Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance No. 12-O6ORDINANCE NO. 12-06 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA APPROVING AMENDMENT ZCA 234 TO CHAPTER 88—DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF AZUSA MUNICIPAL CODE WHEREAS, on February 22, 2005, the City Council of the City of Azusa ("City Council') adopted the new Development Code (Chapter 88 of the Azusa Municipal Code) with the understanding that the "Form -Based Code" format included wholesale changes to the prior Code, and that revisions would be necessary after the new Code was implemented; and WHEREAS, City staff has prepared a number of proposed amendments to the Development Code to provide clarification and to add necessary language to the existing provisions of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, on October 10, 2012, the Planning Commission of the City of Azusa ("Planning Commission") conducted a noticed public hearing on the proposed amendment to the Development Code at which time all persons wishing to testify in connection with the revision to the Development Code were heard and the revision was fully studied, discussed and deliberated; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission carefully considered all pertinent testimony and the staff report presented during the public hearing for the amendment to the Development Code and adopted Resolution No. 2012-11 recommending that the City Council approve the proposed amendment to the Development Code; and WHEREAS, on November 5, 2012, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed amendment to the Development Code at which time all persons wishing to testify in connection with the amendment to the Development Code were heard, and the proposed amendment and public testimony were fully studied, discussed, and deliberated; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to adopt the proposed amendment to the Development Code. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Development Code is amended as follows, with additions shown in underline. SECTION 2. Section 88.54.100 of the Azusa Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 88.54.100. - Required Termination of a Nonconforming Use, Structure, or Site Improvement. A. Amortization Schedule and Effect of Termination Requirement. The council finds and determines that nonconforming uses, structures, and site improvements are contrary to the orderly development of the City of Azusa, and have the potential to adversely affect public health, safety, and welfare, and shall, therefore, be discontinued, or brought into conformity with all applicable provisions of this Development Code in compliance with this section. 1. Amortization and Termination Required. A land use, structure, or site improvement that is made nonconforming by the adoption of this Development Code or an amendment to this Development Code shall be discontinued, or brought into conformity with all applicable provisions of this Development Code, within the following time periods from the date of the service of notice by the city in compliance with subsection B. a. A nonconforming land use located on a site within the DTC (Downtown - Town Center), DCC (Downtown - Civic Center), DTV (Downtown - Transit Village), or CFB (Foothill Boulevard Corridor) zones - 20 years, b. Adult business—Six months, or as extended in compliance with Chapter 88.40 (Adult Business Regulations). c. Auto wrecking and/or scrap yard -20 years. d. Contractor's storage yard -20 years. e. Outdoor shooting range -18 months; provided that the amortization period may be replaced by an executed development agreement. f. Surface mining operation—Five years, except where a vested right exists. g. Mobile recycling—Six months. h. Trash enclosure—One year. 2. Amortization Schedule for Prior Nonconformities. An owner of property that is in receipt of an official city notice regarding the property's nonconformity before March 25, 2005 (the effective date of this Development Code), shall conform to the amortization schedule in effect at the time of the original notice. An owner of property that is in receipt of an official city notice regarding the property's nonconformance before March 25, 2005 shall complete the amortization appeal process by March 31, 2006, if an appeal is desired. The amortization appeal process is defined in Section 88.54.100.0 and 88.54.100.D. 3. Nuisance Abatement. A use that does not comply with this subsection shall be deemed a public nuisance and shall be abated accordingly, unless an extension is granted by the council in compliance with subsection F. B. Notice. Upon determination that the provisions of this section apply to a given parcel of land, the director shall send a notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the owner as shown on the current tax assessor's rolls, shall cause the property to be posted with a similar notice, and shall publish the notice at least once in a newspaper of general circulation. 1. The notice required by this subsection shall state the following: a. That the property in question is a nonconformity; b. The date of abatement established in subparagraph 1. (Amortization schedule), above; and 2 c. That the date of abatement maybe appealed to the council within 30 days of the date indicated on the notice. 2. The city has no legal obligation to notify subsequent owners of an affected parcel C. Appeal 1. For those parcels deemed nonconforming as a result of this Development Code's implementation, the owner of any parcel upon which a nonconforming structure or use is being maintained may appeal the length and/or the classification of the required amortization period by submitting a written appeal, on a form provided by the director and accompanied by any required fee in compliance with the city's fee resolution, within 30 days of the date on the notice. 2. For those parcels deemed nonconforming and receiving written notice prior to the adoption of this Development Code, the owner of any parcel upon which a nonconforming structure or use is being maintained may appeal the length and/or the classification of the required amortization period by submitting a written appeal, on a form provided by the director and accompanied by any required fee in compliance with the city's fee resolution. The appeal process must be completed by March 31, 2006. D. Hearing. Within 60 days after receipt of an appeal, the council shall hold a public hearing to determine whether the nonconformity should be abated as indicated in the notice, or whether a time extension should be granted as provided in subsection F. 1. Notice of the hearing shall be provided in the same manner as the notice of abatement, and shall also be provided by mail to the owners of abutting parcels. 2. The council shall receive written and oral testimony at the hearing relating to the term of abatement. During the hearing, the owner shall be permitted to call witnesses and be represented by counsel. 3. Council consideration of amortization period. a. For those parcels deemed nonconforming as a result of this Development Code's implementation - At the close of the hearing, the council shall determine whether the nonconformity should be abated, and whether the owner of the parcel can amortize the investment in the term for abatement required by subsection A., and if not, what term for abatement should be provided. The burden of proof shall be upon the owner to demonstrate, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the owner is entitled to a longer abatement period than required by subsection A. b. For those parcels deemed nonconforming as a result of a previous Development Code's implementation - At the close of the hearing, the council shall determine whether the nonconformity should be abated, and whether the owner of the parcel can amortize the investment in the term for abatement required by the previous Development Code, and if not what term for abatement should be provided, not to exceed ten years. The burden of proof shall be upon the owner to demonstrate, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the owner is entitled to a longer abatement period than established by the previous Development Code. The criteria for granting an extension includes but is not limited to, value of buildings and other structures located on the parcel, compatibility with neighboring structures and uses, condition of structures located on the parcel, and condition of the property. 