Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-04-13 - AGENDA REPORTS - APPEAL MC 90 185 (2)AGENDA REPORT PUBLIC HEARING City Manager Item to be Lynn M. P /,M/[ DATE: April 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Master Case 90-185 (Tentative Tract Map 49334, Conditional Use Permit 90-031, and Oak Tree Permit 90-039) to allow for the subdividing of a76 acre property Into 32 single family residential lots. The project is located east of Triumph Avenue, 600 feet south of Sultus Street and 1,300 feet west of Sand Canyon Road In the Sand Canyon area of the City. Appellant: Mr. Robert Lyn Project Applicant: Sand Canyon Ranch Estates DEPARTMENT: Community Development BACKGROUND The Council heard this item on August 25, October 13, November 10, and December 8, 1992, continuing the Item to the April 13, 1993, City Council meeting. The numerous hearings and continuances on this Item have been the result of ongoing negotiations between City staff, the applicant, surrounding property owners, and the Santa Clarita Water Company in an effort to immediately extend the waterline to both the project site and surrounding areas. These negotiations have resulted In the applicant providing payment for this extension, the water company awarding a contract to a firm for construction, and the withdrawal of the appeal by the appellant. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council: Recognize the withdrawal of the appeal, with the understanding that Master Case 90-185 Is approved. ATTACHMENTS Appeal Withdrawal Letter from Robert Lyn Agenda Reports Planning Commission Resolution P92.15 counciNr90185.ga2 Adopted: Agenda Item: CITY OF SANTA CLARITA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF MASTER CASE NUMBER 90-185 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 49334, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-031 AND OAK TREE PERMIT 90-039) TO SUBDIVIDE 76 ACRES INTO 32 LOTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES. THE LOCATION IS EAST OF TRIUMPH.AVENUE, 600 FEET SOUTH OF SULTUS STREET AND 1,300 FEET WEST OF SAND CANYON ROAD IN THE SAND CANYON AREA IN THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA THE APPLICANT FOR THE PROJECT IS SAND CANYON.RANCH ESTATES ROBERT LYN. A HOMEOWNER IS APPEALING THE COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT. PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: A Public Hearing will be held before the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita to consider an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Master Case Number 90-185 (Tentative Tract Map 49334, Conditional Use Permit 90-031 and Oak Tree Permit 90-039) to subdivide 76 acres into 32 lots for single family residences. The site is presently vacant, contains hillside areas, borders Sand Canyon Wash and has over 700 Oak trees. A Conditional Use Permit has been requested to allow for the clustering of the lots to preserve open space and reduce impacts to Oak trees. An Oak tree permit has been requested for the removal of a maximum of 39 non -heritage size Oak trees in order to construct roadways and driveways. All roadways in this project would be public. The Waterline would be extended to serve this site and a bridge over both Sand Canyon and Iron Canyon' Wash would be constructed to serve these lots. Equestrian trails are proposed through this property. The location of the project is east of Triumph Avenue, 600 feet 'south of Sultus Street and 1.300 feet west of Sand Canyon Road in the Sand Canyon area. The applicant for the project is Sand Canyon Ranch Estates. Robert Lyn, a homeowner -is appealing the Commission's approval of the project. The hearing will be held by the City Council in the City Hall Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Blvd., 1st Floor,Santa Clarita, the 25th day of August, 1992, at or after 6:30 p.m.. Proponents, opponents, and any interested persons may appear and be heard on this matter at that time. Further information may be obtained by contacting the City Clerk's office, Santa Clarita City Hall, 23920_Valencia Blvd., 3rd Floor, Santa Clarita. If you wish to challenge this order in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council, at, or prior to the public hearing. Date: July 28, 1992 Donna M. Grindey, CMC City Clerk Publish Date: August 3,.1992 March 31, 1993 City of Santa Clarita Dear Glenn, RECEI V E0 APR 11993 COMMUNITY OEVELOvmENT CITY OF',ANTA CLARITA Please be advised that I would like to withdraw my appeal on the Dan Holmes, Greg Adallian tract. We have come to an agreement of items for Dan and Greg to accomplish, and as long as these things are accomplished, they should take away from the negative factors that we had expressed in our appeal. I thank you and the City for your cooperation in this matter. CItY OF SAHTACLARIfA 16335 Sultus Street Canyon Country, CA 91351 June 16, 1092 CITY G'..`• ., ',.. . City of Santa Clarita City Hall 23920 West Valencia Boulevard Santa Clarita, CA Attention: City Clerk Dear City Council; I would like to appeal the approval of the development project, for the following reasons: 1. The development project does not conform to the Santa Clarita hillside ordinance, ruling and/or zoning. 2. The proposed development does not conform to the two (2) acre minimum as established by the City of Santa Clarita. 3. The development would eventually create the de- struction of approximately 120 Oak trees which .would seem to violate the spirit if not the Oak tree,ordinance. For the above reasons I feel this appeal is necessary and I am re- questing the City Council to take a much closer look at this proposed development. Thank you very much for your time in this matter. Sipc-eY�e-ly; i Robert L`y Homeowner VICINITY MAP MC 90-185 it f AGENDA REPORT PUBLIC HEARING City ManagerApprova v Item to be presented Lynn M. Harris DATE: December 8,1992 SUBJECT: Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Master Case 90-185 (Tentative Tract Map 49334, Conditional Use Penult 90-031 and Oak Tree Permit 90-039) to allow for the subdividing of a 76 acre property Into 32 single family residential lots. The project is located east of Triumph Avenue, 600 feet south of Sultus Street and 1,300 feet west of Sand Canyon Road in the Sand Canyon area. Appellant: Mr. Robert Lyn Project Applicant: Sand Canyon Ranch Estates DEPARTMENT: Community Development BACKGROUND On June 2, 1992, the Planning Commission voted 5-0 to adopt Resolution P92.15, approving the above referenced project. Mr. Robert Lyn appealed the Planning Commission's decision. The 76 acre project site Is presently vacant, contains hillside areas, borders Sand Canyon Wash and has over 700 oak trees. A secondary ridgeline crosses a portion of the site and no development is proposed on this ridgeline. The conditional use penult request Is to allow for the clustering of 32 single family residential lots to minimize Impacts to oak trees and preserve open space and hillside areas.. An oak tree permit has been requested to remove a maximum of 39 non -heritage size oak trees and encroach Into the protected zone of a maximum of 60 oak trees. The Council heard the hem on August 25, October 13, and November 10, 1992, continuing the Item to the December 8,1992 Council meeting. The numerous hearings on the Item have been the result of ongoing negotiations between City staff, the applicant, surrounding property owners, and the Santa Clarita Water Company in an effort to extend the waterline Immediately to both the project site and surrounding areas. Staff Informed the Council in the last agenda report that the recording of an easement for the waterline In a proposed City roadway will not present a problem to the City nor hold up the recordation of the project. Since the meeting of November 10, 1992, the applicant has submitted a preliminary design for the extension to the water company. This design was submitted on November 23, 1992. The water company has sent a contract to the applicant for signature. In conjunction with finalizing the contract, the applicant will be required to pay a deposit to cover costs associated with completing final design drawings for the extension. The water company has estimated the cost to be $7,000. After completing final design drawings, the water company would request payment from the applicant sufficient to cover costs associated with the extension (approximately $110,000). Upon receiving this payment, the water company would send the project out for bid, then hire a contractor, and subsequently construction would begin. Continued To:-/-3-9� 9 n4 Item: The applicant, at this time, Intends to provide the $7,000 deposit, Indicating that It will be sent to the water company on December 1, 1992.1 The applicant has Indicated that he will pay the additional money at the completion of the design work, when It would usually be requested by the water company. The appellant's group Is requesting that the applicant provide payment, equivalent to the cost of the improvement, prior to the appeal being withdrawn. The Intent is to deposit this money within an escrow account (between the applicant and homeowners association) established for the specific purpose of Installing the waterline. Once the account Is established, this money could not be withdrawn for any reason by the applicant except to construct the waterline. The appellant's group believes this action would provide them with the necessary assurances that the extension