CITY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT

Transcription

1 Page 1 CITY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: April13, 2016 TO: FROM: BY: City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita Jennifer M. Cervantez, C,i!, Manager ;JZ/ Amy Diaz, City Clerk ~ SUBJECT: Adoption of an Ordinance Approving Zoning Code Text Amendment CA Site Development Permit Regulations Recommendation Adopt Ordinance No entitled: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT CA REVISING SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT REGULATIONS INCLUDING AN EXEMPTION FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION (B)(3) Background and Discussion At the March 23, 2016, City Council regular meeting, the City Council unanimously introduced for first reading, read by title only, and waived further reading of Ordinance No Ordinance No will adopt Zoning Code Map Amendment CA to modify the threshold for the administrative review of Site Development Permits (SOPs) from 1,000 square feet to no more than 1 0 percent of the original building square footage, not to exceed 6,500 square feet; and remove the public hearing requirement for all SOPs unless another type of discretionary permit requires a public hearing. It is now in order for the City Council to adopt Ordinance No Alternatives 1) The City Council could choose to deny the adoption of Ordinance No for Zoning Code Map Amendment CA ) To otherwise modify the code and provide direction to staff. 04/13/16 Item No. 4.4

2 Adoption of Ordinance for Zoning Code Text Amendment CA SOP Regulations April 13, 2016 Page 2 Page 2 Fiscal Impact There are no fiscal impact associated with the adoption of Ordinance No The revisions will be updated during the regular municipal code update process done through and budgeted within the City Clerk's department. Attachments A. Copy of March 23, 2016 Agenda Packet for First Reading of Ordinance No

3 Page 3 CITY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: March 23, 2016 TO: City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita FROM: Jennifer M. Cervantez, City Manager ~ BY: Cheryl Kuta, Development Services Diret~ SUBJECT: First Reading and Introduction of an Ordinance Entitled "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita, California Adopting Zoning Code Text Amendment CA Revising Site Development Permit Regulations including an Exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(8)(3)" Recommendation 1. Receive staff presentation and report. 2. Council questions of staff. 3. Open the public hearing. 4. Receive public testimony. 5. Close the public hearing. 6. Council discussion and deliberation. 7. Introduce for first reading, read by title only, and waive further reading of an Ordinance entitled: Background AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT CA REVISING SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT REGULATIONS INCLUDING AN EXEMPTION FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION (8)(3) On December 2, 2015, the Planning Commission considered Zoning Code Text Amendment CA and approved a Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance. The proposed Ordinance would revise the threshold for administrative review of Site Development Permit (SOP) applications for certain types of non-residential building expansions and modifications to allow the Development Services Director authority to approve non-residential additions that do not exceed 10 ATTACHMENT A 03/23/16 Item No. 5.1

4 CA Modify Regulations for Site Development Permits March 23, 2016 Page 2 Page 4 percent of the original square footage and which comply with all other applicable development standards for the Zoning District. The purpose of this Zoning Code Amendment (ZCA) is to streamline the approval process for certain minor building expansions. A copy of the Planning Commission's December 2nd Staff Report on this item (without attachments) has been included as Attachment E for reference. On January 27, 2016, the City Council conducted a public hearing and considered the proposed ZCA. Although the City Council was generally supportive of the proposed Ordinance, there were concerns raised regarding the potential for major expansions to large buildings without Planning Commission review. For example, the City's largest building, located at Avenida de las Banderas, is 310,000 square feet. As proposed, the Ordinance could potentially allow for a 31,000 square foot expansion at the discretion of the Development Services Director, if the proposed expansion met all applicable development standards. The City Council proposed an upper limit to the Development Services Director's approval authority be established. The suggested revision would provide an approval authority threshold for the Development Services Director up to 1 0 percent of the original square footage, and not to exceed 6,500 square feet. The City Council requested that the Planning Commission consider two discussion topics related to the proposed Amendment: 1) The inclusion of a maximum square footage within the threshold approval authority for the Director; and, 2) Whether any distinctions should be made between additions to commercial and industrial buildings. Each of these two issues will be discussed in greater detail below. According to Section of the Rancho Santa Margarita Zoning Code (RSMZC), "If the City Council proposes any substantial modification to the [Zoning Code] amendment not previously considered by the Planning Commission, the City Council shall refer the matter back to the Planning Commission for consideration." Since the additional threshold constitutes a substantial modification, this item was referred back to the Planning Commission for consideration. Staff revised the draft redlined changes to the RSMZC and highlighted the City Council proposed revisions (see Attachment C). On March 2, 2016, the Planning Commission considered and unanimously supported the City Council's modifications (see Attachment 8). Staff is recommending that the City Council conduct its first reading and introduce the revised Ordinance. Discussion Issue 1: Maximum Square Footage As stated previously, the City Council proposed to include a maximum square footage within the threshold approval authority for the Development Services Director in reviewing SOPs. The proposed maximum square footage threshold discussed by the City Council was 6,500 square feet. The City Council's reasoning was that anything larger than 6,500 square feet could potentially have a significant impact on the character of the City and, therefore, should be considered by the Planning-Commission.

5 CA Modify Regulations for Site Development Permits March 23, 2016 Page 3 If a 6,500 square foot upper limit on Development Services Director approval were approved, it would mean that the 10 percent threshold would only apply to buildings that are 65,000 square feet or smaller. Staff has researched the City's business registration database and has determined that there are only 12 buildings in the City that are 65,000 square feet or larger. In order to facilitate discussion on this issue, the map provided in Attachment D has been included to show all non-residential buildings 65,000 square feet or greater shown highlighted in orange. Staff has also included buildings between 50,000-65,000 square feet highlighted in yellow in order to provide a more comprehensive overview for the size of buildings in the City. The Planning Commission discussed the threshold and agreed with the City Council that the Development Services Director should have the authority to approve SOPs with up to 10 percent additional square footage, not to exceed 6,500 square feet. It is also important to note that in order for the Development Services Director to approve any SOP, the proposed development must comply with all other development standards established for that particular zoning district (i.e., setbacks, height limit, parking requirements, floor area ratio, lot coverage, etc.). Any development that does not meet all of the development standards requires approval of an Alternative Development Standard or a Variance and must be considered by the Planning Commission through a public hearing. Issue 2: Commercial vs. Industrial The other issue the City Council requested that the Planning Commission discuss was related to whether there should be a distinction made between commercial and industrial building additions. Since many commercial buildings have been subdivided into smaller tenant spaces, a business could potentially argue that the code, as proposed, would allow the business to increase its square footage 10 percent of the building rather than 10 percent of the tenant space. For example, in Mercado del Lago, Ralph's is approximately 45,000 square feet and Rite Aid is approximately 24,000 square feet. If those two tenants are considered part of one building (69,000 square feet), an argument could be made that either tenant would be eligible for Director approval for a 6,500 square foot expansion of the building, even though the increase would exceed 10 percent of the tenant space. Although this Page 5

