Citywide Form-Based Code and Plan for Cincinnati Land Use Framework
Paradigm shift back to urbanism: complete neighborhoods for Cincinnati
Mesa Downtown Plan and Form-Based Code
Capturing the Transformative Potential of Transit
Doheny Village Form-Based Code
Dana Point, California
Reinforcing a surfer/maker culture with smart coding
Building types can be useful in form-based codes where the goal is to enable a fine–grained mix of buildings of varied density and type in walkable neighborhoods. The approach of using building types is also effective in situations where permit streamlining is required and discretionary review is not allowed or significantly limited. For example, in California, Senate Bill 35 requires that only a community’s ‘Objective Design and Development Standards’ apply to multi-family or mixed-use projects. This means that more rather than less clarity in the standards and the community’s expectations is needed. Building types when prepared well offer that needed clarity.
Recent California state legislation (eg., SB 35, SB 330 and the Housing Accountability Act) stipulates that in certain situations, projects that qualify for streamlined review and processing must be designed and reviewed only through objective design standards. Marin County retained Opticos Design in 2019 to develop Objective Design and Development Standards (ODDS) for multifamily and mixed-use residential development in coordination with 11 separate jurisdictions within the County, the largest objective design standards application to date.
As established in Part 1 of this series, we understand why it’s important to use building types. Now, let’s get into the next question: where? This post focuses on where building types are most effective, where they could be helpful but aren’t necessary, and where they are not necessary and should not be used.