HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-06-09 - AGENDA REPORTS - AMEND UDC ROOMING HOUSES (2)Agenda Item:
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
AGENDA REPORT
PUBLIC HEARING City Manager Approval:
Item to be presented by: Patrick Leclair
DATE: June 9, 2009
SUBJECT: AMENDMENTS TO 1) SECTIONS 17.12 AND 17.13 OF THE
CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ADDRESSING
ROOMING HOUSES IN SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
ZONES; 2) SECTIONS 17.07 OF THE CITY'S UNIFIED ,
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDING THE DEFINITION OF
FAMILY CONSISTENT WITH STATE REQUIREMENTS; AND 3)
TITLE 23 OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE CREATING
SECTION 23.50 FOR THE CREATION OF THE RESIDENTIAL
HIGH OCCUPANCY PERMIT (RHOP)
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
RECOMMENDED ACTION
City Council introduce and pass to second•reading an ordinance entitled, "AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE (UDC) TO INCLUDE (1) A NEW
DEFINITION FOR ROOMING HOUSES, (2) A PROHIBITION OF ROOMING HOUSES IN
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES, AND (3) MODIFYING THE EXISTING
DEFINITION OF "FAMILY" IN THE UDC, AND ADOPTING THE ASSOCIATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION".
Introduce and pass to second reading an ordinance entitled, "AN ORDINANCE
ESTABLISHING A RESIDENTIAL HIGH OCCUPANCY PERMIT (RHOP) FOR OWNERS
IN ALL RESIDENTIAL ZONES WHO RENT THEIR PROPERTIES TO MORE THAN SIX
PEOPLE 18 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER, AND ADOPTING THE ASSOCIATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION".
BACKGROUND
The process by which these amendments were developed resulted from a series of meetings from
June 2008 to the present between staff, Councilmember Kellar, and almost 70 members from the
Ordinance passed to
Second reading
fat Orc�;ncwrePs�
Monte Verde neighborhood group. This group discussed the issue of several property owners
within the Monte Verde neighborhood that had been renting individual rooms of their properties
to tenants. It was reported that these tenants were causing various nuisances and disrupting the
quality of life for neighborhood homeowners.
The neighborhood group requested the City take steps to abate the nuisances. In response, the
City's Community Preservation staff and the Sheriffs Department worked in tandem to help
resolve many of these issues through the enforcement of existing codes. In addition, the
neighborhood group brought several ordinances from other cities, designed to address and
prevent these types of issues, for staff to review and consider.
Subsequent to meetings with the Monte Verde neighborhood group, staff researched the various
methods other cities were using to remedy this problem. Staff, along with Councilmember
Kellar, continued to meet with members of the Monte Verde neighborhood group to report the
findings of this research and to discuss all possible options. One of the options that came from
this research was a model employed by the City of San Diego.
The model staff is proposing to the City Council for approval closely mirrors the City of San
Diego's approach. The first component, the Rooming House Ordinance, requires a change to the
City's Unified Development Code to define and prohibit rooming houses in single family
residential zones. The second component, the Residential High Occupancy Permit (RHOP),
establishes a permit process for owners who rent their properties to more than six people 18 years
of age or older.
UDC AMENDMENT - PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS
The following is a summary of the amendments proposed at this time. Throughout the following
amendments, the changes are noted as follows:
Underlined sections indicate new wording.
Str-ilethreugk sections indicate sections to be removed.
Staff is in the process of updating the City's Housing Element as a part of the One Valley,
One Vision General Plan process. The City is required to submit the Housing Element to
the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for
certification. As a part of their review, it was found that a minor modification to the
City's definition of "Family" was required to comply with the requirements of HCD.
Therefore, in accordance with the recommended action of the Planning Commission, staff
is proposing the following amendments to the definition of "Family" in Section 17.07.010
of the UDC in order to comply with the requirements of HCD for certification of the
Draft Housing Element for One Valley, One Vision:
"Family" shall mean one or more individuals living together as a single housekeeping
unit in a single dwelling unit. Family shall also mean the persons living together in a
licensed "residential facility" as that term is defined in California Health and Safety Code
Section 1502(a)(1), which services six (6) or fewer persons, excluding staff. ,,,hiding the
091
2. Staff is proposing to delete the definition of "Boarding House" and add the following
definition of "Rooming House" in the Use Type Classifications in Section 17.12 of the
UDC. Recently, staff has identified various single-family homes that have been rented to
an excessive number of tenants In some cases, these homes have been modified without
permits to provide individual access to each room, separate from the primary residential
entry. This amendment is not intended to affect group care homes or any other housing
type protected by federal or California state law.
12. Rooming House — includes a dwelling unit (other than a hotel or motel) where three
or more rooms are rented individually or separately, to tenants under separate rental
agreements, resulting in multiple, independent living units where tenants do not share
common access or financial responsibility for use of the dwelling unit as a whole Rental
agreements may be written or oral. Rent may be paid in money, goods labor, or
otherwise. Housing protected by federal or State law, including housing for persons
protected under the Fair Housing Act (42 USC Section 66040 and the California Fair
Housing Act (California Government Code Section 12920 et seq.) or housing otherwise
subject to treatment as a single family dwelling unit by the provisions of State law shall
not constitute a Rooming House.
In addition to the new definition of "Rooming House," staff is proposing to modify
Section 17.13.010 of the Permitted Use Chart to add the establishment of "Rooming
Houses" as permitted uses in the Residential Moderate, Residential Medium High, and
Residential High zones only.
