Blog Post < Previous | Next >
City of Mill Valley Residential Guidelines
The proposed Mill Valley Residential Design Guidelines fail to embrace 21st century design
The following letter was submitted to the Mill Valley Planning Commission in anticipation of their hearing on July 12th, to approve the new Single Family Residential Design Guidelines.
Dear Mill Valley Planning Commissioners:
I’m writing to comment on the Draft Single Family Residential Design Guidelines that you will be considering at your hearing on July 12th.
Simplifying the residential design guidelines and making them more user-friendly has been a goal for more than a decade in Mill Valley. So it’s good to see we’re taking major steps in that direction. Adding accompanying photographs and diagrams is much more effective in communicating ideas than text alone. And the use of the “”Do This” and “Not This” examples will also be helpful to homeowners, designers, and future planning commissioners.
That considered, my comments and suggestions are as follows:
Architecture vs. Style: Although the Draft Guideline pages do show some variety of architectural styles in the photos and diagrams, I would suggest that we need to more clearly communicate that Mill Valley is open to approving any type of style proposed. Good architecture has nothing to do with what style it is.
Historically, in Mill Valley, there has been an overly subjective and somewhat oppressive bias toward “cutsy” cottage and “craftsman” designs (as if those styles are somehow by definition “good” design), and an unfair bias against more modern or contemporary design proposals. I hope we can move past that kind of parochial thinking and invite and embrace good design in any form or style, and make that very clear in the Guidelines.
For example, the large photo on the first page of Chapter II shows the entrance to a craftsman style home. This sends the wrong message. I would suggest that this page have a collage of at least 3 photos, each of a different style home. Similarly, the cover page shows three photos of homes, all of which are cottage / craftsman style. I would suggest we mix those photos up as well. We need to be invite innovation and high quality design of all types.
Solar and Alternative Energy: Climate change and the need to move away from fossil fuels dependency, as quickly as possible, are the central environmental issues of our time. Solar and other “zero carbon footprint” technologies will require us to learn, encourage, and embrace a new aesthetic language in the 21st century.
This said, the information and photo examples about solar panels, on page 14 of Chapter II, need to be changed to reflect this new reality, particularly the photo of roof panels that are labeled “Not This.” Solar panels and mini wind turbines are not the same kind of “rooftop equipment” as air conditioning units and compressors.
Solar panel technology is a science not a decoration. It has very specific technical demands in order to perform. The engineering demands of alternative energy technology must take precedence over the provincial aesthetic conventions we’re used to seeing. To do otherwise, would be environmentally irresponsible.
The proposed solar panel guidelines also fail to consider renovations and remodels (to which the Residential Design Guidelines also apply). Homeowners do not have the luxury of changing their homes’ general orientation on the lot when renovating and upgrading the energy efficiencies of existing homes. In fact, solar panels must sometimes be arranged vertically, or angled on racks on rooftops, in order to function at all.
Finally, I see no mention of other important green building concepts such as passive solar design. Here again, the photographs generally seem biased toward a 19th century kind of thinking where good design and style were erroneously considered synonymous. Similarly, the notes on “Sustainability” on page 19 are mostly about “materials” and other superficial aspects of design, but not substantive, proven green building concepts.
I strongly suggest that we need to encourage zero carbon footprint architecture in every possible way, and make that abundantly clear in the new Guidelines.
Thank you for your consideration.