Loading...
ORD 2291 ORDINANCE NO , 47 AN ORDINANCE adopting a Design Review Manual , adopting regulations to implement the guidelines and standards of the Design Review Manual , establishing a review process , and providing remedies for violation of the design review regulations . WHEREAS , the City Council of the City of Camas has caused to be prepared a Design Review Manual which contains design standards and guidelines for all new commercial development , redevelopment , and major rehabilitation , and WHEREAS , the Design Review Manual has been considered by the Planning Commission at a public hearing , and the Planning Commission has issued its recommendation for adoption , and WHEREAS , the Design Review Manual has been considered by the City Council at a public hearing , and WHEREAS , the Council desires to adopt the Design Review Manual and the implementing regulations , NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMAS AS FOLLOWS : Section I There is hereby added to the Camas Municipal Code a new chapter to be entitled Chapter 18 . 19 , Design Review . The Chapter shall be in the form attached hereto as Exhibit " A" and by this reference incorporated herein . Section II This ordinance shall take force and be in effect five ( 5 ) days from and after its publication according to law . PASSED by the Council and APPROVED by the Mayor this4g day of March , 20010 SIGNED . Mayor ATTEST : �I Clerk APPROVED as to form : Ci y Attorney CAMAS DESIGN REVIEW GUIDELINES : RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES Final Draft Prepared For : Camas City Council Prepared By: Design Review Ad ' Hoc Committee February 2001 0000, i::.",,: , Acknowledgements Elected City Officials : Dean Dosset — Mayor Helen Gerde — City Council Ward 4 Paul Dennis — City Council Ward 1 Mary Kufeldt-Antle — City Council Ward 5 C . R . " Woody " Woodruff — City Council Ward 2 Greg Anderson — City Council Ward 6 Peter Nicholls — City Council Ward 3 Dale Thomas — City Council At- Large Planning Commission : Stan Pickard — Chair Paul Blair Charles Clark — Vice Chair Janet Borst Don Abrahamsen Steve Karnes Jack Sprouse City Staff: Martin Snell — Planning Department Ad ' Hoc Committee Members : Paul Dennis — Chair , City Council Gene Simpson — Civil Engineer , Citizen Janet Borst — Planning Commission Barney Siverson — UCAN , Citizen Francher Donaldson — Architect , Citizen Casey O' Dell — Sharp Microelectronics of the Americas ( Industrial Park Tenant) Prior Ad ' Hoc Committee Members : Greg Anderson — City Council Dale Thomas — City Council City of Camas : Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Commercial Uses (Final Draft) Page 1 1, ee 111 Table of Contents PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Goalsof Design Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a * * . . . . . woos . . . . . . . . . 2 Design Principles vs . Development Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Development Guidelines . . . . . of memo ass * * * * ON 9 * 0 * 9009 * 0 0 googol me 3 COMMERCIALGUIDELINES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DesignPrincipals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Design Guidelines . . of $ * 4 seageoveof 0 * * & so * & goo Do sews * * asset Sawa base 6 * 6 Samoa ovemeopee OR * message 0 0 see * so * * 5 RESIDENTIAL GUIDELINES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0400 . . . . 10 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE STRUCTURE & FRAMEWORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I I General Description of Current Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Integration of Design Review . . . . . . of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .aged . . . 12 Design Review Committee Structure . , . . . . . . . . * * # * as goo owsoosoosse 9 O & * 0 & oa * * S * mm4 as 006 * 9 * Sao * we * 12 Enforcement . . a * * * ease moos * of * Mao * * of 9 * 00 0 000 of so 0 # 69 4 * 0 * 0 660004 " Re am of am 0 * sees * so * * Samoa woos * * * we * * * * * * * 0 oQ9e * # * Oe % Oo . 0 . 000 . 12 IMPLEMENTATION & PERIODIC REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 City of Camas : Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Commercial Uses {Final Draft) Page ii PREFACE The Camas City Council formed the original Design Review Ad ' Hoc Committee (DRAG ) at its January 1998 planning retreat . The committee ' s primary goal was to assess whether or not design review would be a good idea for Camas . The DRAC review materials collected from Municipal Research Services Center , which included design review manuals from Bainbridge Island, Gig Harbor, and Sumner , as well as news articles , legal opinions , and implementing ordinances . The committee also conducted an informal survey at a United Camas Association of Neighborhoods (UCAN) meeting and a telephone conference with the City of Olympia ' s Planning Director . At the end of June 1998 , the committee reported back to the City Council with their findings . In order to answer the question , is design review good for Camas ? The committee started by trying to decide , from a community perspective , what would be the purpose of design review ? What should it accomplish? What should it prevent? The DRAC concluded that a good starting point would be to review the City ' s Mission Statement : The City of Camas commits to preserving its heritage, sustaining and enhancing a high quality of life for all its citizens and developing the community to meet the challenges of the future . We take pride in preserving a healthful environment while promoting economic growth . We encourage citizens to participate in government and community, assisting the city in its efforts to provide quality services consistent with their desires and needs . Design review in the context of the City ' s mission statement should aid in the preservation of our community ' s heritage , enhance our City ' s quality of life , guide us through the challenges of the future , preserve a healthy environment, promote economic growth , and enable citizens to participate in the process . Based on all the materials reviewed and the level of interest from UCAN members , The DRAC concluded that design review was worth further investigation and recommended to the City Council that a citizen committee be formed and that the members be made up of individuals familiar with the development process . The City Council agreed to further study Design Review by establishing a citizen committee to draft potential guidelines that could be successfully implemented for the City . The citizen committee has been meeting every first and third Wednesday of each month since September of 1998 . What proceeds in this document is the compilation of almost two years of work by the DRAC . City of Camas : Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Commercial Uses (Preliminary Draft) Page 1 INTRODUCTION All proposals subject to design review should strive to meet the goals of design review and address Design Review Goals each of the appropriate design principals and development guidelines . In order to achieve the ,a, . .y. � Y � MMI established goals of design review , a set of design principals and development guidelines have been identified for both commercial and residential land- Design Principals uses . Design principals are the overriding factors that each development proposal must demonstrate it can achieve or reasonably mitigate . Development guidelines are created to assist the development ' s applicant in accomplishing the design principals as Development Guidelines well as the establishedf s o oaldesign review. 4 OT g ,45 . 3a11 x II n�'.sR#i6ih a�i . � � h rise Y •� 011402111�st'k3s'c�'Y'vL 3 •d Y SI34 GOALS OF DESIGN REVIEW The goals of design review are intended to establish the overall purpose ( or intent) of the design principals and development guidelines and set the stage of what they should be trying to accomplish . The goals of design review are : All developments should be meaningful , add value , and produce a positive impact on the immediate area , as well as the community . b To encourage better design and site planning so that new development will preserve or enhance the community' s character as well as allow for diversity and creativity ; b To encourage compatibility with surrounding uses (zone transition) and quality design ; 4* To promote responsible development that results in an efficient use of the land ; b To create a park like setting with the integration of the building , landscaping , and natural environment ; L-7 To preserve the community' s heritage by incorporating a piece of the area ' s history into the development ; To facilitate early and on - going communication among property owners , neighborhoods , and City officials ; b To increase public awareness of design issues and options ; and To provide an objective basis for decisions that address visual impact and the community' s futuregrowth . _ .. . .. ._ . _ .. .. . . .. _.. . .. . . . _ . . . .. __ .._ .._ . _.. . ..... ... .. . _ . . . . . . .. .. . ... ... _ . . . . . _. _......__._. . . .. . . .. . . .... . . ..... .. . .........-- City of Camas6 Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Commercial Uses (Final Draft) Page 2 DESIGN PRINCIPLES VS . DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES Design principles are established for both residential and commercial uses . Design principals are the overriding factors that the development guidelines are trying to accomplish . Every development proposal (whether the applicant is from a private , non -profit , or public entity) that comes before the City must adequately address each of the design principals and demonstrate that it can achieve the overall intent of the established principals . If a proposal can not meet every development guideline set forth under each section , but has demonstrated that it can achieve the overall intent of the established design principals then the City may have reason to allow the proposal to move forward through the approval process . See the Design Review Committee Structure & Framework section for a review of the design review process . DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES Development guidelines for residential and commercial uses have been divided into five major a) Landscaping & Screening , b ) Architecture , �} Massing & Setbacks , d) guideline categories : Historic & Heritage Preservation , and e) Circulation & Connections . Under each major category is a list of general issues that should be addressed, if appropriate , by each proposal subject to design review . Landscaping & Screening : Massing & Setbacks : Gateways Complement Surrounding Uses Impervious vs . Pervious View Shed Landscaping & Screening Infill Signage Density Provisions Lighting Height , Bulk , Scale Outdoor Furnishings Flexibility of Building Location (Preservation) Fences Zone Transition Significant Trees Historic and Heritage Preservation : Outdoor Common Areas Preservation of Existing Structures or Sites Parkway Incorporate Historic/Heritage Information Architecture : Circulation & Connections . Signage Parking Lighting Transit Stops Building Form ( architecture) Streetscape Building Materials Traffic Patterns ( entrance , exits , delivery, etc ) Walkways City of Camas : Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Commercial Uses (Final Draft) Page 3 AA COMMERCIAL GUIDELINES Before establishing specific guidelines , a vision of how the Commercial zones should function needed to be identified ( e . g . purpose of zone , types of uses , character , etc . ) . In reviewing the list of allowed uses , the committee decided that C - 1 Commercial zone (the lowest intensity commercial zone ) should be noted as Neighborhood Commercial , as the allowed uses tend to be those that would serve the surrounding neighborhood . The C - 2 Commercial zone should take on the name of Community Commercial , as the allowed uses tend to serve the local community . The C - 3 Commercial zone (the highest intensity commercial zone) should be denoted as Regional Commercial , as this zone is intended to serve the commercial needs of the broader region . The Core Commercial zone refers to the Downtown area and is intended to serve multiple markets . Note : changes to the City ;s zoning ordinances