The City of Charleston recently published a report titled: “Revised B.A.R. Process for New Construction and Large Projects.” The report was prepared by DPZ Partners under the leadership of the famed urban planner, Andrés Duany. The City of Charleston and the Historic Charleston Foundation hired DPZ to study the current B.A.R. process and to make recommendations on how to improve the process and make better architecture.
““The client’s directive was simple: Charleston architecture must be great and must be of Charleston. The BAR Process has not been resulting in excellence.””
For a copy of the report: Revised B.A.R. Process For New Construction and Large Projects
I have reviewed the report and am excited about the potential changes. The report is 48 pages. That is 47 pages more than most people are willing to read. So I'm gonna do you a big one and boil it down to:
The 5 Things You Need to Know
#1. 2 Boards is Better Than 1
The report proposes 2 separate boards: one for small buildings and one for large buildings. Large buildings are classified as 10,000sf and above. Within each board, 3 of the 5 board members shall be architects. The most interesting part is that at least 1 of the 3 architects shall be sympathetic to traditional architecture and at least 1 shall be sympathetic to modern architecture. Architects don’t typically have that classification on their resume, but I get the point (Pages 6, 7; Revised B.A.R. Process For New Construction and Large Projects)
What This Means For Clients
The multiple boards shall allow members adequate time to review and evaluate all applications. Currently, the members are overwhelmed and it is suspected that the applications are not getting reviewed prior to the meeting. If you see the board members frantically flipping through the drawings during your presentation, that’s a good sign that the drawings have not been previously reviewed. Also, with one board focused on large buildings it should be assumed that projects would no longer be criticized for being too large or for maxing out the zoning envelope.
What This Means For Architects
All of the above. In addition, architects presenting large projects would have adequate time to properly present their projects. In a recent meeting, we were presenting a 300,000sf apartment building. When I asked for 15 minutes to present rather than the normal 10, the chairmen gave me a mean look before reluctantly agreeing. Even with 15 minutes, I was racing through the presentation glossing over major elements of the design. Big buildings take some time to present and digest.
The gentlemen that presented right before me was presenting a garden wall and he used every second of his 10 minutes. A freakin wall!!!!!
The modern/traditional minded architect idea is intriguing. It should lead to much better architecture rather than the homogenization that Duany described.
#2. 1 Less Board Meeting
The report proposes that the final BAR review will be by staff rather than the board. However, it does say that staff reserves the right to require final review with the BAR. (Page 9; Revised B.A.R. Process For New Construction and Large Projects)
What This Means For Clients
One less board visit should shorten schedules.
What This Means For Architects
On paper this appears to be a good thing. One less board meeting is definitely a benefit.
However…
The ‘Final Details to Staff’ review has historically been one of the most frustrating steps of the BAR process. On many occasions, the duration for this final details review has been longer than if we had just gone to the board. I was once shown a list of 70 projects in the final details to staff queue. Our project was #70.
For this to work, additional BAR staff will need to be added because the current staff is overworked. The jury is out on whether this will be a positive change.
#3. The Approval Matrix
I think this is my favorite part. It is really hard to graphically articulate a process that is extremely subjective. And that is just what this little chart attempts to do. The chart basically says, "If you do these things on the left, your project will be easier to approve and if you do these things on the right, buckle up cowboy...it’s going to be a long ride.”
What This Means For Clients
It provides a more predictable format.
What This Means For Architects
This chart should be very helpful for architects. It will help architects better articulate the B.A.R.’s expectations to their clients and inform design decisions.
Some may argue that this is too formulaic. Perhaps?
#4. Potential for a Dialogue?
Under the current procedures, the applicant does not have the opportunity to speak once the board begins their discussion. The report proposes that the applicant will have an opportunity to clarify points of discussion after the board’s deliberation and prior to the motion. Essentially allowing for the opportunity of a dialogue. (Page 9; Revised B.A.R. Process For New Construction and Large Projects)
What This Means For Clients
This format supports a dialogue and creates an opportunity for clarification. Should increase the chances of projects getting approval, which expedites schedules.
What This Means For Architects
It is sad that this change is so groundbreaking. It highlights one of the major faults of the current system. I have already mentioned that the time constraints are challenging for the applicants. This 'last word' allows the architects an opportunity to clarify and defend the design. This is huge.
#5. Changing to Story-Based Height Districts
This would be a game-changer. The report proposes changing the definitions of height districts to a story based system rather than feet. For example, instead of a 55’ district you would have a 4 or a 5 story district.
What This Means For Clients
They can finally deliver on those 10’ ceilings they have been fibbing about in their marketing literature! On the flip side, this change could be a negative. If the 55’ district becomes a 5 story district than that is a positive. If it becomes a 4 story district than many developers will be missing out on that extra 5th floor that they have been squeezing in. Decreased density potential will lower land values.
What This Means For Architects
That newfound ceiling height freedom will make for better spaces, more natural light and better proportioned facades. Just better architecture all around. Do you know how much time I have spent trying to squeeze out a couple extra inches to make a parapet detail work?
Charleston Design School?
OK. So I snuck in a 6th item. Sue me! This one is a bonus because it really doesn’t have anything to do with the B.A.R. When Duany was here in March, he planted this seed for a Joe Riley Design School in which students would be trained on the architecture and urban design of Charleston. I think many thought this was not real but the school is mentioned in this report. And after a discussion with Duany the seeds have started to take root.
What This Means For Clients
Not really sure.
What This Means For Architects
Having a local design school would help elevate the local talent pool of architects. Elevating the profession and the architecture of the city.
So what now?
The next steps are that the city is going to boil this report down to the essential ingredients. Once that occurs, that list will be written into code language. Those new codes will then be presented to the Planning Commission. If successful at the Planning Commission, it will move on to the City Council for a vote.
I would estimate 3 months for the code language to be written and another 3 to make it through the Planning Commission and the City Council. And I think this schedule is even optimistic.
So what do you think?
I encourage everyone to review the report and comment here on the pro's and con's. The City welcomes feedback and Andrés told me to send him comments. Here's your opportunity!
Cheers,
Steve Ramos AIA, LEED AP
