HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-06-24 - RESOLUTIONS - MC 02-288 CINGULAR APPEAL (2)RESOLUTION NO. 03-97
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA CLARI'I'A, CALIFORNIA, DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE
MASTER CASE 02-288, CONSISTING OF MINOR USE PERMIT 02-053,
FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THREE TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES
AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT SHELTERS LOCATED AT
16500 SOLEDAD CANYON ROAD (APNs 2839-007-032 AND 2839-007-003)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita (hereafter "City") hereby
makes the following findings of fact:
A. An application for Master Case 02-288 (Minor Use Permit 02-053) was filed by Cingular
Wireless (the "applicant") with the City of Santa Clarita on August 2, 2002. The
property for which this application was filed is located at 16500 Soledad Canyon Road.
The General Plan and zoning designation for the property is CC (Community
Commercial). The application was deemed complete on October 29, 2002.
B. The project proposes the installation of an additional three telecommunications facilities
and equipment shelters. These facilities do not meet the intent and requirements set forth
within the Unified Development Code, more specifically the Wireless Facilities
Ordinance.
C. The surrounding land uses include commercial uses to the north and east, single-family
residences to the west and State Route 14 to the south.
D. A public hearing was duly noticed for the Planning Commission meeting of
November 19, 2002. The public hearing was held at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council
Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita, CA. During this meeting, the
Planning Commission received the staff report and public testimony on the project. The
Planning Commission continued the item to the January 21, 2003 public hearing. On
January 21, 2003, the item was continued to March 4, 2003. On March 4, 2003, the item
was continued to April 1, 2003.
E. On April 1, 2003, the Planning Commission denied, without prejudice, Master
Case 02-288 finding that the project would have significant aesthetic impacts to the
surrounding area.
F. Cingular Wireless submitted a letter on April 11, 2003, requesting an appeal of the
Planning Commission's decision.
G. A public hearing was duly noticed for the City Council meeting of June 24, 2003, which
was held at 6:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard,
Santa Clarita, CA.
Resolution No. 03-97
Page 2
H. Cingular Wireless submitted a letter requesting to withdraw their appeal in order to
submit a new application for review by the Planning Commission.
I. The application was heard before the City Council on June 24, 2003. During this
meeting, the City Council received the staff report, public testimony on the project,
accepted the applicant's letter to withdraw the appeal and affirmed the Planning
Commission decision to deny Master Case 02-288.
WHEREAS, in making its determination regarding the conditional use permit
application, the City Council has considered certain principles and standards, and finds and
determines as follows:
A. That the proposed location, size, design, and characteristics of the proposed wireless
telecommunication facilities and associated equipment are not developed in accordance
with the purpose of the Unified Development Code, more specifically the Wireless
Communication Facilities Ordinance because the proposal will add to the visual clutter
on the subject site, will not be camouflaged or concealed, will be highly visible from
Sand Canyon Road and State Route 14 and will not be adequately screened. The
placement of these telecommunications facilities will be visually intrusive to traffic along
State Route 14 traveling both northbound and southbound, in addition to Sand Canyon
Road over State Route 14. The facilities will be located in a manner where no
topography, vegetation or other structures provide any screening of the facilities and
therefore, do not satisfy the UDC, more specifically the Wireless Communications
Facilities Ordinance.
B. That the location, size, design, and characteristics of the wireless telecommunications
facilities and the necessary equipment does comply with the performance standards of the
existing Community Commercial zoning designation, however is not consistent with the
requirements set forth in the Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance because the
proposal will adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent uses or natural
resources, with consideration given to:
1. The project is not in harmony in scale, bulk, coverage, and density of the site because
the proposed project and all the alternatives will add to the visual clutter on the
subject site and is highly visible with no adequate screening as required by the
ordinance;
2. The availability of public facilities, services, and utilities for other uses will not be
affected because the project would not demand any additional facilities and services;
3. The project will have harmful effect on desirable neighborhood character because the
proposal includes the installation of telecommunications facilities that will increase
visual clutter, be highly visible and distract traffic along State Route 14 and
Sand Canyon Road. In addition, the installation of the wireless facilities, as
proposed, do not meet the goals and policies of the General Plan to promote design
excellence within commercial centers;
Resolution No. 03-97
Page 3
4. The capacity of the surrounding streets will not be impacted because the project will
result in one maintenance trip per month and therefore, will not generate additional
traffic. However, the facilities will cause a distraction to traffic along State Route 14
and Sand Canyon over State Route 14;
5. The project is not suitable at the site for the type and intensity of use or development
which is proposed because the telecommunications facilities will add to the visual
clutter of the site; and
6. The project will not have a harmful effect upon environmental quality and natural
resources because the project meets the requirements of CEQA. However, the project
is highly visible, will not be screened adequately and will contribute to the visual
clutter of the site and does not meet the intent of the Unified Development Code,
more specifically, the Wireless Communications Facilities Ordinance.
C. That the proposed location of the telecommunications facilities conflicts with the
surrounding uses because the proposal will have a significant negative visual impact.
D. That the proposed telecommunications facilities do not comply with the applicable
provisions of Unified Development Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Santa
Clarita, California, as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council hereby affirms the Planning Commission decision and
denies, without prejudice, Master Case 02-288, consisting of Minor Use
Permit 02-053, for the installation of three telecommunications facilities
and associated equipment shelters.
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of June, 2003.
���
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK r
Resolution No. 03-97
Page 4
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
I, Sharon L. Dawson, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita at a
regular meeting thereof, held on the 24th day of June, 2003, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: McLean, Kellar, Weste, Ferry, Smyth
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
1 aLlrlv9
CITY CLERK
sApbs\cutrentV2002\02-288\cc reso