6 CA Modify Regulations for Site Development Permits March 23, 2016 Page4 Page 6 example has never been proposed, staff has historically interpreted an expansion to be based solely on the tenant's expansion rather than an expansion of the entire building. The Planning Commission discussed this example and felt that the proposed language as written would appropriately address this concern and that no distinction needed to be made between retail and industrial building expansions. The City Council also pointed out at its January meeting that most retail buildings are single-story buildings and could potentially add an additional story without expanding the building footprint. The Planning Commission also discussed this concern and determined that most commercial center expansions would require an Alternative Development Standard or Variance for parking, thus requiring the SOP to also be considered by the Planning Commission. Furthermore, since the Development Services Director has the authority to refer any application to the Planning Commission for consideration, they felt that it was not necessary to add a distinction between retail and industrial buildings to address this concern. SUMMARY The City Council is being requested to conduct a public hearing on Zoning Code Text Amendment CA and to introduce the Ordinance, read by title only, and waive further reading. The clarifications proposed within the Zoning Code Amendment are summarized as follows: Modify the threshold for the administrative review of SOPs from 1,000 square feet to no more than 10 percent of the original building square footage, not to exceed 6,500 square feet. Remove the public hearing requirement for all SOPs unless another type of discretionary permit requires a pll.lblic hearing. Alternatives 1) The City Council could determine that findings cannot be made to approve the proposed revisions to the SDP regulations and decline to approve the proposed Ordinance. 2) The City Council could modify the proposed Ordinance; however, any significant changes to the proposed Ordinance would require the Planning Commission's reconsideration of their recommendation. Fiscal Impact Not applicable. Attachments A. City Council Proposed Ordinance Approving Zoning Code Amendment CA B. Planning Commission Resolution Recommending Approval of CA C. Redlined Changes to the RSMZC

7 CA Modify Regulations for Site Development Permits March 23, 2016 Page 5 Page 7 D. Building Square Footage Map E. January 27, 2016 City Council Staff Report (without Attachments)

8 THiS PAGE intentionally LEFT BLANK Page 8

9 Page 9 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT CA REVISING SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMiT REGULATIONS INCLUDING AN EXEMPTION FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION (8)(3) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita hereby finds, determines, and declares as follows: A. On December 10, 2002, the City of Rancho Santa Margarita adopted the Rancho Santa Margarita General Plan. B. On April 11, 2007, the City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita adopted Title 9 of the Rancho Santa Margarita Municipal Code (the "Rancho Santa Margarita Zoning Code"), establishing site development permit regulations. C. The City of Rancho Santa Margarita has initiated Zoning Code Text Amendment No to revise the City's site development permit regulations to revise the threshold for administrative review of certain nonresidential building expansions and modifications. D. The Planning Commission on December 2, 2015, held a duly noticed public hearing, considered the written and oral information and testimony presented by City staff, community residents and other interested parties, and recommended that the City Council approve and adopt Zoning Code Text Amendment CA E. The City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita held a duly noticed public hearing and considered public comments and the written and oral information and testimony presented by City staff, community residents and other interested parties at a public hearing held on January 27, 2016, and proposed substantial modifications to Zoning Code Text Amendment CA and requested that the Planning Commission consider those modifications. F. The Planning Commission on March 2, 2016, held a duly noticed public hearing, considered the written and oral information and testimony presented by City staff, community residents and other interested parties, and ATTACHMENT A

10 Ordinance No. Page 2 Page 10 recommended that the City Council approve and adopt Zoning Code Text Amendment CA G. The City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita held a duly noticed public hearing and considered public comments and the written and oral information and testimony presented by City staff, community residents and other interested parties at a public hearing held on March 23, Section 2. in accordance with Section (d) of the Zoning Code, the following findings for approving Zoning Code Text Amendment CA are hereby made: (A) GENERAL PLAN Finding: That the proposed Zoning Code text amendment is consistent with the goals, policies. programs. and land uses of applicable elements of the General Plan. The proposed Zoning Code Amendment is consistent with the goals, policies, programs and land uses of applicable elements of the General Plan because the proposed Zoning Code text amendment consists of minor modifications to the procedural mechanism for reviewing and taking action upon applications for Site Development Permits. The proposed Amendment by itself does not allow any additional structures, but simply modifies the procedural mechanism to allow Site Development Permits meeting certain thresholds to be granted administratively. Specifically this Zoning Code Amendment supports the following goals and policies established in the General Plan: Economic Development Element Goal 2: Attract and retain the types of businesses and employment generating uses that are beneficial to the community. Modifying the site development permit regulations will facilitate the development and improvement of commercial properties to best suit the needs of tenants and property owners. A small business owner requiring minor expansion or modification to his or her property may consider existing regulations burdensome, and could potentially decide to relocate rather than pursue a build-to-suit alternative. By enhancing the built-in flexibility of the site development permit, the City would improve business attraction and retention. " Economic Development Element Policy 2. 1: Encourage the retention of existing industry and employment generators in the community by providing and maintaining high-quality services and facilities. By streamlining the permitting process for additions, applicants may receive their approvals in an efficient and cost-effective manner, thereby encoll.!raging the retention of existing industry and employment generators in the community. The Zoning Code text amendment as proposed advances the City's efforts to attract and retain high quality retail and service uses by nurtll.!ring a business-friendly environment

