Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-12-09 - AGENDA REPORTS - N VALENCIA SP AND ANNEX AMEND (2)AGENDA REPORT 1 PUBLIC HEARING City Manager Approval: Item to be presented by: Jeffrey Lambert DATE: December 9, 1997 SUBJECT: NORTH VALENCIA SPECIFIC PLAN AND ANNEXATION (MASTER CASE NOS. 95-242, 96-120, 97-063), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97-001, SPECIFIC PLAN (PREZONE) 97-001, ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 96-001, ANNEXATION NO. 95-006, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 51931, OAK TREE PERMIT 97-009, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH # 96071077 DEPARTMENT: Planning and Building Services rA • uM W1Qt0A-0Z'XQ OM 1. Receive staff presentation regarding the residential components of the Project, receive public testimony, close the public hearing; and 2. Adopt Resolution No. 97-126 Certifying the Environmental Impact Report and Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations; 3. Adopt Resolution No. 97-127 Approving General Plan Amendment No. 97-001, Tentative Tract Map 51931, Annexation No. 95-006, and Oak Tree Permit 97-009; 4. Introduce Ordinance No. 97-19 (Specific Plan Zone Change); and 5. Introduce Ordinance No. 97-20 (Annexation and Development Agreement). BACKGROUND The City Council opened the public hearing on this item at its November 4, 1997 meeting. At this meeting, the City Council heard a presentation from staff and a presentation from the City's environmental consultant summarizing the major findings of the Environmental Impact Report. The Council also heard public testimony. In an effort to ensure an orderly review of this project, the City Council scheduled three meetings to discuss this project by subject: (1) commercial, industrial, and fiscal impacts at the November 25, 1997 meeting, (2) river and recreation issues at the December 2, 1997 meeting, and (3) residential at the December 9, 1997 meeting. Due to time constraints at the November 25, 1997 meeting, the Council combined November 25th and December 2nd issues and discussed both at its December 2, 1997 meeting. Continued To: r7,- I�Jc� AgendaItem:/ ^ `9191we i 8RMIMPIWA131 W-4mrol At its December 2, 1997 meeting, the Council discussed several issues related to this project. Councilwoman Heidt suggested that a condition be added to the project that the applicant work with the City to encourage small businesses to locate in the various commercial centers within the North Valencia Annexation area. The following is a draft of this condition: The Newhall Land and Farming Company is encouraged and agrees to work with the City should the City develop a small business assistance program which will provide incentives for small and local businesses to locate in new commercial centers operated by The Newhall Land and Farming Company. In addition to this issue, Councilwoman Majic raised several issues and questions regarding the river purchase and flood plain information: • present a map outlining the river purchase area and the upland preserve area; • present a map overlay showing the flood plain area over the proposed development; • what is the value of the river property? • comparison of this river land purchase to other such purchases? • why is the City purchasing this area over other potential purchases? These exhibits and answers will be provided at the December 9, 1997 City Council meeting. SCHOOL DISTRICT MITIGATION The City Council has recently received letters which provide an update on the status of the Hart School mitigation negotiations with The Newhall Land and Farming Company. It is expected that an agreement will be in place shortly. RESIDENTIAL The following is a summary of the residential uses proposed within the North Valencia Annexation and Specific Plan: Residential Units Logo de Valencia 1,100 units South River 900 units Total Units 2,000 units No other planning areas within the project include residential development. The City's General Plan allows the uses proposed in the North Valencia Specific Plan. Under the General Plan designations, the Lago de Valencia and South River planning areas would allow a mid-range density of 4,926 residential units or an upper -range density of 9,748 residential units. The proposed Specific Plan would allow substantially fewer residential units than would otherwise be allowed in this project area. Staff has worked with the applicant to ensure a relatively high residential density as compared to the rest of the Santa Clarita Valley. This higher density (remember, it is much lower than the General Plan would allow) is necessary to implement sustainable and livable development goals as expressed by the City Council in recent months. This higher residential density, along with adjacent and local serving commercial uses will allow a less auto -dependent lifestyle and encourage a greater interaction among the area's residents. Staff has attached a copy of The Ahwahnee Principles for the Council's information. The North Valencia Specific Plan not only follows the "Community Principles" but also follows the implementation recommendations by not allowing development in the area until a specific plan is prepared. ATTACHMENTS 1. Specific Plan (previously distributed) 2. Memorandum of Understanding (previously distributed) 3. Overview of project and entitlements requested (previously distributed) 4.' City Benefits from the North Valencia Annexation Memorandum (previously distributed) 5. Final EIR (forwarded earlier under separate cover) 6. Ordinance No. 97-19 (Specific Plan Zone Change) 7. Ordinance No. 97-20 (Annexation and Development Agreement) 8. Draft Annexation and Development Agreement 9. Resolution No. 97-126 (Certifying the Environmental Impact Report and Adopting a Statement of Overiding Considerations) 10. Resolution No. 97-127 (Approving General Plan Amendment No. 97-001, Tentative Tract Map 51931, Annexation No. 95-006, and Oak Tree Permit 97-009) NEW ATTACHMENTS 1. The Ahwahnee Principles 2. Response to issues raised by Councilmember Klajic JJL:Iep ed:cuundI\nvIm129,jj1 CITY OF SANTA CLARITA INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and Members FROM: George Caravalho, City Manager DATE: December 5, 1997 SUBJECT: NORTH VALENCIA PURCHASE PROJECT - SANTA CLARA RIVER The following is in response to questions raised by the City Council at its meeting of December 2, 1997, concerning the purchase of river property in conjunction with the North Valencia Annexation project. As I recall, the questions were: 1. Why is the City purchasing this particular area of the Santa Clara River versus other areas? 2. How was the purchase price or value of the river purchase established? 3. How does the acquisition price compare to other river property purchases made by the City? SITE SELECTION FOR ACQUISITION There are three formally adopted City planning documents which speak directly to the acquisition and preservation of sensitive ecological areas (SEA's) and the Santa Clara River for public use. These include the City's General Plan, Santa Clara River Recreation and Water Features Study, and the Santa Clara River Park project report. Goal five of the Parks and Recreation element of the General Plan, states "encourage multiple uses of public easements and public lands, such as the flood inundation areas of the Santa Clara River, and its tributaries for recreational purposes," and "promote the implementation of the Santa Clara River Recreation and Water Features Study." Further, the implementation component of the open space and conservation element of the General Plan includes establishing "an open space acquisition fund for the purchase of privately held parcels that are located on or within areas of significant ridgelines, groundwater recharge areas, or areas of endangered flora or fauna." Funds have been established with the successful application of grant money from the State of California Habitat and Conservation Fund (HCF), as well as money specifically designated for river park and open space purchases from the 1992 Los Angeles County Proposition A Bond Measure. Page 1 of 2 Funding sources for the acquisition are: Wetland Acquisition Grants (HCF) $492,500 Riparian Acquisition Grant (HCF) $303,500 Required matching funds (Prop. A) $796,000 In furtherance of both the City's General Plan and Santa Clara River Recreation and Water Feature Study, the Santa Clara River Park project adopted by the City Council in July of 1995, identifies the area targeted for acquisition in the North Valencia Annexation project as one of 14 priority acquisition areas. Further, the North Valencia Annexation site is one of the top three priorities listed for acquisition and preservation. DETERMINING PROPERTY VALUE Pursuant to the requirements of the Habitat and Conservation Fund Grant Application Requirement for purchasing this property, the area to be acquired was appraised by a licenced appraiser, (Scott Voltz and Associates). Additionally, the grant required that the initial appraisal be reviewed and verified as to accuracy by a second qualified appraiser (which was accomplished by DeBover/Skipper and Associates). The appraisal, which is on file in the City Clerk's Reading Library, considered the total area of river property to be acquired, separating riverbed from upland/developable property, and compared the acquisition to eight comparable land sales whose land value ranged between $1,361,000 to $1,633,800 with a mid-range acquisition price for the subject rounded to $1,500,000 by the appraiser. Subsequent to the original appraisal and its verification by a second appraiser, additional upland/developable land area was added to the acquisition area without increasing the agreed upon purchase price of $1,500,000 which further adds to the value of this acquisition. COMPARISON PURCHASES In comparison to other City purchases of river property, the square foot river bottom land of this acquisition was valued at .05 cents a square foot. At 43,560 per acre x 262.1 acres of river bottom land, this equates to approximately $570,854. The most recent acquisition of river property by the City in the Canyon Country area valued the land, via a Superior Court Jury award, at .06 cents per square foot for river bottom. Additionally, the original appraisal included roughly 10.2 acres of generally level river edge for trail use. The appraised value of this property was determined to be $2.09 a square foot. With the addition of added trails and upland/developable areas as have been previously reported, while the value of the property has remained the same, the acquisition price for that same property has dropped to somewhere between .25 and .50 cents a square foot. Similar property recently acquired by the City in the Canyon Country area was purchased at $1.29 per square foot for developable land. Please advise if you have further questions concerning the acquisition of river land. GAC:REP:cac pkadmin/northval.gac cc: Jeff Lambert, Planning Manager Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 97-126 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF FEIR SCH096071077, AND RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS THAT WEIGHS PROJECT BENEFITS AGAINST THE PROJECT'S SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS FOR MASTER CASE NOS. 95-242, 96-120, 97-041, 97-063 FOR ANNEXATION NO. 95-006 (NORTH VALENCIA), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97-001 TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT TEXT AND LAND USE MAP, PREZONE 97-001 TO SPECIFIC PLAN (SP) AND OPEN SPACE (OS), ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 96-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT. MAP 51931, OAK TREE PERMIT 97-009 AND HAUL ROUTE TO ALLOW FOR THE 858 ACRE NORTH VALENCIA ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF A 706.6 ACRE PROPERTY WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA KNOWN AS THE NORTH VALENCIA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby make the following findings of fact: a. The North Valencia Annexation area is approximately 858 acres generally located east of Anza Drive, south of Newhall Ranch Road, west of Bouquet Canyon Road and .Valencia Boulevard, and north of Magic Mountain Parkway and the Auto Center in the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County adjacent to the City of Santa Clarita. The North Valencia Specific Plan area is approximately 706.6 acres within the North Valencia Annexation area and is generally located south of Avenue Hopkins and east of Anza Drive and the west side of San Francisquito Creek, south of Newhall Ranch Road, west of Bouquet Canyon Road and Valencia Boulevard, and north of Mpgic Mountain Parkway and the Auto Center in the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County adjacent to the City of Santa Clarita. b. In November 1995, the City and the Valencia Company entered into a non- binding Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding certain aspects of the Potential annexation of approximately 969 acres of unincorporated area in the North Valencia area. At the time the MOU was adopted, the Valencia Company stated their intention to request approvals for up to 3,690 dwelling units, approximately 850,000 square feet of commercial uses; and 223,000 square feet of industrial square footage. Entitlements to be requested at the time of MOU approval included a prezone, an annexation and development agreement, and tract maps. C. A prezone (MC: 95-242, PZ: 95-006) was approved on April 16, 1996 by the City Council for portions of the North Valencia Annexation area through Ordinance Reno 97•186 No. 96-12. , An annexation request for the North Valencia Annexation (Annexation No. 95-006) was filed with LAFCO in.June, 1996 following the direction of the City Council on June 11, 1996 (Resolution 96-84). Following the prezone and Sling of the annexation request by the City, the Valencia Company, herein referred to as the "applicant", submitted the entitlement requests noted above for a portion of the annexation area known as the North Valencia Specific Plan Area, which are subject to environmental review. The City's annexation request is on hold at LAFCO at the request of the City and the applicant pending approval of the environmental review document and the above entitlements. d. On June 5, 1996, the applicant submitted the foLowing entitlement requests (Master Case No. 96-120): Annexation and Development Agreement 96-001, Annexation 95-006, Conditional Use Permit 96-010, TPM 20496 (Builder's South), TPM 20669 (Valencia Industrial Center), TPM 18417 (Pony League), TPM 24516 (Overall Project Area), VTTM 51931 (Valencia Del Lago), VTTM 51281 (South River) and VTTM 44832 (Arbor Park). Incomplete letters were sent on these entitlement requests in July with staff noting that an. Oak Tree Permit would also be required. In January 1997, the applicant formally withdrew. the application for a conditional use permit and all of the tract and parcel maps except for VTTM 51931. The applicant then submitted the following entitlement requests: a Specific Plan document, including a comprehensive plan of development and development standards for the North Valencia Specific Plan area, and Prezone 97-001 to change the zoning within the area to the City zone SP (Specific Plan). Following review of the Specific Plan document and revised site plan, staff recommended that a general plan amendment be filed in order for the requested entitlements to be consistent with the City's General Plan. On March 12, 1997 the applicant Sled a request for an oak tree permit (OTP: 97-009) to allow for possible encroachment upon oak trees, and a general plan amendment (GPA: 97-001) to modify the text of the Land Use Element Valley Center Concept narrative to allow for a North Valencia Specific Plan, and to also allow for an amendment to the Land Use Map. The development application includes the proposed annexation of approximately 858 acres of unincorporated Los Angeles County land located adjacent to the City boundary. Thisrequestwould amend portions of Ordinance No. 96-12 to establish the City of Santa Clarita prezone Specific Plan (SP) over 706.6 acres on the areas known as the North Valencia Specific Plan area. The remaining acreage in the annexation area would remain as previously prezoned by Ordinance No. 96-12. The Specific Plan request includes entitlement for up to 2,000 dwelling units (750 single family detached, 1,250 multi -family attached), 636,000 square feet of commerciallretail, 167,000 square feet of industrial/business park space, a 6.5 -acre elementary school site, a 15.2 -acre lake/park, a 12.4 -acre community park, 4.9 acres of neighborhood parks, 355.6 acres of open space and over 5 miles of community trails, a Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTIM 51931) to subdivide 706 acres into 138 lots, an oak tree permit K 0 Rew 97.128 to allow construction within 200 feet of the oak trees with no removals or encroachments currently proposed, and review and certification of the Environmental Impact Report (SCH#96071077) prepared for the project. e. The original North Valencia Specific Plan request excluded a.6 acre Southem California Gas Facility located on Magic Mountain Parkway; however, the City proposes to include this area within the Specific Plan area to avoid the issue of spot zoning. The North Valencia Specific Plan arqa is bisected by the approximately 13 acre Metropolitan Water District (MWD) property which is excluded from the Specific Plan prezone; however, the City proposes to prezone this area Open ,apace (OS) in order to be consistent with the surrounding uses proposed in the Specific Plan. f. On June 25, 1991, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-98, adopting the General Plan of the City of Santa Clarita and Certifying the Environmental Impact Report. The City s General Plan presently designates the annexation area as Commercial Town Center (CTC), Community Commercial (CC), Business Park (BP), and Residential Moderate (RM), with a Valley Center Concept (VCC) Overlay on the majority of: the site and a Significant Ecological Area (SEA) Overlay over the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek. The General Plan does not specifically mention the North Valencia site as an area ideal for a specific plan; however, the site does meet the minimum size of 100 contiguous acres under single ownership as identified in the Specific Plan zoning standards of the City's Unified Development Code . Zoning on the site is presently Los Angeles County zones C2, MliK and A2-5 and has already been prezoned City of Santa Clarita zones CTC (Commercial Town Center),. CC (Community Commercial), BP (Business Park), and RS (Residential Moderate). g. The North Valencia Specific Plan area is vacant, generally flat, and was used for agricultural purposes. The approximately 153 acres of the annexation area that is excluded from the Specific Plan is flat and improved with industrial, commercial and public utility uses. Major features of the annexation area include the Santa Clara River, the South Fork of the Santa Clara River, San Francisquito Creek, Bouquet Creek, a portion of the San Gabriel Fault Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone, the MWD aqueduct pipeline and electrical transmission corridors. h. Tbe.design of the project concentrates development within areas previously used for agricultural uses and includes preservation of approximately 348.3 acres of the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek and 84 acres of upland buffer area located adjacent to the River and Creek as identified in the North Valencia Specific Plan document. The project proposes grading on approximately 281 acres of the 858 acre project site. The total amount of grading involves approximately 1.4 million cubic yards of cut and 2.7 million cubic yards of on-site fill, with earth to be imported from the northeast corner of McBean Parkway and Newhall Ranch Road through Conditional Use Permit No. 96-013 (MC#96-236) 3 6 Rego 97.186 ,and from the area known as the Center City Specific Plan area located east of the present terminus of Newhall Ranch Road, east of Bouquet Canyon Road. i. 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 annexation, annexation and development agreement, tentative tract maps, conditional use permit and oak tree permit was mailed in July 1996 to affected agencies. A scoping meeting was held at the Valencia Town Center Conference Room on August 7, 1996 to obtain information from the public as to issues which should be addressed is the environmental documQnt. Following a revision to the project with the withdrawal of the conditional use permit application, withdrawal of tentative tract maps and submittal of the prezone, specific plan document, general plan amendment, and. revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51931 applications, a subsequent NOP was prepared and mailed in May 1997. j. The Planning Commission went on a field visit to the North Valencia site on Saturday, May 31, 1997 at 9:00 a.m., beginning in the Council Chambers for the purpose of becoming familiar with the annexation and Specific Plan area. k. The City Council held a study session on this project on June 3, 1997 and received an informational report on the status of this project. At that Council Study Session the Council approved a preliminary processing schedule for this project which identified various Planning Commission public hearing dates and specific project topics to be discussed at each of these meetings. The goal of this processing schedule was to reduce redundancy and allow the Commission and the public to better prepare for the meetings. This processing schedule allowed for each issue area of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEER) to be discussed in a public forum during the DEIR public comment period, allowing for maximum public participation with numerous opportunities for the public to ask questions and receive information concerning the environmental document and the project. L The Planning Commission received an informational presentation about the North Valencia Specific Plan proposal at their regularly scheduled meeting on June 17, 1997, at 7:00 p.m. at the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita. This presentation was given by staff to distribute copies of the proposed North Valencia Specific Plan dated June 1997 and the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51931 version dated June 13, 1997, to provide the Commissionwith a background on the project application, and to provide the Commission with a review of the entitlements requested. m The North Valencia Specific Plan DEIR (SCH#96071077) was circulated for review and comment by the affected governmental agencies and all comments . received.have been considered. The DEIR was distributed to the Planning 4 ri Resp 97-126 Commission, the public and affected governmental agencies for a 45 -day public review period beginning on August 1, 1997 and ending on September 15, 1997. Late comments were accepted until September 22, 1997 to allow for mail delays. n. Following the processing schedule set by the Council .on June 3, 1997, the Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings on the North Valencia Annexation and Specific Plan and related entitlements commencing on July 1, 1997 and continuing on July 9, 1997, July 23, 1997, August 5, 1997, August 13, 1997, August 19, 1997, August 25, 1997, September 2, 1997, September 10, 1997, September 24, 1997, October 7, 1997, October 15, 1997, and October 30, 1997. These public hearings have been held at 7:00 p.m. at the City Council Chambers, 23920.Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita. Five of the public hearings were held between August 5, 1997 and September 2, 1997 which was during the public comment period. These public hearings were held for the purpose of providing an opportunity for the Commission and the public to consider focused discussions on each of the environmental issue areas discussed in the DEER. These hearings, however, did not limit the public testimony to the topic at hand, but allowed for comments/questions regarding all materials presented throughout the DEIR. o. The DEIR prepared for the project identified an option for bank stabilization at the River/Creek edge: as termed throughout the DEER, the "proposed project" included the placement of 2.7 miles of bank stabilization along the edge of the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek. This bank stabilization would be visible from within the project site and would also be visible to the public along major roadway corridors. The option presented in the DEIR included the use of buried bank stabilization set back from the River/Creek edge approximately 100 feet. The Buried Bank Stabilization Option was identified and mitigated separately throughout the DEIR, as the impacts of this option differed from the impacts of the proposed project (which incorporated bank stabilization along the edge of the River/Creek). During the course of the public hearings, the Planning Commission determined that the Buried Bank Stabilization Option was the preferred option. However, the Commission received public testimony from the project biologist and a third party biologist indicating that, with heavy revegetation efforts, a 75 foot setback from the River edge in the project's Lago de Valencia planning area was adequate. The Commission therefore accepted a setback approximately 25 feet less than what was originally analyzed in the DEIR for the Lago de Valencia planning area only, and has recommeded that the City Council also accept such a setback. p. The Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit A, includes the DEIR and the following responses to written comments on the DEIR, responses to public testimony regarding DEIR issues raised at the public hearings during the public comment period, modifications to 61 0 Rew 97.726 the DEIR text, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). The DEIR was provided to the Commission on August 1, 1997 and the remaining Final EIR documents were prepared and provided to the Planning Commission on October 3, 1997. The Proposed Specific Plan Text dated June 1997, herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit B, also contains specific development standards and policies that mitigate potential environmental impacts which were considered by the Planning Commission. Discussions regarding the annexation and development agreement commenced during the public hearing of October 15, 1997, and continued at the hearing on October 30, 1997. The Planning Commission considered the Draft EIR, the Final EIR, information provided in staff reports, the general plan amendment tex�, the proposed specific plan, the entitlement requests, the deal points of the annexation and development agreement, and public testimony prior to recommending project approval to the City Council. q. A duly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on November 4th, 1997, commencing at 6:30 p.m. at the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita. At this meeting, the Council considered the project's Draft EIR, the Final EIR, information provided in staff reports, the general plan amendment text, the proposed specific plan document, the entitlement requests, the Planning Commission's considerations, and public testimony regarding the project. SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Santa Clarita does hereby make the following findings of fact: a. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires decision -makers to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental impacts. If the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse effects may be considered "acceptable" by adopting a "Statement of Overriding Considerations." This statement sets forth the project benefits or reasons why the Lead Agency is in favor of approving and weighs these benefits against the project's adverse environmental impacts identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report that cannot be mitigated to a level less than significant. b. CEQA requires decision -makers to adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (N MRP) for those mitigation measures which are conditions of the project. SECTION 3. The City Council does hereby find that the Final EIR for the North Valencia Annexation 95-006, Prezone 97.001, General Plan Amendment 97-001, North Valencia Specific Plan 97-001, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51931, and Oak Tree Permit 97-009 identifies LJ 0 Rego 97.126 cumulative project impacts and project specific impacts. Environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR are summarized as follows: a. The DEIR, herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit A, identifies the following issue areas as significant but unavoidable: Air Quality; Visual Resources; Agricultural Resources; Solid Waste Disposal; and Biota. b. The DEIR identifies the following issue areas as significant but feasibly mitigable to a less than significant level: Geotechnical Hazards; Flooding; Noise; Cultural Resources; Human Made Hazards; Traffic/Access; Water Service; Wastewater Disposal; Utilities (Energy Resources); Fire Protection; Sheriff Services; Parks and Recreation; Library Services; Education; and Population/ Housing/Employment. A mitigation monitoring reporting program has been prepared to mitigate these potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level and is included as part of the Final EIR. c. The DEIR identifies the following issue areas as less than significant: Biota - Creation of Upland Preserve Zone; and Parks and Recreation - Connection to Existing Trail System. SECTION 4. Based upon the testimony and other evidence received, and upon studies and investigation made by theCity Council and on its behalf, the City Council further finds: a. That the Final Environmental Impact Report for this project is adequate, complete, and has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). b. That the City Council has reviewed and considered the Final EIR in reaching its recommendation. C. That changes and alterations have been required and incorporated into the North Valencia Specific Plan and related entitlements which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect because feasible mitigation measures included in the MMRP are made conditions of approval for this project. SECTION 5. Based upon the testimony and other evidence received, and upon studies and investigation made by the City Council and on its behalf, the City Council further finds that the Final EIR analyzes a range of project alternatives. a. Alternative 1, the No Project Alternative. This Alternative is required by the CEQA Guidelines and it compare the impacts which might occur if the site is left in its present condition with those that would be generated by the project as proposed. The No Project Alternative is considered to be the "environmentally superior" alternative since the following environmental areas would not be affected without the implementation of the project. public services and utilities, 7 0 Ren 97.!26 solid waste, education, libraries, parks and recreation, fire/Sheriff services, gas and electricity, visual resources, trafficlaccess, air quality, and noise. However, this alternative is less desirable in terms of sedimentation/runoff and effects of agricultural operations, and does not provide the upland habitat which the proposed project with the Buried Bank Stabilization Option includes. This alternative was therefore rejected. b. Alternative 2, Buildout According to the City of Santa Clarita General Plan. The purpose of this alternative is to describe the impacts of developing the site according to the General Plan land use designations and to compare such impacts with those generated by the proposed project. Under Alternative 2, impacts associated with geotechnical resources/grading, biota, cultural resources, fire Protection, agricultural resources, and human made hazards would be similar to the proposed project. Impacts generated by Alternative 2 associated.with• flood, traffic and access, air quality, noise, water service, wastewater, solid waste, utilities, housing, and education would be greater than the proposed project. Impacts generated by Alternative 2 associated with library services, parks and recreation, employment and Sheriff services would be less than those anticipated under the proposed project. The Buried Bank Stabilization Option under Alternative 2 would have the same impacts as this option under the proposed project. This alternative was rejected because overall it has greater environmental impacts than the project. On the basis of environmental impacts alone, this alternative is not environmentally superior to the proposed project. C. Alternative 3, The Biological Alternative. The purpose of this Alternative is to provide more clustering of units, by reducing the residential footprint, thereby providing more open space and fewer impacts to biological resources. The - number of residential units would remain the same. Under Alternative 3, impacts associated with geotechnical resources, library services, fire protection, Sheriff demands, and population/housing/employment would be similar to the proposed project. This alternative would allow only clustered units and a smaller residential footprint which would be preferred to the proposed project in terms of flood, trafficlaccess, air quality, biota, cultural resources, visual, water, wastewater, solid waste, utilities, education, parks and recreation, agricultural resources and human made hazards. The Buried Bank Stabilization Option under Alternative 3 would have the same impacts as this option under the proposed project- On the basis of environmental impacts alone, this Alternative is "environmentally superior' to the proposed project. This Alternative would not meet project objectives in that it would not provide as great a variety or mix of residential housing types .as .the proposed project nor would it meet the anticipated housing market conditions over several years. Alternative 3 would limit the range of housing opportunities, and would not reflect the housing opportunities demand under which the project site could be developed. Therefore, Alternative 3, the Biological Alternative, was rejected. 0 Rew 9A PY6 d. Alternative 4, The 20 Percent Reduced Density Alternative. This Alternative would reduce dwelling units and commercial square footage on the site by 20 percent, down to 1,600 residential units, 508,000 commercial square feet, and 167,000 square feet of industrial uses. Alternative 4 would have a reduced project footprint to reflect reduced unit counts. Impacts under this alternative associated with geotechnical resources, flood, trafficlaccess, biota, cultural resources, air quality, noise, water service, wastewater, solid waste, utilities, education, library services and fire/Sheriff services, parks and recreation, agricultural resources and human made hazards would be less than the proposed project. The Buried Bank Stabilization Option under Alternative 4 would have the same impacts as the proposed project. Alternative 4 is an "environmentally superior" project, but it does not meet the project objectives of providing a mix of residential and commercial opportunities as it reduces the number of housing units available and reduces commercial square footage. The reduction of housing units does not meet the project objectives of responding to economic conditions by providing as great a variety. of housing types. The reduction of commercial square feet reduces the subsequent tax base available to the. City to support public services as compared to the project objectives. Alternative 4 has been rejected in favor of the proposed project because this Alternative would limit housing and employment opportunities, and thus would not accommodate the housing or employment demands of the regional area under which the project site could be developed. e. Alternative 5, The 40 Percent Reduced Density Alternative. This Alternative results in a 40 percent reduction in residential units and commercial square footage. The reduction would result in a total of 1,200 residential units, and 381,600 square feet of commercial. uses. Other aspects of the project would remain consistent with the proposed project. In reducing the project by 40 percent, Alternative 5 will create a reduced development footprint for both residential and commercial uses. This Alternative also includes a grade separated crossing of Avenue Scott at Bouquet Canyon Road and a bridge over Bouquet Creek Channel for Avenue Scott. Impacts under this alternative associated with geotechnical resources, flood, trafficlaccess, biota, cultural resources, air quality, noise, water service, wastewater, solid waste, utilities, education, library services, fire/Sheriff services, parks and recreation, agricultural resources and human made hazards would be less than the proposed project. The Buried Bank Stabilization Option under Alternative 5 would have the same impacts as the option under the proposed project. Alternative 5 is an "environmentally superior" project, but was rejected over the proposed project because it does not meet the project'objectives of providing a mix of residential and commercial opportunities.. This Alternative reduces the number of housing units available and reduces commercial square footage. The reduction of housing units does not meet the project objectives of responding to economic conditions by providing a great variety of housing types. The reduction of commercial square feet reduces the subsequent tax base available to the City to support E rj ROW 497.128 public services as compared to the project objectives. Alternative 5 would not accommodate the housing or employment demands of the regional area under which the project site could be developed. SECTION 6. By adoption of this Resolution, the City Council finds that the Final EIR identifies certain significant environmental effects and feasible mitigation measures that mitigate potential significant impacts to levels less than significant for each of these impacts with the exclusion of Air Quality, Visual Resources, Agricultural Resources, Solid.Waste Disposal, and Biota. In accordance with CEQA Sections 15091 and 15093, a description of each significant impact and rationale for finding that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or: substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR is detailed below: a. Air Quality: Construction -related emissions would be generated by on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, construction worker vehicles, and energy use. Operation -related emissions would be generated by on-site and off-site stationary sources and by mobile sources. During both the construction and operation phases, emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), reactive organic compounds (ROC), oxides of nitrogen (No.) and particulate matter (10 micron) (PM,d would exceed thresholds of significance. recommended by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Furthermore, the actual rate of growth in vehicle miles traveled, and hence vehicular air emissions caused by the proposed residential and non-residential uses of the project would occur at a higher rate than the rate of growth associated with the expected on-site resident and employee population. The Buried Bank Stabilization Option's construction -related and operation -related emissions are also considered unavoidably significant. Mitigation Measures: Mitigation.measures Al through A76 as identified in the Final EIR would reduce the magnitude of construction -related and operation -related emissions to some extent. However, no feasible mitigation exists which would reduce these emissions to below the SCAQMD's recommended thresholds of significance. This is inconsistent with the Air Quality Management Plan performance standards; therefore, the cumulative air quality impacts of the proposed residential uses, non-residential uses, and impacts due to construction of the Buried Bank Stabilization Option would be unavoidably significant. b. Visual Res==es The project is an infill development of a developed urban area. This area is envisioned by the City of Santa Clarita General Plan for the type of development Proposed. The change in character:of the project site would represent the replacement of open space/agricultural uses with urban uses but is not considered an unavoidable significant impact because such uses already occur immediately surrounding the project site. However, bank stabilization at the rivers edge is a significant alteration to the basic visual character of the region, as well as to the river itself. The loss of riparian vegetation and the associated change in visual character of the River and Creek due to 10 Rep 97.126 the placement of bank stabilization along the River/Creek edge would be significant and unavoidable. In the event that the preferred buried bank stabilization were -to remain buried, no significant impacts would occur as most of the existing riparian vegetation along the banks would remain. However, the buried bank lining may become exposed in the event that future flood waters erode the existing banks and intervening upland preserve zone, exposing the buried reinforced concrete lining. In the event such erosion and exposure were to occur in the future, impacts of this option would be similar to the proposed project and would be significant, albeit further removed from the watercourse. Mitigation Measures: With the implementation of the buried bank stabilization and mitigation measures VQ1 through VQ6 (as identified in the Final EER), the visual impacts of the project will be reduced to a less than significant level. This finding assumes that the buried bank stabilization will remain buried. If the buried bank lining is exposed due to future flood water erosion, then the impacts to visual resources will be considered unavoidably significant. C. Aorimiltural Resources- The cumulative conversion of prime agricultural land to urban uses constitutes a loss of an irreplaceable resource and would result in the loss of 284 acres of prime agricultural land. No feasible mitigation exists for this conversion and it would be an unavoidable significant impact. Like the proposed project, the Buried Bank Stabilization Option would result in the loss of the conversion of all of the available agricultural land in the site, and is thus considered to have an unavoidably significant impact. Mitigation Measures: The Final EIR identifies three mitigation measures listed as AG1, AG2 and AG3 which would reduce the magnitude of the project's impacts to agricultural resources. However, no feasible mitigation exists which would reduce these impacts to a less than significant level, therefore the project's impacts to agricultural resources remain unavoidable and significant. d.olid W- & Upon buildout and assuming no solid wastes from the proposed project would be recycled (a worst-case scenario), the proposed project would generate approximately 40,428 pounds of solid waste per. day, which is equivalent to approximately 7,378 tons per year. However, given the City's current overall waste diversion rate of 47 percent, it is estimated that the project will actually generate 20,214 pounds of solid waste per day, which is equivalent to 3,689 tons per year. The project may also generate household -type hazardous wastes. Cumulative development within the Santa Clarita Valley area would generate 626,230 tons per year of solid waste, as well as hazardous waste. The prof eel's 7,378 tons per year would represent 1.2 percent of this Valley total and an approximately 6 percent increase in the incorporated City area. Land suitable for landfill development or expansion is quantitatively finite and limited due to numerous environmental, regulatory and political constraints. Until long- term landfill space or other disposal alternatives will be adequate to serve the existing and future uses for the forseeable future, project and cumulative solid waste and hazardous waste impacts within the City will be considered unavoidably significant. 11 Reed 97•!28 As with the proposed project, landfill space is finite and until long-term space or other disposal alternatives are identified,'the solid waste impacts of the project with the Buried Bank Stabilization Option and cumulative solid waste and hazardous waste impacts are considered unavoidably significant. Mitigation Measures: As identified in the Final EIR, mitigation measures SW1 through SW 17 would reduce the magnitude of the project's solid waste impacts to some extent. However, no feasible mitigation exists which would reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. The cumulative solid waste impacts of the proposed project, along with the implementation of the Buried Bank Stabilization. Option, will remain unavoidably significant. e. Biota: Temporary and permanent direct impacts on biological resources will occur as a result of the following project -related actions or activities: construction and grading for urban lots, roads, parks, recreational areas, buildings, and other facilities and structures; construction of the Avenue Scott bridge over San Francisquito Creek and the Santa Clara .River, and maintenance activities associated with bank stabilization, bridges, water quality basins, and storm drain outlets.. Project implementation will result in the permanent loss of 165.4 acres of agricultural fields, 89.3 acres of disturbed/ruderal fields, 3.97 acres of coastal sage scrub, 4.74 acres of cottonwood -willow riparian woodland, 0.83 acres of alluvial scrub, 3.41 acres of mule fat scrub; and 6.56 acres of riparian scrub. A portion of the cottonwood -willow riparian woodland and alluvial scrub habitat will be temporarily lost as a result of bank stabilization activities and will be replanted upon completion of the stabilization. Although the project proposes mitigation measures which will reduce impacts to the riparian ecosystem and wildlife species that utilize the riparian and upland habitats, it is assumed that human and domestic animal use of adjacent habitat areas will continue to occur as a result of project implementation and cannot be entirely prevented, despite signage and barriers. With respect to equestrian use, enforcement of rules and regulations will be difficult and the trails may invite access by other non -compatible uses such as off-road vehicles. Therefore, the effects of these project activities onthe riparian resources of the site remains an unavoidable significant impact. The loss of wildlife habitat and open space areas as a result of development within the proposed project site represents an unavoidable significant cumulative impact to biological resources. Unavoidable significant cumulative impacts include the loss of riparian habitat, disturbance to riparian wildlife due to nearby urban development, and effects on habitat for the unarmored three -spine stickleback and least Bell's vireo. The implementation of the Buried Bank Stabilization Option results in a net loss of habitat that is less than the construction of bank lining at the River/Creek .edge. However, losses to these habitats are still considered to have an unavoidably significant impact to biological resources. Potentially significant unavoidable impacts could occur 12 Seco 97.126 to the three special -status fish species as a result of sedimentation, erosion, and loss of riparian habitat along the edges of the river channel, and to special -status bird species potentially nesting in the riparian vegetation (and in the case of burrowing owl, within the upland agricultural and ruderal fields). In the event of a substantial flood event, or as a result of ongoing flooding and erosion over time, thepreserved upland habitat areas may eventually erode so much as to be of little or no value as upland habitat. This loss of upland habitat would substantially affect the overall ability of the riparian ecosystem to maintain the current level of terrestrial species diversity and abundance. Therefore, this loss would be considered an unavoidable significant impact under this option. In addition, because there will still be only 67 percent of the remaining upland habitat that meets the 100 -foot minimum preservation criteria (with exception given to the 7:; -foot setback in the project's Lago de Valencia planning area), the resultant impact on the riparian ecosystem remains a significant unavoidable impact under the Buried Bank Stabilization Option. The overall permanent conversion of 2.6 acres of habitat within the SEAS to urban development represents a net loss of SEA habitat. This loss is also considered an unavoidable impact under this option. Mitigation Measures: As identified in the Final EIR, mitigation measures B1 through B40 and the Buried Bank Stabilization Option mitigation measures would reduce the magnitude of the project's biota impacts to some extent. However, no feasible mitigation exists which would reduce these impacts to less than significant with project implementation. The cumulative impacts of the project, including the construction of the buried bank stabilization lining, would be unavoidably significant. SECTION 7. Based upon the testimony and other evidence received, and upon studies and investigation made by the City Council and on its behalf, the Council further finds that the North Valencia Annexation, North Valencia Specific Plan and related entitlements will have community benefits. The City Council finds that the following benefits are overriding considerations which support adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations: a. The Project recommended for approval by the City Council implements the Valley Center Concept of the General Plan with implementation of the General Plan Amendment as proposed. b. The project will provide the City with infrastructure including improvements to portions of major highways designated on the City's Master Plan of Arterial Highways as follows: Newhall Ranch Road, Magic Mountain Parkway, Bouquet Canyon Road, Valencia Boulevard, McBean Parkway, Avenue Scott and Avenue Tibbitts. C. The project is consistent with: 1) the City's General Plan and Zoning Land Use Classifications; and 2) the intensity of development allowed in the Specific Plan area with: City Council approval of the Specific Plan General Plan Amendment approval of a zone change to SP (Specific Plan Zone) as identified in the Specific Plan for this project, adoption of the Specific Plan document, and the approval of 13 0 Rego 97•126 a'zone change for the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) site to OS (Open Space) d. The project proposes a range of uses including residential, commercial, industrial and recreational in support of City's General Plan Goals and Policies. Appendix A of the Specific Plan, herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit C, includes a detailed explanation of how the North Valencia Specific Plan project integrates the goals and policies of the City s General Plan. The following are a sample of the goals, policies and implementation features of the City's General Plan which are supported by the project: The project supports the Land Use Element including policies promoting a mixed- use town center, with higher density residential, in proximity to public transportation, as follows: Policy 3.1 "Promote .the development of City centers where more intensive land uses will be encouraged." Policy 3.3 "Identify a primary town center ...which encourage(s) a Pedestrian orientation and can accommodate a clustered mix of commercial, entertainment, recreation, town squaretmeeting . place(s), multi -use complexes, and multi -modal transportation activity opportunities." Policy 3.6 "Locate higher density residential development in close proximity to regional and sub -regional centers and public transportation corridors." The Project supports the Open Space and Conservation Element including policies to preserve special natural features and protect the natural environment as follows: Policy 1.6 Link buffer areas, wherever possible, to provide for contiguous areas of open space. Policy 3.7 Preserve to the extent feasible natural riparian habitat and ensure that adequate setback is provided between riparian habitat and surrounding urbanization. The project supports the Air Quality Element which seeks to reduce pollution from automobiles by relating land uses to transportation, facilitating non -automotive travel, and encouraging a jobs/.housing balance, including the following. Goal 10 "To reduce vehicle emissions by creating an urban form that efficiently utilizes urban infrastructure and services." Policy 10.1 "Contribute to the reduction of vehicle miles traveled by achieving a more reasonable job/housing balance." 14 Rew 97.1$6 Policy 10.2 "Develop and encourage efficient transportation systems and land use patterns which *ninim;ze total trips and vehicle miles traveled." Goal 12 "To reduce mobile source emissions by promoting a shift from single occupancy to higher occupancy vehicles." The project supports the Housing Element which has numerous sections calling for mixed use projects, flexibility in standards, a mix of housing types, and using the specific plan process, as shown in the following sections: Policy 1.4 "Promote the development of compatible mixed use projects in order to create a village concept, with various interacting uses ... to stimulate activity." Program 1.a "Alternative Development Standards. Use the specific plan process ... to permit alternative housing design where such projects result in attractive, desirable housing types, including affordable housing." Program Lc "Specific Plan/Planned Development. Permit flexible development standards in specific plans... that encourage housing developments which meet the. needs of the community. Flexible development standards should allow for clustering, and a variety of site design characteristics as appropriate." Policy 2.2 'Locate higher density residential- development and housing ...in close proximity to public transportation and commercial land uses..." Policy 3.3 "Encourage a mix of housing types and densities in new large scale development." Policy 3.11 "Consider alternative development standards where. Practical -to promote desired housing types and benefits...:. The project supports the Community Design Element, which in the following policies are also supportive of this theme, as follows: Policy 2.2 "Provide for residential uses in proximity to business/commercial centers in a manner which promotes the neighborhood/village/town center planning concept and maintains—the concept of the Valley Center." 15 s Rom 91.186 Policy 3.3 "Encourage the establishment of mixed use and village commercial centers..., urban open spaces, and the effective use of street furniture in downtown areas. Policy 3.4 "Encourage design and uses of commercial districts and related housing that add pedestrian orientation and that provide for safe and secure daytime and nighttime activities." e. The North Valencia project will provide various residential housing opportunities for different economic levels with a mix of single family and multi -family dwelling units as required by the Housing Element of the General Plan, the Housing Allocation for the City of Santa Clarita as set forth by SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments) in the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) and the City's Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) component of the City's Comprehensive Plan prepared for the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). f.. The project provides significant. public benefits including employment opportunities, increased residential densities in proximity to transportation corridors, an improved circulation network including improvements to portions of Newhall Ranch Road, Magic Mountain Parkway, Bouquet Canyon Road, McBean Parkway, Avenue Scott and Avenue Tibbitts, identification and preservation of a riparian buffer area along the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek Significant Ecological Areas (SEAs), and significant expansion of the City's River Trail system of bicycle, pedestrian and equestrian paths. SECTION 8. By adoption of this Resolution, the City Council has reviewed and considered the environmental information contained in the Final EIR (SCH#96071077) and determines that it is adequate and in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.). In compliance with CEQA Section 15093, the Planning Commisaion has considered the project benefits as balanced against the unavoidable adverse, environmental effects and hereby determines that the benefits outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects; therefore, the City Council determines that this resolution comprises a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) and the adverse environmental effects are considered acceptable..The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council certify the Final EIR documents and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC). SECTION 9. By the adoption of this Resolution, the City Council approves certification of the environmental impact report and adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations that identifies the benefits of the project as balanced against its unavoidable environmental risks, but has not granted any approval or entitlement on this project. SECTION 10. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. 16 &w 97.126 SECTION 11. 