HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-03-24 - AGENDA REPORTS - AMEND MUNICODE UDC SB2 (2)Agenda Item:
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
AGENDA REPORT
PUBLIC HEARING City Manager Approval:
Item to be presented by:
DATE: March 24, 2009
SUBJECT: AMENDMENTS TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE INCLUDING
AMENDMENTS TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
(UDC) (TITLE 17) TO MEET THE INTENT OF SENATE BILL 2
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
RECOMMENDED ACTION
City Council receive staff report, presentation and conduct the public hearing.
Introduce and pass to a second reading on April 28, 2009, an ordinance entitled: "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA,
CLAIFORNIA APPROVING MASTER CASE 09-002, UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE
AMENDMENT 09-001, ZONE CHANGE 09-001 AMENDING TITLE 17 (THE UNIFIED
DEVELOPMENT CODE) OF THE SANTA CLARITA MUNICIPAL CODE, CREATING A
HOMELESS SHELTER OVERLAY ZONE AND ADOPTING A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION.
PLANNING COMMISSION
On February 17, 2009, City staff presented the proposed project to the Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission, in a 5-0 vote, recommended that the City Council approve Master
Case 09-002, consisting of Unified Development Code Amendment 09-001 and -Zone Change
09-001.
BACKGROUND _
SENATE BILL 2 REQUIREMENTS
On October 13, 2007, the Governor of California approved Senate Bill 2 (S132) to amend
Ordinance passed to
Second reading � ,
Sections 65582, 65583, and 65589.5 of the Government Code, related to local planning. The
amended Planning and Zoning Law requires that local jurisdictions amend zoning laws to meet
the intent of S132, with regard to homeless shelters, supportive housing, and transitional housing.
The bill [Senate Bill 2] would add shelters to the housing element thus requiring a local
government to identify a zone or zones where shelters are allowed as a permitted use without a
conditional use permit or other discretionary permit. (Government Code Section 66582, 65583,
65589.5)
The State requires that local governments identify a zone or zones to include capacity to
accommodate the need for at least one year-round shelter. The local government shall also
demonstrate that the existing or proposed permit processing, development, and management
standards are objective and encourage and facilitate the development of, or conversion to,
homeless shelters. In addition, the State requires that local jurisdictions provide development
opportunities for a variety of housing types including transitional and supportive housing.
Transitional housing is a type of housing used to facilitate the movement of homeless individuals
and families into permanent housing. The resident of the transitional home is limited to a stay of
up to two years while receiving supportive services that enable independent living. Supportive
housing is permanent rental housing linked to a range of support services designed to enable
residents to maintain stable housing and lead fuller lives. It is important to note to the City
Council that failure to comply with Senate Bill 2 can potentially allow shelters to be permitted
without the approval of a discretionary permit in all zones, including residential, throughout the
City.
Currently, the City of Santa Clarita Municipal Code does recognize transitional and supportive
housing types as permitted residential uses. However, the UDC does not have language
describing this recognition. In addition, homeless shelters are currently addressed in the UDC
and are allowed in the CC (Community Commercial) zone with approval of a Conditional Use
Permit, in the I (Industrial) and IC (Industrial Commercial) zone with the approval of a Minor
Use Permit (subject to a public hearing) and in the BP (Business Park) zone with the approval of
a Minor Use Permit. All existing requirements for locating homeless shelters will remain in place
with the exception of the areas located within the Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone where no
discretionary permit would be required. It is important to note, however, that the construction of
a homeless shelter in the proposed overlay zone shall require a Development Review Permit,
where the site plan, architecture, floor plans, etc. would be reviewed to ensure compliance with
the City's UDC.
PLANNING COMMISSION AND EMERGENCY WINTER SHELTER TASK FORCE
On May 20, 2008, Planning staff presented to the Planning Commission the annual UDC
amendments. These amendments included adding definitions for supportive and transitional
housing as well as changes to permit homeless shelters in the BP zone by right without a
discretionary permit, in order to comply with S132. The Planning Commission approved staff's
recommendation by adopting Resolution P08-10 and recommended that the City Council
approve Master Case 08-038.
2''
Since the May 20, 2008 Planning Commission meeting, City staff elected to remove the UDC
amendments regarding S132 from the July 8, 2008 City Council agenda to research alternatives to
the original proposal, and to meet with the City's Emergency Winter Shelter Task Force.
Planning staff worked with the City's Emergency Winter Shelter Task Force to identify where
homeless shelters should be permitted by right. Staff presented the original proposal to the Task
Force to allow homeless shelters by right in the BP zone. In response to comments from the Task
Force, staff revised the original proposal to create an overlay zone, which includes three areas of
the City (Valencia Industrial Center, Rye Canyon Business Park, and Centre Pointe Business
Park). Staff also created 300 -foot buffers around public and private schools, as well as creating a
buffer from residential zone along the eastern edge of the Centre Pointe Business Park, where
shelters would not be permitted by right. The intent of creating these buffer areas is to maintain
the character of adjacent residential communities and schools. These revisions to the original
proposal have been incorporated into the project and are a part of the project description. In
addition to meeting with the Task Force, staff has met with the Valley Industrial Association,
Larry Rasmussen of Spirit Properties, and the Chamber of Commerce who have all given their
support for the proposed project.
On February 17, 2009, City staff presented the proposed project to the Planning Commission,
The Planning Commission, in a 5-0 vote, recommended that the City Council approve Master
Case 09-002, consisting of Unified Development Code Amendment 09-001 and Zone Change
09-001, amending the Unified Development Code as described in the attached Exhibit "A" and
"B," and adopt the Negative Declaration prepared for the project.
During the public comment period, no comments were submitted by the public.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Santa Clarita is preparing amendments to Chapter 17 of the City's Municipal Code
(the Unified Development Code (UDC)) and Zoning Map to identify a zone or zones where
shelters are permitted by right by creating a Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone. The proposed
Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone will identify three areas including the Valencia Industrial Center,
Rye Canyon Business Park, and a portion of the Centre Pointe Business Park. These areas of the
City are located within the existing BP zone. Within the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay
Zone are 300 -foot buffers around public and private schools and residential zones along the
eastern edge of the Centre Pointe Business Park, where homeless shelters would not be permitted
by right. In addition to the Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone, the City is proposing to amend the
UDC to define supportive and transitional housing as permitted residential uses in order to meet
the intent of SB2. In addition, the proposal includes specific development standards for the
construction and operation of homeless shelters. A copy of the proposed amendments and
overlay zone has been provided as Exhibit "A" and the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone
Map as Exhibit "B".
ANALYSIS
UDC CONSISTENCY
3
The proposed amendments include the addition of language to (1) reflect the State's mandate that
transitional and supportive housing are permitted residential uses, (2) create a Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone, and (3) provide specific homeless shelter development standards. A description of
these changes include:
• Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone Map
Create a Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone that identifies three areas of the City within the
existing Business Park Zone where homeless shelters are permitted by right.
• 17.07 Definitions
Create or modify definitions for "Transitional Housing" and "Supportive Housing"
pursuant to SB2.
• 17.12 Use Type Classification
Create or modify Use Type Classifications and/or definitions for use types "Transitional
and Supportive Housing" to reflect the language of the State -required definition.
• 17.13 Permitted Use Chart
Indicate "Transitional and Supportive Housing" as permitted uses in all residential
zones, consistent with State regulations.
• 17.17 Special Uses and Standards
Specific Development Standards were created for homeless shelters consistent with State
regulations.
These amendments and the proposed overlay zone are in substantial conformance with City and
State regulations. Attached is a copy of the proposed amendments (Exhibit "A" of the attached
ordinance) and the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone Map (Exhibit "B"). Within Exhibit
"A", the amendments are indicated as follows:
Underlined sections indicate new wording to the UDC.
