Loading...
Planning Comm PKT 03-19-2003 City of Federal Way .PLANNING COMMISSION March 19, 2003 7:00 p.m. City 1.lall Council Chambers AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. APPROVAL OF SUMMARY 4. AUDIENCE COMMENT 5. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 6. COMMISSION BUSINESS I&' PUBLIC HEARING - Continuation Design Guidelines and Definition of Height Code Amendments 7. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS 8. AUDIENCE COMMENT 9. ADJOURN Commissioners John Caulfield, Chair Dini Duclos William Drake Grant Newport Tony Moore (Alternate #2) Lawson Bronson (Alternate #4) Hope Elder, Vice-Chair Dave Osaki Marta Justus Foldi Christine Nelson (Alternate #1) Merle Pfeifer (Alternate #3) City Staff Kathy McClung, CDS Director Margaret Clark, Senior Planner E. Tina Piety, Administrative Assistant 253-661-4105 11'11'\1'. cityof[ederal11'av. com K:\Planning Commission\2003lAgenda 03-19-03.docILast printed 03/12/200307:53 AM MEETING SUMMARY Commissioners present: Hope Elder, Dave Osaki, Dini Duclos, Bill Drake, and Marta Justus Foldi. Commissioners absent (excused): John Caulfield and Grant Newport. Alternate Commissioners present: Merle Pfeifer and Christine Nelson. Alternate Commissioners absent (excused): Lawson Bronson. Alternate Commissioners absent (unexcused): Tony Moore. Staff present: Community Development Director Kathy McClung, Senior Planner Margaret Clark, Traffic Engineer Rick Perez, Assistant City Attorney Karen Kirkpatrick, and Administrative Assistant E. Tina Piety. Acting Chair Elder called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ApPROVAL OF SUMMARY It was m/s/c to adopt the summary of November 20, 2002, as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENT None. ADMINISTRA TIVE REPORT None. COMMISSION BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING - 2002 Comprehensive Plan Update, Site-Specific Requests Ms. Clark delivered the staff report and gave a background of the process for the benefit of those in the audience. She explained that the Commission had been given copies of updated maps and a text change they had requested. There are four site-specific requests for the commission to consider tonight. Request #1- Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Single Family High Density Residential and RS 7.2 to Community Business and BC of four parcels located south of South 304th Street adjacent to Military Road South. The original request consisted of three parcels. As part of their review, City staff performed noise readings in the area and because of the results, suggested the fourth parcel be added (Shirlene Olsen's property). The noise in the area is high because of the proximity to 1-5 and Military Road. Trees in the area have been removed to construct an HOY lane and a K:\Planning Commission\2002\Meeting Summary 12-04-02.doc Planning Commission Summary Page 2 December 4, 2002 storm water detention facility. This request includes two businesses, Vilma's Signs and Pat's Plumbing, both of which are uses that are not allowed in the Community Business (BC) zone. They are allowed in the Business Park (BP) zone. Ms. Clark noted that the BC and BP zones are not appropriate for this area because of the residential surroundings. Therefore, staffs recommendation is that the properties be given a comprehensive plan designation and zoning of Neighborhood Business and BN. This would allow Vilma's Signs and Pat's Plumbing to continue as legal nonconforming uses. As such, they would not be able to expand or make structural changes. However, the properties could be sold and redeveloped for uses allowed in the Neighborhood Business (BN) zone. This would be a better use of the properties than the current zoning of residential. Commissioner Duclos asked why change to BN since it means the businesses would not be able to expand or make structural changes? Commissioner Osaki noted that requested change to BC would also make the businesses nonconforming. The Commission would like to know Ms. Olsen's response to her property being included in the request. Ms. Clark replied Ms. Olsen has been notified and Ms. Olsen had no response. The public testimony was opened at 7:25 p.m. Wayne Carlson - He is here for Pat's Plumbing. He stated that the business dispenses vans for routine repair and maintenance and they want to expand the office building. The vans are not on-site during the day. He commended the staff for recognizing the noise problem. He is concerned that Pat's Plumbing does not meet the criteria for the BC zone; they had understood it did meet the criteria. He understands the staff s concerns about the locations of the BC zones [currently located along Pacific Highway South], but feels this is a unique situation because of the noise problem. Tim Hickel- He is an attorney here to represent Vilma's Signs. He gave the Commission a comment sheet and synopsis of the BN and BP zones. Vilma's makes and sells signs for end use customers, as opposed to wholesale. It noted the area is an isolated triangular area between Military Road and 1-5. One has to travel down 304th to find residences. Vilma's has five employees and has been there for approximately 20 years with no complaints. This request is about more than making sure we have so much BP, BN, and BP zoned land in the community; it affects real people and real jobs. He feels that the staff recommendation fails to address the problem and ignores the history of the area. It is his understanding that BN is for office and retail establishments, while BP is for fabrication/ assembly/distribution establishments. As such, why is Vilma's Signs not conforming under BN, but does conform to BP? The overall goal, and most common sense solution, is not only a zone change, but to also ensure the businesses are conforming. Michael Klingman - He is a neighbor of Ms. Olsen. He had talked to Ms Olsen's son, Mr. Smith, and was upset he was not informed of this meeting until today. There are three other private properties that would be affected by this change. They have been concerned with the noise level and have spoken with the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). He attended the meeting hosted by WSDOT where it was stated that a concrete wall along 1-5 had been proposed, but was lost due to Referendum 51. WSDOT has placed walls to the north and south of the area, and a wall is still proposed for the area, but there is no funding. What does commercial zoning have to do with the noise problem? He stated he was not able to get an appraisal because of the noise problem. K:\Planning Commission\2002\Meeting Summary 12-04-02.docILast printed 0311212003 03: 12 PM Planning Commission Summary Page 3 December 4, 2002 Public Testimony was closed at 7:45 p.m. The Commission expressed their concern that the rezoning would lead to nonconforming uses. The staff offered to research further what exactly the uses are for Vilma's Signs and Pat's Plumbing to ascertain if the might meet the criteria for BN. In addition, as part of their workplan next year, staff will be reviewing the uses for BN and BP zones. Requests #2 & #3 - These requests are for two adjacent parcels, which although under different ownership, are presently being used as a truck terminal; therefore, they are being reviewed together. Request is to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Business Park and BC to Community Business and BC of two parcels located north of South 336th Street and west of Enchanted Parkway South. The owners believe that the BC designation and zoning is consistent with surrounding zoning and land uses. The staff recommendation is that these requests not be approved because the City has enough land zoned BC. It is further suggested that the City explore potential changes to the allowable uses in the BP zone in order to meet changing market conditions. The Public Testimony was opened at 8:25 p.m. Anthony Starkovich - He represents STRS Associates. He stated it is difficult to compete as an industrial use with the Port of Tacoma and Auburn valley. An idea has arisen that this area is trying to compete with the City Center-Core area. This isn't true. This area is looking for a different type ofretail. The properties currently have a trucking business, but don't have the infrastructure to compete. Rob Rueber - He represents Clerget Industries and gave the Commission copies of a letter. He stated that the one thing that drove the request is that since Home Depot went in, they have had many requests for retail on the property, but no requests or interest in BP use,s. Nothing has happened with industrial zoning in some 20 to 30 years. More retail wants to move into the area and when the truck stop moves out, any industrial uses in the area will also leave. Public Testimony was closed at 8:35 p.m. Other than a couple of clarifying questions, there was no discussion. Request #4 - For the record, Commissioner Duclos stated she is employed by the Multi-Service Center, who owns Glenwood Place, which is adjacent to this request. Request is to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Business Park to Multiple Family and RM 2400 for parcels located west of the on-site wetlands south of South 336th Street and west of Pacific Highway South. City staffis currently working on a development agreement for Kitts Corner (of which this request is a part of). The applicants had made this request once before but withdrew it when the staff recommend it not be approved because it would have created an island of multiple family use surrounded by commercial designations. Since that time, a boundary line adjustment has increased the size of one of the parcels and Glenwood Place, a 50-unit senior citizen housing complex, was constructed adjacent to the request. Staff recommends that this request be approved and included in the Kitts Corner Development Agreement. Public Testimony was opened at 8:50 p.m. Leonard Schaadt - He represents Campus Gateway and Gene Merlino. He stated that he has experiered a lack of demand for BP zoned land. He feels BP would be inappropriate in this area because of the wetlands. He is working with the property owners on a plan for the other part of Kitts Corner that would complement mutiple family. Residential uses would be less invasive of the wetlands and would compliment the retail on the other part of Kitts Corner. K:\Planning Commission\2002\Meeting Summary 12-04-02.doclLast printed 03/12/2003 03: 12 PM Planning Commission Summary Page 4 December 4, 2002 Public Testimony was closed at 8:55 p.m. and being no further discussion, the Public Hearing was closed at 8:55 p.m. It was mls/c to consider each request independently. It was mlslfailed (one yes, four no) to adopt the staff recommendation for Request #1. It was m/slf(two yes, three no) to adopt the staff recommendation on Request #1, but to not include the Olsen property (a friendly amendment was made that Ms. Olsen be contacted to be sure of her position). It was m/slf (one yes, three no) to bring back information on Ms. Olsen and Vilma's Signs. It was m/s/c (three yes, two no) to approve the staff recommendation for Request #1, but to not include the Olsen property. Ms. Kirkpatrick stated that Request #1 will go forward to the Land Use/Transportation Committee as "no recommendation" because according to the Planning Commission By-Laws, a majority vote of the full Planning Commission (four votes) is necessary to recommend approval of an item referred to the Commission for Process IV review. It was m/s/c (four yes, one no) to adopt the staff recommendation for Request #2. It was m/s/c (four yes, one no) to adopt the staff recommendation for Request #3. It was m/s/c (unanimous) to adopt the staff recommendation for Request #4. It was m/s/c (unanimous) to adopt the 2002 Comprehensive Plan text amendments, as amended by the Planning Commission. