HomeMy WebLinkAbout3034 Overlay/Special Height Overlay District ZoningOrdinance 3034
Height (herlay
Page 1 of 6
Ordinance No. 3034
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT
TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO LAND USE AND
ZONING, CONCERNING PROVISIONS IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT
IN CHAPTER 17.26 AND THE SPECIAL HEIGHT OVERLAY DISTRICT
IN CHAPTER 17.28 EFFECTING BLOCK 100 OF THE ORIGINAL
TOWNSITE, AND PROVIDING THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE
OVERLAY DISTRICT ZONING APPLY IN THE EVENT OF CONFLICT
WITH THE UNDERLYING ZONING, CORRECTING THE OFFICIAL
HEIGHT OVERLAY MAP FOR BLOCK 100, CLARIFYING THAT ONLY
PORTIONS OF BLOCKS AS SHOWN ON THE OVERLAY MAP ARE
SUBJECT TO THE HEIGHT OVERLAY, AND FURTHER
CORRECTING A MAPPING ERROR ON THAT PORTION OF
ADJACENT VACATED FRANKLIN STREET
RECITALS:
A. Council adopted Ordinance 2992 on October 3, 2008, and held a public hearing on the matter
on November 17, 2008. By Ordinance 3008 (March 16, 2009), Council re-enacted and extended
Ordinance 2992 to provide additional time to address the issue and fox Planning Commission
review to occur. By Ordinance 3022 Council re-enacted and extended Ordinance 3008 to
provide additional time to address the issue and for Planning Commission review to occur.
B. Chapter 17.26 -Overlay District and Chapter 17?8 -Special Height Overlay District are in
conflict. Specifically:
Chapter 17.26 -Overlay District of the PTMC, originally adopted by Ordinance 2216 in
1990 and re-adopted in Ordinance 2571 (1997) provides in part that: "ln any case where
the provisions of an overlay district conflict with the provisions of the underlying zone,
the overlay district provisions shall apply." PTMC17.26.020.
2. Chapter 17.28 -Special Height Overlay District of the PTMC, also originally adopted by
Ordinance 2216 in 1990 re-adopted in Ordinance 2571 (1997), provides fox height limits
for certain blocks and lots in the Original Townsite of Port Townsend, which limits are
generally less that the height limit allowed by the underlying zoning, and provides that:
"In any case where the provisions of the special height overlay district conflict with the
provisions of an underlying zone, the more restrictive height limitation shall apply."
PTMC 17.28.040.
C. There are only two instances where the height limits fox private (non-public) property in the
Chapter 17.28 -Special Height Overlay District provide for a height limit greater than the
underlying zone. In all other instances, the height limits for private (non-public) property in
Ordirzarzce 3039
Height Overlay
Page 2 0~'6
Chapter 17.28 -Special Height Overlay District provide for a height limit less than the
underlying zone. The two instances where private property has greater limits in the Chapter
17.28 -Special Height Overlay District than the underlying zone are as follows:
For Block 93, C-II is the underlying zoning with a height limit of 40.' The
height limit for Block 93 in the Special Height Overlay District is 43'.
For Block 100, R-II is the underlying zoning with a height limit of 30'. The
height limit for Block 100 in the Special Height Overlay District is 43'.
D. If the provision cited above in PTMC 17.28.040 (Special Height Overlay District) were
applied to determine height limits, the height limit in the underlying zoning would prevail
(namely, 40' for Blocks 93 and 30' for Block 100). If the provision cited above in PTMC
17.26.020 (Overlay District) were applied, the height limit in the Special Height Overlay
Dishict would apply (namely, 43').
E. The intent of the above provisions may have been that the height limits in the Special Height
Overlay District would apply, even if the limit was great er than the underlying zone.
However, if this result were applied to Block 100, zoned residential (with a 30' height limit
in the zoning code), then Block 100 would be the only residential property in the City with a
special height limit above the underlying zoning (in this case, 43' per the overlay). The City
Council determines that if this is the result, it was likely a mistake when adopted and would
be a mistake if applied now.
