Design Guide - Somerset County Government

ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR
DESIGN GUIDE
Jefferson and Somerset Townships
Somerset County, Pennsylvania
Prepared for:
Somerset County Planning Commission
300 North Center Avenue, Suite 540
Somerset, PA 15501
(814) 445-1544
Contact: Bradley Zearfoss, Director
County Commissioners:
Pamela Tokar-Ickes, Chair
John Vatavuk, Vice Chair
James Marker, Secretary
Prepared by:
T&B Planning
3081 Carson Avenue
Murrysville, PA 15668
(724) 327-3760
In Association with:
Mackin Engineering
This publication was financed by the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development through the Land Use Planning and Technical
Assistance Program (LUPTAP) and by Somerset Township and Jefferson Township.
DRAFT: March 25, 2009
PREFACE
I
PREFACE
T
his Design Guide was prepared as a tool to help preserve
and improve the landscape and character of existing and
future development along Route 31 West. The use of this
Design Guide is voluntary. The recommendations given in
this document are encouraged to be used as general guidance
in making decisions about how to use land and construct and
improve buildings and other improvements along Route 31
West in Jefferson and Somerset Townships.
At the time this Design Guide was prepared, Jefferson
and Somerset Townships did not have zoning ordinances.
Development controls were limited to the Somerset County
Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance (SALDO)
and the Pennsylvania Uniform Construction Code, enforced
locally by Somerset County. This Design Guide does not
impose any requirements, restrictions, or zoning standards. It
neither authorizes nor prohibits new construction. This Design
Guide carries no legal weight or regulatory authority and is not
a replacement for zoning ordinances or the Somerset County
SALDO.
I
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
INTRODUCTION
1
INTRODUCTION
1
STUDY AREA
P
ennsylvania Route 31, also known as “Glades Pike” is a
64-mile roadway that passes through portions of Fayette,
Westmoreland, Somerset, and Bedford Counties. This study
focuses on a 10.6-mile stretch of the road located in Jefferson
and Somerset Townships within Somerset County. The road
extends from Somerset Borough in the east to the Somerset
County/Westmoreland County border in the west.
Throughout this document, the roadway segment and the
properties visible from it are called the “Route 31 West Corridor”
or simply “Corridor.” Regional access to the roadway segment
comes from the Pennsylvania Turnpike via the Donegal Exit in
the west and the Somerset Exit in the east.
LAUREL RIDGE
LAUREL RIDGE
FORBES
STATE FOREST
(
'
&
%
LINCOLN
TOWNSHIP
76
Sh
DONEGAL
TOWNSHIP
rR
ea
Cl
fe
af
rR
un
un
LAUREL RIDGE
RD
IE
ED
BA
KE
FORBES
STATE
FOREST
E
31
RS
VI
LL
t
u
JEFFERSON
TOWNSHIP
ill Run
reek
ill C
ES
PK
RD
AD
rel H
M
GL
State Route 31 Study Area
County Boundary
Lavansville
TR
D
h
TR
EN
LAUREL HILL
I-76/PA Turnpike
State Roads
t
u
31
RD
Railroads
E
SEVEN
SPRINGS
BOROUGH
Somerset
Lake
K
LA
Municipality Boundaries
SOMERSET
TOWNSHIP
ch
an k
Br ree
st C
We oxes
C
Somerset/Jefferson Townships
SR 0601
n
State Route 31 Corridor
00 9
SR 4
CREEK
Ru
COXES
ise
(
'
&
%
76
n
Cr
ek
Ru
FORBES
STATE
FOREST
LEGEND
Cre
h Bakersville
oss
Gr
SALTLICK
TOWNSHIP
ill
lH
La u
SE
ER
TM
ES
SO
W
re
Lau
Jones M
T
O
RE
CO
LA
U
N
N
D
TY
CO
U
N
TY
KOOSER
Municipal Roads
State Park
0
0.1875 0.375
0.75
N T OW
N RD
NEW
MILFORD
TOWNSHIP
Miles
Source(s): Mackin Engineering, Sommerset GIS, ESRI
Figure 1-1: Map of the Study Area
2
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
CEN
T ERV
ILLE
RD
S CEN TER AVE
State Forest
MIDDLECREEK
TOWNSHIP
EDGEWOO D AV
IN D IA
Lakes
INTRODUCTION
PRIMARY TRAVEL ROUTE AND GATEWAY
Route 31 West is worthy of special attention because it
serves as a primary travel route and gateway to a number
of attractions and outdoor recreation opportunities in the
Laurel Highlands area of Pennsylvania. These include Hidden
Valley Four Seasons Resort, Kooser State Park, Seven Springs
Mountain Resort, Frank Lloyd Wright’s Fallingwater, and
1
several established communities having eco- and geo-tourism
features and appeal.
Not only should the road function as an efficient and safe travel
route, but the experience of traveling on the road should be
pleasant and appealing because vistas seen from the road serve
as visual windows to the area’s scenic character.
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
3
INTRODUCTION
1
BACKGROUND
A
s it winds through the mostly rural Jefferson and Somerset
Townships of Somerset County, Pennsylvania, Route
31 West is a two-lane roadway with a painted center divider
line and variable shoulder widths.
Land uses along the
roadway range from open spaces, farms, and parks to industries,
businesses, resorts, and residential homes.
Historically, Glades Pike
played a vital role in the
development of Somerset
County. Beginning first as
a Native American trail,
the roadway transitioned
into a toll road in the
1800s to provide funding
for its maintenance. Many
towns and villages were
then formed along the road, such as Bakersville and Lavansville
in Jefferson and Somerset Townships.
Jefferson and Somerset Townships have no zoning regulations
in place, so controlling how properties along the Corridor are
used is largely left to property owners. Based upon experiences
in Pennsylvania and other states, uncontrolled growth and
development can occur in gateway highway corridors leading
to major tourism destinations, particularly in areas having
few development controls. Very often, this uncontrolled
development can detract from authentic community character,
create transportation-related problems, and negatively affect
the unique landscape in the surrounding areas.
