Milton City Zoning Code
CHAPTER 17
43 DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES
§ 17.43.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to establish the types of developments which shall be subject to design review pursuant to the adopted standards and guidelines. Further, the chapter shall establish the standards and guidelines for the city of Milton, and the procedure to address conflicts between the standards and guidelines and the underlying zoning designation, should such a conflict arise.
(Ord. 1841 § 2, 2014; Ord. 1912 § 1, 2017)
§ 17.43.020 Review required.
A.
Design Review. All development which falls within the thresholds provided in this section shall be subject to design review as provided for in Chapter 17.71 MMC, Permit Decision and Appeal Processes.
B.
Applicability. The following types of development shall be required to conform to the requirements of the uptown district design standards and guidelines, applicable to the type of development activity being undertaken (i.e., new buildings shall be required to comply with the standards and guidelines applicable to new buildings, parking lot standards shall apply to parking lot reconfiguration, etc.):
1.
New buildings.
2.
Expansion of Building Footprint. The new square footage associated with the building expansion is required to meet the applicable criteria of the uptown design standards and guidelines, except where such expansion is greater than 50 percent of the gross square footage of the building, in which case the entire building shall be brought into compliance with the applicable criteria of the uptown design standards and guidelines.
3.
Parking Lot Reconfiguration. The reconfigured portion of the parking lot shall meet the applicable criteria of the uptown design standards and guidelines, except where such expansion is greater than 50 percent of the overall parking lot, at which point the entire parking lot shall be brought into compliance with the applicable criteria of the uptown design standards and guidelines. Actions such as relocation of ADA spaces, overlays, or other minor projects which do not alter the circulation pattern or physical location of the parking stalls are exempt.
4.
External facade modification resulting in modification of more than 50 percent of the building facade.
C.
Conflicts. In the event of a conflict between the standards and guidelines adopted in MMC § 17.43.040(A) and the underlying zoning code, the standards and guidelines shall apply. The standards and guidelines adopted in MMC § 17.43.040(A) are not intended to and shall not be construed to modify, alter or supersede any provisions related to allowed or prohibited uses in the underlying zoning code.
D.
In the event that a formal code interpretation is requested, the director shall follow the process in Chapter 17.76 MMC, Administration and Enforcement, and Chapter 17.71 MMC, Permit Decision and Appeal Processes.
1.
In making the interpretation, the director shall refer to the intent statements in the applicable sections of the standards and guidelines, the overall intent of the standards and guidelines, the goals and policies identified in the comprehensive plan, and the adopted 2012 Vision, in determining the appropriate standard to apply. This is not intended to create a new standard.
2.
In case of inconsistency or conflict, regulations, conditions, or procedural requirements that are specific to an individual land use shall supersede regulations, conditions, or procedural requirements of general application.
3.
The interpretation shall be in writing and shall include references to all provisions of the city's adopted codes and regulations referenced or relied upon in making the determination.
4.
In addition to the provisions of Chapter 17.76 MMC, the director shall enter findings of facts in substantial similarity to those found in subsections (E)(1) through (E)(5) of this section.
E.
Proportional Compliance. Where strict application of a standard or guideline will interfere with the use, existing building, site operations or use, circulation or access, or site ownership, the applicant may request a proportional compliance decision. A proportional compliance decision determines the extent to which a redevelopment project needs to meet the design standards and guidelines. It is intended to assure, for example, that a parking lot modification does not trigger the requirement for facade compliance with the design standards and guidelines; that a building modification that does not alter the parking or circulation patterns does not trigger parking and circulation compliance, etc. In requesting a proportional compliance decision, the applicant shall submit to the director a written request that addresses required findings (1) through (4) below. In making a decision on the request, the director shall follow the process for code interpretations in Chapter 17.76 MMC, Administration and Enforcement, and Chapter 17.71 MMC, Permit Decision and Appeal Processes, and enter findings of fact to support the proportional compliance decision. The findings shall include:
1.
A description of unique site or building characteristics which prohibit strict application of the standard or guideline;
2.
A description of why strict application of the standards and guidelines will interfere with the existing building or site operations and ultimately detract from the implementation of the adopted 2012 Vision;
3.
A description of how the proposal meets the intent of the standards and guidelines for which proportional compliance is being sought;
4.
A description of how the proposal meets the city's adopted Visioning Report, uptown district comprehensive plan policies, the uptown district standards and guidelines purpose and intent, guiding principles.
5.
An affirmative decision shall be made on the following findings for any decision authorized under this section:
a.
The proposal will further the intent of city's 2012 Vision;
b.
The proposal is consistent with the intent of the design guidelines and standards;
c.
The proposal is similar or demonstrably superior to the original requirement;
d.
The request for proportional compliance is not solely based on monetary savings;
e.
The proposal is consistent with the city's comprehensive plan;
f.
The proposal will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare.
F.
Alternatives. When a development or application for development proposes an alternative that is not specifically addressed in the standards and guidelines, the applicant shall show that the proposed alternative is equivalent or demonstrably superior to the requirements of the standards and guidelines. In requesting an alternative to the design standards and guidelines, the applicant shall submit to the director a written request that addresses required findings (1) through (4). In making this decision the director shall enter findings of fact in substantial similarity to those found above in subsections (E)(1) through (E)(5) of this section.
(Ord. 1841 § 2, 2014; Ord. 1912 § 1, 2017)
§ 17.43.030 Procedure.
The procedures for design review shall be as provided in Chapter 17.71 MMC, procedures for land use permits, as a process type II permit. The director shall be responsible for the implementation and enforcement of the standards and guidelines as provided for under Chapter 17.71 MMC.
(Ord. 1841 § 2, 2014; Ord. 1912 § 1, 2017)
§ 17.43.040 Design guidelines and standards adopted.
The following documents shall be utilized in design review as appropriate:
A.
The city hereby adopts the standards and guidelines published in the uptown district design guidelines and standards dated October 30th, 2013, which shall be applied to the developments as listed in MMC § 17.43.020.
B.
The city's currently adopted comprehensive plan.
C.
The City Vision, adopted by the city council in November 2012, is hereby adopted by reference as the guidance for the standards and guidelines.
(Ord. 1841 § 2, 2014; Ord. 1912 § 1, 2017)
§ 17.43.050 Compliance.
No permit for construction or a use subject to these standards and guidelines shall be issued until the plans are in compliance with the standards. All such developments shall be maintained in compliance for the life of the structure. The director may require bonds or other guarantees to ensure the completion of a project consistent with approved plans. All such developments shall be in compliance with the standards prior to occupancy, unless the project proponent can show that meeting the conditions of approval or standards is not feasible prior to occupancy, in which case the director may, at his/her discretion, authorize bonding of certain items prior to occupancy.
(Ord. 1841 § 2, 2014; Ord. 1912 § 1, 2017)
