HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-04-11 - AGENDA REPORTS - PH PORTA BELLA DEVAGMT (2)AGENDA REPORT
City Manager Approval
v
Item to be presented by:
Lynn M. Harris �Z�
PUBLIC HEARING
DATE: April 11, 1995
SUBJECT: Continued Public Hearing From March 28, 1995 Regarding the Porta
Bella Specific Plan and Development Agreement As Well As the Three
Appeals Filed Concerning the Decision On June 21, 1994, By the
Planning Commission
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
I�[N�l7�iiil►i�
At the March 28, 1995, City Council meeting, the Council resumed the continued public
hearing for the Porta Bella project. At the close of the item, the Council continued the public
hearing to April 11, 1995, and limited future public testimony to 30 minutes, evenly divided
between those in support of and opposed to the project. Furthermore, the Council restricted
testimony to the Keysor-Century appeal and Hillside Ordinance questions only..
ANALYSIS
Keysor-Century Appeal: Keysor-Century's primary reason for their appeal was to request
the precise alignment of the proposed Magic Mountain extension in order to identify any
potential impact on their property. The applicant has now completed a number of alignment
studies. The one currently being proposed by the developer minimizes and/or eliminates
impacts to the many existing small businesses on Springbrook, and primarily impacts the
Keysor and Hasa properties. The question in front of the City Council is whether this is the
best access to the site.
The applicant is working with due diligence to resolve the issue_to the mutual satisfaction
of Keysor-Century and the applicant. According to the applicant, the proposed alignment
would impact a storage area, some portable offices, and vacant land on the Keysor site.
Keysor recently indicated that they intended to construct an office structure on the vacant
piece at some future date; however, no application to do this has been filed with the City.
The developer is now working with Keysor to compensate them, either monetarily, with other
land to accomplish their plans, or some other method. Failing all of this, should the City
decide it is in the public interest for the road to go through the Keysor site, the City would
initiate condemnation proceedings. As the affected property owner, Keysor would get fair
Continued To:yam"-- Agenda Item:- �
compensation in either eventuality, and the Porta Bella applicant is required to pay the costs
in both scenarios.
Even without the Porta Bella proposal, if Keysor- Century applied for an office building on
their site, the City would have required a dedication for the extension of Magic Mountain
Parkway, as this is already on the General Plan, Currently, Keysor has manufacturing,
storage, and office uses on their land, and by requiring the dedication for a General Plan
roadway, the City is not prohibiting the property owner from using the site. Additionally,
the applicant may have other areas on the site where the office could work,.
From a staff perspective, the current alignment is best in that it impacts the fewest
businesses, and primarily impacts vacant land that might have been developed versus
numerous small businesses and buildings already in existence. The alignment is a logical
extension of the existing Magic Mountain Parkway, and the bridge proposal is superior to an
at -grade crossing.
By choosing this precise alignment, the Council satisfies the Keysor appeal, in part, by at
least identifying the preferred alignment and reaffirming that the property owner will receive
full and just compensation, either through a cooperative agreement or through condemnation
proceedings. It should be remembered, that the Council is only approving this alignment at
a conceptual level at this time. The off-site extension of Magic Mountain Parkway will
require additional environmental review tiered to the existing EIR and Addendum prepared
for the Porta Bella project, including identification of impacts and mitigation measures,
alternatives analysis, and public comment and review.
Applicant's Appeal of Traffic Condition TE -1: The applicant appealed Traffic Condition TE -1,
arguing that it was vague and could cause the applicant to provide more than a fair share
of infrastructure in excess of the project's impacts. The appeal and recent legal decisions,
particularly the Dolan decision, required staff to re-examine the condition as approved by the
Planning Commission Staff and the applicant, after extensive review, have agreed on
revised language for TE -1, which continues to protect the City's interests, while recognizing
the legitimate concerns raised by the applicant. See Attachment A for the full language.
Appeal by Dean Cheeseman, Carl Kanowskv, Circle J Residents, and Others: This appeal
was not specific, and basically appealed everything recommended or approved by the
Planning Commission. Since then, there have been numerous letters as well as public
testimony that have helped to define the issues of concern to the Circle J residents and
others. The applicant has now proposed numerous project modifications that address the
concerns expressed including: elimination of Oakdale Canyon Bridge; realignment of Magic
Mountain Parkway to minimize impacts on Circle J Open Space; realignment of Via
Princessa away from homes; realignment of Magic Mountain extension to minimize impacts
on small businesses; requirement that the entire site be cleaned up prior to construction of
new homes or commercial uses; willingness to work to improve equestrian trails off-site,
including equestrian crossings at Santa Clarita Parkway; landscaping and berms on -and -off-
site to mitigate new roads; adherence to seismic codes at the time of construction, etc. Other
than the preference that there be no new development, staff believes the applicant has
proposed a project that is consistent with the General Plan and the Hillside Ordinance, while
meeting a majority of the residents' concerns.
Hillside Ordinance Application Procedures: The application for the Porta Bella Specific Plan
was accepted and deemed complete before the City adopted a Hillside Ordinance, As a result,
the applicant was not required to provide any specific hillside exhibits, and this requirement
cannot be made retroactive. Despite that, numerous exhibits were furnished by the applicant
or provided for in the EIR that allowed a thorough examination of the project's impact on
hillsides. Of more importance, the General Plan Land Use Element includes specific
language regarding the "Valley Center," including the "Civic
Center/Entertainment/Information Component," and the "Office/ Financial Corridor," that
apply directly to the northwest portion of the Porta Bella site. In addition, another section
of the General Plan includes a section entitled, "Bermite Site." These sections collectively
apply to the Bermite site, and while recognizing the past industrial uses and the hilly nature
of the site, the General Plan describes a development concept that the Porta Bella plan tries
to implement. This is why the Planning Commission was able to find that the project was
consistent with the General Plan.
The Planning Commission, recognizing the disturbed nature of the site, the General Plan
sections cited above, and the cutting edge design features of the Porta Bella proposal, made
the finding that the project is "innovative." The proposed density is less than 70% of the
allowable mid -point zoning, and is actually below the low point for the allowable zoning on
the site. If the City disregarded: (a.) the disturbed nature of the site; (b:) the "innovation"
finding, and (c.) the General Plan language that calls for a development similar to the
proposed Porta Bella, the model would cause the new development to be clustered to the
south, furthest away from the Santa Clarita/ Metrolink Transportation Center, and closest
to the Circle J Estate homes. Due to the many minor site undulations, the development
would be disjointed, discontinuous, and discouraging to a pedestrian orientation in favor of
the auto.
Proiect Modifications
As a result of Council consensus on specific issues and modifications proposed by the
applicant during the public review process of this project, staff has prepared modified
conditions of approval and mitigation measures, with any new changes indicated in bold.
Attachment A, the first attachment, contains only those conditions and mitigation measures
that have been so modified. The major modifications involve;
a. The entire site must be cleaned prior to new development.
b. Curb, gutter, and landscaping on Springbrook, north from Drayton Street.
b. No construction traffic on Springbrook Avenue.
d. Drainage improvements and a second access for Oak Orchard.
e. Project will adhere to future building and seismic codes.
f. Equestrian crossings for Santa Clarita Parkway,.
g. A gate guarded entry from Via Princessa to Karrie Lane.
h. Relocation of Magic Mountain and Via Princessa further from existing homes.
i. No Oakdale Canyon bridge, and impact to Circle J Open Space very minimal.
j. A berm and landscape plan for Magic Mountain Parkway and Via Princessa.
k. Magic Mountain as a four lane collector on site, with right-of-way for two more lanes.
Staff has also drafted a resolution for certification of the EIR and a Statement of Overriding
Consideration, a draft resolution for approval of the project and disposition of the appeals,
and a draft ordinance for adopting the Specific Plan, including modifications to the General
Plan and Zoning Map per Council's direction.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Receive staff report. Limit testimony to 30 minutes, divided equally between project
proponents and opponents. Limit testimony to the Keysor-Century appeal and the
application of the Hillside Ordinance to the project. Close the public hearing.
2. Adopt Resolution No. 95-41 certifying the EIR and including a Statement of
Overriding Consideration for the Project and a Mitigation Monitoring Program.
3. Adopt Resolution No. 95-42 regarding the three Porta Bella appeals of the Planning
Commission action on the Porta Bella project and approving Master Case No.'s 91-
164 and 93-012, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51599, Oak Tree Permit 91-033, and
a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation to Specific Plan and
amend the Highway Network of the Circulation Element of the General Plan.
4. Adopt Ordinance No. 95-6 approving the Porta Bella Specific Plan, including: a Zone
Change to allow for Specific Plan 91-001, which includes a zoning reclassification
from RS, BP and OS to Specific Plan (SP); and the establishment of special
development standards.
5. Refer the initial review of the Development Agreement back to the Planning
Commission with direction and an expected completion date.
Attachments:
No. 1 City Council Draft Modified Conditions and Mitigation Measures Only
No. 2 Draft Resolution 95-41 and Draft Mitigation Measures
No. 3 Draft Resolution 95-42 and Draft Conditions of Approvals
No. 4 Draft Ordinance 95-6
file xurre nt\ ph_wr 12.ki m
ATTACHMENT 1: CITY COUNCIL MEETING: APRIL 11, 1995
DRAFT REVISED CONDITIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES,
PORTA BELLA PROJECT
MUIVITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Development Services Division (DS)
DS -1 The master vesting tentative tract map shall
=A- the
revised network as indicated in
DS -2 The project land uses, densities, road network and product yields shallbe'as
depicted in exhibits "B" and "C" attached, and as further modified by the
City Council, as reflected in Exhibits AA and BB. The draft Porta Bella
Specific Plan is exhibit "D," the cover of which is attached. The complete draft
exhibit 'D is available in the Community Development Department. The
language and exhibits included in the Porta Bella Specific Plan, exhibit "D;'
shall be modified to reflect the changes delineated in''the ,previous exhibits and
the conditions of approval to the; satisfaction of the Director of Community
Development.
DS -3 The Porta Bella Specific Plan, "Exhibit D" and as further modified by the
City Council, (as reflected in Exhibits AA and BB), shall be the governing
land use and planning document for the Porta Bella site. Future tract maps,
product designs, improvements, and infrastructure must be consistent with the
Specific Plan, as updated in accordance with City Council modifications
of the project: during the public hearing process., sheela the Spe �
DS -9 Exhibit "E" identifies the phasing used for the purposes of the traffic study.
The phasing on.the Master Vesting Tentative Tract Map shall be consistent
with this exhibit. Grading activities may cross phase boundaries. The
development and occupancy of residential and commercial products shall be
phased and consistent with Exhibit "E," and as modified by exhibits AA
and BB. The revised Specific Plan, exhibit 'D," shall include a table to the
satisfaction of Community Development summarizing the intensity of land uses
in each phase of exhibit "E" consistent with exhibits "A, B, and C, and as
modified by exhibits AA and BB.
DS -12 The Mitigation Monitoring Plan is attached as Exhibit "F." The applicant is
responsible for implementing the mitigation measures to the satisfaction of the
City for the life of the project. Mitigation Measures RU -1 and RU -3 are
superseded by the following language:
For the entire 996 acre site, the applicant and/or future developer shall
provide evidence for proper hazardous waste indentification and
remediation, to the satisfaction of the City, from California
City Council Draft Revised
Conditions/Mitigations 4/11/95 1 Attachment 1
Environmental Protection Agency/ Department of Toxic Substances
Control prior to the issuance of any grading permits. No construction
of Phase I residential, commercial, office, or office park may
commence until the entire site is cleared by Cal EPA/ DTSC.
Construction of major highway segments and other public
infrastructure may be permitted to the satisfaction of Cal EPA/ DTSC
and the City prior to the clean-up of the entire site, provided the area
in question has received clean closure from Cal EPA/ DTSC.
DS -16 Submit and implement landscape plans to the satisfaction of the City in the
vicinity of the off-site
of
Mountain Parkway that impacts
open space.
DS -19 Prior to recordation of the Final, Map, modify the map, to the
satisfaction of the City, to reflect modifications as indicated in
Exhibits AA and BB.
DS -20 Determination of alignments and construction of off-site highway
segments of Santa Clarita Parkway, Magic Mountain Parkway, and Via
Princessa, will require additional environmental review tiered to the
existing DEIR and Addendum, prior to any construction, to the
satisfaction of the City.
DS -21 Prior to recordation of the Final Map, update all exhibits and text in
the Specific Plan,,to the satisfaction of the City, implementing all
changes mandated by the PlanningCommission and the City Council,
to the satisfaction of the City; and incorporating Exhibits AA and BB.
DS -22 Prior to recordation of the map, update number of residential units
specified in each phase in condition TE -1. Update Specific Plan to be
consistent with revised phasing in TE -1. Phasing numbers shall
reflect reductions in density mandated by the Commission, as well as
any reductions due to the revised roadways as indicated in Exhibits
AA and BB, such as the relocation of Magic Mountain Parkway and
Via Princessa.
Prior to recordation, realign Via Princessa so that the centerline is no
closer. than 400 feet to the southerly boundary. Obtain letter from the
HOA, indicating whether land to the south is to be open space or
estate homes. Update the map and Specific Plan prior to recordation,
.to the satisfaction of the City, to reflect these changes. Provide a
landscape plan, including a berm where necessary, to mitigate impacts
to the homes to the south, to the satisfaction of the City.
DS -24 Provide a landscape plan, including a berm where necessary, to
mitigate impacts of Magic Mountain Parkway when adjacent to Circle
J homes or impacting Circle J open space.
City Council Draft Revised
Conditions/Mitigations 4/11/95 2 Attachment 1
DS -25 Concurrent with the opening of both Via Princessa to Rainbow Glen
Drive and Wiley Canyon Bridge, provide a gate guarded entry to Karie
Lane of the Circle J Estates to the satisfaction of the City.
DS -26 Provide equestrian crossings in at least two places under Santa
Clarita Parkway concurrently with construction of the roadway.
DS -27 A second access point to the Oak Orchard area of Placerita Canyon
will be provided to Santa Clarita Parkway concurrently with the
construction of the roadway.
DS -28 Prior to initiating construction of Santa CIarita Parkway in the
vicinity of the Oak Orchard areaofPlacerita Canyon, provide a
drainage study to the satisfaction of the City focusing on the Oak
Orchard area. Construct requireddrainage ` improvements,, to the
satisfaction of the City, concurrently with construction of 'Santa
Clarita Parkway.
DS -29 The project will adhere to the seismic and building codes in effect at
the time of recordation of each map.
DS -30 Construct streetscape improvements to Springbrook Avenue, north of
Drayton Street to the Keysor-Century property line, consisting of
curbs, gutters, and landscaping, to the satisfaction of the City, prior
to occupancy of Phase 1 of the project.
DS -31 No construction traffic will use Springbrook Avenue.
TE -1 The conditions listed below refer to the improvements that would be necessary
to be in place ,prior to the issuance of occupancy for each phase as outlined
below and as specified in the traffic study for this project.
The design plans for the subject improvements for each phase shall be approved by the
City Engineer prior to the recordation of each phase.
Any deviations from the listed conditions may need a further traffic study and shall be
subject to the approval of the City Traffic Engineer.
The off-site improvements as indicated in the traffic study have been assumed to be in
place concurrent.with each of the three phases of this development. Sheu4 If those
traffic study off-site improvements which relate to a portion of the project for
which a map is to be recorded are not -be -in place or otherwise provided for at the
time such map is to be recorded
peiti,... of a e de-Felep en , then the applicant shall be required to submit an additional
traflie stades study for such portion of the project. prier to _, .,.-chat ... of eeeh map
• l' -i p - vffli l d :a eA"r • This additional traffic study shall determine the need for
alternative mitigation measures, and applicant shall be required to implement those
alternative measures te- which address the impacts of this project.
City Council Draft Revised
Conditions/Mitigations 4/11/95 3 Attachment 1
The traffic improvements included in the conditions of approval are those deemed
necessary by the traffic study to accommodate regional traffic anticipated in horizon
years coinciding with the completion of each phase of the project. Implementation or
and funding of these improvements is not the sole responsibility of the developer. The
fair share contribution by the project shall be determined based upon traffic analysis-,.-
however,
nalysis;;however, the identified improvements or other mitigations as identified in subsequent
traffic studies to be conducted prior to the recordation of a final map for any portion of
the development shall be in place or otherwise provided for to the satisfaction of the
Director of Community Development.
The land use assumptions for each phase of the developmentas outlined in the traffic
study is shown below. Some uses have been reduced from the values assumed in the
traffic study to reflect the reduction in the number,of units proposed by the applicant.:
A.
PHASE 1:
Single Family Units
Multi Family Units
Commercial (Square Feet) 16;
Office (Square Feet) 25E
Business Park (Square Feet)
Neighborhood Park (Acres)
Driving Range (Acres)
Recreational (Square Feet)
School
Church (Acres)
Hotel (Rooms)
IC
Feet)
School
Church
Hotel (1
Single Family Units
Multi Family Units
Commercial (Square Feet)
Office (Square Feet)
Business Park (Square Feet)
Neighborhood Park (Acres)
419
765
313,632
411,850
8.5
3.75
25,000
One
931
510
374,939
398,574
561,520
22.0
City Council Draft Revised
Conditions/Mitigations 4/11/95 4 Attachment 1
Driving Range (Acres)
Recreational (Square Feet) 45,000
School One
Church (Acres) 1.8
Hotel (Rooms) 140
TE -3 A minimum of two new traffic signals (Magic Mountain Parkway/Rio Vista
Road, Soledad Canyon Road/Santa Clarita Parkway) shall be in place prior to
issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 1. The applicant shall be required
to assess the need for signalization at other intersections, including
but not limited to the intersection of Magic MountainParkway/Via
Princessa, to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer.
TE -4 Magic Mountain Parkway (Alaoe,4 eessa) shall be extended with 'a
minimum of four traffic lanes from San Fernando Road/Bouquet Canyon Road
to Rio Vista Road and shall be designed and constructed as a grade separated
crossing over San Fernando Road and the railroad tracks prior to issuance of
occupancy permits for Phase 1. In no event shallcondition Tr&19 be applicable
to this condition.
TE -5 Magic Mountain Parkway (Alag<��i shall be extended with a
minimum of two traffic lanes from Rio Vista Road to Via Princessa, and Via
Princessa shall be constructedwith a minimum of two traffic lanes
from Magic Mountain Parkway to Rainbow Glen Drive prior to issuance of
occupancy permits for Phase 1. A maximum threshold of development may be
permitted within Phase 1 prior to extending this roadway subject to the
satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer.
TE -9 A minimum of three twe new traffic signals (Santa Clarita Parkway/D Street,
Santa Clarita Parkway/Via Princessa;' and, Magic Mountain Parkway/Main
Street) shall be in place prior to issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 2..
The applicant shall, be required to assess the need for signalization at other
intersections, including but not limited to the intersection of Magic
Mountain Parkway! Via Princessa, to the satisfaction of the City Traffic
Engineer.
TE -11 Magic Mountain Parkway (Ala ielPr ..,.,.. sa4 shall be widened to six traffic
lanes from San Fernando Road/Bouquet Canyon Road to Rio Vista Road place
prior to issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 2 in accordance with Traffic
Engineering condition TE -1.
Magic Mountain Parkway'"ra�ss shall be widened to four traffic
lanes from Rio Vista Road to Via Princessa, and Via Princessa shall be
widened to four traffic lanes from Magic Mountain Parkway to Rainbow
Glen Drive prior to issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 2 in accordance
with Traffic Engineering condition TE -1.
TE -15 A minimum of three new traffic signals (Magic Mountain Parkway/Via
Princessa, Santa Clarita Parkway/Via Porta Bella, Magic Mountain
City Council Draft Revised
Conditions/Mhlgations 4/11/95 5 Attachment 1
Parkway/Via Porta Bella Alain StreetW4& Prineessa) shall be in place prior
to issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 3. The traffic signal for Magic
Mountain/Via Princessa maybe required to be installed in Phase l or
Phase II, to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant
shall be required to assess the need for signalization at other intersections to
the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer.
TE -16 Magic Mountain Parkway (A4aeessa) shall be widened to include six
traffic lanes from Rio Vista Road to Via Princessa, and Via Princessa shall
be widened to include six traffic lanes from Magic Mountain Parkway
to Rainbow Glen Drive prior to issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 3 in
accordance with Traffic Engineering condition TE -Lt
TE -18 Via Princessa shall be extended from Magic. 'Mountain Parkway
Alagie44-ineessa west to connect to existing Wiley Canyon Road. 'west of San
Fernando Road as a six lane arterial with an overcrossing at San Fernando
Road and the railroad track prior to issuance Iof occupancy permits for Phase
3 in accordance with Traffic Engineerins,condition TE -1.
TE -20 The City may permit the developer to enter into a reimbursement agreement
�
or other appropriate mechanism for traffic improvements constructed on behalf
of others for improvements which are not included'in the Bridge and
Thoroughfare District to the satisfaction; of the Community Development
Department.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Engineering Division
TENTATIVE MAP CONDITIONS
ED -11 Prior to the recordation of each phase of the project the applicant shall provide
a preliminary vertical and horizontal alignment to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer for all proposed major highways, including Via Princessa, Magic
Mountain Parkway Al Tessa, and Santa Clarita Parkway, including
off-site segments, as part of the implementation of the General Plan
Amendment. The alignment shall extend beyond the project boundary and join
to existing improvements. The applicant shall receive Bridge and
Thoroughfare credit for this work. The applicant shall not be required to pay
review fees.
prior to any grading plans being approved by the Community
)pment Department, the City shall review them for intent of tract
Ions. The grading plans shall demonstrate:
a. That the open space areas that will remain as natural slopes be protected
during grading operations.
b. That grading activities are phased so that the exposure of unprotected areas
City Council Draft Revised
Conditions/Mitigations 4/11/95 6 Attachment 1
is limited to the areas where work is immediately undertaken especially during
the rainy season.
c. That areas which are not being built up shall not be cleared of vegetative
cover until actual grading is to be started.
d. That areas which have been cleared and could potentially be exposed to a
storm event shall be protected by adequate source control Best Management
Practices.
e. The applicant will provide a Dust
for review and approval prior to the
each phase.
ED -55 The applicant shall submit a final
geologic certification, to the City 1
phase prior the recordation of that p'.
ED -56 The applicant shall submit
sedimentation plan for review
phase of the project. The drain
prevent drainage problems down
of the City Engineer,.
ED -69 The applicant shall provide for cc
and return drainage to its na'
acceptance letters from affectec
substantial down stream impc
stream property owners. The ap
(as
review
Engineer
Plan for
each
a drainage plan and an erosion and
and approval prior to; the recordation of each
age plan shall provide sufficient facilities to
stream of road right-of-ways to the satisfaction
tory; drainage from adjoining properties
ondtions or secure off-site drainage
rty owners. The project will require
ts'to eliminate the impacts to down
:'shall construct sufficient on-site and
by the City) improvements to reduce
tion of each phase.
:D MITIGATION MEASURES
City Council Draft Revised
Conditions/MRlgatlons 4/11/95 7 Attachment 1
RU -1
RU -3,
PORTA BELLA SPECIFIC PLAN 91-001; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599; OTP 91-033 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM - ALL MITIGATION
MEASURES ARE CONDITIONS TO VTTM 51599
EXHIBIT AA:
MODIFIED MITIGATION MEASURES
for City Council Consideration April 11, 1995
. uperceaed by Condition of Approval DS -12 for Vesting Tentative Tract Map.
51599.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Grading Permits Project developer(s)/engineers DTSC/City Engineer
speech^ clevelop ent projeets. Superceded by Condition of Approval DS -12 for Vesting
51599.
Tract Map.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Remnsibility
Grading Permits Project developer(s)/engineers CAL EPA /City Engineer
H4. Design and construct runoff filtering zones in large parking areas (as opposed to driveways of single family homes
or duplexes) to the satisfaction of the City. These should be located at the lower elevations of parking areas and
designed to catch runoff with relatively high oil and grease concentrations. These facilities shall be designed to
permit percolation of the runoff through the soil and underlying layers (sand and gravel), permit hydrocarbon
filtration and absorption, and encourage the degradation of hydrocarbons by naturally -occurring soil bacteria..
All such measures shall meet NPDES requirements.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility M o n i t o r i n g
Responsibilitv
Each Grading Phase Project developer(s)/engineer(s) City Engineer
H-5. To the extent possible, incorporate settling ponds, detention basins, and vegetated swales, to slow and filter runoff
prior to discharge into the storm drain system or into natural streamcourses. Final design criteria will be
generated with ultimate project design and would involve percolation testing and geotechnical investigations in
proposed detention basin locations to the satisfaction of the City. All such measures shall meet NPDES
requirements.
current\pbmmp2.kjm
City Council Draft Revised
Conditions/Mitigations 4/11/95 S Attachment 1
Rif
City Council Draft Revised
Conditions/Mitigations 4/11/95
pvr�h .�e,14
"rx- 44
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. 95-41
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
ADOPTING A
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
AND
CERTIFYING FEIR AND ADDENDUM SCH 92-04104
FOR MASTER CASE NOS, 91-164 AND 93-012, VESTING TENTATT
51599,
OAK TREE PERMIT 91-033, AND SPECIFIC PLAN 91-(
TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 996 ACRE PR(
KNOWN AS THE BERMITE SITE LOCATED SOUTH OF SOLEDAD
AND EAST OF BOUQUET CANYON AND SAN FERNANDO
AND A ZONE CHANGE TO SPECIFIC PLAN
0
AND A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE MAP AND THE
HIGHWAY NETWORK OF THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT AND ADOPTING A
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE DEVELOPMENT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby make the following findings of fact:.
a. Applications for Specific Plan 91-001 and Oak Tree Permit 91-033 (Master
Case No. 91-164) were filed by Anden Corporation, (the applicant) with the
City of Santa Clarita on October 25, 1991. These applications were deemed
complete on February 26, 1992._ Subsequently the applicant submitted
applications ` for 'Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51599 and Development
Agreement 93-003_(Master Case No. 93-012) on February 2, 1993. On March
9, 1993 the City deemed the application complete. The City was notified in
August 1993 that Northolme Partners was the new project applicant.
The applicant requested a specific plan for a comprehensive plan of
development, including proposed modifications to the Circulation Element of
the General Plan and the Unified Development Code within the project area.
