Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-10-27 - AGENDA REPORTS - DENIAL OF MC 92 093 (2)AGENDA REPORT City Manager Approv Item to be presented UNFINISHED BUSINESS � DATE: OC*ober 27, 1992 SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commission's denial of Master Case 92.093 (Time Extension 92-015) to allow a one year time extension of Tentative Tract Map 48379 located at 17731-17745 Scherzinger Lane. Applicant: Oliver Stone DEPARTMENT: Community Development _ On July 21,1992, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution P92-28 formally denying the above referenced project. On June 19, 1990, the project, Tentative Tract Map 48379, received approval from the City of Santa Clarita for a 35 -unit condominium complex on 1.77 acres of land. At the time of approval, the City's General Plan was being drafted. It was subsequently adopted on dune 26, 1991. The expiration date of the project is June 19, 1992. On May 26, 1992, Mr. Jeffrey Krieger, an agent for the applicant, filed an application with the Community Development Department requesting approval for a one-year time extension of Tentative Tract Map 48379. The zoning of the property is R-3 (multi -family, maximum 30 units per acre) and the General Plan Designation is RM (Residential Moderate, 6.7-15.0 units per acre). The project has a density of 20 units per acre. The request for the time extension was denied by the Director of Community Development on the basis that the project Is Inconsistent with the intent and objectives of the General Plan. The denial was issued on May 26, 1992. On June 10, 1992, the Community Development Department received a letter from Mr. Krieger requesting an appeal of the Director's decision to the Planning Commission. The project was heard by the Planning Commission on July 7,1992. Elizabeth Watson, attorney for the applicant, testified at this meeting, requesting that the Planning Commission overturn the Director'sdenial of the application. No persons spoke in opposition to the request. Following the hearing, the Commission determined that the granting of the applicant's request (a one year time extension) would not ensure the recordation of the Tract Map. Therefore, the Planning Commission denied the time extension. OPTIONS The City Council may: 1) Uphold the Planning Commission's decision, denying the project: 2) Approve the time extension, directing staff to prepare a resolution for the Council's consideration. -APPROVED Agenda Item: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: 1) Uphold the Planning Commission's denial of time extension 92-015 and thereby deny the appeal 2) Direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial for the Council's consideration at the I November 10 1992 meeting. Resolution Number P92-28 Planning Commission Staff Report Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of July 21, 1992 agn9-22.sdb G CITY OF SANTA CLARITA INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Ma or la c and embers of a Ci Council � �� FROM: Lynn- Harris, Director of ommunity Development DATE: October 27, 1992 SUBJECT: Master Case 92-093, Time Extension 92.018 On September 21, 1992, this item was continued by the City Council to the regular City Council meeting of October 27, 1992, and was announced as such. SDB:11 curren0sr92093.sdb Agenda Item: (, RESOLUTION NO. P92-28 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, DENYING TIME EXTENSION 92-015 (MASTER CASE :NUMBER 92-093), FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 48379 LOCATED AT 17731.AND 17745 SCHERZINGER LANE, NORTH OF ADON AVENUE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission does hereby make the following findings of fact: a. An application for Time Extension 92-105 was filed with the City of Santa Clarita on May 5, 1992, by Jeffrey Krieger on behalf of Mint Canyon Partners (the "applicant"). The property for which this entitlement has been filed is located at„17731 and 17745 Scherzinger Lane, north of Adon Avenue (Assessor Parcel Numbers 2839-020-012, 012.) The project site is 1.77 gross acres in size. b. This project is a request for a one year time extension of tentative tract map 48379, which was approved by the Planning Commission on June 19, 1990. C. The project was denied by the Director of Community Development on May 26, 1992. d. A request to appeal the Director's decision of denial was received by the Community Development Department oa.June 16, 1992. e. The project site is relatively flat. There are no oak trees on the property. f. The subject parcel'is zoned R-3 (Limited Multiple Residential) and is designated as RM (Residential Moderate), with a density range of 6.7 to'15.0 units per acre, by the City's General Plan. g. The surrounding land uses are multi family residential to the north, single and multi family residential to the south, multi family residential to the east, and commercial to the 'west. The