<%BANNER%>

Participation and Predictability

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0043862/00001

Material Information

Title: Participation and Predictability a Comparative Analysis of Processes and Outcomes of the Form-Based Codes and Previous Conventional Zoning Codes of Miami, Florida and Denver, Colorado
Physical Description: 1 online resource (199 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Wright, Kristina Lynn
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2011

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: citizen -- code -- conventional -- denver -- design -- form -- formulation -- implementation -- miami -- outcome -- participation -- planning -- predictability -- process -- public -- visual -- zoning
Urban and Regional Planning -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Urban and Regional Planning thesis, M.A.U.R.P.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: This study analyzed the form-based code participatory processes of Miami, Florida and Denver, Colorado to examine the relationship between code formulation and implementation to gauge how, and if, predictability has been generated through extensive, front-loaded participation. The design-orientation of the form-based code has also been examined for its ability to serve as a catalyst within these processes. The need for additional flexibility through additional public participation following code adoption was examined to consider the adaptation of the predictability model. As a result, this study analyzed the following research question: Considering the extensive participatory processes used to create the form-based codes in Miami, Florida and Denver, Colorado, how have these processes produced outcomes that increase predictability, and how is this predictability balanced with the potential need for further citizen participation? Both scenarios were analyzed through the use of case studies, project analyses, and discussions that resulted from the evaluation of processes and outcomes within code formulation and implementation. In sum, these were used to analyze the hypotheses developed during preliminary analysis that were used to test the function, processes, and outcomes of each code type within each context. The design-orientation and the use of visual communication used within code formulation were analyzed to evaluate if, and how, these have advanced predictability and public accessibility in terms of outcomes produced by these processes.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Kristina Lynn Wright.
Thesis: Thesis (M.A.U.R.P.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local: Adviser: Frank, Kathryn.
Local: Co-adviser: Jourdan, Dawn.
Electronic Access: RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2013-06-30

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID: UFE0043862:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0043862/00001

Material Information

Title: Participation and Predictability a Comparative Analysis of Processes and Outcomes of the Form-Based Codes and Previous Conventional Zoning Codes of Miami, Florida and Denver, Colorado
Physical Description: 1 online resource (199 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Wright, Kristina Lynn
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2011

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: citizen -- code -- conventional -- denver -- design -- form -- formulation -- implementation -- miami -- outcome -- participation -- planning -- predictability -- process -- public -- visual -- zoning
Urban and Regional Planning -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Urban and Regional Planning thesis, M.A.U.R.P.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: This study analyzed the form-based code participatory processes of Miami, Florida and Denver, Colorado to examine the relationship between code formulation and implementation to gauge how, and if, predictability has been generated through extensive, front-loaded participation. The design-orientation of the form-based code has also been examined for its ability to serve as a catalyst within these processes. The need for additional flexibility through additional public participation following code adoption was examined to consider the adaptation of the predictability model. As a result, this study analyzed the following research question: Considering the extensive participatory processes used to create the form-based codes in Miami, Florida and Denver, Colorado, how have these processes produced outcomes that increase predictability, and how is this predictability balanced with the potential need for further citizen participation? Both scenarios were analyzed through the use of case studies, project analyses, and discussions that resulted from the evaluation of processes and outcomes within code formulation and implementation. In sum, these were used to analyze the hypotheses developed during preliminary analysis that were used to test the function, processes, and outcomes of each code type within each context. The design-orientation and the use of visual communication used within code formulation were analyzed to evaluate if, and how, these have advanced predictability and public accessibility in terms of outcomes produced by these processes.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Kristina Lynn Wright.
Thesis: Thesis (M.A.U.R.P.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local: Adviser: Frank, Kathryn.
Local: Co-adviser: Jourdan, Dawn.
Electronic Access: RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2013-06-30

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID: UFE0043862:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 PARTICIPATION AND PREDICTABILITY: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PROCESSES AND OUTCOMES OF THE FORM BASED CODES AND PREVIOUS CONVENTIONAL ZONING CODES OF MIAMI, FLORIDA AND DENVER, COLORADO By KRISTINA WRIGHT BOWEN A THESIS PRESEN TED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR TH E DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2011

PAGE 2

2 2011 Kristina Wright Bowen

PAGE 3

3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Dr. Kathryn Frank and Dr. Dawn Jourdan for their patience a nd care in allowing the concepts within this thesis to develop, in addition to their expertise and guidance that ensured the advancement of my research, and for this I am extremely g r ateful. I would als o like to thank Luciana Gonzalez, Project Manager of Miami 21 and the Assistant t o the Director of Community Plan ning and Development in the City of Miami, Florida for being a phenomenal resource and for taking the time to allow me to in tervi ew her as part of this thesis. I would also like to thank Tina Axelrad, Principal Planner for the City of Denver, Colorado for allowing me to interview her and for providing staff reports and projects for the analyses contained within this thesis. I w ould also like to thank Lowell Garrett, Planning Manager for the City of Newberry, Florida and Dr. Ruth Steiner for providing me with the opportunity to gain considerable experience while assisting the City in the preparation of the Evaluation and Appraisa l Report while working to complete my education at the University of Florida. I would also like to thank my husband, Robert W. Bowen, P.E., and my family and friends for providing their continued support and encouragement while working to achieve my educat ional goals.

PAGE 4

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 3 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 8 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 9 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 10 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 12 Statement and Nature of the P roblem ................................ ................................ ..... 12 The Conventional Zoning Code and the Form Based Code ................................ ... 14 Form Based Code Overview ................................ ................................ ................... 15 Introduction of Case Studies: Miami, Florida and Denver, Colorado ...................... 16 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 18 2 LITERATURE REVIE W ................................ ................................ .......................... 19 Overview ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 19 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 19 The Differences between the For m Based Code and the Conventional Zoning Code ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 21 Differences in Terms of Process ................................ ................................ ...... 22 Differences in Terms of Outcomes ................................ ................................ ... 24 Form Based Code Participatory Processes ................................ ............................ 26 The Form Based Code Product ................................ ................................ .............. 27 Steps Involved in the Creation of a Form Based Code ................................ ........... 28 The Design Orientation of the Form Based Code ................................ ................... 31 Analytical Criteria fo r Participatory Processes and Outcomes ................................ 43 Process Criteria ................................ ................................ ................................ 44 Outcome Criteria ................................ ................................ .............................. 45 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 46 3 METHODOLOGY ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 47 Thesis Objective ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 47 Hypotheses ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 49 Secondary Objectives ................................ ................................ ............................. 50 Methodology of Investigation ................................ ................................ .................. 52 Data Collection and Analysis ................................ ................................ .................. 55 Limitations, Possible Defects, and Reasonable Solutions ................................ ...... 55 Thesis Justification, Expecte d Results, and Contribution ................................ ........ 56

PAGE 5

5 4 CODE FORMULATION CASE STUDIES ................................ ............................... 58 Overview ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 58 Case Study: The Process and Outcomes of Creating the Miami 21 Plan ............... 59 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 59 Problem Identification and t he Previous Conventional Zoning Code, Ordinance 11000 ................................ ................................ ........................... 59 The Form Based Code Response ................................ ................................ .... 60 The Process Used to Create Miami 21 ................................ ............................. 61 Outcomes and the Implementation of the Form Based Code ........................... 66 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 67 Case Study: The Process and Outcomes of Creating the Denver Zoning Code ..... 67 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 67 Problem Identification ................................ ................................ ....................... 68 The Form Based Code Response ................................ ................................ .... 70 The Process Used to Create the Form Based Code ................................ ........ 70 Outcomes and the Implementation of the Form Based Code ........................... 76 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 77 Discussion ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 78 Overview ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 78 Process Criteria of Good Consensus Building (Innes & Booher, 1999) ............ 79 Outcome Criteri a of Good Consensus Building Processes (Innes & Booher, 1999) ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 82 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 87 5 CODE IMPLEMENTATION AND PROJECT ANALYSES ................................ ....... 88 Overview ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 88 Miami Project Analyses ................................ ................................ ........................... 89 Miami 21: The Brickell CitiCentr e ................................ ................................ ..... 89 Ordinance 11000: The Miami World Center ................................ ..................... 94 Before and After: Miami World Center ................................ ............................ 100 Analysis of Consensus Building Processes and Outcomes of the Projects in Miami ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 103 Process Criteria ................................ ................................ .............................. 103 Outcome Criteria ................................ ................................ ............................ 106 Denver Project Analyses ................................ ................................ ....................... 108 The Denver Zoning Code: 505 East Colfax Avenue ................................ ....... 108 Chapter 59: 6201 Colfax Avenue ................................ ................................ ... 110 Before and After Analysis: 6201 East Colfax Avenue ................................ ..... 112 A nalysis of Consensus Building Processes and Outcomes of the Projects in Denver ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 115 Process Criteria ................................ ................................ .............................. 117 Outcome Criteria ................................ ................................ ............................ 118 Analysis of the Hypotheses ................................ ................................ ................... 121 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 126

PAGE 6

6 6 CONCLUSION AND RECOMME NDATIONS ................................ ....................... 129 Overview ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 129 Case Study Summary ................................ ................................ ........................... 130 Discussion Summ ary ................................ ................................ ............................ 131 Project Analyses Summary ................................ ................................ ................... 135 Hypotheses Summary ................................ ................................ ........................... 138 Find ings ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 140 Recommendations ................................ ................................ ................................ 143 Gaps in the Literature and Areas for Additional Research ................................ .... 144 Conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 145 APPENDIX A MIAMI WATERCOLOR PERSPECTIVES ................................ ............................ 146 B DIFFERENCES IN PRODUCT BETWEEN ORDINANC E 11000 AND MIAMI 21 148 C MIAMI INFORMED CONSENT LETTER ................................ .............................. 154 D SUMMARY OF MIAMI INTERVIEW QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES ................ 155 E BRICKELL CITICENTRE CONCEPTUAL ELEVATION ................................ ........ 159 F BRICKELL CITICENTRE CONCEPTUAL RENDERING ................................ ...... 161 G MIAMI 21 REGULATIONS FOR THE BRICKELL CITICENTRE .......................... 163 H MIAMI 21 BUILDING FUNCTION USES INCLUDING BY RIGHT ........................ 165 I ......................... 166 J MIAMI 21 PERMITTING PROCESS DIAGRAM ................................ ................... 167 K MIAMI WORLD CENTER CO NCEPTUAL RENDERING ................................ ...... 168 L THE MIAMI WORLD CENTER REGULATING PLAN ................................ ........... 169 M MIAMI WORLD CENTER BUILDING DISPOSITION REGULATIONS ................. 170 N DENVER INFORMED CONSENT LETTER ................................ .......................... 171 O SUMMARY OF DENVER INTERVIEW QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES ........... 172 P MS COLFAX AVENUE ................................ ................................ ................................ 176 Q MS FOR 505 EAST COLFAX A VENUE ................................ ................................ ...... 177

PAGE 7

7 R DENVER ZONING CODE SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORITY AND NOTICE .. 178 S SITE PLAN FOR 505 EAST COLFAX AVENUE ................................ ................... 179 T PHOTOGRAPH OF COMPLETED PROJECT AT 505 EAST COLFAX AVENUE 181 U SITE PLAN FOR 6201 EAST COLFAX AVENUE ................................ ................. 183 V PHOTOGRAPH OF 6201 EAST COLFAX AVENUE ................................ ............ 185 W AVENUE ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 187 X COLFAX AVENUE ................................ ................................ ................................ 188 Y CHAPTER 59 BY RIGHT POLICIES RELATED TO 6201 EAST COLFAX AVENUE ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 189 Z COLFAX AVENUE ................................ ................................ ................................ 190 AA DENVER ZONING CODE PERMITTED USE CHART, ARTICLE 5 FOR BEFORE AND AFTER A NALYSIS ................................ ................................ ....... 192 BB DENVER ZONING CODE SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORITY AND NOTICE, ARTICLE 12 ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 193 CC DENVER COPYRIGHT PERMISSION ................................ ................................ 194 DD MIAMI COPYRIGHT PERMISSION ................................ ................................ ...... 195 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................. 196 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ .......................... 199

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF TABLES Table page 4 1 Code formulation process criteria of good consensus building ........................... 82 4 2 Code formulation outcome criteria of good consensus b uilding .......................... 87 5 1 Process criteria of good consensus building for code implementation in Miami ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 105 5 2 Outcome criteria of good consensus building for code implementation in Miami ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 107 5 3 Process criteria of good consensus building for code imple mentation in Denver ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 118 5 4 Outcome criteria of good consensus building for code implementation in Denver ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 121

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 3 1 ................................ ........................ 48 3 2 Methodological diagram ................................ ................................ ..................... 54

PAGE 10

10 Abstract of Thesis Presen ted to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Urban and Regional Planning PARTICIPATION AND PREDICTABILITY: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PROCESSES AND OU TCOMES OF THE FORM BASED CODES AND PREVIOUS CONVENTIONAL ZONING CODES OF MIAMI, FLORIDA AND DENVER, COLORADO By Kristina Wright Bowen December 2011 Chair: Dr. Kathryn Frank Cochair: Dr. Da wn J ourdan Major: Urban and Regional Planning This study analyze d the form based code participatory processes of Miami, F lorida and Denver, Colorado to examine the relationship between code formulation and implementation to gauge how, and if, predictabil ity ha s been generated through extensive, front loaded participati on The design orientation of the form based code h as also been examined for its ability to serve as a catalyst within these processes The need for additi onal flexibility through additio nal public participation following code adoption was exam ined to cons ider the adapt at ion of the predictability mod el As a result, this study analyzed the following research question: C onsidering the exten s ive participatory processes used to create the form base d codes in Miami, Florida and De n ver, Colorado, how have these processes produced outcomes that increase predictability, and how is this predictability balanced with the potential need for further citizen participation? Both scenarios were analyzed through the use of case studies, project analyses, and discussions tha t resulted from the evaluation of processes and outcomes within

PAGE 11

11 code f ormulation and implementation. I n sum, these were used to analyze the hypotheses developed during preliminary analysis that were used to test the function, processes, and outcomes of eac h code type within each context. The design orientation and the use of visual communication used within code formulation were analyzed to evaluate if, and how, these have advanced predictability and public accessibili ty in terms of outcomes produced by t he se processes

PAGE 12

12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTIO N Statement and Nature of the Problem Several states and municipalities throughout the nation require citizen participation as part of the planning and land development process that, often at a minimum, requires publ ic hearings and notifications. Increasingly over time, citizen participation has evolved to change the na ture of and the approach to planning. From the rise of affordable housing through required citizen participation to aid in the success of avenue to empower and incorp orate the views of the public. This participation influences community developme nt and policy making through the formation of constituencies that aid in the likelihood of successful project and policy implementation to furt her increase decentralization. However are current citizen participation methods providing an adequate platform for citizens to voice their concerns and assist in shaping their communities throug h decision and policy making? While the formulation of all code types can present opportunities to engage the public, this study investigates the participatory processes th at are us ed to create form based codes. The formulation of the form based code often entails extensive, front loade d citizen participation and this study examined how the s e formulation processes and outcomes relate to those within code implementation to e valuate the need for further citizen participatio n following code adoption The form based code ha s also been compared to the conventional zoning code in order to ascertain differences in code implementation through the examination of code

PAGE 13

13 organization and function alongside process and outcomes. These comparisons served to illustrate differences in participatory capacity, predictability and opportunities for further participat ion following code adoption between both code types Other aspects examin ed with in this study include the design orientation and the use of visual communication within these processes, in addition to cost, time, outreach, marketing methods, and attendance levels in order to consider the economic fe asibility of these approaches. These analyses where performed while investigating the timing and extent of participation translated from code fo rmulation into implementation. Form based code formulation processes are often noted for intensive and extensive public engagement that generates pr escriptive regulations and increased predictabilit y through code implementation. As a resu lt, this study analyzed the following question: C onsidering the extensive participatory processes used to create the form based codes in Miami, Florida and Denver, Co lorado, how have these processes produced outcomes that increase predictability, and how is this predictability balanced with the potential need for further citizen participation? The aim of this study wa s to analyze form based code formulation and impleme ntation that compared the processes and outcomes of conventional zoning code s through development review. The timi ng and extent of participation wa s examined to uncover the similarities and differences between both code formats and functio n that analyz e d i f these produce differen ces in participatory capacity. This wa s achieved through the analysis of two cities that have recently adopted form based codes, the City of Miami, Florida an d the City of Denver, Colorado.

PAGE 14

14 The Conventional Zoning Code and the Form Based Code Within the United States (U.S. ) conventional zoning is believed to have begun in New York City as a means to segregate uses in order to promote and preserve real estate values by delineating less desirable uses that crea ted wealth through exclu sion. While conventional zoning, in general, is believed to have begun in London during the Industrial Revolution to promote the health, safety and public welfare during the Victorian Era, similar measures and motivations were established in New York City that led to the segregation of uses into pockets of industry that promoted the separation of re sidential and commercial uses. While conventional zoning is still predominant in most communities throughout the U.S., the push to re urbanize and promote smart growth has led many cit ies to adopt form based codes. According to Berg (2010b), there are abo based codes ( 6 ) across North America According to the Form Based Codes Institute (FBCI) (2011), t he form based c ode segregation of land uses, and the control of development intensity through abstract and uncoordinated parameters (e.g., FAR [Floor Area Ratio] dwellings per acre, setbacks parking rations, traffic LOS [Level of Service] (3). In response, the form based code aims time tested forms 3). According to Berg (2010b), he conventional method of zoning, known as Euclidean zoning, determines what sort of (10). He explained that t division of land uses can make it difficult or even illegal to build de velopments that mix different but compatible b, 10).

PAGE 15

15 According to Elizabeth Plater Zyberk, the regulatory framework of the conventional zoning code being criticized a (as cited in Berg, 2010b, 12 ). S the codes were just written tha as cited in Berg, 2010b, 12). Berg (2010b) stated that New Urba nists developed an alternative, the form based 10). Form Based Code Overview The form quality public realm by using physical form (rather than separation of uses) as the organizi ng principl 2011 1). According to FBCI (2011), t hese (1) that mass of buildings in relation to one another, and the scale and types of streets and 2). A ddition ally based codes are presented in both words and clearly drawn diagra ms and other visuals .... keyed to a regulating plan that designates the appropriate form and scale (and therefore, character) of development, rather than only distinctions in lan d 2). The form based code relies upon citizen participation to establish the community vision throug h specific regulations based on form and context based approaches. The goal of these processes and outcomes often aim to increase predic tability, which may lessen the necessity of additional administrative approval processes with the aim of promoting deve lopment through greater certainty T he form (17) and while

PAGE 16

16 and l abor intensive upfront ... once ev the rules are very clear (17) ... because the project conforms with the vision b 17). This assumption relies on the form based to generate predictability as an outcome of form based code formulation translated through code implementation This predictability and the relationship between formulation and implementation will be examin ed within Chapter Five : Code Implementation and P roject Analyses Introduction of Case Studies: Miami, Florida and Denver, Colorado Hawley (2010) stated orm based codes first took hold in the southeastern (5) based code, and D enver is preparing to fo 5). According to Berg (2010b), was the first large Am erican city to adopt a form based code but D enver was close on its heels 7 ). As a result of the involvement of one of the most extensive series of citizen based code, Miami 21 was selected for this study. Miami approached these participatory processes on a smaller and more immediate scale at the beginning through the division of the city into q uadrants. Additionally, the City of Denver was selected for this study since it is another major city that has adopted a form based code that was created through exte nsive public participation, which approached participation through the division of the co mmuni ty into ward based form of governance. Districts were ach used by the City of Miami. Both code f ormulation

PAGE 17

17 scenarios are analyzed in Chapter Four, and code implementatio n has been analyzed in Chapter Five Through a comparative analysis of Miami 21 and the Denver Zoning Code, this work explored whether the form based code is a better vehicle for fost erin g civic engag ement This study also consider ed the design orientation of the form based code and the use of visual communication within code formulation processes to evaluate how these aspects may increase public accessibility, in clusivity, and contrib ute towards increased predictability. The underlying assumption was that this design orientation and the specificity of the form based code can provide a means to e xpand participatory capacity through the creation of a meaningful and pur poseful policy maki ng process. These aspects were compared and contrasted with the regulation by use found within conventional zoning to question the ability of this format and approach to specifically define the public vision and lead to the develop ment of predictable outco mes. Code implementation of each code type wa s tested through the project analyses contained within Chapter Five This chapter also examin ed the necessity of and the potential for, further public p articipation opportunities within the development review and approval processes of both code types for the projects provided by each city This analysis was performed to compare the value of p redictability generated through extensive public participation within code formulation processes to by right development policies t hat can serve t o streamline code implementation processes. For the purpose of this study, predictability has been defined as the product of extensive and purposeful participation obtaine d through form and context based approaches that codify the community vision through specific and prescriptive

PAGE 18

18 regulations that can reduce the need for additional processes and participation in order to promote development through increased certainty. Summary Providing opportunities for extensive public participat ion can entail significant time and expense. A tudies have demonstrated that our perceptions of the fairness and leg itima cy of governing processes depend in large part on the nature of our participation, [and] especially [the] opportunities to voice our v ( p. 815). Since the form based c ode c an pr ovide these opportunities within code formulation, code implementation has also be en examined to uncover the prevalence of these public participation opportunities follow ing code a doption. This analysis has also tak en into consideration the value of predictability and streamlined development review and approval processes. Additionally, comparisons have been made to conventional zoning code implementation to form an analysis of best practices and ethical planning approaches based on the timing and exte nt of participation between each code type which formed the basis of the recommendations provided at the end of Chapter Six

PAGE 19

19 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Overview The current status o f the literature has been explored to illustrate the differences between the form based code and the conventional zoning code in terms of proce ss and outcomes. The step s involved in code formulation have been outlined alongside measur e s which aid in implem entation. The relationship between formulation and implementation has also been examined to consider the potential need for further participation following code adoption. Additionally, t he design orientation of the form based code was analyz ed to uncover i f it generates a difference in terms of partici patory capacity and predictability that may justify streamlined review and approval processes in order to promote development. Analytical criteria have been outlined within this chapter and we re used within Ch apters Four and Five of this work to assess the participatory processes and outcomes of code formulation and implementation for both the City of Mi ami Florida and the City of Denver, Colorado More specifically, t hese criteria were used with in the discuss ion and analysis section that follows the code formulation case studies within Chap ter Four T hese criteria were also used to evaluate code implementation processes and outcomes through the use of project analyses for each city within Chapter Five. Introdu ction According to W alters (2007), public participation through the communicative planning approach (p.53) since the pursuit of the sustainable community must address the diverse needs of existing and future residents p. 54 ). T his sustainable approach is

