Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-06-23 - AGENDA REPORTS - ROOMING HOUSE ORD (2)CONSENT CALENDAR DATE: SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT Agenda Item: 0 CITY OF SANTA CLARITA AGENDA REPORT City Manager Approval: Item to be presented by: June 23, 2009 Patrick Leclair SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES AMENDING THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE TO 1) ADDRESS ROOMING HOUSES IN SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES; 2) MODIFY THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY; AND 3) CREATE A RESIDENTIAL HIGH OCCUPANCY PERMIT (RHOP) Community Development RECOMMENDED ACTION City Council conduct a second reading and adopt ordinances entitled: 1) "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"." 2) "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." BACKGROUND On June 9, 2009, the City Council received a presentation and conducted a public hearing regarding amendments to the Municipal and Unified Development Codes addressing 1) Rooming ©►d. D9-9 AdoptedOrd, jq- ../a Houses in single-family residential zones; 2) The definition of "Family"; and 3) Creating a Residential High Occupancy Permit (RHOP). At the June 9, 2009 hearing, the City Council introduced the proposed ordinances and passed them to second reading. The adoption of the ordinance addressing rooming houses would have a two-year amortization period, while the ordinance addressing the Residential High Occupancy Permit (RHOP) would have a one-year amortization period. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Other actions as determined by Council. FISCAL IMPACT Implementation of these ordinances will be administered by 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 the cost of issuing the RHOP and associated inspection requirements for permit issuance. ATTACHMENTS Ordinance - Municipal Code Amendments (UDC) Ordinance - Municipal Code Amendments Initial Study available in the City Clerk's Reading File 2 ORDINANCE NO. 2009 - 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 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 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 where tenants do not share common 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 RV RL RS RM RIM RH CT CC CN C 1. Rooming House* X X X X X P** P** P** X X X 2. Caretaker's Residence (6) 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 4. Dwelling a Single -Family P P P P P P P P X X X b Two -Family X X X X X P P P X X X c Multifamily X X X X X P(19 P(19 P(19 C C X 5. Family Day Care Homes a Adult—up to six (6) P P P P P P P P P P X adults b Family—up to fourteen P P P P P P P P P P X (14) children 6. Fraternity/Sorority Houses X X X X X C C C X X X (18) 7. Home Occupation Business P P P P P P P P P P X 8. Joint Living/Working X X X X X X X X C C C Quarters 9. Model Homes M M M M M M M M M M X 1 Mobilehome Park X X X X C C C C X C X 0. 1 Residential Health Care X X X X X C C C C C C 1. Facility 1 Residential Service/Care P P P P P P P P X X X 2. Home 1 Second Units P P P P P P P P X X X 3. P = Permitted, M = Minor Use Permit, C = Conditional t Numbers contained in parentheses refer to notes found * Rooming house regulations effective as of pe ** Rooming houses are not permitted in neighborhoods that are comprised predoi Residential Use Types CO VS BP IC I PE OS MH SP R 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 3 5 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. 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 )2008. FRANK FERRY, MAYOR ATTEST: SHARON DAWSON, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: CARL K. NEWTON CITY ATTORNEY STATE OF CALIFORNIA - ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ) I, being first duly sworn, depose and say: MW That (s)he is the duly appointed and qualified City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita: That in compliance with State Laws of the State of California, ORDINANCE NO. , being: 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". A certified copy of the full text of Ordinance No. _, along with the names of those City Council Members voting for and against said Ordinance, was caused to be posted in the Office of the City. Clerk. SHARON DAWSON, CITY CLERK (SEAL) 5 7 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 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. 2 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. / C 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 12009. ATTEST: CITY CLERK M MAYOR 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 ID-1 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 no /3 / CITY OF SANTA CLARITA NEGATIVE DECLARATION [X] Proposed [ ] Final MASTER CASE NO: Master Case 09-045 PERMIT/PROJECT 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 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 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 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. 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 Clarity [X] City Council [ ] Planning Commission [ ] Director of Planning and Building Services 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 [ J Are Not Attached Lisa M. Webber, AICP PLANNING MANA R Prepared by: Patrick Leclair, Associate Planner ignature) (Name/Title) AApproved 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 AMCURRENW 2009\RDA Negative Declaration.doc 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 I 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 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: 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_iist on the following pages. [ ] Aesthetics [ ] Agriculture Resources [ ] Air Quality [ ] Biological Resources [ ] Cultural Resources [ ] Geology / Soils [ ] Hazards & Hazardous [ ] Hydrology / Water [ ] Land Use / Planning Materials Quality [ ] Mineral Resources [ ] [ ] Public Services [ ] [ ] Utilities / Service Systems [ ] B. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: Noise [ ] Population / Housing Recreation [ ] Transportation / Traffic Mandatory Findings of Significance [X] I Lind 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 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. MC09-045, UDC 09-002 Apn1 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. ,N -01 Patrick Leclair, Associate Planner Date Sharon Sorensen, Senior Planner Date MC09-045, UDC 09-002 April 13, 2009 Page 5 of 25 C. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. AESTHETICS - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but 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 quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation e)Other [J I I [] 11. 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 [ ] [ ] [ J [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 [ ] [ ] [ J IN 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? MC09-045, UDC 09-002 1 Apn1 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 [ ] [ ] IN [ ] 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] [] 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 [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the j Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, j marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] 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 [ ] [ ] , [X] [ ] protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Oak trees? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? g) Affect a Significant Ecological Area (SEA) or [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] Significant Natural Area (SNA) as identified on the City of Santa Clarita ESA Delineation Map? h)Other [] [] I I V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] significance of a historical resource as defined in '15064.5? MC09-045, UDC 09-002 April 13, 2009 Page 8 of 25 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? i e)Other [] [] [] [] 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. I 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? I I 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] [X] [X] [X] [X] MC09-045, UDC 09-002 Apn1 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 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? [X] I '1, MC09-045, UDC 09-002 April 13, 2009 Page 11 of 25 i) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards (e.g. electrical transmission lines, gas lines, oil pipelines)? Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation [) I IN I 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 I have been granted)? i 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? I ' 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 j additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] MC09-045, UDC 09-002 Apn1 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 I00 -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? [] [X] [] [] [X] [] [] [X] [] [] [X] [] [] [X] [] [] [X] [] I 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? 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 [] I [X] [] 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] [] [] [X] [] MC09-045, UDC 09-002 � J 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 [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] inefficient manner? XI. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] 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 [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] i groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] 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, [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 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? MC09-045, UDC 09-002 Apn1 13, 2009 Page 16 of 25 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. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - 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? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? h) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? ' 4 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? [] [X] [] [] [X] [] MC09-045, UDC 09-002 April 13, 2009 Page 18 of 25 b) Does the project have impacts that are individually [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] 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 [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] 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 [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] 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." ' 1 MC09-045, UDC 09-002 April 13, 2009 Page 19 of 25 D. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND/OR EARLIER ANALYSIS: Section and Subsections Evaluation of Impacts 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 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 Sil4nificant 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 Significant 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 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. -f.) 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 Sitnificant 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 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. & £) 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 MC09-045, UDC 09-002 Apn1 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 SXMCURRENI�!2009\09-045 (UDC 09-002)\Initial Study - Rooming House doe 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 1706, 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. SXMCURRENI�!2009\09-045 (UDC 09-002)\Initial Study - Rooming House doe