Applications subject to community design guidelines shall be subject to the Design Review process pursuant to the procedures set forth in LMC 18A.10.400. Planning staff will inform the applicant which standards are applicable to the project to assist the applicant to meet the community design requirements. Each application shall demonstrate how the various building elements, such as walls, roofline, entries, modulation, and materials are organized into a functional and visually agreeable composition, and how the concept relates to site conditions and site design such as visibility, access, pedestrian circulation, and neighboring development. Design review will generally be conducted as a function of project permit review. During project permit review, the staff person will note which design standards have been satisfied and any requirements that have not yet been met. The Community Development Director shall have the authority to approve, modify, or deny proposals pursuant to a review under this process.
This chapter sets parameters for design, but is constructed to allow for design flexibility and innovative design solutions. Decisions under this chapter 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 chapter. Advisory guidelines may be used as a basis for the conditioning, modification, or denial of an application. Decisions under this chapter may be appealed using the appeal procedures of the administrative land-use process.
Exceptions to the Standards. The Community Development Director may permit a deviation from one (1) or more specific standards if it is determined that public benefit may be achieved by an alternative proposal. In addition, the Community Development Director may allow a development project to meet a lesser standard, if during redevelopment of an existing developed site, the Community Development Director, in consultation with the City Engineer, has determined that the specific standard(s) cannot be met due to the size or configuration of the parcel and makes findings that demonstrate that the public benefit associated with public safety and/or the community design standards that have been met by the project design exceeds the public benefit associated with those standards that will not be met by the proposed design. The alternative proposal shall be consistent with the purpose of this section, public safety practices and with the comprehensive plan goals and policies.
This chapter in no way should be construed to supersede or modify any other City codes or ordinances that apply to the proposal. To the extent that any provision of this chapter is inconsistent or conflicts with any other chapter or City ordinance, the more specific provision shall control. Otherwise, this chapter shall be construed consistently with the other provisions and regulations of the City. [Ord. 307 § 23, 2003; Ord. 277 § 1, 2002.]