Recognizing the potential for uncontrolled development to
occur along the Route 31 West Corridor, representatives of
Somerset County and Jefferson and Somerset Townships,
along with property owners and other stakeholders, initiated a
comprehensive public process wherein consensus could be built
on a general vision for land use and design concepts along the
roadway.
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
4
1.
Define a study area.
2.
Analyze existing conditions.
3.
Identify key issues currently affecting the Corridor and that could affect the Corridor in the future.
4.
Create a guiding vision for the Route 31 West Corridor.
5.
Improve roadway safety.
6.
Preserve the Corridor’s pastoral setting and scenic views.
7.
Protect properties along the Corridor from future adverse impacts associated with increased traffic and/or uncontrolled
development.
8.
Develop design guidelines to help stakeholders preserve and improve upon the existing pastoral, scenic character experienced along
the Corridor.
9.
Suggest recommendations that will aid in implementing the vision (as outlined in this document).
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
EXISTING CONDITIONS
2
1
2
INTRODUCTION
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
COMMERCIAL
EXISTING LAND USES AND CHARACTER
R
oute 31 West, known locally as Glades Pike, is used daily
by residents, businesses and their patrons, visitors, and
passers-by. Several expanses of the roadway offer views of the
surrounding mountains and countryside, with both open fields
and forests visible, interspersed with the occasional home or
farm. A denser pattern of development fronts some sections
of the roadway, including a wide and eclectic mixture of land
use types. As the road twists and turns through Somerset and
Jefferson Townships, climbing and descending in elevation,
it sometimes offers only limited views, while at other times
expansive long-range views are available.
AGRICULTURAL
Residents and visitors appreciate and value the scenic views
and undeveloped green areas along segments of the Route 31
West Corridor. A quaint and laid back atmosphere adds to
the pastoral and rural characteristics. Currently, only short
sections of the roadway are heavily developed. The sporadic
development pattern, easily accessible roadway with no traffic
lights, tourist-related small businesses, historic structures and
farms, and scenic backdrop make the roadway special to those
that travel along it, whether it is for the first or one-thousandth
time.
Development along the Corridor has occurred over time in a
sporadic and haphazard pattern. When measured in total length,
more than five miles of the Corridor’s 10.6-mile segment are
developed with a mixture of commercial and residential uses
along at least one side of the roadway.
RESIDENTIAL
The total roadway frontage along the Corridor is 21.2 miles,
representing both sides of the 10.6-mile segment.
6
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
EXISTING
INTRODUCTION
CONDITIONS
1
2
Properties along the sides of the roadway generally consist of:
•
Commercial, 3.87 miles
•
Residential, 3.89 miles
•
Agriculture, 8.92 miles
•
Vacant Land, 1.22 miles
•
State Park or Forest, 2.69 miles
•
Other (churches, cemeteries, and other state-owned lands
not including ‘State Park or Forest’), 0.62 miles
LAUREL RIDGE
LAUREL RIDGE
FORBES
STATE FOREST
(
'
&
%
LINCOLN
TOWNSHIP
76
Sh
rR
ea
Cl
fe
af
rR
un
un
RD
BA
KE
FORBES
STATE
FOREST
IE
31
E
t
u
JEFFERSON
TOWNSHIP
RS
VI
LL
LAUREL RIDGE
ED
DONEGAL
TOWNSHIP
ill Run
Jones M
Lau
reek
ill C
rel H
RD
NT
TR
E
31
RD
t
u
Exempt
Vacant Lot
Lakes
Public Utility
State Forest
Unknown
0.75
Miles
Source(s): Mackin Engineering, Sommerset GIS, ESRI
N T OW
N RD
NEW
MIDDLECREEK
TOWNSHIP
MILFORD
TOWNSHIP
CEN
TERV
ILLE
RD
S CEN TER AVE
State Park
IN D IA
EDGEWOO D AV
Mineral
Municipality Boundaries
0.1875 0.375
h
SOMERSET
TOWNSHIP
E
Industrial
Somerset/Jefferson Townships
0
Lavansville
LAUREL HILL
Commercial
Railroads
County Boundary
PK
K
LA
Low Density Residential
State Roads
ES
ch
an k
Br ree
st C
We oxes
C
State Route 31 Corridor
I-76/PA Turnpike
AD
RD
h
Existing Land Use
SEVEN
Agriculture
SPRINGS
High Density Residential
BOROUGH
00 9
SR 4
GL
SR 0601
n
LEGEND
Village
CREEK
Ru
COXES
ise
(
'
&
%
76
n
Cr
ek
Ru
FORBES
STATE
FOREST
Cre
hBakersville
oss
Gr
SALTLICK
TOWNSHIP
l
Hil
rel
La u
TY
CO
SE
ER
M
ES
W
SO
TM
O
T
RE
LA
U
N
N
D
CO
U
N
TY
KOOSER
Figure 2-1: Existing Land Use Map
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
7
INTRODUCTION
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
1
2
EXISTING LAND USES
Examples of existing uses along the Corridor include, but are not limited to:
8
•
Forbes State Forest
•
Glades Pike Inn Bed & Breakfast
•
Kooser State Park
•
Glades Pike Winery
•
Hidden Valley Four Seasons Resort
•
Retail shops and shopping centers
•
Villages of Bakersville and Lavansville
•
Service businesses
•
Municipal service buildings (fire stations and fire halls)
•
Churches
•
Dine-in restaurants and drive-thru restaurants
•
Residential homes
•
Ski, bike, and other recreational equipment sale and rental shops
•
Farm fields, barns, and silos
•
Barns adapted to new uses (Resort Furnishings, John Harvard’s Restaurant)
•
Gas and service stations
•
Campgrounds (including the Pioneer Park Campground)
•
Signs and billboards in various styles and sizes
•
Quarry (New Enterprise Stone and Lime Co.) and other smaller industries
•
Vacant lands
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
EXISTING
INTRODUCTION
CONDITIONS
ROADWAY TRAVEL
EXISTING REGULATIONS
N
A
o traffic lights exist along the road, and no speed limit
is posted along much of the Corridor, indicating that
the maximum allowed vehicle speed is 55 miles per hour (the
Pennsylvania speed limit set for two-lane roads); a 35 mile per
hour speed limit is posted near the eastern end of the Corridor
near Somerset Borough (from Coxes Creek Road to the Borough
boundary). Vehicles travel in single lanes in each direction,
and are divided by a painted center line.