In order to ensure orderly transition of any existing uses that may conflict with the
proposed amendments, staff is proposing the City Council consider the adoption of a
two-year amortization period from the effective date of these regulations. This will
temporarily make existing "Rooming Houses" non -conforming uses, thereby requiring
them to be brought into compliance with the proposed amendments within the two-year
amortization period.
MUNICIPAL CODE - PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS
The following is a summary of the amendments proposed at this time. These amendments are
shown through the addition of Section 23.50 to the Municipal Code:
Staff is proposing a required Residential High Occupancy Permit (RHOP) to be
obtained by property owners of any single-family dwelling unit that is rented or leased
and occupied by six or more persons 18 years of age or older. This requirement is not
tied to the number of leases, but rather to the number of persons living within the
residential unit. Thus, if a property owner maintains one lease within a single-family
dwelling that allows for six or more persons (related or non -related) over 18 years of
age to reside, the property owner would be subject to the RHOP requirement.
However, the RHOP will not be required of property owners who can demonstrate
3
their dwelling unit(s) are exempt from these regulations by federal or state law.
2. Staff is also proposing that the owners of properties subject to the RHOP requirement
file for the RHOP on an annual basis. In order for the City to ensure the health,
safety, and well-being of its residents, the applicant must demonstrate that his/her
property provides one off-street parking space per occupant 18 years of age or older
on the premises, and that the property also complies with all applicable zoning and
building codes.
3. Additionally, staff is proposing a revocation of the RHOP whereby two or more code
violations, within a span of 12 months, have been determined to exist. Further, staff
is proposing that violations of the RHOP requirements may also be punishable by
misdemeanor.
4. In order to ensure the orderly transition of any existing uses that may conflict with the
proposed additions, staff is asking that the City Council adopt a one-year amortization
period from the effective date of these regulations. This will temporarily make
properties meeting the requirements for a Residential High Occupancy Permit
non -conforming, thereby requiring them to be brought into compliance with the
proposed amendments within the one-year amortization period.
5. Staff is proposing that City Council adopt a fee to be attached with the Residential
High Occupancy Permit during the amortization period. Further, staff also is
proposing that a fee waiver for economic hardship may be requested with the RHOP
application and shall be granted where a property owner demonstrates their annual
income (including rental income) is less than the area median income.
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. The Initial Study and Negative Declaration were
circulated for public review from April 14, 2009 to May 5, 2009.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Other action as determined by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
Implementation of the proposed ordinances will be administered by the existing staff of the
Planning Division, Community Preservation Division, and Building and Safety Division. A
permit fee will be established for the RHOP process and will be administered by the Building
and Safety Division. The permit fee for the RHOP will cover the cost of issuing the RHOP and
associated inspection requirements for permit issuance.
ATTACHMENTS
Ordinance - Unified Development Code Amendments
Ordinance - Municipal Code Amendments
Initial Study available in the City Clerk's Reading File
S
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 91h day of June, 2009, at or after 6:00 p.m. to consider the approval of
amendments to various sections of the City's Municipal Code including amendments to
the Municipal Code and the Unified Development Code. The proposed amendment to
the Municipal Code would create the Residential High Occupancy Permit (RHOP) that
would require property owners to obtain an RHOP from the City if a single-family
dwelling is rented or leased to more than six persons age 18 or older. Further, the
proposed amendment outlines the permit process, development standards, and
enforcement regulations for the RHOP. The proposed amendment to the Unified
Development Code creates a definition of the "Rooming House", prohibiting them in all
zones with the exception of the multiple family residential zones within the City.
A DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION has been prepared for this project. The
document is available for a public review period, during which the City of Santa Clarita
Community Development Department will receive comments, beginning at 12:00 p.m. on
May 11, 2009 and ending at 12:00 p.m. on June 9, 2009. During the public review period
a copy of the draft negative declaration and all supporting documents will be located at
the Planning Division public counter located in the City Hall Building at 23920 Valencia
Boulevard, Suite 302, Santa Clarita, CA 91355. A copy of the draft negative declaration
(without all supporting documents) will be posted at the Los Angeles County Library,
Valencia Branch during the public review period noted above.
Proponents, opponents and any interested persons may appear and be heard on this matter
at that time. Further information may be obtained by contacting the Community
Development Department, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302, Santa Clarita, CA
91355; (661) 255-4330, Patrick Leclair, Associate Planner.
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: May 7, 2009
Sharon L. Dawson, MMC'
City Clerk
Publish Date: May 11, 2009
S \pbs\current\20081\08-038\08-038 CC Notice
ORDINANCE NO. 09 -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA,
CALIFORNIA, PROTECTING PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELL-BEING WITH
RESPECT TO ROOMING HOUSES BY AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE SANTA CLARITA
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 17.12.030, AND 17.12.040, "USE TYPE
CLASSIFICATIONS" AND SECTION 17.13.010 "PERMITTED USE CHART", AND WITH
RESPECT TO THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY BY AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE SANTA
CLARITA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 17.07.010 "DEFINITIONS".
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA,
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council finds, based upon information provided in the staff
report accompanying this Ordinance, as well as evidence and testimony presented at the meeting
where this Ordinance was considered, that the transient, multiple occupant/multiple lease nature
of Rooming Houses creates impacts on surrounding neighborhoods that are distinct from those of
residences occupied by owners, or persons sharing a household under one or two leases. More
specifically, the City has received multiple complaints from neighbors living near Rooming
Houses concerning crime, parking, noise, trash, and maintenance issues. Several Rooming
Houses in single family residential neighborhoods have consumed a great deal of code
enforcement and police resources in responding to complaints. Both the sheriffs and Code
Enforcement have cited the owners of Rooming Houses for multiple maintenance and building
code violations. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council determines that Rooming Houses
are a for profit endeavor that are inconsistent with the character of single family residential uses
and further determines that Rooming Houses should not be located in single family residential
neighborhoods.