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS The next Planning Commission meeting will not be until the second regular meeting of January. AUDIENCE COMMENT None. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. K:\Planning Commission\2002\Meeting Summary 12-04-02.doclLast printed 03112/2003 03: 12 PM MEETING SUMMARY Commissioners present: John Caulfield, Hope Elder, Dave Osaki, Grant Newport, and Bill Drake. Commissioners absent (excused): Dini Duclos and Marta Justus Foldi. Alternate Commissioners present: Merle Pfeifer, Lawson Bronson, and Christine Nelson. Alternate Commissioners absent (unexcused): Tony Moore. Staff present: Community Development Director Kathy McClung, Senior Planner Margaret Clark, Senior Planner Lori Michaelson, Assistant City Attorney Karen Kirkpatrick, and Administrative Assistant E. Tina Piety. Chair Caulfield called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. ApPROVAL OF SUMMARY The December 4, 2002 summary was tabled to the next meeting AUDIENCE COMMENT None. ADMINISTRA TIVE REPORT None. COMMISSION BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING - Design Guidelines and Definition of Height Code Amendments The public hearing was opened at 7:10 p.m. Ms. Clark delivered the staff report. A copy of the staff report was sent to all churches in Federal Way. City staff has received two phone calls on this issue. The first was in support and the second had a few questions (that staff answered) and expressed concern that there was not enough time to study the staff report. Ms. Clark noted that the amendments will affect large institutional uses in all zones, not just residential. Because of recent projects, the staff has discovered that the guidelines need some tweaking, hence these code amendments. Ms. Michaelson continued the staff report with an explanation of the definition of height code amendments. She stated that the City has received a letter from Stephen Hammer (copy given to the Commissioners) that is generally in favor of the proposed amendments. He does recommend some changes and she and Ms. Clark will discuss those recommendations at the appropriate points of the staff K:\Planning Commission\2003\Meeting Summary 03-05-03.doc Planning Commission Summary Page 2 March 5, 2003 report. Ms. Michaelson went on to explain that the proposed changes to the definitions of average building elevation and height are for clarification. In his letter, Mr. Hammer comments that we should use more than two points to determine the average building elevation. Staff feels that two points are adequate (we have not had any problems with using just two points) and do not think we need to change. Mr. Hammer commented that a gable only occurs on gable roofs and a pitched roof is any sloped roof in any configuration; therefore, the wording of the height definition should be changed to, "... the highest principal gable of a pitched, hip, gambrel, or similar sloped roof." Staff concurs with this change. The only substantive change to the definitions is the addition of the last sentence to the height definition. The Building Division has experienced problems with the number and size of dormers on some houses; they are intrusive, add to the "mass" of the home, and block views. The additional sentence will limit dormers. The intent of the façade and roof guidelines is to have the use blend in with neighboring uses. The staff has encountered problems when applying these guidelines to institutional uses. Therefore, new section (22-1639) is proposed to be added to the Community Design Guidelines to apply to institutional uses. Sections 22-1639(3) and (4) are intended to breakdown the horizontal mass of the building. Section 22- 1639(5) still requires some modulation, but allows for creativity. Mr. Hammer thinks the City is excessive by requiring 10 percent for the offset. Staff feels that it does give flexibility and thereby disagrees with Mr. Hammer. The current guidelines require landscaping after every 10 parking stalls. Staff has discovered that this does not work well with large sites, especially those with natural features worth preserving. New Section 22-1639(6) would allow flexibility in the placement of landscaping and preserves natural features. The Commission discussed the staff report as presented to this point. In regards to dormers and the sentence added to the height definition, Commissioner Drake asked if the City has received complaints from neighbors? He also asked what are other cities doing and are we going against a new housing trend? Ms. Michaelson said that the City has not received any complaints, but Ms. Kirkpatrick said that the City has received inquires from attorneys about how height is measured, indicating that there is a problem. Ms. Michaelson went on to reply that the staff has not researched what other cities are doing and she would have to ask the Building Official if this is a new housing trend. Chairman Caulfield asked if standards were being proposed to protect views in view corridors and if so, could these standards be considered a "taking"? Ms. Michaelson replied that while the code does have a note in some of the use charts stating that views designated in the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) should not be blocked, the FWCP does not have any designated view corridors. The City Council wanted this language in case view corridors may be designated in the future. Chairman Caulfield asked if this sentence was likely to draw the City into a lawsuit about views? Ms. Kirkpatrick replied that it would not. The intent of the sentence is to not add to the "bulk" of a home. By not adding to the bulk of a home you may preserve someone's view, but that would be a coincidence. The Commission discussed modulation and staff clarified that this code amendment would apply to all institutional uses no matter in which zone they are located and would apply to the façade of the building that faces a residential zone, right-of-way, or public park or other recreation area. This code amendment does not apply to commercial buildings because the City hasn't had any with a l20-foot façade and they have other guidelines as well. Ms. Clark continued the staff presentation. She went over the proposed changes to the use zone charts. When researching the height issue, staff discovered that the Community Business (BC), City Center- Core (CC-C), and City Center-Frame (CC-F) zones already had adequate provisions to increase height, KIPlanning Commission\200J\Meeting Summary OJ-05-03.doclLast printed 03/12/2003 0213 PM Planning Commission Summary Page 3 March 5, 2003 and no changes are proposed. With the exception that staff does recommend that the note allowing an additional 15 feet for crosses and other religious icons be added to the BC zone. For all zones where it is proposed, this additional 15 feet is be added to the underlying approved height. The Commission suggested that rather than using the word "crosses," the note should just refer to religious icons. A number of churches have expressed the need for an increase in height for sanctuaries with high ceilings, raised pulpits, or multi-level seating. In response, staff is recommending that a height increase to 40 feet be allowed in Suburban Estates (SE), Single-Family Residential (RS), and Multifamily Residential (RM) if certain restrictions are met. The restrictions are that the increased height must be necessary to accommodate a particular use conducted in the building; one-foot of additional setback is provided for each one-foot of additional height; and it shall not block views designated by the comprehensive plan. In addition in each of these zones, the height of the sanctuary or principal worship area may be increased to 55 feet if one-foot of additional setback is provided for each one-foot of additional height; it shall not block views designated by the comprehensive plan; and the footprint of the sanctuary may not exceed 50 percent of the total area of the church footprint. In order to support good design, the proposed code amendment will allow architectural extensions (such as parapets and cornices) to exceed the 30-foot base height in RM and RS zones by three feet; this provision is not proposed in the SE zone since the maximum allowable height (35 feet) already exceeds 30 feet. The code amendments include a number of small miscellaneous "housekeeping" changes. One of these changes is that the 20-foot height limit for lighting fixtures should not apply to large institutional uses. The staff had already discovered that because of the size of the area, the 20-foot height limit for lighting fixtures was not adequate for public parks and school stadiums. Without this restriction, the height of lighting fixtures can be the same as the underlying base height allowed the building. The Public Testimony was opened at 8:50 p.m. John Manuel, Austinicina Architects - He is working with Calvary Community Church on their current proposal and is pleased to see many of the proposed amendments. He does have some concerns regarding modulation. He stated that the Weyerhaeuser Corporate Headquarters has a long façade without modulation, and it has won awards for its design. Who determines what is a good-looking building? He commented that the new high school added an arbor to one edge of their building just to meet the modulation standards. This cost them thousands of dollars. Churches do not have that kind of money; they rely upon donations from their members. Some building materials cannot be modulated at the distances required in the proposed amendments. The modulation could cause seismic problems. Another concern regarding modulation is that the required landscaping is likely to hide the modulation. He also stated that the roof pitch requirement (#13 on page 14 of Exhibit A) should be clarified. One would never see a roof pitch of 4: 12 on a large building. He requested the City consider the social and economic impacts of the proposed amendments. Lawson Bronson, Alternate Planning Commissioner - He sated he has four concerns: I) there was not enough time for the public to study the staff report; 2) he agrees with the previous testimony in regards to who decides what is a good-looking building; 3) was there any engineering input, some of the proposed modulations would not fit well; and 4) would the modulation requirements cause seismic problems? He requested the Commission continue the public hearing in order to study these concerns. K:\Planning Commission\2003\Meeting Summary 03-05-03.docILast printed 03/12/2003 02: 13 PM Planning Commission Summary Page 4 March 5, 2003 Roddy Nolten - He commented that undulating the footprint of a building as required by modulation could cause seismic problems. It would make it more difficult to engineer the building. Wade Fisher, Brook/ake Church - He thanked the Commissioners for their service. He asked for a clarification. Their church is in a Suburban Estates (SE) zone, but they have a large school ministry. How is church defined? Does the City view churches as Little House on the Prairie, or as modern large churches? The Public Testimony was closed at 9:00 p.m. Commissioner Hope commented that she has problems with the proposed amendments. The City should take cost into account. Landscaping is expensive and a church could use that money for an additional room. If a project is not infringing on their neighbors, why should the City regulate it. Gateway Center was built without these guidelines and it is a nice looking facility. She is concerned the City is placing too many restrictions on developers. Commissioner Osaki would like additional comment on three items: 1) he would like to see a side elevation of dormers on a home that is considered too massive; 2) clarification on lighting fixtures and their use on site; and 3) modulation and landscaping, what landscaping is required, does it detract from the modulation, and does the landscaping screen the modulation? Commissioner Drake would like the staff to address the seismic issue and to provide the Commission with a copy of the proposed code amendments incorporating Stephen Hammer's comments. Ms. Michaelson stated that the City is not in the business of regulating beauty. What the staff looks for is whether the project meets code or not. It was m/s/c to continue the Public Hearing to March 19,2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Ms. McClung thanked the audience for coming. She told them to feel free to call the staff and ask questions. This is just the first step of the process. After Planning Commission, the code amendments will go the City Council's Land Use/Transportation Committee, and then to the City Council. Public comment will be accepted and considered at each step. