HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-12-08 - ORDINANCES - NEGDEC MC 20 043 (2)ORDINANCE NO.20-10
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED FOR THE
PROJECT AND APPROVING MASTER CASE 20-043, CONSISTING OF UNIFIED
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 20-001 AND SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
20-001 (ZONING AMENDMENT), AMENDING THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT
CODE, LYONS AVENUE CORRIDOR PLAN, SOLEDAD CANYON ROAD
CORRIDOR PLAN, AND THE OLD TOWN NEWHALL SPECIFIC PLAN
AS SHOWN IN EXHIBITS A, B, C, AND D
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS OF FACT. The City Council does hereby make the following
findings of fact:
A. The City of Santa Clarita (City) periodically prepares updates to the Unified Development
Code (UDC) including the Lyons Avenue Corridor Plan (LCP), Soledad Canyon Road
Corridor Plan (SCP), and Old Town Newhall Specific Plan (ONSP);
B. The UDC and ONSP were last updated in November 2019;
C. The LCP and SCP have not been updated since their adoption in 2013 and 2015,
respectively;
D. On March 12, 2020, the City initiated Master Case 20-043, consisting of UDC 20-001 for
the update of the UDC code sections, the LCP, and SCP, and Specific Plan Amendment
(SPA) 20-001 to update the ONSP;
E. The proposed amendments are incorporated by reference as Unified Development Code
Amendments, Lyons Avenue Corridor Plan Amendments, Soledad Canyon Road
Corridor Plan Amendments, and Old Town Newhall Specific Plan Amendments;
F. The proposed amendments are minor in scope, reflect recent legislation and current
planning trends, and clarify code language to keep the planning documents relevant and
easy to read and use;
G. On September 1, 2020, staff met with the City Council Development Committee to
discuss the proposed amendments and to receive feedback;
H. The application was deemed complete on September 3, 2020;
I. The project was duly noticed in accordance with the public hearing noticing requirements
of the UDC and a 1/81h-page advertisement was placed in The Signal Newspaper on
September 15, 2020;
Page 1 of 7
The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on this issue commencing
on October 6, 2020, at or after 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa
Clarita, California;
K. At the hearing, the Planning Commission considered a staff presentation, the staff report,
public testimony on the proposed amendments, and the Negative Declaration prepared for
the project, and in a 5-0 vote, recommended the City Council adopt the Negative
Declaration and approve Master Case 20-043 and its associated entitlements;
L. The project was duly noticed in accordance with the public hearing noticing requirements
of the UDC and a 1/8`h-page advertisement was placed in The Signal Newspaper on
November 3, 2020;
M. The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on this issue commencing on
November 24, 2020, at or after 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa
Clarita, California; and
N. At the hearing, the City Council considered a staff presentation, the staff report, public
testimony on the proposed amendments, and the Negative Declaration prepared for the
proj ect.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS. Based
upon the foregoing facts and findings, the City Council, hereby finds as follows:
A. An Initial Study and a Negative Declaration for the project have been prepared in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA);
B. The Initial Study was circulated for review and comment by affected governmental
agencies and the public, and all comments received, if any, have been considered. The
Negative Declaration was posted and advertised on September 15, 2020, in accordance
with CEQA. The public review period was open from September 15, 2020, through
October 6, 2020;
C. There is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the
environment. The Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the City of
Santa Clarita;
D. The documents and other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which
the decision of the Planning Commission is made is the Master Case 20-043 project file,
located within the Community Development Department and in the custody of the
Director of Community Development;
E. The necessary Native American Tribal Consultation required by Assembly Bill 52 and
Senate Bill 18 concluded on April 30, 2020, and no comments were received; and
F. The City Council, based upon the findings set forth above, hereby finds the Negative
Declaration for this project has been prepared in compliance with CEQA.
Page 2 of 7
SECTION 3. GENERAL FINDINGS FOR MASTER CASE NO.20-043. Based on the
foregoing facts and findings for Master Case No. 20-043, the City Council hereby finds as
follows:
A. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan;
The project is consistent with the General Plan's objectives, policies, and procedures. The
proposed amendments will assist the City in implementing the General Plan by creating
consistent planning documents, updating code sections to reflect recent changes in state
law, codifying Director's Policies for escape rooms and parking structure vertical
clearance, and by making certain code sections easier to understand. The amendments
support the continued revitalization of Old Town Newhall, the Lyons Avenue Corridor,
the Soledad Canyon Road Corridor, and the City in general.
