Cities Index.
Zone Text Amend

Belmont City Council
June 23, 2026

Document
Zone Text Amend
Meeting
June 23, 2026
Body
Belmont City Council
Original file
766 KB
Text extracted from the city's file for reading and search. Open the original on belmont-ca.granicus.com. That file is the official record.

Consideration of Zoning Text Amendments
Single-Family Design Review, Planned Development & Airport Compatibility June 23, 2026
Rob Gill, Senior Planner
Proposed Zoning Text Amendments
Amendments are proposed to three areas of the Belmont Zoning Ordinance (BZO):
• Single-Family Review: Simplify and expedite review procedures for specific, eligible single-family home additions
• Planned Development Standards: Align the review prosses for residential additions in Planned Developments with the standard processes currently used in traditional residential zones
• San Carlos Airport Safety Zone: Update the zoning code to comply with State law related to San Carlos Airport safety zones
• Objective: These amendments are part of the Planning Division’s ongoing effort to improve operational efficiency, align with best practices, and ensure compliance with State law
2 Subcommittee Background
• In early 2026, the City Council created the Housing and Long-Range Planning Subcommittee comprised of Vice Mayor Jordan and Councilmember Latimerlo Subcommittee Focus Areas:
• State Law: Recent State Housing Law
• Zoning Code Modernization: Update and modernize outdated local zoning regulations
• Efficiency: Improve project planning efficiency
• Staff and subcommittee identified specific zoning text amendments to improve our operational efficiency and modernize zoning regulations 3 SFDR Background
• 2016 - The City updated Single Family and Duplex Residential Design Review (SFDR) and created a tiered residential design review system to streamline planning projects
• This system categorizes residential projects into three levels (i.e., tiers) by size, complexity, and impact
• As a result, the code update has significantly reduced project processing times for certain project types without an increase in appeals or complaints 4 5
Tier Project Characteristics Reviewing
Authority
1 • Ground floor additions up to 399 sf. cgfa, with top of the addition plate height 12 feet or less, and top of the new roof 18 feet or less, as measured from finished grade.
• Enclosure of carports & additions of any size that do not increase the foot - print of the home (i.e., underfloor and attic areas that are made habitable) Community
Development
Department
(CDD)
2 • Ground floor additions not consistent with Tier I
• Ground floor additions from 400 sf to 899 sf. cgfa
• Upper floor additions up to 399 sf. cgfa
• Combination of upper and lower floor addition up to 899 sf. cgfa Zoning
Administrator
(ZA)
3 • Upper floor additions of 400 sf. cgfa. or more
• Combination of upper and lower floor additions of 900 sf. cgfa. or more • New Single-Family Homes
• Grading more than 500 cubic yards
• Disturbance of 6,000 sf. or more of site area
• SFDR with other PC level entitlements
Planning
Commission (PC)
SFDR Amendments
Tier 1: Community Development Director Review (Building Permit Review) • Current: Ground floor additions up to 399 sf, carport enclosures, and interior additions of any size that do not increase the footprint of the home • Proposed: Allow ground floor additions up to 500 sf. (No other changes.) 6 SFDR Amendments
Tier 2: Zoning Administrator Review
• Current: Ground floor additions 400 to 899 sf, upper-floor additions up to 399 sf, and combined upper and lower floor additions up to 899 sf • Proposed: Any size addition to the dwelling, provided the addition meets all other development standards (i.e. setbacks or height) and the total development does not exceed the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for the subject lot 7 SFDR Amendments
Tier 3: Planning Commission Review
• Current: New home construction, combination of upper and lower floor additions of 900 sf. or more, grading more than 500 cubic yards and disturbance of 6,000 sf. or more of site area
• Proposed: All new single-family homes. Eliminate duplicative grading and ground disturbance provisions currently addressed in the City Code 8 Existing SFDR Procedures
• All existing neighborhood outreach, project noticing, and multi-tiered approval pathways remain unchanged.
9 Tier Neighborhood
Outreach Project Notice Public Hearing
1 Not required Not required Not required
2 All projects - required
Notice to Neighboring
Property Owners (150
ft. radius)
Only if requested in
writing within 10
days of the notice.
3 All projects - required
Notice to Neighboring
Property Owners (300
ft. radius)
Required
SFDR Amendments
Benefits:
• Further streamlines the overall planning and development review process • Lowers application and processing costs for project applicants • Frees up Planning Commission capacity to prioritize complex projects 10 Planned Development (PD) Amendments
• The Community Development Director has the authority to administratively approve minor ground-floor additions, provided the addition is under 200 square feet and the total home size does not exceed 3,500 square feet • Projects that exceed these parameters such as any second-story expansions require a formal review by the Planning Commission
• These restrictions are only unique to PD single-family residential zoning district • These requirement leads to extended approval timelines and higher application costs for relatively simple additions
11 PD Ordinance Amendments
• Amend the PD Ordinance to allow single-family additions and new construction in residential PD districts to use the same design review process that applies to other single-family homes in residential districts
• Under this amendment, all single-family projects would use the same review design review proses and tier system
• Single-family home additions in PD Districts would still have to comply with all PDspecific regulations for height, setbacks, FAR, and parking 12 PD Ordinance Amendments
Other PD Amendments Include:
• Establishing clear, objective criteria for adopting Detail Development Plans for PD Districts
• Eliminating outdated and ambiguous language
Benefits:
• Streamlines the application process and lower fees for simple additions 13 Background - San Carlos Airport Safety Zone
• State Law Mandate: California Government Code § 65302.3 requires all city land use documents (General Plan, specific plans, zoning) to explicitly align and be consistent with the adopted with the adopted Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) • Recent Updates: The ALUCP for the San Carlos Airport was updated, prompting a review of the City's current codes
• Approach: Staff consulted with the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) to review our strategy for updating the Zoning Ordinance to ensure compliance with the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) • Draft Amendments: Based on consultation with C/CAG, staff drafted a series of proposed, minor zoning text amendments to the existing Zoning Code to demonstrate compliance with the adopted ALUCP
14 Background - San Carlos Airport Safety Zone
Application Checklist: Staff also created an implementation checklist to help development proposals adhere to ALUCP compatibility criteria (e.g., safety, structure heights, overflight notification requirements)
Application Submission: Staff submitted proposed zoning text amendments and implementation checklist to County C/CAG
March 26, 2026: Acting as the Airport Land Use Committee, C/CAG unanimously recommended and finding Belmont's updates consistent with the ALUCP April 9, 2026: The C/CAG Board finalized the approval, formally confirming that the City’s procedures align with San Carlos Airport compatibility criteria 15 San Carlos Airport Safety Zone
Next Step: The City must amend the Zoning Ordinance to reflect the approach recently approved by the C/CAG Board. This ensures full State law compliance while streamlining the process for both staff and development applicants 16 Request of City Council
Provide feedback and direction on the proposed approach to the amendments to allow staff to prepare draft ordinance amendments for future Planning Commission and Council consideration
17 Questions
18

← All documents from this meeting