The planproposed 1,678 single family homes and 1,560 multiple family homes
on 399 acres; 91 acres of commercial and industrial uses; 14 acres of
institutional uses; 434 acres of open space and recreational uses; 58 acres of
streets; and the provision of related infrastructure on the site's 996 acres. A
vesting tentative tract map was requested to subdivide the 996 acre site into
76 master lots to be further subdivided by merchant builders into future tract
maps. An oak tree permit was requested to allow for the removal and/or
encroachment into the protected zones of up to 73 native Oak Trees, including
two 'heritage size oak trees. A development agreement was requested,
however, the details of the agreement are yet to be negotiated. The Specific
Plan includes a modification to the Circulation Network of the General Plan,
specifically the project proposes to substitute Santa Clarita Parkway for Rio
Draft Resolution 95-41, 4/11/95 1 Attachment 2
Vista and to extend Magic Mountain Parkway to Via Princessa through the
project area with minor impacts to a small portion of Circle J open space.
The site is known as the Bermite site located south of Soledad Canyon Road,
east of Bouquet Canyon Road/San Fernando Road; north of the Circle J Ranch
Community; and west of the Golden Triangle Industrial area. The assessor
parcel numbers for the project are 2836-012-010, 011, 012 and 019.
b. The General Plan presently designates the project s
Overlay on the northwest portion of the site,
development in the areas near the raiUtrai Sporn
Plan specifically mentions the Bermite siter as an a
with a mix of land uses from high -to -low density
Zoning on the site is presently RS (Residential Sulu
and OS (Open Space).
C. The project site is located in a hillside terrain
Significant ridgelines are on the site as identi6
Development is proposed on some of these rid
hillsides with slopes exceeding 25%, The site
previous industrial uses and the land form has
previous and on-going uses.
d. The City of Santa Clarita
determined that the project i
and that an environmental
Preparation (NOP) for the S
April 8, 1992 to affected
Tentative Tract Map and De
NOP was ;prepared and mail
Valley Center
high density
The General
slopes in excess of 10%.
he City's Ridgeline map.
s and on portions of the
en severely impacted by
iisturbed and altered by
ed an initial Study for the project which
ave a significant effect on the environment
A report must be prepared. A Notice of
Plan and Oak Tree Permit was mailed on
es.`" Following submittal of the Vesting
lent Agreement applications, a subsequent
February 12, 1993.
e. Since 1992 the City has leased a ten acre portion of the project site for use as
the Santa Clarita Metrolink commuter rail station, park-and-ride lot, and bus
transfer station.. The Specific Plan also proposes to provide corridors and
construct portions of three proposed east -west arterials (Santa Clarita
Parkway, Magic ;Mountain Parkway, and Via Princessa) that will provide
alternative circulation routes through the center of the City which is presently
in need of such roadways. The Specific Plan also includes an escalator and
trail connection between the commercial and residential areas and the
commuter rail station.
of Santa Clarita Development Review Committee met and the
has been supplied with draft conditions of approval.
g. The Planning Commission held extensive hearings on the project, and the City
Council has reviewed the record on the project. As a result of the Planning
Commission, the project was redesigned to subdivide the 996 acre parcel and
allow the following land uses: 406.95 acres open space, 41.75 acres for parks
Draft Resolution 95-41, 4/11/95 2 Attachment 2
h.
k,
and recreation, 10 acres for schools, 56 acres for streets, 4 acres for
institutional uses, 299.8 acres for single family residential uses (1,244 units),
85 acres for multi -family residential uses (1,667 units) and 92 acres of
commercial and industrial uses. An oak tree permit to allow for the removal
of a maximum of 109 non -heritage size oak trees and up to 5 heritage size oak
trees out of the 182 oak trees (including 10 heritage size oaks) located on-site.
The redesigned project either approved or recommended for approval by the
Planning Commission included the Magic Princessa Corridor, which links
Magic Mountain Parkway to Via Princessa. A portion of this is off-site in the
designated open space of Circle J. The addendum studied the impacts of the
proposed corridor.
The site was previously used as an
manufacturing and testing facility.
terminated in 1987. The site is curre
transportation center, and for swap me
hazardous materials contaminated the s
total of 14 hazardous waste clean-upsi
been cleaned -up under the direction of tb
Agency/ Department of Toxic Substance
identified sites have received clean'
Remediation efforts are continuing on t
sites have been identified, to be remedial
Extensive grading and landform alterati
resulting in major surface disturbance,
modification of natural drainage patten
review, the California Environmental Pi
Substances Control and the nroverty owe
CaEPA/DTSC
for film productions, the
Heavy metals and other
dt of the previous use. A
m identified and 13 have
alifornia,+Environmental Protection
Jontrol,(Ca EPA/ DTSC). The 13
osure certification from DTSC.
remaining site. An additional 64
prior to obtaining grading permits..
have occurred over most of the site
ieration of topographic relief, and
Since the Planning Commission
ction Agency, Department of Toxic
have entered into a consent decree
of the site to the satisfaction of
The City's Ridgeline Preservation and Hillside Development Ordinance (UDC,
Sec. 17.80) identifies significant ridgelines in the City and regulates
development on property having average slopes over 10%. The Ordinance
contains a provision for innovative projects, which specifies that innovative
projects are exempt from provisions of the ordinance and may not have project
densities lowered to less than 70 % of the mid -point density. The Planning
Commission' found that the project was innovative and that the proposed
density ,was below 70% of the mid -point.
The design of the project concentrates development within an area disturbed
by:. the previous industrial uses. The project proposes grading on
approximately 603 acres of the project site, much of which has already been
previously disturbed. The total amount of grading involves approximately 18
million cubic yards of cut and 18 million cubic yards of fill, balanced on-site.
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the proposed
project pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Draft Resolution 95.41, 4111/95 3 Attachment 2
Act. The Draft EIR has been circulated for review and comment to all affected
governmental agencies and all comments received have been considered by the
Planning Commission. The review period for the Draft EIR was from
September 27, 1993 to November 12, 1993. A Final EIR dated January 7,
1994, was prepared which included responses to comments received on the
DEIR.
in. As a result of public and Planning Commission comments on,the11 'project and
the Final EIR, the applicant modified his project. The Planning Commission
directed the applicant and staff to provide environmental analysis of the
modified proposal and a FEIR Addendum was prepared dated April 8, 1994.
n. The Final EIR (FEIR) and the FEIR
with CEQA.
o. The use of the FEIR Addendum is appropriate pursuant to Title 14, Chapter
3. Article 11 of the California Administrative Code because:
(1) Changes in the project which gave rise to ,the need for the FEIR
Addendum did not involve:
(a) Significant environmental impacts which were not previously
considered in the FEIR;
(b) Changedcircumstances under which the project will be
undertaken which gave rise to new significant environmental impacts
not covered in the FEIR; or
(c) New information of substantial importance to the project;
(2) Only minor technical changes or additions were necessary in the FEIR
Addendum to make the FEIR adequate pursuant to CEQA; and
(3) The changes to the FEIR by the FEIR Addendum do not raise important
new issues about the significant effects on the environment.
The City Council received numerous informational reports on the Porta Bella
Specific Plan from staff, the City's Environmental Consultant, CaEPA/DTSC,
the applicant and his consultants. Staff provided a review of the EIR process
for the Council.
The FEIR and the FEIR Addendum were presented to the Planning
Commission; as the decision making body of the City of Santa Clarita for
Master Case Nos. 91-164 and 93-012, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51599 and
Oak Tree Permit 91-033, the Commission reviewed the FEIR and the FEIR
Addendum and considered the information contained therein at several duly
noticed public hearings held at the City Council Chambers (October 19, 1993,
November 16, 1993, December 21, 1993, January 11, 1994, June 7, 1994, and
Draft Resolution 95-41, 4/11/95 4 Attachment 2
June 21, 1994) a field trip to the site (November 13, 1993), and immediately
following the Northridge Earthquake, at emergency locations at the Bank of
America Building (January 18, 1994 rescheduled because of the earthquake to
February 1, 1994) and the Hart High School District Headquarters Board
Room (March 15, 1994, and April 20, 1994).
r. The City Council reviewed the Planning Commission resolution certifying the
EIR and adopting a Statement of Overriding Consideration, and the City
Council concurred with the Planning Commission, ''while requiring project
modifications that decreased the impact to the environment. The City Council
considered all alternatives to the project as set forth in the FEIR and selected
the project as shown (with modifications) in the Specific Plan and the Vesting
Tentative Tract Map over all other alternatives analyzed because:
(a) Alternative No. 1 (No Project) was natselected because this alternative
is not consistent with the City's General Plan Valley Center Concept
which envisions higher density mixed use development in the central
portion of the City near the-CityTransit Station and Civic Center sites.
The No Project alternative does not recognize that this project is
proposing a re -use of the site and That this project area has already
been significantly altered from its natural state due to past uses. Were
this project site to be developed'under the existing RS (Residential
Suburban) zoning, this project would not be consistent with the General
Plan since the development allowable under this zone would not result
in higher densities around the transit center and would not provide
mixed uses as envisioned in the General Plan for the Valley Center.
(b) Alternative No. 2 (Replace Residential Uses With Additional Office and
Business Parks) was not selected because this is not consistent with the
Valley Center Concept to provide higher density residential uses near
the City Transit Center. This alternative is not consistent with a mix
of uses which encourage a pedestrian environment since housing and
residential uses are not sufficiently mixed.
Alternative No. 3 (Transit Oriented Development) was not selected
because this alternative only provides high density by the Transit
Station at the northern portion of the site and does not utilize the
southern portion of the site. The General Plan also called for a mix of
low and high density housing and this alternative did not include low
density housing. Thus, this alternative does not provide for full
utilization of the site.
(d) Alternative No. 4 (Low Density/Hillside Preservation) was not selected
because; although this was the environmentally preferred alternative,
this project design encouraged strict adherence to the hillside standards
and did not allow for innovative design criteria that would allow
Draft Resolution 95-41, 4/11/95 5 Attachment 2
residential density to be clustered in the steep hillside areas around the
Transit Center. Thus, low density would be placed in the northern
portions of the site designated as part of the Valley Center which is
contrary to General Plan discussions encouraging high density in this
area.
(e) Alternative No. 5 (Replace Residential Uses with Increased Office and
Industrial Parks) was not selected because this alternative does not
provide for mixed use development as envisioned in the General Plan
for the Valley Center Concept which seeks uses with greater density in
the center of the city. This alternative would also be. inconsistent with
providing a unique identity for the center of the City, also identified in
the Valley Center Concept.
SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Santa Clarita does hereby make the
following findings of fact:
a. The California Environmental Quality;
to balance the benefits of a propos
environmental impacts. If the benefit
unavoidable adverse environmental c
considered "acceptable" by adoptil
Considerations." This statement sets fc
has approved the project when there
identified in the Final Environmental
cannot be mitigated to a level''less than
1ct (CEQA) requires decision -makers
>d_ project against its unavoidable
of a proposed project outweigh the
ffecis, the adverse effects may be
g a "'Statement of Overriding
th the reasons why the Lead Agency
are adverse environmental impacts
Impact Report and Addendum that
significant.
es to adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting
measures which are conditions of the project.
SECTION 3: The City Council of the City of Santa Clarita does hereby find that the
FEIR and FEIR Addendum for the Porta Bella Specific Plan 91-001, Vesting Tentative Tract
Map 51599, and Oak' Tree Permit 91-033 identify cumulative project impacts and project
specific impacts that are partially mitigated, but not to a level considered less than
significant. Adverse environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR and Addendum that
have not been mitigated to a level less than significant are summarized as follows:
a. Project Specific and Cumulative Air Quality Impacts - Implementation of the
proposed project would generate both construction -related and operational
pollutant emissions. During the construction phases, emissions of reactive
organic compounds (ROC), oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and particulate matter -
10 micron (PM,,) would unavoidably exceed South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds of significance. Operational
emissions generated by the proposed project would also exceed SCAQMD
thresholds of significance for carbon monoxide (CO), ROC, NOx , and Plh .
The project would require the development and implementation of TDM
Draft Resolution 95-41, 4/11/95 6 Attachment 2
(Transportation Demand Management) measures to be considered consistent
with the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) and the Air Quality Element
of the General Plan; however, these proposed measures would not reduce air
quality impacts from operational emissions to a less than significant level.
Therefore, project related air quality impacts are considered,. unavoidably
significant..
b. Cumulative Biotic Impacts - Project
disturbances to sensitive plants and anis
further fragment natural habitat, further
which support localized wildlife moveme
measures reduce these impacts to a li
ongoing, incremental loss of natural of
woodlands, and loss of wildlife is cox
conjunction with other planned develop
Clarita Valley, and the surrounding reg
area and contains significant ridgy
A visual analysis of the proposed
proposed to the significant ridgeL
limits would be visible to a large
Road, as well as nearby mobile']
located north of the site along So.
the significant ridgeline for, Sant
and significant visual impact, _-iv
ecific impacts i include potential
The project has the potential to
luce the site's open space resources
and remove oak trees- :.Mitigation
less than significant. However
space, loss of oak trees and oak
eyed cumulatively significant in
it throughout the City, the Santa
project site is located in a hillside
ratified on the City's Ridgeline map.
ent plan shows that the alterations
northeastern portion of the project
of motorists along Soledad Canyon
3ents and business establishments
yon Road. The proposed grading of
Parkway would be an unavoidable
)ortance of these landform features.
Risk of Upset/Health Hazard Impacts - Fourteen hazardous waste sites have
been identified on. the site and have been registered as a Hazardous Waste
Management Unit (HWMU). To date, 13 of these 14 sites have been cleaned
up to the satisfaction of the California Environmental Protection Agency,
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). The remaining HWMU is
expected to be successfully remediated soon. A variety of other sites not
permitted as IHWMU's have been identified as containing potential
environmental contaminants. CalEPA is conducting investigations into these
sites, however their efforts are not complete and it is not known what health
risks these other sites present. To mitigate potential risks to construction
workers and future site occupants from remaining contamination sites that
may 'exist, a mitigation measure has been added that would require
certification by DTSC of adequate clean-up of the other 64 sites identified prior
to the issuance of grading permits. All grading activity will also be monitored
to the satisfaction of CalEPA and DTSC. The risk of upset/health.hazard is
considered a significant adverse impact since the exact extent of contamination
and its effects are unknown,
e. Transportation and Circulation Impacts - Although traffic and circulation
Draft Resolution 95-41, 4/11/95 7 Attachment 2
mitigation measures have been identified, the project would contribute to
unavoidable and significant cumulative impacts at eight intersections, with or
without the Wiley Canyon Bridge.
Solid Waste Disposal Impacts - The amount of solid wastes projected to be
produced by the project would not result in short-term adverse impact to the
Chiquita Canyon Landfill in Val Verde and/or the Sunshine Canyon Landfill
in Sylmar, provided that these landfills receive approval to expand their
capacities prior to the expiration of their current operating permits. Because
there is an existing shortage of landfill space available for long-term solid
waste disposal within the Los Angeles basin and because expansion plans for
these landfills are not guaranteed to be approved, the existing solid waste
disposal situation is considered to be in a serious capacity shortfall- Therefore,
the project and cumulative impacts on solid waste disposal facilities would be
unavoidably significant.
SECTION 4. The FEIR and FEIR Addendum for the Porta Bella Specific Plan 91-001,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51599, and Oak Tree Permit 91- 033 identify project specific
and cumulative impacts that can be mitigated to levels consideredless than significant.
Adverse environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR and Addendum that, with the
incorporation of identified mitigation measures, can be: reduced to a level less than
significant are summarized as follows.
a. Geotechnical Impacts The site contains a variety of geotechnical factors
common throughout Southern California: seismicity, loose soils, unstable
slopes, as well as surface and subsurface remnant of debris produced during
the site's history as a munitions and explosives manufacturing and testing site.
An active trace of the San Gabriel Fault has been mapped and designated by
the State of California, Division of Mines and Geology as within an Alquist-
Routine engineering and construction measures will adequately mitigate the
potential liquefaction, slope stability and other general geotechnical
constraints. During the lifetime of the proposed project, structures and
occupants would be subject to ground shaking of potentially severe intensity
due to the proximity of various active and potentially active faults.
Implementation of proposed mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts,
but would not eliminate seismic risks.
Hvdroloev Impacts - The project will add impervious surfaces and direct storm
water runoff to proposed streets and a system of existing and proposed storm
drain facilities. The amount of clear water runoff is anticipated to increase,
however, the developed condition runoff in general is reduced due to smaller
debris producing areas. The high potential for debris production, however,
could cause downstream sedimentation impacts during grading and
construction. Mitigation measures can be added to the project which would
Draft Resolution 95-41, 4/11/95 8 Attachment 2
ensure that there would be no net increase in runoff or sedimentation impacts
from the project site.
C. Noise Impacts - Short-term noise impacts may occur during the construction
phases of the project, however, these are considered a short-term nuisance and
not considered a significant impact because of the common use of construction
equipment and the relatively short time period associated with grading and
construction, and City noise control restrictions. Cumulative increases in traffic
noise would occur incrementally, over a long period of time...,The cumulative
noise impacts are not anticipated to be significant because subsequent projects
will be reviewed for noise impacts and appropriatemitigation measures will
be imposed as needed at that time.
d. Land Use Impacts - The proposed project is consistent with the City of Santa
Clarita Land Use Element policies relative Ito I the type and intensities of the
proposed land use mix.. No conflict with surrounding uses is anticipated.
Development on significant ridgelines`and hillsideswould be in conflict with
Land Use Element policies relative'to ridgeline preservation and hillside
development. The ridgeline and hillside' grading impacts are related to uses
with public benefit which may permitted by the Planning Commission and
City Council Encroachment upon ridgelines and grading in hillside areas as
proposed under the specific plan and other, entitlements may be found to be "an
innovative application" under the City's Ridgeline Preservation and Hillside
Development Ordinance and Guidelines. With this finding, the project's land
use impacts would not be considered unavoidably significant.
e. School Impacts -'The Saugus Union School District and the William S. Hart
Union High School District have indicated that additional facilities would be
needed to accommodate the students that would live in this development. The
developers will be required to pay a state -mandated school fee and/or dedicate
land toi the satisfaction of the school districts.
f. Fire and Police Impacts - The Los Angeles County Fire and Sheriffs
Departments have indicated that additional manpower, equipment, and
facilities 4ould 'be needed to serve the proposed project. Some of the impact
to fire protection facilities will be mitigated by payment of a fee to defray the
cost of construction and equipping fire protection facilities. It is also
anticipated that the City would continue to contract for additional Sheriffs
officers as permitted by budget allowances. Mitigation measures have also been
identified such as restrictions on landscaping, access requirements, and
...............
provisions for security equipment that will reduce the demand for police and
fire services. Therefore, the proposed project would not significantly affect the
Fire and Sheriffs Department service abilities.
g. Sewaee Disposal Impacts - Given the existing and project treatment capacity
of Sanitation District No. 26, the proposed project and known cumulative
Draft Resolution 95-41, 4/11/95 9 Attachment 2
h.
1.
development could be served with no adverse impacts to the wastewater
treatment system; however, much of the site lies outside of the jurisdictional
boundaries of District No. 26 and would have to be annexed to the district
prior to the provision of sewer service.
Water Service Impacts - The proposed and related projects within the service
area of the Santa Clarita Water Company would not have an adverse impact
on local water supplies. The project would need toJb6 annexed to the Santa
Clarita Water Company.
been found on the project site, and given the
disturbance that has occurred, none are ,exp,
resources of any kind be uncovered during fut
grading operations in that area will cease and=
contacted to evaluate the finding.
SECTION 5. The City Council is approv
Specific Plan because the benefits of the revised
environmental effects of the project. Changes
incorporated into, the project which mitigate or a
identified in the completed FEIR and FEIR
considerations have been found which support
site
to exist.
archaeologist will be
;ed, lower density Porta Bella
weigh the unavoidable adverse
ins have been required in, or
gnficant environmental effects
n. The following overriding
of a Statement of Overriding
Considerations:
a. The project' approved by the City Council implements the Valley Center
1. Concept and Bermite Concept in the General Plan.
b. The project will provide the City with the Magic Mountain Parkway connector
necessary to provide direct access to the Civic Center and bus/rail
The project is consistent with: 1) the site's General Plan and Zoning Land Use
Classifications,_'and 2) the intensity of development allowed in the Specific
Plan area with City Council approval of the Specific Plan General Plan
amendment, approval of zone changes to SP (Specific Plan Zone) as identified
in the Specific Plan for this project and adoption of the Specific Plan document.
proposes a range of uses including residential, industrial and
in support of General Plan Goals as follows:
The project supports the Land Use Element including policies promoting a
mixed-use town center, with higher density residential, in proximity to public
transportation, as follows:
Draft Resolution 95-41, 4/11/95 10 Attachment 2
Policy 3.1 'Promote the development of City centers where more intensive
land uses will be encouraged, including the development of...a
civic town center."
Policy 3.3 "Identify a primary town center ... which encourage(s) a
pedestrian orientation and can accommodate a clustered mix of
commercial, entertainment, recreation, towm, square/meeting
place(s), multi -use complexes, and multi -modal transportation
activity opportunities."
Policy 3.6 "Locate higher density `residential development in
proximity to regional and sub -regional centers and:
transportation corridors,"'
The project supports the Air Quality Element which seeks to reduce pollution
from automobiles by relating land uses to transportation, facilitating non -
automotive travel, and encouraging'a jobsihousing balance, including the
following.
Goal 10 "To reduce vehicle emissions by creatingan urban form that
efficiently utilizes urban infrastructure and services."
Policy 10.1 "Contribute to the reduction of vehicle . miles traveled by
achieving a more reasonable job/housing balance."
Policy 10.2 "Develop and encourage efficient transportation systems and
land use patterns which minimize total trips and vehicle miles
traveled."
Goal 12 "To reduce mobile source emissions by promoting a shift from
single occupancy to higher occupancy vehicles:'
The project supports the Circulation Element which seeks to locate major
residential and employment centers adjacent to a multi -modal transit facility,
including rail. as shown in:
Policy 24' "Develop a multi -modal transit facility that is strategically
located in the City, adjacent to a potential public transit rail line
and located convenient to major local residential and
employment centers:'
The project supports the Housing Element which has numerous sections
calling for mixed use projects, flexibility in standards, a mix of housing types,
and using the specific plan process, as shown in the following sections:
Policy 1,4 "Promote the development of compatible mixed use projects in
Draft Resolution 95-41, 4/11/95 11 Attachment 2
order to create a village concept, with various interacting
uses ... to stimulate activity."
Program La "Alternative Development Standards. Use the specific plan
process ... to permit alternative housing design ,where such
projects result in attractive, desirable housing types, including
affordable housing."
Program Lc "Specific Plan/Planned
development standards in
developments which meei
development standards sl
of site design character's
Program IS "Mixed Use. Allow mixed -user developments and ensure that all
mixed use (housing -commercial development) plans provide the
necessary open space and parking and adequately buffer
residents..:."
Policy 2.2 "Locate higher density residential development and housing for
the elderly in close proximity ,to public transportation and
commercial land uses,....'
Policy 3.3 "Encourage a mix of housing types and densities in new large
scale development."
Policy 3.11 "Consider alternative development standards where practical ... to
promote desired: housing types and benefits,...."
ect supports the Community Design Element, which in the following
Ire also supportive of this theme, as follows:
Provide for residential uses in proximity to business/commercial
centers in a manner which promotes the
neighborhood/village/town center planning concept and
maintains... the concept of the Valley Center:
"Encourage the establishment of mixed use and village
commercial centers..., urban open spaces, and the effective use
of street furniture in downtown areas.
Policy 3.4 "Encourage design and uses of commercial districts and related
housing that add pedestrian orientation and that provide for safe
and secure daytime and nighttime activities, i.e., the Newhall
historic area and the City center."
Draft Resolution 95-41, 4/11/95 12 Attachment 2
e. The Porta Bella project will provide various residential housing opportunities
for different economic levels with a mix of single family and multi -family
dwelling units as required by the Housing Element of the General Plan, the
Housing Allocation for the City of Santa Clarita as set forth by SCAG
(Southern California Association of Governments) in the Regional Housing
Needs Assessment (RHNA) and the City's Comprehensive Housing
Affordability Strategy (CHAS) prepared for the Federal Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD),
The project approved by the City Council is an innovative design under the
criteria of the Ridgeline Preservation and Hillside Development O.rdinance and
Guidelines for purposes of allowing encroachment into significant ridgeline
areas and allowing grading on hillsides with slopes over 25%, Innovative
design concepts incorporated into the project include pedestrian pockets, new
housing types, a neo -traditional approach to town planning, modern traffic
circles, promoting sustainable cities concepts, clustering to preserve open space,
mixed uses, utilizing congestion management principals, and promoting
alternate modes of transit usage through land use patterns. Therefore, the
project approved by the City Council is consistent with the City's Land Use
Element policies regarding hillside development and the City's Ridgeline
Preservation and Hillside Development Ordinance and Guidelines
g. The project provides significant public benefits including employment
opportunities, increased residential densities in proximity to the Metrolink
station, an improved circulation network including portions of Santa Clarity
Parkway and the Magic Mountain_ Parkway connector, and increased access to
the planned Civic Center.
h. The_DEIR addendum extensively studied the impacts of the proposed Magic
Princessa Corridor. The traffic study found that this road link would enhance
valley circulation. The addendum also concluded that the noise, visual, and
aesthetic concerns would not be significant. The substitution of Santa Clarita
Parkway. for Rio Vista provides better spacing of north -south corridors.
SECTION 6. The City Council of the City of Santa Clarita does hereby find that City
staff conducted an Initial study of the Porta Bella project which determined that the project
may have a significant effect upon the environment and that an environmental impact report
must be prepared. A Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Specific Plan 91-001 and an Oak
Tree Permit 91-033 was mailed to affected agencies. Following submittal of the Vesting
Tentative Tract Map 51599 and Development Agreement applications, a subsequent NOP was
prepared and mailed on February 12, 1993. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared
and circulated for review and comment by the affected governmental agencies. The review
period of the Draft EIR was from September 27, 1993 to November 12, 1993. A Final EIR
dated January 7, 1994, was prepared which included responses to comments received on the
DEIR. As a result of public, and Planning Commission comments on the Final EIR, an
addendum was prepared dated April 8, 1994.. A mitigation monitoring and reporting plan
Draft Resolution 95.41, 4/11/95 13 Attachment 2
(MMRP) has been prepared for this project in accordance with CEQA. The Final EIR and
Addendum address all concerns of responsible agencies, interested organizations and
individuals, and has been considered and deemed complete by the City Council of the City'
of Santa Clarita.
SECTION 7. 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 City Council and on its behalf, the City Council further finds as
follows:
a. At the hearings, the City Council considered staff presentations, staff reports,
Planning Commission resolutions, applicantpresentations, .and'' public
testimony on the proposal, and the Final ETR and Addendum prepared for the
project.,
b. Development may be allowed on
roadways and other transportati
project promote the public health
meets the innovative design c
ridgelines and for grading on
innovative design concepts incor
pockets, new housing types, a
modern traffic circles,`promotinl
preserve open space, mixed uses,
and promoting alternate modes of
has also been demonstrated the
Addendum for this project that th
the ridgelines because the construction of
on improvements; proposed as part of this
, safety,and general welfare. The proposal
iteria for. encroachment upon significant
hillside slopes; in excess of 10% because
)orated into the project include pedestrian
ieotraditional approach to town planning,
sustainable cities concepts, clustering to
utilizing congestion management principals,
transit usage through land use patterns. It
ugh precise illustration in the FEIR, and
e proposed development will not violate the
ridgeline area.