ENVIROMENTAL REVIEW
An Initial Study was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). The Initial Study determined that all impacts related to the proposed modifications are
considered to be less than significant. Therefore, a Negative Declaration was prepared in
accordance with Section 15070 of CEQA. Future development guided by the proposed
modifications to the UDC would be required to complete environmental review in compliance
with CEQA. The Negative Declaration was posted and advertised on January 17, 2009, in
accordance with CEQA. The public review period was opened from January 17, 2009, through
February 17, 2009.
PUBLIC REVIEW
As required by the Unified Development Code, the public notice was placed in The Signal
Newspaper advertising Master Case 09-002. To date, no comments have been submitted.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Other action as determined by the Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
No negative fiscal impact is anticipated as a result proposed modifications to the Unified
Development Code.
ATTACHMENTS
Ordinance -
Exhibit A - Proposed UDC Amendment
Exhibit B - Proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone Maps
Negative Declaration
Initial Study
Planning Commission Staff Report available in the City Clerk's Reading File
Planning Commission Resolution 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 24`'' day of March, 2009, at or after 6:00 p.m. to consider the' approval
of Master Case 09-002 (Zone Change 09-001, Unified Development Code (UDC)
Amendment 09-001) proposal to amend various sections of the City's Municipal Code
and Zoning Map to identify a zone or zones where shelters are permitted by right in
creating a Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone. In addition to the Homeless Shelter Overlay
Zone, the City is proposing to amend the UDC to define supportive and transitional
housing to meet the intent of SB2.
A draft negative declaration has been prepared for this project and the public review
period was from January 17, 2009 to February 17, 2009. A copy of the draft negative
declaration and all supporting documents are 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 declarations (without all supporting documents)
is available at the Los Angeles County Library, Valencia Branch.
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 Community
Development Department, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302, Santa Clarita, CA
91355; (661) 255-4330, Jason Killebrew, Assistant Planner I.
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: February 24, 2009
Sharon L. Dawson, MMC
City Clerk
Publish Date: March 2, 2009
5A-
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING MASTER CASE 09-002, UNIFIED
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 09-001, ZONE CHANGE 09-001 AMENDING
TITLE 17 (THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE) OF THE SANTA CLARITA
MUNICIPAL CODE, CREATING A HOMELESS SHELTER OVERLAY ZONE AND
ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita General Plan requires the implementation of the
City of Santa Clarita Unified Development Code (UDC) to be in compliance with the
Government Code of the State of California;
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita Planning Division is proposing a Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone, and proposing amendments to the UDC regarding Homeless Shelters, and
Transitional and Supportive Housing to ensure consistency with Senate Bill 2;
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita Planning Division has initiated Unified
Development Code Amendment 09-001 and Zone Change 09-001 (Master Case 09-002) to
modify the Zoning Map and various sections of Title 17 of the City of Santa Clarita Municipal
Code;
WHEREAS, Unified Development Code Amendment 09-001 and Zone Change 09-001
include various modifications to the UDC attached as Exhibit "A" and "B", (the project);
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments and Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone are
consistent with and further implement the Goals and Policies of the City of Santa Clarita General
Plan;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the
project on February 17, 2009, at City Hall, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita, CA 91355.
Notice of the time, place, and purpose of the aforementioned meeting was duly noticed in
accordance with Government Code 65090. At this meeting, the Planning Commission adopted
Resolution P09-04, recommending that the City Council adopt an ordinance approving Master
Case 09-002, consisting of Unified Development Code Amendment 09-001 and Zone Change
09-001 and adoption of the Negative Declaration prepared for the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita conducted a duly noticed public
hearing on the project on March 24, 2009, at City Hall, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita,
CA 91355. Notice of the time, place, and purpose of the aforementioned meeting was duly
noticed in accordance with Government Code 65090. At the March 24, 2009 Council meeting,
the City Council considered the staff report, staff presentation, and public testimony on the
J
proposed amendments, introduced the ordinance to modify the Unified Development Code and
passed the ordinance to a second reading on April 28, 2009.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The proposed amendments to the Unified Development Code and creation
of the Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone to the Zoning Map are consistent with the City of Santa
Clarita General Plan.
SECTION 2. The proposed amendments to the Santa Clarita Unified Development Code
identified in Exhibit "A" are hereby adopted. The proposed creation of a Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone identified in Exhibit "B" are herby adopted.
SECTION 3. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS. Based
upon the foregoing facts and findings in the Initial Study prepared for the project, the City
Council further finds, approves, and determines as follows:
a. An Initial Study and a Negative Declaration have been prepared for this project in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
b. The Initial Study has been circulated for review and comment by affected governmental
agencies and the public and all comments received, if any, have been considered. The
document was posted and advertised on January 17, 2009, in accordance with CEQA.
The public review period was open from January 17, 2009, through February 17, 2009.
C. Staff found that there were no impacts created as a result of the proposed project and a
Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project in accordance with the CEQA.
The Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the City of Santa Clarita.
d. The location of the documents and other material which constitutes the record of
proceedings upon which the decision of the City Council is based is the Master Case
09-002 project file within the Community Development Department and is in the custody
of the Director of Community Development.
SECTION 4. That if any portion of this Ordinance is held to be invalid, that portion shall
be stricken and severed, and the remaining portions shall be unaffected and remain in full force
and effect.
SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days from its
passage and adoption.
SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance and shall cause
the same to be published as required by law.
2
I -
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of April, 2009,
J1.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
',,.COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
I, Sharon L. Dawson, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Ordinance No. 09- was regularly introduced and placed
upon its fI st•reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 24th day of March, 2009.
That thereafter, said Ordinance was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City
Council on the 28th day of April, 2009, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
AND I FURTHER CERTIFY that the foregoing is the original of Ordinance No.
and was published in The Signal newspaper in accordance with State Law (G.C.
40806 V
CITY CLERK `
3
j
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
CERTIFICATION OF
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE
I, Sharon L. Dawson, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that this is a true
and correct copy of the original Ordinance No. 09- , adopted by the City
Council of the City of Santa Clarita, CA on April 28, 2009, which is now on file in my office.
Witness my hand and seal of the City of Santa Clarita, California, this — day of
20_.
Sharon L. Dawson, MMC
City Clerk
By -
Susan Caputo
Deputy City Clerk
0
Exhibit A of Ordinance 09-
17.12.040 Residential Use Classifications
2. Transitional Housing — includes buildings configured as a rental housing development
but operated under program requirements. Upon termination of assistance, the unit shall
be recirculated as an assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at some
predetermined point in time where length of stays shall be no less than 6 months and no
more than two (2) years.
3. Supportive Housing — includes housing with no limits on length of stay, that is linked to
on-site or off-site services that assist residents in retaining housing,proving his/her
health conditions and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in
the community
17.020.070 Public and Semi -Public Use Type Classifications
4. Homeless Shelter — a facility which provides housing on a not-for-profit basis. Housing
may include emergency shelters on a short-term basis or temporary until permanent
housing is found. These facilities generally provide referrals to other agencies, meals,
counseling and advocacy. (See 17.17.040.S Specific Development Requirements)
17.17.040 Specific Development Requirements
S. Homeless Shelters. All facilities which provide housing on a not-for-profit basis,
including emergency shelters on a short-term basis or temporary transitional basis (up to
and not exceeding six (6) months) until permanent housing is found. These facilities
generally provide referrals to other agencies, meals, counseling and advocacy.
1. The homeless shelters shall maintain a maximum occupancv not to exceed sixtv (60
individuals.
2. Homeless shelters shall provide on-site waiting and intake areas screened from view
to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development.
