HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-11-23 - AGENDA REPORTS - UCD GP MOD MC 04-285 (2)Agenda Item: 1+
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
AGENDA REPORT
PUBLIC HEARING City Manager Approval:
Item to be presented by: Fred Follstad
DATE: November 23, 2004
SUBJECT: MODIFICATIONS TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
AND GENERAL PLAN (MASTER CASE 04-285) WHICH
INCLUDES UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT
04-001 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 04-004
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Economic Development
RECOMMENDED ACTION
City Council open the public hearing, receive public testimony, close the public hearing and
adopt a resolution to adopt the Negative Declaration prepared for the project; adopt a resolution
that modifies the Land Use Element of the General Plan; and introduce and pass to a second
reading the ordinance that updates the Unified Development Code for the City of Santa Clarita.
BACKGROUND
The City of Santa Clarita Planning Division staff prepares draft updates to the City of Santa
Clarita Unified Development Code (UDC/Code) on a periodic basis. The draft update that staff
has prepared is substantial and is intended to streamline the development review process. The
proposed changes have come about as a result of input from the City Council, the Planning
Commission, City staff, ad hoc economic development committee and the public. These groups
have identified issues within the UDC that will be addressed and corrected as part of this update.
In general, this update seeks to clarify the following: the intent of certain sections where it is
currently unclear; ensure compliance with state laws; correct/improve certain processes; establish
new processes; correct inconsistencies, contradictions, and inaccuracies; consolidate redundant
sections; and correct formatting issues. This update will result in a UDC that is easier to use,
understand, and interpret for both City staff and the public.
V_f)� t4mevdvoep\4�
Confinued To.. a --b QA hy�) 9 dut);5- &IL frt_c_
- - d �ro-�ruaq�� Or,&-, VvL A C -e-
Permitted Uses
The UDC was first adopted in 1992 and has been amended several times over the past 12 years.
This year, staff elected to overhaul the the Permitted Use Chart in an effort to make it user
friendly. To do this, staff expanded the Permitted Use Chart to bring clarity to the different types
of land uses. In addition, a new section, "Use Types", was created to provide a definition for
each of the uses identified in the Permitted Use Chart. Lastly, the Parking section was revised to
provide the required parking for each of the uses identified in the new "Use Types" section of the
UDC.
Valley Center Concept
The City of Santa Clarita General Plan identifies an overlay zone described as the Valley Center
Concept (VCQ. The concept envisioned a center of regional services and transportation for the
entire Santa Clarita Valley under the initial General Plan. The area includes the Valencia Town
Center, the future City Civic Center site, Valencia Auto Center, County Civic Center and the
Soledad Metrolink Station. The VCC allows for increased densities and heights for both
residential and commercial uses throughout the overlay zone.
Since the adoption of the City's General Plan, the City has looked toward developing Downtown
Newhall as a secondary center for activities in the Santa Clarita Valley, especially since the
completion of the Metrolink Station on Railroad Avenue, the Community Center (currently under
construction), and the implementation of the Redevelopment Agency for the area. In an effort to
encourage new development within the Downtown Newhall area, staff is requesting that the
VCC overlay be extended to the area along San Fernando Road within the Downtown Newhall
Special Standards District. This will complement the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan
currently under preparation by allowing for the increased densities envisioned with this plan.
In addition, staff is including language to be part of the City's General Plan and Unified
Development Code, modifying the Downtown Newhall Special Standards to allow for increased
densities for mixed use projects with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP).
Oak Trees
Staff received direction at the May 2004, joint study session between the City Council and
Planning Commission to make the current oak tree ordinance less restrictive for City residents.
In addition, staff was directed to conduct a thorough public participation program to solicit
feedback from the community regarding what types of amendments should be made to the
ordinance to achieve this end.
In July and August, staff conducted a two-part public outreach campaign. First, staff conducted
two public meetings. The meetings were attended by approximately 100 community members.
The purpose of the meetings was to discuss existing issues with the ordinance and how these
issues could be revised. In addition to the public meetings, staff also developed a an interactive
page on the City's website. The website advertised all of the public meetings, posted meeting
notes, gave updates on the revision process, and offered residents an anonymous survey to
complete. The survey asked the same questions that were asked at the public meetings. In this
way, any resident that could not attend the meetings could still voice their opinion and provide
feedback about the issue. Nearly 250 residents responded to the survey.
