Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-07-24 - AGENDA REPORTS - GP PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (2)CONSENT CALENDAR DATE: July 24, 1990 AGENDA REPORT City Manager Approv Item to be presented by:�y// Lunn M. Harris•i'/.c�17Fnn..li—�-r SUBJECT: General Plan Public Participation DEPARTMENT: Community Development BACKGROUND On May 8, 1990, the City Council reviewed an update and status report on the General Plan program and authorized staff to conduct early public forums on the Draft Land Use Map in order to achieve greater public participation. Four public forums were conducted in June at locations around the City. Attendance ranged from approximately 50-85 persons at each forum. The Council requested staff report back with the results of the forums.and outline plans for additional General Plan public participation. Public Forum Comments: The attached chart provides a summary overview of the public forum comments and copies of written comments received. The public forum comment chart summarizes comments received by subject area: land use (includes map comments), circulation, public services and facilities, parks and recreation, growth management, community design and the general process. The chart indicates the number of comments received on a subject at each forum and the total number of comments. It is designed to track, respond and to record recommended actions on the various comments by the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC), Planning Commission and City Council. Special Presentations: Concurrent with the public forums and ongoing are General Plan presentations which are being offered to clubs, organizations and homeowner associations. To date (July 11, 1990), Community Development Department staff has conducted seven General Plan presentations for various groups and organizations. Seven additional presentations are currently scheduled with still more requests being received. We expect to compile and summarize the comments received from these meetings in a manner similar to that prepared from the public forums. At -large Community Meetings: Two additional at -large community meetings are also anticipated. The first community meeting would occur following the GPAC recommendation and prior to the commencement of Planning Commission public hearings. The purpose of this meeting would be to provide wide community exposure as follow-up to the public forums and GPAC's response to comments received; to provide information regarding the public hearing process, and; to distribute meeting notices and other public information. A similar meeting is anticipated following the Planning Commission recommendation and prior to the commencement of public hearings by the City Council. The emphasis of this meeting would be to provide a summary of public testimony during Planning Commission hearings and the Planning Commission's recommendation while also obtaining additional public input prior to and for the City Council hearings. APPROVED Agenda Item:_ 0) July 24, 1990 Page 2 Publicity and Notification: An extensive General Plan publicity and notification effort for the community meetings and public hearings is planned. This major effort has already begunwiththe substantial publicity which has been used to advertise the public forums and staff presentations. This publicity, which was coordinated by the Public Information Officer, provided comprehensive coverage, including: • Full and half page newspaper advertisements • Radio public service announcements • Invitations for presentations to clubs and organizations (250) • Mailings to homeowner associations (100) • Letters and articles to newsletter and magazine editors • Article in the "Municipal Report" • Article in "City View" • Flyers and brochures distributed throughout the community • Press releases and press conferences on a regular basis • Public service messages on cable TV • General Plan slide at the Mann Theaters • Solicitation of ideas from the Public Information Resources Group • Speakers Bureau and slide shows presented to community groups Additional notification and publicity will be repeated and will build upon that of the public forums through direct notification of persons who attended and provided addresses on sign-up sheets as well as others known to be interested or requesting notification. Newsletters will also be prepared for wide distribution within the Santa Clarita Valley. RECOMMENDATION That City Council affirm the proposed public participation program. ATTACHMENT General Plan Public Forum Comment Chart GENERAL PLAN PUBLIC FORUM COMMENTS LAND USE NUMBER OF COMMENTS RECEIVED* - PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED #1 #2 #3 #4 TOTAL GPAC RESPONSE/ACTION PC RESPONSE/ACTION CC RESPONSE/ACTION Criticisms of the Santa Catarina process and project. 