SECTION 2. Section 17.12.030 of the Santa Clarita Municipal Code is amended to
include "Rooming House" in the listing of Residential Use Types.
SECTION 3. Section 17.12.040 of the Santa Clarita Municipal Code is amended to
include the following definition under Residential "Use Type Classifications:
"Rooming House --means a dwelling unit (other than a hotel or motel) where three or more
rooms are rented individually or separately, to tenants under separate rental agreements, resulting
in multiple, independent living units where tenants do not share common access or financial
responsibility for use of the dwelling unit as a whole. Rent may be paid in money, goods, labor,
or otherwise. Rental agreements may be written or oral. Housing protected by federal or state
law, including housing for persons protected under the Fair Housing Act (42 USC section
3604(F) and the California Fair Housing Act (California Government Code section 12920 et
seq.), or housing otherwise subject to treatment as a single family dwelling unit by the provisions
of state law shall not constitute a Rooming House."
SECTION 4. The permitted use chart in Section 17.13.010 is amended to read as
follows:
Section 17.13.010 Residential Use Types.
Residential Use Types A RE LV RL RS RM HM RH CT CC CN C
1.
Rooming House*
X
X
X
X
X
P**
P**
P**
X
X
X
N
2.
Caretaker's Residence (6)
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
3.
Community Care Facility
X
X
X
X
X
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
4.
Dwelling
a Single -Family
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
X
X
X
N
b Two -Family
X
X
X
X
X
P
P
P
X
X
X
N
c Multifamily
X
X
X
X
X
P(19
P(19
P(19
C
C
X
N
5.
Family Day Care Homes
a Adult—up to six (6)
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
X
N
. adults
b Family—up to fourteen
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
X
N
. (14) children
6.
Fraternity/Sorority Houses
X
X
X
X
X
C
C
C
X
X
X
N
(18)
7.
Home Occupation Business
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
X
N
8.
Joint Living/Working
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
C
C
C
C
Quarters
9.
Model Homes
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
X
N
1
Mobilehome Park
X
X
X
X
C
C
C
C
X
C
X
N
0.
1
Residential Health Care
X
X
X
X
X
C
C
C
C
C
C
N
1.
Facility
1
Residential Service/Care
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
X
X
X
N
2.
Home
1
Second Units
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
X
X
X
N
3.
1
P = Permitted, M = Minor Use Permit, C = Conditional Use Permit, X = Prohibited
Numbers contained in parentheses refer to notes found at the end of the chapter
* Rooming house regulations effective as of per Ordinance No.
** Rooming houses are not permitted in neighborhoods that are comprised predominantly of single family det
Residential Use Types CO VS BP IC I PE OS MH SP
LU
P
1. Rooming House* X X
X X X X X X X
2. Caretaker's Residence (6) P P
P P P P(18 P(17) P(16 (13)
3. Community Care Facility C X
X X X X X C(16 (13)
4. Dwelling
a Single -Family X X
X X X X P(14,17) P(16 (13)
b Two -Family X X
X X X X X X (13)
c Multifamily X X
X X X X X X (13)
5. Family Day Care Homes
a Adult—up to six (6) X X
X X X X X P(16 (13)
. adults
)
b Family—up to fourteen X X
X X X X X P(16 (13)
(14) children
)
6. Fraternity/Sorority Houses X X
X X X C X X (13)
(18)
7. Home Occupation Business X X
X X X P(18 P(17) P (13)
8. Joint Living/Working C X
C C C X X X (13)
Quarters
9. Model Homes X X
X X X X X M (13)
1 Mobilehome Park X X
X X X X X P(16 (13)
0.
)
1 Residential Health Care X X
C C X X X C(16 (13)
1. Facility
)
1 Residential Service/Care X X
X X X X X P(16 (13)
2. Home
)
1 Second Units X X
X X X X X X (13)
3.
* Rooming house regulations effective as of
per Ordinance No.
SECTION 5. In order to ensure the orderly transition of any uses that may conflict with
the provisions of this Ordinance and to provide sufficient time for property owners to come into
conformity with the terms of this Ordinance, this Ordinance shall not take effect until two years
after its final passage (the "Effective Date").
Notwithstanding any section of the Santa Clarita
Municipal Code to the contrary, any use in
existence as of the date of the adoption of this
Ordinance shall not be considered a legal non -conforming use as of the Effective Date of this
Ordinance, but shall instead be deemed to be illegal and fully amortized as of the Effective Date
of this Ordinance.
SECTION 6. In order to comply with the requirements of the State of California
Department of Housing and Community Development, the definition of "Family" in Section
17.07.010 of the Santa Clarita Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
"Family" shall mean one or more individuals living together as a single housekeeping
unit in a single dwelling unit. Family shall also mean the persons living together in a licensed
"residential facility" as that term is defined in California Health and Safety Code Section
1502(a)(1), which services six (6) or fewer persons, excluding staff.
SECTION 7. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or
portion of this Ordinance, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision
of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this
Ordinance and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof,
irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences,
clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 8. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days from its
passage and adoption.
