The URL can be used to link to this page

8622 - AMENDING TITLE 9, “LAND USE CODE,” B.R.C. 1981, TO SIMPLIFY CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDINANCE 8622 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 9, “LAND USE CODE,” B.R.C. 1981, TO SIMPLIFY CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESSES; AND SETTING FORTH RELATED DETAILS. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO: Section 1. Section 4-20-43, “Development Application Fees,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 4-20-43. Development Application Fees. (a) Subdivision fees: … (b) Land use regulation fees: … (3) An applicant for approval of a use review shall pay the following fees: Standard Initial application .....$3,420 Reapplication for same type of revision on same property within six months (if initial application is withdrawn or denied) .....$1,710. Fee includes an initial and two subsequent staff reviews of the application. Each additional staff review of an application is .....$1,130. Nonconforming uses and nonstandard lots and buildings Initial application .....$2,870 Reapplication for same type of revision on same property within six months (if initial application is withdrawn or denied) .....$1,435 Fee includes an initial and two subsequent staff reviews of the application. Each additional staff review of an application is .....$950. Minor use review K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Initial application .....$1,710 Reapplication for same type of revision on same property within six months (if initial application is withdrawn or denied) .....$855 Fee includes an initial and two subsequent staff reviews of the application. Each additional staff review of an application is .....$560. … Section 2. Section 8-6-10, “Vacation of Public Easements,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 8-6-10. - Vacation of Public Easements Vacation of city easements dedicated for any purpose, except public rights of way and access easements, may occur: (a) Through the subdivision process; or (b) By approval of the city manager upon a determination that no public need exists for such easement. The city manager will review the requested vacation pursuant to Section 9-2-2, "Administrative Review Procedures," B.R.C. 1981. If the city manager approves an easement vacation, it is not effective until thirty days after the date of its approval. Promptly after approving the vacation, the manager will forward to the city council a written report, including a legal description of vacated portion of the easement and the reasons for approval. The manager will publish notice of the proposed vacation once in a newspaper of general circulation in the city within thirty days after the vacation is approved. Upon receiving such report and at any time before the effective date of the vacation, the council may rescind the manager's approval and call up the vacation request for its consideration at a public hearing, which constitutes a revocation of the vacation. Section 3. Section 9-1-4, “Transitional Regulations,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-1-4. Transitional Regulations This section addresses the applicability of new substantive standards enacted by amendments to this title to activities, actions and other matters that are pending or occurring as of the effective date of this titlethereof. … (e) Existing Uses Subject to Specific Use Standards or That Require a Use Review or Conditional Use Approval: (1) Use Review or Conditional Use Approvals: Any previously approved use that was established prior to the adoption of new regulations that make K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 such the use permitted only pursuant to a conditional use or a use review shall be allowed to continue in operation. Any change or expansion of a the use that was established prior to the adoption of new regulations that make such use permitted pursuant to a conditional use or a use review shall be made in conformance with the applicable standards procedure for use review or, conditional uses, or for changes or expansions to nonconforming uses. (2) Specific Use Standards: Any previously allowed use that was established prior to the adoption of new regulations that make such use allowed subject to specific use standards shall be allowed to continue in operation. Changes to a the use that was established prior to adoption of the new regulations that imposed specific use standards shall be made in conformance with the applicable specific use standardsor in conformance with the applicable standards for changes or expansions to nonconforming uses. (3) Discontinued Use: If active and continuous operations of a use subject to the standards of paragraphs (e)(1) or (e)(2) of this section are not carried on for a period of three years, it shall thereafter be occupied and used by a use meeting the requirements of this title, as required by Subsection 9-10- 2(a), B.R.C. 1981. (f) Nonconforming Uses: Nonconforming uses are subject to the standards in Chapter 9-10, “Nonconforming Standards,” B.R.C. 1981. (fg) Violations Continue: Any violation of the previous land development regulations of the city shall continue to be a violation under this title and shall be subject to the penalties and enforcement set forth in Chapter 9-15, "Enforcement," B.R.C. 1981, unless the use, development, construction or other activity is clearly consistent with the express terms of this title. Section 4. Section 9-2-1, “Types of Reviews,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-2-1. Types of Reviews (a) Purpose: This section identifies the numerous types of administrative and development review processes and procedures. The review process for each of the major review types is summarized in Table 2 -1of this section. (b) Summary Chart: TABLE 2-1: REVIEW PROCESSES SUMMARY CHART I. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS II. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND BOARD ACTION K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Affordable housing design review pursuant to Section 9-13-4, B.R.C. 1981 Building permits Change of address Change of street name Conditional uses, as noted in Table 6-1: Use Table Demolition, moving, and removal of buildings with no historic or architectural significance, per Section 9-11- 23, "Review of Permits for Demolition, On-Site Relocation, and Off-Site Relocation of Buildings Not Designated," B.R.C. 1981 Easement vacation Extension of development approval/staff level Landmark alteration certificates (staff review per Section 9-11-14, "Staff Review of Application for Landmark Alteration Certificate," B.R.C. 1981) Landscape standards variance Minor modification to approved site plan Minor modification to approved form-based code review Noise barriers along major streets per Paragraph 9-9- 15(c)(7), B.R.C. 1981 Nonconforming use (extension, change of use (incl. parking)) Parking deferral per Subsection 9-9-6(e), B.R.C. 1981 Parking reduction of up to 25 percent per Subsection 9- 9-6(f), B.R.C. 1981 Parking reductions and modifications for bicycle parking per Paragraph 9-9-6(g)(6), B.R.C. 1981 Parking stall variances Public utility Rescission of development approval Revocable permit Right-of-way lease Setback variance Site access variance Substitution of a nonconforming use Solar exception Zoning verification Annexation/initial zoning BOZA variances Concept plans Demolition, moving, and removal of buildings with potential historic or architectural significance, per Section 9-11-23, "Review of Permits for Demolition, On-Site Relocation, and Off-Site Relocation of Buildings Not Designated," B.R.C. 1981 Form-based code review Geophysical exploration permit Landmark alteration certificates other than those that may be approved by staff per Section 9-11-14, "Staff Review of Application for Landmark Alteration Certificate," B.R.C. 1981 Lot line adjustments Lot line elimination Minor Subdivisions Out of city utility permit Rezoning Site review Subdivisions Use review Vacations of street, alley, or access easement K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Section 5. Section 9-2-2, “Administrative Review Procedures,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-2-2. Administrative Review Procedures (a) Purpose: Administrative review of projects will occur at various times in project development to ensure compliance with the development standards of the city. … (d) Conditional Uses: … (5) Expiration: Any conditional use approval that is not established within one year of its approval, is discontinued for at least three years, or is replaced by another use of land shall expire. … Section 6. Section 9-2-7, “Development Review Action,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-2-7. Development Review Action No development review application will be accepted unless and until it is determined to be complete. Such determination will be made within five days after the submission of the application. The city manager will review the application and provide the applicant with a list of any deficiencies. … (b) Planning Board Review and Recommendation: Development review applications requiring a decision by the planning board shall be reviewed as follows: … (3) Appeal and Call-Ups: (A) The applicant or any two interested persons may appeal the city manager's decision pursuant to Section 9-4-4, "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. (B) A Two members of the planning board may call-up an application for review pursuant to Section 9-4-4, "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981, except that minor use review processes are not subject to call-up by planning board. K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (c) City Council Call-Up: The city council may call-up any planning board decision pursuant to Section 9-4-4, "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. (d) Building Permit Pending Appeal: A building permit may be applied for after the initial approval of a development review application, but no building permit will be issued until after any and all applicable call-up or appeal periods have expired. An applicant for such a permit bears all risks of subsequent disapproval and waives any claims arising from the permit application. (e) Judicial Review: Any person aggrieved by the final decision of the city manager may seek judicial review pursuant to Subsection 9-4-4(g), B.R.C. 1981. Section 7. Section 9-2-8, “Public Hearing Requirements,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-2-8. Public Hearing Requirements Within sixty days after a referral, or an appeal or call-up pursuant to Section 9-4-4, "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981, the approving agency, after publishing notice pursuant to Section 9-4-3, "Public Notice Requirements," B.R.C. 1981, will hold a public hearing on the application. Section 8. Section 9-2-9, “Final Approval Requirements,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-2-9. Final Approval Requirements (a) Development Agreement: After the approving agency has finally approved an application for use review, site review, or form-based code review, the owner and the city manager will execute a development agreement that incorporates all conditions of the approval, including, without limitation, time limits for completion of the development, and, if applicable, requirements for appropriate easements or deed restrictions if unique conditions of approval apply. The development agreement shall be binding on all parties thereto, shall run with the land and will be recorded upon execution by the city clerk in the office of the County Clerk and Recorder of Boulder County. Any violation of a development agreement is a violation of this title. (1) Exceptions: The city manager may waive the requirement for a development agreement for: (A) A minor amendment to a site review; (B) A minor use review process; and (C) If there are no public improvements associated with a form-based code review application, a form-based code reviewthe city manager can waive the requirements for a development agreement. K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (b) Final Approved Plans: The applicant shall file a paper or electronic copy containing the approved site plan, any applicable restrictions or modifications to the underlying zoning district, and any conditions approved by the approving agency. The paper or electronic copy shall be filed with the city