The roadway carries especially heavy traffic when it occasionally
serves as a detour route for the Pennsylvania Turnpike
(Interstate 76 (I-76)) in the event of Turnpike closure between
the Somerset and Donegal Exits. Large trucks carrying heavy
loads are also common.
There are no sidewalks or formal pedestrian pathways along
the Corridor, and shoulders vary from approximately two feet
to 10 feet in width. The road was not built for pedestrians or
bicyclists, although the occasional biker or walker does travel
along the roadway.
SPRING
SUMMER
1
2
s previously mentioned, Somerset and Jefferson Townships
have no zoning regulations in place, so property owners
have wide discretion in deciding how to use their lands. Even
though there are no zoning requirements, building permits
are required. Also, development of any property in the two
townships is subject to the Somerset County Subdivision and
Land Development Ordinance (SALDO), which is in place to
promote public health, safety, and general welfare throughout
the County.
Any existing building or lot that does not comply with the
SALDO is not required to comply in order to continue the
existing use. A SALDO application is only required if a new land
development or subdivision is proposed. Further, compliance
with the ordinance’s design standards is only required for major
land developments and subdivisions of four lots or more. Small
projects, therefore, have few design requirements. (A copy
of the Somerset County SALDO can be obtained from the
Somerset County Planning Commission office.)
FALL
WINTER
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
9
1
2
INTRODUCTION
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
POTENTIAL THREATS
EXISTING CORRIDOR CHALLENGES AND CONCERNS
W
W
ith no zoning controls and few design requirements
in place, the potential for uncontrolled and undesired
development to occur is a threat to the Route 31 West Corridor.
Luckily, most of the Corridor remains visually attractive and
rural in character. An unattractive sprawling development
pattern has occurred along other segments of Route 31 and
along other routes in adjacent areas serving as travelways to
nearby ski resorts and state parks.
Because views from main roadways can leave lasting impressions
on travelers about a community’s history, character, and civic
pride, the protection of roadway corridors from view blockage,
poorly designed development, and unnecessary visual clutter
is important. A passing motorist can clearly see the extent
to which a community values or disregards its image and
character. Also, unsightly land uses and unnecessary visual
clutter (such as too many signs) can lead to motorist stress and
cause drivers to speed by a location instead of feeling invited to
drive more slowly to enjoy the scenery or to stop and patronize
a business.
10 ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
hen asked what challenges (or fears) exist for the Route
31 West Corridor and that could be addressed through a
Design Guide, stakeholders provided these responses:
•
Good development and tourism have the potential to attract
additional traffic and uses that may not be desired.
•
The design of new buildings and enterprises could be
inconsistent with the area’s rural style and character.
•
Additional development could block scenic views.
•
Gateways into the Corridor are not attractive and
welcoming (quarry in the west and strip commercial
development in the east).
•
Light pollution could increase, particularly from intensive
uses such as industries, shopping centers, and resorts.
•
Increased traffic has the potential to worsen roadway safety
(heavy traffic, trucks, speed).
•
Infrastructure challenges (roads, sewer, water) may increase
as development continues.
•
Access for bicycles and pedestrians is poor (no bike lanes;
no sidewalks; no easy way to access attractions other than
by car; existing roadway shoulders are not safe for bicyclist
or pedestrian use).
•
Utility towers, wind towers, and gas exploration could
litter the rural landscape.
•
Signs and billboards are already too numerous and detract
from the scenic experience.
•
Lack of a visitor’s center, confusing directional signage, and
similar place names cause confusion for visitors and create
safety hazards as people search for their destinations.
VISIONING SESSION RESULTS
3
1
3
INTRODUCTION
VISIONING
SESSION RESULTS
VISIONING PROCESS
T&B Planning and Mackin Engineering were retained as
consultants and invited to lead stakeholders through several
visioning sessions and public meetings, which took place
between June 2008 and February 2009. Stakeholders who
participated in the process included municipal officials, business
owners, residents, and land owners/developers.
Three stakeholder meetings and one public meeting were
focused on visioning. The goals of the first stakeholder meeting
were to establish an understanding of the existing conditions,
to define the experience of traveling along Route 31 West,
and to determine forces of change that could affect the area
positively and negatively in the future.
A Community Image Survey (CIS) was used in the second
stakeholder meeting and a general public meeting held in late
2008. A total of 83 persons participated in the survey. CIS
participants viewed a series of 60 images and were asked to
rate their preference for each image. Through this process,
T&B Planning determined what type and style of architecture,
building features, and other improvements were most desired
along the Corridor. Also, participants identified key issues
that should be addressed and identified common design themes
that the community wants to support. Shared goals for the
Corridor’s future were then established.
During the third stakeholder meeting, a conceptual vision and
draft design recommendations were presented. Stakeholders
reacted to the initial concepts and assisted in revising and
refining the vision and design concepts. Some of the initial
recommendations were removed and others were modified
or added. Through this visioning process, T&B Planning assist
ed Jefferson and Somerset Townships in developing the final
vision and design guidelines presented in Sections 4 and 5 of
this document.
12 ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
VISIONING SESSION
INTRODUCTION
RESULTS
Included below is a brief summary of the visioning session
results.