SECTION 9. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance and shall
cause the same to be published as required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of )2009.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
E
/e�•(�)�
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
I, Sharon L. Dawson, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance 09- was regularly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on the day of, 2009. That thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day
of , 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 and
was published in The Signal newspaper in accordance with State Law (G.C. 40806).
CITY CLERK
5
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 09- , adopted by the City Council of the City of
Santa Clarita, CA on , 2009, which is now on file in my office.
Witness my hand and seal of the City of Santa Clarita, California, this day of
)2009.
Sharon L. Dawson, MMC
City Clerk
By
Susan L. Caputo, CMC
Deputy City Clerk
2
ORDINANCE NO. 09 -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, PROTECTING PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND
WELL-BEING WITH RESPECT TO HIGH OCCUPANCY SINGLE DWELLING UNITS BY
ADDING CHAPTER 23.50, "RESIDENTIAL HIGH OCCUPANCY LICENSING AND
REGISTRATION" TO
TITLE 23, OF THE SANTA CLARITA MUNICIPAL CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA,
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. RECITALS. THE CITY COUNCIL FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
The City Council, based upon information provided in the staff report accompanying this
Ordinance, as well as evidence and testimony presented at the meeting where this Ordinance was
considered, that the renting of a residence to six or more adults creates unique parking demands
upon neighborhoods that need to be addressed to avoid a situation where a property owner's use
of their property does not unduly burden surrounding properties.
Further, based upon the experience of the City's code enforcement staff, the renting of a
residence to six or more adults increased the likelihood that interior modifications to the
residence are made, such as the installation of additional walls, doors, locks, and the modification
of electrical systems, without appropriate permitting. Such modifications involve inherent safety
risks that jeopardize the safety of not only the occupants of such residences, but surrounding
properties as well. Thus, a mechanism to allow for inspections of such residences is needed to
protect both the health and safety of the occupants of such residences, as well as the
neighborhood around such residences
SECTION 2. CHAPTER 23 OF THE SANTA CLARITA MUNICIPAL CODE IS
AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
"CHAPTER 23.50"
RESIDENTIAL HIGH OCCUPANCY LICENSING AND REGISTRATION
SECTIONS:
23.50.010 Purpose of Residential High Occupancy Permit
23.50.020 When a Residential High Occupancy Permit is Required
23.50.030 How to Apply for a Residential High Occupancy Permit
23.50.040 Decision on a Residential High Occupancy Permit
IZ
23.50.050 Issuance of a Residential High Occupancy Permit
23.50.060 Enforcement and Administrative Remedies
23.50.070 Enforcement by Designees
23.50.080 Violations Punishable
Section 23.50.010 Purpose of Residential High Occupancy Permit.
The purpose of these procedures is to provide for annual review and inspection of high
occupancy single-family dwelling units for conformance with the applicable zoning and building
regulations by ensuring that high occupancy units provide adequate parking and minimize
impacts to adjacent properties.
Section 23.50.020 When a Residential High Occupancy Permit is Required.
(a) On, and after , 2010, a Residential High Occupancy Permit is required for any
single-family dwelling unit that is rented or leased (in whole or in part) and is occupied by more
than six persons that are eighteen years of age or older.
(1) Prior to the rental or sale of a single dwelling unit, the property owner shall
disclose the requirement for a Residential High Occupancy Permit to prospective tenants
or buyers.
(2) The Residential High Occupancy Permit requirement shall apply to a single
dwelling unit regardless of whether six or more persons eighteen years of age and older
resided in the dwelling unit prior to the effective date of this ordinance.
(b) Notwithstanding the foregoing, a Residential High Occupancy Permit shall not be
required for any dwelling unit that is exempt from such regulation by virtue of any state law.
Section 23.50.030 How to Apply for a Residential High Occupancy Permit.
(a) Within thirty days of an increase in a single-family dwelling unit occupancy, that is
rented in whole or in part, such that the occupancy meets or exceeds that set forth in Section
23.50.020 (a), a property owner shall apply for a Residential High Occupancy Permit in
accordance with Section 23.50.040.
(b) The Residential High Occupancy Permit application and applicable fees shall be
resubmitted annually by the property owner to ensure compliance with the provisions of this
division.
(c). A fee waiver for economic hardship may be requested with the permit application
and shall be granted where a property owner demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City Manager
that their annual income is less than the area median income.
(d). It is unlawful for any responsible person to violate any requirement of this Chapter.
13
Section 23.50.040 Application for a Residential High Occupancy Permit
An application for a Residential High Occupancy Permit shall demonstrate on submitted
plans that one off-street parking space per occupant eighteen years of age or older, will be
accommodated on the premises. In cases where an occupant eighteen years of age or older does
not have a vehicle or valid driver's license, the applicant shall provide evidence to the satisfaction
of the City Manager to demonstrate the need for a lower parking requirement, which shall be
documented in the permit record. The form of the application shall be approved by the City
Manager, or his designee. Review of the application may include an inspection of the premises
by designees of the City Manager for purposes of verifying the information contained in the
application, as well as confirming that the dwelling unit is in compliance with the provisions of
this Code. The application shall be submitted with the annual permit fee, as set by City Council
resolution.
Section 23.50.050 Issuance of a Residential High Occupancy Permit.
(a) The City Manager shall issue the Residential High Occupancy Permit when the
required fees have been paid (or a fee waiver is granted), a copy of the lease agreement(s) have
been provided where applicable, and the permit has been approved.
(b) A Residential High Occupancy Permit shall not be issued to a property with a
pending code violation case.
