HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-03-26 - AGENDA REPORTS - APPEAL PLANNING COMMISSION MC (2)AGENDA REPORT
City Manager Approva ,.
Item to be presented by:
Glenn Adamick
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
DATE: March 26, 1996
SUBJECT: AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF
MASTER CASE 96-010 TO CONSTRUCT A 26' WIDE'BRIDGE OVER
SAND CANYON WASH AND A REVISION TO OAK TREE PERMIT 95-
034 TO ALLOW FOR A PAVED 20 TO 24' WIDE PRIVATE ROAD
WITHIN THE PROTECTED ZONE OF 16 OAK TREES AND
TRIMMING OF ONE TREE TO MEET MINIMUM CLEARANCE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 27367 SAND
CANYON ROAD.
APPLICANT: SHARON KENNEALLY
APPELLANT: SHARON KENNEALLY
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
BACKGROUND
On October 16, 1995, the applicant submitted a request for an oak tree permit to allow for
pavement of an existing private driveway within the protected zone of 15 oak trees. The
driveway would then be paved from Sand Canyon Road to the western property line of the
subject property. The applicant also indicated that there was a potential that a bridge may
be constructed on the property some time in the near future and that the private driveway
may be utilized as access to three residential tracts located west of the City limits. Because
of this, the applicant requested that the item be scheduled before the Planning Commission
as a hearing. Typically, oak tree permits for encroachments are handled at, the staff level.
On November 8, 1995, the Planning Commission approved Oak Tree Permit 95-034 to allow
for the pavement of a private driveway/road within the protected zone of 11 oak trees. The
Commission did not approve the request to allow encroachment within the protected zone of
15 oak trees, disallowing encroachment within four oak trees located near the western
property line of the subject property. The Commission also limited this access to serving the
two residences located on the site.
On January 17, 1996, the applicant submitted Master Case 96-010 (Initial Study 96-002 and
Revised Oak Tree Permit 95-034) to allow for the construction of a bridge, pavement within
the protected zone of 16 oak trees, and the trimming of one oak tree to meet minimum
Agenda Item:
L --
clearance requirements.
The property owner has been working with the County of Los Angeles to use developer
provided funds intended for the construction of a bridge across Sand Canyon Wash. These
funds were provided in conjunction with Tract 34464, which was approved in the early 1980's
and is located west of the City limits. A bridge had been promised to the residents of this
development since that time. The County has agreed, in concept, to release this money to
the applicant for the construction of a bridge on the property. The bridge and private road
would then provide all-weather access to Tract 34464. Additionally, the bridge and private
road would provide legal, all-weather access for two tentative tract maps located in the
County - 50173 and 50449. These two developers as well as residents in the Sand Canyon
Oaks neighborhood were proposing to construct a bridge at Sultus Street and had received
conceptual approval from the Council to do so if certain issues could be resolved. However,
it appears that the issues will not be resolved in the near future and the construction of a
bridge at Sultus is unlikely at this time.
Presently, the residents west of Sand Canyon Wash do not have an all-weather access or
bridge across the wash, which becomes impassable during bad weather.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
On March 5, 1996, the Planning Commission heard Master Case 96-010, denying the item
3-2, and directing staff to return with a resolution of denial at the meeting of March 19, 1996.
The Commission denied the item, finding that other alternative locations for a bridge were
not adequately studied, that the bridge and private road at this location may induce further
subdividing of land west of Sand Canyon Wash, and that this bridge and private road would
not be sufficient to accommodate the increased growth.
Three people spoke in favor of the project, citing the safety benefits of a bridge to the
residents west of Sand Canyon Wash. Five persons spoke in opposition to the project. Two
of these persons are owners of an adjacent property and a third person their attorney. The
other persons cited concerns with the use of asphalt within the protected zone of oak trees.
- _-TAFF ANALYSIS
The applicant is proposing to construct a bridge over Sand Canyon Wash to provide legal, all-
weather access to certain developments within the County. The bridge and appurtenant
structures would not require any modifications to the visible drainage course of Sand Canyon
Wash. The span of the bridge would be prefabricated (rail car platform) and approximately
90' in length. Guard rails would be provided in conjunction with the bridge. Eleven feet of
clearance would be provided between the bridge and the bottom of Sand Canyon Wash, which
would be sufficient for equestrians to cross under the bridge. The bridge would meet all
weight load requirements issued by the Fire Department and the City's Building and Safety
Division. The applicant would also have to comply with all requirements of the City's
Engineering Division, Los Angeles County Flood Control District, Army Corps of Engineers,
and the Federal Emergency Management Agency for the construction of a bridge.