0 0 1 21 22 Allow only single family detached units/ no more condos. 0 0 4 7 11 - Opposed to more condos or high density in Canyon Country. 0 0 4 5 9 Preserve our natural areas and the Local ecology and save the native plants and animals, keep open spaces. 0 2 0 6 8 Spread the high density projects throughout the City. 0 0 2 3 5 Keep major roads from going through the middle of residential neighborhoods. 0 1 4 0 5 Wants moderate density at the junction of Sierra Highway and Golden Valley Road. 0 1 1 2 4 St Stephens Episcopal Church bal Lfield should be moderate density. 1 2 1 0 4 The greenbelts are one of the best ideas in the plan. 0 2 2 0 4 - Don't Let Santa Fe ruin the area. 0 0 3 1 4 ALL the public uses (fire stations, Libraries, etc) should be on the map. 3 0 0 0 3 - The density for the area between Valencia Blvd and the golf course should be reduced to Low or very Low density with open space. 1 2 0 0 3 The area at west end of Avenue of the Oaks is already moderate density residential. 0 1 1 1 3 = Forum #1 was held at Arroyo Seco Junior High School on Monday, June 11, 1990. Forum #2 was held at College of the Canyons on Thursday, June 14, 1990. Forum #3 was held at Old Orchard Elementary School on Monday, June 18, 1990. Forum #4 was held at Canyon Country High School on Thursday, June 21, 1990. Page 2 - - - - - LAND USE (CONT)- - - NUMBER OF COMMENTS RECEIVED* - - PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED #1 #2 #3 #4 TOTAL GPAC RESPONSE/ACTION PC RESPONSE/ACTION CC RESPONSE/ACTION - Need.quaLity shopping opportunites. 0 0 2 1 3 Change the pattern of commercial develop- ment the vaLLey from strips to centers, No mini-maLls. D 1 1 1 3 - Designate the area between Sodedad Canyon Road and the proposed levee (east of _ Langside Drive) for business/commercial uses. 0 1 0 2 3 Keep the area between Sodedad Canyon Road and the proposed Levee for park, greenbeLt, and traiL uses. 0 1 0 1 2 Don't mix industrial and residential uses need to provide a buffer between them. 0 1 0 1 2 Limit number of convenience stores that seLL beer. 0 0 0 1 1 - - Increase densities along major roadways. 0 0 0 1 1 Opposed to high density on ridgetops 0 1 0, 0 1 Revegetate natural areas. 0 0 0 1 1 Provide a noise buffer aLong SR -14 0 1 0 0 1 Keep the area between the river, Cordova Estates mobile home park and the future - SR -126 and Via Princessa for park, golfcourse, picnic uses. Wants Low density on the Santa Catarina 0 0 0 2 2 project site 0 0 0 2 2 The boundary of the proposed park south of whites Canyon Road in not correct. 0 1 0 1 2 Opposed to more high density along Sierra Highway 0 0 0 1 1 • Forum #1 was held at Arroyo Seco Junior High SchooL on Monday, June 11, 1990. Forum #2 was held at College of the Canyons on Thursday, June 14, 1990. " Forum #3 was held at OLd Orchard Elementary School on Monday, June 18, 1990. Forum #4 was held at Canyon Country High School on Thursday, June 21, 1990. LAND USE (CONT) - NUMBER OF COMMENTS RECEIVED• PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED #1 #2 #3 #4 TOTAL GPAC RESPONSE/ACTION PC RESPONSE/ACTION CC RESPONSE/ACTION Maintain the commercial and manufacturing uses in the Honby area. 0 0 0 1 1 The area north of Leona Cox Elementary school should be suburban residential. 1 0 0 0 1 Likes the idea of a business park in the Canyon Park. area. 0 0 0 1 1 Keep the Canyon Park area residential. 0 0 0 1 1 Expand the commercial manufacturing along .J Sierra Highway to the south. 0 0 1 0 1 Want moderate density along Sand Canyon Road north of SoLedad Canyon Road. 0 0 0 1 1 The area near the end of OakSpringsRoad is already moderate density. 