(c) The permit shall be valid for a twelve month period, except that an increase or the
number of vehicles in excess of that authorized under the permit shall require a new permit
application and fees.
(d) Once a permit is issued, the permittee shall apply for a renewal of the permit prior to
the permit's expiration. Such renewal shall require payment of the annual permit fee and may
include an inspection of the single family dwelling, at the discretion of the City Manager or his
designee.
Section 23.50.060 Enforcement and Administrative Remedies
(a) Violations of this Division are subject to the judicial and administrative enforcement
remedies identified in Title 23 of the Municipal Code
(b) Violations of this Division may also result in the revocation of a previously approved
Residential High Occupancy Permit, in the event that two or more code violations, within the last
twelve months, have been determined to exist either prior to or pursuant to the final adjudication
of any of the enforcement remedies available under Title 23 of the Municipal Code.
Section 23.50.070 Enforcement by Designees
Wherever in this Chapter enforcement authority is given to any City employee or officer,
such authority may be exercised by designees of those officers and employees.
ly
Section 23.50.080 Violations Punishable
Except as otherwise provided by this Chapter, violations of this Chapter are punishable as
set out in Sections 1.01.200 through 1.01.260 of the Municipal Code
SECTION 3. This Ordinance shall not take effect until thirty (30) days from its
passage and adoption.
SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or
portion of this Ordinance, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision
of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this
Ordinance and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof,
irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences,
clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this Ordinance and
shall cause a summary thereof to be published within fifteen (15) days of the adoption, including
the vote for and against the same, in accordance with Government Code § 36933.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2009.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
MAYOR
4 /-5
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
I, Sharon L. Dawson, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance 09- was regularly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on the day of, 2009. That thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day
of , 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 and
was published in The Signal newspaper in accordance with State Law (G.C. 40806).
CITY CLERK
5 /6
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 09- , adopted by the City Council of the City of
Santa Clarita, CA on , 2009, which is now on file in my office.
Witness my hand and seal of the City of Santa Clarita, California, this day of
52009.
Sharon L. Dawson, MMC
City Clerk
By
Susan L. Caputo, CMC
Deputy City Clerk
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
• __ ______ [X] Proposed [ ]Final
_ _________===
MASTER CASE NO: Master Case 09-045
1' 1 u /' 16310H
NAME: Unified Development Code Amendment 09-002
APPLICANT: City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Boulevard
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
LOCATION OF THE
PROJECT: Citywide
DESCRIPTION OF
THE PROJECT: The City of Santa Clarita is preparing amendments to the Municipal Code and
the Unified Development Code (UDC).
Amendments are proposed to Title 17 of the UDC that would create a defmition for a "Rooming House" and
would modify the definition of "Family". A Rooming House would be defined as "a dwelling unit (other than
a hotel or motel) where three or more rooms are rented individually or separately, to tenants under separate
rental agreements, resulting in multiple, independent living units where tenants do not share common access or
financial responsibility for use of the dwelling unit as a whole. Rent may be paid in money, goods, labor, or
otherwise. Housing protected by federal or state law, including housing for persons protected under the Fair
Housing Act (42 USC section 3604(F)) and the California Fair Housing Act (California Government Code
section 12920 et seq.), or housing otherwise subject to treatment as a single family dwelling unit by the
• provisions of state law shall not constitute a Rooming House". Rooming houses will be prohibited in all zones
with the exception of the Residential Moderate (RM), Residential Moderate High (RMH), and Residential
High_(RH)_zones.—An_amendment to_the_definition o£F_amily_is proposed to read as follows: "Family" shall
mean one or more individuals living together as a single housekeeping unit in a single dwelling unit. Family
shall also mean the persons living together in a licensed "residential Facility" as that term is defined in
California Health and Safety Code Section 1502(a)(1), which services six (6) or fewer persons, excluding staff.
In addition, amendments are proposed to add Chapter 23.50 Residential High Occupancy Licensing and
Registration to the Municipal Code. The proposed amendment would create the Residential High Occupancy
Permit (RHOP) process that would require property owners to obtain an RHOP from the City if a single-family
dwelling is rented or leased to more than six persons age 18 or older in all. Further, the proposed amendment
outlines the permit process, development standards, and enforcement regulations for the RHOP.
The proposed amendments are anticipated to be regulatory in nature and are not anticipated to create any new
construction or development opportunities in the City. However, any potential development as a result of the
amendments is too speculative at this time to predict or analyze. While the amendments could enable the
construction of rooming houses in the City in compliance with all required, on-site parking and development
standards, it is more likely that these amendments will serve to regulate the rental of existing residential
properties in the City. Potential impacts related to new development and previously undisturbed land as a
result is uncertain and speculative at this time. As a result, all impacts associated with new development will
need to be analyzed on a project by project basis to determine the potential impacts on the environment.
0
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 Planning and Building Services is
finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant effect upon the environment, and that a
Mitigated 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 MANA R
Prepared by: Patrick Leclair, Associate Planner
ignature) (Name/Title)
Approved by: / Sharon Sorensen, Senior Planner
(Signature) (Name/Title)
Public Review Period From April 14 2009 To May 5, 2009
Public Notice Given On April 13 2009
[X] Legal Advertisement [ ] Posting of Properties [ ] Written Notice
CERTIFICATION DATE:
S \CD\CURREN11'2009\RDA Negative Declaration doc
•
0
•
•
•
INITIAL STUDY
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
Project Title/Master Case Number:
Lead Agency name and address:
Contact person and phone number:
Project location:
Applicant's name and address:
General Plan designation:
Zoning:
MC 09-045
Unified Development Code Amendment 09-002
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 302
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Patrick Leclair
Associate Planner
(661) 255-4349
City Wide
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 302
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
N/A
N/A
Description of project and setting: The City of Santa Clarita is preparing amendments to the
Municipal Code and the Unified Development Code
(UDC).