3. The homeless shelter shall provide on-site 24-hour management with security
4. Parking areas shall be paved.
5. The homeless shelter shall be well lit during operational hours to the satisfaction of
the Director of Community Development.
6. Homeless shelters shall be allowed have intake between the hours of 5 p.m. to 8 p.m.
or at dusk, whichever is sooner, and may discharge patrons from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m.
Page 1 of 2
s \cd\current\12009\09-002 (sb2 homeless shelter zone)\exhibit a - sb 2 doe
10
CL
U)
CL
x
U
O
LU
CL
U
CL
CD
a
N
O
U
Z
U
U
U
U
H
U
x
a
x
a
a
rn
X
J
a
J
>
a
W
a
Lf
T � T
XI XI x
XI xi X
xi xi x
xi xi
cn
XI xi
XI xi
xi XI X
xi XI X
XI XI X
UI UI U
UI UI X
CLI dl X
a.l CLI x
cLI al X
CLI CLI X
CLI CLI x
a.l ELI x
CLI (LI x
CLI Q -I x
o
> E
E2 o o L o
M-01-:fn22(n
"s <
i 1
1b
No
`t1Ji
or
/ `A\ I L
.3
v J itr
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
1)1?Ak*J"
[X] Proposed [ ] Final
MASTER CASE NO: 09-002
PERMIT/PROJECT
NAME: Proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone, and UDC Amendments
APPLICANT: ' City of Santa Clarita
LOCATION OF THE
PROJECT: Citywide
DESCRIPTION OF
THE PROJECT: The City of Santa Clarita is preparing amendments to the Chapter 17
of the City's Municipal Code (the Unified Development Code (UDC))
and Zoning Map to identify a zone or zones where emergency shelters
are permitted by right by creating a Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone. In
addition to the Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone, the City is proposing
to amend the UDC to define supportive and transitional housing to
meet the intent of S132.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the information contained in the Initial Study prepared for this project, and pursuant to the
requirements of Section 15065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of
Santa Clarita
[X] City Council [ ] Planning Commission [ ] Director of Community Development
finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant effect upon the environment,
and that a Negative Declaration shall be adopted pursuant to Section 15070 of CEQA.
Mitigation measures for this project
[X] Are Not Required [ ] Are Attached [ ] Are Not Attached
Lisa M. Webber, AICP
PLANNING MANAGER
Prepared by:
Approved b�
Jason Killebrew, Assistant Planner I
(Name/Title)
Lisa M. Webber, AICP, Planning Manager
(Name/Title)
Public Review Period From January 17, 2009 To February 17, 2009
Public Notice Given On ' January 18, 2009
[X] Legal Advertisement [ ] Posting of Properties [ ] Written Notice
CERTIFICATION DATE:
SAMCURREN V2009109-002 (SB2 Homeless Shelter Zone)Weg Dec doe
�5
INITIAL STUDY
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
Project Title/Master Case Number: Master Case 09-002 (Zone Change 09-001, UDC09-
001, IS 09-001)
Proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone
Lead Agency name and address: City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 302
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Contact person and phone number: Jason Killebrew
Assistant Planner 1
(661) 255-4330
Project location: r . Citywide
Applicant's name and address: City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 302
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
General Plan designation: N/A
Zoning: N/A
Description of project and setting: On October 13, 2007 the Governor of California
approved Senate Bill 2 (S132) to amend Sections 65582,
65583, and 65589.5 of the Government Code, related to
local planning. The amended Planning and Zoning Law
requires that local jurisdictions, in regards to emergency
homeless shelters, farmworker housing, supportive
housing, and transitional housing. The bill would add
emergency shelters to the housing element thus
requiring a local government to identify a zone or zones
where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted
use, without a conditional use permit or other
discretionary permit. (Government Code Section
66582, 65583, 65589.5)
The City of Santa Clarita is preparing amendments to
the Chapter 17, of the City's Municipal Code (the
Unified Development Code (UDC)) and Zoning Map to
identify a zone or zones where emergency shelters are
permitted by right by creating a Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone. In addition to the Homeless Shelter
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 2 of 30
Overlay Zone, the City is proposing to amend the UDC
to define supportive and transitional housing to meet
the intent of SB2.
The State requires that local governments identify a
zone or zones to include capacity to accommodate the
need for at least one year-round emergency shelter(s).
The local government shall also demonstrate the
existing or proposed permit processing, development,
and management standards are objective and encourage
and facilitate the development of, or conversion to
emergency shelters.
The Unified Development Code Amendment, in and of
it self, is not anticipated to directly result in any
development. All future development affected by these
changes will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to
determine their impacts on the environment pursuant to
CEQA. Therefore, the findings in this Initial Study
relate only to the amendments themselves.
The changes to the UDC and Zoning Map consist of the
following:
Zone Map
Create a Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone that identifies
two areas of the City within the existing Business Park
Zone where homeless shelters are permitted by right.
17.07 Definitions
Create or modify definitions for "Transitional Housing"
and "Supportive Housing".
17.12 Use Type Classification
Create or modify Use Type Classifications and/or
definitions for use types "Transitional and Supportive
Housing" to reflect the language of the State -required
definition.
17.13 Permitted Use Chart
Indicate permitted added for Transitional and
Supportive Housing as in all Residential Zones to the
Permitted Use Chart, consistent with State regulations.
17.17S
2ecial Uses and Standards
Specific Development Standards were created for
I_f
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 3 of 30
Surrounding land uses:
Other public agencies whose
approval is required:
Homeless Shelters consistent with State regulations.
N/A
N/A
A. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or a "Less than Significant with
Mitigation" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
[ ] Aesthetics [ ]
[ ] Biological Resources [ ]
[ ] Hazards & Hazardous [ ]
Materials
[ ] Mineral Resources [ ]
[ ] Public Services [ ]
[ ] Utilities / Service Systems [ ]
B. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
Agriculture Resources
Cultural Resources
Hydrology / Water
Quality
[ ] Air Quality
[ ] Geology / Soils
[ ] Land Use./ Planning
Noise [ ] Population / Housing
Recreation [ ] Transportation / Traffic
Mandatory Findings of Significance
0
[X] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the
project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I
Master Case 09-002
Gone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 4 of 30
[ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one
effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis
as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,
but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
[ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately
in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and
(b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required.
Ja o lebfew, Assistant Planner I Date
ebber, AICP, Planning Manager Date
19
Master Case 09-002
"Lone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 5 of 30
C. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
I. AESTHETICS - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
not limited to, primary/secondary ridgelines, trees,
rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
e)Other I I I I
H. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES - In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California
Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the
California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on
agriculture and farmland. Would the project: -
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or' [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
a Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment [ ] [ ] [] [X]
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
10
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 6 of 30
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
- Mitigation
d)Other [] [] [] []
III. AIR QUALITY - Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable
air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the
following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non -attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
f) Other
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the
project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
[X] I
2t
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 7 of 30
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, and
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance? Oak trees?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional,
or state habitat conservation plan?
g) Affect a Significant ,Ecological Area (SEA) or
Significant Natural Area (SNA) as identified on the
City of Santa Clarita ESA Delineation Map?
h) Other
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
'15064.5?
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
[] [] [X] I
[] [] [X] []
[] [] [X] I
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 8 of 30
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to '15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy or impact a unique ( ]
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred [ ]
outside of formal cemeteries?
e) Other [ ]
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS — Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial [ ]
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as [ ]
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? [ ]
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including [ ]
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides? [ ]
b) Result in substantial wind or water soil erosion or the [ ]
loss of topsoil, either on or off site?