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS Commissioner Drake asked if the Commission could be sent the staff report via email, as opposed to mailing. There may be some members who do not have email and it would have to be mailed. Ms. Clark replied that she would look at the code to see if it states the staff report must be mailed. AUDIENCE COMMENT None. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 9: 15 p.m. K:\Planning Commission\2003\Meeting Summary 03-05-03.docILast printed 03112/2003 02: 13 PM ~ CITY OF ~ Federal Way MEMO RAND UM March 19, 2003 TO: John Caulfield, Chair of the City of Federal Way Planning Commission FROM: Kathy McClung, Director of Community Development Services Margaret H. Clark, AICP, Senior Planner Lori Michaelson, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Amendments to Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 22, Article XIX - Design Guidelines and Definition of Height (File #03-100842-00-UP) Additional Follow-up to Planning Commission's Questions During the March 5, 2003, Public Hearing MEETING DATE: March 19,2003 (Continuation of March 5, 2003, Public Hearing) I. BACKGROUND During the Planning Commission March 5, 2003 Public Hearing, the Planning Commission requested that staff follow up on the following: 1. Provide a side elevation of dormer elements on a home that are considered too maSSIve. Provide clarification on height of lighting fixtures. Clarify how modulation and landscaping are related. Address how modulation may affect the engineering of a building as it relates to seismic standards. Incorporate those staff-agreed upon changes from Steve Hammer's letter. 2. 3. 4. 5. II. STAFF RESPONSE The responses to the first four requests were provided to you in a March 12,2003, memorandum. Additional proposed amendments as discussed during the March 5, 2003, Planning Commission meeting are shown as highlighted and are incorporated in the following sub-sections I and 2. In addition, in sub-section 3, staff has included an explanation on the procedure used to address a situation where someone is unable to comply with a specific design standard, and an explanation of the definition of church is provided in sub-section 4. 1. Steve Hammer's Comments Mr. Hammer's suggested amendment is shown on Page 1 of Exhibit A. Height of structure means the vertical distance above the average building elevation measured to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof, or to the average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof mid-point between eave and rid2e of the hi2hest principall(ftillfi:i. 2able of a pitched, hip, 2ambrel, or similar sloped roof. For sin2le-family residential structures where the total roof area of dormers exceeds 35 percent of the total area of the underlyin2 sloped roof, hei2ht will be measured to the rid2e of the hi2hest principal 2able. 2. Change in Terminology for Crosses The Commission requested that the term "religious icons" should be used instead of "crosses." The following language has been substituted both to address this concern and to clarify how the additional IS feet height to accommodate religious symbols and icons would be measured. This language has been substituted in the Suburban Estates (SE), Single Family Residential (RS), and Multiple Family (RM) Use Zone Charts. In addition, as discussed during the Planning Commission public hearing, it has been added to the Community Business (BC) Use Zone Chart in order to allow a similar 15-foot height allowance as in the residential zones. The other zones, City Center Core (CC-C) and City Center Frame (CC-F), already have provisions to exceed the maximum allowable height limits through a Process III review. The proposed language can be found in Exhibit B and is as follows: BuUd.j.IIg-mOlnltedjfJ~sses..afld-&tber-.eust&ma-Fy_f'RcligiQ!!s..Ð'I!J hots n lid icons f<?-,"-- ~h.~cI~~ ~H1(1 otl!~r !"cljgiQ...u!¡ institutions m;!y C~~Cc(' thç ¥pFOy'ed-u!Kle!:h:!!.~~!g'-~ !irBit:-b¥ 1J..~.~~.oint ofthc. un~tcrlri!!g r~~f o."-~JliclÜ!Js n~_ou!ltcd !~.n additi()n~¡,L! 5 ft., provided that such symbol is a minor architectural accent and only one such symbol is permitted on the principal structure for this use. 3. Procedure for Granting Modifications/Variances to Design Guidelines The design review process is intended to be collaborative, and many of the "design solutions" are a product of some degree of negotiation between the City and applicant. In addition, some guidelines are more flexible than others, for example where the code says, "should" instead of "shall." Also, the guidelines are written to give an applicant a menu of choices and alternatives, such as the proposed modulation alternative. In the unlikely event that an applicant simply could not comply with a guideline for some reason, the applicant could appeal the decision of the Director on the Design Guidelines, or request a variance. We have not run into this problem since the guidelines were adopted in 1996 and we don't anticipate that the current amendment will pose any additional problems for compliance, since it will actually add more flexibility to the current code. Page 2 4. Definition of Church Mr. Wade Fisher of Brooklake Church asked for clarification of what was considered a modern church today. Since many churches have associated schools, should they be treated as one use? Following are the definitions of church, synagogue, or other place of worship and schools as found in Federal Way City Code (FWCC), Chapter 22, Article I. Church, synagogue, or other place of worship means an establishment, the principal purpose of which is religious worship and for which the principal building or other structure contains the sanctuary or principal place of worship, and which may include related accessory uses. Schools means institutions of learning, excluding those offering post-secondary education, offering instruction in the several branches of learning and study required by the Basic Education Code of the State of Washington to be taught in public, private and parochial schools, including those disciplines considered vocational, business- related, or trade in nature. It has always been the City's position that a church and school are two different uses, and are, therefore, treated differently in the code related to setbacks and other standards. If both a church and school are proposed on the same site, they are treated as dual principal uses and not accessory to each other. This would require those port.ions of the site that contain the church and its accessory uses to comply with the development standards for churches in the zone that it is located, and those portions of the site containing the school and its accessory uses to comply with those development standards for schools in the zone that it is located. If you have additional questions, please call Senior Planner Margaret Clark at 253-661-41 ! II. EXHIBITS Exhibit A - FWCC Section 22-1 Proposed Amendments and FWCC Chapter 22, Article XIX- Community Design Guidelines With Proposed Amendments Exhibit B - SE, RS, RM, and BC Use Zone Charts With Proposed Amendments K:\CD Planning\Design Guidelines & Definition of Height\Planning Commission\Materials for 031903 Meeting\Additional Infonnation for 031903 Meeting.doc/03/19/2003 12:24 PM Page 3 EXHIBIT A FEDERAL WAY CITY CODE Chapter 22, "Zoning" 22-1 Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Average building elevation (A.BE) means a reference datum on tIlt: sulfa<.;t: tupuglaphy uf a subject property from which building height is measured. TIlt: I t:[t:1 t:1l<.;t: datuJII shall ùt: a puilllllu hight:1 lhall [¡ vt: ft:d abuvt: lht: luwt:sl t:!t:valiun lakt:n al allY t:xlt:r iul wall uf lht: sll udul t: t:ilht:1 pi iul lu allY dt:vdupJllt:lll adivily UI al fi.nisIlt:d gradt:, whidlt:vt:1 is luwt:l, plOvidt:d LIlt: Idt:lt:n<.;t: datum is t:4ualtu UI luwt:1 lllanlht: higbt:sl t:kvaliull al allY t:xlt:liul wall uftllt: slrudUlt:: prim tu dt::vduplllt::lll adivily. A~F i~ the aver~ge of the highest and lowest existing or proposed elevations, whichever is lowest, ta);en at the ba~e of the nterior walls of the structure; provided that ABE shall not be greater than five feet above the lowest existing or proposed elevation. Allowed Building Height ,--------- , I I I I I I I I I , I , I 1------ 5' :_----- - - - - --- --, , I , I , I , I , I , I , I ------, Lowest Elevation Reference datum (ABE) Highest Elevation Height of structure means the vertical distance above the average building elevation measured to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof, or to the avt:ragt:: ht::ight U[ lht: hight::s.~f?:~gl~ii~r a pildl~iMii~¡i..!å.¡gg.~~ lOuf mid-point between eave and ridge of tb(' highest pril1dpalrfJfJfôf.}ì{ gable ¡iripHìi;liêU, hip, gambrel, or similar sloped roo! For single-family residential structures where the total roof area of dormers exceeds 35 percent of the total area of the under1ying sloped roof, Þeight will be measured to the ridge of the highest principal gable. Article XIX. COMMUNITY DESIGN GUIDELINES Sections: 22-1630 Purpose. 22-1631 Administration. 22-1632 Applicability. 22-1633 Definitions. 22-1634 Site design - All zoning districts. 22-1635 Building design - All zoning districts. 22-1636 Building and pedestrian orientation - All zoning districts. 22-1637 Mixed-use residential buildings in commercial zoning districts. 22-1638 District guidelines. 22-1639 Design criteria for public on-site open space. 22-1640 Design for cluster residential subdivision lots. 22-1641- 22-1650 Reserved. 