PAGE 20

20 n order to achieve urban development has to be b ased on ... human, social, cultural, intel lectual, environmental and urban capital ... guided by a long term vision ... that enjoys popular support because it has been put together through ( Walters, 2007, p. 55). he principle that people who us e public spaces and buildings should have a say in designing them is central to this enhanced notion o Some citizens may question their ability to influence decision and policy making and the value of their representation. As a resul t, t he form based code and the co nventional zoning code were examined to analyze the differences in terms of participatory capacity, code format and regulatory approach By establishing constituenci es through partic ipatory processes within code formulatio n planning can prescribe the qualit y of the built env ironment. The specificity of these processes and the outcomes produced can lead to predictability, which serves to eliminate uncertainty in order to promote developme nt According to Bingham (2006), new g overnance processes centralize the voice of citizens into planning and policy exchange of reasons with each other in an effort to ac hieve an agreement or consensus rather than t aking the expedient of voting ... [that ] allows for people to learn and change their v p. 817). Through this exchange and interaction, reflexive lear ning provides ownership of policies as a result of collaborative policy making. While the conventional zoning code and th e form based code can both present this collaborative oppo rtunity this study examined if this potential i s inherent within the regulatory approach of either

PAGE 21

21 code format while examining why it is the form based code that is often noted for the ability to a ttract and incorporate extensive public participation. The Differences between the Form Based Code and the Conventional Zoning Code The purpose of examining the difference between the form based code an d the conventional zoning code wa s to consider each bo th in terms of proc ess and o utcome s to inform the analyses found later within this work. This was also performed to evaluate the timing and ex t ent of participation to uncover differen ces in participatory capacity between both code types According to Walte rs (2007), the form based code, or Code is perhaps the most significant effort to reform American land use regulations (p. 114). Walters (2007) explained that the f orm logic and provisions attempt to reverse more than 50 years of development control based on separated single use districts with no urban design content p p 114 115). Walters (2007) stated that the form t usable by planners and other municipal Additionally, f orm based c ode participatory processes within code formulation can provide the opport unity for citizens to respond to design concepts that address the interaction of the built form and the creation of open spaces (Parolek, Par olek & Crawford, 2008 ). In comparison, t he conventional zoning code regulation leads to use segregation that disc ourages pedestrian activity, while promoting v ehicular activity Additionally, s etbacks are often used within the conventional zoning, but according to Parolek, Parolek, and Crawford (2008), these

PAGE 22

22 ( p p. 42 43 ). Acco f missing information is that form based c ( as cited in Parolek, et al., 2008, p. 14). Form based codes quality urban design ... and a participatory planning methodology known as the Parolek, et al., 2008, p. 14). This contrasts with the conventional on the practice of consultants designing and crafting policies in isolation and then presenting ed that his kind of design ... proved a recipe for much [of the] bad urbanism in the modernist pe ( p. 169). While the charrette can be used within conventional zoning code formulation processes as well, the specificity of the form based code and the use of organizing frameworks that employ form and context based approach es provide the means to achiev e detailed, purposeful public participation processes wit hin a relatively compressed time period Differences in Terms of Process The differences in terms of process between the f orm based code a nd the conventional zoning code stem from the form and conte xt based approach of the form based code which entails participatory processes to be focused in order to derive specific regulations to achieve predictability. According to Walters (2007), participation within contemporary planning processes rely on the u se of the charrette to assist in the facilitation of communicative planning, which involves the use of visual and verba l communication styles in order to develop the best poss p 62). While

PAGE 23

23 conventional zoning code formulation processes ca n also incorporate a balance of words a nd visuals, Polyzoides indicated that the form in co since the form based code formulation process es require the development of prescriptive regulations that are context specific ( as cited in Parolek, et. al, 2008, pp. xvii). Constituencies are formed through form based code formulat i on processes as a result of this fo rm an d context based approach. These processes provide the mean s to ge nerate specific regulations and, therefore, increase the level of predictability within the form based code to represent private interests and the (Parolek, et al., 2008, p. xv i ). Parolek, et al. (2008) delineated the the form based c oding process addresses both the short and long term int erests of all the specialized disciplines that need to work in concert to create and maintain the (p. 98) This entails visioning to be prescriptive in order to transform the form and context based community vision f rom concept into reality Walters (2007) explained that t he parameters of the form based code and the use of visual communication within these to ideas as they are raised... [and] enables the concepts to b e debated more accurately ... [while helping] individuals and groups understand and agree on plan proposals without necessarily having a unified point of p. 63). This level of specificity is required to define and codify outcomes of the form based c ode participatory proce sses

PAGE 24

24 as a result of the form and context based approach es that are absent with in the language and use based approaches of the conventional zoning code. Differences in Terms of Outcomes According to Parolek, et al. (2008), the form development to achieve a specific urban form .... [ to ] create a predictable public realm primarily by controlling physical form (p.4) in which there is a decreased emphasis on regulating land use Walters (2007) state d that by approaching code formulation through a much more profound and reliable (p. 62) such as those found within conventional zoning codes The emphasis on form and space can produce plans which provide predictability and assurance to potential 63). This level of predictability cannot be achieved throug h the regulation of use alone. T he predictability generated by the form based code is achieved through specific measures. T hese specific measures include the use of build to lines which create a hig her level of certainty than the use of setbacks zoning and the regulation by use found wit hin conventional zoning codes ( Parolek, et al., 2008, p. xvi). Additionally, the formulation of the form based code entails an extensive front loaded participatory process to derive these specific regulations to p roduce predictability. Parolek, et al. (2008) stated that the concepts within these processes are presented to a balance of words, diagrams, and tables that are clear ... without (p. xviii), and these can also result in user friendly regulations as an outcome of the code formulation process While these regulations may be noted as clear and simply presented, these regulations must be

PAGE 25

25 specific enough to ensure the realization of the community visio n during code implementation According to Parolek, et al. (2008), the c onventi onal zoning code may also ight, but (p. 18). This use emphasis truncates the ability of the conventional zoni ng code to prescribe relationships between structures through the ir placement within the built environment and the creation of interactive open space s Parolek, et al. (2008) also stated that conventional zoning code formulation processes generally focus o drafting ( p. 99). This approach may inhibit the collaboration of those less familiar with the existing code, and the absence of a design orientation can limit visualization and public response. Parolek, e t al. (2008) explained that c (p. 99), which limits the amount of predictability that these codes can produce. Finally, Walters (2007) stated that while conventional zoning codes sometimes use ls as their base criteria ... these design guidelines, [are] essentia lly Band A ids pport weak conventional zoning, [which] are often mistaken for form based codes very different in their formulation The conventional zoning code does not centralize a form and context based approach from which to enable public response within its formulation since its emphasis remains on land use This inhibits the ability to achieve a specific community vision to derive predictabil ity

PAGE 26

26 Form Based Code Participatory Processes T he public participation that takes place within form based code formulation process was examined to uncover how these processes may be deemed meaningful in comparison to those that accompany conventional zoning. The form based code formulation process was also examined to ascertain ho w predictability i s produced as an outcome of these processes These findings were used to analyze the timing and extent of public participation from code formulation through imple mentation to consider the effects o f streamlined development review and approval process es through the project analyses that are contained within Chapter Five The form based code concept was developed by Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater Zyberk. Walters (2007) described the form based code as ticipatory the objective expertise of planning and design experts with the subjective experiences, histories and expectations of individual (p. 63). This site specificity is integral in m aintain ing community interest and this local knowledg e combined with expert information and a context specific, design oriented process provides the foundation for a purposeful public participation process. Walters (2007) stated that eaningful public participation ... [that these form based ] codes have any val p. 63). According to Walters (2007), a meaningful process and p redictability are achieved (p. 6 2). This e ntails public collaboration to define the community vision to produce specific form and context based regulations. However, while form based codes can be flexible to their application to a variety of contexts and circumstances, flexibility withi n this work entailed

PAGE 27

27 the consideration of opportunities for public participat ion following code adoption, which has been analyze d within Chapter Five: Code Implementation and Project Analyses W alters (2007) explained that the form based code participatory process requires dimensional thinking into the third (p. 62), which presents concepts that their depiction of urban qualities to create agreement about the architectural, urban and environmental character of an p. 62). Walters (2007) also stated that p ublic p articipation is critical to creation of site specificity ... for commun ity buy p. 63). To initiate these processes, s om e degree of concept framing is usually made prior to collaborating with the public; however, this provides a range of possibilities to initiate a dialogue to collaboratively formulate the form based code product. The Form Based Code Product Form based code s generate predictability throu derived metrics [that] rolek, et al., 2008, p. xvii). According to Parolek, et al. (2008), f orm based codes regulate public and private spaces and places and th eir interaction through the use o f an organizing principle to (p. 11) that ensure s that the community vision is upheld and made predictable This organization ensure s comprehensibility while creating smooth and often imperceptible transitions betwe en regulatory zones rather than the hard edge separation and buffering between single use zones that is p 11 12). Parolek, et al. (2008) stated that form based codes empower communities both to enable and to (p. 4)

PAGE 28

28 These outcomes are a result of the specificity of the form based code, which is obtained through form and context based approach es and applied within a specific context as a result of public c onfirmation obtained through ext ensive citizen participation The prescribed community vision is implement ed through form based code regulations, which are often accompanied by ent review and approval process[es] requiring little or no subjective review thus encouraging Parolek, et al., 2008, p. 12). This is seen as a complement to extensive participation that derives predictability. The value of predictability is also central to the notion that certainty will promote development. Acc ording to Polyzoides specificity and an emphasis on design also serve as economic development engine .... calibrated to the local ec onomic opportuni ties that the market can deliver as cited in Parolek, et al., 2008, p. xvii) In sum, the form based code can produce predict ability to promote development through a context specific, holistic design emphasis which can maximize the appropriateness of po tential development Steps Invo lved in the Creation of a Form B ased Code Prior to the public participation compo nent of the form based c ode, existing conditions analyse s and preliminary concepts are developed to assist in facilita ti n g the process. Accordin g to Parolek, et al. (2008), t he actual coding process involves three maj or steps, which include documenting visioning, and assembling the code ( p p 95 97 ). P reliminary analyses are conducted during the scoping and documenting phases include developing th e regulating plan, public space standards, and b uilding form standards (Parolek, et al., 2008). Parolek, et al. (2008) indicat ed that the regulating plan is used to apply zones within a framework of streets and blocks, not just in large unrefined geograp hic areas

PAGE 29

29 (p. 17) This adds to the specificity of the plan and focuses the approach to formulate the code Furthermore, t he regulating plan is used within the form based code to ensure the development of smooth transition s b etween z ones The form based code formulation p rocess may also include the depiction of building type s and frontage requirements in order to establish relation ships based on the proximity to specific thoroughfare types (Parolek, et al., 2008) According to Parolek, et al. (2008), these depictions often correlate with development standards, which are used to differences in the form and character of development in ea (p. 17) that assist within the develop ment of the confi guration of the p. 17). B uilding form standards ensure the integration of the ph ysical form within the larger context. The depiction of these concepts are useful within the formulation process and within the final code product in which t is graphic [and involves] integrating simple diagrams and easy to read tables for ease of use and clarity of the Parolek, et al., 2008, p. 3 9). These building form standards are in draft format during the public participation component and are the result of exis ting conditions analyses. These depictions help to facilitate these participatory processes, and these preliminary design parameters are malleable in order to incorporate public input (Parolek, et al., 2008). The regulating plan assig ns the location of each building type, and these context specific parameters help to realize the desired community vision. In sum, t he existing conditions analyses the development of building form standards, and the use of a regulating plan all help to or ganize and prescribe the achievement of fut ure

PAGE 30

30 d evelopment goals by providing a framework for purposeful public participatio n within the code formulation process Within the approach to create the form based code, Parolek, et al. (2008) t is critical to involve the community early and often to ensure that the code truly re (p. 124). C ommunity input is garnered within these processes in order of the existi ng comm unity are liked and disliked (Parolek, et al., 2008, p. 125 ). The s e findings provide the a good place and how those characteristics are or are not inherent within certain parts of th e com Parolek, et al., 2008, p 125). During form based code formulation the form based code team and the stake holders develop a vision plan, which a detailed vision for the future of (Parolek, et al., 2008, p. 96). Acco rding to Parolek, et al. (2008), this an illustrative p lan, a variety of three dimensional p. 96). Next the regulating pla n is adjusted using these pla ns to incorporate the goals of the community pertaining to specific icts, streets, blocks, and lots 2008, p p. 96 97). These processes result in specific regulations to ensure the implemen tation and realization of the community vision. The form based code can be used to revitaliz e a specific area or it can be applied to an entire city in order to overhaul an existing conven tional zoning code. The form based code product often refle cts the unique, local character, whic h has been defin ed thr ough the public par ticipation pr ocess within code formulation through the

PAGE 31

31 ident ification of ( Parolek, et al., 2008, p. 108) These patterns are generally established through gn and layout, character, quality and location of public spaces, sizes and types of buildings, and relationships to such natural conditions as creek corridors and topo (Parolek, et al., 2008, p. 108). Additionally, t he se patterns often correlate wit h the (Pa rolek, et al., 2008, p. 101) that often serve as the foundation of the new intent and purpose Parolek, et al. (2008) emphasized the importance of the momentum created through collaborati on that results in a sha is o ften critical in getting a form based code through the difficult waters of the public approval p p. 146). T he benefit s of form based code formulation coding) process, which can speed up both the visioning process and the public approval process Parolek, et al., 2008, p. 146) Additionally, the extensive public participation often associated with form based code formulation and the predictabi lity produced may be used to justify streamlined development review and approval procedures, which can include the use of by right development policies. The project analyses contained within Chapter Five of this work examined the implementati on of each code type within two different contex ts. These analyses examine d the development review and approv al process of the projects provided by each city, which include the consideration of streamlined development review and approval procedures and processes The D esign Orientation of the Form Based Co de Overview The design orientation of the form based code can increase the accessibility of the public to contribute towards pol icy making within code formulation process es. T he form and context based approach can be used to generate

PAGE 32

32 predictability wit hin code implementation in which t he design emphasis differentiates the form based code from the conventional zoning code. According to Eliz abeth Plater Zyberk, l com ponents of a given place .... [sin ce] d as cited in Parolek, et al., 2008, p. ix). Plater Zyberk ex based c ode depends on the use of a typology, a catalogue of types, to rationalize and make predictable built form ( as cited in Parolek, et al., p. xii). She also stated the rational structure of the form based c ode can engage the public in the creative as cited in Parol ek, et al., 2008, p. xii). Differences between Form Based Codes and Conventional Zoning Codes Numerous sources on form b ased coding note the prescriptive nature, predictability, and certainty generated by the form based code These are the result of speci fic regulations obtained through focused, extensive, and intensive citizen participation that derives parameters that address form and relationships within a given context at both the micro and macro levels. This emphasis on design and form, rather than us e, differentiates the form based code from the conventional zoning code. This design emphasis often calls upon the use of visual forms of communication wit hin the formulation process to produce regulations often conveyed throug h a balance of words and visu al imagery arly planners promoted a theory of systemized planning, [but] they failed to extend the sys p. 158). Talen odern FBCs [ form based codes] aim to impose limits that are no longer dictated by technological and other constraints, but instead rely entirely on

PAGE 33

33 p. 158). Talen (2009) indicated t and while s are tryin g to simplify regulation ... [ they are also ] attempting to reverse the trends evolving since the onset of modernism a p. 158). According to Talen (2009), form based codes must have all three attributes, which nificant enforceability; the intent to prescribe the public realm, often by regulating private building; and the direct or indirect production of time t ested forms of p. 146). Talen (2009) excluded (p. 146) form as a by product of regulating something else, such as separation, property value, traffic flow, or p. 146). While both form based codes and conventional zoning can use visua l participation techniques the for m based code process focuses on attaining consensus in order to codify specific form and context based regulations. Walters (2007) explained that zoning ordinance s and land use ha ve dom inated planning since the 1960s which almost resulted in the disappearan ce of design ( p p 57 59 ). C onv entional zoning codes can also incorporate aspects of design but the underlying difference between both code types are found within the fo rm emphasis on design that results in a specific, holistic approach to urban planning and development that can result in a meaningful public participation process This contrasts with the conventional generate s form as a by product (Parolek, et al. 2008 ; Talen, 2009 ). Talen (2009) indicated that requiring meaningful public

PAGE 34

34 participation in the code making process ... is (p. 157), and meaningful public participation within these processes is a ( p. 157). Historical u nderpinnings Both Talen and Walters explain the historical evolution of planning th at led to the form based code. W hile form based codes seem relatively n ew in concept, Walters (2007) compares these new codes to the Spanish master planning concept (p. 85) and buildin gs, and orientations ( p. 85). Walters (2007) also indicated that within the pursuit of the sustainable community, ajo r comeback (p. 55) While the design oriented form based code is often considered new these have 2009, p. 158). T he form based code relies on public consensus much diff erent than the design ori ented codes of the past. Talen (2009) emphasiz ed zoning that has a decidedly p. 158). Legal p recedent and the right to d es ig n. Even tho ugh form based codes are gaining in popularit y there can be concerns with switching to design rela ted or form based regulations. In response, t he form based code participatory pro cesses are used to build const ituencies ; however, there are legal precedents that es tablish a des ign (Walters, 2007). According to Walters (2007 ), comprehensive ordinance is constrained by American law regarding the amount of architectural detail that can be controlled (pp. 100 101). Walters (2007) explain ed that these regulations often conc on issues of public spatial infrastructure (p. 101) while regulating buildings to the extent that they must play their roles in creating these sp p 101).

PAGE 35

35 While form based codes may claim that aesthetics are not the primary concern, it is through this design orientation that the courts, and perhaps even public participation processes, have validated thi s exercise. Walters (2007) stat ed based zoning disavows aesth etics as its main concern, yet [it] is historically enabled under la w by invoking aest p. 108). For the sake of caution, many communities e public policy goals ... based on clear, objective stand ters, 2007, p. 107). California is the first state to attempt to strengthen the form based code and its design orientation legally, and a ccording to Walters (2007), California laws have created based zoning, but at the moment it stands alone in its clarity ... [ with out compara ble] legisl ation in other states, although Florida is considerin p. 107). he Californ ia law [states that] ... the text and diagrams ... that address the location and extent of land uses, and the zoning ordinances that implement these provisions, may also express community intentions regarding urban fo (p. 107), which is directly written to facilitate New Urbanist form based zoni ng p. 1 08). The regulation of design oriented objectives has evolved from being an aspec t of a component of the public welf are established by Euclid and People v. Stover that found that urban design can constitute (Walters, 2007, p. 108). According to Walters (2007), f orm based codes may avert matters of aes thetic detail instead on more basic issues of urban char a p. 108). Walters (2007) stated is potential problem

PAGE 36

36 can be resolved in the wording of the Penn Central legal opinion that regards the ... as equivalent under the p. 108). he ability to validate for m based zoning legally under (p. 108) legal security especially if regulations focus on questions of basic urban design, not (p. 108). These measures are taken to avoid (p. 108), and Walters (2007) further emphasize d based zoning codes to clearly stated publ p. 108). Walters (2007) explained that f orm based codes have the ability to legally control as street width and connectivity, building height, contextual relationships of building massin g, relationship of buildings to streets at the pedestrian level, positioning of building entrance s (p. 108). These objectives for safe and attractive urban a Through the emphasis on typology and morphology, form based code regulations receive validation by de (Wal ters, 2007, p p 108 109). While conventi onal zoning may be able to sidestep these concerns through use regulation the form based code is validated through legal precedent

PAGE 37

37 The c harrette Code formulation processes often entail the use of the charrette. Ac cording to Walters (2007), t he precedent of this French term (p p 168 169 ), which Planning movement beginning in the mid p 169). While the charrette can be used to improve levels of citizen participation within conventional zoni ng, the charrette is often the basis of the approach of form based code formulation, and the difference between both co de types lies in the specificity of the approach and code outcome and the ability to produce a meaningful and purposeful public process According to Walters (2007), t he benefits of these processes include that the sign process in action, to see how variables are (p. 170) T he creation of specific regulations through intensive par ticipation of form based code formulation creates the distinction between the processes of the form based code and the conventional z oning code Walters (2007) emphasized that esign process must be truly collaborative and harness the talents and energies of all interested parties if the plan is to be both feasible and transformative in terms of bringing ab (p. 171) since defend the plan, the professionals know they p. 171). The simplicity of the form based code is an importan t aspect in generating participation since Walters (2007) indicat ed that complexity creates bar riers to collaboration and rais democrati p. 88).