will be completed. If this action Is not completed prior to the meeting of December 8, 1992, the group has Indicated that they will oppose the project. The applicant Is concerned with the above request, due to the project cost being an estimate and the possibility that problems may arise prior to construction of the extension. The applicant would prefer that the design drawings and other standard steps are completed prior to providing the final payment to the water company. Regardless, the immediate extension of the waterline does pose a risk for the applicant. The applicant would not be reimbursed for the costs associated with the extension If the map falls to record (the creating of the 32 tots). Additionally, the applicant is paying for both the initial costs of extending the waterline through the project site and for the relocation costs that may occur In the future due to the Improvement of the project site. A significant benefit of the project is the extension of the waterline. Staff has conditioned the applicant to complete this prior to recordation, which is the standard procedure. This property provides the best and possibly the only feasible opportunity to extend the waterline to properties west of Sand Canyon Wash. This opportunity may be lost If the project is denied, not recorded by the applicant, or legally challenged by surrounding property owners. The Planning Commission and staff have both evaluated the project and believe the conditions Imposed are satisfactory. It Is the opinion of City staff, that the City has done Its best to resolve the Issue and that the applicant Is moving forward with the installation of the waterline as quickly as can be expected. . RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) Approve Master Case 90.185 (Tentative Tract Map 49334, Conditional Use Permit 90-031, and Oak Tree Permit 90.039; and, 2) Adopt Resolution No. 92-215, approving the project subject to the attached conditions. ATTACHMENTS Resolution No. 92-215 Agenda Reports Planning Commission Resolution P92-15 currenar90.185.ga1 AGENDA REPORT City Manager Approval Item to be presented by PUBLIC HEARING Lynn M. Harris ,, Q DATE: November 10, 1992 SUBJECT: Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Master Case 90-185 (Tentative Tract Map 49334, Conditional Use Permit 90-031 and Oak Tree Permit 90-039) based on non-conformance with the hillside ordinance, non-conformance with the General Plan minimum lot size, and violation of the spirit of the Oak Tree Ordinance. The project Is located east of Triumph Avenue, 600 feet south of Sultus Street and 1,300 feet west of Sand Canyon Road In the Sand Canyon area. Appellant: Mr. Robert Lyn Project Applicant: Sand Canyon Ranch Estates DEPARTMENT: Community Development BACKGROUND On June 2, 1992, the Planning Commission voted 5-0 to adopt Resolution P92-15, approving the above referenced project. Mr. Robert Lyn appealed the Planning Commission's decision. The 76 acre project site Is presently vacant, contains hillside areas, borders Sand Canyon Wash and has over 700 oak trees. A secondary ridgellne crosses a portion of the site and no development is proposed on this ridgeline. The conditional use permit request Is to allow for the clustering of 32 single family residential lots to minimize Impacts to oak trees and preserve open space and hillside areas. An oak tree permit has been requested to remove a maximum of 39 non -heritage size oak trees and encroach Into the protected zone of a maximum of 60 oak trees. The appeal was first heard on August 25,1992. Following this hearing, the City Council continued this Item to the October 13, 1992 meeting. At this meeting, staff recommended that the Council continue the item to the November 10, 1992, meeting to allow staff, the applicant, Santa Clarlta Water Company, and adjacent property owners time to resolve Issues associated with the immediate extension of the waterline. This waterline would Immediately service the adjacent property owners and would eventually service the proposed project. ANALYSIS Staff believes there are two primary Issues associated with the Immediate extension of the line. They are as follows: 1) Costs - The Planning Commission approved the project with a condition requiring the applicant to extend the waterline prior to map recordation. Extending the waterline immediately will require payment from the applicant and/or property owners to the water company. Relocation of this waterline, in conjunction with the required project Improvements, could become necessary in the future and bring forth additional costs. Both the project applicant and Continued To: X02 Agenda Item: adjacent property owners have expressed a willingness to share these costs, though no formai agreement has been finalized. If the waterline Is required to be relocated due to construction of permanent access, the costs associated with this relocation would be borne by the developer. 2) Map Recordation - Staff has met with representatives of the Santa Clarita Water Company. Staff has assured the water company that the recording of an easement in the area shown as a public roadway on the tentative map will not present a problem, nor will it affect the timing of the recordation of the tentative map. Staff has spoken with the appellant and adjacent property owners and believes they are satisfied with staff's effort to resolve these Issues. Staff expects the appellant to withdraw his appeal prior to the meeting. Regardless, It is staff's opinion that the above Identified Issues have been adequately resolved. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) Approve Master Case 90.185 (Tentative Tract Map 49334, Conditional Use Permit 90.031, and Oak Tree Permit 90-039; and, 2) Adopt Resolution No. 92-215, approving the project subject to the attached conditions. ATTACHMENTS Resolution No..92-215 Agenda Reports Planning Commission Resolution P92.15 GEAJI coundr,Ar90485.gea AGENDA REPORT City Manager Approval _ 1�k Item to be presente b : Lynn M. Harris PUBLIC HEARING DATE: October 13, 1992 'SUBJECT: Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Master Case 90.185 (Tentative Tract Map 49334, Conditional Use, Permit 90-031 and Oak Tree Permit 90.039) based on non-conformance with the hillside ordinance, non-conformance with the General Plan minimum lot size, and violation of the spirit of the Oak Tree Ordinance. The project Is located east of Triumph Avenue, 600 feet south of Sultus Street and 1,300 feet west of Sand Canyon Road In the Sand Canyon area. Appellant: Mr. Robert Lyn Applicant: Sand Canyon Ranch Estates DEPARTMENT: Community Development BACKGROUND Following the hearing of August 25, 1992, the City Council continued this Item to the October 13, 1992 meeting, to allow the applicant and adjacent property owners time to resolve an Issue associated with the Immediate extension of the waterline (servicing the project and surrounding residences). The timing of the waterline extension Is the primary Issue associated with the appeal. On September 28, 1992, staff received a letter from Mr. Robert Lyn, requesting that the Item be continued an additional two weeks to resolve issues associated with the waterline extension. This letter is signed by Mr. Lyn, Mr. Greg Adallan, and Mr. Dan Holmes. Mr. Holmes and Mr. Adalian comprise Sand Canyon Ranch Estates, which Is the applicant In this case. Representatives from the two affected homeowners associations In the Immediate area also support the continuance. Both sides have been meeting on the Issue. Representatives from the Santa Clarita Water Company have also been in attendance at these meetings. Staff has had on-going conversations with all the parties involved In this Issue and believes progress has been made. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Council continue Master Case 90.185 (Tentative Tract Map 49334, Conditional Use Permit 90-031, and Oak Tree Permit 90.039) to the Council meeting of November 10, 1992. Additional time to resolve the Issue and a full agenda on October 27, 1992, necessitate a meeting date of November 10, 1992. ATTACHMENTS Continuance request letter GEA:IL•oounciPar90185.gea Continued To: Agenda Item: AGENDA REPORT City Manager Approve Item to be presented PUBLIC HEARING C DATE: August 25, 1992 SUBJECT: Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Master Case 90-185 (Tentative Tract Map 49334, Conditional Use Permit 90-031 and Oak Tree Permit 90-039) based on non-conformance. with the hillside ordinance, non-conformance with the General Plan minimum lot size, and violation of the spirit of the Oak Tree Ordinance. The project is located east of Triumph Avenue, 600 feet south of Sultus Street and 1,300 feet west of Sand Canyon Road in the Sand Canyon area. Appellant: Mr. Robert Lyn Applicant: Sand Canyon Ranch Estates DEPARTMENT: Community Development BACKGROUND On June 2, 1992, the Planning Commission voted 5-0 to adopt Resolution . P92-15 approving the above referenced project. Mr. Robert Lyn appealed the Planning Commission decision and Mr. Hal Good later filed a.letter in ,. support of this appeal. The 76 acre project site is presently vacant, contains hillside areas, borders Sand Canyon Wash and has over 700 oak trees. A secondary ridgeline crosses a portion of the southeastern portion of the site and no development is proposed on this ridgeline. The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to cluster 32single family residential lots to minimize impacts to oak trees and preserve open space and ridgelines. An oak tree permit has been requested to remove a maximum of 39 non -heritage size oak trees and encroach into the protected zone of a'maximum of 60 oak trees for the purpose of roadway improvements. The project site is designated RE (Residential Estate, 2 acre 'minimum lot size) by the City's General Plan and is zoned A-1-2 (Light Agricultural, two acre minimum lot size.) The project's density is .42 dwelling units per acre. Of the lots below two acres, six lots have 1.8 acres (Lots 4, 9, 17, 21, 22, and 23) and one has 1.9 acres (Lot 24). -The remaining 25 lots have a minimum of two acres or greater. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The project was .heard by the .Planning Commission on April 22, 1992 where a 38 lot design was considered. The hearing was continued to May 19, 1992 to allow the applicant to redesign the project. On May 19, 1992, a second hearing was held on a 33 lot redesign. Following the public hearing on May 19, 1992, the Commission tentatively approved the project for 32 lots. Continued To: 1c-1 -Y --9u Agenda Item: Page 2 The Planning Commission required roadways to be public and built to City standards. Bridges are required over Iron Canyon Wash and Sand Canyon Wash. The applicant was conditioned to install a waterline to the site prior to recording of the final map. Two equestrian trails through the property would be provided and would connect to the City trail system. DISCUSSION OF THE THREE APPEAL POINTS * Hillside Ordinance The newly adopted Hillside Ordinance and Guidelines do not apply to this project since the application was deemed complete before they were adopted. The only grading proposed is to construct roadways and correct existing landslide areas. No grading is proposed on ridgelines. The Commission found that the project. is consistent with General Plan hillside policies which limit development on ridgelines, require balanced grading and seek to minimize topographic change. * Minimum Lot Size and Clustering The General Plan allows for clustering of.lots, or creation of lots below the minimum, in instances where smaller lots can be justified to preserve natural resources. The Commission unanimously agreed that clustering was justified for this project because it allows the applicant to keep development off a significant ridgeline, minimizes impacts to oak trees and preserves open space. The Sand Canyon Homeowners Association endorsed clustering for this project. * _ Oak Tree Preservation The Planning Commission found that removal and encroachment of the oak trees as proposed is consistent with the Oak Tree Ordinance. Project roadways have.been located in areas to minimize impacts to oak trees and no heritage oaks will be removed. Conditions of approval have been added to protect oak trees to be preserved during grading and construction. A total of ten persons spoke in favor of the project and nine spoke in opposition. Staff has received 28 letters in favor of the project, four letters in opposition and 12 neutral letters with general comments about the project. The Sand Canyon Oaks Property Owners Association and the Sand Canyon Homeowners Association submitted letters in support of this project. RECOMMMATIOx Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) - Uphold the Planning Commission decision and approve Master Case No 90-185 (Tentative Tract Map 49334, Conditional Use Permit 90-031, and Oak Tree Permit 90-039) and, 2) Direct staff -to prepare a resolution of approval for the Council's consideration at the September 8, 1992 meeting. ATTACHMENTS Resolution P92-15 Planning Commission Staff Reports and Minutes Correspondence LHS:577 RESOLUTION NO. P92-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, APPROVING MASTER CASE NUMBER 90-185 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 49334, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-031 AND OAK TREE PERMIT 90-039 TO ALLOY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 76 ACRE SITE INTO 32 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF TRIUMPH. 600 FEET SOUTH OF.SULTUS STREET AND 1.300 FEET VEST OF SAND CANYON ROAD. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission does hereby makethe following findings of fact: a. An application for Tentative Tract Map (TT 49334) to create 38 single family lots and an application Conditional Use Permit to allow for the clustering of the lots was filed with the City of Santa Clarita by Sand Canyon Ranch Estates (the "applicant") on August 10, 1990. The property for which this application has been filed is located east of Triumph, 600 south of Sultus Street and 1,300 feet west of Sand Canyon Road in Sand Canyon. (Assessor . Parcel Numbers 2841-018-035 and 2848-008-007, a legal description of which is on file in the Department of Community Development.) A revised application proposing 33 single family lots was submitted by the applicant on January 31, 1992. b. This project is a request for a subdivision of 76 acres into 33 single family residential parcels. An 'Oak Tree 'Permit has been requested to remove a maximum of 39 non -heritage oak trees and to allow encroachment upon the protected zone of a maximum of 60 oak trees (as identified on Exhibit "A") for the purposes of roadway improvements. Lots 4, 5, 6, and 7 will be subject to plot plan and oak tree permit review prior to the construction of single family residences. C. Clustering of lots has been requested to preserve oak trees: -and ridgelines. .The City's General Plan contains policies to encourage clustering if the development. is consistent with the character of existing surrounding neighborhoods (Community Design Element, GOAL.1, Policy 1.2). The General Plan also promotes the retention of ridgelines and oak trees. d. The property was not involved in a division of a larger parcel within the previous two (2) years. RESO NO. P92-15 Page 2 e. The -subject parcel- is zoned A-1-2 (Light Agricultural, two acre minimum lot size) and is designated as RE (Residential Estate, 2 acre minimum lot size) by the City of Santa Clarita General Plan. The proposed density for the project is .44 dwelling units per acre. f. The property has hillside. areas, is vacant and is in a predominantly natural state. The site has an average cross slope of approximately 20Z. This project is -exempt from the Hillside Ordinance. since the application was deemed complete prior to its adoption. Three historic landslides have been identified on the site and the site contains over 700 oak trees. g. All surrounding parcels have A-1-2 zoning, are designated RE on the City's General Plan, and are either vacant or developed with single family residences. Equestrian uses are predominant in the 'Sand Canyon area. All the proposed lots would be 'conducive to equestrian uses. h. Access to the proposed development would be over public streets from Sand Canyon Road. Bridges would be constructed over Iron Canyon Wash and Sand Canyon Wash as part of this project. All streets within the subdivision shall be offered for dedication as public streets and all bridge and roadway improvements shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The location .of improvements may be varied to preserve and minimize impacts -to the oaks trees on the project site. The applicant would also make *fair shares contributions to funding mechanisms relating to the improvement of the Sand Canyon Road bridge over the Santa Clara River and SR 14. i. The applicant would grade and balance on-site 120,000, cubic yards of cut and fill' in order to eliminate landslide hazard and create roadway and pad areas. j. The applicant.v6uld provide equestrian trails through the project site which will connect to the City trail system. The applicant would provide ramps at the bridge crossing at Iron and Sand Canyon Wash to provide equestrian access from the wash to the roadway level and back in order to provide a continuous trail system. k. The. City. of Santa Clarita Development Review Committee (DRC) met on January 31, 1992, to review this project. 