Code next emlk contact team - 2018
0 likes102 views
The document discusses code-next, a rewrite of Austin's development code. It addresses concerns about separating code changes from upzoning, focusing inspections on external rather than internal building functions, and making inspection more automated. It suggests the city focus on external impacts like runoff rather than internal building functions, which are responsibilities of licensed professionals. The document argues code-next should have options for lower-cost housing and consider risks of increased density, recommending a risk mitigation matrix.
Code next emlk contact team - 2018
- 1. “Code-next” – EMLK Contact Team Pinaki Ghosh, May. 2018 Chairman EMLK Combined Planning Area Contact Team
- 2. Topics • Separation of Concerns • McMansion Ordinance and Form based code • Inspection with a form based code • Code-next and Risks
- 3. Code-next – EMLK Comments Separation of Concerns – code vs. up-zoning • Rewriting the code to help planners and citizens navigate and make the development code usable • Rezoning various parts of the city with new zones/codes but under existing density model • Up zoning of various parts of the city
- 4. Using Code-next – some practicality • Form • Fit • Function • “Form” works to “fit” the neighborhood and that will be baked in the code. • So our concerns should be “form” & “function” • Currently COA inspection process is heavily “function” based inside a building even though we need a licensed • Architect • Structure Engineer • Electrician • Plumber • HVAC etc.
- 5. Using Code-next – some practicality • So our concerns are “form” & “function” • “Form” is mostly external • “Function” can be “external or internal” of a “form” • City is responsible for the external “functions” like run-off, sound etc. • Currently COA focus of inspection is for the internal “functions” • Goal: COA depts. should be focusing on external “functions & forms” and delegate the internal “functions” of the “form” to licensed professionals.
- 6. McMansion Ordnance has been most influential in shaping our neighborhoods and it’s a form based code
- 7. Foundation Assumptions • A “house” is a product like a car in US with a limited lifespan. • The price of the house will depend on the quality of the product based on free market • Houses are designed by Architects and those designs are approved by COA for “form”. • Almost all important internal “functions” of a house are done by license trades man who are licensed by the city
- 8. Internal Functions Internal Functions Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 Internal Functions External Functions External Functions External Functions External Functions City’s Responsibility Focus of the city should be external “functions” instead of internal “functions” in absence of specific complains. Lot envelopLot envelopLot envelop
- 9. Suggestions at Policy level • Internal “Functions” and construction details inside the envelop of a home should be responsibility of license professionals and not city. • City should focus on inspection of external functions and forms like run-off, canopy compliance (this can be equitable with infra- structure). • External “functions” drive CIP costs for city. • Code’s prescription of “form” is driver for neighborhood character. • Preserving the owners equity should be the guiding principle for both external “form” and “function”.
- 10. Form based inspection must be automated
- 11. Code-next and Innovation • Use of drones and software to measure “form”. • Use of big-data and AI to compare to codes and standards like “run- off”. • This code puts the entry point in the market to a much lower cost - which means small builders with smaller capital will have less option. • There should be options like tiny houses, neighborhood RV parks
- 12. Code-next and Risks • The word “Risk” does not exist anywhere but we are trying to change the entire blueprint of a city • Where is the risk mitigation matrix? • Pandemic is a legitimate risk – how does density increase the chances of pandemic