zoning code and design guidelines workshop€¦ · o require at least one street tree ... zoning...

Department of Community Development August 25, 2014

Tricia Stevens

Planning and Environmental Review

Zoning Code and Design

Guidelines Workshop

August 25, 2014 Department of Community Development – Making It Happen! 2

Zoning Code and Design Guidelines Workshop

Workshop Agenda

Staff presentation of Zoning Code Second Public

Review Draft and Design Guidelines

Commission questions and comments

Public comments

No formal action - provide direction to staff

Determine if September 4 Hearing is needed



DEVELOPMENT CODE

PACKAGE



• Urban Farming; Raising of Chickens

• Parking of RVs, Boats and Trailers

• Major Revisions to Sign Requirements

• Shopping Cart Retrieval Program

Amendments Deferred Until After Adoption

Amendments on a Separate Path

• Recycling

• Alcohol Sales



OBJECTIVES

Provide business and user friendly practices that

promote economic development and streamline the

entitlement process, providing flexibility while

insuring appropriate community review.

Achieve higher standards for the quality of the built

environment through enhanced Design Guidelines

and Development Standards.

Promote sustainable development practices through

enhanced Design Guidelines and Development

Standards that promote low-impact development,

active design, walkable communities, energy

efficiency, and water conservation.



Zoning Code Update

• First major update in 30+

Years

• Initiated in 2007 and

re-Initiated in 2013

• Zoning Code is the

regulatory document with

definitive standards:

“shall”



Design Guidelines

• Consolidates existing

and new Guidelines

• New Single-Family and

“New Communities”

Chapters

• New Single-Family

Design Review Program

• Design Guidelines are desired objectives: “should”



User Guide

• Case Studies

• Guide to using

the Zoning Code

• Guide to the

development

process

• Links to different

regulations



Outreach:

Board of Supervisors workshop

Planning Commission workshop

Community Planning Advisory Councils (CPAC)

External Stakeholder Group – business and

developer interests

Internal stakeholders

Environmental Council of Sacramento (ECOS)

California Grocers Association

County Disability Advisory Committee

Chamber of Commerce

Other groups



Overall Organization

• Collapse uses into

more general

categories

• Add “Use Standards”

to replace footnotes

• Consolidate multiple

Use Tables into a

single table



Streamline Entitlement Process and Promote

Economic Development

• Lower hearing authority levels reducing timelines and cost

• Add a new staff-level administrative minor use permit

• Special Development Permit to replace prior variances,

exceptions, lot reduction permits, and review of parking

• Protect the Community Planning Advisory Council process

– Denials bump project to Planning Commission (no change)

– Appeals to the Board of Supervisors with a finding of community-

wide concern by the CPAC (changes explained later)



Outreach Comments:

• Some uses are highly controversial and the

hearing authority should not be lowered

• Development interests think Zoning Code

should be more aggressive on reducing

hearing authority

• Minor use permits need clear criteria and

County needs to be careful to balance public

input and streamlining



Responses and Changes:

• Staff proposals strike a balance

• Lowering of hearing authority from Board to Planning

Commission are for local uses; regional uses stay at

Board

• Many uses lowered to ZA; controversial items with

CPAC denial automatically heard by Planning

Commission

• Added criteria to minor use permits



• Greater Mix of Uses Without

Barriers

• Higher Intensities/Densities

• Options for Shared or Reduced

Parking

• Place Making Opportunities

• Enhanced Pedestrian Circulation

New Mixed-Use Zones

Santana Row

San Jose, CA



Outreach and Responses

• Overwhelming support for creation of Mixed Use Zones

• Added Design Guidelines and Zoning Code standards

to address internal protection of residential uses from

utility areas



Landscaping

• Focus on low impact

development practices,

drought tolerant plantings,

and water conservation

• Commercial and industrial areas - Increase in the size of

planters and number of trees

• Residential areas

o Require at least one street tree

o Maintenance and irrigation required

o Waiver for lawns during drought; not trees and shrubs



Outreach Comments and Responses:

• Residential:

o Number of street trees changed to one tree for lots

under 7,500 sq. ft.; two trees if greater than 7,500

square feet

o Applies to new construction

o Alternative landscaping materials allowed

• Landscaping plans to comprehensively address

stormwater quality design, water conservation,

shading, and screening

o Maximum use of sustainable landscaping practices



Parking

• Evaluated minimum parking requirements to ensure

consistency with adjacent jurisdictions

• Provides greater options for shared parking

• Reduced parking for many uses

• Reduction for proximity to transit

• Alternatives to satisfy shading requirements – solar



Decrease in Minimum Number of Spaces

• Churches: from 1/3 Seats to 1/4 Seats

• Bank/S&L: from 5.0/1,000 to 3.0/1,000

• Office: from 4.5/1,000 to 3.5/1,000

• Medical/Dental: from 6.5/1,000 to 4.5/1,000

• General Retail: from 4.5/1,000 to 4.0/1,000

• Multi-Family: from 2.0 to 1.5 per unit

Increase in Minimum Number of Spaces • Hospital: from 2/Bed to 2/Bed, Plus 1/3 Employees

• Congregate Care: from 1/3 Beds to 1/3 Beds, Plus

1/3 Employees



Outreach Comments and Responses:

• Justification for parking reductions requested

• County reductions are comparable to other

jurisdictions in Northern California

• Example: New standard for medical/dental

offices of 4.5/1,000 is more than the City of

Sacramento and close to the cities of Napa and

Rocklin



Multi-Family Development Standards

• Form-based approach to multi-family standards by

reducing most definitive standards and relying on Design

Guidelines

• Setback for two-three story multi-family adjacent to single-

family reduced from 100 feet to 20/40/60 standard

• Multi-family Design Guidelines provide robust guidance for

privacy

• Projects up to 150 units are staff level review if all

standards and guidelines are met



Outreach Comments and Response:

• Setbacks adjacent to single-family

o CPAC concern over reduced setback

o Development interests suggested further reductions and rely on

Design Guidelines

o Staff proposal streamlines approval of multi-family with appropriate

protections for adjacent uses

• Requirement for assigned parking eliminated

• Maintains requirement for covered parking

• Retail uses allowed with use permit in multi-family zones

• Allows for no upper limit on density with special development

permit in high density urban locations near transit



Fencing

• Residential areas:

o Limit height of solid fencing to

36 inches to maintain an open

feeling

o Applies to RD, AR, and AG zones

o Allows up to seven feet on interior lot lines

• Commercial Areas:

o Non-conforming fences between commercial and

residential uses may remain if kept in good repair



Outreach and Responses

• Added definition of solid fencing

• Some rural CPAC’s oppose 36 inch limitation in rural

areas; staff proposal to keep this requirement

• Criteria added for minor use permit for solid fences over

36 inches

• Added clarification on non-conforming fences and at

what point worn fences must be removed



Billboards

• Only allowed along Freeways; eliminated other areas

• Requires 4:1 square footage removal ratio of existing

billboards

• 2,500 foot distance between digital billboards

• Requires Development Agreement



Outreach and Responses:

• Increased setback from residential to 300 feet

• ECOS commented that requirements should be

more restrictive

• Fight the Light group suggested one mile

between digital billboards and 500 feet from

residential



Lighting

• Request to research best practices on minimal light

trespass in commercial and industrial areas

• Added new language

on shielding, use of

recess lighting, and

prohibiting direct

illumination on

adjoining properties



Noise

• First draft included restriction on loading/unloading

hours of operation

• Revised to rely on stronger

enforcement of the County

Noise Ordinance

o Acoustical study may be

required if non-compliance

is confirmed



Solar Facilities and Wind Turbines

Use Permitted Zoning Districts

Entitlement/Process

Small Accessory (I) Solar

All Zoning Districts None: Permitted Accessory Use (A)

Large Accessory (II) Solar Small Wind Turbine

All Zoning Districts Minor Use Permit (MC)

Small Commercial (I) Solar All non-residential (i.e. Res, Ag-Res, UR & IR)

Minor Use Permit (MC) (except RR requires a Conditional Use Permit (CZ))

Large Commercial (II) Solar

RR + Ag & Industrial Conditional Use Permit (CP) (Planning Commission)

Large Wind Turbine Ag, Mixed Use, Commercial & Industrial

Conditional Use Permit (CP) (Planning Commission)



Other Items:

• Rural Institutional Findings: Added findings related to

compatibility and intensity

• CPAC Appeals: Added to Zoning Code; CPAC to vote

on appeal after action

• Certain Commercial Uses: Requires minor use permit;

added findings

• Cargo containers: Provide for grandfathering of mini-

storage; clarifies when used in agricultural, residential

and commercial areas



Other Items - continued:

• Room Rental and Vacation Rental: Needs administrative

approval

• Yard Parking: Changed to apply to entire front yard (not

setback only)

• Accessory Structures in Agricultural-Residential Areas:

Allows for greater size and maximum size of 5,000 sq ft



Other Items - continued:

• Enlargements of Non-Conforming Buildings:

Permitted if addition conforms

• Shopping cart Retrieval Program: Deferred for

complete ordinance



Design Review:

• Adds Single-Family and “New Communities” Design

Guidelines

• Provides for Single-Family Design Review Program

• Revised Multi-Family, Commercial, Employment Center,

Village Center/Mixed Use Design Guidelines’

• Adds technical review of staff level

design review of major projects

• Focus on “Active Design” practices



Single-Family Design Review:

• New program to increase the livability of residential

neighborhoods

• Neighborhood Site Design Guidelines apply to all

projects

o Focus on walkability and neighborhood compatibility

• Building Design and Landscaping apply to subdivisions

over 20 lots, or optional on smaller projects

o Focus on building elevations, scale and massing,

garages, siding



Single-Family Design Review:

• Design Review occurs with building permits for most

projects; with tentative map for projects of eight units per

acre or more

• Review of Single-Family Guidelines – comments to be

received at workshops and public hearing

• Concerns raised about too much focus on neighborhood

compatibility



New Communities Design Guidelines:

• Implement General Plan policy

for design of new communities

on a larger scale

• Design Guidelines focus on the

community’s special character,

theme and livability practices

• Applies to Master Plans in new growth areas and large

projects over 50 acres

• Revised based on input from sub-group; further comments

expected



Summary and Next Steps

• Comprehensive and innovative revision to development

regulations

o Business and user friendly

o Quality design of the built environment

o Sustainable development practices

• Planning Commission to provide direction for public

hearings

• Determine if September 4 hearing is needed

• Board of Supervisors targeted for October

zoning code and design guidelines workshop€¦ · o require at least one street tree ... zoning...

Documents