If existing crossings on Sand Canyon Wash become impassable, the bridge would provide
emergency access to residents west of Sand Canyon Wash and emergency personnel. There
are approximately 100 - 150 homes west of the wash. During good weather, other closer
existing crossings would be used by a majority of these residents.
The City's Traffic Engineering Section has reviewed the request and determined that the
intersection of the private road and Sand Canyon Road would meet line of sight requirements
with a recommended condition requiring the applicant to relocate a power pole located
adjacent to this intersection. The applicant has agreed to complete this requirement.
The City's Oak Tree Consultant has reviewed the request and visited the site. The
consultant believes the request is reasonable and in conformance with the City's Oak Tree
Ordinance with the application of conditions. The Oak Tree Consultant also believes that
any health related impacts to the oak trees due to the placement of pavement within the
protected zone would be minimal at best, as most of the proposed road is presently being used
and the ground has already been compacted due to this use.
The City has not formally prepared a study to analyze alternative locations for the
construction of a bridge. The Council has reviewed proposals for a bridge at Sultus Street
and a bridge associated with Tract 49334, which was approved by the Council in 1992. It is
unlikely that a bridge will be constructed at either location in the near future. This location
seems to be the most viable at this time and may be the least intrusive alternative, as it will
be constructed on private property, approximately 50' from the nearest property line. Most
of the private road would be between 80' to 160' from the nearest property line. The private
road and bridge would not be sufficient, by itself, to accommodate use by all of the residents
west of Sand Canyon Wash on a regular basis. However, most of these residents will use
other closer existing "Arizona Crossings" when weather is good. Staff does not believe that
the bridge and private road will induce growth substantially, as it is not a public street and
is not available as legal access to all of the property owners west of Sand Canyon Wash. It
may benefit property owners in close proximity to the private road or those that have an
easement on the road, but any additional growth or subdividing of land induced by this
improvement would be minimal due to the large lot zoning requirements of the area.
Overall, staff believes that this improvement would be extremely beneficial to the residents
west of Sand Canyon Wash. The bridge and road would be constructed on private property
and maintained by its users and not the City. The road would not be gated on the subject
site and would be made available to residents west of the wash when the wash is impassable.
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council:.
Deny Master Case 96-010 and direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial for the
Council's consideration at the next regularly scheduled Council meeting.
Staff recommends that the City Council:
Approve Master Case 96-010, subject to the attached conditions, and direct staff to
prepare a resolution of approval for the Council's consideration at the next regularly
scheduled Council meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
Planning Commission Minutes
Planning Commission Staff Reports
Correspondence
GAC:GEA
cow 6n]0 gea
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - MASTER CASE 96-010
1. Approval is granted to encroach within the protected zone of 16 oak trees as shown
on the revised oak tree/road plan. Approval to trim live wood from Tree No. 16 to
meet minimum clearance requirements is permitted. All paving within the protected
zone of any oak tree is to be placed at existing grade.
2. Approval is granted to construct a 26' wide private bridge over Sand Canyon wash
on the subject site. This bridge shall be constructed in the location shown on the
approved plan.
3. The applicant shall be required to relocate the existing power pole at the intersection
of the private drive and Sand Canyon Road to the satisfaction of the City's Traffic
Engineer.
4. Prior to any work on-site, the applicant shall submit a fencing plan for review and
approval by the City's Oak Tree Consultant. All required fencing shall be in place
prior to and throughout the paving of the driveway..
5. The applicant's oak tree consultant shall be on-site during all work done within the
protected zone of the oak trees. The applicant's oak tree consultant shall certify all
work performed within the protected zone of any oak tree.
6. All other applicable provisions of Section 17.17.090 of the Unified Development Code
(City of Santa Clarita Oak Tree Protection and Preservation Ordinance) shall apply.