0 1 0 1 2 Wants commercial along Soledad Canyon Road east of GaLeton Road. 0 0 0 1 1 The Low density residential area in PLacerita Canyon should be expanded. 0 0 2 0 2 The Low density residential area in PLacerita Canyon should not be expanded, ' it should be reduced. 0 0- 2 0 2 ' Wants to see business and commercial uses between Sierra Hwy and SR -14, north of PLacerita Canyon Road. 0 0 0 1 1 Placerita Canyon area should have a special planning (standards) district. 0 0 1 0 1 Specific Plan for the area between West Creek project and PLacerita Canyon Road. 0 1 0 0 1 Likes the business park at Golden Valley and Soledad Canyon Road. 0 1 0 0 1 * Forum #1 was held at Arroyo Seco Junior High School on Monday, June 11, 1990. Forum #2 was held at College of the Canyons on Thursday, June 14, 1990. Forum #3 was held at Old Orchard Elementary School on .Monday, June 18, 1990. - Forum #4 was held at Canyon Country High School on Thursday, June 21, 1990. Page 4 LAND USE (CONT) - NUMBER OF PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED #1 #2 COMMENTS RECEIVED* - - #3 #4 TOTAL GPAC RESPONSE/ACTION PCRESPONSE/ACTION CC RESPONSE/ACTION Locate the City HaLL site near Bouquet Junction. - 0 0 1 0 1 Keep the Bermite Property open space. 0 1 0 0 1 Add a commercial or industrial area in Placerita Canyon. 0 O 1 0 1 old Newhall should be medium high or high density residential. 0 1 1 0 2 Approves of commercial manufacturing on the east •� side of Pine Street. 0 0 2. 0 2 The channel of Lower NewhaLL Creek is concrete and shouLd not be identified as river/easement. 1 0 0 0 1 - The area west of I-5 at Ca Lgrove should be designated as employment/commercial. 1 0 0 0 1 The school site on Ca Lgrove is resident ial. 0 1 0 0 1 Specific PLan for the Gates Property. 0 1 0 0 1 Opposed to commercial or office uses along Wiley Canyon Road in Oakwood area. 0 1 0 0 1 Wants moderate density uses along Wiley Canyon Road in Oakwood area. 0 0 1 O 1 Wants park and open space uses in the Oakwood area. 0 0 1 0 1 Wants office uses at I-5 and Valencia Blvd. 1 0 0 0 1 The intersection of Sand and Lost Canyon Roads (and north of Sulphur Springs School) should be commercial. 0 0 0 1 1 Opposed to heavy industry in the Valencia Industrial Center. 0 1 0 0 1 • Forum #1 was held at Arroyo Seco.Junior High School on Monday, June 11, 1990. Forum #2 was held at College of the Canyons on Thursday, June 14, 1990. Forum #3 was held at old Orchard Elementary Schoo( on Monday, June 18, 1990. Forum #4 was held at Canyon Country High School on Thursday, June 21, 1990. Page 5 - - LAND USE (CONT) NUMBER OF COMMENTS RECEIVED• PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED #1 #2 #3#4 TOTAL GPAC RESPONSE/ACTION PC RESPONSE/ACTION CC RESPONSE/ACTION Put. office buildings not a 7-11 on the corner of Valencia Blvd and McBean Pkwy 0 1 0 0 1 Wants commmerciaL or high density north of Racquet CLub development. Q 0 0 1 1 Isolate city hall from everything else. 0 0 1 0 1 - The area of estate density in Sand Canyon - south of Mandalay Road should be very Low density residential. 1 0 0 0 1 The north east corner of Sand and Soledad Canyon Roads should be a commercial. and ' office center. 0 1 0 0 1 The intersection of Sand and Lost Canyon Roads.shouLd not be a mini maLL strip shopping center. 0 0 0 1 1 Put community commerciaL on PampLico Drive near top of the ridge. 0 0 1 0 1 - Opposed to a community commerciaL center on PampLico Drive at top of the ridge. D 0 1 0 1 Keep the Saugus Rehab site as undeveloped open space. 0 0 0 1 1 Put suburban residential south of Vernal. Drive and north of Haycreek Street. 0 0 0 1 1 Wants suburban residential. north of CopperhiLL Drive and HaskeLL Canyon Road. 0 0 0 1 1 Put commerciaL aLong upper Sierra Highway. 0 0 0 ' 1 1 No off-road vehicLe park in Whitney or ELsmere Canyons. 0 0 2 0 2 • Forum #1 was held at Arroyo Seco Junior High School on Monday, June 11, 1990. Forum 42 was held at CoLLege of the Canyons on Thursday, June 14, 1990. Forum #3 was held at Old Orchard Elementary SchooL on Monday, June 18, 1990. Forum 04 was held at Canyon Country High SchooL on Thursday, June 21, 1990. • Page 6 - NUMBER PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED #1 OF #2 - COMMENTS #3 #4 - CIRCULATION RECEIVED* _ TOTAL GPAC RESPONSE/ACTION PC RESPONSE/ACTION CC RESPONSE/ACTION Opposed to the WileyCanyon Bridge. 