[] [X] I
[] [x} I
[] [X] I
[] [X] I
[l [X] []
L] [X] I
M
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 9 of 30
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction
or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- [ ] [ ]
1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating
substantial risks to life or,property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the [ ] [ ]
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
f) Change in topography or ground surface relief [ ] [ ]
features?
g) Earth movement (cut and/or fill) of 10,000 cubic [] [ ]
yards or more?
h) Development and/or grading on a slope greater than [ ] [ ]
10% natural grade?
i) The destruction, covering or modification of any [ ] []
unique geologic or physical feature?
j) Other [ ] [ ]
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the [ ] []
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X]
[X] I
aJ
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 10 of 30
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the [ J [ J [XJ [ J
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving explosion or the
release of hazardous materials into the environment
(including, but not limited to oil, pesticides,
chemicals, fuels, or radiation)?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or [ ]
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of [ ]
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan [ ]
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, [ ]
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with [ ]
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of [ ]
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized
areas or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
[] [XJ [J
[J [XJ [J
[J [XJ [J
[] [XJ [J
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page I 1 of 30
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
i) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
health hazards (e.g. electrical transmission lines, gas
lines, oil pipelines)?
j)Other I I I []
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the
project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-
site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
0
ab"
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 12 of 30
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures [ ]
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of [ ]
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? [ ]
k) Changes in the rate of flow, currents, or the course [ ]
and direction of surface water and/or groundwater?
i) Other modification of a wash, channel creek or river? [ ]
1) Impact Stormwater Management in any of the [ ]
following ways:
i) Potential impact of project construction and [ ]
project post -construction activity on storm water
runoff?
ii) Potential discharges from areas for materials [ ]
storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or
equipment maintenance (including washing), waste
handling, hazardous materials handling or storage,
delivery areas or loading docks, or other outdoor
work areas?
iii) Significant environmentally harmful increase in [ ]
the flow velocity or volume of storm water runoff?
iv) Significant and environmentally harmful [ ]
increases in erosion of the project site or
surrounding areas?
I [X] I
[J [X] I
[] [XJ I
[] [X] I
[] [XJ I
[] [X] I
24
Master Case 09-002
Gone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 13 of 30
v) Storm water discharges that would significantly
impair or contribute to the impairment of the
beneficial uses of receiving waters or areas that
provide water quality benefits (e.g. riparian
corridors, wetlands, etc.)
vi) Cause harm to the biological integrity of
drainage systems, watersheds, and/or water bodies?
vii) Does the proposed project include provisions
for the separation, recycling, and reuse of materials
both during construction and after project
occupancy?
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the
project:
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
[] [] [X] I
a) Disrupt or physically divide an established [ ]
community (including a low-income or minority
community)?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, [ ]
or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation [ ]
plan, natural community conservation plan, and/or
policies by agencies with jurisdiction over the
project?
X. MINERAL AND ENERGY RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral [ ]
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
[X] I
I [X]
M
R
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 14 of 30
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally [ ] [ ] [X] [
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
c) Use nonrenewable resources -in a wasteful and
inefficient manner?
XI. NOISE - Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels
in excess,of standards established in the local -general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project? J
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
[Xl I
[X] I
[X] I
[X] I
I [Xl
I [X]
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 15 of 30
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere (especially affordable housing)?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project
result in:
a) Substantial adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction 'of
which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
i) Fire protection?
ii) Police protection?
iii) Schools?
iv) Parks?
XIV. RECREATION - Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such
that substantial physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
[1
11 [X] []
[1
11 1X1 []
[1
11 1X1 []
11 11 1X1 f1
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 16 of 30
b) Include recreational facilities or require the [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
construction or expansion of recreational facilities
which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
XV. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC - Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase
in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads
or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [ ] [ ] r [X] [ ]
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs [ ] [ J [X] [ ]
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
h) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [ ] [ ] [X] [ J
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the [ ] [ ] [X] [ J
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 17 of 30
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or [ ]
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm [ J
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the [ ]
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater [ ]
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted [ ]
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
[X] I
2X-
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 18 of 30
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually [ ] [ ]
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and the_
effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which [ ] [ ]
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
XVII. DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME`DE MINIMUS' FINDING
a) Will the project have an adverse effect either [ ] [ ]
individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife
resources? Wildlife shall be defined for the purpose
of this question as "all wild animals, birds, plants,
fish, amphibians, and related ecological
communities, including the habitat upon which the
wildlife depends for it's continued viability."
[X] I
[X] I
I [X]
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 19 of 30
D. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND/OR EARLIER ANALYSIS:
Section and Subsections
Evaluation of Impacts
I. AESTHETICS a.) Less than Significant Impact: The City of Santa Clarita is
located within Southern California's Santa Clarita Valley, which is
bounded by the San Gabriel Mountains to the south and east, the
Santa Susanna Mountains to the southwest, and the mountains of the
Los Padres and Angeles National Forests to the north. The
surrounding natural mountains and ridgelines, some of which extend
into the City, provide a visual backdrop for the City. Other scenic
resources within or visible from the City include the Santa Clara
River corridor, forested/vegetated land, and a variety of canyons and
natural drainages in portions of the City.
The Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and modifications to the Unified
Development Code (UDC) regarding "Transitional and Supportive
Housing" will not affect any scenic vistas or other scenic resources
within the City of Santa Clarita. Rather, the Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone with specific development standards proposed would
have a less than significant impact on aesthetics, visual character and
visual quality of specific projects within the City of Santa Clarita by
clarifying development requirements for homeless shelter projects
adhere to other standards and guidelines of the UDC. Therefore, the
proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone, and the UDC amendments
related to "Transitional, Supportive Housing and Homeless Shelters"
(herein after UDC amendments) would have a less than significant
impact on scenic vistas.
b.) Less than Significant Impact: The only roadway within the City
of Santa Clarita that is identified in the California Department of
Transportation's State Scenic Highway program is the Interstate 5 (1-
5) freeway, which is designated as an "Eligible State Scenic
Highway". This designated eligible segment of the I-5 Freeway
extends from the I-210 Freeway interchange to the SR126/Newhall
Ranch Road interchange. SR 126 from the City's boundary at the I-5
west to SR 150 in Ventura County is also designated an "Eligible
State Scenic Highway". The proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay
Zone and UDC amendments will not affect existing City
development standards, codes and ordinances regarding development
of or near Scenic Highways. Therefore, the proposed Homeless
Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments would have no
significant impacts on scenic resources within a state scenic highway.
c.) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed amendments and
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 20 of 30
development standards would be applied to all future homeless
shelter development within the City. Homeless Shelter projects
based on the proposed specific development standards would be in
character with current UDC. Therefore, the proposed Homeless
Shelter Overlay Zone and amendments would have a less than
significant impact on the visual character or quality of site and
surroundings.
d.) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone and UDC amendments do not alter the City standards
for outdoor lighting and would not be a new source of light or glare.
The proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments
are anticipated to have a less than significant impact on light and
glare.
II. AGRICULTURE
a. -c.) No Impact — The proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone
RESOURCES
and modifications to the UDC will not affect any farmland identified
by the California Resources Agency, farmland designated under a
Williamson Act Contract, and will not convert any farmland to non-
agricultural use. Therefore, the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay
Zone and UDC amendments are anticipated to have no impact on
agricultural resources.
III. AIR QUALITY
a.) Less than Significant Impact: The City of Santa Clarita is
within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is bounded by the
San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north
and east, and the Pacific Ocean to the south and west. The air quality
in the SCAB is managed by the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD).
The SCAB has a history of recorded air quality violations and is an
area where both state and federal ambient air quality standards are
exceeded. Because of the violations of the California Ambient Air
Quality Standards (CAAQS), the California Clean Air Act requires
triennial preparation of an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP).