propose the above name chanzes of C4 , C- 2 , and C- 3 commercial zones . In assessing how a proposed project addresses specific design guidelines , weight should be given to the location of the property, topographic characteristics , size and shape , disposition of adjacent properties , etc . For example , the specific character of the Community Commercial zoned properties differ based on their general location , topography, and surrounding built environment . For instance , one of the Community Commercial properties located in the Southwest portion of the City has an auto oriented feel as it is surrounded by Highway 14 and Southeast 6th Ave . Another property located in Grass Valley has a somewhat rural feel as it is surrounded by residential and wetlands . However , even though each area has a different feel , they all have direct linkages to surrounding neighborhoods and , therefore , these properties should provide a pedestrian friendly environment ( one of the specific design principals ) , to the degree possible , along major street frontages , DESIGN PRINCIPALS The following design principals are intended to be applied to all new commercial development, redevelopment (including change in use , e . g . residential to commercial ) , or major rehabilitation ( exterior changes requiring a building permit) . A site plan should be provided by the applicant that identifies and illustrates how the proposed development will meet the design principals . The site plan should include placement of buildings , designated landscaped and open space areas , parking , and any other major components of the development . The site plan should also include dimensions as to give all reviewers a sense of scale . Rehabilitation projects are only required to address the principals and guidelines that relate to the building permits they are seeking . -shall be done with purpose . It should be used as a tool to integrate the Landscaping proposed development with the surrounding environment . Properties located at the gateways (or entrances ) to the City shall develop in a manner that portrays a quality image of the community . All attempts shall be made at minimizing the removal of significant natural features . Significant natural featuresQ :6 41 shall be integrated into the overall site plan . City of Camas : Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Commercial Uses (Final Draft) Page 4 On - site parking areasshallbe placed to the interior of the development, unless site development proves prohibitive . All on - site parking areas along adjacent roadways shall be screened with landscaping L;; Buildings �- -shall be used to define the streetscape , unless site conditions proves prohibitive . b Commercial structures abutting or located in residentially zoned areas sIJshall be designed to mitigate size and scale differences . Walls 4shall be broken up to avoid a blank look and to provide a sense of scale . Buildings QLAIIIJ shall have a " finished" look . Any use of panelized materials Shy -shall be integrated into the development in a maiaer" �manner that achieves a seamless appearance . A proposed development •s -shall attempt to incorporate or enhance historic/heritage elements related to the specific site or surroundi fng area . DESIGN GUIDELINES The design guidelines developed for commercial zenes are intended to serve as a guide to the development community ( or prof ect proponent) . These guidelines were developed to assist a project in meeting the established design principals . Furthermore , a project should not be expected to meet every design guideline as long as it can show it can achieve the overall intent of the design principals . However , the project proponent is expected to adequately address each guideline and if it cannot meet a specific guideline then provide an explanation as to why and how it will mitigate and still meet the intent of the design principals . Landscaping Screening Landscaping and screening is an important factor in determining the overall character of the building site . Landscaping should be done with purpose , such as providing a buffer against less intense uses , screening parking or other components viewed as being intrusive , and defining the streetscape . Gateway Sites Properties located in gateways should meet a higher standard than other sites . Properties at the entrance to the City should develop in a manner that portrays a quality image of the community . These DEAR, properties provide the first impression and should set or meet the standard that demes the City . l 4 �.. Ma or items that should be addressed, but not limited u to , include vegetation , lighting , and signage , b A landscaping/vegetation plan needs to identify 1 y � the type of plants or trees to be planted within the 1 LL foreground of the visual area ( or street — --- — -- — J intersection — see exhibit 1 ) . The use of °R � G�'° �' ' /A" '°R 5TKga7" vegetation native to the Pacific Northwest ( or Exhibit 1 . City o,f Camas , Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Conunercial Uses (Final Draft) Page 5 Camas ) should be encouraged , with the exception of noxious weeds . Low maintenance/hardy landscaping should also be encouraged . A list of low maintenance/hardymaterials � s available ..