8.1 Design Review Board Text AmendmentCITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME
3/07/2016 4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: FISCAL APPROVAL:
NO: 8
BY:
Development Services FINAL APPROVAL:
ITEM 1 Planning
NO:
Page 1 BY: Dean Andrew 33ABY:
ITEM: Ordinance No. 16-10824
Consider adoption of amendments to Section 2-208 through 2-211 and the addition of Section 2-212
to the Salina Business Improvement District Design Review Board ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
The Design Review Board (DRB) was established by the City Commission in 1986 under the
authority of home rule powers granted by the Kansas Constitution and Kansas Business
Improvement Act. The DRB is charged with protecting and enhancing the exterior appearance of
properties in the Business Improvement District No. 1 (Now Lee District) by regulating through proper
application of architectural principles, the design, use of materials, finished grade lines and building
orientation of new building construction and the alteration, improvement, repair or demolition of
existing buildings. This is done through a Certificate of Compatibility process. No building, sign or
demolition permit can be issued or work performed in the BID without first obtaining a Certificate of
Compatibility from the DRB.
The Development Services Department nas provided staff assistance to the DRB since late 2001.
Certificate of Compatibility applications are now submitted to the Development Services Department
instead of the Salina Downtown, Inc. office. Development Services Department staff accepts
applications, schedules the public hearings, provides legal notice, presents the applications to the
DRB and coordinates the issuance of Certificates of Compatibility and building, sign and demolition
permits for Downtown projects. DRB meetings have been held in Room 107 of the City -County
Building since 2001. The Design Review Board uses Design Guidelines for Downtown Salina,
adopted by the City Commission in 2008, in its review of downtown projects.
Design Review Guidelines
The Design Guidelines for Downtown Salina were developed by the Business Improvement District
Design Education Committee and the SDI Office in 1995 as part of the Main Street Program of the
National Trust. The Design Review Board approved the original guidelines at their July 13, 1995
meeting. The BID Board of Advisors approved the guidelines on July 20, 1995 although this action did
not include any formal adoption of the guidelines by resolution. The guidelines were not presented to
the City Commission at that time to tie them back to the DRB ordinance which sets out the design
review process. Without any official status, the design guidelines were used by the SDI office to
inform and educate property owners, design professionals and contractors as to what types of
treatments would be recommended or not recommended when planning exterior improvements.
Absent any formal adoption by the Board of Advisors or reference in the DRB ordinance, the design
guidelines were advisory and no certificate of compatibility decisions were or could be based on their
use alone. Any findings developed by staff concerning projects in the BID (Now Lee District)
referenced the five standards codified in Section 2-208 of the existing DRB Ordinance. However,
these standards are quite general, and applicants and members of the board alike found it difficult to
understand how projects were to be evaluated. Conformance with the design guidelines has been
one of the criteria proposed in the Development Incentive Grant Program(formerly the Storefront
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME
` 3/07/2016 4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: FISCAL APPROVAL:
NO: I I BY:
Development Services FINAL APPROVAL:
ITEM Planning
NO:
Page 2 BY: Dean Andrew BY:
Improvement Grant Program) being administrated by Salina Downtown, Inc.
During the deliberations of a working group organized by SDI to finalize amendments to the Design
Review Board Ordinance, some deficiencies and gaps in the 1995 Design Guidelines were identified.
At the time of their creation, the guidelines referenced the Main Street Program that Downtown Salina
participated in from 1989 to 2002. These references were not always consistent with the
recommendations of the Progressive Urban Management Associates (PUMA) Plan adopted by the
City of Salina and Salina Downtown in 2002. The PUMA Plan recommended the realignment from a
"preservation -based" Main Street approach to a more "market-based" economic development
approach in the Business Improvement District (now the Lee District).
One of the recommendations of the PUMA report was to create a Santa Fe Historic District to take
advantage of the Rehabilitation Tax Credit incentives available for listed historic properties. The
development of updated Design Guidelines and their official adoption were intended to provide
specific guidance and allow their consistent use by reviewing bodies regardless of whether grant
funds are being applied for. The updated Design Guidelines were intended to provide a basis for
making decisions about the appropriate treatment of existing buildings, including historic resources,
and the design of compatible new construction. The Guidelines were also intended to serve as an
educational and planning tool for property owners and their design professionals to increase
awareness of what constitutes good design and to assist applicants in achieving these objectives.
