HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-05-09 - RESOLUTIONS - MC 91-164 93-012 (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 ACRE
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 Agx eement 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 Northholme
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, a portion of which crosses the designated open space of Circle J.
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). w
c. The project site is located in a hillside terrain with slopes in excess of 10%.
d. The City of Santa Clarita prepared an Initial 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.
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 five 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 cleanup 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
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. The 13 identified sites have received clean closure
2
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 3
certification from DTSC. Remediation efforts are continuing on the remaining
open site. Information on an additional 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.
The project proposes the extension of all utility services to the project site.
j. Article 8-- Specific Plans Sec 65451 et seq. of the California Planning and Zoning
Laws defines the contents which 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.
(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 work 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
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.
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 4
(c) Provide for the development of a comprehensively planned community
within the zone that is superior to development otherwise allowable under
alternate regulations.
(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 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.
in. An Environmental Impact Report and Addendum thereto have been prepared for
the proposed project pursuant to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
n. 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 an 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.
o. 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. 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.
P. The Planning Commission received an informational presentation about the
Porta Bella Specific Plan proposal at their regularly scheduled meeting on
n
RESO NO. 95-42.
Page 5
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.
q. 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; 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.
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 public hearing
to the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting on December 21, 1993.
On December 21, 1993, the Planning Commission held a continued public
hearing. In the staff presentation, staff provided a detailed review of the
proposed land uses on the site. The staff report focused on the potential revision
to the Magic Mountain/Via Princessa corridor; the relationship of the Porta Bella
and Civic Center projects; General Plan Consistency; and the Land Use Section
(Chapter 3) of the Specific Plan. This public hearing was continued to a study
session on January 11, 1994, to address all issues other than traffic and
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 6
circulation
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; 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 Boulevard, 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 'Y"
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
10% reduction in residential units, the elimination of "T' 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\Via Princessa alignment. Impacts
of the roadway alignments upon Circle J were discussed. The Commission
continued the hearing to the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting
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.
RESO NO. 95-42
— Page 7
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 on City Council 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 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 cleanup
'— 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.
r. At the regularly scheduled meeting of June 21, 1994, the Planning Commission
received updated information on the status of hazardous waste site cleanup 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.
S. 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.
t. Three appeals of the Planning Commission's 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
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 8
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.
U. Numerous duly noticed public hearings were held 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 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.
(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: 2,911 dwelling units, consisting
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
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 9
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 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 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 Highways, including
direction to staff to continue additional traffic modeling. The Circle J
community presented four alternative corridors to the Magic/Princessa
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
m
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 10
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, cleanup, 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 development agreement; and the appeals of the
Planning Commission decision. 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,
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 cleanup, 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 modeling study, proposed
roadways, and traffic mitigation; hazardous waste and the need to
cleanup 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. appeal and legal representative for certain small business owners
located on Springbrook Avenue, and these responses were reviewed at the
10
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 11
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 unacceptableness of the Oakdale Canyon
Bridge, ground and water contamination, fault lines, impacts on small
businesses, the role of the CaIEPA/ DTSC in managing the site cleanup,
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 to not certify 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, 1995, City
Council meeting.
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 cleanup of the site, agreed
to between CaIEPA/ DTSC and Whittaker/ Bermite, 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 Porta 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
11
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 12
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.
(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 Master Plan, 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
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; 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,
12
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 13
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 realign 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 -1. 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 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.
(n) At the meeting of April 11, 1995, the Council reviewed issues regarding
the three appeals. The City's Environmental Consultant, Impact
Sciences, reviewed issues studied in the Environmental Impact Report.
Council reached consensus regarding various project modifications,
including:
13
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 14
a. The entire site must be cleaned prior to new development.
b. Curb, gutter, and landscaping on Springbrook, north from Drayton
Street.
C. 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.
The Council continued the meeting to the April 25 meeting, indicating
that testimony would be limited to the draft conditions of approval for the
project. Furthermore, the Council indicated that written comments could
be submitted until April 28, with the applicant having until May 3 to
respond to comments.
(o) On April 28, 1995, staff and the applicant apprised the Council of the
status of the negotiations of the appeal filed by Keysor- Century, and the
proposed settlement of the issue. Staff presented additional background
regarding 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, except as noted above for written comments.
-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. Via the adoption of Resolution 95-41
(including a Mitigation Monitoring Program), the Council moved to certify
the EIR and Addendum, and to adopt a Statement of Overriding
Consideration. After discussion, the Council continued the meeting to the
May 9, 1995 City Council meeting.