7. All pavement shall be a minimum of five feet from an oak tree trunk.
8. The private bridge and paved road shall be made available to all residents during
times when other existing crossings on Sand Canyon wash are impassable.
9. Gating of this access on the subject site shall be prohibited.
10. The applicant shall provide an offer of dedication, 52' from centerline, along the
project site's frontage on Sand Canyon Road.
11. The applicant shall comply with all Los Angeles County requirements related to this
private bridge and road. This shall include all conditions of approval on Tracts
34464, 50173, and 50449 related to project access requirements.
12. The private bridge shall comply with the requirements of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Army Corps of Engineers, City's Building and Engineering
Department, and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District.
13. The private bridge and road shall be maintained in satisfactory condition.
14. The applicant shall either remove the unpermitted stream stabilizer located north
of the proposed bridge or obtain a permit for the structure. This action shall be
completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
15. The applicant must sign a notarized affidavit to confirm acceptance of the above
conditions.
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
STAFF REPORT
MASTER CASE NO. 96-010
REVISED OAK TREE PERMIT 95-034
INITIAL STUDY 96-002
DATE: March 5, 1996
TO: an ownsley and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: n s p, s t City Manager
CASE PLANNER: Glenn Adamick, Associate Planner
APPLICANT: Sharon Kenneally
LOCATION: 27367 Sand Canyon Road
REQUEST: An initial study for a proposal to construct a 26' wide bridge over Sand
Canyon wash and a revision to Oak Tree Permit 95-034 to allow for a
paved 20-24' wide private road within the protected zone of 16 oak
trees. Trimming of one tree would also be necessary to meet minimum
clearance requirements for the road. A majority of the limbs trimmed
in conjunction with this request would be less than two inches in
diameter.
BACKGROUND
Portions of this request have been to the Planning Commission before. On November S, 1995,
the Commission heard a request from the applicant to allow for the pavement of a private
driveway/road within the protected zone of 15 oak trees. The driveway is presently being
used but is unimproved. The Commission approved Oak Tree Permit 95-034, but conditioned
the encroachment to only 11 trees and required that the driveway only serve the two
residences located on the subject site.
In the previous reports, staff did mention that there was a potential that a bridge would be
proposed on this property at some time in the future. The property owner has been working
with the County of Los Angeles to use developer provided funds intended for the construction
of an all-weather access (bridge) across Sand Canyon wash. These funds were provided in
conjunction with the development of Tract 34464, located west of the City limits. The County
has agreed, in concept, to release this money to the applicant for the construction of a bridge
on the property. Final action on this item is scheduled to be taken by the Board of
Supervisors on March 12, 1996.
This bridge and access would provide the lots in Tract 34464 with all-weather access.
Additionally, the access would satisfy conditions placed on two other tentative tract maps
located in the County - 50173 and 50449. The bridge and access would provide these tracts
with legal, vehicular, all-weather access to Sand Canyon Road. These two developers were
previously attempting to construct a bridge on Sultus Street and had received conceptual
approval from the City Council to do so if access issues could be resolved. These issues have
not been resolved and the construction of a bridge at Sultus Street appears unlikely.
Typically, both of these requests could be handled at the staff level. However, the applicant
requested that Oak Tree Permit 95-034 be heard by the Planning Commission and staff has
treated this new application in the same manner. Staff also sent notice of the hearing to all
property owners within 500'.
ANALYSIS
The applicant is requesting to construct a bridge over Sand Canyon wash on the subject site.
The span of the bridge would be prefabricated (rail car platform) and approximately 90' in
length. Guard rails would also be provided with the bridge. The bridge would meet all
weight load requirements issued by the Fire Department and Building and Safety. Eleven
feet of clearance between the bridge and the elevation of Sand Canyon wash would be
maintained. This clearance would be sufficient to allow for equestrians to cross under the
bridge. The bridge and appurtenant structures would not require any modifications to the
visible drainage course of Sand Canyon wash. The applicant presently uses an "Arizona
Crossing" to provide access across Sand Canyon wash, and is requesting that this crossing
remain. The applicant is indicating that the crossing would serve to act as a stream
stabilizer for the bridge and reduce the potential for undermining of the bridge structure.
Staff would recommend that an additional unpermitted stream stabilizer located north of the
proposed bridge be removed or the applicant be required to obtain a permit for this structure.