The 2007 update to the 1995 Design Guidelines was not intended to create a Downtown Historic
District. Within the guidelines historic resources are those buildings or sites which retain their historic
appearance, are at least 50 years old and are representative of their period of significance. Projects
which may affect historically designated properties, such as the six National Register properties
located in the Lee District, will continue to be administered by the Salina Heritage Commission.
The Downtown Design Guidelines are organized into an introduction of the design goals, the uses
and benefits of having guidelines and what design guidelines do. An historic context section
describes the physical history of the Downtown area. The guidelines are broken into sections
addressing building rehabilitation, when improvements are made to existing resources, alterations
and new construction. Specific elements of the streetscape that are addressed in the guidelines
include awnings, signs, lighting, utility and mechanical areas, parking and landscaping. Demolition
and relocation guidelines provide guidance for these types of activities.
The purpose of the Downtown Design Guidelines was that they be used by the DRB in reviewing
Certificate of Compatibility applications. The Design Guidelines are also used as one of the criteria in
funding decisions under the Development Incentive (Facade Grant) Program so that the matching
funds dispersed by the program will conform to goals of the Design Review Board. The Guidelines
are not regulations. The Guidelines are for developers, design professionals, owners and decision
makers for reviewing and evaluating proposals and design quality. Exceptions to the Guidelines may
be considered if the overall intent of the Guidelines has been met.
AGENDA SECTION
NO:
ITEM
NO:
Page 3
DRB Ordinance Amendment
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:
Development Services
Planning
BY: Dean Andrew
DATE TIME
3/07/2016 4:00 P.M.
FISCAL APPROVAL:
BY:
FINAL APPROVAL:
BY:
Since the Development Services Department assumed staff responsibilities for the DRB in
September 2001, a number of weaknesses in the ordinance have been identified. An ad hoc
committee of the Design Review Board looked over the Ordinance and presented their
recommendations in 2003. Their recommendations included developing a process for administrative
review for minor project types to reduce delays in the issuance of building or sign permits. They also
recommended the clarification of procedural practices to accomplish this administrative review and
the provision of a broadened set of design standards for the Design Review Board to base their
decisions upon.
A Design Review Matrix was developed whereby Development Services staff could review "minor" or
small scale projects. An exemption for routine maintenance and repair, where there is no change
made to the design, material, color or general appearance of a building or site was also proposed.
The overall objective of the proposed amendments to the Ordinance was to make project review and
the issuance of necessary building, sign or demolition permits for minor projects more efficient and
less time consuming for owners, their contractors and tradesmen.
A working group was organized by SDI to reexamine the existing DRB Ordinance and Design
Guidelines in September 2007. The group included two members from the Design Review Board and
two members from the Business Support and Recruitment Committee. The group met over a period
of eight weeks to review and refine potential changes to the Ordinance and the original Design
Guidelines.
On January 14, 2008 the City Commission approved Ordinance No. 08-10432 amending Chapter 2,
Article X of the Saline Code pertaining to the Business Improvement District No. 1 (Lee District)
Design Review Board to create a minor review (administrative review) process in addition to a full
review (Design Review Board review) process for projects involving exterior alterations in the Lee
District. The Commission also approved Resolution No. 08-6480 adopting the Design Guidelines for
Downtown Salina to be used in reviewing Certificate of Compatibility applications and Resolution No.
08-6481 adopting the Certificate of Compatibility Review Matrix which identifies which types of
projects require DRB review and which are considered minor projects that can be reviewed and
approved administratively by staff. The Design Guidelines and the matrix have been used by staff in
the administration of the DRB ordinance since that time.