(p) On May 9, 1995, after discussion regarding the project and the conditions
of approval, the Council moved to affirm the Planning Commission's
approval of the Tract Map and the Oak Tree Permit, to adopt the Specific
14
RESO NO. 95-42
—' Page 15
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
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, Planning Commission resolutions, applicant presentations, and
public testimony on the proposal, and the FEIR and FEIR Addendum prepared
for the project.
b. 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.
C. 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 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.
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,
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. Main Street and "D" Street provide a north -south corridor
connecting Soledad Canyon Road and Magic Mountain\Via Princessa and serve
as the Bermite Connector.
15
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 16
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
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.
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
and certified the FEIR and FEIR Addendum (SC 92-041040) (Resolution 95-41,
adopted April 25, 1995.)
SECTION 3. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the City Council hereby finds
as follows:
a. An FEIR and FEIR Addendum, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
(MMRP) and a 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 approving a vesting tentative
tract map and oak tree permit.
e. That the substitution of Santa Clarity Parkway for Rio Vista Road, that the
identification of Main Street and Road "D" as the Bermite Connector and that the
proposed "Magic Mountain Extension' are appropriate modifications of the
16
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 17
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 Council hereby approves Master Case Nos. 91-164 and 93-012, Vesting
Tentative Tract Map 51599 and Oak Tree Permit 91-033 a general plan amendment and subject
to 1) the conditions which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference,
marked as Exhibit "A", and 2) Specific Plan 91-001, and the Council hereby 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
SECTION 5. The Council shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and certify this record
to be a full, complete, and correct copy of the action taken
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of
r1ay 1995
O
ATTEST:
TY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
I, Donna M. Grindey, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita at
a regular meeting thereof, held on the oo t h day of r1 ay 19-2 5 by
the following vote of Council:
17
RESO NO. 95-42
Page 18
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Heidt, Pederson, Boyer, Smyth, Darcy
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
KJM:Iep
s: \cd\cunent\pbcme&5.kjm
ff.]
TY CLERK
FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
Resolution 95-42, Exhibit "A"
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 51599; Oak Tree Permit No. 91-033
Master Case No.'s 91.164 and 93.012 --Porta Bella Specific Plan
Adopted by City Council May 9, 1995
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Development Services Division (DS)
DS -1 The master vesting tentative tract map shall incorporate the revised network as
indicated in Exhibits AA and BB.
DS -2 The project land uses, densities, road network and product yields shall be as
depicted in exhibits "B" and "C" attached, as modified by the City Council and
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," as modified by the City Council and
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.
DS -4 The approval of the master tentative tract map and the oak tree permit are
contingent on City Council approval of the Porta Bella Specific Plan.
DS -5 On -street parking may be permitted at the discretion of the Community
Development Department.
DS -6 The use of "Z" lots is not permitted.
DS -7 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, subject to the requirements of other
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. 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," as hereby 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," as hereby 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 in 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 for 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 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, to the satisfaction of the City, of proper hazardous waste identification
and remediation, from California Environmental Protection Agency/ Department
of Toxic Substances Control.
DS -13 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.
DS -14 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, including but not limited
to, oak trees, geology, and traffic may be required. Additional conditions and
requirements may be placed on subsequent tract maps and plot plans to the
satisfaction of the City.