Draft revisions to the ordinance were presented to the Planning Commission at their September
21, 2004, study session. At that time, the Planning Commission directed staff to make further
revisions to their recommended changes.
Other Modifications
Attached to this report is a list and a brief description of each of the significant changes that are
proposed. In addition to these changes, many maintenance and clean-up modifications are being
proposed to correct grammar, spelling and numbering errors, and will clarify the intentions of
various sections of the UDC. These minor "clean-up" items are not listed or discussed in this
report.
Modifications on the attached Exhibit "A" are indicated as follows:
Underlined sections indicate new wording to the UDC.
DQuble underlined indicate sections that already exist in the UDC but have been
relocated.
gtfiked3i,� sections indicate sections to be removed from the UDC.
Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission held three study sessions over the past nine months to receive an
overview and provide input on the proposed modifications. One of the study sessions focused on
the issue of oak trees. After staff addressed the issues raised by the Planning Commission, a
public hearing was held on October 19, 2004, at which time the Commission unanimously
adopted a resolution recommending approval of the changes to the City Council.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
The City Council may deny or modify all or any portion of the requested modifications.
2. Any action as determined by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
The majority of the proposed changes to the Unified Development Code will not create a fiscal
impact to the City of Santa Clarita as the proposed changes will affect the development of private
property. However, minor changes that are proposed to the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance
may create a minimal fiscal impact. Currently, the City subsidizes the permitting costs of oak
tree permits with money from the City's General Fund. The removal of the oak tree permitting
process for single family residential will reduce the amount of oak tree permits that are processed
annually, and will therefore, alter the General Fund money that has been used to subsidize the
oak tree permits in the years past.
ATTACHMENTS
Summary of Modifications
Exhibit "A" - Complete List of Changes
Exhibit "B" - List of Department Modifications
CEQA Resolution
General Plan Amendment Resolution
Ordinance
Negative Declaration available in the City Clerk's Reading File
Initial Study available in the City Clerk's Reading File
Planning Commission Staff Reports dated 2/17/04, 7/20/04 and 10/19/04 available in the City
Clerk's Reading File
Planning Commission Minutes 10/19/04 available in the City Clerk's Reading File
Planning Commission Resolution PO4-30 available in the City Clerk's Reading File
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN:
A Public Hearing will be held before the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in the
City Hall Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, I" Floor, Santa Clarita,
California, on the 23d day of November, 2004, at or after 6:00 p.m. to consider the
approval of Master Case 04-285 including Unified Development Code Amendment 04-
001 and General Plan Amendment 04-004 to revise various sections of the City of Santa
Clarita Unified Development Code (UDC). Various sections will be amended as cleanup
items including minor grammar and spelling changes as well as legal updates and
corrections. Additional modifications proposed at this time are a General Plan
Amendment to place the Valley Center Concept Overlay zone over San Fernando Road
corridor within the Downtown Newhall Special Standards District, an overhaul of Section
17.13, the Permitted Use Chart, and revisions to the City's Oak Tree Preservation
Ordinance as it pertains to single-family residences.
A DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION has been prepared for this proposed project
and is available for a public review period, during which the City of Santa Clarita
Planning & Building Services will receive comments, beginning at 12:00 p.m. on
October 28, 2004 and ending at 12:00 p.m. on November 23, 2004. During the public
review period a copy of the draft negative declaration and all supporting documents will
be located at the Planning Division public counter located in the City Hall Building at
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302, Santa Clarita, CA 91355. A copy of the draft
negative declaration (without all supporting documents) will be posted at the Los Angeles
County Library, Valencia Branch during the public review period noted above.
Proponents, opponents and any interested persons may appear and be heard on this matter
at that time. Further information may be obtained by contacting the Department of
Planning and Building Services, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302, Santa Clarita, CA
91355; (661) 255-4330, Patrick Leclair, Assistant Planner 11.
If you wish to challenge this action in court, you may be limited to raising only those
issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in
written correspondence delivered to the City Council, at, or prior to, the public hearing.