0 4 19 1 24 ' Rio Vista needs to be reevaluated, reconsidered, or restudied. 0 0 6 4 10 . Approves of the Wiley Canyon Bridge. 0 0 1 3 4 We need more roads. 0 1 0 3 4 - Widen the freeways and add more ramps. 0 1 0 3 4 Link Via Princesa to Magic Mountain, • rather than to Wiley Canyon. 0 0 1 2 3 Wants a east -west expressway that runs from freeway to freeway. 0 0 1 1 2 Opposed to an east -west expressway that runs from freeway to freeway. 0 0 0 1 1 Wants a north -south expressway across the middle of the valley. 0 0 1 1 2 SR -126 on the Central area map is shown on the wrong side of the river. 0 1 0 0 1 The Santa Clarity VaLLey..should be gridded Like the San Fernando Valley. 0 0 0 1 1 Whites Canyon Road should not carry through traffic. 0 0 2 0 2 ' No more private streets. 0 0 1 1 2 Need a transit system that allows people to easily get around (to shop, to play, " and to go to work) without a car. 0 0 0 2 2 The City should go to the voters to get the money needed to build roads. 0 0 0 1 1 • Forum #t was held at Arroyo Seco Junior High School an Monday, June 11, 1990. Forum #2 was held at College of the*.Canyons on Thursday, June 14, 1990. Forum #3 was held at OLd Orchard Elementary School on Monday, June 18, 1990. Forum #4 was held at Canyon Country High School on Thursday, June 21, 1990. Page 7 - . ._ CIRCULATION (CONT) NUMBER OF COMMENTS RECEIVED• - - PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED #1 #2 #3 #4 TOTAL GPAC RESPONSE/ACTION PC RESPONSE/ACTION CC RESPONSE/ACTION Reserve transit easements along SR -14. 0 0 0 1 1 Opposed to Backer Road as the primary access to the VaLencia Commerce Center, should use SR126 or I-5. 0 1 0 0 1 Put in a monorail system. 0 0- 0 1 1 - 40 " Forum #1 was heLd at Arroyo Seco Junior High School on Monday, June 11, 1990. Forum #2 was heLd at CoLLege of the Canyons on Thursday, June 14, 1990. Forum #3 was held at OW Orchard Elementary School on Monday, June 18, 1990. Forum #4 was held at Canyon Country High SchooL on Thursday, June 21, 1990. Page 8 * Forum #1 was held at Arroyo Seco Junior High SchooL on Monday, June 11, 1990. Forum #2 was held at College of the Canyons on Thursday, June 14, 1990. Forum #3 was held at OLd Orchard Elementary School on Monday, June 18,-1990. Forum #4 was heLd at Canyon Country High School on Thursday, June 21, 1990. 0 PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILTIES NUMBER OF COMMENTS RECEIVED* PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED #1 #2 #3 #4 TOTAL OPAC RESPONSE/ACTION PC RESPONSE/ACTION CC RESPONSE/ACTION Need a comprehensive -recycling program. 0 0 0 4 4 Concerns about schools. 0 0 0 2 2 Is the water suppLy and water pressure adequate? 0 0 0 2 2 FLood control in Oak Springs Canyon area. 0 0 0 2 2 City services and facilities should be distributed evenly throughout the City, not just in Valencia. 0 1 0 1 2 - Some street Lighting is inappropriate and inefficient. 0 0 0 1 1 We should be self sufficient in handling our own solid waste. 0 0 0 1 1 Need a new Library that is centraLLy Located with services for everyone. 0. 0 1 0 1 Canyon Country needs a new library. 0 0 1 0 1 The new City hall site should be the property at the southeastern corner of Bouquet Junction. 0 0 1 0 1 Put a new fairgrounds on the property - Located at the southeastern corner of Bouquet Junction. 0 0 1 0 1' ALLow hard bottom (concrete) river and stream channels in Sand Canyon area. 0 0 0 1 1 * Forum #1 was held at Arroyo Seco Junior High SchooL on Monday, June 11, 1990. Forum #2 was held at College of the Canyons on Thursday, June 14, 1990. Forum #3 was held at OLd Orchard Elementary School on Monday, June 18,-1990. Forum #4 was heLd at Canyon Country High School on Thursday, June 21, 1990. 0 10 * Forum #1 was held at Arroyo Seco Junior High School on Monday, June 11, 1990. Forum #2 was held at College of the Canyons on Thursday, June 14, 1990. Forum #3 was held at Old Orchard Elementary School on Monday, June 18, 1990. Forum #4 was held at Canyon Country High School on Thursday, June 21, 1990. NUMBER OF COMMENTS RECEIVED* - - PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED #1 02 #3 #4 TOTAL GPAC RESPONSE/ACTION PC RESPONSE/ACTION CC RESPONSE/ACTION Need more trails and bike lanes. 