SANTA BARBARA COUNTY & MONTECITO PLANNING COMMISSIONS Zoning Ordinance Reformatting Hearing Date: September 7, 2006 Director: John Baker, Director Staff Report Date: August 25, 2006 Project Sponsor: Zoraida Abresch Case Nos.: 06ORD-00000-00009 Staff: Kimberley McCarthy Staff: Noel Langle Phone No.: 568-2005 Phone No.: 568-2009 Environmental Document: CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) 1.0 REQUEST AND RECOMMENDATION Hearing on the request of the Planning and Development Department that the Santa Barbara and Montecito Planning Commissions take the following actions: 1.1 That the Montecito Planning Commission follow the procedure outlined below and: A. Forward a recommendation to the County Planning Commission, as the following pertain to the portions of the Montecito Planning Area that are located within the Coastal Zone, that they adopt a recommendation to the County Board of Supervisors that the Board of Supervisors: 1. Adopt the findings for approval of the proposed Amendments (Attachment A - Findings for Approval). 2. Find that this Amendment is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Sections 15265 of the Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (Attachment B - CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) Notice of Exemption). 3. Adopt 06ORD-00000-00009, an ordinance (Attachment E - Board of Supervisors Ordinance) repealing Articles I, II and V of Chapter 35 of the County Code, and adopting Section 35-1 of Chapter 35 of the County Code, the Santa Barbara County Land Use and Development Code. B. Adopt a Resolution (Attachment D - Montecito Planning Commission Resolution) and forward a recommendation to the County Board of Supervisors that the Board of Supervisors: 1. Adopt the findings for approval of the proposed Amendments (Attachment A - Findings for Approval). 2. Find that this Amendment is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Sections 15265 of the Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (Attachment B - CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) Notice of Exemption).
Page 2 3. Adopt 06ORD-00000-00009, an ordinance (Attachment E - Board of Supervisors Ordinance) repealing Article IV of Chapter 35 of the County Code, and adopting Section 35-2 of Chapter 35 of the County Code, the Santa Barbara County Montecito Land Use and Development Code. 1.2 That County Planning Commission follow the procedures outlined below and: A. Adopt a resolution (Attachment C - County Planning Commission Resolution) and forward a recommendation to the County Board of Supervisors that the Board of Supervisors: 2.0 JURISDICTION 1. Adopt the findings for approval of the proposed Amendments (Attachment A - Findings for Approval). 2. Find that this Amendment is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Sections 15265 of the Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (Attachment B - CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) Notice of Exemption). 3. Adopt 06ORD-00000-00009, an ordinance repealing Articles I, II, III, IV and V of Chapter 35 of the County Code, and adopting Section 35-1 of Chapter 35 of the County Code, the Santa Barbara County Land Use and Development Code. This ordinance amendment is being considered by the County and Montecito Planning Commissions based upon provisions of Section 65855 of the Government Code. The Government Code and the County Code require that the County and Montecito Planning Commissions, as the designated planning agencies, review and consider this ordinance amendment and render their decisions in the form of a written recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. 3.0 BACKGROUND The Zoning Ordinance Reformatting Project (ZORP) developed out of the Process Improvement Team (PIT) in early 2003. The ZORP team was formed to evaluate the current Zoning Ordinances (Articles I through IV of Chapter 35 of the County Code) and formulate a recommendation as to how to alleviate identified problems with the current format. ZORP team members include members of PIT Steering Group #3 (Policies and Zoning Ordinances), community representatives from throughout the County, Planning and Development staff, and a consultant team hired to draft the reformatted ordinances, led by the firm of Crawford Multari & Clark Associates (CMCA).
Page 3 Throughout 2004 and 2005, the ZORP team held numerous meetings to identify issues within the existing ordinances, identify goals and solutions and to agree upon a format that would accomplish the identified goals. Additionally during this timeframe, the team met eight times with the County Planning Commission, nine times with the Montecito Planning Commission and six times with the Board of Supervisors to provide progress reports/updates and to receive direction as to the reformatting efforts. In September 2005, staff received direction from the Board of Supervisors to prepare two Land Use and Development Codes, the County Land Use and Development Code (regulating all but the inland portion of the Montecito Community Plan area) and the Montecito Land Use and Development Code (regulating only the Montecito inland area). During this timeframe draft sections of the reformatted Zoning Ordinances (Land Use Development Codes) were submitted by CMCA. Planning and Development staff members were assigned to review these sections for accuracy, consistency and completeness and send revisions back to CMCA. Staff distributed the draft material to the ZORP team members for their comments, which were also sent back to CMCA. On October 18, 2005, the CMCA finalized the first draft of the County Development and Land Use Code and P&D staff began reviewing the document in its entirety to ensure accuracy with existing ordinance regulations, correct errors and verify the readability of the Code. In April 2006, staff began the same review process for the Montecito Land Use Development Code. During the review process members of the ZORP team and County Counsel met several times to discuss the documents, resolve issues regarding errors or the accuracy of the text and address potentially substantive changes. On March 17, 2006, the Public Draft of the County Land Use and Development Code was released to the public for review and comment. On May 30, 2006 the Public Draft of the Montecito Land Use and Development Code was released to the public for review and comment. Over a hundred postcards were mailed out to announce the release of the public drafts and encourage public input. The pubic was given until June 23, 2006 to comment on the two draft documents. In addition to providing printed documents and electronic copies (CDs), the draft Development Codes were also posted on the website for public review. An email link was established on the web page, allowing the public to email Planning and Development with questions, comments and suggestions. These comments and staff responses to these inquiries are posted on the website. Three public workshops were held on April 5 th, 6 th and 12 th to answer questions and receive comments from the community. A total of 30 people attended these workshops. On May 31, 2006, the County and Montecito Planning Commission held a joint public workshop on the two draft documents. At this workshop, staff updated the Commissions on the progress of the reformatting efforts, answered questions regarding the documents and the review process, particularly in regard to substantive changes, reviewed the public comments received to date and took comments and suggestions from the Commissions. As appropriate to the established format of the Codes, and where deemed non-substantive, changes were made to the draft Codes in response to input received from staff, the public and the Commissions. For example, Commissioner s requested that key or site specific Development