DS -15 All grading activities on the property, which is composed of approximately 996
acres and is commonly know as the Bermite Site, located south of Soledad
Canyon Road and east of Bouquet Canyon and San Fernando Roads ("Project
Site"), shall be continuously monitored on-site for hazardous and solid waste
materials to the satisfaction of appropriate agencies, including the City. If
"hazardous" or "toxic" 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 current owner of the Project Site, Whittaker Porta Bella
Development, Inc. and Whittaker Corporation, and any future owners (except for
the ultimate purchaser/user of individual parcels of property), as well as the
applicants (including, but not limited to, Miden Corporation, Miden Northholme
2
Partners, BMC Northholme Corp., Northholme Partners), for each of them and
each of their successors and assigns (which indemnifiying parties are hereinafter
referred to as "Indemnifying Parties") shall execute an indemnity and hold
harmless agreement in which the Indemnifying Parties agree to indemnify,
protect, defend (with counsel acceptable to the City) and hold the City harmless
from any and all liability, costs, fines, penalties, charges and/or claims of any
kind whatsoever (including, but not limited to, the death or injury of any person)
("Liability") 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 in California or federal law, whether presently found on the Project Site
or later discovered on the Project Site. A current definition of "toxic" and
"hazardous" materials, as defined in California and federal law, is attached
hereto as Exhibit "G". Notwithstanding the foregoing, and Indemnifying Party
shall not be required to indemnify the City for any Liability arising from "toxic"
or "hazardous" substances or materials which were not present on the Project
Site or portion thereof as of the date of sale of such Project Site, or such portion
thereof (as the case may ), by such Indemnifying Party to a third party. It shall
be the Indemnifying Parties' obligation to establish that any "toxic" or
"hazardous" substances were deposited on the Project Site after the date of sale
of such property to a third party either to the City's satisfaction or in a court of
law. Until such time as the responsibility for the "toxic" or "hazardous"
substances or materials is so established, it shall be the duty of the Indemnifying
Parties to protect, defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), hold harmless
and indemnify the City from any and all liability, costs, fines, penalties, charges
and/or claims of an kind whatsoever (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 on the project site. The foregoing
indemnity is intended to operate as an agreement pursuant to Section 107(e) of
the Comprehensive Environmental Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42
U.S.C. Section 9601, et sea. and California Health and Safety Code Section 25364
to assure, protect, hold harmless and indemnify the City from liability.
DS -16 Submit and implement landscape plans to the satisfaction of the City in the
vicinity of the off-site 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, 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
approvals be given.
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
Planning Commission and as modified by the City Council, and reflected in these
Conditions of Approval, 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 southern boundary of the
outside edge of the road right-of-way (not the centerline) is a minimum of 400
feet from the homes in Circle J Estates. 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 (consistent with the Specific Plan's
Master Landscape Plan), including a berm where necessary, to mitigate impacts
to the homes to the south, to the satisfaction of the City. The Circle J Estates
HOA Board of Directors shall have an opportunity to review and comment on the
landscape plan prior to final City approval. The landscaping shall be
implemented upon completion of rough grading for Via Princessa.
DS -24 Provide a landscape plan (consistent with the Specific Plan's Master 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 The developer/ project applicant will seek to obtain a letter of support or non-
support from the Circle J Estates Homeowners Association regarding a gate
guarded entry to Karie Lane. Provided the aforementioned letter in support of
a gate is obtained, 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. If the Circle J Estates
Homeowners Association does not provide a letter of support for the gate by
December 1, 1996, the developer/ project applicant is released from this
condition. The proposed gate shall be consistent with the existing Circle J
Estates entry as a minimum standard.
DS -26 Provide equestrian crossings in at least two places under Santa Clarita Parkway
concurrently with construction of Santa Clarita Parkway south of Via Princessa.
DS -27 An emergency access point to the Oak Orchard area of Placerita Canyon will be
provided to Santa Clarita Parkway concurrently with the construction of Santa
Clarita Parkway south of Via Princessa.
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 south of Via Princessa.
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
street trees, to the satisfaction of the City, prior to occupancy of Phase I of the
project.
DS -31 No construction traffic will use Springbrook Avenue or Drayton Street.
DS -32 Disclosure statements concerning potentially adverse noise impacts from the
Saugus Speedway and from train movements along the tracks adjacent to the
transit station shall be provided to all prospective home buyers and renters.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Traffic Engineering (TE)
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. 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 in place or otherwise provided for at the time such map is to be
recorded, then the applicant shall be required to submit an additional traffic study for such
portion of the project. This additional traffic study shall determine the need for
alternative mitigation measures, and applicant shall be required to implement those
alternative measures which address the impacts 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 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.
The land use assumptions for each phase of the development as 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:
419
Single Family Units
298
Multi Family Units
285
Commercial (Square Feet)
163,350
Office (Square Feet)
258,485
Business Park (Square Feet)
--
Neighborhood Park (Acres)
3.75
Driving Range (Acres)
25,000
Recreational (Square Feet)
One
School
1.8
Church (Acres)
140
Hotel (Rooms)
Single Family Units
419
Multi Family Units
765
Commercial (Square Feet)
--
Office (Square Feet)
313,632
Business Park (Square Feet)
411,850
Neighborhood Park (Acres)
8.5
Driving Range (Acres)
3.75
Recreational (Square Feet)
25,000
School
One
Church (Acres)
1.8
Hotel (Rooms)
140
C. PHASE 3:
Single Family Units
931
Multi Family Units
510
Commercial (Square Feet)
374,939
Office (Square Feet)
398,574
Business Park (Square Feet)
561,520
Neighborhood Park (Acres)
22.0
Driving Range (Acres)
--
Recreational (Square Feet)
45,000
School
One
Church (Acres)
1.8
Hotel (Rooms)
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,
6
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 Mountain Parkway/Via Princessa, to the satisfaction of the
City Traffic Engineer.
