a two-block main street to a
county-wide region. An early form-based code was adopted
for downtown West Palm Beach in 1995. A significant code for
a major urban arterial, the Columbia Pike in Arlington County,
Virginia, was adopted in 2003 (Ferrell Madden Associates). A
regional FBC was adopted in 2006 by St. Lucie County, Florida
(Spikowski Associates, Dover-Kohl Partners).
 Recent developments

• Duany/Plater-Zyberk has drafted a model FBC that is also a transect-based

code that can be calibrated‫ يقوم‬for local needs—the SMARTCODE. Its first
attempted customization was done for Vicksburg, Mississippi in 2001
(Mouzon & Greene). The lessons learned there led to the first California
adoption of a citywide form-based code for the City of Sonoma in March
2003 (Crawford Multari & Clark Associates, Moule & Polyzoides), followed in
2004 by the first SmartCode adopted in the U.S., for central Petaluma,
California (Fisher and Hall Urban Design, Crawford Multari & Clark
Associates). SmartCodes are now being calibrated for Miami, Florida and
Hurricane Katrina ravaged ‫ المخربة‬communities in Mississippi and Louisiana,
along with cities as diverse as Taos, NM, Michigan City, IN, Jamestown, RI,
Lawrence, KS, New Castle, DE, and Bran, Romania. Planetary climate change
that must be mitigated by changes in the human environment will no doubt
be an inducement to form-based and transect-based coding in the future.
 Recent developments

• Because of the growing number of consultants

advertising themselves as capable of writing
FBCs but with little or no training, in 2004 the
non-profit Form-Based Codes Institute was
organized to establish standards and teach
best practices. In addition, SmartCode
workshops are regularly scheduled by
PlaceMakers.com, SmartCodePro.com, and
SmartCodeLocal.com.
 Components of Form-Based Codes

• Form-based codes commonly include the following elements:

• Regulating Plan. A plan or map of the regulated area designating the
locations where different building form standards apply, based on clear
community intentions regarding the physical character of the area being
coded.
• Public Space Standards. Specifications for the elements within the public
realm (e.g., sidewalks, travel lanes, on-street parking, street trees, street
furniture, etc.).
• Building Form Standards. Regulations controlling the configuration,
features, and functions of buildings that define and shape the public realm.
• Administration. A clearly defined application and project review process.
• Definitions. A glossary to ensure the precise use of technical terms.
At a minimum, a form-based code, written to enable or preserve a specific
urban form, consists of building form and public space standards keyed to a
regulating plan. An urban design is the intention or goal, the form-based code
is the regulatory tool to achieve it.

Components of Form-Based Codes

 Components of Form-Based Codes

• Form-based codes also sometimes include:

• Architectural Standards. Regulations controlling external architectural
materials and quality.
• Landscaping Standards. Regulations controlling landscape design and plant
materials on private property as they impact public spaces (e.g. regulations
about parking lot screening and shading, maintaining sight lines, insuring
unobstructed pedestrian movements, etc.).
• Signage Standards. Regulations controlling allowable signage sizes, materials,
illumination, and placement.
• Environmental Resource Standards. Regulations controlling issues such as
storm water drainage and infiltration, development on slopes, tree
protection, solar access, etc.
• Annotation. Text and illustrations explaining the intentions of specific code
provisions.
 Building Form Standards

‫ صفـات‬that can be regulated in a Building Form

Building attributes
Standard, in this case for a hypothetical street in a neighborhood center
 Building Form Standards

• The types of buildings that make for a lively main street are different from the
types of buildings that make for a quiet residential street. Building Form Standards
are sets of enforceable‫ قابلة التطبيق‬design regulations for controlling building types
and how they impact the public realm. These Standards are mapped to streets on a
Regulating Plan. Building Form Standards can control such things as: the alignment
of buildings to the street; how close buildings are to sidewalks; the visibility and
accessibility of building entrances; minimum and maximum buildings heights;
minimum or maximum lot frontage coverage; minimum and maximum amounts of
window coverage on facades; physical elements required on buildings (e.g. stoops,
porches, types of permitted balconies); and the general usage of floors (e.g. office,
residential, or retail). These regulations are less concerned with architectural styles
and designs than in how buildings shape public spaces. If a local government also
wishes to regulate the quality of architecture--for example to preserve the historic
appearance of a neighborhood--then Architectural Standards should be drafted in
addition to Building Form Standards
 BUILDING FORM STANDARD
• An example of a Public Space Standard for public streets from the
SmartCode 9.0
• Public Space Standards control the physical form of squares, parks,
the public right-of-way of streets, and other public spaces. Public
spaces are typically under the control of public works, parks, and
highway departments. Streets, being the most common public
spaces in a community, are the most frequently regulated. Public
Space Standards for streets are typically described with
dimensioned cross-sections and/or plan views showing travel lane
widths, sidewalk widths, street tree and street lamp placement,
locations of transit lanes, and the placement of architecture. Plan
view diagrams may also be included showing spacing of street trees
and lamps, and the radii of the curves of street corners.
 Identifying Form-Based Codes