Amendments are proposed to Title 17 of the UDC that
would create a definition for a "Rooming House" and
would modify the definition of "Family". A Rooming
House would be defined as "a dwelling unit (other than a
hotel or motel) where three or more rooms are rented
individually or separately, to tenants under separate
rental agreements, resulting in multiple, independent
living units where tenants do not share common access
or financial responsibility for use of the dwelling unit as
a whole. Rent may be paid in money, goods, labor, or
otherwise. Housing protected by federal or state law,
including housing for persons protected under the Fair
Housing Act (42 USC section 3604(F)) and the
California Fair Housing Act (California Government
Code section 12920 et seq.), or housing otherwise
subject to treatment as a single family dwelling unit by
the provisions of state law shall not constitute a
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 2 of 25
Rooming House". Rooming houses will be prohibited in •
all zones with the exception of the Residential Moderate
(RM), Residential Moderate High (RMH), and
Residential High (RH) zones. An amendment to the
definition of Family is proposed to read as follows:
"Family" shall mean one or more individuals living
together as a single housekeeping unit in a single
dwelling unit. Family shall also mean the persons living
together in a licensed "residential Facility" as that term
is defined in California Health and Safety Code Section
1502(a)(1), which services six (6) or fewer persons,
excluding staff.
In addition, amendments are proposed to add Chapter
23.50 Residential High Occupancy Licensing and
Registration to the Municipal Code. The proposed
amendment would create the Residential High
Occupancy Permit (RHOP) process that would require
property owners to obtain an RHOP from the City if a
single-family dwelling is rented or leased to more than
six persons age 18 or older in all. Further, the proposed
amendment outlines the permit process, development
standards, and enforcement regulations for the RHOP.
The proposed amendments are anticipated to be- is
-regulatory-in-nature-and-are-not anticipated -to -create -any
new construction or development opportunities in the
City. However, any potential development as a result of
the amendments is too speculative at this time to predict
or analyze. While the amendments could enable the
construction of rooming houses in the City in
compliance with all required, on-site parking and
development standards, it is more likely that these
amendments will serve to regulate the rental of existing
residential properties in the City. Potential impacts
related to new development and previously undisturbed
land as a result is uncertain and speculative at this time.
As a result, all impacts associated with new development
will need to be analyzed on a project by project basis to
determine the potential impacts on the environment.
Surrounding land uses: Citywide
Other public agencies whose N/A
approval is required:
0
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 "Potentia .y Significant Impact' or a "Less than Significant with
Mitigation" as indicated by the checl_tist on the following pages.
[ ] Aesthetics [ ] Agriculture Resources [ ] Air Quality
[ ] Biological Resources [ ] Cultural Resources [ ] Geology / Soils
[ ] Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
[ ] Mineral Resources
[ ] Hydrology / Water
Quality
[ ] Noise
[ ] Land Use / Planning
[ ] Population / Housing
[ ] Public Services [ ] Recreation [ ] Transportation / Traffic
[ ] Utilities / Service Systems [ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance
B. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
• [X] I rind that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
eiivironment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[ ] I find that although the proposed project could nave 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 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.
is
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 4 of 25
[ ] 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
prop o d proje , nothing further is required.
-01
Patrick
Patrick Leclair, Associate Planner Date
LqJ
Sharon Sorensen, Senior Planner Date
is
is
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 5 of 25
• 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 [] [] [] []
II. 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
is
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 6 of 25
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
d)Other [] I I I
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 [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
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?
•
0
•
0
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 7 of 25
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
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?
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 8 of 25
0
•
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 [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
outside of formal cemeteries?
e)Other []
[] I []
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS — Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
•
death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
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? [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides? [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
b) Result in substantial wind or water soil erosion or the [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
loss of topsoil, either on or off site?
0
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 9 of 25
• 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]
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 10 of 25
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the [ ]
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 anile 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?
I [X]
IN
•
L
1�1
•
•
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 11 of 25
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
i) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards (e.g. electrical transmission lines, gas
lines, oil pipelines)?
j) Other [ ]
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the
project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste [ ]
discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or [ ]
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 [ ]
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] [ ]
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 12 of 25
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? [ J
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?
[] [X] []
[] [X] []
[] [X] []
[] [X] []
[] [X] []
[] [X] []
•
•
•
0
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 13 of 25
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?
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
[] I [X] I
[X] I
vii) Does the proposed project include provisions [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
for the separation, recycling, and reuse of materials
both during construction and after project
occupancy?
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the
project:
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] I
[X] I
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 14 of 25
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
groundbome 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?
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?
H [] [X] H
H [] [X] []
H [X] []
[] [] [X] []
[] [] [X] H
[] [] [] [X]
[] 11 H [X]
•
•
0
is
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 15 of 25
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
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, [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere (especially affordable housing)?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
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? [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
ii) Police protection? [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
iii) Schools? [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
iv) Parks? [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
XIV. RECREATION - Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and [ ]
[ ] [X] [ ]
regional parks or other recreational facilities such
that substantial physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
0
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 16 of 25
b) Include recreational facilities or require the [ ]
construction or expansion of recreational facilities
which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in [ ]
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 [ ]
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 [ ]
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 [ ]
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? [ ]
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [ ]
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs [ ]
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
h) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [ ]
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the [ ]
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
[X]
[X]
•
[] [XJ [J
[J [XJ [J
[J [XJ []
•
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 17 of 25
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 [ ]
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?