EXISTING VISION AND THEME
D
ue to the haphazard development pattern and wide array
of building types and styles, stakeholders do not believe
that there is a cohesive theme along the Corridor now, but
would like to see some level of increased consistency in
the future. Stakeholders expressed the desire to keep the
Corridor’s character rural in nature, to accentuate the setting
as mountainous and recreational, and to preserve scenic views
and vistas, especially the Laurel Ridge.
LAND USES
R
egarding land uses along the Corridor, concerns were
expressed about the lack of zoning ordinances. Without
zoning, the townships have no way to manage or enforce what
types of land uses will occur in what locations along the Corridor.
While the best locations for future commercial development
were debated among stakeholders, most people agreed that
commercial uses should be clustered together, rather than
sprawled along the length of the roadway. Currently, there is
nothing to encourage or enforce this practice.
Another concern is the size, type, and style of new buildings.
Stakeholders believe that new structures should look “nice”
and “fit in,” but recognize that the definition of these terms
mean different things to different people. Overall, most
stakeholders agreed that new development should have a have
an agricultural, mountain village, or rustic appearance in
order to best assimilate into the desired community character.
Although some opposition to new construction was expressed,
a majority of the stakeholders were not opposed to new
construction provided that it does not overwhelm the Corridor
or detract from its attractiveness.
1
3
The four-season climate was also recognized as an important
consideration. When planning the placement and type of
structures, fences, and landscaping along the roadway, space
should be reserved for snow and plowing during the winter.
Also, trees that lose leaves in the winter should not be used for
visual screening.
When asked what land uses should and should not be encouraged
and how they should be designed, stakeholders suggested that
agricultural, residential, and light commercial land uses be
encouraged. Existing vacant buildings should be adaptively
reused whenever possible. Gambling and casinos, heavy
industry and strip mining, large wind turbines, and “tourist
traps” and temporary vendors (selling fireworks and t-shirts,
for example) were discouraged. It was recognized that certain
land uses like gas stations and utility towers are needed, but
that they should be sensitively designed and placed.
THE ROADWAY
S
takeholders are highly concerned with safety along the
Corridor. There are concerns about speeding motorists and
inconsistent and unclear directional signage to guide visitors.
Also, stakeholders expressed that there are too many advertising
signs along the roadway, which add to driver confusion.
Stakeholders would like to keep the Corridor free of traffic
lights, but make other improvements that protect motorists.
The open nature of surface parking lots paralleling the Corridor
was identified as a traffic safety concern, and parking lot designs
were identified as an issue in need of improvement. While, in
general, the stakeholders would like to discourage pedestrians
or bicyclists from using the roadway for reasons of safety, they
would like safety measures to consider the road’s occasional use
by pedestrians and bicyclists.
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE 13
1
3
INTRODUCTION
VISIONING
SESSION RESULTS
FORCES OF CHANGE IN THE COMMUNITY
W
hen asked what forces could change the existing character
of the area, stakeholders responded that development
could be both beneficial and detrimental to community
character. For example, the redevelopment of Hidden Valley
Four Seasons Resort is viewed as a positive because of increased
jobs and tax benefits to the county, townships, and school
district, while scattered development that could occur without
proper planning would be a negative.
Stakeholders recognize that tourism can bring both desired and
undesired development to the region and they are concerned
that high expectations of some business owners could be
unfounded, as seasonal fluctuations in customers often affect
the success of businesses in the area, thereby causing businesses
to close. As new development occurs, there is a fear of rising
land and ownership/rental costs in the area.
Rural characteristics and green space are a benefit and strength
for the area, and businesses that “look like they belong there”
are encouraged (Glades Pike Winery and Glades Pike Inn were
cited as good examples).
Stakeholders see the potential for design guidelines and zoning
as an opportunity, as design standards and land use controls
along the Corridor would be a benefit to the area (based on a
public open house held in September 2008, the general public
agrees with this view). Tasteful expansion of tourist services
is a welcome opportunity, and easy access to area resorts and
services is a strength.
GOALS
•
Preserve the Corridor’s existing pastoral, mountain, and
recreational character.
STRENGTHS AND OPPORTUNITIES
•
Encourage property maintenance.
R
•
Promote the use of appropriate architectural styles.
•
Maintain views to open spaces and scenic vistas.
•
Protect scenic beauty and environmental quality.
•
Encourage environmental sensitivity.
•
Promote a welcoming atmosphere along the Corridor, for
both visitors and residents.
•
Improve traffic safety.
•
Minimize the impact of artificial lighting.
•
Reduce excess signage.
•
Improve the Corridor’s general appearance.
esidents in Jefferson and Somerset Townships are
content with the lifestyle that living near the Route 31
West Corridor affords them, specifically rural and mountain
characteristics combined with access and amenities. They see
the opportunity to preserve and enhance the Route 31 West
Corridor, before over-development occurs.
14 ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
VISION
4
1
4
INTRODUCTION
VISION
VISION
CONCEPTUAL ILLUSTRATION
The future vision for the Route 31 West Corridor is to preserve
its agricultural, outdoor recreational, and mountainous
characteristics, encourage development to cluster together
and be attractive and complementary in style, and to preserve
agricultural lands, woodlands, open spaces, and scenic vistas.
In order to illustrate the desired vision, a Future Vision
Illustration has been prepared. The illustration shows an
artist’s sketch demonstrating the application of some of the
design guidelines recommended in Section 5 of this document.
A commercial development area has been used as the example.
The illustration is conceptual, but shows a sample vision for
the future.
Along long stretches of the road, no development would be
visible. The traveler would enjoy scenic views of woodlands,
mountain vistas, and agricultural fields and farms. Properties
would be well-maintained and visually appealing. In activity
areas (such as in and near the villages of Bakersville and
Lavansville, near the entrance to Hidden Valley Four Seasons
Resort, and east of Coxes Creek Road), development would
visually complement the natural surroundings and reflect
building styles traditionally used in the region.
