Article I — Site Plan and Design Review

The purpose of the site plan and design review permit is to ensure that the physical aspects of development projects are consistent with the general plan and applicable specific plan or transit village plan and with all applicable design guidelines; to ensure the development is of high quality and is compatible with and complimentary to surrounding development; to ensure streets and other public access ways and facilities, parking facilities, and utility and other infrastructure, both on-site and off-site, are adequate and available to support the development and conform to city development standards; to promote energy efficiency and water conservation; and to avoid or minimize to the extent feasible adverse environmental effects of development. Site plan and design review is a discretionary permit and is not the automatic right of an applicant. (Ord. 2013-0020 § 1; Ord. 2013-0007 § 1)

A. The scope of site plan and design review extends to all aspects of the physical characteristics of development, such as the design features and site improvements of a development enumerated below.

1. Architectural design features of buildings and structures, including the size, scale, massing, articulation, colors, and materials of buildings and structures; the number, size, color, materials, design, and location of detached and attached signs (but not for the content or graphic design of the message displayed); and the screening of roof-mounted mechanical equipment;

2. Site design features, including subdivisions, the location and orientation of buildings, structures, detached signs, parking areas, and open spaces; the location, dimensions, and design of access ways and facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles; and the layout, design, and visual and functional characteristics of the landscape plan, including plantings, hardscape, lighting, paving, grading, drainage, and the screening of storage and service areas and ground-mounted equipment;

3. The adequacy of, and any reasonably required improvements to, streets and other public access ways and facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles; parking facilities, if any; and utility and other infrastructure, both onsite and off-site; all as required to serve the development;

4. Physical site and architectural design features related to energy consumption and use of renewable energy resources;

5. Measures for the protection of environmentally sensitive features such as rivers, creeks, wetlands, protected plant and animal habitats, city trees, and private protected trees; and

6. Measures for the prevention of fires, flooding, erosion, subsidence, air and water pollution, glare, excessive noise and vibration, and exposure to hazardous substances.

B. The scope of site plan and design review does not include consideration of the use to which the development is put. (Ord. 2025-0007 § 36; Ord. 2021-0024 § 37; Ord. 2013-0020 § 1; Ord. 2013-0007 § 1)

A. Site plan and design review includes the authority to approve or require deviations that are more or less restrictive than the applicable design guidelines; subdivision standards; sign standards; lot coverage standards; setback

and open space standards; height; development standards; parking facility standards, including the minimum and maximum off-street parking requirement; and allowable roof projections, including parapets, pitched roofs, mechanical penthouses, and spires.

B. Except as otherwise provided in this title, a deviation from design guidelines and development standards for the matters listed in subsection A of this section is subject to director-level review. (Ord. 2020-0021 § 3; Ord. 2013-0020 § 1; Ord. 2013-0007 § 1)

A. Site plan and design review at the commission level is required for the following development projects:

1. A development project involving a landmark, contributing resource or noncontributing resource that, in the determination of the preservation director, involves one or more of the following:

a. Significant alteration to an existing landmark or contributing resource that would have a significant impact upon the character-defining features of the resource or upon original fabric, or would impact the resource's eligibility for listing in the Sacramento register;

b. New construction of a building or structure on the site of an existing landmark, contributing resource or noncontributing resource that would have a significant impact upon the character-defining features of the resource or upon original fabric, or would impact the resource's eligibility for listing in the Sacramento register; or

c. Relocation of a building or structure to the site of an existing landmark, contributing resource or noncontributing resource that would have a significant impact upon the character-defining features of the resource or upon original fabric, or would impact the resource's eligibility for listing in the Sacramento register;

2. A development project that involves the demolition or relocation of a landmark or contributing resource, except the demolition or relocation of accessory buildings and structures that are not identified as significant features or characteristics of the landmark or contributing resource;

3. A development project that involves the relocation of a building or structure to a vacant lot in a historic district;

4. When review of the project is elevated to the commission level under section 17.808.300 or commission-level review is otherwise required under this title.

B. Commission-level site plan and design review is conducted by the preservation commission if the development project is located in a historic district or involves a landmark. Otherwise, commission-level site plan and design review is conducted by the planning and design commission. If the development project is subject to preservation commission review, but also requires another discretionary permit or legislative request under this title, the preservation commission shall, at the conclusion of its hearing, forward a recommendation on the site plan and design review to the planning and design commission, rather than take final action.

