The purpose of this chapter is to provide a process for Site Plan Review, assuring that new development complies with the applicable site development standards of this Code and that older nonconforming sites are upgraded at the time the uses or structures on such sites are expanded or intensified. The Site Plan Review process is integral to the City's other discretionary and non-discretionary development review procedures in order to facilitate the permitting process.
(Ord. 2020-002 § 4; Ord. 2022-001 § 3)
Site Plan Review is required for uses or developments specifically identified in district Administrative Regulations and/or any other section of this Code which requires Site Plan Review.
(Ord. 2001-015 § 1; Ord. 2004-007 § 9; Ord. 2007-020 § 2; Ord. 2016-012 § 4; Ord. 2017-003 § 4; Ord. 2020-002 § 4; Ord. 2022-001 § 3)
When a development project requires a Use Permit, Variance, or any other discretionary approval, the Site Plan Review application shall be submitted as a part of the application for the underlying permit, Use Permit, or Variance, processed concurrently, and reviewed and decided on by the highest review authority designated for any of the approvals.
(Ord. 2001-015 § 1; Ord. 2020-002 § 4; Ord. 2022-001 § 3)
A. 
The Zoning Enforcement Official shall review and approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove applications for Site Plan Review based on consideration of the requirements of this chapter except as follows.
1. 
The Planning Commission shall have Site Plan Review authority for all projects otherwise requiring Planning Commission approval.
2. 
The Zoning Enforcement Official may refer items directly the Planning Commission when in the Zoning Enforcement Official's opinion the public interest would be better served by having the Planning Commission conduct Site Plan Review.
(Ord. 2001-015 § 1; Ord. 2007-020 § 2; Ord. 2008-015 § 1; Ord. 2020-002 § 4; Ord. 2022-001 § 3; Ord. 2024-011, 7/15/2024)
A. 
Administrative Site Plan Review.
1. 
Public Notice. No public notice is required for Administrative Site Plan Review.
2. 
Action. Upon review of the application the Zoning Enforcement Official may take action on the Administrative Site Plan Review application without holding a public hearing.
3. 
Notice of Decision. The applicant shall be given written notification of the Zoning Enforcement Official's action on the Administrative Site Plan Review application so that an appeal may be filed within 15 days from when such notification is sent.
B. 
Minor Site Plan Review.
1. 
Public Notice. Notice of an application for projects requiring Minor Site Plan Review shall be mailed to property owners adjoining and across the street from the subject site, not less than ten days prior to action on the application.
2. 
Action. Upon review of the application and any related correspondence received, the Zoning Enforcement Official may take action on the application without holding a public hearing.
3. 
Notice of Decision. The applicant, and those who submitted written comments regarding the application, shall be given written notification of the Zoning Enforcement Official's action on the Minor Site Plan Review application so that an appeal may be filed within 15 calendar days from when such notification is sent.
C. 
Major Site Plan Review.
1. 
Public Notice. Written notification of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing by the Zoning Enforcement Official on the Major Site Plan Review application shall be mailed to the applicant, property owner, and property owners adjoining and across the street from the subject site, not less than ten days prior to the hearing except as follows.
a. 
RS-VP. In the RS-VP Subdistrict, written notification of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing by the Zoning Enforcement Official on the Major Site Plan Review application shall be mailed to the applicant, property owner, and property owners within a 500-foot radius from the subject site, not less than ten days prior to the hearing.
b. 
Parking Reductions. Written notification of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing by the Zoning Enforcement Official on Major Site Plan Review applications for a reduction in the number of required parking spaces shall be mailed to the applicant, property owner, and property owners within a 500-foot radius from the subject site, not less than ten days prior to the hearing.
2. 
Public Hearing. The Zoning Enforcement Official shall hold a public hearing on an application for a Major Site Plan Review.
3. 
Notice of Decision. The applicant, and those who submitted written comments regarding the application, shall be given written notification of the Zoning Enforcement Official's action on the Major Site Plan Review application so that an appeal may be filed within 15 days from when the decision was made.
(Ord. 2001-015 § 1; Ord. 2020-002 § 4; Ord. 2022-001 § 3)
A. 
