24.105.300 Streamlining procedures.
On January 13, 2022, Ordinance No. 2021-017 became effective, which established streamlining regulations for the portions of the city located outside of the coastal zone. This section was created to incorporate similar provisions into the local implementation plan (LIP) in order to have more consistent streamlining regulations apply citywide.
This section amends procedural and processing requirements of this title, the downtown specific plan and midtown corridors development code for properties within the coastal zone, as reflected in the LIP. In situations where this section and other parts of this title, the downtown specific plan or the midtown corridors development code conflict, each as reflected in the LIP, the terms of this section shall prevail.
A. Decision-Making Authority. The design review committee and historic preservation committee are recommending bodies. Decision-making authority for all development applications in the coastal zone shall be by the director at an administrative level, at a director’s hearing, planning commission hearing, or city council hearing, as specified below.
1. For new development that includes one or more major variance(s) or exception(s), or requires a subdivision-tentative map, the decision-making authority shall be the planning commission.
2. For new development that includes one or more minor variance(s) or warrant(s), or is otherwise compliant with zoning regulations, the decision-making authority shall be a director’s hearing.
3. For all use permits, the decision-making authority shall be a director’s hearing.
4. All appeals of actions shall be heard by the city council. Any decision made by the city council shall be final, except that appeals of coastal development permits, or other applications processed concurrently with a coastal development permit, shall be processed pursuant to Section 24.515.130 as reflected in the LIP.
B. Interrelated Applications. When multiple, interrelated applications are submitted for a proposed project that requires, as a necessary component, one or more actions by a combination of the city council, planning commission or the director, the decision-making authority shall be as follows:
1. When decision-making authority for components of the proposed project is shared between the planning commission and director, the director shall forward the entire project application package to the planning commission who shall become the decision-making authority for all component applications.
2. When decision-making authority for components of the proposed project is shared between the city council and other decision-making authorities, the city council shall become the decision-making authority for all application components and the other decision-making authority/authorities shall become a recommending body/recommending bodies for the entire project application package.
C. Forwarding Applications. The director may forward any application that does not otherwise require review by the design review committee or historic preservation committee, to the design review committee or historic preservation committee for a recommendation. The director may forward any application for which the director is authorized to take an administrative action to a director’s hearing or to the planning commission for action.
D. Historic Preservation.
1. The director may require applications for any development proposal involving buildings or structures over 40 years of age that are not designated or have not been identified in a previous historic resources survey adopted by the city council to provide a historic resources assessment report (or “Phase I”) prepared by a city-designated historic preservation professional and funded by the applicant. The director will base this decision on the following considerations:
a. The building or structure appears to retain historic integrity; and
b. There is evidence that the building or structure embodies the distinctive characteristics of an architectural style or type, or is associated with someone on the city’s list of significant architects and builders; or
c. There is evidence that the building or structure is associated with important historical events or persons.
2. If the director determines a building or structure is a potential historic resource, then historic design review is required.
3. Designation or removal of a designation as a landmark or point of interest shall occur by a recommendation from the historic preservation committee to the city council for final action.
4. The historic preservation committee will make a recommendation to the planning commission for the establishment of a historic district. The planning commission will make a recommendation on the establishment of a historic district to the city council for final action.
E. Design Review. Design review approval is required prior to any human-made change to improved or unimproved real property, including, but not limited to, construction of structures, paving, grading, landscaping, and signage, unless otherwise provided in this chapter. Such changes shall be considered development requiring design review for the purposes of this chapter.
1. Design review shall be categorized as major design review, minor design review or historic design review. An application for major, minor, or historic design review shall require a complete application and payment of fees by the property owner or agent and shall be reviewed and acted upon by the director, except that minor design review may be administratively approved by the director without notice or hearing, except as otherwise required for any interrelated approvals for the subject development.
a. Major Design Review. Major design review shall be required for development that adds five or more residential units, new nonresidential structures greater than or equal to 2,000 square feet of gross area, or additions to existing nonresidential structures greater than or equal to a 25 percent increase in the square footage or lot coverage of an existing nonresidential structure. Development subject to this subsection shall be referred to the design review committee (DRC) for a recommendation to the decision-making authority at a noticed public hearing.