---- / 1 upon request , pSIG l Intersections at gateways should be illuminated, but not dominated by lighting . Incorporating lighting into they s landscape should be encouraged to illuminate the quality of the natural environment . ( see exhibit 2 ) Exhibit 2 . All Sites Before any commercial site is developed it should provide a landscaping plan that identifies : The vegetation to be utilized and should encourage native , low maintenance plantings . Trees planted along streetscapes with overhead power lines should include only those identified on the City ' s Street Tree List (to be developed based on Clark County & Clark PUD ) . When possible , existing significant trees or other natural features that do not pose a hazard or hinder development should be required to remain and be incorporated into the landscaping and site plans . b Signage should be on buildings or incorporated into the landscaping . Signage in the landscaping should be built in to the vegetation to keep it from being the main focus – similar to the light industrial zones . Efforts should be made to make signs vandal resistant . The intent is for the landscape not to be dominated by signage as well as to soften the visual impact . ( see exhibit 2 ) z* If outdoor furnishings are employed , they should be compatible with the immediate environment . b If the site is to be fenced, then the fencing should be incorporated into the landscaping so as to have little or no visual impact . ( see exhibit 3 ) L* Low voltage , non - glare , indirect lighting should be used exclusively for landscaping . Street lighting , such as light poles and lamps , should be compatible , with other nearby lighting on the same --"' ----- —�' :- street , unless other lighting is expected to "�"-" , del e �'� =--- be replaced in the foreseeable future . Surrounding sites should be screened f from parking and building lighting . Exhibit 3 . City of Camas : Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Commercial Uses (Final Draft) Page 6 Parking spaces should be clustered in small groupings . Groupings should be separated by landscaping to create a pedestrian friendly , ' r park like environment . Parking lot landscaping should be credited toward the total landscaping requirement . ( see exhibit 4 ) dw b Commercial developments should be encouraged to include a community Y information kiosk . The kiosk could be used � -' ! ,.-- ' r r' to provide community information and/ or atop incorporate historic/heritage information relating to the specific site or surrounding area . - b Green belts should be used to separate different uses . ( see exhibit 5 ) Exhibit 4 . In general , the Light Industrial landscaping requirements are perceived as setting a �' SZ E N TIA q p g good example of the intent of the landscaping • GREEN guidelines . The entrance to Cascade Business _ LT Park was identified as an example not to follow because it currently has limited landscaping , is disconnected from the surrounding area , and serves littlep �u ose . Massing & Setbacks Massing and setbacks are major elements of a site plan . These elements have the greatest sTKrrr impact as to how the proposed development . relates to the surrounding area and how Exhibit 5 .. individuals living and visiting the area interact r . ._.. . ._.. . ..._ _ with the development . Major components that + define the character and quality of the proposed + development include the size , scale , and placement of buildings , lot coverage , and traffic/pedestrian circulation . Specific guidelines 44% �R w F5� that should be addressed include : v b Since buildings define circulation routes , they should be placed as close to streets and roads as the zoning code allows before being /AATOR sTREOr set back to the interior or rear of the lot unless site constraints make it impossible or Exhibit 6 . characteristics of surrounding properties already developed make it incompatible . ( see exhibit 6 ) City of Camas : Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Commercial Uses (Final Draft) Page 7 Commercial structures abutting residentially zoned areas should be designed to mitigate size and scale differences . L On - site parking areas should be placed to the interior of the site when ever possible . ( see exhibit 6 ) Architecture Few restrictions should be placed on the architecture and building materials used in the --development . Instead general guidelines are ---.�-- -r��--- - developed to identify the type of development desired . Buildings should have a " finished " , sound , durable , and permanent appearance . Any use of panelized materials should be integrated into the development in a m��manner that achieves a Exhibit 7. seamless appearance . This would bring into question the use of corrugated materials , ' standing seam , T - 1 11 , or similar siding • materials , unless architectural renderings can g show the use of these materials will produce a St ti ; l development with a high visual ( or aesthetic ) 1 quality . The developer will be held accountable " for ensuring the finished development resembles the architectural renderings . • � � 1 4 , : l Developments surrounded by residential areas or adjacent to residentially zoned properties 41 should be built with a residential feel (i . e . size , Exhibit 8 . scale , and materials compatible with neighboring buildings ) . ( see exhibit 7 ) Y The placement of buildings should preserve = = significant natural features , such as rocks , trees , '�� MOON t Via. etc . In doing so , developers may make use of site variances such as adjusting setbacks . ( see -h exhibit 8 ) + b The use of bold colors should be avoided except Exhibit 9 . it when used as minor accents . b Building walls or fences along roadways should be broken up to avoid a blank look . The wall can be broken up by including some combination of window/ display space , plantings , offsetting walls with two - tone colors , or creating plazas , water features , art ( civic , pop , etc . ) , awnings , or similar devices . ( see exhibit 9 ) i* Buildings over two stories should have the third story and above offset from the first two stories . 00 o,f' Camas : Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Commercial Uses (Final Draft) Page 8 Circulation & Connections Most vacant and redevelopable commercial land within the City of Camas will occur along existing roads or areas that have established circulation and connections . Therefore , the scope of appropriate regulations in regards to connections and circulation is limited . However, the following two guidelines are important to consider in terms of public safety or the perception there of Pathways define traffic/pedestrian movement . Buildings brought up to the road help define these movements . Trees and/or planting strips shall be used for separating vehicles and pedestrian movements , as well as providing a secure and pedestrian friendly environment . New streets intersecting commercial properties should be designed to create a safe environment . " Coving " techniques and "round- a -bouts " should be