• A well-crafted form-based code is the most

effective form of development regulation for
shaping pedestrian-scaled, mixed use and
fine-grained urbanism. How does one
determine if a development regulation is a
form-based code and a well-crafted one?
Form-based codes generally receive
affirmative answers to all of the following
questions:
 Identifying Form-Based Codes

• Is the code's focus primarily on regulating urban form and less on land use?
• Is the code regulatory rather than advisory?
• Does the code emphasize standards and parameters for form with predictable
physical outcomes (build-to lines, frontage type requirements, etc.) rather than
relying on numerical parameters (floor-area ratios, density, etc.) whose
outcomes are impossible to predict?
• Does the code require private buildings to shape public space through the use
of building form standards with specific requirements for building placement?
• Does the code promote and/or conserve an interconnected street network and
pedestrian-scaled blocks?
• Are regulations and standards keyed to specific locations on a regulating plan?
• Are the diagrams in the code unambiguous, clearly labeled, and accurate in
their presentation of spatial configurations?
 Implementation

• How are form-based codes incorporated into a

local government's development regulations?
There are three basic ways:
 Mandatory codes
• Mandatory codes. This is the most common adoption approach. It has the most
regulatory "teeth"—compliance is required. But it is the most ambitious‫ طموح‬of
the approaches, making the new code a seamless part of, or a complete
replacement for, the existing zoning ordinance. The form-based code can be
adopted as a new zoning district or as an overlay district.
• Unique to California and a few other states with appropriate enabling legislation,
form-based codes can be contained within a planning document called a
"specific plan," which can completely override the zoning ordinance for a given
geographic area. Since it stands apart from the zoning ordinance, it can be more
creative in its format, giving the coder greater freedom in designing for user-
friendliness through page layout, diagrams, and illustrations. Also, the urban
design plan and the implementing regulations are bundled together, greatly
improving user comprehension. But since the specific plan is not securely
integrated within the existing zoning ordinance, it may be more politically
vulnerable to retraction.
 Mandatory codes
• Example adopted codes:
Winter Springs Town Center District Code,
Winter Springs, Florida
Farmers Branch Station Area Form-Based
Code, Farmers Branch, Texas
Central Petaluma Specific Plan and
SmartCode, Petaluma, California
 Optional (parallel) codes
• Optional (parallel) codes. An optional or parallel form-based code serves
as an alternative to, but doesn't replace, a present zoning ordinance‫تعليمات‬
. Compliance is voluntary‫ اختياري‬. The developer has the choice of
complying with the form-based code or the zoning ordinance, but it must
be one or the other. This approach makes sense when compliance with
the zoning ordinance is so difficult and time consuming that most
development is stymied‫ محبط‬. Thus a developer has the option of
following a form-based code that will streamline and simplify his
development process. But, for a local government to maintain two
different sets of development regulations for one area is added work
which can be significant if the area is extensive. Also depending on the
area being regulated, if some developers are choosing the form-based
code and others nearby are not, the possibilities for integrated place-
making can be compromised.
 Optional (parallel) codes
• Example codes:
Columbia Pike Form-Based Code, Arlington
County, Virginia
Pike Road SmartCode, Pike Road, Alabama
• Pass Christian SmartCode, Pass Christian,
Mississippi
 Floating-zone codes
• Floating-zone codes. Floating zones are most often written to facilitate master-
planned suburban communities and are called PUDs (planned unit developments).
However, floating-zone codes are now being written as form-based codes to facilitate
urban development. A floating-zone form-based code does not contain a regulating
plan but includes instructions and standards for developers to follow when they
prepare a regulating plan for their property (e.g. maximum block dimensions, street
types, building types, open space accessibility, sidewalk widths.) This distinguishes
floating-zone codes from the other two approaches–developers rather than the local
government create the regulating plans and the urban designs that they facilitate, but
the local government sets the standards. Floating-zone codes allow local governments
to establish urban form standards for development without incurring the expense of
developing urban design and regulating plans. Developers are given the freedom,
within clear parameters, to prepare regulating plans for their property that are likely
to meet government approval. A developer submits his or her regulating plan for
approval through the rezoning process. Upon rezoning, the floating zone replaces the
prior zoning for that property and the regulating plan becomes binding
 Floating-zone codes
• Example codes:
Miami/Dade County TND District, Dade County,
Florida
Towns, Villages, Countryside Land Development
Regulations, St. Lucie County, Florida
Flowood SmartCode, Flowood, Mississippi
Montgomery SmartCode, Montgomery, Alabama
(not to be confused with the mandatory SmartCode
for downtown)
 SPICIAL CITY APPROCH
• Initially a local government may wish to adopt a form-based
code for its entire jurisdiction following one approach, but find
this too ambitious with short-term resource and political
limitations requiring a more focused effort. Instead it may wish
to follow one approach for a smaller area, and then phase in
other areas using the same or different approaches as needed.
Or a floating-zone code could be adopted for large areas
awaiting the public resources coming later that would allow
the local government to draft its own regulating plans.
Whatever approach is followed—or combination of
approaches—simplicity and consistency helps at the permit
desk where the code is implemented.
THANKS