b. Minor Design Review. Unless specifically exempted by subsection (E)(3) of this section, all other development that does not qualify for major design review shall require minor design review, including but not limited to:
i. Development that adds three or four residential units, new nonresidential structures less than 2,000 square feet of gross area, or additions to existing nonresidential structures less than a 25 percent increase in the square footage or lot coverage of an existing nonresidential structure.
ii. Facade changes, including change of color, paint, windows, and awnings.
iii. Site and landscape modifications.
iv. New or modified fences and walls.
v. Lighting improvements, including ground- and building-mounted fixtures.
vi. All signs and sign programs.
vii. Screening enclosures for equipment-storage, trash, and similar items.
viii. Outdoor dining areas or enclosures.
ix. Minor changes. The director may forward any minor design review application to the design review committee for a recommendation. A referral of a minor design review application to the design review committee shall be placed on a meeting agenda but shall not require notice or a public hearing, except as otherwise required for any interrelated approvals for the subject development. Any minor design review project that the director determines is likely to have significant public interest due to scope, location or any other issue, shall be required to provide mailed notice, posted notice and pay applicable fees prior to any administrative action. The director shall include any prior improvements that resulted in the addition of units or nonresidential building area over the past 24 months when determining whether a project qualifies as major or minor design review. For purposes of this section, any type of accessory dwelling unit shall not count as a unit for the determination of major or minor design review, except as otherwise required for any interrelated approvals for the subject development.
c. Historic Design Review. Development on a property within or immediately adjacent to a designated historic district (HD) overlay zone, alterations or additions to a property of a designated historic landmark, a property identified as eligible in a historic resources survey adopted by the city council, or a contributor to a designated HD overlay zone, new construction or adjacent to a designated historic landmark, or affecting a potential historic resource as determined by the director, shall require historic design review. The historic design review process will be based on the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
i. Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) affecting an identified or potential historic resource shall require minor design review.
ii. All other development, alterations or additions the director determines may have an impact on an identified or potential historic resource shall be referred to the historic preservation committee (HPC) for a recommendation to the decision-making authority at a noticed public hearing.
2. Consideration of minor design or color changes may be referred to the DRC by the decision-making authority as a condition of any permit or other approval granted pursuant to this division. If there are substantial changes, the decision-making authority shall continue the hearing and refer the application for a DRC recommendation prior to the decision-making authority’s final action hearing.
3. Exemptions. Development associated with the following is exempt from design review in all cases:
a. Single-family and two-family residential properties, except as required by subsection (E)(1)(c) of this section;
b. Accessory dwelling units, except if a historic resource is involved, as required by subsection (E)(1)(c) of this section;
c. Site, landscaping or structural aspects of:
i. Temporary uses allowed by Chapter 24.120;
ii. Farmers’ market, certified;
iii. Mobile homes;
iv. Animal husbandry, apiculture, crop production, horticulture, produce sales on agriculturally zoned properties;
v. Repair, or repainting, of conforming structures to match previously permitted conditions;
vi. Resurfacing of paved areas to match previously permitted conditions;
vii. Replanting of landscaping to match previously permitted conditions;
viii. Changes to the interior design or layouts of buildings or other structures unless the director determines a publicly visible exterior is significantly affected by the change;
ix. Development that is exempted by state law from local design review; and
x. Any development the director determines is de minimis.
4. Findings for Design Review. Prior to granting an approval of an application for design review, the decision-making authority must make all of the following findings:
a. The design and layout of the proposed development is consistent with the applicable policies and provisions of the certified comprehensive plan and any adopted city-wide design architectural criteria or design criteria for specialized areas, such as designated historic districts, theme areas, planned developments, or specific plans that the project is located in, as reflected in the city’s certified LCP;
b. The design and layout of the proposed development will accommodate the functions and activities that are proposed for the property, will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing, or future developments, and will not create traffic or pedestrian hazards;
c. The site, architectural, and landscape design of the proposed development is reasonably compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and all reasonable design efforts have been made to maintain the harmonious, orderly, and attractive development contemplated by this zoning ordinance and the comprehensive plan as reflected in the city’s certified LCP; and
d. The design of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment for its occupants and visiting public as well as its neighbors and that it is aesthetically of good composition, materials, texture, and color that will remain aesthetically appealing with the level of maintenance and upkeep that might reasonably be expected of the occupants.