considered for traffic calming . City of Camas : Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Commercial Uses (Final Draft) Page 9 RESIDENTIAL GUIDELINES The City of Camas currently has zoning regulations pertaining to architectural design of new planned developments . At this time , no residential development design guidelines beyond those that already exist have been developed . However, this document will be updated in the near future to include a comprehensive list of guidelines for residential structures . Therefore , anyone using this guide should contact the City of Camas to ascertain whether or not they have the most upAo - date guideline manual . City of Camas : Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Commercial Uses (Final Draft) Page 10 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE STRUCTURE $� FRAMEWORK Implementation and enforcement of the design review guidelines is intended to be incorporated within existing City planning and development review systems . The State mandates local jurisdictions process development applications within 120 days , unless significant issues ( e . g . traffic , potential hill slides , etc . ) are identified that the applicant has not , but is required to , address before being given approval . Therefore, a streamlined design review process is recommended for the City of Camas . GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT PROCESS The current development review process within the City of Camas comprises a three to six step process depending on the proposed development project : Pre -Application Conference — the applicant meets with city staff consisting of the various department such as Building , Engineering , Fire , Public Works/Operations , Planning , and others as needed to get feed back on conceptual drawings that Pre-Application Conference II Preliminary 5 illustrate the applicants proposal . The staff identifies (Large Commercial, industrial, Multi-Fandly, Subdivisions, & Planned Developments) Design Review all SEPA and other non4ocal or local regulations (Commercial & Residential) that will have to be addressed by the applicant and the studies ( i . e . traffic , archaeology , geo -technical , etc . ) that will be required .�. Application Application Submittal — Applicant submits an Submittal PID Design x (All Development Proposals) Design Review application with the appropriate fees , materials , and Committee Determination SEPA checklist . The 120 - day review period begins (Planned Industrial k (Commercial & Residential) a DeveSopments ) now . IF Staff Review & V + Staff Review & Recommendation — Cit staff Y Recommendation yN, (All Development Proposals) reviews the application along with all submitted staff .: materials . Planned Industrial Developments PIDs 3tG p ( Decission (Short Plaits, Muhi- are reviewed by the PID Design Committee and a Fanrily, & Commetcial) recommendation is made to staff. Staff approves or Planning Commission It denies short plats , multifamily , and commercial Review & Recommendation (All Other Development Proposals) proposals and makes a recommendation for approval . or denial to Planning Commission for all other development proposals . city Council b Planning Commission Review & Recommendation -- Decission Planning Commission holds a public hearing , (All Other Development Proposals) reviews all submitted testimony and written materials . Based on the evidence , they make a recommendation for approval or denial of the development proposal to the City Council . City Council Decision — City Council reviews the public record and makes a decision to approve or deny the development proposal based on findings of fact and a set of conditions ( if approved) . City of Camas : Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Commercial Uses (Final Draft) Page 11 INTEGRATION OF DESIGN REVIEW As shown in the chart above , design review is intended to be incorporated within the existing development process at two distinct levels of review : Preliminary Design Review . At the time of the pre - application conference meeting , City staff will review the development proposal , determine if design review is warranted, and make a preliminary assessment to whether or not the applicant has adequately addressed the appropriate design review principals . Staff will recommend to the applicant any modifications or additions they need to make to their site plan in order to better address the appropriate design review principals . Design Review Determination . A formal design review determination will occur during the City staff review & recommendation period . If City staff finds that the development proposal meets the intent of the design review principals then it has the authority to make the recommendation for approval as it pertains to design review . If significant issues arise or the development proposal is unable to meet the intent of all design review principals then City will convene the design review committee to review the proposal . The design review committee will make a recommendation to deny the development proposal or approval with a set of recommended mitigation measures . The application will then proceed through its normal development process . All determinations whether made by staff or the design review committee will produce ajinding of fact . Any appeal of a final design review decision will use the existing appeals processes . Projects approved administratively by City staff ( e . g . short plats , commercial , multifamily) can be appealed to the City Council . Other projects approved by the City Council are subject to appeal and reconsidered by the Council . For the first year , all design review proposals will be forward on to the standing desiZn committee . Staff will allow committee members two weeks to comment before mak ' l determination . If the majority of the committee members identify significant issu at need to be addressed they can petition staff to convene a meeting of all committee members to discuss the proposal and snake recommendations to the applicant . After the first year , the City Council will determine whether or not the two - week comment period