The AQMP analyzes air quality on a regional level and identifies
region -wide attenuation methods to achieve the air quality standards.
These region -wide attenuation methods include regulations for
stationary -source polluters; facilitation of new transportation
technologies, such as low -emission vehicles; and capital
improvements, such as park-and-ride facilities and public transit
improvements.
The most recently adopted plan is the 2007 AQMP, adopted on June
1, 2007. This plan is the South Coast Air Basin's portion of the State
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 21 of 30
Implementation Plan (SIP). This plan is designed to implement the
California Clean Air Act an in turn implement the Federal Clean Air
Act administered by the EPA. The AQMP accommodates population
growth and transportation projections based on the predictions made
by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).
Thus, projects that are consistent with employment and population
forecasts are consistent with the AQMD.
The proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and changes to the
UDC will not alter any of the aforementioned measures directly. The
proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments are
consistent with Zoning and General Plan Land Use designations. The
proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments are
consistent with, and will have no effect on, the growth expectations
for the region and are therefore consistent with the 2007 AQMP.
Subsequent homeless shelter development projects within the City
may affect the local air quality in the future. The potential air quality
impacts of future development projects however, are too speculative
to evaluate at this time. Regardless, subsequent homeless shelter
development projects will be required to adhere to the General Plan
and standards set forth in the UDC. Future homeless shelter
development is therefore also anticipated to be consistent with the
AQMP and is not expected to result in significant environmental
impacts.
b.) Less than Significant Impact: Santa Clarita is located in a non -
attainment area, an area that frequently exceeds national ambient air
quality standards. However, the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay
Zone and UDC amendments do not affect the South Coast Air
Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) land use, construction,
and mobile emission thresholds for significant air quality impacts,
according to the 1993 updated SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality
Handbook. Therefore, no significant impact to air quality standards
is anticipated as a result of the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay
Zone and UDC amendments.
c.) Less than Significant Impact: As discussed is Section III.b), the
proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments
would not exceed the thresholds of significance established by the
SCAQMD. The SCQAMD established these thresholds in
consideration of cumulative air pollution in the SCAB. As such,
projects that do not exceed the SCAQMD's thresholds are not
considered- to significantly contribute to cumulative air quality
impacts. The proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and
amendments to the UDC do not propose development; however, any
future development will be evaluated pursuant to CEQA and assess
A--
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 22 of 30
project related air quality impacts. Therefore, no impact to ambient
air quality is anticipated as a result of the proposed Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone and UDC amendments.
d.) Less than Significant Impact: Certain residents, such as the
very young, the elderly and those suffering from certain illnesses or
disabilities, are particularly sensitive to air pollution and are
considered sensitive receptors. In addition, active park users, such as
participants in sporting events, are sensitive air pollutant receptors
due to increased breathing rates. Land uses where sensitive air
pollutant receptors congregate include schools, day care centers,
parks, recreational areas, medical facilities, rest homes, and
convalescent care facilities.
The proposal does not include any physical development at this time.
The proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments
may apply to future development projects within the City. However,
the proposed amendments and Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone do not
remove any odor -related regulations and would not foreseeable lead
to a change in the generation of odor. Additionally, the proposed
amendments would not place sensitive land uses adjacent to
substantial air pollution sources. Therefore, the proposed Homeless
Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments would have no air
quality impacts on sensitive receptors.
e.) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone and UDC amendments will. not locate any land use
adjacent to an odor producing facility or use. The proposed
amendments are regulatory in nature and all future land uses must
comply with all applicable regulations of the AQMD and the City of
Santa Clarita General Plan and UDC. Therefore, the proposed
Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments would ,have
no significant odor -related impacts.
IV. BIOLOGICAL a. -d.), Less than Significant Impact - The proposed changes to the
RESOURCES UDC and the creation of a Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone do not
include the modification of any habitat and would not otherwise
affect any candidate, sensitive or special status species identified by
the Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Further, the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and
UDC amendments will not have any adverse affect on any riparian
habitat or wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
The proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC changes will
help to guide future development within the City in regards to
Transitional Housing, Supportive Housing and Homeless Shelters,
will alter land use entitlements for related homeless shelter
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 23 of 30
developments, and would not remove environmental review
requirements or necessary entitlements for any future developments.
In addition, there is no proposed alteration to any wildlife corridor or
migratory fish corridor proposed and no change to any regulation or
code protecting such resources. Therefore, the proposed Homeless
Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments would not cause
significant impacts to sensitive species, sensitive natural community,
riparian habitat, or wetlands.
e.) Less than Significant Impact — The City of Santa Clarita has an
Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance that regulates the development
adjacent to and under oak trees. The Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone
and UDC amendments to not alter or change the Oak Tree
Preservation Ordinance. Therefore, no significant impact to oak trees
is anticipated with the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and
UDC amendments.
f. -g.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed UDC
modifications propose no alterations to any local or regional habitat
conservation plan. In addition, the proposed UDC modifications will
not affect any property designated as an SEA (Significant Ecological
Area) or SNA (Significant Natural Area) on the City's ESA
(Environmentally Sensitive Area) Delineation Map. Therefore, no
significant impact is anticipated with respect to any SEA or SNA as
identified on the City's ESA map.
V. CULTURAL a. -d.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed Homeless
RESOURCES Shelter Overlay Zone and changes to the UDC will not have a
significant impact on cultural resources in the City of Santa Clarita.
The proposed modifications to the UDC will not alter any unique
geological feature, paleontological resource, any human remains or
affect any historical or archeological resource. The proposed
Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments will govern
subsequent residential development activity, which may impact
cultural resources. However, the potential impact of future
development is too speculative to evaluate at this time; and all future
development activity within the established areas would be required
to comply with Goal 10 of the City's Open Space and Conservation
Element, to protect the historical and culturally significant resources,
which contribute to community identity and a sense of history.
Therefore, a less than significant impact to archeological, historical
or cultural resource would be caused by the proposed Homeless
Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments.
Al. GEOLOGY AND a. t -iv) Less than Significant Impact — Southern California has
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Noe 24 of 30
SOILS numerous active and potentially active faults that could affect the
City. As stated in the City's General Plan, the City is susceptible to
geologic hazards in the event of a mayor earthquake (magnitude 8.3)
along the San Andreas Fault. This could result in ground failure and
liquefaction. However, the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone
and modifications to the UDC would not change the requirements of
future development to follow all state and City building
codes/regulations. Therefore, the proposed Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone and UDC amendments would have a less than
significant impact related to exposure of people or structures to any
adverse effects of seismic activity.
b.- i.) Less that Significant Impact — The proposed Homeless
Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC modifications will not result in any
erosion or location of structures on or near unstable soil, expansive or
otherwise. The proposal would not affect requirements of future
developments to comply with all state and city building
codes/regulations. Therefore, the proposal would have a less than
significant impact with respect to erosion, unstable or expansive soil,
or any topographical features.
VII. HAZARDS AND a. -d.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed Homeless
HAZARDOUS Shelter Overlay Zone and changes to the UDC would not directly
MATERIALS expose people to health hazards or hazardous materials and would
not interfere with any emergency response plans. Subsequent
developments in the city would be required to comply with the City's
General Plan and development codes and federal, state, and local
hazardous material regulations. Furthermore, no development is
associated with the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and
UDC modifications, and potential future effects would only occur as
a subsequent affect of future on-site development. Therefore, a less
than significant impact to hazardous materials is anticipated with the
proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC modifications.
e. -f.) No Impact — The proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and
UDC amendments includes no change to land use or development
standards for land within 2 miles of an airport and airfield or
otherwise within an airport land use plan. Further, no airport of
airfield is located within 2 miles of the City boundaries. Therefore,
the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments
would not affect the risks of land uses adjacent to airports or airfields
and the proposal would have no related impacts.
g.) Less than Significant Impact — No development is associated
with Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone. Future development of any
homeless shelter would be subject to all health and safety
^ � 1
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 25 of 30
4-a
requirements and emergency response plans. Therefore the proposed
Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments would not
affect the implementation of emergency response plans, and would
have a less than significant impact.
h.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone and UDC amendments would not directly increase the
risks of wildland fires, and would not change the regulations or
development standards governing development adjacent to wildlands.
