Design Review Boards

Was it Barnum who said, "Never underestimate the poor taste of the American public"? Attempts to improve a downtown include attempts to improve it's appearance, and often these efforts are botched by local "designers" who try too hard.

In Dundee, Michigan, funds were not available for replacing the Italianate downtown buildings with a "modern" mall, so one businesswoman suggeted painting all the old buildings a common color--in this case, a grey/pink color that may have looked satisfactory on an interior, but was completely out of place as a "thematic" treatment for a historic downtown center.

As one columnist described:

"Sometime in the 1960s, sinister forces put something in the national water supply that made us temporarily nuts, That's the only way to explain the awful things that have been done to too many American downtown in the past few decades...

"Much more extreme is the case of Helen, a small town in the North Georgia mountains that transformed itself into a Bavarian village--Hansel-and-Gretel architecture, signs in Gothic script, and a half-timbered Olde Towne clocktower that probably houses a cuckoo the size of a pterodactyl. When I saw the place, it seemed that everything stationary had a basket of geraniums hanging from it, and everything ambulatory was wearing a dirndl or lederhosen. Heidi's yodeled. Glockenspiels tinkled. I got out of there fast."1

A city should make clear the basis on which approval or disapproval for proposed changes to downtown buildings will be given. If these are clearly and unambiguously described there would be little question about what will or won't be permitted.

Yet, in spite of how well an ordinance is written, there will always be cases where changes proposed by the owner must be reviewed and interpreted, based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards or other local standards. It is then incumbent to have some procedure for design review. In such an instance, who is most capable of doing the design review and giving approval? Some cities have turned the responsibility over to a separate design review board, whose members have design backgrounds. These boards have operated with mixed success. Examples are provided below.

Portland, Oregon

In Portland, Oregon; the review board has worked well, and virtually every downtown project is subject to the Board's review. The review procedure also serves as a public forum for discussion of a project's merits. Developers seem to favor this, for they get public reaction in a controlled, organized environment, rather that in the unpredictable arenas of politics and the media.

Boulder, Colorado

Boulder, Colorado has a history of "growth control" ordinances; e.g., recently the citizens passed an ordinance limiting population growth to two percent a year. The community also has passed laws that preserve solar access, control smoke from wood fires, and promote energy conservation.

In recent years Boulder's downtown community has been increasingly concerned about growing competition from suburban shopping malls. To counter this problem, in 1986 the city created an ordinance to establish design guidelines for the downtown, in an attempt to ensure a pleasing downtown environment. A citizens board was set up to review all proposed downtown projects. Although the review of projects was mandatory, compliance with the board's recommendations was voluntary.

Some claim that the guidelines have stifled creativity among architects. Other responses to the program have been mixed. "Still, many local architects seem essentially sympathetic to the guidelines' major premise--that designs for an urban setting should respond to the urban context--even if the architects do not welcome the addition of yet another stage to a lengthy approval process. 'I can certainly understand that bringing downtown buildings up to some common level of acceptability is important,' says James Leese, AIA, chairman of Boulder's planning board and president of Architecture Four Collaborative. 'But I'm convinced that the guidelines must remain voluntary. It's OK to have a kind of 'dress code' for buildings, but a great designer must have the option of breaking the code for the sake of truly spectacular results. What we need is a board with the sensitivity and wisdom to allow excellence.'"2

Scottsdale, Arizona

The Arizona city of Scottsdale has a design review board made up of design professionals. The board's agenda includes, but is not limited to, the following: As stated in the city's Development Guide, "Development Review is intended to enrich the lives of all the citizens of Scottsdale by promoting harmonious, safe, attractive and compatible developments..."3 The Board has been very pervasive in establishing a consistent design format to all new development, based on the adobe design style. Recent projects, however, have developed significant diversity within this uniform design palette. Some residents have been critical of the stifling of creativity that comes with design review and the resulting pattern of homogeneous design, but most Scottsdale residents seem well satisfied with the designs that have been built throughout the city.

San Francisco, California

In San Francisco, the city and the public were concerned about the uncontrolled growth of the downtown, and wanted to put a cap on new construction. A Review Board, appointed annually by the City Planning Director and made up of three well-respected individuals, was established to screen new projects and to approve only those that adhered to strict design criteria. This procedure has protected structures in the local historic districts by allowing developers to transfer their development rights to other, non-historic areas of the city, and has also encouraged the redevelopment of blighted areas by giving incentives in those areas and disincentives in heavily developed downtown areas.

It has generally been found that such a review procedure tends to eliminate the worst projects; unfortunately, it oftens tends to also discourage innovative solutions. Designers will tend to look for the common denominator that will guarantee approval, and submit designs that are generally mediocre. However, when the Design Review Board is well respected and its determinations are shown to be in the public interest, this procedure has been a useful protection against inappropriate design.

1 Dwight Young. "The Back Page." Historic Preservation News. March/April 1993. p. 32.
2 "Voluntary Design Guidelines Take Effect in Boulder, Colorado"
3 Development Guide. City of Scottsdale, Arizona. p. 9.
Suggested other pages...
Revitalization Strategies Functional Strategies
Design Design Guidelines for Downtowns
Physical Improvement Strategies Case Study Cities