18.08.603 - Major Site Plan Review
(a) Purpose This section describes the process by which proposed development is reviewed for compliance with the development and design standards of this Title. The major site plan review procedure ensures that potential impacts of development are considered before submittal of an application for construction plan approval or issuance of a building permit.
(b) Applicability Approval of a major site plan review according to the procedures and criteria in this section is required for the following uses, development, and activities, unless exempted under Subsection (c), below:
(1) Specified Development Applications All development activities expressly made subject to a major site plan review in this Title.
(c) Exemptions The following are exempt from the major site plan review procedure, but are subject to the standards of this Title:
(1) Accessory Structures Accessory structures with combined gross floor areas no larger than 1,000 square feet on each parcel.
(2) Additions to Nonresidential Facilities A structural addition to nonresidential facilities that would require a major site plan review are exempt if the following conditions are met:
a. The addition does not exceed 20 percent of the size of the original development or 20,000 square feet in size, whichever is smaller.
b. The construction of the proposed addition will not materially alter the original major site plan application in that no new use is involved in the addition that would itself require discretionary review, no potentially deleterious aspect of the development will be increased, the proposed addition will not have significant impacts on neighboring properties, the size of the property has not been increased, and the proposed addition will continue to comply with other conditions of the approval.
c. The exemption provided in this Paragraph may be used only once per property.
(3) Certain Urban Districts Projects that meet the standards of Subsection 18.04.1002(c)(1), Certain Development Exempt from Discretionary Review, with Exceptions.
(4) Solar Structures Solar structures, classified as accessory alternative utility systems.
(d) Application Submittal and Review Procedures Figure 8-10, below, identifies the applicable steps from Article 3, Common Review Procedures, that apply to the review of major site plan review applications. Additions or modifications to the common review procedures are noted below.
Figure 8-10: Summary of Major Site Plan Review Procedures
[image omitted; see the official code]
(1) Application Submittal and Handling Major site plan review applications shall be submitted, accepted, and revised, and may be withdrawn, in accordance with Section 18.08.303, Application Submittal and Handling.
(2) Applications Subject to Major Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit The processing of any development subject to a major site plan review and a conditional use permit shall be combined into a single application for a conditional use permit and processed in accordance with Section 18.08.605, Conditional Use Permit. Both the findings for a major site plan review and conditional use permit shall be made and listed in the staff report.
(3) Staff Review and Action The Administrator shall review the application and prepare a staff report and recommendation in accordance with Section 18.08.304, Review and Action.
(4) Scheduling and Notice of Public Hearing The major site plan review application shall be scheduled for a public hearing before the Planning Commission and noticed in accordance with Section 18.08.305, Scheduling and Notice of Public Hearings.
(5) Review and Decision
a. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing within 65 days of application.
b. The Planning Commission shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application within 30 days from the date of the hearing in accordance with Section 18.08.306, Review and Decision, based on the general approval criteria in subsection 18.08.304(e), Approval Criteria Applicable to all Applications and the specific findings for major site plan review applications in subsection 18.08.605(e), Findings, below.
(6) Appeal The decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council in accordance with Subsection 18.08.307(j), Appeal.
(7) Post-Decision Actions and Limitations All common procedures in Section 18.08.307, Post-Decision Actions and Limitations, shall apply, with the following modifications:
a. Time Limitations and Extensions
1. Time Limitations
[a] Major site plan reviews that accompany tentative maps shall be valid as long as the tentative map is valid.
[b] The owner or developer shall apply for a building permit for the entire project within 18 months of the date of approval of the major site plan review application and maintain the validity of that permit, or the major site plan review approval shall be null and void unless a different time limitation was established at the time of final approval based on the characteristics and complexity of the project.
2. Extension by the Administrator
[a] The Administrator may extend the time limit by up to 12 months if a request is received prior to the expiration of the time limit to apply for a building permit under a major site plan review, provided that:
i. The applicant agrees to comply with all requirements of this Title and all conditions of approval; and
ii. The applicant agrees to pay all applicable fees.
[b] No more than one administrative time extension shall be approved for any project or project phase.