project site and surrounding areas are designated RM (Residential Moderate) and CC (Community Commercial) by the City's General Plan. Reso P92-28 Page 2 h. Proposed access to -the project will be from Scherzinger Lane. i. A duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on June 16, .1992 at 7:00 P.M. at the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita. The Commission continued the item to the meeting of July 7, 1992. SECTION 2. Based upon the above findings of fact, oral and written testimony and other evidence received at the public hearing held for the project, and upon studies and investigations made by the Planning Commission and on its behalf, the Planning Commission further finds as follows: a. The project was originally approved when there was no General Plan adopted by the City. The City's General Plan, adopted June 26, 1991, has a designation for the project site of Residential Moderate (6.7 to 15.0 units per acre, 11.0 units per acre midpoint). The project density of 20.0 units per acre is not consistent with this designation. b. The proposed use, development of the land and the application of development standards, when considered on the basis of the suitability of the site for particular use or development intended, is not arranged to insure public health, safety, and general welfare, prevent adverse effects on neighboring property and is not in conformity with good zoning practice, due to the project's inconsistency with the General Plan. SECTION 3.' Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the Planning Commission hereby determines as follows: a. There is no reasonable likelihood that the project will be recorded within the next twelve months. b. The applicant .has not. substantiated the required burden of proof for the granting of a one year time extension. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita, California, as follows: a. The Planning Commission hereby upholds the Director's decision to deny Time Extension 92-015, a request to allow for a one year time extension of a 35 unit condominium complex. Reso P92-28 Page 3 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of July, 1992. i . L, Jerry D. Cherrington, Chairman Planning Commission ATTEST: Jjf7 •, ynn M. Harris �� Director of Community Development STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) as CITY OF SANTA CLARITA) I. Donna M: Grindey, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the. Planning Commission of the City. of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 21st day of July, 1992 by the following vote of the Planning Commission: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Cherrington,Woodrow, Brathwaite, Modugno.and Doughman NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None SDB:283 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF'THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA Tuesday July 7, 1992 7:00 p.m. ITEM 5: TIME EXTENSION 92-015 (MASTER CASE NO. 92-093) - Located at 17731 and 17745 Scherzinger Lane. A letter was received from the first trust deed holder on the property in question, and Assistant City Attorney Timothy McOsker read the letter for the public record and advised the Commission on a recommended course of action. At 7:35 p.m. Chairman Chen'ington allowed statements from the public. Ms. Elizabeth Watson, attomey for the first trust deed holder, spoke In favor of approval of the extension. The Commission asked questions of the speaker and moved on to a discussion. Vice -Chairman Woodrow made a motion to uphold the Director's denial thereby dehying Time Extension 92-015 and direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial for adoption at the next regularly . scheduled meeting of July 21, 1992, Commissioner Modugno seconded the motion, and the item: was denied by a vote of 4-1, with Commissioner Brathwaite dissenting. CITY OF SANTA CLARITA STAFF REPORT APPEAL OF TIME EXTENSION 92-015 MASTER CASE NUMBER 92-093 DATE: June 16, 1992 TO: Chairman Cherrington and Members of the 'Planning ` Commission FROM: Lynn M. Harris, Director of Community DevelopmentpO PROJECT PLANNER: Sarona Becker, Planning Technician APPLICANT: Mint Canyon Partners LOCATION: 17731 and 17745 Scherzinger Lane, north iof Adon Avenue. Assessor's Parcel Numbers 2839-020-011, 012. REQUEST: BACKGROUND: The applicant is appealing the Director's denial of a one year time extension on a previously approved 35 -unit tract map (TTM 48379). On June 19, 1990, the project site received approval from the City of Santa Clarita'for a 35 -unit condominium complex on 1.77 acres of land. Existing zoning 'cif the parcels is R-3. The expiration date of the. project is June 19, 1992. The City's General Plan now depicts the property in the Residential Moderate category, which allows a lesser density. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project site is an approximately 1.2 net acre parcel, located at the northwest end of the southerly cul-de-sac on Scherzinger Lane. The parcel has a gross area of 1.77 acres. The approved project was for 35 condominiums to be constructed within one building. Parking spaces for residents were to be provided within a subterranean parking garage. Access to the project was proposed via Scherzinger Lane. The project was granted a plot plan approval for apartment use in August, 1989. This approval has subsequently expired. Agenda Item: - Staff Report Time kxtension 92-015 Page 2 of 2 SURROUNDING LAND USE/ZONING/GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY: The existing zoning, General Plan designation and existing land uses of the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: General Plan Zone Land use Project RM (Residential R-3 Proposed Multi -family Moderate) North RM (Residential R-3 Multi -family Moderate) East RM (Residential R-3 Multi -family Moderate) South RM (Residential R-3 Flag lot -Single-family Moderate) and Multi -family Vest CC (Community C-3 Commercial Commercial) ANALYSIS: OnMay26, 1992, Mr. Jeffrey Krieger (an agent for the owner) filed an application with the Community Development Department requesting approval for a one-year time extension of Tentative Tract Map 48379. The zoning of the property is R-3 (multi -family, maximum 30 units per acre) and the General Plan Designation is RM (Residential Moderate, 6.7- 15.0 unitg.per acre). Prior to submittal, the applicant met with staff to discuss the feasibility of the time extension. Because the project density is greater than the General Plan designation for the site, he was advised that the application would most likely be denied. On May 26, 1992, the project was issued a denial because the density was greater than the density allowed under the General Plan. The project proposes a density of 20.0 units per acre while the General Plan.allows a maximum of 15.0 units per acre. Staff believes that the denial of the request for a time extension, based on the density range identified in the General Plan, was appropriate. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Commission uphold the Director's decision and thereby deny the appeal. SDB:254 VICINITY MAP N.T.S. PROXIMITY MAI; MC 92-093 TE 92-015 HL n 1 - - — e' A 1 2500' e I / \ i SUBJECT SITE 300' `7 4 !'7 TR - N0� magioll �� .�► Vii►®� AM ®.ill►� � s ��C71 0'to rte. 'i ���lllilnu, �• Qe�� ►liar SENT BY=GREENBERGI GLUSKER An muw N. N."MI{RA MtlLV OLBCKR BIDNEI J. MADNTIMO{N ETLfNLM CLAMAN IN RAM 11 I.., , N, rhgDMAM "IN.. on Curun JOIN J. CALL* PAULA J. PETER* M.nAEL X. .,.no buN 1. vJKD {VINE GREENE JCMCrN M. "An NN L. MINNE NORMAN h. LEVINE MILLLLM L MAI.AMALMA A J.MCI G RCRMNILIM ROOM N. NM.MMAM AU RROBERT F. t[xIµm. A. IN. N. Rwu. NUANAIt M. 41[n uME GEMINI S. [LLLI" DART L. RMLAM COBE" ., IARNEE LA -..0V, man [. IL!/ ... n.... MARC A. STAMRLMCM 10-27-92 : 3:11PM : 310553087- 805 259 81254 2 LAW OFFICES OF RG, GLUSKFR, FIELDS, CLAMAN 4L MACNTINGER ROBERTA M. 'MOL„ ..R .I`MAVEN IDOO AVON C OF TMC STAR& JILL E. BMBTIB DARRYL M,CWETER SUITE 8000 NM. cOOL{MCN LOS ANGELES CALIFORNIA 00069 GLENN K. 1 LRMLM ELRABETN M, ET fL10M ftGM C,.. . 'AMC,... . U.iiet. TELERNON 1. (310) SLJI•I610 ONNS"E B. MERRTEN G.WD A. MEMTEN FAA, l to) ssS•aw P.TMIC4 M.I ATT N.NM1Y pN BONNEA. B C. Am, ONR[NAEI L, EUNANrn A. ANI. WRITCA•s DI RECT DIAL NMMA[R ..NMC B. NCL Ck JEEFRETA. MIEGRAYER (310) 201-7439 RILRA97 T. - INAM.LNC.LMIR 404A.L IDNNAR M GAZIN EGIMAR1 M.. OUR IL[ NUYACgI WRL11NL N. BEIBRAD UEL 8175 -000.82 Honorable Members bf City Council I city of Santa clay to 23920 Valencia Bou ev Santa Clarita, Cal fo October 27 1922 RtCEIVED AND MADE A PART OF THE RECORD AT the Santa Clarita 91355 Re: Master Case No. 92-093/Map Extension Appeal 9 Tentativjb Tract Map No. 48379/17731 and 17745 Honorable City This letter iI submitted on behalf of our client, 01] Stone, the holder :f the first trust doed on the above -re! Property (the "Property"). Mr. Stone has taken an active seeking the extens on of the above -referenced Tentative Tx (the "Tentative Me 11) due to a bankruptcy filing by the m the Property, Mint Canyon Partners L.P. ("Mint Canyon"). Recently, Mint Can on's bankruptcy petition was dismissed, allowing Mr. Stone to proceed immediately to obtain title control of the Property. A. On Mr. Stone' Tentative Map in a The Tentative Map "Project") on 1.77 a transitional nai Across from the Pr the south is a fiv which are on,septi approximately 20 d neighboring comple 8175800082.179858.271 behalf, we have requested an extension i effort to protect the value of his seeu) pproved a 35 -unit condominium complex (t) acres located at the and of Scherzinger 1 hborhood of small dwellings and trailers perty is a 62 -unit apartment complex and -building complex of dwelling units, bot! Systems. The Project density is elling units per acre, while both of the as contain 30 dwelling units per acre. ) in Map of and the