Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />their passion for the objectives of the programs they have been ap- <br />pointed to implement. Ironically, they are often appointed because <br />they have demonstrated a passion forthose program objectives. This <br />human factor is all the more reason that the criteria applied by these <br />boards should be precise and clear and that the members be diligent <br />in requiring that competent and substantia(facts be presented to <br />support each element of the criteria. <br /> <br />THE ROLE OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW <br />What is the legitimate role of an architectural review process? It should <br />not be to detennine the acceptable-style of architecture on a case-by- <br />case basis. Architecture is a fonn of visual art and is an expression of <br />a property owner. Some designs challenge or even offend us, as they <br />should. If a community desires to limit the acceptable architectural <br />styles and materials or establish a minimum quality for materials, then <br />they need to do that in a comprehensive manner by adopting those <br />requirements in a public process. Otherwise, the focus should be on <br />features that could have a negative impact on adjacent houses, such <br />as paint color so bright that it would distract drivers or bike riders; <br />lighting that spills over into adjacent properties, physical elements that <br />allow forthe undue invasion of the privacy of adjacent properties, and <br />exterior materials that tend to disintegrate or show wear easily. The <br />cost of land and the sale prices of other homes in a neighborhood will <br />have, in most instances, a direct relationship to the quality and style of <br />a new or renovated house in that neighborhood. <br />Issues of building mass, setbacks from adjacent properties or <br />streets, and minimum amounts of . landscaping are the subjects of lot, <br />area, and bulk regulations established in the zoning code. Property <br />owners have a right to rely on these uniform standards, and architec- <br />tural boards should not revisit them on a case-by-case basis. <br /> <br />STANDARDS, ISSUES, AND SUGGESTiONS <br />The following standards present problems with respect to <br />discernability and challenges with respect to providing competent <br />substantial evidence. <br /> <br />(1) The plan for the proposed building or structure is in conformity <br />with good taste and design and in general contributes to the image ot <br />the town as a place of beauty, spaciousness, balance, taste, fitness, <br />charm, and high quality. <br /> <br />Comment: What constitutes good taste and design or beauty, spaciousness, <br />balance, taste, fitness, charm, and high quality? Legally, it cannot be the <br />personal opinions of the members ofthe architectural review commission. <br />What does it mean to contribute to the community's image? It suggests <br />adding to the image, but a building may neither contribute nor detract from <br />that image. How would such a contribution be determined objectively?- <br />It would require some objective and officially articulated description of <br /> <br /> <br />ZONINGPRACTICE 7.Q9 <br />AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION [page 3 <br /> <br />165 <br />