PAGE 38

38 This simplicity is often achieved through the incorporation of a balance of visual imagery and language to convey concepts within the process and within the outcomes through clearly and specifically codified regulations that r epresent the community vision. While all code formulation processes can incorporate visual imagery, form b ased codes rely on context and form based approaches, which centralize a design orientation achieved t hrough processes that engender specific response The us e of visual forms of communication is integral to these processes since implications of policies and ideas what they might look like on the ground is crucial to citizen empowe rme Architect Richard Rogers stated that city and as cited in Walters, 2007, p. 79). He also emphasized the importance of this public inv olvement in ( as cited in Walters, 2007, p. 79). Walters (2007) indicated that effective types of regulation for this purpose are ... form 200 7, p 80). Design r evival According to Walters (2007) t (p. 57), and design based conception of planning continues to have relevance in planni ng th p. 57) The visual communication and the design orientation are helpful in facilitating co mmunicative planning. Walters (2007) indic ated that t he combination of a design orientation and communicative planning (p. 57) that

PAGE 39

39 enrich the physical design (p.57). P erhaps the physical design process is useful in enriching the participatory aspect, a s well. societal awareness 48) and motivating and enabli p. 48). DiSalvo (2009) analyzed [that] might contribute to the construction of ( p. 49). DiSalvo (2009) emphas ized that communication enables a public to (p. 51 ) and stated that for the construction of publics and a place where design cont p 51). DiSalvo (2009) identified (p. 51) not and indicated that design provides a means to facilitate such action since design might contribute to the construction of publics is by the application of designerly means to this task p 52). DiSalvo (2009) delineated the construction of the public and the design into strategies and tactics (p. 52) since expressions and structures of power exerted by i nstitutions ... that attempt to prescribe behavior a p. 52). In this manner, tactics include the public response and according to DiSalvo (2009) these appropriations, or manipulations of des (p. 52) which include projection and tr acing Within the projection tactic, DiSalvo (2009) differentiated between predictive and prescrip t ive scenarios, which construe possibilities visio ns of what should p. 53). According to DiSalvo (2009),

PAGE 40

40 t (p. 55) an issue; in ways that foster knowledge thro p 56). Through project analyses, DiSalvo (2009) indicated that of materials, actions, concepts and values that shape and frame the issue are not intellectualized and distanced: (p. 58) design tactic of tracing is not defined by context, but by method and intent; by the crafted transcription of complex information into comprehensive forms that appeal to our p. 58). He emphasi zed the role of contextual and temporal relationships between projections and tracings produced through responses to design within the construction of the public (DiSalvo, 2009). DiSalvo (2009) concluded tics and common grounds, we can begin to ask, and answer, the question of how the processes and products of design might serve in discovering and articulating the issues that spur a pub p. 62). DiSalvo (2009) also concluded with mention of the concern for ethics, since while these may further develop the notion of what constitutes the public by inspiring action or participation, he acknowledges how these acts can also lead to th eir misuse and misinformation. T his underlying assumption stems from imbalances of power, which is in contrast to the aim of both the form based code and the conventional zoning code in that the form b ased code requires extensive publ ic collaboration to produce a commun ity vision based on a form and context based appr oach T he conventional zoning code emp hasize s use rather than design perhaps as a means to segue this potential ;

PAGE 41

41 however, this results in the absence of a responsive design platform fr om which to engage the public. True stakeholder collaboration would not lead to great imbalances of power, and the caution within these processes seems to stem from partici pation not being meaningful; therefore streamlined code implementation policies could produce results less in line with public preference and could be per ceived as less ethical within proc esses lacking the specificity derived from a form and context based approach In response, DiSalvo (2009) emphasized hand in hand with the construct p. 63). Pre dictability versus f lexibilit y. According to Talen (2009) (p. 157) and she stated between infusing aesthetic goals into the planning process, and c oding prescribed p. 157 ). Walters (2007) indicated that the d esign oriented approach can generate meaningful new and site specific knowledge (p. 55) and formulated or ge p p 55 56 ). The concepts within fo rm based codes are often framed for public consideration, but the intent is not to pre formulate outcomes. The consensus building that takes place within code formulation processes aims to generate greater predictability through regulations created by the public to achieve the future goals and objectives of the communit y. The extensive front loaded citizen participation that goes into for m based code formulation aims to increase levels of predictability within code implementation processes and outcomes As a result of a high level of purposeful public participation within form based code formulation the predictability derived from the form based code process has the potential to be more ethical when coupled with streamlined

PAGE 42

42 implementation policies than the conventional zoning code process when coupled with streamline d implementation policies. This is due to the potential for citizen participation to be more meaningful and purposeful within form based code formulation processes as a result of a focus on gener ating context specific and prescriptive regulations based on form rather than use However, a dditional flexibility, in the form of additional opportunities for citizen participation may also be necessary to accompany the implementation pr ocess due to the potential for additional concerns to arise through actual development projects that may require further consideration. Streamlined b y right development policies ca n accompany the predictability model to reduce time and expense; however, these may not enta il public proc esses While there can be oppor tunities for the public to discuss or negotiate with the developers or staff for projects that do not require public hearings these often take place off of the public record and do not allow the public to seek conditions of approval from the City Commissi on or Council that could exacerba te imbalances in influence. T he predictability model can present a feasible and ethical approach from mu ltiple perspectives since it can involve incorporating extensive public in put through form based code formulation that can serve to reduce time and expense throughout code implementation O pportunities for further citizen participation throughout code implementation could be incorporated into development review and approval thro ugh the use of new techno logies to minimize time and expense while maximizing the best of representation bala nced with additional opportunities for participation through collabo ration, consensus building, increased public access, and transparency. The

PAGE 43

43 pred ictability model that incorporates aspects of the flexibility model would therefore advance an ethical planning approach while minimizing increases in uncertaint y, time and expense within code implementation processes to produce the most efficient and r esponsive set of outcomes. Analytical Criteria for Participatory Processes and Outcomes Analytical criteria provided by Inn es and Booher (1999) we re examined for their application to assess the effectiveness of participat ory processes and outcomes of code formulation that lead t he discussion in Chapter Four. These criteria are also used to gauge the quality of processes and outcomes of code implementation following eac h Chapter Five. Thes e findings are also used to analyz e the hypotheses at the end of Chapter Five and the sum of these findings comprises the recommendations made within Chapter Six. According to Walters (2007), Judith Innes argu ed persuasively that new public participation techniques developed under the rubric of communicative planning enabled the process of consensus building to be reinvigor ated, and a usable definition of the public int erest to be achieved While local governments follow state guidelines that involve public hearings to provide a forum for public input, according to Innes (199 6), jurisdictions ... (p. 469). This is problematic since according to Innes (1996), a lack of citizen participation p. 469). Consensus buildi ng through participation is critical to the success of a plan in e, flexible, long term strategies f (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 413). Innes and Booher (1999)

PAGE 44

44 indicate d that he way to evaluate consensus building is to see whether it produced the intended agreement and whether it resulted in the intended o utcom p 416 ). (p. 418) and include the evaluation of process and o utcome criteria in order to analyze each process and o p 419). process that is inclusive, well informed, and comes close to achieving consensus is more likely to produce an (p. 42 0 ) are more likely to feel comfortable with a process they can organize themselves and more likely to b p 420). Process Criteria According to Innes and Booher (1999), process criteria of a good cons ensus bu ilding consist p. 419), and t hese processes (p. 419). T hese should also be organizing, allowing participants to decide on ground rules, objectives, tasks, Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419), and should d Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). According to Innes and Booher (1999) ch allenges to the status quo and [foster] creat hig h quality info rmati agreement o p. 419), and consensus only after discussions have fully explored the

PAGE 45

45 issues and interests and significant effort has been made to find creative responses to Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Innes and Booher (1999) conclude d that meet any one of them hinders the effectiveness of the process and the quality of its p. 419). Outcome Criteria According to Innes and Booher (1999), outcome criteria should include producing (p. 419) (p. 419) and ensuring that the th other planning methods in terms of costs ( p. 419). These processes should also (p. 419) 1 999, p. 419). O utcome s of a good particip atory processes should include the creation o (p. 419) and outcomes cascade of changes in attitudes, behaviors and actions, spinoff partnerships, and new er, 1999, p. 419). The outcomes of these (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Innes and Boo her (1999) explain ed (p. 419) second order effects that show up while the project is underway but outside of the boundaries of the project or eve p. 419). Innes and Booher t is not necessary for every outcome criterion to be achieved (p. 419). However, Innes and Booher (1999) stated that

PAGE 46

46 produces more of the desired outcomes is probably better than one which achieves fewer, but in any case, one or more of the outcomes may be of p. 419). Finally, Innes and Booher (1999) state d that consensual solution would be a d esirable and robust one in the sense that it would be well informed it would have stood the test of challenging discussion, and it would serve (p. 418) including those that may question t p. 418). Summary The differences be tween the form based code and the conventional zoning code have been analyzed within this chapter. Additionally, t he form based code has been examined according to process and outcomes thr ough the consideration of code formulation and implementation T he d esign orientation and use of visual communication within the form based code formulation process has also been analyzed to uncover the application of these in expanding public accessibility P redictability has been examined to consider how it is achieved t hrough code formulation and translated into code implementation Finally, c riteria for good consensus building processes and outcomes have also been outlined to provide a standard from which to analyze code formulation for the Cities of Miami, Florida and Denver, Colorado T hese criteria were also used to evaluate code implementation through project analyses for each code type within each city in Chapter Five.

PAGE 47

47 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY Thesis Objective This study specifically examined the participation that o ccurs within form based code formulation This has been analyzed to uncover the potential for outcomes that reflect establish ed design specifics, which may preclude the necessity of further public participation through increa sed predictability within the d e velopment review and approva l process Project analyses we re used t o exam ine code implementation processes and outcomes to identify the pot ential differences between the form based code and the conventional zoning code based on projects provided by the Ci ties of Miami, Florida and Denver, Colorado. These project analyses we re used to consider the timing and extent of p ublic participation as critical, ethical factors that are affected by the relationship between code formulation and implementation for each code type To test the s e relationships two scenarios hav e been provided by each city. These were used to evaluate the differences in terms of code implementation process es and outcomes produce d by both co de types A ddition ally projects reviewed under bot us conventional zoning codes have been subjected to the regulations of the newly adopted form based codes to uncover if there are differences in ter ms of process and outcomes between both code types Furthermore, the processes and outcomes of code formulation and code consensus building processes and outcomes (1999), which were discussed in the lit erature review in Chapter Two. These anal yses are conducted separate ly. The analysis of code formulation occurs at the end of Chapter Four, and code

PAGE 48

48 analyses within Chapter Five. A summary of these findings are provided in Chapter Six, and a diagram for these ana lyses have been included below within Figure 3 1 : Analyses using Innes and riteria. Figure 3 1:

PAGE 49

49 Hypotheses From t he outset, it was hypothesized, within Hypothesis I, that the form based code has great er potential to incorporate meaningful participation earlier in the process than the conventional zoning code. of the general public to assist in shaping public policy and decision making and the level of specificity generated in order to achieve consensus and incr ease certainty in development. Interest in certainty and predictability stems from information obtained through the literature review r egarding form based codes that indicated that these quali ties are c onducive to promoting development and economic growth To examine this hypothesis, information obtained through interviews and staff reports, and the proj ect analyses were used to analyz e Hypothesis I. F rom preliminary analysis, it was discovered th at both Miami and Denver have by rig ht development policies Projects reviewed under both the current form based code and the previous co nventional zoning code can preclude public participation during the review and approval process if a project do es no t warrant a dditional processes This can make the public participation that went into code formulation critical since opportunities to participate after the code has been adopted may be limited or even non existent. While the intent of the form based code is to increase predictability and streamline develop ment review, this analysis weigh ed the value of further participation against the value of increased certa inty in promoting development. The level of detail that often goes into the creation of form based codes may be complemented by streamlined implementation policies, which include those pertaining to by ri ght development As a result, the participation that goes into code formulation is examined alongside the analysis of projects accompanying both code types to test the relationship between

PAGE 50

50 code formulation and implementation in order to analyze the necessity and presence of further public participation opportunities Secondary Objectives The secondary objectives of this study were used to examine the p rescriptive natur e of form based codes in order to uncover ho w predictability is generated. The design orientation and t he use of visual communication within code formulation we re analyze d to identify differences between each code type in terms of process and outcomes. These findings were factored in to consider the relationship to each code type and as a means to maximize the quality and e xtent of public participation within code formulation The use of design and form within each context were analyzed wit hin the code implementation project analyses to identify potential differences in terms of code function and organization that serve to predict and achieve the community vision This study also anal yzed Hypothesis II, which projected that t he form based co de entails a greater level of visual communication and decision making based on the design orientation than the conventional zoning code. Hypothesis III projected that d ue to this design orientation and visual communication, participation within the form b ased code is more inclusive and acc essible to the general public. The value of these secondary objectives is to support the project and code analyses to uncover the timing and extent of participation and the relationship between code f ormulation and implem entation. Hypotheses II and III were examined through information obtained through the interviews, staff reports, mee ting minutes, and code analyses. The aim was to examine the level of visual communication used within these processes, and the design orien tation of these new codes to consider how these factors relate to the level of accessibility and predictability generated by each code type.

PAGE 51

51 Finally, this study examined language to uncover whether or not these emphases inhibit the potential for purposeful public participation. T hese emphases were also analyzed within the code implementation project analyses to examine if these present abstract and ambiguous concepts and regulatio ns that would produce diffe rences in predictability between both code types A ddition ally th e emphasis on use and language within conventional zoning wa s also examined to uncover if these increase the importance of public participation during code implementation through development review and approval due to the potential for a decreased level of predictability generated through a less specific and, therefore, a less meaningful and purpos eful code formulation process. This study also analyzed Hypothesis IV, which projected that d ue to the emphasis on language and use, the conventional zoning code presents a higher level of predetermined concepts that are more abstract and less likely to facilitate participation, which makes public participation during development review and approv al more critical. This examin ation also considered how citizen participation can result in a clear, well defined, and codified community vision that may shorten the development review and approval process through the elimination of repetition and through the establishment of greater c ertainty. Hypothesis IV was examined through the ana lysis of information obtained from interviews, the code implementation project analyses and the evaluation of good consensus building processes and outcomes achieved through th e analysis of code formulation and implementation based on the criteria establish ed by Innes and Booher (1999).

PAGE 52

52 Methodology of Investigation This study is non experimental and utilizes a cross sectional design for the purpose of ascertaining the extent of variation between processes and outcomes within code f ormulation and implementation. In order to achieve these results, th e case studies have been presented in Chapter Four, and a discussion and analysis using the findings obtained from t he project and cod e analyses have been examined to make processes and outcomes (1999). A portion of this analysis has been performed using open ended, unstructured interviews with city staff th at participated in the creation of Miami 21 and the De nver Zoning Code. This research wa s developed in accordance with the following research objectives. First, the participatory processes used to develop the form based codes in Miami and D enver were exami ned to analyze the approach used to create the form based code to consider the role of the design orientation in generating predictability and as a means to increase the public accessibil ity within the code formulation process Second, project analyses we r e performed to ascertain what differences may exist between the regulations of each code type to examine their effect on code implementation the development outcomes produced, and the need for further citizen participation within the dev elopment review an d approval process Next both the code formulation case studies and code implementation project analyses we re evaluated according to Innes building processes and outcomes to determine the level of criteria achieved under both formulation and im plementation for the projects of both cities to gauge the function of process and outcomes in each sta ge T he findings obtained from these research objectives were used to examine the

PAGE 53

53 hypotheses outlined earlier within this ch apter and these results are provided at the end of Chap ter Five. Finally, t he results of all of these findings were used to make the recommendations contained with in Chapter Six. A diagram of this methodological sequence has been provide d on the next page in Figure 3 2 : Methodological d iagram.

PAGE 54

54 Figure 3 2: Methodological diagram

PAGE 55

55 Data Collection and Analysis This research used a case stud y methodology consisting of form based code formulation analyses performed for the C ities of Miami, Florida and Denver Colorado that involved the collection and analysis of five types of data: 1) interviews; 2) the review of both cities form based codes; 3) the review of both cities conventional zoning codes; 4) analysis of projects for each code type within each conte xt and before and after analyses for each conventional zoning code project reviewed under the new form based code regulations for a total of six analyses; and 5) review of public records and planning documents, newspaper articles, books, and p eer reviewed journal articles. More specifically, these analyses have been performed as a result of interviews with leading planning professionals involved in the processes to creat based code. Case studies have been developed through the use of info rmation obtained from newspaper articles, books, government documents, and p eer reviewed journal articles. Project analyses have been conducted as a result of information provided by each city, which include site development plans, meeting minutes, staff r eports, studies perfo rmed for each project, and regulations obtained from each code type related to the review of each project. Limitations, Possible Defects, and Reasonable Solutions Limitations of this study include limiting interviews to leading plannin g professionals involved in code formulation; howe ver, this should not affect a comprehensive analysis of the process, function, and the o utcomes produced by each code type within code implementation Due to the public nature of local government planning, ethical concerns are limited as a result of a decrease d concern for confidentiality. Interviewing protocol has received approval by the Institutional Review

PAGE 56

56 Board (IRB) an d all interviewees have sign ed the informed consent letter in order to comply with re search standards. Thesis Justification, Expected Results, and Contribution The novelty of this research stemmed from the analysis of processes and outcomes derived from the first major U.S. cities to adopt th e form based code, which considered the relation ship of public participation between code formul ation and code implementation. While much has been covered within participatory theory and communicative planning, little research has been made that app lie s findings obtained through formulation that extends on to implementation to consider the need for further citizen particip ation following code adoption. A ddition ally the value of predictability and cert ainty in promoting development ha s been considered within this study to evaluate the need for additional flexibility to complement the predictability model in the form of additional public participation opportunities This analysis was used to evaluat e ethical planning approach es that were based on the findings obtained from the identification of the process es and outc form based code and conventional zoning code This was achieved through case study analyses that were used to examine cod e formulation and project analyses were used to examine code implementation The gaps within the literature identified for this study include the relationship between the participation that occurs within code formulation through implementation While many sources noted the differences between the regulatory approach of both code types, litt le information was available that e xamined how these processes translate into implementat ion Perhaps this is a result of the relatively new approach of the form based code, and the lack of a prior standard from which to compare the

PAGE 57

57 conventional zoning cod e. In response, this study analyzed the differences between each code type in terms of participatory capacity as a result of the timing, extent, and the need for citizen particip ation following code adoption For this study, t he development review and appr oval process was selected to test each co de in terms of implementation. The design orientation is translated into physical project design review through the delineation of process and outcomes throughout the project analyses to further examine how these ta ngible and visual conceptions enable public response. To advance decision and policy making through public participati on, this study examined whether or not different cod e types affect this potential. It wa s expected that the design orientation of the for m based code would provide a greater opportunity for the public to make contributions t o policy and decision making. It wa s also expected that through a collaborative decision making model that the results of development would be mor e sustainable and pred icta ble. Through the se analyses, this study explored how, and if, predictability wa s created by thes e code types. This study also considered how these regulations and code i mplementation policies may affect the timing, extent and need for further public p articipa tion following code adoption.

PAGE 58

58 CHAPTER 4 CODE FORMULATION CASE STUDIES Overview Code formulation has been examined to analyze the processes used by the City of Miami Florida and the City of Denver Colorado to examine the public participation tha t based code These processes have been analyzed according to prob lem identification to examine the previous conventiona l zoning code T he timi ng and extent of participation was ana lyzed alongside the design orientation and the use of visual communi cation within these code formulation processes. Cha llenges withi n these processes were examined and the outcomes and impleme ntation of the form based code we re analyzed to provide additio nal background for the code implementation project analyses contained within Chapter Five Additionally, the p rocesses and outcomes of code formulation we re examin ed through the use of evaluative criteria for good consensus building processes established b y I nnes and Booher (1999) in the discussion section at the end of this chapter. These analyses we re also repeated to evaluate code implementation processes and outcomes r Five. These comparisons serve d to exp lore if each of these form based code particip atory processes we re considered good consensus building pro cesses and outcomes and these we re also used to assess the need for further par ticipation against the benefits of predictability in Chapter Five. Fina lly, these findings served as the basis of the an alysis of the hypotheses at the end of Chapter Five and were used to generate the f indings and recommendations in Chapter Six

PAGE 59

59 Case Study: The Process and Outcomes of Creating the Miami 21 Plan Introduction The City of Miami adopted its form based code in May 2010, and the process used to create the new code was centered on citizen participation involving an extensive series of wor kshops and meetings over a five year p eriod (Parolek, et al., 2008). The name, of Miami of the 21 st c (1) and the goals of Miami 21 include needs 1 2009 ). Proj ect Manager for Miami 21, stated (p. 34) (p. 35) through the establish 34 ). Problem Identification and the Previous Conventional Zoning Code, Ordinance 11000 based code was driven by several factors. First, the conventional zo ning code was nearly 20 years old and had been amended seve ral times since its adoption, which led to inconsistencies that did not serve to achieve the goal s and objectives (Raterman, 2007). Next, this complexity incentivized development inappropriately and led to the development of 35). The inconsistencies within the code were exacerbated while the economy was strong and it became evident that there was arolek, et al., 2008, p. 228). A ddition ally the city desired predictability, and foun d that the Comprehensive Pl an established densities

PAGE 60

60 as the primary basis for build out with little regulatio n to create predictable outcome[s] (P arolek, et al., 2008, p. 228). The Form B ased Code Response In response, the city identified the desire for predictability that w ould be achieved through the formul ation and implem entation of a form ba sed code. The use of an ( Parolek, et al., 2008, p p 228 229 ). A ccording to Parolek, et al. (2008), this organizing principle was used to transition[s] in height and d p 229). As a result, the city identified areas that could support additional growth and differentiated these areas from areas where additional growth or density would not be viable or desi rable, such as within existing single family neighborhoods. According to Raterman (2007) the city was motivated to adopt a form based code pedestrian (p. 35 ), and it was believed that these would best be addressed p. 35). To begin this process, the city hired Duany Plater Zyberk and Company to create the form based code, and leading consultants in economic development, parks and open space, and transportation produced studies to m based code (Raterman, 2007). As a result, the Miami 21 product not only addresses zoning through a form based and context nomic development, transportation, parks and open

PAGE 61

61 The Process Used to Create Miami 21 Timing and extent of p articipation The process within Miami evolved to incorporate an exten sive number of meetings, w hich exceeded expectations; however, these were deem ed necessary to work towards achieving consensus. T he process goals and purpose were well established by leading experts in form based coding The ticipatory process to creat e the form based code involved over 500 meetings over a 4.5 year period and the overall cost to produce the new form based code was about $3Million, which included marketing and leg al fees in the amount of about $800,000 of the tota l cost ( Gonzalez, personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). The City of Miami has a population of nearly 400,000 residents, and while an estimate of the percentage of the total population would be small, G onzalez indicat ed that this was the most democrat ic process ever wit hin the city, and there was a greater turnout throughout this process than there we re for other community meetings (personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). She explained that at the kick off meeting, t here were over 600 participants and she indicated that the meetings and workshops of all of the quadrants were w ell attended and well organized (Gonzalez, personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). When asked if form based code formulation has greater potential to incorporate meaningful partic ipation earlier in the process than that of the conventional zoning code, Gonzalez responded that the form based code encoura ges p articipation as a result of the predictability achieved through codifica tion (Gonzalez, personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011) I n terms of project review, Gonzalez indicated that criter ia were increased into the code, which include regulations pertaining to height, design, and the pedestrian orientation and she explained that these measures were taken to eliminate

PAGE 62

62 repetition wi thin the design and development review processes since many of these criteria had to be revisited each time for projects reviewed under the conventional zoning c ode, Ordinance 11000 ( personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). Gonzalez explained that Miami 21 is a hybrid form based code and zoning still underlies the new form based code since Miami is a built out city with existing condi tions and nonconformities in which zoning was used to blend these into the form based approach (Gonzalez, personal communicat ion, Aug. 22, 2011). Gonzalez stat ed that "nonconformity is a complicated issue... becaus as cited in Raterman, 2007, p. 36). The code was fixed to address concerns pertaining to nonconformities which stem from the possibility of hurrican es destroying homes grand (Raterman, 2007, p. 36). Gonzalez indicated that the benefit of having a hybrid form base d code that incorporates existing conditions is that it is useful for econom ic development and job creation and the analysis of these existing conditions allowed the team to assess development capacity ( personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). The quadrant a pproach According to Gonzalez, the decision to initiate participation at the quad rant level was a result of t he 13 Neigh borhood Enhancement Teams that ar e a part of g overnment operations which were broken down into net areas and resulted in the four quadrants ( personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). She indic ated that the process began with the East Quadrant sin ce it was the most development intense and the process continued until th e completion of all quadrants North, South, East, and West (Gonzalez, personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011).

