490 likes | 608 Views
Town of Maggie Valley Appearance Standards & Design Review. Public Workshop III Thursday April, 22 2010 Maggie Valley Town Hall. Acknowledgements & Introductions. Planning Board Tom Benoit Billy Brede, Chairman Burton Edwards June Johnson Bob Knoedler John Schreiber. North Carolina
E N D
Town of Maggie ValleyAppearance Standards &Design Review Public Workshop III Thursday April, 22 2010 Maggie Valley Town Hall
Acknowledgements & Introductions Planning Board Tom Benoit Billy Brede, Chairman Burton Edwards June Johnson Bob Knoedler John Schreiber North Carolina Department of Commerce Community Planning Program Western Region Ron Hancock, AICP
Outline Overview Changes since Public Workshop II (Oct 6 2009) Group Breakout Session Planning Board Comments Public Comment
Today’s Thought…. “We shape our buildings; thereafter, they shape us.” Winston Churchill
Yesterday’s Ideas, Tomorrow’s Look Several “buzz” words have dominated Town Land Planning Documents Since the 1970s Appearance Standards Architectural Standards Town Theme Mountain Heritage Native Landscaping
Land Use Plan (1977) To guide further commercial development along US 19 and to improve the appearance of existing as well as future development along this path
Driving Miss Maggie (Comprehensive Plan 2004) Need to create an image for Maggie Valley Develop architectural review standards…require architectural conformity for commercial buildings as a minimum Preserve mountain architectural heritage Revise landscape ordinance for commercial districts
Land Use Plan (2007) Short Term Goal Add basic aesthetic/appearance or design standards into the ordinance. The Town should decide if there is a specific set of appearance characteristics that they would like to see for non-residential development. A broad set of guidelines could be included in the ordinance to move toward a specific “look.”
Why Now? Bad Economy, Good Timing? Existing businesses have already embraced proposed theme concepts The Town has embraced the vision design criteria i.e. the Police Department, Festival Ground Stage and ABC Store Protects, Encourages and Enhances Town Pride
Mountain Vernacular Mountain Vernacular is not a style of architecture. It cannot be defined in simple terms or achieved by following a certain set of strict design requirements. Mountain Vernacular is as much of a process as it is an end product. It is also a philosophy about design, a philosophy that puts and emphasis on thorough consideration of all elements of the project. Rather than an attempt to stifle good design it is meant to inspire the highest quality design
Appearance Standards & Review Criteria A) Compatibility & Context B) Frontage, Orientation & Facades C) Setbacks & Yards D) Building Materials E) Scale & Massing F)Height G) Articulation Individual Storefronts I) Awnings and Signage J) Pitched Roofs K) Colors L ) Parking M) Screen Utilities N)Sufficient Lighting O)Landscaping P)Bike/Ped
Changes Since October 6 , 2009 Color Building Height Perceived to be overly bureaucratic for minor color change Planning Director now has limited approval authority if color is a recognized earth tone If Planning Director is uncomfortable with color choice then formal CUP process will begin (pp 10-11) Previously capped at 45 feet although “inferred” floodplain exceptions Now explicitly cites 55 feet maximum building height if located in floodplain (p. 8)
Deciding Conditional Use Permits (CUP) The decision on CUP is quasi-judicial and subject to procedural due process requirements: Evidentiary hearing - affected parties have the right to offer evidence, cross examine witnesses, and have sworn testimony The deciding board applies a degree of judgment and discretion A record must be produced that supports the decision (findings of fact) Findings must be based on set standards Special attention given to avoiding bias and conflicts of interest
The CUP must be issued under standards, rules, and regulations that are uniformly applied to all applicants Does not materially endanger the public health or safety Will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be developed Is in compliance with the intent and spirit of the established design criteria Will not substantially injure the value of adjoining property
Additional CUP Decision Elements • Only those standards specifically listed in the ordinance may be applied when making a decision • Additional standards may not be developed on an ad hoc basis • The board must clearly state whether the standards have been met • The applicant has the burden of proof that an application meets the standards
Examples No Change Color Minor/Single Element Renovation Major/Multi Element Renovation New COMMERCIAL Construction
No Changes There will be no amortization requirement period. Improvements to existing buildings are not required, only when changes to the building’s exterior are made will elements of the aesthetic and design standards apply May sell building without improvements
Color (K) Suitable Colors (elements, accents & trim) Mountain Vernacular Palette Pantone Matching System (PMS) Color Chart Intensely Personal/Polarizing
Minor/Single Element Change Changes less than 50% of gross floor area or existing building tax value will only need to comply to the aesthetic and design standards of that specific change only
Application 2 Maggie Valley Magic and Gifts Façade Improvement Project
Major/Multi Element Renovation Changes exceeding 50% of gross floor area or existing building tax value must comply to all aesthetic and design standards
Application 3 Alamo Motel and Cottages Renovation of Primary Building
New Construction If proposed building site is within the C-1 District must comply with all aesthetic and design requirements
Application 4 New Commercial Development McDonald’s Restaurant
Public Comment Three Minute Time Limit Comments Can Be As Specific or general Please state your name & address for the record