manager, who will endorse and date the approved site plan. The location of the approved development will be included on an official map showing development in the City. The paper or electronic copy will remain on file in the planning department. (c) Expiration: Unless expressly waived by the city manager for good cause, pursuant to a written request made prior to expiration of the approval, if the applicant fails to file the final approved plans according to the specifications in Subsection (b) above or sign the development agreement within ninety days of final approval, the approval expires. Section 9. Section 9-2-10, “Amendment Procedures,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-2-10. Amendment Procedures An approved use review may be amended pursuant to Subsection 9-2-15(hj), B.R.C. 1981. An approved site review may be amended pursuant to Subsection 9-2-14(l) or (m), B.R.C. 1981. The city manager may approve, without notice, minor modifications to a use review or a site review under the procedures prescribed by Subsection 9-2-14(k), B.R.C. 1981. Section 10. Section 9-2-12, “Development Progress Required,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-2-12. Development Progress Required. (a) Three-Year Rule: The applicant must obtain applicable building permit approvals and start construction within three years of the date of the final approval of the site review, use review, or form-based code review. For a use review without construction requiring a building permit, the use must be established within three years of the date of final approval. begin and substantially complete the approved site review, use review, or form- based code review as specified in the development agreement within three years from the time of the final approval of the site, use, or form-based code review or as modified by a development schedule incorporated in the development agreement. For the purposes of this section, substantially complete means the time when the construction is sufficiently complete so the owner can occupy the work or portion thereof for the use for which it is intended. If the project is to be developed in stages, the applicant must begin and substantially complete the development of each stage within three years of the time provided for the start of construction of each stage in the development agreement. Failure to substantially complete the development or any development stage within three years of the approved development schedule shall cause the unbuilt portion of the development approval to expire. K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (1) Phasing: For reviews with phased development established in the development agreement, for each development phase, the applicable building permits must be obtained and construction must be started within three years of the start of the phase, or as modified by the development agreement. (2) Expiration: Failure to comply with the three-year rule shall cause the development approval to expire. For phased development, if an approval for one phase expires, then all successive phases not completed or under construction shall expire. After an approval has expired, any new application for development is subject to all the procedures and standards of this title in effect at the time of such application. (3) Vested Rights: Nothing in this section is deemed to create a vested property right in any applicant; such vested property right may only be created pursuant to the provisions of Section 9-2-20, "Creation of Vested Rights," B.R.C. 1981. (b) Extension: If the applicant requests an extension prior to the expiration of a site review, use review, or form-based code review approval, the city manager may grant an extension of the approval pursuant to the following: Prior to the expiration of a form- based code review, use review, or site review approval, the applicant may request an extension of the time allowed for the completion of the development. (1) The city manager will grant up to two one-year extensions to obtain applicable building permit approvals and start construction or establish the use if the applicant demonstrates that it exercised reasonable diligence and has good cause as to why the extension should be granted. The extension must be requested in writing prior to the expiration of the approval. The first extension extends the approval by one year from the date of final approval. The second extension extends the approval by an additional year and can be requested only after the first extension has been granted and additional progress has been made. City Manager Level Extension: The city manager may grant up to two six-month extensions for each phase of the development if such extension will enable the applicant to substantially complete the phase of development or is necessary to allow the applicant to request an extension from the planning board. (2) Planning Board Level Extension: The planning board may grant an extension of a development approval, pursuant to a hearing conducted under the provisions of Chapter 1-3, "Quasi-Judicial Hearings," B.R.C. 1981, after the applicant has exhausted any extension granted pursuant to Paragraph (b)(1) of this section. The applicant shall be required to demonstrate that it exercised reasonable diligence in completing the project according to the approved development schedule and good cause as to why the extension should be granted. (A) Criteria for Demonstrating Reasonable Diligence: An applicant may show that it has exercised reasonable diligence by providing evidence that it has done substantial work towards obtaining building permit approval or starting constructioncompleting the project. Such evidence may include, K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 without limitation, drafting plans for building permit or technical document review, applications for building permits or other permits that are required prior to the issuance of building permits,, or site preparation and grading, or commencement of the construction of a portion of the project. (B) Criteria for Demonstrating Good Cause: An applicant may show good cause as to why an extension should be granted by providing evidence that includes, without limitation, the following: a demonstration of the applicant's ability to complete the projectobtain building permit approval and start construction within the extension; the extension is needed because of the size of the project or phasing of the development; or that economic cycles and market conditions prevented delayed the building permit approval process and start of construction the construction of the project during the original approval period. (C) Additional Conditions: As part of a hearing to consider an extension, the planning board may impose additional conditions on the applicant in order to ensure compliance with any amendments to this title enacted after the date of the original approval. (c) Building Permits: Upon issuance of a building permit pursuant to a development review approval, the applicant must adhere to the schedule for construction and inspection as defined in the city building code, Chapter 10-5, "Building Code," B.R.C. 1981. In addition to the provisions of this title, all provisions of the building code regarding expiration and termination of building permits shall apply. (d) Annexations/Six-Month Rule: If an owner of property not located within the city, for which a development review application is approved, fails to annex the property to the city within six months of the date of approval, the approval shall expire unless the approving agency extends the time period, upon a finding of good cause predicated upon a written request of the applicant delivered to the city manager before the expiration of the six-month period. (e) Rescission of Development Approval: If, after use review, special review, site review, Planned Development (PD), Planned Residential Development (PRD), or Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval is granted pursuant to this chapter, the owner of property desires to develop, instead, under the provisions of Chapters 9-6, "Use Standards," 9-7, "Form and Bulk Standards," and 9-8, "Intensity Standards," B.R.C. 1981, the owner may request rescission of such use review, site review, PD, PRD or PUD approval by filing a written request for rescission with the city manager. The manager will grant a rescission if: (1) The manager will grant a rescission of such use review, site review, PD, PRD, or PUD approval if noNo building permit has been issued for the development and K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 neither the city nor the developer has taken any actions in detrimental reliance on the terms of the development agreement. ; The manager may also rescind a site review, PD, PRD, or PUD approval if (2) For a site review, PD, PRD, or PUD approval, the existing or proposed development complies with all the use, form, and intensity requirements of Chapters 9-6, "Use Standards," 9-7, "Form and Bulk Standards," and 9-8, "Intensity Standards," B.R.C. 1981, and there is no substantial public benefit in maintaining the original approval. ; or An owner may also request a rescission of a use review or special review approval in order to (3) For a use review or special review approval, the rescission will return the property to a use that is allowed by right or as a conditional use if itand the owner is able to meet all applicable standards for such use under this title. Section 11. Section 9-2-14, “Site Review,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-2-14. Site Review … (h) Criteria: No site review application shall be approved unless the approving agency finds that the project is consistent with the following criteria: … (6) Land Use Intensity and Height Modifications: Modifications to minimum open space on lots, floor area ratio (FAR), maximum height, and number of dwelling units per acre requirements will be approved pursuant to the standards of this subparagraph: … (C) Additional Criteria for a Height Bonus and Land Use Intensity Modifications: A building proposed with a fourth or fifth story or addition thereto that exceeds the permitted height requirements of Section 9-7-5, "Building Height," or 9-7-6, "Building Height, Conditional," B.R.C. 1981, together with any additional floor area or residential density approved under Subparagraph (h)(6)(B), may be approved if it meets the requirements of this Subparagraph (h)(6)(C). For purposes of this Subparagraph(h)(6)(C), bonus floor area shall mean floor area that is on a fourth or fifth story and is partially or fully above the permitted height and any floor area that is the result of an increase in density or floor area described in Subparagraph (h)(6)(B). The approving authority may approve a height up to fifty-five feet if one of the following criteria is met: … (iv) Alternative Community Benefit: Pursuant to the standard in this Subparagraph (iv), the approving authority may approve an K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 alternative method of compliance to provide additional benefits to the community and qualify for a height bonus together with any additional floor area or density that may be approved under Subparagraph (h)(6)(B). The approving authority will approve the alternative method of compliance if the applicant proposes the alternative method of compliance and demonstrates that the proposed method: a. Will improve the facilities or services delivered by the city, including without limitation any police, fire, library, human services, parks and recreation, or other municipal facility, land or service, or will provide an arts, cultural, human services, housing, environmental or other benefit that is a community benefit objective in the BVCP, and b. Is of a value that is equivalent to or greater than the benefits required by this Subparagraph (h)(6)(C). … (k) Minor Modifications to Approved Site Plans: The city manager reviews applications for minor modifications pursuant to the procedures in Section 9-2-2, “Administrative Review Procedures,” B.R.C. 1981. (1) Standards: Minor modifications may be approved if the proposed modification complies with the following standards: (A) Scope: The proposed modification is to the approved plans. (B) Intent: The modification does not alter the basic intent of the site plan approval; (C) Residential Uses: The housing type is not changed; (D) Height: No portion of any building is expanded above the