CNU 21 – Real Estate Matters
Browsing Tag

CNU 21

Residential Real Estate

CNU 21: Missing Middle Housing

Spencer Agnew attended the 21st annual Congress for the New Urbanism in Salt Lake City. He will do a series of short blog posts highlighting ideas and trends from this national gathering of urban planners, architects, and real estate professionals.

Day two at CNU 21 featured a discussion of “Missing Middle” housing. Missing Middle housing includes residential buildings which are somewhere between a single family home and a mid-rise multifamily building in density. This includes building types such as  duplexes, triplexes, bungalow courts, townhouses, and courtyard apartments. Although a common feature in pre-war historic building stocks, these housing types have become much less common (hence the “missing”). Modern building codes,  zoning regulations, and subdivision regulations often make it impossible to build these housing types, even in areas where they are part of the existing building stock.

A primary benefit of Missing Middle housing is that it provides more choice in housing types while blending in to existing single family neighborhoods. They are typically more affordable than a single-family home due to being smaller and sharing communal parking and lawns. However, unlike mid-rise apartment buildings, Missing Middle housing can blend right in to single family neighborhoods. Daniel Parolek of Opticos Design noted that these building types typically have a residential unit density in the range of 16 to 30 units per acre but are often perceived as being less dense due to the being smaller in scale.

Duplex – Portland, OR

Several market trends tend to favor the development of Missing Middle housing, should zoning and building codes be modified to allow it. University of Utah demographer Christopher Nelson has found the national demand for small lot and attached housing exceeds supply by some 35 million units. Christopher Leinberger at the Brookings Institution also researched housing preferences and found that while 30% to 40% of buyers want to be in walkable urban neighborhoods, only 5% to 10% of the housing stock is providing that in any given housing market. Another factor in favor of smaller housing types is the increasing trend towards smaller households and fewer households with children.

Site Plan- Ericksen Cottages – Bainbridge Island, WA (photo credit: The Cottage Company)

Linda Pruitt of the The Cottage Company (based in Seattle) has had success building several “cottage court” developments in the Seattle area. She noted that many Continue Reading

Urban Planning

CNU 21: The Pros and Cons of Form-Based Zoning Codes

Spencer Agnew attended the 21st annual Congress for the New Urbanism in Salt Lake City. He will do a series of short blog posts highlighting ideas and trends from this national gathering of urban planners, architects, and real estate professionals.

Day one at CNU 21 featured a lively discussion by a panel of experts on form-based codes. Form-based codes are a form of land-use regulation that “address the relationship between building facades and the public realm, the form and mass of buildings in relation to one another, and the scale and types of streets and blocks.” Form-based code ordinances often include diagrams and visuals that display specific architectural design elements that are allowed. This approach to land-use regulation differs with conventional Euclidean zoning, which focuses on the micromanagement of land uses and the regulation of development intensity through abstract metrics such as floor area ratio, setback distances, and parking ratios.

Form-based codes have become popular with advocates of New Urbanism because they focus on the quality of the built environment rather than on the location of different types of land uses. Conventional zoning is often associated with suburban-style land use and development, due to the tendency of use-based zoning to separate land uses and minimize density while ignoring urban design. However, they have been slow to take hold among municipal governments; there are currently about 280 adopted form-based code ordinances in the U.S., impacting just 3% of the national population. Many of the adopted codes are optional, meaning that developers may choose whether to seek entitlements through the form-based code or through the pre-existing use-based zoning.

Form-based codes were intended to simplify land use entitlements and clarify expectations. If a developer proposed a project that met the form-based criteria, they would not need to apply for the various variances for parking, setbacks, and FAR which are commonly necessary with use-based zoning. Theoretically, the regulations would be simpler and easier to understand, and review processes would be faster. That hasn’t always turned out to be the case however. Despite the original intent to keep codes short and simple, many adopted form-based codes have been lengthier and more complex than the previous use-based zoning codes. Sandy Sorlien of the Transect Codes Council pointed out that many codes become bloated through the creation of too many zoning sub-districts or through the inclusion of explanatory language that is non-regulatory.

To date, there are no adopted form-based codes in Minnesota. The most prominent example of a large-scale adoption of form-based zoning is the Miami, which implemented its Miami 21 form-based zoning initative in 2010.