C. A commission-level decision on a site plan and design review application is appealable to the city council as provided in section 17.812.060. (Ord. 2020-0021 § 4; Ord. 2017-0061 § 86; Ord. 2013-0020 § 1; Ord. 2013-0007 § 1)

A. Site plan and design review at the director-level review is required for the following development projects:

1. A development not subject to commission-level review and that the director determines is not in substantial compliance with applicable design guidelines or that includes a deviation from design guidelines or development standards is subject to director-level review under section 17.808.120. A deviation that does not involve a distance, area, or quantity is subject to director-level review.

2. A development project involving a landmark or, contributing resource that is not subject to preservation commission review and that involves one or more of the following:

• a. New construction of a building or structure on the site of an existing landmark or, contributing resource;

• b. Additions of new porches, dormers, or new conditioned space on primary façades or affecting significant features or characteristics;

c. Alterations such as new openings in primary façades, raising the structure, partial demolitions, or other changes with the potential for having impacts on character-defining features of the property or district, or on existing original fabric; or

d. Demolition or relocation of accessory buildings and structures that are not identified as significant features or characteristics of the landmark or contributing resource.

3. When review of the project is elevated to the director level under section 17.808.300 or director-level review is otherwise required under this title.

B. Director-level site plan and design review is conducted by the preservation director if the development project is located in a historic district or involves a landmark. Otherwise, director-level site plan and design review is conducted by the design director. If the development project requires another discretionary permit under this title to be heard at the director level, the preservation director or design director shall conduct the hearing on the development project concurrently with the hearing conducted by the zoning administrator or planning director.

C. A director-level decision on site plan and design review application made by the preservation director is appealable to the preservation commission, and a director-level decision on site plan and design review application made by the design director is appealable to the planning and design commission, as provided in section 17.812.060. If the development project includes another discretionary permit under this title that is also being appealed, the preservation commission shall, at the conclusion of its hearing, forward a recommendation on site plan and design review to the planning and design commission, rather than take final action. (Ord. 2019-0057 § 2; Ord. 2013-0020 § 1; Ord. 2013-0007 § 1)

A. Site plan and design review at the staff-level is required for any development project that is not subject to director-level or commission-level review.

B. Staff-level site plan and design review is conducted under the general direction of the preservation director if the development project is located in a historic district or involves a landmark. Otherwise, staff-level site plan and design review is conducted under the general direction of the design director.

C. A staff-level decision is subject to reconsideration under section 17.812.020, and is not appealable. (Ord. 20130020 § 1; Ord. 2013-0007 § 1)

The following development projects are exempt from the site plan and design review requirement:

• A. For development projects that are not located in a historic district and do not involve a landmark:

1. An alteration to an existing building or structure that does not substantially alter the exterior appearance of the building or structure, as determined by the director;

2. An alteration to an existing site that does not significantly alter the functioning of the site with respect to traffic circulation, parking, infrastructure, and environmentally sensitive features, as determined by the director;

3. Accessory dwelling units that meet all development standards without deviation (Accessory dwelling units that do not meet development standards are subject to director-level review);

4. Sidewalk cafes;

5. Convenience recycling facilities;

6. Registered house plans (subject to site plan review, but not design review); and

7. Demolition of the following structures if less than 50 years old:

• a. Accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit;

• b. Residential accessory structure;

• B. For development projects located in a historic district or that involve a landmark:

1. Repainting of surfaces that were originally painted and the color scheme is not a significant character-defining feature of the historic resource;

2. Routine nonabrasive cleaning and maintenance; and

3. Site plantings when plantings and landscape elements are not significant character-defining features of the historic resource.

• C. Tentative maps and parcel maps that subdivide vacant land and meet all development standards without deviations.

• D. Antennas that are reviewed or exempt from review under chapter 12.14.

• E. Housing projects that are subject to ministerial review under another provision of this title.

• F. Urban lot splits that are subject to ministerial review under chapter 17.864.

• G. Electric vehicle charging and hydrogen-fueling stations, consistent with California Government Code section 65850.7, subdivision (b).