G. The purpose of the Special Height Overlay District in Chapter 17.28 was to "protect the
visual and physical prominence of the bluff which is a unique and dominant land form of the
city.'° PTMC 17.28.010. The Port Townsend Urban Waterfront flan, adopted by the City
Council in 1990, and incorporated by reference into the City's GMA comprehensive plan
adopted by Ordinance 2539 (1996), adopted polices and guidelines relating to view corridors:
"View corridors identified in the Waterfront Plan should be maintained ...." Design
Guidelines, City Connection, 2.2 View Corridor, page 67. "Designs shall protect views to the
water and the Bluff through compliance with the Shoreline Master Plan, the Special Height
Overlay District Regulations set forth in Chapter 17.28 of this Code, and the other design
guidelines established in this chapter". Guideline, p. 67. The map at page 67 in the
Waterfront Plan shows view corridors to be protected. One corridor is from a point where
the bluff intersects Monroe Street (between Franklin and Clay Streets) extending both
generally southerly (across Memorial field) and easterly (generally, to the north of the
buildings in Block 93 (Old Navy Building, Sea Marine).
H. Block t00 sits in part at an elevation higher up on Monroe Street than Block 93. Block 100
is generally within the view corridor identified on the map in the Waterfront Plan, that is,
development on Block 100 interferes with the identified view corridor in the Waterfront Plan.
To allow Block 100 a higher height limit than the limit applicable to residential zones would
increase view blockage, and is therefore inconsistent with the purpose of the Special Height
Ordinarece 303-0
Height Overlay
Page 3 of 6
Overlay District (to "protect the visual and physical prominence of the bluff..." and to protect
view corridors.) It is unlikely the City Council in 1990 and 1997 intended to single out one
block of residentially zoned property from all the residentially-zoned property adjacent to the
downtown area, and grant it a special height limit increase in an ordinance and plan that were
designed to protect views.
On the other hand, to allow Block 93 (adjacent to Block 100 but lower in elevation) to have a
height limit of 43' as identified in the Special Height Overlay District does not block views
identified for protection in the Waterfront Plan. In 1990, Block 93 was zoned P-I with a
zoning height limit of 50', and thus, the height overlay of 43' actually limited the height for
Block 93. The Council takes note that the height of the Old Navy Building (in Black 93) is
approximately 43', so allowing other development on Block 93 to be limited to 43' would be
consistent with existing development. The height limit table in the PTMC 17.28.040 should
allow a 43' height for Block 93 notwithstanding the 40' limit in the zoning code. On the
other hand, allowing a height limit of 43' for Block 100 (the residential property) represents
an increase in height over existing development in Block 100.
.I, It is unlikely that the City Council in adopting Ordinance 2571 in 1997 intended to grant a
special height limit above the zoning code height to only one block of residential property in
the City, particularly where to do so would increase view blockage contrary to the purpose of
the Special Height Overlay District. Likely, Block 100 was included in the Special Height
Overlay District by error.
K. In reviewing the proposed amendment to the Special Height Overlay, staff discovered that the
zoning map erroneously identifies the south half of vacated Franklin Street attaching to Block
93 of the Original Townsite as R-II single-family residential. The correct zoning is C-II,
General Commercial (per 17.12.050(F) PTMC).
L. Planning staff drafted amendments to the Table in Chapter PTMC 17.28.030B (maximum
building heights in the Original Townsite of Port Townsend) removing Block 100 from the
list and thus applying the height limitations of the underlying R-II zoning. Corresponding
corrections should be made to the Official Height Overlay Map. The Council takes note that
historically a significant portion of Block 100, generally fronting on Jackson Street, was an
industrial site, unlike the portion of Block 100 that fronted on Monroe Street, which has
historically been used for residential uses. The former industrial uses fox Block 100 included
Key City Light & Power Company Gas Plant (circa 1911) and Puget Sound Power c~ Light
Company transformer (circa 1945). Since Block 100 is now zoned R-11, and entirely used
for residential uses, the zoning code height limit for R-II appropriately applies. If in the
future, there are proposed changes in uses or development regulations for all or a portion of
Block 100, the issue of appropriate uses and development regulations, including height
limits, would be revisited consistent with applicable standards and processes.
Ordinance 3D3-t
KeiQ{at Oveslay
Page 4 of 6
M. In reviewing proposed amendments, staff noted the Official Height Overlay Map only
includes portions of Blocks 36 and 37 and therefore the table in the zoning code should he
amended to reflect this.
N. An environmental checklist was prepared for the action of adopting the proposed amendment
to PTMC 17.28.030B in accordance with the State Environmental Policy Act.