1. Public services and utilities are available and the applicant will be required to. extend services to all parcels. The applicant shall provide for 'adequately sized water system facilities, including; fire hydrants, of sufficient size to accommodate the total domestic and fire flows required to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Fire Chief. The applicant shall extend the waterline from its present terminus in Sand Canyon Road to serve the project site. The project would be served by septic system. RESO NO. P92-15 Page 3 M. This project was reviewed pursuant to the - provisions of the California -Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An Initial Study has been completed for this project and a Negative Declaration has been prepared. The Initial Study and Negative Declaration was prepared on March 10, 1992 and was available for public review and comments from April 2, 1992 to April 22, 1992. n. A duly noticed public hearing was held by the -Planning Commission on April 22, 1992 at 7:00 P.M. at the City Council Chambers, 23920 L Valencia. Boulevard, Santa Clarita. The Planning Commission directed the applicant to modify the plan and continued the public hearing to May 19, 1992. On May 19, 1992, the Commission tentatively approved. this project and directed staff to return to the Commission with a resolution and conditions for approval on June 2, 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. At the hearings of April 22, 1992 -and May '19, 1992, the Planning Commission considered the staff reports prepared for this project and received testimony on this proposal. b. The City's General Plan. designation for the project site is Residential Estate (RE), minimum lot size of 2 acres. The site zoning is A-1-2 (Light Agricultural Zone, 2 acre minimum lot size). The site density is .44 DU/acre. With approval -of a Conditional Use Permit the project would be consistent with lots size' requirements of the zoning code. C. At the hearing of May 19, 1992, the Planning Commission directed the applicant to revise the project for '32 single family residential lots. The 76 acre -parcel is suitable for division into 32 lots for single family residential and equestrian usesi` This project is compatible with residential land uses and densities in the surrounding Sand Canyon area. d. Offers of dedication shall be given for all roadways in this project as public roads. The applicant shall contribute on a fair -share basis to funding mechanisms related to the improvement of Sand Canyon bridge over the Santa Clara River and State Route 14. These improvements would be compatible with surrounding improvements and adequate paved access would exist to all lots. e. The applicant shall provide on-site' equestrian trails to connect to the City's trail network in Sand Canyon. The applicant shall provide ramps at the access road crossings of the bridge at Iron Canyon and Sand Canyon in order to provide a continuous trail system in the wash. f. The division and development of the property in the manner set forth on the subject tentative tract map will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise of any public entity and/or public utility, right-of-way and/or easements within the tentative parcel map. Neither the design of the subdivision nor the type of improvements will conflict with public easements for access through RESO NO. P92-15 Page 4 the use of property within the proposed subdivision, since the design and development as set forth in the Conditions of Approval and on the tentative map, provides adequate protection for easements. g. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not cause serious public health problems, since sewage disposal, drainage, emergency access and fire protection are addressed in the recommended Conditions of Approval. h. This major land division will not adversely affect the health, peace, comfort,- or welfare of persons residing in the surrounding area;. nor be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the subject property; nor jeopardize, endanger or otherwise constitute a menace to the public health,, safety or .general velfare since this project conforms to 'standards of the subdivision and zoning ordinance and is compatible with surrounding land uses.. Housing needs of the region were considered and balanced against .the public service needs of local residents. i. A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project pursuant to the California. Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.). SECTION 3. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the Planning Commission hereby determines as follows: . a. This proposed major land division will not have a significant effect upon the environment under the California Environmental Quality Act. b. This project will have adequate legal and physical access to each lot..?ith the Conditions of Approval added, this project will be • adeqately served by highways -and streets of sufficient width, and improved as necessary to carry the kind and quantity of traffic generated by 32 single family residences. All utilities and services would be extended and/or contructed by the applicant as necessary to adequately serve the project site. C. The project is compatible with approved single family residential land uses and lot sizes in. the surrounding Sand Canyon area, is consistent with the City's General Plan, complies with the standards of the A-1-2 Zone with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit; and complies with the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance with the approval of an Oak Tree Permit. d. This proposal will not adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area, or be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the site, or jeopardize, endanger or otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare. e. The site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, landscaping and other required development features. Lots may be subject to the provisions of the Hillside Ordinance at building permit.stage. RESO NO. P92-15 Page 5 NOV, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita, California, as follows: a. The Planning Commission hereby adopts the prepared Negative Declaration and approves Tentative Tract Hap 49334' to create thirty-two (32) lots, and approves Conditional Use Permit 90-031 to allow for clustering of the lots, and approves Oak Tree Permit 90-039 to allow removal of up to 39 oak trees and to allow encroachment into the protected zone of up to 60 additional .oak trees subject to the attached Conditions of Approval (Exhibit "B"). PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2nd daylof June 1992 Jerry D. Cherrington, Chairman Planning Commission ATTEST: % l � • Vii.,.., . /i/• �<,d Lynd M. Barris' Director of Community Development STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS -ANGELES ) SS 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 2nd day of June, 1992 by the following vote of the Planning Commission: AYES: COMMISSIONERS, Brathwaite, Doughman, Modugno, Cherrington, and Woodrow NOES: ABSENT: onnA M. Gr de ity Clerk. LNS:518 RESOLUTION NO. 93-53 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF MASTER CASE 90.185 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 49334, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-031, AND OAK TREE PERMIT 90.039) TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 76 ACRE SITE INTO 32 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, THEREBY DEEMING THE PROJECT APPROVED. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED EAST OF TRIUMPH AVENUE, 600' SOUTH OF SULTUS STREET AND 1,300' WEST OF SAND CANYON ROAD. FOLLOWS: THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby make the following findings of fact: a. An appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Master Case 90.185 was filed with the City of Santa Clarita by Mr. Robert Lyn (the "appellant) on June 16, 1992. The Planning Commission approved Master Case 90-185 (Tentative Tract Map 49334, Conditional Use Permit 90-031, and Oak Tree Permit 9D-039) on June 2, 1993, allowing for the subdividing of a 76 acre parcel into 32 single family residential lots. Conditional Use Permit 90-031 allowed for the clustering of the lots while Oak Tree Permit 90-039 allowed. for the removal of a maximum of 39 oak trees and encroachment Into the protected zone of a maximum of 60 oak trees. b. Reasons cited by the appellant for the appeal Included: 1) The project's Inconsistency with the City's Hillside Ordinance and Zoning Code. 2) The lots within the development do not contain a minimum area of two acres. 3) The removal of the oak trees violates the spirit of the City's Oak Tree Ordinance. c. Duly noticed public hearings concerning the appeal were held by the City Council on August 25, October 13, November 10, and December 8, 1992 and April 13, 1993. At these hearings the Council considered the staff reports prepared for the project and received testimony on the proposal. SECTION 2. Based uponthe abovefindingsof 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 City Council and on Its behalf, the City Council further finds as follows: a. The numerous hearings and continuances on the Item were the result of ongoing negotiations between City staff, the applicant, surrounding property owners, and the Santa Clarita Water Company In an effort to Immediately extend a waterline through the project site to service the project and surrounding areas. Surrounding property owners are presently experiencing water shortages, as they. are using private systems or transporting water to their properties. RESO NO. 93-53 Page 2 b. The appellant, Mr. Robert Lyn, withdrew the appeal on March 31, 1993, citing the project proponent's providing payment to the Santa Clarlta Water Company for the extension of line as the reason. The appellant and surrounding property owners viewed the immediate extension of the waterline as a public benefit, outweighing the Issues cited by the appellant within the appeal letter. SECTION 3. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the City Council hereby determines as follows: a. A negative declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. The project will not have a significant effect upon the environment under the California Environmental Quality Act. b. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65907 and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6, any action or proceeding to attach, review, set aside, void or annul this decision, or concerning any of the proceedings, acts, determinations taken, done or made prior to such decision or to determine the reasonableness, legality, or validity of any condition attached to this decision shall not be maintained by any person unless the action or proceeding is commended within 120 days of the date of this resolution. The City Clerk shall send a certified copy of this resolution to the applicant, and if any, the appellant at the address of said person set forth In the record of proceedings and such mailing shall constitute the notice required by Code or Civil Procedure Section 1094.6 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita, California, as follows: The City Council hereby denies the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Master Case 90.165 (Tentative Tract Map 49334, Conditional Use Permit 90-031, and Oak Tree Permit 90-039) to create 32 clustered single family tots on a 76 acre site. Furthermore, the City Council adopts Planning Commission Resolution P92.16, thereby approving Master Case 90.165 as approved by said resolution and attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1993. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk RESO NO. 93-53 Page 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) § CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ) 1, . DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing Resolution was duty adopted by the City Council of .the City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of 1993 by the following vote of Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: City Clerk GEA: pingcomUes93-53.gea RESOLUTION NO. P92-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, APPROVING MASTER CASE NUMBER 90-185 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 49334, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-031 AND OAK TREE PERMIT 90-039 TO ALLOY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 76 ACRE SITE INTO 32 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF TRIUMPH, 600 FEET SOUTH OF SULTUS STREET AND 1,300 FEET VEST OF SAND CANYON ROAD. 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 Tentative Tract Map (TT 49334) to create .38 single family lots and an application Conditional Use Permit to allow for the clustering of the lots was filed with the City of Santa Clarita by Sand Canyon Ranch Estates (the 'applicant') on August 10, 1990. The property for which this application has been filed is. located east of Triumph, 600 south of Sultus Street and 1,300 feet west of Sand Canyon Road in Sand Canyon. (Assessor Parcel Numbers 2841-018-035 and. 2848-008-007, a legal description of which is on file in the Department of Community Development.) A revised. application proposing 33 single family lots was submitted .by the applicant on January 31, 1992. F b. This project is a request for a subdivision of 76acresinto 33 single family residential parcels. An Oak Tree Permit has been requested to remove a maximum of 39'non-heritage oak trees and to allow encroachment upon the protected zone of a maximum. of 60 oak trees (as identified on Exhibit 'A') for the purposes of roadway improvements. Lots 4, 5, 6, and 7 will be subject to plot plan and oak tree permit review prior to the construction of single family residences. C. Clustering of lots has been requested to preserve oak trees and ridgelines. The City's General Plan contains policies to encourage clustering if the development is consistent with the character of existing surrounding neighborhoods (Community Design Element, GOAL 1, Policy 1.2). The. General Plan also promotes the retention of ridgelines and oak trees. d. The property was not involved in a division of .a larger parcel within the previous two (2) years. RESO NO. P92-15 Page 2 e. The subject parcel is zoned A-1-2. (Light Agricultural, two acre minimum lot size) and is designated as RE (Residential Estate, 2 acre minimum lot size) by the City of Santa Clarita General Plan. The proposed density for the project is .44 dwelling units per acre. f. The property has hillside areas, is vacant and is in a predominantly natural state. The site has an average cross slope of approximately 202. This project is exempt from the Hillside Ordinance since the application was deemed complete prior to its adoption. Three historic landslides have been identified on the site and the site contains over 700 oak trees. g.. All surrounding parcels have A-1-2 zoning, are designated RE on the City's General Plan, and are either vacant or developed with single family residences. Equestrian uses are predominant in the Sand Canyon area. All the proposed lots would be conducive to equestrian uses. h. Access to the proposed development would be over public streets from Sand Canyon Road. Bridges would be constructed over Iron Canyon Wash and Sand Canyon Wash as part of this project. 'All streets within the subdivision shall be offered for dedication as public streets and all bridge and roadway - improvements shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The location of improvements may be varied to preserve and minimize impacts to the oaks trees on the project site. The applicant would also make "fair share* contributions to funding mechanisms relating to the improvement of the Sand Canyon Road bridge over the Santa Clara River and SR 14. i. The applicant would grade and balance on-site 120,000 cubic yards of cut and fill in order to eliminate landslide hazard and create roadway and pad areas. j. The applicant would provide equestrian trails through the project site which will connect to the City trail system. The applicant would provide ramps at the bridge crossing at Iron and Sand Canyon Wash to provide equestrian access from the wash to the roadway level and back in order to provide a continuous trail system. k. The City. of Santa Clarita Development Review Committee (DRC) met on January 31, 1992, to review this project. 1. Public services and utilities are available and -the applicant will be required to extend services to all parcels. The applicant shall provide for adequately sized water system facilities, including fire hydrants, of sufficient size to accommodate the total domestic and fire flows required to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Fire Chief. The applicant shall extend the waterline from its present terminus in Sand Canyon Road to serve the project site. The. project would be served by septic system. RESO NO. P92-15 Page 3 M. This - project was reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An Initial- Study has been completed for this project and a Negative Declaration has been prepared. The Initial Study and Negative Declaration was prepared on March 10, 1992 and was available for public review and comments from April 2, 1992 to April 22, 1992. n. A duly noticed public hearing was held'by the Planning Commission on April 22, 1992 at 7:00 P.M. at the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita, The Planning Commission directed the applicant to modify the plan and continued the public hearing to May 19, 1992. On May 19, 1992, the Commission tentatively approved this project and directed staff to return to the Commission with a resolution and conditions for approval on June 2, 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. At the hearings of April 22, 1992 and May 19, 1992, the Planning Commission considered the .staff reports prepared for this project and received testimony on this proposal. b. The City's General Plan designation for the project site is Residential Estate (RE), minimum lot size of 2 acres. The site zoning is A-1-2 (Light Agricultural Zone, 2 acre minimum lot size). The site density is .44 DU/acre. With approval of a Conditional Use Permit the project would be consistent with lots size requirements of the zoning code. ` C. At the hearing of May 19, 1992, the Planning Commission directed the applicant to revise the project for 32 single .family residential lots. The 76 acre parcel is suitable for division into 32 lots for single family residential and equestrian usesi` This project is compatible with residential land uses and densities in the surrounding Sand. Canyon area. d. Offers of dedication shall be given for all roadways in this project as public roads. The applicant shall contribute on a fair -share basis to funding mechanisms related to the improvement of Sand Canyon bridge over the Santa Clara River and State Route 14. These improvements would be compatible with surrounding improvements and adequate paved access would exist to all lots. e. The applicant shall provide on-site equestrian trails -to connect to the City's trail network'in Sand Canyon. The applicant shall provide ramps at the access road crossings of the bridge. at Iron Canyon and Sand Canyon in order to provide a continuous trail system in the wash. f. The division and development of the property in the manner set forth on the subject tentative tract map will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise of 'any public entity and/or public utility, right-of-way and/or easements within the tentative parcel map. Neither the design of. the subdivision nor the type of improvements will conflict with public easements for accesi through RESO NO. P92-15 Page 4 the .use of property within the proposed subdivision, since the design and development as set forth in the Conditions of Approval and. on the tentative map, provides adequate protection for easements. g. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not cause serious public health problems, since sewage disposal, drainage, emergency access 'and fire protection are addressed in the recommended Conditions of Approval. h. This major land division will not adversely affect the health, peace, comfort, or welfare of persons residing in the surrounding area; nor be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the subject property; nor jeopardize, endanger or otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare since/ this project conforms to standards of the subdivision and zoning ordinance and is compatible with surrounding land uses. Housing needs of the region were .considered and balanced against the public service needs of local residents. i. A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.). SECTION 3. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the Planning Commission hereby determines as follows: a. This proposed major land division will not have a significant effect upon the environment under the California Environmental Quality Act. b. This project will have adequate legal and physical access to each lot. With the Conditions of Approval added, this project will be adequately served by highways and streets of sufficient width, and improved as necessary, to carry the kind and quantity of traffic generated by 32 single family residences. All utilities and services would be extended and/or contructed by the, applicant as necessary to adequately serve .the project site. C. The project is compatible with approved single family residential land uses and lot sizes in the surrounding Sand Canyon area, is consistent with the City's General Plan, complies with the standards of the. A-1-2 Zone with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit, and complies with the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance with the approval of an Oak Tree Permit. d. This proposal will not adversely affect the -health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons residing or working in thesurroundingarea, or be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the site, or jeopardize, endanger or otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare. e. The site is adequate in size and shape to -accommodate the yards, walls, fences, parking and loading facilities, landscaping and other required development features. Lots may be subject to the provisions of the.Hillside Ordinance at building permit stage. 6 RESO NO. P92-15 Page 5 r NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita, California, as follows: a. The Planning Commission hereby adoptsthe prepared Negative Declaration and approves Tentative Tract Map 49334 to create thirty-two (32) lots, and approves Conditional Use Permit 90-031 to allow for clustering of the lots, and approves Oak Tree Permit 90-039 to allow removal of up to 39 oak trees and to allow encroachment into the, protected zone of up to 60 additional oak trees subject to the attached Conditions of Approval (Exhibit "B"). PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2nd daylof June,/1992. Jerry D. Cherrington, Chairman Planning Commission ATTEST: i r , LynXi M. Harris Director of Community Development STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ) .M Y 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 2nd day of June, 1992 by the following vote of the Planning Commission: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Brathwaite, Doughman, Modugno, Cherrington, and Woodrow NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: LHS:518 EXHIBIT B CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 49334 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-031 OAK TREE PERMIT 90-039 (MASTER CASE 90-185) GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. The approval of the Tentative Tract Map, Conditional Use Permit and Oak Tree Permit shall expire two years from the date of Planning Commission approval. 2. The subdivider may file for an extension of the conditionally approved map prior to the date of expiration for a period of time not to exceed one year. If' such an extension is requested, it must be filed no later than 60 days prior to expiration. 3. The applicant shall be responsible for notifying. the Department. of Community Development in writing of any change in ownership, designation of a new engineer, or a change in the status of the developer, within 30 days of said change.. 4. Unless otherwise apparent from the context, the term "applicant° shall include the applicant and any other persons, corporation, or other entity making use of this grant. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Santa Clarita, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Subdivision by the City, which action is provided for in the Government Code Section 66499.37. In the event the City becomes aware of any such claim, action, or proceeding, the City shall promptly notify the applicant, or if the City fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. Nothing contained in this Condition prohibits the City from participating in the defense of any claim, action, or proceeding, if both the following occur: (1) the City bears. its own attorneys' fees and costs; and (2) the City defends the action in good faith. The applicant shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement unless the entitlement is approved by the applicant.' 5. Details shown on the Tentative Tract Map are not necessarily approved. Any details which are inconsistent with requirements of ordinances, general conditions 'of approval, or City policies -must be specifically approved. 6. Easements shall not be .granted or recorded within areas proposed to be granted, dedicated, or offered for dedication for public streets_ or highways, access rights, building restriction rights, or other easements, until 'after the final map is filed with the County Recorder unless such easements. are subordinated to the proposed grant or dedication. If easements are. granted after the date of the tentative approval, a subordination must be executed by the easement holder prior to the filing of the final map. RESO 927215 7. The Applicant is hereby advised that this project is subject to fees at the time of building permit issuance which may include, but are not limited to, the following as applicable: (1) Los Angeles County Residential Sever Connection Fee; (2) Interim School ,Facilities Financing Fee; (3) Installation or Upgrade of Traffic Signals Fees and/or Road Improvement Fees; and (4) Planned Local Drainage Facilities Fee. 8. The Applicant is hereby advised that lots created in this project may be subject to additional review under the Oak Tree Ordinance and the Hillside Ordinance at building permit. 9. In lieu, of establishing the final specific locations of structures on each lot at this time, the owner, at the time of issuance of a building permit, agrees to develop the property in conformance with the City Code and other appropriate ordinances such as the Building Code, Plumbing Code, Grading Ordinance, Highway Permit Ordinance, Mechanical Code, Zoning Ordinance, Undergrounding of Utilities Ordinance, Water Ordinance, Oak Tree Ordinance, Sanitary Sever and Industrial Waste Ordinance, Electrical Code, and Fire Code. Improvements and other requirements may be imposed pursuant to such codes and ordinances. 10. A final tract map must be processed through the City Engineer prior to being filed with the County Recorder. 11. A grading permit shall be required for any and all off-site grading to occur for the purposes of this project. MAP -REQUIREMENTS 12. The owner, at the time of issuance of permits or other grants of approval agrees to develop the property in accordance with City Codes and other appropriate ordinances such as the Building Code, Plumbing Code, Grading Code, Highway Permit Ordinance, Mechanical Code, Zoning Ordinance, Undergrounding of Utilities Ordinance, Sanitary Sever and Industrial Waste Ordinance, Electrical Code and Fire Code.. 13. The applicant shall file a map which shall be prepared by or under the direction of a licensed land surveyor or registered civil engineer. The map shall be processed through the .City Engineer' prior to being filed with the County Recorder. The applicant shall note all offers of dedication by certificate on the face of the map. 14. If signatures of record title interests appear on the map, the applicant shall submit a preliminary guarantee. If said signatures do not appear on the, map, a title report/final guarantee is needed showing all fee owners and interest holders. 15. The applicant shall pay a deposit as required to review documents and plans for final map clearance in accordance with Section 21.36.010(c) of the Subdivision Ordinance. - 2 RESO 92=215 ROAD IMPROVEMENTS 16. Applicant's street and grading plans and all construction permitted by such plans shall comply with the requirements of the approved oak tree report. 17. The applicant shall offer for dedication future streets beyond the turnarounds on all streets to the tract boundary if required to serve adjacent properties to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, or extend the turnarounds beyond the tract boundaries within the adjacent ownerships. 18. The subdivider is required to install distribution lines and individual service lines for community antenna television service (CATV) for all new development. 19. The applicant shall install mailboxes and posts per City standards. Secure approval of U.S. Postal Service prior to installation. 20. The applicant shall provide letters) of slope easement(s) and drainage acceptance as directed by the.City Engineer. 