• (Ord. 2024-0051 § 30; Ord. 2021-0035, § 4; Ord. 2021-0024 § 38; Ord. 2020-0031 § 3; Ord. 2019-0006 § 18; Ord. 2017-0061 § 88; Ord. 2013-0020 § 1; Ord. 2013-0007 § 1)

A. Except as provided in subsection B of this section, the director shall determine whether an application for site plan and design review is subject to staff-level, director-level, or commission-level review. The determination of the director is final and is not subject to appeal.

B. For site plan and design review applications involving landmarks or contributing resources for which no significant features and characteristics have been identified, the preservation director shall identify the significant features and characteristics and determine whether the application is subject to staff-level, director-level, or commission-level review. The determination of the preservation director is final and is not subject to appeal. (Ord. 2013-0020 § 1; Ord. 2013-0007 § 1)

A. Development projects located in a historic district or involving a landmark.

1. Projects not involving the demolition or relocation of a landmark or contributing resource. For projects not involving the demolition or relocation of a landmark or contributing resource, the decision-maker may approve an application for site plan and design review based on the following findings:

a. The project is consistent with the Secretary of Interior standards and the goals and policies of this chapter; or

b. The project is not fully consistent with the Secretary of Interior standards, due to economic hardship or economic infeasibility, but the project is generally consistent with, and supportive of, the goals and policies of this chapter. The applicant shall have the burden of proving economic hardship or economic infeasibility; or

c. The project is not fully consistent with the Secretary of Interior standards, but is consistent with and supportive of identified goals and policies of the general plan or applicable community or specific plan(s); and the project is either generally consistent with, and supportive of, the goals and policies of this chapter, or if not, the

benefits of the project and furthering the identified goals and policies of the general plan or applicable community plan outweigh any impacts on achieving the goals and policies of this chapter.

2. Projects involving demolition or relocation of a landmark or contributing resource. For projects involving the demolition or relocation of a landmark or contributing resource, the decision-maker may approve an application for site plan and design review based on the following findings:

a. Based upon sufficient evidence, including evidence provided by the applicant, the property retains no reasonable economic use, taking into account the condition of the structure, its location, the current market value, the costs of rehabilitation to meet the requirements of the building code or other city, state, or federal law; or

b. That the demolition or relocation of the landmark or contributing resource is necessary to proceed with a project consistent with and supportive of identified goals and policies of the general plan or applicable community or specific plan(s), and the demolition of the building or structure will not have a significant effect on the achievement of the purposes of this chapter or the potential effect is outweighed by the benefits of the new project; or

c. In the case of an application for a permit to relocate, that the building may be moved without destroying its historic or architectural integrity and importance; or

d. That the demolition or relocation of the landmark or contributing resource is necessary to protect or to promote the health, safety or welfare of the citizens of the city, including the need to eliminate or avoid blight or nuisance, and the benefits of demolition or relocation outweigh the potential effect on the achievement of the goals and policies of this chapter.

B. Development projects not located in a historic district and not involving a landmark. For projects not located in a historic district and not involving a landmark, the decision-maker may approve an application for site plan and design review based on all of the following findings:

1. The design, layout, and physical characteristics of the proposed development are consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan or transit village plan; and

2. The design, layout, and physical characteristics of proposed development are consistent with all applicable design guidelines and with all applicable development standards or, if deviations from design guidelines or development standards are approved, the proposed development is consistent with the purpose and intent of the applicable design guidelines and development standards; and

3. All streets and other public access ways and facilities, parking facilities, and utility infrastructure are adequate to serve the proposed development and comply with all applicable design guidelines and development standards; and 4. The design, layout, and physical characteristics of the proposed development are visually and functionally compatible with the surrounding neighborhood; and

4. The design, layout, and physical characteristics of the proposed development ensure energy consumption is minimized and use of renewable energy sources is encouraged; and

5. The design, layout, and physical characteristics of the proposed development are not detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, or welfare of persons residing, working, visiting, or recreating in the surrounding neighborhood and will not result in the creation of a nuisance.

C. The decision-maker may impose conditions as the decision-maker determines to be necessary or appropriate in order to make the required findings for approval. (Ord. 2013-0020 § 1; Ord. 2013-0007 § 1)