O. The SEPA Responsible Official for Port Townsend issued a Declaration ofNon-Significance
pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (Chapter 43.21C RCW) on September 30,
2009.
P. Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 22, 2009 to obtain testimony and
evidence from the public, on the proposed revisions to the maximum height limits applicable
to Block 100 o'f the Original Townsite. No written or oral testimony was provided. The
Planning Commission deliberated the issues and voted 6-0-0 to recommend approval of the
amendments to Chapter PTMC 17.28.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY" COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT TOWNSENll,
WASHINGTON, ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. PTMC 17,28.030 B is hereby amended, and shall read as follows:
,17.28.030 Development standards.
A. No structure shall be erected, or altered, in any area defined in this section to a
!height in excess of the limits established in this section, unless otherwise provided.
B. The maximum building heights in each of following described subdistricts of the
Original Townsite of Port Townsend shall be as follows:
subdistricts: All within the Original Townsite of Port Townsend Maximum
height in
feet
Blocks 2, 47, 50, 95 and 98 (Pt. Hudson) 25
Block 94 (Pt. Hudson) 32
Block 99 (Pt. Hudson) and Lots 1, 3, and 5 - 8 of Block 45 34
Block 4 40
Block 5 36
Block 6 46
Blocks 7, 8, 9, 40, 41 and 42 50
Blocks 10 and 38 46
Blocks 11 and 52, plus Lots 2 and 4 of Block 45 37
Ordinance ?p34
Height Cherlcrp
Page 5 of 6
Block 12 35
Blocks 36~ and 44 40
Block 37 42
Block 39 48
Block 43 47
Blocks 93 aad-a-89 43
The subdistrict bounded on the southeast by Washington Street, on the northeast
by Quincy Street, and on the northwest by the face of the bluff 50
The subdistrict bounded on the southeast by Washington Street, on the southwest
by Quincy Street, on the northeast by Monroe Street, and on the northwest by the
face of the bluff
45
~'~ Only portions of Blocks 36 and 37 that are within the district boundaries as shown
on the Special Height Overlay Map are subject to this height limit.
tz~ When the height overlay was originally adopted Block 93 was zoned P-I with a
height limit of 50-feet it was subsequently rezoned to C-II with a height limit of 40-
feet. The 43' height limit herein applies even though the height limit in the zoning
code is 40' (and even though PTMC 17.28.040 provides that "in the event of a
conflict between the provision of the special height overlay district and the provision
of the underlying zone, the more restrictive height limit shall apply".
(Ord. 2782 § 4, 2001; Ord. 2571 § 2, 1997).
Section 2. Amendments to the Land Use and Zoning Maps.
Council directs staff to amend the Land Use and Zoning Maps as follows:
For that portion of vacated Franklin Street lying between Monroe and Jackson Streets and
attaching to Block 93 of the Original Townsite by operation of law, the zoning R-II
single-family residential shall be corrected to reflect C-Il, General Commercial (per
17.12.050(F) PTMC).
Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should be
held to be unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence,
clause or phrase of this Ordinance.
Section 4. Publication. This Ordinance shall be published by an approved summary consisting
of the title.
Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately after passage if adopted
by a majority plus one of the City Council. Otherwise this ordinance shall take effect and be in
Ordinance 3034
Height Overlay
Page 6 of 6
force five days after the date of its publication in the manner provided by law. Publication of this
ordinance shall be by summary thereof consisting of the title.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Port Townsend, Washington, at a regular
meeting thereof, held this first day of March, ?010.
Michelle Sandoval, Mayor
Attest:
Pamela Kolacy, MMC
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
C_. i L.. ~-"..
John Watts
City Attorney
Minor Housekeeping Changes to
Ordinances 3026, 3034, 3035, 3037, 3038 and 3039
(Adopted by Counci109/07/10)
LIST OF REVISIONS
Minor Housekeeping Revisions to Recently Adopted Ordinances 3026 -
Administrative Procedures (July 19, 2010), 3034 -Height Overlay (March 1, 2010),
3035 -Zoning Code Amendments (June 21, 2010), 3037 -Historic Preservation
Code (Ch. 17.30 PTMC) (Jaly 19, 2010), 3038 -Bulk and Scale (July 19, 2010), and
3039 -Building Code (June 7, 2010)
(1) Ordinance 3026 -Administrative Procedures (July 19, 2010)
(a) PTMC 1.14.020(C) on code enforcement and 20.02.010 on code
interpretations contain cross-references to Title 15 (Fire), which has been
repealed when the fire code and building code were consolidated into Title 16.