PAGE 63

63 Initially, the city considered using the form based code for a portion of the city, but after much consideration, it was decided that this new code would be applied to the arolek, et al., 2008, p. 228). Within each quadrant, staff and consultants worked with the public to produce a workable plan that contained t he vision per each quadrant. These were later combined to provide a comprehensive new vision for the entire city. The approach to participation at t he quadrant level consisted of status presentations and workshops that res ulted in the development of the initial draft (Parolek, et al., 2008, p. 229). According to Parolek, et al. (2008), t he process to create Miami 21 consisted of (p. 229) c outreach processes ever p. 229). The code formulation process involved analyzing existing conditions and the uses contained within the conventional zoning code to consider the application of the transect, followed by the determinati on of areas with additional development ca pacity (Parolek, et al., 2008). (p. 229) were performed, according to Parolek, et al. (2008), and these were developed into a study to determine the evolution (p. 229). T he results of these analyses (P arolek, et al., 2008, p. 229). The goal of these open houses, workshops, and meetings was t o provide an arena for elected officials, city staff, design professionals, and the citizens of Miami to collaborate on the construction of a new vision and a responsive set o f regulations that would prescribe th e future of the City of Miami.

PAGE 64

64 The design o r ientation and visual c ommunication The use of visual communication and the design orientation within the form based code formulation process was used to increase accessibility and serve d to clar ify concepts to increase particip atory capacity. The form bas ed code team considered how the transect zones would be depicted per each quadrant in order to initiate and further develop the se participatory processes. According to Parolek, et al. (2008), the team (p. 229) which to be the most successful representation of the T (p. 229) (see Appendix A) Visual images were used to graphically present these concepts and to relay the developing community vision through a common visual l an guage. According to Gonzalez, the city went above and beyond in their marketing and outreach efforts to solicit participation for Miami 21, which included bus shelter ads, bumper stickers, banners, fliers, and direct postcard mail outs to all residents and househ olds throughout the entire city ( personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). Outreach in other languages, including Spanish and Creole, consisted of postcards delivered in other languages and translators were available at the meetings and workshops. Gon zalez explained that about $250,000 was spent on m arketing over the five year period (personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). Gonzalez also confirmed that the use of visual communication and the design orientation were bigger factor s within the form based code than the conventional zoning code, Ordinance 11000, and she indicated that the two plans and the processes to complete them do not even compare since they are so different (personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). When asked if the format and approach of the form based code participatory processes encourages

PAGE 65

65 greater levels of participation, Gonzalez indicated t hat particip ation is central to the process within form based code formulation since successful plans rely on community buy in (personal communic ation, Aug. 22, 2011). Ch allenges within the p rocess to c reate Miami 21 Challenges within the form based code formulation process stemmed from concerns r egarding comprehensibility, the potential for limits to be placed on creative freedom, and the appropr iateness of development that could be produced by the new code (Viglucci, 2009). In response, the City of Miami and the project consultants worked to clarify concerns and address these issues. According to Gonzalez, additional studies were performed to dem onstrate that Miami 21 would not be any more restrictive than Ord inance 11000, and the team successfully indicated this as a result of these studies, which have been included in Appendix B: Differences in Product (personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). Wh en asked what could be changed if the process were to be redesigned or facilitated from the beginni ng once again Gonzalez stated that the team could sta rt early to identify opposition (personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). She also indicated that since t he code affects properties leadership should be nurtured alongside the timely provision of drafts, which would allow additional time for everything to be digested prior to the public hearings (Gonzalez, personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). Gonzalez al so indicated that small stakeholder groups should be identified to represent larger bodies, and they should be made part of th e team as champions, which would include outreach and communication from the beginning with the local AIA (American I nstitute of A rchitects) Chapter (personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). Suggestions that Gonzalez had for other cities wanting to transform an existing conventional zoning

PAGE 66

66 code into a for m based code include d having an eye on implementation since administration and im plementatio n were not covered as much as they could hav e been during the code formulation process due to the absenc e of the full spectrum at that time (personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). Outcomes and the implementation of the form based c ode As a prod uct, the Miami 21 fo rm based code is considered to have increased predictability in order to s treamline development review, and t he process that went into the creation of Miami 21 led to ( Parolek, et al., 2008, p p 22 9 230 ) This served to streamline regulations in order to increase clarity and predictability Parolek, et al. (2008) indicated that as a result of the code formulation process, the tra nsect (p. 230 ) in order to increase compatibility between intensities and densities, while implementing design complexity of physical size and use needed in Miami (p. 229 ) The outcomes of the code formulation pro cess and the resulting new code roper b 4). According to Parole k, et al. (2008), abutting T zone transitions were developed to blen d intensities and uses through stepping and height requirem ents, and floor plate maximums were developed to ensure proportional and predictable development p. 232). by net lot area and gross floor a (p. 232) was developed to increase predictability and other s k et al., 2008, p. 232 ). According to

PAGE 67

67 Parolek, et al. (2008), t his o fit within the regulated FAR [floor area r atio] (p. 232) which was c hanged to floor lot r (p. 233 ) for the new code in order to ens ure envelope of the bu p. 233). Summary Now that the form participation in the future include opportunities for further citizen participa tion through r equired public hearings and through the rewrite of th e sign regulations for Miami 21 (Gonzalez, personal com munication, Aug. 22, 2011). A ddition ally the use of ne w technologies and social media are being considered to provide additional form s of public participation (Gonzalez, personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). Even though Miami 21 resulted in a responsive set of regulations and a streamlined development process to incr ease predictability, according to Gonzalez, there are still a lot of public process deviators that involve public notice and the opportunity for public comment ( personal c he structure of the Miami 21 code is a vast improvement over the general SmartCode in relation to a citywide application and is a good refe r ence for other cities and FBC [form based c ode] p ractitioners creating citywide form based c (p. 232) Case Study: The Process and Outcomes of Creating the Denver Zoning Code Introduction The City of Denver ad opted its form based code, the Denver Zoning Code in June ( Denver, 2010 b p. 1). The code formulation process entailed an extensive pa rti cipatory process over a five year period.

PAGE 68

68 Problem Identification convent ional zoning code, Chapter 59. Development Director, Peter J. Park ( as cited in Laetz & Halbur, 2010, 7). O verall, the problem with Chapter 59 was that the a pproa ch to planning in the 1950s (7) which attempted to reverse (Laetz & Halbur, 2010, 7). City Planner, Tina Axelrad, the conventiona l zoning code, Chapter 59, was old, out of date, had lots of rezonings, and often involved highly negotiate d processes with neighbors that resulted in waivers an d conditions (personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). Axelrad explained that the differences between the two codes are the level of clarity and certainty reflected in the new code, and while the old c ode did incorporate newer mixed use categories from the mid 90s on, it created numerous unique zoning districts each with a twist that led to too many differe nces within the plan and zoning (personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). This included over 900 distinct zoning classifications due to the existence of P UDs (Planned Unit Developments) (Axelrad, personal com munication, Aug. 30, 2011). The Denver Comprehensive Plan (2000) an d Blueprint Denver (2002), the C integrated land use and transportation plan both called for an overhaul of the conventional zonin g code since it was found to create a barrier to achieving smart growth ( Denver, 2010 b p. 1). dated June 17, 2010, indicate d design(ed) to reflect values and aspi rations of another era...[that] encumber(ed) ( Denver, 2010 b p. 1 2 ). A ddition ally Blueprint

PAGE 69

69 Denver (2002) cal promote development t can support additional growth and through the designation of areas for preservation and built out areas ( Denver, 2010 b p. 2). were not addres sed within the conventional zoning code, Chapter 59, and according to as cited in Hill, 2009, 7). The city found th at the conve ntional zoning code Chapter 59, demonstrated support for the mixed use, pedestrian (Denver, 2010b, p. 2), and Chapter 59 encourage investmen (Denver, 2010b, p. 2) to promote services relat ed to transit use These goals and objectives also correlate d with the second motivation underlying the creation of the new form based code, which wa recovery and continued growth and prosperity into the 21 st (Denver, 2010b, p. 3). The team identified the need t o create a new code that enabled development in parts of Denver that have the infrastructure and land capacity to ( Denver 2010 b p. 3). The third and final motivation for the new form based code wa year old conventional zoning code, C hapter 59, since it was found to contain out dated goals and objectives that use redevelopment or reinvestment; ... rather than balancing new development with enhancing the stability of established neighborhoods; or its emphasis on use regulations rather than a more balanced (Denver, 2010b, p. 3). These factors reflected

PAGE 70

70 se priorities [that] led to numerous patchwork Denver, 2010 b p. 3). The Form B ased Code Response In order to respond to these inconsistencies and to implement these plans, Denve r decided to create and implement a new form ( Denver, 2010 b p. 1). The new c sensitive zonin (Denver, 2010b, p. 4). This approach emphasized a balance between building form and land use regulation, and according to the City of Denver (2010b), this has resulted in a easy to (p. 6) set of re gulations that are based on the vis ion per eac h neighborhood context A ccording to Hill (2009) the city 1 and B (1) (1) to ensure predictability in achieving outcomes based on the comm unity vision established through the form based code formulation process The P rocess Used to Create the Form B ased Code The timing and e xtent o f p articipation The estimated cost for the five year process was about $85 0,000, overall, and this included payment to code consultants, Code Studio from Austin, Texas, and Winter and Company from Boulder, Colorado (Axelrad, personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). Axelrad stated that there was a significant amo unt of staff time involved and about $215,000 was spent for pu blic outreach and communication, which consisted of the project website, newsletters, and a direct postcard mailing to over 219,000 parcels ( personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). In order to eliminate barriers to participation, Spanish translation was provided,

PAGE 71

71 and post cards in Spanish were hand del ivered by city council members to re ach out to their districts (Axelrad, personal communication, Aug. 30 2011). Meetings were also offered at different times to best accommodate those with different schedules, and d ifferent locations for meetings and even different formats were used to increase accessibility and inclusivity within these processes (Axelrad, personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). Staff and consultants even went to HOAs (Homeowners Associations) and cr eative press releases were used (Axelrad, personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). Overall, Axelrad indicated that everyone demonstrated great sen sitivity to need and difference, and the city council member s worked within their districts to listen and incorporate differences and work through the issues ( personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). neighborhood groups are pleased with not only the outcome of the new zoning co de proposal, but also the public process that went into deve 12). Steve J. Nissen, Chair of INC (Inter Neighborhood best and has been lauded over and over b ( as cited in Marcus, 2010, 13). hallmark of this project has been the (p. 9), which a series of ci ty stakeholder groups, followed by work sessions with the ZCTF (Zoning Code Task Force), to diagnose and identify the top priority problems with ... [Chapter 59] that the Ne w Code should a p. 9). After the diagnosis phase was completed the City of

PAGE 72

72 Denver (2010b) indicated that (p. 9) took place to discuss the (p. 9) in order to address these issue s The district a pproach The City of De nver approached the creation of its new zoning code through its 11 co uncil districts. The city has two at large council members and 11 council membe rs representing each district. This resulted in 13 ward based meetings (Axelrad, personal communication, Aug 30, 2011). According to the City of Denver (2010b), t (p. 9) was kicked off in 2005 by the 16 membe Zoning Code (p. 9) consisting of the businesses, organizations, civic groups, a nd political leadership, which came together to ( p. 9). According to Axelrad, this five year process which spanned from 2005 until 2010, started and ended i ntact ( personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). Listening sessions were hel d to diagnose problems to devise the best approach, which endured over a year communication, Aug. 30, 2011). While the code was being drafted, the task force and city council members were cont inually briefed, and the public review draft was made available online for public comment (Axelrad, personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). In general, Axelrad indicated that there was a high level of interest from the community throughout this process, w h ich consisted of a balance of words and mapping much like the outcome produced by this process, the n ew Denver Zoning Code ( personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). According to the City of Denver (2010b), t he first drafts were reviewed internally by (p. 10)

PAGE 73

73 (p. 10) long intensive public outreach and comm ent p. 10). Throughout the process, the City of De nver used a project website to post drafts and to collect additional comments, and the 13 public meetings that were hel d from May to June in 2009 resulted in the ( Denver, 2010 b p. 10). According to the C ity of Denve r (2010b), o n going briefings, work session s Code (p. 10) (p. 10) accompanied the review of each draft Public presentations were held within th e districts from August to September in 2009, which included 13 additional ( Denver, 2010 b p. 10). City Council and Plann held on two consecutive days ... to spoke ... [and] Denver, 2010 b p. 10 ). ontinuing key stakeholder presentations and small (p. 11) were h eld to involve civic and professional organizations, which included the American Institute of Architects (AIA) Denver Chapter, (p. 11) was formed Following the p ublic review of two more drafts, the City Council approved the Denver Zoning Code on June 22, 2010, and the Denver Zoning Code became effe ctive on June 25, 2010 ( Denver, 2010). According to Winter and Company (2010), the c onsultants involved in code formul based zone districts and building forms that are the ( 1) and the team

PAGE 74

74 development, sustainability and context 1). Winter and Company (2010) indica (3) was completed to (3) community survey on design and re (3) was performed, in addition to the preparation of building form grap (3), which were all used to create form based code Winter and Company, 2010, 9). This use of vi sual communication allowed the team to convey developing concepts within the code formulation process. The design orientation and visual c ommunication T he layout of the new code uses a balance of graphics and text in order to produce a 21st c entury code u pdate ; however, the images used were not codified and were used for illustrative purposes (Axelrad, personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). The co de still relies on the use text but the se images hel p convey parameters that were also used w ithin the formul ation process (Axelrad, personal com munication, Aug. 30, 2011). The f orm b ased code formulation process emphasized a form and context based approach that, according to Marcus (2010), helped to translate graphic 9). According to Laetz and Halbur (2010), Denver recognized that zoning regulations (12) and this was remedied by (13) ng (13). Pet er J. Park explained that most zoning co des ( as

PAGE 75

75 cited in Berg, 2010b, 14). However, rs and designers toward what they can do, mainly by being a very visual doc 2010 b 14). For example visual images depicting neighborhoods and streetscapes helps give everyone a better idea about what impact the right kind of projects can ( as cited in Berg, 2010 b 14). Ch allenges with in the p rocess to c reate the Denver Zoning Cod e. Berg (2010b) explained that aving a picture book for a zoning code was a b it worrisome for (15) Architect Paul Brady ( as cited in Berg, 2010b, 15) as a result of l lengths and plate heights and (15) within the earlier drafts of the ne w code However, Brady explained concerns w ere irone as cited in Berg, 2010 b 15 ). When asked about challenges that occurred within the process and whether or not the local AIA (American Institute of Architects) chapter supported th ese plans Axelrad indic ated that the AIA organiz ed into topic area work groups which included a residential group and a commercial group ( personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). She indicated that there were concerns but mea sures were taken and support was achieved (Axelrad, personal communication, Au g. 30, 2011). She explained that on the second or third draft, the busine ss and retail group engaged the process (Axelrad, personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). T he process was s topped in response to

PAGE 76

76 vocal red flags and a business and retail work group was organized to address concerns which added an additional four to six months onto the process ; however, according to Axelrad, the issues were worked through (personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). Additional flexibility resulted from the consideration of alternatives and exceptions and according to Axelrad, no quest personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011) Steven Carr, President of AIA Denver, indicated that the new form based code will s about what they can do in their neighborhoods ... ( as cited in Hill, 2009, 6). He also indicated that the new code will th as cited in Hill, 2009, 6). In general, t he form based code formulation process was described as inclusive since concerns were listened to and responded to, and, overall, the process was a pplauded (Axelrad, personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). Outcomes and the Implementation of the Form B ased Code Pre dictability wa s considered as an outcome of this process that served to streamline development review while producing outcomes in accorda nce with the community vision. According to Hill (2009), (5) t districts: suburban, urban, urban edge, general urban, urban center, downtown, a nd (5 ) with each classified according to areas of stability to areas of change in order to encour age appropriate new infill development and red evelopment ( 7 ). According to Berg (2010a), D on three areas: taking a context based approach that organizes neighborhoods by their unique

PAGE 77

77 characteristics; a form based appro ach that translates written language into graphi cs and tables; and organizing the overall language to simplify the code (4) The context based code classifies areas from urban to suburban, and Peter J Park stated that street block structure, the building forms, and how the buildings relate to their site and to each other, is reflected in the different contex as cited in Laetz & Halbur, 2010, 8). According to Laetz and Halbur (2010) p redictability is generated through relationship of the building the use of build to lines (8) (8) in order to orient development to the pedestri an Predictability is also generated by the code based on the contextual classification of development for the building scale based o n those context 8). Each neighborhood rticle within the new Denver Zoning Code, which includes a range of forms illustrated to convey concepts immediately followed by specific regulations pertaini ng to use and form within each context. However, according to Axelrad, the conventional zoning code, Chapter 59 st ill applies to about 25% of the City, where about 900 PUDs ( Planned Unit Developmen ts) are still in place, and z oni ng still underlies this hyb rid form based code in order to addre ss existing conditions ( personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). Summary Predictability is achieved through these clearly presented and specific regulations economy, ... [and] er J. Park

PAGE 78

78 zoning code as a significant economic development initiative because ... uncertainty goes awa as cited in Laetz & Halbur, 2010, 9). In response, the City of Denver certain ty (Laetz & Halbur, 2010, 9). The move to adopt a form based code has produced a set of regulations that enact the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan (2000) and Blueprint Denver (2002) where the community vision is achieved through predictability as an outcome of this form b ased code formulation process. T his extensive public participation process that took place ov er five years has resulted in a new form based code that is user friendly and includes a balance of v isuals and language to guid e the achievement of the community vision through predictabili ty and certainty within the code implem entation process and the ou tcomes produced Discussion Overview The Miami, Florida and Denver, Colorado scenarios are analyzed through the criteria estab lished by Innes and Booher (1999) for good consensus building in order to assess these participatory processes used to formulate t he form based code, in addition to the outcomes produced a s a result of these processes. This discussion takes into consideration the case study findings found in the ear lier sections of this chapter. Both these findings and this discussion serve as compon ents that are used to analyz e the hypotheses, following the evaluation and comparison to code implementation processes and outcomes, which are located after

PAGE 79

79 Process Crit eria of Good Consensus Building (Innes & Booher, 1999 ) Did the p rocesses i nclude representatives of all relevant and significantly different interests (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Both Miami and Denver indicated that portions of their budget included costs for marketing and outreach to enco urage participation within these processes to create the form based c ode. Of the estimated $3Million Miami spent to create Miami 21, about $250,000 was spent on m arketing and outreach over the five year period (Gonzalez, personal communication, Aug. 22, 20 11) to produce the new form based code was about $850,000, which included about $215,000 for public outreach and communication (Axelrad, personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). Both cities used postcard mail outs to reach out to citizens to seek their participation and postcards in Spanish were also delivered. Findings obtained from b oth scenarios indicated that foreign language translation was made available at presentat ions, meetings, and workshops. Both cities expended the e xtra effort necessary to work towards achieving consensus with the architectural, busines s, and retail communities. This added an additional four to six itional time and expense as a result of studi es produced to indicat e the similarities between the regulatory approach of both code types architects to illustrate the differences that would be produced by both code types th rough conceptual renderings tha t depict the maximum development potential produced under the regulations of both Miami 21 and Ordinance 1 1000. These served to illustrate that the new form based code was not as restrictive as some had originally believed.

PAGE 80

80 driven by a pur pose and task that are real, practical, and shared by the group (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Both cities identified the problem areas years in advance of undertaking the process to overhaul their conventional zoning code s with new form based code s Mi ami wanted clarity, predictability, and streamlined regulations to produce its community vision based on smart growth principles, and Denver needed a responsive set of regulations that would enforce the goals and objectives established within its Comprehen sive Plan (2000) and Blueprint Denve r (2002) self organizing allowing participants to decide on ground rules, objectives, tasks, working groups, and discussion topics (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). In both cases, the processes were st ructured to s ome degree; however, meetings and workshops were added as they became necessary. Both cities processes were self organizing to the extent that groups needing further discussion and opportunity to collaborate were able to organize and the cit y and its consultants provided additional studies, workshops, and meetings to integrate a diversity of interests into the process in order to work towards achieving consensus. engag[ e ] participants, keeping them at the table, interested, a nd learning through in depth discussion, drama, humor, and informal interaction (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). This criterion is best addressed by the fact that both cities began their processes on a muc h smaller and immediate scale. hood Enhan cement Teams were divided into four based form of governance, consisting of 11 districts comprised the approach to reach out to and engage the public in these participatory processes. Both Miami and Denver indicated that visual

PAGE 81

81 communication figured strongly in conveying concepts for discussion and resulted in a balance of words and visual imagery within the adopted new form based code s encourag[e] challenge s to the status quo and foste[r] creative t hinking (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). While the primary intent of these processes may not have been for participants to was viewed as an opportunity f or further cons ensus building. This entailed creative thinking from all parties to work through the issues to achieve results in which nearly all were satisfied. Did t he process incorporate high quality infor assur[e] agreement on its meaning (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Both processes involved the collaboration of leading experts in form based coding and each process addressed the items identified through cons iderable thought and planning. er (2002), and the analysis of the shortcomings of the conventional zoning code, Chapter 59, served as the motivation for cre ating the new form based code. In Miami, the previous conventional zoning code demonstrated great complexity as a result of the num ber of amendments that had been made over its approximate 20 year lifespan, which resulted i n inconsistencies. This led to the determination of the need to overhaul these conventional zoning codes in order to achieve goals and objectives that increase pred ictability to s treamline code implementation. Throughout these processes, leading experts were hired as consultants and provided expert opinion. Innovative planning concepts were developed and conveyed to the publ ic through a balance of verbal and visual c ommunication. This information was used to assure agreement on the meaning within the process of each scenario.