The applicant would have to comply with all of the requirements of the City's Engineering
Division, Los Angles County Flood Control District, Army Corps of Engineers, and the
Federal Emergency Management Agency for the construction of the bridge. This would
include a requirement that the bridge not produce a rise in the estimated water surface
elevation. The applicant has been talking with these agencies and has submitted building
plans with the City's Building and Safety Division.
If existing crossings on Sand Canyon wash become impassable due to a storm, staff would
anticipate that residents from approximately 150 homes west of Sand Canyon wash would
use the access. During good weather, other closer existing crossings would be used by a
majority of these residents. The bridge would also provide all-weather access to emergency
personnel (Sheriff and Fire Department). The City's Traffic Engineering Section has
reviewed the request and determined that the intersection of the private road and Sand
Canyon Road would meet line of sight requirements with the addition of a recommended
condition. The Traffic Engineering Section would recommend that the applicant be required
to relocate an existing power pole adjacent to this intersection. This action would be
completed to the satisfaction of the City's Traffic Engineer.
The City's Oak Tree Consultant has reviewed the request and visited the site. The
Consultant believes that the request is reasonable and in conformance with the Oak Tree
Ordinance with the application of conditions. Any impacts to the oak trees due to the
encroachment would be related to compaction caused by the pavement and vehicles using the
road The City's Oak Tree Consultant has analyzed this issue and believes that any impacts
related to compaction would be minimal at best, and would therefore not be expected to affect
the health of the oak trees. Most of the proposed road is presently being used and the ground
has already been compacted due to this use.
Staff believes that this improvement would be extremely beneficial to the residents west of
Sand Canyon wash. According to the applicant, gates would not be constructed across the
access on the subject property and the access would remain open and could be used by
residents during times when Sand Canyon wash is impassable. Staff would recommend that
conditions be added prohibiting gating of the access on the subject site and that the access
be available for use by residents when Sand Canyon wash is impassable. Staff would also
recommend that the applicant be required to provide an offer of dedication, 52' from
centerline, along the project site's frontage on Sand Canyon Road.
One concern cited in conjunction with the project is related to the applicant possibly raising
the elevation of the stream bed/wash on the subject property. The applicant has submitted
topographical maps, one from 1965 and the other from 1996 showing that elevation of the
stream bed has not been raised.
Staff has received a letter of opposition from Mr. & Mrs. Fleck. The Flecks' residence is
located adjacent to the project site.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
1) Adopt the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project finding
that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment; and,
2) Adopt Resolution No. P96-10, approving Master Case 96-010 (Initial Study 96-
002 and Revised Oak Tree Permit 95-034) subject to the conditions of approval.
KP:GEA:lep
v�awm�asmio.�„
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
[ X I Proposed [ I Final
PERMIT/PROJECT: Master Case 96-010 (Revised Oak Tree Permit 95-034)
APPLICANT: Sharon Kennally
MASTER CASE NO.: 96-010
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT: The applicant is proposing to construct a 24' wide
bridge over Sand Canyon Wash. The bridge would part of a paved access beginning at
the western property line and ending at Sand Canyon Road on the project site. The
applicant is also requesting to modify Oak Tree Permit 95-034 to allow for the
encroachment within the protected zone of 16 oak trees.
Based on the information contained in the Initial Study prepared for this project, and
pursuant to the requirements of Section 15065 of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), the City of Santa Clarita
[ I City Council
[XI Planning Commission
[ I Director of Community Development
finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant effect upon the
environment, and that a Negative Declaration shall be adopted pursuant to Section
15070 of CEQA
Mitigation measures for this project
[ I are not required. [ X I are attached. [ I are not attached.
Prepared by:UGlenn Adami k. AssociatePlanner
(Signature)
Reviewed by: Fred Follstad. Associate Planner
( ature)
Public Review Period From: Z-[ 3 -, ` To:
Public Notice Given On: -2- -) `4 - By:
[XI Legal Advertisement.
CERTIFICATION DATE:
VICINITY MAP
Al IR_ IPr-T
City of Santa Clarita
Dept of Community Development
23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 300
Santa Clarita Ca 91355-2196
FAX 259-8125
Gentlemen:
February 27, 1996
Re Master Case 96-010
In lieu of appearing at the public hearing 5 March 1996, we
would like this written comment to be incorporated into this
project instead of the description of the applicant,(Kenneally).