0
[] [] [X]
[] [] [X]
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 18 of 25
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 IDE 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."
•
•
•
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 19 of 25
• D. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND/OR EARLIER ANALYSIS:
•
0
Section and Subsections
Evaluation of Impacts
4
I. AESTHETICS
a. -d.) Less than Significant Impact: While the proposed
amendments could indirectly result in construction of rooming
houses or other structures that would enable the rental of new
residences in the City, the impacts to aesthetics associated with any
future development would be speculative at this time and would be
evaluated on a project by project basis. These amendments are
anticipated to be regulatory in nature and are not anticipated to
directly result in any aesthetic impacts.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes are not anticipated to have an impact on
aesthetics within the City.
II. AGRICULTURE
a. -c.) No Impact — No designated farmland'is located within the City
RESOURCES
of Santa Clarita. Therefore, the proposed amendments to the
Municipal and Unified Development Codes 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, no impact to agricultural resources is anticipated as a
result of the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes.
III. AIR QUALITY
a. -e.) Less than Significant Impact: While the proposed
amendments could indirectly result in construction of rooming
houses or other structures that would enable the rental of new
residences in the City that could impact construction and operations
related air quality in the City, the impacts to air quality associated
with future development would be speculative at this time and would
be evaluated on a project by project basis. These amendments are
anticipated to be regulatory in nature and are not anticipated to
directly result in any air quality impacts.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes are not anticipated to have an impact on air
quality within the City.
IV. BIOLOGICAL
a. -g.) Less than Significant Impact — While the proposed
RESOURCES
amendments could indirectly result in construction of rooming
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 20 of 25
•
0
houses or other structures that would enable the rental of new
residences in the City, the impacts to biological resources associated
with future development would be speculative at this time and would
be evaluated on a project by project basis. These amendments are
anticipated to be regulatory in nature and are not anticipated to
directly result in any impacts to biological resources.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes are not anticipated to have an impact on
biological resources within the City.
V. CULTURAL
a. -d.) Less than Significant Impact — While the proposed
RESOURCES
amendments could indirectly result in construction of rooming
houses or other structures that would enable the rental of new
residences in the City, the impacts to cultural resources associated
with future development would be speculative at this time and would
be evaluated on a project by project basis. These amendments are
anticipated to be regulatory in nature and are not anticipated to
directly result in any impacts on cultural resources.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes are not anticipated to have an impact on cultural
resources within the City.
VI. GEOLOGY AND
a. -i.) Less than Significant Impact ; — While the proposed
SOILS
amendments could indirectly result in construction of rooming
houses or other structures that would enable the rental of new
residences in the City, the impacts to geology and soils associated
with future development would be speculative at this time and would
be evaluated on a project by project basis. These amendments are
anticipated to be regulatory in nature and are not anticipated to
directly result in any impacts to geology and soils.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes are not anticipated to have an impact on geology
and soils within the City.
VII. HAZARDS AND
a. -d. and g. -i.) Less than Sil4nificant Impact — While the proposed
HAZARDOUS
amendments could indirectly result in construction of rooming
MATERIALS
houses or other structures that would enable the rental of new
residences in the City, the impacts from hazards and hazardous
materials associated with future development would be speculative at
this time and would be evaluated on a project by project basis. These
amendments are anticipated to be regulatory in nature and are not
anticipated to directly result in any impacts to hazards or hazardous
•
0
is
L
•
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 21 of 25
materials.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes are not anticipated to have an impact on hazards
or hazardous materials within the City.
e.-£) No Impact — No airport of airfield is located within 2 miles of
the City boundaries.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes would not affect the risks of land uses adjacent
to airports or airfields and the proposal would have no related
impacts.
VIII. HYDROLOGY
a. -l.) Less than Significant Impact — While the proposed
AND WATER
amendments could indirectly result in construction of rooming
QUALITY
houses or other structures that would enable the rental of new
residences in the City, the impacts to hydrology and water quality
associated with future development would be speculative at this time
and would be evaluated on a project by project basis. These
amendments are anticipated to be regulatory in nature and are not
anticipated to directly result in any impacts to hydrology or water
quality.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes are not anticipated to have an impact on
hydrology and water quality within the City.
IX. LAND USE AND
a. -c.) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed amendments to
PLANNING
the Municipal and Unified Development Codes establish a definition
for Rooming House and modify the existing definition of "Family" as
well as guidelines for the Residential High Occupancy Permit. In and
of themselves, the proposed amendments will not directly result in
changes to the physical environment. The proposed amendments are
regulatory in nature and will not directly result in any physical
development at this time. Future projects may have an impact on the
established community, land use plan, or other habitat conservation
area. However, the extent of these impacts is unknown and too
speculative to evaluate at this time. Any future
development/redevelopment will be required to be evaluated in
compliance with CEQA and must comply with the City's General
Plan, Municipal Code, and Unified Development Code.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes are not anticipated to have an impact on land use
and planning within the City.