PAGE 82

82 consensus only after discussions have fully explored the issues and interests and significant effort has been made to fi nd creative response to difference (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Both cities began these processes with the goal of producing a form based code; however, the achievement of consensus does not appe ar to be the exclusive motivator within these scenarios, rather the concepts were conveyed and extensive public outreach and participation took place. A ddition ally significant effort was demonstrated by each city to incorporate the views of all stakeholders within the community, which included the extra effort made by each city to work to address the concerns of the architectural, business, and retail communi ties. This effort allowed each city to achieve consensus through the code formulation process, rather than purely focusing on the achievement of consensus as an outcome. Table 4 1: Code f ormulation process criteria of good consensus b uilding (Innes & Booher, 1999) Process Criteria Miami Denver Included representatives of all relevant and significantly different interests Y Y Was driven by a purpose and tas k that are real, practical, and shared by the group Y Y Was self organizing, allowing participants to decide on ground rules, objectives, tasks, working groups, and discussion topics Y Y Engaged participants, keeping them at the table, interested, and le arning through in depth discussion, drama, humor, and informal interaction Y Y Encouraged challenges to the status quo and fostered creative thinking Y Y Incorporated high quality information of many types and assures agreement on its meaning Y Y Sought consensus only after discussions have fully explored the issues and interests and significant effort has been made to find creative responses to differences Y Y Outcome Criteria of Good Consensus Building Processes (Innes & Booher, 1999) Did the process a high quality agreement ? (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419).

PAGE 83

83 high quality agre ements and demonstrate innov ations in form based coding, which resulted in the adoption of a form based code within a major metropolitan cont ext. These extensive participatory processes led to an agreement in which nearly everyone was satisfied. Both code processes presented concepts, goals, and objectives through a balanc e of words and visual imagery. Of the based code is si mplifi ed the most; however, 25 % of the city is still regulated by Chapter 59, the conventional zoning code, and effort made to incorporate these additional areas could have r esulted in greater complexity. However, both cities have demonstrated the achievem ent of high quality agreements that were the result of considerable public outreach and participation. Did the process en [ d ] stalemate ? ( Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). The processes within both contexts involved overcoming obstacles and working through i nterests of hundreds, and even thousands, of people representing as many interests within these cities as possible. The most notable challenges within both processes involved working through differences of opinion with the architectural, bus iness, and reta il communities. T he code teams of both cities either produced additional studies or provided additional workshops and meetings to work through the issues to end stalemate Does the process compar [ e ] favorably with other planning methods in terms of costs and benefits ? (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Since these form based code formulation processes are the first to be produced within major metropolitan contexts in the U.S. these present innovations within the field of planning, and a comparative guide as to what these processes should cost is not readily available; however, Miami and Denver have indicated what th e costs were to

PAGE 84

84 produce their plans. in a tota l of about $3Million over the five ye $850,000 for a process of that same duration ( Gonzalez, personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011; Axelrad, personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). Zyberk and Company), t he firm which created the form based code, and involved the collaboration of leading experts in economic development, public space planning, and transportation. In addition, Miami included the regulation of the entire city within their form based code wh il e Denver left about 25% of the city to be regulated by Chapter 59, the conventional z oning code. A ddition ally approximately 900 PUDs (Planned Unit Developments) remain regulated by these te xts within the City of Denver. In terms of benefits, both cities i ndicated that their new codes have increased predictability and are more responsive towards the achievement of the community vision. Did the process produc [ e ] creative ideas ? (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Both processes entailed considerable creative t hinking, and as a result, pro duced creative ideas, as well. Miami is the first ma jor metropolitan area in the U. S. to adopt a form based code, and innovations were developed within this form based code. This customize regulations per each context in order to fi ne tune the approach to apply the form based cod e to a city of this magnitude. Denver made major transform ations to its nearly 55 year old convent ional zoning code, Chapter 59. emely user friendly and demonstrates contemporary planning approaches that exemplify a context and form based approach.

PAGE 85

85 Did the process resul [ t ] in learning and change in and beyond the group ? (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). The City of Miami indicated that if it were to start the pro cess again today that it would start early to ident ify the opposition and provide outreach to c ommunicate with the local AIA chapter from the beginning (Gonzalez, personal communication, Aug. 22, 2011). Denver indicated that if it were to begin the process again today, it would fine tune the pace of the process from the beginning, since some momentum was lost and indicated that the architectural, business, and retail group engaged the process much later (Axelrad, personal com munic ation, Aug. 30, 2011). As a result of both cities efforts hange in and (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419) were outcomes of these processes Did the process c reat [ e ] social and political capital ? (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). These efforts not only produced new codes, but these also provided opportunities (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419 ) was created An architect from Denver noted that even though there were concerns about the first drafts of the new code in regards to s tricter design regulations these concerns were resolved and the local A IA Chapter in Denver has endorsed the new code (B erg, 2010 b ; Hill, 2009). Did the process produc [ e ] information that stakeholders understand and accept ? (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Both of these processes demonstrate the recognition of the importance of public participation in building constituenci es to generate support for the plan t o achieve successful outcomes. A ddition ally five years of public processes involved public collaboration through workshops, presentations, and meetings where concepts were

PAGE 86

86 conveyed through visual techniques and project websites that further promoted citizen par ticipation within both cities. As a result of these efforts, the information produced p. 419). Did the process se [ t ] in motio n a cascade of changes in attitudes, behaviors, and actions, spinoff partnerships, and new practices or institutions ? (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Both processes resulted in new practices, and both scenarios indicated that great sensitivity to differen ce was demonstrated, which led to the extra effort made by each city to iron out concerns R elationships and partnerships were established throughout these exchanges within these code formulation proces ses. As a result, these processes produced outcomes, w hich include new practices established through the process to create the regulations that are contained within these new form based codes. Did the proces s resul [ t ] in institutions and practices that are flexible and networked, permitting the community to be more creatively responsive to change and conflict ? (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). These processes entailed extensive public outreach and participation, which led to the establishme nt of agreements and networks. T he format of the form based code is co nsidered f lexible in its application, which enables its application to a variety of contexts and conditions, while the intent is to promote predictability through code implementation through specific, well defined, and prescr iptive parameters. T hese proces ses have enabled flexibility through code formulation and predictability within code implementation. B oth Denver and Miami have produced outcomes that have Innes & Booher, 199 9, p. 419). These experiences will allow each city and its participants to

PAGE 87

87 build upon these lessons learned for future participation and con sensus building opportunities. Table 4 2: Code f ormulation outcome criteria of good consensus b uilding (Innes & Boo her, 1999) Outcome Criteria Miami Denver Produced a high quality agreement Y Y Ended Stalemate Y Y Compared favorably with other pla nning methods in terms of costs and benefits Y Y Produced creative ideas Y Y Resulted in learning and change in and bey ond the group Y Y Created social and political capital Y Y Produced information that stakeholders understand and accept Y Y Set in motion a cascade of changes in attitudes, behaviors, and actions, spinoff partnerships, and new practices or institutions Y Y Results in institutions and practices that are flexible and networked, permitting the community to be more creatively responsive to change and conflict Y Y Summary accordance with the criteria established by Innes and Booher (1999). This analysis demonstrat ed that these processes and outcomes were indicative of good consensus building processes as a result of the achievement of all of the process and outcome criteria. Throughout th e case studies, the use of visual communi cation within these processes and the design orientated outcomes were explored for the pu rpose of further analysis and comparison to examine code implementation within Chapter Fiv e through the project analyses using the same criteria T hese result s are fac tored into the anal ysis of the hypotheses and the sum of these result s comprises the findings and recommendations provided in Chapter Six.

PAGE 88

88 CHAPTER 5 CO DE IMPLEMENTATION AND PROJECT ANALYSES Overview T he projects within t his chapter have been analyze d according to the process es and outcomes involved within code implementation These p rojects hav e been provided by each city and consist of one reviewed under the conventional zoning code and one reviewed under the fo r m based code. P rojects reviewed under each city zoning code have also be en subjected to their new zoning and reviewed ac cordingly form based code in order to gauge differences in code function, process, and ou tcomes. T he pr oject analyses have participation requirements for both code types. These analyses were performed to identify t he level of o pportunity available for citizen participation through the developmen t review and approval process fo llowing code adoption Additionally, the p r edictability generated by the extensive participatory processes of form based code formulation ha s been explored alongside code implem entation processes and outcomes. This analysis has been performed to assess the value of expedited review processes, whic h include the use of by right development rev iew policies and procedures to take into consideration the need for additional flexibility through opportunities for further citizen participation within code implement a tion These results have been compared and contrasted with code implementation procedures for conventional zoning to gauge how the potential for the achievement of predictability differs between both code types. Both Miami and Denver have by right develop ment policies, which serve to streamline code implementation processes to increase predictability and certainty to

PAGE 89

89 promote development; however, these policies can also limit or even inhibit public participation since opportunities to participate at public hearings are restricted to projects requiring additio nal processes. T herefore meaningful and purposeful citizen participation at the code formulation stage is critical when the public does not have the opportunity to comment and seek conditions of approv al from the City Commission or City Council on the public record after the code has been adopted Miami Project Analyses Projects for this study were based on a random selection that consisted of a re ferral from the City of Miami. The City was asked if the re were any projects that have come in under Miami 21 and if there were any under Ordinance 11000, the previous conventional zoning code which would make a good comparison. Due to the City of ject representing the Miami 21 f orm based c ode is the Brickell CitiCentre, and the project representing the conventional zoning code, Ordinance 11000 is the Miami World Center. Miami 21: The Brickell CitiCentre Project d escription The B rickell CitiCentre consists of a 9.038 acre Speci al Area Plan (See Appendices E F for conceptual renderings). Within the City of Miami, a special area plan allows a p roperty consisting of over nine abutting acres to be master planned in order to provide adequate infrastructure, thoroughfare connectivity, and additional design standards that will increase the responsiveness of a l arge scale development ( Miami, 2011 ). This Special Area Plan required a rezoning and, therefore public hearin gs before the City Commission. In addition to the Special Area Plan, a development agreement also was heard before the City Commission. Both of these

PAGE 90

90 items provided the opportunity for the public to comment and to seek conditions of approval from the City Commission This project will span four city blocks and will contain over 4.68 Million square feet Miami, 2011 33 ). This mixed use development will contain residential, commercial, and lodging, among other uses and provides numerous amenities, with sidew alks and internal streets lined with a climate trellis [s] the i Miami, June 2011 26 ). Code organization and function and review p rocedure s. The Brickell indicates that it is within indicates the bonus potential while the O is used to determine density regulations. Revie w under Miami 21 entails determining the zoning classification and transect designation, and then Article 3 is used to obtain general transect zone regulatio ns. Next, Article 4 is used to determine b uilding function, uses, and r eview and public hearing pro cedures (See Appendic es G J) ( Miami, 2010 ). Finally, Article 6 contains supplemental regulations for additiona l requirements that may apply. While reviewing the code, the level of specificity and the organization of the code were apparent, and the new code was found to contain a balance of words a nd visuals that were helpful in understanding the concepts, parameters, and regulations conve yed The code is generally easy to follow although cross referencing to other s ections is sometimes necessary. The overa ll approach of the form based code is different from

PAGE 91

91 conventional zoning codes in that the entire city has been truly master planned and the level of detail and the context based approach generates a greater level of specificity than the conventional zonin g code, Ordinance 11000 The level of thought and detail regarding relationships at the micro and macro scales contributes toward the notion of predictability and helps to guide development that will be responsive in achieving the goals and vision establis hed by the community through the code formulation process. Additionally, t he Brickell CitiCentre project, and each project analyze d within this analysis, included the examination of review procedures and opportunities for citiz en participation Since th is project requi red public hearings, this analysis also consisted of the review of th ese public hearings and includes a summary of public comments. If the Brickell Cit iCentre project would not have required public hearings, the form based code project would h ave consisted of analyzing Article 7, Diagram 14: Permitting Process (see Appendix J) for review and approval procedures Article 4, Table 3 Building Function: Uses (see Appendix H) wa s used to determine if t he use(s) are allowed by right or if the use(s) require a warrant or an exception. These findings are used to determine the development review and approval procedures within Article 7, D iagram 14: Permitting Process. Exceptions and variances appear before the Planning Zoning Advisory Board (PZAB) and zo ning changes require public hearings before the City Commission. Public h earing s. A representative of Swire properties summarized the support and recommendations received for the project during the City Commission meeting and (13) and is the first special area plan under the ne ( Miami, July 2011 13 ). I t was noted

PAGE 92

92 (13) and t he repr esentative for the project st maintaining open communication (13) but indica ted that the developer applicable to Miami, July 2011 13 ). Citizen p articipati on at the public h earing s. As a result of the special area plan and the development agreement the public had the opportunity to demonstrate support for the projec t and to voice their conc erns. Citizens representing community organizations spoke in support of the project and reinforced the loc ation of the project along the main corridor and applauded the projec commitment to the community including the economi c impact that the project will mak e ( Miami, 2011). While most cit izens expressed support for the project, concerns were expressed by the citizens in order to ease the transition of incorporating a project of this magnitude into the community. These c oncern s included the number and location o f driveways near existing businesses since it was felt that these conflicts w ould create a traffic problem and would interfere with the proposed pedestrian orientation of the project ( Miami, July 2011 17 ). R equests wer e made by citizens to address the number, location, and placement of driveways and a sidewalk buffer was sought to protect pedestrians As a result, citizens urged the C ommission to condition any approval to address these concerns ( Miami, July 2011 17 ). A ddition al ly, of this pr oject (17) on private properties and requests were made to devise

PAGE 93

93 measures to protect adjacent and neighborhood properties from construction re lated dus (17) through requests made for condi tions of approval to provide (Miami, July 2011, 17) that would ensure the uninterrupted operation of businesses surroundin g the proposed project A t this time during hours of operation, and requests were made to ensure that there will be uninter rupted utility service ( Miami, July 2011 17 ). Other concerns included continued pedestrian access and alternative parking during construction and it was requested that a contact person be made available to resolve issues as they arise It was also no ted for the record that t he developer has discussed the co nstruction management agre ement; however, a citizen noted that before you, except my presentation and maybe the presentation of others that shows that the developer will actually a Miami, July 2011 17 ). As a result, it was req plan [based] ( Miami, July 2011 17 ). These concerns were responded to by a representative for the developer and staff, and it was indicated that many of these concerns have been added as conditions to the recommendation for approval ( Miami, 2011). In addition, M r. Garcia Community Development Director the adjacent p roperty owners, all the stakeholders in the area because it is only through that interaction that we will fully understand what impacts might be generated by the construction process and of course [to] (Miami, July

PAGE 94

94 3011, 89 ). Garcia explained that e the applicant will ... submit a construction managemen will reach out to the stakeholders in the area to ensure that the y Miami, July 2011 89 ). Immediately following the public hearing, a Commissioner also added additional conditions to the approval to address th e concerns of citizens ( Miami, 2011). Summar y. In summary, the special are a plan consisted of four public hearings and the develop ment agreement c onsisted of two public hearings. B oth were unanimously approved with conditions and modifications by the City Commiss ion on July 28, 2011 While public hearings may not offer the same level of collaboration as the participation found with in code formulation, this scenario demons trates that the public hearing does provide a venue for additional pu blic participation and indica tes public acknowledgement of the value of the public hearing in providing an arena for the public to their concerns through the inclu sion of concerns and requests on the public record and as a result of the opportunity f or the public to seek c onditions of approval from the C ommission. Ordinance 11000: The Miami World Center Project d escriptio n. The Miami World Center consists of approximately 2 5 acres of mixed use development, which was added as a Special District to Ordinance 11000, cep tual rendering ). S ince the project was being developed concurrently with the process to creat e Miami 21, many of the concepts, goals, and objectives were incorporated into the project, which included the use of a regulating plan (See Appendix L). As a result of these factors and as a result of th e magnitude of this project, which spans 9 city bloc ks, the

PAGE 95

95 zoning information and regulations of this project within the new Miami 21 form based code. The project is located immediately north of the Central Business District in downtown Miami rise offices, hotels, shops, restaurants, entertainment and conference venues, school, and eventually, residences, all built ( Miami, Nov. 2008 b 56 ). The project is described as the e City into becoming a vibrant urban Miami, Oct. 2008 32 ). The process to approve the Miami World Center involved a zoning amendment of the zoni ng atlas within Ordinance 11000 and a zoning change to add Special District SD 16.3 Miami W orld C enter to Ordinance 11000. The development agreement for this project establish es density, base floor area ratios, bonuses, and provides a regulation that stipulates that the project is unlimited in terms of height and establish es a 20 year ag r eement for the project ( Miami, 2008). All three item s required public hearings, which provided the opportunity for the public to comment and seek conditions of approval from the Commission. Code o rganizatio n and function and review p rocedure s. The Miami World Cen ter was added to Ordinance 11000 as Special District SD 16.3, and while reviewing this section within O rdinance 11000, and t he Miami World Center Design Standards it was apparent that the language contained within SD 16.3 and the Miami World Center Design Standards were exactly the same regulations contained within the Miami 21 form based code (Miami, 1991) (See Appendix M: Building Disposition Regulations). T hese regul ations feature a balance of language and imagery to convey

PAGE 96

96 concepts, and b ased on this analysis it was found that the review procedures were the same for both code types The level of detail and the inspirations for the project are cle arly conveyed throughout both code types. The Miami World Center project reviewed under Ordi nance 11000 entailed review procedures and citizen participation opportunities that are similar due to the temporal proximity of this project alongside the creation of the new Miami 21 form based code which resulted in the inclusion of this project as App form based code regulations. Since the Miami World Center project entailed creating a special district through a zoning change, zoning amendment, and included a development agreement, this project required public hearings before th e City Commission and provided opportunities for the public to comment and to seek conditions of approval from the Commission. If the project would not have required public hearings, the analysis of development review and approval procedures would have inv olved the same reference to the permitting process diagram in Arti cle 7, Diagram 14 (Appendix J). A s a form based code regulations and as a result of the re ference to 7.1.2. Permits, i t was indicated that permitted uses are established within Article 4, Table 3. This table indicated th at permitted uses are approved by right standards of the Miami 21 code, and the other specific requirements that may be mi, 2010, Article 7.1.2.1). A lso within Article 7.1.2.1, it wa s indicated that the Zoning A dministrator issues building permits and certificates of use and sets forth the requirements for warrants, waivers exceptions, variances, zoning amendments, and sign permits. Differences

PAGE 97

97 its inclusion as a Special District within Ordinance 11000 is that under 11000 developments that contain a number of residential u nits or hotel rooms or an amount of square feet of f inished floor area would have to be reviewed for major use special permits. Otherwise procedures are similar between both code types, but these codes differ in terms of the overall o rganization and clarit y. Within the reference to Article 7.1 Procedures, there are charts, diagrams, and specific sections devoted to clarify the permitting proces s and decision making authority. Public h earing s. According to a representative for the developer the Miam i World (11) and the zoning change Miami, Oct. 2008 11 ). The ... appl[ies] (11 ) ... preserve[s] the zoning to allow stable, quality, long term development and the creation of ... public open spa Miami, Oct. 2008 11 ). Although the project required a zoning change and a zoning amendment, it was n oted that the project does not involve a change in use and a r epresentative for the project indica nciples of ( Miami, Oct. 2008 11 ). During the October 23, 2008 City Commission meetin g pertaining to the zoning amendment a represen tative of the developer emphasized the amount of time and energy Agency) to make sure this has been an open process and everyone in the community has been inv (11), which includes m e e t ing with about 10 different civic

PAGE 98

98 organizations representative that several letters of support have been received for the project ( Mia mi, Oct. 2008). During City Commission meeting pertaining to the zoning change i t was indica ted neglected part of downtown, and this project brings lots of (42) stunning representation of a walkable and sustainable t ype of a development with lots of ped estrian opportu Miami, Oct. 2008 42 ). Furthermore, the Commission Vice Chair acknowledged the organizat ions in the area had the opportunity to voice their concerns and issues with the project Miami, Oct. 2008 57 ). Citizen participation at the public h earing s. During the City Commission meeting pertaining to the first reading of the zoning change, severa l citizens, business owners, and representatives spoke in favor of the project and noted the long term outlook ... with vibrant commerce and commercial spa Miami, Oct. 2008 32 ). During the second hearing for the zon ing change, s everal citizens, civic organizations, and businesses owners and their representatives voiced their support of the project, and stated that the project is well planned and ap plauded the pedestrian orientation ( Miami, Nov. 2008 b 37 ). Concerns expressed included issues relating to the actual ownership of the (39), which differs from the fact that it was previously mentioned (Miami, Nov. 2008b, 39). It