height permitted under Sections 9-7-1, “Schedule or Form and Bulk Standards,” or 9-7-6, “Building Height, Conditional,” B.R.C. 1981; (E) Parking: Any parking reduction is reviewed and approved through the process and criteria in Subsection 9-9-6(f), B.R.C. 1981; (F) Solar Panels: Any solar panels do not substantially add to the mass or perceived height of the building and comply with all applicable building height, solar access, building coverage, and open space requirements; (G) Other Requirements: The modification complies with all other applicable requirements of this title; and (H) Modified Standards: The numeric standards in the site plan are not modified by more than allowed through Table 2-3. K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Table 2-3: Minor Modification Standards Standard modified Maximum allowed as a minor modification Setbacks: interior to the site plan area No limit to setback modifications Setbacks: along boundary of site plan area Minimum zoning district requirement Floor area (cumulative in minor modification processes) Increase of up to 10 percent of the floor area granted in the site review approval, not to exceed the floor area ratio listed in Chapter 9-8, “Intensity Standards,” B.R.C. 1981. These limitations on floor area do not apply to detached dwelling units on individual lots in zoning districts without a maximum floor area ratio. Open space Minimum zoning district requirement Building location Up to 10 percent of the length or width of the building Building envelope Increase of up to 10 percent in area (2) Notification: If an applicant requests approval of a minor modification to an approved site review, the city manager will determine which properties within the development would be affected by the proposed change. The city manager will provide notice pursuant to Subsection 9-4-3(b), B.R.C. 1981, of the proposed change to all property owners so determined to be affected. Changes to the site plan, building plans, and landscaping plans may be approved by the city manager without an amendment to the site plan if such changes are minor. All minor modifications shall be noted, signed, and dated on the approved site plan. For proposed minor modifications of site review projects that are partially or totally developed, the applicant shall provide notice to any owners of property within the development that might be affected, as determined by the manager. In determining whether a proposed change is a minor modification, the following standards shall apply: (1) Setbacks along the boundary of the site plan area cannot be reduced by a minor modification to be less than the minimum setbacks permitted by the underlying zoning district; (2) Excepting any site plan approval consisting of detached dwelling units on individual lots where no maximum floor area ratio applies, the floor area of the development, including principal and accessory buildings, may be expanded by the cumulative total of no more than the greater of ten percent or two hundred square feet or, in the case of a building that exceeds the permitted height, no more than five percent, except that the portion of any building over thirty-five feet in height may not be expanded under the provisions of this paragraph. However, the floor area or FAR shall not exceed the maximum floor area or FAR of a zoning K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 district or granted in the site review approval, if such amount requires special approval through the site review process; (3) Approved commercial and industrial building locations may be moved or expanded by no more than the greater of ten feet, or ten percent of the length of the building, measured along the building's axis in the direction that the building is being moved or expanded; (4) Approved principal and accessory building locations may be moved or expanded by no more than ten feet in any direction within the development in residential districts and lots abutting residential districts. The resulting setbacks shall not be less than the minimum allowed setback of the underlying zone; (5) Dwelling unit type may not be changed; (6) The portion of any building over the permitted height under Section 9-7-1, "Schedule of Form and Bulk Standards," B.R.C. 1981, may not be expanded under the provisions of this subsection; (7) No increase may be granted to an open space reduction or to a parking reduction in excess of that allowed in Subsection 9-9-6(f), B.R.C. 1981; (8) Solar panels that are proposed to be mounted on a building's roof may not substantially add to the mass or perceived height of the building and shall be consistent with Sections 9-7-7, "Building Height, Conditional," and 9-9-7, "Solar Access," B.R.C. 1981. Solar panels proposed to be ground mounted may not result in a building coverage greater than permitted by the zone and shall not result in open space less than required by Chapter 9-8, "Intensity Standards, " B.R.C. 1981; and (9) No change may alter the basic intent of the site plan approval. (l) Minor Amendments to Approved Site Plans: The city manager reviews applications for minor amendments for changes that exceed the limits of a minor modification in Subsection (k) pursuant to the procedures in Section 9-2-7, “Development Review Action,” B.R.C. 1981. (1) Standards: Minor amendments may be approved if the proposed amendment complies with the following standards: (A) Scope: The proposed amendment is to the approved plans, conditions of approval, or written statement. (B) Intent: The minor amendment does not alter the basic intent of the site plan approval. (C) Site Review Criteria: The minor amendment complies with the site review criteria of Subparagraphs (h)(2) and (h)(3) of this section; (D) Residential Uses: The housing type is not changed; (E) Height: No portion of any building is expanded above the height permitted under Sections 9-7-1, “Schedule or Form and Bulk Standards,” or 9-7-6, “Building Height, Conditional,” B.R.C. 1981; K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (F) Parking: Any additional parking that is provided is accommodated in the previously approved on-site parking design; (G) Other Requirements: The minor amendment complies with all other applicable requirements of this title; and (H) Modified Standards: The numeric standards in the site plan are not amended by more than allowed through Table 2-4. Table 2-4: Minor Amendment Standards Standard amended Maximum allowed as a minor amendment, but not to exceed maximum or minimum zoning district requirements. Floor area (cumulative in minor amendment processes) 20 percent Open space (cumulative in minor amendment processes) Decrease of up to 20 percent Building location Up to 20 percent of the length or width of the building (1) Standards: Changes to approved building location or additions to existing buildings, which exceed the limits of a minor modification, may be considered through the minor amendment process if the following standards are met: (A) In a residential zone as set forth in Section 9-5-2, "Zoning Districts," B.R.C. 1981, all approved dwelling units within the development phase have been completed; (B) In residential zones, dwelling unit type is not changed; (C) The required open space per dwelling unit requirement of the zone is met on the lot of the detached dwelling unit to be expanded; (D) The total open space per dwelling unit in the development is not reduced by more than ten percent of the amount specified on the approved site plan and is not reduced to less than the minimum required for the zone; (E) If the residential open space provided within the development or an approved phase of a development cannot be determined, the detached dwelling unit is not expanded by more than ten percent and there is no variation to the required setbacks for that lot; (F) For a building in a nonresidential use module, the building coverage is not increased by more than twenty percent, the addition does not cause a reduction in required open space, and any additional required parking that is provided is substantially accommodated within the existing parking arrangement; K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (G) The portion of any building over the permitted height under Section 9-7-1, "Schedule of Form and Bulk Standards," B.R.C. 1981, is not increased; and (H) The proposed minor amendment does not require public infrastructure improvements or other off-site improvements. (2) Amendments to the Site Review Approval Process: Applications for minor amendment shall be approved reviewed and approved according to the procedures prescribed by this section for site review approval, except: (A) If an applicant requests approval of a minor amendment to an approved site review, the city manager will determine which properties within the development would be affected by the proposed change. The city manager will provide notice pursuant to Subsection 9-4-3(b), B.R.C. 1981, of the proposed change to all property owners so determined to be affected, and to all property owners within a radius of 600 feet of the subject property. (B) Only the owners of the subject property shall be required to sign the application. (C) The minor amendment shall be found to comply with the review criteria of Subparagraphs (h)(2)and (h)(3)of this section. (D) The minor amendment shall be substantially consistent with the intent of the original approval, including conditions of approval, the intended design character, and site arrangement of the development, and specific limitations on additions or total size of the building which were required to keep the building in general proportion to others in the surrounding area or minimize visual impacts. (EC) The city manager may amend, waive, or create a development agreement. … Section 12. Section 9-2-15, “Use Review,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-2-15. Use Review (a) Purpose: Each zoning district established in Section 9-5-2, "Zoning Districts," B.R.C. 1981, is intended for a predominant use, but other uses designated in Section 9-6-1, "Schedule of Permitted Land Uses," B.R.C. 1981, may be allowed by use review if a particular use is demonstrated to be appropriate in the proposed location. Nonconforming uses may be upgraded or expanded under this section if the change would not adversely affect the traffic and the environment of the surrounding area or if the change would reduce the degree of the nonconformity or improve the appearance of the structure or site without increasing the degree of nonconformity. Nonstandard buildings may be changed, expanded or modified consistent with the criteria and standards set forth in this section and Subsection 9-10-3(a), B.R.C. 1981. … K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (d) Review and Recommendation: (1) The city manager will review applications for use review of a nonresidential use in residential zoning districts, attached and detached dwelling units or a residential use in a P district, and oil and gas operations and will submit a recommendation to the planning board for its final action pursuant to Subsection 9-2-7(b), B.R.C. 1981. (2) The city manager shall review and make decisions on all other use review applications pursuant to Subsection 9-2-7(a), B.R.C. 1981. (3) Reviews by either the city manager or planning board shall be pursuant to Section 9-2-7, "Development Review Action," B.R.C. 1981, except that minor use review processes are not subject to call-up by planning board. (e) Criteria for Review: No use review application will be approved unless the approving agency finds all of the following: (1) Consistency With Zoning and Nonconformity: The use is consistent with the purpose of the zoning district as set forth in Section 9-5-2, "Zoning Districts," B.R.C. 1981, except in the case of a nonconforming use; (21) Rationale: The use either: (A) Provides direct service or convenience to or reduces adverse impacts to the surrounding uses or neighborhood; (B) Provides a compatible transition between higher intensity and lower intensity uses; (C) Is necessary to foster a specific city policy, as expressed in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, including, without limitation, historic preservation, moderate income housing, residential and nonresidential mixed uses in appropriate locations, and group living arrangements for special populations; or (D) Is an existing legal nonconforming use or a change theretoan expansion that is permitted under Subsection (f) of this section; (32) Compatibility: The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed development or change to an existing development are such that the use will be reasonably compatible with and have minimal negative impact on the use of nearby properties, or, for residential uses or community, cultural, and educational uses in industrial zoning districts, the proposed development reasonably mitigates the potential negative impacts from nearby properties; (43) Infrastructure: As compared to development permitted under Section 9-6-1, "Schedule of Permitted Land Uses," B.R.C. 1981, in the zone, or as compared to the existing level of impact of a nonconforming use, the The proposed developmentuse will not significantly adversely affect the infrastructure of the surrounding area, including, without limitation, water, wastewater and storm drainage utilities and streets, compared to an allowed use in the zoning district, or compared to the existing level of impact of a nonconforming use; K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (54) Character of Area: The use will not change the predominant character of the surrounding area or the character established by adopted design guidelines or plans for the area; and (65) Conversion of Dwelling Units to Nonresidential Uses: There shall be a presumption against approving the conversion of dwelling units in the residential zoning districts to nonresidential uses that are allowed pursuant to a use review, or through the change substitution of one nonconforming use withto another nonconforming use. The presumption against such a conversion may be overcome by a finding that the use to be approved serves another compelling social, human services, governmental or recreational need in the community, including, without limitation, a use for a daycare center, park, religious assembly, social service use, benevolent organization use, art studio or workshop, museum, or an educational use. (f) Additional Criteria for Modifications Expansion to of a Nonconforming Uses: No application for a change toan expansion of a nonconforming use shall be granted unless all of the following criteria are met in addition to the criteria set forth above: (1) Reasonable Measures Required: The applicant has undertaken all reasonable measures to reduce or alleviate the effects of the nonconformity upon the surrounding area, including, without limitation, objectionable conditions, glare, adverse visual impacts, noise pollution, air emissions, vehicular traffic, storage of equipment, materials and refuse, and on-street parking, so that the change expansion will not adversely affect the surrounding area. (2) Reduction in Nonconformity/Improvement of Appearance: The proposed change or expansion will either reduce the degree of nonconformity of the use or improve the physical appearance of the structure or the site without increasing the degree of nonconformity. (3) Compliance With This Title/Exceptions: The proposed change in useexpansion complies with all of theother applicable requirements of this title.: (A) Except for a change of a nonconforming use to another nonconforming use; and (B) Unless a variance to the setback requirements has been granted pursuant to Section 9-2-3, "Variances and Interpretations," B.R.C. 1981, or the setback has been varied through the application of the requirements of Section 9-2-14, "Site Review," B.R.C. 1981. (4) Cannot Reasonably Be Made Conforming: The existing building or lot cannot reasonably be utilized or made to conform to the requirements of Chapter 9-6, "Use Standards," 9-7, "Form and Bulk Standards," 9-8, "Intensity Standards," or 9-9, "Development Standards," B.R.C. 1981. This paragraph (4) shall not apply to reconstruction or restoration permitted pursuant to Paragraph 9-10-3(c)(4), B.R.C. 1981, with respect to density and other pre-existing nonconformities of the use or nonstandard features of the building. K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (5) No Increase in Floor Area Over Ten Percent: The change or expansion will not result in a cumulative increase in floor area of more than ten percent of the existing floor area. (6) Approving Authority May Grant Zoning Variances: The approving authority may grant the variances permitted by Subsection 9-2-3(d), B.R.C. 1981, upon finding that the criteria set forth in Subsection 9-2-3(h), B.R.C. 1981, have been met. (g) Conditions of Approval: The approving agency may impose modifications or conditions on the use review approval in order to assure ensure compliance with the criteria set forth in Subsections (e) and (f) of this section. In the case of a nonconforming use, conditions may also be imposed to reduce nonconformity and to improve site design. (h) Oil and Gas Operations: The criteria for review in Subsection (e) shall not apply to an application for oil and gas operations. An oil and gas operations use shall meet the criteria set forth in Section 9-6-7(b), "Oil and Gas Operations," B.R.C. 1981. Any use review approval for an oil and gas operations use shall expire, whether operational or not, in ten years from the date of final approval. Prior to such expiration for an oil and gas operations use, applicants will be responsible for submitting a new use review application for an oil and gas operations use proposed for operation beyond ten years. Following approval of any oil and gas operations use, the applicant shall have two years to obtain the necessary permits to establish the use. (i) Minor Use Review Process: A use review for a nonresidential use that is proposed to occupy an existing nonresidential space without any site changes may be reviewed pursuant to a minor use review process. For the purposes of this subsection, site changes do not include changes to landscape plantings, pedestrian pathways, installation of bicycle parking, ordinary site maintenance or repair, signs, or site lighting. (1) Process: The city manager shall review and make decisions on all minor use review process applications pursuant to Subsection 9-2-7(a), “City Manager Review and Recommendation,” B.R.C. 1981. The applicant or any two interested persons may appeal the city manager’s decision pursuant to Paragraph 9-2- 15(l)(1), but the city manager’s decision is not subject to call-up by the planning board pursuant to Paragraph 9-2-15(l)(2). The city manager may refer the application to the planning board for review or decision. (2) Development Agreement: The city manager may waive the requirements for a development agreement for a minor use review. (ij) Amendments and Minor Modifications: No person shall expand or modify any approved use review use. However, the approved site plan may be modified as provided in Subsection 9-2-14(k), B.R.C. 1981, if it does not expand the use, any changes conform to Section 9-7-1, "Schedule of Form and Bulk Standards," B.R.C. 1981; the impact on other uses of the approved use review is not changed; and the change complies with all other provisions of this title and any other ordinance of the city. No person shall modify an approved use review without a new use review approval, except that minor modifications K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 may be approved pursuant to Section 9-2-2, “Administrative Review Procedures,” B.R.C, 1981, provided that the minor modification meets the following standards: (1) The use is not expanded and the modification is otherwise substantially consistent with the conditions of the original approval; (2) The modification does not adversely increase impacts to other surrounding properties or adjacent uses; and (3) The site plan complies with all other provisions of this title and any other ordinance of the city. (jk) Expiration: Any use review approval or previously approved special review which that is discontinued for at least three years shall expire. The city manager, upon a finding of good cause, may grant an extension not to exceed six months from the original date of expiration. In addition, use review approvals for oil and gas operations are subject to expiration pursuant to the standards in Subsection (h) of this section. (kl) Appeals and Call-Ups: (1) The applicant or any two interested persons may appeal the city manager's decision pursuant to Section 9-4-4, "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. (2) A Two members of the planning board may call-up the manager's decision pursuant to Section 9-4-4, "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981, except that decisions in minor use review processes are not subject to call-up by the planning board. (3) The city council may call-up any planning board decision pursuant to Section 9-4- 4, "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. Section 13. Section 9-2-16, “Form-Based Code Review,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-2-16. Form-Based Code Review. (a) Purpose: The purpose of form-based code review, is to improve the character and quality of new development to promote the health, safety and welfare of the public and the users of the development. The form-based code review regulations are established to create a sense of place in the area being developed or redeveloped and ensure a site and building design that: … (o) Appeals and Call-Ups: K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (1) The applicant or any two interested persons may appeal the city manager's decision pursuant to Section 9-4-4, "Appeal, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. (2) A Two members of the planning board may call up the manager's decision pursuant to Section 9-4-4, "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. (3) The city council may call up any planning board decision pursuant to Section 9-4- 4, "Appeal, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. … Section 14. Section 9-3-6, “Floodplain Development Permits,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-3-6. Floodplain Development Permits. … (h) Floodplain development permits that allow for development in the conveyance zone or the high hazard zone, or which will involve a change of watercourse, shall be decided by the city manager. The decision of the city manager shall be subject tomay be call-up by the planning board, or appealed by any aggrieved party to the planning board, subject to the call-up and appeal procedure of Section 9-4-4, "Appeals, Call-Ups, and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. … Section 15. Section 9-3-7, “Variances,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-3-7. Variances (a) The city manager may grant a variance from the requirements of Subsection 9-3-2(i) and Sections 9-3-3, 9-3-4, and 9-3-5, B.R.C. 1981, except that no variance shall be granted for expansion or enlargement of any structure constructed after July 12, 1978, unless such expansion or enlargement conforms to the flood protection elevation requirement in effect at the time of the original construction. … (f) Any decision by the city manager to approve a variance may be is subject to call-up by the planning board or appealed by any aggrieved party to the planning board as described by Section 9-4-4, "Appeals, Call-Ups, and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. … Section 16. Section 9-3-9, “Stream, Wetlands, and Water Body Protection,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 9-3-9. Stream, Wetlands, and Water Body Protection … (c) Permitted, Allowed and Prohibited Uses within the Regulated Area: The purpose of this subsection is to describe activities that are exempted, conditionally permitted, requiring development review or prohibited: (1) Explanation of Table Abbreviations: The abbreviations used in the cells in table 3-1 have the following meanings: "E"(Exempted Activities): indicates that the use type is allowed as a matter of right and no stream, wetland or water body permit is required. "C"(Conditional Use Review): indicates that the use type will be reviewed in accordance with the requirements in paragraph (e)(32) of this section. "S"(Standard Permit Review): indicates that the use type will be reviewed in accordance with the requirements in paragraph (e)(43) of this section. "P"(Prohibited Activities): indicates that the use type is prohibited in the zone. "N"(Allowed with Notice): indicates that the use type is allowed as a matter of right subject to the application of best management practices as defined in chapter 9-16, "Definitions," B.R.C. 1981, and provision of notice in paragraph (5) of