Page 4 Standards be included in the Community Plan attachment where appropriate. The Hearing Draft copy of the County and Montecito Land Use Development Codes include the key or site specific standards as requested. Additionally, Planning and Development staff continued their review of the documents correcting errors, incorporating recently adopted Amendments and refining language and procedures for clarity. Marked versions of the Public Drafts were posted on the Planning and Development web page on August 24, 2006. The marked documents identify all changes made to the Public Draft documents. 4.0 PROJECT INFORMATION To resolve problems the ZORP team identified relating to the outdated structure and organization of the existing zoning ordinances and to provide a framework for future substantive Amendments the existing zoning regulations [Article I (Sign Ordinance), Article II (Coastal Zoning Ordinance), Article III (Inland Zoning Ordinance), Article IV (Montecito Zoning Ordinance) and Article V (Addressing and Road Naming Ordinance) of County Code Chapter 35] were combined into two Development Codes documents. If adopted, the County Land Use and Development Code will govern the unincorporated area of the County of Santa Barbara with the exception of the inland area of the Montecito Planning Area. The portion of the Montecito Planning Area outside of the Coastal Zone will governed by the Montecito Land Use and Development Code. A future phase of this effort will be to delete the regulations from the County Land Use and Development Code that apply to the Montecito Coastal Zone and incorporate them within the Montecito Development Code. The Development Codes seek to arrange existing regulations into a format that is both easier to read and to search, in part by eliminating duplicated information/procedures, using plain English and grouping related information. The visual presentation of ordinance information is considerably different than the existing Zoning Ordinances and changes in wording and syntax do occur throughout the Development Codes. However, the documents were written to ensure that the intent of the ordinances and established Departmental procedures were not altered, and to minimize any substantive changes to the existing regulatory scheme. For the purposes of ZORP, a substantive change is defined as: An alteration of existing text which changes the way the County processes or reviews applications for development. Where ambiguities in existing text may result in differing interpretations, changes are intended to reflect the meaning most consistent with the way applications for development are currently processed. Changes were made to simplify (i.e. put into plain English) the ordinance language, standardize repeated phrases or planning terms (e.g., lot not parcel, structure not building or structure ) and to accommodate the new format of the Land Use and Development Codes. Attachment F (Table of Ordinance and Land Use Development Code Text Comparisons) provides examples of existing ordinance language and its counterpart language in the Development codes. Attachment G (Revisions to Existing Ordinance Language Included in the Land Use and Development Codes) provides examples of broader revisions to text that were made to codify existing Departmental procedure, State law requirements, or to correct obvious over-sights, errors or inconsistencies in treatment and to modernize the document. Additionally, where a definition did not exist for an existing use type, a definition was incorporated into the appropriate LUDC. A list of
Page 5 Development Code definitions not provided in the existing Ordinances is included in the staff report as Attachment H (Definitions within the Development Code Not Provided within the Zoning Ordinances). The County and Montecito Land Use Development Codes include all ordinance amendments that have been adopted by the Board of Supervisors as of August 18, 2006. The Department has several Ordinance Amendment packages in various stages of review/adoption. Some of these amendments may be adopted by the Board of Supervisors prior to adoption of the County and Montecito LUDCs. Attachment I (List of Pending Ordinance Amendments) contains a list of pending Amendments that would need to be incorporated into the Land Use and Development Codes if they are adopted prior to the adoption of the Land Use and Development Codes. Phase I of ZORP is considered the first step in improving the quality of the County s existing ordinance regulations. Combining and reformatting Articles I through V of County Code Chapter 35 provided opportunities to identify changes necessary or desirable to improve local zoning regulations. These items have been assembled into a Phase II list (see Attachment J - Phase II Substantive Amendments List). The Department hopes to focus efforts on these substantive amendments upon the adoption of the County and Montecito Land Use and Development Codes. 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed Ordinances are recommended to be determined to be exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Section 15061(b)(3), the general rule exemption, states that where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment that the activity is not subject to CEQA. No significant environmental impacts would occur as a result of these Ordinances, as no substantive changes to the ordinance are proposed (see Attachment B - Notice of Exemption). 6.0 POLICY CONSISTENCY The ordinance reformatting program does not alter the existing zoning regulations which have been previously found consistent with applicable policies of the Comprehensive Plan, including the Coastal Plan and the community, area or specific plans. 7.0 ORDINANCE COMPLIANCE The proposed County and Montecito Land Use and Development Codes combine adopted ordinance regulations without making substantive changes to existing zoning laws. The revised format will not affect the compliance of existing regulations within the Land Use Development Codes. 8.0 APPEALS PROCEDURE
Page 6 Ordinance amendments are legislative acts that are automatically forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for final action, therefore no appeal is required. 9.0 ATTACHMENTS A. Findings for Approval B. CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) Notice of Exemption C. County Planning Commission Resolution D. Montecito Planning Commission Resolution E. Board of Supervisor s Ordinance F. Table of Ordinance and Land Use Development Code Text Comparisons. G. Revisions to Existing Ordinance Language Included in the Land Use and Development Codes H. Definitions within the Development Code Not Provided within the Zoning Ordinances. I. List of Pending Ordinance Amendments J. Phase II Substantive Amendments List