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 22 of 25
•
•
40
X. MINERAL AND
a. -c.) Less than Significant Impact — While the proposed
ENERGY
amendments could indirectly result in construction of rooming
RESOURCES
houses or other structures that would enable the rental of new
residences in the City, the impacts to mineral and energy resources
associated with future development would be speculative at this time
and would be evaluated on a project by project basis. These
amendments are anticipated to be regulatory in nature and are not
anticipated to directly result in any mineral and energy resource
impacts.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes are not anticipated to have an impact on mineral
and energy resources within the City.
XI. NOISE
a. -d.) Less than Significant Impact — While the proposed
amendments could indirectly result in construction of rooming
houses or other structures that would enable the rental of new
residences in the City, the impacts from noise associated with future
development would be speculative at this time and would be
evaluated on a project by project basis. These amendments are
anticipated to be regulatory in nature and are not anticipated to
directly result in any noise impacts.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes are not anticipated to have an impact on noise
within the City.
e. & f.) No Impact — The City is not located within an airport land
use plan, two miles of an airport, or within the vicinity of a private
airstrip.
Therefore, no impact relating to noise generated by an airport or
airstrip is anticipated to occur as a result of the approval of the
proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified Development
Codes.
XII. POPULATION
a. -c.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed amendments to
AND HOUSING
the Municipal and Unified Development Codes establish guidelines
for the Residential High Occupancy Permit and for the establishment
of rooming houses in the City. In and of themselves, the proposed
amendments will not directly result in changes to the physical
environment. The proposed amendments are regulatory in nature and
will not directly result in any physical development that would induce
substantial population growth, displace substantial numbers of
•
•
40
•
0
MC09-045,-UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 23 of 25
existing housing units, or displace substantial numbers of people.
Future projects that result from the proposed amendments may have
an impact on the established community, land use plan, or other
habitat conservation area. However, the impacts associated with
these future projects are too speculative at this time to be evaluated.
Any future development will be required to be evaluated in
compliance with CEQA and must comply with the City's General
Plan, Municipal Code, and Unified Development Code.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes are not anticipated to have an impact on
population and housing within the City.
XIII. PUBLIC
a)i.-iv. Less than Significant Impact — While the proposed
SERVICES
amendments could indirectly result in construction of rooming
houses or other structures that would enable the rental of new
residences in the City, the impacts to public services associated with
future development would be speculative at this time and would be
evaluated on a project by project basis. These amendments are
anticipated to be regulatory in nature and are not anticipated to
directly result in any impacts to public services.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes are not anticipated to have an impact on public
services within the City.
XIV. RECREATION
a. -b.) Less than Significant Impact — While the proposed
amendments could indirectly result in construction of rooming
houses or other structures that would enable the rental of new
residences in the City, the impacts to recreational facilities associated
with future development would be speculative at this time and would
be evaluated on a project by project basis. These amendments are
anticipated to be regulatory in nature and are not anticipated to
directly result in any recreation impacts.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes are not anticipated to have an impact on
recreation within the City.
XV.
a. -b. & d. -h.) Less than Significant Impact — While the proposed
TRANSPORTATION /
amendments could indirectly result in construction of rooming
TRAFFIC
houses or other structures that would enable the rental of new
residences in the City, the impacts to transportation and from traffic
associated with future development would be speculative at this time
and would be evaluated on a project by project basis. These
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 24 of 25
•
•
•
amendments are anticipated to be regulatory in nature and are not
anticipated to directly result in any transportation or traffic impacts.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes are not anticipated to have an impact on
transportation or traffic within the City.
c.) No Impact — The City is not located near any airports and will
therefore not impact any air traffic patterns. Further, the proposed
amendments do not entitle any development at this time; they only
authorize a regulatory expansion to the City's eminent domain
authority within the Plan Area.
Therefore, no impact to air traffic patterns is anticipated with the
proposed amendments to the proposed Municipal and Unified
Development Codes.
XVI. UTILITIES AND
a. -g.) Less than Significant Impact — While the proposed
SERVICE SYSTEMS
amendments could indirectly result in construction of rooming
houses or other structures that would enable the rental of new
residences in the City, the impacts to utilities and service systems
associated with future development would be speculative at this time
and would be evaluated on a project by project basis. These
amendments are anticipated to be regulatory in nature and are not
anticipated to directly result in any impacts to utilities and service
systems.
Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Municipal and Unified
Development Codes are not anticipated to have an impact on utilities
or service systems within the City.
XVII. MANDATORY
a. -c.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed amendments to
FINDINGS OF
the Municipal and Unified Development Codes 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
amendments do not involve any physical development at this time.
The proposed 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 amendments, the proposal
would not contribute to any cumulative impacts and would not cause
environmental effects that would adversely affect humans. Rather,
the proposed amendments are intended to establish guidelines for the
Residential High Occupancy Permit as well as for the permit process
for establishing a rooming house within the City.
•
•
•
•
MC09-045, UDC 09-002
April 13, 2009
Page 25 of 25
• S \CD\CURREN"IV2009\09-045 (UDC 09-002)\Initial Study - Rooming House doc
0
Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant
impact that could result in a Mandatory Findings of Significance.
XVIII. DEPARTMENT
a.) No Impact — The legislative intent of the Department of Fish and
OF FISH AND GAME
Game `De Minimus' Finding is "to extend the current user -based
`DE MINIMUS'
funding system by allocating the transactional costs of wildlife
FINDING
protection and management to those who would consume those
resources through urbanization and development..." (AB 3158,
Chapter 1766, Statutes of 1990, effective January 1, 1991, Section
1(c)). The proposed 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\CURREN"IV2009\09-045 (UDC 09-002)\Initial Study - Rooming House doc
0