HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-11-12 - RESOLUTIONS - PLOT PLAN 89-146 APPROVAL (2)RESOLUTION NO. 91-182
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
�., CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
APPROVING PLOT PLAN 89-146
TO ALLOY FOR A 28,280 GROSS SQUARE FOOT (THREE STORIES, 35'
IN HEIGHT) COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED AT
28352 SAND CANYON ROAD
AS FOLLOWS:
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE
SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby make the following
findings:
a. An application for a plot plan was filed on December 20, 1989, by
Mr. Maurice Ungar (the "applicant"). The property for which this
entitlement has been filed is located at 28352 Sand Canyon Road
(Assessor Parcel Number 2840-008-031) (the "site"). The existing
zoning for the project is C-3 Unlimited Commercial. The General
Plan designation for the site is CC (Community Commercial)
b. Plot Plan 89-146, when first submitted, proposed a 46' high,
three story, office building with a total square footage of
33,000 on a parcel consisting of 56,570 square feet.
c. The site is relatively flat with a vacant single family residence
r. on the property. The site lies adjacent to and above the Santa
Clara River. Vegetation on-site consists of native shrubbery,
trees, and grasses.
d. The plot plan application (46' high, three story) was denied by
the Director of Community Development on May 10, 1990. The
denial was based upon the following factors:
1) Circulation/Traffic - The Traffic Division indicated four
circulation improvements in the immediate area were
necessary to achieve a functional circulation system. These
improvements would require phased implementation in a timely
manner to avoid further deterioration of the area
circulation system. The Traffic Division required that
these considerable improvements be implemented to
significantly reduce the public safety hazards caused by an
inadequate circulation system.
2) Aesthetics - The proposed project would likely have a
significant adverse effect on neighboring residential
properties. The further intrusion of commercial development
within a predominantly residential area may set precedent.
In addition to the above, the building was modern in design
and incompatible with the surrounding area.
3) Good Zoning Practice - The project's height, bulk, and
visibility are intrusive and out of character with the area,
and therefore not in conformance with good zoning practices.
e. The appeal of the Director's denial was heard by the Planning
Commission on June 19, 1990, at the City Council Chambers, 23920
Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita, at 6:30 p.m.
f. The Commission, at the June 19, 1990 meeting, directed the
applicant to meet with the Sand Canyon area homeowners to find an
acceptable building design and for staff to review the design and
project for consistency with the City's draft General Plan.
g. On December 10, 1990, the applicant submitted revised Plot Plan
89-146 (39' high, three stories, 30,712 square feet) to the
Community Development Department. The Community Development
Department required the applicant to submit an initial study with
the appropriate fees.
h. The City's then draft General Plan designation for the project
site was Community Commercial (CC), which is intended for
retailing uses of a community -wide nature with development
governed by a floor area ratio range of .25 to .5:1.
i. The Initial Study prepared by staff indicated environmental
impacts in the areas of land use, transportation/circulation, and
aesthetics with possible mitigation measures addressing the
impacts.
j. A duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission
on February 19, 1991, at the City Council Chambers, 23920
Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita, at 6:30 p.m. The item was
continued to the March 5, 1991, Commission meeting. Prior to the
continuance, testimony was taken on the project from the
... applicant's agent, a project proponent, and a project opponent.
k. A duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission
on March 5, 1991, at the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia
Boulevard, Santa Clarita, at 7:00 p.m. The applicant's agent
requested the continuance at the direction of the applicant. The
item was continued to a date uncertain, with the Commission
requesting that staff review revisions in the project prior to
returning.