PAGE 99

99 was indicated that this concern was in response to current economic uncertainty and for the poten tial for this project to go un r Miami, Nov. 20 08 b 39 ). As a result, a suggestion was made (Miami, Nov. 2008 b 39) in order to prevent the City from being bound to one vision to allow other deve lopment in they overwhelmingly own 80 percent ( Miami, Nov. 2008 b 46 ). In response, a representative for the project came forward to explain that this only concerns the proposed project under current ow nership and that it does not bind property not o wned by the Worldcenter Group. Another representative for the project (55) percent of the land, a large portion of which we stil (55) and ... do not close on the properties before the zoning is Miami, Nov. 2008 b 55 ). T hese concerns were backed by additional conditions of the ap proval within the development ag reement, which ensures adherence independent DRI for the project or unless the project is e ( Miami, Nov. 2008 a 3 ). Summar y. The zoning amendment con sisted of three public hearings, the zoning change consisted of five public hearings, and the deve lopment agreement consisted of four public hearings, which provided the o pportunity for public comment. The zoning amendment, zoning change, and development a greement were all unanimously approved by the City Commission on November 1 3, 2008 ( Miami, 2008 b ). As a result of

PAGE 100

100 this analysis and review, it was found that the code organization, function, and review procedures did not change between the Special District SD 16.3 within the conventional zoning code, Ordinance 11000 and the inclusion of the project and its regulations within new Miami 21 form based code in this specific instance T he zoning change, zoning amendment, and development agree ment al l required public hearings, which all provided the opportunity for further public participation Before and After: Miami World Center The purpose of this ana lysis is to examine the differences in process and outcomes that would result if the Miami World Center was reviewed today under the regulations of the new Miami 21 form based code. This process is repeated for Denver project analy ses later within this chapter. Proje ct d escription. If the Miami World Center project were reviewed today under Miami 21, little would change in terms of process and outcomes. This project and its regulations were created in 2008 while the new Miami 21 form based code was being developed Du e consists of about 25 acres in downtown Miami and as a result of the efforts to include the goals and objectives of ew Miami 21 form based code. However, this 16.3 Miami and reviewed under Ordinance 11000 while it was still in effect Code organization and function and review p rocedure s. Within Ordinance 16.3 Miami ial district within Article 6. Zoning information pertaining to the project is under Section 616.1 2: SD 16.3

PAGE 101

101 Miami World Center. The project w as reviewed under the conventional zoning code and the special district regulations originally consisted of a zoning change, a zoning amendment, and a development agreement, which re quired public hearings. Within Ordinance 11000 it is also indicated that the Miami World Center Design Standards (Miami, 1991) and as a result these are incorporated by re ference Building disposition, configuration, use and density, parking standards, among ot her regulations are all described within the Miami World Center Design Standards (Miami, 2008a) Man y of the concepts from Miami 21 have been incorporated, which included the public benefits program, LEED (Leadership in Environmental Energy Design) certification, and several other concepts mentioned in Ordinance 11000, The Miami World Center Design Stand ards, and in sum within Ordinance 11000 references The Miami World Center Design Standards, which is the more restrictive document (Miami, 2008a; Miami, 1991) As a result, th e remainder of this review analyze d the Miami World Cen ter Design Standards for comparison to the Miami 21 form based code. The Miami World Center Design Standards document introduces the project, contains the regulatory plan, street design specifi cations, and design standards. The pro ject is d escribed as a mixed use development located north of the Central Business District (CBD) in downtown Miami that consists of 25 acres, spans 9 city blocks and features residential, office, and institutiona Miami, 2008 a p 5 ). After reviewing Ordinance plan was ex amined. T he language of Ordinance 11000 pertaining to SD 16.3 were

PAGE 102

102 1 plan from pag es 403 415, and t he Miami World Center Design Standards are included fro m pages 416 468, respectively (Miami, 2010; Miami, 2008a; Miami, 1991) As a result, these were all found to be similar in terms of process and ou tcomes between both code types. Public h earings and citizen p articipation. Under Ordinance 11000 public hearings were triggered for the zoning change, zoning amendment, and the development agreement. Based on the findings from review under Miami 21, this process would not change under the new code. The zoning change and amendment and the development agreement all triggered public hearings and these would under the new code, as well. At th e public hearing, the public had the opportunity to voice their support and concerns regarding the project and had the opportunity to see k conditions of approval. Th is opportunity would remain unchang ed between both code types as a result of the consistenc y between both sets of regulations R eview under both code types involve s similar code implementation proc ess es in terms of developmen t review and approval and public hearing requirements Outcomes and s ummar y. Although the Miami World Center was created under Ordinance 11000 in 2008, the concepts of Miami 21 were inte grated into the project and regulations T he Miami World Center regulations have also been attache d as Appendix with in the new Miami 21 form based code As a result, t he organization, function, and review procedures betwe en the se codes were found to be similar in this instance P ublic hearings would a lso be requir ed for this project under the new code due to the reciprocity of this project between both code types

PAGE 103

103 Analysis of Consensus Building Processes and Outcomes of the Projects in Miami Within this section projects p rovided by the City of Miami have been analyzed according to the same consensus building process and outcome criteria established by Innes a nd Booher (1999) that were used within the discussion section in Chapter Four to review form based code formulation processes and outco mes While the development review and approval process found within code implementation may not seem on par with the level of consensus building used in form based code formulation, the analysis of the process es and outcomes involved in code implementation es tablish another level of comparison that also provide s a basis from which to gauge the value of predictability generated by these processes while considering the need for further citizen participation opportunities The overall findings from all of these a nalyses provide an overview of the relationship between code formulation and implementation. Process Criteria The projects in Miami have been reviewed by staff and involved the review and approval of the City Com mission, which provided opportunities for c itizen participation thr ough required public hearings. Throughout both development review processes, developers worked with community organizations, business owners, and residents to address concerns off the public record. During the public hearings, repre sentatives for the developer, staff, the City Commission, and concerned citizens worked to find solutions in the best interests of all parties. As a result, both the Brickell CitiCentre and nd significantly (p. 419) Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419).

PAGE 104

104 The processes invol ved within these projects were self organizing to the degree that t he public hearing provided the opportun ity for citizens to contribute discussion topics based on concerns, tasks, and to seek chan ges in ground rules in the form of conditions of approval requested fro m the City Commission. This indicated that these develo organizing, allowing participants ( Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). T his opportunity would not be present for projects that d o not require public hearings. While it is of interest to streamline the development review and approval process in order to increase certainty, the absence of the public hearing would reduce the process to negotiations such as those between the developer, staff, and concerned citizens and business owners off of the public record. These processes entailed the review of proposed regulations and conceptual renderings and the public hearings provided a forum for the public to voice concerns and demonstra te su pport for these projects. This indicated that these processes quality infor mation of many types and assure[d] agreement [their] meaning[s] both fully explored the issues a nd interests, and significant effort ... [was] made to find Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). The only two criteria for good consensus building processes that were not as evident within these processes include the ability o keeping them at the table, interested and learning through in depth discussion, drama, (p. 419), e same level as the processes used to

PAGE 105

105 create the form based code (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Participants within these processes at these public hearings had concerns primarily based on either the impacts of construction that could affect the ability t o conduct business as usual or were the result of design related matters and actual property ownership that could adversely impact the city if the project were not to be realized during uncertain economi c times. The intent within these processes was not to challenge the status quo but rather the intent was to ensure that the impacts of development and co nstruction would be minimized. These concerns were voiced on the public record and were requested as conditions of approval from the City Commission in whi ch nearly every item was addressed and included within the approval of these projects. Table 5 1 : Process criteria of good consensus b uilding for code i mplementation in Miami (Innes & Booher, 1999) Process Criteria Brickell CitiCentre Miami World Center Miami World Center Included representatives of all relevant and significantly different interests Y Y Y Was driven by a purpose and task that are real, practical, and shared by the group Y Y Y Was self organizing, allowing participants to decide o n ground rules, objectives, tasks, working groups, and discussion topics Y Y Y Engaged participants, keeping them at the table, interested, and learning through in depth discussion, drama, humor, and informal interaction To some degree To some degree To s ome degree Encouraged challenges to the status quo and fostered creative thinking To some degree To some degree To some degree Incorporated high quality information of many types and assures agreement on its meaning Y Y Y Sought consensus only after dis cussions have fully explored the issues and interests and significant effort has been made to find creative responses to differences Y Y Y

PAGE 106

106 Outcome Criteria T he development review and approval processes of the Brickell CitiCentre and the Miami World Cente r resu lted in high quality agreements ( Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). These processes ended stalemate and produced creative ideas as a result of the opportunity to participate in the public hearings for these projects ( Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Whil e developer, staff, and citizen negotiations can provide these opportunities off the public record, the public hearing was acknowledged as a means to provide leverage through the inclusion of concerns and requests for conditions of approval on the dais mad e by citizens within th e Brickell CitiCentre project. Even though this project was reviewed under the form based code, there were still conce rns and items to be addressed. For projects that do not required public hearings, this opportunity for public parti cipation would not exist and would be limited, or even non existent. (p. 419) since these projects underwent review and approval through streamlined processes, yet provided the opportunity for further citizen participation on the public record as the result of required public hearings ( Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). and change in and beyond the (p. 419) and create (p. 419) that began with collaboration on a more immediate level between the developer, staff, and citizens, which were noted on the public record during these public hearings ( Innes & Booher, 1999 p. 419). As a result, these opportunities provided processes that Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419).

PAGE 107

107 motion a cascad e of changes in attitudes, behaviors, and actions, spinoff partnerships, (p. 419) ; however, these exchanges were noted on the public record and resulted in a change in practice based on the conditions made to the approval by the Commi ssion in both projects under both code types (Innes & Booher 1999, p. 419). W hile some degree of learning throug h participation occurred, it may be practices that are flexible and networked, permitting the community to be more (p. 419) based on these processes alone ; h owever, t hese have produced outcomes more clo s ely aligned to this criterion but arguably not to the same deg ree as code formulation (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Table 5 2 : Outcome criteria of good consensus b uilding for code i mplementation in Miami ( Innes & Booher, 1999 ) Outcome Criteria Brickell CitiCentre Miami World Center Miami World Center Prod uced a high quality agreement Y Y Y Ended Stalemate Y Y Y Compared favorably with other planning methods in terms of costs and benefits Y Y Y Produced creative ideas Y Y Y Resulted in learning and change in and beyond the group Y Y Y Created social an d political capital Y Y Y Produced information that stakeholders understand and accept Y Y Y Set in motion a cascade of changes in attitudes, behaviors, and actions, spinoff partnerships, and new practices or institutions Y Y Y Results in institutions a nd practices that are flexible and networked, permitting the community to be more creatively responsive to change and conflict Y Y Y

PAGE 108

108 Denver Project Analyses Projec ts for this study were based on a random selection that consisted of a ref erral from the Ci ty of Denver. The City was asked if there were any projects that have come in under the new Denver Zoning Code and if there were any under Chapter 59, the previous conventional zoning code that would make a good comparison. As a result recommendation, the project representing the Denver Zoning Code is the project at 505 East Colfax Avenue and the project representing Chapter 59 is the project at 6201 East Colfax Avenue The Denver Zoning Code : 505 East Colfax Avenue Project d escriptio n. The project at 505 East Colfax Avenue was provid ed by the City of Denver as the project for analysis u nder the new form based code The project is MS built form, stories, which allows up to 8 stories ( Denver, 2010 a ). The project was built in 2010 and consists of 3,92 2 square feet on a 15,000 square foot lot (See Appendices S T). Code organization and format and review p roc edure s. The new form based c ode is organized into articles based on neighborhood context and the instructions guide the reader through the use of t he code. There is very little cross referencing necessary and regulations are clearly presented in a balance of words and visual images that are used to convey concepts parameters, and regulations Illustrative building forms are presented for use types w ithin each neighborhood context and are immediately preceded by regulations pertaining to the specific building ty pe (See Appendices P Q).

PAGE 109

109 T he drive thru restaurant and eating and drinking establishment is conveyed as a permitted use by right without limit ations which entailed only zoning permit review as indicated in Article 7: Division 7. 4, Uses and Required Minimum Parking (Denver 2010a) (see App endix Q) Section 12.2.7 Summary Table of Aut hority and Notice indicated that the decision making authority i s the Zoning Administrator for uses requiring only zoning permit review (See Appendix R) (Denver 2010 a ). Public hearings and citizen p articipatio n. development policy, this project was reviewed and the decisions were ma d e by the Zoning A dministrator; t herefore, no public hearings were required. Opportunities for citizen participat ion would be limited to citizen, developer, and staff negotiations since this project and projects with permitted uses meeting established cri teria, would not entail public processes. These policies are intended to streamline the development review and approval process and are seen as a complement to the extensive citizen participation tha t accompanies form based code formulation Summar y. The p roj ect at 505 East Colfax Avenue achieved a pedestrian oriented outcome through precise, yet easy to navigate regulations within t based code. As a result of by right development policies, the review of this project was not a public proce ss. The project is designed to incorporate the concepts established through the new Denver Zoning Code, which includes an increased pedestrian orientation that results in the b engage s the public realm from the primary street with v ehicular access and traffic circulation situated behind the building and made secondary to the pedestrian orientation. The format, function, and organization of the code present ed clear parameters, conveyed through text and

PAGE 110

110 supported by relevant an d illust rative visual imagery. While reviewing the code, it was apparent that the regu la tions are specific, detailed, and these are the result of code formulation processes that have processed the relationship between context and form within each neighborhood cont ext to produce a predictable outcome. Chapter 59: 6201 Colfax Avenue Project d escriptio n. The project at 6201 Colfax Ave nue was presente d by the C ity for the analysis under the prev ious conventional zoning code, Chapter 59 The 3,535 square feet on a 35,542 square foot lot between Krameria and Leyden Streets on Colfax Avenue (See Appendices U V) (Axelrad, personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). Code o rganizatio n and functi on and review p rocedure s. While reviewing the project under Chapter 59, immediately it was evident that the number of regulations took precedence over specifics related to form and the consideration of relationships that lead to the achievement of 21 st c en tury planning objectives. In addition, the organization of the code produced a vast difference from the new Denver Zoning Code, which resulted in covering the entire section pertaining to Division 7 that included all of the information for the B 1, B 2, B 3, B 4, and B 8 districts in order to uncover parameters for development based on a zoning X). In addition, considerable cross referencing to other sections was necessary. In terms of the analysis performed for t his project as r eviewed under the previous conventional zoning code, Chapter 59 the review procedures and opportunities for citizen participation during code implementation was indicated on page 238 ood (p. 238) is a permitted use wi

PAGE 111

111 classificati on (Denver 1956, p. 238). By right policies are covered within Section 59 38 Duties and Powers (see Appendix Y) As a result of these findings, it was confirmed that the project entailed a permitted use and that it was re viewed administratively Public h e arings and citizen p articipation. Denver development policy, under which this drive thru restaurant was found to be permitted as a use by right, required on ly review by zoning permit. As a result, there were no opportunities for citizen p articipation outside of citizen, developer, and staff discussions and negotiations since this was not a pub lic process; therefore, the project did not require public hearings Summary The project at 6201 East Colfax Avenue was developed in 2005, prior to the adoption of the new Denver Zoning Code. The building was constructed with the drive thru lane parallel to Colfax Avenue, creating a barrie r between the pedestrian realm and access to the building entrance from the primary st reet, which involve s pedestrians having to cross the drive thru lane in order to enter the building Overall, vehicular access and parking take precedence within this project, and vehicular activity dominates the street frontage. This differs significantly from the approach of the form based code where building proximity to the street front and pedestrian a ctivity would take precedence. A ddition ally the format of the conventional z oning code does not convey the predictability that the new code does as a re sult of generalized regulations that lack a context and form based approach. There we re no public hearings required within the review and approval of this project, and as a result, opportunities for further citizen participation we re limited due to b y rig ht development policies.

PAGE 112

112 Before and After Analysis: 6201 East Colfax Avenue The before and af ter analysis examined if differences exist in code implementation in terms of the process and the outcomes produced between the project as it was reviewed under th e previous conventional zoning code and the project to be reviewed under the new form based code for this study This wa s performed to determine if there are differences in terms of the predictability pr oduced between both code types As a result, t his ana lysis wa s used to demonstrate differences in code function, and to examine how predictability and the outcomes produced by each code type co r relate to the presence and necessity of further citizen participation opportunities Project d escriptio n. If the pr oject at 6201 East Co lfax Avenue were to be MS that the project would be class eighborhood Context and the zoning allows a maximum height of 3 stories (See Appendices Z AA) The project was reviewed and developed in 2005 prior to the adoption of the new form based code B 4 General Business District at that time (Axelrad, personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011). The project involved the construct ion of a fast food restaurant and drive thru facility that consisted of 3,535 square feet on Colfax Avenue, situated between Le yden and Krameria Streets on a lot measuring 35,542 square feet. Code organization and function and review p rocedure s. based code con sists of 13 articles, and MS for the project, if it was reviewed today, would fall und er the regulations of Article 5: Ur ban (U ) Neighborhood Context. A review of A rticle 5 found the regulations to be clearly presented and

PAGE 113

113 contained almost entirely within the article based on the neighb orhood context classification. Next, the building form presented chart containing regulations for the form follows on the ne xt page (See Appendices Z AA). T he zone lot use restrictions indicate that the eating and drinking establishment would be a primary us e 2010 a p. 5.3 23) would be exclude d from these restrictions. T his section also conveys the build to requirements, which include the minimum and maximum depths for primary and side street frontages along with t he setback requirements. The chart also nd primary (p. 5.3 23) (p. 5.3 23) are not allowed, and it is indicated tha t vehicle access is determined as part of site development plan r Denver, 2010 a p. 5.3 23 ). To achieve an orientation towards the pedestrian, the ground story activation requirements indicate the percentage of transparency required on primary and side streets, and it is also indicate d that an entrance is required for pedestri an access on a primary street. Supplemental Design Standards indicate permit ted uses and required parking. Parking calculations are provided per square feet of gross floor area and as a result, if the project were built under the same specifications today, it would require 14 parking spac es much less than the amount develo ped under the B 4 regulations. Next, it is indicated that an eating and drinking establishment within the MS 6). A rticle 12 .2.7 Summary Table of Authority and Notice indicates that the zoning administrator has decision making au thority ( Denver,

PAGE 114

114 2010a p. 12.2 6 ) (See Appendix BB) As a result, the project en tailed a use by right, which would not require public hearings either Public h e arings and citizen p articipation. Since this project invo lve s a use by right, it would only r equire zoning permit review under the new form based code. This is similar to the development review and approval process used under the conventional zoning code. Therefore n o public hearings would be required under the form based code As a result, there would also be no opportunities for citizen participation following code adoption w i thin a recorded, public forum. The code implementation procedures of both code types were found to be similar. Outc omes and s ummary. Based on review of the plan provided by the City of Denver, the appearance of the project, if it were built today under the regulations of the new form the street front, and vehicular access, activity, and parking wou ld tak e on a secondary emphasis to the pedestrian or ientation ( See Appendices S V). T he development regulated by a drive thru facility parallel to the primary street creating a pedestrian access b arrier A ddition ally the plan provided by the city ind icated that the project included 38 parking spaces; however, the project would only require 14 under the ne w form based code regulations. Based on the analysis of these projects, t he differences betwee n the conventional zoni ng code and the form based code in Denver are within the function of the code and the outcomes that these regulations have produced within the final development product. The organization and format of the code also provi ded additiona l differences. T he conventional zoning code, Chapter 59, was found to contain several pages of

PAGE 115

115 limitations, which number ed from 1 to 192 at the beginning of the code O verall, there are a lot of regulations to cover in Chapter 59 that d o not pertain to the project that must be covered to find the regulations t hat do pertain to the project. This is considerably different from the organization and function of the new form based code, in that clear instructions for using the code are included in the beginning and the regulations per each neighborhood context ar e within separate articles, and very lit tle cross referencing is necessary to other articles within the new code. The new form based code demonstrates relatio nships b etween context and form, which are app arent from the information obtained through focused and specific images tables, and diagrams It was also foun d that the procedures for development review under the new fo rm based code would be similar to those within the conventional zoning code. However t he code function, organization, and their effect on the final form would produce differences based on the project analyses performed for both code types. While t his project did not require public hearings and therefore, did not provide opportunities fo r furt her citizen participation, this was found to be constant between both code ty pes Analysis of Consensus Building Processes and Outcomes of the Projects in Denver The projects provided by the City of Denver were analyzed according to the same process and outcome criteria established by Innes and Booher that were used to evaluate the processes and outcomes produced through form based code formulation in the d iscus sion section in Chapter Four. These criteria were also used to evaluate the projects in Mia mi earlier within this chapter (see pp. 103 107 ). While the development review and approval process within these project analyses are more constrained than

PAGE 116

116 the extensive five year participatory process involv ed in form based code formulation, analysis of p rocess and outcome criteria of these project analyses provides another level of evaluation from which to gauge the relationship between code fo rmulation and implementation What is unique to the Denver projects, yet similar in theory to other potential pro not require public hearings as a result of b y right development policies. public hearings, these were a result of zoning changes, amendments, developme nt agree ments, and special area plans. This process would be similar in Denver, and if the projects in Denver were reviewed under similar circumstances in Miami, these would not trigger public hearings, either However, f ewer process and outcome criteria w ere met by the projects in Denver as a result of by right development policies and pr ocedures, which resulted in an absence of require d public hearings for both projects Each of these criteria could be argued and justified through staff and applicant exch anges; however as a result of the absence of public hearings, and therefore, no recorde d minutes, these exchanges gotiations T he objective that often accompanies the extensive pu blic participation involved in f orm based code formulation is that further public participation within code implementation would not be as necessary due to the results of a specific and purposeful formulation process. The elimination of further public part icipation following code adoption can be used to reduce time and expense as a result of a streamlined processes in order to increase cer tainty as a means to promote development.