C. The design of the project and the type of improvements will not cause serious
public (health problems, since water, sewage disposal, fire protection and
hazardous material cleanup impacts addressed in the Final EIR and
Addendum will be addressed in the MMRP and Conditions of Approval at the
time of project approval.
d. The project is consistent with the intent of the City's General Plan. The City's
General' Plan identifies the Bermite site as being appropriate for a specific
plan,: Following Council redesignation of the project site to SP (Specific Plan)
on the City's General Plan land use map, zone changes to SP (Specific Plan
Zone) as identified in the Specific Plan for this project and adoption of the
Specific Plan, including modifying the Highway Network of the Circulation
Element of the General Plan to add Santa Clarita Parkway in place of Rio
Vista Road and add the Magic Mountain Parkway connector, this project will
be consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
Draft Resolution 95-41, 4/11/95 14 Attachment 2
e. The Final Environmental Impact Report and Addendum identify 'certaih
significant environmental effects. The Final Environmental Impact Report and
Addendum identify feasible mitigation measures for each of these impacts with
the exclusion of air quality, biological resources, aesthetics;' fight "'d'gla e
risk of upset/health hazard, transportation and circulation, and cumulative
solid waste impacts which cannot be avoided through mitigation. The identified
mitigation measures will be incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring
Reporting Plan (MMRP) and conditions of approval for the project at the time
of project approval.
THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND FIND AS FOLLOG
a. Pursuant to Section 15090 of the California Environmental Quality Act, the
City Council certifies that the Porta Bella project FEIR and FEIR Addendum
(SCH# 92--041040) has been prepared in compliance, with the California
Environmental Quality Act, and was, presented to, and the information
contained therein reviewed and considered by the City Council prior to
reaching a decision on this project.
b. The City Council has considered the unavoidable impacts to air quality, biota,
aesthetics, light and glare, risk of upset/health hazard, transportation and
circulation and solid waste relevant to the.potentialbenefits which this project
will provide to the community. The City Council has determined that these
unavoidable impacts are acceptable in light of the long-term benefits to the
community that this project will provide including employment opportunities,
a: variety of housing types suiting a range of economic levels, increased
residential densities in proximity to the Metrolink station, an improved City
circulation network including portions of Santa Clarita Parkway and Magic
'Mountain Parkway connector, and increased access to the planned Civic
The City Council of the City of Santa Clarita does hereby certify the FEIR and
FEIR Addendum (SCH# 92-041040; adopts the Statement of Overriding
Considerations set forth in Section 5 above, and adopts and approves the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit " F ".
d.
T46 City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and certify this
record to be a full and correct copy of the action taken.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of
, 19_.
Draft Resolution 95-41, 4/11/95 15 Attachment 2
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES §
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
I, Donna M. Grindey, City Clerk of the Cit
the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the
at a regular meeting thereof, held on the
19_ by the following vote of Council:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
do hereby certify that
Citv of Santa Clarita
Draft Resolution 95-41, 4/11/95 16 Attachment 2
PORTA BELLA SPECIFIC. PLAN 91-0013 VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599; OTP 91-033 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM - ALL MITIGATION
MEASURES. ARE CONDITIONS TO VTTM 51599
PORTABELLA SPECIFIC PLAN
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
AS MODIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL APRIL 11, 1995
GEOTECHNICAL
G-1. Prior to recordation of each phase, additional investigations shall be performed to determine the presence of addi-
tional traces of the San Gabriel Fault; throughout the "expanded special studies zone" recommended by;GEOLABS-
WESTLAKE VILLAGE, as shown on Figure 19 in the EIR. If additional traces are found within areas proposed
for development of habitable structures or other critical facilities, appropriate setbacks shall be delineated for all
fault traces, to prohibit development in these areas to the satisfaction of the City.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility , Monitoring Responsibility
Recordation of each Phase Master developer City Engineer
G-2. At least two all-weather routes of vehicular ingress/egress to the off-site arterial roadway system shall be provided
for all developed portions of the project site, at all times, so that emergency vehicle access can be maintained in
all occupied areas in the event of earthquake damage that results in a closure of primary routes.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility, Monitoring Responsibility
Recordation of each Phase Project developer(s)/engineer(s) City Engineer
G-3 Prior to the replacement of compacted fills, alluvial materials 'shall be removed to bedrock or firm underlying
alluvium. Alluvial removals in the major northerly draining canyon and previously developed portions on the
northern end of the site will be dependent upon the proposed development for the area. In general, if proposed
finished grades roughly approximate the existing grades, removal and replacement of the upper 4 to 6 feet of
existing soils' may be necessaryprior to the placement of fill. If deeper fills are programmed, deeper
overexcavation. removals) of the existing, alluvial materials will be necessary. Also, depths of removals north of
the Southern Pacific right-of-way will be dictated by the results of a future deep exploration program needed to
evaluate the possible susceptibility of the subsurface sediments to liquefaction. Mitigation shall be performed to
the satisfaction..of the City Engineer.
Implementation PhaseImplementing Responsibility Monitoring_R�ponsibility
Recordation of each Phase Project developer(s)/engineer(s) City Engineer
G-4. All remaining water and oil wells shall be properly abandoned, pursuant to the requirements of the California
Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region #4 (water wells), and the district office of the California Depart-
ment of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (oil wells). Evidence of proper abandonment of previously
closed wells, in accordance with State requirements, shall be provided to the City prior to the issuance of any
grading permits. '
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Grading Permits Project developer(s)/engineer(s) City Engineer
Draft Resolution 95-41
.Mitigation Measures 4/11/95 mmp-1 Attachment 2
PORTA BELLA SPECIFIC PLAN 91-001; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599; OTP 91-033 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM - ALL MITIGATION
MEASURES ARE CONDITIONS TO VTTM 51599
G-5. If encountered, either remove or cut and plug abandoned pipelines according to the applicable code requirements
and as property line conditions dictate, This includes water line "mains" from the existing water tanks..
Unreinforced concrete pipelines may be crushed in-place and incorporated into the deeper fills. The applicant
shall place an applicable note on all grading plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsiblity
Each Grading Phase Project developers)/engineer(s) City Engineer
G-6. During mass grading, special care should be exercised so as to avoid spillage and deposition of loose soil or debris
onto slope areas programmed to remain in a natural state. Any loose slough, debris or other deleterious materials
deposited or accumulated on natural slope areas will have to. be removed by the grading contractor upon
completion of earth construction. The applicant shall place an applicable note on all grading plans to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Implementation Phase
Each Grading Phase
Project
G-7. Building pads beneath natural slope areas have the
debris flow activity. Thus, it may be necessary to i
diversion/impact walls or earth catchment barriers at
to intercept solid debris and direct flows to paved sw
to approved disposal areas to the satisfaction of the C
Implementation Phase
Each Grading Phase
G-8. All exist
entirety..
fills. Di
engineer and to
Phase
Monitoring Responsbility
City Engineer
a by runoff and soil slippage and
asures such as low slough walls,
L Such devices shall be designed
;e away from proposed structures
Monitoring Responsibility
City Engineer
fill materials on-site within areas proposed for development must be removed in their
xnd to be free of, any trash, debris or other deleterious material can be used in engineered
of the suitability for disposal of existing materials with respect to their toxicity and
6zardous materials will be left to environmental consultants working with the project
itisfaction of the City and the Department of Toxic Substance Control, CAL EPA.
waste consultants
Monitoring Respo wbility
City Engineer
CAL EPA-DTSC
G-9. Abandon and remove any underground storage tanks encountered in accordance with State and local code
requirements. Any remaining cavities will be filled with compacted fill to the satisfaction of the City.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Grading Phases : Project developer(s)/engineer(s) City Building Official, City
Engineer
G-10. Haul routes used by the grading contractor shall avoid disturbing terrain which is to remain in a natural state to
the satisfaction of the City.
Draft Resolution 95-41
Mitigation Measures 4/11/95 mmp-2 Attachment 2
PORTA BELLA SPECIFIC PLAN 91-001; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599; OTP 91-033 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM - ALL MITIGATION
MEASURES ARE CONDITIONS TO VTTM 51599
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility
Each Grading Phase Project developer(s)/engineer(s)
AIR QUALITY
AQ -1. Prior to engaging in demolition activities, complete all Rule 1403 procedures for the removal of asbestos materials
to the satisfaction of the SCAQMD and secure the appropriate permits allowing demolition activity.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility:. Monitoring Responsibility
Prior to demolition of Project developers South Coast Air Quality
remaining structures Management District and
City Building Official
AQ -2. Develop and implement a construction management plan, as approved by the City, which may include some, or
all, of the following measures recommended by the SCAQMD:'-.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility,'Monitoring Responsibility
Prior to demolition of Project developer(s) South Coast Air Quality
remaining structures Management District and
City Building Official
(a) Provide temporary traffic controlsduring all phases of construction activities to maintain traffic flow (e.g., flag
person).
(b) Schedule construction activities that affect traffic flow on the arterial system to off-peak hours (e.g., 10:00 A.M.
to 3:00 RM). `r
(c) Implement.a trip reduction plan to achieve a target average vehicle ridership (AVR) of 15 for construction
employees.
(d) Operate a shuttle service to and from retail services and food establishments during lunch hours.
(e) Prohibit truck ,idling in excessoftwo minutes.,
(f) Maintain equipment and vehicle engines in good condition and in proper tune as per manufacturers' specifications
and per SCAQMD rules, to minimize excessive emissions.
(g) If pile drivers must be used at thesite during construction, use methanol -fueled pile drivers.
(h) Suspend use of all construction` equipment operations during second stage smog alerts. Contact the SCAQMD
at (800) 242-4022 for daily forecasts.
(i) Use electricity from power poles rather than temporary diesel- or gasoline -powered generators.
(j) Use methanol or natural gas -powered mobile equipment instead of diesel.
(k) Use propane or butane -powered on-site mobile equipment instead of gasoline.
AQ -3. Implement a dust control plan to the satisfaction of the City of Santa Clarita.
implementation Phase
Grading and construction phases
Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Project developers) /contractors City Building Official
Draft Resolution 95-41
Mitigation Measures 4/1.1/95 mmp-3 Attachment 2
PORTA BELLA SPECIFIC PLAN 91-001; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599; OTP 91-033 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM -ALL MITIGATION
MEASURES ARE CONDITIONS TO VTTM 51599
AQ4. Orient buildings to the north, as feasible, to augment natural cooling and include passive solar design (e.g.,
daylighting) as part of the project.
Implementation Phase
Building Permits
AQ -5. Construct, contribi
commuting routes.
Implementation Phase
Occupancy Permits
AQ -6. No construction traffic related
streets within the Circle J Ranch.
Implementation Phase
Grading and Construction Phases
H-1. The applicant will prepare a final
design, when precise engineering
13 of the EIR and/or establish add
the site will be permitted. All el(
administered by the City of Santa
H-2.
Implementing Responsibility
Project developer(s)/contractors
Magic-Princessa
other element of the project, shall use
)gy analysis in conjunction with ultimate project
ons will verify the conditions identified in Table
sfy the criteria that no net increase in runoff from
Stem shall conform to the policies and standards
County Flood Control District, as applicable.
Monitoring Responsibility
City Engineer
Los Angeles County
sroduction calculations will be prepared to verify the requirements for
>faction of the City. Concurrent with submittal of grading plans, erosion
submitted for approval by the City of Santa Clarita.
H-3. Ultimate project design shall verify the feasibility of the proposed detention basin at the southwest corner of the
property to the satisfaction of the City. To reduce the size of the required detention basin, and to maintain
existing storm flows to natural streamcourses, an alternate design approach splitting discharges from the basin
to the'two natural streams in this area, shall be evaluated to the satisfaction of the City. Geotechnical feasibility
shall be, included in this evaluation to ensure that the optimum size detention basin can be properly supported
by stable material during periods of prolonged saturation.
Implementation Phase
Implementing Responsibility
Draft Resolution 95-41
Mitigation Measures 4/11/95 mmp-4 Attachment 2
Monitoring Responsibility
PORTA BELLA SPECIFIC PLAN 91-001; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599; OTP 91-033 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM - ALL MITIGATION
MEASURES ARE CONDITIONS TO VTTM 51599
Each Grading Phase Project developer(s)/engineer(s) City Engineer
H-4. Design and construct runoff filtering Zones in large parking areas (as opposed to driveways of single family homes
or duplexes) to the satisfaction of the City. These should be located at the lower elevations of parking areas and
designed to catch runoff with relatively high oil and grease concentrations. These facilities shall be designed to
permit percolation of the runoff through the soil and underlying; layers (sand and gravel), permit hydrocarbon
filtration and absorption, and encourage the degradation of hydmcarbons by naturally -occurring soil bacteria.
All such measures shall meet NPDES requirements.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Each Grading Phase Project developer(s)Jengirieer(s) City Engineer
H-5. To the extent possible, incorporate settling ponds, detention basins; and Vegetated swales, to slow and filter runoff
prior to discharge into the storm drain system or into natural'streameourses. Final design criteria will be
generated with ultimate project design and would involve percolation testing; and geotechnical investigations in
proposed detention basin locations to the satisfaction of the City. All such. measures shall meet NPDES
requirements.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Each Grading Phase Project developer(s)/engineer(s).`" City Engineer
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
B-1. Develop and implement all Native Landscape Treatments set forth in the Draft Specific Plan, in coordination with
the City of Santa Clarita and the California Department of Fish and Game, to replicate the natural vegetation
communities present on the site. The habitat needs of sensitive animal and plant species should be incorporated
into the plans -
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibilty
Grading Permits Project developer(s) City Parks and Recreation
Department
B-2. Prior to issuance of phased grading permits, the applicant shall complete focused spring surveys for the shortjoint
beavertail cactus, Peirsons's morning glory, and Davidson's bush mallow. If found, individuals or propagules of
these species salvaged from the impact areas shall be relocated to areas proposed for natural open space on the
project site. A relocation and monitoring plan shall be incorporated into the proposed native landscape treatments
and other open space management plans, subject to approval by the California Department of Fish and Game and
the City. Monitoring of relocated individuals or propagules shall occur for a minimum of five years to ensure
Implementing Responsibility Monitoring_Responsibility
Project developer(s) City Parks and Recreation
Department
Draft Resolution 95-41.
Mitigation Measures 4/11/95 mmP-5 Attachment 2
PORTA BELLA SPECIFIC PLAN 91-001; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599; OTP 91-033 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM - ALL MITIGATION
MEASURES ARE CONDITIONS TO VTTM 51599
B-3. Preserve the major drainages as identified in the Specific Plan. Incorporate existing natural vegetation and natural
streambank conditions where feasible. If the Los Angeles Flood Control District requires structural stabilization
as part of necessary channelization efforts, use permeable materials such as "Armore-Flex" that include both
structural elements and open pockets through which native vegetation can be established or other mechanisms
to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department.
Implementation Phase
Grading Permits
Project
B4. Construct wildlife guzzlers in open space areas, as
where drainage patterns will be altered by grading a:
for these areas.
Implementation Phase
Grading Permits
the California Department of.Fish and Game,
nt. This will replace the existing water sources
Monitoring Responsibility
City Parks and Recreation
Department/California
Fish & Game Department
B-5. Shield natural open space from introduced light sources using native shrubs and trees.
Implementation Phase Implementing;: Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Building Permits Project developer(s) CDFG/City Parks and
Recreation Department
NOISE
N-1. Provide staging areas on-site to minimize off-site transportation of heavy construction equipment. Locate these
areas to maximize the distance between staging areas and residential areas to the satisfaction of the City.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Grading and Construction Phases Project developer(s)/contractors City Building Official
N-2. Ensure that construction` equipment is fitted with sound -reduction equipment, per manufacturer's specifications.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Grading and Construction Phases Project developer(s)/contractors City Building Official
N-3. Submit acoustical analysis reports acceptable to the City concurrently with submittal of precise development plans
for all residential areas and institutional (school) facilities located adjacent to any of the four or six -lane roadways
on the project site. ;Single family dwelling units shall be located in areas outside of the projected 60 DB(A) CNEL
noise contourwith appropriate mitigation. Multi -family dwelling units and school classrooms and library
buildings shall be located in areas outside of the projected 65 dB(A) CNEL noise contour with appropriate
mitigation. Buildings at the athletic center within the Soledad District shall be located outside of the projected
Draft. Resolution 95-41
Mitigation Measures 4/11/95 mmp-6 Attachment 2
PORTA BELLA SPECIFIC PLAN 91-001;. VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599; OTP 91-033 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM ALL MITIGATION
MEASURES ARE CONDITIONS TOVTTM 51599
70 dB(A) CNEL noise contour with appropriate mitigation. Interior noise levels within residential and school
facilities shall not exceed 45 dB(A) CNEL.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility .'.Monitoring Responsibility
Building Permits Project developer(s)/engineer(s) City Building Official
N4. Construct earth berms in the initial grading phases of the Magic-Princessa connector along the western edge of
the corridor alignment where the roadway construction is not hidden by landforms to the satisfaction of the City.
(This measure does not pertain to the construction of the bridge across Oakdale Canyon because of adverse
impacts on biological resources, recreational trails and drainage considerations).
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsib7lty
Grading Phases Project developer(s)/Contractors City Building Official
City Engineer
AESTHETICS, LIGHT AND GLARE
AE -1. Screen the proposed water tanks on Lot 64 of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51599 by using a lower profile
tank, by establishing a landscaping buffer including the use of "volcano berms, and by painting the tank an
earthtone color that blends with adjacent landformsto the satisfaction of the City.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring BesRQnsibility
Building Permits Project developer(s): Community Development
Parks and Recreation
Department
AE -2. Project landscaping.,plans shall include. appropriate screening materials along the west and southern site
boundaries to 'screen views of the project site from neighboring portions of the Circle J Ranch. Additional
measures shall be included, if needed, to screen the proposed detention basin to be constructed in the southwest
corner of the project site to the satisfaction of the City.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Building Pemtits Project developer(s) City Parks and Recreation
Community Development
Department
AE -3. The Oakdale Canyon bridge design, including visual mitigation, shall be approved to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Department. Consideration shall be given to utilizing earthtone colors on the bridge
and : incorporating landscaping to mitigate the appearance of the bridge to the satisfaction of the City.
lmplementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring ResponsibH tv
Magic-Princessa bridge design phase Project developer(s) Community Development
Department
Draft "Resolution. 95-41
Mitigation Measures 4/11/95 mmp-7 .Attachment 2
PORTA BELLA SPECIFIC: PLAN 91-001; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599; OTP 91-033 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM - ALL MITIGATION
MEASURES ARE CONDITIONS TO VTTM 51599 -:
LAND USE
LU -1. In order to avoid potential conflicts of the development with existing easements, the developer will obtain written
approval from the easement holders for all proposed encroachments, prior, to the issuance of grading permits.
Final plans, construction procedures and improvements shall comply with all requirements of such approvals.
Implementation Phase
Grading Plan
Project
LU -2. Prior to approval of a Final Map for that phase, prove to the
would not significantly impact the First Los Angeles Aqued
alternative access to Lots 54 and 55 to avoid encroachment
the satisfaction of the LADWP and the City.
Implementation Phase I^nleme.
Final Vesting Tract Map/ Project d,
Grading Permits
RISK OF UPSE'
RU -1
by
Project
LM
of the LADWP that proposed "GG" Street
:.the alignment of "GG" Street or provide
DWP aqueduct easement in this area to
Monitoring_ResMnsbility
City Engineer
Approval DS -12 for Vesting Tentative Tract Map.
Monitoring Responsbility
DTSC/City Engineer
identifying any possibly hazardous materials not previously detected shall be
process to the satisfaction of CAL EPA-DTSC and to the City.
Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Project developer(s)/contractors Building Official/
DTSC
Draft Resolution 95-41
Mitigation Measures 4/11/95 mmp-8 Attachment 2
PORTA BELLA SPECIFIC PLAN 91-001; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599; OTP 91-033 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM -.ALL MITIGATION
MEASURES ARE CONDITIONS TO VTTM 51599
Superceded by Condition of Approval DS -12 for
51599.
Implementation Phase
Grading Permits
TRANSPORTATION &
Intersections
Tract Map.
TC -1. Table 36 in the EIR summarizes mitigation measures and, lane configurations recommended for all study
intersections for existing conditions and at full buildout of each analysis phase: Please note that the following
considerations shall be observed in the actual implementation of these measures.
(a) For Phase I, mitigation measures were recommended to keep;the LOS at or below level of service D. In some
cases, however, level of service was mitigated to LOS E, because. the provision of additional mitigation measures
were not feasible at this stage. Those mitigations were recommended for future phases where applicable.
(b) For Phase II, recommended mitigation measures should be carefully monitored since at that time (year 2004)
a number of major highway extensions and new roadways may constructed. These additional roadways may
alter commuting behaviors and specific traffic mitigations accordingly.
(c) For Phase III, mitigation measures were recommended assuming that a number of other transportation elements
embodied in the City of Santa Claita Circulation Element would be in place (please refer to Figures 10a, 10b,
and 10c in the Traffic Study for network' assumptions),. However, these mitigation measures should be
monitored and periodically evaluated in order to assess their need before implementation.
(d) In a few case$, mitigation measures were recommended not only based on V/C ratio, but also based on traffic
volumes.
(e) It is recommended that subject mitigation be monitored on a phase by phase basis and that the developer of
future individual parcels be requested to provide additional traffic analysis and mitigation assessment at each
phase tentative tract map level..
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsbility
Prior to recordation of the phase Future Tract Subdivisions Community Development
Department
TC -2. In addition to the intersection lane configurations identified in Table 36 of the EIR, the City will monitor the pace
of development carefully, and will not approve a level of development above the totals for each land use category
assumed in the traffic phasing analysis, as shown on Table 33.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsbility
Grading Permits for each "super pad" Project developer(s) City Traffic Engineer
Draft Resolution 95-41
Mitigation Measures. 4/11/95 mmp-9 Attachment.2
PORTA BELLA SPECIFIC PLAN 91-001; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599; OTP 91-033 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM - ALL MITIGATION
MEASURES ARE CONDITIONS TO VTTM 51599
TC -3 To ensure that increasing traffic volumes on the arterial network are distributed to the maximum feasible
efficiency, the City will continue to implement the planned arterial system identified in the Circulation Element
of the General Plan, at the maximum design capacities. Furthermore, the City will monitor the pace of project
development carefully, and will not approve a level of development above the totals for each land use category
assumed in the traffic phasing analysis, as shown on Table 33 in the Traffic Section; unless additional traffic
improvements are advanced.
Implementation Phase Implementing ResWrisibility Monitoring_EgWons�bility
Grading Permits for each "super pad" Project developer(s) ` City Traffic Engineer
TCI. Restripe Magic Mountain Parkway from Valencia Boulevard to San Fernando Road to six traffic lanes and upgrade
Magic Mountain Parkway to a six -lane roadway from San Fernando;Road to Rio Vista Road by Phase II of the
Traffic Study,
Implementation Phase
Grading Permits for each "super pad"
TC -5. Existing traffic conditions warrant si
Road. Since the Porta Bella Project
delays during train crossings, this I
Implementation Phase
Final Vesting Tract Map
TC -6. Provide a
of any bu
ermit and
Phase I
Implementing Responsibility Monitoring E=Qnsbility
Fair share contribution by this piolod's'- City Traffic Engineer
developer(s)
AaeiclMountain Parkwav/San Fernando Road
zation of the railroad crossing at Magic Mountain Parkway/San Fernando
Id increase congestion at this intersection, as well as contribute to longer
't will be required to participate in the costs of a future grade separation.
Monitoriny�Responsibility
City Traffic Engineer
Emergency Access
Parkway to Soledad Canyon Road prior to the occupancy
Implementing Responsibility
Project developer(s)
Transportation Demand Management
Monitoring Responsbility
City Engineer/Building
Official
TC -7. Develop and implement TDM programs as approved by the City and SCAQMD, throughout the life of the project,
incorporating measures such as, but not limited to, those identified in the Traffic and the Air Quality sections of
this EIR. Implementation shall begin concurrently with occupancy of the first phase.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility
Commercial and industrial occupancy Commercial and industrial
Draft. Resolution 95-41
Mitigation Measures 4/11/95 mmp-10 Attachment 2
Monitoring Responsbility
AQMD, Transit Division
PORTA BELLA SPECIFIC PLAN 91-001; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599; OTP 91-033 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM - ALL MITIGATION
MEASURES ARE CONDITIONS TO VTTM 51599
permits businesses Community Development
Department
General
TC -8. Fast food drive-through restaurants shall be prohibited within the Town Center District of the Porta Bella site.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Approval of specific plan, then Project Developers), subsequent ('City Development Services
throughout the life of the project landowners
SCHOOLS
5-1. Prior to recording Vesting Tract Map No. 51599, the master developer shall reach an agreement with the Saugus
Union School District and the William S. Hart Union High School District to the satisfaction of the school districts.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring RespQn bffl
Final Vesting Tract Map Master developer School Districts
City Development Services
FIRE AND POLICE PROTECTION
FP -1. Prohibit planting of highly Flammable and heavy fuel volume plant species such as Eucalyptus, Pines, Junipers,
and Cyprus plant species within 50 feet of natural vegetation areas to the satisfaction of the City.
Implementation Phase' Implementing Responsibility MonitoringRgWonsibih
Building Perndts Project developer(s)/builders FiireDepartment/City Pa&
and Recreation
FP -2. Prior to recordation of the final maps for original and subsequent subdivisions, obtain Fire Department approval
for water systems, fire hydrant locations, and street grades. Install required improvements to the satisfaction of
the City and the Fire Department.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Final Subdivision Maps " Project developer(s) Fire Department/ City
Engineer
FP -3. Prior to the approval of final tract maps, consult with the Sheriff's Department for advice on crime prevention
features appropriate to the particular tract. With this information, prepare and submit a security plan for review
to the satisfaction of the Sheriffs Department and the City of Santa Clarita Department of Community
Development.
Draft Resolution 95-41
Mitigation Measures 4/11/95 mmp-11 Attachment. 2
PORTA BELLA SPECIFIC PLAN 91-001; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599; OTP 91-033 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM - ALL MITIGATION
MEASURES. ARE CONDITIONS TO VTTM 51599
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsiln7ity
Final Subdivision Maps Project developer(s)/builders Sheriffs Department /City
SEWAGE DISPOSAL
SD -1. The project will be required to obtain a Trunk Sewer
Angeles County Sanitation District trunk sewer.