1. A duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission
on May 7, 1991, at the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia
Boulevard, Santa Clarita, at 7:00 p.m. Prior to this meeting the
applicant again revised the project (35' high, three story,
30,712 square feet). The item was continued to the May 21, 1991,
regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting.
m. A duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission
on May 21, 1991, at the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia
Boulevard, Santa Clarita, at 7:00 p.m. At this meeting, the
Commission adopted Resolution P91-31 formally denying the
applicant's appeal request.
n. On May 31, 1991, the applicant in written correspondence appealed
,.. the Planning Commission's denial of Plot Plan 89-146 (As Revised).
o. A duly notice public hearing was held by the City Council on
August 13, 1991, at the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia
Boulevard, Santa Clarita, at 6:30 p.m. At the request of the
applicant, the City Council continued the item from the August
13, 1991 to a date uncertain.
p. A duly notice public hearing was held by the City Council on
October 22, 1991, at the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia
Boulevard, Santa Clarita, at 6:30 p.m.
SECTION 2. Based upon the testimony and other evidence received
at the public hearing, and upon the study and investigation made by the City
Council and on its behalf, the Council further finds as follows:
a. The City's General Plan designation for the project site is
Community Commercial (CC). The project is consistent with the
intent of the designation regarding land use, and the project's
floor area ratio of .49:1 is consistent with the floor area ratio
range of .25 to .5:1 governing the Community Commercial
designation.
b. The following goals and policies of the General Plan support the
approval of the project:
1) Goal 2, Policy 2.4 of the Land Use Element of the General
Plan states: Establish a hierarchy of commercial centers,
including neighborhood, community, and regional service
centers, together with appropriate and compatible levels of
use to serve the population. The centers should be located
on arterial thoroughfares and be non -intrusive and sensitive
�.�. to residential land uses so as to provide convenience and
compatibility. (The project is sufficiently distanced from
residential uses located in the immediate area. In
addition, the project is located on a major thoroughfare and
is adjacent to additional commercial development).
2) Goal 2, Policy 2.14 of the Land Use Element of the General
Plan states: Promote the development of commercial and
industrial activities in all communities of the planning
area. (The addition of a commercial office building in the
Canyon Country area will increase the availability of office
space in an area which is presently insufficient in that
regard).
3) Goal 7, Policy 7.1 of the Land Use Element of the General
Plan states: Ensure demand for public facilities and
services does not exceed the ability to provide and maintain
such facilities and services; necessary facility
improvements should precede or be coordinated with future
development. (The implementation of circulation
improvements conditioned upon the project will result in the
improvement of a presently unsatisfactory circulation
system).
.-� c. Additional goals and policies of the General Plan related to
infrastructure improvements support the approval of the project.
d. The identified environmental impacts can be mitigated though the
conditioning of the project.
e. The Council finds that approving the project, as proposed with
r+ the addition of conditions, does satisfy the following principles
and standards for consideration of a plot plan:
That the use, development of land and/or application of
development standards, when considered on the basis of the
suitability of the site for the particular use or
development intended, is so arranged as to avoid traffic
congestion, insure the protection of public health, safety
and general welfare, prevent adverse effects on neighboring
property and is conformity with good zoning practice.
f. The project, visually, (inclusive of the 35' height and grading)
will not be detrimental to or negatively affect nearby rural
residential uses.
SECTION 3. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the
City Council hereby determines as follows:
a. The proposed project is compatible with existing development in
the area and is consistent with the City's General Plan.
b. The proposed project will not have a significant effect upon the
environment pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act. Conditions of approval have been added to the project to
mitigate all identified impacts caused by the project.
SECTION 4. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Santa Clarita, California, as follows:
a. The City Council hereby adopts the negative declaration prepared
for the project with the finding that the project will not have a
significant effect upon the environment.
b. The City Council hereby approves Plot Plan 89-146 (Revised -35
foot, three story, 28,280 gross square feet).
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of November , 1991.
044-G, Anz�/
Carl Boyer, Mayo
ATTEST:
a M. Grinde City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) ss
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA)
I, Donna M. Grindey, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing
Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita
at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 12th day of November 1991
by the following vote of Council:
AYES: COUMCILMEMBERS: Darcy, Heidt, Klajic, McKeon, Boyer
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
nna M. Grindey, City Clerk