The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2026-02-24 - RESOLUTIONS - DENYING APPEAL 25-003 LYONS SELF STORAGERESOLUTION NO.26-8 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA,. CALIFORNIA, DENYING APPEAL 25-003 AND AFFIRMING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF MASTER CASE 25-039, CONSISTING OF ZONE CHANGE 25- 002, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 25-002, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 25-003, AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW 25-004 FOR THE LYONS CENTER SELF STORAGE FACILITY PROJECT, IN AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING LOCATED AT 24860 ORCHARD VILLAGE ROAD (ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 2855-006-010), IN THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. FINDINGS OF FACT FOR MASTER CASE 25-039. The City Council makes the following findings of fact: A. An application for Master Case 25-039 (Zone Change (ZC) 25-002, Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 25-002, Development Review (DR) 25-003, and Architectural Design Review (ADR) 25-004)) was filed by Philip Lee of Lyons Center, LLC (applicant), with the City of Santa Clarita (City) on March 7, 2025 (project). The property for which this application was filed is Assessor's Parcel Number 2855-006-010 (project site); B. The applicant proposes to amend the Lyons Corridor Plan (LCP) to permit self -storage facilities with the approval of a CUP within the Lyons Urban 3 (L-U3) zone; C. The applicant further proposes to develop and operate a new self -storage facility in the vacant portion of the existing Aldi building at 24860 Orchard Village Road. The existing 26,880 square -foot tenant space would be renovated to construct a second floor, resulting in 1, 108 square feet of first -floor office space and 52,652 square feet of self -storage space. Exterior architectural enhancements are proposed on the front elevation. The site plan also includes a new drop-off zone in front of the self -storage use; D. The General Plan designation for the site is Community Commercial (CC), and the zoning designation is L-U3 within the LCP; E. The project site is surrounded by residential development and a high school to the north, the school and a church to the east, commercial development to the south, and commercial development and a church to the west; F. The City reviewed the project's environmental impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA") and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines"); G. On March 7, 2025, the applicant submitted a formal application for a ZC, CUP, DR, and ADR for the proposed project; Page I of 5 H. On May 20, 2025, the applicant submitted a proposed zoning text amendment to the LCP to permit self -storage uses in the L-U3 zone with a CUP. Staff informed the applicant that n it may not propose an amendment to the LCP; however, the applicant did not provide a revised proposal; I. On September 11, 2025, the Director of Community Development denied the application for the proposed project; J. On September 24, 2025, Hunt C. Braly, on behalf of Lyons Center, LLC, filed an appeal of the Director of Community Development's decision to deny the project; K. On December 2, 2025, a duly noticed public hearing was held before the City of Santa Clarita Planning Commission at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita; L. At this public hearing, the Planning Commission considered the staff report, staff presentation, applicant's presentation, and public testimony; M. After closing the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted 4-0 to adopt Resolution P25-17, denying Appeal 25-001 and affirming the Director of Community Development's denial of the proposed project; N. On December 15, 2025, Hunt Braly formally filed an appeal (Appeal 25-003) of the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council; ^ O. On February 24, 2026, a duly noticed public hearing was held before the City of Santa Clarita City Council at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita; P. At this public hearing, the City Council considered the staff report, staff presentation, applicant's presentation, and public testimony; and Q. This resolution and its findings are made based upon City Council's de novo review of the entire administrative record, including, without limitation, testimony and evidence presented to the City Council at its public hearings, including the staff report. SECTION 2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF MASTER CASE 25-039. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the City Council hereby finds as follows: A. Section 15270 of the CEQA Guidelines provides that environmental review is not required when disapproving of a project; B. The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the decision of the City Council is based is the Master Case 25-039 project file, located within the Community Development Department and in the custody of the Director of Community Development; and C. Based upon the findings set forth above, the City Council hereby finds no further I I Page 2 of 5 environmental review is required for compliance with CEQA. SECTION 3. GENERAL FINDINGS FOR MASTER CASE 25-039. Based on the foregoing facts and findings for Master Case 25-039, the City Council determines as follows: A. That the proposal is consistent with the General Plan; The project is not consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan and the underlying land use designation of CC for the project site, as it proposes a use which is not permitted within the L-U3 zone. Therefore, the project would not be consistent with the General Plan and the City Council cannot support these findings. B. The proposal is allowed within the applicable underlying zone and does not with all other applicable provisions ofthe Santa Clarita Municipal (SCMC); The SCMC does not pennit an applicant to propose an amendment to the LCP. The proposed development cannot be permitted under the requirements of the L-U3 zone. Therefore, the project would not be consistent with the underlying zoning of the project site and the City Council cannot support these findings. 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 The project would encumber land zoned as L-U3 in the City with a land use not permitted under the CC land use designation to provide community -serving commercial uses. The project, including the GPA and ZC, would not support the public interest and would be detrimental to the community, and therefore, the required findings cannot be supported by the City Council. 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 ofsufcient width and are improved as necessary to carry the kind and quantity of traffic -such proposal would generate; 3. Public protection services (e.g. Fire protection, Sheriprotection, etc.) are readily available; and 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. Page 3 of 5 The project would encumber land zoned as L-U3 in the City with an inappropriate land n use and would conflict with the intent of the CC land use designation to provide community -serving commercial uses. The project, including the GPA and ZC, would not support the public interest and would be detrimental to the community, and therefore, the required findings cannot be supported by the City Council. SECTION 4: DETERMINATION: DENIAL. Master Case 25-039, inclusive of ZC 25- 001, CUP 25-002, DR 25-003, and ADR 25-004, is denied for the proposed project and zone change at 24860 Orchard Village Road (Assessor's Parcel Number 2855-006-010). SECTION 5: RELIANCE ON RECORD. Each and every one of the findings and determinations in this resolution are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the project. The findings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole. SECTION 6: SUMMARIES OF INFORMATION. All summaries of information in the findings, which precede this section, are based on the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact. SECTION 7: NOTICE. The City Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this resolution to n the City Council and any other person requesting a copy. SECTION 8: EFFECTIVE DATE. This resolution becomes effective immediately upon adoption and memorializes the City Council's final decision made on February 24, 2026. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 20 day of February, 2026. ATTE$T LIAVI"11C CITY CLERK DATE: n Page 4 of 5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) r� COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss. CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ) r� I, Mary Cusick, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 26-8 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 24' day of February, 2026, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: McLean, Miranda, Gibbs, Ayala NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Weste ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None CITY CLERK Page 5 of 5