PAGE 117

117 Process Criteria The process involved in the review and approval of both proj ects, regardless of (p. 419) yet these exchanges were limited to development review staff and the applicants and were administratively reviewed in house with little or no public input outside of potential discussions and negotiations off the public record (I nnes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). (p. 419) in that these objecti ves included the review and approval of projects to be developed within the city; however, it is important to note (p. 419) would have included reviewing parties and applicants with little to no public input (I nnes & Booher, 1999 p. 419). The self organization of these processes were limited to staff and applicants, which would have nnes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). ipants, keeping them at the table, interested, and learning through in depth discussion, drama, humor, (p. 419) were limited to exchanges between staff and applicants since the review and approval of these projects were not public processes (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). While the processes that led to the development of both proje cts involved creative thinking this once again was limited ( Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). As a result, (p. 419) would not have been as integral to the process as it would have be en if these were public processes involving broad citizen participation ( Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). The development of plans and studies rated high quality information

PAGE 118

118 (p. 419) and the purpose of the development review and approval (p. 419) through consensus building; however, once again, this would have been limited to staf f and applicants (I nnes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). (p. 419) where significant effort (p. 419) but the se processes were not made public (Innes & Booher, 19 99, p. 419). Table 5 3 : Process criteria of good consensus b uilding for code i mplementation in Denver (Innes & Booher, 1999) Process Criteria 505 East Colfax Avenue 6201 East Colfax Avenue East Colfax Avenue Included representatives of all relevant and significantly different interests To some degree To some degree To some degree Was driven by a purpose and task that are real, practical, and shared by the group To some degree To some degre e To some degree Was self organizing, allowing participants to decide on ground rules, objectives, tasks, working groups, and discussion topics To some degree To some degree To some degree Encouraged challenges to the status quo and fostered creative thi nking N N N Incorporated high quality information of many types and assures agreement on its meaning Y (with limitations) Y (with limitations) Y (with limitations) Sought consensus only after discussions have fully explored the issues and interests and significant effort has been made to find creative responses to differences Y (with limitations) Y (with limitations) Y (with limitations) Outcome Criteria ... high quality agreement[s] (p. 419) in the form of new development created within the city in each instance (I nnes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). I t was found through the project analyses

PAGE 119

119 that the project at 505 East Colfax Avenue embodies the community vision as a result of clearly def ined parameters and a responsive set of regulations that were produced as an outcome of form based code formulation. (p. 419) as a result of streamlined dev elopment review and approval processes, which include by right development policies (I nnes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). However, these processes limit further citizen participation. While both development review and approval processes produced creative ideas these outcomes were the result of the efforts and exchanges between staff and the applicants for these projects (I nnes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Within these processes, (p. 419) occurred within administrative pr ocesses without public participation nnes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). However, within bot h instances and as a result of by right development policies, the definition of does not include the public within cial and political ( Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419) These processes were most likely limited to the exchanges that took place between staff and applicants (I nnes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). es in attitudes, ... actions, (p. 419) resulted from these administrative review procedures and exchanges between staff an d applicants that ended stalemate in institutions and practices that are flexible and networked (p. 419) ; however, these have not enabled citizens nnes & Booher, 1999, p. 419).

PAGE 120

120 Although the outcomes of these processes indicate that streamlined development review and approval processes a re use d to reduce time and expense in order to increase certainty in promoting development, these findings coupled within those obtained through the Miami project analyses indicate that opportunities for further ci tizen participation can be necessary. I t was also indicated in the Miami scenarios that a recorded public venue can provide concerned citizens with some degree of leverage and assurance th at concerns will be addressed. This can occur through requests for conditions of approval from the Commission or Council. As evidenced by the before and after analysis of the Denver project at 6201 East Colfax Avenue, the responsive set of new form These factors are critical, especially w hen coupled with by right development policies, since there is often no public process involved in the development review and approval of projects that d o not require public hearings. Findings from the before and after analysis also indicated that the pred ictability generated by the form based code would have led to the elimination of the pedestrian acces s barrier produced by the drive thru lane from the primary street within the project at 6201 East Colfax Avenue if it were to be reviewed and developed to day. Opportunities for further citizen participation might have also addressed this conflict and convent ional zoning code, Chapter 59. Even though the city now has a newly a dopted form based code, these new regulation s only regulate about 75% of the city (Axelrad, personal communication, Aug. 30, 2011) In addition, concerns can accompany specific projects even under the form

PAGE 121

121 based code, as evidenced from th e Miami project an alyses. As a result, opportunities for further public participation can be useful in eliminating errors and can be used to ensure the smooth transition of projects into the community. O pportunities for further participation accompanied by streamlined devel opmen t review and approval processes, following extensive public participation within form based code formulation processes, would produce the best processes and outcomes. Table 5 4 : Outcome criteria of good consensus b uilding for code i mplementation in De nver (Innes & Booher, 1999) Outcome Criteria 505 East Colfax Avenue 6201 East Colfax Avenue East Colfax Avenue Produced a high quality agreement Y Y (to some degree) Y Ended Stalemate Y (with limitations) Y (with limitations) Y (with limitat ions) Compared favorably with other planning methods in terms of costs and benefits Y Y (with limitations) Y Produced creative ideas Y (with limitations) Y (with limitations) Y (with limitations) Resulted in learning and change in and beyond the group Y (with limitations) Y (with limitations) Y (with limitations) Produced information that stakeholders understand and accept Y (with limitations) Y (with limitations) Y (with limitations) Set in motion a cascade of changes in attitudes, behaviors, and act ions, spinoff partnerships, and new practices or institutions Y (with limitations) Y (with limitations) Y (with limitations) Results in institutions and practices that are flexible and networked, permitting the community to be more creatively responsive t o change and conflict N N N Analysis of the Hypotheses Within this section the hypotheses outlined in Chap ter Three Methodology are examined as a result of the findings obtained from the case studies and project analyses.

PAGE 122

122 Hypothesis I: The form based cod e has greater potential to incorporate meaningful participation earlier in the process than the conventional zoning code. In terms of participatory timing through project review, the analysis of these projects indicated that the timing and ext ent of partic ipation within the implementation of the form based code and the conventional zoning code through development review and approval is similar following code adoption. In both the Miami and Denver scenarios, by right development policies preclude public hear ings unless projects require them While both projects in Miami required public hearings, these are the result of code implementation policies a nd processes that produced similar results wit hin both contexts for both code type s T he citizen participation t hat occurred through public hearings within the Miami project analyses demonstrated that the public hearing does provide citizens with some degree of leverage by giving and by requesting conditions of approval from the Commission on the public record. I n Denver, neither proje ct required public hearings, which reinforces the importance of citiz en participation during code formul ation. The difference b etween both code types lies in the degree of specificity of the regulations produc ed within form based code formulation, which increases the likelihood of participation within these processes being meaningful and purposeful. Hypothesis II: The form based code entails a greater level of visual communication and decision making based on t he design orientation than the conventional zoning code. The analysis of projects reviewed under these newl y adopted form based codes led to the discovery of regulations that are more visual and design oriented than those within the conventional zoning cod e s of both cities. The form based code regulations are precise and prescriptive and there is a balance between words and imagery within

PAGE 123

123 these new codes The previous conventional zoning codes of both cities are text laden and otherwise indicative of earli er planning methods, lack ing form based and context based approach es These conventional zoning codes contain less of a bala nce between language and visual imagery, which produc result ing in a greater level of ambiguity. In comparis on, the approach of the form based code prescribes and depicts parameters clearly and provide Both cities indicated that the form based code formulation processes relied on use of visual communication in order t o collaborate w ith the public. This was evidenced by the Miami scenario, which included the use of watercolor perspectives to convey conce pts and to stimulate discussion, which are included within Appendix A, Watercolor P erspectives. In Denver, building forms were used t o illustrate design parameters within the form based code formulation processes and were included in the final code product (see Appendices P and Z ). Hypothesis III: Due to the design orientation and visual communication, participation within the form base d code is more inclusive and accessible to the general public. While visual images were used to communica te concepts within specific form based and context based ap proaches of the form based code formulation processes within both cities, both Miami and Den ver indicated that increased levels of participation were a result of extensive mar keting and outreach campaigns. Public acknowledgement that these new codes would affect properties also increased attendance and partici pation within these processes. In ter ms of development review, the design orientation of these new codes and the use of visual communication within these form based code formulation processes increased the clarit y of the concepts conveyed and

PAGE 124

124 produced specific and prescriptive regulations tha t serve to streamline development revie w and approval Differences in code type generally do not affect procedures in terms of the opportunity for further citizen participation through public hearings since procedures within both code types within both cit ies were found to be similar As a result, inclusivity and accessibilit y within code implementation was not affected by code type following code adoption within these instances in which further citizen participation on the public record was limited to ite ms which require d public hearings. Hypothesis IV: Due to the emphasis on language and use, the conventional zoning code presents a higher level of predetermined concepts that are more abstract and less likely to facilitate participation, which makes public participation during development review and approval more critical Both Miami and Denver have created form based codes through extensive participatory processes that produc ed prescriptive regulations to ensure the achievement of the community visi on. C on ventional zoning code s present a less prescriptive set of regulations yet there was little differ ence in terms of opportunities for further citizen particip ation between both code types. This finding is more favorable to the form base d code since these fo rmulation processes often involve ext ensive public participation to produce a specific set of regulations that prescribe outcomes in line with the community vision. It was found that t he re gulations and procedures of each code type for both cities we re sim ilar in terms of code implementation procedures through development review and approval that specify which projects require public hearings and those that do not. However, a more ambiguous set of regulations with an emphasis on use and fewer visual design orien ted parameters achieved through a context and form based approach would not as distinctively convey the intent on specific properties. Both cities

PAGE 125

125 implied that a sense of urgency was produced through public acknowledgement of the e ffect that a new s et of regulations would have on private properties, which resulted in increased participation within form based code formulation processes within both cities. Through development and code review within the project analyses, it was found that the language and use based conventional zoning co des present ed a focus on limitations without as clearly con veying the possibilities. The use and language emphases inhibit the production of specific para meters to enforce the community vision predictably through context and form based approach es. These use and language emphases devoid of a design orientation also truncate the ability to collaborate on a more meaningful and purposeful level with the public within code formulation process es As a result, the form based co de can generate greater predi ctability than the conventional zoning code as a result of The specificity of the form based code may seem more restrictive during code formulati on, but the detailed and focused participati on within these processes can be used to engage the publ ic on a more meaningful and purposeful level The Miami scenarios indicated that public hearings were used t o seek conditions of approval from the Commission to ensure appropriate design and the reali zation of development that would not adversely affect surrounding properties. Design related concerns, such as the number and location of driveways, were voiced at the public ions between property owners and representatives for the project. Both Miami and Denver noted that prior to their form based codes, many criteria were repeated extensively from

PAGE 126

126 project to project, and the new codes have been used to clarify contem porary pl anning concepts while streamlining the development review and approval process. T he clarity of the form based code and its increased certainty within implementation process es are used to encourage appropriate development supported through publi c constituen cies T he goal within form based code formulation processes is to create specific parameters that will reduce or eliminate potential conflicts. However, the Brickell CitiCentre project in Miami reviewed under the form based code included concerns voiced by the public at the required public hearings that would have had to be negotiated off the public record if the project would not have required public hearings as a result of the inclusion of a special area plan and a development agreement. In this matter, negotiations and measures to address these concerns would have to entail negotiations that could signal differences in influe nce without the opportunity to participate in a rec orded public hearing Summary F rom the Miami project analyses, i t was found that i ssues and concerns often surface in relation to physical site design through code implementation While there is generally opportunity to work with developers and staff on p rojects outside of public hearings, many citizens use the recorded public hearing as a means to give requests and concerns by seeking conditions of approval from the Commission While the for m based code often presents an extensive amount of pub lic participation during code formulation it was found that this participation is critical since opportuni ties for further public particip ation during code implementation may be limited or even non existent

PAGE 127

127 The Miami and Denver scenarios illustrate d that these different contexts have similar procedur es, which include those pertaining to by right development. While the Miami projects required pu blic hearings the two project s from the City of Denver did not This comparison demonstrate s by right developmen t scenario s that could occur w ithin either city Development review is often streamlined through by right development policies, but participation following code adoption may be necessary as evidenced by the analysis of public hea ring minutes for the Miami projects included within this study The Denver projects demonstrated the form based code achieved the community vision through increased predictability as reflected in project outcomes within the before and after analysis pertaining to the project at 6201 East Colfax Avenue and as a result of the comparison of projects produced under both code types Wi thin Denver the new form based code is a vast improvement over Chapter 59 in terms of clarity, predictability, and in terms of the new code being more user friendly. In Miami, the new form based code gene rates predictability through spe cific regulations that are also presented through a balance of words and visual imagery. T he projects analyzed did not demonstrate differences in the outcomes produced between the regulations of bo th code types due to the more recent amendment s made to Ordinance 11000. Additionally, t he inclusion of Miami 21 goals and objectives within the conventional zoning code project and its magnitude resulted in the inclusion of its regula tions in based code There was also little difference in terms of review procedures within the projects analyzed under both the conventional zoning code and the form based code in both Miami and Denver. The comparison between Miami and Denver indicate a difference in

PAGE 128

128 terms of opportunities for further participation, which result from projects that require public hearings and those that do not. There is an elevated importance of participation during code formulation sinc s not require public hearings. Overall, both cities have produced form based codes through extensive citizen participation that have led to an increase in predictability through outcomes and process es that are achieved through the specific and prescriptive regul ations of the form based code. Streamlined development re view procedures, which include by righ t development policies can be useful in expediting these processes, but these can also inhibit t he opportunity for further public participation at public hearings In summary form based code formulation can lead to the creation of increased predictability through specific and prescriptive regulations produced through extensive citizen participation, and by right development policies can expedite code implementation processes. However, these should be accompanied by additional methods to incorporate opportunities for further public participation through a recorded medium in order to ensure accountabil ity and responsiveness in addressing public concerns. The combination of form based code formulation processes, involving extensive public participation and by right development policies along with methods to ensure opportunities for public participation following code adoption wo uld produce the best results.

PAGE 129

129 CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION AND RECOM MENDATIONS Overview Thi s research examin ed the citizen participation that took place within form based code formulation for the Cities of Miami, Florida and Denver, C olorado This study included interviews with leading planning professionals involved in the creatio n of these form based codes. This study also includ ed a discussion and analysis based on the criteria established by Innes and Booher (1999) for good consens us building processes to evaluate the processes and outcomes of form based code formulation, which is detailed with in the d iscus sion section in Chapter Four. The same criteria were used to evaluate the proc esses and outcomes of code implementation that fol lowed the project analyses of ea ch city within Chapter Five. Chapter Five also contains the examination of proje cts reviewed under both code types for both the City of Miami and the City of Denver to analyze code organization, function, and review procedur es in order to evaluate the process and outcomes of code implementation These analyses e xami ned the predictability model while consider ing the need for additional flexibility through further citizen participation following code adoption. B efore and after analyses were used to evaluate project s reviewed under both previous convent ional zoning codes. These projects were subjected to the regula tions of the new form based codes in order to ascertain if differences exist between cod e function and implem entation through development re vie w and approval. Finally, the hypotheses established in Chapter Three Metho dology were analyzed based on the findings obtained from the case studies, the discussion in Chapter Four, and all of the project analyses within Ch apter Five.

PAGE 130

130 Case Study Summary Within the Miami and Denver case studies the problems were identified that served as the motivation to overhaul the ex isting conventional zoning code For Miami, it was the need to red uce inconsistencies within a 20 year old plan that had been amend ed multiple times, which dis incentivize d smart growth. For Denver, it was the dopted plans, which included Comprehensive Plan (2000) and Blu eprint Denver (2002) while formulati ng context and f orm based regulations to increa se clarity and certainty within the code implementation in order to improve upon the more than 50 year old conventional zoning code, Chapter 59. Both cities undertook a five year participatory process to create their form bas ed codes. However, there were significant cost diffe rences between the two cities. process cost about $3Million, while D Both cities hired consultants to lead the cr eation of the form based code. Miami chose DPZ (Duany Plater Zyberk and Company), and Denver hired Code Studio and Winter and Company. Thes e processes were both well attended and involved thousands of citizens over the five year peri od. Both cities origin ated these participatory processes on a much smaller a nd immediate scale at the beginning. were reduced in to four quadrants: east, west, north, and south, in which worksh ops and presentations were hel d. based form of governance involved initiating participa tion at the district level. Both code processes entailed existing conditions analyses and the use of an organizing principle to derive the approach to apply the form based code. A ddition ally ropriately direct development. After these factors were determined,

PAGE 131

131 building form, height and relationships between structures, contexts, and the development of design sta ndards led to the creation of specifi c and pred ictable regulations which demonstrate a balance of text an d visual imagery. B oth cities also noted challenges within the form based code formulation proces s from the architectural, bus iness, and retail communities. Both cities took the initiative and made the extra effort to direct consensus building activities to work through these conc erns to achieve results that n early all were satisfied with. The City of Miami conducted extra studies to demonstrat e that there is little difference between the intensity of regulations of the conventional zoning code and the form based code and they were successful in working through these concerns to embrace differ ences of opinion The City of Denver made extra effort after the second and third drafts had already been pr esented and stop ped the code formulation process in order to build consensus, which added an additional fou r to six months to the process Outcomes of processes include d the adoption of new form based code s ju st on e month apart. These consist of specific and re sponsive regulations that aim to increase predictability within code implementation through the development review and approval process Discussion Summary nd outcome criteria for good consensus building, both of these scenarios were exami ned and comparisons were made. Both the City of Miami and the City of Denver implemente d marketing a nd outreach campaigns to encourage participation. Miami spent about $800, 000 on marketing and outreach and Denver spent about $250,000, which included direct postcard mail outs to property owners within each ci ty. B oth cities also had foreign

PAGE 132

132 t ranslation services available. Miami provided translation in Spanish and Creole, whi le Denver provided Spanish translation to increase accessibility and inclusivity. The results of the se processes indicate d that (Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419) were incorporated within these processes to the extent possible. The extra effort made by both cities to integrate the interests of all groups, including the architectural, business, and retail communities, demonstrates further adherence to this criterion. Both scenarios identifie zoning code with a form process was driven by a purpose and task that is real, practical, and shared by the 9, p. 419). While the focus of both processes was on the goal of crea ting a form based code these processes were self organizing to the degree that latent stakeholders were able to organize and present opposition which both cities recognized as opportunitie s f or further consensus building. As a result, these processes organizing, allowing participants to decide on ground rules, 419). The smaller scale appr oach at the beginning of these processes coupled with the use of visual imagery to convey concepts throughout these processes indicated that these participants, keeping them at the table, interested, and learning through in depth discussion, d Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). ive within these processes, but op position was not ignored. The findings obtained through analysis of

PAGE 133

133 these processes demonstrate d that both cities took the initiative to embrace differences of opinion to work through the issues and interests to achieve consensus. This confirms (1999) challenges to the status quo and fos p. 419). Leading experts in form based coding were involved in both processes, and this coupled with the multitude of analyses performed, pro vided high quality information. Both cities used visual imagery to convey con ce pts and to build consensus E ach process incorporate [ d ] high quality infor mation of many types assure ] agreement on ... Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). As a result of the effort made to work through the concerns of the architectu ral, business, and retail communities, both the Miami and Denver scenarios demonstrate d to difference s 419). As a result of the sum of these findings, both processes were found to have met the seven criteria for good consensus building processes establish ed by Innes and Booher (1999). A ddition ally d based codes in which nearly all were satisfied, and indicate d that extra effort was made to address concerns Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Both scenarios involved innovations in form based coding since these are the first major U .S. cities t o adopt a form based code. While significant time and expense accompanied the creation of these form based codes, these have produced an increase in predictability and are considered the for erunners of form based coding within major metropolita n contexts As

PAGE 134

134 a result, these processes and outcomes methods in terms of costs a (p. 419) ( Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Due to the collaboration, group learning an d consensus building achieved with gr oups with dissenting voices these processes demonstrate learning and change in and bey (p. 419) Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). The form based codes pro duced within both Miami and Denver are clearly presented through a balance of words and text, and the techniques used in collaboration to convey concepts have demonstrated great sensitivity in the achievement of agreement on their meaning. As a result the se processes have Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). Throughout these process es, group learning occurred through collaboration and ctions, spinoff partnerships, and new practices or institution (p. 419) and that are flexible and networked, permitting the community to be more creatively Innes & Booher, 1999, p. 419). As a result, these findings indicate that both cities met all of the outcome criteria establish ed by Innes and Booher (1999). Innes and Booher (1999) have indicate d every outcome criterion to be achieved to have a successful pro (p. 419) ; however better than one which a p. 419).

