A. In review of a Type II Site and Design Review Application described in Section 16.49.035.A.1, the Planning Director shall, in exercising his powers, duties or functions, determine whether there is compliance with the DCO site and design review standards.
B. In review of a Type III Site and Design Review Application, the Board shall, in exercising or performing its powers, duties or functions, determine whether there is compliance with the following:
1. The proposed site development, including the site plan, architecture, landscaping and graphic design, is in conformance with the standards of this and other applicable city ordinances insofar as the location, height and appearance of the proposed development are involved; and
2. The proposed design of the development is compatible with the design of other developments in the same general vicinity; and
3. The location, design, size, color and materials of the exterior of all structures and signs are compatible with the proposed development and appropriate to the design character of other structures in the same vicinity.
4. The proposed development incorporates the use of LID best management practices whenever feasible based on site and soil conditions. LID best management practices include, but are not limited to, minimizing impervious surfaces, designing on-site LID stormwater management facilities, and retaining native vegetation.
5. The Board shall, in making its determination of compliance with this Ordinances, shall use the matrix in Table 16.49.040 to determine compatibility unless this matrix is superseded by another matrix applicable to a specific zone or zones under this title. An application is considered to be compatible with the standards of Table 16.49.040 if the following conditions are met:
a. The development accumulates a minimum of 60 percent of the total possible number of points from the list of design criteria in Table 16.49.040; and
b. At least 10 percent of the points used to comply with (a) above must be from the list of LID Elements in Table 16.49.040.
6. Street lights installation may be required on any public street or roadway as part of the Design Review Application.
D. In review of a Type III Site and Design Review Application, the Board shall, in exercising or performing its powers, duties or functions, determine whether there is compliance with the INTENT of the design review standards set forth in this ordinance.
E. The Board shall, in making its determination of compliance with the above requirements, be guided by the objectives and standards set forth in this ordinance. It must be demonstrated that all required public facilities and services are available, or will become available through the development, to adequately meet the needs of the proposed development. If the site and design review plan includes utility facilities or public utility facility, then the City Planner shall determine whether those aspects of the proposed plan comply with applicable standards.
F. The Board shall, in making its determination of compliance with the requirements set forth, consider the effect of its action on the availability and cost of needed housing. The Board shall not use the requirements of this section to exclude needed housing types. However, consideration of these factors shall not prevent the Board from imposing conditions of approval necessary to meet the requirements of this section. The costs of such conditions shall not unduly increase the cost of housing beyond the minimum necessary to achieve the purposes of this ordinance.
G. As part of the site and design review, the property owner may apply for approval to cut trees in addition to those allowed in Chapter 12.32, the city Tree ordinance. The granting or denial of said application will be based on the criteria in Chapter 12.32. The cutting of trees does not in and of itself constitute change in the appearance of the property which would necessitate application for site and design review. (Ord. 848, Part III, section 2, 1991; Ord. 955 section 24 & 25, 1996; Ord.1237, 2007, Ord.1296, 2008; Ord. 1338, 2010; Ord. 1514, 2019)
Table 16.49.040 Site Design Review Menu
As part of Site and Design Review, the following menu shall be used as part of the review. In Ord.er to “pass” this table 60% of total possible points shall be earned,
10% of the total possible points must be from LID elements
Design Criteria | Possible Points | ||||
Parking | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Screening of parking and/or loading facilities from public right-of-way | Not screened | Partially screened | Fully screened | - | - |
Parking lot lighting provided | No | Yes | - | - | - |
Parking location (behind building is best) | Front | Side | Behind | - | - |
Number of parking spaces provided (% of minimum required) | >120% | 101-120% | 100% | - | - |
Screening of Storage Areas and Utility Boxes | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Trash storage is screened from view by solid wood fence, masonry wall or landscaping. | No | Yes | - | - | - |
Trash storage is located away from adjacent property lines. | 0 - 10 feet from adjacent property | 11 - 25 feet from adjacent property | >25 feet from adjacent property | - | - |
Utility equipment, including rooftop equipment, is screened from view. | Not screened | Partially screened | Fully screened | - | - |
Access | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Distance of access to nearest intersection. | ≤70 feet | 71 - 100 feet | >100 feet | - | - |
Pedestrian walkways from public street/sidewalks to building entrances. | One entrance connected. | - | Walkways connecting all public streets/ sidewalks to building entrances. | - | - |
Pedestrian walkways from parking lot to building entrance. | No walkways | Walkway next to building only | Walkways connecting all parking areas to building entrances | . | |
Design Criteria | Possible Points | ||||
Tree Retention | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Percentage of trees retained | <10% | 10-50% | 51-75% | >75% | - |
Replacement of trees removed | <50% | ≥50% | - | - | - |
Signs | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Dimensional size of sign (% of maximum permitted) | >75% | 50-75% | <50% | - | - |
Similarity of sign color to building color | Not similar | Somewhat similar | Similar | - | - |
Pole sign used | Yes | No | - | - | - |
Building Appearance | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Style (similar to surroundings) | Not similar | Somewhat similar (1 or 2 points possible depending on level of similarity) | - | - | |
Color (subdued and similar to surroundings is better) | Neither | Similar or subdued | Both | - | - |
Material (concrete, wood and brick are best) | Either 1 or 2 points may assigned at the discretion of the Site and Design Review Board | ||||
Size of building (smaller is better) | >20,000 square feet | ≤20,000 square feet | - | - | - |
Provision of public art (i.e. murals, statues, fountains, decorative bike racks, etc.) | No | - | - | - | Yes |
Landscaping | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Number of non-required trees provided | - | At least one tree per 500 square feet of landscaping. | - | - | - |
Amount of grass (less grass is better) (% of total landscaped area) | >50% | 25-50% | <25% | - | - |
Low Impact Development (LID) | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Use of pervious paving materials (% of total paved area) | <10% | - | 10-50% | 51-75% | >75% |
Provision of park or open space area | None | - | Open space (Generally not for public use) | - | Park (public or privately owned for public use) |
Design Criteria | Possible Points | ||||
Use of drought tolerant species in landscaping (% of total plants) | <25% drought tolerant | - | 25-50% drought tolerant | 51-75% drought tolerant | >75% drought tolerant |
Provision of additional interior parking lot landscaping (% of minimum required) | 100% | 101-110% | 111-120% | >120% | - |
Provision of an eco-roof or rooftop garden (% of total roof area) | <10% | - | - | 10-50% | >50% |
Parking integrated within building footprint (below-grade, structured parking, or tuck-under parking) (% of total on-site parking) | <10% | - | - | 10-50% | >50% |
Disconnecting downspouts from city stormwater facilities | None | Some downspouts disconnected | All downspouts disconnected | - | - |
Shared parking with adjacent uses or public parking structure (% of total required parking spaces) | None | <50% | ≥50% | - | - |
Provision of rain gardens/bioretention areas for stormwater runoff (% of total landscaped area) | None | - | 10-50% | 51-75% | >75% |
Total Possible Points = 71, 60%=42.6 points, 10%=7.1 points | |||||
(Ord. 1296, 2008; Ord. 1338, 2010)