11 Ordinance No. Page 3 Page 11 (B) COMPATIBILITY Finding: That the proposed Zoning Code text amendment will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the surrounding environment. The proposed Zoning Code Amendment will not have an adverse impact on the surrounding properties or the surrounding environment because the Amendment consists of minor modifications to the discretionary review of site development permits. The revisions to the administrative review of site development permits will not modify Rancho Santa Margarita Zoning Code (RSMZC) Section (c)(2)(c), which states that if a site development permit proposes a development standard different than those identified by Title 9 for the proposed use or zoning district, such site development permit shall always require a public hearing before the Planning Commission and findings be made pursuant to Section (Alternative Development Standard). Furthermore, the Development Services Director and Planning Commission shall, in acting to approve a site development permit, be required to make identical findings. (C) GENERAL WELFARE Finding: That the proposed Zoning Code text amendment promotes public health, safety, and general welfare and serves the goals and purposes of [Title 9]. Zoning Code Text Amendment CA will promote public health, safety and general welfare and serve the goals and purposes of Title 9 by ensuring that applicants for site development permits are granted the appropriate level of review. Section 3. Title 9 of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita Municipal Code (Planning and Zoning), Chapter 9.08 (Administration), Section (Site development permit) is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: Sec, 9,08,170, ~Site development permit (a) Introduction. This Section establishes a process to promote superior aesthetics, design compatibility, and high quality site planning. The site development permit process provides for the effective and efficient review of development proposals to ensure compatible and enhanced site and building design throughout the community. Through the site development permit the City can achieve excellence and innovation in the design of development projects. (b) Site development permit required. (1) When no other discretionary permit is required, a site development permit shall be required for all new residential development projects, and non-residential development projects involving new construction, reconstruction, building additions (see Section (a)(2)), or structural or site modifications as defined herein

12 Ordinance No. Page 4 Page 12 (2) Modifications: Any person holding a permit granted under this Title may request a changed plan or amendment to that permit. For the purpose of this Section, the modification of a permit may include modification of the terms of the permit itself, project design, or the waiver or alteration of conditions imposed in the granting of the permit. (3) If the Development Services Director determines that a proposed project action is not in substantial conformance with the original approval, the Development Services Director shall notify the pioperty owner of the requirement to submit a site development permit application for consideration and action by the same approving authority as the original permit. (4) The Development Services Director may require that a site development permit be filed for any proposal determined by the Director not to be in clear compliance with General Plan policies and/or this Title as described in Section (c) initiation of application. Applications for site development permits may be filed with the Development Services Department by a recorded owner of the property in question or by the owner's authorized agent. The Development Services Director shall prescribe the form of application and the supporting information required to initiate both environmental review (pursuant to Section ) and the site development permit application review. (d) Site development permit process. (1) Application for site development permits shall be processed in accordance with Table and the procedure depicted in Figure Once an application is received by the Development Services Director, the application will be reviewed for completeness. If the Development Services Director finds the application to be complete, then the application shall be processed in accordance with the process illustrated in Figure If the application is found to be incomplete, the Development Services Director will notify the applicant in writing within 30 days what additional information is required, and the application will not be processed until that information is received by the Development Services Department. (2) When a site development permit is required in the absence of any other discretionary permit, the Development Services Director or the Planning Commission shall, review and take action upon the application in accordance with the following procedures: a. Decision by the Development Services Director. When an application for a site development permit proposes a building addition that would increase by 10 percent or less the gross square feet of non-residential building area approved on the original site development permit, up to a maximum of 6,

13 Ordinance No. Page 5 Page 13 square feet, or which involves temporary uses and structures, the Development Services Director shall have the authority to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the project. All decisions of the Development Services Director are subject to appeal to the Planning Commission, pursuant to Section The Development Services Director may refer any application for a site development permit to the Planning Commission for consideration. b. Decision by the Planning Commission. When an application for a site development permit proposes a building addition that would increase by more than 10 percent of the gross square feet approved on the original site development permit of nonresidential building area, or any increase above 6,500 square feet, or any new residential development, the application must be reviewed by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall have the authority to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the project. Decisions of the Planning Commission are subject to appeal to the City Council, pursuant to Section No public hearing is required. c. If a site development permit proposes a development standard different than those identified by this Title for the proposed use or zoning district, such site development permit shall always require a public hearing before the Planning Commission and findings be made pursuant to Section (Alternative Development Standards). d. if an application for a site development permit proposes a use not specifically identified as permitted by this Title, such site development permit shall be considered by the Planning Commission as described in Section (Use Determination). e. If a site development permit is processed in conjunction with a conditional use permit, alternative development standard, variance, or other discretionary permit, additional findings may be required. (3) If a site development permit application is submitted in conjunction with another discretionary permit, the Development Services Director shall conduct the review and shall make a recommendation to the Planning Commission. (e) Findings and conditions of approval. (1) The following findings must be made prior to approval of a site development permit:

14 Ordinance No. Page 6 Page 14 a. In acting to approve a site development permit, the Development Services Director or Planning Commission shall be required to make the following findings: b. That the proposed site development permit will be consistent with the objectives, policies and general land uses and programs specified in the City's General Plan c. That the proposed site development permit is consistent with the provisions of this Title; d. That the location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed site development permit will not create unusual noise, traffic or other conditions or situations that may be objectionable, detrimental, or incompatible with other permitted uses in the vicinity; and e. That the proposed site development permit will not result in conditions or circumstances contrary to the public health and safety and the general welfare. (2) In order to mitigate the possible adverse impact of a proposed project on surrounding properties and to ensure overall consistency of the development project with the Zoning Code and the General Plan, specific conditions may be imposed on any site development permit approval. (f) Establishment of development. Site development permits, when approved, authorize new construction, reconstruction, building addotions, or structural or site modifications at a particular location. Projects approved by site development permits must be established at the approved location within the time frame set by the approval authority. Time extensions to establish development may be granted by the Planning Commission. Site development permits shall expire and become null and void if any of the following activities do not occur within the timeframes established by the permit: (1) The issuance of a building permit for new construction (if said building permit expires, approval of site development permit shall become null and void); (2) The issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy for the establishment of the approved development; or (3) The commencement of operation of the use in cases where no construction or existing structure is involved. (g) Consistency of working drawings with approved plans. A site development permit approval shall pertain only to those plans reviewed and approved with the site development permit. Further, all plans approved with a site development permit shall be considered an integral part of the site development permit approval. The Development Services Director shall ensure that any final working drawings for