Implementation Phase Implementing Res)?
Recordation of Each Phase Project builders
a Los
SD -2. Pay fees to the County Sanitation Districts and the City of Santa Clarita, as required, to fund sewerage
infrastructure improvements to serve the proposed project. `
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Occupancy Permits Project Builders LACSD/City Engineer
SD -3. Annex that portion of the project site outside of the jurisdictional boundaries of County Sanitation District No.
26 to the district prior to final map approval.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Final Vesting Tract Map Master, developer LACSD/ City Engineer
WATER SERVICE
W -l. Comply with all applicable code and ordinance requirements for construction of water mains, fire flows, and fire
hydrants.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Final Subdivision Maps Project developer(s) City Engineer
W-2. Design and construct the proposed water facilities to the requirements of the State of California Regional Water
Quality. Control Board, Region #4;'the California Department of Health Services; the California Department of
Water Resources; the State Water Resources Control Board; the Cary of Santa Clarita Department of Public Works;
and the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring_Rwponsibility
Final Subdivision Maps Project developer(s) City Engineer
W-3. Annex the site to the service area of the Santa Clarita Water Company prior to the recordation of each phase.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Final Vesting Tract Map Master developer SCWC/City Engineer
Draft Resolution 95-41
Mitigation Measures 4/11/95 mmp-12 Attachment 2
PORTA BELLA SPECIFIC PLAN 91-001; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599; OTP 91-033 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM -.ALL MITIGATION
MEASURES ARE CONDITIONS TO VTTM 51599
W-4. If required, obtain written agreement from off-site property owner(s) to construct the proposed lift station along
Via Princessa.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Final Subdivision Maps Project developer City Engineer
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
SW -1. The grading contractor shall chip and mulch all greenwaste removed from the construction site'during grading
operations. Mulched material shall be used as a fire retardant and applied on graded slopes and natural hillsides.
The contractor shall also submit certified weights (tonnages) of the chipped and mulched material.
Implementation Phase Implementing* Responsibility . Monitoring Responsibility
Grading Phases Project developer(s)/contractors City Solid Waste and City
Building Official
SW -2. Construct all roads with a minimum of 25 percent recycled _content (base and asphalt), where feasible, in
consultation with the City.
Implementation Phase Implementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Grading Permits Project developer(s) City Solid Waste and
City Engineer
SW -3: Where feasible, and in consultation :with the City, construct all drainage improvements with a minimum 25 percent
recycled bedding material. Native soils shall be used as backfill when applicable and in accordance with SB 846
Native Backfill::._
Implementation Phase ,Implementing Responsibility MonihmM Responsibility
Approval of storm drain plans Project developer(s) City Solid Waste and
City Engineer
SW4. Where feasible; and in consultation with the City, all street, park and public area signs shall contain a minimum
of 25 percent recycled content.
Implementation Phase [dementing Responsibility Monitoring Responsibility
Approval of street improvement plans Project developer(s) City Solid Waste and
and vendor sign specifications City Engineer
ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
AC -1. Should significant cultural resources be uncovered during future grading operations, work shall be stopped in
the affected area and a qualified archaeologist should be called in to evaluate the findings to the satisfaction of
the City.
Draft. Resolution 95-41
Mitigation Measures 4/11/95 mmp-13 Attachment 2
PORTA BELLA SPECIFIC PLAN 91-001; VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599; OTP 91-033 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM - ALL MITIGATION
MEASURES ARE CONDITIONS TO VTTM 51599
Iml2lementation Phase Iml2lementing_Resnonsibility Monitoring_ Responsibility
Grading Phases Project developer(s) City Building Official
Draft Resolution 95-41
Mitigation Measures 4/11/95 mmp-14 Attachment 2
RESOLUTION NO. 95-42
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
APPROVING MASTER CASE NOS. 91-164 AND 93-012, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 51599, AND OAK TREE PERMIT 91-033, AND A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FOR LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND AN AMENDMENT TO THE
HIGHWAY NETWORK OF THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 996 ACREI.
PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE BERMITE SITE,: `
LOCATED SOUTH OF SOLEDAD CANYON:ROAD
AND EAST OF SAN FERNANDO AND BOUQUET CANYON ROADS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby make the following findings of fact:
a. Applications for Specific Plan 91-001 and Oak Tree Permit 91-033 (Master
Case No. 91-164) were filed by Anden Corporation, (the applicant) with the
City of Santa Clarita on October 25, 1991.: These' (applications were deemed
complete on February 26, 1992. Subsequently the applicant submitted
applications for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51599 and Development
Agreement 93-003 (Master Case No. 93-012) on February 2, 1993. On March
9, 1993 the City deemed the application complete. The City was notified in
August 1993 that`Northolme Partners was the new project applicant.
The applicant ;requested a specific plan for a comprehensive plan of
development, including proposed modifications to the Circulation Element of
the General Plan and the Unified Development Code within the project area.
The plan proposed 1,678 single family homes and 1,560 multiple family homes
on 399 acres; 91 acres of commercial and industrial uses; 14 acres of
institutional uses; 434 acres of open space and recreational uses; 58 acres of
streets; and the provision of related infrastructure on the site's 996 acres. A
vesting tentative tract map was requested to subdivide the 996 acre site into
76 master lots to be further subdivided by merchant builders into future tract
maps. An oak tree permit was requested to allow for the removal and/or
encroachment into the protected zones of up to 73 native Oak Trees, including
as many as five heritage size oak trees. A development agreement was
requested, however, the details of the agreement are yet to be negotiated. The
project also proposes a General Plan Amendment to the Highway Network of
the Circulation Element of the General Plan, including the substitution of
Santa Clarita Parkway for Rio Vista as a north/south corridor and the
connection of Magic Mountain Parkway to Via Princessa via the
"Magic/Princessa" corridor; a portion of which crosses the designated open
space of Circle J.
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 1 Attachment 3
The site is known as the Bermite site located south of Soledad Canyon Road,
east of Bouquet Canyon Road/San Fernando Road; north of the Circle J Ranch
Community; and west of the Golden Triangle Industrial area. The assessor
parcel numbers for the project are 2836-012-010, 011, 012 and 019.
b. The General Plan presently designates the project site RS with a Valley Center
Overlay on the northwest portion of the site. The General Plan specifically
mentions the Bermite site as an area ideal for a specific plan. Zoning on the
site is presently RS (Residential Suburban), BP (Business Park), and OS (Open
Space).
C. The project site is located in a hillsii
Significant ridgelines are on the site
Development is proposed on some of
hillsides with slopes exceeding 25%.
of
d. The City of Santa Clarita prepared anInitial Study for the project which
determined that the project may have a significant effect on the environment
and that an environmental impact report must be prepared. A Notice of
Preparation (NOP) for the Specific Plan and Oak Tree Permit was mailed on
April 8, 1992 to affected agencies. Following submittal of the Vesting
Tentative Tract Map and Development Agreement applications, a subsequent
NOP was prepared and mailed on February 12,;1993.
e. Since 1992 the City has leased a ten acre portion of the project site for use as
the Santa Clarita Metrolink commuter rail station. The Specific Plan also
proposes to provide corridors and construct portions of two proposed east -west
arterials (Santa Clarita Parkway and Magic Princessa) that will provide
alternative circulation routes through the center of the City which is presently
in need of such roadways.: The Specific Plan also includes an escalator and
trail connection between the commercial and residential areas and the
commuter rail station.:.
f. The City of Santa Clarita Development Review Committee met and supplied
the applicant with draft conditions of approval.
g. The project has since been redesigned to subdivide the 996 acre parcel and
allow the following land uses: 406.95 acres open space, 41.75 acres for parks
and recreation, 10 acres for schools, 56 acres for streets, 4 acres for
institutional uses, 299.8 acres for single family residential uses (1,244 units),
85 acres for multi -family residential uses (1,667 units) and 92 acres of
commercial and industrial uses. An oak tree permit requests the removal of
a'maximum of 104 non -heritage size oak trees and 5 heritage size oak trees out
of the 182 oak trees (including 10 heritage size oaks) located on-site..
h. The site was previously used as an ammunition, explosives and flares
manufacturing and testing facility. Operations on the site were terminated in
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 2 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 3
1987. Heavy metals and other hazardous materials contaminated the site as
a result of the previous use. A total of 14 hazardous waste clean-up sites,
referred to in the project EIR as hazardous
(HWMU's) have been identified and 13 have
direction of the California Department of Toxic Su
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.;. T
received clean closure certification from'DTS(
continuing on the remaining open site.' Infori
HWMU's where hazardous waste has been iden
Extensive grading and landform alteration; have z
resulting in major surface disturbance, altemtic
modification of natural drainage patterns.
The project proposes the extension
ment units
under the
(DTSC) and
sites have
efforts are
Led is in ttie project EM
erred over most of.the site
of tonoerauhic'relief. and
to the project site.
Article 8-- Specific Plans Sec 65451 et .seq of the ;California Planning and
Zoning Laws defines the contentswhich must be included in a specific plan as
follows:
(a) A specific plan shall include a text and a diagram or diagrams which
specify all of the following in detail:
(1) The distribution,` location, and extent of the uses of, land, including
open space, within the area covered by the plan.
(2) The proposed distribution, location, and extent and intensity of
major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water
drainage; solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities
proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed
to support the land uses described in the plan.
ards and criteria by which development will proceed, and
for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural
where applicable.
(4) A program of implementation measures including regulations,
programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to
carry out paragraphs (1), (2), and (3).
(b) The specific plan shall include a statement of the
relationship of the specific plan to the general plan.
k.. Section 17.16.030 of the City's Unified Development Code (UDC) identifies
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 3 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 4
general requirements and performance standards for a specific plan zone. A
Specific Plan Zone shall:
(a) Include a minimum of 100 contiguous
(b) Be determined by the Council
of the Planning Commission.
(c) Provide for the dev
community within the zone
allowable under alternate r
(d) Provide for development
with the General Plan and
policies of the City.
(e) Provide for the constn
transportation facilities, public
development within the zone.
The City's Ridgeline Preservation and
Sec 17.80) identifies significant ridgelu
on property having average slopes ove
ridgelines is permissible for innovativ(
of
to
a manner consistent
opment and growth
1, or extension of
services required by
3illside Development Ordinance (UDC,
as in the City and restricts development
10%. Encroachment upon significant
design applications. An application for
ws is considered innovative when:
use is proper in relation to adjacent uses, the
ommunity and the various goals and policies of the
;e or development will not be materially detrimental to the
atter of the neighborhood or community, nor will it endanger
health, safety or general welfare.
(c) The appearance of the use or development will not be different than
the appearance of adjoining ridgeline areas so as to cause depreciation
of the ridgeline appearance in the vicinity.
(d) The establishment of the proposed use or development will not
impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of
surrounding property, nor encourage inappropriate encroachments to
the ridgeline area,
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 4 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 5
(e) It has been demonstrated that the proposed use or development will
not violate the visual integrity of the significant ridgeline area through
precise illustration and depiction.
An application for
innovative when:
(a) The hillside
compliance with;
Preservation an[
Guidelines.
(b) No develol
shall be permit
provided for '.
ridgelines.
is considered
and
nt construction activities or grading
on slopes of 50% or greater except as
wative applications on significant
M. The design of the project concentrates development within areas disturbed by
the previous industrial uses. The project proposes grading on approximately
603 acres of the project site. The total amount of grading involves
approximately 18 million cubic yards of cut and 18 million cubic yards of fill,
balanced on-site.
n. An Environmental Impact Report and Addendum thereto have been prepared
for the proposed;, project pursuant to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act..
o. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was circulated for review and
comment by the affected governmental agencies and all comments received
have been considered. The review period for the DEIR was from September
27, 1993 to November 12, 1993. A Final EIR (FEIR) dated January 7, 1994,
was prepared which included responses to comments received on the DEIR.
As a result of public and Planning Commission comments on the project and
the FEIR, the applicant modified his project. The Planning Commission
directed staff to provide environmental analysis of the modified proposal and
a FEIR Addendum was prepared dated April 8, 1994. A mitigation monitoring
and reporting plan (MMRP) has been prepared for this project in accordance
with CEQA and adopted by the Planning Commission simultaneously herewith
pursuant to Resolution P94-04.
P. The Planning Commission went on a tour of the Central Circulation System
of the City on September 12, 1993. The purpose of this tour was to see the
various sites where potential future roadways are proposed to be constructed.
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 5 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 6
This tour included viewing the site and proposed roadways in the Porta Bella
Specific Plan proposal including Santa Clarita Road and an extension of Magic
Mountain Parkway.
q. The Planning Commission received an informational presentation about the
Porta Bella Specific Plan proposal at their regularly scheduled meeting on
October 5, 1993, at 7:00 p.m. at the City Council Chambers�;23920 Valencia
Boulevard, Santa Clarita. This presentation was given by tie applicant and
his consultants. Staff updated the Commission on the status of the WEIR
processing and let the applicant give a :background on the project: The
Commission also set a preliminary datel6na tour of the Bermite site for
Saturday, November 13, 1993.
r. Several duly noticed public hearings were held by the Planning Commission
commencing on October 19, 1993, at 7:00 p.m. at the CityCouncil Chambers,
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita. At that hearing the Planning
Commission received a staff report from Kevin Michel, Senior Planner, and a
review of the DEIR, save traffic/eirculation issues, from the City's EIR
consultants Tom Worthington and Randy Nichols of Impact Sciences, Inc. The
staff report for that hearing reviewed existing state law and the City's General
Plan and Zoning Code regarding Specific Plans; General Plan and Zoning
Conformity; the relationship of the project to the Valley Center Concept and
other elements of the General Plan; relationship to the Civic Center Project
and Central City Circulation; ridgeline preservation and hillside development,
including the issue of "innovation"; and a review of environmental issues and
alternatives included in the DEIR. The Commission identified areas of concern
for further study and continued the public hearing to a field visit for the Porta
Bella site for Saturday,' November 13, 1993 at 9:00 a.m., beginning in the
The Planning Commission held a continued public hearing which included a
field trip to the `,Porta Bella site on Saturday, November 13, 1993. at 9:00 a.m.,
beginning in the Council Chambers. The Commission conducted a detailed site
visit of the BermitelPorta Bella property, including 14 viewing points. The
Commission continued the public hearing to the regularly scheduled Planning
Commission meeting on November 16, 1993.
At the continued public hearing held on November 16, 1993, the Planning
Commission discussed the field trip of November 13, 1994, identified more
areas of concern and received a presentation from the traffic consultant, Justin
Farmer of Justin Farmer Transportation Engineers, about traffic issues
discussed in the DEIR and Specific Plan. The Planning Commission continued
the public hearing to the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 G Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 7
on December 21, 1993.
On December 21, 1993, the Planning Commission held
hearing. In the staff presentation, staff provided a de
proposed land uses on the site. The staff report:f6&A
revision to the Magic Mountain/Via Princessa corridor; th
Porta Bella and Civic Center projects; General Plan Con:
"Innovative Projects" under the Ridgeline'Preservation an
Ordinance; and the Land Use Section (Chapter 3} of the
public hearing was continued to a study: session on J.,
address all issues other than traffic and.circulation.
a continued public
ailed review of the
:d on the potential
relationship of the
stency; the issue of
to
The continued public hearing held on January 11) 1994 was a study session
where the Commission discussed issues other than "traffic and circulation
including consistency with the General Plan; consistency with the Valley
Center Concept; consistency with the Bermite section of the General Plan;
proposed land uses and their location; innovation and the hillside ordinance;
relationships to the Civic Center Project; relationships to the Circle J
communities; impacts on school; fire, police, and other services; public
testimony received to date; oak tree impacts; open space and recreation; and,
potential development, agreement issues. The Commission continued this
public hearing to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting
on January 18, 1994.
The regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting on January 18, 1994,
was, postponed due to the Northridge Earthquake which occurred the previous
day. ;The meeting scheduled for January 18, 1994, was rescheduled and so
noticed to February 1, 1994 at 7:00 p.m. in the meeting room at the Bank of
America; 23929 Valencia Blvd, Santa Clarita. On February 1, 1994, the
Planning Commission held a continued public hearing. At that hearing the
Commission conceptually approved Phase 1 of the project and discussed the
elimination of "Z" lots, the need for project compatibility adjacent to Circle J,
and the need for additional analysis of the Magic Mountain/Via Princessa
Corridor, The public hearing was continued to the regularly scheduled
Planning Commission meeting on March 15, 1994.
On March 15, 1994, the Planning Commission held a continued public hearing
at 7:00 p.m.. at the William S. Hart School District Board Room, 21515
Redview Drive, Santa Clarita. At this hearing the applicant presented the
revised project to the Planning Commission as described in Section 1g;
including an approximate 1017o reduction in residential units, the elimination
of "Z" lots, the elimination of a multi -family project on lot 26 adjacent to Circle
J and the use of larger lots adjacent to Circle J, and the Magic Mountain/Via
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 7 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 8
Princessa corridor. The applicant and his consultant Monica Simpson of the
SWA Group made a slide presentation on the various product types to be used
in the project. The City's EIR consultant Mr. Randy Nichols of Impact
Sciences gave an initial overview of the impacts of the ;proposed Magic
Mountain\Via Princessa alignment. Impacts of the roadway` alignments upon
Circle J were discussed. The Commission continued the:, hearing to the
regularly scheduled Planning Commissionmeeting,, on` April', 20, 1994. The
FEIR Addendum was completed on April'8, 1994 and copies were immediately
made available to the public and the Planning'` Commission. This FEIR
Addendum included a complete analysis of the modified project and the Magic
Mountain/Via Princessa corridor, including a.traffic study evaluating this
proposed modification to the General Plan network.
At the regularly scheduled Planning' Commission meeting of April 20, 1994,
held at the William S. Hart School District Board Room, the Commission
conceptually approved the project 3-1 (Woodrow dissenting vote, Doughman
absent) and directed staff to return to the Commission with conditions of
approval and a resolution approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51559, Oak
Tree Permit 91-003, contingent onCityCouncil approval of the Specific Plan;
certifying Final Environmental Impact Report and Addendum SC 92-041041
and adopting a Statement of Overriding Consideration; and recommending that
the City Council shall approve the Porta Bella Specific Plan as modified by the
Commission and process a Development Agreement with Planning Commission
input. The 'Planning Commission' continued this public hearing to the
regularly scheduled meeting on June 7, 1994. The project was re -noticed for
At the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of June 7, 1994, held
in the City Council Chambers, the Commission directed staff to make
modifications to the conditions of approval, mitigation monitoring and
reporting plan. and resolutions approving this project. The Commission also
asked for further information and clarification on hazardous and solid waste
clean-up issues. The Commission requested additional information regarding
the 64 additional sites in addition to the 14 IiWMU sites. The Commission
directed staff to return to the following meeting, The Planning Commission
continued this public hearing to the regularly scheduled meeting on June 21,
At the regularly scheduled meeting of June 21, 1994, the Planning Commission
received updated information on the status of hazardous waste site clean-up
on the site and received modified conditions of approval, a mitigation
monitoring and reporting plan and resolutions approving this project as
directed by the Commission on June 7, 1994. The information regarding the
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 8 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 9
additional 64 non RCRA sites had already been commented on and referenced
in the DEIR, FEIR, FEIR Addendum and MMRP.
t. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution P94-07; approving Master Case
Nos. 91-164 and 93-012, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51599,, Oak Tree Permit
91-033 and recommending approval of Specific Plan 91-001, including the
amendment of the Highway Network of the' Circulation Element of the General
Plan and certification the FEIR and FEIR Addendum (SC -041040) to the City
Council.
U. Three appeals of the Planning Commissions decision were filed with the City
Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita and are as follows:
1) An appeal of the Planning Commission's decision was filed by Mr.
Everett Scott of the Keysor-Century Corporation on June 29, 1994.
2) An appeal was filed on June 30, 1994, by Mr. Dean Cheeseman and
several other members of the Circle J Ranch and Placerita Canyon
Homeowners.
3) An appeal was filed on July 19, 1994, by Mr. Salvatore Veltri,
representing Northolme Partners, Mr. Veltri was appealing certain
conditions of the project approval.
Numerous duly noticed public hearings were held by the City Council and are
summarized as follows:
(a) The City Councilreceived an informational presentation about the
Porta Bella Specific Plan proposal at a City Council Study Session on
September 29, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall in the City Council
Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita (hereafter, City
Council Chambers). This presentation was given by the applicant and
his consultants. Staff updated the City Council on the processing and
status of the EIR.
(b) The City Council received a subsequent informational presentation
regarding the Porta Bella project at a City Council Study Session on
June 29, 1994, in the City Council Chambers, following the Planning
Commission decision to approve the project on June 21, 1994 This was
an informational session only. The presentation by staff reviewed slides
depicting the project design, land uses, densities, and product types.
Staff updated the Council regarding the Planning Commission hearings
on the project and the EIR.
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 9 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 10
(c) Numerous duly noticed public hearings (including field trips) were held
by the City Council commencing on August 23, 1994, at 6:30 p.m. in the
City Council Chambers. Staff presented a detailed project description,
including: Specific Plan No, 91-001; Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
51599; Development Agreement No, 93-003; Oak Tree Permit No, 91-
033; and DEIR/FEIR SCH 92-041041. Staff described the project as
modified by the Planning Commission, including: 2,91 ',dwelling units;
comprised of 1,244 single-family homes and 1,667 multi -family units;
106 acres of commercial, office, and business park; and over 450 acres
of open space on a total of 996 acres. Staff presented summaries of the
three appeals. One, by Dean Cheeseman, Carl Kanowsky, et. al,
appealed all aspects of the project as_ approved by the Planning
Commission without any specificity.' Another,, by the project applicant,
Sam Veltri of Northholme Partners, appealed the language of Traffic
Condition TE -1, arguing that as drafted, theicandition could mandate
the project to contribute more than its fair share of infrastructure
improvement in comparison to the impacts of the project. The last, by
Everett Scott, Jr., Vice President of Keysor-Century and his designated
representative, Roger Hutchinson, was on behalf of Keysor-Century, a
business and property owner, that could be impacted by the proposed
bridge extension of Magic Mountain Parkway, argued that the
alignment should be ,explicitly defined. Staff initially presented the
project and appeals as two separate items. The Council heard extended
public testimony from the applicant and the general public, at this and
all the other subsequent meetings and study sessions, except where
noted. Council directed staff to combine the items into a single agenda
item in future hearings. The Council moved to continue the public
hearing to a field trip, beginning at the Santa Clarita Metrolink and
Transportation Center, which is located on that portion of the project
area fronting'on Soledad Canyon Road, on September 24, 1994 at 7
a.m.. The Council also moved to hold a joint study session with the
Planning 'Commission on October 4, 1994, at 7 p.m. to discuss the
Planning Commission review process and decision for Porta Bella.
(d) At 7 a.m., on September 24, 1994, the City Council reconvened the
public hearing for the Porta Bella project at the Santa Clarita
Metrolink and Transportation Center on the Bermite site, the area
proposed for the Porta Bella development. Staff and the applicant
conducted a comprehensive field visit, describing: road alignments;
product types and locations; areas impacted by hazardous wastes; the
relationship to the Civic Center property and the Civic Center Master
Plan; project impacts and proposed mitigation; and issues relating to
the three appeals filed on the project. At the conclusion of the field
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 10 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 11
(e)
(f)
(g)
tour, the City Council continued the public hearing to the regularly
scheduled City Council meeting on October 11, 1994.
Though not specifically a Porta Bella
conducted a Study Session on
Chambers, regarding the propo
the Circulation Element and N
direction to staff to continue ad
community presented four altei
alignment proposed by the proj
Plan includes a General Plan
Element of the General Plan.
On October 4, 1994, at 7 p.m.,
of
ors to the
, The Por
to modify
City Council
City Council
lent to revise
J
the City Council Chambers, the City
Council and the Planning Commission conducted a joint study session
to review the Planning, commission's deliberations and decisions
regarding the .Porta Della project. The Commission reviewed their
deliberations regarding: 'General Plan consistency; project
characteristics such as density, product types, and design guidelines;
the imuortance of linking land use and transportation planning, as
the plan; project modifications mandated by the
cluding;density reductions, reduced grading impacts, and
cessa connection;hazardous waste status, clean-up, and
iditions of approval; roads and infrastructure and the
share; oak tree impacts and mitigation; the EIR and
Statement of Overriding Consideration; the "innovative"
and the Hillside Ordinance; the development agreement;
s of the Planning Commission decision. This was an
ieeting only, and no decisions were made.
proposed by
Commission; in
the Mazic/Prin
ect fl
the
The City?Council resumed the public hearing for the project on October
11, 1994, at the City Council Chambers. Staff reviewed the various
aspects of the project application and the three appeals filed against the
Planning Commission decision. The City's Environmental Consultant,
Randy Nichols of Impact Sciences, gave a detailed presentation on the
Environmental Impact Report and Addendum. discussing impact areas,
mitigation measures, and the Statement of Overriding Consideration
adopted by the Planning Commission. Carla Slepak, from the
California Environmental Protection Agency/ Department of Toxic
Substances Control described their work in reviewing the existing
conditions on site, the requirement for site clean-up, and their
coordination with City, staff in drafting the conditions of approval and
mitigation measures that were approved by the Planning Commission.
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 11 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 12
Council directed staff to work with the applicant regarding his appeal
of Traffic condition TE -1 and to set up guidelines for a reimbursement
district to satisfy the requirement. The Council discussed; results of the
traffic modelling study, proposed roadways, and trM is mitigation;
hazardous waste and the need to clean-up the site; and, liability and
insurance issues. The Council moved to continue the. public hearing to
November 8, 1995, in order to discuss the ,site visit, ,the joint City
Council/ Planning Commission meeting, and the public testimony
received to date.
(h) The City Council resumed the public hearing for the project on
November 8, 1994, in the City Council Chambers. Staff reviewed the
issues involved in each of the three appeals: filed on the project. As
directed by Council; staff had prepared extensive comments to respond
to a letter from Carl Kanowsky, the designated spokesperson for the
Circle J homeowners et. al appealand legal representative for certain
small business ownerslocated on;,Springbrook Avenue, and these
responses were reviewed at the meeting The Council discussed
hazardous wastes` and the necessity to clean the entire site before
constructing the project, traffic impacts, the release of legal opinions,
the unacceptability of the Oakdale Canyon Bridge, ground and water
contamination, fault lines, impacts on small businesses, the role of the
CaEPA/ DTSC in managing the site clean-up, road financing, the
General Plan amendment of the circulation element proposed by the
project, and impact of proposed new roads and bridges on property
owners. Council moved that staff should continue to work on the
appeals' issues, require that the entire site be cleaned up prior to
allowing new construction, examine the impact of roads and to look for
an alternative to the bridges, and deny certification of the EIR at this
time pending additional review. The meeting was continued to the
November 22, 1994, City Council meeting.