should remain in place . DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE STRUCTURE The design review committee will be made up of seven members . Six of the seven members are intended to be permanent members . The six permanent committee members are two from the development community, one council member , one planning commissioner , and two citizens at- large . The seventh member shall be a neighborhood representative from one of the surrounding impacted neighborhoods . If no neighborhood representative can be identified then a designated ULAN member will fill the vacancy . ENFORCEMENT Enforcement of the Design Review principals and guidelines is governed by the following : City of Camas : Camas Design Review Guidelines ; Residential and Commercial Uses (Final Draft) Page 12 A . The applicant , or any other current or future legal owners of the subject property, are expected to complete the work identified through Design Review . In enforcing this Chapter, th lannin Mana er or anent shall have the following duties and po rs : I . To inspect all construction and landscaping activities to ensure compliance with the provisions of this Chapter . 2 . To issue a " stop work" order for the site upon notice of any construction or landscaping activity being conducted in violation of this Chapter [ or in violation of any condition of approval ] . 3 . To require any person violating the provisions of this Chapter [ or any condition of approval] to undertake all corrective and any other remedial measures necessary to remedy such violation . B . Enforcement — Stop Work Order . 1 . The issuance of a " stop work" order indicates that all work of every type , make and description on the site shall cease , except for corrective or remedial measures necessary to remedy the stated violation . 2 . A " stop work" order will be in effect until such time as th lannin Manager or aizent establishes that the stated violation has been remedied . C . Enforcement — Civil Infraction , 1 . Any person, firm or corporation which violates any provision of this Chapter or which undertakes any construction or landscaping activity in violation of an approved design review plan , [ or any other condition of approval ] , or who violates the terms of any " stop work" order issued pursuant to this Chapter , shall be guilty of a civil infraction punishable by a fine of not more than $ 500 . 00 per day . Each separate day or any portion thereof during which any violation occurs or continues constitutes a separate offense . D . Continued Duty to Correct Violation . Payment of a monetary penalty pursuant to this Chapter does not relieve a person of the duty to correct the violation as ordered . E . Appeal . Any appeal to the decision of the Camas Municipal court shall be governed by Rules for Appeal of Decisions of Courts of Limited Jurisdiction (RALJ) . F . Accrual of Penalty . The City is authorized to collect the monetary penalty by use of appropriate legal remedies . Seeking legal redress by the City shall neither stay nor terminate the accrual of additional per diem monetary penalties so long as the violation continues . City of Callas : Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Commercial Uses (Final Draft) Page 13 IMPLEMENTATION �c PERIODIC REVIEW Will contain implementing ordinances if design review is adopted by City Council . City of Camas : Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Conunercial Uses (Final Draft) Page 14 91 1 8w 19 Chapter 18 . 19 DESIGN REVIEW Sections : 18 . 19 . 010 Purpose . 18 . 19 . 020 Scope . 18 . 19 . 030 Design Review Manual adopted . 18 . 19 . 040 Application requirements . 18 . 19 . 050 Design review procedures . 18 . 19 . 055 Conditional use permits . 18 . 19 . 060 Variance to design review guidelines 18 . 19 . 070 Design review committee . 18 . 19 . 080 Design review decision chart . 18 . 19 . 090 Enforcement . 18 . 19 . 010 Purpose . This chapter is intended to provide for orderly and quality development consistent with the design principles of the Camas Design Review Guidelines : Residential and Commercial Uses , hereafter referred to as Design Review Manual ( DRM ) . The design review process is not intended to determine the appropriateness of a given use on a given parcel . The design review process is intended to produce a meaningful integration of building , landscaping and natural environment . This will protect the general health , safety and welfare of the community by making efficient use of the land which is consistent with the visual character and heritage of the community . 18 . 19 . 020 Scope . Design review is required for all new commercial development , redevelopment ( including change in use , e . g . residential to commercial ) , or major rehabilitation ( exterior changes requiring a building permit or other development permit ) . 18 . 19 . 030 Design Review Manual adopted . The city ' s design standards are primarily 5contained in the design review manual , which is hereby adopted by the city . The manual includes both principles and guidelines . The principles are mandatory and must be demonstrated to have been satisfied in overall intent in order for approval of a design review application to be granted . Commercial Principals : 1 . Landscaping shall be done with a purpose . It shall be used as a tool to integrate the proposed development into the surrounding environment . 2 . Properties located at gateways ( or entrances ) to the City shall develop in a manner that portrays a quality image of the community . 74 Exhibit " A" 18 . 19 3 . All attempts shall be made at minimizing the removal of significant natural features . Significant natural features shall be integrated into the overall site plan . 4 . On - site parking areas shall be placed to the interior of the development , unless site development proves prohibitive . All on - site parking areas along adjacent roadways shall be screened with landscaping . 5 . Buildings shall be used to define the streetscape , unless site conditions prove prohibitive . 6 . Commercial structures abutting residentially zoned areas shall be designed to mitigate size and scale differences . 