Dated: November 2, 2004
Sharon L. Dawson, CMC
City Clerk
Publish Date: November 2, 2004
S \P�\Cu�n(M�1\04 285\04-285 CC N�ice
Attachment "A"
Summary of Modifications
0 Organizational Changes
Various organizational changes within the City of Santa Clarita have triggered
changes within the Unified Development Code. The Department of Planning and
Building Services has been renamed the Department of Planning and Economic
Development. Therefore, all references to the Planning and Building Services
Director and Department have been replaced with the new Planning and Economic
Development Director and Department. In addition, the landscape plan -check
function has been moved from the Parks Division to the Planning Division. Any
reference to the landscape function will be modified to reference the Department of
Planning and Economic Development and/or Planning Division.
16.29.070 City Engineer Action
This section is new to Title 16 Subdivisions of the UDC and intended to streamline
the review of final maps. Currently, all final maps are approved by the City Council.
This section will give the City Engineer the authority to approve final maps in
instances where no acceptance of dedications is required. The City Council will
continue to approve final maps where acceptance of dedications is required.
17.01.100 Public Hearings and Notifications
Modifications are being made to the public hearing and notification requirements to
clarify the procedures for notifying the public of proposed development. No changes
to the noticing timeframes are being proposed. The current Code has notification
requirements dispersed throughout. The proposed changes will unite all of the public
notification requirements under one section of the Code making the code easier to use
and read for staff and the public.
Public meetings are to be removed from the Code. Staff has interpreted a "public
meeting" to mean public hearing before the Planning Commission. The change
codifies this interpretation.
The administrative hearings process is to be removed as well. These hearings were
originally added to the Code as a part of the Sign Ordinance and were eliminated
during the last update. The administrative hearing process no longer exists and
reference to it is to be removed from this section.
17.01.170 Expansions of Conditionally Permitted Uses and Structures
This section is being added to address the expansion of uses and structures with
previously approved conditional or minor use permits. It clearly identifies thresholds
City Council
Summary of Modifications
November 23, 2004
Page 2 of 7
for determining the level of review that is required for these expansions, helping to
streamline expansion of such uses. Currently, the UDC contains no such thresholds.
0 17.03.025 Master Plans
The goal of the Master Plan entitlement is to allow for the comprehensive planning of
an entire area. The Plan will identify all proposed uses, the general location and size
of all structures, the architectural scheme of the development, a phasing plan, and any
other pertinent information. In lieu of granting multiple entitlements for the
development, approval of a Master Plan would authorize by right all uses, buildings,
architecture, landscaping, etc. that was within the scope of the Plan. As phases are
built, a staff level non -discretionary review would occur to ensure that development is
consistent with the approved Master Plan.
17.03.040 Conditional Use Permits and Minor Use Permits
Findings for conditional and minor use permits are to be modified. Currently, the
findings for both permits are identical, though the level of review of a MUP is
intended to be less than that of a CUP. Therefore, the findings for a MUP are to be
modified to reflect the lower level of review.
In addition, the findings for a CUP are to be modified to include wording that
considers the adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Further changes include elimination of the noticing requirements, instead adding a
reference to Section 17.01. 100 Public Hearing and Noticing.
Finally, changes to this section include clarification of the approving authority and
when the Director of Planning and Economic Developenuit has the ability to make a
determination on a minor or conditional use permit and when these permits could be
referred to the Planning Commission.
17.03.045 Non -Construction Conditional Use Permits and Non -Construction
Minor Use Permits
To address the increasing demand of uses proposed in existing commercial or
industrial centers and buildings which require no exterior construction and streamline
their review, staff is proposing a new type of CUP and MUP. The Non -Construction
CUP or MUP will be less expensive and could be processed more quickly than a
normal CUP/MUP, as review of the permit will be limited strictly to use. Because no
construction would be proposed, grading, building, landscaping, and other plans
would not be needed. Currently, uses which require no exterior improvements, such
as an instructional school in a commercial center, require the same level of review
and fees as a large construction project, such as a new church.
17.03.060 Development Review
Modifications to this section are still being developed and will be included in the
update when it returns to the Commission. The modifications will clarify that
City Council
Summary of Modifications
November 23, 2004
Page 3 of 7
Development Review Permits are ministerial permits and cannot be subject to
discretionary modifications or conditions of approval.