The edits delete the references to Title 15.
(b) PTMC 2.14.050(C) on hearing examiner duties contains across-reference to
PTMC 8.04.272 on dangerous dogs. That section has been repealed. The edit is
to change PTMC 8.04.272 to "Chapter 8.04 PTMC, Article V" where hearings
and appeals are discussed.
(c) Ordinance 3026 renumbers PTMC 20.01.310 as 20.01.295. The edit is to
update the relevant cross-references in PTMC 20.01.235(E)(3), 20.01.260 and
20.02.050.
(d) PTMC 17.46.030 (Cottage Housing) was amended by Ordinances 3026 and
3035. Minor inconsistencies resulted. The inconsistencies are resolved by the
edits to PTMC 17.46.030 set forth at the end of this List under "Ordinance 3035
and 3026 Reconciled."
(e) PTMC 20.01.100(C) on requirement for permit applications begins, "In
addition to the requirements set forth in subsection A of this section...."
Subsection A is an introductory section, and the substantive requirements are set
forth in subsection B. The edit is to change "subsection A of this section" to read
"subsection B of this section."
(f) PTMC 20.01.100(C)(1) on permit applications and 20.02.010 on code
interpretations contain references building code requirements adopted by PTMC
16.04.010. In these two sections, the edit is to change the cross-references from
"16.04.010" to "16.04.020," since the building codes are adopted in PTMC
16.04.020.
(g) PTMC 19.05.050(H) changed an existing reference from "assessor" to
"auditor" (to accurately state where documents are recorded). In making the
change, the text, in adding "auditor," inadvertently did not strike out "assessor"
The edit is to delete "assessor," and leave in "auditor."
(2) Ordinance 3034 - 3034 -Height Overlay (March 1, 2010)
Minor Housekeeping Changes to
Ordinances 3026, 3034, 3035, 3037, 3038 and 3039
(Adopted by Council 09/07/10)
The ordinance adds a Footnote (2) to the table in PTMC 17.28.030. The footnote
reads, in part, "...(and even though PTMC 17.28.040 provides that "in the event
of a conflict between the provision of the special height overlay district and the
provision of the underlying zone, the more restrictive height limit shall apply")."
The quoted text is not an exact quote of PTMC 17.28.040. The edit is to delete
the quotation marks.
(3) Ordinance 3035-Zoning Code Amendments (June 21, 2010)
Section 11 of the ordinance amended PTMC 18.08.020 to read: "The lot lines
separating two or more lots of record may only be adjusted under the provisions
of this chapter, except as provided under RCW 58.17.040, as now adopted or
hereafter amended." Only the first sentence of the section (the one being
amended) was set out in the ordinance. The question is whether the ordinance
intended to repeal the balance of the section. It did not (since the change in the
ordinance was only adding the "or more" to the first sentence). The edit is clarify
the section reads in its entirety, "The lot lines separating two or more lots of
record may only be adjusted under the provisions of this chapter, except as
provided under RCW 58.17.040, as now adopted or hereafter amended. Actions
which change or impair conditions or requirements imposed by previous platting
decisions must be accomplished pursuant to the subdivision requirements set
forth in this title; provided, that all requirements set forth in this chapter are met,
lot line adjustments proposing lot reorientations shall be deemed to be minor in
nature."
(4) Ordinance 3037 -Historic Preservation Code (Ch. 17.30 PTMC) (July 19,
2010)
(a) PTMC 17.30.100. The introductory paragraph of this section reads, "This
section applies to completed applications for a certificate of approval, except it
does not apply to completed applications for a certificate of approval [for]
alterations or changes to secondary residential structures, which do not require
HPC review and recommendation." The edit is to add the word "for" shown in the
[...].