Y. of SENT BY:GREENBERG, GLUSKER :10-27-92 : 3:12PM : 310553087» 805 259 8125:# 3 GREENBERG, GLUSKER, F�ELDS, CLAMAN & MACHTINGIER Honorable Member of the Santa Clarita City Council October 27, 1992 Page 2 I The Planning Commission denied the Tentative Map extension request based on the.density reductions adopted in the Cit FIG General Plan, whiah specifies a range of from 6.7 units to 10 units per acre, r then than the 20 dwelling units per acre approved by the T ntative Map, The Planning Commissioners also expressed concern that, since Mint Canyon was in bankruptcy and Mr. Stone did not have title to the Property, the filing o a final map would nt likely occur within a one-year Tentati a Map extension period. B. ZKFOmAiion TO SUPPORT TENTATTVIS MAP EXTENSION I Since the Planning Commission hearing on this matter, we have learned sign ficant information not previously avails le to us through the assistance of Mint Canyon's architect, Mr. Zd. Piazza, and the Project engineer, Newman Engineering Associates. Moreover, certain events have occurred since that hearing hick are pertinent to this decision. We believe that these critical facto establish a tenuating circumstances relating to this Tentative Map which support the granting of the extension. Briefly, those itims are as follows: 1. Mint CJyon's bankruptcy petition has been dismis ed, and the Property foreclosure sale is set for Thursday of th s week. Consequent y, Mr. Stone can proceed to obtain contro of the Property, all wing him to pursue recordation of a final map. 2. We have learned that the Project was ready for a building permit w en Hint Canyon's financial problems surfs ed nearly two years go. specifically, the Project arehiteot, Mr. Ed Piazza, submit ed detailed plans to the City for plan ch ck in 1990. A plan the k fae was paid, the Building Department reviewed the plan and identified correction items, and tho e plan corrections ere made. Consequently, this Project could proceed without delay based on those plans. 3. We will voluntarily offer to designate a portion f the Project as affordabla housing consistent with the City's standards governing the Tentative Map. While the City soul not impose thin as a c ndition of the Tentative Map extension, ire will volunteer auc a restriction. The Property is located in a transitional neigh orhood suitable for affordable housing. We understand that th s Project would be the first in the City to voluntarily offer o meet those City affordability guidelines. The Project will rppresent a substantial upgrade of the neighborhood and w Il assist the city in meeting its State law 61756000/-IM56.231 SENT BY:GREENBERG, GLUSKER oRE1:NBERO, OLU3KER, Fl CLAMAN & MACHTINGI Honorablo.Members October 27, 1992 Page 3 obligation to prov affordable housing 4. The Tent line approximately Property. goo Ten apartment building septic systems. A the Property but & Scharzinger Lane. street -from the Pr at the end of the 5. The Ter complex on 1.77 a units per acre. Map was approved Project is oompat the densities of previously noted, Lana contain appr Tentative Map den surrounding area. 10-27-92 : 3:13PM : US, 2, 310553087- the 10553087 the Santa Clarity City Council its "fair share" of the regional ve Map requires the extension of the 000 feet up 6char2inger Lana to the ive Map Condition No. 23. The existi and rosidencea on scherzinger Lane are rdingly, the sewer line can service n oximately 100 other residential units e 61 -unit apartment building across t rty and the five -building apartment c -de-sae both rely solely on septic sy ve Map approved a 35 -unit condominium Of land at a density of approximately permitted density at the time the Tanta far greater -- 30 units per acre. The with the neighborhood and consistent k ounding multi -unit residential projects adjacent apartment buildings on Scherz ately 30 dwelling units per acre. The is consistent with the development of 6. In addition to the lower density, the Project is shorter in height than the 62 -unit building across the str That building is approximately 34 feet in height at the fr property line, while the maximum Project height at the fro: will be 27 feet. 7. Although the Project was designed more than two ago, it fully cone rms with the current City parking code respects, providin86 parking spaces. 