HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-02-25 - AGENDA REPORTS - COMMUTER RAIL STATION (3)AGENDA REPORT
City Manager Ap
Item to be pres
Re) ZF44Z"Kq.MIm�) IIsiA
DATE: . February 25, 1992
SUBJECT: COMMUTER RAIL STATION, Resolution No. 92-47, A Resolution
Certifying Negative Declaration 92-009, Prepared for the
Commuter Rail Site Lease Agreement and Associated Development
Applications (PP 92-002, etal).
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
BACKGROUND:
On February 26, 1991, the Council adopted Resolution No. 91-21 and applying
for funding, establishing the City's intention to construct, in coordination
with the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission (LACTC), a Commuter Rail
station. Staff was directed to focus on the "Bermite Property" as the primary
location, with the "Glazier" and "Gates" properties as alternate locations..
Pursuant to the Council's direction and CEQA, initial studies were conducted
on all three sites in September 1991, it was determined that a negative
declaration would be appropriate for the first two sites, and, that an EIR
would likely be required for development of the "Gates" property. Public
Works staff also worked with the "Bermite Property" owner, the Whittaker
Corporation, to secure a lease agreement for devlopment of the station on an
approximately ten acre portion of that site.
On September 24, 1991, the Council conceptually approved the Lease Agreement
with the owners of the "Bermite Property", and conceptually approved a
proposed Negative Declaration for that agreement and associated site
development plans. Staff was directed to complete the Negative Declaration
and return it to Council for final certification.
The Community Development Department has prepared a Negative Declaration for
the project. -in compliance... with ..CEQA-requirements. Technical appendices to
Negative Decalation 92-009 include the following: Phase I Archaelogical
Study, Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Oak Tree Report, Traffic Impact Study,
and a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Toxic Report). The Initial Study
and technical appendices are available for public review in the City Clerk's
office.
The Initial Study and supporting documentation indicate that development of
this site will have no significant impact on the environment with
incorporation of mitigation measures. Mitigation measures identified in the
Initial Study have been incorporated into the Commuter Rail lease agreement,
site plan, and related construction specification plans. Mitigation measures
Continued To.. -3 5 � Agenda Item:
include, but are not limited to: traffic improvements and',signalization on
Soledad Canyon Road at the location of the station, -on-site parking and
landscaping improvements,. site design to avoid removal of two Heritage oak
trees, and appropriate construction practices to reduce noise, air quality
impacts, and erosion.
All required notices and public review periods for the proposed Negative
Declaration have been completed, and no correspondence regarding the lease
agreement or the proposed Negative Declaration has been received from any
agency or from the public.
Staff recommends that the City Council take action to �dopt Resolution No.
92-47, certifying proposed Negative Declaration 92-009, for the Commuter Rail
Lease Agreement and associated site development plans
Resolution No. 92-47
Proposed Negative Declaration 92-009
DMW:138
RESOLUTION NO. 92-47
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA
CERTIFYING NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 92-009 FOR
THE COMMUTER RAIL LEASE AGREEMENT AND RELATED APPLICATIONS,
IN THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, LOS ANGELES COUNTY
WHEREAS, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby make the following findings
of fact:
a. The City of Santa Clarita proposes to lease an approximately ten -acre
site and, in coordination with the Los Angeles. County Transportation
Commission (LACTC), to construct a public commuter rail station to
provide commuter rail service between the cities of Santa Clarita and
Los Angeles. This project will utilize existing leased track of the
Southern Pacific Railroad and will include construction of a 500'
platform and canopy, parking facilities, commuter bus facilities,
bike paths, street improvements, and associated signalization.
Landscaping and irrigation are also included -as part of the project
design.
b. In June 1991, the City's Public Works Department prepared and
submitted an environmental questionnaire along with proposed lease
agreement to the Community Development Department. The Community
Development Department reviewed the proposal to assess potential
environmental effects andGeneralPlan consistency.