THEME
The theme that would best suit the Route 31 West Corridor
is Pastoral-Agrarian-Mountain Village. With application
of the design recommendations described in Section 5, the
Corridor will retain its scenic characteristics, embrace its more
than 100 years of agricultural and outdoor recreation history,
and visually reflect a pastoral-agrarian-mountain village theme
in ways that are appropriate for the Corridor yet fitting with a
modern lifestyle.
16 ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
Buildings are sufficiently set back from the roadway, use shared
driveways, and are low in profile to allow views to the scenic
backdrop. Natural materials such as brick, wood, and stone
are used on building exteriors and for development features
such as walls, fences and signs. Parking lots are attractively
landscaped. Lighting is directed downward to protect the
dark night sky. Buildings appear as though they “fit in” to an
agricultural-pastoral-mountain village character.
To summarize, roadway travelers perceive the development
area to be inviting. They feel enticed to stop and patron the
businesses because the buildings offer a pastoral-agrarianmountain village ambiance that is unique to the region. In
residential and other private use areas, the same vision is
conveyed, but absent the public welcoming elements (such as
signs and wide driveway aprons) that would entice roadway
travelers to park or trespass on private property.
INTRODUCTION
VISION
1
4
FUTURE VISION ~ COMMERCIAL AREAS
Figure 4-1: Visual Simulation demonstrating the use of recommendations contained in design guidelines from this document.
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE 17
1
4
INTRODUCTION
VISION
The below graphic shows how some of the design recommendations presented in Section 5 have been used in the Future Vision
Illustration.
Consolidated Signage
Natural Building
Materials (Wood,
Brick, Stone, Etc.)
Unobtrusive Hillside
Development
Accomdations
For Pedestrians
Scenic Backdrop
Preservation
Covered Entry
Open Fencing
Style
Figure 4-2: Application of the Design Guidelines
18 ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
Contemporary (But Not
Identicial) Buildings
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
Shared Driveway
Downward Directed
Light Fixture
Pitched Roof
Attractive
Landscaping
Sufficient
Setback
INTRODUCTION
VISION
1
4
LAND USES VISIBLE FROM ROUTE 31 WEST
T
here is a wide mixture of land uses along the Corridor
today. Concentrating development in clustered areas
along the Corridor and preserving large expanses of open land,
woodlands, and agricultural landscapes is a high priority.
The visual presence of woodlands, farms and farm fields is an
essential component of the Corridor’s landscape. Agricultural
landscapes reinforce the hard-working farming culture and
reflect the region’s history and personal values based on a
traditional way of life. Woodlands reflect the treasured asset
of the region’s trees and natural resources.
There are no zoning regulations in place for Jefferson and
Somerset Townships, so in order to provide a general sense of
land uses that are desired and undesired along the Corridor’s
field of vision, the list to the right has been developed. This
list is not all-inclusive and is not regulated, but it generally
represents the types of land uses that would be fitting with
the visual character desired along the Route 31 West Corridor.
This list is also consistent with the “Future Land Use Plan”
map included in the Somerset County Comprehensive Plan.
DESIRED LAND USES
•
Agricultural and Agri-tourism
•
Churches (and other religious institutions)
•
Country Inns
•
Cultural / Historic Sites and Places
•
Dine-In Restaurants
•
Farmers’ Market
•
Low Density Rural Residential
•
Open Space
•
Parks and Outdoor Recreational Facilities
•
Resorts
•
Small-Scale Civic (fire station, post office, school)
•
Small-Scale Community Retail
•
Visitor-Serving Retail
UNDESIRED LAND USES
•
Disposal Areas and Junkyards
•
Drive-Thru Restaurants (except between Coxes Creek
Road and Somerset Borough)
•
High Density Residential
•
Heavy Industry and Industrial Parks
•
Large-Scale Institutions
•
Manufacturing
•
Outdoor Storage
•
Large-Scale Commercial Centers
•
Wind Energy Farms
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE 19
INTRODUCTION
VISION
1
4
ARCHITECTURAL STYLES
T
he architectural styles of buildings visible along the Route
31 West Corridor should be reflective of the traditional
styles historically used in Somerset and Jefferson Townships, as
well as some styles used in the surrounding Laurel Highlands
region. The use of traditional building styles and/or the
characteristics from these styles will reinforce the Corridor’s
authentic character. The desired building style is classic, simple,
and functional. Ornate styled buildings are not appropriate for
the pastoral-agrarian-mountain village theme.
RECOMMENDED ARCHITECTURAL STYLES
•
American Farmhouse
•
Early American
•
Three primary building styles are recommended: American
Farmhouse, Early American, and Vernacular, but other similar
styles may also be appropriate in context. To provide a general
sense of the architectural styles that are desired and undesired
along the Corridor’s field of vision, the list to the right has been
developed. This list is not all-inclusive and is not regulated,
but it generally represents the range of styles that would be
fitting with the visual character desired along Route 31 West.
BUILDING MATERIALS
T
he use of building materials (such as stone, wood, and brick)
found in the local, natural environment is encouraged.
Stone is plentiful in the region, as evidenced by local rock
quarry operations. Representing permanency, strength, and
authenticity, stone used as a building material will serve as a
reminder of the region’s heritage. Because of its prominence
in the region’s forests, wood is also recognized as a valued
cultural asset. Lastly, the use of brick is commonplace in the
region and has been a popular choice for farmers, tradesmen,
and tavern keepers in Somerset County since the early 1800s.
These materials are encouraged for use not only as primary
building materials, but also for other needs such as fences,
walls, walkways, columns, and porches.