7 . Walls shall avoid a blank look and provide a sense of scale . 8 . Buildings shall have a "finished " look . Any use of panelized materials shall be integrated into the development in a manner that achieves a seamless appearance . 9 . A proposed development shall attempt to incorporate or enhance historic/ heritage elements related to the specific site or surrounding area . The guidelines include five major guideline categories : 1 . Landscaping & Screening ; 2 . Architecture ; 3 . Massing & Setbacks ; 4 . Historic and Heritage Preservation ; and , 5 . Circulation and Connections . Each of the major guidelines include subcategories . Compliance with the guideline categories and subcategories demonstrate compliance with the principles . However , not every guideline may be deemed applicable and therefore required by the approval authority . Additionally , the approval authority may approve a variance from one or more guidelines provided the overall intent of the principles are satisfied . A copy of the design manual is on file with the Department of Public Works . 18 . 19 . 040 Application requirements . Application for design review shall be submitted on forms provided by and in a manner set forth by the Planning Manager . The application shall include such drawings , sketches and narrative as to allow the approval authority review of the specific project on the merits of the city ' s design review manual and other applicable city codes . An application shall not be deemed complete unless all information requested is provided . 18 . 19 . 050 Design review procedures . Design Review applications are processed as a Type 1 - administrative decision . In addition to the requirements for a Type 1 decision , the following procedures shall be applicable . 75 Exhibit " A" 18s19 A . Pre - application : Prior to filing a design review application , the applicant shall participate in a formal pre - application conference concerning the requisites of formal application consistent with CMC18 . 55 . 090 . The City Planner may waive the requirement of a formal pre - application conference for minor design review proposals . B . Filing : Following the pre - application meeting , the applicant shall file with the City Planner a design review application , which shall contain the items listed in subsection ( 1 ) through ( 7 ) below together with any other requirements identified in the pre - application conference : 1 . Existing conditions plan ; 2 . Proposed Development ( Site ) Plan ; 3 . Grading Plan ; 4 . Utility Plan ; 5 . Landscaping Plan ; 6 . Architectural Drawings , indicating floor plans and elevations ; and 7 . Written narrative describing how the proposal is consistent with the design review principals . C . Completeness Review/ Design Review Committee determination : A letter of completeness will be mailed within 28 days of the applicant submittal as provided in CMC 18 . 55 . 110 . The notice will also indicate whether the application will be subject to review and recommendation by the Design Review Committee ( DRC ) . Following notice of an incomplete application , the applicant shall within forty- five days submit the requested information or refuse in writing to submit the additional information . Failure to comply with the forty-five day requirement will result in the application being rejected and no decision being made . D . Public Notice : A Notice of Development Application shall be mailed when required by CMC 18 . 55 . 140 to those properties located adjacent to the boundaries of the subject property . In addition to the notice requirements of CMC 18 . 55 . 140 , the required Notice of Development Application shall specify : 1 . The date , time and location of a DRC meeting if one is called ; and , 2 . That the application and all applicable requirements are available for review at City Hall . Copies of the application or related material may be purchased at a reasonable cost . E . Administrative Approvals : Design Review applications will initially be decided by the City Planner , subject to the following : 76 Exhibit " A" 18w19 1 . Until January 1 , 2002 , prior to any decision by the City Planner of a design review application , review and recommendation by the DRC will be required ; 2 . After January 1 , 2002 , the City Planner will have discretion in determining whether or not DRC review and recommendation will be required , however , any request for a variance to the guidelines of the DRM shall be subject to DRC review and recommendation . 3 . The City Planner shall prepare a decision to include findings of consistency with the Camas Municipal Code and DRM together with conditions necessary to mitigate and /or ensure consistency . The findings shall take into consideration use of an administrative standards checklist , recommendations of the DRC , and /or other means together with the application materials to clearly demonstrate compliance with the design review principals . 4 . Notice of approval of a Design Review decision will be provided as per CMC 18 . 55 . 150 and become final at the close of business on the 15th day after the date on the Notice of Decision as per CMC 18 . 55 . 200 ( B ) . F . Appeal of Design Review decision : Appeal of a design review decision shall be to the City Council consistent with Section 18 . 55 . 280 and in the manner provided in Section 18 . 55 . 300 . 1 . Where an administrative decision did not include a DRC review , no appeal shall be heard by the City Council until a DRC review and recommendation occurs and has been forwarded along with the administrative decision to the City Council . 2 . Notice of an appeal hearing shall be as provided in Section 18 . 55 . 170 . 18 . 19 . 055 Conditional use permits . An applicant may choose to file an application for design review concurrently with a conditional use permit application or upon approval of a conditional use permit . In either case , design review shall be processed pursuant to CMC 18 . 55 . 200 . However , any design review decision issued prior to a conditional use approval shall be preliminary pending the outcome of the conditional use process . Minor modifications to a preliminary design review decision may be made as necessary to be consistent with a conditional use permit . 