0 17.03.070 Lot Line Adjustments
This section is to be replaced entirely with an updated section that is both consistent
with State law and reflects a new internal process for reviewing lot line adjustments.
0 17.03.080 Temporary Use Permits
Temporary Use Permits (TUP) currently allow for various uses of a temporary nature
that typically do not exceed 30 days. The Planning Commission requested staff to
create a permit process that would allow for greater flexibility for uses that exceed the
cur -rent TUP standards. Staff has reviewed the temporary use pen -nit and has created
a TUP category that would allow for temporary uses not exceeding one year to be
approved at the Director of Planning and Economic Development's discretion. Any
use that would exceed one year would require public notification consistent with the
noticing requirements of a minor use permit and, with objection, may require the
approval of the Planning Commission.
17.07.010 Definitions
The definitions section of the Code has been modified significantly. Several
definitions have been added and a substantial number unnecessary definitions have
been removed to avoid duplication and ensure consistency with the new use type
definitions proposed in Chapter 17.12 and with changes made to the permitted use
chart as is later discussed.
17.12 USE TYPE CLASSIFICATIONS
This is a new section to the UDC. Currently, all of the use types listed in the UDC
are contained only in the Permitted Use Chart in Chapter 17.13. The majority of
these use types are not defined anywhere in the UDC. In instances where a proposed
use does not clearly match one of the current use types, the lack of definitions has
lead to uncertain staff interpretations, inconsistent interpretations, and frustration
from the public. In addition, many of the current use types listed are not really use
types at all, but specific business types. For instance, "apparel stores" and "jewelry
stores" are listed as two separate use types, when in fact, they are two separate
business types. Similar business types, such as apparel and jewelry stores, should not
be listed individually, but instead included in a comprehensive use type that can be
applied to all similar retail uses.
To enable staff and the public to better categorize types of uses, staff proposes
Chapter 17.12 USE TYPE CLASSIFICATIONS. This chapter consolidates several
of the existing business types currently identified into broader use types. For
example, the current use types "apparel store" and "jewelry store," along with
"appliance stores ... .. art stores," "book stores," and other similar retail business types,
have been included in the new use type of "Retail Sales, General".
City Council
Summary of Modifications
November 23, 2004
Page 4 of 7
Other use types, such as "Residential Service/Care Home," have been added to ensure
consistency with state law.
0 17.13 PERMITTED USE CHART
To reflect the revised use types as indicated above, the Permitted Use Chart has been
modified. To the extent possible, current permitting requirements have been retained.
Due to the introduction of new use types, new permitting requirements were required
to be developed.
As a result of the joint City Council/Planning Commission study session held on
January 26, 2004, staff has modified the permitting requirements for auto repair uses
pursuant to Council/Commission direction to encourage the development of auto
repair uses in the industrial zones and require a higher level of review in commercial
zones and along commercial corridors. To accomplish this, the current requirement
for a minor use permit in BP, IC, and CTC zones will be retained, as will allowing
them by right in the I zone. In the CC zones, where compatibility with adjacent
commercial and residential uses may be an issue, the permitting requirement has been
changed from a minor use permit to a conditional use permit. Because the City's
major commercial corridors are zoned CC, including San Fernando, Lyons, Soledad
Canyon, Sierra Highway, and Bouquet Canyon, CUPs will be required for auto repair
development in the commercial areas along these major corridors. Auto repair uses
will continue to be prohibited in the residential zones and CN and CO zones.
In addition, the use charts currently contained in the Mobile Home Park (MHP), Open
Space (OS), and Private Education (PE) zones were relocated to the Permitted Use
Chart in order to have a single comprehensive location for the permitting
requirements of all City zones.
* 17.16.010 MHP— Mobile Home Park Zone
The permitted use chart located in this section of the Code was relocated to Section
17.13 of the Unified Development Code.
17.16.060 OS — Open Space Zone
The permitted use chart located in this section of the Code was relocated to Section
17.13 of the Unified Development Code.