20 ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
•
Colonial
•
Federal
•
Georgian
Vernacular
OTHER APPROPRIATE ARCHITECTURAL SYLES
•
Adirondack
•
Contemporary Woodland
•
Craftsman
•
Greek and Classic Revival
•
Log Construction
INAPPROPRIATE ARCHITECTURAL SYLES
•
Art-Deco
•
Baroque
•
Futurist
•
Gothic and Gothic Revival
•
Mediterranean
•
Mission
•
Postmodern
•
Spanish Colonial
•
Victorian
INTRODUCTION
VISION
1
4
FARMHOUSE STYLE
VERNACULAR STYLE
T
ernacular architecture is a concept of using locally available
materials, traditional local expression of culture, and local
climate conditions as reflections of the unique surroundings
and history of a region. Vernacular buildings were a common
architectural style of the 1900s. They were built by local
carpenters using native materials, based on architectural
traditions and floor plans that settlers originally adapted from
buildings in their native homelands; Somerset County was
settled by immigrants from the Palatinate of Germany (France,
Switzerland, and Bavaria), as well as Amish Mennonites from
Lancaster, Berks, and Chester, PA. Vernacular architecture
typical of the Jefferson and Somerset Township areas consist of
the following elements.
he American Farmhouse is a sturdy and well-crafted style
that was developed as settlers adapted farmhouse styles
used in their native homelands to the local conditions. These
buildings typically have covered porches, dormer windows, and
pitched roofs. Building materials consist of wood and/or heavy
stone. The exterior design is simple, while incorporating some
decorative elements to demonstrate the owner’s style and
taste This building style is viewed as practical, unpretentious,
straightforward, and functional.
Aside from a rural location, several consistent elements exist
among farmhouses:
V
•
A functional and welcoming front porch
•
A boxy shape and thick walls
•
A front porch with decorative accents (railings, columns)
•
A height of one or one-and-one-half stories (however,
modern interpretations often have two stories)
•
A boxy shape, and a height of two stories or less
•
Symmetrically placed windows
•
Small windows and modest exterior ornamentation
•
•
Gable roof
Brick or stone
ornamentation
•
Wood and/or stone construction
•
Gable roof
•
Wood construction or siding with simple vertical lines
accents
and
modest
exterior
VERNACULAR
FARMHOUSE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE 21
INTRODUCTION
VISION
1
4
EARLY AMERICAN STYLE
OTHER APPROPRIATE STYLES
T
ther architectural styles are also appropriate for
the Corridor. As listed previously, these include the
Adirondack, Craftsman, Contemporary Woodland, Greek and
Classic Revival, and Log Construction.
he Early American style is one of the dominant architectural
styles used in Somerset Borough to the east of the Corridor.
The use of this style along the Route 31 Corridor is appropriate,
particularly near its eastern end. The Early American style
of architecture is a simple and refined style. Most popular
variations of this style are the Colonial, Georgian, and Federal
(Adam).
Common features of the Early American architectural style
include the following.
•
A symmetrical floor plan and façade composition
•
A paneled front door
•
Double-hung sash windows with symmetrical placement
•
Gable, gambrel or hip roof with medium pitch
•
Minimal roof overhangs
•
Exterior materials of brick, stone, or wood
EARLY AMERICAN
22 ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
O
DESIGN GUIDELINES
5
INTRODUCTION
DESIGN
GUIDELINES
1
5
APPLICATION OF THE DESIGN GUIDELINES
This document is a simple, flexible tool that sets design
objectives, promotes a high standard of visual quality, and
defines expectations for the Route 31 West Corridor in
Jefferson and Somerset Townships. The design guidelines
included within this Section are intended to help plan for
and guide the future of the Corridor in ways that maintain
and enhance its positive qualities, improve access and public
safety, and encourage styles of development that are fitting for
the area. The guidelines will be available to help newcomers
to the area (and those already living and working there), use,
design, and rehabilitate properties to best fit with what the
community desires.
Use of the guidelines presented within this document is
voluntary. This is not a legal document and is not meant to
restrict development or limit property rights. Use of these
design guidelines (numbered DG1, DG2, etc.) is highly
encouraged in order to achieve the desired goals, objectives,
and vision for the Route 31 West Corridor.
SUMMARY OF DESIGN GUIDE ELEMENTS:
•
Land Uses and Building Placement
•
Building Styles
•
Parking and Access
•
Landscaping
•
Signage
•
Lighting
•
Environment
24 ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
DESIGN
INTRODUCTION
GUIDELINES
LAND USE AND BUILDING PLACEMENT
DG1.
Maintain views of the existing agricultural and natural
landscape as seen from Route 31 West. Do not allow
new building construction (either a single building
or a line of buildings) to substantially block scenic
views.
DG2.
Cluster development together rather than allowing
it to spread out along the Corridor. Concentrate
new development in locations where development
already exists, near existing villages (Bakersville
and Lavansville), near entrances to activity centers
(Hidden Valley Four Seasons Resort) and in the area
between Coxes Creek Road and Somerset Borough.
DG3.
Do not extend significant and continuous retail stripcenter commercial development beyond the area where
it already exists (at the eastern portion of the Corridor
between Coxes Creek Road and Somerset Borough).
Commercial development constructed along other
segments of Route 31 West should be smaller in scale
and not form a long line of continual development.
DG4.
Discourage new development from disrupting wide
agricultural landscapes and forests. The following
segments of Route 31 West are identified as key
areas where existing landscape preservation is highly
valued.
•
Between the village of Lavansville and Coxes Creek
Road.
•
Between the village of Bakersville and Trent Road.
•
Immediately east and west of Forbes State Forest
and Kooser State Park
1
5
DG1
DG2
DG3
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE 25
1
5
INTRODUCTION
DESIGN
GUIDELINES
DG5
DG5.
Encourage the reuse or redevelopment of existing
vacant buildings and/or the properties they occupy as a
higher priority than new construction on undeveloped
parcels.
DG6
DG6.
Maintain deep front yard setbacks along the Corridor
for any new construction. The larger and taller a
building, the further it should be set back from the
roadway.
DG7
DG7.
Encourage the retention of existing agricultural
operations and farm structures that are attractive and
structurally sound.
26 ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
DESIGN
INTRODUCTION
GUIDELINES
1
5
DG8
DG8.
If a farming use along the Corridor becomes inactive
but attractive and structurally sound agricultural
structures remain (farmhouses, silos, barns), retain
structures that could be occupied by other uses.