22-1630 Purpose. The purpose of this article is to: (1) Implement community design guidelines by: a. Adopting design guidelines in accordance with land use and development policies established in the Federal Way comprehensive plan and in accordance with Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) Guidelines. b. Requiring minimum standards for design review to maintain and protect property values and enhance the general appearance of the city. c. Increasing flexibility and encouraging creativity in building and site design, while assuring quality development pursuant to the comprehensive plan and the purpose of this article. d. Achieving predictability in design review, balanced with administrative flexibility to consider the individual merits of proposals. e. Improving and expanding pedestrian circulation, public open space, and pedestrian amenities in the city. (2) Implement Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles by: a. Requiring minimum standards for design review to reduce the rate of crime associated with persons and property, thus providing for the highest standards of public safety. b. CPTED design principles are functionally grouped into the following three categories: 1. Natural Surveillance. This focuses on strategies to design the built environment in a manner that promotes visibility of public spaces and areas. 2. Access Control. This category focuses on the techniques that prevent and/or deter unauthorized and/or inappropriate access. 3. Ownership. This category focuses on strategies to reduce the perception of areas as "ownerless" and, therefore, available for undesirable uses. c. CPTED principles, design guidelines, and performance standards will be used during project development review to identify and incorporate design features that reduce opportunities for criminal activity to occur. The effectiveness of CPT ED is based on the fact that criminals make rational choices about their targets. In general: I. The greater the risk of being seen, challenged, or caught; the less likely they are to commit a CrIme. 2. The greater the effort required, the less likely they are to commit a crime. 3. The lesser the actual or perceived rewards, the less likely they are to commit a crime. d. Through the use of CPTED principles, the built environment can be designed and managed to ensure: Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A {;)2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03-1 0O842-00-UP / Doc ID 22300 Page 2 I. There is more chance of being seen, challenged, or caught; 2. Greater effort is required; 3. The actual or perceived rewards are less; and 4. Opportunities for criminal activity are minimized. COrd. No. 96-271, § 3, 7-2-96; Ord. No. 99- 333, § 3, 1-19-99; Ord. No. 01-382, § 3,1-16-01) 22-1631 Administration. Applications subject to community design guidelines and Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) shall be processed as a component of the governing land use process, and the director of community development services shall have the authority to approve, modify, or deny proposals under that process. Decisions under this article will consider proposals on the basis of individual merit and will encourage creative design alternatives in order to achieve the stated purpose and objectives of this article. Decisions under this article are appealable using the appeal procedures of the applicable land use process. COrd. No. 96-271, § 3, 7-2-96; Ord. No. 97-29I, § 3, 4-I-97; Ord. No. 99-333, § 3, I-I9-99; Ord. No. 01-382, § 3, I-I6- 01) 22-1632 Applicability. This article shall apply to all commercial, office, and industrial development applications, in commercial æM5 except single-family residential, subject to FWCC 22, Zoning,~ and which were submitt-ed for review after July 1, 1996, and shall apply to any non single family residential development application in any zone, which 'Nas submitted after January 25, 1999. CPTED guidelines and performance standards shall also apply to all previously described applications above, including community facilities and public parks submitted after January 2-1,2000. CPTED guidelines and performance standards shall not apply to projects that have received preapplication review prior to the effective date of the amendments. Project proponents shall demonstrate how each CPTED design principle is met by the proposal, or why it is not relevant by either a written explanation or by responding to a checklist prepared by the city. Subject applications for remodeling or expansion of existing developments shall meet only those provisions of this article that are determined by the director to be reasonably related and applicable to the area of expansion or remodeling. This article in no way should be construed to supersede or modify any other city codes, ordinances, or policies that apply to the proposal. COrd. No. 96-271, § 3, 7-2-96; Ord. No. 97-291, § 3,4-1-97; Ord. No. 99-333, § 3, l-I9-99; Ord. No. OI-382, § 3, I-16-01) 22-1633 Definitions. (1) Active use(s) means uses that by their very nature generate activity, and thus opportunities for natural surveillance, such as picnic areas, extracurricular school activities, exercise groups, etc. (2) Arcade means a linear pedestrian walkway that abuts and runs along the facade of a building. It is covered, but not enclosed, and open at all times to public use. Typically, it has a line of columns along its open side. There may be habitable space above the arcade. (3) Awning means a roof-like cover that is temporary or portable in nature and that projects from the wall of a building for the purpose of shielding a doorway or window from the elements. (4) Canopy means a permanent, cantilevered extension of a building that typically projects over a pedestrian walkway abutting and running along the facade of a building, with no habitable space above the canopy. A canopy roof is comprised of rigid materials. (5) Common/open space area means area within a development, which is used primarily by the occupants of that development, such as an entryway, lobby, courtyard, outside dining areas, etc. (6) Natural surveillance means easy observation of buildings, spaces, and activities by people passing or living/working/recreating nearby. (7) Parking structure means a building or structure consisting of more than one level, above and/or below ground, and used for temporary storage of motor vehicles. Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A @2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03-1 00842-00-UP / Doc 1022300 Page 3 (8) Plaza means a pedestrian space that is available for public use and is situated near a main entrance to a building or is clearly visible and accessible from the adjacent right-of-way. Typical features include special paving, landscaping, lighting, seating areas, water features, and art. (9) Public on-site open space means a space that is accessible to the public at all times, predominantly open above, and designed specifically for use by the general public as opposed to serving merely as a setting for the building. (I 0) Right-of-way means land owned, dedicated or conveyed to the public, used primarily for the movement of vehicles, wheelchair and pedestrian traffic, and land privately owned, used primarily for the movement of vehicles, wheelchair and pedestrian traffic; so long as such privately owned land has been constructed in compliance with all applicable laws and standards for a public right-of-way. (II) Sight line means the line of vision from a person to a place or building. (12) Streetscape means a term in urban design that defines and describes the character and quality of a street by the amount and type of features and furnishings abutting it. Such features and furnishings may include trees and other landscaping, benches, lighting, trash receptacles, bollards, curbing, walls, different paving types, signage, kiosks, trellises, art objects, bus stops, and typical utility equipment and appurtenances. (13) Surface parking lot means an off-street, ground level open area, usually improved, for the temporary storage of motor vehicles. (14) Transparent glass means windows that are transparent enough to permit the view of activities within a building from nearby streets, sidewalks and public spaces. Tinting or some coloration is permitted, provided a reasonable level of visibility is achieved. Reflective or very dark tinted glass does not accomplish this objective. (Ord. No. 96-271, § 3, 7-2-96; Ord. No. 99-333, § 3,1-19-99; Ord. No. 01-382, § 3, 1-16-01) 22-1634 Site design - All zoning districts. (a) General criteria. (I) Natural amenities such as views, significant or unique trees, creeks, riparian corridors, and similar features unique to the site should be incorporated into the design. (2) Pedestrian areas and amenities should be incorporated in the overall site design. Pedestrian areas include but are not limited to outdoor plazas, arcades, courtyards, seating areas, and amphitheaters. Pedestrian amenities include but are not limited to outdoor benches, tables and other furniture, balconies, gazebos, transparent glass at the ground floor, and landscaping. (3) Pedestrian areas should be easily seen, accessible, and located to take advantage of surrounding features such as building entrances, open spaces, significant landscaping, unique topography or architecture, and solar exposure. (4) Project designers shall strive for overall design continuity by using similar elements throughout the project such as architectural style and features, materials, colors, and textures. (5) Place physical features, activities, and people in visible locations to maximize the ability to be seen, and therefore, discourage crime. For example, place cafes and food kiosks in parks to increase natural surveillance by park users, and place laundry facilities near play equipment in multiple family residential development. Avoid barriers, such as tall or overgrown landscaping or outbuildings, where they make it difficult to observe activity. (6) Provide access control by utilizing physical barriers such as bollards, fences, doorways, etc., or by security hardware such as locks, chains, and alarms. Where appropriate, utilize security guards. All of these methods result in increased effort to commit a crime, and therefore, reduce the potential for it to happen. (7) Design buildings and utilize site design that reflects ownership. For example, fences, paving, art, signs, good maintenance, and landscaping are some physical ways to express ownership. Identifying intruders is much easier in a well-defined space. An area that looks protected gives the impression that greater effort is required to commit a crime. A cared for environment can also reduce fear of crime. Areas that are run down and the subject of graffiti and vandalism are generally more intimidating than areas that do not display such characteristics. Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A @2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03-100842-00-UP / Doc ID22300 Page 4 (b) Surface parking lots. (I) Site and landscape design for parking lots are subject to the requirements of Article XVII of this chapter. (2) Vehicle turning movements shall be minimized. Parking aisles without loop access are discouraged. Parking and vehicle circulation areas shall be clearly delineated using directional signage. (3) Driveways shall be located to be visible from the right-of-way but not impede pedestrian circulation on-site or to adjoining properties. Driveways should be shared with adjacent properties to minimize the number of driveways and curb cuts. (4) Multi-tenant developments with large surface parking lots adjacent to a right-of-way are encouraged to incorporate retail pads against the right-of-way to help break up the large areas ofpavement. (5) See FWCC 22-1638 for supplemental guidelines. (c) Parking structures (includes parking floors located within commercial buildings). (I) The bulk (or mass) of a parking structure as seen from the right-of-way should be minimized by placing its short dimension along the street edge. The parking structure should include active uses such as retail, offices or other commercial uses at the ground level and/or along the street frontage. (2) Parking structures which are part of new development shall be architecturally consistent with exterior architectural elements of the primary structure, including rooflines, facade design, and finish materials. (3) Parking structures should incorporate methods of articulation and accessory elements, pursuant to FWCC 22-l635(c)(2), on facades located above ground level. (4) Buildings built over parking should not appear to "float" over the parking area, but should be linked with ground level uses or screening. Parking at grade under a building is discouraged unless the parking area is completely enclosed within the building or wholly screened with walls and/or landscaped berms. (5) Top deck lighting on multi-level parking structures shall be architecturally integrated with the building, and screened to control impacts to off-site uses. Exposed fluorescent light fixtures are not permitted. (6) Parking structures and vehicle entrances should be designed to minimize views into the garage interior from surrounding streets. Methods to help minimize such views may include, but are not limited to landscaping, planters, and decorative grilles and screens. (7) Security grilles for parking structures shall be architecturally consistent with and integrated with the overall design. Chain-link fencing is not permitted for garage security fencing. (8) See FWCC 22-1638(c)(4) for supplemental guidelines. (d) Pedestrian circulation and public spaces. (I) Primary entrances to buildings should be clearly visible or recognizable from the right-of-way. Pedestrian pathways from rights-of-way and bus stops to primary entrances, from parking lots to primary entrances, and pedestrian areas, shall be accessible and should be clearly delineated. (2) Pedestrian pathways and pedestrian areas should be delineated by separate paved routes using a variation in paved texture and color, and protected from abutting vehicle circulation areas with landscaping. Approved methods of delineation include: stone, brick or granite pavers; exposed aggregate; or stamped and colored concrete. Paint striping on asphalt as a method of delineation is not encouraged. Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A @2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03-1 00842-00-UP / Doc 1022300 Page 5 figure j. S('J.~. 21- 1634 (d) PtoIM""¡'" p,tfw.r8YI ttW'll It,O.W, 5; ¡'-:.. æ-~ ~........~.-.-.. ;:.~ ".' ".." ~ =- -=. Figure :1. S~. 22- ! 634 «(I) f>"t~ía" QCMtelion. (3) Pedestrian connections should be provided between properties to establish pedestrian links to adjacent buildings, parking, pedestrian areas and public rights-of-way. (4) Bicycle racks should be provided for all commercial developments. (5) Outdoor furniture, fixtures, and streetscape elements, such as lighting, freestanding signs, trellises, arbors, raised planters, benches and other forms of seating, trash receptacles, bus stops, phone booths, fencing, etc., should be incorporated into the site design. (6) See FWCC 22-1638 for supplemental guidelines. (e) Landscaping. Refer to Article XVII of this chapter for specific landscaping requirements and for definitions of landscaping types referenced throughout this article. (f) Commercial service and institutional facilities. Refer to FWCC 22-949 and 22-1564 for requirements related to garbage and recycling receptacles, placement and screening. (I) Commercial services relating to loading, storage, trash and recycling should be located in such a manner as to optimize public circulation and minimize visibility into such facilities. Service yards shall comply with the following: a. Service yards and loading areas shall be designed and located for easy access by service' vehicles and tenants and shall not displace required landscaping, impede other site uses, or create a nuisance for adjacent property owners. b. Trash and recycling receptacles shall include covers to prevent odor and wind blown litter. c. Service yard walls, enclosures, and similar accessory site elements shall be consistent with the primary building(s) relative to architecture, materials and colors. d. Chain-link fencing shall not be used where visible from public streets, on-site major drive aisles, adjacent residential uses, or pedestrian areas. Barbed or razor wire shall not be used. Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A ~2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03-1 0O842-00-UP / Doc ID 22300 Page 6 f'igurc 3 - 5e.:. 22 - I i>3-t (t) Tr"" M4 SCOfolg6' "'" 1,:,.~u; :~; .,l" . 3... '. .' FI$l1I"C 4-&c~. 22 - 163410 Lo.onf tÎI,ta$ (2) Site utilities shall comply with the following: a. Building utility equipment such as electrical panels andjunction boxes should be located in an interior utility room. b. Site utilities including transformers, fire standpipes and engineered retention ponds (except biofiltration swales) should not be the dominant element of the front landscape area. When these must be located in a front yard, they shall be either undergrounded or screened by walls and/or Type I landscaping, and shall not obstruct views of tenant common spaces, public open spaces, monument signs, and/or driveways. (g) Miscellaneous site elements. (I) Lighting shall comply with the following: a. Lighting levels shall not spill onto adjacent properties pursuant to FWCC 22-954( c). b. Lighting shall be provided in all loading, storage, and circulation areas, but shall incorporate cut-off shields to prevent off-site glare. c. Light standards shall not reduce the amount of landscaping required for the project by Article XVII of this chapter, Landscaping. (2) Drive-through facilities such as banks, cleaners, fast food, drug stores and service stations, etc., shall comply with the following: Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A {;)2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03- I 00842-00-UP / Doc ID 22300 Page 7 a. Drive-through windows and stacking lanes are not encouraged along facades of buildings that face a right-of-way. If they are permitted in such a location, then they shall be visually screened from such street by Type III landscaping and/or architectural element, or combination thereof, provided such elements reflect the primary building and provide appropriate screening. b. The stacking lane shall be physically separated from the parking lot, sidewalk, and pedestrian areas by Type III landscaping and/or architectural element, or combination thereof, provided such elements reflect the primary building and provide appropriate separation. Painted lanes are not sufficient. c. Drive-through speakers shall not be audible off site. d. A bypass/escape lane is recommended for all drive-through facilities. e. See FWCC 22-1638(d) for supplemental guidelines. (Ord. No. 96-271, § 3, 7-2-96; Ord. No. 99- 333, § 3, l-I9-99; Ord. No. 01-382, § 3,1-16-01) 22-1635 Building design - All zoning districts. (a) General criteria. (I) Emphasize, rather than obscure, natural topography. Buildings should be designed to "step up" or "step down" hillsides to accommodate significant changes in elevation, unless this provision is precluded by other site elements such as stormwater design, optimal traffic circulation; or the proposed function or use of the site. figure S - Sc~ z;z - 1625 (;ü EmphJ..u¡ng na1ulallopagra.phy (2) Building siting or massing shall preserve public viewpoints as designated by the Comprehensive Plan or other adopted plans or policies. (3) Materials and design features offences and walls should reflect that of the primary building(s). (b) Building facade modulation and screening options, defined. All building facades that are both longer than 60 feet and are visible from either a right-of-way or residential use or zone shall incorporate facade treatment according to this section. Subject facades shall incorporate at least two of the four options described herein; except, however, facades that are solidly screened by Type I landscaping, pursuant to Article XVII of this chapter, Landscaping, may use facade modulation as the sole option under this section. Options used under this section shall be incorporated along the entire length ofthe facade, in any approved combination. Options used must meet the dimensional standards as specified herein; except, however, if more than two are used, dimensional requirements for each option will be determined on a case-by-case basis; provided, that the gross area of a pedestrian plaza may not be less than the specified minimum of200 square feet. See FWCC 22-1638( c) for guidelines pertaining to city center core and city center frame. (1) Facade modulation. Minimum depth: two feet; minimum width: six feet; maximum width: 60 feet. Alternative methods to shape a building such as angled or curved facade elements, off-set planes, wing walls and terracing, will be considered; provided, that the intent of this section is met. Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A \1;)2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03-1 00842-00-UP I Doc ID 22300 Page 8 Figure 6. SC", 22.1635 (b) incD'f'Gra11:19 ~lalføns (2) Landscape screening. Eight-foot-wide Type II landscape screening along the base of the facade, except Type IV may be used in place of Type II for facades that are comprised of 50 percent or more window area, and around building entrance(s). For building facades that are located adjacent to a property line, some or all of the underlying buffer width required by Article XVII of this chapter, Landscaping, may be considered in meeting the landscape width requirement of this section. ~ ~.' ."fJf? ' *~~, *0~! ~"" : . Qof¡ It Q,ro '0.*°.' (:) .~.. .. ;r: ""if;"*," ' . ;t.¿:.o it Fígur<: 7-Sec, 22-1635 (b) Inçorporatín[/ larid$tll:~ bllflffl (3) Canopy or arcade. As a modulation option, canopies or arcades may be used only along facades that are visible from a right-of-way. Minimum length: 50 percent of the length of the facade using this option. (4) Pedestrian Plaza. Size of plaza: Plaza square footage is equal to one percent of the gross floor area of the building, but it must be a minimum of200 square feet. The plaza should be clearly visible and accessible from the adjacent right-of-way. Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A «=>2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03- I 00842-00-UP / Doc!D 22300 Page 9 1~'~4 ~ ! ~--- _4~ ~ ríg'J.te 8 - $~c. 12 - 1635 (h) 1I1Cáljllifllnll tlltlcpyllttllat _.H- - - J . -¡-~: ~A.~ + I I 1 rig;J.Te t) - Sec. 22 - 1635 (b) tncDrpt>tllol""9 ::>~d_1iIu1 pi."" (c) Building articulation and scale. (1) Building facades visible from rights-of-way and other public areas should incorporate methods of articulation and accessory elements in the overall architectural design, as described in subsection (c)(2) of this section. -- fip-tR : f) s..'r'. 12 ~ulldíni iIIrtìcJ.llallo" ("I Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A <1::>2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03-1 00842-00-UP / Doc ID 22300 Page 10 fIgure 11- 51:('. 22 - (,J5 ((I A<;~OIy e.¡.,""~1"14$ '. -----.-. -~ ---- --- ~... . . . . . . . . ~ ihøwœsa rmtlowli Fì?lm' I ~ See, 23 I (1:"ì.:1 Ú;) W¡jJc.;¡llrcIUs; "-.-"'--- ..--.-.. L.enrJ~þiníl Anwtltlr.MU«11 ..!!o<:. -~ -.----- + . ':"-':" ,-~- -Ft- À!r;hI:..dUtod ".o1Ii,... Pi::;¡¡n: I). So.:. 22. 