PAGE 135

135 Project Analyses Summary The project analyses entailed the examination of one project reviewed unde r the form based code and one project reviewed under the conventional zoning code which were provided by each city. The first round of analyses examined the project, provided a general description, and analyzed code organization, function, and development review procedures. The anal ysis of developmen t review procedures, including by right development policies, outlined which projects require public hearings and which pro jects do not in order to take in to consider ation the presence of opportunities for citi zen participation following code adoption, w hich included public hearings. If projects requi red public heari ngs, summaries of meeting minutes were included and outlined according to an overview of the public hearing and the citizen participation that took pl ace within the public hearing. These findings were compared to code type and compared and contrasted bet ween both contexts. If projects did not require public hearings, administrative revi ew procedures were summarized. Out comes produced by each code type were explored to consider how, and i f, predictability was created T he s e findings were used to analyze the relationship between participation within code formulation and implementation to evaluate the need for additional flexibility through further citize n participation within the developmen t review and approval process. This flexibility was weighed against the value of certainty and predictability in promoting development. found t codes and procedures, public hea rings would not occur, either. Furthermore, it was

PAGE 136

136 demons trated that projects that do not require public hearings are limited in terms of further citizen partic ipation. While the public hearing may present limitations within participatory potential, often citizens use the public hearing to ensure that concerns a re addressed and to seek conditions of approval from the City C ommission. projects that were originally reviewed under t heir conventional zoning codes. For this analysis, th based code to further examine differences in code organ ization and function while considering the differences between the development review and appro val procedures. T hese projects were also examined to uncover the differences in the outcomes produced as a result of the differences in function and predictability generated by each code type The Miami World Center project demonstrated similarities between both code types in terms of proce ss and outcome s, and differences in the predictability and outcomes pro duced between both code types. However, the findings from both the Miami and Denver scenarios demonstrated similar code implement ation procedures and processes between both code types, which highlighted similar opportunities for further citizen participation following c ode adoption T he use of vi sual communication was used to develop concept s within the form based code formulation p rocess es within both the Miami and Denver scenarios. B oth form based codes demonstrate a balance of visual imagery and text that clarif y concepts and help make these new form based codes more user friendly T he conventional zoning code s from both cities ar e less prescript ive and present ambiguity in terms of design oriented objectiv es and concepts, and this lessens the ability to

PAGE 137

137 predict the location of intensities and relationships produced within the greater context This was illustrated by the Denver sce nario in which the outcome produced by the new form based code demonstrated significant differences in the ability to predict building placement to promote the pedestrian orientation. T he emphasis on languag e and use predominate within the se conventional z oning code s and ambiguous regulations would seem to necessitate further citizen participation during code implementation However, it was found that the development review and approval procedures were similar for each code type for both cities. The differe nces in outcomes produced between both code types for each city were found in the creation of a more pre dictable set of regulations to achieve the commu nity vision While many concerns and differences of opinion we re addressed during these five year partic ipatory process es, public hearings were found to provide a n important venue for further citizen participation on the public record following code adoption These provided the public with the opportunity to request conditions of approval from the Commission for the projects reviewed under both code types within the City of Miami However, these additional processes add time, expense, and can decrease certainty within the developmen t review and approval process. The Denver projects demonstrate the function of by right development policies that streamline development review and approval that could ha ve occurred in Miami, as well. Based on these comparisons, extensive citizen participation that results in a specific set of regulations was found to be critical in order to predict the achievement of publicly desired outcomes, especially for projects that do not require public hearings or provide opportunities for further citizen participation following code adoption

PAGE 138

138 Hypotheses Summary It was projected in Hypothes is I that the form based code has greater potential to incorporate meaningful participation earlier in the process than the conventional zoning co de. The project analyses indicated that opportunities for further citizen participation were not affected by c ode type within these scenarios. However, the intent behind this hypothesis was confirmed through the code analyse s which indicated that the level of specificit y of the form based code entail s the development of spec ific form and context based regulation s t hat increase the likelihood of participat ion being purposeful and meaningful while pr oducing a responsive set of regulations and increased outcome predictability. A nalysis of these codes also indicat ed that the form based codes we re more specific and pr escriptive due to a balance of text and imagery that convey context and form based regulations, which are absent within previous conventional zoning codes. It was projected in Hypothesis II that the form based code entails a greater level of visual communication and decision making based on the design orientation than the conventio nal zoning c ode. Both of t he new form based codes were found to be more visual and design oriented than the previous conventional zoning codes through project and co de analyses B oth form based code formulation processes entailed the use of visual imagery to produce specific and clear regulations that nearly all understood and agreed on. In the Miami project analyses, the level of design oriented regulations used to r eview projects were similar due to recent amendments made to Ordinance 11000 and the inclusion of the conventional zoning code project, the Miami World Center, within Append I n the Denver project analyses, the difference s were with in the level of design oriented regula t ions used to review projects between both

PAGE 139

139 code types, which were a result of the age of the previous conventional zoning code in addition to its emphasis on use There were also differences produced be tween both code types, which were demonstrated by an outcome that was found to be in and exemplified the community vision as a result of the function of the Denver form based code which differed considerably from the previous conventional zoning code Chapter 59 It was projected in Hypothesis III that due to the design orientation and visual communication, participation within the form based code is more inclusive and accessible to the general pu blic. C ase study analyses demonstrated the importance of the design oriented approach and the use of visual communication. B oth cities also indicated that extensive marketing an d public outreach increased level s of inclusivity and accessibility within the form based code formulation processes Addi tionally, it was implied that a sense of urgency was created through public acknowledgement that these new codes would affect nearly all properties within each city. However, the levels of inclusivity and accessibility were similar within code implementati on for both code type s following code adoption It was projected in Hypothesis IV that due to the emphasis on language and use, the conventional zoning code presents a higher level of predetermined concepts that are more abstract and less likely to facilit ate participation, which makes public participation during development review and approv al more critical. The specificity and predictability pro duced by the form based code contrast s with the regulatory approach of the conventional zoning codes that are us e based However, the Miami conventional zoning code project, the Miami World Center, presented an except ion since it was

PAGE 140

140 master plan ned as a special district and bridges the intent between the conventional zoning code and the form based code. This project also demonstrated similarities in terms of development review and approval processes including opportunities for further citizen participation within both code types during code implementation The Denver project analyses d emonstrated how the new form bas ed code concepts were prescribed through the achievement of development outcomes. The analysis of the projects in Denver demonstrated similar opportunities for further citizen participation between both code types following code adoption since both project s did not require public hearings as a result of by right development policies In theory, the level of specificity of the concepts conveyed and their application in achieving the community vision should decrease the need for further citizen parti cipation; however, the project s in Miami demonstrated that there was a need for further citizen pa rticipation. The form based code project in Denver at 505 East Colfax Avenue demonstrated the function of by right development policies, which do not include public pr plans and reflected the community vision deriv ed through the form based code formulation process Findings Code formulation p rocess es Visual communication was used to convey the context and form based approach to establish specific and detailed regulations to achieve community desired outcomes within both process scenarios. Marketing and outreach campaigns helped to maximize participation within both scenarios, which included direct postcard mail outs and the provision of foreign language translat ion

PAGE 141

141 within both s cenarios. These factors combined increased accessibility and inclusivity within both form based code formulation scenarios. Code formulation o utcomes. Both form based code formulation processes led to the development of specific and detailed regulations that feature a balance of text and visuals that have increased the level of predictability through the implementation of these form based codes. Code implementation p ro cesses. B y right development policies streamline development review and approval processes, and public hearings can provide opportunities for further citizen partic ipation only if projects require them Opportunities for further citizen participation were found to be similar between both co de types within both contexts. The goal of creating a form based code through extensi ve citizen participation is often to achieve streamlined code implem enta tion processes and this often entails the use of by righ t deve lopment policies in order to increase certainty within the development process Code implementation o utcome s. Review of the form based code project in Miami revealed differences between the organization of the code and the use of visual im agery between bot h code types. However, due to the temporal proximity and magnitude of the Miami World Center project reviewed under the conventi onal zoning code, t hese regulations were also incorporated into the new Miami 21 fo rm based code Review of the form based code project in Denver also revealed differences between the organization of the code and the use of visual imagery between both code types. P roject analyses revealed that there was a difference in terms of outcomes produced as a result of the r egulations of both code types.

PAGE 142

14 2 form based code, the Denver Zoning Code, has incorporated the community vision, goals and objectives of Comprehensive Plan (2000) and Blueprint Denver (2002) which prescribed an orientation toward the pedestria n much different than the project reviewed under the previous convent ional zoning code, Chapter 59. The conventional zoning code project when subjected to the new form based code regulations would produce similar results to the project reviewed under the n ewly adopted form based code. These changes would include the location of the building directly adjacent and accessible to the pedestrian zone on the primary street front with vehicular access and activity second to the pedestrian orientation. Evaluation o f form based code f o rmulation and i mplementatio n. Both form based code formulation processes met all of the criteria for good consensus building processes establi shed by Innes and Booher (1999) and b oth form based code formulation processes produced outco mes that met all of the criteria for outcomes of good consensus building processes establ ished by Innes and Booher Evaluation of code i mplementation th rough development review p rocedur es and o utcome s. criteria met by the processes and outcomes of code form ulation due to required public hearings. projects featured streamlined development review and approval processes, but these achieved fewer process and outcome criteria due to the absence of re quired public hearings analyses for both citie s pr ojects reviewed under the previous conventional zoning cod es were subjected to the regulations of the new form ba sed code s, which indicated that there would be little difference in terms of code i mplementation process es based on these scenarios Outcomes would differ in Denver

PAGE 143

143 as a result of a more responsive set of regulation s produced through form based co de formulation. Recommendations This study has demonstra ted that predictability can be achie v e d through specific context and form based regulations T hese are often conveyed through a balance of text and visual imagery in order to p rescribe outcomes in accordance with the community vision While the establishment of predictability can lead to in creased certainty to promote development, it was di scovered that additional citizen participati on following code adoption may be necessary. As a result, it is recommended that methods for further citizen participation are developed to incorporate flexibil ity into the predictability model Both cities indicated that new technologies and websites were used throughout the se form based code formulation process es. These could also b e useful in providing an additional forum to complement by right development pol icies. Through the designation of staff or elected officials to monitor these new technologies or websites, someo ne would be available to address concerns These new methods would also provide an additional source of recordation and accountability and woul d allow projects to be tailored during development review to incorporate citizen participation regardless of project type. This approach would limit increase s in time, expense, and uncertainty within the d evelopment process and would not entail additional public hearings In summary, t he use of new technologies would provide an additional means to address concerns without decreasing certainty w ithin the development process. This approach coupled with the extensive and purposeful front loaded public partic ipation of form based code

PAGE 144

144 formulation in addition to streamlined development review and approval procedures would provide the best results. Gaps in the Literature and Areas for Additional Research Innes and Booher (1999) indicated the need for evaluatio of consensus building processes, and both Miami and Denver have indicated that there is a likelihood that post analyses will be performed ( p. 420) Future areas of research cou ld include obtaining public opinion thro ugh surveys following form based code participatory processes and after these codes have been in plac e to gauge public satisfaction. One source noted that while other areas not regulated by form based codes have b een affected by the economy, the a reas wher e form based codes are in place have been nearly unaffected by the economy (Hawley, 2010). S everal sources have mentioned the use of form based codes as e conomic development tools but do not provide substantive evi dence for method or measurement The analy sis of the form based code as an economic development engine would provide another avenue for further research from which to explore the predictability and flexibility models of code implementation F orm based codes are still a relatively new concept, and t he adaptation of th ese code formulation processes and the resulting format can be useful in a dvancing the quality of public participa tion through a design orientation This would also provide an interesting avenue for further research, which could be used to examine how the predictability and flexibility model s are further develop ed to produce the most ethical and most responsive approach to achieving the community vision

PAGE 145

145 Conclusion Based on the sum of these findings, creating a form based code presents a premium oppor tunity for consensus building. While the formulation of these codes ca n be costly, these processes often incorporate exten sive citizen participation requiring speci fic input and focused collaboration that can lead to increased outcome predic tability The specificity of the form based code can be used to streamline d evelopment review while producing outcomes in accordance with the community vision. However, additional flexibility through further citizen participation within code implementation can be necessary The results of these analyse s indicate d that form based codes can provide opportunitie s for purposeful and meaningful citizen participation within code formulation. This participation was found to be critical since opportunities for furt her citizen participation can be limited within code implementation The use of visual forms of communication and design were found to be important component s within the public collaboration process and were found to be helpful in convey ing the regulations within the se new form based codes. In conclusion, both the City of Miami and the City of Denver have created form base d codes that involv ed extensive public partici pation and community outreach. The predictability generated by the se code s through specific and well though t out parameters is a product of extensive and purposeful public p articipation within the code formulation process. This, when paired with additional flexibility in the form of addition al public participation opportunities within code imple menta tion will ensure the optimum approach towards realizing the community vision.

PAGE 146

146 APPENDIX A MIAMI WATERCOLOR PER SPECTIVES Source: City of Miami

PAGE 147

147 Source: City of Miami

PAGE 148

148 APPENDIX B DIFFERENCES IN PRODU CT BETWEEN ORDINANCE 11000 AND MIAMI 21 Sourc e: City of Miami Results from Ordinance 11000

PAGE 149

149 Source: City of Miami Results from Miami 21

PAGE 150

150 Source: City of Miami Results from Ordinance 11000

PAGE 151

151 Source: City of Miami Results from Miami 21

PAGE 152

152 Source: City of Miami Resul ts from Ordinance 11000 Results from Miami 21

PAGE 153

153 Source: City of Miami Results from Ordinance 11000 Results from Miami 21

PAGE 154

154 APPENDIX C MIAMI INFORMED CONSE NT LETTER

PAGE 155

155 APPENDIX D SUMMARY OF MIAMI INTERVIEW QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES

PAGE 156

156

PAGE 157

157

PAGE 158

158

PAGE 159

159 APPENDIX E BRICKELL CITICENTRE CONCEPTUAL ELEVATION

PAGE 160

160 Source: City of Miami

PAGE 161

161 APPENDIX F BRICKELL CITICENTRE CONCEPTUAL RENDERING

PAGE 162

162 Source: City of Miami

PAGE 163

163 APPENDIX G MIAMI 21 REGULATIONS FOR THE BRICKELL CIT ICENTRE

PAGE 164

164 Source: City of Miami

PAGE 165

165 APPENDIX H MIAMI 21 BUILDING FU NCTION USES INCLUDIN G BY RIGHT Source: City of Miami

PAGE 166

166 APPENDIX I TION SPECIFICATIONS Source: City of Miami

PAGE 167

167 APPENDIX J MIAMI 21 PERMITTING PROCESS DIA GRAM Source: City of Miami

PAGE 168

168 APPENDIX K MIAMI WORLD CENTER C ONCEPTUAL RENDERING Source: City of Miami

PAGE 169

169 APPENDIX L THE MIAMI WORLD CENT ER REGULATING PLAN Source: City of Miami

PAGE 170

170 APPENDIX M MIAMI WORLD CENTER B UILDING DISPOSITION REGULATIONS Source: City of Miami

PAGE 171

171 APPENDIX N DENVER INFORMED CONS ENT LETTER

PAGE 172

172 APPENDIX O SUMMARY OF DENVER IN TERVIEW QUESTIONS AN D RESPONSES

PAGE 173

173

PAGE 174

174

PAGE 175

175

PAGE 176

176 APPENDIX P DRIVE THRU BUILDING MS ST COLFAX AVENUE So urce: City of Denver

PAGE 177

177 APPENDIX Q DRIVE THRU RESTAURAN T REGULATIONS USED I MS ZONING FOR 505 EAST COLFAX AVENUE Source: City of Denver

PAGE 178

178 APPENDIX R DENVER ZONING CODE S UMMARY TABLE OF AUTH ORITY AND NOTICE Source: City of Denver

PAGE 179

179 APPENDIX S SITE PLAN FOR 505 EAST CO LFAX AVENUE

PAGE 180

180 Source: City of Denver

PAGE 181

181 APPENDIX T PHOTOGRAPH OF COMPLE TED PROJECT AT 505 E AST COLFAX AVENUE

PAGE 182

182 Source: City of Denver

PAGE 183

183 APPENDIX U SITE PLAN FOR 6201 E AST COLFAX AVENUE

PAGE 184

184 Source: City of Denver

PAGE 185

185 APPENDIX V PHOTOGR APH OF 6201 EAST COL FAX AVENUE

PAGE 186

186 Source: City of Denver

PAGE 187

187 APPENDIX W S FOR 6201 EAST COLF AX AVENUE Source: City of Denver

PAGE 188

188 APPENDIX X S AND PERMITTED USES FOR 6201 EAST COLFAX AVENUE Source: City of Denver

PAGE 189

189 APPENDIX Y CHAP TER 59 BY RIGHT POLICIES RELATED TO 6201 EAST COLFAX AVE NUE Source: City of Denver

PAGE 190

190 APPENDIX Z BEFORE AND AFTER ANA IONS FOR 6201 EAST C OLFAX AVENUE Source: City of Denver

PAGE 191

191 Source: City of Denver

PAGE 192

192 APPENDIX AA DENVER ZONING CODE P ERMITTED USE CHART, ARTICLE 5 FOR BEFORE AND AFTER ANALYSIS Source: City of Denver

PAGE 193

193 APPENDIX BB DENVER ZONING CODE S UMMARY TABLE OF AUTH ORITY AND NOTICE, ARTICLE 12 Source: City of Denver

PAGE 194

194 APPENDIX CC DENVER COPYRIGHT PERMISSION

PAGE 195

195 APPENDIX DD MIAMI COPYRIGHT PERM ISSION

PAGE 196

196 LIST OF REFERENCES Berg, N. ( 2010 a August 19 ). Denver's f o rm based code closer to a pproval. Planetizen Retrieved from http://www.planetizen.com/ node/44374 Berg, N. ( 2010 b July 8 ). Brave new c odes. Architect Magazine Retrieved from http://www.architectmagazine.com/codes and standards/brave new codes.aspx B ingham, L. (2006). The new urban governance: Process for e ngag ing citizens and s takeholders [Electronic version] Review of Policy Research, 23 ( 4 ), 815 826. Denver (Colorado). Denver Zoning Code [Denver, CO:] The City [2010a, June 25]. Retrieved from http://www.denvergov.org/cpd/CPDHome/Zoning/DenverZoningCode/tabi d/432507/Default.aspx Denver (Colorado). CPD staff report for proposed n ew Denver Zoning Co de [ Denver CO:] The City [2010 b June 17]. Print. Denver (Colorado). Chapter 59 [Denver, CO:] The City [1956]. Retrieved from http://www.denvergov.org /cpd/CPDHome/Zoning/DenverZoningCode/tabi d/432507/Default.aspx DiSalvo, C. ( 2009 ) Design and the c onst ruction of p ublics [Electronic version] Massachusetts Institute of Technology Design Issues, 25 ( 1 ), p. 48 63. Form Based Codes Institute (FBCI). ( 2011) What are form based c odes? Retrieved from http://www.formbasedcodes.org/what are form based codes Hawley, S. (2010, April 21). Form based code t akin g hold: Alternative to z oning. H ouston Tomorrow Retrieved from http://www.houstontomorrow.org/livability/story/form based code taking hold/ Hill, D. (2009, Aug. 14). de could set p recedent. Architectural Record. Retrieved from http://www.planetizen.com/node/40288 Innes, J., & Booher, D. (1999). Consensus building and complex adaptive systems: A framework for evaluat ing collaborative p lanning [Electronic version] Journal of the Amer ican Planning Association, 65 ( 4 ), 412 423. Innes, J. (1996). Planning t hrough consensus b uilding [Electronic version] Journal of the Amer ican Planning Association, 62 ( 4 ), 460 472.

PAGE 197

197 Laetz, E. and Halbur, T. (2010, Oct. 25). A return to physical p lanning. Planetizen Retrieved from http://www.planetizen.com/node/46586 Marcus, P. (2010, May 24). Zoning code rolling o ut. Denver Daily News R etrieved from http://www.thedenverdailynews.com/article.php?alD=8577 Mayor Manny Diaz issues statement r egarding Miami 21 meeting to be held on Aug. 7. ( 2009, July 29). US Federal News Service, including U.S. State News. Retrieved on Oct. 24, 2011 from HighBeam Research: http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3 1807680011.html Miami (Florida). (2011, June 23). Miami City Commission meeting minutes : Special Area Plan for the Brickell CitiCentre ( File ID 11 00380ap ). [Miami, FL:] The City [2011 ]. Retrieved from http://egov.ci.miami.fl.us/LegistarWeb/frameset.html Mi ami (Florida). (2011, July 28). Miami City Commission minutes: Development Agreement for the Brickell CitiCentr e ( File ID 11 00541). [Miami, FL:] The City [2011]. Retrieved from http://eg ov.ci.miami.fl.us/LegistarWeb/frameset.html Miami (Florida). Miami 21 [Miami, FL:] The City [2010, May 20]. Retrieved from http://www.miami21.org/PDFs/May2011/Miami21 FU LLDOCUMENT May2011.pdf Miami (Florida). Miami World Center design s tandards. [Miami, FL:] The City [2008 ]. Retrieved from http://egov.ci.miami.fl.us/Legistarweb/Attachments/45741 .pdf Miami (Florida). (2008, Nov. 13). Miami City Commission minutes: Miami World Center Development Agreement (File ID 08 01015da ). [Miami, FL:] The City [Nov. 2008a]. Retrieved from ht tp://egov.ci.miami.fl.us/LegistarWeb/frameset.html Miami (Florida). (2008, Nov. 13). Miami City Commission minutes : Miami World Center Zoning Change ( File ID 08 01015z t). [Miami, FL:] The City [ Nov. 2008 b ]. Retrieved from http://egov.ci.miami.fl.us/LegistarWeb/frameset.html Miami (Florida). (2008, Oct. 23). Miami City Commission minutes: Miami World Center Zoning Change (File ID 08 01015zt). [Miami, FL:] The City [ Oct. 2008]. Retrieved f rom http://egov.ci.miami.fl.us/LegistarWeb/frameset.html Miami (Florida). Ordinance 11000 [Miami, FL:] The City [1991]. Retrieved from http://library4.municode.com/default test/home.htm?infobase=11251&doc_action=whatsnew

PAGE 198

198 Parolek D. G. Parolek, K., & Crawford, P. C. (2008). Form based codes: A guide for planners, urban designers, munic ipalities, and d evelopers Hoboken, NJ: J. Wiley & Sons Raterman, D. (2007 Dec. ). In the tropical z one [Electronic version] American Planning Associatio n, 73 (11) 34 37. Talen, E. (2009). Design by the rules: The historical u nde rpinnings of form based c odes [Electronic version] Journal of the Amer ican Planning Association, 75 ( 2 ), 144 160. Viglucci, A. (2009, Jan. 8). Miami 21 rezoning changes inch f orward. The Miami Herald Retrieved from http://www.miamiherald.com/news/miami dade/story/842583.html Walters, D. (2007). Designing community: C harrettes, m asterplans and f or m based c odes Amsterdam: Elsevier/Architectural Press Winter & Company. (2010). Citywide form based zoning c ode D enver, Colorado Retrieved from http://www.winterandcompany.net/pdf/denver_co.pdf

PAGE 199

199 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Kristina Wright Bowen received a Master of Arts Degree in Urban and Regional Pla nning from the University of Florida in the fall of 2011. While working to complete her graduate education, she served as the Research Assistant between the University of Florida and the City of Newberry, Florida. During that time, she assisted the city wi th the preparation of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report. Prior to working to complete her graduate education, Kristina worked as a Planner for Glynn County, Georgia She also worked for the Cities of Palm Coast and Orange City in Florida in planning and land development. Kristina was selected as a Fulbright Finalist in 2000 and received a Fellowship from the Bauhaus Dessau Foundation to collaborate on a project entitled professi onals. The project resulted in an international exhibition and publication, which included a published article and a collaborative documentary film. As a result of her participation in the project, she received a postgra duate certificate from the Bauhaus Kristina received the Presidential Award for Academic Excellence and was awarded the Valerie Canady Foundation and H.J. Heinz Award as an undergraduate student at West Virginia University. She graduated cum laude and earned a Bachelor s degree from West Vi rginia University in 1999. Kristina is a member of the American Planning Association, and her interests include architecture and contempo rary art. Her future goal is to incorpor at e a planning, engineering, an d design firm in order to serve the coastal comm unities of North Florida and South Coastal Georgia.