this subsection. Such activity shall not significantly alter the function of the stream, wetland or water body. No person shall conduct any activity that is allowed with notice in violation of the best management practices. … (e) Stream, Wetland and Water Body Permit Application Review: (1) Acceptance of Application: Applicants for stream, wetland or water body permits shall submit an application as set forth in subsection (d) of this section. Upon receipt of an application, the city manager shall review the application for completeness. A permit application will be accepted when the city manager determines that it is complete. (2) Public Notification of Application: Upon acceptance of a complete standard review application, public notice shall be provided according to the requirements shown in section 9-4-3, "Public Notice Requirements," B.R.C. 1981, using Public Notice Type 5 from table 4-2. Public notice of a conditional use review application is not required. (32) Criteria for Review: For an activity requiring conditional use or standard review, the applicant shall demonstrate that the stream, wetland or water body permit application meets the following criteria: … (B) Criteria for the Outer Buffer Zone: In the outer buffer zone, the following criteria shall apply: K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (i) The provisions of Subparagraph (e)(32)(A) of this section. (ii) Impervious surface coverage: Any new building or attached structure, expansion of an existing building or attached structure, new surfacing or expansion of an existing surface that would result in a cumulative total of twenty percent or more impervious surface in the outer zone on the property shall provide mitigation according to the requirements in subsection (f) of this section for the loss of pervious surface. (C) Criteria for the Inner Buffer Zone: In the inner buffer zone, the following criteria shall apply: (i) The provisions of Subparagraph (e)(32)(A) of this section. (ii) The provisions of Subparagraph (e)(32)(B) of this section. (iii) Channel bank protection or stabilization shall utilize, to the extent feasible, techniques that involve landscaping with appropriate native plants rather than rock or artificially hardened structures. (iv) All new plant material adjacent to wetlands or water bodies or along the banks of a stream shall be consistent with all applicable city rules concerning best management practices as described in chapter 9-16, "Definitions," B.R.C. 1981. Mitigation monitoring for restoration projects may be required by the city manager. (v) "Vegetation removal - major" shall only be allowed to prevent noxious weed infestation, provide for native habitat restoration or for other permitted projects. Major removal of vegetation shall be mitigated within the inner buffer according to the requirements in subsection (f) of this section. (vi) New steps, paths or other minor access to or over a stream on private property will be permitted if there is no more than one access on an individual property, the path or steps are designed to have minimal impact to the wetland, stream or water body, and the path and the area of impact does not exceed four feet in width. (D) Criteria for the Wetland, Stream or Water Body: In the wetland, stream, or water body, the following criteria shall apply: (i) The provisions of Subparagraph (e)(32)(A) of this section. (ii) The provisions of Subparagraph (e)(32)(B) of this section. (iii) The provisions of Subparagraph (e)(32)(C) of this section. (iv) Replacement or repair of an existing fence shall be generally in the same location and not result in additional impacts to the wetland, stream, or water body. (v) Utility line or drop structure maintenance or repair shall not impact the existing functions of the wetland, stream, or water body. K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (vi) Activities conducted solely for the purpose of removing stream sediment shall not alter the flood capacity as shown on the adopted floodplain maps. Vegetated channel bottoms shall be restored and stabilized. (4) Criteria for Standard Review: In addition to the standards in paragraph (e)(32) of this section, the applicant shall demonstrate that the stream, wetland or water body permit application meets the following criteria: … (g) Permit Issuance: … (5) Referrals, Call-up or Appeal: (A) Conditional Use Permits: For conditional use permits, there shall be no referrals, call-ups or appeals. An applicant may resubmit a standard permit application for a denied conditional use application, pay the balance of the standard permit fee and proceed pursuant to the standard permit review process. (B) Standard Review Permits: The decision of the city manager shall be subject to call-up by the planning boardmay be, or appealed by the applicant to the planning board, subject to the call-up and appeal procedure of sectionSection, 9-4-4 "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. … (k) Stream, Wetland and Water Body Boundaries: … (3) Map Revisions: At the request of a property owner and after submittal of an application and payment of the fee prescribed in section 4-20-53, "Stream, Wetland and Water Body Permit and Map Revision Fees," B.R.C. 1981, or at the city manager's initiative, adopted stream, wetland and water body boundaries may be modified by the city manager by means of the performance of a boundary determination in accordance with the requirements of this subsection: … (B) Review of Map Revision Applications: (i) The city manager shall review the application in accordance with subsection (l) of this section, and may approve the proposed boundary change, approve the proposed boundary change with modifications or deny the proposed boundary change. K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (ii) The decision of the city manager shall be subject to call-up by the planning board ormay be appealed by the applicant to the planning board, subject to the call-up and appeal procedure of Section 9-4-4, "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. … (m) Variances: … (7) The decision of the city manager shall be subject to call-up by the planning board, ormay be appealed by the applicant to the planning board, subject to the call-up and appeal procedure of Section 9-4-4, "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. … Section 17. Table 4-1: Summary of Decision Authority by Process Type in Section 9-4- 2, “Development Review Procedures,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-4-2. Development Review Procedures (a) Development Review Authority: Table 4-1 of this section summarizes the review and decision-making responsibilities for the administration of the administrative and development review procedures described in this chapter. The table is a summary tool and does not describe all types of decisions made under this code. Refer to sections referenced for specific requirements. Form and bulk standards may also be modified by site review. Additional procedures that are required by this code but located in other chapters are: (1) "Historic Preservation," chapter 9-11; and (2) "Inclusionary Housing," chapter 9-13. TABLE 4-1: SUMMARY OF DECISION AUTHORITY BY PROCESS TYPE Standard or Application Type Staff/City Manager BOZA Planning Board City Council Code Interpretation SECTION 9-2-3 D CA(14) CA(30) CA Setback variance ≤20% SECTION 9-2-3 D D — — Setback variance >20% SECTION 9-2-3 — D — — Parking access dimensions SECTION 9-2-2 D — — — Parking deferral SECTION 9-2-2 D — — — Parking reduction ≤25% SECTION 9-2-2 D — — — Parking reduction >25% but ≤50% SECTION 9-2-2 D(14) — CA, D(30) CA Parking reduction >50% SUBSECTION 9-9-6(f) — — D(30) CA K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Building height, conditional SECTION 9-7-6 D — — — Building height, less than principal or nonstandard building height max SECTION 9-2-14 D(14) — CA, D(30) CA Building height, greater than principal building height max SECTION 9-2-14 — — D(30) CA Building height SECTION 9-7-5 — — D(30) CA Conditional Use SECTION 9-2-1 D — — — Site Review SECTION 9-2-14 D(14) — CA, D(30) CA Use Review SECTION 9-2-15 D(14) — CA, D(30) CA Form-Based Code Review SECTION 9-2-16 D(14) — CA, D(30) CA Form-Based Code Review, administrative SECTION 9-2-16 D — — — Form-Based Code Review, minor modification SECTION 9-2-16 D — — — Annexation SECTION 9-2-17 — — R D Rezoning SECTION 9-2-19 — — R D Wetland Permit-Simple SECTION 9-3-9 D — — — Wetland Permit-Standard SECTION 9-3-9 D(14) — D(30) CA Extension of Dev't Approval ≤1 yr PARAGRAPH 9-2-12(b)(1) D — — — Extension of Dev't Approval >1 yr PARAGRAPH 9-2-12(b)(2) — — D(30) CA Rescission of Dev't Approval SUBSECTION 9-2-12(e) D — — — Creation of Vested Rights >3 yrs SECTION 9-2-20 — — R D Floodplain Dev't Permit SECTION 9-3-6 D(14) — CA(30) CA Wetland Boundary change-Standard SUBSECTION 9-3-9(e) — — R D Geophysical Exploration Permit SECTION 9-6-7(b) D(14) — CA(30) CA Substitution of Nonconforming Use SECTION 9-10-3 D — — — Expansion of Nonconforming Use SECTION 9-10-3 D(14) — CA(30) CA Subdivision, prelim plat SECTION 9-12-7 D — — — Subdivision, final plat SECTION 9-12-8 D(14) — CA — Subdivision, minor SECTION 9-12-5 D(14) — CA(30) CA Subdivision, LLA or LLE SECTIONS 9-12-3 and 9-12-4 D — — — Solar Exception SUBSECTION 9-9-17(f) D D — — Solar Access Permit SUBSECTION 9-9-17(h) D D — — Accessory Bldg Coverage SUBSECTION 9-7-8(a) — D — — Minor Modification of Discretionary Approval SUBSECTION 9-2-14(k) D — — — Minor Amendment of Discretionary Approval SUBSECTION 9-2-14(l) D(14) — CA(30) CA K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Amendment of Discretionary Approval not involving height SUBSECTION 9-2-14(m) D(14) — CA, D(30) CA Amendment of Discretionary Approval involving height SECTION 9-2-14 — — D(30) CA KEY: D = Decision Authority CA = Call-Up and Appeal Authority R = Recommendation only (n) = Maximum number of days for call-up or appeal Standard or Application Type Staff/City Manager BOZA Planning Board City Council Section 9-2-2: Administrative Review Procedures Conditional Use Section 9-2-2 D — — — Section 9-2-3: Variances and Interpretations Code Interpretation Section 9-2-3 D CA(14) CA(30) CA Setback Variance ≤20% Section 9-2-3 D D — — Setback Variance >20% Section 9-2-3 — D — — Section 9-2-12: Development Progress Required Extension of Development Approval Paragraph 9-2-12(b) D — — — Rescission of Development Approval Subsection 9-2-12(e) D — — — Section 9-2-14: Site Review Amendment of Discretionary Approval - not involving height Subsection 9-2-14(m) D(14) — CA, D(30) CA Amendment of Discretionary Approval - involving height Section 9-2-14 — — D(30) CA Building Height - less than principal or nonstandard building height maximum Section 9-2-14 D(14) — CA, D(30) CA Building Height - greater than principal building height maximum Section 9-2-14 — — D(30) CA Minor Amendment of Discretionary Approval Subsection 9-2-14(l) D(14) — CA(30) CA Minor Modification of Discretionary Approval Subsection 9-2-14(k) D — — — Site Review Section 9-2-14 D(14) — CA, D(30) CA Section 9-2-15: Use Review Minor Use Review Subsection 9-2-15(i) D(14) — A CA Use Review Section 9-2-15 D(14) — CA, D(30) CA Use Review Minor Modification Subsection 9-2-15(j) D — — — Section 9-2-16: Form-Based Code Review Administrative Form-Based Code Review Section 9-2-16 D — — — Form-Based Code Review Minor Modification Section 9-2-16 D — — — K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Form-Based Code Review Section 9-2-16 D(14) — CA, D(30) CA Section 9-2-17: Annexation Requirements Annexation Section 9-2-17 — — R D Section 9-2-19: Rezoning Rezoning Section 9-2-19 — — R D Section 9-2-20: Creation of Vested Rights Creation of Vested Rights >3 years Section 9-2-20 — — R D Section 9-3-6: Floodplain Development Permits Floodplain Development Permit Section 9-3-6 D(14) — A CA Section 9-3-9: Stream, Wetlands, and Water Body Protection Wetland Permit Conditional Section 9-3-9 D — — — Wetland Permit Standard Section 9-3-9 D(14) — A CA Wetland Boundary Revision Subsection 9-3-9(k) D(14) — A CA Section 9-6-7: Specific Use Standards - Agriculture and Natural Resource Uses Geophysical Exploration Permit Section 9-6-7(b) D(14) — CA(30) CA Chapter 9-7: Form and Bulk Standards Accessory Building Coverage Subsection 9-7-8(a) — D — — Building Height Section 9-7-5 — — D(30) CA Conditional Building Height Section 9-7-6 D — — — Section 9-9-6: Parking Standards Parking Access Dimensions Section 