15 Ordinance No. Page 7 Page 15 grading or construction authorized by a site development permit approval are consistent with said previously-reviewed plans prior to release of working drawings for plan check. The Development Services Director may approve minor variations from previously-reviewed plans if he/she determines that the original plan concepts are being carried out. If the Development Services Director does not make such a determination, the subject working drawings shall be referred to the decision-making authority for review and action. The Planning Commission may extend the time period for meeting the preceding requirements for establishment of development. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing prior to action on such a time extension. Additional conditions may be imposed on a site development permit in conjunction with a time extension. However, such new conditions may only be imposed following a public hearing to receive testimony on the proposed additional conditions. Section 4. Title 9 of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita Municipal Code (Planning and Zoning), Chapter 9.08 (Administration), Section (General Procedures) is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: All development proposals may be subject to one or more development application processing procedures contained in this Chapter. The exact application processing procedures that apply to a specific project will be determined by the Development Services Director based on the project characteristics. Table outlines the primary types of development applications and review procedures. Table Application Types, Review Bodies and Responsibilities Planning Planning Commission Director City Council Type of Authority Authority Advisory Public Final Application to to to City Hearing Authority/Public Approve Approve Councii Required Hearing or Deny or Deny Only Required Alternative development X X standards Amendment of the Zoning X X X Code text 1 and change of zone district Annexation X X X Appeal x4 x4 x

16 Ordinance No. Page 8 Page 16 Conditional use permit X X Development agreement X X X Home occupation permit X Landscape plan review X Lot line adjustment X Tentative parcel map Final parcel map X X x5 Sign permit X Sign program Site development permit x2 X x3 Special event permit X Specific plan X X X Temporary use permit Tentative tract map Final tract map X X X x5 Variance X X Notes: 1 -May be submitted by city staff, Planning Commission or City Council only. 2- When an application for a site development permit proposes a building addition that would increase by 1 0 percent or less the gross square feet of non-residential building area approved on the original site development permit, up to a maximum of 6,500 square feet, or which involves temporary uses and structures and not performed in conjunction with another discretionary permit review that requires action by the Planning Commission. 3 -When an application for a site development permit proposes a building addition that would increase by more than 10 percent of the gross square feet approved on the original site development permit non-residential building area, or any increase above 6,500 square feet, and/or performed in conjunction with another discretionary permit review that requires action by the Planning Commission. A site development permit alone does not require a public hearing. 4 -The Planning Commission is board of appeals for development services director decisions, and its decision on the appeal is final. A Planning Commission public hearing is required only when the original application required a public hearing. The city council is board of appeals for Planning Commission decisions, and its decision on the appeal is final

17 Ordinance No. Page 9 Page No public hearing required. Consent calendar item on city council agenda. Section 5. Title 9 of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita Municipal Code (Planning and Zoning), Chapter 9.08 (Administration), Section (Administrative approvals) is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: Sec, 9.08,040. -Administrative approvals. (a) Authority of the development services director. The development services director has the authority to approve or deny the following applications, subject to specific findings and procedures, including, but not limited to: (1) Amateur radio antennas in compliance with the provisions of Section (g); (2) Building additions not to exceed ten percent of the gross floor area of the non-residential building area approved on the original site development permit, up to a maximum of 6,500 square feet, or involves temporary uses and structures. A finding of consistency with the existing building architectural style, materials, colors, and other provisions of the Code shall be made; (3) Changed plan-minor. An applicant may initiate a request for a modification of an approved development application upon the submittal of the applicable form, materials, and fees. Minor modifications must be granted in writing by the development services director prior to the issuance of a building permit for any changed plans. To grant the request, the development services director must find that the requested modification is substantially in compliance with the original approval plans, and conditions shall be limited to the following: (a) A modification that involves 10 percent or less of the building area or project site area, up to a maximum of 6,500 square feet; or (b) A modification that involves minor changes in color, material, signage, design, landscape material, or parking or driveway orientation; or (c) A modification that involves minor design changes that represent improvements to previous engineering, site design, or building practices provided the request does not change the character of the project or result in negative impacts to adjoining properties, drainage facilities, or rights-of-way. All modifications that do not meet the criteria in Subsections (a), (b), and (c) above shall be considered major changes and shall be subject to the same review procedures established for the original development review application. (4) Color changes, windows, and door relocation and/or additions that are compatible with the existing building architectural style; (5) Exterior lighting as permitted in individual zoning districts in compliance with the provisions of Section ;

18 Ordinance No. Page 10 Page 18 (6) Fences exceeding six feet in height in compliance with the provisions of Section ; (7) Home occupation permit applications which comply with the provisions of Section ; (8) Outdoor display of merchandise and product display for an existing building that complies with the provisions under Sections and ; (9) Outdoor storage as permitted in individual zoning districts in compliance with the provisions under Section ; (10) Roof eaves and gables on accessory structures in excess of 12 inches, measured from the vertical side of the unit, in compliance with Section ; and (11) Sign permit applications in compliance with the provisions of Chapter 9.07; and (12) Any other items delegated to the development services director for review and approval. Section 6. Title 9 of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita Municipal Code (Planning and Zoning), Chapter 9.01 (General Provisions), Section ("S" Definitions) is hereby amended add the following: Site Development Permit means a permit issued by the City, or permits issued by the County of Orange prior to incorporation of the City, for all new residential development projects, and non-residential development projects involving new construction, reconstruction, building additions (see Section (a)(2)), or structural or site modifications as defined herein. Section 7. The City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita determines that Zoning Code Text Amendment CA is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Sections (c) (2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. Section 8. The City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita determines that, pursuant to Section of the California Fish and Game Code, this Ordinance is exempt from the required fees as it has been determined that no impacts to wildlife resources will result from the project. Section 9. The City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita determines that this Ordinance will not have any adverse impacts to any subregional Natural Communities Conservation Planning (NCCP) Program

19 Ordinance No. Page 11 Page 19 Section 10. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 11. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause the same to be posted as required by law

20 Ordinance No. Page 12 Page 20 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF L. ANTHONY BEALL, MAYOR ATTEST: AMY DIAZ, CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE CITY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA ) ) ss I, Amy Diaz, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance No. _ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a Regular Meeting of the City Council on the day of 2016, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was du~y adopted and passed at a Regular Meeting of the City Council on the day of 2016, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: AMY DIAZ, CITY ClERK

21 Ordinance No. Page 13 Page 21 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss CiTY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA ) AMY DiAZ, being first duly sworn, deposes and says: That she is the duly appointed and qualified City Clerk of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita; That in compliance with State Laws of the State of California, ORDINANCE NO.,being: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CiTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA, CAliFORNIA, ADOPTING ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT CA REVISING SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT REGULATIONS INCLUDING AN EXEMPTION FROM THE CAUFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(8)(3) on the 11th day of March 2016, was published in the Orange County Register; and was, in compliance with City Resolution No , on the 11 1 h day of March 2016, caused to be posted in three places in the City of Rancho Santa Margarita, to wit: Rancho Santa Margarita City Hall Fire Station 45 Trabuco Canyon Water District AMY DIAZ, CiTY CLERK Rancho Santa Margarita, California