On October 5, 2015, the City Attorney informed the City Commission about correspondence that had
been received from a downtown property owner's attorney challenging staff's interpretation and
application of the DRB ordinance and Design Guidelines. The correspondence was in regard to the
Design Review Board's denial of a proposal to paint the unpainted masonry exterior of a building
located at 104 North Santa Fe. The decision of the Board was supported by the Downtown Design
Guidelines but the City Attorney advised staff and Commissioners that an amendment of the DRB
ordinance was needed to further clarify the circumstances under which a Certificate of Compatibility
must be issued for exterior alterations that are made within the Lee District.
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME
3/07/2016 4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: FISCAL APPROVAL:
NO:
BY:
Development Services FINAL APPROVAL:
ITEM Planning
NO:
Page 4 BY: Dean Andrew BY:
In regular session, the City Commission added Ordinance No. 15-10806 to their agenda and
approved on first and second reading this ordinance which established a 60 day moratorium on the
painting of currently unpainted masonry exterior surfaces and the painting of any exterior surface
involving a change of color on any building located within the Lee District.
In approving the 60 day moratorium the Commission found that the public interest is served by a
moratorium of a duration limited to the time required for the Governing Body to )1) seek legal review;
(2) seek input from relevant advisory boards and the public; and (3) make any necessary policy
determinations clarifying the application of the requirements of Article X, Chapter 2 of the Salina Code
and the adopted Design Guidelines for Downtown Salina to the subject application and other future
applications relating to the painting of currently unpainted masonry exterior surfaces and the painting
of any exterior surface involving a change of color, on any building located within the Lee District.
Since the adoption of the moratorium, staff has met numerous times and thoroughly reviewed the
Design Guidelines, the review matrix and the DRB ordinance amendments approved in 2008. The
goal of the staff working group has been to insure that the DRB ordinance aligns with the adopted
Design Guidelines, the review matrix and the past actions and practice of the Design Review Board.
Planning staff has reviewed and categorized all the Certificates of Compatibility issued since 2001
and draft amendments further defining the scope of the DRB's review authority have been reviewed
and discussed internally by staff but not by the DRB or Lee District Board of Advisors.
The 60 day moratorium expired on December 5, 2015. In their review, staff identified several policy
questions that it believed require feedback from the DRB and the Lee District Board of Advisors. In
order to allow for that to occur, staff requested that the Commission consider adoption of an
additional 60 day moratorium. During that 60 days, staffs plan was to proceed as follows:
1. Complete its draft of proposed code amendments and any recommended changes or
clarifications to the Design Guidelines and review matrix.
2. Place those recommended amendments on the Lee District Design Review Board's agenda for
review and comment.
3. Obtain input and feedback from the Lee District Board of Advisors on the proposed
amendments.
4. Place the recommended amendments on the City Commission's February 1, 2016 agenda for
City Commission consideration.
The City Commission adopted a new moratorium ordinance (No. 15-10814) on first and second
reading December 7, 2015 which has an expiration date of February 7, 2016.
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME
3/07/2016 4:00 P.M.
AGENDA SECTION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: FISCAL APPROVAL:
NO:
BY:
ITEM Development Services FINAL APPROVAL:
Planning
NO:
Page 5 BY: Dean Andrew BY:
Overview of Proposed Amendments
There are no changes proposed to Sections 2-200 — 2-206 of the Design Review Ordinance. An
amendment of Section 2-207 (Ordinance No. 16-10819) was approved on 15t and 2nd reading at the
Commission's February 1, 2016 meeting prior to expiration of the moratorium.
Ordinance No. 16-10824 contains the following proposed amendments:
Section 2-208
The primary change to Section 2-208 is the elimination of the five (5) findings in the ordinance that
Board members have struggled to interpret and apply to Certificate of Compatibility applications over
the years. The proposed amendment states that proposed work requiring a Certificate of
Compatibility will be evaluated based on the Design Guidelines for Downtown Salina and the design
review matrix. The DRB would still be required to make findings in support of their decisions but the
findings would be based on the design guidelines and not factors contained in the Design Review
Board ordinance.