9-9-5 D — — — Parking Deferral Subsection 9-9-6(e) D — — — Parking Reduction ≤25% Subsection 9-9-6(f) D — — — Parking Reduction >25% but ≤50% Section 9-9-6(f) D(14) — CA, D(30) CA Parking Reduction >50% Subsection 9-9-6(f) — — D(30) CA Section 9-9-17: Solar Access Solar Access Permit Subsection 9-9-17(h) D D — — Solar Exception Subsection 9-9-17(f) D D — — Section 9-10-3: Changes to Nonstandard Buildings, Structures, and Lots and Nonconforming Uses Expansion of a Nonconforming Use Section 9-10-3 D(14) — CA(30) CA Substitution of a Nonconforming Use Section 9-10-3 D — — — Chapter 9-12: Subdivision Final Plat Section 9-12-8 D(14) — CA — Lot Line Adjustment or Lot Line Elimination Sections 9-12-3 and 9-12-4 D — — — Minor Subdivision Section 9-12-5 D(14) — CA(30) — Preliminary Plat Section 9-12-7 D — — — K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 KEY: D = Decision Authority CA = Call-Up and Appeal Authority (for City Council, call-up only) R = Recommendation only (A) = Appeal Authority only (n) = Maximum number of days for call-up or appeal Section 18. Section 9-4-3, “Public Notice Requirements,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-4-3. Public Notice Requirements (a) Process and Options: When a process or procedure identified in this title requires public notice, the city manager shall provide such notice according to Table 4-2 of this section. If a code section does not reference a specific method, the city manager shall determine the most appropriate notification method to be used. TABLE 4-2: PUBLIC NOTICE OPTIONS Public Notice Type Type of Application, Meeting or Hearing Mailed Notice Posted Notice 1 Administrative Reviews (except those identified below) none none 2 Preliminary Plats and Minor Subdivisions To adjacent property owners a minimum of 10 days before final action and mineral rights owners a minimum of 30 days before initial hearing or decision Post property a minimum of 10 days from receipt of application and prior to final action or any hearing 3 Good neighbor meetings To property owners within 600 feet of subject property a minimum of 10 days before meeting none 4 Solar exceptions, solar access permits To adjacent property owners a minimum of 10 days before final action Post property a minimum of 10 days from receipt of application and prior to final action or any hearing 5 Applications requiring BOZA action, wetland permit and boundary determination To property owners within 300 feet of subject property a minimum of 10 days before final action Post property a minimum of 10 days from receipt of application and prior to final action or any hearing 6 Development Review Applications (site review, use review, annexation, rezoning, concept plans) To property owners within 600 feet of subject property a minimum of 10 days before final action and mineral rights owners a minimum of 30 days before initial hearing or decision Post property a minimum of 10 days from receipt of application and prior to final action or any hearing 7 Form-based code review To property owners and all addresses within 600 feet of the subject property a minimum of 10 days before final action and mineral rights owners a minimum of 30 days before initial hearing or decision Post property a minimum of 10 days from receipt of application and prior to final action or any hearing 8 Use review applications for oil and gas operations To property owners, all addresses, and the local government designee of any local government within 5,280 feet (one mile) of the subject property upon finding an application complete and a minimum of 10 days before final action and any mineral rights owners at that Post property a minimum of 10 days from receipt of application and prior to final action or any hearing K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 time and a minimum of 30 days before initial hearing … Section 19. Section 9-4-4, “Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-4-4. Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings When a section of the land use regulations code indicates that a decision is subject to appeal or call-up, the following standards shall apply: (a) Appeal: If a right to appeal is noted in this title, If noted in Table 4-1, Section 9-4-2, "Development Review Procedures," B.R.C. 1981, in a specific section, an applicant or, if applicable, an aggrieved party or any two interested persons may appeal the city manager's decision to grant or deny an application to the planning board by delivering a written notice of appeal to the city manager within fourteen days of the decision. (b) Board Call-Up: If a planning board call-up of a city manager decision is noted in this title, If noted in Table 4-1, Section 9-4-2, "Development Review Procedures," B.R.C. 1981, a two members of the planning board may call up a city manager's decision upon written notification to staff or by making a verbal request, on the record, at a regularly scheduled board meeting within fourteen days of the manager's decision. A member of the BOZA may call up a city manager's decision regarding an interpretation upon written notification to staff or by making a verbal request, on the record, at a regularly scheduled board meeting within fourteen days of the manager's decision. On any application that it calls up, the board will hold a public hearing under the procedures prescribed by Chapter 1-3, "Quasi-Judicial Hearings," B.R.C. 1981, after publishing notice as provided in Subsection 9-4-3(d), B.R.C. 1981. Within thirty days of the public hearing or within such other time as the board and the applicant mutually agree, the board will either grant the application in whole or in part, with or without modifications and conditions, or deny it. The decision will specifically set forth in what respects the development review application meets or fails to meet the standards and criteria required by Sections 9-2-14, "Site Review," 9-2-15, "Use Review," and 9-2-16, "Form-Based Code Review," B.R.C. 1981, for the type of review requested. (c) City Council Call-Up: With the exception of minor subdivisions and plats, tThe city council may call up any board decision within thirty days of the board's action. The city manager may extend the call-up period until the council's next regular meeting, if the manager finds in writing within the original call-up period that the council will not receive notice of a decision of the board in time to enable it to call up the decision for review. On any application that it calls up, the council will hold a public hearing under the procedures prescribed by Chapter 1-3, "Quasi-Judicial Hearings," B.R.C. 1981, after publishing notice as specified by Subsection 9-4-3(d), B.R.C. 1981, summarized in Subsection (b) of this section. Together with the evidence presented at such public hearing, the council may consider the record, or any portion thereof, of the hearing before the board. Within thirty days of the public hearing or within such other time as the K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 council and the applicant mutually agree, the council will either grant the application in whole or in part, with or without modifications and conditions, or deny it. The decision will specifically set forth in what respects the development review application meets or fails to meet the standards and criteria required by Sections 9-2-14, "Site Review," 9-2- 15, "Use Review," and 9-2-16, "Form-Based Code Review," B.R.C. 1981, for the type of review requested. (d) Public Hearing Requirements: Within sixty days after a referral, appeal or call-up under this section, the approving agency will hold a public hearing on the application. On any application that it calls up, the board or council will hold a public hearing under the procedures prescribed by Chapter 1-3, "Quasi-Judicial Hearings," B.R.C. 1981, after publishing notice as provided in Subsection 9-4-3(d), B.R.C. 1981. Within thirty days of the public hearing or within such other time as the board or council and the applicant mutually agree, the board or council will either grant the application in whole or in part, with or without modifications and conditions, or deny it. The decision will specifically set forth in what respects the development review application meets or fails to meet the standards and criteria required by Sections 9-2-14, "Site Review," 9-2-15, "Use Review," and 9-2-16, "Form-Based Code Review," B.R.C. 1981, for the type of review requested. … Section 20. Section 9-6-3, “Specific Use Standards - Residential Uses,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-6-3. Specific Use Standards - Residential Uses (a) Residential Uses: (1) This Subsection (a) sets forth standards for uses in the residential use classification that are subject to specific use standards pursuant to Table 6-1, Use Table. (2) Residential Uses in the IG and IM Zoning Districts: The following standards apply in the IG and IM zoning districts to residential uses that may be approved pursuant to a use review: (A) Location: Dwelling units may be constructed only on a lot or parcel that meets one or more of the following requirements (i), (ii), or (iii). If a lot or parcel meets this location standard, the approving authority shall presume that the standard in Paragraph 9-2-15(e)(54), B.R.C. 1981, has been met. … (e) Dwelling Unit, Detached: … (2) In the RH-1, RH-2, RH-3, RH-4, RH-5, RH-7, MU-1, MU-2, and MU-4 Zoning Districts: K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (A) Review Process: In the RH-1, RH-2, RH-3, RH-4, RH-5, RH-7, MU-1, MU-2, and MU-4 zoning districts, the following review process applies to detached dwelling units: … (ii) Use Review: A new detached dwelling unit that is not allowed by right may be approved pursuant to a use review if the approving authority finds that: a. The use meets the use review criteria in Paragraphs 9-2- 15(e)(1), (32), (43), and (54), "Use Review," B.R.C. 1981; … Section 21. Section 9-6-5, “Specific Use Standards - Commercial Uses,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-6-5. Specific Use Standards - Commercial Uses … (b) Brewery, Distillery, and Winery: … (2) In the IS-1, IS-2, and IMS Zoning Districts: … (A) In the IS-1, IS-2, and IMS zoning districts, breweries, distilleries, and wineries shall meet the following standards: (i) Review Process: In the IS-1, IS-2, and IMS zoning districts, the following review process applies: … c. Use Review: If the use is not allowed by right or as a conditional use, the use may be approved only pursuant to a use review subject to the use review criteria in Paragraphs 9-2-15(e)(1), (32), (43), and (54) "Use Review," B.R.C. 1981. (ii) General Standard: No brewery, distillery, or winery shall exceed 15,000 square feet in floor area. (3) In the IG and IM Zoning Districts: (A) In the IG and IM zoning districts, breweries, distilleries, and wineries shall meet the following standards: (i) Review Process: In the IG and IM zoning districts, the following review process applies: K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 … c. Use Review: If the use is not allowed by right or as a conditional use, the use may be approved only pursuant to a use review subject to the use review criteria in Paragraphs 9-2-15(e)(1), (32), (43), and (54) "Use Review," B.R.C. 1981. … (i) Office Uses: … (2) Office Uses in the MU-4 Zoning District: (A) Review Process: In the MU-4 zoning district, the following review process applies to office uses: … (ii) Use Review: Office uses that may not be approved by right may be approved pursuant to a use review if the approving authority finds that the use: a. Meets the use review criteria in Paragraphs 9-2-15(e)(1), (32), (43), and (54), "Use Review," B.R.C. 1981; and … (3) Office Uses in the BT-1, BT-2, BMS, BR-1, and BR-2 Zoning Districts: (A) Review Process: In the BT-1, BT-2, BMS, BR-1, and BR-2 zoning districts, the following review process applies to office uses: (i) Allowed Use: Office uses are allowed by right if they meet the following standards: a. The use is located within the University Hill general improvement district; b. The combined total amount of floor area of any office uses does not exceed 20,000 square feet on the lot or parcel; or c. The use was legally established within the associated floor area prior to August 6, 2019. Uses that exceed the 20,000 square feet limitation of Subparagraph (A)(i)b. shall be considered a nonconforming use. Changes in operations, such as changes in ownership, tenancy, management, number