Therefore, the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC
amendments would have a less than significant impact.
VIII. HYDROLOGY
a. -b.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed project would
AND WATER
not impact water quality standards, nor affect groundwater supplies.
QUALITY
The proposed project is an amendment and zone for a specific
residential (homeless shelter) land use provisions, and will not be
responsible for direct development impacts. However, subsequent
development projects would be required to comply with the
development impact standards put forth in the City's General Plan
and all Clean Water Act Requirements, including the National
Pollutant discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Therefore, the
project will have a less than significant impact to water quality or
ground water supplies.
c. -l.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed changes to the
UDC and Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone are anticipated to have a
less than significant impact on any 100 -year flood hazard area,
tsunami, drainage pattern, or runoff of Stormwater Management
systems. As mentioned previously, the proposed project is an
amendment and zone for a specific homeless shelter land use
provisions, and will not be responsible for direct development
impacts. However, subsequent development projects in the
Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone would be required to comply with
the standards put forth in the City's General Plan and all Clean Water
Act Requirements, including the National Pollutant discharge
Elimination System (NPDES). Furthermore, the proposed Homeless
Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments would not change any
hydrology or water quality -related codes, laws, permits, or
regulations. Therefore, the project will have a less than significant
impact. ;
IX. LAND USE AND
a.) Less than Significant Impact: No established community would
PLANNING
be disrupted or physically divided due to the proposed project, as the
project proposes changes to the UDC related to homeless shelters and
transitional housing. The project in and of itself would not impose
4-a
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 26 of 30
41
any physical barriers on any existing and established community.
therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
b.) Less than Significant Impact: The purpose of the proposed
Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments is primary to
comply with SB2. SB2 requires that cities adopt a zone or zones
where a year round homeless shelter would be permitted by right. The
proposed amendments to the UDC establish development standards
for homeless shelters, as well as add the State definition for
Supportive Housing and Transitional Housing to the UDC. No
development activity will be authorized at this time. Therefore, a less
than significant impact related to land use and planning is anticipated
with the proposed Homeless Shelter and amendments to the UDC.
c.) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone and UDC amendments do not affect current City
standards regarding habitat conservation plans, natural community
preservation plans, and/ or the policies of agencies with jurisdiction
over resources and resource areas within the City. Any future
development project under the Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone would
be subject to the standards and regulations established by the City and
other agencies. Therefore, the project would have a less than
significant impact on conservation plans.
X. MINERAL AND
a. -c.) Less than Significant Impact — Gold mining and oil
ENERGY
production historically have been the principal mineral extraction
RESOURCES
activities in and around the Santa Clarita Valley. Other minerals
found in the planning area include construction aggregate, titanium,
and tuff. Mineral resources and extraction areas are shown in Exhibit
OS -5 of the City's General Plan. No modifications to the UDC are
proposed at this time with respect to current mining operations within
the city and will not affect mineral resources in the city. Therefore,
no significant impact related to mineral and energy resources is
anticipated.
XI. NOISE
a. -d.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed Homeless
Shelter Overlay Zone and modifications to the UDC will not expose
persons to the generation of excess' noise levels, groundborne
vibration, or increase ambient noise in the City of Santa Clarita. The
UDC modification and Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone, in fact, do
not propose any development at this time and therefore, there would
be no impact to noise levels in the city. The proposed amendments
may apply to future development projects within the City. The
proposed amendments and Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone do not
remove any noise -related regulations and would not foreseeable lead
41
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 27 of 30
'iL
to a change in the generation of noise at this time. Therefore, no
significant impact is anticipated with relation to noise.
e. -f.) No Impact — There are no airports, airfields, or airport land use
plans within the City. Therefore, the proposed Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone and UDC amendments would cause no impacts related
to airport noise.
XII. POPULATION
a. -c.) Less than Significant Impact — Growth -inducing impacts are
AND HOUSING
caused by those characteristics of a project that foster or encourage
population and/or economic growth. These characteristics include
adding residential units or businesses, expanding infrastructure, and
generating employment opportunities. The proposed project is a
regulatory adjustment that would modify the City's UDC related to
homeless shelters and transitional/supportive housing, and does not
include any development activity at this time. The amendments
would permit homeless shelters within areas of the City identified
under the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone. Any new facility
would be subject to the development standards set forth in the
proposed amendments and consistent with SB2. Furthermore, the
proposed project would not otherwise induce growth by the
expanding the capacity of the roadway network or utility
infrastructure. Therefore, although the proposed project would permit
homeless shelters within the City, the project would not cause
significant growth inducing impacts. The proposed Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone and UDC modifications would not alter the City's
population projections and are consistent with the City's General
Plan. Therefore, the project would have no significant impacts to
population and housing.
XIII. PUBLIC
a)i. Less than Significant Impact — The proposed project will not
SERVICES
directly increase the need for fire protection services. However, any
future development would be subject to development fees, which are
established to compensate for growth. Since, the proposed Homeless
Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments are not anticipated to
have an immediate impact on fire protection services, and future
development would remain subject to development fees, the project
would have no significant impact to fire services.
a)ii. Less than Significant Impact — The proposed Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone and UDC amendments are not anticipated to directly
increase the need for police services. However, any future
development would be subject to development fees, which are
established to compensate for growth. Since, the proposed Homeless
Shelter and UDC amendments would have no immediate impact on
'iL
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 28 of 30
y3
police services, and future development would remain subject to
development fees, the project would have no significant impact to
police services.
a) iii. Less than Significant Impact — The proposed project is not
anticipated to directly increase the population of the City of Santa
Clarita. However, any future residential development would be
subject to school development fees, which are established to
compensate for growth. Since, the proposed change UDC
amendments and creation of the Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone
would have no immediate impact on school services, and future
development would be subject to school development fees, the
project is anticipated to have a less than significant impact to school
services. ,
a)iv. Less than Significant Impact — The proposed project is not
anticipated to directly increase number of persons using public parks.
However, any future development would be subject to park impact
fees, which are established to compensate for residential growth.
Since, the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC
amendments would have no immediate impact on parks, and future
development would remain subject to park impact fees, the
amendments are anticipated to have a less than significant impact to
parks.
XIV. RECREATION
a. -b.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed changes to the
UDC and Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone will not have any impact
on recreational amenities within the City of Santa Clarita. The
proposed project is a regulatory adjustment and does not include any
development activities at this time. Any subsequent development
would be required to comply with the Parks and Recreation Element
in the City's General Plan and would be subject to the City's park
impact fees. Therefore, no significant impact to recreation is
anticipated with the proposed UDC modifications.