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 _ day of 1997 MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) § CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ) I, Sharon L. Dawson, CMC, 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 _ day of , 1997, by the following vote of the City Council: AYES: COUNCE[A EMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: cd\council\nvlccre 1.eir 17 f_j RESOLUTION NO. 97-127 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA APPROVING MASTER CASE NOS. 95-242, 96-120,97-041, 97-063 FOR ANNEXATION NO. 95-006 (NORTH VALENCIA), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97-001 TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT TEXT AND LAND USE MAP, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP51931, OAK TREE PERMIT 97-009 AND HAUL ROUTE TO ALLOW FOR THE 858 ACRE NORTH VALENCIA ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF A 706.6 ACRE PROPERTY WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA KNOWN AS THE NORTH VALENCIA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA 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. The North Valencia Annexation area is approximately 858 acres generally located east of Anza Drive, south: of Newhall Ranch Road, west of Bouquet Canyon Road and Valencia Blvd., and north of Magic Mountain Parkway and the Auto Center in the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County adjacent to the City of Santa Clarita. The North Valencia Specific Plan area is approximately 706.6 acres within the North Valencia Annexation area and is generally located south of Avenue Hopkins and.east of Anza Drive and the west side of San Francisquito Creek, south of Newhall Ranch Road, west of Bouquet Canyon Road and Valencia Blvd., and north of Magic Mountain Parkway and the Auto Center in the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County adjacent to the City of Santa Clarita. b. In November 1995, the City and the Valenica Company entered into a non- - binding Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding certain aspects of the potential annexation of approximately 969 acres of unincorporated area in the North Valencia area. At the time the MOU was adopted, the Valencia Company stated their intention to request approvals for up to 3,690 dwelling units, approximately 850,000 square feet of commercial uses, and 223,000 square feet of industrial uses. Entitlements to be requested at the time of MOU approval included a prezone, an annexation and development agreement, and tract maps. Ther MOU specifically indicated that any annexation would be subject to environmental review. C. A prezone (MC95-242, PZ95-006) was approved on April 16, 1996 by the City Council for portions of the North Valencia Annexation area through Ordinance No. 96-12. An annexation request for the North Valencia Annexation (Annexation No. 95-006) was filed with LAFCO in June 1996 following the direction of the City Council on June 11, 1996 (Resolution 96.84). Following the prezone and filing of the annexation request by the City, the Valencia Company, herein referred to as the "applicant", submitted entitlement requests noted above for a portion of the annexation area known as the North Valencia Reso. 97-127 Page 2 Specific Plan Area which are subject to environmental review.. The City's annexation request is on hold at LAFCO at the request of the City and the applicant pending approval of the environmental review document and the above entitlements. d. On June 5, 1996, the applicant submitted the following entitlement requests: (Master Case No. 97-120) Annexation and Development Agreement 96-001, Annexation 95-006, Conditional Use Permit 96-010, TPM 20496 (Builder's South), TPM 20669 (Valencia Industrial Center), TPM 18417 (Pony League), TPM 24516 (Overall Project Area), VTTM 51931(Valencia .Del Lago), VTTM 51281 (South River) and VTTM 44832 (Arbor Park). Incomplete letters were sent on these entitlement requests in July and staff noted that an Oak Tree Permit would also be required. In January 1997, the applicant formally withdrew the application for a CUP and all of the tract and parcel maps except for VTTM 51931. The applicant submitted the following entitlement requests: a Specific Plan document including a comprehensive plan of development and development standards for the North Valencia Specific Plan area and Prezone 97-001 to change the zoning within the area to the City zone SP (Specific Plan). Following review of the specific plan document and revised site plan, staff recommended that a general plan amendment be filed in order for the requested entitlements to be consistent with the City's General Plan.. On March 12, 1997, the applicant filed a request for MC 97-041, OTP 97-009 to allow for possible encroachment upon oak trees, and a general plan amendment to the text of the Land Use Element Valley Center Concept narrative to allow for a North Valencia Specific Plan and an amendment to the Land Use Map The development application includes the proposed annexation of approximately 858 acres of unincorporated Los Angeles County land located adjacent to the City boundary. This request would amend portions of Ordinance No. 96.12 to establish the City of Santa Clarita prezone Specific Plan (SP) over 706.6 acres on the areas known as the North Valencia Specific Plan area. The remaining acreage in the annexation area would remain as previously prezoned by Ordinance No. 96.12. The Specific Plan request includes entitlement for up to 2,000 dwelling units (750 single family detached, 1,250 multi -family attached), 636,000 square feet of commercial/retail, 167,000 square feet of industriaUbusiness park space, a 6.5 -acre elementary school site, a 15.2 -acre lake/park, a 12.4 -acre community park, 4.9 acres of neighborhood parks, 355.6 acres of open space and over 5 miles of community, trails; Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51931 to subdivide 706 acres into 138 lots; An oak tree permit to allow construction within 200 feet of the oak trees.with no removals or encroachments are proposed; and review and certification of the Environmental Impact Report (SCH896071077) prepared for this project. A development agreement was also requested 2 s Reso. 97-127 Page 3 d. The original North Valencia Specific Plan request excluded a .6 acre Southern California Gas Facility located on Magic Mountain Parkway; however, the City proposes to include this area within the Specific Plan area to avoid the issue of spot zoning. The North Valencia Specific Plan area is. bisected by the approximately 13 acre MWD property which is excluded from the Specific Plan prezone; however, the City proposes to prezone this area Open Space (OS) in order to be consistent with the surrounding uses proposed in the Specific Plan. e. On June 25, 1991, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-98, adopting the General. Plan of the City of Santa Clarita and Certifying the Environmental Impact Report. The City's General Plan presently designates the annexation area as Commercial Town Center (CTC), Community Commercial (CC), Business Park (BP), and Residential Moderate (RM), with a Valley Center Concept (VCC) Overlay on the majority of the site and a Significant Ecological Area (SEA) Overlay over the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek. The General Plan does not specifically mention the North Valencia site as an area ideal for a specific plan; however, the site does meet the minimum size of 100 contiguous acres under single ownership as identified in the Specific Plan zoning standards of the City's Unified Development Code. Zoning on the site is presently Los Angeles County zones C2, Mliz, and A2-5 and has already been prezoned City of Santa Clarita zones CTC (Commercial Town Center), CC (Community Commercial), BP (Business Park), and RS (Residential Moderate). f. The North Valencia Specific Plan area is vacant, generally flat, and was used for agricultural purposes: The approximately 153 acres of the annexation area that is excluded from the Specific Plan is flat and improved with industrial, commercial and public utility. uses. Major features of the annexation area include the Santa Clara River, the South Fork of the Santa Clara River, San Francisquito Creek, Bouquet Creek, a portion of the San Gabriel Fault Alquist- Priolo Special Studies Zone, the MWD aqueduct pipeline and electrical transmission corridors. g. The design of the project concentrates development within areas previously used for agricultural uses and includes preservation of approximately 348.3 acres of the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek and 84 acres of upland buffer area located adjacent to the River and Creek as identified in the North Valencia Specific Plan document. The project proposes grading on approximately 281 acres of the 858 acre project site. The total amount of grading involves movement, of approximately 1.4 million cubic yards of on-site cut, 2.7 million cubic yards of on-site fill and 1.5 million cubic yards of off-site earth to be imported. Movement of approximately 850,000 cubic yards of the necessary off-site fill has been approved from the northeast comer of McBean Parkway and Newhall Ranch Road through conditional use permit No. 96-013 (MC# 96-236). The remaining earth would be imported from the area known 3 Reso. 97-127 Page 4 as the Center City Specific Plan area located east of the present terminus of Newhall Ranch Road, east of Bouquet Canyon Road. A haul route for imported earth is included within the Specific Plan document, however, specific haul route approval would be required at the time of grading permit. h. 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 annexation, annexation and development agreement, tentative tract maps, conditional use permit and oak tree permit was mailed in July 1996 to affected agencies. A scoping meeting was held at the Valencia Town Center Conference Room on August 7, 1996 to obtain information from the public as to issues which should be addressed in the environmental document. Following a substantial revision to the project with the withdrawal of the conditional use permit application and six of the tentative maps in January 1997 and filing of a request for a prezone, specific plan document, general plan amendment, and revised vesting tentative tract map 51931, a subsequent NOP was. prepared and mailed in May 1997. i. The Planning Commission went on a field visit to the North Valencia site on Saturday, May 31, 1997 at 9:00 a.m., beginning in the Council Chambers .for the.purpose of becoming familiar with the annexation and Specific Plan area. The City Council held a study session on this. project on June 3, 1997 and received an informational report on the status of this project. At that Council Study Session the Council approved a preliminary processing schedule for this project which identified various Planning Commission public hearing dates and specific project topics to be discussed at each of these meetings. The goal of this processing schedule was to reduce redundancy and allow the Commission and the public to better prepare for the meetings. This processing schedule allowed for each issue area of the Draft EIR to be discussed in a public forum during the Draft EIR public comment period to allow for maximum public participation, with numerous opportunities for the public to ask questions and receive information concerning the environmental document and the project. k. The Planning Commission received an informational presentation about the North Valencia Specific Plan proposal at their regularly scheduled meeting on June 17, 1997, at 7:00 p.m. at the' City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita. This presentation was given by staff to distribute copies of the proposed North Valencia Specific Plan dated June 1997 and the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51931 version dated June 13, 1997, to provide the Commission with a background on the project application and to provide the Commission with a review of the entitlements requested 4 0 Reso. 97-127 Page 5 I. The North Valencia Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was circulated for review and comment by the affected governmental agencies and all comments received have been considered. The DEIR (SCH#96071077) was distributed to the Planning Commission, the public and affected governmental agencies for a 45 -day public review period beginning on August 1, 1997 and ending on September 15, 1997. Late comments were accepted until September 22, 1997 to allow for mail delays. in. Following the processing schedule set by the Council on June 3, 1997, the Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings on the North Valencia Annexation and Specific Plan and related entitlements commencing on July 1, 1997 and continuing on July 9, 1997, July 23, 1997, August 5, 1997, August 13, 1997, August 19, 1997, August 25, 1997, September 2, 1997, September 10, 1997, September 24, 1997, October 7, 1997, October 15, 1997 and October 30, 1997. These public hearings have been held at 7:00 p.m.,at the City Council Chambers and Orchard Rooms, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita. Five of the public hearings were held between August 5, 1997 to September 2, 1997 which was during the public comment period. These public hearings were held for the purpose of providing an opportunity for the Commission and the public to consider focused discussions on each of the environmental issue areas discussed in the DEIR. n. The Final EIR , herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit A, includes the Draft EIR and the following: responses to written comments on the DEIR, responses to public testimony regarding Draft EIR issues raised at the public hearings during the public comment period, modifications to the Draft EIR text, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). The Draft EIR was provided to the Commission on August 1, 1997 and the remaining Final EIR documents were prepared and provided to the Planning Commission on October 3, 1997. The Proposed Specific Plan Text dated June 1997, herein incorporated by reference as Exhibit B, also contains specific development standards and policies that mitigate potential environmental impacts and was considered by the Planning Commission., The Planning Commission has considered the Final EIR,-as well as information provided in staff reports, the amendment text and through .public testimony, prior to recommending project approval. o. The City of Santa Clarita Development Review Committee met and supplied the applicant with draft conditions of approval. P. The project proposes the extension of all utility services to the project site Reso. 97-127 Page 6 q. 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 teat 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. r. 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. (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. D 0 Reso. 97-127 Page 7 . (e) Provide for the construction, improvement, or extension of transportation facilities, public utilities, and public services required by development within the zone. S. A duly noticed public hearing was held on November 4, 1997 at 7:00 in the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard SECTION 2. Based upon the above findings of fact, oral and written testimony and o'her evidence received at the public hearings held for the project, and upon studies and investigations made by the City Council find as follows: a. At the hearing described above, the City Council considered staff and consultant presentations, staff reports, applicant presentations, and public testimony on the proposal, and the FEIR prepared for the project. b. The Specific Plan complies with Article S --Specific Plans Sec 65451 et seq. of the California Planning and Zoning Laws by including the required text and diagrams which specify all of the detail as described in Section Lq of this Resolution No. P97-20. C. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not cause serious public health problems, since water, sewage disposal, fire protection and other public services and utilities are addressed in the Specific Plan, MMRP and Conditions of Approval. d. The project complies with the general requirements and performance standards for the Specific Plan Zone. The project is consistent with the intent of the Specific Plan Zone which was created to: facilitate development of certain areas by permitting greater flexibility and consequently, more creative and imaginative designs; promote more economical and efficient use of land while providing a harmonious variety of choices, higher level of amenities, and preservation of natural and scenic qualities of open space; and ensure that development substantially conforms to the approved plans. e. Following a redesignation of the North Valencia Specific Plan area to SP (Specific Plan) and the MWD ownership area to OS (Open Space) on the City's General Plan land use map, prezone SP (Specific Plan Zone) and OS (Open Space) as identified in the Specific Plan for this project and adoption of the Specific Plan, this Specific.PIan project will be consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. 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 FEM for the project (Resolution 97-126). 7 Reso. 97-127 Page 8 SECTION 3. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the City Council hereby find as follows: a. An FEIR, 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 Plaru ing Commission and 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, and consistent with the State Planning and Zoning Laws. d. The applicant has substantiated the -findings for approving a general plan amendment, haul route, vesting tentative tract map and oak tree permit. SECTION 4. The City Council hereby approves the following entitlements requested under Master Case Nos. 95-242, 96-120, 97-041, and 97-063: General Plan Amendment 97- 001 to the amend the Land Use Element Teat and Land Use Map with text and map changes attached hereto as Exhibit "A", Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51931, Oak Tree Permit 97-009 and a haul route and subject to the VTTM conditions which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit "B", which includes the MMRP which is incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit "C7. SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and certify this record to be a full, complete, and correct copy of the action taken i7 0 Reso. 97-127 Page 9 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of .1997 ATTEST: CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )ss CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ) I. Sharon L. Dawson_ 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 day of 1997 by the following vote of Council: AYES: COUNCII.MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY CLERK Reso. 97-127 Page 10 Exhibit A General Plan Text and Map Changes Incorporated by Reference 10 J Reso. 97-127 Page 11 Exhibit B Conditions of Approval Incorporated by Reference 11 Reso. 97-127 Page 12 sAcd\council\res97127.fff Exhibit C Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Incorporated by Reference 12 0 The Ahwahnee Principles Existing patterns of urban and suburban development seriously impair our quality of life. The symptoms are: more congestion and air pollution resulting from our increased dependence on automobiles, the loss of precious open space, the need for costly improvements to roads and public services, the inequitable distribution of economic resources and the loss of sense of community. By drawing upon the best from the past and the present, we can, first, infill existing communities and, second, plan new communities that will more successfully serve the needs of those who live and work within them. Such planning should adhere to these fundamental principles: Community Nnciples r. All planning should be in the form of complete and integrated communities containing housing, shops, work places, schools, parks and civic facilities essential to the dally life of the residents. z. Community size should be designed so that housing, jobs, daily needs and other activities are within easy walking distance of each other. 3. As many activities as -possible should be located within easy walking distance of transit stops. 4. A community should contain a diversity of housing types to enable citizens from . a wide range of economic levels and age groups to live within its boundaries_ S. Businesses within the community should provide a range of job types for the community's residents. 6. The location and.character of the community should be consistent with a larger transit network. 7• The community should have a center focus that combines commercial, civic, cultural and recreational uses. 8. The community should contain an ample supply'of specialized open space in the form of squares, greens and parks whose frequent use is encouraged through placement and design. 9. Public spaces should be designed to encourage the attention and presence of people at all hours of the day and night. to. Each community or cluster of communities should have a well defined edge, such as agricultural greenbelts or wildlife corridors, permanently protected from development. t t. Streets, pedestrian paths and bike paths should contribute to a system of fully - connected and interesting routes to all destinations. Their design should encourage pedestrian and bicycle use by being small and spatially defined by buildings, trees and lighting; and by discouraging high speed traffic. (Wouinued on back) ta. Wherever possible, the natural terrain, drainage, and vegetation of the community should be preserved with superior examples contained within parks or greenbelts. 13. The community design should help conserve resources and minimize waste. 14. Communities should provide for the efficient use of water through the use of natural drainage, drought tolerant landscaping and recycling. 15. The street orientation, the placement of buildings and the use of shading should contribute to the energy efficiency of the community. Regional Principles r. The regional land -use planning structure should be integrated within a larger transportation network built around transit rather than freeways. z: Regions should be bounded by and provide a continuous.system of greenbelt/ wildlife- corridors to be determined by natural conditions. 3. Regional institutions and services (government, stadiums, museums, etc.) should be located in the urban core. 4. Materials and methods of construction should be specific to the region,.exhibiting continuity of history and culture and compatibility with the climate to encourage .the development of local character and community identity. Implementation Strategy r. The general plan should be updated to incorporate the above principles. a. Rather than allowing piecemeal development, local governments should take charge of the planning process. General plans should designate where new growth, infill or redevelopment will be allowed to occur. 3. Prior to any development, a specific plan should be prepared based on these planning principles. With the adoption of specific plans, complying projects could proceed with minimal delay. 4. Plans should be developed through an open process and participants in the process should be provided visual models of all planning proposals. Authors: Editors: Peter Calthorpe' Judy Corbett Michael Corbett Peter Katz Andres Duany Steve Weissman Elizabeth Moule Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk Stefanos Polyzoides For more information contact The Center for Resource Efficient Communities: 916 448-1 i98 © Copyright t99t, Local Government Commission, Sacramento, CA North Valencia Annexation and Specific Plan Master Case Nos. 95-242,96-120,97-03 Response to Issues Raised by Councilwoman Magic 1. Maintenance of alleys and security All public roadways within the project, primarily the regional roads such as Newhall Ranch Road and McBean Parkway, will be maintained by the City upon the completion of construction and acceptance by the City. Private roads within the project will be maintained by the Home Owners Association. Security will be provided by the Los Angeles Sheriff in accordance with the City contract for these services. Additional security may be provided by the Home Owners Association. 2. Present zoning and number of units allowed compared to number of units requested The current Los Angeles County zoning designation for this property is A-2-2. However, the City General Plan designations are BP (Business Park), CC (Community Commercial), CTC (Commercial Town Center), RS (Residential Suburban), RM (Residential Moderate), SEA (Significant Ecological Area), and VCC (Valley Center Concept).. The number of units allowed in the current General Plan for Lago de Valencia and South River is 4,926 as compared to the 1,100 units proposed. 3. Trash and recycling containers The Planning Commission imposed a number of solid waste conditions of approval at the request of the City s Environmental Services Division. These conditions discuss all aspects of solid waste and recycling and are provided as an attachment to this document. 4. Street safety and gating The applicant originally requested the approval of six gate locations within the annexation area. The Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council reduces to three the number of approved gates locations. The attached circulation plan identifies 3 gate locations supported by the Planning Commission. 5. Maps with traffic circulation See attached circulation map as proposed in the North Valencia Specific Plan. 6. Bus route accessibility See attached bus stop map as proposed in the North Valencia Specific Plan and approved by the Transit Division. 7. Alternatives comparison See attached summary from EIR Alternatives analysis. JJL:lep cd\cwncU\kjaiicl jjl Master Care 96249 Drat Conditions o/Approval Page 24 TS 11. For all retail commercial projects which do not front of major highways, a pedestrian linkage between the main entrance and the sidewalk shall be provided. The following conditions, which are specific to the project, shall apply: TS 12. At proposed major bus stops in the project area, bus benches and/or shelters and trash receptacles which reflect the architecture of adjacent development shall be installed, to the satisfaction of the Transit Division. TS 13. Pedestrian access shall be provided to all public amenities in the project (i.e.: lake, park, schools, zipper walkway system, paseos) from the adjacent public street. TS 14. In accordance with the City's Transportation Development Plan and the Circulation Element of the General Plan, pedestrian -friendly site design shall be encouraged throughout the project area SOLID WASTE REFUSE/RECYCLABLES WM 1. Each enclosure shall consist of an adequate:• container capacity sufficient to accommodate projected refuselrecyclables design and shall be located in appropriate areas to serve the building's use per City standards. WM 2. A sufficient number of bins and/or containers shall be provided to allow for the collection and loading of refuse and recyclable materials generated by the project. The number and container type shall be as described below. . WM 3. Developers and property owners are encouraged to include design features in the collection systems for projects to assist in the removal and separation of refuse and recyclables.. Such features may include: roll-out compartments below the sink; built. in recycling receptacles; fireproof, cleanable, secure chutes for collecting and loading recyclable materials: WM 4. For multi -family unit apartment projects, refusetrecycling enclosure(s) shall be designed to comply with the physically disabled requirements of Title 24. WM b. Refusahvegcling enclosures shall not be placed immediately adjacent to residential structures unless otherwise authorized by the Planning & Building Services and Fire Departments. WM 6. For rental projects, the owner or agent shall inform all tenants about recycling, the refuselrecycling collection program including the location of the enclosure(s), and the materials to be recycled. U mter Came 96262 Draft Conditions o/AppmV&1 Page 25 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS FOR REFUSE/RECYCLING WM 7. Dimensions of the refuse/ recycling enclosure shall accommodate containers per City standards. WM 8. The design and selection of building materials for enclosures shall be compatible with surrounding building architecture. WM 9. Multi -Family attached residential unit refuse collection and recycling space shall be provided for two three -cubic yard collection bins, one for refuse and one for recyclables (107" X 84") for the first 20 units and two additional three -cubic yard bins for each additional 20 units, thereafter subject to review by the Director of Planning & Building Services. WM 10. Office and General Commercial. refuse collection and recycling space shall be provided for two three -cubic yard collection bins (107"X 84" or 168" X 53.5") for the first 10,000 square feet of gross floor area and (84" X 53.5") one three -cubic yard collection bin for the neat 20,000 square feet.. Space for drop boa collection of recyclables may be provided in lieu of three -cubic yard bin service. Projects in excess of 40,000 square feet shall be reviewed on a case by case basis. WM 11. Retail refuse collection and recycling space shall be provided for two three -cubic yard collection bins (107" X 84" or 168" X 53.5") for the first 8,000 square feet and two additional three -cubic yard bins for each 8,000 square feet or fraction thereafter. Refuse space for drop box collection of recyclables may be provided in lieu of three - cubic yard bin service.. WM 12. Industrial refuse collection and recycling space shall be provided for two three -cubic yard collection bins for the first 20,000 square feet of gross floor area (107" X 84" or 168" X 53.51 and one three -cubic yard collection bin (84" X 53.5") for each 10,000 square feet or fraction thereafter. Space for drop box collection of recyclables may be provided in Hen of three -cubic yard bins. WM 13. Institutional - Refusecollection and recycling space shall be provided in the form of allocated space. foe a minimum of two three -cubic yard collection bins (107" X 84"). WM 14. The walls of each refusetrecycling enclosure shall be six (6) feet in height, with an exterior surface finish compatible to the main structure(s). WM IS. Signs that clearly identify recyclables and refuse collection and loading area(s) and the materials accepted therein shall be posted at points of access to each recycling enclosure area per City standards. WM 16. Each enclosure shall have metal frames and gates with self-closing hinges designed with cane bolts in front of the block walls to secure gates when in the open position. The main gate opening of any bin enclosure must be at least 84 inches wide. Master Case 96242 Dn4? Conditions o/APProval Page 28 WM 17. The full width of the pavement area in front of each refuselrecycling enclosure shall have a maximum 2% slope away from the enclosure to allow manipulation of bins and drainage. WM 18. Driveways or travel aisles shall be designed to provide sufficient, unobstructed collection vehicle and personnel movement. WM 19. A six (6) inch high continuous concrete curb shall be provided around the bottom interior perimeter of the .enclosure per City standards. WM 20. A minimum four (4) foot wide, six (6) inch thick concrete apron with 2% slope shall be constructed in front of each refuse/recycling enclosure at the point where collection service is provided per City standards. WM 21. All new enclosures for multi -family apartment projects shall be designed with a separate pedestrian access to avoid use of the main enclosure gates. WM 22. Wherever feasible, developers are encouraged to use building materials made of recycled materials to construct the enclosures per City standards. WM 23. A minimum vertical clearance of at least fourteen (14) feet shall be maintained at all truck pick-up areas. WM 24. No enclosure shall be designed with gates oriented and visible to or observable from a public right of way. WM 25. Each enclosure and pedestrian access shall be adequately illuminated by a free standing light fixture or as determined appropriate by the Planning & Building Services Department: WM 26. All single family detached'developments shall be designed to include individual area for composting:: ,. RECYCLING PLAN WM 27. The developer and/or owner of proposed .developments utilizing refuselrecycling enclosures in.their project shall submit a written recycling plan in coordination with the PublicsWorks Department. This plan shall be submitted 60 days prior to occupancy per City standards. PLANNING DIVISION PL 1. The Final Map shall be developed in substantial conformance with the Vesting Tentative Tract Map approved by the Planning Commission. K � E§� � r@ u§ § •+\\ +. � � 6.0 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1. PURPOSE The purpose of the AIternatives section of this EIR is to assess a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives (CEQA Guidelines § 15126 (d)(1). CEQA also states that "the EIR shall include sufficient informationabout each alternative to allow meaningful evaluation, analysis, and comparison with the proposed project." The Guidelines state that the discussion of alternatives should be governed by the "rule of reason." Generally, significant effects of an alternative shall be discussed, but in less detail than the proposed project, and should provide decision -makers perspective as well as a reasoned choice. This section addresses five alternatives to the proposed project. Specific alternatives include: • Alternative 1, the No Project Alternative. This Alternative is required by the CEQA Guidelines and it compares the impacts which might occur if the site is left in its present condition with those that would be generated by the project as proposed. • Alternative 2, Buildout According to City of Santa Clarita General Plan The purpose of this alternative is to describe the impacts of developing the site according to the General Plan land use designations and to compare such impacts with those generated by the proposed project. • Alternative 3, the Biological Alternative. The purpose of this alternative is to provide more clustering of units, by reducing the residential footprint, thereby providing more open space and fewer impacts to biological resources. The number of residential units will remain the same. However, only multi -family units would be constructed in the Lago de Valencia planning area. The Pony League, South River Village, Valencia Industrial Park and Bouquet South planning areas will remain the same as proposed. • Alternative 4, the 20 Percent Reduced Density Alternative. This alternative results in a 20 percent reduction in residential units and commercial square footage. In doing so, Alternative 4 will create a reduced development footprint for both residential and commercial uses. Industrial and school uses will remain the same as the proposed project. 