22 THIS PAGE INTENTiONALlY LEFT BLANK Page 22

23 Page 23 RESOLUTION NO. PC A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT RSM TO THE RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA ZONING CODE TO MODIFY REGULATIONS RElATED TO SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPROVAL AUTHORITY INCLUDING AN EXEMPTION FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(b)(3) WHEREAS, on December 10, 2002, the City of Rancho Santa Margarita adopted the Rancho Santa Margarita General Pian; and WHEREAS, on May 11, 2007, Rancho Santa Margarita Zoning Code became effective; and WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Santa Margarita initiated a Zoning Code Text Amendment CA in accordance with Section of the RSM Zoning Code t«ll revise the City's site development permit regulations; and J WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends to revise the Site Development Permit regulations to revise the threshold for administrative review of certao8'1l 8'1lon-residential building expansions and modifications; and WHEREAS, this modification is proposed as a way to streamline the administrative review process, which benefits residents, business owners and property owners; a1111d WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered information presented in this Resolution by City Staff, the public, and otlher interested parties at a chjiy noti~ed public hearing held on December 2, 2015; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita held a dll.llly noticed public hearing and considered public comments and the written and oral information and testimony presented by City staff, community residents and other interested parties at a public hearing held on January 27, 2016, and proposed substantial modifications to the proposed Ordinance and has requested that the Piannung Commission consider those modifications; and J WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered information presented in this Resolution by City Staff, the public, and other interested parties at a duly noticed public hearing held on March 2, ATTACHMENT B

24 Page 24 NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita DOES HEREBY RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council determine that Zoning Code Text Amendment CA is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15061(b)(3) because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. 10' i t.... SECTION.2. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita determine that, pursuant to Section of the California Fish and Game Code, Zoning Code Text Amendment CA is exempt from the required fees as it has been determined that no impacts to wildlife resources will result from the project. SECTION 3. The Planning. Commission recommends that the City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita determine that Zoning Code Text Amendment CA 14-00:2 will not have any adverse impacts to any subregional Natural Communities Conservation Planning (NCCP) Program. SECTION 4. The Planning Commission r.ecomme111lds that the City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita adopt Ordinance No. _, which is attached!hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, approving Zoning Code Text Amendment CA to revise site development pem118t regulations. 0 r ) I I ' I LJ

25 Page 25 AITEST: STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE CITY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA ) ) ) ss I, Amy Morales, Development Services Secretary of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoijng is a tme and correct copy m Resoh.rtion No. PC 16~03~02-02 adopted by the Planning CommissoiOJn of the City of RanchOJ Sarnta Margarita, California, at a regular meetijng the~~eof, he~d thus 2nd day of March, 20161bythe following vote: J AYES: Commissioners Christopoulos, Eaki91, Josephs91, VOce-Chair figll!lema, Chair McQuaid NOES: None ABSENT: ABSTAIN: None None AMY MORALES, ASSISTANT EVELOPMENT SERV!CES ADMINISTRA T~VE J

26 THiS PAGE intentionally LEFT BLANK Page 26

27 Page 27 Sec Site development permit. (a) Introduction. This Section establishes a process to promote superior aesthetics, design compatibility, and high quality site planning. The site development permit process provides for the effect ~ ve and efficient review of development proposals to ensure compatible and enhanced site and building design throughout the community. Through the site development permit the City can achieve excellence and innovation in the design of development projects. (b) Site development permit required. (1) When no other discretionary permit is required, a site development permit shall be required for all new residential development projects. and non-residential development projects involving new construction. reconstruction, building additions (see Section (a}(2ft or structural or site modifications as defined herein. (2) Modifications: Any person holding a permit granted under this Title may request a changed plan or amendment to that permit. For the purpose of this Section, the modification of a permit may include modification of the terms of the permit itself, project design, or the waiver or alteration of conditions imposed in the granting of the permit. (2)(3} If the Development Services Director determines that a proposed project action is not in substantial conformance with the original approval, the Development Services Director shall notify the property owner of the requirement to submit a site development permit application for consideration and action by the same approving authority as the original permit. t3}(4) The Development Services Director may require that a site development permit be filed for any proposal determined by the Director not to be in clear compliance with General Plan policies and/or this Title as described in Section (c) Initiation of application. Applications for site development permits may be filed with the Development Services Department by a recorded owner of the property in question or by the owner's authorized agent. The Development Services Director shall prescribe the form of application and the supporting information required to initiate both environmental review (pursuant to Section ) and the site development permit application review. (d) Site development permit process. (1 ) Application for site development permits shall be processed in accordance with Table and-te the procedure depicted in Figure Once an application is received by the Development Services Director, the application will be reviewed for completeness. If the Development Services Director finds the application to be complete, then the application shall be processed in accordance with the process ATTACHMENT C

28 Page 28 illustrated in Figure If the applicatio11 is found to be i ncomplete...~. the Development Services Director will notify the applicant in writing within 30 days what additional information is required. and the application will not be processed until that information is received by the Development Services Department. (2) When a site development permit is required in the absence of any other discretionary permit, the Development Services Director or the Planning Commission shall, review and take action upon the application in accordance with the following procedures: a. Decision by the Development Services Director. When an a building application for a site development permit proposes _ addition that would increase by 10 percent or less tf\ar ;t,.qoothe gross square feet of non-residential building area approved on the original site development permit. up to a maximum of 6,500 sq uare feet, or which involves temporary uses and structures, the Development Services Director shall have the authority to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the project. All decisions of the Development Services Director are subject to appeal to the Planning Commission, pursuant to Section The Development Services Director may refer any application for a site development permit to the Planning Commission for consideration. b. Decision by the Planning Commission. When an application for a site development permit proposes a building addition that would 1,QQQ increase by more than 10 percent of the gross square feet _approved on the original site development permit Gf mer-e-of non-residential building area, or any increase above 6,500 square feet. or any new residential development, the application must be reviewed by the Planning Commission-iR-a public hearing. The Planning Commission shall have the authority to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the project. Decisions of the Planning Commission are subject to appeal to the City Council, pursuant to Section No public hearing is required. c. If a site development permit proposes a development standard different than those identified by this Title for the proposed use or zoni ng district, such site development permit shall always require a public hearing before the Planning Commission and findings be made pu rsua nt to Section (Alternative Development Standards). d. If an application for a site development perm it proposes a use not specifically identified as permitted by this Title, such site development permit shall always require a public hearh=lg