17.16.070 PE — Private Education Zone
The permitted use chart located in this section of the Code was relocated to Section
17.13 of the Unified Development Code.
17.17.020 Keeping of Small Animals
The current development code limits the number of small animals that one can keep
on residential property. In some cases, the keeping of more than the maximum
City Council
Summary of Modifications
November 23, 2004
Page 5 of 7
number may be appropriate. To accommodate this flexibility, additional animals
would be permitted with the approval of a minor use permit.
17.17.040 Specific Development Requirements
This section of the code includes various minor alterations that have been made for
clarifications and consistent formatting. In addition, language has been added to
ensure that preexisting alcohol sales facilities are not rendered non -conforming when
a church, school, or residence is established within the required separation distance.
Finally, development requirements for the installation of solar panels have been
added to be consistent with previous policies established by staff.
17.17.050 Adult Business Ordinance
This section is being modified to eliminate "massage parlor" as an adult business to
avoid conflicting provisions with "massage therapy," a legitimate personal service
use.
17.17.070 Density Bonus Requirements
This section is to be modified to allow density bonuses for senior, very low, and low
income families "by right" and not dependent upon locational and fiscal impact
criteria, as required by State law.
* 17.17.090 Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance
At the May 4, 2004, joint City Council and Planning Commission Study Session,
staff was directed to review the Oak Tree Permit process for single family residences
within the City. Based on staff's research and direction given at the September 21,
2004, Planning Commission Study Session and the October 19, 2004, Planning
Commission meeting, the following changes are proposed:
Pruning
All pruning of oak trees will be exempt from the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance for
single-family residential homeowners.
Encroachment
Any development on an existing single-family residential lot will be exempt from the
Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance, with the exception of any heritage oak tree. All
standards for encroachment within the protected zone of a heritage tree as defined by
the UDC will be subject to the current policies and procedures.
Removal
Removal of five oak trees (non -heritage) or less within a five-year period on any
single-family residential lot will be exempt from the Oak Tree Preservation
City Council
Summary of Modifications
November 23, 2004
Page 6 of 7
Ordinance however; this action will require prior verification from the City prior to
the oak tree removal. Removing six or more non -heritage trees will be subject to the
current policies and procedures. Removal of any heritage tree will follow current
policies and procedures for heritage trees.
17.18 PARKING STANDARDS
Several modifications to this section are proposed, most of which are to codify
existing policies and practices. For instance, tandem parking spaces, which tend to be
discouraged, are to be eliminated as permitted parking for non-residential uses.
Another example is that excessively long dead-end drive aisles are typically
conditioned to provide a turnaround. This requirement of a turnaround will now be
codified. Bicycle racks, routinely conditioned to be provided, will also be required
under the ordinance.
Several modifications to the off-street parking requirements section are proposed.
These include the addition of definitions for terms that are used throughout the
section. In addition, the parking chart has been modified to be consistent with the
uses in the amended Permitted Use Chart. Each use is provided specific parking
requirements, instead of the generalized parking requirements now used. Where
practical, the existing parking requirements were maintained. However, based on the
parking issues that staff has identified, parking requirements have been altered for
specific uses. For instance, the current parking requirement for churches (I space per
5 seats) has resulted in a shortfall of parking at many churches and other assembly
uses. To help correct this shortfall, staff proposes to increase the parking requirement
to I space per 4 seats. Shopping centers, which are currently required to park at the
retail sales ratio of I space per 250 square feet, often result in a parking shortfall
when a use with a higher parking requirement, such as a restaurant or medical office,
wants to open in the center. To address this, new shopping centers would be required
to provide parking at a ratio of I space to 200 square feet. This will allow the center
flexibility to allow for future tenants.
Compact parking is currently permitted for office and industrial uses at a maximum
of 20% of the total required parking on the project site. At the direction of the
Planning Commission, staff has revised this standard to eliminate the use of compact
stalls all together.
Chapter 17.80 RIDGELINE PRESERVATION AND HILLSIDE
DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE
Modifications to this ordinance are proposed to better differentiate between hillside
development and ridgeline preservation. No policies contained in the ordinance are
to be changed. Currently, the permit requirements and development standards,
though different for each, are contained under single sections. The modifications
include the addition of sections that separate out the permit requirements and
development standards for each type of development.