18 . 19 . 060 Variances to design review guidelines . A design review application that includes a variance or deviation from any of the five major guidelines of the DRM shall be subject to review and recommendations from the Design Review Committee . The Board of Adjustment does not review variances or deviations from the design review standards or criteria of this chapter . The DRC shall base its recommendation upon findings setting forth and showing that all of the following circumstances exist : A . Special conditions or circumstances exist which render a specific requirement of the DRM unreasonable , given the location and intended use of the 77 Exhibit " A" 18 . 19 proposed development ; B . The special conditions and circumstances are characteristic of the proposed general use of the site and not of a specific tenant ; C . The specific conditions and circumstances are not representative of typical commercial -type development which may be allowed within the zoning district ; D . The requested variance is based upon functional consideration rather than economic hardship , personal convenience or personal design preferences ; E . Variation from a guideline ( s ) has sufficiently been compensated by other site amenities ; and F . The requested variance will not result in a project that is inconsistent with the intent and general scope of the DRM principles . 18 . 19 . 070 Design review committee . The City Council shall establish a seven person Design Review Committee ( DRC ) for the purposes of reviewing specific proposals and recommending conditions and or other actions necessary for consistency with the principals of the DRM . The DRC members serve at the pleasure of the City Council . The DRC shall consist of six members appointed by the City Council to include two from the development community , one council member , one planning commissioner , and two citizens at large . A seventh member shall be a neighborhood representative of the surrounding neighborhood to a specific proposal or a United Camas Association of Neighborhoods member . The DRC will hold a public meeting to consider a design review application when . A . The City Planner determines that the issues related to a specific proposal are complex enough to warrant a review by the DRC ; B . The proposal varies from the guidelines of the DRM ; or , C . When an administrative decision on a design review application is appealed with no prior review by the DRC . The DRC shall not issue a decision , but shall prepare a written recommendation together with findings to support the recommendation to the approval authority within ten days of a public meeting held for that purpose . [ RCW 36 . 70 . 020 ( 5 )] . 78 Exhibit " A " 18 . 19 18 . 19 . 080 Design review decision chart . CITY PLANNER DESIGN REVIEW CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE Administrative decision No DRC review unless Public hearing on Administrative decision is appeal of appealed . Develops findings to administrative support Recommendation to decision City Council . Administrative decision Develops finding to support Closed record ( after DRC recommendations to City hearing on appeal recommendation ) Planner prior to administrative of administrative decision . decision Administrative decision Develops findings to support a Closed record ( after DRC review & recommendation to City hearing on appeal variance Planner regarding compliance of administrative recommendation ) with DRM and variance criteria . decision 18 . 19 . 090 Enforcement . In addition to the Article VII of the Camas Zoning Code , the enforcement of the Design Review principals and guidelines is governed by the following : A . The applicant , or any other current or future legal owners of the subject property , are expected to complete the work identified through Design Review . In enforcing this Chapter , the Planning Manager or his/ her designee shall have the following duties and powers : 1 . To inspect all construction and landscaping activities to ensure compliance with the provisions of this Chapter . 2 . To issue a " stop work " order for the site upon notice of any construction or landscaping activity being conducted in violation of this Chapter [or in violation of any condition of approval ] . 3 . To require any person violating the provisions of this Chapter [or any condition of approval ] to undertake all corrective and any other remedial measures necessary to remedy such violation . B . Enforcement — Stop Work Order 1 . The issuance of a " stop work " order indicates that all work of every type , make and description on the site shall cease , except for corrective or remedial measures necessary to remedy the stated violation . 2 . A " stop work" order will be in effect until such time as the Planning Manager or his / her designee establishes that the stated violation has been remedied . 79 Exhibit " A " 18 . 19 C . Enforcement — Civil Infraction , 1 . Any person , firm or corporation which violates any provision of this Chapter or which undertakes any construction or landscaping activity in violation of an approved design review plan , [or any other condition of approval ] , or who violates the terms of any " stop work" order issued pursuant to this Chapter , shall be guilty of a civil infraction punishable by a fine of not more than $ 500 . 00 per day . Each separate day or any portion thereof during which any violation occurs or continues constitutes a separate offense . D . Continued Duty to Correct Violation . Payment of a monetary penalty pursuant to this Chapter does not relieve a person of the duty to correct the violation as ordered . E . Appeal . Any appeal to the decision of the Camas Municipal court shall be governed by the Rules for Appeal of Decisions of Courts of Limited Jurisdiction ( RALJ ) . F . Accrual of Penalty . The City is authorized to collect the monetary penalty by use of appropriate legal remedies . Seeking legal redress by the City shall neither stay nor terminate the accrual of additional per diem monetary penalties so long as the violation continues . 80 Exhibit " A "