163] (c) ,""""iol ......w(~ . Lu_dproJ I"'IIIiu' "Ice... A";hil..~,,,.., .....Iw,.... (2) Methods to articulate blank walls: Following is a nonexclusive list of methods to articulate blank walls, pursuant to FWCC 22-1 564(u) and subsection (c)(l) of this section: a. Showcase, display, recessed windows; b. Window openin2s with visible trim material, or painted detailin2 that resembles trim; ~. Vertical trellis(es) in front ofthe wall with climbing vines or similar planting; GQ. Set the wall back and provide a landscaped or raised planter bed in front of the wall, with plant material that will obscure or screen the wall's surface; ~. Artwork such as mosaics, murals, decorative masonry or metal patterns or grillwork, sculptures, relief, etc., over a substantial portion of the blank wall surface. (The Federal Way arts commission may be used as an advisory body at the discretion of the planning staff); @f. Architectural features such as setbacks, indentations, overhangs, projections, articulated cornices, bays, reveals, canopies, and awnings; fg. Material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, or textural changes; and gh. Landscaped public plaza(s) with space for vendor carts, concerts and other pedestrian activities. (3) See FWCC 22-1638(c) for supplemental guidelines. (Ord. No. 96-271, § 3, 7-2-96; Ord. No. 99-333, § 3,1-19-99; Ord. No. 01-382, § 3, 1-16-01) Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A ~2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03- I 00842-00-UP / Doc ID 22300 Page 11 22-1636 Building and pedestrian orientation - All zoning districts. (a) Building and pedestrian orientation. (I) Buildings should generally be oriented to rights-of-way, as more particularly described in FWCC 22-1638. Features such as entries, lobbies, and display windows, should be oriented to the right-of-way; otherwise, screening or art features such as trellises, artwork, murals, landscaping, or combinations thereof, should be incorporated into the street-oriented facade (does not apply to residential zones). (2) Plazas, public open spaces and entries should be located at street corners to optimize pedestrian access and use. Fí¡¡UI\' 14. .13",' 22. 1(¡)t) (¡¡) SMr~ pu1lk lip8tu!þI;u".. (3) All buildings adjacent to the street should provide visual access from the street into human services and activities within the building, if applicable. (4) Multiple buildings on the same site should incorporate public spaces (formal or informal). These should be integrated by elements such as plazas, walkways, and landscaping along pedestrian pathways, to provide a clear view to destinations, and to create a unified, campus-like development. (Ord. No. 96-271, § 3, 7-2-96; Ord. No. 99-333, § 3,1-19-99; Ord. No. 01-382, § 3,1-16-01) 22-1637 Mixed-use residential buildings in commercial zoning districts. (a) Ground level facades of mixed-use buildings that front a public right-of-way shall meet the following guidelines: (I) Retail, commercial, or office activities shall occupy at least 20 percent of the gross ground floor, area of the building (unless exempt from this requirement by FWCC district zoning regulations). (2) If parking occupies the ground level, see FWCC 22-1634(c). Jffi ~ ~Uß ~ m(!! ""'- . ~ -, Figure 15 - &~. 22 - 1M? (a) Rull1e.1\1!.!I1 ground lev,' ~CiI" .'Imilnls Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A tD2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03-1 00842-00-UP / Doc ID 22300 Page 12 (3) Landscaped gardens, courtyards, or enclosed terraces for private use by residents should be designed with minimum exposure to the right-of-way. (Ord. No. 96-271, § 3, 7-2-96; Ord. No. 99-333, § 3, I - I 9- 99; Ord. No. 01-382, § 3, 1-I6-01) 22-1638 District guidelines. In addition to the foregoing development guidelines, the following supplemental guidelines apply to individual zoning districts: (a) Professional office (PO), neighborhood business (BN), and community business (BC). (1) Surface parking may be located behind the building, to the side(s) of the building, or adjacent to the right-of-way; provided, however, that parking located adjacent to the right-of-way maximizes pedestrian access and circulation pursuant to FWCC 22-l634(d). (2) Entrance facades shall front on, face, or be clearly recognizable from the right-of-way; and should incorporate windows and other methods of articulation. (3) Ground-level mirrored or reflective glass is not encouraged adjacent to a public right-of-way or pedestrian area. (4) If utilized, chain- link fences visible from public rights-of-way shall utilize vinyl-coated mesh and powder-coated poles. For residential uses only: (5) Significant trees shall be retained within a 20-foot perimeter strip around site. (6) Landscaped yards shall be provided between building(s) and public street(s). Parking lots should be beside or behind buildings that front upon streets. (7) Parking lots should be broken up into rows containing no more than 10 adjacent stalls, separated by planting areas. (8) Pedestrian walkways (minimum six feet wide) shall be provided between the interior of the project and the public sidewalk. (9) Lighting fixtures should not exceed 20 feet in height and shall include cutoff shields. This shall not apply to public parks and school stadiums and other comparable lan?;e institutional uses. The maximum heiê:ht for lare:einstitutional uses shall be 3Ò feet and shall include cutoff shields. 20' Fi¡.:l,trt; 1(,. &.-ç. n. /638 (,.) (10) Principal entries to buildings shall be highlighted with plaza or garden areas containing planting, lighting, seating, trellises and other features. Such areas shall be located and designed so windows overlook them. Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A <1)2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03- I 00842-00-UP / Doc ID 22300 Page 13 Fi¡;.\.U\, l7 . S\'\: 22. 1638 «i) (11) Common recreational spaces shall be located and arranged so that windows overlook them. ~ .-------- Fi£'.l1tc 18 - S<x. ~2 -lb,~S (3) (12) Units on the ground floor (when permitted) shall have private outdoor spaces adjacent to them so those exterior portions of the site are controlled by individual households. Figure 19 - Sœ, 22 - 1638 (a) (13) All new buildings, including accessory buildings, such as carports and garages shall appear to have a roof pitch ranging from at least 4: 12 to a maximum of 12: 12. .Figure :ro. Sec, 22 - 1638(\1) Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A ~2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03-1 00842-00-UP I Doc ID 22300 Page 14 (14) Carports and garages in front yards should be discouraged. (15) The longest dimension of any building facade shall not exceed 120 feet. Buildings on the same site may be connected by covered pedestrian walkways. (16) Buildings should be designed to have a distinct "base", "middle" and "top" The base (typically the first floor) should contain the greatest number of architectural elements such as windows, materials, details, overhangs, cornice lines, and masonry belt courses. The midsection by comparison may be simple. (Note: single-story buildings have no middle.) The top should avoid the appearance ofa flat roof and include distinctive roof shapes including but not limited to pitched, vaulted or terraced, etc. figurt' 21 - xc 22 - 1638 (~) (17) Residential design features, including but not limited to entry porches, projecting window bays, balconies or decks, individual windows (rather than strip windows), offsets and cascading or stepped roof forms shall be incorporated into all buildings. Window openings shall have visible trim material or painted detailing that resembles trim. (b) Office park (OP), corporate park (CP), and business park (BP). (1) Surface parking may be located behind the building, to the side(s) of the building, or adjacent to the right-of-way; provided, however, that parking located adjacent to the right-of-way maximizes pedestrian access and circulation pursuant to FWCC 22-1634( d). (2) Buildings with ground floor retail sales or services should orient major entrances, display windows and other pedestrian features to the right-of-way to the extent possible. (3) Ground-level mirrored or reflective glass is not encouraged adjacent to a public right-of-way or pedestrian area. (4) If utilized, chain-link fences visible from public rights-of-way shall utilize vinyl-coated mesh and powder-coated poles. For non-single-family residential uses only: (5) Subsections (a)(5) through (A)(l7) of this section shall apply. (c) City center core (CC-C) and city center frame (CC-F). (1) The city center core and frame will contain transitional forms of development with surface parking areas. However, as new development or re-development occurs, the visual dominance of surface parking areas shall be reduced. Therefore, surface parking areas shall be located as follows: a. The parking is located behind the building, with the building located between the right-of-way and the parking areas, or it is located in structured parking; or b. All or some of the parking is located to the side(s) of the building; or c. Some short-term parking may be located between the building(s) and the right-of-way, but this shall not consist of more than one double-loaded drive aisle, and pedestrian circulation shall be provided pursuant to FWCC 22-1634( d). Large retail complexes may not be able to locate parking according to the above guidelines. Therefore, retail complexes of 60,000 square feet of gross floor area or larger may locate surface parking between the building(s) and the right-of-way. However, this form of development shall provide for small building(s) Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A «:>2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03-1 00842-00-UP / Doc ID 22300 Page 15 along the right-of-way to break up and reduce the visual impact of the parking, and pedestrian circulation must be provided pursuant to FWCC 22-1634( d). For purposes of this guideline, retail complex means the entire lot or parcel, or series of lots or parcels, on which a development, activity or use is located or will locate. (2) Entrance facades shall front on, face, or be clearly recognizable from the right-of-way; and should incorporate windows and other methods of articulation. (3) Building facades that are visible from a right-of-way and subject to modulation per FWCC 22- 1635(b), shall incorporate facade treatment as follows: a. The facade incorporates modulation and/or a landscape screening, pursuant to FWCC 22- 1635(b); and b. The facade incorporates an arcade, canopy or plaza; and/or one or more articulation element listed in FWCC 22-163 5( c )(2); provided, that the resulting building characteristics achieve visual interest and appeal at a pedestrian scale and proximity, contribute to a sense of public space, and reinforce the pedestrian expenence. (4) Drive-through facilities and stacking lanes shall not be located along a facade of a building that faces a right-of-way. (5) Above-grade parking structures with a ground level facade visible from a right-of-way shall incorporate any combination of the following elements at the ground level: a. Retail, commercial, or office uses that occupy at least 50 percent of the building's lineal frontage along the right-of-way; or b. A 15-foot-wide strip of Type III landscaping along the base of the facade; or c. A decorative grille or screen that conceals interior parking areas from the right-of-way. (6) Facades of parking structures shall be articulat~d above the