21. The applicant shall obtain approval of the City Engineer and the City Attorney for proposed homeowners association maintenance agreements prior to recordation of the final map or a phase thereof. 22. The applicant shall include a disclosure in the CCER's to comply with the Geologist's recommendations in the Geology Report for restrictions on watering, irrigation; planting and recommend types of plants to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 23. The subdivider, by agreement with the City Engineer, may guarantee installation of improvements as determined by the City Engineer through faithful performance bonds, letters of credit or any other acceptable means. 24. Applicant shall dedicate right of way and construct off-site improvements for the access road and the bridges (across Sand and Iron Canyon Vash) which are required to adequately serve this development. It is the sole responsibility of the developer to acquire the necessary right-of-way and/or easements. The applicant shall construct the access road at an angle of intersection with Tannahill to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Subdivider shall secure at the subdividers.expense sufficient title or interest in land to permit any off-site improvements to be made. The Bridge shall be designed to meet public .safety and maintenance standards -and shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Possible materials used may be steel, concrete, wood or other material, to the .satisfaction of the City Engineer and Building Official. A pedestrian walkway shall be provided on at least one side of each Bridge. - 3 - RESO 92-215 25. The applicant shall provide and install street .name signs prior to occupancy of building(s). 26. The applicant shall construct pavement and inverted shoulder 18 feet from centerline on all streets including the access road to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 27. The applicant shall dedicate (no gates shall be allowed on the below listed streets) and construct the following required road improvements: Street R/W Paving and Name Width Inverted Shoulder 'A' Street 60-0 FT XX 'B' Street 60-0 FT XX 'C' Street 60-0 FT XX 'D' Street 58-0 FT XX 'E' Street 60-0 FT XX 'F' Street Access Road 64-0*FT XX Tannahill Road 32-0*FT from centerline XX Triumph Avenue_ _ 32-0*FT from centerline XX * or as approved by the City Engineer WATER 28. The applicant. shall file a statement with the City Engineer from the water purveyor indicating that the water system will be operated by the purveyor and that under normal operating conditions, the necessary quantities of water will be available, the system will meet the requirements ,for the land division, and that water service will be provided to each lot or parcel. This condition requires the extension of the water service mainline from its present terminus to the project. 29. The applicant shall serve all lots or parcels with adequately sized water system facilities, including fire hydrants, of sufficient size to accommodate the total domestic and fire flows required for the land division. Domestic flows required for the land division are to be determined by the City Engineer or Director of Public Works. Fire flows required are to be determined by the Fire Chief. SEWERS 30. The subdivider shall install and dedicate main line DRY sewers and serve each lot/parcel with a.separate house lateral or have approved and bonded sewer plans on file with the City Engineer. The health - department has authorized the .usage of septic tanks and leach lines until such time as the project can be connected to the public sewer system. - 4 - RESO 92-215 GRADING. DRAINAGE & GEOLOGY 31. The applicant shall submit a grading plan which must be approved prior to approval of the final map. The' applicants grading plan shall be based on a detailed engineering geotechnical report which must be specifically approved by the geologist and/or soils engineer and show all recommendations submitted by .them. It must also agree with the tentative map and conditions as approved by the Advisory Agency. 32. The applicant shall eliminate all geologic hazards associated with this proposed development, or delineate a restricted use area approved by the consultant geologist to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and dedicate to the City the right to prohibit the erection of buildings or other structures within the restricted use areas. The geologist has recommended building setbacks in certain areas and these shall be designated on the final map. 33. The _ applicant shall submit drainage plans and necessary support documents to comply with Engineering. requirements. These must• be approved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to filing of the map. Portions of the property lying adjacent. to the Sand Canyon Wash are subject to flood hazard because of overflow, inundation, and debris flows. A determination shall be made prior to approval of the final map that all lots contain sufficient area for an adequate building pad outside of the flood.setback area. 34. The applicant shall provide drainage facilities to remove the flood hazard and dedicate and show necessary future easements for flood control purposes and drainage facilities and rights-of-way for the Sand Canyon Wash and Iron Canyon Wash on the 'final map to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 35. The applicant shall place a note of flood hazard on final map and delineate the areas subject to flood hazard and shall show and label all natural drainage courses. Dedicate to the City the right to restrict the erection of buildings in the flood hazard areas. 36. Applicant shall comply with the requirements for the Sand and Iron Canyon Flood Protection setback 'districts. Structures within the flood fringe areae must be elevated 1' - 0" above the elevation of the surface of the water. No structures will be allowed in the floodway. Applicant shall submit cross sections to determine the exact extent of the flood limits. This must be submitted. and approved prior to approval of the final map. 37. Applicant shall record an instrument or indicate by note on the final map that the lot owners in said subdivision shall not interfere with the established drainage of said subdivision. The note shall state that each owner of a lot in said subdivision shall not erect concrete block. walls or similar solidobstructions except as approvedbythe City Engineer. - 5 - RESO 92-215 38. The applicant shall provide for contributory drainage from adjoining properties and return drainage to its natural conditions or secure off=site drainage acceptance letters from affected property owners. 39. The applicant shall adjust, relocate, and/or eliminate lot lines, lots, streets, easements, grading, geotechnical protective devices, and/or physical improvements to comply with ordinances, policies, and standards in effect at .the date the City determined the application to be complete all to the satisfaction of this Department. 40.. Prior to final approval, enter into a written agreement with the City of Santa Clarita whereby the subdivider agrees to pay to the City a sum (to be determined by the City Council) times the factor per development unit for the purpose of contributing to a proposed Bridge and Thoroughfare Benefit District to implement the highway element of the General -Plan as a means of mitigating the traffic impact of this and other subdivisions. in the area. The form of security for performance of said agreement shall be as approved by the City. The agreement shall include the following provisions: Upon establishment of the District and the area of benefit, the fee shall be paid to a special Community Development Department fund. , In the event funds are required for work prior to formation of the District, the City Engineer may demand a sum of $4,800 (or greater as determined by the City Council), times - the factor per development unit to be credited toward the final fee established under the District. The subdivider may construct improvements of equivalent: value in lieu of paying fees established for the District subject to approval of the City Engineer. The City Engineer may require the developer to submit a traffic report periodically that addresses traffic congestion and the need to mitigate the problems prior to issuing building permits. Factors for development units are as follows: Development Unit Factor Single Family per unit 1.0 The project is in the Route 126 Bridge and ThoroughfareDistrict 41. Applicant shall acquire permits from the Army Corps of Engineers and the Fish 6 Game Department prior. to issuance of grading permits or the commencement of any work within any natural drainage course. FIRE DEPARTMENT 42. This property is located within the area described by the Forester and Fire Warden as Fire Zone 4 and future construction must-, comply with applicable Code requirements. The required number of fire hydrants and their locations shall be established prior to recordation of the map. _ 6 _ RESO 92-215 43. Provide water mains, fire hydrants, and fire flows as required by the County Forester and Fire Warden for all land shown on the map to be recorded. 44. Provide Fire Department and City approved street signs, and building address numbers prior to occupancy. 45. Fire Department access shall extend to within 150 feet distance of any portion of structures to be built. 46. Access shall comply with Section 10.207 of the Fire Code which requires all weather access.. All weather access may require paving. 