Encourage property owners to adaptively reuse these
structures for new uses.
DG9.
Allow markets for local goods and produce to locate
along the Corridor, but only locate food stands and
farmers’ markets in locations where it is safe for
drivers to pull off the roadway. The use of existing
agricultural buildings and farmhouses for economic
outlets are preferred in lieu of temporary/makeshift
structures positioned near the roadway.
DG9
DG10
BUILDING STYLES
DG10.
Use architectural styles that are classic, simple, and
functional. Recommended architectural styles that
positively reinforce the area’s traditional character
and complement a pastoral-agrarian-mountain village
theme include American Farmhouse, Early American,
and Vernacular. Other appropriate styles are listed in
Section 4 of this document
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE 27
1
5
INTRODUCTION
DESIGN
GUIDELINES
DG11.
Avoid modern and overly ornate architectural styles
(see Section 4 of this document).
DG12.
Avoid prototypical franchise architecture (as is typical
in chain stores, restaurants, and gas stations) that
does not complement a pastoral-agrarian-mountain
village theme. If franchise architecture is proposed,
suggest variations to the exterior design to incorporate
elements characteristic of an architectural style
that reinforces a pastoral-agrarian-mountain village
theme.
DG13.
DG12
DG13
When new structures are built, design them at an
appropriate size and scale to the landscape. Buildings
visible from Route 31 West should be no taller than
2½ stories (approximately 40 feet). Do not locate
buildings taller than 2 ½ stories close to the road. If
tall structures are proposed, set them back from the
roadway such that they do not stand in sharp contrast
to a scenic view or silhouette against the sky.
DG14
DG14.
Use exterior building materials that could be found in
the local, natural environment or that reflect textures
and colors of the natural environment. Recommended
primary building materials include: wood and timber,
stone, brick, rustic irregular masonry, fiber cement
siding, and modern composite materials that appear
natural.
28 ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
DESIGN
INTRODUCTION
GUIDELINES
DG16.
Pitched roofs, simple window designs, and covered
entries and porches are recommended.
DG17.
Pre-fabricated homes and structures that are highly
visible from the Route 31 West Corridor should
incorporate materials that are non-reflective and
naturally-appearing such as natural or simulated
wood, brick, stone, or other similar materials. Smooth,
ribbed, or corrugated metal and plastic panels are not
preferred.
1
5
DG16
DG17
PARKING AND ACCESS
DG18.
Encourage the use of shared driveways. In new
construction, limit the number of direct access points
and intersections with Route 31 West. Too many
driveways can lead to traffic safety issues caused by
vehicle turning movements.
DG18 and DG 19
DG19.
Close existing unrestricted parking lots fronting on
Route 31 West. Install a landscape buffer or barrier
parallel to the road and define specific vehicle entry
and exit points.
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE 29
1
5
INTRODUCTION
DESIGN
GUIDELINES
DG20.
Although pedestrian and bicycle use of the Corridor
is limited, allow sufficient width along the roadway so
that pedestrians can walk safely and bicyclists have a
safe place to stop or move away from traffic. Formal
sidewalks are not recommended.
DG21.
Do not plant trees or install fencing, accessory
structures, or other improvements immediately
adjacent to the Route 31 West public right-of-way.
Instead, locate all private improvements away from
the public right-of-way. Improvements located close
to the road can be subject to damage by snow plows,
snow drifts, and vehicles that veer off the roadway.
DG20
DG21
LANDSCAPE SCREENING, WALLS, AND FENCES
DG22.
DG23.
Plant trees and other plant materials in random,
natural patterns.
Use native and naturalized plant materials. Native
plants have ecological needs for water, sunlight, and
nutrients acclimated to the region’s climate and soil
types.
30 ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
DG23
DG22
DESIGN
INTRODUCTION
GUIDELINES
DG24.
Do not plant non-native or invasive plant materials
immediately adjacent to forested areas and natural
landscapes.
DG25.
Consider the four-season climate when selecting plant
materials for landscaping and landscape buffering. A
mixture of plant materials should be selected that will
be attractive in all seasons.
1
5
DG25
DG26
DG26.
The use of mature evergreen trees and other evergreen
plant materials are encouraged for year-round visual
screening of unsightly uses visible from Route 31
West.
DG27
DG27.
Select fencing types that complement a pastoralagrarian-mountain village theme. Open rail fences
made of wood products as well as most agricultural
fencing products are appropriate choices. Wood,
stone, and brick are recommended for solid walls.
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE 31
1
5
INTRODUCTION
DESIGN
GUIDELINES
DG28.
If physical separation is needed between Route 31 West
and private property, use an open rail fencing type. A
solid wall or any type of solid barrier that completely
blocks views from Route 31 West is not recommended
parallel to the road unless a solid barrier is needed to
screen an unattractive use.
DG28
DG29.
Do not place chain link, barbed wire, or electric
fencing adjacent to and parallel to Route 31 West
unless there is no other viable option. These types
of fencing products convey an unwelcoming and
institutional atmosphere that is not desired along the
Corridor.
DG30.
Limit outdoor storage areas visible from the road or
screen them from view by landscaping, berms, walls,
or fences. Also screen unsightly elements such as
trash containers, loading docks, and large mechanical
equipment from public view, or place these areas at
the rear of buildings where they are not visible from
Route 31 West.
DG31.
Do not allow large paved parking areas to dominate
the foreground of any view. Where large parking
lots are necessary, screen or soften them with grade
separation and/or landscaping.
32 ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
DG31
DESIGN
INTRODUCTION
GUIDELINES
OUTDOOR FREESTANDING SIGNS
DG32.
Display the words “Glades Pike” more often on signs.
People identify with names (Glades Pike) much more
so than route numbers (Route 31). Visually identifying
Route 31 as Glades Pike will give it identity and
distinctiveness.
DG33.