At the meeting on November 22, 1994, at the City Council Chambers,
the Council reviewed the traffic conditions for the project. The
feasibility of an at -grade crossing to extend Magic Mountain Parkway
was reviewed. The proposed bridge over Oakdale Canyon was
discussed, including other available options. The EIR analysis of these
issues was reviewed. The potential impacts of new road infrastructure
on property owners were reviewed, including compensation,
condemnation, and relocation. The Council directed that staff release
City Attorney analyses on the project to the public. The meeting was
continued to December 13, 1995, City Council meeting.
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 12 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 13
0)
At the continued public hearing on December 13, 1995 in the City
Council Chambers, the staff reviewed staff responses to
at the November 22, 1994, City Council meeting. St
Consent Order, which mandates the
site, agreed to between CaEPA/ DI
property owner. Staff reviewed f
crossing to extend Magic Mountain
and the railroad tracks. Staff revie
approved by the Planning CpXnm
infrastructure, and the EIR Adden
public testimony, but continued the.
January 31, 1995, 6:30 p.m., for the s
Bella with at least two Plannine Coy
The
fuestions raised
ff reviewed the
clean-up of the
r/ Bermite, the
of an at -grade
take
to an adjournedmeeting on
c,purpose of discussing Porta
(k) The City Council, with members of the Planning Commission, met on
January 31, 1995, in a public hearing exclusively devoted to the Porta
Bella Specific Plan et. al. and the three appeals filed against the
Planning Commission approval and recommendation. The Planning
Commissioners reviewed ,the major issues that they considered in
making their recommendation to the City Council. The applicant and
community representatives reported on various meetings held to reach
compromise and/or a consensus position. The Council heard extensive
public testimony and directed 'staff to respond in writing to all the
questions raised. The applicant offered a revision to the project in
schematic form, which greatly reduced the impact in the Circle J open
space. The revised proposal does away with the Magic/Princessa major
highway connection and substitutes Magic Mountain Parkway as a four
lane collector that"T"'s into Via Princessa, which is located primarily
on the project site with minimal impacts to the Circle J open space and
includes the elimination of the Oakdale Canyon Bridge, Because of
concerns raised over the extension of Magic Mountain Parkway across
San Fernando Road, particularly, whether it should be a bridge or not
and what specific properties might be impacted, the Council continued
the public hearing to 4 p.m., February 21, 1995, at Divided Lite, 25835
Springbrook Avenue, Santa Clarita.
The City Council and Planning Commission convened a joint meeting
at 4 p.m, on February 21, 1995, at the parking lot of Divided Lite,
25835 Springbrook Avenue, Santa Clarita. Staff provided background
on the existing Circulation Element of the General Plan, which
indicates the extension of Magic Mountain Parkway through the
Springbrook area. Staff reviewed the Civic Center Master Plan,
approved by Council and referenced in the EIR, which included a
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 13 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 14
matrix ranking various alternatives to extend Magic Mountain
Parkway, and which favored a grade -separated extension generally
proceeding along the existing alignment as defined by the'new bridge
crossing the South Fork of the Santa Clara River. The applicant
reviewed various alignment proposals for ;the extension of Magic
Mountain Parkway, which included markings in the field to depict the
proposed location and height of the bridge. At the,conclusion of the
meeting, the City Council continued the meeting to March 28, 1995, and
directed the applicant to continue working with staff, property owners,
and businesses in the. area.
(m) At the continuation of the public hearing on March 28, 1995, in the City
Council Chambers, staff reviewed the detailed responses prepared to all
the issues raised at the January 31, 1995, meeting by the public and by
the City Council. These issues included, but were not limited to:
condemnation issues; EIR issues; hazardous waste; the Hillside
Ordinance, "innovation, and project density; insurance and
indemnification; off-site roadway. segments; OSHA requirements;
Placerita Special Standards; the proposed school site; Springbrook
businesses; streams; and trails. The"staff report, in brief, indicated that
the applicant proposes to extend "Magic Mountain Parkway with a
bridge that primarily impacts the Keysor-Century and Hasa properties,
rather than the small business owners on Springbrook. The applicant
proposes to work with the affected property owners. The applicant
reaffirmed the commitment to eliminate the Magic/Princessa connection
as a six -lane highway substantially encroaching into Circle J
Homeowners open space and requiring the Oakdale Canyon bridge, and
substituted the extension of Magic Mountain Parkway as a 4 -lane
collector, primarily within the project area, with minimal disturbance
to the Circle 'J open space, and which "T"s into the proposed Via
Princessa alignment. The applicant proposed to dedicate sufficient
right-of-way for 6 lanes. The report provided additional testimony that
an at -grade crossing for the Magic Mountain extension is infeasible.
Three alignment studies for the proposed Santa Clarita Parkway,
.,prepared by the applicant, were discussed, with the applicant favoring
an alignment consistent with the previously submitted feasibility
alignment submitted to staff, intersecting with the public portion of
Placerita Canyon and generally between the existing industrial and
residential uses, providing a landscaped and bermed buffer. The off-site
extension of all proposed roadways, including Santa Clarita Parkway,
Via Princessa, and Magic Mountain Parkway, will require additional
environmental review tiered to the environmental work already
prepared for the project. The applicant agreed to re -align Via Princessa
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 14 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 15
so that the centerline is no closer than 400 feet to the southern property
line, with the area to the south of the alignment to be developed with
large lot estate homes or to be left at open space, with this
determination to be made by the homeowners association for the homes
south of the property liner Regarding the status of the appeals, the
applicant and staff continued to work on revised language for Traffic
Condition TE -1. A number of the proposed design changes offered by
the applicant address concerns of the various Circle Jneighborhoods.
The applicant continued to prefer an alignment that primarily impacts
Keysor- Century and the Hasa companieswhile limiting impacts on the
small Springbrook businesses. At the close of the hearing, the Council
continued the item to the April 11, 1995, regularly scheduled City
Council meeting, directing that public testimony should be limited to
the Keysor-Century appeal and issues related tothe Hillside Ordinance.
(n) On April 28, 1995, staff and the applicant apprised the Council of the
resolution of the appeal filed by Keysor- Century, and the proposed
settlement of the issue. Staff presented additional background
regarding the application of the Hillside Ordinance to the project site.
The revised language for Vesting Tentative Tract Map Condition TE -1,
agreed to by staff and the applicant, was reviewed and approved as
modified. The Council heard testimony and closed the public hearing.
Staff reiterated that due to the all-encompassing nature of the Circle J
et. al. appeal, that their issues were addressed in testimony, by project
modifications by the applicant, and by staff responses, in writing, to the
various issues brought up. Council moved to certify the EIR and
Addendum, to adopt a Statement of Overriding Consideration, to affirm
the Planning Commission's approval of the Tract Map and the Oak Tree
Permit, to adopt the Specific Plan, including modifications to the Zoning
Map, :General Plan Land Use Map, and General Plan Circulation
Network, as approved and modified by the City Council. The Council
further moved to refer the Development Agreement back to the
Planning Commission for their advice, as required by City Ordinance,
prior to Council review and action.
SECTION 2. 'Based upon the above findings of fact, oral and written testimony and
vidence received at the public hearings held for the project, and upon studies and
rations made by the City Council and on its behalf, the City Council further finds as
a. At the hearings described above, the City Council considered staff
presentations, staff reports, Planning Commission resolutions, applicant
presentations, and public testimony on the proposal, and the FEIR and FEIR
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 15 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 16
Addendum prepared for the project.
b. Development may be allowed on the ridgelines because the construction of
roadways and other transportation improvements proposed' as part of this
project promote the public health, safety and general welfare. The proposal
meets the innovative design criteria for encroachment upon significant
ridgelines and for grading on hillside slopes in excess of 106W because:
(a) The proposed use is in proper relation to adjacent—uses, 'the
development of the community and the various goals and policies of the
General Plan.
(b) Although the project will be visible, the'use'or development will not be
materially detrimental to the visual character of the neighborhood or
community, nor will It endanger „the public healthi
(c) The appearance of the development will not be different than the
appearance of adjoining ridgeline areas so as to cause depreciation of
the ridgeline appearance in the vicinity.
(d) The establishment of the proposeduse or development will not impede
the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding'
property, nor encourage inappropriate encroachments to the ridgeline
area.
(e) It has been "demonstrated through precise illustration in the FEIR and
Addendum for this project that the proposed development will not
violate the visual integrity of the significant ridgeline area.
(f) The hillside development plan is in substantial compliance with all
applicable provisions of the Ridgeline Preservation and Hillside
Development Ordinance and standards for hillside development of the
project shall be identified in the Specific Plan for the site.
C. The design of the subdivision and the typeof. improvements will. not cause
serious` public health problems, since water, sewage disposal, fire protection
and hazardous material cleanup are addressed in the MMRP and Conditions
d. The project complies with the general requirements and performance standards
for the Specific Plan Zone. The project is consistent with the intent of the
Specific Plan Zone which was created to: facilitate development of certain areas
by permitting greater flexibility and consequently, more creative and
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 16 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 17
imaginative designs; promote more economical and efficient use of land while
providing a harmonious variety of choices, higher level of amenities, and
preservation of natural and scenic qualities of open space; and, ensure that
development substantially conforms to the approved plans.
e.. The project is consistent with the intent of the City's General Plan. The City's
General Plan identifies the Bermite site as being appropriate for a specific
plan. Following Council redesignation of the project site to SP (Specific Plan)
on the City's General Plan land use map, zone changes to SP (Specifie`Plan
Zone) as identified in the Specific Plan for this project and adoption of the
Specific Plan, this project will be consistent; with the City's General Plan and
Zoning Ordinance. The addition of Santa Clarita Parkway to the Circulation
Network of the General Plan substitutes for the deletion of Rio Vista Road as
a north -south corridor due to the close proximity of the two corridors. Santa
Clarita Parkway is superior in that it avoids the issue of creating excess
capacity directly adjacent to San Fernando Road. MainStreet and "D" Street
provide a north -south corridor connecting,',Soledad Canyon Road and Magic
Mountain\Via Princessa and serve as the Bermite Connector.
f. The Final Environmental Impact Reportand Addendum identify certain
significant environmental effects. The Final Environmental Impact Report and
Addendum identify feasible mitigation measures for each of these impacts with
the exclusion of air quality, biological' resources, aesthetics, light and glare,
risk of upset/health hazard, transportation and circulation, and cumulative
solid waste impacts which cannot be avoided through mitigation. The identified
mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring
Reporting Plan (MMRP) and conditions of approval for the project. The
Addendum studies the connection of Magic Mountain Parkway to Via Princessa
by the "Magic/Princessa" corridor. The traffic study concluded that the
proposed road would offer circulation benefits and that the noise, visual, and
aesthetic impacts would not be significant and could be mitigated.
g. The City,'', Council has adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for
those impacts in the project which cannot be mitigated to less than significant
levels and certified the FEIR and FEIR Addendum (SC 92-041040) (Resolution
95-41, adopted simultaneously herewith.)
.;.SECTION 3. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the City Council hereby
finds as follows:
a. A FEIR and FEIR Addendum, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
(MMRP) and Statement of Overriding Considerations for this project have been
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 17 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 18
prepared and circulated in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act and adopted as certified as required by that Act.
b. This project as modified by the City Council will not adversely affect the
health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons residing ur the area; nor be
materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment, or valuation of property in the
vicinity of the project site; nor jeopardize, endanger ,or otherwise constitute a
menace to the public health, safety, or general welfare since the project
conforms with the zoning ordinance and is compatible with surrounding land
uses.
C. The project is compatible with existing development in the area, consistent
with the City's General Plan and Zoning.
d. The applicant has substantiated the findings for an innovative design
application for encroachment upon significant ridgelnes and for development
on hillsides in excess of 10% slope.
e. The applicant has substantiated the findings for approving a vesting tentative
tract map and oak tree permit.
f That the substitution of Santa Clarita Parkway for Rio Vista Road, that the
identification of Main Street and Road "D as the Bermite Connector and that
the proposed "Magic/Princessa' corridor are appropriate modifications of the
Highway Network of the Circulation Element of the General Plan with the
adoption of a General Plan Amendment in conjunction with the Specific Plan.
SECTION 4. The City Councilhereby approves Master Case Nos. 91-164 and 93-012, Vesting
Tentative Tract Map i; 51599 and Oak Tree Permit 91-033 a general plan amendment and
subject to lj the conditions which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference,` marked as Exhibit "'Y, and 2) Specific Plan 91-001. and amends the Highway
Network of the Circulation Element of the General Plan to include the addition of the Magic
Mountain Parkway connector, Santa Clarita Parkway, the recognition of Main Street and 'D"
Street as the Bermite Connector and the elimination of Rio Vista
5. The: Council shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and certify this
e -a full, complete, and correct copy of the action taken
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of
, 19_:
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 18 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 19
Mpvnu
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 19 Attachment 3
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 20
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA j
I, Donna M. Grindey, City Clerk of the Ci
the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the
at a regular meeting thereof, held on the
19_ by the following vote of Council:
ty of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that
City Council of the City of Santa Clarita
CITY CLERK
Draft Resolution 95-42,4/11/95 20 Attachment 3
Draft FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL- CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 51599; Oak Tree Permit No. 91-033
Master Case No.'s 91-164 and 93 -012 --Porta Bella Specific Plan
Revised April 11, 1995
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Development Services Division (DS)
DS -1 The master vesting tentative tract map shall
revised network as indicated in
DS -2 The project land uses, densities, road
depicted in exhibits "B" and "C" attac
City Council, as reflected in Exhil
Specific Plan is exhibit "D," the cover i
exhibit "D" is available in the Comn
language and exhibits included in the
shall be modified to reflect the change!
the conditions of approval to the. sat
Development.
DS -3 The Porta Bella Specific
City Council, (as refle4
land use and planning',d
product designs,improve
Specific Plan, asupdate(
of the Droiect. durine
DS -4
DS -5
on
the
further modified ;bythe
BB. The draft Ports. Bella
tacked. The complete draft
opment Department. The
Specific Plan, exhibit "D,"
n the, previous exhibits and
he Director of Community
modified by the
in Exhibits AA and BB), shall be the governing
ient for the Porta Bella site. Future tract maps,
ts. and infrastructure must be consistent with the
with City Council modifications
firing process., should the Spe
r tentative tract map and the oak tree permit are
approval of the Porta Bella Specific Plan.
be permitted at the discretion of the Community
The use of "W' lots is not permitted.
Lot 26 will become an open -space lot. The multi -family project originally
proposed for Lot 26 will be eliminated from the project. The grading contour
lines on the Vesting Tentative Tract Map shall be adjusted accordingly and the
lot shall be designated an Open Space lot, subjectto the requirements of other
11 open space lots.
DS -8 Drive-through restaurant uses are not permitted in the Town Center District.
DS -9 Exhibit "E" identifies the phasing used for the purposes of the traffic study.
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 1 Attachment 3
The phasing on the Master Vesting Tentative Tract Map shall be consistent
with this exhibit. Grading activities may cross phase boundaries. The
development and occupancy of residential and commercial products shall be
phased and consistent with Exhibit "E," and as modified by exhibits AA
and BB. The revised Specific Plan, exhibit "D," shall include a table to the
satisfaction of Community Development summarizing the intensity of land uses
in each phase of exhibit "E" consistent with exhibits "A, B, and.C," and as
modified by exhibits AA and BB.
DS -10 A homeowner's association (HOA) or other entity, to:which the City is made a
party to with right of enforcement, shall be formed prior to recordation of the
final map to have responsibility and authority as indicated m' these conditions
to the satisfaction of the City.
DS -11 The applicant shall provide and maintain private alleys to the satisfaction of
the Community Development Department i'or the paired single-family homes
fronting on Green Street as indicated in the Specific Plan. The alleys will be
private driveways, and shall be maintained by,. the, HOA. No gated alleys,
driveways or streets are approved with this project,
DS -12 The Mitigation Monitoring Plan is attached as Exhibit "F." The applicant is
responsible for implementing the mitigation2measures to the satisfaction of the
City for the life of the project. Mitigation Measures RU -1 and RU -3 are
superseded by the following language::
For the entire 996 acre site, the applicant and/or future developer shall
provide evidence for proper hazardous waste indentification and
remediation, to the satisfaction of the City, from California
.>,Environmental'Protection Agency/ Department of Toxic Substances
Control prior to the issuance of any grading permits. No construction
of Phase I residential, commercial, office, or office park may
commence until the entire site is cleared by Cal EPA/ DISC.
Construction of major highway segments and other public
infrastructure may be permitted to the satisfaction of Cal EPA/ DTSC
and the City;prior to the clean-up of the entire site, provided the area
in question has received clean closure from Cal EPA/ DTSC.
The people mover/escalator shall be noted on the master vesting tentative map.
This improvement shall be constructed during the final phase of development.
Any modification to the existing multi -modal station necessary to accommodate
the people mover/escalator shall be at the expense of the developer and to the
satisfaction of the City.
Future tract maps will be required to further subdivide the property. Plot Plan
Applications will be required if further tract maps are not necessary, subject
to appropriate conditions of approval. Additional studies, included but not
limited to, oak trees, geology, and traffic may be required. Additional
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 2 Attachment 3
conditions and requirements may be placed on subsequent tract maps and plot
plans to the satisfaction of the City.
DS -15 All grading activities shall be continuously monitored on-site for hazardous and
solid waste materials to the satisfaction of appropriate agencies, including the
City. If wastes are encountered, work must be stopped in that area and the
appropriate agencies, including the City, shall be notified..: Mitigation
measures imposed by the appropriate agencies, including the City, shall be
adhered to. The applicant, for itself, its successors and assignees, shall execute
an indemnity and hold harmless agreement, in which it agrees to indemnify,
protect, defend and hold the City harmless from any and all liability including,
but not limited to, the death or injury of any person caused by, arising from,
or by reason of, the presence of any "toxic" or "hazardous" substance or
material, as those terms are currently, or hereinafter defined m Califoirn a or
federal law, rather presently found on the project or after discovered on the
project. A current definition of "toxic" and "'hazardous" materials, as defined
in California and federal law, is attached hereto as Exhibit "G".
DS -16 Submit and implement landscape plains to
vicinity of the off-site Magic name.., i Edi
of the City in the
the time , nstruetion of this read segment , . section of Magic
Mountain Parkway that impacts the northeast corner of the Circle J
open space.
DS -17 Unless specifically vested by the project's approval, the project shall be
developed in conformance with the City's Unified Development Code.
DS -18 Further subdivisions, plot plans,t and other entitlements proposed for the
property are subject to environmental review, including the preparation of
additional studies. ,Additional mitigation measures and conditions may be
attached to the ;property as a result should additional entitlements and/or
DS -19 Prior to recordation of the Final Map, modify the map, to the
satisfaction of the City, to reflect modifications as indicated in
Exhibits AA and BB.
iation of alignments and construction of off-site highway
of Santa Clarita Parkway, Magic Mountain Parkway, and Via
a, will require additional environmental review tiered to the
DEIR and Addendum, prior to any construction, to the
ion of the City.
DS -21 Prior to recordation of the Final Map, update all exhibits and text in
the Specific Plan, to the satisfaction of the City, implementing all
changes mandated by the Planning Commission and the City Council,
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 3 Attachment 3
to the satisfaction of the City, and incorporating Exhibits AA and BB.
DS -22 Prior to recordation of the map, update number of residential units
specified in each phase in condition TE -1. Update Specific Plan to be
consistent with revised phasing in TE -1. Phasing numbers shall
reflect reductions in density mandated by the Commission, as well as
any reductions due to the revised roadways as indicated in Exhibits
AA and BB, such as the relocation of Magic Mountain Parkway and
Via Princessa.
DS -23 Prior to recordation, realign Via Princessa so that the centerline is no
closer than 400 feet to the southerly, boundary.,, Obtain letter from the
HOA, indicating whether land to the south is to be open„ space or
estate homes. Update the map and,Specific Plan prior to recordation,
to the satisfaction of the City, to reflect these changes. Provide a
landscape plan, including a berm where necessary, to mitigate impacts
to the homes to the south, to the satisfaction of the City.
DS -24 Provide a landscape plan, including a berm where necessary, to
mitigate impacts of Magic Mountain. Parkway when adjacent to Circle
J homes or impacting Circle J"open space. `
DS -25 Concurrent with the opening of both Via Princessa to Rainbow Glen
Drive and Wiley Canyon Bridge, provide a gate guarded entry to Karie
Lane of the Circle J Estates to the satisfaction of the City.
DS -26 Provide equestrian crossings in at least two places under Santa
Clarita Parkway concurrently with construction of the roadway.
DS -27 Xsecond access point to the Oak Orchard area of Placerita Canyon
will be provided to Santa Clarita Parkway concurrently with the
DS -28 Prior to initiating construction of Santa Clarita Parkway in the
vicinity' of the Oak Orchard area of Placerita Canyon, provide a
drainage study; to the satisfaction of the City focusing on the Oak
Orchard area. Construct required drainage improvements, to the
satisfaction'' of the City, concurrently with construction of Santa
Clarita Parkway.
DS-29,,The project will adhere to the seismic and building codes in effect at
the time of recordation of each map.
Construct streetscape improvements to Springbrook Avenue, north of
Drayton Street to the Keysor-Century property line, consisting of
curbs, gutters, and landscaping, to the satisfaction of the City, prior
to occupancy of Phase I of the project.
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 4 Attachment 3
DS -31 No construction traffic will use Springbrook Avenue.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Traffic Engineering (TE)
TE -1 The conditions listed below refer to the
to be in place prior to the issuance of
below and as specified in the traffic sti
The design plans for the subject improvements
City Engineer prior to the recordation of each
Any deviations from the listed conditions may
subject to the approval of the City Traffic Enl
The off -"site improvements as indicated in the ti
place concurrent with each of the three phase:
traffic study off-site improvements which re
which a map is to be recorded are not -be -in
time such map is to be recorded prier is 4
per -fie of the deve opmen`, then the applicant sl
traffic stwlies study for such portion of the p.
,,,i._.h v -sold identify This additional traffic
alternative mitigation measures, and applicant
alternative measures to- which address the is
be necessary
as outlined
each phase shall be approved by the
se.
1 a further traffic studv and shall be
C study have'been assumed to be in
this development. Shexlcl If those
3. to a portion of the project for
�e or otherwise provided for at the
to submit an additional
shall determine the need for
be required to implement those
of this project.
The traffic improvements included in the conditions of approval are those deemed
necessary by; the traffic study. to accommodate regional traffic anticipated in horizon
years coinciding with the completion of each phase of the project. Implementation of
and funding of these improvements is not the sole responsibility of the developer. The
fair share contribution by the project shall be determined based upon traffic analysis -
however, the identified improvements or other mitigations as identified in subsequent
traffic studies to be conducted prior to the recordation of a final map for any portion of
the development shall be in place or otherwise provided for to the satisfaction of the
Director of Community Development.
land use assumptions for each phase of the development as outlined in the traffic
yis shown below. Some uses have been reduced from the values assumed in the
is study'to reflect the reduction in the number of units proposed by the applicant.
PHASE 1:
Single Family Units 298
Multi Family Units 285
Commercial (Square Feet) 163,350
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 5 Attachment 3
Office (Square Feet)
Business Park (Square Feet)
Neighborhood Park (Acres)
Driving Range (Acres)
Recreational (Square Feet)
School
Church (Acres)
Hotel (Rooms)
B. PHASE 2:
Single Family Units
Multi Family Units
Commercial (Square Feet)
Office (Square Feet)
Business Park (Square Feet)
Neighborhood Park (Acres)
Driving Range (Acres)
Recreational (Square Feet)
School
Church (Acres)
Hotel (Rooms)
C. PHASE 3:.
Single Family Units
Multi Family Units ,
Commercial (Square Feet)
Office (Square Feet)
Business Park (Square Feet)"
Neighborhood Park (Acres)
Driving Range (Acres)
258,485
45,000
One
1.8
140
TE -2 "` A total of 24 intersections will be significantly impacted as referenced in Table
8, page 51 of the Traffic Study. The mitigation measures identified in Table
12, pages 58 to 62 shall be in place prior to issuance of occupancy permits for
Phase 1.
A minimum of two new traffic signals (Magic Mountain Parkway/Rio Vista
Road, Soledad Canyon Road/Santa Clarita Parkway) shall be in place prior to
issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 1. The applicant shall be required
to assess the need for signalization at other intersections, including
but not limited to the intersection of Magic Mountain Parkway/Via
Princessa, to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer.
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11195 6 Attachment 3
TE -4 Magic Mountain Parkway (Alagie/Pr-ineessa4 shall be extended with a
minimum of four traffic lanes from San Fernando Road/Bouquet Canyon Road
to Rio Vista Road and shall be designed and constructed as a grade separated
crossing over San Fernando Road and the railroad tracks prior to issuance of
occupancy permits for Phase 1. In no event shall condition TE -19 be applicable
to this condition.
TE -5 Magic Mountain Parkway (Alag�sa) shall be extended with a
minimum of two traffic lanes from Rio Vista Road to Via Princessa, and Via
Princessa shall be constructed with a minimum of two traffic lanes
from Magic Mountain Parkway to Rainbow Glen Drive prior to issuance of
occupancy permits for Phase 1. A maximum threshold o£ development may be
permitted within Phase 1 prior to extending this roadway subject to the
satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer -
TE -6 Santa Clarita Parkway shall be extended with a minimum of two traffic lanes
from Soledad Canyon Road to "D" Street prior to issuance of occupancy permits
for Phase 1.
TE -7 "D" Street shall be extended with:a minimum of two traffic lanes from Santa
Clarita Parkway to Main Street prior to-.issuance`of occupancy permits for
Phase 1.
TE -8 A total of 25 intersections will be significantly impacted as referenced in Table
9, page 52 of the Traffic Study. The mitigation measures identified in Table
12, pages 58 to 62 shall be in place prior to issuance of occupancy permits for
Phase 2.
TE -9 A minimum of three twe new traffic signals (Santa Clarita Parkway/D Street,
Santa Clarita Parkway/Via Princessa, and, Magic Mountain Parkway/Main
Street) shall be in place prior to issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 2.
The applicant shall be required to assess the need for signalization at other
intersections, including but not limited to the intersection of Magic
Mountain Parkway/ Via Princessa, to the satisfaction of the City Traffic
TE -10 Magic Mountain Parkway shall be restriped to accommodate six traffic lanes
from Valencia Boulevard to San Fernando Road/Bouquet Canyon Road place
prior to issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 2.
cMountain Parkway (Alagi g2rin.,., sa4 shall be widened to six traffic
from San Fernando Road/Bouquet Canyon Road to Rio Vista Road place
to issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 2 in accordance with Traffic
ieering condition TE -1.