THIS PAVED PRIVATE ROAD WOULD PROVIDE LEGAL
ALL WEATHER VEHICULAR ACCESS FOR THE HEALTH
AND SAFETY FOR ALL PROPERTIES WEST OF SAND
CANYON WASH.
This is the intent of the Los Angeles County Board of
Supervisors in their approval of Tract 50173 (Fredrick) and
Tract 50449 (Vath). We have enclosed a copy of these
conditions for your easy reference.
Please note that more than half of tract 34464 is North of
the bridge location.
We would ask that you also consider acquiring an
easement for a deceleration lane at the intersection of Sand
Canyon Rd. for this project.
9n 4e� /o
Thank you,
Mr. S Mrs E. N. Ruddell
16352 Valley Ranch Rd.
Canyon Country, Ca 91351
Tele 805-252-0614
Fax 805-252-0614
27363 Sand Canyon Rd.
Santa Clarita, CA 91351
(805) 298-2000
February 26, 1996
Chairwoman Townsley &
Members Of The Santa Clarita Planning Commission
City of Santa Clarita
3920 Valencia Blvd. Suite 300
Santa Clarita, CA 91355-2196
Dear Commission Members:
This letter is a request for . you to reject the Negative
Declaration for Master Case # 96-010 and Oak Tree Permit #95-034 and
deny the application submitted by Sharon Kenneally for construction of
a bridge and through road at 27367 Sand Canyon Road.
The current application disguises (as did the previous application)
the applicant's true intent, which is to build a County -funded legal
access road to provide all weather access to Sand Canyon Road and to
permit development of hundreds of new homes West of Sand Canyon
Wash. Attached are letters of agreement between the County of Los
Angeles and Sharon Kenneally and Bill Frederick which reveal this
intent.
We believe that these plans leave out important facts about the
ultimate nature of this project. In fact, this application is identical to
one the Commission denied November 8, 1995 except that now a bridge
over Sand Canyon Wash has been proposed. No new data is included
about the roadway design which would now support a decision to allow a
through road to connect with existing roads West of the Wash.
At that meeting, Commissioner Modugno stated: "We have to look
at development in the County.... If she wants something beyond...
serving only two residences ... if this road is serving potentially 100
homes or beyond ... it is unacceptable that action be taken by this
Commission without the benefit of additional data... including an EIR,
maximum development potential, traffic department report. and the Oak
Tree Consultant re -look at it."
None of this asked for additional information has been submitted.
The Oak Tree Report is the same as was submitted last November. This
Report is for a paved driveway to serve two residences. In that Oak Tree
Report, Consultant Kay Carlson specifies "an asphalt driveway to an
'0-M,
existing residence and to an adjacent property," with no mention of a
legal all-weather access that will be afforded to all homes on the West
side of the Wash by this bridge. Yet this intent is clear in Mrs.
Kenneally's August 5, 1995 letter to the County. She states "I will grant
an easement... for the benefit of the residents located West of the Sand
Canyon Wash." The approved Oak Tree Report doesn't mention what
effects heavy traffic might have on the proposed roadway's adjacent Oak
Trees.
For example, using the County calculation of ten vehicle trips per
detached home per day, there would be as many as 1000 vehicle
trips/day. These trips would include heavy delivery trucks, garbage
trucks, water delivery trucks, school buses, and fire engines. All traffic
would use this route on rain days. Once there is an all weather access
across the Wash, permitted development in County areas there can
proceed. This would very likely increase the number of per day trips to
near 3000 (up to 300 houses x 10 trips per day).
The proposed roadway, as described in the Oak Tree Report, is not
sufficient to bear that kind of traffic. Oak Tree specialist Richard lbarra
states that with access to additional houses the width and "depth (i.e..
subgrade) of existing road will require additional construction" and "oak
tree removals and impacts will most likely occur." (See attache(f
February 21, 1996 letter.)
The County Board of Supervisors, when approving this roadway as
an access for County residents West of Sand Canyon Wash, required this
all weather access must be open to the public for use by all people West
of Sand Canyon Wash. "Canyon Oaks..... will run from Rolling Hills
Avenue east to Sand Canyon road, as .... access to Sand Canyon Road.