of employees, hours of operation, or changes to other uses also within the office use category within the existing floor area referenced in this subsection, shall do not require city manager review.be considered an expansion of a nonconforming use. Such changes shall not K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 require a request for a change of use pursuant to Section 9- 10-3(c)(2), "Standards for Changes to Nonconforming Uses," B.R.C. 1981. Additions or changes to floor plans that result in the combined floor area of these uses exceeding the 20,000 square foot feet limitation of Subparagraph (A)(i)b. for the nonconforming floor area may are not be allowed by right and are subject to the standards of Subparagraphs (A)(ii) and (A)(iii). (ii) Conditional Use: The use may be approved as a conditional use if the following standards are met: a. The total amount of floor area of any office uses does not exceed 40,000 square feet on the lot or parcel; b. Dwelling units are constructed on the same lot or parcel or within the area of the same approved site review, planned unit development, or form-based code review and at least thirteen percent of those dwelling units meet the requirements for permanently affordable units set forth in Chapter 9-13, "Inclusionary Housing," B.R.C. 1981; and c. No less than two permanently affordable units are constructed on said lot or parcel or within said area of an approved site review, planned unit development, or form- based code review. (iii) Use Review: Any use that is not allowed by right and may not be approved as a conditional use may be approved pursuant to a use review if the approving authority finds that the use: a. Meets the use review criteria in Paragraphs 9-2-15(e)(1), (32), (43), and (54), "Use Review," B.R.C. 1981; and b. The proposed use is part of a mixed-use development that includes residential or retail uses. … (k) Office: … (4) In the IG and IM Zoning Districts: (A) Review Process: In the IG and IM zoning districts, the following review process applies to offices: … (ii) Use Review: If the office is not allowed by right, the use may be approved only pursuant to a use review. In addition to meeting the use review criteria in Paragraphs 9-2-15(e)(1), (32), (43), and (54) "Use Review," B.R.C. 1981, the applicant shall demonstrate that: K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 … (r) Financial Institution: … (2) In the MU-4 Zoning District: (A) Review Process: In the MU-4 zoning district, the following review process applies to financial institutions: … (ii) Use Review: Financial institutions that may not be approved by right may be approved pursuant to a use review if the approving authority finds that the use: a. Meets the use review criteria in Paragraphs 9-2-15(e)(1), (32), (43), and (54), "Use Review," B.R.C. 1981; and … Section 22. Section 9-7-5, “Building Height,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-7-5. Building Height (a) Permitted Height: The height permitted without review within the City is set forth in Section 9-7-1, "Schedule of Form and Bulk Standards," B.R.C. 1981, except as provided in Paragraph (b)(2) of this section. Buildings greater than the permitted height may be approved under Section 9-2-14, "Site Review," B.R.C. 1981. … (d) Nonconformity to Permitted Height: For existing buildings that exceed the height permitted in Section 9-7-1, "Schedule of Form and Bulk Standards,” or Section 9-7-6, “Building Height, Conditional,” B.R.C. 1981, the following changes require approval under Section 9-2-14, “Site Review,” B.R.C. 1981: (1) There shall be no increase in Increasing the building’s highest point as established by Subsection 9-7-5(b), “Measurement of Height,” B.R.C. 1981; (2) Adding building elements or massing above the permitted or conditional height unless permitted by Section 9-7-7, “Building Height, Appurtenances,” B.R.C. 1981; or (3) or Adding the floor area of buildings greater than theabove the permitted or conditional height but less than fifty-five feet in height, unless approved under Section 9-2-14, "Site Review," B.R.C. 1981. … Section 23. Section 9-8-5, “Occupancy of Dwelling Units,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 read as follows: 9-8-5. Occupancy of Dwelling Units … (d) Nonconforming Uses: A nonconforming residential use that is not permittedprohibited by Section 9-6-1, "Schedule of Permitted Land Uses," B.R.C. 1981, or is a lot or parcel that does not meet the density requirements of Chapter 9-8, "Intensity Standards," B.R.C. 1981, is subject to the following: … Section 24. Section 9-9-2, “General Provisions,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-9-2. - General Provisions No person shall use or develop any land within the city except according to the following standards, unless modified through a use review under Section 9-2-15, "Use Review," B.R.C. 1981, or a site review, Section 9-2-14, "Site Review," B.R.C. 1981, or a variance granted under Section 9-2-3, "Variances and Interpretations," B.R.C., 1981. (a) Fire and Life Safety: All development shall meet the applicable requirements of Chapter 10-8, "Fire Code," B.R.C. 1981. (b) Maximum Permitted Buildings on a Lot: No more than one principal building shall be placed on a lot in the RR, RE, RL-1, and RM zoning districts unless approved under the provisions of Section 9-2-14, "Site Review," or 9-7-12, "Two Detached Dwellings on a Single Lot," B.R.C. 1981. … Section 25. Section 9-9-6, “Parking Standards,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-9-6. Parking Standards (a) Rationale: The intent of this section is to provide adequate off-street parking for all uses, to prevent undue congestion and interference with the traffic carrying capacity of city streets, and to minimize the visual and environmental impacts of excessive parking lot paving. … (c) General Parking Requirements: (1) Rounding Rule: For all motor vehicle and bicycle parking space requirements resulting in a fraction, the fraction shall be: (A) Rounded to the next higher whole number when the required number of spaces is five or less; or K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (B) Rounded to the next lower whole number when the required number of spaces is more than five. (2) Parking Requirements for Lots in Two or More Zoning Districts: For lots that have more than one zoning designation, the required motor vehicle and bicycle parking for the use(s) on the lot may be provided on any portion of the lot, subject to the provisions of this title. (3) Off-Street Parking Requirement for Unlisted Nonresidential Uses: If the city manager determines that the use type is not specifically listed in Table 6-1, Use Table, or Table 9-4, Use Specific Motor Vehicle Parking Requirements for Nonresidential Uses in All Zones, the city manager may apply one of the following standards that adequately meets the parking needs of the use: (A) The applicable off-street parking requirement under Table 9-3, Nonresidential Motor Vehicle Parking Requirements by Zoning District; (B) The off-street parking requirement under Table 9-4 for the listed use type most similar to the proposed use based on public parking demand, nature of the use type, number of employees, or any other factors deemed appropriate by the city manager; (C) An off-street parking requirement established based on local or national best practices or by reference to standards or resources such as the Institute of Traffic Engineers, Urban Land Institute, International Council of Shopping Centers, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, or American Planning Association; or (D) An off-street parking requirement demonstrated by a parking demand study prepared by the applicant according to Paragraph 9-9-6(d)(6). … Section 26. Section 9-9-17, “Solar Access,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-9-17. Solar Access … (d) Basic Solar Access Protection: (1) Solar Fence: A solar fence is hereby hypothesized for each lot located in SA Area I and SA Area II. Each solar fence completely encloses the lot in question, and its foundation is contiguous with the lot lines. Such fence is vertical, is opaque and lacks any thickness. (A) SA Area I: No person shall erect an object or structure on any other lot that would shade a protected lot in SA Area I to a greater degree than the lot would be shaded by a solar fence twelve feet in height, between two hours before and two hours after local solar noon on a clear winter solstice day. K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (B) SA Area II: No person shall erect an object or structure on any other lot that would shade a protected lot in SA Area II to a greater degree than the lot would be shaded by a solar fence twenty-five feet in height, between two hours before and two hours after local solar noon on a clear winter solstice day. (C) SA Area III: Solar fences are not hypothesized for lots located in SA Area III. Solar access protection in SA Area III is available under this section only through permits, as hereinafter provided. (D) Adjoining Duplex or Townhouse Lots in All Solar Areas: On duplex or townhouse lots, solar fences are not hypothesized on interior lot lines between adjoining units of a duplex or adjoining townhouses. Other lot lines are subject to the solar fence restrictions of subsection (A), (B), or (C), as applicable. … (f) Exceptions: … (5) Referral or Appeal of City Manager's Decision: The city manager may refer the application or the city manager's decision may be appealed by the applicant to the BOZA pursuant to the procedures of Section 9-4-4, "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. If an affidavit from each owner of each affected lot per subparagraph (f)(4)(A) cannot be obtained, the applicant may apply for consideration of the exception before the BOZA. Public notification of the hearing shall be provided pursuant to Section 9-4-3, "Public Notice Requirements," B.R.C. 1981. The sign posted shall remain posted until the conclusion of the hearing. … (g) Solar Siting: … (2) Waivers: Upon request of any applicant for a building permit or a subdivision or planned unit development approval, the approving authority may waive such of the requirements of this paragraph as it deems appropriate if it finds that any of the following criteria are met: … (D) The applicant's proposal incorporates the following additional energy resource and conservation option points in excess of the requirements of Subsection 10-5.5-2(y), "Resource Conservation - Green Points," B.R.C. 1981: (i) 2 points - to qualify for a waiver of the requirement of Subparagraph (g)(1)(A) of this section; K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (ii) 3 points - to qualify for a waiver of the requirement of Subparagraph (g)(1)(B) of this section; and (iii) The city manager finds that adequate protection for any solar energy systems to be installed is provided either under the provisions of this section, or through covenants, easements, or other agreements among affected landowners. … Section 27. Section 9-10-2, “Continuation or Restoration of Nonconforming Uses and Nonstandard Buildings, Structures, and Lots,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-10-2. Continuation or Restoration of Nonconforming Uses and Nonstandard Buildings, Structures, and Lots Nonconforming uses and nonstandard buildings and lots in existence on the effective date of the ordinance which first made them nonconforming may continue to exist subject to the following: (a) One-Year Expiration for Nonconforming Uses: A nonconforming use, except for a use that is nonconforming only because it fails to meet the required off street parking standards in of Sections 9-9-6, "Parking Standards," and or residential density requirements of Section 9-78-1, " Schedule of Intensity StandardsSchedule of Form and Bulk Standards," B.R.C. 1981, that has been discontinued for at least one year shall not be resumed or replaced by another nonconforming use as allowed under Subsection 9-2- 15(f), B.R.C. 1981, unless an extension of time is requested in writing prior to the expiration of the one-year period. The approving authority will grant such a request for an extension upon finding that an undue hardship would result if such extension were not granted. … Section 28. Section 9-10-3, “Changes to Nonstandard Buildings, Structures, and Lots and Nonconforming Uses,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-10-3. Changes to Nonstandard