City Council
Summary of Modifications
November 23, 2004
Page 7 of 7
In addition, in lieu of requiring a conditional use permit for an innovative application,
the ordinance will require a Hillside Review Permit — Innovative Application.
Currently, a CUP for an innovative application requires that the eleven criteria
contained in the Ridgeline Preservation Ordinance be met in addition to the findings
of a CUP. To simplify the innovative application process, staff proposes that the
eleven criteria be changed to findings that would support the Hillside Review Permit
— Innovative Application. The need for a CUP would be eliminated. The Hillside
Review Permit — Innovative Application would be the same cost as a Hillside
Development Review Permit, but would remain a discretionary application subject to
Planning Commission approval.
Exhibit "B"
Department Reclassification
Changes to Title 16
Section 16.21.020 A
Section 16.21.020 B
Section 16.21.200 D
Section 16.23.090
Section 16.23. 100 A
Section 16.23.110
Section 16.25.020
Section 16.25.060
Section 16.25.100
Section 16.25.130
Changes to Title 17
Section 17.01.050
Section 17.01.060
Section 17.01.080 F
Section 17.01.090 C
Section 17.0 1. 100 C- I
Section 17.01.100 D-2
Section 17.01.110
Section 17.01.120
Section 17.01.130
Section 17.01.160
Section 17.03.010 D
Section 17.03.030 F
Section 17.03.030 H
Section 17.03.030 1-2
Section 17.03.030 1-3
Section 17.03.030 J
Section 17.03.040 A
Section 17.03.050 A-2
Section 17.03.050 G
Section 17.03.070 A
Section 17.03.080 A
Section 17.03.080 A -3e
Section 17.03.080 A-8
Section 17.03.080 A-10
Master Case 04-285
October 19, 2004
Page 2 of 4
Section 17.03.080 A- I I
Section 17.03.080 A-13.7
Section 17.03.080 D -I
Section 17.03.080 E
Section 17.03.090 B- 17
Section 17.03. 100 C
Section 17.05.020 D
Section 17.05.030
Section 17.05.060
Section 17.07.010
"Building Official"
"City engineer"
"Director"
"Lot" — 2
"Setback, Front Yard"
"Yard, Front"
"Yard, Rear"
"Yard, Side"
Section 17.13
Section 17.15.020 A-3
Section 17.15.020 J-2
Section 17.15.020 J-5
Section 17.15.020 J-6
Section 17.15.020 M-5
Section 17.15.040 A-4
Section 17.15.040 B-4
Section 17.15.040 B-6
Section 17.15.040 B-7
Section 17.15.040 H-5
Section 17.15.040 H-9
Section 17.15.060 F-2
Section 17.15.060 1-1
Section 17.16.030 E
Section 17.16.040 C -2a
Section 17.16.040 C -2b
Section 17.16.060 D-8
Section 17.16.070 C -2h
Section 17.16. 100 C- I a
Section 17.16. 100 C- I d
Section 17.16. 100 C- I h
Section 17.16.100 C -3k
&\PBSTURRENTWOMUDC Changes\Update PBS-PED.doe
Master Case 04-285
October 19, 2004
Page 3 of 4
Section 17.16.100 C -6b
Section 17.16. 100 G -2d
Section 17.16. 100 G-3
Section 17.17.040 B- I
Section 17.17.040 B-9
Section 17.17.040 C-2
Section 17.17.040 C-4
Section 17.17.040 C-8
Section 17.17.040 F -2c
Section 17.17.040 F -2d.23
Section 17.17.040 G-3
Section 17.17.040 G-7
Section 17.17.040 G-8
Section 17.17.040 G- 10
Section 17.17.040 G- I I
Section 17.17.040 G- 13
Section 17.17.040 M-5
Section 17.17.040 M-6
Section 17.17.040 N -3q.1 Ic
Section 17.17.040 N-4.1
Section 17.17.040 Q-4
Section 17.17.050 E-1
Section 17.17.050 E-Ij.3
Section 17.17.050 E -Ir
Section 17.17.050 E- Is
Section 17.17.050 E-2
Section 17.17.050 E-3
Section 17.17.050 E-4
Section 17.17.050 E-6
Section 17.17.050 F -I
Section 17.17.050 F-2
Section 17.17.050 H
Section 17.17.050 1-5
Section 17.17.050 1-12
Section 17.17.050 I -17b
Section 17.17.050 1-21
Section 17.17.05 0 L- I
Section 17.17.050 M-1
Section 17.17.050 M-2
Section 17.17.050 M-3
Section 17.17.050 N
Section 17.17.050 N-1
Section 17.17.050 N-2
Section 17.17.090 A
Section 17.17.090 1-4
SAPBSTURRENT�!2004\UDC Changes\Update PBS-PED.doc
Master Case 04-285