3. Extension by the Planning Commission
[a] The Planning Commission may extend the time limit by six additional months if an application is received by the Administrator 45 days prior to the expiration of the extension granted by the Administrator, and the Planning Commission approves a schedule indicating that the applicant will apply for a building permit for the entire project or the relevant phase within the six-month extension.
[b] In reviewing any such extension request, the Planning Commission shall consider the continued appropriateness of the project in the approved location and may add conditions to ensure that the project does not adversely impact other properties and to protect the public interest.
[c] No more than one six-month time extension shall be approved for any project or project phase.
(e) Findings In addition to meeting the criteria in Section 18.08.304(e), Approval Criteria Applicable to all Applications, the following findings shall be made prior to granting a major site plan review permit:
(1) General
a. The proposed design is compatible with surrounding development;
b. The proposed design is consistent with applicable development standards;
c. Public services and facilities are available to serve the project, or will be provided with development;
d. The characteristics of the project as proposed and as may be conditioned are reasonably compatible with the types of development permitted in the surrounding area; and
e. The approval will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. The factors to be considered in evaluating this application shall include:
1. Property damage or nuisance resulting from noise, smoke, odor, dust, vibration, or illumination; and
2. Any hazard to persons and property.
(2) Mixed-Use Downtown (MD-) Districts In addition to the general major site plan review findings, the following findings shall be made prior to approving a major site plan review to modify the supplemental standards for the Mixed-Use Downtown Riverwalk (MD-RD) District:
a. Strict application of the building envelope, height restrictions, Riverfront Esplanade setbacks, or provision of the design guidelines would constrain the design of the project;
b. The proposed project will not negatively impact the visual integrity of the river or result in a visual barrier to the river corridor;
c. The project provides adequate separation from the river course to allow for public circulation along the river corridor and creates pedestrian oriented public spaces adjacent to the river;
d. The project does not unduly shade the North Esplanade, or increased shading has been mitigated by providing additional or enhanced pedestrian amenities;
e. The project will enhance or preserve environmental resources;
f. The project does not impede flood flows; and
g. The project will be used by and benefits local residents.
(3) Cluster Development In addition to the general major site plan review findings, the following findings shall be made prior to approving a major site plan review in cluster developments:
a. The clustering proposal, compared with a more traditional site development plan, better attains the policies and objectives of this article, such as providing more open space, preserving existing trees and vegetation coverage, preserving view corridors, and preserving sensitive environmental areas such as stream corridors, slide areas, wetlands, and steep slopes;
b. The clustering proposal will have no significant adverse impact on adjacent properties or development, or the applicant has agreed to adopt appropriate mitigation measures such as edge matching, landscaping, screening, illumination standards, and other design features to buffer and protect adjacent properties from the proposed clustered development; and
c. The clustering proposal meets all other applicable requirements set forth in this article or in other applicable ordinances or regulations.
(4) Grading Activity In addition to the general major site plan review findings, the following findings shall be made prior to approving a major site plan review for the following: (1) Grading resulting in cuts deeper than 20 feet and/or fills greater than 10 feet in height; (2) Hillside development meeting the criteria in Section 18.04.402, Applicability; (3) Grading within a major drainageway meeting the criteria in section 18.04.104(c) Applicability; or (4) Grading within the Parks, Greenways, and Open Space (PGOS) District, except for paths, public recreational amenities, or environmental restoration.
a. Findings The following findings shall be made prior to granting a major site plan review (or conditional use permit, if elevated), in addition to the general major site plan review findings:
1. The proposed project mitigates environmental degradation, including slope failure, erosion, sedimentation, and stormwater run-off;
2. The proposed project utilizes grading practices that are appropriate for hillsides and designed to minimize the visibility of unsightly scarring;
3. The proposed project provides open space based on hillside constraints;
4. The proposed project adheres to applicable hillside development design standards and to Master Plan provisions related to development in sloped areas; and
5. The proposed project's site layout and design features adequately mitigate potential visual impacts of development near prominent ridgelines and within other visually prominent areas.
(Ord. No. 6692, § 1(Exh. A), 1-8-25)