Section 2-209
The proposed amendment to Section 2-209 spells out the requirement for completing and submitting
a Certificate of Compatibility application and required submittals such as pians and elevation
drawings. At the time of submittal, staff will refer to the design review matrix and determine whether
the proposed work is minor work which can be reviewed and approved administratively or major work
which must be reviewed and approved by the Board.
Currently there is no fee charged for Certificate of Compatibility applications but the draft amendment
makes provision for payment of an application fee if the Board of City Commissioners wishes to
create an application fee.
Section 2-210
This section sets out the process for administrative staff review and requires staff to approve or deny
a Certificate of Compatibility within seven (7) days. If approved, staff prepares and issues a
Certificate of Compatibility. If staff denies an application, it must provide written notice to the applicant
and the applicant has the right to appeal staff's denial to the Design Review Board. If an appeal is
filed, the appeal would be scheduled for a hearing before the Board just as with any other application
referred to the Board for review.
This is not a substantive change from the current process.
AGENDA SECTION
NO:
ITEM
NO:
Page 6
Section 2-211
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT:
Development Services
Planning
BY: Dean Andrew
DATE TIME
3/07/2016 4:00 P.M.
FISCAL APPROVAL:
BY:
FINAL APPROVAL:
BY:
This section sets out the review and hearing process for Certificate of Compatibility applications
referred to the Board for review. One substantive change being proposed is an expansion of the
notification area for applications. Currently notice is mailed to all owners of property adjacent to the
request area, including property owners across the street. Under the proposed amendment, the
notification area would be expanded to 200 ft. from the perimeter of the property that is the subject of
the application. In addition to notice to the record owner, the proposed amendment would require that
notice of the hearing also be sent to the places of business located within the 200 ft. notification area.
The other substantive change being proposed is to narrow who can appeal a Design Review Board
decision to the City Commission. Currently "any person dissatisfied with the decision of the Board to
approve or deny a Certificate of Compatibility application" may appeal that decision to the Board of
City Commissioners. The proposed amendment would limit the right of appeal to the applicant, any
owner of property located within the Lee District or any business owner in the Lee District. Staff
believes this makes more sense because only business and property owners within the Lee District
are directly affected by decisions of the Board.
Because any approval of a Certificate of Compatibility by the Board is subject to appeal, the actual
issuance of a Certificate of Compatibility would be held in abeyance until the 14 day appeal period
expires. The applicant would receive notice of the Board's findings and decision but the Certificate
itself would not be issued until the appeal period expires.
Section 2-212
This section is unchanged, except for transferring the authority to issue stop work orders from the
building official to the zoning administrator. The thinking behind this is that the zoning administrator is
in a better position to identify work being done that requires a Certificate of Compatibility than the
building official.
DRB Recommendation
The Lee District Design Review Board (DRB) reviewed the proposed changes to the DRB ordinance
at their January 29, 2016 meeting. Following presentation of the staff report and discussion and
questions, the Lee District Design Review Board voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the proposed
amendments to the DRB ordinance as drafted and recommended by staff.
Lee District Board of Advisors Recommendation
The Lee District Board of Advisors reviewed the proposed changes to the DRB ordinance at their
February 18, 2016 meeting. Following presentation of a staff report and comments from Board
members, the Board unanimously approved a motion endorsing the proposed ordinance changes
AGENDA SECTION
NO:
ITEM
NO:
Page 7
CITY OF SALINA
REQUEST FOR CITY COMMISSION ACTION DATE TIME
3/07/2016 4:00 P.M.
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT
Development Services
Planning
BY: Dean Andrew
FISCAL APPROVAL:
BY:
FINAL APPROVAL:
BY:
with the qualification that they were not in favor of the initiation of a Certificate of Compatibility
application fee. The sentiment of the Board was that there are other types of application fees that
downtown property and business owners already pay and they did not want to see a new fee added.
COMMISSION ACTION:
Staff has identified three(3) alternatives for the City Commission's consideration:
1. The City Commission could approve the proposed amendments to Section 2-208 — 2-211 and
the addition of Section 2-212 to the DRB ordinance as drafted and recommended by staff and
approve Ordinance No. 16-10824 on first reading.
