Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-01-11 - AGENDA REPORTS - MOD UDC AND GP MC 04-285 (2)Agenda Item: CITY OF SANTA CLARITA AGENDA REPORT PUBLIC HEARING City Manager Approval: Item to be presented by: Fred Follstad DATE: January 11, 2005 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 This item was first heard by the City Council at the November 25, 2004 meeting. The item heard by the Council included modifications to the oak tree permit process. At that meeting,the Council received a presentation from staff and heard public testimony which was focused on the modifications to the oak tree ordinance. Based on the issues raised at the public hearing, the Council directed that the modifications to the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance be separated from the rest of the Unified Development Code (UDC) amendments and continued the UDC amendments to this evening's meeting with the oak tree amendments being continued to the February 8, 2005 City Council meeting. Since the November 25, 2004 meeting, the item was presented to the City Council Development Subcommittee for their review and comment. In addition, Councilmembers Weste and McLean requested and received a presentation on the proposed changes. The City of Santa Clarita Planning Division staff prepares draft updates to the City of Santa Ordinance passed to Adopted: Second reading Clarita Unified Development Code (UDQ 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, the 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 intent of certain sections; 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 LJDC that is easier to use, understand, and interpret for both City staff and the public. 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). 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 undalined indicate sections that already exist in the UDC but have been relocated. S4ikethfettgh sections indicate sections to be removed from the UDC. Environmental Review and Public Noticing As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an initial study was prepared for the complete project. The initial study determined that project would not have an environmental impact and therefore, a Negative Declaration was prepared. The project was noticed by the placement of a display notice in the newspaper of general circulation per the applicable state and local requirements Planning Commission Action The Planning Commission held two study sessions over the past nine months to receive an overview and provide input on the proposed modifications. 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 other 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. ATTACHMENTS Summary of Modifications Exhibit A (City Clerk's Reading File) Exhibit B (City Clerk's Reading File) 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 23 d 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 �PWCUMn620041�04-285\04 285 CC NMice Attachment "All Summary of Modifications e 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 January 11, 2004 Page 2 of 6 for determining the level of review that is required for these expansions, helping to streamline expansion of such uses. Currently, the TJDC contains no such thresholds. 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 Developenint 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 WP. 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 January 11, 2004 Page 3 of 6 Development Review Permits are ministerial permits and cannot be subject to discretionary modifications or conditions of approval. 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 current TUP standards. Staff has reviewed the temporary use permit 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 January 11, 2004 Page 4 of 6 Other use types, such as "Residential Service/Care Home," have been added to ensure consistency with state law. 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 Femando, 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 January 11, 2004 Page 5 of 6 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. 17.18 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 (1 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 City Council Summary of Modifications January 11, 2004 Page 6 of 6 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. 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.