1 2 5 2 10 - - Areas along the Santa Clara River should be used for parks and for recreation (especially in the area of SoLedad ' Canyon Road and Sierra Hiway). 1 1 3 4 9 Need more parks. 2 1 1 0 4 Opposed to a bike path behind the houses along the South Fork near Lyons Ave. 0 1 2 0 3 Develop the Saugus rehab site as park. 1 0 0 2 3 Use easements and unbuilt right-of-ways for trails and green belts. 2 0 0 0 2 Need equestrian trails. 0 0 2 0 2 Develop the Bermite property as park or golf course. 0 1 0 0 1 Parks should include natural and undeveloped areas. 0 1 0 0 1 Wants a bike path along the South Fork near Lyons Ave. D 0 1 D 1 The maps should include traits along Placerita Creek. 0 0 1 0 1 10 * Forum #1 was held at Arroyo Seco Junior High School on Monday, June 11, 1990. Forum #2 was held at College of the Canyons on Thursday, June 14, 1990. Forum #3 was held at Old Orchard Elementary School on Monday, June 18, 1990. Forum #4 was held at Canyon Country High School on Thursday, June 21, 1990. is * Forum #1 was held at Arroyo Seco Junior High School on Monday, June 11, 1990. Forum #2 was held at College of the Canyons on Thursday, June 14, 1990. Forum #3 was held at Old Orchard Elementary School on Monday, June 18, 1990. Forum #4 was held at Canyon Country High School on Thursday, June 21, 1990. NUMBER OF COMMENTS RECEIVED* - -" PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED #1 #2 #3 #4 TOTAL GPAC RESPONSE/ACTION PC RESPONSE/ACTION CC RESPONSE/ACTION Control hillside development and protect ridgeLines. 0 3 2 11 16 Require adequate infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, schools, parks, etc.) in place before new development is approved, control the rate of growth. 1 0 0 6 7 Don't designate an area open space just because its unbuiLdable, protect real - - open space. 0 1 3. 1 5 • Stop aLL building activities. 2 0 0 2 4 Need a growth management method, not just a policy. 0 1 0 0 1 Build out the center of the valley first. 0 1 0 0 1 Ensure that new development with only a single access is not be allowed. 0 0 0 1 1 with aLL the building in the floodway, what will happen if we have another 1984 or Larger flood? 0 0 0 1 1 There should be a maximum net density for multifamily zoning. 0 0 D 1 1 Do not allowbuildingsin areas with unstable soils. 0 0 0 1 1 is * Forum #1 was held at Arroyo Seco Junior High School on Monday, June 11, 1990. Forum #2 was held at College of the Canyons on Thursday, June 14, 1990. Forum #3 was held at Old Orchard Elementary School on Monday, June 18, 1990. Forum #4 was held at Canyon Country High School on Thursday, June 21, 1990. Page 11 COMMUNITY DESIGN NUMBER OF COMMENTS RECEIVED* PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED #1 #2 #3 #4 TOTAL GPAC RESPONSE/ACTION PC RESPONSE/ACTION CC RESPONSE/ACTION Maintain community identities. 0 2 2 0 4 Higher density residential developments need recreational facilties for kids and families 1 0 0 0 1 Need a citywide theme. 0 1 0 0 1 GENERAL PROCESS • NUMBER OF COMMENTS RECEIVED - PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED #1 #2 #3 #4 TOTAL GPAC RESPONSE/ACTION PC RESPONSE/ACTION CC RESPONSE/ACTION Concerns about the general plan process and how the plan relates to zoning. 0 1 0 1 2 What are the popuLation and density projections for this plan. 0 1 0 1 2 The City needs to be responsible for what ' it is doing now, not just hide behind what the County did. 0 0 0 1 1 Need more public-forums/meetings before the public hearings. 0 0 0 1 1 The moderate density range is to broad. 0 0 1 0 1 Annex the Timberlane area and include the adjacent undeveloped areas. 0 0 1 0 1 Do not designate mobile home parks on the Land use map. 0 .1 0 0 1 Add Significant.EcoLogicat Areas to the Land use map(s). 0 0 0 1 1 Bring in movie industry, and teLecommun- ication businesses. 0 1 0 0 1 Forum #1 was held at Arroyo Seto Junior High Schoo Lon Monday, June 11, 1990. Forum #2 was held at ColLege of the Canyons on Thursday, June 14, 1990. Forum #3 was held at Old Orchard ELementary School on Monday, June 16, 1990. Forum #4 was held at Canyon Country High School on Thursday, June 21, 1990. GENERAL PLAN PUBLIC FORUM Program Agenda June, 1990 I. Welcome II. What is a General Plan? III. "Santa Clarita - Opportunities and Issues" Slide Show IV. The Concept Map V. How to Read the Preliminary General Plan Maps - Designations, Densities and Colors VI. Audience Review of Maps - Questions, Answers, Comments* *NOTE: Comments may be written on this page, folded and mailed back to the City. (Self-addressed on reverse side). 