TE -4 Magic Mountain Parkway 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 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
of 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 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 -10 Magic Mountain Parkway shall be restriped to accommodate six traffic lanes
from Valencia Boulevard to San Fernando Road/Bouquet Canyon Road prior to
issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 2.
TE -11 Magic Mountain Parkway shall be widened to six traffic lanes from San Fernando
Road/Bouquet Canyon Road to Rio Vista Road prior to issuance of occupancy
permits for Phase 2 in accordance with Traffic Engineering condition TE -1.
TE -12 Magic Mountain Parkway 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 -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 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 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 -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 west to connect
to existing Wiley Canyon Road west of San Fernando Road as a six lane arterial
with an over crossing 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 and provide technical assistance to help 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 -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 imulement the circulation
element of the General Plan as a means of mitigating the traffic impact of this
subdivision. 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:
Development Units Factors
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:
[X] Via Princessa Bridge 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 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 Porta 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 traffic.
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, 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.
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.
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 all streets constructed
as a part of this project to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the
recordation of each phase of the project.
10
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 extend 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
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 Department.
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.
ED -23 The applicant shall name all public streets prior to 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 right turn pocket along Soledad Canyon
Road at the intersection of Santa Clarita Parkway to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. The construction shall be concurrent with the construction of Santa
Clarita Parkway.
ED -26 The applicant shall construct full width street 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
11
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 a lighting 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 and
construction activities.
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
Mountain.
ED -32 The applicant shall dedicate to the City the right to restrict vehicular access to
Magic Mountain Parkway, Via Princessa and Santa Clarita Parkway.
ED -33 The applicant shall design all roadways with the following criteria:
a. 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 may be
required.
C. Align the centerline of all local streets without creating jogs of less than 150 feet.
A one -foot jog may be used where a street changes width from 60 feet to a 58 foot
right-of-way.
I 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 side to comply with design speeds and sight
distances per current Cal Trans and AASHTO standards
g. Local streets shall have a 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,
12
including intersection of local streets with General Plan Highways, and 35 feet
where all General Plan Highways intersect.
j. The applicant shall not construct driveways 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.
The applicant shall construct catch basins in the roadway where depth & velocity
of the water in the roadway exceed accepted practices as approved by the City
Engineer.
M. The applicant shall design major highways with a minimum centerline radius to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
n. 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.
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 roadways with cross sections different than the
currently adopted City standard. They must be approved and/or revised by the
City Engineer prior to the recordation of each phase. These roadways as shown
in the Specific Plan or as modified to the satisfaction of the City Engineer may
be constructed otherwise.
13
The City standards are as follows:
Street Name R/W Width (ft)** Curb to Curb Width (ft)**
Via Princessa
104 min.
84*
Santa Clarita Parkway
104 min.
84*
Magic Mountain
104 min
84*
Main Street
84 min.
64*
Rio Vista
84 min.
64'
Local Residential Collector
64
40
Local Residential
60
36
Local Residential Cul -de -Sac
58
34
Commercial
84
64
Commercial Cul -de -Sac
66
46
Alley
30
30
* Note: Includes 14'
median.
** Note: Additional
right-of-way and
pavement width shall be provided to
accommodate
trails.
ED -38 The applicant shall construct the
following off-site roadways to the following
standards:
The project proposes several roadways with cross sections different than the
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 84
Santa Clarita Parkway 104 84
Magic Mountain 104 84
** Note: Additional right-of-way and pavement width shall be provided to accommodate
trails.
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.
14
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.
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 least 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
15
court within said time period.
h. The applicant shall not sell any lot/parcel/unit shown on the final map until
the City has acquired said sufficient land interest.
If the Superior Court thereafter rules in a final judgment that the City may
not acquire 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
constructed.
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 docilments specified in e.
hereinabove, or make the deposits specified in f. hereinabove shall constitute
applicant's waiver of the requirements otherwise imposed upon 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.
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 main 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
16
Department, the City shall review them for intent of tract conditions. 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
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 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. 1+
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 to the recordation of relevant phases.
ED -55 The applicant shall submit a final grading plan, geologic report, and geologic
certification, to the City Engineer for review and approval of each phase prior to
the recordation of that phase.