ground level pursuant to FW CC 22- 1635(c)(1). (7) When curtain wall glass and steel systems are used to enclose a building, the glazing panels shall be transparent on 50 percent of the ground floor facade fronting a right-of-way or pedestrian area. (8) Chain-link fences shall not be allowed. Barbed or razor wire shall not be used. For non-single-family residential uses only: (9) Subsections (a)(5) through (a)(17) of this section shall apply. (d) For all residential zones. (1) Non-residential uses, Subsections (a)(5) through (a)(10) and (a)(13) through (a)(17) of this section shall apply. (2) Non-single-family residential uses. Subsections (a)(5) through (a)(17) of this section shall apply. (Ord. No. 96-271, § 3, 7-2-96; Ord. No. 99-333, § 3, 1-19-99; Ord. No. 01-382, § 3, 1-16-01) 22-1639 Institutional uses. (a) In all zonin2 districts where such uses are permitted the followin2 shall apply. (1) Sections 22-1634, 22-1635, and 22-1636. (2) Subsections 1638(a)(l) throu2h (a)(5) and (a)(7) throu2h (a)(9). (3) Duildin2 facades that exceed 120 feet in len2th and are visible from an adjacent residential zone, ri2ht-of-way or public park or recreation area shall incorporate a si2nificant structural modulation (offset). The minimum depth ofthe modulation shall be approximately equal to ten percent of the totallen2th of the subject façade and the minimum width shall be approximately twice the minimum depth. The modulation shall be inte2ral to the building structure from base to roofline. (4) Roof desi2n shall utilize forms and materials that avoid the 2eneral appearance of a "flat" roof. Rooflines with an inte2ral and obvious architectural pitch are an approved method to meet this 2uideline. Alternative distinctive roofforms such as varied and multiple stepped rooflines, architectural parapets, articulated cornices and fascias, arches, eyebrows, Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A «::>2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03-1 00842-00-UP 1 Doc ID 22300 Page 16 and similar methods will be considered by the director provided that the roof design minimizes uninterrupted horizontal planes and results in architectural and visual appeal. (5) Alternative methods to organize and shape the structural elements of a building and provide façade treatment pursuant to Subsection 1635(b) and/or (3), above, will be considered by the director as part of an overall design that addresses the following criteria: a. Façade design incorporates at least two of the options listed at Subsection 1635(b); b. The location and dimensions of structural modulations are proportionate to the height and length of the subject façade, using Subsections 1635(b) and (3) above, as a guideline; c. Façade design incorporates a majority of architectural and accessory design elements listed at Subsection 22-1635(c)(2) and maximizes building and pedestrian orientation pursuant to Section 22-1636; and d. Overall building design utilizes a combination of structural modulation, façade treatment, and roof elements that organize and vary building bulk and scale, add architectural interest, and appeal at a pedestrian scale, and when viewed from an adjacent residential zone, rights-of-way, or other public area, results in a project that meets the intent of these guidelines. (6) The director may permit or require modifications to the parking area landscaping standards of Subsection 1638(a)(7) for landscape designs that preserve and enhance existing natural features and systems, provided that the total amount of existing and proposed landscaping within parking area(s) meets the applicable square footage requirement ofFWCC Article XVII, Landscaping, and the location and arrangement of such landscaping is approved by the director. Existing natural features and systems include environmentally sensitive areas, stands of significant trees and native vegetation, natural topography and drainage patterns, wildlife habitat, migration corridors, and connectivity to adjacent habitats. 22-16W40 Design criteria for public on-site open space. The following guidelines apply to public on-site open space that is developed pursuant to the height bonus program established in Article Xl, Division 8, of this chapter. (I) Open space developed under this section should be located so that it: a. Abuts a public right-of-way, or alternatively, is visible and accessible from a public right-of- way; b. Is bordered on at least one side by, or is readily accessible from, structure(s) with entries to retail or office uses; housing, civic/public uses, or another public open space; and c. Is situated for maximum exposure to sunlight. (2) Open space site design and configuration must meet a majority of the following guidelines: a. The gross area of the open space does not incorporate any other site elements such as setbacks, landscaping, buffers, paving, or storm drainage facilities, that would otherwise be incorporated into site design without exercising the open space option; b. The gross area of the open space encompasses at least 2.5 percent of the lot area, up to a total aggregate square footage of 25,000 square feet; c. The open space area must be clearly visible and accessible from the adjacent right-of-way; d. The primary area is at least 25 feet in width; e. A minimum of 15 percent of the total area of the open space is landscaped using Type IV landscaping or other landscaping alternative; and f. The open space may not be used for parking or loading of commercial vehicles. Commercial vehicle loading areas abutting the open space must be screened by a solid, site-obscuring wall. (Ord. No. 96- 271, § 3, 7-2-96; Ord. No. 99-333, § 3, 1-19-99; Ord. No. 01-382, § 3, 1-16-01) Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A @2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03-1 00842-00-UP / Do<: 1022300 Page 17 22-1640! Design for cluster residential subdivision lots. (a) Garages shall be provided for all residential lots except if the lot is in a multifamily zone. (b) Front entryways should be the prominent feature of the home. Attached garages should not compose more than 40 percent of the front facade ofthe single-family home ifthe garage doors are flush with the front facade, or will be set back a minimum of five feet from the rest of the front facade. Detached garages should also be set back a minimum of five feet from the facade. (c) If garage access is provided from alleys, the front yard setback can be reduced to 15 feet. (d) Each dwelling unit shall be intended for owner occupancy. (Ord. No. 01-381, § 3, 1-16-0I) 22-16412- 22-1650 Reserved. Design Guidelines & Definition of Height Code Amendments Exhibit A ~2002 Code Publishing Co. File #03-1 00842-00-UP I Doc 1D 22300 Page 18 EXHIBIT B SE, RS, RM, & BC USE ZONE CHARTS WITH PROPOSED AMENDMENTS Sec. 22-601. Churches, etc. The following uses shall be permitted in the suburban estate (SE) zone subject to the regulations and notes set forth in this section: USE Church, synagogue or other place of religious worship DIRECTIONS: FIRST, read down to find use. . . THEN, across for REGULATIONS ø Z 0 ..... E-< < .... ;;;. r..; ¡.¡ cz:: r/] r/] u:.¡ U 0 0"' ¡;jPo. ....i::: ;:¡!:9 0';;>- ¡;j¡;j MINIMUMS REQUIRED YARDS u:.¡ N ¡;¡ ¡.... 0 ...J ~ t.) .. ~ u:.¡ 0 ¡;¡ f-o Ô "' ~ Process IV 15 acres 130 ft. 130 ft. See note I 30 ft. Process I, II, III and IV are described in §§ 22-351 - 22-356, 22-361 - 22-370, 22-386 - 22-411, 22-431 - 22-460 resp-"cliv-"Iy. P<: < ¡;j MAXIMUMS ¡.¡,¡ c:; ~ ¡.¡,¡ f-o;;>- 00 ....¡U ~¡;j O;:¡ f-of-o 5~ ....p<: gjt¡; 75% 135 ft. above average building elevation. See notes 4, ~, and 6. r/] u.¡ U < Po. Or/] ¡;jC:; -~ §;;2 ¡;j~ A transportation management plan (TMP) shall be submitted as part of the application. The TMP shall address the following: traffic control, parking demand and management, and traffic movement to the adjacent street system. USE ZONE CHART ZONE SE SPECIAL REGULATIONS AND NOTES I. This use must obtain a master plan approved through Process IV. The master plan must show the ultimate development of the site including all buildings, parking and circulation areas, other major improvements and buffers. For proposals also reQuiring a development agreement. the citY council's public hearing on a develoomen~¡¡greement shall take the place of the public hearing for master plan approval byJhe hearing examiner. 2. The subject property may contain a rectory or similar dwelling unit for use by the religious leader of the congregation. If this is a detached dwelling unit, its setbacks are as established for detached dwelling units in the zone. 3. The subject property must be adjacent to a collector or arterial right-of-way. 4. If any portion of a structurIJ em tlJIJ subjIJct property is located less thaA 100 ft. from an adjacent Ig'v Ihmsity zone, then either: For other infonnalion about parking and parking areas, see § 22-1376 el seq. For details of what may exceed this height limit, see § 22-1046 et seq. For details regarding required yards, see § 22-1131 et seq. (Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(15.35), 2-27-90; Ord. No. 93-170, § 7(Exh. B), 4-20-93; Ord. No. 97-291, § 3, 4-1-97; Ord. No. 99-333, § 3, 1-19-99; Ord. No. 01-385, § 3, 4-3-01) K:\CD Planning\Design Guidelines & Definition of Height\Planning Commission\Materials for 031903 Meeting\Sec 22-60I.doc/Last printed 03/19/2003 12:53 PM Exhibit B Sec. 22-635. Churches, etc. The following uses shall be permitted in the single family residential (RS) zone subject to the regulations and notes set forth in this section: USE ZONE CHART USE Church, synagogue or other place of religious worship DIRECTIONS: FIRST, read down to find use. .. THEN, across for REGULATIONS MINIMUMS I MAXIMUMS REQUIRED YARDS '" Z 0 ... ¡... -< ...;¡ ~ " ~ a:: 0 ~~i2 -¡.¡;¡¡.¡;¡ ;:J-U 0'>0 ~~g: ¡.¡;¡ ~ ¡..... <Z) Z ¡.¡;¡:ë' ~ ¡..... '2 0 9 g ~ ....¡ "" <Z)~ As 30 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. established on the I See notes 3 - 6 zoning map. See note I. Process IV See note 2. Process I, II, III and IV are described in §§ 22 JSg 22 11 I 22-351 - 22-356, 22-361 - 22-370, 22-386-22-411. 22-431 - 22-460, respectively. ¡.¡;¡ 0 ;2 ¡.¡;¡ ¡.....> 00 ""¡u 75% 130 ft. above average building elevation. See note~ 5~ and 8. ""~ O;:J ¡.....¡..... ::tu O;:J -~ !Ijt:; 00 ~~<Z) S~O O'~-< ¡.¡;¡-<"'"' ~"'"'<Z) ZONE RS SPECIAL REGULA nONS AND NOTES ercent of the total area of the build". For other information about parking and parking areas, see § 22-1376 et seq. For details of what may exceed this height limit, see § 22-1046 et seq. For details regarding required yards, see § 22-1131 et seq. (Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(20.25), 2-27-90; Ord. No. 93-170, § 7(Exh. B), 4-20-93; Ord. No. 97-291, § 3,4-1-97; Ord. No. 99-333, § 3,1-19-99; Ord. No. 01-385, § 3, 4-3-01) K:ICD PlanninglDesign Guidelines & Definition ofHeightlPlanning CommissionlMaterials for 031903 MeetinglSec 22-635.doc/Last printed 03119/2003 12:49 PM A transportation management plan (TMP) shall be submitted as part of the application. The TMP shall address the following: traffic control, parking demand and management, and traffic movement to I the adjacent street system. Exhibit B Sec. 22-671. Churches, etc. The following uses shall be permitted in the multifamily residential (RM) zone subject to the regulations and notes set forth in this section: USE Church, synagogue or other place of religious worship DIRECTIONS: FIRST, read down to find use. .. THEN, across for REGULATIONS MINIMUMS I MAXIMUMS I REQUIRED YARDS r.n :z 0 - ¡.. < ...;¡ ;;;¡ " ... cr:: '" '" r.l.J U 0 CI~ ~::>. ....