Extracted text (via pymupdf)
7470 characters
Administrative Review Text Amendments Mary Kopaskie-Brown, Planning Director Rachel Phillips, Assistant Planning Director February 23, 2026 Background - Purpose • Shared goal: Staff, City Council, the development community, and state legislators Streamline and improve development review and entitlement processes • City Council & development community emphasized the need for: predictable, coordinated, and user-friendly processes that support high- quality development and improve customer service • Recent state legislative updates support this effort by requiring objective standards and more administrative decision-making 2 • HB 2447 signed by the governor on March 31, 2025 • Changed existing law to require (without public hearing): Administrative approval of certain land use applications (i.e. site plans, development plans, plats, etc.) Review and approval of design plans to be based on objective standards Changes to State Legislation 3 4 What We Heard - City Council • Improve the development review process to streamline quality development • Eliminate redundancies in the development review process • Strengthen interdepartmental review to ensure consistent and timely reviews • Use data to guide decision-making and enhance transparency • Enhance the customer experience for applicants and improve the overall business climate • Expand support for small businesses, including Ombudsman assistance 5 What We Heard - Development Community • Expand administrative approvals for site plans, site plan modifications, and plats • Clarify and adjust thresholds for major vs minor site plan amendments • Adopt streamlined and flexible infill and redevelopment standards for constrained or unique sites • Reduce uncertainty in the Design Review process through clearer expectations and consistent comments • Maintain predictable timelines and continue to publish development review schedules Proposed Amendments - Overview • Modify existing development/design standards to ensure they are objective • Add new development/design standards to promote high- quality design outcomes • Create a consolidated “Development Plan Review” process • Modify expiration and extension provisions • Modify Alternative Compliance process • Reorganize and reword text for clarity and consistency • Modify and add definitions 6 • Add specificity and ensure current requirements are objective, for example: Add a minimum required depth for horizontal articulation in a wall plane Add a minimum required % of primary building materials to use on publicly visible and non-publicly visible façades Clarify that variations in color or texture not a separate material Proposed Amendments - Modify Existing Development/Design Standards 7 Proposed Amendments - New Development Standards • Add development standards (setbacks, heights, etc.) for the MX District • Add site planning and design standards for the Downtown Districts • Add a maximum lot coverage for Recreational Vehicle and Manufactured Home Subdivisions • Add landscape diversity requirements (i.e., maximum % of plant species per tree, shrub, etc.) • Add requirement for residential amenities based on the number of units • Add requirement that loading of materials occur from truck dock, loading, and service areas 8 Proposed Amendments - New Consolidated Development Plan Review Process • Streamline processes and consolidate Site Plan Review and Design Review • Applicability largely the same, add Middle Housing to exempt projects • Add criteria for when the Planning Director referral to Planning and Zoning Board • Provide clarity on compliance with final site plan or final development plan condition 9 10 • Legislative Development Plan Modification - Meets either of the following general criteria: • Rezoning or Overlay Request • Development Plan Condition Modification – but only if: • Change in Site Plan exceeds objective criteria • Cumulative increase/decrease in total GFA over 10% • An increase in the residential density approved • The addition of a drive-thru lane • An increase in traffic generation (TIS or TIA) over 15% • Change in Use • Administrative Development Plan Modification • Other Site Plan Modifications Proposed Amendments - New Development Plan Modification Process Proposed Amendments - Modify Expiration and Extension Provisions • Make expirations consistent across all land use application types • Change the criteria for when an approval is exercised: Remove requirement for construction to have commenced Retain issuance of a building permit • Change the expiration from 2 years to 5 years • Change the extension allowances: From a 1-year extension from the Planning Director to a 1-year extension from the approving body Allow for the submission of a retroactive request- no later than 90 days after the expiration 11 Proposed Amendments - Modify Alternative Compliance Process • Require applicants to specify requested deviation, proposed alternative, and justification • Amend approval criteria for Alternative: Does not create adverse impacts on safety, access, visibility, glare, privacy, noise, drainage, heat island effect, and does not reduce pedestrian comfort or accessibility Minimum necessary to achieve the intent while maintaining overall compliance with all other applicable standards The proposal either: • Provides equivalent or superior quality and functionality; or • Provides offsetting public benefits (e.g., improved streetscape, enhanced shade/canopy, open space, sustainability features) • Requires recommendation from the Design Review Board 12 • Create unique sections for Site Planning and Design Standards in Chapters 5, 6, 7, and 8 • Move Comprehensive Youth Residences from Ch. 5 to Ch. 31 • Change terminology throughout Code from “site plan” and “design review” to “development plan” or “development plan review” • Change terminology throughout Code from “yard” to “setback” • Consolidate sections in the Code to reduce redundancy • Remove outdated terminology (e.g. Commercial Collectors, Industrial Collectors etc.) Proposed Amendments – Reorganize and Reword Text 13 • Add definitions for terms currently used in the code- “Change of Use,” “Floor Area (Net Floor Area, Habitable Area”), “General Plan Amendment,” “Good Neighbor Policy,” “Plan of Operation,” and "Rezoning" • Add definition of “Development Plan Condition” and “Development Plan Review” • Add a definition of “Kitchen Area” to clarify requirements for Accessory Dwelling Units • Add a definition for “Setbacks” to replace the term Yard used in Code • Modify the definition of “Yard” Proposed Amendments – Modify and Add Definitions 14 15 Outreach • September 16, 2025 - Developers Advisory Forum • September 29, 2025 - Open House • Four Attendees • December 10, 2025 – Planning and Zoning Board – one speaker • Lack of public engagement • Opposition to a “change of use” being a criteria for a Major Development Plan Modification 16 Outreach • January 2026-February 2026 • Additional Outreach with Stakeholders • Approximately 250 comments received (many duplicative) • Two Stakeholder group meetings • Three individual meetings with stakeholders • Communicated Council Direction on Legislative Development Plan Modification • Staff/Stakeholders agreed to several modifications to design standards, definitions and other clarifications in the updated text amendments Questions? 18