6.0-1 North VaWzda Armcaxon nit Fm August 1997 6.0 Project Alternatives • Alternative 5, the 40 Percent Reduced Density Alternative. This alternative results in a 40 percent reduction in residential units and commercial square footage. In doing so, Alternative 5 will create a reduced development footprint for both residential and commercial uses. This altemative also includes a grade separated crossing of Avenue Scott at Bouquet Canyon Road and a bridge over Bouquet Creek Channel for Avenue Scott. All of the alternatives, except for No Project, assume that bank stabilization will be at the river/creek edge. Utility and service provider calculations for. each of the alternatives is provided in Appendix 6.0. Generation demand for services and utilities vary given the type and nmuber (mix) of residential units. The actual amount of square feet for industrial and commercial uses proposed will also vary total service generation figures. For example, Alternative 4 and Alternative 5 propose a 20 percent and 40 percent reduction in dwelling units and commercial square feet, respectively. Simply reducing the service and utility figures by respective percentages as that would not take into consideration the mix of residential units which.has variable generation figures dependent upon the type of housing unit (single or multi -family). Neither would it take into consideration that the amount of industrial square feet remains the same in all alternatives as well as the elementary school in Alternatives 3,4 and 5. All services and utilities estimates were calculated individually to give each Alternative a worst case analysis. 2. ALTERNATIVE 1—No Project Alternative Under the No Project alternative, the project site would remain in its present condition and would be used for agricultural purposes and partially developed with industrial uses. As described in Section 20, Environmental Setting, a majority of the site is, or has been, used for agricultural activities or is in a otherwise disturbed state (e.g., City of Santa Clarita initiated storm drain grading project on the South River Village Planning Area). Under the No Project alternative, the potential project - related impacts described in Section 4.0, Environmental Impact Analyses, would not occur. Development of the proposed project would reduce the amount of sedimentation/erosion below existing levels as a result of covering the site with landscaping and impervious surfaces (i.e., residences, streets, sidewalks, etc.). The No -Project alternative would allow the project site to remain in its current state, thereby allowing continued sedimentation/erosion of the site. Also, in its current state there is no flood protection, except in limited areas. The CLWA is investigating the use of reclaimed water that may ultimately reduce amounts of reclaimed water added to the Santa Clara River by Sanitation District No. 26. 6.0-2 North Valy d Armaatmi Dr* EIR August 1997 6.0 Project Alternatives The project site presently has little true 'upland' habitat; the proposed project includes an area, termed the "upland preserve zone," to provide for such habitat. In relation to the proposed project this alternative would have less demand on public services and utilities (i.e., water service, wastewater, solid waste, education, libraries, parks and recreation, fire and police protection; gas and electricity). Project viewsheds would remain the same as the existing condition. The alternative would not generate the traffic, air emissions and noise emissions associated with the proposed project. This alternative would however, result in the same amount of storm runoff and sedimentation that is occurring today. It would continue the use of fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides for agricultural activities which would be carried into riparian areas through sedimentation/runoff. On balance, the No. Project alternative is considered to be the "environmentally superior" alternative since most of the environmental effects of the project will not occur, although this alternative is less desirable in terms of sedimentation/runoff and effects of agricultural operations, and does not provide the upland habitat which the proposed project includes. 3. ALTERNATIVE 2—Buildout According to the City of Santa Clarita General Plan As shown on Figure 6.0-1, this alternative assumes development of the project site under the City of Santa Clarita General Plan which designates the site for the following land uses: Commercial Town Center (CTC), Community Commensal (CC), Residential Moderate (RM), Business Park (BP) with overlays of Significant Ecological Area (SEA) and Valley Center Concept (VCC). Both the CTC and CC land use designations allow for a midpoint density of 0.375:1 floor area ratio (FAR). The BP land use designation allows a midpoint FAR of 1:1. The RM land use designation allows a midpoint density of 11.0 dwelling units per acre. The General Plan establishes "mid -point" densities within each land use categories to ensure that the level of development proposed matches the intent of the General Plan The General Plan states that new development may propose densities above the mid -point range, provided that substantial community benefits are incorporated into the development plan, such as affordable housing or a community recreation center. Under this alternative, 14.5 acres are designated as RM which would allow 160 dwelling units at a mid -point density. Approximately 361 acres of land would be allocated to commercial uses; at a mid- point FAR of 0.375 this would equate to 5,896,935 square feet of commercial uses. Industrial square footage would remain the same as the proposed project (167,000). This alternative does not include parks or a school. The project proposes 2,000 dwelling units and 636,000 square feet of commercial uses. 6.0-3 North Vaimna Amaatim Drat ErR August 1997 6.0 Project Alternatives The VCC overlay allows for thematic and mixed-use concepts for the Valley Center area containing major commercial, open space, residential and recreational opportunities. The VCC allows residential development where it would otherwise not be allowed. The SEA overlay designation allows for limited development The following discussion compares the potential environmental impact of this alternative to those associated with implementation of the proposed project. a. Geotechnical Hazards Implementation of this alternative would not be expected to result in a reduction in geotechnical impacts. The identified Alquist-Priolo Fault zone would subject this alternative to the same constraints as that of the proposed project. Development of this alternative would also involve grading of the project site (building pads, roadways, utilities, eta); therefore, grading impact potential would be similar to that of the proposed project Based cn this information, from a geotechnical standpoint the City of Santa Clarita General Plan alternative would not be preferred over the proposed project. h- Flood Implementation of this alternative will have more hardscape and therefore cause greater surface runoff than the proposed project The urban runoff that is generated larder this alternative would be conveyed and discharged into the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek in a similar manner as the proposed project. This runoff would require similar treatment before it is discharged into these water courses in compliance with Clean Water Act and Regional Water Quality Control Board standards. Nonetheless, this alternative would result in more runoff than the proposed project and is not preferred over the proposed project. c. Traffic and Access Implementation of Alternative 2 would result in an increase in project -generated traffic. Specifically, using ITE generation factors, average daily trip generation an the project site, would increase from 52,356 trips to 238,471 trips (a 455 percent increase). Project trips will increase in Alternative 2 due to the significantly greater amount of commercial uses which have a higher trip generation factor than residential uses. Once project -generated traffic leaves the project area, the increase in trips would also have a greater impact on local and regional roadways than the proposed project 6.0-4 North VAIM=AM=ut= DMfi M August 1997 i RSxs - �d �Sa � 55yy5 W p �E w T` r ys LU Y _.ay y� Jt i RSxs - 6.0 Project Alternatives As a result, traffic and circulation impacts in the project vicinity would be significantly worse under this alternative than under the proposed project Given these considerations, this alternative would not be preferred over the proposed project for traffic impacts. d. Air Quality The majority of the site would be developed with commercial uses under Alternative 2. Air-quality impacts related to construction activities would remain similar to the proposed project However, long- term (Le., operational) impacts related to vehicular traffic would be greatly increased due to this alternative. Proposed Project 10,736.0 694.5 805.3 51.4 8,321.6 Alternative 2 45,923.7 3,136.7 3,405.8 216.3 38,067.8 Recommended SCAQMD Ttrce✓Mds 550.0 55.0 55.0 150.0 150.0 Source: Impact Sciences, Inc., June I997. This increase in air emission impact magnitude would occur primarily due to commercial uses which generate a much higher average daily trip (ADT) generation than residential uses. Based on this, Alternative 2 would not be preferred over the proposed project for air quality impacts. e. Noise The majority of the project site would be developed with commercial uses, which because of its greater amount of vehicular traffic will generate more noise than the proposed project. Although the commercial uses under this Alternative may not exceed the noise levels established by the City of Santa Clarita, they will generate higher noise levels than the proposed project Given these considerations, this alternative would not be preferred over the proposed project for noise impacts. £ Biota Biological impacts would remain the same as the proposed project The upland preservation zone would still be developed to minimize impacts to the riparian/upland ecotone along the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek and upland foraging areas used by wildlife species associated with this type of vegetation. Because this alternative would have a smaller permanent on-site population 6.0-6 North Valencia Am=d mt Dmf! M August 1997 6.0 ProjectAIternatfves but a substantially higher daytime population, from a biological resources standpoint, neither the General Plan alternative or the proposed project would be preferred. .& Cultural Resources Grading associated with this alternative would be similar to that of the proposed project in that the footprints would be similar. • Consequently, potential cultural resource impacts resulting from project development would be similar to that of the proposed project. Based on this information, from a cultural resources standpoint, neither the General Plan alternative or the proposed project would be preferred. h. Visual Resources Implementation of this alternative would allow construction of both multi -family and commercial stvcturesup to the permitted height limitation of 35 feet. The project proposes cluster and attached residential units and commercial struchues to an allowable height of 50 feet Also, this alternative would likely result in more hardscape (e.g., parking lots) and less landscaped areas than the proposed project Overall, viewshed impacts of the project may be reduced despite the greater hardscape and less landscaping, given the lower building heights developed under this alternative, but because visual perceptions are subjective this is not certain. Based on this information, it cannot beconcluded, from a visual resources standpoint, that either the General Plan alternative or the proposed project would be preferred. L Water Service The water demand for the proposed project is 1,339 acre feet per year (afy). The water demand for this alternative with the majority of the site developed as commercial uses would be approximately 1,422 afy, an increase of 83 afy as compared to the proposed project. For this reason, the proposed project is preferred from a water perspective over this alternative. j. Wastewater Disposal Wastewater generation for Alternative 2 is approximately 618,82850 gallons per day (gpd), which is 139,753.50 gpd higher than the proposed project This alternative would not be preferred over the proposed project due to an increase in wastewater generation. 6.0-7 North Valencia Annaat on Dmf! ERL Angnet 1997 '6.0 Project Alternatives k Solid Waste Disposal The proposed project would generate 7,378 tons of solid waste per year. Alternative 2 would generate approximately 15,185 tons per year resulting in an increase of 7,807 tons per year compared to the proposed project. Given that this alternative will more than double the amount of solid waste generated, the proposed project is preferred over Alternative 2. 1. Utilities Natural gas usage from development of this alternative would be approximately 216,743,898 cubic feet of gas per year (cu.ft./yr.). This would result in an increased demand of 70,302564 cmft./yr. compared to the proposed project. This alternative would result in an demand of 72,025,393 kilowatts per year (kWh/year) and result in an increased usage of 38,877,732 kWh/year compared with the proposed project. Based on this information the proposed project is preferred over this alternative from a utilities perspective. m. Education This alternative would generate 42 students compared to the 791 students that would be generated by the project. This alternative would not provide a school for elementary students. All elementary students generated under this alternative would attend existing elementary schools in the Saugus Union School District. All junior and senior high school students generated on the project site would attend off-site schools in any case. Because the project would not provide an elementary school, but would still be generating students, this alternative is not preferred to the proposed project n. Library Services This alternative would generate a project residential population of 477 persons (160 du. x 2.98 = 476.7). Based on County lbrary planning standards of 0.35 square feet of library facilities per capita and 2.0 books per capita, the alternative would require a total of 167 square feet of library facilities with 954 additional volumes of books for the library system's collection. This demand is 1,919 fewer square feet of library facilities and 10,966 fewer volumes of books than the proposed project This alternative - would create less of a demand on library services than the proposed project and for this reason would be - preferred. 6.0-8 North valmmAr =dm VMft rm August 1997 6.0 Project Alternatives o. Fire Protection Alternative 2 would result in a smaller residential population on the project site than would occur under the proposed project. This alternative would, however, significantly increase the amount of commercial uses on the site which would result in a need for paramedic and fire services. Based on this information, from a fire protection standpoint neither the General Plan alternative or the proposed project would be preferred. p. Parks and Recreation Under City (and Quimby Act) requirements, development of Alternative 2 would require 1.43 acres of parkland, while the proposed project would require 17.88 acres of parkland. Development under this alternative would require 16.45 less acres of parkland than the proposed project and would have less demands on existing parkland due to the fact the site's population would largely convert from a constant residential population to a transient commercial population. Based on this information, from a parks and recreation standpoint the General Plan alternative would be preferred over the proposed project because it does not exacerbate the existing parkland deficiency within the City as much as the proposed project. 4 Population/Housing/Employment Development under this alternative would result in the construction of 160 dwelling units, which is substantially less than the proposed project. This would generate a project site residential population of approximately 477 persons. This would result in 1,840 fewer dwelling units and 5,493 fewer residents when compared with the proposed project. However, because of the increased commercial square footage, this alternative would provide greater employment opportunities than the proposed project. SCAG projects that northern Los Angeles County and the City of Santa Clarita will have a substantially greater need for housing in the future. Based on an employment ratio factor of 2.5 employees per thousand square feet for commercial uses and 2.0 employees per one thousand square feet of industrial uses, this alternative .would generate a total of 15,143 jobs (13,195 more than the proposed project). This. alternative would have a jobs/housing ratio balance of 94.25. While this alternative would bring more jobs to the presently housing rich, employment poor Santa Clarita Valley, it would not meet the long-term housing needs projected by the City and SCAG. Consequently, this alternative is preferred over the proposed project with respect to employment but not preferred with respect to the provision of housing. 6.0-9 Nath Vdm= An =d= Dmjt EIR August 1997 '6.0 ProjectAiternatives r. Agricultural Resources Given that the footprint of Alternative 2 is similar to the proposed project, development of the project site under this alternative would result in the same loss of prime agricultural land and agricultural production as the proposed project From an agricultural resources standpoint, neither the General Plan alternative or the proposed project would be preferred. s. Sheriff Services Based upon the dwelling unit factor of 275 utilized by the Sheriff's Department, Alternative 2 would result in a permanent resident population of 440 persons, while the proposed project would result in a resident population of 5,960 persons. Given the Sheriff Department ratio of 1 officer per 1,000 population, this alternative would require the services of 0.44 officers, while the proposed project would require 5S officers. Because there would be less of an impact on Sheriff service demand, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project t. Human Made Hazards Given that the footprint of Alternative 2 is similar to the proposed project, development of the project site under this alternative would result in similar impactsresulting from abandonedoil wells, electrical transmission lines, and high pressure gas mains when compared with the proposed project. Based on this information, it is inconclusive, from a human made hazards standpoint, as to whether the General Plan alternative or the proposed project would be preferred. u. Buried Bank Stabilization The buried bank stabilization option under Alternative 2 would have the same impacts to geotechnical hazards, traffic/access, air quality, noise, biota, cultural Resources, visual resources, water service, wastewater disposal, solid waste, utilities, education, libraries, fire protection, parks and recreation, population/housing/employment agricultural, Sheriff services, and human made hazards as the buried bank stabilization option under the p1OP°sed projecL v. Conclusion Generally, under this Alternative 2, impacts associated with geotechnical resources/grading, biota, cultural resources, visual resources, fire protection, agricultural resources and human made hazards 6.0.10 North Vakwia Amumatm Draft Ent August I997 6.0 Project Alternatives would be similar to the proposed project Impacts generated by Alternative 2 associated with flood, traffic and access, air quality, noise, water service, wastewater, solid . waste, utilities, housing, and education would be greater than the proposed project. Impacts generated by Alternative 2 associated with library services, parks and recreation, employment and Sheriff services would be less than those anticipated under the proposed project The buried bank stabilization option under Alternative 2 would have the same impacts as this option under the proposed project. This alternative was rejected because overall it has greater environmental impacts than the project On the basis of environmental impacts alone, this alternative is not environmentally superior to the proposed project 4. ALTERNATIVE 3—The Biological Alternative This alternative analysis allows for the same number of dwelling units as the proposed project, but clusters the units in order to create a smaller footprint and to provide more open areas (see Figure 6.0-2). This alternative provides additional setback in order to further avoid development contact with the river. All of the residential units would be clustered or attached under Alternative 3. All commercial and industrial acreage will remain the same as the proposed project All other uses of the project such as the elementary school and the lake are a part of the project. The averge setabck in this alternative would be 1000 feet from San, Frandsquito Creek and the Santa Clara River. The purpose of this discussion is to describe and compare impacts generated by this alternative with impacts generated by the proposed project. a. Geotechnical Hazards Implementation of this alternative would result in less grading but would not be expected to result in a reduction in geotechnical/seismic impacts. The identified Alquist-Priolo Fault zone would subject this alternative to the same constraints as that of the proposed project Therefore, geotechnical impact potential would be similar to that of the proposed project From a geotechnical standpoint, neither the project or Alternative 3 would be preferred. b. Flood Implementation of this alternative would. result in slightly less stone runoff and more infiltration than the proposed project because residential units will be clustered resulting in more open area. Also, it is likely the irrigation needs of Alternative 3 would be less than the proposed project due to less _ landscaped acreage. The urban runoff that is generated under this alternative would be conveyed and discharged into the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek in a similar manner as the proposed 6.0-11 North Va1mNa Antes atunt Dmft EM August 1997 m 6.0 ProjectAitematiaes project This runoff would require similar treatment before it is discharged into these water courses in compliance with Regional Water Quality Control Board standards. Nevertheless, this alternative would be preferred from a flood perspective over the proposed project because the amount of drainage reaching the River would be less than the proposed project. c. Traffic and Access Implementation of Alternative 3 would result in a reduced amount of traffic as compared to the proposed project. Specifically, using ITE Trip Generation Manual factors, average daily trip generation on the project site would be estimated at 49,318 trips. Because there would be less traffic generated with this alternative, from a traffic perspective, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project d. Air Quality As grading requirements are expected to be less for this alternative, short-term grading and construction -related air quality impacts are expected to be similar (or slighly reduced) to those of the proposed project Long-term (Le., operational) impacts for this alternative would be similar to the proposed project - Proposed Project 10,736.0 694.5 805.3 51A 8,321.6 Alternative 3 10,108.9 658.0 787.6 50.2 7,945.8 Re=mendedSCAQMDThresholds 550.0 55.0 55.0 150.0 150.0 Source. Impact Sciences, Inc., lune 1997. Both the proposed project and this alternative would result in SCAQMD air quality thresholds being exceeded for CO, NO, ROC and PMIo. Consequently, based on this information, from an air quality standpoint, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project. e. Noise Because of the reduced number of vehicle trip reduction associated with this alternative, there would be less noise impacts as compared to the proposed project on and in the vicinity of the site. This would 6.0.13 North Valmcv Am zatm Dmn EIR August 1997 6.0 Project Altematives result in less noise impacts on -and off-site. Noise levels will be consistent with the City's Noise Element of the General Plan. Consequently, from a noise standpoint, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project f. Biota Given that there would be more open area because of the clustering of residential units, there may be a reduction in the direct. biological impacts with this alternative compared to the proposed project. Depending upon the design and location of building footprints associated with this alternative, it may be possible to create additional open area near the upland preserve zone which could provide some greater biological benefit than the proposed project Because the footprint of Alternative 3 would be less than the proposed project, and additional open area could be located adjacent to the upland preserve zone, Alternative 3 is preferred to the proposed project g.. Cultural Resources Grading associated with this alternative would be reduced when compared with the proposed project due to a smaller development footprint. Consequently, potential cultural resource impacts associated with Alternative 3 would be less than that of the proposed project Based on this information, from a cultural resources standpoint this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project. It. Visual Resources Both residential and commercial structures could be constructed up to 50 feet in height under this alternative and the proposed project How the commercial and residential buildings are ultimately situated on the site will influence how they impact viewsheds from major roadways. The proposed project would allow single family residential which allows heights of up to 35 feet, which may provide greater visual interest in combination with the multi -family units which allow a 50 -foot height limit. However, due to the clustering of residential units, viewsheds may be more 'open' and development may appear less visually dense. Based on this information, it can be concluded, from a visual resources standpoint, that this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project 6.0-14 North Vaknda Aw=afm DmJt EIR August 2997 6.0 Project Alternatives i. Water Service The water demand for this alternative would be 761 afy which is 580 afy less than the proposed project due to the change in mix of residential units. Consequently, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project. j. Wastewater Disposal Wastewater generation for this alternative would be approximately 379,835 gpd which would result in a decrease of 99,240 gpd when compared to the proposed project due to the change in mix of residential units. This alternative would, as a result, be preferred over the proposed project. k. Solid Waste Disposal The project would generate 7,378 tons of solid waste per year. In comparison, Alternative 3 would generate 4,778 tons of solid waste per year resulting in a decrease of 2,600 tons per year of solid waste generated compared to the proposed project. Less waste is generated due to reduced construction waste, educed population and the like. This alternative would, therefore, be preferred over the proposed project - 1. Utilities Natural gas usage from development of this alternative would be approximately 121,965,000 cubic feet of gas per year. This would result in a decrease in demand of 16,108,049 cubic feet of gas per year compared to the proposed project. This alternative would result in a demand for electricity of 21,460,850 kWh/year and result in a decrease of 19,433,337 kWh/year compared with the proposed project. Based on this information, it can be concluded that this alternative would be preferred over the proper project. m. Education Alternative 3 would generate 522 students compared to the 791 students that would be generated by the. project. Alternative 3 like the proposed project, would include a school site for elementary students. All junior and senior high school students generated on the project site would attend off-site schools in any case. Alternative 3 is preferred with respect to school impacts, because the alternative would generate fewer students than would the proposed project 6.0-15 North Valencia AMMtM Draft Ent August 1997 6.0 Project Alternatives n. Library Services Based on County Mrary planning standards of 0.35 square feet of library facilities per capita and 20 books per capita, the project would require a total of 2,086 square: feet of library facilities with 11,920 additional volumes of books for the library system's collectiom. This demand is the same as the proposed project. Because the impacts on library services, would be the same as the proposed project, i t neither the alternative or the project would be preferred. o. Fire Protection While the number of residential units on the site would remain the same as the proposed project. The population estimates used by the City of Santa Clarita utilize a 298 persons per household generation figure (298 x 2,000 = 5,960). Because population figures are the same (because the project is generating the same number of units), this alternative would result in the same number of service calls to the site as the proposed project. Based on this information neither this alternative or the proposed project is preferred. p. Parks and Recreation Under City (and Quimby Act) requirements, development of Alternative 3 would require the applicant to provide 17.88 acres of dedicated parkland, the same as the proposed project. There would, however, be an increase in passive open area because of the clustering of residential units. This alternative will result in a greater amount of passive open space which could become a maintenance burden on the City, however, this would be addresses through provisions for a landscape maintanence district or homeowners association maintenace as in the proposed project. Because this alternative would provide additional passive open area, it would be preferred from a parks and recreation perspective. ck Population/Housing/Employment Population/housing/employment impacts under this alternative would be the same as the proposed project as the number of dwelling units, commercial and industrial acreage would not change. Based upon this information, neither this alternative or the proposed project is preferred. 