17
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.
ED -57 The applicant shall include a statement in the CC&R's to comply with any of the
Geologist's recommendations in future geotechnical reports.
ED -58 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 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 approved 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. 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 of each
phase.
ED -66 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 drainage course.
18
ED -67 The applicant shall establish a Drainage Benefit Assessment District which must
be ratified prior to recordation of the final map to ensure 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.
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 downstream
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 satisfaction of 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 to the recordation of 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 downstream 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.
ED -75 The project consultants shall provide all necessary inspection during grading to
ensure 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
19
... 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.
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 exporting or importing of materials among phases
shall be provided on-site.
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 ekTAting 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 within any natural drainage course.
ED -84 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.
ED -85 The applicant shall install all utility services within the development pursuant
to the Unified Development Code.
20
ED -86 The applicant shall underground all existing utility services within the project
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 to prohibit the construction of
structures within areas designated as open space.
ED -90 The applicant shall provide reciprocal access and maintenance agreements to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer for all parcels which share common uses along
common property lines.
ED -91 The design and location of all security gates shall be reviewed to the satisfaction
of the Community Development Department and the Fire Department prior to
the issuance of a building permit. No gates are approved at this time. Any gates
approved in the future shall be designed to automatically open should there be
a power failure in the area, so that Fire Department personnel will have
immediate access through the gate systems. No gated alleys, driveways, or
streets are approved 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
OT -1 The applicant is permitted to remove a maximum of 109 oak trees, (species:
QuerLuaAgdfQ4a - Coast Live Oak; O herhaddifolia - 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
encroachment into the protected zone can be avoided through redesign,
construction of retaining walls, or other measures to the satisfaction of the City.
21
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 to determine whether
relocation is possible. As feasible, oak trees with 8" diameter 4 1/1 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 U.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 of the
property/project.
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.1.lb of
the Oak Tree Preservation and Protection Guidelines.
OT -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 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
22
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 running 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 drip line 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 CCR's shall
include such a limitation 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.
OT -16 Adequate drainage measures shall be installed to ensure that nuisance water
does not flow or collect near the base of any oak tree.
OT -17 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
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, under the direction of the applicant's oak
tree consultant.
23
OT -21 Prior to occupancy of any phase of the 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
building permit issuance.
TR -2 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 that are
within 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 in perpetuity 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.
24
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 DEP RTMENT
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 recordation of each development phase.
PR -2 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 owner(s) of 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-of-way. 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
25
property to the satisfaction of the Parks, ity Ses
Recreation, and Communrvice
Department prior to certificate of occupancy. Drought -resistant plant material
and water -efficient irrigation systems should be utilized in the design.
PR -7 The applicant shall provide median landscaping improvements to the medians
adjacent to and within the project prior to project acceptance. These
improvements shall be to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks, Recreation,
and Community Services.
PR -8 The proposed park site must have room for a building
3,000
square feet outside the fault zone. The park sites must
conform to the pad of at 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.
PR -10 Class 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
pedestrians and bicyclists, to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks,
Recreation, and Community Services.
The existing railroad bridge is to allow for a bicycle under crossing 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 the project, in accordance with the Specific
Plan.
t11e:Wfnurr.1.pb,=,, ki,
26
st�
N
1�
000001*
I-V
J _ <♦ S '� p r Ii/ ,✓' J
3 I
;%
O
O
N
!Z1
N
H
O
N
i—
i
Its "a �o )
CCA
o,
r-
�. C
Exhibit 2e
Ot REVISED PLAN
y 'H
N
A
LAND USE SUMMARY TABLE
L✓ M at
Land Use
Map Key Density
Area
Target#
% of Total
% of Total
Designation
Range
(Acres)
of Units
Dwellings
Area
Open Space
OS
na
406.95
na
na
40.9%
Parks k Recreation
P,R
na
41.75
na
na
4.2%
Subtotal
448.70
45.1%
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 Residential
SF 10,000
SF 10,000
2-4 du/ac
63.15
144
4.9%
6.3%
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
87.50
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
6-8 j.,/dc
72.00
434F __i5.0%
7.2%
Sui;total
_
299.80
1,244,
42.7%a
30.1%
Multi -Family Residential
MF - 10
MF -10
8-12 du/ac
17.50
175
5.0%
1.8176
MF -12
MF -12
10.14 du/ac
21.50
222
;..,,7
2.2076
MF -18
MF - 18
16-20 du/ac
13.70
204
7.0%
1.4
MF -22
MF - 22
20-22 du/ac
14.30
259
8.9%
1.4%
MF -40
MF -40
38-42 du/ac
18.50
532
18.3%
1.9%
Center
TC
6-8 du/ac
na
275
9.4%
na
_Town
Subtotal
85.50
1,667
57.3%
8.6%
Commercial
Town Center Comm.