2. The City Commission could approve the proposed amendments witn any additions, deletions
and/or modifications to the ordinance text that the Commission deems appropriate.
3. The City Commission could maintain the status quo and decide that the proposed
amendments should not be made to the DRB ordinance. The Commission should then vote to
deny Ordinance No. 16-10824.
Enclosures: Ordinance No. 16-10824
cc: Penny Bettles, Salina Downtown, Inc.
(Summary published in The Salina Journal on March _, 2016.)
(Published on the City of Salina's website for a minimum of one week from March to , 2016.)
ORDINANCE NUMBER 16-10824
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SALINA CODE SECTIONS 2-208 THROUGH 2-211
AND ADDING SECTION 2-212, ALL PERTAINING TO THE SALINA BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, AND REPEALING THE
EXISTING SECTIONS 2-208 THROUGH 2-211.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Governing Body of the city of Salina, Kansas:
Section 1. Salina Code Section 2-208 is amended to provide u. z follows:
Sec. 2-208. Design Guidelines for Downtown Salina.
Proposed work requiring a certificate of compatibility shall be evaluated on the basis of the
Design Guidelines for Downtown Salina as adopted and amended from time to time by
resolution of the board of commissioners. The proposed work shall be evaluated by the board
unless it has been predetermined to be eligible for administrative staff review and approval in
the design review board matrix, also as adopted and amended from time to time by resolution
of the board of commissioners. The design guidelines and design review board matrix shall be
available in the offices of the department of development services and on the city website.
Section 2. Salina Code Section 2-209 is amended to provide as follows:
Sec. 2-209. Application for a certificate of compatibility.
A building owner or audwrized representative shall make application for a certificate of
compatibility by (a) completing and submitting an application form provided by the city, (b)
attaching the required submittals identified on the application form, and (c) paying the
application fee determined pursuant to Sec. 2-2. Upon submission of an application for a
certificate of compatibility, administrative staff shall respond within seven (7) calendar days by
(a) applying the design review board matrix to determine whether the application requires
administrative staff or board evaluation, (b) advising the applicant of that determination, (c)
determining if evaluation of the application requires additional information or submittals in
order to qualify as a complete application, and (d) if required, advising the applicant of the need
and deadline for providing the additional information or submittals.
Section 3. Salina Cotte Section 2-210 is amended to provide as follows:
Sec. 2-210. Administrative staff evaluation and appeal.
When evaluation of the application for a certificate of compatibility is to be performed by
administrative staff, administrative staff shall evaluate the application and provide the applicant
with written notice of the administrative staff determination within seven (7) calendar days
following the date of submission of a complete application, as follows:
(a) .Issuance of certificate upon approval. If approved, the certificate of compatibility shall be
issued to the applicant and a copy provided to the building services division.
(b) Applicant's right to appeal a denial. If denied, a written notice of denial shall be provided
to the applicant, including a written explanation of the basis for the denial. Only the
applicant may appeal the administrative staff denial by filing a notice of appeal within
fourteen (14) calendar days following the date of the written notice of denial. The notice of
appeal must be filed in the development services department on a form provided by the city.
Scheduling, publication of notice, evaluation of the application on appeal by the board, and
any further appeal from the decision of the board to the board of commissioners shall be
conducted in the same manner outlined in section 2-211.
Section 4. Salina Code Section 2-211 is amended to provide as follows:
Sec. 2-211. Design review board evaluation and appeal.
When evaluation of the application for a certificate of Compatibility is to be performed by the
board, the following process shall occur:
(a) Scheduling of hearing. Within seven (7) calendar days following the date of submission of a
complete application, administrative staff shall schedule the application for public hearing at
the first regular meeting of the board that will allow time for notice under subsection (b) and
shall notify the applicant of the public hearing time and date.
(b) Notice of hearing. Not less than e'en (7) calendar days prior to the public hearing,
administrative staff shall:
(1) Mail by first class mail a, notice of the date, time, and place of the public hearing and a
statement of the nature of the application addressed to the places of business and record
owners of the real estate located within 200 feet of the perimeter boundaries of the real
estate that is the subject of the application that are within the Lee District;
(2) Post a notice of the hearing on the city's website, including the same information
contained in the mailed notice; and
(3) Email notice of the hearing, including the same information contained in the mailed
notice, to all subscribers to the design review board email list maintained by
administrative staff.