While this is an acceptable alternative, it should be permitted only with
a condition that the owner of Tract 50449 as well as those neighbors
determined to have a justifiable need within the surrounding area --
including the members of the Sand Canyon Oaks Property Owners
Association and the owners of parcels within Tract 34464 --be allowed use
of that road and the appropriate portion of Rolling Hills Avenue, and
that these roads be all weather access improved to the standards of the
respective jurisdictions within which they lie." (from findings dated
August 17, 1995 & approved by LA County Board Of Supervisors)
As Glen Adamick, City Planner, stated in your meeting last
November, "You're probably the last guardian of that ... issue because the
County almost certainly is going to permit 100 (more) homes to be back
there and they will have their legal access which is all the county has
required for that area to open it up, and all those lots can further
subdivide..."
This site was not the County's first choice for this bridge. in a
December 8, 1994 *tber to Sand Canyon Oaks vesidedts, BIB Frederick
(the subdivider of tract 501731 stated *the most logical place for the
bridge is Sultus Street --hands downl In fact ... I would like to assure all
residents west of the Sand Canyon wash that you will have complete and
unrestricted access and use of the new Sultus Street bridge ---
guaranteed!"
In a June 7, 1995 letter from Mr. Frederick's attorney, Timothy J.
Ruben, addressed to David Vanatta at the County, the issue of Canyon
Oaks Road is first raised. This is only a few days before this alternate
Canyon Oaks site was passed by the County Board of Supervisors, with
no environmental review, no oak tree report, and no notice to adjacent
homeowners who would be most affected by the construction.
A lawsuit has been filed and is pending in the Los Angeles Superior
Court which challenges the County's approval of this roadway on the
grounds that the approval violated the California Environmental Quality
Act.
Prior to that approval, the County Planning Commission looked at
three possible sites for this bridge: Roadrunner, which is presently the
Legal Access for tract 34464, Valley Ranch Road, and Sultus Road. The
Santa Clarita City Council voted last year to support Sultus as a site for
this bridge. All three of those sites have no affected Oak Trees, and all
those roads are already paved.
For Kenneally s proposed Canyon Oaks road, there's no new design
information that describes what kind of road will connect to the
proposed bridge, and there's no consideration of what kind of damage to
Oak Trees and the riparian environment there will be from the
construction and use of this road if it were to be built. The plans don't
discuss
drainage facilities for runoff on the road connected to the bridge
reports on construction of road or road plans
reports on road soils or hydrology
reports on increased, traffic impact on the Oak Trees
reports on traffic impact on Sand Canyon
any alternative sites which might be less destructive to the
environment.
Robby Rhamani from City's traffic department stated on February
21, 1996 that "the County requires a 24' wide road, each lane 12', and-
bridge to be 26'." The proposed road as planned would be 20' wide with a
24' easement. But the application doesn't specify any distance between
the edges of that 24' easement and the adjacent oak trees. This narrow
width might be adequate for a driveway that only serves two homes:
But if Canyon Oaks is to be a private road for public access, with
funding from the County, any construction must be able to handle not
only present traffic levels, but projected levels in the future.
This application does not address any Sand Canyon Special
Standards District issues. This project will interfere with one of the
Canyon's most popular equestrian trails. The Sand Canyon Wash at this
site is heavily used as both a hiking and a riding trail, and is a secondary
or feeder trail for the City's backbone trail system. The bridge plans show
an 11' maximum clearance. Wayne Webber of the City Park & Recreation
Planning Department said usually at least 12' to 14' of headroom is
required. He also noted that the original construction needs to be at
least that high because siltation in our local stream beds makes dredging
after every storm necessary to maintain equestrian headroom clearance.
In 1992 Kenneallys installed a dam just downstream of the
proposed bridge site for the express purpose of causing siltation of the
streambed at the proposed bridge site. They were cited by the City and by
the Department of Fish and Game for its construction, and there is
presently a City "substandard" against the property because of that
construction. (See enclosed copy of letters and stop work orders from the
City regarding that dam, and photos of the dam taken last week..)
In addition, the Kenneallys have demonstrated the real nature of
their "spirit of cooperation" by blocking off Triumph avenue at the
proposed Canyon Oaks site to prevent usage of the existing paved road.