XV.
a. -b.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed amendments to
TRANSPORTATION /
the UDC and creation of the Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone are
TRAFFIC
regulatory in nature and are not anticipated to have immediate
developmental impacts that alter traffic load or capacity on street
systems. Future development activity in the city would be regulated
by the City's UDC, General Plan, and transportation policies. Future
projects would be subject to additional CEQA review to determine
project related impacts and potential mitigation measures. However,
at this time, since no development is being approved, a less than
significant impact to traffic is anticipated as a result of the proposed
y3
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 29 of 30
44>
Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments.
c. -h.) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed amendments to
the UDC do not authorize any development at this time. Therefore,
the proposed amendments would have no impacts on City traffic
systems including emergency routes, parking capacity, pedestrian or
bicycle routes, air traffic patterns, or increase hazards due to a design
feature or incompatible use. Future development projects would be
required to comply with the Circulation Element of the City's
General Plan, the City's roadway design and parkway standards, and
all adopted policies, plans, and programs supporting alternative
transportation. Therefore, the proposed amendments and Homeless
Shelter Overlay Zone would have a less than significant impact on
traffic.
XVI. UTILITIES AND
a. -g.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed Homeless
SERVICE SYSTEMS
Shelter Zone and amendments to the City's Unified Development
Code do not include any development at this time. Therefore, the
project would not result in the construction of new water facilities,
expansion of existing facilities, affect drainage patterns, water
treatment services, and furthermore, no impacts to the City's landfill
capacity would occur. Any subsequent development would be
required to comply with the City's General Plan and the requirements
of the Regional Water Quality Control Board and all applicable
utility purveyors. Compliance with these requirements would ensure
all federal, state and local statutes and imposed regulations are met.
Therefore, a less than significant impact to utilities or service systems
is anticipated with the proposed amendments and Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone.
XVII. MANDATORY
a. -c.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed Homeless
FINDINGS OF
Shelter Overlay Zone amendments to the UDC are not anticipated to
SIGNIFICANCE
have a significant impact on the environment that would lead to a
substantial reduction in habitat of a fish or wildlife species, or reduce
or restrict the number of rare, threatened or endangered species. The
proposal does not involve any physical development at this time.
The proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC amendments
may apply to future development projects within the City. However,
the proposed amendments do not remove any established City
regulations that protect any plant and animal species. Due to the
nature of the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and UDC
amendments, the proposal would not contribute to any cumulative
impacts and would not cause environmental effects that would
adversely affect humans. Rather, the proposed Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone and UDC amendments are intended to guide future
44>
Master Case 09-002
Zone Change 09-001, Initial Study 09-001
Page 30 of 30
S \CD\CURRENn'2009\09-002 (SB2 Homeless Shelter Zone)\Initial Study doe
7 � i
development throughout the city. Therefore, the proposed project
would have no significant impact that could result in a Mandatory
Findings f Significance.
XVIII. DEPARTMENT
a.) No Impact — The legislative intent of the Department of Fish and
OF FISH AND GAME
`DE
Game `De Minimus' Finding is "to extend the current user -based
MINIMUS'
FINDING
funding system by allocating the transactional costs of wildlife
protection and management to those who would consume those
resources through urbanization and development..." (AB 3158,
Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990, effective January 1, 1991, Section
1(c)). However, the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and
UDC amendments would not entitle any new development; and any
future development proposal seeking discretionary approval would
remain subject to CEQA and the CDFG Code. Since, the proposed
amendments are not anticipated to have a significant adverse effect
either individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife resources, the
project's impacts on fish and wildlife are de minimus.
S \CD\CURRENn'2009\09-002 (SB2 Homeless Shelter Zone)\Initial Study doe
7 � i
h
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
STAFF REPORT
MASTER CASE NO. 09-002
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 09-001
ZONE CHANGE 09-001
DATE: February 17, 2009
TO: Chairperson Kennedy and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Paul D. Brotzman, Director of Community Deveel pme
Lisa M. Webber, AICP, Planning Manage MW "
CASE PLANNER: Jason Killebrew, Assistant Planner I (/
APPLICANT: City of Santa Clarita
LOCATION: Citywide
REQUEST: The City of Santa Clarita is requesting approval to amend various sections of
Chapter 17 of the City's Municipal Code (the Unified Development Code
(UDC)) and Zoning Map in order to meet the intent of Senate Bill 2. Proposed
amendments include creating a Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone where shelters
are permitted by right. In addition to the Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone, the
City is proposing to amend the UDC to define supportive and transitional
housing and create development standards for homeless shelter operation and
construction within the overlay.
BACKGROUND
On October 13, 2007, the Governor of California approved Senate Bill 2 (S132) to amend
Sections 65582, 65583, and 65589.5 of the Government Code, related to local planning. The
amended Planning and Zoning Law requires that local jurisdictions amend zoning laws to meet
the intent of SB2, with regard to homeless shelters, supportive housing, and transitional housing.
The bill [Senate Bill 2] would add shelters to the housing element thus requiring a local
government to identify a zone or zones where shelters are allowed as a permitted use without a
conditional use permit or other discretionary permit. (Government Code Section 66582, 65583,
65589.5)
The State requires that local governments identify a zone or zones to include capacity to
accommodate the need for at least one year-round shelter. The local government shall also
demonstrate that the existing or proposed permit processing, development, and management
standards are objective and encourage and facilitate the development of, or conversion to,
homeless shelters. In addition, the State requires that local jurisdictions provide development
opportunities for a variety of housing types including transitional and supportive housing.
Agenda Item: q.
Master Case 09-002
February 17, 2009
Page 2 of 4
Transitional housing is a type of housing used to facilitate the movement of homeless individuals
and families into permanent housing. The resident of the transitional home is limited to a stay of
up to two years while receiving supportive services that enable independent living. Supportive
housing is permanent rental housing linked to a range of support services designed to enable
residents to maintain stable housing and lead fuller lives.
Currently, the City of Santa Clarita Municipal Code does recognize transitional and supportive
housing types as permitted residential uses. However, the UDC does not have language
describing this recognition. In addition, homeless shelters are currently addressed in the UDC
and are allowed in the cc (Community Commercial) zone with approval of a Conditional Use
Permit, in the I (Industrial) and IC (Industrial Commercial) zone with the approval of a Minor
Use Permit (subject to a public hearing) and in the BP (Business Park) zone with the approval of
a Minor Use Permit. All existing requirements for locating Homeless Shelters will remain in
place with the exception of the areas located within the Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone where
no, discretionary permit would be required. It is important to note, however, that the construction
of a homeless shelter require a Development Review Permit, where the site plan, architecture,
floor plans, etc. would be reviewed to ensure compliance with the City's UDC.
On May 20, 2008 Planning staff presented to the Planning Commission the annual UDC
amendments. These amendments included adding definitions for supportive and transitional
housing as well as changes to permit homeless shelters in the BP zone by right without a
discretionary permit in, order to comply with S132. The Planning Commission approved staff's
recommendation by adopting Resolution P08-10 and recommending that the City Council
approve Master Case 08-038, consisting of Unified Development Code Amendment 08-001,
amending the UDC.
Since the May 20, 2008, Planning Commission hearing, City staff elected to remove the UDC
amendments regarding S132 from the City Council agenda to research alternatives to the original
proposal, and to meet with the City's Emergency Winter Task Force. Planning staff worked with
the City's Emergency Winter Shelter Task Force to identify where homeless shelters should be
permitted by right. Staff presented the original proposal to the Task Force to allow homeless
shelters by right in the Business Park Zone. In response to comments from the Task Force, staff
revised the original proposal to create an overlay zone on three specific business park areas in the
City (Valencia Industrial Center, Rye Canyon Business Park, and Centre Pointe Business Park).
For each of these three areas, staff also created 300 -foot buffers around public and private
schools and public parks. A buffer was also created along the eastern edge of the Centre Pointe
Business Park from the neighboring residential properties, where a homeless shelter would not
be permitted by right. The intent of creating these buffer areas is to maintain the character of
adjacent residential communities and schools.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Santa Clarita is preparing amendments to Chapter 17 of the City's Municipal Code
(the Unified Development Code (UDC)) and Zoning Map to create an overlay zone where
shelters are permitted by right. The proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone includes three
areas - the Valencia Industrial Center, Rye Canyon Business Park, and a portion of the Centre
a
Master Case 09-002
February 17, 2009
Page 3 of 4
Pointe Business Park. These areas of the City are located within the existing Business Park zone.