(b) PTMC 17.30.158(A)(3). In the ordinance, this subsection contains
subsections (a), (b) and (c). Given that subsection (a) functions as an
introduction to (b) and (c), the edit is to combine subsection (a) with the
subsection header and to re-letter (b) and (c) as (a) and (b). The subsection now
reads:
" 3. Accessory Structures. Accessory structures such as garages, ADUs or
other similar structures shall be located to the rear or side of the subject
property consistent with the following requirements:
a. Proposed accessory structures shall be set back a minimum of 10 feet
Minor Housekeeping Changes to
Ordinances 3026, 3034, 3035, 3037, 3038 and 3039
(Adopted by Council 09/07/10)
from the building line of the principal historic facade(s).
b. In the case of historic residences that are located on corner lots that
have two principal historic facades, accessory structures shall be
permitted on the side containing a principal historic facade; provided, that
their proposed location minimizes view blockage of the historic facade
from the adjacent public right-of-way."
(c) PTMC 17.30.159(6) contains atypo - it refers to a table at "Table 17.60.030"
(a non-existent table and reference). The edit is to change this to the correct
reference, namely, "Table 17.16.030."
(d) PTMC 17.30.320(A) reads,
"A. General Requirements. Prior to the partial or complete demolition (as
defined in PTMC 17.30.310) of a building or structure regulated under this
chapter, the applicant must obtain a certificate of approval for [both] the
proposed demolition."
This subsection was previously codified as PTMC 17.30.060(A), the end of which
read, "...the applicant must obtain a certificate of approval for both the proposed
demolition and any proposed replacement development." The edit is to omit the
word "both." Later sections provide the requirement for design review for a
replacement building only applies to the demolition of a commercial building (if
demolition is allowed for stated criteria) and not to residential buildings.
(c) Chapter 17.30 PTMC, Article III, Demolition Standards. Several of the
sections in this article contain references to "this section," which date back to
when several of these sections were codified together as PTMC 17.30.085. The
edit is to change the references so that they now read "this article." Edits are at
PTMC 17.30.340, 17.30.350, and 17.30.360(4) and (5).
(d) PTMC 17.30.400(C) reads, in part, "In the event the director determines a
structure [is experiencing demolition by neglect is occurring], the director is
authorized to give notice to the owner and/or person in charge of the specific
instances of failure to maintain or repair, in accordance with the procedures in
Chapter 1.20 PTMC, Code Administration and Enforcement." The edit is to
remove "is occurring" as extraneous language in the bracketed text.
(e) PTMC 17.30.400(C) reads, in part, "Except in cases of life-safety or
emergency, or in cases where the owner has ignored or failed to [copy] with past
notices, the director shall seek voluntary compliance and provide at least 60 days
for voluntary correction to occur or for a plan proposed by the owner with time
frames for correction to be approved by the director." The edit is to change the
bracketed word to "comply" to reflect the obvious intent.
(f) At PTMC 17.30.155(A)(2), the beginning of the second sentence of this
subsection reads, "Redevelopment and/or additions of to existing buildings..."
Minor Housekeeping Changes to
Ordinances 3026, 3034, 3035, 3037, 3038 and 3039
(Adopted by Counci109f07/10)
The edit is to delete the word "of." (The word "of" does not belong after
"redevelopment" because redevelopment is not limited to redevelopment of
buildings, but can also include site redevelopment.)
(5) Ordinance 3038 -Bulk and Scale (July 19, 2010)
Table 17.16.030 is amended by Ordinances 3035 (June 21, 2010) and 3038
(July 19, 2010). In amending the Table, Ordinance 3038 did not refer to
amendments made by Ordinance 3035 (which could allow a statutory
interpretation argument that Ordinance 3038 impliedly repeated the amendments
in Ordinance 3035). The edit is to retain all the Ordinance 3035's amendments
("MINIMUM AVERAGE HOUSING DENSITY -units per 40,000 square foot area
row, the "MINIMUM LOT SIZE" row, the "MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHT"" row, and
Footnote (1), and then follow Ordinance 3038.
(S) Ordinance 3039 -Building Code (June 7, 2010)
(a) Ordinance 3039 adopted the 2009 International 3uilding Code in Exhibit A to
the Ordinance. The Ordinance mistakenly also referred to a nonexistent Exhibit
B. The edit is to remove the reference to Exhibit B in Ordinance 3039.
(b) Ordinance 3039 (at PTMC 16.04.100) inadvertently cited to a section that had
been repealed and then amended by Ordinance 2952 (March 31, 2008). The
edit is to remove the incorrect citation (which reads: "Any person who violates
any provision of this Chapter shall be subject to the penalties and enforcement
provisions of Chapter 20.10 PTMC.") and replace it with the amended text
adopted in Ordinance 2952, which reads as follows:
"A. Director's Authority. Whenever the DSD director or his or her designee
("director") determines that a condition exists in violation of this chapter or
any standard required to be adhered to by this chapter, or in violation of
any permit issued hereunder, he or she is authorized to enforce the
provisions of this chapter.
