No preview available
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