A Decision on a Site Plan Review may be appealed pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 5.20 Appeals.
(Ord. 2001-015 § 1; Ord. 2020-002 § 4; Ord. 2022-001 § 3)
To approve or conditionally approve a Site Plan Review, the decision maker or the decision making body shall find that the proposal is in substantial compliance with the following standards, to the extent permitted by applicable State or Federal law:
A. 
For Administrative Site Plan Review for multi-family and mixed-use housing development projects, as defined by Government Code Section 65589.5, that comply with all applicable objective standards and criteria:
1. 
The project is in compliance with the minimum objective standards and criteria of this Code, the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, and all other applicable objective standards and criteria. This Administrative Site Plan Review process shall be ministerial.
B. 
For all other Site Plan Review, including Administrative Site Plan Review, Minor Site Plan Review and Major Site Plan Review not covered by Subsection (A)(1) above:
1. 
The project is in compliance with the minimum requirements of this Code and are arranged as to achieve the intent of such requirements by providing a harmonious and orderly development that is compatible with its surroundings. Parking, loading, storage, and service areas are appropriately screened by building placement, orientation walls, and/or landscaping.
2. 
The building(s) has(have) adequate articulation, with appropriate window placement, use of detailing, and/or changes in building planes to provide visual interest. The exterior materials, finishes, detailing, and colors are compatible with those of surrounding structures. Visually incompatible elements, such as roof-mounted utilities, are fully screened from public view. If the proposal is for an addition to an existing building, such additions shall appear as an integral element of the building. Additions shall not have a "tacked on" appearance, and either the addition should be consistent with the existing building's design element, or the existing building should be remodeled concurrently with construction of the addition.
3. 
The landscaping complements the architectural design, with an appropriate balance of trees, shrubs, and living ground covers, and provides adequate screening and shading of parking lots and/or driveways.
4. 
Detail features, such as signs, fences, and lighting for buildings, parking lots, and/or driveways are visually consistent with the architectural and landscape design and minimize off-site glare.
5. 
Exceptions to Above Regarding Expansions and/or Alterations to Existing Nonconforming Structures and Sites. The decision maker or the decision making body may vary from the standards outlined in Subsections (B)(1) through (B)(4) above and approve a Site Plan that cannot achieve compliance with these standards due to the limitations created by pre-existing nonconforming structures and site features. In such cases, the priority of Site Plan Review is to reduce, to the degree feasible given the scale and scope of the proposal, the nonconforming features. The nonconforming features to be addressed shall include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. 
Deficiencies in landscaping shall be corrected, with selective additional plantings, primarily where such landscaping can have the greatest visual benefit to the overall area. The scale and scope of such landscaping requirements will be relative to both the degree of non-compliance with current Code requirements and the changes/improvements being proposed by the applicant.
b. 
Obsolete and unused equipment, such as roof-mounted utilities, exterior manufacturing equipment, and unused pole sign and wall sign cabinets shall be removed, as required.
c. 
The effects of past "deferred maintenance," where such has been identified, shall be corrected by such effort as repainting, repaving, restriping, replanting of existing landscape areas, and removal of unused equipment, vehicles, and debris.
C. 
All site plan elements in the SA-1, SA-2, and SA-3 Districts shall be reviewed for general consistency with the Design Guidelines contained in the East 14th Street South Area Development Strategy, unless otherwise superseded by this Code.
D. 
All site plan elements in the DA-1, DA-2, DA-3, DA-4, and DA-6 Districts shall be reviewed for general consistency with the Design Guidelines contained in the Downtown San Leandro Transit-Oriented Development Strategy, unless otherwise superseded by this Code.
E. 
Site Plan Review Standards—Residential Single Unit Development. To approve or conditionally approve a Site Plan for a single dwelling unit, the decision-maker or the decision making body shall find that the proposed project is in substantial compliance with all of the following standards:
1. 
The Residence's Architecture is Appropriate and Consistently Applied. The structure has adequate articulation, with appropriate window placement, architectural detailing, roof forms and/or changes in wall planes to provide visual interest. Additions shall not have a "tacked on" appearance, and either the addition should be consistent with the existing residence in terms of design and use of materials, or the existing residence should be remodeled concurrently with construction of the proposed addition in order to achieve the desired consistency.
