Regional and Urban Design Committee

Hi Karen

In Sacramento we have a 'bulk ordinance' that was put into effect about ten years ago in response to some tear downs in older neighborhoods followed by massive and incompatible new homes built to the 'limit'.   

Unfortunately one major factor in how these form based standards are crafted is:  'how easy is it going to be to check' – and that's why we now have a simple 'volume tent'.  Applying the rule is pretty easy – but it makes many existing older homes non-compliant as they stand, and additions and remodels often subject to expensive variance processes at best, and unworkable at worst. 

There are some curious forms that are inadvertently being rewarded.  One is the clipped gable.  One day someone will be scratching their head wondering why so many Sacramentans fell in love with clipped gables in the mid 2010's

To change even the few sentences of this ordinance once it's in place takes so much effort that it tends to keep getting kicked down the road – and of course as architects who are trying to survive in business we have to keep an eye on our customers and current projects, leaving little time or energy for reshaping our regulatory environments.  These kind of ordinaces seem increasingly popular; certainly the McMansion problem is real; the trick is in how one addresses the problem without incentivizing patterns that 'work with the code' but are simply bad design.  I'd like to hear about some examples of success in crafting these kinds of form based requirements.

Cheers

Mike

Michael F. Malinowski FAIA

President, Applied Architecture Inc

President Streamline Institute Inc

Contributing Editor California Buildings News

2016 AIA California President

2012-2014 AIA National Director

2008 President AIA Central Valley

2007 Chair Sacramento Development Oversight Commission

2550 X Street Sacramento CA 95818

         Corner of 26th and X

916 456 2656 voice   916 456 1050 fax

mfm@appliedarts.net

www.appliedarchitecture.net

37 years of sensitive and sensible architectural solutions

ü Please consider the environment before printing this email.

Hi Karen

In Sacramento we have a 'bulk ordinance' that was put into effect about ten years ago in response to some tear downs in older neighborhoods followed by massive and incompatible new homes built to the 'limit'.   

Unfortunately one major factor in how these form based standards are crafted is:  'how easy is it going to be to check' – and that's why we now have a simple 'volume tent'.  Applying the rule is pretty easy – but it makes many existing older homes non-compliant as they stand, and additions and remodels often subject to expensive variance processes at best, and unworkable at worst. 

There are some curious forms that are inadvertently being rewarded.  One is the clipped gable.  One day someone will be scratching their head wondering why so many Sacramentans fell in love with clipped gables in the mid 2010's

To change even the few sentences of this ordinance once it's in place takes so much effort that it tends to keep getting kicked down the road – and of course as architects who are trying to survive in business we have to keep an eye on our customers and current projects, leaving little time or energy for reshaping our regulatory environments.  These kind of ordinaces seem increasingly popular; certainly the McMansion problem is real; the trick is in how one addresses the problem without incentivizing patterns that 'work with the code' but are simply bad design.  I'd like to hear about some examples of success in crafting these kinds of form based requirements.

Cheers

Mike

Michael F. Malinowski FAIA

President, Applied Architecture Inc

President Streamline Institute Inc

Contributing Editor California Buildings News

2016 AIA California President

2012-2014 AIA National Director

2008 President AIA Central Valley

2007 Chair Sacramento Development Oversight Commission

2550 X Street Sacramento CA 95818

         Corner of 26th and X

916 456 2656 voice   916 456 1050 fax

mfm@appliedarts.net

www.appliedarchitecture.net

37 years of sensitive and sensible architectural solutions

ü Please consider the environment before printing this email.

None of these form based codes have actually " saved " any neighborhoods.

They just create an artificially expensive neighborhood of low density that limits needed housing and services for other groups that can't afford a single family house on a large piece of land.

All inner city neighborhoods have pressure to evolve, as that is the basic and historic nature of cities and their growth.

As architects, we should be looking at how we can accommodate the growing  populations with safe, affordable, livable housing within reach of transit options, work options and open space.

Instead many architects are buying into the "save at all costs" every single family house and tree in a desperate attempt to "stop growth" by maintaining what has always been in a neighborhoods, instead of looking at what "should or needs " to be built to accommodate a new population. Ironically some of the population being shut out are our own kids and grandchildren.

That Austin and other cities have used a  "tent " to dictate an artificial  maximum shape , height and area that perpetuates a single family neighborhood is a real component of the affordability problem Austin shares with other cities.

These limitations only "work" for those who want to limit development to maintain their single family neighborhoods to the detriment of all other populations, whether they are  lower income, minority or young.

They perpetuate suburban sprawl at a time when many of the city's population would prefer to live in urban areas, close to work and services, but now find those close-in neighborhoods occupied by "NIMBYS" intent on adding expensive regulation after expensive regulation to any housing or redevelopment that can get built.

San Francisco should be a cautionary tale for any urban designer.

Betty J Trent, AIA LEED AP

Austin TX