C. The proposal (the lease and associated site development plans to be
submitted later) is determined to be a project per the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has been reviewed pursuant to
its provisions. In August 1991, The Community Development Department
completed the draft Initial Study on this project and determined that
the project as proposed would not have any significant effect on the
environment. On September 25, 1991, the City Council conceptually
certified the negative declaration and conceptually approved the
proposed lease agreement. The Council directed that the negative
declaration be returned to Council for final .certification upon
finalization of the lease agreement.
d._..In- January, ...1991,._the.Community..Development: Department. completed, the
final Initial Study on this project and determined that the project
as proposed would not have a significant effect on the environment,
with the adoption of mitigation measures identified in the Initial
Study. These mitigation measures have been incorporated into the
lease agreement, sitedesign and proposed construction plans. The
Initial Study also determined that project implementation will not
impact resources protected by the California Department of Fish and
Game and that a finding of de minimus impact on such resources is
appropriate.
Resolution No. 92-47
Page 2
SECTION 2. Based upon the above findings of fact and upon studies
and investigations made on behalf of the City Council, the City Council'
further finds as follows:
a. At its meeting of February 25, 1992, the City Council considered the
agenda report, the Negative Declaration and corresponding
environmental documents as needed, including, but not limited to, the
Initial Study prepared for the project.
b. Based on the Initial Study, the project does not -have the potential
to adversely effect the environment or resources under the protection
of the California Department of Fish and Game, and no significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of project implementation.
C. A proposed Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project
based on the Initial Study findings and determination that the
proposed project could not have a significant effect on the
environment.
d. A notice of environmental assessment was. posted and advertised, and
the proposed Negative Declaration was made available for a 30 day
review period in compliance with CEQA and other State law.
e. No correspondence regarding the project has been received from any
agency, or from the public, during the 30 day review period.
SECTION 3. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the City
Council hereby determines that;
a. The project is compatible with existing and proposed development in
the area, consistent with the Residential Suburban/Valley Center
Overlay General Plan land use designation, and complies with the uses
allowed in the M 1.5 (Limited Heavy Manufacturing) zone.
b. The project will not have a significant impact on the environment or
on resources under the protection of the California Department of
Fish and Game.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
..Santa.Clarita,.California as -follows:
a. The City Council hereby certifies the Negative Declaration prepared
for the project.
'Resolution No. 92-47
Page 3
b. The City Council hereby approves that a final determination of
Negative Declaration be issued.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day.of 1992.
Jill Klajic, Mayor
ATTEST:
Donna M. Grindey, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) ss
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA)
I, Donna M. Grindey, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing
Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita
at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of , 1992 by
the following vote of Council:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Donna M. Grindey, City Clerk
ENV/136
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
NEGAT IVE DECLARAT ION
[X] Proposed [ ] Final
PERMIT/PROJECT: Commuter Rail Station, City of Santa Clarita (Lease/Site Plan)
APPLICANT: City of Santa Clarita MASTER CASE NO: 92-009
LOCATION OF THE PROJECT: The approximately ten -acre site is a small portion
of the "Bermite" property, located .75 miles east of Bouquet Canyon Road on
the south side of Soledad Canyon Road immediately east and adjacent to the
Saugus Speedway site, and generally north of the SPRR right-of-way. (APN's
2836-011-012; -012-010,011; and -010-909 are affected.)
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT: The City of Santa Clarita and the Los Angeles
County Transportation Commission propose to construct a commuter rail station
for the purpose of establishing a public transporation rail link between the
City of Santa Clarita and the City of Los Angeles. The passenger platform
will be approximately .500 feet long by 30 feet wide and will include a canopy
structure for protection. The project will also include a parking area, with
approximately 525 spaces for use by commuting rail passengers.
............... ==•====......... =...... ___________...... _____________.........
__
Based on the information contained in the Initial Study prepared for this
project, and pursuant to the requirements of Section 15065 of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Santa Clarita
[X]City Council [ ]Planning Commission [ ]Director of Community Development
finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant effect
upon the environment, and that a Negative Declaration shall be adopted
pursuant to Section 15070 of CEQA.
Mitigation measures for this project
[ ] are not required. [ ] are attached
LYNN M. HARRIS
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Prepared by: Mr. Leg Lisecki. Project Ma
(Sign ure)
00,
Reviewed b
ign u )
Approved by:
Public Review Period From 01/18/92 To 02/17/92
[x] are not attached.
Myra Frank & Associates
(Name/Title)
Don Williams, Senior Planner
(Name/Title)
Don Williams, Senior Planner
(Name/Title)
Public Notice Given On 01/18/92 By: r
[X] Legal advertisement. [ ] Posting of properties. [X] Written.notice.
CERTIFICATIE:
ON DAT