2. 
The Visual Mass of the Home is De-Emphasized. The home appears in scale with the surrounding homes. The building's surfaces should be articulated in a manner that reduces the appearance of blocky or massive features, and architectural features, detailing and/or land-scaping should subdue, rather than accentuate the prominence of larger homes.
3. 
The Neighborhood's Existing Visual Character is Valued. The proposal "fits in" to the neighborhood's existing architectural and landscape context, utilizing a compatible architectural vocabulary and retaining existing trees to the degree feasible and where conducive to achieving the purposes of this chapter. The landscaping to be retained and/or provided around the new and/or remodeled residence should include an appropriate balance of trees, shrubs and living ground covers, and should be designed to blend the project into its larger setting.
4. 
The Physical Impacts to Neighbors Are Minimized. The proposed home or addition does not substantially impair the privacy and access to light and air of adjacent residences, while balancing the applicant's ability to improve the subject property in accordance with all applicable restrictions.
5. 
View Preservation Standard, RS-VP District. To approve or conditionally approve a Site Plan in the RS-VP District, the decision-maker or the decision-making body shall also find that the proposed construction does not unreasonably block or diminish neighbors' views of distant and scenic features, such as the San Francisco Bay and surrounding open spaces and skylines, while balancing the applicant's ability to improve the subject property in accordance with the applicable restrictions.
(Ord. 2001-015 § 1; Ord. 2004-007 § 9; Ord. 2007-020 § 2; Ord. 2016-012 § 4; Ord. 2020-002 § 4; Ord. 2022-001 § 3; Ord. 2022-022 § 3)
In approving Site Plan Review, reasonable conditions may be imposed as necessary to achieve consistency with the intent of the applicable District's development standards and the standards of this chapter. When approving a Site Plan for projects that expand and/or alter existing nonconforming sites, complete consistency may not be obtainable, and conditions may be imposed to reduce, if not eliminate, the nonconforming site features.
(Ord. 2001-015 § 1; Ord. 2020-002 § 4; Ord. 2022-001 § 3)
A. 
Effective Date. Site Plan approval shall become effective on the 15th day after the date the decision maker or the decision making body approves the site plan, unless appealed, as provided in Chapter 5.20 Appeals.
B. 
Lapse of Approvals and Renewals. Site Plan approval shall lapse two years after its date of approval, or at an alternate time specified as a condition of approval, unless:
1. 
A grading permit or building permit has been issued, coupled with diligent progress evidencing good faith intention to commence the intended use; or
2. 
An occupancy permit has been issued; or
3. 
The approval is granted a one-year extension by the Zoning Enforcement Official upon receipt of a written application with the required fee within the time period specified by the review authority, or two years of the date of the approval.
C. 
Changed Plans. The Zoning Enforcement Official may approve changes to approved plans or in conditions of approval without a public hearing upon determining that the changes in conditions are minor and consistent with the intent of the original approval. Revisions involving substantial changes in project design or conditions of approval shall be treated as new applications to be reviewed as a new project by the decision making body as required by Section 5.12.112 Review and Approval Authority of this chapter.
D. 
Automatic Extension. Any site plan review for a single-family residential, multi-family residential, or mixed-use residential project granted between January 1, 2019 and June 30, 2022, including any such site plan review that has lapsed, shall be automatically extended by two years. The extension provided by this subsection shall be in addition to any other extension granted pursuant to any section of the San Leandro Zoning Code or applicable California law and shall not limit the ability of an applicant to apply for and receive such additional extensions under the Zoning Code.
E. 
Additional Automatic Extension. Any site plan review for a residential, commercial, or industrial project that is unexpired as of March 1, 2024, shall be automatically extended by two years. The extension provided by this subsection shall be in addition to any other extension granted pursuant to any section of the San Leandro Zoning Code or applicable California law (including, but not limited to, Section 5.12.132(D)), and shall not limit the ability of an applicant to apply for and receive such additional extensions under the Zoning Code.
(Ord. 2001-015 § 1; Ord. 2020-002 § 4; Ord. 2022-001 § 3; Ord. 2022-013 § 2; Ord. 2024-011, 7/15/2024)