TC
na
24.75
na
na
2.5%
Soledad Comm.
SC
na
12.50
na
na
1.3%
Nieghborhood Comm.
NC
na
8.50
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
2,911 100.0% 100.0%
Exhibit 2f
Land use tabulations are approximate and subject to further verification REVISED PLAN
Porta Be1l2SpeciFc Plan
�X
Porta Bella
Draft Specific Plan
October, 1991
Prepared for:
-The City of Santa Clarita
Community Development Department
Lead Agentx
The Whittaker-Bemiite Company
Owner
The Anden Group
Applicant
Prepared by:
The SWA Group, Laguna Bcach - Planning and Landscape Architecture
Crosby Mead K Benton, Encino - Civil Engineering
SGPA. Irvine - Architecture
The Jerde Partnership, Vcnice Beach - Architecture
Laura Simonck/ESCO. Culver City - Environmental
Tom Dodson Associates, San Bemanlino - Environmental
Delta Environmental, Rancho Cordova, Environmental
Biological Assessment Services. Los Angeles - Biology
Lilbum Corporation. San Bernardino - Biology
Barton Aschman Associates. Pasadena - Trak
Pacific Soils. Harbor City - Geotechnic/Soils
Acton Mickelson Van Dam. Camemn Park- Hazardous Waste
Alfred Gobar Associate,. Brea - Economics
Ex • �>
J01.hu
I?azardouQ
material, sewage or wastenwh ch hazard
ous or toxic substance,
prohibited by statute, rule, re regulated, controlled or
any governmental authorit the ulation, decree or order of
United States Government ynow or State of California or
effect. The term at any time the
limitation, an "Hazardous Materials" hereafter in
y material or substance whichiisludes, without
1.defiined�as a "hazardous waste," "extremely hazardous
r restricted hazardous waste" under Sections
2SI40,Of the 7California Health andor 25122.7, or eSafet Codd Pursuant to Section
20, Chapter 6.5 (Hazardous Waste Control Law); Division
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.a ("HSAA Act");
3. defined as a "hazardous material," hazardous
substance," or 'hazardous waste" under Section 25501 (i),
(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 "hazardous substance" under Section
25281(d) of the California Health and Safety Code,
Division 20, Chapter 6.7 (Underground
Hazardous Substances); Storage of
5. defined as "waste" in Section 13050(d) of the
California water Cods (the porter -Cologne water Quality
Act);
6• petroleum, includingcrude oil or an
thereof, natural y fraction
natural oas, or synthetic gas liquids, liquefied
mixture theriof; y gas usable for fuel, or any
7. listed under Article 9 or defined as hazardous or
extremely hazardous pursuant to Article 2 of Title'22 of
the California Administrative Code, Division 4.5, Chapter
10;
8. designated as a "hazardous substance" pursuant to
Section 311(a)(14) of the federal water Pollution control
Act, 33 U.S.C. Sections 1251, 1321(a)(14);
9. defined as a "hazardous waste" pursuant to Section
1004 of the Solid waste Disposal Act Amendments to the
Resource 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 Response,
Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 ("CERCLA"), as
amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 9601(14);
11. polychlorinated biphenoyls (PCBs), asbestos or urea
formaldehyde foam insulation;
12. organochlorine pesticides (GCBs), including but rot
limited to DDT, DDD and DDE; or
13. any other chemical, material, or substance that,
because of its quantity, concentration, or physical or
chemical characteristics, exposure to which is limited or
regulated for health and safety reasons by any
governmental authority, or which poses a significant
present or potential hazard to human health and safety or
to the environment if released into th" work place or the
environment.
se zmvoi �u ^v 1
1 0 r I'F aG 11�
Guidelines for Park Dedication �. H
1. Proposed site to have a minimum usable area of 5 acres.
2. 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.
4. Infrastructure provided to the site by developer to include power,
sewer, water, gas line, cable T.V., telephone, storm drains, etc.
5. 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.
8. 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 use, 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 possible, the park must be linked to the Citywide trail
system.
14. Developer are encouraged in tract planning to place street lights
adjacent to park sites 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.