6.0-16 North VaW= AMMMh a DMft ESR August 1997 6.0 Project Alternatives r. Agricultural Resources Development of the project site under this alternative would result in the loss of prime agricultural land and agricultural production but less than the proposed project due to a smaller development footprint. From a practical standpoint it would be difficult to cost effectively manage and farm small discontinuous agricultural areas. However, based on this information, from an agricultural resources standpoint, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project. s. Sheriff Services Based upon the dwelling unit factor of 2 75 utilized by the Sheriff's Department, the proposed project would result fn a resident population of approximately 5,500 persons. Given the Sheriff Department ratio of 1 officer per 1,000 population, this alternative would require the services of 5.5 officers which is the same number required by the proposed project Based on this information, from a Sheriff services standpoint neither the Biological alternative nor the proposed project would be preferred. L Human Made Hazards Development of the project site under this alternative would be reduced when compared with the proposed project due to a smaller development footprint Based on this information, from a human made hazards standpoint, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project. u. Buried Bank Stabilization The buried bank stabilization option under Alternative 3 would have the same impacts to geotechnical hazards, traffic/access, air quality, noise, biota, cultural Resources, visual resources, water service, wastewater disposal, solid waste, utilities, education, libraries, fire protection, parks and recreation, population/housing/employment, agricultural, Sheriff services, and human made hazards as the buried bank stabilization option under the proposed project v. Conclusion Generally, under this Alternative 3, impacts associated with geotechnical resources, library services, fire protection, Sheriff demands, and population/housing/employment would be similar to the proposed project This alternative would allow only clustered units and a smaller residential footprint which would be preferred to the proposed project in terms of flood, traffic/access, air quality, biota, 6.0-17 North Vaknda AmumthmtDmJt EIA August 1997 6.0 ProjectA1teraatives cultural resources, visual, water, wastewater, solid waste, utilities, education, parks and recreation, agricultural resources and human made hazards. The buried bank stabilization option under Alternative 3 would have the same impacts as this option render the proposed project. On the basis of environmental impacts alone, this alternative is environmentally superior to the proposed project. 5. ALTERNATIVE 4 — The 20 Percent Reduced Density Alternative Alternative 4 would reduce the number of residential units and the amount of commercial square footage an the site by 20 percent, to 1,600 residential units (600 single family and 1,000 multi -family) and 508,800 commercial square feet (see Figure 6.0.3). This alternative would also allow 167,000 square feet of industrial uses. Alternative 4 will also have a reduced project footprint to reflect reduced unit counts. This alternative includes all' other uses on the project site including the lake and school. The description of these uses is the same as the proposed project. Areas not dedicated for specific development would be vegetated with habitat similar to that of the project proposed upland preserve zone. This type of habitat would not require irrigation after initial planting activities necessary to establish species. Open areas were selected generally away from the river area so that the site plan for the Biological Alternative wouldn't be replicated. The following discussion compares the potential environmental impact of this alternative to those associated with implementation of the proposed project. a. Geotechnical Hazards Implementation of this alternative would result in less grading but would not be expected to result in a reduction in geotechnical impacts. The identified Alquist-Priolo Fault zone would subject this alternative to the same constraints as that of the proposed project, but would expose fewer people to seismic hazard on the site. From a geoteduucal standpoint, Alternative 4 would be preferred over the proposed project. b. Flood Implementation of this alternative would result in slightly less storm runoff and more infiltration than the proposed project because there will be less residential and commercial development area and more open area. Also, it is likely the irrigation needs of Alternative 4 would be less than the proposed project due to less landscaped acreage. The urban runoff that is generated under this alternative would be conveyed and discharged into the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek in a similar manner 6.0-18 Narth Vaknda Amu when Dmft EIR August 2997 :J, .1 I 11 6.0 Project Alternatives as the proposed project. This runoff would require similar treatment before it is discharged into these water courses in compliance with Regional Water Quality- Control Board standards. Nevertheless, this alternative would be preferred from a Flood perspective over the proposed project because amount of drainage reaching the River would be less than the proposed project. c. Traffic and Access Implementation of Alternative 4 would result in a decrease in,project-generated traffic due to the reduction in units and commercial square footage. Spechically, using rM Irip Generation Manual factors, average daily trip generation on the project site would decrease from 52,356 trips to 41,482 trips (a 20 percent decrease). Consequently, Alternative 4 would be preferred to the proposed project with respect to traffic and circulation impacts. It should be noted however, that since there is demand for greater housing in the area, reducing the density of the project may create a need for development of higher densities in non -infill areas, which would create greater traffic impacts than providing for such density in the project d. Air Quality As grading requirements are expected to be less for this alternative, short-term grading and construction -related air quality impacts are expected to be slightly less than those of the proposed project. Proposed Project 10,736.0 694.5 805.3 51.4 8,321.6 8,550.9 552.2 644.1 41.0 6,617.5 Alternative 4 Recommended SCAQMD Thresholds 550.0 55.0 55.0 150.0 150.0 Source: Impact Sciences, Inc., June 1997. Long-term (i.e., operational) impacts for this alternative would also be reduced when compared with the proposed project. The decrease in air quality impacts would primarily oras due to the decrease in the number of traffic trips. Both the proposed project and this alternative would result in SCAQMD air quality thresholds being exceeded for CO, NO, ROC and PM10. Nevertheless, Alternative 4 would be preferred over the proposed project because -the magnitude of air quality impacts would be greater with the proposed project 6.0-20 North Vshnno Ama@imi Dru t EIR August 1997 6.0 Project Alternatives e. Noise Because of the vehicle trip reduction associated with this alternative, there would be a reduction in project -generated noise impacts on and in the vicinity of the site. The noise impacts of this alternative would be consistent with the City's General Plan Noise Element. This would result in a decease in noise impacts on -and off-site and, therefore, Alternative 4 would be preferred over the proposed project from a noise perspective. £ Biota It is anticipated that there would be more open area bemuse of the reduction in the number of residential units and commercial square footage. Consequently there may be a reduction in the impacts to biota under this alternative compared to the proposed project. Depending upon the design and location of building footprints associated with this alternative, there may be additional open area near the upland preserve zone which could provide greater biological benefit than the proposed project. Because the footprint of the Alternative 4 would be less that the proposed project, and additional open area could be located adjacent to the upland preserve zone, Alternative 4 is preferred to the proposed project & Cultural Resources Grading associated with this alternative would be reduced when compared with the proposed project due to a smaller development footprint Consequently, potential cultural resource impacts associated with Alternative 4 would be less than that of the proposed project Based on this information, from a cultural resources standpoint this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project. h. Visual Resources How the commercial and residential buildings are ultimately situated on the site will influence how they impact viewsheds from major roadways. However, due to the reduction in the number of residential units and the amount of commercial square footage, viewsheds may be more 'open' and development may appear less visually dense. Based on this information, it can be concluded, from a visual resources standpoint, that this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project. 6.0.21 North Valencia Anncmtion Dmf+ £IR Augwl 1997 6.0 Project Alternatives L Water Service The water demand for this alternative would be 837 afy which is 501 afy less than the proposed project. Consequently, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project j. Wastewater Disposal Wastewater generation for this alternative would be 377,355 gpd which is 101,720 gpd less than the proposed project This alternative would, therefore, be preferred over the proposed project k. Solid Waste Disposal The project would generate 7,378 tons of solid waste per year. In comparison, Alternative 4 would generate 4,527 tons of solid waste per year, resulting in a decrease of 2,851 tons per year of solid waste generated compared to the proposed project This alternative would, therefore, be preferred over the proposed proles 1. Utilities Natural gas demand of this alternative would be approximately 118,510,440 cubic feet of gas per year. This would result in a decrease in demand of 15,28,278 cubic feet of gas per year when compared to the proposed project due to the reduction in units and commercial square footage. This alternative would result in a demand for electricity of 17,18,050 kWh/year which is 15,629,611 kWh/year less than the proposed project due to the reduction in units and commercial square footage. Based on this information, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project m. Education Alternative 4 would generate 631 students compared to the 791 students that would be generated by the project due to the reduction in units. Alternative 4 would still include a school site for elementary students. All junior and senior high school students generated on the project site would attend off-site schools in any case. Alternative 4 is preferred with respect to school impacts because the alternative. would generate fewer students than would the proposed project 6.0-22 Nona Vd=d9A==dM Dmft EI& August 1997 6.0 Prgect AIternatives n. Library Services This alternative would create a resident population of 4,768 persons (1,600 du. x 2.98 = 4,768 persons). The proposed project would create a resident population of 5,960 persons. Based on County Library planning standards of 0.35 square feet of library facilities per capita and 2.0 books per capita, Alternative 4 would require a total of 1,669 square feet of library facilities with 9,536 additional volumes of books for the library system's collection. This demand is 417 fewer square feet of library facilities and 2,384 fewer volumes of books than the proposed project Consequently, the demand for library services of Alternative 4 is less than the proposed project and is preferred over the proposed project. o. Fire Protection This alternative would result in a smaller resident population on the project site than would occur under the proposed project due to the reduction in the number of units. Therefore, there would be fewer calls made to the Fire Department than under the proposed project. Based on this information, this alternative would be preferred. p. Parks and Recreation Under County (and Quimby Act) requirements, development of the project would require the applicant to provide 14.3 acres of dedicated parkland. Development under this alternative would require 3.58 fewer acres of parkland than the proposed project. This alternative will result in a greater amount of passive open space which could become a maintenance burden an the City, however, this would be addresses through provisions .for a landscape. maintanence district or homeowners association maintenace as in the proposed project. Based on this information, this alternative would result in fewer demands for parkland and would be preferred over the proposed project. % Population/Housing/Employment Development under this alternative would result in the construction of 1,600 dwelling units and 508,800 commercial square feet, resulting in a resident population of 4,768 which is a decrease of 1,192 persons as compared to the proposed project. Alternative 4 would also generate approximately 1,651 new job opportunities, which is 297 fewer jobs than the proposed project. SCAG project's that northern Los Angeles County and the City of Santa Clarita will have a substantially greater need for housing in the future. This would result in a jobs/housing ratio of 1.03 which is substantially less than the regional 6.0-23 North Valencia Ann=tm Dmfr E!A August I997 6.0 Project Alternatives goal of 1.30. This alternative, when compared to the proposed project, would create fewer jobs in the employment poor Santa Clarita Valley, and would not go as far in meeting the long-term housing needs projected by the City and SLAG. Consequently, Alternative 4 is not preferred over the proposed project r. Agricultural Resources Development of the project site under this alternative would result in the loss of prime agricultural land and agricultural production, but less than the proposed project due to a smaller development footprint From a practical standpoint it would be difficult to cost effectively manage and farm small discontinuous agricultural areas. However, based an this information, from an agricultural resources standpoint, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project s. Sheriff Services Based upon the dwelling unit factor of 2.75 utilized by the Sheriff's Department, Alternative 4 would result in a resident population of 4,400 persons. Given the Sheriff Department ratio of 1 officer per 1,000 population, this alternative would require the services of 4.4 officers, which is 1.1 fewer officers than the proposed project. Based on this information, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project. L Human Made Hazards Development of the project site under this alternative would be reduced when compared with the proposed project due to a smaller development footprint Based an this information, from a human made hazards standpoint, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project. u. Buried Bank Stabilization The buried bank stabilization option under Alternative 4 would have the same impacts to geotechnical hazards, traffic/access, air quality, noise, biota, cultural Resources, visual resources, water service, wastewater disposal, solid waste, utilities, education, libraries, fire protection, parks and recreation, population/housing/employment, agricultural, Sheriff services, and human made hazards as the buried bank stabilization option under the proposed project 6.0-24 North Valaub Amumo ion Dmft rIR August I997 6.0 Project Alternatives v. Conclusion Imparts under this alternative associated with geotechnical resources, flood, traffic/access, biota, cultural resources air quality, noise, water service, wastewater, solid waste, utilities, education, library services and fire/Sheriff services parks and recreation, agricultural resources and human made hazards would be less than the proposed project. Impacts regarding population/housing/employment would be greater than the proposed project The buried bank stabilization option under Alternative 4 would have the same impacts as this option under the proposed project. On the basis of environmental impacts alone, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project 6. ALTERNATIVE 5 — The 40 Percent Reduced Density Alternative This alternative involves the reduction of 40 percent of residential units and a reduction of 40 percent of commercial square footage (see Figure 6.0-1). Alternative 5 will also have a reduced project footprint to reflect_ reduced densities. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, this alternative would evaluate 1,200 dwelling units (750 single family and 450 multi -family) and 381AW square feet of commercial uses. Other aspects of the proposed project (Le., industrial uses, upland preservation area, lake and school) would remain consistent with the proposed project This alternative also evaluates a grade separated crossing of Avenue Scott at Bouquet Canyon Road and a bridge at Bouquet Creek Channel. This alternative is similar to the Natural River Management System EIS alternatives that include Avenue Scott/Bouquet Canyon Bridge which is not a part of the North Valencia Specific Plan project. The following discussion compares the potential environmental impact of this alternative to those associated with implementation of the proposed project. a. Geotechnical Hazards Implementation of this alternative would result in less grading but would not be expected to result in a reduction in geotechnical impacts. The identified Alquist-Priolo Fault zone would subject this alternative to the same constraints as that of the proposed project, but would expose fewer people to seismic hazard on the site. From a geotechnical standpoint, Alternative 5 would be preferred over the proposed project 6.0-25 North Valerian Annaaem, Draft ER August 1997 rdl 1/ --,17-7777 rdl 1/ 6.0 Project Alternatives h Flood Implementation of this alternative would result in slightly less storm runoff and more infiltration than the proposed project because there will be less residential and commercial development area and more open area. Also, it is likely the irrigation needs of Alternative 5 would be less than the proposed project due to less. landscaped acreage. The urban runoff that is generated under this alternative would be conveyed and discharged into the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek in a similar manner as the proposed project. This runoff would require similar treatment before it is discharged into these water courses in compliance with Regional Water Quality Control Board standards. Nevertheless, this alternative would be preferred from a flood perspective over the proposed project because amount of drainage reaching the River would be less than the proposed project. c. Traffic and Access Implementation of Alternative 5 would result in a decrease in project -generated traffic because of the reduction in units and commercial square footage.. Specifically, using ITE Trip Generation Manual factors, average daily trip generation on the project site would decrease from 52,356 trips to 32,295 trips (a 38 percent decrease). This alternative incorporates the easterly extension of Avenue Scott that would be required to accommodate future traffic volumes. The planned easterly extension of Newhall Ranch Road will not be able to accommodate these future traffic volumes. A joint City -County Buildout Traffic Model shows Avenue Scott as a major highway between Rye Canyon Road and Bouquet Canyon Road OTA, 1993b). Its function is to supplement Newhall Ranch Road as an arterial into the Valencia Industrial Center by carrying about 20,000 vehicles per day. The extension of Avenue Scott east of Bouquet Canyon Road may be necessary to ease the existing congestion at the intersection of Bouquet Canyon Road and Newhall Ranch Road. Newhall Ranch Road is proposed as a high-speed thoroughfare . with minimal intersections and turnoffs, so that the only access to business and residences east of Bouquet Canyon Road would be from Avenue Scott. Circulation and sight distance requirements dictate that the intersection of Avenue Scott and Bouquet Canyon Road be. a minimum distance of 500 feet from the intersection of Newhall Ranch Road and Bouquet Canyon Road.' 1 California Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Anny Corps of 6.0-27 NorthVafauia Am mahon Dm/t EIR Aagmt 1997 6.0 Project Alternatives Because the traffic volumes would be less than the proposed project, from a traffic standpoint, Alternative 5 would be preferred over the proposed project. d. Air Quality As grading requirements are expected to be less for this alternative; short-term grading and construction -related air quality impacts are expected to be slightly less than those of the proposed project. Long-term (i.e., operational) impacts for this alternative would also be reduced when compared with the proposed project. Proposed Project 10,736.0 .694.5 805.3 51.4 8,321.6 Alternative 5 6,471.3 418.2 494.4 31.5 5,018.6 Rea mmended SCAQMD Thresholds 550.0 55.0 55.0 150.0 150.0 Source: Impact sciences, Inc., June 1997. The decrease in air quality impacts would primarily occur due to a decrease in the mmdxr of traffic trips. Both the proposed project and this alternative would result in SCAQMD air quality thresholds being exceeded for CO, NO, ROC and PM, Nevertheless, Alternative 5 would be preferred over the proposed project because the magnitude of air quality impacts would be greater with the proposed project. e. Noise Because of the vehicle trip reduction associated with this alternative, there would be a reduction in project -generated noise impacts an and in the vicinity of the site. This would result in a decrease in noise impacts on -and off-site and, therefore, Alternative 5 would be preferred over the proposed project from a noise perspective. f. Biota It is anticipated that there would be more open area because of the reduction in the number of residential units and commercial square footage and overall project footprint. Consequently there may be a reduction in the impacts to biota under this alternative compared to the proposed project. 6.0-28 Nora, Va&,=Amcation Dnft EM August 1997 6.0 Project Alternatives Depending upon the design and location of building footprints associated with this alternative, there may be additional open area near the upland preserve zone which would provide greater biological benefit than the proposed project. Because the footprint of the Alternative 5 would be less than the proposed project, and additional open area could be located adjacent to the upland preserve zone, Alternative 5 is preferred to the proposed project. & Cultural Resources Grading associated with this alternative would be reduced when compared with the proposed project due to a smaller development footprint. Consequently, potential cultural resource impacts associated with Alternative 5 would be less than that of the proposed project. Based on this information, from a cultural resources standpoint this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project. h. Visual Resources How the commercial and residential buildings are ultimately situated on the site will influence how they impact viewsheds from major roadways. However, due to the reduction in the number of residential units and the amount of commercial square footage, viewsheds may be more 'open' and development may appear less visually dense. From a visual resources standpoint, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project i. Water Service The water demand for this alternative would be 506 afy which 833 afy less than the proposed project Consequently, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project j. Wastewater Disposal Wastewater generation for this alternative would be 317,835 gpd which is 161,240 gpd less than the proposed project due to the reduction in units and commercial square -footage. This alternative would, therefore, be preferred over the proposed project k Solid Waste Disposal The project would generate 7,378 tats of solid waste per year. In comparison Alternative 5 would generate 3,884 tons of solid waste per year resulting in a decrease of 3,494 tons per year of solid waste 6.0-29 North VaUm An tion U+afr ern August 2997 6.0 Project Aftematiaes generated compared to the proposed project. This alternative would, therefore, be preferred over the proposed project. 1. Utilities Natural gas demand of this alternative would be approximately 100,222,080 cubic feet of gas per year. This would result in a decrease in demand of 46,219,254 cubic feet of gas per year when compared to the proposed project. This alternative would result in an demand for electricity of 13594,130 kWh/year which is 19,553531 kWh/year less than the proposed project Based an this information, it can be concluded that this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project. in. Education Alternative 5 would generate 313 students compared to the 791 students.that would be generated by the project. Alternative 5 would still include a school site for elementary students. All junior and senior high school students generated on the project site would attend off-site schools in any case. Alternative 5 is preferred with respect to school impacts because the alternative would generate fewer students than would the proposed project n. Library Services This alternative would create a resident population of 3,576 persons (1,200 du. x 2.98 = 3,576 persons). The proposed project would create a resident population of 5,960 persons. Based on County Library planning standards of 0.35 square feet of library facilities per capita and 2.0 books per capita, Alternative 5 would require a total of 1,252 square feet of library facilities with 7,152 additional volumes of books for the library system's collection. This demand is MA fewer square feet library facilities and 4,768 volumes fewer books than the proposed project. Consequently, the demand for library services of Alternative 5 is less than the proposed project and is preferred over the proposed project. o. Fire Protection This alternative would result in a smaller resident population on the project site than would occur under the proposed project due to the reduction in the number of units. Therefore, there would be fewer calls made to the Fire Department than under the proposed project. Based on this information, this alternative would be preferred. 