Buildings, Structures, and Lots and Nonconforming Uses Changes to nonstandard buildings, structures, or nonstandard lots and nonconforming uses shall comply with the following requirements: … (c) Nonconforming Uses: (1) Nonconforming Changes to Conforming Use Prohibited: No conforming use may be changed to a nonconforming use, notwithstanding the fact that some of the features of the lot or building are nonstandard or the parking is nonconforming. (2) Standards for Changes Substitutions ofto Nonconforming Uses: The city manager will grant a request for a change substitution of a nonconforming use, which is the K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 replacement of one nonconforming use with another, if the modified or new use does not constitute an expansion of a nonconforming use. Any other change of use that constitutes expansion of a nonconforming use must be reviewed under procedures of Section 9-2-15, "Use Review," B.R.C. 1981. (3) Nonconforming Only as to Parking: The city manager will grant a request to change a use that is nonconforming only because of an inadequate amount of parking to any conforming use allowed in the underlying zoning district upon a finding that the new or modified use will have an equivalent or less parking requirement than the use being replaced. … Section 29. Section 9-12-3, “Adjustment of Lot Lines,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-12-3. Adjustment of Lot Lines (a) Scope: The city manager is authorized to grant exemptions from the subdivision process for the transfer of part of one lot or parcel for the purpose of enlarging an existing adjacent lot or parcel if such transfer meets the requirements of this section. If an applicant cannot meet the standards of this section, then an adjustment may be approved, if it meets the applicable standards, as part of a minor subdivision or a subdivision. … (d) City Manager Approval: No person shall transfer land under this section until after the city manager reviews the map and legal description of the property and all other information required under this section to verify that the transfer is exempt under this chapter. The city manager shall sign the documents of transfer before they are recorded and will record the approved replat map after the applicant has recorded the documents of transfer. The city manager shall sign the approved replat map and the city clerk shall record the replat map in the office of the Boulder County Clerk and Recorder. Any such approved replat not recorded within six months after the date it was approved shall automatically expire. Section 30. Section 9-12-4, “Elimination of Lot Lines,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-12-4. Elimination of Lot Lines (a) Scope: Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, existing lot lines forming the boundary between two or more conforming platted lots located within the same subdivision or lot lines between lots or parcels that have merged to form one building lot pursuant to subsection 9-9-2(c), B.R.C. 1981, may be removed or eliminated through a replatting process which conforms to the requirements of this section. … K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (e) City Manager Decision: The city manager shall notify the planning board in writing within seven days of the disposition of the replat application. (fe) City Manager Approval: The city manager shall sign all approved replats and, upon the payment of the recording fees prescribed by subsection 4-20-43(a), B.R.C. 1981, the city clerk shall record all such replats in the office of the Boulder County Clerk and Recorder. Any such approved replat not recorded within six months after the date it was approved shall automatically expire. Section 31. Section 9-12-5, “Minor Subdivision,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-12-5. Minor Subdivision (a) Scope: A minor subdivision is a division of land that is already served by city services, will not require the extension of streets or public improvements and will not result in more than one additional lot. … (f) Existing Streets or Alleys, Dedication and Vacation of Easements: Right-of-way necessary to bring an existing street or alley up to a current city standard, or public easements for utilities or sidewalks may be dedicated on a minor subdivision plat. The City may approve the vacation of city utility easements on the replat. … Section 32. Section 9-12-10, “Final Plat Procedure,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-12-10. Final Plat Procedure (a) If the final plat and the required plans, specifications, agreements, guarantees and other documents meet the requirements of this code, the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards and other ordinances of the City or requirements determined by the city manager to be necessary to protect the public health, safety or welfare, the manager shall approve the final plat (subject to the provisions of subsection (d) of this section) within ninety days of the date of submitting the required documents. The manager shall then execute a subdivision agreement that incorporates the final plat, the undertaking to provide public improvements prescribed by Section 9-12-12, "Standards for Lots and Public Improvements," B.R.C. 1981, the undertaking of financial guarantees prescribed by Section 9-12-13, "Subdivider Financial Guarantees," B.R.C. 1981, the public improvement warranty prescribed by Section 9-12-14, "Public Improvement Warranty," B.R.C. 1981, the subdivider's commitment to provide an update of the preliminary title report or attorney memorandum current as of the date of recording the plat and any other terms and conditions to which the parties agree. … K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (e) Any person aggrieved by a decision of the city manager to approve or deny an application for a subdivision may appeal such decision to the planning board by filing an appeal with the city manager within fourteen days of the decisionpursuant to Section 9-4- 4, "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. Two members of the planning board may call-up the city manager decision pursuant to Section 9-4-4, "Appeals, Call- Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981.The board shall hear the appeal or call-up of the subdivision application, after giving notice to all interested parties, within thirty days of the notice of appeal or call-up, under the procedures prescribed by Chapter 1-3, "Quasi- Judicial Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. The board shall determine whether the subdivision application meets the requirements of this code and other ordinances of the City or those determined by the city manager to be necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare and shall grant or deny the application. … Section 33. Section 9-16-1, “General Definitions,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows: 9-16-1. General Definitions (a) The definitions contained in Chapter 1 -2, "Definitions," B.R.C. 1981, apply to this title unless a term is defined differently in this chapter. (b) Terms identified with the references shown below after the definition are limited to those specific sections or chapters of this title: (1) Airport influence zone (AIZ). (2) Floodplain regulations (Floodplain). (3) Historic preservation (Historic). (4) Inclusionary housing (Inclusionary Housing). (5) Solar access (Solar). (6) Wetlands Protection (Wetlands). (7) Signs (Signs). (c) The following terms as used in this title have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: A—E … Conforming Use means any use of a building or use of a lot that is permitted by Section 9-6-1, “Schedule of Permitted Land Uses,” B.R.C. 1981 and meets any applicable specific use standards. A conforming use also includes: (1) A legal existing use that is not prohibited but was not approved as a conditional use or use review use; K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (2) A use approved pursuant to a valid use review or special review, except where the review was a nonconforming use review; Expansion of a nonconforming use means any change or modification to a nonconforming use that constitutes: (1) An increase in the occupancy, floor area, required parking, traffic generation, outdoor storage, or visual, noise, or air pollution; (2) Any change in the operational characteristics which may increase the impacts or create adverse impacts to the surrounding area including, without limitation, the hours of operation, noise, or the number of employees; (3) The addition of bedrooms to a dwelling unit, except a single-family detached dwelling unit; or (4) The addition of one or more dwelling units. K—O … Nonconforming use means any use of a building or use of a lot that is not permittedprohibited by Section 9-6-1, "Schedule of Permitted Land Uses," B.R.C. 1981, but excludes a conforming use in a nonstandard building or on a nonstandard lot; a legal existing use that has not been approved as a conditional use or a use review use, or a use approved pursuant to a valid special review or use review approval. A nonconforming use also includes an otherwise conforming use, except a single dwelling unit on a lot, that does not meet the following parking and or residential density requirements, including, without limitation, the requirements for minimum lot area per dwelling unit,; useable open space per dwelling unit, or required off-street parking requirements of Sections 9-8-1, "Schedule of Intensity Standards," and or 9-9-6, "Parking Standards," B.R.C. 1981. … Nonstandard building or structure means any building or structure that does not conform to the setback, height, side yard bulk plane, side yard wall length articulation, or building coverage requirements of Section 9-7-1, "Schedule of Form and Bulk Standards," or the floor area ratio requirements of Section 9-8-1, "Schedule of Intensity Standards," and Section 9-8-2, "Floor Area Ratio Requirements," B.R.C. 1981, unless the nonstandard features of the building or structure were approved as part of a planned unit development or a site review, or as a variance. A nonstandard building or structure does not render a conforming use a nonconforming use. Nonstandard lot means any lot that does not conform to the minimum lot area requirement of Section 9-8-1, "Schedule of Intensity Standards," B.R.C. 1981, or frontage upon a public street required by Section 9-12-12, "Standards for Lots and Public Improvements," B.R.C. 1981, unless the nonstandard nature of the lot was approved as part of a planned unit development or a site review. A nonstandard lot does not render a conforming use a nonconforming use. K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 … Section 34. This ordinance shall apply to any application under Title 9, “Land Use Code,” B.R.C. 1981, (hereafter referred as “Application”) applied for on or after the effective date of this ordinance. Any project for which a complete Application has been submitted to the city or which has received an approval prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall be subject to the standards in effect at the time such Application was submitted to the city. Section 35. If any section, paragraph, clause, or provision of this ordinance shall for any reason be held to be invalid or unenforceable, such decision shall not affect any of the remaining provisions of this ordinance. Section 36. This ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the city and covers matters of local concern. Section 37. The city council deems it appropriate that this ordinance be published by title only and orders that copies of this ordinance be made available in the office of the city clerk for public inspection and acquisition. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY TITLE ONLY this 16th day of May 2024. _____________________________ Aaron Brockett, Mayor Attest: ______________________________ Elesha Johnson, City Clerk K:\PLAD\o-8622 3rd rdg Simplifying Development Review Process-.docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 READ ON SECOND READING, AMENDED AND PASSED this 6th day of June 2024. _____________________________ Aaron Brockett, Mayor Attest: _____________________________ Elesha Johnson, City Clerk READ ON THIRD READING, PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of June 2024. _____________________________ Nicole Speer, Mayor Pro Tem Attest: _____________________________ Elesha Johnson, City Clerk