F. Noticing. Coastal development permits shall be noticed pursuant to Section 24.515.100 as reflected in the LIP. In addition, the following noticing requirements shall apply:
1. Courtesy Notice. The additional requirement of a courtesy notice requires postal cards or letters mailed within the first 30 days of formal application submittal to the owners of all property and tenants within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property involved in the application.
2. Mailed notices for applications other than coastal development permits shall include owners and tenants within 300 feet of the property involved in the application. Coastal development permits shall continue to require mailed notices to owners within 300 feet and tenants within 100 feet of the property involved in the application, as required by Section 24.515.100.
3. Courtesy notices and mailed notices are required for all zoning applications that require a public hearing, except that courtesy notices are not required in cases where the director refers an administrative action to a public hearing.
4. Posted notice is required for all applications that require a public hearing. Posted notices shall comply with the following standards:
a. Notice Location, Size, Structure and Height. Posted notices shall adhere to one of the following standards:
i. Posted notices shall be placed along each street frontage of the property that is the subject of the hearing not more than 10 feet from the property line and in an area that is most visible to the public, subject to approval by the city. If necessary, multiple signs may be required, on each street frontage, as determined by the director. However, on corner lots, notices shall not be posted within the vehicular sight distance area, defined as the corner area within a 90-degree right triangle containing two 10-foot sides.
ii. Each posted notice shall be placed on a white four feet high by eight feet wide signboard made of one-half-inch MDO plywood or one-quarter-inch coroplast (corrugated vinyl). Where the signboard is made of MDO plywood, it shall be supported by two two-inch by four-inch posts, with one-inch by three-inch stringers to support the signboard. The signboard and supporting structure shall not exceed six feet in height and shall not be illuminated.
b. For projects involving existing buildings or structures, hearing notices may be posted in the storefront window of the property in question; provided, that they are posted in an area that is most visible to the public, subject to approval by the city.
i. Each hearing notice shall be placed on white 24-inch by 36-inch paper. When mounted outside, the hearing notice shall be mounted on signboard made of one-half-inch MDO plywood or one-quarter-inch coroplast (corrugated vinyl). Where the signboard is made of MDO plywood, it shall be supported by two two-inch by four-inch posts, when necessary. The signboard and supporting structure shall not exceed six feet in height and shall not be illuminated.
G. Coastal Development Permits. Coastal development permits, of any type, shall be required pursuant to state law and Chapter 24.515 as reflected in the LIP. All coastal development permit applications shall be processed based on Sections 24.105.090 and 24.515.070 as reflected in the LIP, except as follows:
1. Coastal development permit applications that have one or more major variance(s) or exception(s) or require a subdivision-tentative map shall be acted on by the planning commission.
2. Coastal development permit applications that have one or more minor variance(s) or warrant(s), and/or otherwise comply with zoning regulations, shall be acted on at a director’s hearing.
3. Courtesy notices, as set forth in subsection (F)(1) of this section, are required for all coastal development permit applications.
4. In cases where a coastal development permit is required, the coastal development permit may substitute for any required planned development permit. In no case shall a planned development permit substitute for a coastal development permit.
H. Findings for Warrants and Exceptions. The downtown specific plan and midtown corridors development code define development standards and provide a warrant and exception process for variation from those standards. In order for the decision-making authority to approve a warrant or exception, all applicable findings must be made by the decision-making authority as follows:
1. Warrants.
a. The project design reasonably achieves the intent of the standard for which the warrant is requested.
b. The warrant does not result in the project being incompatible with the surrounding area.
c. The warrant would not result in impacts detrimental to or that would adversely impact adjacent properties.