TE -12 Magic Mountain Parkway"R..m�sa) shall be widened to four traffic
lanes from Rio Vista Road to Via Princessa, and Via Princessa shall be
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4111195 7 Attachment 3
widened to four traffic lanes from Magic Mountain Parkway to Rainbow
Glen Drive prior to issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 2 in accordance
with Traffic Engineering condition TE -1.
TE -13 Santa Clarita Parkway shall be widened and extended to have a minimum of
four traffic lanes from Soledad Canyon Road to Via Princessa prior to issuance
of occupancy permits for Phase 2 in accordance with Traffic ,Engineering
condition TE -1.
TE -14 A total of 31 intersections will be significantly impacted as referenced in Table
11, page 54 of the Traffic Study. The mitigation measures identified in Table
12, pages 58 to 62 shall be in place prior, to issuance of occupancy permits for
Phase 3.
TE -15 A minimum of three new traffic signals (Magic Mountain Parkway/Via
Princessa, Santa Clarita Parkway/Via :Porta Bella, Magic Mountain
Parkway/Via Porta Bella Alain StreetcVia FrLqeessa) shall be in place prior
to issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 3.` The traffic signal for Magic
Mountain/Via Princessa may be required to be installed in Phase 1 or
Phase II, to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant
shall be required to assess the need for signalization at'other intersections to
the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer.
TE -16 Magic Mountain Parkway (AlagieA4ineessa� shall be widened to include six
traffic lanes from Ria Vista Road to Via Princessa, and Via Princessa shall
be widened to include six traffic lanes from Magic Mountain Parkway
to Rainbow Glen Drive prior to issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 3 in
accordance with Traffic Engineering condition TE -1.
TE -17 Santa Clarita Parkway shall be widened and extended to the north and south
beyond the project boundary to include six traffic lanes from Bouquet Canyon
Road to Sierra Highway at the Placerita Canyon Road junction prior to
issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 3 in accordance with Traffic
Engineering condition TE -1.
TE -18 Via Princessa _shall be extended from Magic Mountain Parkway
"'�a=. eessa west to connect to existing Wiley Canyon Road west of San
Fernando Road as a six lane arterial with an overcrossing at San Fernando
Road and the railroad track prior to issuance of occupancy permits for Phase
3 in accordance with Traffic Engineering condition TE -1.
TE -19 The City may permit monies in satisfaction of road improvement traffic
mitigation conditions to satisfy the project's impact, subject to the approval of
the City Engineer. This condition is not applicable to condition TE -4.
TE -20 The City may permit the developer to enter into a reimbursement agreement
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 8 Attachment 3
or other appropriate mechanism for traffic improvements constructed on behalf
of others for improvements which are not included in the Bridge and
Thoroughfare District to the satisfaction of the Community Development
Department.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Engineering Division
TENTATIVE MAP CONDITIONS
ED -1 The applicant shall file a final map for each,phase 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.
ED -2 The applicant shall pay applicable fees for subsequent modifications of the
phasing plan to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department.
ED -3 The applicant shall not grant or record easements 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 tentative approval, a subordination must be executed by the
easement holder prior to the filing of the final parcel map.
ED -4 Prior to the recordation of any.phase of the project the applicant shall pay the
applicable Bridge and Thoroughfare District Fee to implement the circulation
element of the,General Plan as a means of mitigating the traffic impact of this
subdivision. I The applicant may construct off-site improvements of equivalent
value in lieu of;paying fees established for the District subject to approval of
the City Engineer, Factors for development units are as follows:
Single -Family Per Unit
1.0
Townhouse Per Unit
0.8
Apartment Per Unit
0.7
Commercial Per Unit
5.0
Industry Per Unit
3.0
The project is in the:
I .,,.. X
-essa Bride and Thoroughfare District
[X]East/West Bridge and Thoroughfare District
ED -5 The applicant shall pay all applicable plan check fees as required to review
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95.42, 4/11/95 9 Attachment 3
all documents, improvement plans, phasing plans, final maps and all
clearances required for the project in accordance with the City Municipal
Code.
ED -6 The applicant, 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
prior to the recordation of any phase of the project.
ED -7 Prior to the recordation of each phase ;of the project the applicant shall
submit sufficient information and documentation to demonstrate sufficient
infrastructure will be constructed for the phase to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
ED -8 The applicant shall pay applicable fees to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer, to have the City's Bridge and Major Thoroughfare District Fee
Analysis Report revised as a result of the amendment to the Circulation
Element of the General Plan proposed by the )aorta Bella Specific Plan.
ED -9 Should diagonal parking be permitted by the Community Development
Department the applicant shall provide any necessary additional pavement
width to accommodate the parking area on the street.
ED -10 The proposed railroad crossings, for Magic Mountain and Santa Clarita
Parkway which provide access to the subject site shall be designed and
constructed as grade separated crossings and shall be in place prior to issuance
of occupancy permits for Phase I as outlined in the traffic study for this project.
An"'at, grade" crossing for Magic Mountain Parkway may be permitted on an
interim basis to the satisfaction of the City to be used only for construction
ED -11 Prior to the recordation of each phase of the project the applicant shall provide
a preliminary I vertical and horizontal alignment to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer for all proposed major highways, including Via Princessa, Magic
Mountain Parkway Magiell?rineesse, and Santa Clarita Parkway, including
off-sitesegments, as part of the implementation of the General Plan
Amendment. The alignment shall extend beyond the project boundary and join
to existing improvements. The applicant shall receive Bridge and
Thoroughfare credit for this work. The applicant shall not be required to pay
review fees.
ED -12 All public improvement plans for the project shall comply with the approved
oak tree report to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department.
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 10 Attachment 3
ED -13 During the course of construction of the project the applicant shall guarantee
that existing City roadways will not be damaged by construction activity to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
ED -14 The applicant shall dedicate the right to restrict vehicular access to all major
and secondary highways constructed as a part of this development either by
separate instrument or on the final map.
ED -15 The proposed traffic circles shall be landscaped in compliance with the Specific
Plan and to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department.
These areas shall be included in a landscape maintenance district prior to the
acceptance of the roadway.
ED -16 The applicant shall provide signing and striping plans ;for I ":.streets
constructed as a part of this project to the, satisfaction of the City Engineer
prior to the recordation of each phase `a£ the project.
ED -17 The applicant shall provide sufficient turnaround improvements at phase
boundaries to the satisfaction of the City Engineer,,:, The applicant shall
dedicate future streets where the 'turnarounds 4terid beyond a phase
boundary.
ED -18 The applicant is granted permission for street grades up to 10 percent on all
local residential streets and cul-de-sacs, up • to 10 percent on all local collector
streets and 6 percent on all major and secondary streets constructed as a part
of this project. Where grades in excess of 10 percent are required the applicant
shall have obtain prior approval from the City Engineer. In no case shall
grades exceed 15,percent for public road ways constructed as a part of this
project.
ED -19 The. applicant shall construct wheelchair ramps on each corner to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer at the intersections of all public streets. At
the intersection of all major to major and major to secondary streets two wheel
chair ramps,,shall be constructed at each corner..
ED -20 The applicant shall construct all public streets within the development to
provide for drainage facilities, a structural section meeting the traffic index
and soil parameters, gutter, curbs, parkways, sidewalks, street lighting,
landscaping, bus stops, street trees and traffic signals.
ED -21 The applicant shall provide and install street name signs prior to occupancy
of,,any building(s) to the satisfaction of the Community Development
ED -22 The applicant shall design and install all traffic control, regulatory, guide and
street signs for all public roadways constructed as a part of this project to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 11 Attachment 3
ED -23 The applicant shall name all public streets prior the recordation of each phase
of the project to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department.
ED -24 The applicant shall construct sidewalk, street tree and street light
improvements along the project frontage of both sides of Soledad Canyon Road
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer concurrent with the construction of the
intersection of Santa Clarita Parkway and Soledad Canyon Road along the
property frontage.
ED -25 The applicant shall construct a dedicated i:right turn pocket along Soledad
Canyon Road at the intersection of SantaClarita Parkway to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer. The construction shall be concurrent with the
construction of Santa Clarity Parkway. _
ED -26 The applicant shall construct full width'streef improvements for all'public
roadways along phase boundaries to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
ED -27 All major and secondary highways should be designed for 65 miles per hour.
The design speed may be reduced to'60 mph for majors and 55 mph for all
secondary highways subject to the prior approval of the City Engineer.
ED -28 The applicant shall design all bike ways within the public right-of-way to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and Parks and. Recreation Department.
ED -29 The applicant shall include all traffic signals constructed or modified as a part
of the project in alighting and landscape maintenance district to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
ED -30 A surety bond shall be posted in an amount satisfactory to the City Engineer
to cover any road damage and street cleaning costs in connection with grading
ED -31 Obtain construction permits from the State Department of Transportation prior
to construction within the state right-of-way of San Fernando and Magic
The applicant shall dedicate to the City the right to restrict vehicular access
to Magic Mountain Parkway, Via Princessa and Santa Clarita Parkway.
The applicant shall design all roadways with the following criteria:
Provide a minimum 200 foot landing for all major and secondary roadways and
100 foot landing for all other controlled intersections. The maximum grade for
the landing shall be 3%.
b. Provide for sight distance along extreme slopes or curves to the satisfaction of
the City Traffic Engineer. Additional right-of-way dedication and/or grading
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 12 Attachment 3
may be required.
C. Align the centerline of all local streets without creating jogs of less than 150
feet. A one -foot jog maybe used where a street change width from 60 feet to
a 58 foot right-of-way.
d. Provide minimum stopping sight distances on all public road ways to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer to comply with design „speeds pursuant to Cal
Trans and AASHTO standards.
e.. The applicant shall design a 350 -foot minimum centerline'radius on all local
streets with a minimum distance of 40 feet between curbs and a 350 -foot
minimum radius on all streets where grades exceed ten percent.
f. The applicant shall design the minimum centerline radius on a local street
with an intersecting street on the concave sideto comply with design speeds
and sight distances per current Cal Trans and AASHTO standards
g. Local streets shall have minimum centerline curve- length of 100 feet
minimum.
h. The central angles of the right-of-way radius returns shall not differ by more
than ten degrees on local streets.
i. Provide standard curb return radii of 25 feet at all local street intersections,
including intersection of local streets with General Plan Highways, and 35 feet
where all General Plan Highways intersect.
j. The applicant shall not constructdriveways within 25 feet upstream of any
catch basins where street grades exceed six percent.
k. The applicant shall construct full -width sidewalk at all walk returns.
1. The applicant shall construct catch basins in the roadway were depth &
velocity of the water in the roadway exceed accepted practices as approved by
the City Enaineer.
The applicant should design major highways with a minimum centerline radius
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Knuckles will be permitted only on local streets where speed limits do not
exceed 25 mph. The maximum length of street with a knuckle should not
exceed 1000 feet in either direction from the knuckle. Local streets using
knuckles shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
o. Provide sufficient drainage facilities to eliminate the need for cross -gutters on
all public streets to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 13 Attachment 3
ED -34 The top/toe of slopes adjacent to roadways shall be set back from the public
right-of-way to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
ED -35 All streets shall be founded upon firm natural materials or properly compacted
fill. Any existing loose fill, loose soil, or organic material shall be removed
prior to placement of engineered fill.
ED -36 The applicant shall design, construct and dedicate street lights along all public
roadways to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. All,street lights installed as
a part of the project shall be included in a lighting and landscape maintenance
district to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. All lighting. shall be shielded
and directed onto the roadway so as not to be seen directly from the adjacent
residential areas.
ED -37 The project proposes several roadv
currently adopted City standard. T:
City Engineer prior to the record
shown in the Specific Plan or as
Engineer may be constructed other
Via ITMcessa 104 min.
Santa Clarita Parkway 104 min.
Magic Mountain
Main Street
Rio Vista 84 :min.
Local Residential Collector 64
Local Residential 60
Local Residential Cul -de' -Sac 58
sections different than the
roved and/or revised by the
hase. These roadways as
ie, satisfaction of the City
Width (ft)**
84*
104 min.84*
84 min.64*
64'
40
36
34
8464
46
30
Note: Additional right-of-way and pavement width shall be provided to
accommodate trails.
The applicant shall construct the following off-site roadways to the following
standards:
The project proposes several roadways with cross sections different than the
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 14 Attachment 3
currently adopted City standard. They must be approved and/or revised by the
City Engineer prior to the recordation of any phase.
Street Name R/W Width (ft)**
Curb to Curb Width (ft)**
Via Princessa 104 8
Santa Clarita Parkway 104 84
Magic Mountain 10484
** Note: Additional right-of-way and
accommodate trails.
Richt of Way
provided to
ED -39 The applicant shall dedicate additional -right-of-way for bus bays along all
major and secondary highways to the -satisfaction of the Public Works and
Community Development Department.
ED -40 The applicant shall dedicate slope easements to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer where required for public improvements prior to the recordation of
each phase.
ED -41 The applicant shall grant easements to the City,"appropriate agency or entity
for the purpose of ingress, egress," construction and maintenance of all
infrastructure constructed for this project to the satisfaction of the City.
ED -42 Pursuant to the mitigation measures outlined in the EIR the applicant is
required to construct off-site improvements to adequately serve this
development. It is the sole responsibility of the developer to acquire the
necessary right-of-way and/or easements to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
ED -43 The project approval is subject to the applicant's acceptance of the following
conditions for acquisition of the necessary off-site right-of-way and/or
easements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer:
a. The applicant shall secure at the applicant's expense sufficient title or
interest in land to permit any off-site improvements to be made.
b. If the applicant is unable to acquire sufficient title or interest to permit the
off -'site improvements to be made, the applicant shall notify the City
Engineer of this inability not less than six months prior to approval of the
" final map.
c. In such case, the City may thereafter acquire sufficient interest in the land .
which will permit the off-site improvements to be made by applicant.
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 15 Attachment 3
d. The applicant shall pay all of the City's costs of acquiring said off-site
property interests pursuant to Government Code Section 66462.5.
Applicant shall pay such costs irrespective of whether the final map is
recorded or whether a reversion occurs. The cost of acquisition may
include, but is not limited to, acquisition prices, damages, engineering
services, expert fees, title examination, appraisal costs, acquisition services,
relocation assistance services and payments, legal services and fees,
mapping services, document preparation, expenses and/or damages as
provided under Code of Civil Procedures Sections 1268.510-.620 and
overhead.
e. At the time applicant notifies the City Engineer as 'provided in b.
hereinabove, the applicant shall simultaneously submit to the City in a
form acceptable to the City Engineer, all appropriate appraisals,
engineering specifications, legal land descriptions, plans, pleadings and
other documents deemed necessary by the City Engineer to commence its
acquisition proceedings. Said documents must be submitted to the City
Engineer for preliminary review and comment at east thirty days prior to
applicant's notice described hereinabove at b.
f.. The applicant agrees to deposit with the City, within five days of request
by the City, such sums of money as the City estimates to be required for
the costs of acquisition. The City Engineer may require additional deposits
from time -to -time.
g. The applicant agrees that the City will have satisfied the one -hundred -and -
twenty -day limitation of Government Code Section 66462.5 and the
foregoing conditions relating thereto when it files its eminent domain
action in superior court within said time period.
Ii. The applicant, shall not sell any lot/parcel/unit shown on the final map until
the City has acquired said sufficient land interest.
i. If the Superior Court thereafter rules in a final judgment that the City may
notyacqure-said sufficient land interest, the applicant agrees that the City
may require' alternative mitigation measures which would mitigate project
impacts as if the interest had been acquired and applicable improvements
j. The. applicant shall execute any agreement or agreements mutually
agreeable prior to approval of the final map as may be necessary to assure
compliance with the foregoing conditions.
k. Failure by the applicant to notify the City, as required by b. hereinabove,
or simultaneously submit the required and approved documents specified
in e. hereinabove, or make the deposits specified in f. hereinabove shall
constitute applicant's waiver of the requirements otherwise imposed upon
Draft Condltlons of Approval
Resolutlon 95.42, 4/11/95 16 Attachment 3
the City to acquire necessary interests in land pursuant to Section 66462.5.
In such event, applicant shall meet all conditions for installing or
constructing off-site improvements notwithstanding Section 66462.5, or
enter into a mechanism designed by the City to ensure the timely
fulfillment of the acquisition without cost to the City.
Sewer
ED -44 The applicant shall submit a sewer area study to the City Engineer for review
and approval for the project prior to the recordation of the first phase. -
ED -45 The applicant shall install and dedicate amain line sewers and serve each lot
with a separate house lateral.
ED -46 The applicant shall send a print of the land division map for each phase to the
County Sanitation District, with the request for annexation prior to the
recordation of the final map. If applicable, such annexation must be assured
in writing.
ED -47 The applicant shall pay sewer reimbursement charges as determined by the
City Engineer or the County of Los Angeles before the recording of this map.
ED -48 The discharge of sewage from this land division into the public sewer system
will not violate the requirements of the California Regional Water Quality
Control Board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000) of the
Water Code.
ED -49 .:.That prior to any,. grading plans being approved by the Community
Development Department, the City shall review them for intent of tract
conditions. The 'eradina'nlans shall demonstrate -
a. That the open space areas that will remain as natural slopes be protected
during grading operations.
b. That grading activities are phased so that the exposure of unprotected
areas is limited to the areas where work is immediately undertaken
especially during the rainy season.
That areas which are not being built up shall not be cleared of vegetative
cover until actual grading is to be started.
d. That areas which have been cleared and could potentially be exposed to a
storm event shall be protected by adequate source control .Best
Management Practices.
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 17 Attachment 3
e. The applicant will provide a Dust Control Plan to the City
Engineer for review and approval prior to the approval of the
Grading Plan for each phase.
ED -50 That during and prior to any demolition or grading on the subject property, a
pest control ,firm shall be retained to conduct a rodent control program to
prevent the migration of any rodents or pests to neighboring properties.
Evidence shall be provided to Community Development prior to the issuance
of the grading permit indicating that this condition has been satisfied.
ED -51 The applicant shall design the grading plans for each phase of the project so
that the overall shape, height and grade of any cut/fill slope shall be developed
to appear similar to the existing natural contours in scale with the natural
terrain of the project site. Where any cut or fill slopes intersect the natural
grade, the intersection of each slope shall be rounded and/or blended with the
natural contour so as to present a natural appearance.
ED -52 The applicant shall promptly replant areas that are graded to control erosion.
The grading plans for this project shall include full erosion control plans,
including a maintenance schedule, that reflect this to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer.
ED -53 The applicant shall submit a complete geologic report on the subject site to the
City Engineer for review and approval prior to the recordation of the each
phase. The report shall identify the trace fault lines of the San Gabriel Fault.
ED -54 The applicant shall revise lot lines to the satisfaction of the City Engineer once
the trace fault lines of the San Gabriel Fault are determined. Lot lines shall
be revised prior the recordation of relevant phases.
ED -55 The, applicant shall submit a final grading plan, geologic report, and
S geologic certification, to the City Engineer for review and approval of each
phase prior the recordation of that phase.
ED -56 The applicant shall submit a drainage plan and an erosion and
sedimentation` plan for review and approval prior to the recordation of each
phase of the project. The drainage plan shall provide sufficient facilities to
prevent drainage problems downstream of road right-of-ways to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
shall include a statement in the CC&R's to comply with any of
: recommendations in future geotechnical reports.
The applicant shall construct drainage improvements and offer easements
needed for street drainage or slopes to the satisfaction of the City Engineer..
ED -59 The applicant shall provide letter(s) of slope easement(s) and drainage
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 18 Attachment 3
acceptance as directed by the City Engineer prior to the recordation of any
phase.
ED -60 The grading plan for each phase 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 to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. The plan must substantially conform to the
tentative map and conditions as approved by the Advisory Agency to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Department.
ED -61 The applicant shall eliminate all geologic hazards associated with this proposed
development, or delineate a restricted use 'area approve& by the consultant
geologist to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The applicant shall dedicate
to the City the right to prohibit the erection of buildings or other structures
within the restricted use areas to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
ED -62 All recommendations of the geotechnical reports shall be implemented to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
ED -63 The applicant shall provide drainage facilities to remove'the flood hazard and
dedicate and show necessary easements and/or rights-of-way on the final map.
ED -64 The applicant shall submit drainage plans and necessary support documents
to comply with Engineering requirements'r These must be approved to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to filing of the map. Portions of the
property are subject to sheet overflow and ponding and high velocity scouring
action. Portions of the property lying in and adjacent to natural drainage
courses are subject to flood hazard because of overflow, inundation, and debris
flows.
ED -65 The, applicant shall not construct structures within a flood hazard area. The
applicant shall submit sufficient calculations to the City Engineer for review
and approval to delineate the limits of the flood way prior to the recordation
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
any subdivision shall not erect concrete block wall or similar solid
constructions except as approved by the City Engineer along any natural
drainaee course.
The applicant shall establish a Drainage Benefit Assessment District which
must be ratified prior to recordation of the final map to insure the continued
maintenance of any drainage improvements which are not accepted by a public
entity. The first years maintenance costs shall be paid by the applicant prior
to recordation of the phase..
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 19 Attachment 3
ED -68 The applicant shall provide for the proper distribution of drainage to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
ED -69 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. The project will require
substantial down stream improvements to eliminate the impacts to down
stream property owners. The applicant shall construct sufficient 'on-site and
any needed off-site (as determined by the City) improvements to reduce
the downstream impacts with construction: of each phase.
ED -70 Prior to approval of grading plans for each phase, the applicant shall adjust lot
lines so that they are located at or near the top of the slopes, along drainage
terraces, or at similar locations acceptable for establishment of slope
maintenance responsibilities to the satisfactionof the City Engineer.
ED -71 Applicant shall comply with all state requirements for construction within an
Alquist- Priolo Special Studies Zone. A geology report must be submitted and
approved by the City Engineer prior the recordationof the appropriate phase
of the project. Copies of the report must be sent to the state geologist.
ED -72 The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall evaluate and recommend repair
for the landslides shown on the "Geotechnical Evaluation Map" included within
the project EIR. The applicant's geologist shall' recommend measures to be
implemented during the course of grading to stabilize the landslides within the
project site to the satisfaction of the City Engineer,
ED -73 Due to the down stream flow restrictions of existing storm drainage facilities
the applicant shall design storm drain facilities on the project site or in close
proximity to the site to reduce the peak Q (flow of water) by a minimum of 25
% for each phase to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
ED -74 The applicant shall coordinate with the Los Angeles County Department of
Public Works prior to recordation of the final map for any necessary permits
with respect to, discharge, construction and reconstruction within or adjacent
to their existing: storm drain facilities in this area.
The project consultants shall provide all necessary inspection during grading
to insure against unforeseen hazards and submit a "Monthly Grading Progress
Report and Map" for Department approval. The Grading Progress Map shall
be at'a suitable scale to illustrate the progress of grading inspection and
approval accomplished during that reporting period. The map will, therefore,
be updated in each successive grading inspection report. A convenient
lettering and numbering system may be used to identify specific areas of cut
and fill, as well as subdrain placement. Upon completion of the grading, the
final geologic and soil engineering inspection reports, based upon an As -Built
Plan, shall be filed for Department approval.
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 20 Attachment 3
ED -76 The geologist and soil engineer shall inspect all excavations to determine that
conditions anticipated in the report have been encountered and to provide
recommendations for the correction of hazards found during grading.
ED -77 All slide, slump and creep debris shall be removed pursuant to the
recommendations of the applicant's geologist to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer,
ED -78 All existing uncertified fill and/or creep prone soils, shall be removed and
recompacted under the geotechnical supervision of the soils engineer.
ED -79 Periodic inspection of the drainage control structures and devices both on-site
and on the Open Space lot shall be performed by a registered civil engineer
prior to the start of each rainy season and thence at intervals deemed
necessary by maintenance conditions.
ED -80 All haul routes utilized for the exportink.'6r importing of materials among
phases shall be provided on-site.
Miscellaneous
ED -81 The applicant shall design, and construct; applicable water systems for the
project to meet the potable drinking water and fire flow requirements.
ED -82 The applicant shall abandon the existing water wells on the project site to the
satisfaction of State of California Department of Conservation prior to the
recordation of the individual"phases. The applicant shall submit sufficient
information to demonstrate that the existing wells which have been abandoned
were done so pursuant to the State of California Department of Conservation
prior to the recordation of the individual phases.
ED -83 Applicant shall ° acquire, permits from the Army Corps of Engineers and the
State Fish & Game Department prior to issuance of grading permits or the
commencement of any work witjiin any natural drainage course.
The applicant shall acquire N.P.D.E.S, permits for the subject project prior to
the issuance of any construction permits required by the City. The applicant
must meet state general construction permit requirements. Prior to obtaining
a grading permit, the applicant shall provide a certified copy of a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) general construction permit
from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board to provide evidence
that any storm water discharge is being mitigated.
The applicant shall install all utility services within the development pursuant
to the Unified Development Code.
ED -86 The applicant shall underground all existing utility services within the project
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95.42, 4/11/95 21 Attachment 3
and along the adjacent road way frontages to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
ED -87 The applicant is required to install distribution lines and individual service
lines for community antenna television service (CATV) for all new development
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
ED -88 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.
ED -89 The applicant shall dedicate to the City the right
of structures within open space.
ED -90 The applicant shall provide reciprocal
the satisfaction of the City Engineer f
along common property lines.
ED -91 The design and location of all sec
satisfaction of the Community Del
Department prior to the issuance of a'
at this time. Any gates approved
automatically open should there be,a
Department personnel will have immi
No gated alleys, driveways, or streets
aintenance agreements to
which share common uses
>hall;.be reviewed to the
epartnent and the Fire
iit. INo gates are approved
ire shall be designed to
e in the area, so that Fire
through the gate systems.
I with this project.
ED -92 Should contaminated soils and materials be encountered during construction,
the applicant shall remediate these on-site, and/or remove and properly treat
and dispose of them after notification of and in accordance with methods
approved by the County Department of Health Services and the Regional
Water Quality Control Board. The applicant must determine if the
contaminated soils constitute a hazardous waste. If the soils are hazardous
waste, the applicant must manage the soil in accordance with the state and
federal`laws and regulations governing hazardous waste.
OAK TREE CONDITIONS:
OT71 The applicant is permitted to remove a maximum of 109 oak trees, (species:
Quercus aerifolia - Coast Live Oak; Q. berberidifolia - Scrub Oak)
including five heritage trees (nos. 11, 12, 24, 140, and 159) to construct the
Porta Bella Specific Plan. Updates to the oak tree report will be required
for subsequent tract maps and plot plans in order to try and save
additional trees, and additional mitigation measures and conditions may
be imposed.
OT -2 Prior to obtaining a grading permit for any parcel or lot, the applicant shall
analyze impacts to each affected oak tree to determine whether removal and/or
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 22 Attachment 3
encroachment into the protected zone can be avoided through redesign,
construction of retaining walls, or other measures to the satisfaction of the
City.