9. Newmnn E ineering Associates, the engineers for Canyon, have adviead us that the final map could be comple, filed and recorded well within the period of a one-year extension. As the lender assembling all of Consequently, the to -these items. Mi position to obtain doubts of certain the recordation of accomplished withi: etna000tsz•t tvue.zat representative, we have had difficulty isinformation in a timely fashion. anning Commission was not fully informed ®over, the fact that Mr. Stone is now in ontrol of the Property may have resolved anning Commissioners who were concerned 1 he final map could not feasibly be a one-year extension period. Finally, wi 259 61254 4 for 1 on only As all as a the SENT BY:GREENBERG GLUSKER GREENBERG,GLUSKER,FI CLAMAN & MACHTINGI Honorable Members October 27, 1992 Page 4 10-27-92 7 3:13PM DS, 310553087 the Santa Clarita city Council understand that th s Project would be the first to offer to meet City affordable housing guidelines. C. LEGAL SA ES TO SUPPORT WNTamrvc V%n cvm' In our July 7 1992 letter to the Planning Commission, outlined our legal objections to the denial of the Tentativ extension and we i corporate that letter herein by referenc addition, ws.belie a that a denial of the extension would v State laws intonde4 to promote the construction of housing specifically, Government Code 665913(b) discloses the legislative intentil stating: "(b) Th that the been inc process that vit halted o, to the o' neces so as to and stat housing In furtherance of requires special housing developme 11 (j) Whe complies and dove that the is dater, roposes t uaon shall bas housing di supported that both 817MU2-179856,231 Legislature further finds and declares :osts of new housing developments have used, in part, by the existing permit A by existing land use regulations and ly needed housing developments have been rendered infeasible despite the benefits lie health, safety, and welfare of those to and despite the absence of adverse tal impacts. It is, therefore, to enact this chapter and to amand tatutes which govern housing development rovida greater encouragement for local governments to approve needed and sound velopments." policy, Government Code 565589.5(j) gs before a local agency can disapp hat statute diotates that: a proposed housing development project lith the applicable general plan, zoning, )pment policies in effect at the time lousing development project's application .ned to be complate, but the local agency :o disapprove the project or to approve ie condition that the project be at a lower density, the local agency i its decision regarding the proposed 'velopment project upon written findings by substantial evidence on the record of the following conditions exist: 259 81254 5 ly Hap in R SENT BY:GREENBERG, GLUSKER :10-27-92 : 3:14PM : 310553087- 805 259 81254 6 OREENBERG,GLUSKER,FI CLAMAN & MACHTING. Honorable Members October 27, 1992 Page 5 IN ( 1 ) have a public that the density. DS, the Santa Clarita City Council 1 housing development project would ecifiel adverse impact upon the alth or safety unless the project is 'ad or approved upon the condition Project be developed at a lower 11(2) Thre is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse Impact ientified pursuant to paragraph (1), ot: than the disapproval of the housing development Project r the approval.of the project upon the conditio that it be developed at a lower We understand that when the Tentative Map was originally approved, the City certified a Negative Declaration finding no unmitigated envir0 ental impacts. Moreover, we are aware f no evidence of an adv rse health or safety impact attributable to the Project. Aceo dingly, we do not believe the statutory findings required or a denial can be made in this case. n. CONCLUSI N This Project will represent a substantial upgrade of t neighborhood and w ll provide much needed affordable'housin units in a neighborhood suited to that type of development. The Tentative Map also provides an opportunity to extend the so r line approximately 2,000 fact CO as to avoid situations like the 52 -unit apartment 11111ding on a septic system across the str at. We understand that the Tentative Map was approved originally, in Part* because the Project was doomed compatib e with the neighborhood and consistent with the density of oxi ting apartment projects surrounding the'Property. The R-3 zoning then in effect allowed a maximum density of.30-units par acre. Tie Tentative Map. was all below that density. 1n addition to tie sewer line, the nearly 50 conditions of approval imposed by s Tentative May require installing a traffic signal and rastri ing the intersection of 6cherzinger Lane and Sierra Highway; contributing to a fund for flood control channel improvement¢; and contributing to A fund to establish secondary access. The Project p4n& have been through plan check and the inal map could be record d feasibly within a one-year extension period. Accordingly, we are hopeful that the City Council w 11 appreciate the meri s of this Project and the much-neaded 8175! MU -179856.231 SENT BY!GREENBERG, GLUSKER :10-27-92 : 3!14PM GREENBERG. GLUSKER, F1 LDS, CLAMAN & MACHTING R Honorable Members October 27, 1992 Page 6 affordable housinc Map for one year. ESP/vac cc: Ms. Lynn Hari Mr. Richard j Ms. Sarona Bi Carl K. Newt( Jeffrey A. M 8113800082.IMS6.231 310553087+ of the Santa Clarita City Council that At represents and extend the ctson S, Deputy City Manager/Community Henderson, Community Devalopment ker, Planning Technician , City Attorney ager, Esq. 805 259 81254 7 we 9 r i IL v =v E a 0 4D 0 = Z 0 0 O .4 Z 9 t n a � r Cl) Nl'. ' { 1{a Ylri t "T;.