B. The proposal is allowed within the applicable underlying zone and complies with all
other applicable provisions of this code;
The UDC amendments do not require a consistency finding with the existing
development code because the project would amend the UDC in general, along with the
LCP, SCP, and ONSP. While no consistency finding is required, the proposed
amendments would not change development densities or the City's zoning map, and the
changes are considered to be minor in nature, making the amendments consistent with
these aspects of the development code.
C. The proposal will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the
public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare, or be materially
detrimental or injurious to the improvements, persons, property, or uses in the vicinity
and zone in which the property is located; and
Nothing contained in the proposed amendments would endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise
constitute a hazard to the public. The proposed amendments consist of minor updates to
the UDC, LCP, SCP, and ONSP, and are intended to update the planning documents to
reflect recent laws, development trends, and to clarify portions of the code where there
are inconsistencies or ambiguity.
D. The proposal is physically suitable for the site. The factors related to the proposal's
physical suitabilityfor the site shall include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. The design, location, shape, size, and operating characteristics are suitable for the
proposed use;
2. The highways or streets that provide access to the site are of sufficient width and are
improved as necessary to carry the kind and quantity of traffic such proposal would
generate;
3. Public protection service (e.g., Fire protection, Sheriff protection, etc.) are readily
available;
Page 3 of 7
4. The provision of utilities (e.g. potable water, schools, solid waste collection and
disposal, storm drainage, wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal, etc.) is
adequate to serve the site.
The proposal is physically suitable for the site in terms of location, shape, size, and
operating characteristics. The amendments are minor and do not change the scope or
goals of the various planning documents or the City's General Plan. No development is
proposed or would be approved by the amendments. Any future development that may
occur under the revised amendments would require development review and
environmental analysis at the time the projects are submitted. The City currently receives
adequate service from the Los Angeles County Fire Department and the Los Angeles
County Sheriff's Department. The project area is likewise served by all applicable
utilities. Nothing in the proposed amendments would increase the need for fire or police
protection services, or increase demand for utilities.
SECTION 4. ADDITIONAL FINDINGS FOR UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
AMENDMENT 20-001 AND SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 20-001 (ZONING
AMENDMENT). Based upon the foregoing facts and findings for UDC 20-001 and SPA 20-001
(Zoning Amendment), the City Council hereby finds as follows:
A. The amendment is consistent with the adjacent area, if applicable;
B. The amendment is consistent with the principles of the General Plan;
The proposed amendments are consistent with the adjacent area and consistent with the
principles of the General Plan. The proposed amendments would not alter the General
Plan Land Use Map or Zoning Map, nor would the proposed amendments change
development densities or population projections for the City. The proposed amendments
consist of routine updates to the UDC, LCP, SCP, and ONSP, and are intended to
increase consistency amongst the documents, reflect new legislation, and to revise certain
code sections to be clearer, easier to read, and easier to interpret.
Specifically, the proposed amendments would implement the following objectives and
policies of the General Plan:
Objective LU 1.2: Maintain the distinctive community character of villages and
neighborhoods throughout the planning area by establishing uses,
densities, and design guidelines appropriate to the particular
needs and goals of each area...
Policy LU 1.2.1: In Newhall, provide opportunities for new business and housing by
implementing the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan, provide
incentives to promote infill development and re -use of
underutilized sites, and continue to plan for the future development
of North Newhall.
Objective LU4.3: Enhance older commercial and industrial areas.
Policy LU 4.1.4: Promote economic opportunityfor all segments of the community,
including small businesses and new businesses.
Page 4 of 7
Policy LU 4.3.4: Promote business development that upgrades and revitalizes older
commercial corridors, including Lyons Avenue, Railroad
Avenue/Newhall Avenue, Main Street and Soledad Canyon Road,
in a manner that reflects reach area's character, architecture, and
history.
