City design has long been recognized as predicated on power. Planners have the power to regulate the use and form of privately owned land—an enormous task. Zoning is the foundation of city planning. The caliber of cities' future development hinges on zoning. Over the last fifteen years, communities have been divesting themselves of their historic Euclidean zoning in favor of the newer concept of form-based code. However, changing an entire zoning code is an immense project that requires a massive investment of motivation, time, perseverance and money. Does changing code provide an answer to undesirable consequences of Euclidean zoning, or are the claims of form-based code advocates correct and their code the panacea for everything wrong with planning and development? This is a sweeping question and one that is asked in hundreds of planning offices by planners, urban designers, politicians and their communities. The primary question is why and how communities change from conventional Euclidean zoning to form-based code. This research examines the state of practice and the impact of form-based code on zoning. Issues critical to an examination of the theory and practice aspects of this investigation includes key questions: What motivates change? What difference does it make? Who are the primary motivators for change? What is the comparative analysis and the basis for change and the impact of form-based code? Two protocols, including online surveys of planning practitioners and case studies of Cincinnati, Denver and Miami, are used to investigate the intended, and often unintended, outcomes and consequences that emerge with a zoning change within an established community.

Zoning is premised upon the segregation of land uses. Rudimentary zoning ordinances originated in New York around 1916 as a means of separating the lower class fabric markets from the upscale retailers of 5th Avenue nearby, and to reduce density. The Standard Enabling Acts of the 1920s granted governments the broad authority to enact zoning ordinances to reduce population densities in cities for the purposes of health, safety, and well being. The United States Supreme Court upheld this authority as constitutional in the landmark case of Euclid v. Ambler Realty (1926). In the roughly eighty years since the Euclid decision, zoning has become the planning profession's primary tool to regulate land use. While an effective policy response to issues at that time of a rapidly industrializing America, Euclidean zoning has unintentionally shaped the US landscape into a sprawling, auto-dependent society characterized by segregated communities of isolated populations. Euclidean zoning makes it extremely difficult to mix uses. As a result, 'traditional' development patterns with high-density housing, nearby commercial, and pedestrian-friendly walkways are virtually impossible to create. Many critics suggest that zoning promulgates sprawl. In short, Euclidean zoning prevents 'good' urban design. In recent years, new trends have emerged to address these problems to varying degrees of success. Form-Based Codes are one of the most recent planning innovations. With origins in the New Urbanist school of development, Form-Based Codes elevates physical design in city planning, as opposed to the 'use-based' restrictions of Euclidean zoning. This paper examines whether or not Form-Based Codes could be a viable solution to the ills associated with Euclidean zoning. Benefits and drawbacks of both Euclidean zoning and Form-Based Codes are debated, including a case study analysis, as well as a discussion of legal ramifications and future scenarios in land use planning. / Master of Urban and Regional Planning

This document is a professional project and academic companion piece completed to partially fulfill requirements for the attainment of a Masters in City and Regional Planning at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. The project is the City of King West Broadway Master Plan (Plan). The Plan was completed over the course of a year for a real-world client (The City of King) and provides new form-based code recommendations in the Plan Area. The Plan is included as Appendix A. The companion piece is intended to provide additional background research that was conducted during the planning process, but omitted from the final project. In the companion piece, I first explain why I selected the WBMP for my professional project. Next, I elaborate on the sources and inspiration for the goals of the project that are listed in the plan including grant requirements, input from the public, and current planning practices. Finally, I provide background research and justifications for two parts of the plan that have little reasoning in the text: mobilehome relocation law and the suggested development standards.

No description available.

No description available.