47. Where driveways extend further than 300 feet and are of single access design, turnarounds. suitable for fire protection equipment use shall be provided .and shown on the final map. Turnarounds shall be designed, constructed and maintained to insure their integrity for Fire Department use. Where topography dictates, turnarounds shall be provided for driveways which extend over 150 feet. 48. The private driveways shall be indicated on .the final map as "FIRE LANES" and shall be maintained in accordance with the Los Angeles County Fire Code. 49. All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted prior to construction. Vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction. 50. Grades for all driveways shall not exceed 15I grade, unless modified by the Fire Department. 51. The. applicant shall provide fire hydrants in a number, location, and type and shall provide for fire flows as determined by and to the satisfaction -of the Fire Chief. 52. The applicant shall pay fees, if established by the City, to provide funds for fire protection facilities which are required by new commercial, industrial or residential development prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits.- This fee shall not exceed' nineteen cents per square foot. TRAFFIC DIVISION 53. The.applicant shall install a left -turn lane complete with appropriate transitions for northbound traffic on Sand Canyon Road turning left onto the project access road. This shall be operational to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to occupancy. 54. The applicant shall contribute on a *fair share basis" to the funding mechanism(s) (existing/proposed/under development) related to roadway improvements and signalization as follows: Sand Canyon Road bridge over the Santa Clara River. - 7 - RESO 92-215 Sand.Canyon Road bridge over the Antelope Valley Freeway (SR 14). 55. The applicant shall provide the. City with documentation which assures that the appropriate sight distance is provided for motorists at all project-driveway/street and street/street intersections, to the satisfaction.of the City Engineer. DEPARTMENT OF PARRS AND RECREATION 56. The applicant shall provide final landscape and irrigation plans for review to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks and Recreation. 57. The applicant shall provide trail easements in a location, 'width, and type to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks and Recreation. These trail easements shall include at a minimum a north/south and east/guest trail. The applicant shall provide an alternate trail route around the project bridge for the Sand Canyon Wash equestrian trail. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY 58. This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the permittee and the owner of the property involved (if other than the permittee) have filed with the Director of Community Development their affidavit stating that they are aware of, and agree to accept, all of the conditions of this grant. 59. All requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and of the specific zoning of subject property must be complied with unless set forth in the permit and/or as shown on the approved tentative tract map. 60. The property shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the tentative tract map. 61. Within one year of the approval of this project, the applicant shall pay a Transit Impact Fee of $200.00 per residential unit; provided that the City has.its Transit Impact Program in effect. These fees shall be paid to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 62. The applicant shall stop all work if any archaeological, paleontological, or cultural resources are detected. The applicant shall hire a qualified archaeologist, acceptable by the City, who shall inspect the site .and prepare a report and recommended mitigation to.the satisfaction of the'City. 63. within nine months after the completion of grading activities (provided water is available), all graded areas not covered by impervious surface shall be stabilized -with landscaping. This requirement shall not include graded pad areas. 64. Landscaping coverage and stabilization of graded slopes shall be selected and designed ,to be compatible with surrounding, natural vegetation or to replace removed natural vegetation and should -recognize climatic, soil, and ecologic characteristics of the region. - 8 - RESO 92-215 65. Where the cut or fill slopes intersect. the natural grade, the intersection of each slope shall be vertically and/or horizontally rounded and blended with natural contours so as to present a natural slope appearance. 66. All cut or fill slopes, except slopes less than five (5) feet in vertical height shall be planted with adequate plant materials to protect the slope against erosion. The cut slope on lot 2 shall contain additional landscaping to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. 67. The applicant shall provide a grading plan at a scale of 1:20 with the surveyed locations of oak trees to the satisfaction of the City's Oak Tree.Consultant prior to final map. 68. No removals or encroachment of oak trees shall be authorized until the grading plan at 1:20 has been completed and approved by the City's Oak Tree Consultant prior to final map. 69. The applicant shall payor plant oak trees in a number equal to the ISA value of all oak trees to be removed. ISA values and the values of any replacement trees shall be established by the applicant and approved by the City's Oak Tree Consultant prior to final map. Permitted removals and encroachments are identified within the table below: TABLE I OAK TREE I)SPACTS A. Encroachment 1, 10, 17, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 163, 164, 166, 167, 168, 190, 209, 210, 250, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 272, 273, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 284, 285, 286, 288, 289, 294, 296, 297, 298, 336; 368, 369, 410, 411, 432, 437, 473, 477, 497, 498,. 499, 500, 500A, 501, 502, 503. B. Removal 2, 9, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 161; 162, 165_, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 251, 290, 367, 402, 415, 416, 417; 418, 433, 434, 435, 436, 474, 475, 476, 504, 508. 70. Where possible, removed oaks shall be transplanted on the site. The applicant shall provide a transportation and monitoring.plan for oak tree transplanting to the satisfaction of the City's oak Tree Consultant.prior to final map. 71. The applicant shall follow all construction procedures in the Oak Tree Protection and Preservation Guidelines,. including fencing and use of hand tools within the protected -zone of the oak trees. 72. All impacted oak trees (includes encroachments, replacements, and relocated trees) shall be monitored by the applicant's oak tree - 9 - RESO 92-215 consultant for a period of five years, to commence at recordation of the map. Said monitoring shall include, at a minimum, an annual report by the applicant's oak tree consultant submitted to the Director of Community Development for review and approval. 73. The applicant shall modify the proposed roadway to avoid removal of Oak Tree 1258. 74. The applicant shall record a deed restriction on the property restricting further subdivision of the created lots (Lots 1 through 32). Furthermore, a note reflecting this restriction shall be placed on the final map. Both actions shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 75. The pad location for lot 18 shall be option 2 (the lower pad location). 76. The applicant shall provide to the City the Declaration of Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions for the project for review prior to recordation which shall state that the applicant on behalf of itself, its successors and assignors and purchasers of the lots agrees not to protest or otherwise contest the formation of any assessment district or method of: assessment applicable to the development which may be.established by the City .for the purpose of financing and constructing road improvements in the Sand Canyon area. The appropriate document is to be recorded and to run with the land. The document is to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. However, nothing in this condition is intended to limit: (1) the applicant's right under state law to protest the manner in which any assessment is spread over. parcels within the boundaries of any district which may be formed; (2) applicant's right to vote in any elections required for imposition of any tax; or (3) applicant's right to participate in any public hearing related to the formation of such district or other method of assessment. 77. Prior to first construction on lots 4, 5, 6, and 7, the applicant, or the applicant's respective successors and assignors: and purchasers of. lots 4, 5, .6, and 7, shall submit a site plan and gain oak tree permit approval from the Planning Commission at an administrative hearing. This condition is in addition to any requirements which may be lawfully imposed pursuant to the existing Ordinance 89-10 (Oak Tree Ordinance) and regulations of the City. This map shall indicate notes evidencing this requirement for lots 4, 5, 6, and 7. 78. The applicant shall pave Ravenhill Road and construct associated cul-de-sac improvements to provide paved access to lot 32. This action shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. LHS:485 - 10 -