(a) Exemptions. A development project is exempt from the requirements of this section 4-11 if:
(1) A preliminary or final subdivision plat, final site plan, or master plan is unconditionally approved for the project before April 15, 2007; or
(2) The project generates or is expected to generate no more than fifteen (15) peak hour new vehicle trips.
(3) A CAPF-R is not required for a development project to be constructed entirely on a lot of record if the development project does not require more than twenty (20) percent increase in road capacity over the existing development and consists solely of one or more of the following:
(A) The change of use of a structure existing as of April 15, 2007;
(B) The renovation, with no addition of square footage, of a structure existing as of April 15, 2007;
(C) The construction of an addition of five thousand (5,000) square feet or less to a structure existing as of April 15, 2007; or
(D) The demolition of a structure existing as of April 15, 2007 and replacement with a structure no more than five thousand (5,000) square feet larger than the one demolished.
(b) Determination of adequacy.
(1) Test. The director shall determine whether roads and intersections are adequate based on the criteria set forth in this subsection.
(A) Roads and intersections are adequate if a LOS of D or better is maintained on all evaluated road segments, for each turning movement at an intersection, and for the overall intersection. For each turn lane in the study area, the ninety-fifth percentile of the queue lengths shall not exceed the length of the turn lane. The methods outlined in section 1203 of the LMC will be used for this analysis.
(B) Except for on/off ramps, the following highways are exempt from the testing provisions of this section:
(i) I-70;
(ii) I-270;
(iii) U.S. 15; and
(iv) The section of U.S. 40 between I-270 and U.S. 15.
(C) All other roads, including county and state roads, are subject to the requirements of this section.
(D) If the criteria for adequacy specified in section 4-11(b)(1) and section 1203 of the LMC cannot be achieved without alteration or removal of existing structures, the planning commission may (in its sole discretion) conclude that the existing roads and intersections are adequate so long as the planning commission finds that the developer has incorporated as much mitigation as reasonably possible.
(2) In determining the total peak hour vehicle trips generated by the proposed development project during the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic, the director will include all land at one location within the city under common ownership or control of the developer. The phrase “at one location” means all adjacent land the property lines of which are contiguous or nearly contiguous at any point.
(3) A developer may not avoid the requirements of this section by submitting piecemeal applications for preliminary plats or site plans. If a developer seeks approval of only a portion of a development project that generates fewer than fifteen (15) peak hour trips, then upon seeking approval of the rest of the project, the previously approved trips will be included as new trips in the new submittal.
(4) The capacity of any road funded for construction within two (2) years of the date of application pursuant to the city or county CIP or state CTP may be considered in the application of the adequacy test.
(5) If the LOS meets the criteria but changes the grades by two (2) or more levels, the director will review the project and may require mitigation before issuance of a CAPF-R.
(c) Issuance of CAPF-R. If the director determines that the roads and intersections are adequate based on the criteria of subsection (b) of this section, the director shall issue a CAPF-R for the project. If the director denies the CAPF-R, the master plan, preliminary or final subdivision plat, or site plan application will not be scheduled for consideration by the planning commission, subject to subsection (d) of this section.
(d) Mitigation. If the director denies a CAPF-R, a developer may mitigate the impact of the proposed development through any of the actions described in this section 4-11(d).
(1) A developer may pursue any of the options set forth in section 4-16. The developer shall submit to the director a mitigation plan describing the improvements the developer intends to make in order to render the roads and intersections adequate to serve the proposed development. If the director finds, using the criteria of subsection (b) of this section, that the implementation of the mitigation plan would result in adequate roads and intersections, the director shall issue a provisional CAPF-R, and the master plan, preliminary or final subdivision plat, or site plan application may be scheduled for consideration by the planning commission. If the director determines, using the criteria of subsection (b) of this section, that the implementation of the mitigation plan would not result in both adequate roads and adequate intersections, the director shall deny the mitigation plan, and the master plan, preliminary or final subdivision plat, or site plan application will not be scheduled for consideration by the planning commission.
(A) If the mayor approves, in accordance with section 4-16(a)(1), a public works agreement that includes the mitigation plan approved by the director or a substantially similar mitigation plan, the director shall issue a final CAPF-R. If the mayor does not approve a public works agreement that includes such a mitigation plan, then the provisional CAPF-R will be void.
(B) If the mayor and board of aldermen approve, in accordance with section 4-16, a mitigation agreement that includes the mitigation plan approved by the director or a substantially similar mitigation plan, the director shall issue a final CAPF-R. If the mayor and board of aldermen do not approve a mitigation agreement that includes such a mitigation plan, then the provisional CAPF-R will be void.
(2) In lieu of any of the options referenced in section 4-11(d)(1), a developer may mitigate the impact of the proposed development on roads and intersections by contributing money to an escrow account as set forth in section 4-17. (Ord. No. G-07-6, § 1, 3-22-07; Ord. No. G-07-19, § 1, 9-6-07)