Construct signs of natural materials or materials that
appear to be natural. The preferred materials for
sign construction are wood, stone, brick, and modern
materials that appear natural such as high density
pre-formed foam or similar material. Finish modern
materials so that they are visually interpreted as
naturally appearing in form, texture, and color.
DG34.
DG35.
1
5
DG32
DG33
If modern materials such as plastics, metals, and
aluminums are used for sign faces, construct the sign’s
base, support pole, and/or surround with a natural or
naturally-appearing material.
DG34
Do not use signs that flash, move, have the illusion
of movement, contain neon lights, or use large
spotlights.
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE 33
1
5
INTRODUCTION
DESIGN
GUIDELINES
DG36.
Select sign colors that complement the area’s natural
environment and pastoral-agrarian-mountain village
character. Strong earth tones (browns, bronzes, and
greens) and vintage American colors (reds, whites,
and blues) are encouraged for background colors.
Avoid the use of soft colors such as pastels and corals
and bright colors such as fluorescents.
DG37.
Use contrasting colors to differentiate the sign’s
background color from its lettering or other
messaging.
DG36
DG39
Composite Sign Face
DG38.
On-premises business identification or advertisement
signs should be shorter than the roofline of that
business’ building. Also, do not place signs on the
roof of any building.
8 ft.
Cut Stone
Base
12 ft.
DG39.
West of Coxes Creek Road, signs should be less than
15 feet in height, externally illuminated with soft
lights (or not lit), and avoid the use of glossy and
reflective materials such as plastic.
34 ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
DESIGN
INTRODUCTION
GUIDELINES
DG40.
With the exception of gas station pricing signs and
other essential interchangeable copy information,
the use of large signs with interchangeable copy is
discouraged. Where small interchangeable copy
signs are used, surround the sign with a brick, stone,
or a naturally appearing border and base to tie the
sign’s appearance to the Corridor’s pastoral-agrarianmountain village character.
DG41.
Display brief messages. By using fewer words, a sign’s
visual clutter is reduced and the sign becomes more
attractive and easy to read at the posted speed limits
(55 mph west of Coxes Creek Road and 35 mph
between Coxes Creek Road and Somerset Borough).
DG42.
Billboard displays are discouraged. Billboards have
been found to lower surrounding property values,
block views, and create distractions to motorists.
DG43.
Repair, remove, or replace signs that are damaged,
faded, or no longer current or useful.
DG44.
Between Coxes Creek Road and Somerset Borough,
encourage businesses to work together to consolidate
signage as much as possible. Business that use shared
driveways, access roads, and parking lots are strong
candidates for sign consolidation.
1
5
DG40
DG44
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE 35
1
5
INTRODUCTION
DESIGN
GUIDELINES
DG46
DG45.
Route 31 West travels through hillside and mountain
terrain, ascending and descending in elevation many
times. Use low-profile signs and/or do not place signs
where Route 31 West crests in elevation. Road crests
have the most potential for scenic quality disruption.
DG46.
Limit the number of off-premises business identification
signs, particularly through open space and woodland
landscapes.
DG47.
Reduce commercial sign clutter around the existing
Somerset Borough sign or make the sign more
prominent by redesigning it or moving it to a location
that is less overburdened with commercial signage.
DG48.
Add an interpretive sign along Route 31 West near the
quarry operations in the eastern portion of Jefferson
Township. The sign should display a brief message
about the importance of the region’s mineral resources.
An interpretive sign can make the visibility of this
use interesting. If no pull-off is provided, the message
should be brief and legible to passers-by at the speed
limit of 55 mph.
36 ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
DG47
DG48
DESIGN
INTRODUCTION
GUIDELINES
1
5
LIGHTING
DG49.
Use downward-directed lighting fixtures. If upwarddirected lights are used, angle lights up at no more
than 25 degrees from the ground surface. Under no
circumstances should a light point directly upward
toward the sky.
DG49
DG50.
Dim lights that illuminate businesses and commercial
areas when businesses are closed. Install timers and/
or motion sensors to dim or turn off lights in a manner
that allows for safety and security.
DG51
DG51.
Fully shield all lighting fixtures installed under
canopies (such as over gas station pumps and drivethrough lanes).
DG52.
Use the minimum amount of light intensity and
brightness necessary for safety and security. Roof lights,
neon signs, colored lights, flashing lights, spotlights,
searchlight beams, and illuminated building trims are
not appropriate.
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
DG49
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE 37
1
5
INTRODUCTION
DESIGN
GUIDELINES
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
DG53
DG53.
Use locally produced products (wood, brick, and stone
for example) in construction projects to reduce energy
use and transportation costs associated with shipping
materials over long distances.
DG54.
When opportunities arise to work with utility
companies, request that the number of overhead
utility lines be reduced and/or consolidated to
enhance the quality of scenic views.
DG55
DG55.
Use grass-lined channels, rain gardens, and other
forms of natural water filtration methods to clean
runoff before it reaches creeks and streams, particularly
in areas tributary to Laurel Hill Creek and Coxes
Creek.
DG56.
Consider alternatives to concrete and asphalt during
the construction and resurfacing of driveways and
parking lots. Alternatives include permeable concrete,
paving stones, permeable interlocking concrete pavers,
and unmortared brick or stone. The use of gravel,
rock, and decomposed granite may also be appropriate
in some areas, provided that an appropriate form of
erosion control can be maintained.
38 ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
DG56
DESIGN
INTRODUCTION
GUIDELINES
1
5
DG57
DG57.
Avoid placing buildings on hilltops and ridgelines
that are highly visible from Route 31 West.
DG58.
Avoid large-scale tree harvesting on slopes, ridgelines,
and other areas highly visible from Route 31 West.
DG59
DG59.
Preserve existing healthy, mature trees that grow
along the roadway to the maximum extent possible.
Trees provide erosion control, visual relief, shade, and
wildlife habitat.
DRAFT: MARCH 2009
ROUTE 31 WEST CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDE 39