~ ::J::J 0'> ~~ ::;:: u 0:1 ~ r.l.J CI Cñ r.l.J t:::J '" f-< 0 .....¡ f-< Z 0 ~ u.. ~ < ~ Process IV /7,200 130 ft.~ ft. sq. ft. See notes 2 and 5. See note I. Process I, II, III and IV are described in §§ 22-351 - 22-356, 22-361 - 22-370, 22-386-22-411, 22-431 - 22-4 lixeL, r.l.J 0 ~ r.l.J f-<> 00 .....¡u 75% u..~ O::J ¡..f-< :r:u O::J ....~ r.l.J¡.. :r:", USE ZONE CHART '" r.l.J U < ::>. CI'" ~O ....ï?; ~~ ~~ ZONE RM SPECIAL REGULA nONS AND NOTES In RM 3.6 and 2.4 zones, 30 ft. above average building elevation. In RM 1.8 zones, 35 ft. above average building elevation. See note~ 4, 5~ and 7 inRM For other information about parking and parking areas, see § 22-1376 et seq. For details of what may exceed this height limit, see § 22-1046 et seq. For details regarding required yards, see § 22-1131 et seq. (Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(25.35), 2-27-90; Ord. No. 93-170, § 7(Exh. B), 4-20-93; Ord. No. 97-291, § 3, 4-1-97; Ord. No. 99-333, § 3, 1-19-99; Ord. No. 01-385, § 3,4-3-01; Ord. No. 02-426, § 3, 10-15-02) K:ICD PlanninglDesign Guidelines & Definition of HeightlPlanning CommissionlMaterials for 031903 MeetinglSec 22-671.doc/Last printed 03/19/2003 12:50 PM Exhibit B 22- 755 Schools - Day care facilities - Churches. The following uses shall be permitted in the community business (Be) zone subject to the regulations and notes set forth in this section: ~ DIRECTIONS: FIRST, read down to find use. . . s: Minimums ~ ~ Required Yards .... Q) ;J g " -0';: ¡.¡ Q) ~ &:t: .!:: Q) "'.- 0"> Q) Q) ¡:z:¡:z: USE Schools, business or vocational schools, or trade schools Day care facilities, except Class II home occupations Church, synagogue or other place of religious worship Q) N ë;j Õ ....¡ ? u '" ~ Q) -0 ë;j c 0 .t ProcessTIlNone 120 ft. ~ See notes I and I I Possible Process III See note 2 Process I, II, III and IV are described in §§ 22-351 - 22-356, 22-361 - 22-370 22-386 - 22-411, 22-431 - 22-460, respectively. THEN, across for REGULATIONS USE ZONE CHART æ Q) ¡:z: ..... 0 ~ - '" ..c - .~ g ~b5 '" Q) u '" c.. -oVJ ~ bO .- <: '" .- 0"..1< ~J:: Schools and day care: Determined on a case-by-case basis A transportation management plan (TMP) shall be submitted as part of the application. The TMP shall address the following: traffic control, parking demand and management, and traffic movement to the adjacent street system. ZONE BC SPECIAL REGULA nONS AND NOTES I. If any portion of a structure on the subJect property is located less than I 00 ft.from an adjacent resIdential zone;then that portion of the structure shall not exceed 30 ft. above average building elevation and the structure shall be set back a minimum of 20 ft. from the I property line of the residential zone. I 2. Except for gyms, if approved through process III, the height of a structure may exceed 35 ft. above average building elevation to a maximum of 55 ft., if all of the following criteria are met: a. The additional height is necessary to accommodate the particular use conducted in the building; and, b. Each required yard abutting the structure is increased five ft. for each one ft. the structure exceeds 35 ft. above average building elevation; and c. The increased height is consistent with goals and policies for the area of the subject property as established by the comprehensive plan. 3. For any structure, including gyms, an increase in height above 35 ft. shall not block views designated by the comprehensive plan. eli ious s mbols and icons for churches and reli ious institutions ma exceed the an additional 15 ft. rovided that such s mbol is a minor architectural accent and onl one such s mbol is ermItted on the rinci al structure for this use. 4-. i, Church facilities may contain a rectory or similar dwelling unit for use by the religious leader of the congregation. .)., §, Day care facilities must contain an outdoor play area with at least 75 sq. ft. for each child using the area at anyone time. This play area must be completely enclosed by a solid fence or other screen at least six ft. in height. Play equipment and structured play areas must be set back at least five ft. from each property line. 4-. L Day care facilities may include accessory living facilities as defined by § 22-1. +-. ! Day care facilities and schools must comply with the requirements of the State Department of Social and Health Services and/or I the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. &-. 2c All activities pertaining to schools, business or vocational schools, or trade schools, such as auto-repair or other uses that may impact adjacent properties, must take place within an enclosed building. 9-.lQ, No maximum lot coverage is established. Instead, the buildable area will be determined by other site development requirements, i.e., required buffers, parking lot landscaping, surface water facilities, etc. -W-.ll, For community design guidelines that apply to the project, see Article XIX. -l-J--. g For landscaping requirements that apply to the project, see Article XVII. U-.11 For sign requirements that apply to the project, see Article XVIII. -lJ-.l1, Refer to § 22-946 et seq. to determine what other provisions of this chapter may apply to the subject property. -l-4-. Ii, Schools may locate containers on-site for the storage of emergency preparedness supplies as an accessory use. Containers may I not be located in any required yard. Landscaping may be required by the director of community development services to screen the installation if the proposed location will be visible from a public right-of-way and/or neighboring properties. Siting is subject to review and approval under process I, Site Plan Review, unless proposed as a component of another project; in which case the siting of the container will be reviewed as part of the overall development proposal and subject to the underlying review process. For other infonnation about parking and parking areas, see § 22-1376 et seq. (Ord. No. 90-43 § 2(45.65), 2-27-90; Ord. No. 93-170, § 7(Exh. B), 4-20-93; Ord. No. 96-270, § 5, 7-2-96; Ord. No. 97-291, § 3, 4-1-97; Ord. No. 01-385, § 3, 4-3-01; Ord. No. 01-399 § 3, 8-7-01) For details of what may exceed this height limit, see § 22-1046 et seq. For details regarding required yards, see § 22-1131 et seq. 55 ft.above average building elevation for gyms if located 100 ft. or more from an adjacent residential zone 35 ft. above average building elevation for all other structures See notes I - K:ICD PlanninglDesign Guidelines & Definition of HeightlPlanning CommissionlMaterials for 031903 MeetinglSec 22- 755.doc/Last printed 03/19/2003 01 :06 PM Exhibit B ~ CITY OF ~ Federa I Way MEMORANDUM March 12, 2003 To: John Caulfield, Chair of the City of Federal Way Planning Commission FROM: Kathy McClung, Director of Community Development Services Margaret H. Clark, AICP, Senior Planner Lori Michaelson, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Amendments to Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 22, Article XIX - Design Guidelines and Definition of Height (File #03-100842-00-UP) FoUow-up to Planning Commission's Questions During the March 5,2003, Public Hearing MEETING DATE: March 19,2003 (Continuation of March 5, 2003, Public Hearing) I. BACKGROUND During the Planning Commission March 5, 2003 public hearing, the Planning Commission requested that staff follow up on the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. Provide a side elevation of dormers on a home that is considered too massive. Provide clarification on height of lighting fixtures. Clarify how modulation and landscaping are related? Address how modulation may affect the engineering of a building as it relates to seismic impacts. Incorporate those staff-agreed upon changes from Steve Hammer's letter. 5. II. STAFF RESPONSE The responses to the first four requests are as follows. Staff will provide proposed amendments as discussed during the Planning Commission public hearing prior to the March 19th continuation of the public hearing. 1. Side Elevation of Dormers Please refer to attached Exhibit A for a side view of a residential structure with multiple dormers on both sides of the roof. 2. Height of Lighting Fixtures for Institutional Uses FWCC Section 22-1638. District Guidelines - Section 22-1638(9) is proposed to be amended as follows): (9) Lighting fixtures should not exceed 20 feet in height and shall include cutoff shields. This shall not apply to public parks and school stadiums and other comparable large institutional uses. The Commission asked how lighting fixtures for those uses not limited to the 20 feet maximum height limit would be determined. Staff Response - Pursuant to FWCC Section 22- I, "Definitions," institutional uses are defined as schools, churches, colleges, hospitals, parks, government facilities, and public utilities. This section also defines structure as anything that is built or constructed, an edifice or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner. As a result, a lighting fixture is considered to be a structure and is governed by the maximum allowable height of the principal structure in a particular zone. Based on a review of the Use Zone Charts where institutional uses are allowed, the base height is either 30 or 35 feet depending on use and zone (staff will provide a comparison table at the March 19, 2003, public hearing). In addition, the standard height for streetlights on local streets is 30 feet. As a result, staff recommends that the maximum allowable height for lighting fixtures associated with large institutional uses in any zone, where they are allowed, be 30 feet. 3. Do landscaping requirements for buildings adjacent to rights-ol-way and residential zones provide sufficient visual screening to reduce or eliminate the needfor building modulation? Staff Response - Existing and proposed landscaping is always considered when assessing "visibility" to adjacent areas and determining the nature and extent of façade treatment, including modulation. For example, a minimum-width, sparse landscape buffer would not interrupt visibility, but a mature and solid buffer would. Most facades will be visible from the adjacent sidewalk and right-of-way because only a ten-foot wide "partial" buffer is required against streets in single-family residential zones. However, requirements for landscaping against residential zones range from 10 to 20 feet in width, and from "partial visual separation" to "solid screening," depending on the zone. When proposed and/or existing landscaping exceeds the minimum, such screening will continue to be a factor in determining degree of visibility and associated façade requirements. 4. Is there a cost impact to designing a building with a major structural modulation in order for it to comply with seismic requirements? Staff Response - According to the City's Building Official, as well as an outside architect (with input from a structural engineer), there should not be a quantifiable impact on the seismic design by incorporating a significant structural modulation (as defined in the proposed code change) for buildings over 120 feet long. There may be other cost impacts, but the seismic design cost would typically not be impacted. K:\CD Planning\Design Guidelines & Definition ofHeight\O31903 Report to Planning Commision.doc/O3/12/2003 3: 11 PM Page 2 ~ Federal Way SIDE VIEW OF RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE WITH MUL TIPLE DORMERS ON BOTH SIDES OF ROOF ~I~ .. 'Ï III 2ND FF. RIGHT EJ...EV ATION 114'.1'-0"