2. Exceptions.
a. The project authorized by the exception is consistent with the policies and provisions of the comprehensive plan.
b. There are special conditions, or exceptional circumstances, involving the physical attributes of the subject property, including, without limitation, its size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, which do not apply generally to the properties in the same vicinity and zone.
c. Approval of the exception is necessary because strict application of the zoning ordinance would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone.
d. Approval of the exception does not grant a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the same vicinity or zone.
e. Approval of the exception is not based on economic hardship.
3. Additional Finding in the Hillside Overlay. The warrant or exception from one or more standards for a project in the hillside overlay would not directly result in unreasonably or unnecessarily interfering with the scenic view from any other public or private property, including, but not limited to, public streets and other public areas.
4. Additional Finding for an Identified or Potential Historic Resource. The warrant or exception from one or more standards may be granted if determined to be necessary to preserve those portions or features which convey the building or structure’s historical, cultural or architectural values.
5. Findings to Be Used for Warrants for Civic Buildings in Addition to the Warrant Findings in Subsection (H)(1) of This Section. The warrant is necessary to provide a public service and the associated project is designed to feature as a prominent, architecturally significant contribution to the built environment.
I. Miscellaneous.
1. References to “administrative” permits are amended as follows:
a. Administrative variances that require planning commission action (including those defined in Section 24.535.110 as reflected in the LIP) shall be classified as major variances.
b. Administrative variances that do not require planning commission action (including those defined in Section 24.535.070 as reflected in the LIP), and sign variances, shall be classified as minor variances and shall require action at a director’s hearing.
c. Administrative use permits are now classified as use permits. All use permits shall require action at a director’s hearing.
d. Administrative coastal development permits and coastal development permits shall be acted upon at a public hearing based on the following standards:
i. A project that qualifies for a coastal development permit under Chapter 24.515 that includes a major variance or exception, or requires a subdivision-tentative map, shall require action by the planning commission.
ii. All other coastal development permits shall require action at a director’s hearing.
2. A minor variance or warrant/exception is required for parking spaces that do not comply with the design and dimension standards of Chapter 24.415 as reflected in the LIP.
3. Alcohol beverage establishments shall require a use permit acted on at a director’s hearing, for the purpose of ensuring public health and safety.
4. Parking approvals in the downtown parking (DP) overlay zone shall be processed based on Chapter 24.510 as reflected in the LIP, except that parking approval request shall require a use permit. Note that Chapter 24.515 requires a coastal development permit in addition to the use permit.
5. Zoning Amendments. Zone changes or amendments to text shall be processed based on Chapter 24.540 as reflected in the LIP, except as follows:
a. Zoning amendments are reviewed by the planning commission for a recommendation to city council.
b. Design review committee review is not required.
6. Development Agreements. Development agreements in the coastal zone shall be processed based on Chapter 24.550 as reflected in the LIP, except as follows:
a. The director may initiate applications requesting consideration and adoption of a development agreement, provided a person having a sufficient legal or equitable interest in the subject real property has provided a written statement of consent.
b. A planning commission action rejecting a proposed development agreement shall be forwarded to the city council for final action.
c. Design review committee review of a development agreement is not required.
7. Specific Plans. The procedure for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of specific plans shall be based on Chapter 24.555 as reflected in the LIP, except as follows:
a. Design review committee review of a specific plan is not required; however, the director may refer portions of a specific plan related to design standards or guidelines to the design review committee for a recommendation.
8. Permit Amendment, Revocation and Reevaluation. The procedure for the amendment, revocation or reevaluation of a zoning permit shall be based on Chapter 24.570 as reflected in the LIP, except as follows:
a. Amendments to any zoning permit shall be acted on by the director at a public hearing. Amendments that result in major changes to a project acted on by the planning commission or city council shall be referred to the planning commission or city council, as applicable, for final action.
b. Revocation or reevaluation of a permit for cause may be initiated by city staff. The hearing will be held by the decision-making authority, or the city council. For revocation or reevaluation, the decision-making authority is that which has the authority to act on the permit as of January 13, 2022, or the date of final certification by the Coastal Commission of this chapter for permits in the coastal zone. (Ord. No. 2022-009, § 1, 6-27-22; Ord. No. 2024-005, §§ 1 – 16, 6-4-24)