October 19, 2004
Page 4 of 4
Section 17.17.090 K-3
Section 17.18.030
Section 17.18.040 A
Section 17.18.050 C
Section 17.18.050 D
Section 17.18.050 E
Section 17.18.060
Section 17.18.060 A
Section 17.18.060 B
Section 17.18.070 D-1
Section 17.18.070 E-1
Section 17.18.070 E-2
Section 17.18.070 E-3
Section 17.18.070 E-7
Section 17.18.070 E-8
Section 17.18.070 E-9
Section 17.18.070 E- 10
Section 17.18.100
Section 17.18.130
Section 17.18.130 "Institutional Uses — More than 50 acres"
Section 17.18.140 B
Section 17.19.020
Section 17.19.040 A
Section 17.19.060 B
Section 17.19.060 G-2
Section 17.80.030 A
Section 17.80.030 B
Section 17.80.030 13- 1
Section 17.80.030 B -2a
Section 17.80.030 D
Section 17.80.040 B -I
Section 17.80.040 B -2b
Section 17.80.040 C
Section 17.80.040 D-2
Section 17.80.040 E-3
Section 17.80.0401
Section 17.80.040 K-3
Section 17.80.040 K-6
Section 17.80.050 B
S:\PBS\CURRENT\!2004\UDC Ch�ges\Update PBS-PED.doe
Director of Parks and Recreation Changes
17.15.040 A- I
17.16.090 B-2 at
17.16.090 B-2 a2
17.28.020 H
S:\PBS\CURRENT\!2004\UDC Changes\Dinector of Parks and Recreation changes.doc
NOTICE OF CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita, at its regular meeting held
November 23, 2004, continued a public hearing on
ITEM 14 MODIFICATIONS TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND GENERAL PLAN
(MASTER CASE 04-285 WHICH INCLUDES UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
AMENDMENT 04-001 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 04-004
to February 8, 2005. The continued public hearing will be held at or after 6:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at 23920 Valencia Blvd., Santa Clarita, California and will consider amendments to the Oak Tree
Preservation Ordinance.
Dated this 24h day of November, 2004.
SHARON L. DAWSON, CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SS AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
SHARON L. DAWSON, being first duly swom, deposes and says that she is the duly
appointed and qualified City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita and that on November 24, 2004, she caused
the above notice to be posted at the door of the Council Chamber located at 23920 Valencia Blvd., Santa
Clarita, California.
C
0
DEC. 15,
1987 C�
-contph N
SHARON L. DAWSON, CITY CLERK
Santa Clarita, California
NOTICE OF CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita, at its regular meeting held
November 23, 2004, continued a public hearing on
ITEM 14 MODIFICATIONS TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND GENERAL PLAN
(MASTER CASE 04-285 WHICH INCLUDES UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
AMENDMENT 04-001 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 04-004
to January 11, 2005. The continued public hearing will be held at or after 6:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber at 23920 Valencia Blvd., Santa Clarita, California and will consider comprehensive changes to the
Unified Development Code, not including amendments to the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance.
Dated this 24h day of November, 2004.
SHARON L. DAWSON, CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SS AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
SHARON L. DAWSON, being first duly swom, deposes and says that she is the duly
appointed and qualified City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita and that on November 24, 2004, she caused
the above notice to be posted at the door of the Council Chamber located at 23920 Valencia Blvd., Santa
Clarita, California.
C I
DrC 15
1,487 C�
-contph 4/
mO
SHARON L. DAWSON, 'CITY CLERK
Santa Clarita, California