My pleasure, Nick. I should add that currently, the criteria for getting in this SmartCode and other form-based codes study is to meet the FBCI criteria for form-based codes:
1. Is the code’s focus primarily on regulating urban form and less on land use?
2. Does the code emphasize standards and parameters for form with predictable physical outcomes (build-to lines, frontage type requirements, etc.) rather than relying on numerical parameters (FAR, density, etc.) whose outcomes are impossible to predict?
3. Does the code require private buildings to shape public space through the use of building form standards with specific requirements for building placement?
4. Does the code promote and/or conserve an interconnected street network and pedestrian-scaled blocks?
5. Are the diagrams in the code unambiguous, clearly labeled, and accurate in their presentation of spatial configurations?
If the above criteria are met, but the below criteria are not, the document falls in the “FB Guidelines” category:
1. Is the code regulatory rather than advisory?
2. Are regulations and standards keyed to specific locations on a regulating plan?
As always, input welcome on suggested modifications to the criteria, as well as additions to the code study itself of codes that meet the criteria.