29 Page 29 beforebe considered by the Planning Commission as described in Section (Use Determination). e. If a site development permit is processed in conjunction with a conditional use permit, alternative development standard, variance, or other discretionary permit, additional findings may be required. (3) If a site development permit application is submitted in conjunction with another discretionary permit, the Development Services Director shall conduct the review and shall make a recommendation to the Planning Commission, Nhich shall condoot a public hearing on the mattefs. (e) Findings and conditions of approva/refluy"ed. ( 1) The following findings must be made prior to approval of a site development permit: a. In acting to approve a site development permit, the Development Services Director or Planning Commission shall be required to make the following findings: b. That the proposed site development permit will be consistent with the objectives, policies and general land uses and programs specified in the City's General Plan c. That the proposed site development permit is consistent with the provisions of this Title; d. That the location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed site development permit will not create unusual noise, traffic or other conditions or situations that may be objectionable, detrimental, or incompatible with other permitted uses in the vicinity; and e. That the proposed site development permit will not result in conditions or circumstances contrary to the public health and safety and the general welfare. (2) In order to mitigate the possible adverse impact of a proposed project on surrounding properties and to ensure overa ll consistency of the development project with the Zoning Code and the General Plan, specific conditions may be imposed on any site development permit approval. (f) Establishment of development. Site development permits. when approved, authorize new construction. reconstruction. building additions. or structural or site modifications at a particular location. Projects approved by site development permits must be established at the approved location within the time frame set by the approval authority. Time extensions to establish development may be granted by the Planning Commission. Site development permits shall expire and become null and void if any of the following activities do not occur within the timeframes established by the permit:

30 Page 30 { 1} The issuance of a building permit for new construction (if said building permit expires, approval of site developrt1~n t permit shall become null and voidt (2) The issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy for the establishment of the approved development; or (3) The commencement of operation of the use in cases where no.construction or existing structure is involved. {gl_ Consistency of working drawings with approved plans. A site development permit approval shall pertain only to those plans reviewed and approved with the site development permit. Further, all plans approved with a site development permit shall be considered an integral part of the site development permit approval. The Development Services Director shall ensure that any final working drawings for grading or construction authorized by a site development permit approval are consistent with said previously-reviewed plans prior to release of working drawings for plan check. The Development Services Director may approve minor variations from previously-reviewed plans if he/she determines that the original plan concepts are being carried out. If the Development Services Director does not make such a determination, the subject working drawings shall be referred to the decision-making authority for review and action. The Planning Commission may extend the time period for meeting the preceding requirements for establishment of development. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing prior to action on such a time extension. Additional conditions may be imposed on a site development permit in conjunction with a time extension. However, such new conditions m~only be imposed following a public hearing to receive testimony on the proposed additional conditions.

31 Page 31 Sec General procedures. All development proposals may be subject to one or more development application processing procedures contained in this Chapter. The exact application processing procedures that apply to a specific project will be determined by the Development Services Director based on the project characteristics. if able ~ outlines the primary types of development applications and review procedures. Table Application Types, Review Bodies and Responsibilities Planning Planning Commission City Council Director Type of Authority Authority Advisory Public Final Application to to to City Hearing AuthoritylPublic Approve Approve Council Required Hearing or Deny or Deny Only Required Alternative development standards X X Amendment of the Zoning Code X X X. text 1 and change of zone district Annexation X X X Appeal x ~~ x4 x4 Conditional use permit X X Development agreement X X X Home occupation permit Landscape plan review Lot line adjustment Tentative parcel map X X Final parcel map Sign permit Sign program Site development permit x2 xs Special event permit X X X X X Specific plan X X X Temporary use permit Tentative tract map X X Final tract map Variance )( X X X xs x5

32 Page 32 Notes: 1 -May be submitted by city staff, Planning Commission or City Council only. 2 - When less than 1,000 square feet.-in~when an application for a site development permit proposes a building addition that would increase by 1 0 percent or less the gross square feet of non-residential building area approved on the original site development permit. up to a maximum of square feet. or which involves temporary uses and structures and not performed in conjunction with another discretionary permit review that requires action by the Planning Commission. 3 - lnhen more than 1,000 square feet in size When an application for a site development permit proposes a bujlding addition th~t would increase by more thaq 10 percent of the gross square feet approved on the original site development permit non-residential building area. or any increase above 6,500 square feet. and/or performed in conjunction with another discretionary permit review that requires action by the Planning Commission. A site development permit alone does not require a public hearing. 4- The Planning Commission is board of appeals for development services director decisions, and its decision on the appeal is final. A Planning Commission public hearing is required only when the original application required a public hearing. The city council is board of appeals for Planning Commission decisions, and its decision on the appeal is final. 5 - No public hearing required. Consent calendar item on city council agenda.

33 Page 33 Sec ~Administrative approvals. (a) Authority of the development services directot~ The development services director has the authority to approve or deny the following applications, subject to specific findings and procedures, including, but not limited to: (1) Amateur radio antennas in compliance with the provisions of Section (g); (2) Building additions not to exceed ten percent of the gross floor area of the non-residential building area approved on the original site development permit. up to a maximum of square feet, or involves temporary uses and structuresekisting building.vith a makimum-et4-,000 square-feet. +rus application shall be allowed one time only for each building on an indi'lidual paroel-gf.~- -A finding of consistency with the existing building architectural style, materials, colors, and other provisions of the Code shall be made; (3) Changed plan-minor. An applicant may initiate a request for a modification of an approved development application upon the submittal of the applicable form, materials, and fees. Minor modifications must be granted in writing by the development services director prior to the issuance of a building permit for any changed plans. To grant the request, the development services director must find that the requested modification is substantially in compliance with the original approval plans, and conditions shall be limited to the following: (a) A modification that involves 10 percent or less than 25 percent of the building area or project site area, up to a maximum of 6,500 square feet; or (b) A modification that involves minor changes in color, material, signage, design, landscape material, or parking or driveway orientation; or (c) A modification that involves minor design changes that represent improvements to previous engineering, site design, or building practices provided the request does not change the character of the project or result in negative impacts to adjoining properties, drainage facilities, or rights-of-way. All modifications that do not meet the criteria in Subsections (a), (b), and (c) above shall be considered major changes and shall be subject to the same review procedures established for the original development review application. (4) Col 1 or changes, windows, and door relocation andlor additions that are compatible with the existing building architectural style; (5) Exterior lighting as permitted in individual zoning districts in compliance with the provisions of Section ; (6) Fences exceeding six feet in height in compliance with the provisions of Section ;

