The Benefits of Creating Hybrid Zoning Codes

[M II A II R II K]

How one city overhauled its zoning code while combining form-based and conventional elements


February 2012

By Roger E. Eastman



Read More: http://www.planning.org/planning/default.htm

Flagstaff, 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 form-based components and conventional Euclidean elements as part of a complete code rewrite. "Simplified, streamlined, predictable" raved an editorial 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 off a successful public engagement process that has changed the generally negative perception of city planners.

An important first step in approaching a new code was differentiating between what Christopher Leinberger calls "walkable urban" areas from "drivable suburban" areas (The Option of Urbanism, Island Press, 2008). By making this distinction, Flagstaff could apply a form-based code in the walkable areas of the city while generally leaving the existing conventional code in place in the drivable suburban areas. Thus, a new transect-based hybrid code resulted that defaults to promoting and allowing for walkable urbanism while seamlessly incorporating refined yet otherwise conventional Euclidean zoning tools for the drivable suburban areas. Because the regulations for the two different types of areas are not muddled together, the form-based code could be kept intact — and development opportunities could emerge in a manner consistent 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 transcontinental railway in 1882 and later Route 66 and Interstate 40, Flagstaff 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 of the area and enjoy outdoor pursuits such as hiking, skiing, hunting, fishing, and camping. The downtown and oldest neighborhoods were planned with small blocks and lots, and today are valued for their historic buildings and inherently walkable urban character. Typical of many American cities, Flagstaff's urban form changed after World War II as auto-oriented suburban developments were added to the periphery of the city. Until recently Flagstaff's zoning ordinances have actively promoted these driveable suburban development patterns.

The need for a comprehensive update of the city's land development code had been apparent for some time as developers, contractors, design professionals, and residents complained about the code's complexity and inconsistency. Some even blamed the cumbersome nature of the code for contributing to the high cost of development and the failure of big projects and economic development opportunities. These issues stemmed from piecemeal amendments over the years that reflected numerous, sometimes conflicting zoning methodologies, such as Euclidian zoning provisions dating back to the 1970s and earlier; complex performance-based standards added in 1991 to protect floodplains, steep slopes, and trees, especially the native ponderosa pines; design guidelines adopted in 2002; and traditional neighborhood standards based on the SmartCode developed by consultants Duany Plater-Zyberk and adopted by the city in November 2007.

.....

Considerable time was taken in analyzing the land development code's 34 conventional and performance-based zones to see if they could be combined. At the same time, a comprehensive macro-scale and micro-scale analysis of the city was prepared so that the city's urban form and character (its DNA) could be better understood.






A thorough assessment of the supplemental standards such as parking, lighting, landscaping, and specific uses was completed to ensure that that they would not compromise the form-based code. It was found that many of these standards are effective in suburban areas but are less applicable in existing or intended urban areas where form-based codes would apply.