(See enclosed photos.)
When we met with Mrs. Kenneally at County offices on December
18, 1995, she declared that she will install a gate on the planned
roadway. Her plans do not show that gate. Further, the plans do not
show an existing double lamp streetlight mounted on a pole which abuts
our property. Why was this lighting omitted from her plans?
The CaliforniaEnvironmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires "all
phases of a project must be ... considered in the initial study of the
project.", Kenneallys' application continues to divide up this proposed
roadway and bridge project as if the parts were mutually exclusive. You
must consider the whole project's environmental impact. Enough facts
have been withheld from this application so you do not have adequate
information on which to base your judgment.
For all the above stated reasons, this application must be denied.
Very tQrQulyours,
Robert Fleck & Jane Fleck
MAR -04-1996 09:44 LEADERSHIP STRATEGIES INT P.02i02
March 5, 1996
Planning Commissioners
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Boulevard
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
RE: Proposed Bridge Over Sand Canyon Wash
Dear Commissioners:
IVEU ?'
5
ommmmlon
Yesterday's JjgW indicated that the Planning Commission will hear a proposal tonight regarding
the construction of a bridge over the Sand Canyon wash. The Sand Canyon Trails Committee
respectfully requests that the Planning Commission insure that the Sand Canyon Special Standards
be applied when considering the proposed bridge construction:
As you know, the Sand Canyon wash provides an invaluable recreational benefit to the residents
of Santa Clarita, particularly for equestrians. It is important that the bridge and any related
construction allows for the continued recreational use of the Sand Canyon wash as an equestrian
trail.
We appreciate the recent efforts the Planning Commission has taken toward incorporating a trail
alignment into the Hunters Green project conditions. We look forward to a continued
relationship between the homeowners of Sand Canyon and the City of Santa Clarita. We envision
the development of a multi -use trail system throughout Sand Canyon that would integrate with
the City's multi-purpose General Trails Plan. This integrated, multi -use trail system in Sand
Canyon would help preserve the rural charm of the area and would provide recreational
opportunities for all residents of Santa Clarita.
Sincerely,
Laura L. Hauser, Chairperson
Sand Canyon Trails Committee
cc: Glenn Adamick
Trails Committee Members
Rick Putman
Laurene Weste
07/05/1996 17:26
5 March 1996
1-916-003-ee69
BRYCE RICHMOND
MAKK A. W99DKS?W, P.C.
C914SULTING ENGINEER
1115 CAN9GA AUNUt
W99DLAND MILLS, CA 9 1 761
616-663-9120
Chairwoman Towmley &
Members of The Santa Clarita Planning Commission
c/o Glen Adamick. City Planner
City of Santa Clarita
3920 Valencia Blvd- Suite 300
Santa Clarita, CA'%'.?55-2196
Re: Master Casa 0)!1-0 10 and Oak Tree Permit 495-034, 27367 Sand Canyon Rd.
Dear Commission Mernbers:
PAGE 02
NED
Yy
:oMMf$ - ON
In January of 19111. as an employee of Hale & Associates, Inc., I performed a topographic survey
of a portion of the Sand Canyon Wash at 27363 Sand Canyon Road for the purpose of a hydraulic
study, pursuan, t,, the purchase of that property by Robert and Jane Fleck. Siltation of several
feet has since t1C,:im-ed in the wash at this location due to concrete "dam" obstructions placed
downstream of thcr Arizona crossing at the north property line. It is my recommendation that
another topogrc;hhic Survey/hydraulic analysis be performed to determine the extent of siltation.
and possible ad -c,, �!� affects on channel flow characteristics, prior to any further action regarding
the above mattcr
Please contact me , the above number if I can be of further assistance in this or any matter.
Respectfully,
1-1
Mark Mark A. Woodrow, P.E.
Registered Civil I nun,cer No.
C�� oar Wo�sY IiLo-k -P Z/(� �
I-Mkv— 0-
C
IL
T
T
L
a
r
V
y
a
Z
�
a
C�
a '
- - - � - % -
1
. � .. .-., -.. .. .._ ... '. '.a .. �. .. .. ..`-ter ... .. .. -0�. K ... �. � ....-- .. ... ... � � - _