34 (7) Home occupation permit applications which comply with the provisions of Section ; (8) Outdoor display of merchandise and product display for an existing building that complies with the provisions under Sections and ; (9) Outdoor storage as permitted in individual zoning districts in compliance with the provisions under Section ; (10) Roof eaves and gables on accessory structures in excess of 12 inches, measured from the vertical side of the unit, in compliance with Section ; and (11) Sign permit applications in compliance with the provisions of Chapter 9.07; and ( 12) Any other items delegated to the development services director for review and approval. Page 34

35 Page 35 Section ("S" Definitions) Site Development Permit means a permit issued by the City, or permits issued by the County of Orange prior to incorporation of the Citv. for all new residential development projects. and non-residential development projects involving new construction. reconstruction, building additions (see Section (a)(2)), or structural or site modifications as defined herein.

36 TH~S PAGE INTENTiONALLY LEFT BlANK Page 36

37 29977 Avenida de las Banderas Santa Margarita Parkway >65,000 sq ft ~::.... ' ~'>- ;'-'>-:......,.. ~ ~..,. Appuea rv1eaaca1 138, Avenida de las Flores 135, Avenida de las Banderas 127, Avenida Empresa 122, El Paseo 98, Tomas 97, Avenida Empresa 22822,t:,venida Empresa 96,000 96, Avenida de las Banderas 89, Avenida Empresa 65, Esperanza 65, Tomas 64, Tomas 57, Antonio Parkway Arroyo Vista 57,000 55, Santa Margarita Parkway 52, Arroyo Vista 52,000 Page 37 ATTACHMENT D

38 THIS PAGE intentionally left BLANK Page 38

39 Page 39 CITY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: January 27, 2016 TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita Jennifer M. Cervantez, City Manager Cheryl Kuta, Development Services Director First Reading and Introduction of an Ordinance Entitled "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Rancho Santa Margarita, California Adopting Zoning Code Text Amendment CA Revising Site Development Permit Regulations including an Exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines Section (8)(3)" Recommendation 1. Receive staff presentation and report. 2. Council questions of staff. 3. Open the public hearing. 4. Receive public testimony. 5. Close the public hearing. 6. Council discussion and deliberation. 7. Introduce for first reading, read by title only, and waive further reading of an Ordinance entitled: Backgll'ound AN ORDiNANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA, CALIFORNiA, ADOPTING ZON~NG CODE TEXT AMENDMENT CA REViSING SiTE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT REGULATIONS INCLUDiNG AN EXEMPTION FROM THE CALiFORNiA ENViRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PER CEQA GUIDELiNES SECTiON 15061(8)(3) The City regularly evaluates its permit processing practices for opportunities to improve efficiency and streamline the approval process as appropriate. Following the May 2014 Planning Commission approval of a Site Development Permit (SOP) for a 2,400 square foot equipment enclosure for Applied Medical, the applicant suggested that staff should evaluate opportunities to streamline the administrative regulations for processing SOPs. ATTACHMENT E

40 CA Modify Regulations for Site Development Permits January 27, 2016 Page2 Page 40 Staff has researched this recommendation and has identified an area that could be modified to streamline the process, while still maintaining an appropriate level of review. Section of the Rancho Santa Margarita Zoning Code (RSMZC) describes the regulations for processing SOPs. A SDP is required for any non-residential expansion and for any new residential development. A SDP may only be approved by the Development Services Director when the development project consists of less than 1,000 square feet. Any SOP proposing development greater than 1,000 square feet (which includes most SDP requests) requires Planning Commission review through a public hearing. This generally causes a 6-8 week approval process because of public noticing requirements and the time necessary to draft the Staff Report and its related documents. However, by adjusting the threshold for approval authority by the Development Services Director and modifying which types of SOPs require a public hearing, the shorter administrative review process could be used effectively. Staff is recommending that Section of the RSMZC be modified to revise the threshold for administrative review of applications for certain types of non-residential building expansions and modifications to allow the Development Services Director authority to appmve non-residential additions that do not exceed 10 percent of the original square footage, and which comply with all other applicable development standards for the Zoning District. Additionally, staff is recommending that the public hearing requirement be reserved only for non-residential development in cases where another discretionary application (i.e., Conditional Use Permit, Variance or Alternative Development Standard) already requires a public hearing, and for any new residential development. The proposed Zoning Code Text Amendment (ZCA) will ensure an appropriate level of review is granted to ali applicants submitting for a site development permit for the expansion or modification of a building or structure. The proposed ZCA also provides an opportunity to ensure that the administrative procedures are consistent with the administrative procedures for other types of discretionary permits. A redline copy of the proposed revisions is included as Attachment C of this report. Discussion issue 1: Review Process A ZCA may be initiated by the City in accordance with Section of the Zoning Code. To approve a ZCA, the Planning Commission must conduct a public hearing and forward a recommendation to the City Council. in order to adopt the proposed Ordinance approving the ZCA, the City Council must make the following findings: (1) That the proposed ZCA is consistent with the goals, policies, programs, and land uses of applicable elements of the General Plan; (2) That the proposed ZCA will not adversely affect surrounding properties or the surrounding environment; and (3) That the proposed ZCA promotes public health, safety, and general welfare and serves the goals and purposes of this Title.