(c) Hearing. The public hearing shall be conducted and a record of the public hearing preserved
as the board may determine. Any interested person may appear and be heard in person or by
authorized representative.
(d) Board approval or denial. The board shall (a) evaluate the application on the basis of the
Design Guidelines for Downtown Salina, (b) make written findings of fact based upon
information presented at the public hearing, and (c) either approve or deny the application
following the public hearing, unless the board determines that compelling circumstances
warrant continuing the public hearing. Within seven (7) calendar days after the date of the
board's decision, written notice of the findings of fact and decision of the board shall be
provided to the applicant.
(e) Status of Certificate of Compatibility Pending Expiration of Appeal Period. The certificate
of compatibility shall be held in abeyance pending expiration of the appeal period pursuant
to subsection (f).
(f) Right of Appeal. The applicant, any business owner within the Lee District, or any record
owner of real property within the Lee District may appeal the board's decision to the board
of commissioners by filing a notice of appeal within fourteen (14) calendar days following
the date of the board's decision. The notice of appeal must be filed in the development
services department on a form provided by the city. Within thirty (30) calendar days
following the date the appeal is filed, the board of commissioners shall hear the appeal de
novo and (1) either uphold or reverse the board's decision or (2) refer the application back to
the board for further consideration, with instructions.
(g) No appeal. If an appeal from a decision of the board approving an application is not timely
filed, the certificate of compatibility shall be issuers to the applicant and a copy provided to
the building services division within seven (7) calendar days following expiration of the
appeal period.
(h) Status of certificate on appeal from approval. If :rn appeal from a decision of the board
approving an application is timely filed, issuance of the certificate of compatibility shall be
held in abeyance until the appeal to the board of commissioners has been decided.
(i) Issuance of certificate upon approval on appeal. If an appeal from a decision of the board
results in approval of the application by the board of commissioners, the certificate of
compatibility shall be issued to the applicant and a copy provided to the building services
division within seven (7) calendar days following the date of the decision of the board of
commissioners.
(j) Denial on appeal. it an appeal from a decision of the board results in denial of the
application by the board of commissioners, written notice of the decision of the board of
commissioners shall be provided to the applicant within seven (7) calendar days following
the date of the decision of they board of commissioners.
ction 5. Salina Code Section 2-212 is adopted to provide as follows:
Sec. 2-212. Stop work orders.
Whenever any work is being performed in violation of this article, or other applicable laws or
ordinances implemented through the enforcement of this article, the zoning administrator may
order the work stopped by serving written notice on any person involved in the performance of
the work or the owner of record of the property upon which the work is being performed. Any
such person or owner of record shall immediately stop the work and shall not resume the work
until the building official has determined that performance of the work is in compliance with
any applicable requirements of this article.
Section 6. Existing Salina Code Sections 2-208 through 2-211 are repealed.
Section 7. Summary of ordinance for publication. This ordinance shall be in full force and
effect from and after its adoption and publication once in the official city newspaper.
Ordinance No. 16-10820 Summary
On March 14, 2016, the City of Salina, Kansas, passed Ordinance No. 16-iuvu. The ordinance
amends Sections 2-208 through 2-211 and adds Section 2-212 to the Salina Business Improvement
District Design Review Board Ordinance by setting out the requirements for submitting a certificate
of compatibility, clarifying the criteria to be used by the design review board in evaluating proposed
work, expanding the notification area for design review board, and clarifying the appeals process
for design review board decisions. A complete copy of the ordinance is available at www.salina-
ks.gov or in the office of the city clerk, 300 W. Ash, free of charge. This summary is certified by
the city attorney.
Introduced. March 7, 2016
Passed: March 14, 2016
.ton R Blanchard, Mayor
(SEAL)
ATTEST:
Shandi Wicks, CMC, City Clerk
Certificate of Publication Summary:
Greg A. Bengtson, City Attorney