In addition to the Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone, the City is proposing to amend the UDC to
define supportive and transitional housing as a permitted residential use in order to meet the
intent of S132. In addition, the proposal includes specific development standards for the
construction and operation of homeless shelters within the overlay. A copy of the proposed
amendments and overlay zone has been provided as Exhibit "A" and the proposed Homeless
Shelter Overlay Zone Map as Exhibit "B".
ANALYSIS
The proposed amendments include the addition of language to: 1) reflect the State's mandate that
transitional and supportive housing are permitted residential uses; 2) create a Homeless Shelter
Overlay Zone; and 3) provide specific homeless shelter development standards within the overlay.
A description of these changes include:
• Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone Map
Create a Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone that identifies three areas of the City within the
existing Business Park Zone where homeless shelters are permitted by right.
• 17.07 Definitions
Create or modify definitions for "Transitional Housing" and "Supportive Housing"
pursuant to S132.
• 17.12 Use Type Classification
Create or modify Use Type Classifications and/or definitions for use types "Transitional
and Supportive Housing" to reflect the language of the State -required definition.
• 17.13 Permitted Use Chart
Indicate Transitional and Supportive Housing as permitted uses as in all Residential
zones, consistent with State regulations.
• 17.17 Special Uses and Standards
Specific Development Standards were created for Homeless Shelters consistent with State
regulations.
These amendments and proposed overlay zone are in substantial conformance with City and State
regulations. Attached is a copy of the proposed amendments (Exhibit "A" of the attached
resolution) and proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone Map (Exhibit "B"). Within Exhibit
"A", the amendments are indicated as follows:
Underlined sections indicate new wording to the UDC.
3
M
LA
Master Case 09-002
February 17, 2009
Page 4 of 4
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS
An Initial Study was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). The Initial Study determined that all impacts related to the proposed modifications are
considered to be less than significant. Therefore, a. Negative Declaration was prepared in
accordance with Section 15070 of CEQA. Future development guided by the proposed
modifications to the UDC would be required to complete environmental review in compliance
with CEQA.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
1) Open the public hearing;
2) Receive testimony from the public; and
3) Adopt Resolution P09-04 recommending that the City Council approve Master Case 09-
002, consisting of Unified Development Code Amendment 09-001 and Zone Change 09-
001 amending the Unified Development Code as described in the attached Exhibit "A"
and `B", and adopt the Negative Declaration prepared for the project.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution P09-04
Proposed UDC Amendment (Exhibit "A")
Proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone Map (Exhibit "B")
Negative Declaration and Initial Study
S \CMCURRENT�12009\09-002 (SB2 Homeless Shelter Zone)\PC Staff Report doc
RESOLUTION NO. P09-04
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA
CLARITA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE MASTER CASE
NO. 09-002 (UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT'CODE AMENDMENT 09-001, ZONE CHANGE
09-001) AND ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IN ORDER TO CREATE A
HOMELESS SHELTER OVERLAY ZONE AND AMEND SECTIONS OF TITLE 17
"ZONING" OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE IN THE CITY OF SANTA
CLARITA
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS OF FACT. The Planning Commission does hereby make the
following findings of fact:
a. On October 13, 2007, the Governor of California approved Senate Bill 2 (SB2) that
mandated local jurisdictions to amend zoning laws and identify a zone or zones to
include capacity to accommodate at least one year-round shelter. In addition, local
jurisdictions are required to allow transitional and supportive housing by right in all
residential zones;
b. On May 20, 2008, Planning staff presented to the Planning Commission the annual
Unified Development Code (UDC) amendments. These amendments included
adding definitions for supportive and transitional housing as well as changes to
permit homeless shelters by right in the BP (Business Park) zone. Since the May
20, 2008 Planning Commission meeting, staff elected to remove the UDC
amendments-regarding-SB21from the July -8-,2008 City Council Agenda to research
- -dlternatives to theoriginal-proposal, and to meet with the City's Emergency Winter
Task Force. Staff and the Task Force worked together to create the Homeless
Shelter Overlay Zone which includes three areas of the City (Valencia Industrial
Center, Rye Canyon Business Park, and Centre Pointe Business Park). In addition,
within the proposed Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone are 300 -foot buffers around
schools and residential areas, where homeless shelters would not be permitted by
right;
C. On January 6, 2009, the City of Santa Clarita initiated an application to create a
Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone and to revise certain sections of the UDC related to
transitional and supportive housing (Title 17 of the City of Santa Clarita Municipal
Code) (the "Project");
d. The project was reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) and was found to have a less than significant impact to the
environment and a Negative Declaration was prepared;
Resolution P09-04
Master Case 09-002
Page 2 of 4
e. The project was duly noticed in accordance with the public hearing noticing
requirements of the Unified Development Code on January 17, 2009;
f. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on this issue
commencing on February 17, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 23920 Valencia
Boulevard, Santa Clarita, California; and
g. At the hearing described above, the Planning Commission considered a staff
presentation, staff report, public testimony on the Unified Development Code
Amendments, and the Negative Declaration prepared for the project.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS. Based
upon the foregoing facts and findings, the Plarming Commission recommends the City Council
hereby find as follows:
a. An Initial Study,and a Negative Declaration, for this project have been'prepared in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. (CEQA);
b. The Initial Study has been circulated for review and comment by affected
governmental agencies and the public, and all comments received, if any, have been
considered. The Negative Declaration was posted and advertised on January 17,
2009, in accordance with CEQA. The public review period was opened fiom
January 17, 2009, through February 17, 2009;
C. There is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the
environment. The Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the
City of Santa Clarita;
d. The location of the documents and other material which constitutes the record of
proceedings upon which the decision of the Planning Commission is the Master
Case 09-002 project file within the Community Development Department and is in
the custody of the Director of Community Development; and
e. The Planning Commission, based upon the findings set forth above, hereby finds
that the Negative Declaration for this project has been prepared in compliance with
CEQA.
SECTION 3, UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT FINDINGS. Based
upon the foregoing facts and findings, the Planning Commission recommends the City Council
hereby find as follows:
a. The proposed Unified Development Code Amendments (Exhibit "A") and
Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone (Exhibit "B") are consistent with the objectives of
Resolution P09-04
Master Case 09-002
Page 3 of 4
the Development Code and the General Plan and will meet new State regulations.
SECTION 4. Based upon the testimony and other evidence, if any, received at the public
hearing, and upon studies and investigations made by the Planning Commission and on its behalf,
the Commission further finds and determines that this proposal is consistent with the City's
General Plan.
SECTION 5. The Planning Commission recommends the City Council hereby approve
Master Case 09-002; Unified Development Code Amendment 09-001 and Zone Change 09-001 to
modify various sections of the Unified Development Code and Homeless Shelter Overlay Zone,
attached as Exhibit "A" and Exhibit `B," and adopt the Negative Declaration prepared for the
project.
SECTION 6. The Planning Commission Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution and certify this record to be a full, complete, and correct copy of the action taken.
Resolution P09-04
Master Case 09-002
Page 4 of 4
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of February, 2009.
ATTEST:
LIS . WEBBER, AICP
CRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
I, Lisa M. Webber, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of
Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 17th day of February, 2009, by the following
vote of the Planning Commission:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BURKHART, JACOBSON, KENNEDY, OSTROM, TRAUTMAN
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
PL ING COMMISSION SECRETARY
S \MCURRENn12009\09-002 (SB2 Homeless Shelter Zone)\PC Resolution doe