0) GENERAL PLAN PUBLIC FORUM Program Agenda June, 1990 id Welcome What is a General Plan? "Santa Clarita - Opportunities and Issues" Slide Show The Concept Map How to Read the Preliminary General Plan Maps - Designations, Densities and Colors Audience Review of Maps - Questions, Answers, Comments* *NOTE: Comments may be written on this page, folded and mailed back to the City. (Self-addressed on reverse side). A27WAia4' GENERAL PLAN PUBLIC FORUM Program Agenda June, 1990 I. Welcome II. What is a General Plan? 4 III. "Santa Clarita - Opportunities and Issues" Slide Show IV. The Concept Map V. How to Read the Preliminary General Plan Maps - Designations, Densities and Colors VI. Audience Review of Maps - Questions, Answers, Comments* Grr gyop 4,L, Q• Gv�/G.J D u�UG- al # 2#6 GA>UG J%te- $ynJ7Xl c!/ `%cJr1 �iTe_ G,�.�G moi[e,,o n Co.USia-,Ce� M42- 77/e (SND SoUTf! o� 71F �20Ga.Seo 6Dc Dem ✓h'CLe-fl /e0,4,0 /s Lam. "�FIE�IfiL.[-� /li%J�219�-) �iddD�GH�O�Gt%G7LA�'c�0 � /�2DT�G7'P�7 .8; fes/% �T TPi ozD ✓mAjlne.JU7S 7N �� 7ge- J (,o�c Desi �}T J9s f�i�ff ocNs,'/z /s No e -ON d Certs�b2/lG0 QUl29�e P© �I'o�1 0 rNE sire QCirl�UitiG- QviLOfi�� �00� /s u)f�h'T G-PJ�c 02S.�i79rP„r� Rovis-e� -lYem 7a ,g�c1l� ei2 Oesi�rn5�77o.� 7D 6e 0,4,17%6 -P, W/ V4 e, eY-/57)O6- C6 s . .1eee_gee, 9 aL;C,x47v4nfs o•F GoideoVa,(. 2d. �v �i/c c --l- .f(�_, —Plebe ,7t �m pcjbl'G reacvdib YAC /"�O,/,S/*t/c�c, /5sv e_) . T{ l6►se, COA ,ne.. () a3 dNQ5 4ALC L. Ssjc^s. `Txa o asa y *NOTE: Comments may be written on this page, folded and mailed back to the City. ( Self-addressed on reverse side) . %�.640- s> < —X/- yJfA e. 6�z c� go GT City of Santa 23920 Valencia Suit 300 Santa Clarita, June 25, 1990 Clarita Blvd. CA 91355 Ms. Lynn Har. -IA Director of Development Dear Lynn: J Uj; 2 6 1990 COMMUNITY O-VELOPMENT CITY of SANTA CLARITA Thank you for answering all those questions at the public forum at Canyon High School on June 21st. I know it must be very difficult for you to step in on a project that has been in effect for some time. It's hard to know all the problems that have been slowly cropping up to lead to all the hostilities from a group of people that just don't want to understand or care to understand that others can live here also. I commend you and your staff"for your patients. After I left the meeting, I realized that I didn't think of a couple of questions that were not addressed. 1. What type of provisions have been.made to stop "High Rise" buildings from being built? I would like to see two story height limitation because of the beautiful mountains surrounding our valley. I really don't want this valley to look like Ventura Blvd. in the San Fernando Valley. 2. Could you please have your staff write some of the major street names on the individual maps so the public can locate their property when they write their comments on them. I found that the Newhall map had part of Valencia on it. The North side of 16th St. going West is Valencia. I'm sure those people that live there w:ill,.be-happy to be moved to the proper map. Thank you for gettingthe public involved with the General Plan. It's important for;°them.to.feel that their voices have been heard. 4 M Sincerely, Laura Mehterian 22890 W. 15th St., Newhall, CA 91321 259-0306 0 r 25049 De Wolfe Road Newhall, California, 91321 June 15. 1990 j City of Santa Clarita Community Development Department 23920 Valencia Blvd. Chris Trinkley: After attending one of the public forums I was told to contact you by one of the GPAC members regarding the sale of produce from a vehicle. At the City Council meeting last year it was decided to refer the question of produce sales from a vehicle to GPAC. Since we have not heard from GPAC we would like to know where this matter stands at this time. People in this community do want the outdoor sale of produce continued, this is why they signed a petition requesting it to remain a part of their community. At the present time outdoor produce sales are licensed with