OT -3 Final grading and drainage plans shall provide for adequate drainage of
water from the protected zones of remaining oak trees. Where retaining
walls and/or tree wells are proposed, cross-sections showing conceptual
drainage design shall be submitted for review and approval by the Oak
Tree Specialist prior to the approval of the grading plan for the project.
OT -4 Oak trees designated for removal shall be evaluated W determine whether
relocation is possible. As feasible, oak trees with 8" diameter4 1/2 feet above
grade or less shall be transplanted in locations which serve to enhance -the
quality of the designated open space areas. If there are additional candidates
for relocation, they shall be incorporated into the project landscaping;'"
OT -5 The applicant's oak tree consultant shall determine values for all oak trees
to be removed or relocated in accordance with Section 17.17.090 of the
Municipal Code (Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance), and according to the
most current valuation methods established by the International Society of
Arboriculture (I.S.A.). Prior to the issuance of the oak tree permit, the
applicant shall deposit a refundable security deposit, equal to the value of
the oak trees, with the City of Santa Clarita The City Oak Tree Specialist
shall review and approve the value of each oak tree as submitted.
OT -6 Prior to the issuance of grading and/or building permits for each phase, the
applicant shall submit a maintenance and care program for the replacement
oak trees to be ;planted on the site, as directed by the City's Oak Tree
Ordinance and Oak Tree Guidelines. This maintenance program shall extend
for a.minimum duration of five years. The applicant shall be responsible for
maintaining (or bonding for maintenance of) the oak trees for this period, and
shall designate a responsible party for their maintenance upon sale or transfer
OT -7 Protective Fencing: Prior to the start of construction for each phase of the site,
the applicant shall install protective fencing around the protected zones of each
oak tree within 200' of proposed grading, or as recommended by the applicant's
oak tree consultant. This fencing shall be installed according to Part C.l.lb
of the Oak Tree Preservation and Protection Guidelines.
)T-8 Where fencing is infeasible because of required access to the site, or for
other reasons deemed reasonable by the City, all areas within the unfenced
protected zone of any oak tree shall be covered with plywood to minimize
compaction during construction.
OT -9 All construction layout in the vicinity of protected oak trees (structures,
roadway, paths, decking and pool, road, trench, footing, etc.) shall be
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 23 Attachment 3
marked or staked in the field prior to the start of grading or construction.
The City's Oak Tree Specialist or designated City official shall verify that
the proposed location is in accordance with the approved plan. If field
markings indicate that further impacts to oak trees will occur than were
indicated on the approved plans, then the applicant shall adjust mitigation
measures to the satisfaction of the City.
OT -10 Any excavation work within the protected zone of any (preserved) oak tree
shall be performed with the use of hand tools only. No tractors, backhoes, or
other vehicles may be used or parked in the protected zones. All excavation
in the protected zones shall be performed under the direct supervision of the
applicant's oak tree consultant. Roots `encountered shall be treated as
discussed within the City Oak Tree Preservation Guidelines and the City Oak
Tree Report. No roots of 2" or greater'in diameter may be cut. The CCR's
shall include such a limitation runnine with the land.
For trees to be preserved on site, and for'any trees to be transplanted, the
applicant shall follow all recommendations contained in the Oak Tree Report
prepared by Biological Assessment Services, dated August 1991.
OT -11 No turf grass shall be placed within the dripline of any oak tree. The CCR's
shall include such a limitation running with the land.
OT -12 Natural grade shall be maintained at the trunk of each oak tree preserved on
site. If alterations are proposed, they shall be to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Department.:` The CCR's shall include such a
limitation running with the land.
OT -13 All planting within the protected zone of any oak tree shall be drought -adapted
and resistant to Oak Root Fungus and Avocado Root Rot. The OCR's shall
include such a Iimtation running with the land.
OT -14 No spray irrigation shall be installed within fifteen feet of the trunk of any oak
tree. The CCR's shall include such a limitation running with the land.
OT -15 Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any lot or parcel, the applicant
shall place a minimum of three inches of organic mulch within the dripline of
each oak tree, to the satisfaction of the City. Decomposed granite (non -
compacted) is an acceptable alternative.
drainage measures shall be installed to insure that nuisance water
flow or collect near the base of any oak tree.
No equipment or materials shall be stored within the protected zone of any oak
tree.
OT -18 Paving materials, such as cellular concrete, gravel, interlocking pavers or brick
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 24 Attachment 3
on sand, gravel, decomposed granite, or similar materials may be used under
any oak tree subject to the Santa Clarita Oak Tree Protection and Preservation
Ordinance and Guidelines and to the approval of the City.
OT -19 Landscape plans for any portion of the site which encompass existing or
proposed oak trees shall be submitted for review and approval by the Oak Tree
Specialist.
OT -20 Other mitigation measures as described within the applicant's Oak Tree Report
shall be incorporated into the project, underthe direction of the applicant's oak
tree consultant.
OT -21 Prior to occupancy of any phase of Ahe project, the applicant's oak tree
consultant or other responsible individual shall provide a letter of certification
to the Community Development Department that all work was completed in
accordance with the above conditions.
OT -22 If the oak tree consultant observes any work in violation of this permit and/or
the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance, the consultant shall immediately contact
the City of Santa Clarita and stop „work , at the affected location until City staff
authorizes work to continue.
OT -23 The applicant shall notify the Department of Community Development in
writing within five (5) days of any changes to the oak tree consultant of record.
OT -24 All other applicable provisions of Section 17.17.090 of the Unified Development
Code (Santa Clarita Oak Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance) and the
Oak Tree Preservation and Protection Guidelines shall apply.
OT -25 The applicant shall place applicable notes on the grading plan for each phase
to ensure compliance with the conditions of approval relating to oak trees.
PUBLIC WORKS -TRANSIT
TR -1 The transit mitigation fee of $200 per residential unit shall be paid prior
to buildingpermit issuance,
Standard bus stop improvements, including shelters, signage, benches,
trash cans, bus pads, bus turnouts, and pedestrian access shall be provided
to, the satisfaction of the Transit Division and Traffic Engineering,:
Locations shall be to the satisfaction of the Transit Division and
Community Development. The ideal distance between bus stops is 750 feet,
with the minimum being 500 feet and the maximum distance, 1,000 feet.
At bus stops, landscaped parkways should be eliminated and sidewalks
should be at least 10 feet wide to facilitate bus shelters.
TR -3 Direct pedestrian access shall be provided from all areas of development
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95.42, 4/77/95 25 Attachment 3
that are within a 1/4 mile from Main Street or Via Princessa to the
satisfaction of the Transit Division and the Community Development
Department.. Access must be available prior to the issuance of Certificates
of Occupancy. Direct pedestrian access to the Santa Clarita Transportation
Center shall be available prior to the issuance of any Certificate of
Occupancy. Prior to the construction of the people mover in the final
phase, and after the first 250 residential units are completed, the applicant
shall provide transit service or an alternative direct pedestrian access from
the Town Center Area to the Transportation Facility. Service shall be
monitored and adjusted every six months to the satisfaction of the Transit
Division.
TR -4 The applicant shall dedicate and record an easement inperpetuity to the
City for the existing rail and bus platform, and pedestrian and vehicle
access to the platform to the satisfaction of the City prior to recordation of
the final map.
TR -5 The applicant shall dedicate and record an easement in perpetuity to the
City for the future people mover/escalators, stairways, and landings to the
satisfaction of the City prior to recordation of the final map. Half the width
of the right-of-way shall be on`the applicant's property.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
FD -1. The applicant shall provide appropriate public and private fire hydrants, fire
lanes, access, building heights, construction practices, sprinklers and fire
mitigation fees, in accordance with the Fire Code.
PARKS AND RECREATION
PR -1 The applicant shall provide to the City the appropriate 'acreage, or a
combination of land and fees, as determined by the City ordinance, for park
land. In the" event that the Department of Parks, Recreation, and
Community, Services determines that it is inadvisable to accept land, the
applicant shall be required to pay a park in -lieu fee equal to an equivalent
amount of land as established by ordinance. The applicant shall fulfill the
appropriate Quimby requirements at the time of dedication of each
development phase..
Prior to the recordation of an applicable final tract/parcel map, the
applicant shall dedicate an easement to the City of Santa Clarita or its
designee over lots 65-76 for the permanent preservation of open space in
a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Parks, Recreation, and
Community Services. Maintenance, upkeep, and liability for said easement
area shall remain the responsibility of the applicant or assignees and
successors (i.e., homeowner's association) or current underlying owners) of
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4/11/95 26 Attachment 3
said easement area and shall not be included in said dedication offer.
PR -3 A homeowner's association (HOA)or other entity, to which the City shall be
made a party, shall be formed prior to recordation of the final map to have
responsibility and authority of all slope maintenance, including, but not
limited to, landscaping, irrigation, and trees to the satisfaction of the
Directors of Community Development and Parks, Recreation, and
Community Services.
PR -4 A special Landscape Maintenance Assessment District shall be formed prior
to recordation of any phase or issuance of permits having the responsibility
and authority of all maintenance, including, but not limited to, landscaping,
irrigation, street trees, and medians within the City right-ofway....The
Landscape Maintenance District shall be annexed into the City-wide major
arterial Landscape Maintenance District at such time as the City forms a
district or assumes an existing City-wide district.
PR -5 The applicant shall demonstrate a reasonable effort to use reclaimed water
for all landscape irrigation systems in the public and private areas of the
developments to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and applicable State
law.
PR -6 The applicant shall provide final landscape and irrigation plans on private
property to the satisfaction of the Parks,Recreation, and Community
Services Department prior to certificate of occupancy. Drought -resistant
plant material and water -efficient irrigation systems should be utilized in
the design,
PR -7 i The applicant shall provide median landscaping improvements to the
medians adjacent to and within the project prior to project acceptance.
GThese improvements shall be to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks,
Recreation, and Community Services.
r
PR-8 The proposed park site must have room for a building pad of at least 3,000
square feet outside the fault zone. The park sites must conform to the
Unified Development Code and the attached "Guidelines for Park
Dedication" requirements, Exhibit "H".
PR -9 All public trails shall be constructed using CalTrans bikeway and the City's
adopted trail standards, to the satisfaction of the Department of Parks,
Recreation, and Community Services.
Glass I, II, and III trails will be required throughout the project to provide non -
motorized access, to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks, Recreation, and
Community Services.
- Non -motorized access is to be provided to the Metrolink Station to include
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95-42, 4111195 27 Attachment 3
pedestrians and bicyclists, to the satisfaction of the Directory of Parks,
Recreation, and Community Services.
- The existing railroad bridge is to allow for a bicycle undercrossing
connecting the Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Trail to the Metrolink
Station, to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks, Recreation, and
Community Services
PR -11 The applicant shall construct and landscape medians on all major highways
constructed within the boundaries of theproject,l in accordance with the
Specific Plan.
me:eurme pbcccoMAjm
Draft Conditions of Approval
Resolution 95.42, 4/11/95 28 Attachment 3
.
0
I
0
n
SX- 44
q-11-95-
I
\ V�
I
LLA
1 #V5
\IITM 151sql
OF
A PeR DVA U
& N 1� h1 A* ""
V7TO 5-1'qq I
KC ptviiM RintA
0
V1
:o
Exhibit 2e
REVISED PLAN
LAND USE SUMMARY TABLE
M M
6,
Land Use
Map Key Density
Area
Target M
% of Total
% of Total
Designation
Range
(Acres)
of Units
Dwellings
Area
4.4%
4.2%
SF 6,000
SF 6,000
4-6 du/ac
8750
Open Space OS na 406.95 nana 40.9%
Parks do Recreation PR na 41.75 na na 4.2%
Subtotal 448.70 45A%
Schools S na 10.00 na na 1.0%
Master Streets na na 56.00 na na 5.6%
Subtotal 66.00 6.6%
Single -Family Residentia
SF 10,000
SF 10A00
24 du/ac:
63.15
144
4.9%
63%
SF 8,000
SF 8,000
3-5 du/ac
41.75
127
4.4%
4.2%
SF 6,000
SF 6,000
4-6 du/ac
8750
326
11.2%
8.8%
SF 4,000
SF 4,000
6-8 du/ac
35.40
211
7.2%
3.6%
SF Paired
Sr P
_ 6-a .iMac
72.00
436
15.0%
7.2%
SuFtotal
TC
6-8 du/ac
299.80
1,244
427%
30.1%
Multi -Family Residential
MF -10
MF -10
8.12 du/ac
1750
175"
5.0%
1.8%
MF -12
MF -12
10-14du/ac
21.50
222
I:'.-?.
2.2%
MF -18
MF -18
16.20du/ac
13.70
204
7.0%
l.a."
MF -22
MF -22
20-22 du/ac
14.30
259
8.9%
1.4%
MF -40
MF -40
38-42du/ac
18.50
532
18.3%
1.9%
Town Center
TC
6-8 du/ac
na
275
9.4%
na
Subtotal
na
8550
1,667
579%
8.6%
Commercial
Town Center Comae.:`
TC
na
24.75
na
na
25%
Soledad Comm.
SC
na
1250
na
na
1.3%
Nieghborhood Comm.
NC
_ na
850
na
na
0.9%
Office Park
OP
na
19.00
na
na
1.9%
Business Park
BP
na
27.25
na
na
2.7%,
Institutional
I
na
4.00
na
na
0.4%
Subtotal
na
96.00
na
na
9.6%
Total of Project Area
996.00
7~911 100.0% 100.0%
Exhibit 2f
lend use tabulations area roidmate and rub' to further verification
PP F'R REVISED PLAN
Porta BellaSpecific Plan
Porta Bella
Draft Specific Plan
October, 1991
Prepared for:
The City of Santa Clarita
Community Development Department
Lead Agenc;r
The Whittaker-Bermite Company
Owner
The Anden Group
Applicant
Prepared by:
The S WA Group. Laguna Beach - Planning and landscape Architecture
Crosby Mead & Benton. Encino - Civil Engineering
SGPA. Irvine - Architecture
The )erde Partnership, Vcnice Beach - Architecture
Laura Simonck/ESCO. Culver City - Environmenrai
Tom Dodson Associates. San Bernardino - Environmental
Delta Environmental. Rancho Cordova. Environmental
Biological Assessmcat Services. Los Angeles - Biology
Lilbum Corporation, San Bernardino - Biology
Barton Aschman Associates. Pasadena - Trac
Pacific Soils. Harbor City - GeorechnictSoils
Acton Mickelson Van Dam. Cameron Park- Hazardous Waste
Aifrcd Gohar Associates, Brca - Economics
Ex • �
.;:
Pr-
•; ..
t`
HUIC
d r' - Any hazardous or toxic
material, sewage or waste which is regulated, controlled substance
prohibited by statute,, rule, regulation, decree or order of
any governmental authority, the State of California or the
United States Government now or at any time hereafter in
effect. The term "Hazardous Materials" includes, without
limitation, any material or substance which is:
1. defined as a "hazardous waste," "extremely hazardous
waste," or "restricted hazardous waste" under Sections
23115, 25117 or 25122.7, or listed pursuant to Section
25140 of the California Health and Safety Code. Division
20, Chapter 6.5 (Hazardous Waste Control Law);
2. defined as a "hazardous substance" under the
Carpenter -Presley -Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act.
Section 25316 of the California Health and Safety Code,
Division 20, Chapter 6.8 ("HSAA Act");
]. defined as a "hazardous material," hazardous
substance," or 'hazardous waste" under Section 25501 (1),
(k), and (1) of the California Health and safety Code,
Division 20, Chapter 6.7 (Hazardous Materials Release
Plans and Inventory);
4. defined as a 11hazardous substance'' under Section
25281(d) of the California Health and Safety Code,
Division 20, Chapter 6.7 (Underground
Hazardous Substances)= storage of
s. defined as "waste" in Section 13030(d) of the
Act);
California Water Code (the Porter -Cologne water quality
6. petroleum, including crude oil or any fraction
thereat, natural gas, natural gas liquids, liquefied
natural gas, or synthetic gas usable for fuel, or any
aixture thereof;
7+ listed under Article 9 or defined as hazardous or
4Xtreme1Y hazardous pursuant to Article 2 at Title 22
tlis California Administrative Code, of
10j Division 4.s, Chapter.
a.
Section1( )
s31a 14) of the
Act, 37 U.S.C. Sections 1Federal Wate&a & "hazardous r pollutfon Control
231, 1321(4)(14);
Joy ra Port^
M.ka
9• defined as a "hazardous
1004 of the caste" pursuant to Sectcn
Resource Solid waste Disposal Act Amendments to the
Conservation and Recovery Act. 42 U.S.C.
Sections 6901, 6903 (5);
10. defined as a "hazardous substance, pursuant to
Section 101 of the Comprehensive Environmental Resporse,
Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 ("CERCLA"), as
amended, 42 U.S.c. Section 9601(34);
11. polychlorinated biphenoyls (PCBs), asbestos or urea
formaldehyde foam insulation;
12• organochlorine pesticides (pegs), including but not
limited to DDT, DDD and DDE; or
17' other chemical,
becausese of material, or substance that,
its quantity, concentration or
chemical characteristics, ih ie�cpeeurs to whcs limited oor
r
regulated for health and satety reasons
governmental
authority, or which poses a n113cant
present or potential hazard to human health sigand safety or
to the environment if released into the work place or the
environment.
k�o r� B� tla
�x�tbt' V, �'-
L
Guidelines for Park Dedication • I
11 Proposed site to have a minimum usable area of 5 acres.
Z• Land shape and configuration to permit active recreation, as
determined by the City.
3. Street frontage with adequate parking should be provided to permit
accessibility and to aid in security and protection against vandalism,
as determined by the City.
a. Infrastructure provided to the site by developer to include power,
sewer, water, gas line, cable T.V., telephone, storm drains, etc.
S. Park site grade must be 3% or less to qualify, as determined by City.
6. Park must be in an acceptable location; the service area should not be
divided by natural or artificial barriers (e.g., freeways, railroads,
commercial or industrial use, flood control channels, or utility
easement).
7. The neighborhood environment must allow active recreation, as
determined by the City.
g. Relationship of park location to other existing or proposed .parks -
there must be need for a park in the area, as determined by the City.
9. Safety factor - must be a safe area for park nae, e.g., site should
not be in or near flood plain, rock slide area, toxic chemicals,
traffic and other natural barriers, as determined by City.
10. Developer to provide right of way and street improvements to the park
site - e.g., driveway, curb, gutter, sidewalk, etc.
11. Park to be geographically situated so that it is convenient and
accessible to the neighborhood which it serves.
12. Wherever possible& neighborhood parks should be located adjacent to
schools.
13. Wherever possibles the park most be linked to the Citywide trail
mses6
14. Developer are encouraged in tract planning to plata street lights
adjacent to park altos Wherever practical.
15. Developer shall install a six-foot block, brick wall or wrought-iron
fence between park and homes siding or backing on park. Wall or fence
shall conform to City standards.
16. The proposed park must adhere to the City's General Plan.
po►-t� 3e ll'i � ,
ORDINANCE NO. 95.6
AN ORDINANCE OF CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARPIA
APPROVING ZONE CHANGE TO ALLOW FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 91-001, WHICH
INCLUDES A CHANGE OF ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM RESIDENTIAL
SUBURBAN (RS), BUSINESS PARK (BP) AND OPEN SPACE (OS) TO; SPECIFIC
PLAN (SP), AND ESTABLISHMENT OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A
CONSISTENT HEREWITH TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 996 ACRE
PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE BERMPlE SITE LOCATED SOUTH OF SOLEDAD ,
CANYON ROAD AND EAST OF SAN FERNANDO AND BOUQUET CANYON ROADS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITAIIOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:°
SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby make the following findings of fact:
a. Applications for Specific Plan 91-001 and Oak Tree Permif91-033 (Master Case
No. 91-164) were filed by Anden Corporation, (the applicant) with the City of
Santa Clarita on October 25,°1991. These applications were deemed complete on
February 26, 1992. Subsequentlythe applicant submitted applications for
Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51599 and Development Agreement 93-003 (Master
Case No. 93-012) on February 2 1993. On March 9, 1993 the City deemed the
application complete. "The City was notified in August 1993 that Northolme
Partners was the new project applicant.
The applicant requested a specific plan for a comprehensive plan of development,
including proposed modifications to the Circulation Element of the General Plan
and the Unified Development Code within the project area. The plan proposed
1;678 single family homes and 1,560 multiple family homes on 399 acres; 91 acres
of commercial and industrial uses; 14 acres of institutional uses; 434 acres of
open space and recreational uses; 58 acres of streets; and the provision of related
infrastructure on the site's 996 acres. A vesting tentative tract map was
requested:to subdivide the 996 acre site into 76 master lots to be further
subdivided by merchant builders into future tract maps. An oak tree permit was
requested to allow for the removal and/or encroachment into the protected zones
of up to 73 native oak trees, including as many as five Heritage size oak trees.
A development agreement was requested, however, the details of the agreement
are yet to be negotiated. The project also proposes a General Plan Amendment
to the Highway Network of the Circulation Element of the General Plan,
including the substitution of Santa Clarita Parkway for Rio Vista as a
north/south corridor and the connection of Magic Mountain Parkway to Via
Princessa.
The site is known as the Bermite site located south of Soledad Canyon Road, east
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 1
of Bouquet Canyon Road/San Fernando Road; north of the Circle J Ranch
Community; and west of the Golden Triangle Industrial area. The assessor
parcel numbers for the project are 2836-012-010, 011, 012 and 019.
b. The General Plan presently designates the project site RS with a Valley Center
Overlay on the northwest portion of the site. The General Plan specifically
mentions the Bermite site as an area ideal for a specific plan. Zoning on the site
is presently RS (Residential Suburban).
C. The project site is located in a hillside terrain with slopes in excess of 10%.
Significant ridgelines are on the site as identified ori the City's Ridgeline maps
Development is proposed on some of these ridgelines and `ori°portions of the
hillsides with slopes exceeding 25%
d. The City of Santa Clarita prepared anenitial Study for the project which
determined that the project may have a signifrcant.effect on the environment and
that an environmental impact report must bo prepared. A Notice of Preparation
(NOP) for the Specific Plan and Oak Tree Permit was mailed on April 8, 1992 to
affected agencies. Following submittal of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map and
Development Agreement applications,, a subsequent NOP was prepared and
mailed on February 12, 1993.
e. Since 1992 the City has leased a ten acre portion of the project site for use as the
Santa Clarita Metrolink commuter Rail Station. The Specific Plan also proposes
to provide corridors and construct portions of two proposed east -west arterials
(Santa Clarita Parkway and Magic Princessa) that will provide alternative
circulation routes through the center of the City which is presently in need of
such roadways. The Specific Plan also includes an escalator and trail connection
between the commercial and residential areas and the commuter rail station.
f. The City of Santa Clarita Development Review Committee met and the applicant
has supplied the applicant with draft conditions of approval.
g. The project has since been redesigned to subdivide the 996 acre parcel and allow
the following land uses: 406.95 acres open space, 41.75 acres for parks and
recreation, 10 acres for schools, 56 acres for streets, 4 acres for institutional uses,
299.8 acres for single family residential uses (1,244 units), 85 acres for multi-
family residential uses (1,667 units) and 92 acres of commercial and industrial
uses. An oak tree permit requests the removal of a maximum of 104 non -
Heritage size oak trees and 5 Heritage size oak trees out of the 182 oak trees
(including 10 Heritage size oaks) located on-site.
h. , The site was: previously used as an ammunition, explosives and flares
manufacturing and testing facility. Operations on the site were terminated in
1987. Heavy metals and other hazardous materials contaminated the site as a
result of the previous use. A total of 14 hazardous waste clean-up sites, referred
to in the project EIR as hazardous waste management units (HWMU's) have been
identified and 13 have been cleaned -up under the direction of the California
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 2
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. The 13 identified sites have received clean closure
certification from DTSC. Remediation efforts are continuing on the remaining
open site. Information on an addition 64 HWMU's where hazardous waste has
been identified is in the project EIR. Extensive grading and landform alteration
have occurred over most of the site resulting in major surface disturbance,
alteration of topographic relief, and modification of natural drainage patterns.
i. The project proposes the extension of all utility services to the "project site.
j. Article 8-- Specific Plans Sec 65451 et seq of the Califorma Planning and Zoning
Laws defines the contents which must be included in a specihcplan as follows:
(a) A specific plan shall include a text and <a diagram" or diagrams which specify
all of the following in detail: 21
(1) The distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land, including
open space, within the area covered by7tlieplan.
(2) The proposed distribution, location, and extent and intensity of major
components of public and private transportation, sewage, water drainage,
solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be
located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the
land uses described in the plan.
(3) Standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and
standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural
resources, where applicable._
(4) A program of implementation measures including regulations,
programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to
carry out paragraphs (1), (2), and (3).
(b) The specific plan shall include a statement of the relationship of the specific
plan to the general plan.
k. Section 17.16.090 of the City's Unified Development Code (UDC) identifies
general requirements and performance standards for a specific plan zone. A
Specific Plan Zone shall:
(a) Include a minimum of 100 contiguous acres.
(b) Be determined by the Council after considering the recommendation of the
Planning Commission.
(c) Provide for the development of a comprehensively planned community within
the zone that is superior to development otherwise allowable under alternate
regulations.
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 3
(d) Provide for development within the zone in a manner consistent with the
General Plan and with related development and growth policies of the City.
(e) Provide for the construction, improvement, or extension of transportation
facilities, public utilities, and public services required by development within the
zone.
1. The City's Ridgeline Preservation and Hillside Development Ordinance (UDC,
Sec 17.80) identifies significant ridgelines in the City anderestricts development
on property having average slopes over 10%. Encroachment upon significant
ridgelines is permissible for innovative design applications. -,An application for
encroachment upon significant ridgelines is considered innovative when:
(a) The proposed use is proper in relation to adjacent uses, the development of
the community and the various goals and policies of the General Plan.'
(b) The use or development will not be materially detrimental to the visual
character of the neighborhood or community, nor will it endanger the public
health, safety or general welfare.
(c) The appearance of the use or development will not be different than the
appearance of adjoining ridgeline areas so as to cause depreciation of the
ridgeline appearance in the vicinity.
(d) The establishment of the proposed use or development will not impede the
normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property, nor
encourage inappropriate encroachments to the ridgeline area.
(e) It has.been demonstrated that the proposed use or development will not
violate the visual integrity of the significant ridgeline area through precise
illustration and depiction.
An application for development on hillsides is considered innovative when:
(a) The hillside' development plan is in substantial compliance with all applicable
provisions of the Ridgeline Preservation and Hillside Development Ordinance and
Guidelines.
