|
Ordinance to cut red tape for new businesses
By Lindsay Street
Staff Writer
Mac Burdette recalls driving down Mount Pleasant’s Coleman Boulevard in 1987 and seeing a recently built metal building. He remembered thinking that the metallic exterior clashed with the town’s rural feel.
Based on that observation, Burdette, administrator for the town of Mount Pleasant, ushered in the state’s first commercial design review board.
Twenty years later, Burdette and the town’s planning commission are lobbying to change the system to a “more business-friendly” program.
“We believe we can maintain and create the same high level of commercial architecture that has been achieved by the (Commercial Design Review Board), but we can do it in a much
more streamlined way,” Burdette said.
Under the current system, the design review board, comprised of seven town-appointed, architecturally competent people, is responsible for reviewing future projects and making sure they comply with Mount Pleasant’s design concept, called Mount Pleasant Rural Vernacular or Lowcountry Architecture.
In the past, some projects took as long as six to eight months for final board approval, said Myles Stempin, Mount Pleasant’s economic development coordinator. In the best case scenario, companies can achieve architecture approval within six weeks.
Revamping this process might put Mount Pleasant ahead of its tri-county rivals in attracting business. Some local municipalities, such as North Charleston, do not have a design review board, which may help attract companies, Burdette said.
“Anytime (companies) can streamline the process, it saves them time and money,” Stempin said. “We are always in a competitive status for those companies. It’s important that our process is streamlined enough to meet the timeframe of the company’s relocation process.”
Continuing to attract business is important because Mount Pleasant receives most of its revenue from the 6% assessed valued property tax on businesses, Burdette said.
“You don’t make money out of residences,” he added. If a resident has a $400,000 home, three cars and boat, the town breaks even between the resident’s demand on the town and taxes.
In the proposed ordinance, the review board would adopt a different role as an appellate body, and town staff would be responsible for determining design compliance. The current two-person staff would increase with the addition of a project coordinator, and staff would have access to two town-approved architects if they are unable to determine a project’s compliance. Companies can appeal design restrictions to the board.
The new project coordinator would oversee approximately 16 applications per month and would be responsible for ushering projects through all stages: building permit, architectural design, fire codes, storm water and roads/infrastructure. The position would cost the town $40,000 per year, plus another $20,000 to pay for architect retainers and other expenses, Burdette said.
But the structure of the design review process isn’t the only change proposed. The original ordinance dictating acceptable building architecture needed clarification, said Burdette.
Photographed examples also are provided in conjunction with the text and, in some cases, precedents set by the board have been included.
“I want Myles to be able to sit down and tell (prospective businesses), ‘Boy, do we have a great process,’” Burdette said. “The business person will say, ‘They treated us fairly and helped us through the process.’”
Despite Burdette’s and Stempin’s positive outlook on the new ordinance, some local architects have expressed dismay.
“I feel the board works now. I don’t see the need to change it,” said Charles Muldrow, president of Stubbs Muldrow Herin Architects. “One size doesn’t fit all. You can’t take a few pictures and have everybody that comes here and say, ‘I want your building to look like that.’”
Muldrow pointed out that as Mount Pleasant grows, some buildings cannot fit easily into the confines of rural vernacular.
“Mount Pleasant is growing much larger than that,” Muldrow said.
Although the planning commission’s program is an “admirable ideal,” he said, implementing a “do and don’t” checklist would hinder creativity and create an architecturally static town.
To make the ordinance as flexible as possible, while retaining clear language, the planning commission has held public forums to gain input from architects. Muldrow attended one of the hearings.
“I think that (the town) saw what we were talking about,” Muldrow said. “I think they are interested in (making it more flexible).”
The ordinance’s wording and staff interpretation leaves plenty of room for flexibility, Burdette said.
If a change is necessary, Muldrow said he would prefer to see architects on staff review projects.
If the ordinance is implemented, the average citizen will not notice a change in the look of the town, Burdette said.
|
E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Version