4. In the case of a nonconforming use, the council shall also determine whether the structure accommodating the nonconforming use can economically be used in its present condition or can successfully be modified for a purpose allowed by the applicable zoning district. 5. The council may require reasonable modifications or alterations to any nonconformity to improve the nonconformity's appearance or compliance with this Development Code, Municipal Code, or state law; except that any modification or alteration that would extend the useful life of the nonconformity is expressly prohibited. E. Decision and Order. The decision of the council and supporting findings shall be in the form of a written order and shall be served upon the property owner personally or by certified mail, return receipt requested, within ten days after the decision is rendered. The order shall also be recorded in the office of the county recorder. The order shall be binding upon the owner, and the owner's successors, heirs, and assignees. F. Extension of time. 1. The council may grant an extension of the time for abatement of a nonconformitywhere it finds that an unreasonable hardship would otherwise be imposed on the property owner; and 2. The council shall base its decision as to the length of the allowed amortization period on any competent evidence presented, including but not limited to the following: a. Criteria for extending amortization period. Nonconforming Parcel Nonconforming Parcel Resulting From Resulting From this Development Code Previous Development Code The nature of the use Value of buildings and other structures The amount of the owners investment in Compatibility of buildings, structures, and uses with neighboring structures and uses improvements The convertibility of improvements to allowed uses The character of the neighborhood The detriment, if any, caused to surrounding properties and the community by continuance of the nonconforming use. The amount of time needed to amortize the investment The depreciation schedule attached to the owner's latest Federal income tax return Provided that the findings can be made that an extension will not be detrimental to public health, safety, welfare, or future planning and development of the area. b. Maximum Time Extension. The maximum extension of time for parcels made nonconforming as a result of a previous Development Code's implementation is ten years. However, the Director of Economic and Community Development may grant an additional seven (7) year amortization period, with the possibility of one more three (3) year extension. based on the criteria in table 2.a. 1, SECTION 3. CE A. The City Council finds that the adoption of this revision to the Development Code is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, because the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment; and Section 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential for resulting in direct or indirect physical change to the environment. SECTION 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason deemed or 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 portion of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Azusa hereby declares that they would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase would be declared invalid, unconstitutional, or unenforceable. SECTION 5. Findings of Fact. The City Council also finds that the proposed addition to the Development Code is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed revision furthers the objectives and policies of the General Plan and does not obstruct their attainment. In accordance with section 88.51.060(E) of the Azusa Development Code, the City Council approves the Code Amendment based on the following findings of fact: That the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, policies and objectives of the general plan, any applicable specific plan, development agreement, owner participation agreement or disposition and development agreement. The proposed addition to the Development Code is consistent with the goals, policies and objectives of the General Plan. The Development Code amendment allows owners of parcels that have a nonconformity resulting from a previous Development Code to seek an additional extension of the amortization of that nonconformity beyond the maximum ten year extension of time currently allowed by the Development Code. The nonconformity could include a nonconforming use, structure, or site improvement. Since nonconforming residential uses are exempt from limitations on nonconformities, commercial businesses would benefit the most from the proposed Code Amendment. General Plan Chapter 4: Economy and Community, Goal 1 is to `Build and maintain a strong, diverse economy in Azusa." The proposed Code Amendment will support this goal by allowing certain existing nonconforming Azusa businesses the opportunity to extend their amortization period of time and to continue operating at their current locations. General Plan Chapter 4: Economic and Community, Goal 7 is to "Help Azusa's Businesses." The proposed zoning code amendment, by providing an extended amortization period for certain nonconforming uses, helps existing Azusabusinesses recoup their investments by permitting them to stay in business in their current locations for a longer period of time. In addition, General Plan Chapter 3: requires that the "City's General PI. maintained to increase effectiveness.' process by which an amortization Development Code a more effective process. The Built Environment, Land Use Goal 12 m and Development Code are updated and The proposed code amendment, regarding a period may be extended, will make the and timely document by providing an updated Based on the above facts, the proposed code amendment is consistent with the approved General Plan. 2. That the proposed zone change will not adversely affect surrounding properties. The proposed zoning code amendment does not include a zone change. However, the proposed code amendment does amend the process by which to extend the amortization of certain nonconforming uses and provides an opportunity to grant an extension of the amortization period for those certain nonconforming uses. By virtue of the proposed zoning code amendment, existing businesses will be permitted to remain in their current locations. There is no record of any adverse effects on surrounding properties caused by these businesses, and no surrounding businesses have expressed concern over adverse effects resulting from the zoning code amendment. Therefore, the effect of the zoning code amendment — permitting the existing businesses to remain at the current locations — will not adversely affect surrounding properties. SECTION 6. Effective date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. SECTION 7. Summary. A summary of this ordinance shall be published in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 19`h day of November, 2012. 114 oseph R. Rocha, Mayor C'. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss. CITY OF AZUSA ) I, Vera Mendoza, City Clerk of the City of Azusa, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 12-06, was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 5h day of November, 2012, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 19`s day of November, 2012, by the following vote to wit: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: CARRILLO, GONZALES, MACIAS, HANKS, ROCHA NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE Vera Mendoza, City Clerk