(b) No development construction activities or grading shall be permitted on
slopes of 50% or greater except as provided for innovative applications on
significant ridgelines.
m.' . The design of the project concentrates development within areas disturbed by the
previous industrial uses. The project proposes grading on approximately 603
acres of the project site. The total amount of grading involves approximately 18
million cubic yards of cut and 18 million cubic yards of fill, balanced on-site.
n. An Environmental Impact Report and Addendum thereto have been prepared for
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 4
the proposed project pursuant to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
o, The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was circulated for review and
comment by the affected governmental agencies and all comments received have
been considered. The review period for the DEIR was from September 27, 1993
to November 12, 1993. A Final EIR (FEIR) dated January 7, 1994, was prepared
which included responses to comments received on the DEIR., !As a result of
public and Planning Commission comments on the project ,and'the FEIR, the
applicant modified his project. The Planning Commission directed staff to
provide environmental analysis of the modified'propc sal and a FEIR Addendum
was prepared dated April 8, 1994. A mitigation monitoring and reporting plan
(MIMERP) has been prepared for this project in accordance with CES and adopted
by the Planning Commission simultaneously herewith pursuant to Resolution
P94-04,
P. The Planning Commission went on a tour of the Central Circulation System of
the City on September 12, 1993. The purposeof this tour was to see the various
sites where potential future roadways are proposed to be constructed. This tour
included viewing the site and proposed roadways in the Porta Bella Specific Plan
proposal including Santa Clarita Road, and an extension of Magic Mountain
Parkway.
q. The Planning Commission received an informational presentation about the
Porta Bella Specific Plan proposal at their regularly scheduled meeting on
October 5, 1993, at 7:00 p.m. at the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia
Boulevard, Santa Clarita. This presentation was given by the applicant and his
consultants. Staff updated the Commission on the status of the EIR processing
and let the applicant give a background on the project. The Commission also set
a preliminary date for a tour of the Bermite site for Saturday, November 13,
1993.
r. Several;; duly noticed public hearings were held by the Planning Commission
commencing, on October 19, 1993, at 7:00 p.m. at the City Council Chambers,
23920 ;Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita. At that hearing the Planning
Commission received a staff report from Kevin Michel, Senior Planner, and a
review of the DEIR, save traffic/circulation issues, from the City's EIR
consultants Tom Worthington and Randy Nichols of Impact Sciences, Inc. The
staff report for that hearing reviewed existing state law and the City's General
Plan and Zoning Code regarding Specific Plans; General Plan and Zoning
Conformity; the relationship of the project to the Valley Center Concept and
other elements of the General Plan; relationship to the Civic Center Project and
Central City Circulation; ridgeline preservation and hillside development,
including the issue of "innovation'; and a review of environmental issues and
alternatives included in the DEIR. The Commission identified areas of concern
for further study and continued the public hearing to a field visit for the Porta
Bella site for Saturday, November 13, 1993 at 9:00 a.m., beginning in the Council
Chambers.
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 5
The Planning Commission held a continued public hearing which included a field
trip to the Porta Bella site on Saturday, November 13, 1993. at 9:00 a.m.,
beginning in the Council Chambers. The Commission conducted a detailed site
visit of the Bermite/Porta Bella property, including 14 viewing points. The
Commission continued the public hearing to the regularly scheduled Planning
Commission meeting on November 16, 1993.
At the continued public hearing held on November 16, 1993," the Planning
Commission discussed the field trip of November 13, 1994, identified more areas
of concern and received a presentation from the traffic consultant, Justin Farmer
of Justin Farmer Transportation Engineers, about traffic issues.discussed in the
DEIR and Specific Plan. The Planning Commission continued the rpublic hearing
to the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting on December 21, 1993.
On December 21, 1993, the
hearing. In the staff presentation, staff pr
proposed land uses on the site. The staff report
to the Magic Mountain/Via Princessa corridor;'tl
and Civic Center projects; General Plan Con:
Projects" under the Ridgeline Preservation an
and the Land Use Section (Chapter;3) of the S
was continued to a study session on January 11,
than traffic and circulation.
dssion held a continued public
vided a detailed review of the
beused on the potential revision
e relationship of the Porta Bella
iAency the issue of "Innovative
I Hillside Protection Ordinance;
)ecificPlan. This public hearing
1994, to address all issues other
The continued public hearing held on January 11, 1994 was a study session
where the Commission discussed issues other than traffic and circulation
including consistency with the General Plan; consistency with the Valley Center
Concept; consistency with the Bermite section of the General Plan; proposed land
uses and their location; innovation and the hillside ordinance; relationships to the
Civic Center Project; relationships to the Circle J communities; impacts on
school, fire, police; and other services; public testimony received to date; oak tree
impacts; open space and recreation issues. The Commission continued this public
hearing to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting on
January 18, 1994.
The regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting on January 18, 1994, was
postponed due to the Northridge Earthquake which occurred the previous day.
The meeting scheduled for January 18, 1994, was rescheduled and so noticed to
February, 1994 at 7:00 p.m. in the meeting room at the Bank of America, 23929
Valencia Blvd., Santa Clarita. On February 1, 1994, the Planning Commission
held a continued public hearing. At that hearing the Commission conceptually
approved Phase 1 of the project and discussed the elimination of "T' lots, the
need for project compatibility adjacent to Circle J, and the need for additional
analysis of the Magic Mountain/Via Princessa Corridor. The public hearing was
continued to the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting on March 15,
1994.
On March 15, 1994, the Planning Commission held a continued public hearing at
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 6
7:00 p.m. at the William S. Hart School District Board Room, 21515 Redview
Drive, Santa Clarita. At this hearing the applicant presented the revised project
to the Planning Commission as described in Section 1g, including an approximate
10% reduction in residential units, the elimination of "Z" lots, the elimination of
a multi -family project on lot 26 adjacent to Circle J and the use of larger lots
adjacent to Circle J, and the Magic Mountain/Via Princessa corridor. The
applicant and his consultant Monica Simpson of the SWA Group, made a slide
presentation on the various product types to be used in.the project. The City's
EIR consultant Mr. Randy Nichols of Impact Sciences gave an initial overview of
the impacts of the proposed Magic Mountain kVia Princessa alignment. Impacts
of the roadway alignments upon Circle_j were disc 'ied.;-The Commission
continued the hearing to the regularly scheduled Planning Comitnission meeting
on April 20, 1994, The FEIR Addendum was completed 6n April"$, 1994�and
copies were immediately made available to the public and° the Planning
Commission. This FEIR Addendum included n complete analysis 'ot:th'e modified
project: and the Magic Mountain/Via Prince ssa -corridor, including a traffic study
evaluating this proposed modification to the General Plan network..
At the regularly scheduled Planning Commission nieetitig of April 20, 1994, held
at the William S. Hart School District Beard Room, the'Commission conceptually
dr
approved the project 3-1 (Woodrow dissenting vote, -I Doughman absent) and
directed staff to return to the Commissionwith conditions of approval and a
resolution approving Vesting Tentative Map 51559, Oak Tree Permit 91-
003, contingent on City Council approval of the Specific Plan; certifying Final
Environmental Impact Report and, Addendum SC 92-041041 and adopting a
Statement of OverridingConsideration; and recommending that the City Council
shall approve the Porta Bella Specific Plan as modified by the Commission. The
Planning Commission continued this public hearing to the regularly scheduled
meeting on June 7, 1994. The project was Te -noticed for the June 7, 1994
"hearing.'
At the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of June 7, 1994, held
in ' the City Council Chambers, the Commission directed staff to make
modifications:to the conditions of approval, mitigation monitoring and reporting
plan and,resolutions approving this project. The Commission also asked for
further information and clarification on hazardous and solid waste clean-up
issues. The Commission requested additional information regarding the 64
additional sites in addition to the 14 HWMU sites. The Commission directed
staff to return to the following meeting. The Planning Commission continued this
public hearing to the regularly scheduled meeting on June 21, 1994.
s. At the regularly scheduled meeting of June 21, 1994, the Planning Commission
received updated information on the status of hazardous waste site clean-up on
the site and received modified conditions of approval, a mitigation monitoring
and reporting plan and resolutions approving this project as directed by the
Commission on June 7, 1994. The information regarding the additional 64 non
RCRA sites had already been commented on and referenced in the DEIR, FEIR,
FEIR Addendum and MMRP.
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 7
t.
Numerous duly noticed public hearings were conducted by the City Council and
are summarized as follows:
(a) The City Council received an informational presentation about the Porta
Bella Specific Plan proposal at a City Council Study Session on September
29, 1993 at 7:00 p.m.. at City Hall in the City Council Chambers, 23920
Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita (hereafter, City Council Chambers).
This presentation was given by the applicant and his consultants. Staff
updated the City Council on the processing and status of the EIR.
(b) The City Council received a subsequent informational presentation
regarding the Pqrta Bella project at aCity Council Study Session on June
29, 1994, in the City Council' Chambers;', following the Planning
Commission decision to approve the project on June 21, 1'994..This was an
informational session only. The presentation by staff reviewed slides
depicting the project design, land usesi densities, and product types. Staff
updated the Council regarding the Planning..Commission hearings on the
project and the EIR.
(c) Numerous duly noticed public hearings (including field trips) were held
by the City Council commencing on August 23 1994, at 6:30 p.m. in the
City Council Chambers. Staff presented a detailed project description,
including: Specific''Plan No, 91-001; Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
51599;; Oak Tree Permit No. 91-033; and DEIR/FEIR SCH 92-041041.
Staff described the project as modified by the Planning Commission,
including: 2,911 dwelling units, comprised of 1,244 single-family homes
and 1,667 multi -family units; 106 acres of commercial, office, and business
park; and over 450 acres of open space on a total of 996 acres. Staff
presented summaries of the three appeals. One, by Dean Cheeseman,
Carl Kanowsky, et. al., appealed all aspects of the project as approved by
the Planning Commission without any specificity. Another, by the project
applicant' Sam Veltri of Northholme Partners, appealed the language of
Traffic Condition`TE-1, arguing that as drafted, the condition could
mandate the project to contribute more than its fair share of
infrastructure improvement in comparison to the impacts of the project.
The last, by Everett Scott, Jr., Vice President of Keysor-Century and his
designated representative, Roger Hutchinson, was on behalf of Keysor-
Century, a business and property owner, that could be impacted by the
proposed bridge extension of Magic Mountain Parkway, argued that the
alignment should be explicitly defined. Staff initially presented the project
and appeals as two separate items. The Council heard extended public
testimony from the applicant and the general public, at this and all the
other subsequent meetings and study sessions, except where noted.
Council directed staff to combine the items into a single agenda item in
future hearings. The Council moved to continue the public hearing to a
field trip, beginning at the Santa Clarita Metrolink and Transportation
Center,' which is located on that portion of the project area fronting on
Soledad Canyon Road, on September 24, 1994 at 7 a.m.. The Council also
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 8
moved to hold a joint study session with the Planning Commission on
October 4, 1994, at 7 p.m, to discuss the Planning Commission review
process and decision for Porta Bella,
(d) At 7 a.m., on September 24, 1994, the City Council reconvened the public
hearing for the Porta Bella project at the Santa Clarita Metrolink and
Transportation Center on the Bermite site, the area proposed for the
Porta Bella development. Staff and the applicant conducted a
comprehensive field visit, describing road alignments; product types and
locations; areas impacted by hazardous wastes; the relationship to the
Civic Center property and the Civic Center Master Planjeproject impacts
and proposed mitigation; and issues relating to the three appeals filed on
the project. At the conclusion of the field tour; the City Council continued
the public hearing to the regularly, scheduled City Council meeting on
October 11, 1994.
(e) Though not specifically a Porta Bella hearing, -the City Council conducted
a Study Session on September 14, 1994, in the City Council Chambers,
regarding the proposed General Plan Amendment to revise the
Circulation Element and Network of Arterial 11 'Highways, including
direction to staff to continue additional traffic modelling, The Circle J
community presented four alternative corridors to the MagicJPrincessa
alignment proposed by the project applicant. The Porta Bella Specific
Plan includes a General Plan Amendment to modify the Circulation
Element of the General Plan,
(f) On October 4, 1994, at 7 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, the City
Council and the Planning Commission conducted a joint study session to
review the Planning Commission's deliberations and decisions regarding
the Porta Bella project. The Commission reviewed their deliberations
regarding: General Plan consistency; project characteristics such as
density, product types, and design guidelines; the importance of linking
land use and transportation planning, as proposed by the plan; project
modifications mandated by the Commission, including density reductions,
reduced grading impacts, and the Magic/Princessa connection; hazardous
waste status, clean-up, and the adopted conditions of approval; roads and
infrastructure and the applicant's fair share; oak tree impacts and
mitigation; the EIR and Addendum; the Statement of Overriding
Consideration; the "innovative" project finding and the Hillside
Ordinance; and the appeals of the Planning Commission. This was an
informational meeting only, and no decisions were made.
(g) The City Council resumed the public hearing for the project on October
11, 1994, at the City Council Chambers. Staff reviewed the various
aspects of the project application and the three appeals filed against the
Planning Commission decision. The City's Environmental Consultant,
Randy Nichols of Impact Sciences, gave a detailed presentation on the
Environmental Impact Report and Addendum. discussing impact areas,
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 9
mitigation measures, and the Statement of Overriding Consideration
adopted by the Planning Commission. Carla Slepak, from the California
Environmental Protection Agency/Department of Toxic Substances
Control described their work in reviewing the existing conditions on site,
the requirement for site clean-up, and their coordination with City staff
in drafting the conditions of approval and mitigation measures that were
approved by the Planning Commission.. Council directed staff to work
with the applicant regarding his appeal of Traffic condition TE -1 and to
set up guidelines for a reimbursement district to satisfy the requirement.
The Council discussed: results of the traffic modelling study, proposed
roadways, and traffic mitigation; hazardous waste and Mlle need to clean-
up the site; and, liability and insurance issues TheeCouncil moved to
continue the public hearing to November 8, 1994, in order to discuss'the
site visit, the joint City Council/Planning,Commission meeting, and the
public testimony received to date."
(h) The City Council resumed the public hearing for the project on November
8, 1994, in the City Council Chambers.Staff reviewed the issues involved
in each of the three appeals filed on the project. As directed by Council,
staff had prepared extensive comments to respond to a letter from Carl
Kanowsky, the designated spokesperson for the Circle J homeowners et.
al. appeal and legal representative for certain small business owners
located on Springbrook Avenue,` and these responses were reviewed at the
meeting. The Council discussed hazardous wastes and the necessity to
clean the entire site before constructing the project, traffic impacts, the
release of legal opinions, the unacceptability of the Oakdale Canyon
Bridge, ground and water contamination, fault lines, impacts on small
businesses, the role of the CaEPA/ DTSC in managing the site clean-up,
road financing, the beneral Plan amendment of the circulation element;
proposed by the project, and impact of proposed new roads and bridges on
property owners. Council moved that staff should continue to work on
appeals issues, to require that the entire site be cleaned up prior to
allowing new construction, to examine the impact of roads and to look for
an alternative to the bridges, and to deny certification of the EIR at this
time pending additional review. The meeting was continued to the
November 22, 1994, City Council meeting.
(i) At the meeting on November 22, 1994, at the City Council Chambers, the
Council reviewed the traffic conditions for the project. The feasibility of
an at -grade crossing to extend Magic Mountain Parkway was reviewed.
The proposed bridge over Oakdale Canyon was discussed, including other
available options. The EIR analysis of these issues was reviewed. The
potential impacts of new road infrastructure on property owners were
reviewed, including compensation, condemnation, and relocation. The
Council directed that staff release City Attorney analyses on the project
to the public. The meeting was continued to December 13, 1994, City
Council meeting,
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 10
0) At the continued public hearing on December 13, 1995 in the City Council
Chambers, the staff reviewed staff responses to questions raised at the
November 22, 1994, City Council meeting. Staff reviewed the Consent
Order, which mandates the investigation and clean-up of the site, agreed
to between CaEPA/DTSC and WhittakerBermite, the property owner.
Staff reviewed the impracticality of an at-grade crossing to extend Magic
Mountain Parkway over San Fernando Road and the railroad tracks.
Staff reviewed the aspects of the project as approved by the Planning
Commission, including phasing, road infrastructure;" and the EIR
Addendum. The Council did not take public testimony; but continued the
item to an adjourned meeting on January 31;1995,:6,30 p.m., for the
specific purpose of discussing Poria Bella with at,'least two Planning
Commissioners.
(k) The City Council, with members of;the Planning Commission, met on
January 31, 1995, in a public hearing 'exclusively devoted to the Porta
Bella Specific Plan et. al., and the three, appeals filed against the Planning
Commission approval and recommendation: The Planning Commissioners
reviewed the major issues that they considered in making their
recommendation to the City Council. The applicant and community
representatives reported on various meetings held to reach compromise
and/or a consensus position:° The Council heard extensive public
testimony and directed staff to respond in writing to all the questions
raised. The applicant offered'a revision to the project in schematic form,
which greatly reduced the impact in the Circle J open space. The revised
proposal does away with the Magc/Princessa major highway connection
and substitutes Magic:' Mountain Parkway as a four lane collector that
"T"'s into Via Princessa, which is located primarily on the project site with
minimal impacts to the Circle J open space and includes the elimination
of the Oakdale Canyon Bridge. Because of concerns raised over the
extension of Magic Mountain Parkway across San Fernando Road,
particularly, whether it should be a bridge or not and what specific
properties might be impacted, the Council continued the public hearing
to 4 p.m., February 21, 1995, at Divided Lite, 25835 Springbrook Avenue,
Santa Clarita.
(1) The City Council and Planning Commission convened a joint meeting at
4 p.m. on February 21, 1995, at the parking lot of Divided Lite, 25835
Springbrook Avenue, Santa Clarita. Staff provided background on the
existing Circulation Element of the General Plan, which indicates the
extension of Magic Mountain Parkway through the Springbrook area.
Staff reviewed the Civic Center MasterPlan, approved by Council and
referenced in the EIR, which included a matrix ranking various
alternatives to extend Magic Mountain Parkway, and which favored a
grade-separated extension generally proceeding along the existing
alignment as defined by the new bridge crossing the South Fork of the
Santa Clara River. The applicant reviewed various alignment proposals
for the extension of Magic Mountain Parkway, which included markings
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 11
in the field to depict the proposed location and height of the bridge. At
the conclusion of the meeting, the City Council continued the meeting to
March 28, 1995, and directed the applicant to continue working with staff,
property owners, and businesses in the area.
(m) At the continuation of the public hearing on March 28, 1995, in the City
Council Chambers, staff reviewed the detailed responses prepared to all
the issues raised at the January 31, 1995, meeting by the public and by
the City Council. These issues included, but were not limited to:
condemnation issues; EIR issues;. hazardous,; waste; the Hillside
Ordinance, "innovation," and project density, pi insurance and
indemnification; off-site roadway' segments; .=QSHAp requirements;
Placerita Special Standards; the proposed 'school,�iie-,Springbiook
businesses; streams; and trails. The staff report, in brief, indicated that
the applicant proposes to extend Magic Mountain Parkway with a bridge
that primarily impacts the Keysoi-Ceiitury and Hasa properties, rather
than the small business owners on Springbiook. The applicant proposes
to work with the affected property owners. � The applicant reaffirmed the
commitment to eliminate the Magic/Prineessa connection as a six -lane
highway substantially encroaching, into Circle'J Homeowners open space
and requiring the Oakdale Canyon Bridge, and substituted the extension
of Magic Mountain Parkway�as a 4 -lane collector, primarily within the
project area, with minimal disturbance to the Circle J open space, and
which "T"s into the proposed Via Princessa alignment. The applicant
proposed to dedicate sufficient right-of-way for 6 lanes. The report
provided additional testimony that an at -grade crossing for the Magic
Mountain extension is infeasible. Three alignment studies for the
proposed Santa Clarita.Parkway, prepared by the applicant, were
discussed, with the applicant favoring an alignment consistent with the
previously; submitted feasibility alignment submitted to staff, intersecting
with the public portion of Placerita Canyon and generally between the
existing industrial and residential uses, providing a landscaped and
bermed buffer. The off-site extension of all proposed roadways, including
Santa Clarita Parkway, Via Princessa, and Magic Mountain Parkway, will
require additional environmental review tiered to the environmental work
already.p'epared for the project. The applicant agreed to re -align Via
Princessa'so that the centerline is no closer than 400 feet to the southern
property line, with the area to the south of the alignment to be developed
with large lot estate homes or to be left at open space, with this
determination to be made by the homeowners association for the homes
south of the property line. Regarding the status of the appeals, the
applicant and staff continued to work on revised language for Traffic
Condition TE -L. A number of the proposed design changes offered by the
applicant address concerns of the various Circle J neighborhoods. The
applicant continued to prefer an alignment that primarily impacts
Keysor- Century and the Hasa companies while limiting impacts on the
small Srpingbrook businesses. At the close of the hearing, the Council
continued the item to the April 11, 1995, regularly scheduled City Council
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 12
meeting, directing that public testimony should be limited to the Keysor-
Century appeal and issues related to the Hillside Ordinance.
(n) On April 28, 1995, staff and the applicant apprised the Council of the
resolution of the appeal filed by Keysor-Century, and the proposed
settlement of the issue. Staff presented additional background regarding
the application of the Hillside Ordinance to the project site., The revised
language for Vesting Tentative Tract Map Condition TE4'' agreed to by
staff and the applicant, was reviewed and approved as' -modified. The
Council heard testimony and closed the public hearing. Staff reiterated
that due to the all-encompassing nature of the Circle J et...,al. appeal, that
ee
their issues were addressed in testimony, by project modifications by the
applicant, and by staff responses, in writing, to the variou9 issues brought
up. Council moved to certify. the EIR and Addendum, to adopt a
Statement of Overriding Consideration, to affirm the, a "Planning
Commission's approval of the Tract `Map and the Oak Tree Permit, to
adopt the Specific Plan, including, modifications to the Zoning Map,
General Plan Land Use Map, and General Plan Circulation Network, as
approved and modified by the City CounciL
SECTION 2. Based upon the above findings of fact, oral and written testimony and
other evidence received at the public hearings 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. At the hearings described above the City Council considered staff presentations,
staff reports, applicant presentations, and public testimony on the proposal, and
the FEIR and FEIR Addendumprepared for the project.
b. Development may be allowed on the ridgelines because the construction of
roadways and other transportation improvements proposed as part of this project
promote the public health, safety and general welfare. The proposal meets the
innovative design criteria for encroachment upon significant ridgelines and for
grading on hillside slopes in excess of 10% because:
(a) The proposed use is in proper relation to adjacent uses, the development
of the community and the various goals and policies of the General Plan,
including the Valley Center Concept and Bermite sections in the Land
Use Element.
(b) -'Although the project will be visible, the use or development will not be
materially detrimental to the visual character of the neighborhood or
community, nor will it endanger the public health.
(c) The appearance of the development will not be substantially different
than the appearance of adjoining ridgeline areas so as to cause
depreciation of the ridgeline appearance in the vicinity.
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 13
(d) The establishment of the proposed use or development will not impede
the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding
property, nor encourage inappropriate encroachments to the ridgeline
area.
(e) It has been demonstrated in the DEIR, FEIR and Addendum for this
project that the proposed development will not significantly alter the
visual integrity of the significant ridgeline area.
(fl With its designation as an "innovative prpjecf.','under the Hillside
Ordinance by the Planning Commission and the'City Council, the hillside
development plan is in substantial compliance, with ! all applicable
provisions of the Ridgeline Preservation and Hillside` Development
Ordinance and Guidelines and standards for hillside development -of the
project shall be as identified in the Specific Plan for the site.
C. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not cause serious
public health problems, since water, sewage disposal, fire protection and
hazardous material cleanup are addressed in the MMRP and Conditions of
Approval.
d. The project complies with the general requirements and performance standards
for the Specific Plan Zone The project is consistent with the intent of the
Specific Plan Zone which was created to: facilitate development of certain areas
by permitting greater flexibility and consequently, more creative and imaginative
designs; promote more economical and efficient use of land while providing
harmonious variety of choices, higher level of amenities, and preservation of
natural and scenic qualities of open" space; and ensure that development
substantially conforms to the approved plans.
e. The Final Environmental Impact Report and Addendum identify certain
significant environmental effects. The Final Environmental Impact Report and
Addendum identify feasible mitigation measures for each of these impacts with
the exclusion of air quality, biological resources, aesthetics, light and glare, risk
of upset/health hazard, transportation and circulation, and cumulative solid
waste impacts which cannot be avoided through mitigation. The identified
mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring
Reporting'`Plan (MMRP) and conditions of approval for the project. The
Addendum studies the connection of Magic Mountain Parkway to Via Princessa.
The traffic study concluded that the proposed road would offer circulation
benefits and that the noise, visual, and aesthetic impacts would not be significant
and could be mitigated. The alignment of this road was further modified by the
City Council to greatly minimize the impacts in Circle J Open Space and to
eliminate the Oakdale Canyon bridge, thereby greatly reducing the impacts on
adjacent existing residential development.
SECTION 3, Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the City Council
hereby finds as follows:
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 14
a. A FEIR and FEIR Addendum, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP)
and Statement of Overriding Considerations for this project have been prepared
and circulated in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and
adopted as certified as required by that Act.
b. This project as modified by the City Council will not adversely affect the health,
peace, comfort or welfare of persons residing in the area; nor be materially
detrimental to the use, enjoyment, or valuation of property in the vicinity of the
project site; nor jeopardize, endanger or otherwise constitute a' menace to the
public health, safety, or general welfare since the project conforms with the
zoning ordinance and is compatible with surrounding land uses,
C. The project is compatible with existing development in the area; consistent with
the City's General Plan and Zoning.
d. The applicant has substantiated the findings for an innovative design application
for encroachment upon significant ridgelines and for development on hillsides in
excess of 10% slope.
e. The applicant has substantiated the findings for approval of a Specific Plan, and
Zone Change, as modified by the City Council.
f. The City Council has adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for those
impacts in the project which cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels
(Resolution 95-41; adopted simultaneously herewith) and certified the FEIR and
FEIR Addendum (SC 92-041040) (Resolution 95-41, adopted simultaneously
herewith.)
SECTION 4. The City Council hereby; approves Specific Plan 91-001 consisting of zone
change from Residential Suburban (RS), Business Park (BP) and Open Space (OS) to Specific
Plan (SP); adopts special development standards as identified in the attached Specific Plan
(Exhibit 1).
SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall become effective at 12:01 a.m. on the thirty-first day
after adoption.
SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify as to the passage of this Ordinance and cause
it to be published in the manner prescribed by law.
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 15
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of '19—.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES } §
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA j
I, Donna M. Grindey, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. was regularly introduced and placed upon its first reading at
a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of ,
19 That thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting
of the City Council on the day of A by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
Draft Ordinance No. 95-6, dated 4-11-95 - Attachment 4, Page 16