B. Chapter 1.20 PTMC Applicable. All violations of any provision of this
chapter or incorporated standards, or of any permit or license issued
hereunder, are made subject to the provisions of Chapter 1.20 PTMC,
including but not limited to abatement, criminal penalty, and civil penalty,
which are incorporated by reference as if set forth herein."
(7) Other Item.
PTMC 9.09.060 (part of the Noise Code) is not amended by this batch of
ordinances, but it appears on one of the pages that is amended. The section
contains two incorrect cross-references to "Chapter 9.11 PTMC, Voluntary
Resolution Procedures." That edit is to change the incorrect reference to
"Chapter 2.82 PTMC Dispute Resolution Program."
Minor Housekeeping Changes to
Ordinances 3026, 3034, 3035, 3037, 3038 and 3039
(Adopted by Council 09/07/10)
"Ordinance 3035 and 3026 Reconciled."
17.46.030 Applicability and Permit Review Process: Standards
Unless otherwise subiect to historic design review process in PTMC 17.30
(Historic Preservation), aAl{ projects in the C-{, C-II, C-II(H), CI/MU, and C-11lMU
zones, cottage housing
developments, as well as multifamily projects in any zone regardless of their
location or form of ownership ~~^F'^~•^'~•° ^^° ^"~°'^"^~~•~^^ ^~^ shall be subject
to the design review process contained within this chapter and processed in
below:
A. Tvpe IATrasIF~-Administrative Review Pursuant to PTMC 17.46.060.
1. Commercia{ and Mixed Use Projects.
a. New buildings, canopies or other structures that exceed 1,000 square
feet and are less than 4,000 square feet in size or no more than two stories
above Grade; or
b. Buildings, canopies, or other structures, the expansions of which either:
i. Exceed 1,000 square feet in size and are less than 4,000 square
feet; or
ii. Comprise a ground floor expansion exceeding 50 percent of an
existing building's ground floor square footage; or
c. Substantial alterations of existing structures, where the existing
structure exceeds 1,000 square feet and are less than 4.000 square feet;
d. Alterations to exterior facades of buildings that require a building permit,
(including but not limited to new or altered exterior electrical or mechanical
systems such as pole mounted or other light fixtures) excepting that not
including ordinary (i.e., nonemergency) maintenance and repair activities
may be granted; provided, (i) that a waiver of design review has first been
obtained from by the director. All work, even that qualifying for a waiver
from the review process, must be conducted in accordance with and (ii) all
applicable code requirements are met, including architectural design
standards of Chapter 17.44 criteria for buildings subject to review under this
chapter.
2. Multifamily projects
a. Including construction of apartments, townhouses, row houses or other
forms of
multifamily housing containing five to nine aS-units; or
Minor Housekeeping Changes to
Ordinances 3026, 3034, 3035, 3037, 3038 and 3039
(Adopted by Council 09/07/10)
b. Alterations to the exterior facades of buildings, (including but not limited
to new or altered exterior electrical or mechanical systems such as pole
mounted or other light fixtures) excepting that ordinary (i.e.,
nonemergency) maintenance and repair activities may be granted a
waiver of design review by the director. All work, even that qualifying for a
waiver from the review process, must be conducted in accordance with
applicable code requirements, including architectural design standards of
Chapter 17.36.
3. Cottage housing developments
Alterations to the exterior facades of buildings which are visible from
adjacent
properties or rights-of-way, including but not ;imited to new or altered
exterior electrical or mechanical systems such as pole mounted or other
light fixtures) excepting that ordinary (i.e., nonemergency) maintenance
and repair activities may be granted a waiver of design review by the
director, All work, even that qualifying for a waiver from the review
process, must be conducted in accordance with applicable code
requirements, including architectural design standards of Chapter 17.34.
From this point on -the revisions in 3026 are followed