all other venders (merchandise, food, etc.). We would be more than willing to meet with GPAC so that this service to'the community and be incorporated into the planning of the community. Please call us at 259-3926 or 254-5375. Thank you; C7— Ed Ed Ramsey Terry Ramsey 0 une i 9, t 990 Burn 11. Harris. Director Community Development 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 300 Santa Clarita, CA 91355 Dear Ms. Harris: 0 That «as a grand meeting at Old Orchard School last evening — informative and thought provoking. Here are some of our thoughts for your review. Although there are concerns with large developers of Hillside properties, there are many smaller 5 to 20 acre parcels that should be addressed. The smaller parcels should be included in the Special Management Areas and should have a density of one dwelling per 5 acres where the slopes exceed 25%. With protection of both primary and secondary ridgelines, excessive grading would be prevented, and the integrity of the hillside would be preserved. The use of clustering on areas designated hillside should be restricted to where the dwelling units are clustered on more or less level land, leaving the steeper slopes in their natural state. The formula for determining the number of allowable units should not be used to circumvent the 1 du per 5 acres in the Hillside Management area. The slope rating system (steep, moderate, low) should not be massaged to approve a subdivision for a developer's plan to build as many dwellings as he wishes when the slopes are steep by destroying the hills to attain the desired number of pads. There are many unique small rural areas in the Santa Clarita Valley, each entirely different, but still part of the city. They each have their hillsides, blind canyons, animal life, dirt roads, and, yes, even flooding. The residents who live in these small areas wish to maintain this rural atmosphere. Bulldozing down the hillsides to create pads and cover the hillsides with houses .would devastate the lifestyle of the neighborhood. Rural residential should not only apply to small farms on 5 acres, but also to those parcels that are in the hillside and canyon areas. It may come to the point where each of these small canyon areas will have to be determined on a canyon by canyon basis rather then included in a general overall land use plan. We hope you will consider these hillside/canyon areas carefully, and determine that the density should be one dwelling per 5 acres. Sincerely,� Pohn and Barbara Bradley 214755 Golden Oak Lane Newhall CA 91321 /"' A --'e7 0 Community Development Department City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Third Floor Santa Clarita, Ca 91355 i Rosemary Hardin 27380 Garza Drive Santa Clarita, CA 91350 I attended the first general plan public forum at Arroyo Seco Junior High School tonight and I have the following comments: 1) I was pleasantly surprised at the willingness to answer questions and the encouragement for public input. I only hope it is not just a "show" but that all citizen suggestions will.be fairly reviewed and incorporated into the plan where possible. I hope city officials have elections (reference: Prop that we want leaders who are taken note from the last two "P" and city council seat) responsive to the community. 2) I urge you to acquire the entire Saugus Rehab Site and preserve it as parkland. An unstructured park would be nice with a lot of open space. Along with general public benefit, it would be a refreshing stop for the people using the planned equestrian and bicycle trails. I think it would be great if there would be a way to control overuse of the area by people from outside the city. Maybe citizens of the city could be issued yearly free passes with proof of residency. A. per/person fee could be charged to non -city users. This might encourage annexation throughout the county -governed areas of our valley. I believe this is being done at some city -owned beach parks in the Redondo Beach and Santa Monica areas. Many Santa Clarita Valley people I know have given up on going to Lake Castaic on the weekends due to this problem. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, 'Rosemary c/2: C. Boyer J. Darcy J. Heidt J. Klajic H. McKeown RECEIVED JUN 2 0 1990