HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-06-23 - RESOLUTIONS - PROJ NO 89436 TRACT 43896 (2)RESOLUTION NO. 92-127
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA,
TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY
REGARDING THE PROPOSED STEVENSON RANCH PHASE 4
RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION, PROJECT NO. 89436/TRACT 43896
IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF THE SANTA CLARITA VALLEY
OPPOSING THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT,
OPPOSING THE PROPOSED EXTENSION OF MCBEAN PARKWAY, OPPOSING THE ENVIRONMENTAL
DEGRADATION OF SIGNIFICANT ECOLOGICAL AREA NO. 63,
REQUESTING PROTECTIVE MEASURES/ALTERNATIVES FOR ITS CONTINUED VIABILITY
AND REQUESTING THE COUNTY TO IDENTIFY AND MITIGATE
TRAFFIC AND OTHER CUMULATIVE IMPACTS TO THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA.
WHEREAS, the County of Los Angeles Regional Planning Commission and
Board of Supervisors will be considering the approval of the proposed
Stevenson Ranch Phase 4 development, which is a 851 acre project, including
1119 residential units on 359 acres, 5 acres of commercial uses, an 8 acre
elementary school site, an 11.3 -acre park site, a 1 -acre fire station site,
and a 1 -acre park and ride site; and
WHEREAS, the project applicant has requested the following
entitlements; approval of Vesting Tentative Tract 43896, Case No. 89-436,
including a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Conditional Use Permit, and
,.. Oak Tree Permit; and
WHEREAS, the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for
this project identifies areas of substantial environmental impact, including
impacts to SEA 63, cumulative and growth -inducing impacts, traffic and
circulation, noise, air quality, water service, sewage disposal, fire and
police protection, educational facilities, biota, scenic qualities, and solid
waste disposal; and
WHEREAS, the project is located south of Pico Canyon Road, west of
the Golden State Freeway, west of the City of Santa Clarita and approximately
one-half mile west of the western boundary of the City; and
WHEREAS, an approximately 59 -acre portion of the property has been
designated by the County of Los Angeles as Significant Ecological Area No. 63,
Lyon Canyon, Newhall (SEA 63); and
WHEREAS, the project proponent has proposed to extend McBean Parkway
southerly from Pico Canyon Road to Calgrove Boulevard, a road segment which
was specifically removed from the Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan prior to the
1990 Plan Update by Los Angeles County and is not included in the Santa
Clarita General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the proposed development may have a substantial impact upon
,.. the City of Santa Clarita, and its circulation network, infrastructure and
levels of service; and
Reso No. 92-127
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita desires to provide formal comment
r.. and testimony to the County of Los Angeles on the proposed project and the
related Environmental Impact Report, all to be a part of the official record;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES
HERESY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND FIND AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City finds that although some of the impacts of this
project may be adequately mitigated by measures identified in the Draft
Environmental Impact Report, project impacts to the Significant Ecological
Area, the City circulation network, infrastructure, and levels of service, and
the cumulative project impacts have not been adequately addressed nor
appropriate mitigation measures proposed, as addressed in the City's comment
on the Draft EIR, dated June 16, 1992, incorporated herein by reference as
Attachment 1. The City requests that the County accept the responsibility for
the identification and mitigation of the impacts of this project, and the
cumulative project impacts on the City circulation network, infrastructure,
and levels of service.
SECTION 2. In light of the County's recent approval of a
comprehensive amendment to the Santa Clarita Valley Areavide Plan, the City is
concerned that this project requests further, substantial, amendments to said
plan. The City requests that no further plan amendments be granted at this
time and that this project adhere to the adopted County General Plan.
SECTION 3. The City requests that the County adopt and enforce
strict provisions to maintain the integrity of Significant Ecological Area 63
(Lyon Canyon, Newhall) in consideration of any approvals for the proposed
project.
SECTION 4. The City finds that the environmentally superior
alternatives which have been identified and rejected in the Draft EIR, or a
combination thereof, warrant further analysis and consideration in order to
determine the appropriate use and development in and around Lyon Canyon, (L.A.
County Significant Ecological Area No. 63). The City opposes the
environmental degradation of SEA No. 63, and requests that responsible
protective measures and consideration of project alternatives be undertaken by
the County for its continued viability and identity.
SECTION 5. The City further finds that the analysis of an
alternative site performed for this project may be encumbered by current
development applications for the property, as well as ownership by another
party, and that another alternative site for this project may be feasible and
appropriate which would lessen significant environmental effects of this
project.
SECTION 6. The City requires that further environmental assessment
be conducted on this project, including a good faith effort to evaluate
potentially significant individual and cumulative impacts, feasible
alternatives and mitigation measures which would lessen the significant
�.. environmental effects of the project; and, that this evaluation, together with
a response and full assessment of the environmental impacts identified in the
City's comments be included in the Final EIR prior to certification and
carefully considered prior to any approvals being granted for this project.
Reso No. 92-127
SECTION 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this
,.. Resolution and certify this record to be a full true correct copy of the
action taken.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of June , 1992.
u4_ti
ill Rlajic, Oayor
ATTEST:
DONNA GRINDEY, CITY CL
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution vas duly adopted by
the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita, at a regular meeting thereof,
held on the 23rd day of June 1992, by the folloving vote of the
Council:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS Boyer, Darcy, Heidt, Pederson, Rlajic
.•. NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS None yam,
ONNA GRI Y, CITY ERR
Reso No. 92-127