6.0-30 North Valencia Am=4t= Dro t M August 1997 6.0 Project Alternatives p. Parks and Recreation Under County (and Quimby Act) requirements, development of the project would require the applicant to provide 10.73 acres of dedicated parkland. Development under this alternative would require 7.15 fewer acres of parkland than the proposed project. This alternative will result in a greater amount of passive open space which could become a maintenance burden m the City, however, this would be addresses through provisions for a landscape maintanence district or homeowners association maintenace as in the proposed project. Based on this information, this alternative would result in fewer demands for parkland and would be preferred over the proposed project. % Population/Housing/Employment Development under this alternative would result in the construction of 1,200 dwelling units and 381,000 square feet of commercial uses. This would result in a resident population of 3,576 (1,200 x 298 = 3576) and a decrease of 2,384 persons as compared to the proposed project. Alternative 5 would generate approximately 1,333 jobs, which is 659 fewer jobs than the proposed project SCAG project's that northern Los Angeles County and the City of Santa Clanta will have a substantially greater need for housing in the future. This alternative would result in a jobs/housing ratio of 1.11 which is less than the regional goal of 1.30. This alternative, when compared to the proposed project, this alternative would create fewer jobs in the employment poor Santa Clarita Valley, and would not go as far in meeting the long-term housing needs projected by the City and SCAG. Consequently, Alternative 5 is not preferred over the proposed project r. Agricultural Resources Development of the project site under this alternative would result in the loss of prime agricultural land and agricultural production and would be reduced when compared with the proposed project due to a smaller development footprint From a practical standpoint it would be difficult to cost effectively manage and farm small discontinuous agricultural areas. From an agricultural resources standpoint, however, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project s. Sheriff Services Based upon the dwelling unit factor of 2.75 utilized by the Sheriff's Department, Alternative 5 would result in a resident population of 3,300 persons. Given the Sheriff Department ratio of 1 officer per 1,000 population, this alternative would require the services of 3.3 officers, which is 2.2 less officers 6.0-31 No AVukcnm Amu¢dm nmft Em August 1997 6.0 Project Alternatives than the proposed project Based on this information, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project. L Human Made Hazards Development of the project site under this alternative would-be reduced when compared with the proposed project due to a smaller development Footprint. Based on this information, from a human made hazards standpoint, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project u. Buried Bank Stabilization The buried bank stabilization option under Alternative 5 would have the same impacts to geotechnical hazards, traffic/access, air quality, noise, biota, cultural Resources, visual resources, water service, wastewater disposal, solid waste, utilities, education, libraries, fire protection, parks and recreation, population/housing/employment, agricultural, Sheriff services, and human made hazards as the buried bank stabilization option under the proposed project. v. Conclusion Impacts under this alternative associated with geotechnical resources, flood, traffic/access, biota, cultural resources, air quality, noise, water service, wastewater, solid waste, utilities, education, library services, fire/Sheriff services, parks and recreation, agricultural resources and human made hazards would be less than the proposed project Impacts regarding population/housing/employment would be greater than the proposed project The buried bank stabilization- option under Alternative 5 would have the same impacts as this option under the proposed project On the basis of environmental impacts alone, this alternative would be preferred over the proposed project. 7. OFF-SITE ALTERNATIVES The proposed project is being proposed to meet the expected demands for increased housing opportunities in the City of Santa Clarita and northern Los Angeles County. Individual alternative sites to the project site could be found and developed in order to meet expected demands for growth, or this amount of demand could be met by developing many smaller parcels of land that are spread out over the area. Consequently, there could literally be hundreds, if not thousands, of land parcels that could be developed in place of the proposed project. However, given the population growth expected in the Santa Clarita Valley, and State-wide, a need may exist to develop all available parcels suitable 6.0-32 North We= Amu=otwn Dro t Em August 1997 6.0 Project Alternatives for housing, including the proposed project site and all other sites. For this reason, these other sites may actually not be "alternative" sites at all; rather, to meet expected demand, there may be a need in the future to develop them all. Also, this is a "Specific Plan" that involves one owner of at least one hundred acres to allow for the coordinated development per the City's Uniform Development Code. Alternate sites within or directly adjacent to the City do not exist or are the subject of other development proposals.The proposed project would involve build -out of an area that is characterized by existing and pending urban development, and associated infrastructure improvements. (i.e., roadways, water mains, sewer lines, and natural gas and electrical service). The City of Santa Clarita General Plan designates the project site for urban density development. Potential alternative project sites in the local vicinity which are similar in acreage and are close to existing or planned infrastructure improvements are also currently also proposed for development. Alternative sites which are located beyond existing urbanized areas would induce growth in these non -urban areas, thereby expanding urban development. For all of the reasons indicated above, no alternative sites were analyzed for this project. 8. ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE As discussed in the Introduction Section, the CEQA Guidelines require that the discussion of alternatives to a project focus on those alternatives which can feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project while avoiding or reducing the significant impacts of the project as proposed Section 15326(d)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that, if the no project alternative is the "environmentally superior" alternative, the. EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. On the following page, Table 6.0-1, Alternatives Impact Comparison, provides a summary of alternatives discussed in this section in relation to. environmental impacts and the ability to meet project objectives. 6.0-33 Nath vclmda Am=dion Dmft EiR August 1997 6.0 Project Alternatives Table 6.0-1 Alternatives Impact Comparison , r k 3�0� .liteataity ` toy i�BmloRccai� �rReduced3aa,oltedno aI' ilriYnlIIfentB•1`T C^++�=>� ,'EiVO . x"42LIP2'dI'«A1tErri�tLYC-� �:.IiEI1.4 +'ZO%+': •_-�'sl'. Geotechnical L S S L L Flood G G L L L Traffic Access L G L L L Au Oualitv L G L L L Noise L G L L. L Biota G S L L L Cultural L S L L L Visual L S L L L Water Service L G L L L Wastewater Dis oral L G L L L Solid Waste L G L L L Utilities L G L L L Education L G L L L Libraries L L S L L Fire Protection L S L L L Parks and Rec. L L S L L PoPOLousin L L S G G Agricultural L S L L L Sheriff Services L L S L L Human Made Hazards L S L L L KEY (Leoei of Impact in Comparison to the Proposed Project): G = Alternative Produces Greater Level of Impact. S = AIternative Produces Similar LevelImpact. L - Alternative Produces Lesser Level of Impact. The No Project Alternative will have reduced environmental impacts but will not meet the project objectives of constructing a balanced project consisting of residential, commercial, industrial and recreational uses within the project area to meet anticipated future demands. This alternative will not bring population or employment opportunities to the presently employment poor Santa Clarita Valley. Alternative 2, Buildout According to the City of Santa Clarita General Plan, will provide a considerably greater amount of employment opportunities for the employment poor Santa Clarita Valley. However, this alternative will not meet the project objectives of creating a .balanced community consisting of residential, commercial, industrial and recreational uses. This alternative does not meet project objectives as it would only provide limited residential uses, and not a a variety of housing types like the proposed project, and no educational or active recreational uses Also, this 6.0-34 North Mensa Amuraf4 Dmft EIR August I997 6.0 Project Alternatives alternative does not provide for project objectives which accomodate a mix of residential housing types in conjunction with employment and recreational opportunties which incorporate a diverse system of pedestrian and bicycle trails that strategically connect to the existing street systems. Additionally, i t will create greater environmental impacts with regard to flood, traffic/access, air quality, noise, waser service, wastewater disposal, solid waste, utilities and education, so this alternative is not necessarily environmentally superior to the proposed project. Alternative 3, The Biological Alternative, would allow the same number of dwelling units but cluster all of the units to provide for more open area. Commercial and industrial square footage would remain the same. This alternative would meet the project objectives of a balanced community providing for residential, commercial, industrial and recreational opportunities. This alternative would not meet project objectives in that it would not provide a great a variety or mix of residential housing types as the proposed project nor meet the anticipated housing market conditions over several years. Although, Alternative 3 would be environmentally superior to the proposed project, this alternative has been rejected in favor of the proposed project because this alternative would limit the range of housing opportunities, and thus it would not reflect the housing opportunities demand under which the project site could be developed. Alternative 4, The 20 Percent Reduced Density Alternative, would reduce dwelling units and commercial square footage on the site by 20 percent. The reduction of ?ll percent of development would still provide varied residential, commercial, industrial and recreational opportunities. The City's General Plan also envisions higher density dwelling units in the VCC area of the City, including the project area and Specific Plan This Alternative does not meet the project objectives of providing a mix of residential and commercial opportunities as it reduces the number of housing units available and reduces commercial square footage. The reduction of housing units does not meet the project objectives of responding to economic conditions by providing as great a variety of housing types. The reduction of commercial square feet reduces the subsequent tax base available to the City to support public services as compared to the project objectives. This alternative would be environmentally superior to the proposed project. However, this alternative has been rejected in favor of the proposed project because this alternative would limit housing and employment opportunities, and thus would not accommodate the housing or employment demands of the regional area under which the project site could be developed and therefore does not meet project objectives. In order to meet the anticipated demand for housing and jobs expected for the area there would have to be greater or more. dense development in other areas, which would likely create the same impacts as meeting such development in the project. 6.035 North Mafia Am=affouW ErR August 1997 6.0 Project Alternatives Alternative 5, The 40 Percent Reduced Density Alternative, would reduce dwelling units and commercial square footage on the project site by 40 percent. This alternative would still provide varied housing, commercial, industrial and recreational opportunities. Impacts under this alternative would be less in magnitude than any of the alternatives except for the No Project Alternative. The City's General Plan also envisions higher density dwelling units in the VCC area of the City, including the project area and Specific Plan. This Alternative does not. meet the project objectives of providing a mix of residential and commercial opportunities as it reduces the number of housing units available and reduces commercial square footage. The reduction of housing units does not meet the project objectives of responding to economic conditions by providing as great a .variety of housing types. The reduction of commercial square feet reduces the subsequent tax base available to the City to support public services as compared to the project objectives. This alternative would be environmentally superior to the proposed project and the previously noted alternatives except that this alternative would limit the amount of housing and employment opportunities, and, thus would not accommodate the housing or employment demands of the regional area under which the project site could be developed and therefore does not meet project objectives. In order to meet the anticipated demand for housing and jobs expected for the area there would have to be greater or more dense development in other areas, which would likely create the same impacts as meeting such development in the project 6.0-36 North Vdeu=A a stun Dru t E3R August 3997 ORDINANCE NO. 97-19 AN ORDINANCE OF CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA APPROVING PREZONE 97-001 (MASTER CASE 97.041) FOR ANNEXATION NO. 95-006 (NORTH VALENCIA) TO ALLOW FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 97-001, WHICH CHANGES THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM LOS ANGELES COUNTY ZONE C2, M11/2, and A2-5 TO CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ZONES SPECIFIC PLAN (SP) ANDOPENSPACE (OS) .ir7D AMENDS PORTIONS OF ORDINANCE 96-12, AND ADOPTION OF THE NORTH VALENCIA SPECIFIC PLAN TO ESTABLISH SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 706.6 ACRE PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE NORTH VALENCIA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA LOCATED WITHIN THE 858 ACRE NORTH VALENCIA ANNEXATION AREA IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY ADJACENT TO THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA. 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. The North Valencia Annexation area is approximately 858 acres generally located east ofAnza Drive, south of. Newhall Ranch Road, west of Bouquet Canyon Road and Valencia Boulevard, and north of Magic Mountain Parkway and the Auto Center in the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County adjacent to the City of Santa Clarita. The North Valencia Specific Plan area is approximately 706.6 acres within the North Valencia Annexation area and is generally located south of Avenue Hopkins and east of Anza Drive and the west side of San Francisquito Creek, south of Newhall Ranch Roads west of Bouquet Canyon Road and Valencia Boulevard, and north of Magic Mountain Parkway and the Auto Center in the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County adjacent to the City of Santa Clarita. In November 1995, ,the City and the Valencia Company entered into a non- binding.Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding certain aspects of the potential annexation of approximately 969 acres or unincorporated area in the North Valencia area. At the time the MOU was adopted, the Valencia Company stated their intention to request approvals for up to 3,690 dwelling units, approximately 850,000 square feet of commercial uses, and 223,000 square feet of industrial uses. Entitlements to be requested at the time of MOU approval included'a Prezone, an annexation and development agreement, and tract maps. bs A.Fiezone for the North Valencia Annexation area was. approved in March 1996. The City Council authorized the filing of an annexation request with LAFCO in June 1996. Following the prezone, the applicant submitted entitlement requests which are subject to environmental review. The annexation request is on hold at the request of the City, pending approval of the environmental review document and approval of the requested entitlements. 0 Ord. 97-19 Page 2 C. On June 5, 1996, the applicant submitted the following entitlement requests: (Master Case No. 97-120) Annexation and Development Agreement 96-001, Annexation 95-006, Conditional Use Permit 96-010, TPM 20496 (Builder's South), TPM 20669 (Valencia Industrial Center), TPM 18417 (Pony League), TPM 24516 (Overall Project Area), VTTM 51931 (Lago de Valencia), VTTM 51281 (South River) and VTTM 44832 (Arbor Park). Incomplete letters were sent on these entitlement requests in July and staff noted that an Oak Tree Permit would also be required. In January 1997, the applicant formally withdrew the application for a CUP and all of the tract and parcel maps except for VTTM 51931. The applicant submitted the following entitlement requests: a Specific Plan document including a comprehensive plan of development and development standards for the North Valencia Specific Plan area and Prezone 97-001 to change the zoning within the area to the City zone SP (Specific Plan). Following review of the specific plan document and revised site plan, staffrecommended that a general plan amendment be filed in order for the requested entitlements to be consistent with the City's General Plan. On March 12, 1997, the applicant filed a request for an oak tree permit (OTP 97-009) to allow for possible encroachment upon oak trees, and a general plan amendment (GPA 97-001) to: 1) Revise the text of the Land Use Element Valley Center Concept narrative allowing for a North Valencia Specific Plan; and 2) revise the General Plan Land Use Map. d. The applicant requests an annexation, a general plan amendment including an amendment to the text of the Land Use Element Valley Center Concept narrative and an amendment to the Land. Use Map, a prezone to specific plan, and adoption of a specific plan document including a comprehensive plan of development and development_' standards for the North Valencia. Specific Plan area. The development appiicationincludes the proposed annexation of approximately 858 acres of unincorporated Los Angeles County land located adjacent to the City boundary.: The entire 858acres was previously prezoned. to City zoning designations ihmugh Ordinance No. 96-12. This request would amend portions of Ordinance No. 96-12 to establish the City of Santa Clarita Zone Specific Plan (SP) over 7084acres on the areas known as the North Valencia Specific Plan area. The remaining acreage in the annexation area would remain as previously prezoned`, by Ordinance. No. 96-12. The Specific Plan request includes entitlements for up to 2,000 dwelling units (750 single family detached, 1,250 multi -family attached), 636,000 square feet of commercial/retail,167,000 square feet of industrial/business park space, a 6.5 -acre elementary school site, a 15.2 - acre lake/park, a 12.4 -acre community park, 4.9 acres of neighborhood parks, 355.6 acres of open space and over 5 miles of trails, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51931 to subdivide 706 acres into 138 lots, an oak tree permit to allow construction within 200 feet of the oak trees with no removals or encroachments proposed, and review and certification of the Environmental Impact Report (SCH#96071077) prepared for this project. An "Annexation and Development 2 0 Ord. 97-19 Page 3 Agreement" was also requested, which will be presented to and approved by the City Council through Ordinance No. 97-20. e. The original North Valencia Specific Plan request excluded a .5 acre Southern California Oras Facility located on Magic Mountain Parkway; however, this area has been included within the Specific Plan area in accordance with good planning principles. The North Valencia Specific Plan area is bisected by the MWD pipeline property which is excluded from the Specific Plan prezone; however; this area is proposed to be prezoned Open Space (OS) in order to be consistent with the surrounding uses proposed in the Specific Plan. f. The General Plan presently designates the project site Commercial Town Center (CTC), Community Commercial (CC), Business Park (BP), and Residential Moderate (RM) with a Valley Center Concept Overlay on the majority of the site. The General Plan does not specifically mention the North Valencia site as an area ideal for a specific plan; however, the site does meet the minimum size of 100 contiguous acres under. single ownership as identified in the Specific Plan zoning standards of the City's Unified Development Code. Zoning on the site is presently Los Angeles County zones C2, M1 M and A2-5 and has already been prezoned City of Santa Clarita zones CTC, CC, BP, and RM. g. The North Valencia Specific Plan area is vacant, generally flat, and was used for agricultural purposes. The portion of the annexation area not included in the Specific Plan is flat and already developed with industrial and commercial uses. Major features of the annexation area include the Santa Clara River, the South Fork of the Santa Clara River, San Francisquito Creek, Bouquet Creek, a portion of the San Gabriel Fault Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone, the MWD aqueduct pipeline and electrical transmission corridors. IL Article 8�- Specific Plans Sec. 65451 g1= 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: fl) 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 r Ord. 97-19 Page 4 (3) Standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable. (4) A program. of implementation. measures including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out paragraphs (1), (2), and (3). (b) The specific plan shall include a statement of the relationship of the specific plan to the general plan. L 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. (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. j. The design of the project concentrates development within areas previously used for agricultural uses and includes preservation of approximately 295.6 acres of open space as part of the Santa Clara River Conservation Area as identified in the North Valencia Specific Plan document. The project proposes grading on approximately 281 acres of the 858 acre annexation site. The total amount of grading involves approximately 1.4 million cubic yards of cut and 2.7 million cubic yards of on-site fill and 1.5 million cubic yards of off-site earth to be imported. Movement of 850,000 cubic yards of the necessary off --site fill has been approved from the northeast corner of McBean Parkway and Newhall Ranch Road through Conditional Use Permit 96-013 (MC#96-236) and from the area known as the Center City Specific Plan area located east of the present terminus of Newhall Ranch Road, east of Bouquet. Canyon Road. V 0 Ord. 97-19 Page 5 k. 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 annexation, annexation and development agreement, tentative tract maps, conditional use permit, and oak tree permit was mailed in July 1996 to affected agencies. A scoping meeting was held at the Valencia Town Center Conference Room on August 7, 1996 to obtain information from the public as to issues which should be addressed in the environmental document. A substantial revision to the project occurred in January 1997, whish included the withdrawal of the conditional use permit application and six of the tentative maps, and the subsequent filing of a request for a prezone, specific plan document, general plan amendment, and revised vesting tentative tract map 51931. Following the revisions to the project, a subsequent NOP was prepared and mailed in May 1997. 1. The North Valencia Specific Plan 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 August 1, 1997 to September 15,1997: Late comments were accepted until September 22, 1997 to allow for mail delays. A Final EIR WEIR) dated October 1997 was prepared in accordance with CEQA and includes the DEER, responses to comments received on the DEIR, minor corrections and clarifications to the EIR text, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). As a result of staff, public and Planning Commission comments on the project and the DEIR, the applicant has made corrections and modifications to the proposed Specific Plan document text and to Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51931. None of these Specific Plan.:, changes or modifications would result in additional environmental impacts.. The FEIR was recommended for adoption by the Planning Commission simultaneously herewith pursuant to Resolution P97-19. 11L The Planning Commission went on a field visit to the North Valencia site on Saturday, May 31, 1997 at 9:00 a.m., beginning in the Council Chambers for the purpose of becoming familiar with the site and its conditions. n. The City Council held a study session on this project on June 3, 1997 and received an informatianal .report an the status of this project. At that Council Study Session the Council approved, a preliminary processing schedule for this project which identified various Planning Commission public hearing dates and specific project topics to be discussed at each of these meetings. The goal of this processing schedule was to reduce redundancy and allow the Commission and the public to better prepare for the meetings. This processing schedule allowed for each issue area of the Draft EIR to be discussed in a public forum during the Draft EIR public comment period to allow for maximum public participation, with numerous opportunities for the public to ask questions and receive information concerning the environmental document and the project. 5 Ord. 97.19 Page 6 o. The Planning Commission received an informational presentation about the North Valencia Specific Plan proposal at their regularly scheduled meeting on June 17, 1997, at 7:00 p.m. at the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita. This presentation was given by staff to distribute copies of the proposed North Valencia Specific Plan dated June 1997 and the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51931 version dated June 13, 1997, to provide the Commission with a background on the project application and to provide the Commission with a review of the entitlements requested. P. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 96071077 ) for this project was distributed to the Planning Commission and to the public on August 1, 1997. This document was circulated for a 45 -day public review beginning on August 1, 1997 and ending on September 15, 1997. The public review period was extended one week to end on September 22, 1997 to allow for receipt of letters that may have been delayed in the mail. q. The Planner Commission has. held duly noticed public hearings on this issue commencing on July 1, 1997 and continuing on July 9, 1997, July 23,.1997, August 5,1997; August 13; 1997, August 19, 1997, August 25, 1997, September 2, 1997, September 10, 19;7, September 24, 1997, October 7, 1997, October 15, 1997, and October 30, 1997. These public hearings have been held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita. r. On October 30,1997, the Planning Commission adopted a recommendation that the City Council adopt an ordinance approving the requested prezone, annexation, and specific plan document. S. The City Council held. duly noticed public hearings on this project commencing on November 4,1997:. On November 4, 1997, the City Council certified the FEIR for this project (Resolution 97-126), held the first reading of this ordinance, waived further reading of the ordinance, and continued this item for a second reading on November 25, 1997. On November 25, 1997, the City Council having waived further reading, completed the second reading in order to approve the North Valencia Annexation and Specific Plan; including. (a) approval of prezone 97-001 to allow for a specific plan, which includes a zoning reclassification from Los Angeles County Zone C2, M1 1/2, and A2-5 to City of Santa Clarita Zone Speafic Plan (SP) and Open Space (OS); and (b) the adoption of the Specific Plan `document which establishes special development standards for the North Valencia Specific Plan'area.' 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 Planning Commission and the City Council and on its behalf, the City Council further finds as follows: r Ord. 97-19 Page 7 a. At the hearings described above, the City Council considered staff presentations, staff reports, Planning Commission staff reports and resolutions, applicant presentations, public testimony on the proposal, and the FE1R prepared for the project. b. The Specific Plan provides for development standards and types of public and private improvements that will not cause serious public health problems, since access, water, sewage disposal, fire protection, and solid waste disposal 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 and the Open Space Zone. The North Valencia Specific Plan 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 waterways; and ensure that development substantially conforms to the approved plans. The Open Space Zone proposed over the MWD property is consistent with the existing and planned use of the site and with the surrounding uses existing and envisioned in the North Valencia Specific Plan. The area included in the Specific Plan Zone and the Open Space Zone was previously prezoned by adoption of Ordinance 95-12 and that ordinance is herein amended to reflect this prezone request as shown on the attached map (Exhibit A). d. - The Final Environmental Impact Report identifies certain significant environmentaleffects. The Final Environmental Impact Report identifies feasible mitigation measures for each of these impacts with the exclusion of air quality, visual resources, agricultural resources, solid waste disposal, and biota, which cannot be avoided through mitigation. The identified mitigation measures have beenincorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Plan (MMRP) and conditions of approval for the project. SECTION 3. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the City Council hereby finds as follows.- a— ollows.a:-. AFEIR, including the Draft EIR, Responses to Comments, Text Changes to the HEIR and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP), and the Statement of Overriding Considerations for this project have been prepared and circulated in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Planning Commission adopted Resolution P97-19 recommending that the City Council certify the FEIR and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations. The City Council certified the FEIR and adopted the Statement of Overriding Considerations through adoption of Resolution 97-126. 7 9 Ord. 97-19 Page 8 b. This project as modified by the Planning Commission and 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 City's General Plan, Unified Development Code and is compatible with surrounding land uses. C. The applicant has substantiated the findings for approval of a Specific Plan and Zone Change. The Specific Plan document includes the items required of a Specific Plan by Article 8-- Specific Plans Sec 65451 et seq of the California Planning and Zoning Laws. SECTION 4. The City Council hereby approves Prezone 97-001 consisting of a zone change from Los Angeles County Zone C2, M1 1l2, and A2-5.to City of Santa Clarita Specific Plan (SP) and Open Space (OS) as shown on the attached map (Exhibit A), amends portions of Ordinance 96-12, and adopts the North Valencia Specific Plan document (including special development standards) as amended by the Planning Commission and the City Council and herein incorporated by reference (Exhibit B). SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall become effective at 12:01 a.m. on the thirty-first day after adoption. SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify as to the passage of this Ordinance and cause it to be published in the manner prescribed by law. 91 Ord. 97-19 Page 9 PASSED AND APPROVED this day of 19_, HAMILTON C. SMYTH, MAYOR CITY COUNCIL ATTEST: SHARON L. DAWSON CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) § CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ) I, Sharon L. Dawson, City Clerk of the City of Santa. Clarita, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. was regularly introduced and pieced upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of , 19 . That thereafter, said Ordinance. was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of , 19 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEWERS LHS. sAcd\c=nci1\nvlord1.H= CITY CLERK 0 ORDINANCE NO. 97-20 AN ORDINANCE OF CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA APPROVING THE ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 96.001 WITH THE VALENCIA COMPANY FOR THE ANNEXATION OF 858 ACRES OF PROPERTY AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF 706.6 ACRES OF SUCH PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE NORTH VALENCIA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA LOCATED SOUTH OF NEWHALL RANCH ROAD, WEST OF BOUQUET CANYON ROAD AND VALENCIA BOULEVARD, NORTH OF MAGIC MOUNTAIN PARKWAY AND THE AUTO CENTER, AND EAST OF ANZA DRIVE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby make the following findings of fact: a. A prezone (MC: 95-242 / PZ: 95-006) was approved on April 16, 1996 by the City Council for portions of the North Valencia Annexation area through Ordinance No. 96-12.. An annexation request for the North Valencia Annexation (Annexation No. 95-006) was filed with LAFCO in June, 1996 following the direction of the Council on June 11, 1996 (Resolution 96-84). Following the prezone and filing of the annexation request by the City, the Valencia Company ("Applicant") submitted the entitlement requests noted below for a portion of the annexation area known as the North Valencia Specific Plan Area. The City's annexation request is on hold at LAFCO at the request of the City and the applicant pending approval of the project's environmental review document and entitlement requests. b. On June 5, 1996, the applicant submitted the following, entitlement requests (Master Case No 96-120): Annexation and Development Agreement 96-001, Annexation 95-006, Conditional Use Permit 96-010, TPM 20496 (Builder's South), TPM 20669 (Valencia Industrial Center), TPM 18417 (Pony League), TPM 24516 (Overall Project Area), VTTM 51931(Lago De Valencia), VTTM 51281 (South River) and VTTM 44832 (Arbor Park). Incomplete letters were sent on these entitlement requests in July with staff noting that an Oak Tree Permit would also be required. In January 1997, the applicant formally withdrew the application for a conditional use permit and all of the tract and parcel maps with the exception of.VTTM 51931. The applicant then submitted the following entitlement requests: a Specific Plan document including a comprehensive plan of development with specialized development standards for the North Valencia Specific Plan area: Prezone 97-001 to change the zoning within the area to the City's SP (Specific Plan) zoning designation; Oak Tree Permit 97-009 to allow for possible encroachment upon oak trees; and General Plan Amendment 97-001 amending the text of the Land Use Element Valley Center Concept narrative to allow for a North Valencia Specific Plan, as well as an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map. • C. The development application includes the proposed annexation of approximately 858 acres of unincorporated Los Angeles County land located adjacent to the City boundary. The applicant's request amends portions of Ordinance No. 96-12 to establish the City of Santa Clarita prezone SP (Specific Plan) over 706.6_ acres of the proposed annexation area: the remaining acreage in the annexation area will be as previously prezoned by Ordinance No. 96-12. The Specific Plan request includes entitlements for up to 2,000 dwelling units (750 single family detached, 1,250 multi -family attached), 636,000 square feet of commercial/retail use, 167,000 square feet of industrial/business park space, a 6.5 -acre elementary school site, a 15.2 -acre lake/park, a 12.4 - acre community park, 4.9 acres of neighborhood parks, 355.6 acres of open space, and over 5 miles of community trails, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51931 to subdivide 706.6 acres into 138 lots, an Oak Tree Permit to allow construction within 200 feet of the oak trees with no removals or encroachments currently proposed, and review and certification of the .Environmental Impact Report (SCH#96071077) prepared for the project. The site is known as the North Valencia Specific Plan area and is generally located south of Newhall Ranch Road, west of Bouquet Canyon Road and Valencia Boulevard, north of Magic Mountain Parkway and the Auto Center, and east of Anza Drive. d. The Annexation and Development Agreement has been processed concurrently with the entitlement requests listed in Section 1(c) above. The approval of General.Plan Amendment 97-001 would designate the site as SP (Specific Plan) and would implement the Valley Center Concept of the General Plan. The Annexation and Development Agreement is consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Land Use classifications, and the intensity of development allowed in the Specific Plan area with: 1) Council approval of the Specific Plan General Plan Amendment; 2) approval of a zone change on the property to SP (Specific Plan); 3) adoption of the project's Specific Plan Document; 4) 'approval of a zone change for the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) site to OS (Open Space); 5) approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 51931; 6) approval of Oak Tree Permit 97-009; and 7) review and certification of the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the project. e. The City Council's approval of Ordinance 97-19 prezones 706.6 acres of the annexation property to SP (Specific Plan). City Council adoption of Resolution 97-126.ceitifies the Final Environmental Impact Report for the project, and Council adoption of Resolution 97-127 approves the project's entitlements as listed above. With these actions complete, the Annexation and Development Agreement is found to be consistent with the goals, policies, general land uses and implementation programs a contained in the General Plan, including the Circulation Element. Furthermore, the Annexation and Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for commercial, industrial, residential, public facilities and parks, and open space development: f. The Annexation and Development Agreement was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law. g. The Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings on the North Valencia Annexation and Specific Plan (and related entitlements) commencing on July 1, 1997 and continuing on July 9; 1997, July 23, 1997, August 5, 1997 August 13, 1997, August 19, 1997, August 25, 1997, September 2, 1997, September 10, 1997, September 24,.1997, October 7, 1997, October 15, 1997, and October 30, 1997. These public hearings have been held at 7:00 p.m. at the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita. h. Discussion specifically regarding the deal points of the Annexation and Development Agreement were held by the Planning Commission at the public hearings of October 15, 1997 and October 30, 1997. These hearings were held at the City Hall Orchard Rooms and City Council Chambers, respectively, at 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita, commencing at 7:00 p.m. At these hearings the Planning Commission received staff reports and testimony from the public and the applicant. i. Duly noticed public hearings regarding the Annexation and Development Agreement were held by the City Council on November 25, 1997 and December 9, 1997 at the City Council Chambers,.23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita, commencing at 6:30 p.m. 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 Annexation and Development Agreement. b. The 15 -year Annexation and Development Agreement includes, but is not limited toy the following deal -points: 1. Annexation Cooperation. The applicant and the City will cooperate to complete the annexation of the Annexation Area into the City. • 2• Santa Clara River Conservation Area: The applicant will convey 295:6 acres of the Santa Clara River, for $1.5 million, to the City, subject to a river conservation easement granted to the California Department of Fish and Game. The boundaries of the River Conservation Area and contiguous Planning Areas may be modified upon the mutual agreement of the applicant and City. An approved Corps of Engineers Permit will establish boundaries where bank stabilization work will be permitted. If such boundaries are revised, the City agrees to make corresponding minor modifications to the River Conservation Area and contiguous Planning Area boundaries, consistent with the Specific Plan.. 3. River Improvements. The Development Agreement incorporates a "System for Landscaping and Improvement of. River Conservation Area." This System will include the following: a list of pre -approved plants, trees, flowers, bushes, etc. that may be planted within the River Conservation Area; a list of the types of pre -approved improvements that may be made within and along the River Conservation Area; specification of maintenance criteria for landscaping and improvements; a phasing plan for installing landscaping and improvements; a requirement that the applicant expend $1.5 million on River Conservation Area landscaping and improvements for habitat enhancement and recreational use; release of the applicant's responsibility for maintenance, repair, replacement and restoration of applicant installed landscaping and other improvements (with the exception of any required riparian mitigations in the. river adjacent to the project's Lago de Valencia planning area. The agreement recognizes that the cost of River Conservation Area landscaping and improvements is likely to exceed the $1.5 million commitment by the applicant and provides that if the cost of such exceeds $1.5 million, the City shall use reasonable efforts to reimburse the applicant for such excess to the extent that the City has funds available from grants or other sources. 4. Bank Stabilization. The area disturbed due to the implementation of the Buried Bank Stabilization Option will be revegetated and preserved as high quality upland habitat (after construction of the buried bank stabilization element). 5. Maintenance. The applicant shall work with the City to establish a Landscape Maintenance District for the maintenance of improvements. 4 6. Buried Bank. Stabilization Materials. The applicant will be permitted to use gunite, grouted rip -rap, ungrouted rip -rap, soil cement or other approved bank stabilization materials throughout the Annexation Project as approved by the City. When bank stabilization has been completed within the River Conservation Area and the City has accepted the work, the City shall thereafter be responsible for the maintenance, repair, replacement and restoration of all stabilization materials used within the accepted area. 7. Upland Preserve Zone. The property within the upland preserve zone will become a habitat preserve , and will cease being used for agricultural and farmland purposes. 8. Lake Park Access. The applicant will include in the Lago de Valencia CC & R's a provision describing the public's access rights (through the paseo and City's trail system) to the Lake Park, in accordance with the Specific Plan. 9. Pony League Ballfields. Following the completion of development of the commercial portion of the Pony League Planning Area, the applicant will provide the William S. Hart Pony League with a 15 year lease for the use of the playing fields, and will provide a signalized- intersection on Valencia Boulevard with access available during all phases of construction. 10. Light Rail Right -of Way. Nothing in the Specific Plan, the Annexation and Development Agreement or any other project approval will preclude future actions by the City to identify and reserve commuter rail and commuter rail stations in locations currently under review in the Southern California Association of Governments Ventura - Santa Clarita Rail Right -of -Way Restoration Study. 11. Valencia Industrial Center - Bus Stop Pads. The applicant will install 8' x 20' bus stop pads at up to 20 locations within the Valencia Industrial Center at locations to be agreed upon by the applicant and the City: 12. Roads to City Standards. New roads will be constructed to City standards, as opposed to County standards. 13. Landscaped Center Medians. Roads improved to major highway standards within and adjacent to the Specific Plan Project will provide landscaped center medians designed to City standards. 14. Traffic Calming Measures. Traffic calming measures will be included in the Specific Plan Project to reduce traffic speed and enhance safety. 15. Elementary School Site. In accordance with the terms of an agreement between Saugus Union School District . and the applicant, a 6.5 acre school site will be conveyed to the Saugus Union School District, within the project's Lago de Valencia planning area. The site will be centrally located and integrated into the City's trail and paseo system. 16. Improvement of Community Park. The applicant will dedicate and improve (with turf and trees) a 12.4 acre community park in the project's Lago de Valencia planning area. The park will be available for joint use in connection with the opening of the elementary school, and will also include an area for a multi- purpose building. A joint use agreement will be entered into between the City and the Saugus Union School District. In addition, the applicant will work to acquire permission to use and improve the adjacent six acre MWD property for additional park lands. 17. Extension of City's River Trail System. The project will include a 5.5 mile extension of the City's river trail system, and the construction of bike trails, as identified in the project's conditions of approval. This area of extension is in addition to the River Conservation Area. 18. Neighborhood Parks. The applicant will dedicate and construct two neighborhood parks of 2.2 and 2.7 acres respectively. The 2.7 acre park will be located in the project's Lago de Valencia planning area, adjacent to the river trail and River Conservation Area. The 2.2 acre park will be located in the project's South River Village and will provide a staging area for access to the river trail and River Conservation Area. 19. Pedestrian Overcrossing Bridges. Two pedestrian bridges, one over McBean Parkway and one over Newhall Ranch Road, will be constructed. 20. Design of Commercial Sites. Commercial sites will be designed to be pedestrian -friendly and to avoid conflicts with on-site auto traffic wherever possible. 21. Avenue Scott Crossing on San Francisquito Creek. The existing at grade crossing of Avenue Scott at San Francisquito Creek will be upgraded to a bridge crossing. 9 ri 22. Elimination of Uncertainty. The Annexation and Development Agreement - will eliminate uncertainty in planning for and securing orderly development of the Annexation Project. 23. Installation of Infrastructure Improvements. The Annexation and Development Agreement assures progressive installation of infrastructure improvements. 24. The Annexation and Development Agreement confirms that all discretionary project approvals are complete unless deemed otherwise by the Specific Plan. 25. The Annexation and Development Agreement allows for flexibility in final design by allowing for administrative modifications, modifications to the size and configuration of commercial, industrial and residential lots, modifications to design and configuration of the planning areas of Lago de Valencia and South River Residential tracts, and modifications to lot design standards. Such modifications are subject to the Annexation and Development Agreement's Applicable Rules, the project's Specific Plan and the project's conditions of approval, and are subject to the approval of the Director of Planning and Building. Services. The applicant will not be permitted to increase the number of residential units in the. project, or increase the amount of square feet of commerciallmdustrW area approved under the Annexation and Development Agreement modification provisions. 26. The Annexation and Development Agreement confirms the vesting of Annexation Project Approvals including the rules, regulations; official policies, fees, and exactions as of the date that Valencia's application for VTTM 51931 was deemed complete. 27. Bridge and Thoroughfare Fees/Roadway Improvements. The City and the applicant confirm that they anticipate a Bridge and Thoroughfare District ("B&T District") to be formed to finance the acquisition, development and maintenance of transportation improvements subject to approval by Los Angeles County of such district. Additional transportation improvements lying outside of the B&T District (as identified in the EIR) may also be required to mitigate the Annexation Project's traffic impacts ("Non-B&T Improvements). The applicant's B&T Fees shall not exceed the lesser of the City's or the County's B&T fees when formed, subject to annual increases in accordance with the CPI. The applicant will be responsible for its share of the. costs of Non-B&T Improvements (as agreed upon by the City) and the VA • applicant's share shall not exceed that amount. B&T fees shall be payable, or secured, at issuance of building permits. 28. Infrastructure Phasing Plan. The Annexation and Development Agreement confirms that the Infrastructure Phasing Plan, as identified in the Specific Plan, serves and fulfills the same purpose as a Development Monitoring System ('DMS"), and that if the City adopts a DMS, the Infrastructure Phasing Plan shall be deemed consistent with and will satisfy the DMS. 29. Reimbursement. The Annexation and Development Agreement will provide for reimbursement by other developers on a fair share basis for any amounts the applicant expends for public improvements benefitting lands, outside of the Annexation Project area. 30. Satisfaction of Parkland Obligations. The Annexation and Development Agreement provides that the dedication of various parks fully satisfy any and all parkland dedication requirements applicable to the Annexation Project and each of the Planning Areas and that no further dedications or in -lieu fees will be required. To the extent that parks and other recreation areas exceed the City's parkland requirements, the applicant shall be authorized to transfer credits for such excess to other Valencia/Newhall projects located outside of the Project area. 31. Public Financing Mechanisms. The City acknowledges that the applicant may seek to utilize the establishment of Mello -Roos Community Facilities Districts pursuant to Section 53311, at. =a., covering all or a portion of the Property, to enable the issuance of bonds for improvements contemplated under the Annexation and Development Agreement. The City shall cooperate with the applicant in establishing such districts as follows: (1) for all non-residential areas of the Project, (2) for residential areas of the Project, only if provision is made to pay off bonds issued by such district which encumber any residence, prior to occupancy of that residence, unless the City Council specifically approves a district absent the forgoing condition, and (3) City will not object to agreements made by and between the applicant and public agencies other than City for establishment of such districts. r'J 32. Standard Development Agreement Provisions. The Annexation and Development Agreement will be 15 years, provided that, as to any lot or parcel for which a final map has been recorded by development has not been completed, the term of the Annexation and Development Agreement and the Applicable Rules shall remain in effect for an additional five-year period. C. The Annexation and Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan and Specific Plan as amended by the City Council (General Plan Amendment 97-001). d. The Annexation and Development Agreement complies with the Development Code and other applicable ordinances, standards, policies, and regulations, including such standards as identified in the project's approved Spec Plan. e. The Annexation and Development Agreement will not: 1. Adversely affect the health, peace, comfort or welfare of persons residing ormorking the surrounding area; 2. Be materially detrimental to the sue, enjoyment, or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity of the site; or, 3. Jeopardize, endanger, or otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety, or general welfare. E The Annexation and Development Agreement provides for clear and substantial public benefit to the City and residents along with a schedule for delivery of the benefit. g. The Annexation and Development Agreement provides a schedule for 'the development to be constructed -in phases to be initiated within specified time periods. h. The construction of public facilities are required in conjunction with the development including, but not limited to, vehicular or pedestrian rights of way, drainage and flood control facilities, parks and other recreational facilities, community trails, sewers or sewage treatment facilities, and road improvements adequate to serve the development. i. The Annexation and Development Agreement, together with the Specific Plan and adopted conditions of approval, satisfies the following findings of Section 17.030.010 of the Unified Development Code: 1. Provides for the prohibition of one or more uses normally listed as permitted and/or accessory, subject to the Director's review, or subject to permit in the zone where placed; and, 0 2. Limits future development and specifies conditions under which further development, not included within the agreement would occur; and, 3. Requires a faithful performance bond where deemed necessary to, and in amount deemed sufficient to, guarantee the faithful performance of specified terms, conditions, restrictions, and/or requirements of the agreement. In lieu of the required bond, the applicant may deposit with the City Clerk and assign to the City, certificates of deposit or savings and loan certificates or shares equal in amount to the same conditions as set forth herein; and, 4. Requires specified design criteria for the exteriors of building and other structures, including signs; and, 5. Requires special yards, open spaces, and buffer areas, fences and walls, landscaping, and parking facilities, including vehicular and pedestrian ingress and egress; and, 6. Regulates nuisance factors such as noise, vibration, smoke, dust, dirt, odors, gases, garbage, heat, and the prevention of glare or direct illumination of adjacent properties; and, 7. Regulates operating hours and other characteristics of operation adversely affecting normal neighborhood schedules and functions on surrounding property. SECTION 3. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the City Council hereby finds as follows: a. A Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP), and Statement of Overriding Considerations for this project have been prepared, circulated in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and adopted as certified as required by the Act. b. The project is compatible with existing development in the area, and consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning as amended (General Plan Amendment 97-001). c. The applicant has substantiated the findings for approval of a 15 -year Annexation and Development Agreement. SECTION 4. The City Council hereby approves Annexation and Development Agreement 96-001. 10 SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall become effective at 12:01 a.m. on the thirty-first day after adoption. SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify as to the passage of this Ordinance and cause it to be published in the manner prescribed by law. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of HAMILTON C. SMYTH MAYOR ATTEST: SHARON L. DAWSON CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES } § CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ) 19_. I, Sharon L. Dawson, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 97-20 was regularly introduced and placed ;upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of 19_ That thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of 19_by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS JJL:JDR1ep coundhord9720jdr 11 CITY CLERK r-1 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Boulevard Suite 300 Santa Clarita, CA 91355 Attn.: City Manager RECORDING FEES EXEMPT DUE TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 27383 City Clerk Santa Clarita, California (Space Above Line For Recorder's Use Only) NORTH VALENCIA ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 96-001 BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA AND THE"NEWHALL LAND AND FARMING COMPANY TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section I. Definitions ...................................... 4 Section II. Obligations of Owner ............................ 5 A. Cooperation with Annexation ........................ 5 B. Santa Clara River Conservation Area .............. b 5 Section 1. Conveyance .................................. 6 5 44 2. River Improvements .......................... 4 6 A. 3. Buried Bank Stabilization & i& 4 . Barre Eta 3��8@cirnx�creex atelciai9 .. ....... ............. 8 33 4. Buried Bank Stabilization Materials ........... 8 C. Lago de Valencia - Lake Park Access ................ 9 D. Use of Pony League Ballfields ...................... 9 E. Light Rail Right -of -Way .......... .... ....... 4 l F. Valencia IndustrialCenter - Bus Stop Pads ......... 10 G. Roads to City Standards ............................ 10 H. Landscaped Center Medians .......................... 10 I. Traffic Calming Measures ........................... 10 J. Elementary School.Site...... ... .............. 44 11 K. Extension of City's River Trail System ............. 11 L. Bike Lane on Newhall Ranch Road . .. ... 11 M. Class I Bike Lane on Newhall Ranch Road Bridge over Bouquet Creek ................................. 12 N. Class -I II Bike Lane on Avenue Scott ........... 12 O. Class II Bike Lane on Avenue Scott Bridge .......... 12 P.Glass11 Bike Lefte Lane/Paseo on Magic Mountain Q. Parkway.. ....... .... 14 Class II Bike Lane along McBean Parkway ......... ira 13 19 R. -elass 11 Bike '--- Enhanced Sidewalk on McBean S. Bridge ...... ...................... Improvement of Community Park ...................... 13 13 T. River Parks ................... i} 14 U. Pedestrian Overcrossing Bridges ................. 44 14 V. Design of Commercial Sites. ....... .. ..... . .14 15 W. Avenue Scott Crossing on San Francisquito Creek. +4 15 X. Installation of Infrastructure Improvements ..... i4 15 Y. Landscape and Maintenance District .............. �4 15 Section III. Annexation_ _________________________________ s4. is A. Timing .......................................... +4 15 B. Term ............................................... 15 Section IV. Project Development .......................... 44 16 A. Permitted Uses ...... ... ........... i& 16 B. Rules, Regulations and Official Policies ........ 33 16 1. Applicable Rules ........................... i& 3.6 2. Conflicting Enactments ..................... i -r 17 C. Administrative Modifications .. .. .. 14 18 D. MedlEleatlens to eemmereiai, Fadsst-i-I 'd Residential Eets '^ Permitted Feea• .. ... •�_ 20 E. wan - strata- - ee4 fie ie - - - .�-'--- - -i- Page F. Let Desilft Standaeds 14 H. Pevtalbeed Fees 19 -Irr Term of Map(s) and Other Project Approvals ............. 