41 CA Modify Regulations for Site Development Permits January 27, 2016 Page 3 Page 41 The proposed Ordinance must be introduced by the City Council for first reading at a public hearing. The City Council then conducts a second reading of the proposed Ordinance at a subsequent meeting for adoption. If approved, the Ordinance would go into effect 30 days following the City Council's second reading and adoption. Pursuant to Section of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Ordinance has been determined to be exempt from CEQA because the proposed revisions to the site development permit regulations will not have any significant effect on the environment. On December 2, 2015, the Planning Commission considered the proposed Ordinance at a duly noticed Public Hearing and adopted a Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance. A copy of this Resolution has been included as Attachment B. A public notice was published in the January 15, 2016 edition of the Orange County Register. A public notice was also posted at City Hall, on the City's Web site, at the Trabuco Canyon Water District Headquarters and at Orange County Fire Authority Fire Station No. 45. The proposed revisions are in conformance with both the Rancho Santa Margarita General Plan and the intent of the Rancho Santa Margarita Zoning Code. The General Plan does not contain policies pertaining specifically to SDPs; however, in order to approve any SOP, certain findings that support goals about complimentary development must be made regardless of the approval authority. Section (Site Development Permit) of the RSMZC lists the various purposes for the SDIP pmcess, which include the establishment of a process to promote superior aesthetics, design compatibility, and high quality site planning, in addition to providing for the effective and efficient review of development proposals to ensure compatible and enhanced site and building design throughout the community. The proposed revisions to SOP regulations continue to promote the purposes of Section Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council introduce the Ordinance for first reading, read by title only, and waive further reading, as contained within Attachment A Issue 2: Administrative Review Threshold Since the adoption of the RSMZC in 2007, the Planning Commission has approved seven SOPs for non-residential development. Five of the seven approvals would have required a public hearing regardless of whether a public hearing was required for the SOP. However, the other two approvals were taken to the Planning Commission for consideration at a public hearing held solely for the SOP. After the May 2014 SDP approval by the Planning Commission for Avenida Empresa, the applicant, Applied Medical, recommended that the City consider modifying the threshold requirements for approval by the Development Services Director to streamline the process for smaller additions and modifications. The following table provides a summary of the SOP approvals by the Planning Commission since the adoption of the RSMZC in 2007:

42 CA Modify Regulations for Site Development Permits January 27, 2016 Page4 Page 42 Appiicanil: Address Square Other Percent Increase Footage Discretionary from Original Application Square Footage Serra Catholic Antonio Parkway NA None 0.0% Applied Medical Avenida Empresa 2,428 SF None 3.1% Cinepolis Santa Margarita Pkwv 1,428 SF CUP 4.6% Applied Medical Esperanza 9,600 SF ADS for parking 61.0% In-n-Out Santa Margarita Pkwv 3,750 SF CUP New Building Serfas Avenida de las Banderas 3,749 SF None 21.5% Applied Medical Esperanza 6,581 SF ADS for parking 44.5% While the proposed ZCA would have only changed the process for two past applications, there have been businesses who decided not to go through the process due to the time and cost associated with the public hearing process. During the same timeframe, there were three SOPs approved by the Development Services Director as summarized below: Appiicai"d Address Square Percent increase Footage from Origill1lal SqllJJare Footage Wendy's Avenida de las Flores 11 SF 0.4% Applied Medical Aventura 998 SF 2.1% Applied Medical Avenida Empresa 357SF 1.4% As discussed! previously, the current threshold for Development Services Director review is set at less than 1,000 gross square feet of non-residential building area or temporary uses and! stmctures. Staff has surveyed seven other comparable cities in south Orange County to determine their approval authority for SDPs. Every city except for San Juan Capistrano provides more flexible SOP standards than the City currently pro VI 'd es. Th e ~ o ii ow1ng. rna t nx. summanzes. th ese SOP regu i a t' 1ons: City SOP Requirement Approvai Authority Notes Aliso Viejo Less than 500 sq. ft. No SOP required Director may refer any SOP 500 sq. ft. or larger Director to the Planning Commission. Dana Point Less than 2,000 sq. ft. No SOP required Director may refer any SOP 2,000 sq. ft. or larger Planning Commission to the Planning Commission. Laguna Hills Up to 10% increase in sq. ft. Director Director may refer any SOP Over 10% increase in sq. ft. Planning Commission to the Planning Commission. Laguna Niguel All non-residential development Director Director may refer any SOP to the Planning Commission. Lake Forest All non-residential development Director Director may refer any SOP to the Planning Commission. Mission Viejo Less than 10,000 sq. ft. Director Director may refer any SOP 10,000 sq. ft. or larger Planning Commission to the Planning Commission. RSM (CIUlnent) Less than 1,000 sq. ft. Dill'ector Director may refer any 1,000 sq. ft. or larger Pianll'inO'IIg Commissio11 SOP to the Planll1ling Commission. RSM (Pmposed) Up to 10% increase in sq. ft. Director Director may refer any Ovei' 10% increase in sq. ft. Planning Commissi()ll SDP to the Planning Commission. San Juan Up to 1,000 sq. ft. Director Director may refer any SOP Capistrano Over 1,000 sq. ft. Planning Commission to the Design Review Committee.

43 CA Modify Regulations for Site Development Permits January 27, 2016 Page 5 Page 43 A business owner requiring minor expansion or modification to the building may consider existing regulations burdensome, and could potentially decide to relocate rather than pursue a build-to-suit alternative. By enhancing the built-in flexibility of the SOP, the City would improve business attraction and retention. This ZCA proposes to modify the gross square footage threshold for the approval authority to allow the Development Services Director to consider proposals that do not increase the square footage by more than 10 percent of the original approval. The Development Services Director would still have the discretion to refer any SOP to the Planning Commission for consideration. Modifying the administrative review threshold will facilitate the development and improvement of commercial properties to best suit the needs of tenants and property owners. Furthermore, identical findings are required whether approval is sought from the Planning Commission or the Development Services Director. These findings address consistency with the General Plan and Zoning Code, compatibility with surrounding uses and structures, and adverse impacts upon the public health and safety and general welfare. issue 3: Public Hearing Requirement Currently, aii SDP applications which prompt Planning Commission review are subject to the City's public hearing procedures as regulated by Section (Public Hearing Procedures) of the RSMZC. This l.ca proposes to exempt SOPs which are in conformance with all applicable development standards from the public hearing requirement Applications proposing more than 10 percent increase above the original square footage for the building, or which propose new residential development, will continue to require Planning Commission approval but will not be subject to Section provided that all other applicable development standards are met. The public hearing procedures ensure that, in cases where the public hearing concerns a specific parcel or parcels of land, notice shall be mailed or delivered to the owner(s) of the parcel(s) in question (if different fmm the applicant) and to all other owners of real property, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll, within 300 feet of the boundaries, whether public or private. These maiiings would not be mandated for SOP applications meeting the City's development standards under the proposed ZCA. Exemption from the public hearing requirement does not preclude informing the public of the Planning Commission meeting and itemization within the agenda. The meeting agenda would continue to be published on the City website on a date prior to the scheduled meeting, and SOPs seeking Planning Commission approval, but which do not require a public hearing, would be listed under the New Business agenda heading. Therefore, the public would still have the opportunity to provide comments on a New Business agenda item.