The proposed amendments are consistent with the objectives and policies listed above
because they would provide updated planning documents that are internally consistent,
easier to read, and provide clearer direction than the existing code documents. The
proposed amendments support the character of the City's neighborhoods, including Old
Town Newhall, Lyons Avenue, and Soledad Canyon Road, and promote economic
opportunities by providing development standards that are easier to understand and that
provide a clear review process.
C. Approval of the amendment will be in the interest of public health, convenience, safety,
and general welfare and in conformity with good zoning practice;
UDC 20-001 and SPA 20-001 (Zoning Amendment) support the public health, '
convenience, safety, and general welfare of the community. They are in conformity with
good zoning practice because the proposed amendments would standardize planning
language and development standards across the planning documents, updating certain
sections to reflect new legislation, implement Director's Policies on parking structure
vertical clearance height and escape rooms, clarify certain code sections for readability
and ease of use, and add new land use categories that support existing and future
businesses.
D. The amendment is consistent with other applicable provisions of this code; and
E. Is necessary to implement the General Plan and/or that the public convenience, the
general welfare or good zoning practice justifies such action.
Unified Development Code Amendment 20-001 and Specific Plan Amendment 20-001
(Zoning Amendment) are consistent with the applicable provisions of the UDC, LCP,
SCP, and ONSP because the proposed revisions would standardize language between the
documents and make the documents more consistent with each other. Therefore, the
amendments would promote the general welfare and public convenience, and would
constitute good zoning practice.
SECTION 5. ADDITIONAL OLD TOWN NEWHALL SPECIFIC PLAN FINDINGS
FOR SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 20-001 (ZONING AMENDMENT). Based upon the
foregoing facts and findings for SPA 20-001 (Zoning Amendment), the City Council hereby
finds as follows:
ONSPI: That the proposed use or project is consistent with the Old Town Newhall Specific
Plan; and
ONSP2: That the proposed use or project meets the development requirements for the zone
within which it is located including parking, architecture, and ground floor uses.
The proposed amendments are consistent with the ONSP. The amendments would
Page 5 of 7
add a new land use category for Accessory Beer and Wine Sales (on -site consumption)
that would support the arts and entertainment uses envisioned by the plan. Other
changes include clarification of existing development standards and the development
review process, minor text revisions to the zoning descriptions of the Urban General 2
zone, Corridor zone, and Urban Center zone, adoption of standardized outdoor space
and recreational facility requirements, and the updating of the ONSP glossary to
reflect new definitions and updated UDC section references. As the revisions to the
ONSP are minor and do not substantially change the development vision of the
ONSP, therefore, the proposed amendments to the ONSP are consistent with the
findings listed above.
SECTION 6. Based upon the staff report, including the materials considered by and the
recommendations made by the Planning Commission, the testimony at the public hearing, and
the findings as set forth in this ordinance, the City Council hereby adopts the Negative
Declaration prepared for the project and approves Master Case 20-043, consisting of Unified
Development Code Amendment 20-001 and Specific Plan Amendment 20-001 (Zoning
Amendment), amending the Unified Development Code, Lyons Avenue Corridor Plan, Soledad
Canyon Road Corridor Plan, and the Old Town Newhall Specific Plan, as shown in Exhibits A,
B, C, and D.
SECTION 7. If any portion of this ordinance is held to be invalid, that portion shall be
stricken and severed, and the remaining portions shall be unaffected and remain in full force and
effect.
SECTION 8. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect 30 days from its passage and
adoption.
SECTION 9. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this ordinance and shall cause
the same to be published as required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 81h day of Decemljer, 2020.
ATTEST:
C T CLERK
�w
DATE
YOR
Page 6 of 7
1
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
I, Mary Cusick, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 20-10 was regularly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on November 24, 2020. That thereafter, said Ordinance was
duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 8th day of December
2020, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Smyth, McLean, Weste, Gibbs, Miranda
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
AND I FURTHER CERTIFY that the forgoing is the original of Ordinance No. 20-10 and
was published in The Signal newspaper in accordance with State Law (G.C. 40806).
CITY CLERK
Page 7 of 7