�gM.*. Nr.� � Ir -«r4 ^�:r�t^,f'(". ►� yrt �3.�.: � ; r'! 'r MINT CANYON PARTNERS L.P. 11515 Killion Street North Hollywood, California 91601 (818) 985-6048 October 27, Rt�tivtU AND MADE H PART OF THE RECORD AT HAND DELIVERED /I � ;7—, .MEETING Members of the Santa Clarita City Council MIND City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Boulevard Santa Clarita, California 91355 Re: Master Case No. 92-093/Map Extention Appeal No. 92- 015/Tentative Tract Map No. 48379/17731 and 17745 Scherzinger Lane/Mint Canyon Partners L.P. Dear Council Members: I am the managing general partner of Mint Canyon Partners L.P., a California limited partnership, which owns the property in question. I have been involved with this project since May, 1989, when I first located the property and began my due diligence to determine the feasibility of developing it into affordable multi- family housing. My interest and the interest of the other general partner of Mint Canyon Partners has always been to develop affordable housing in in -fill areas of the City of Santa Clarita which were already zoned for multi -family housing and in need of rehabilitation. Scherzinger Lane is just such an area. Zoned R-3 but presently containing older single-family homes, it is an area perfectly suited for projects such as ours. From the outset of this project, we have fully cooperated with the City -of Santa Clarita. our decision to build 35 units was made after discussions with Chris Kudija and Richard Henderson in Community Development, who informed us that we could build that number of units. We agreed to pay over $5.00 per square foot in school fees, although it was our understanding that the statutory requirement was $1.56 per square foot. We agreed to -'widen the existing street and to bring the sewer line some 2,000 feet up the street and to provided for all existing and future property owners on the the street to tie into it, including the 63 -unit apartment building directly across the street. We agreed to install a new traffic signal at the corner of Sierra Highway and Adon at a cost of well over $100,000. And we agreed to pay into a fund for future flood channel improvements and a possible secondary access to -our property. In short, we agreed to each and every request and condition from the City. Our project is not located in an environmentally -sensitive area and did not require an Environmental Impact Report. It does not pose any sort of health risk, as we assertained by conducting a toxic Members of the Santa Clarita City Council October 27, 1992 Page 2 study. It does not even require bulldozing of any of the terrain of the Santa Clarita Valley other than to dig the semi -subterranean parking structure. Not one member of the community stood before the Planning Commission during either of our two hearings to argue against the project. We did, however, have several people who spoke in support of our project. It was not, and is. not, a politically controversial project, but rather a modest.one designed solely to meet the needs of the community for affordable housing. The project's one downfall, however, is that it was begun just before the period marked by several bank failures, followed by Iraq's invasion of Kuwait and the recession in which we now find ourselves. I stand before you not because I am any less convinced of the value and viability of the project than I was two years ago, but rather because an inability to obtain construction financing on the project has prolonged its completion and required us to seek an extension of -our already approved tentative map. And I am asking the City for nothing more than I ever have. I am not asking for a re -zoning, or for any special concessions. Rather, I am simply asking that you allow us additional time -- a simple extension of time -- during which to obtain construction financing and complete our project. What hangs in the balance tonight is more than whether we will have to do additional planning work on our project. What hangs in the balance is the project itself. If our extension request is.not granted, then we will lose the property to the lender, Oliver Stone, the movie producer, and with the property over $300,000 from small investors. The density of our project .is certainly not greater than the 63 - unit apartment house across the street or the 46 -unit apartment complex adjacent to ours and up the hill, both of which are on septic tanks. It will not negatively impact the area, but rather will contribute towards its transformation. It is a project worthy of completion, and I ask you only for additional time in which.to complete it. For these reasons, I ask that you grant our request for an extension of our tentative -map. Thank you. Very truly yo rs, ' CIA)( DAVID J. CA ENHOLZ Managing General Partner Mint Canyon Partners L.P.