44 21 ----4 F. Timing of Development .............................. 3& HE. , - - - 21 G. Moratorium ......................................... 21 H%. Vesting of Owner's Rights ....................... *+7-22 —M I. Infrastructure.Capacity ......................... 3} 22 —i9 J. School Mitigation Obligations ................... 34 23 —A K. Satisfaction of Park Land Obligations ........... .2 23 —P L. Public Financing Districts ...................... .24 74- Q M. Bridge and Thoroughfare Fees and Roadway Improvements. ..................... .......... 1. B&T District .24 -4,74- 24 ............................... 2. B&T District Fees .......................... .24 25 3. Non-B&T Improvement Fees ................... 34 25 4. Calculation of Fees for Commercial, Industrial and Residential Areas ........... z4 25 5. Pre-B&T Traffic -Fees ....................... z4 26 6. Credits.. .......................... mL& 26 7. Transfer of Credits ........................ 35 26 —R N. Infrastructure Improvements ..................... .a& 26 1. Infrastructure Phasing Plan ................ 3S 26 2. Reservation of Infrastructure Capacity ..... 36 27 3. Reimbursement and Apportionment ............ m16 27 — 6 0. Development Agreement/Project Approvals ......... �6 27 Section V. Cooperation/Implementation.................... 36 27 A. Further Assurances; Covenant to Sign Documents. $6. 27 B. Processing ... .. ..... .. .......... 4-7 28 C. Processing During Third Party Litigation ........ 4& 29 D. State, Federal or Case Law ...................... z1& 29 E. Other Governmental Bodies ....................... 4& 29 F. Defense of Agreement ............................ z2$ 29 Section VI. General Provisions ........................... 34 30 A. Covenants Run with the Land ..................... z-4 30 B. Transfers and Assignments ....................... 34 30 1. Right to Assign .. ... ................... 4.4 30 2. Liabilities Upon Transfer .................. 34 31 C. Mortgagee Protection .................... ....... 3-1- 32 D. Statement of Compliance .......................... 33 33 E. Default .. ..................................... 33 74- F. Annual Review ................................... 34 35 Default by City ................................. 35 6HG. 76- . H. Legal Action. .... ....................... ars 36 I. Waiver; Remedies Cumulative ..................... 36 37 J. Future Litigation Expenses .................... 36 37 1. Payment to Prevailing Party ................ 36 37 2. Scope of Fees .............................. 3* 38 K. Non -Recourse...... .... .. .............. 38 L. Permitted Delays; Supersedure by Subsequent Laws -}? 28 Paae 1. Permitted Delays .......................... 34 38 2. Supersedure by Subsequent Laws ............. 3$ 79- I, M. Amendment of Agreement. .......................... 3$ 40 — M N. Operating Memoranda ............................. 33 40 Section VII. Miscellaneous. .......................... 34 41 A. Negation of Partnership ......................... 33 Tio B. No Third Party Beneficiary ...................... 4$ 41 C. Entire Agreement ................................. 4$ 41 D. Severability .................................... 44 41 E. Construction of Agreement ................. ..... 4$ 42 F. Section Headings .. ......... ................. 4+ 42 G. Applicable Law and Interpretation ............... +1- 42 H. Notices. ............................... 4+ 42 I. Time is of the Essence .......................... 4-Z 43 J. Recordation ..................................... 4-_.)6 44 NORTH VALENCIA ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 96-001 THIS ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into as of this day of 1997, by and between the CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, a municipal corporation ("City"), and THE NEWHALL LAND AND FARMING COMPANY, a California limited partnership ("Owner"). W I T 17 E S S E T H• A. The.lack of certainty in the approval of development projects can result in a waste of resources, escalate the cost of housing and other development, and discourage investment in and commitment to comprehensive planning which would make maximum efficient utilization of resources at the least economic cost to the public. B. California Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5 (the "Development Agreement Statute") and Santa Clarita Municipal Code, Chapter 22.16, Part 4 (the "City's Development Agreement Ordinance"), therefore authorize the City to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property. C. Owner has a legal or equitable interest in certain real property located in the unincorporated area of the County of Los Angeles (the "County"), as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Specific Plan Area"). D. The following individual Planning Areas, depicted CKSIMONS 24929 261711 7/6 on Exhibit "B," collectively comprise and are referred to herein as the "Specific Plan Project" (all numbers are approximate): (i) Valencia Del Lago: a 228.1 -acre mixed use development including 1,100 residential units and 110,000 square feet of commercial space; (ii) Bouquet South Commercial: a 24.7 -acre development providing 162,000 square feet of commercial space; Pony League: 53.1 acres including 13.0 acres of commercial development providing 180,000 square feet of commercial space and 17.2 acres, devoted to playing fields; (iv) south River Village: a 92.7 -acre mixed use neighborhood including 900 units of high and medium density residential, parks and 184,000 square feet of commercial space; (v) Valencia Industrial Center: an 18 -acre development providing 167,000 square feet of commercial space; and (vi) Santa Clara River Conservation Area: 295.6 acres of riverbed and banks, all of which will be conveyed to City for open space, habitat preserve and recreational purposes Each of the foregoing may be referred to herein individually as a "Planning Area." E. On March 26, 199.6, the Santa Clarita City Council (the "City Council") adopted Resolution 96-37 approving a Negative Declaration pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and adopted Ordinance No. 96-12 prezoning the Specific Plan Area (the "Prezone"). -2- F. On , 1997, the City Council, after making appropriate findings, certified an Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 96071077) (the "EIR") pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and thereafter considered the =n___ the _,_ North Valencia Annexation Project (Master Case Nos. 95-242, 96-120, 97-063) and oranted the following approvals: i. General Plan Amendment ; 97-001: 2. North Valencia Specific Plan Prezone 97-001 (the "Specific Plan"); 3. Annexation No. 95-006; 4. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51931 ("Map No. 5193111); 5. Oak Tree Permit 97-009; and 6. Haul Route. Collectively, the foregoing approvals, along with this Agreement,.shall constitute the "Project Approvals". G. Annexation and development of the Specific Plan Project will further the comprehensive planning objectives contained within City's general plan (the "General Plan") and will result in the City and community benefits outlined in Section II below. H. For the reasons recited herein, City has determined that the Specific.Plan Project is a development for which a.development agreement is appropriate under the -3- Development Agreement Statute and City's Development Agreement Ordinance. I. The City Council has determined that this Agreement is consistent with City's General Plan and.the Specific Plan and has determined that this Agreement is fair, just and reasonable, and City has concluded that the economic interests of its citizens and the public health, safety and welfare will be best served by entering into this Agreement.' J. The Planning Commission of City held a duly noticed public hearing on this Agreement on October 30, 1997 and recommended that the City Council approve this Agreement. K. The City Council, after a duly noticed hearing on 1997, adopted Ordinance No. 97-20, approving this Agreement on Neye bee 25 1997, which ordinance became effective on 1997 (the "Effective Date"). NOW, THEREFORE, with reference to the foregoing recitals and in consideration of the mutual promises, obligations And covenants herein contained, the partieshereto agree as follows: Section I. Definitions. The following terms shall have the meanings defined for such terms, in the Sections set forth below: Term Section Administrative Modifications Section IV.C. Agreement Introduction Applicable Rules Section IV.B.1. Applicable Rules Effective Date Section IV.B.1. B&T District Section EV.e.1 IV. M.1. B&T Fees IV.M.2. CEQA -4- Section iii$.2 Recital E City Introduction City Council Recital E' City's Development Agreement Ordinance Recital B Conditions of Approval Section II.B.2.e. County Recital C Development Agreement Statute Recital B Effective Date Recital K EIR Recital F Future Approvals Section 3V.G IV.C.iv. General Plan Recital G Lake Park Section II.C. Map No. 51931 Recital F Ministerial Approvals Section V.B.3. Mortgagee Section VI.C. Non-B&T Improvements Section !V.Q.1 IV.M.1. Notice of Non -Compliance Section VI.F. Owner Introduction Planning Area Recital D Playing Fields Parcel Section II.D. Prezone Recital E Project Approvals Recital F River Conservation Area Section II.B.l.a. River Landscaping/Improvement System Section II.B.2.b. Specific Plan Recital F Specific Plan Area Recital C Specific Plan Project Recital D Subsequent Rules Section IV.B.2. Term Section III.B. Section II. Obligations of Owner. In consideration of City entering into this Agreement, Owner agrees to perform certain obligations in connection with the development within the Specific Plan Area, which will have an overall benefit to City and the community. These obligations include: -5- A. CooReration with Annexation. Owner will cooperate with City to complete the annexation of the Specific Plan Area into the City. City hereby agrees that annexation of the Specific Plan Area will occur when the Project Approvalsandthe EIR have been approved and the Project.Approvals and EIR have become final, i.e., the time for a legal challenge has expired with.Dut a challenge having been filed or a final judicial determination rejecting such a challenge has been rendered. B. Santa Clara River Conservation Area. 1. Conveyance. a. Following annexation, Owner will convey to the City approximately 295.6 acres of the Santa Clara River (the "River Conservation Area") for a purchase price of One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1.5 Million). City hereby acknowledges that the conveyance of the River Conservation Area will be subject to a river conservation easement granted by Owner to the California Department of Fish and Game r and that Owner will retain all water and mineral rights lying under the River Conservation Area and will reserve blanket easements for accessing, constructing and maintaining utilities, infrastructure and landscaping as may be required by City or other governmental agencies. b. The boundaries of the River Conservation Area and contiguous Planning Areas may be modified upon the mutual agreement of Owner and City. C. Owner has made application for a Corps of Engineers Permit to perform work in the River Conversation Area consistent with the Project Approvals. The Corps of Engineers Permit will, among other things, establish boundaries where bank stabilization work will be permitted. If the Corps of Engineers Permit boundaries differ from the Project Approvals, or if the Permit boundaries are ever revised, City hereby agrees to approve corresponding minor modifications to the River Conservation Area and contiguous Planning Area boundaries, provided that such minor modifications s do not significantly expand the Planning Area boundaries and that such minor modifications remain consistent with the Specific Plan. 2. River Improvements. a. Owner shall install landscaping and other improvements within the River Conservation Area valued at no less than One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1.5 Million) for the purpose of habitat enhancement and recreational use. b. Attached hereto as Exhibit "C" is a "System for Landscaping and Improvement of River Conservation Area" (the "River Landscaping/Improvement System") which (i) lists a variety of pre -approved plants, trees, flowers, bushes, grasses and ground covers that may be planted by Owner within the River Conservation Area and (ii) lists the types of pre -approved improvements that may be made within and along the River Conservation Area. Owner's installation of landscaping and improvements shall be completed concurrently with the development of the adjacent Planning Area. C. If the River Conservation Area is -7- conveyed to City prior to the completion of landscaping and improvements by Owner, City, shall execute all necessary easement and other agreements as may be necessary to permit Owner to complete the landscaping and improvements or, as an alternative and at City's request, Owner shall pay to City the balance remaining in the One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollar ($1.5 Million) fund whereupon City shall thereafter be responsible for completing the landscaping and improvement of the River Conservation Area. d. The parties recognize that the cost of Owner's River Conservation Area landscaping and improvements is likely to exceed the One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollar ($1.5 Million) commitment by Owner. If the cost of landscaping and improvements exceeds One.Million Five -Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1.5 Million), City shall use reasonable best efforts to reimburse Owner for such excess to the extent that City has funds available from grants , ram`=_= or other sources. e. Fpllowing Owner's installation of landscaping and.improvements along the River Conservation Area or any portion thereof, C__y _he__ ^:ner shall, upon notifying City of such installation, immediately thereafter '-'-- ever and be respensible be relieved from responsibility for the maintenance, repair, replacement and restoration of such landscaping and improvements, with the exception of any required riparian mitigations in the River Conservation Area adjacent to Lago de Valencia, which shall be maintained by Owner as specified in the conditions of approval to Map No. 51931 ("Conditions of am Approval"). 3. Buried Bank Stabilization. The Specific Plan provides for a buried bank stabilization element which is different from the rip rap or concrete stabilization methods favored by Los Angeles County Public Works, Flood Control Division. The buried bank stabilization element shall constitute a part of the River Conservat'.on Area improvements described in Section II.B.2.a. above. After construction of the buried bank stabilization element, the affected area will be revegetated by. Owner. 4. Buried Bank Stabilization Materials. Owner shall be permitted to use gunite, grouted rip rap, ungrcuted rip rap, soil cement or other a ev bank stabilization materials throughout the Specific Plan Project Area, as approved by City. When bank stabilization materials have been completed within the River Conservation Area, or any portion thereof, and City has accepted the work, City shall thereafter be responsible for the maintenance, repair, replacement and restoration of all stabilization materials used within the accepted area. MZ C. La -90 de Valencia - Lake Park Access. The Lago de Valencia Planning Area will contain a 15.2 (approximate) acre lake to be known as "Lake Park". The ultimate size of Lake Park may vary depending on its final design. Owner agrees to include in the Lago de Valencia CC&Rs a provision describing the public's access rights (through the paseo and City's trail system }- described in the Specific Plan) to Lake Park. The CC&Rs will provide that the CC&R provision relating to the public's access rights to Lake Park may not be amended without the prior written consent of City. D. Use of Pony Leaaue Ballfields. Following completion of development of the commercial portion of the Pony League Planning Area, Owner will previele theM1111am S. Here Pen . ___ _ with a 3:6 year lease gni the use ref the existing _ _l _ _ Y I 7 fields convey the 17.2 acre playing fields parcel (the "Plaving Fields Parcel") to City or as City may otherwise direct Such conveyance shall be subiect to a condition subsequent that provides that should the Playing Fields Parcel or any portion thereof, ever be -used for anv ouroose other than its current use i.e.. Pony League baseball, title to the Plaving Fields Parcel shall be subiect to the right of Owner to reenter the Playing Fields Parcel and to cause the ownership of the Playing Fields Parcel.to revert to Owner. In.addition, Owner will provide improved access to the playing fields by means of a signalized intersection on Valencia Boulevard, which signalized.intersection shall be installed as a part of.and concurrently with the development of the commercial portion of the Pony League Planning Area. -10- E. Light Rail Right -of -Way. Consistent with the City's General Plan policies.2.1-2.9 of the Circulation Element, nothing in the Specific Plan, this Agreement or any other Project Approval will preclude future actions by City.to identify and reserve commuter rail and commuter rail stations in locations currently under review in the Southern California Association of Governments Ventura - Santa Clarita Rail Right -of -Way Restoration Study. F. Valencia Industrial Center - Bus Ston Pads. Owner shall install bus stop pads (approximately 8' by 3rrL 20' in size adjacent to the curb) at up to 20. .locations within the Valencia Industrial Centerat locations to be agreed upon by Owner and City. Owner shall receive full credit for all costs of the design and installation of the bus stop pads toward Owner's obligations for City's transit mitigation fees G. Roads to Citv Standards. New roads .within the Specific.Plan Project will be constructed to City, not County standards. H. Landscaped Center Medians. Roads that are improved to major highway standards within and adjacent to the Specific Plan Project will provide landscaped center medians (as specified on Map No. 51931) designed to City standards. I. Traffic Calming Measures. Traffic calming measures such as traffic circles, medians, narrower street and driveway sections, serpentine roadway design, diagonal parking and other design features may be included in the Specific Plan Area to reduce traffic speed and enhance safety. J. Elementary School Site -11- In accordance with the terms of an agreement between Saugus Union School District and Owner, a 6.5'acre school site in the Lago de Valencia Planning Area will be conveyed to the Saugus Union School District. The school site will be centrally located and integrated into City's trail and pasec system so that safe and convenient access for children in adjacent neighborhoods and Planning Areas is provided K. Extension of City's River Trail System. The Specific Plan Area will include a 5.5 mile (approximate) extension of the City's river trail system -adjacent to several of the Planning Areas. The 5.5 mile.extension of the City's river trail system is in addition to the River Conservation Area and shall be constructed by Owner as described in Sections II L -R below. L. Bike Lane on Newhall Ranch Road. Owner shall replace the existing temporary bike lane in the same approximate alignment and dimension and with Portland concrete cement materials on the north side of Newhall Ranch Road from ffillsbeveugh Avenue approximately Grandview Drive to McBean Parkway. Owner shall extend the e5elsting bemperar bike lane (in the same approximate alignment and dimension and with the same materials) along the north side of Newhall Ranch Road from McBean Parkway to the east end of the.San Francisquito Creek Bridge and along the south side of Newhall Ranch Road from the west end of the San Francisquito Creek Bridge.to.Avenue Tibbitts. Owner shall construct a Class I bike lane approximately 12' in width within a 16' right of way on the south side of the San Francisquito Creek Bridge concurrently with the widening of the -12- San Francisquito Creek Bridge for traffic purposes. In addition, an undercrossing on the west side of the San Francisquito Creek Bridge shall be constructed by Owner concurrently with the widening of the San Francisquito Creek Bridge for traffic purposes.. All temporary bike lanes, surfaces will be asphalt until the adjacent property is developed at which time the bike lanes will be upgraded to a Portland concrete cement surface; however, if the asphalt deteriorates significantly prior to the development of the adjacent property, Owner will cause the bike lanes to be.upgraded to a Portland concrete cement surface or to be repaired to the satisfaction of City. M. Class I Bike Lane on Newhall Ranch Road Bridge over Bouquet Creek. Owner shall construct a Class I bike lane approximately 12' in width within a 161. right of way on the south side of the Beuquet Gree'._ Newhall Ranch Road Bridge concurrently with the widening of the BeuVe_ ^__e_'._ Newhall Ranch Road Bridge for traffic purposes. N. Class -I- II Bike Lane on Avenue Scott. Owner shall construct a Class + II bike lane approximately +2-L 6' in width within a !6' the road right of way on either the north or the south side of Avenue Scott between McBean Parkway and the east side of the San r,�,nelsgfdt : e er.eelt Avenue Scott Bridge. O. Class II Bike Lane on Avenue Scott Bridges. Owner shall construct a Class II bike lane approximately 61 in width on either the north or the south side of the Avenue Scott Bridge when the bridge is constructed. P. Q-1-� Bike !ftrta Lane/Paseo on Magic Mountain -13- Parkway. Owner shall construct a Haas 1 b1he ane bike lane/paseo approximately 10' in width along the north side of Magic Mountain Parkway west of McBean Parkway concurrently with the widening of Magic Mountain Parkway or with the development of the Planning Area adjacent thereto. Q. Class II Bike Lane along McBean Parkway. Owner shall construct Class II bike lanes along the east and west side of McBean Parkway north of the Santa Clara River to Newhall Ranch Road, and along the west side of McBean Parkway south of -the Santa Clara River to Magic Mountain Parkway concurrently with the widening of McBean Parkway or the development of the Planning Area adjacent thereto. R. Enhanced Sidewalk on McBean Bridge. Owner shall construct a elaes 11 bike lane an enhanced sidewalk approximately 6' in width on the west side of McBean Bridge concurrently with the widening of McBean Bridge for traffic purposes. The existing 10' bike lane on the east side of McBean Bridge shall be used for nerth beund bicyclists and pedestrians. A barrier shall be constructed by Owner to separate the existing bike lane from vehicular traffic No additional right of way shall be required for the barrier. S. Improvement of Community Park. Owner agrees to dedicate a 12.4 acre community _park within the Lago de Valencia Planning Area. In addition, Owner agrees to improve the community park with turf and trees and two baseball diamonds, one of which shall be equipped with a backstop. In addition, Owner agrees to lav out the location of two soccer fields. Owner also agrees to'surchaseland install play equipment for the park -14- provided that the cost of the equipment including installation shall not exceed Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000). Owner shall also Purchase and install Picnic furniture and shall construct a shade structure for the Picnic area. Owner's plans for the improvement and equipping of the community Park shall be subiect to the reasonable anproval of City's Denartment of Parks and Recreation. The 12.4 acre community park will be improved and equipped and available for joint use in connection with the opening of the elementary school. A joint use agreement will be entered into between City and the Saugus School District regarding the use and maintenance of the community park. In addition, Owner shall use reasonable efforts to acquire permission from the MWD to use and improve the adjacent six acre MWD property for additional park lands, in a manner consistent and compatible with the adjacent 12.4 acre community park. , T. River Parks. Owner agrees to dedicate and construct two neighborhood parks of B• 2.0 acres (including 1.4 acres of buffer areal and.2.7 acres respectively as depicted by the Specific Plan. The 2.7 acre park will be located in Lago de Valencia adjacent to the river trail and River Conservation Area, will be improved by Owner with decomposed granite trails and will preserve existing oak trees. The 4 2_0 acre park will be located in South River Village and will provide a staging area for access to the river trail and River Conservation Area. U. Pedestrian Overcrossing Bridge—tea. Two pedestrian. bridges (over McBean Parkway and Newhall Ranch Road) will be constructed by Owner to provide pedestrian linkage to paseos, -15- trails; parks and commercial areas. Following completion of each pedestrian bridge, Owner shall dedicate and City shall accept dedication of each bridge and shall thereafter be responsible for the maintenance and repair thereof. V. Design of Commercial Sites. Commercial sites will be designed by Owner to be pedestrian friendly and to avoid conflicts with on-site auto traffic where•Ter possible. W. Avenue Scott Crossing on San Francisouito Creek. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the last unit in the Lago de Valencia Planning Area [new trigger to be determined], the existing at grade crossing of Avenue Scott at San Francisquito.Creek will be upgraded by Owner to a bridge crossing. X. Installation of Infrastructure Improvements. This Agreement will assure progressive installation of infrastructure improvements for the benefit of the community and the Specific Plan Project Area. Y. Landscape and Maintenance District. Owner will cooperate with City in the establishment of a Landscaping and Maintenance District that will provide for maintenance of landscaping for medians, parkways and paseo bridges. Section III. Annexation. A. Timing. Annexation proceedings regarding annexation of the Specific Plan Project Area shall not be ,completed a€ter until all Project Approvals have been granted. If annexation proceedings are not completed on or before December 31, 1999, either party may terminate this Agreement in.which case -16 it shall be of no further force or effect. B.' Term. This Agreement shall.commence upon the Effective Date and shall extend fifteen (15) years from the Effective Date (the "Term"), unless said term is otherwise termi- nated, modified or extended by circumstances set forth in this Agreement or by mutual consent.of the parties. Following the expiration of the Term, this Agreement shall be deemed terminated and.of no further force and effect; provided, however, such termination shall not affect any right or duty; arising from City approvals, including, without limitation, the Project Approvals, the Future Approvals or the Ministerial Approvals. This Agreement shall terminate with respect to any lot and such lot shall be released and no longer be subject to this Agreement, without the execution or recordation of any further document, when a certificate of occupancy has been issued for the building(s) on the lot. -17- Section IV. Proiect Development. A. Permitted Uses. The parties hereby agree that, for the term of this Agreement, the permitted uses, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and location of public improvements, shall be those set forth in this Agreement, the Project Approvals and the "Applicable Rules" (as hereinafter defined). B. Rules. Recrulations and Official Policies. 1. Applicable Rules. The parties hereby agree that, for the term of this Agreement, the rules, regulations and official,policies governing permitted uses, governing density, and governing design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to development of the Specific Plan Area as well as all fees (including processing fees except for building permit and review fees) and exactions, shall be those rules, regulations and official policies, fees and exactions of the City in force and as interpreted by the City by policy or practice on 1997 (the "Applicable Rules Effective Date"), i.e., the date on which~ Owner's application for Map No. 51931 was deemed complete (the "Applicable Rules"). The parties agree that the rules,. regulations and official policies set forth on Exhibit '! -DD" hereto constitute the parties' best effort to list the Applicable Rules. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this Agreement shall preclude City from applying changes occurring from time to time in the Uniform Building Code, Uniform -Is- Electrical Code, Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, or Uniform Plumbing Code, provided that such changes (i) are found by City.to be necessary to the health or safety of the citizens of City, (ii) are generally applicable to all property in City, and (iii) do not prevent or unreasonably delay development of the Specific Plan Project Area in accordance with this Agreement. 2. Conflicting Enactments. Any change in the Applicable Rules, including, without limitation, any change in any applicable general, area or specific plan, zoning, subdivision or building regulation, the _:..1 ,, r-_.... e P.el-ie Y in Appileable Rules) adopted or becoming effective after the Applicable Rules Effective Date, including, without limitation, any such change by means of an ordinance, initiative, resolution, policy, order or moratorium, initiated or instituted for any reason whatsoever and adopted by the City Council, the Planning Commission or any other board; commission or department of City, or any officer or employee thereof, or by the electorate, or by a court, as the case may be, which would, absent this Agreement, otherwise be applicable to the Specific Plan Area and which would conflict in any way with or be more restrictive than the Applicable Rules ("Subsequent Rules"), shall not be applied by City within the Specific Plan Area unless t -he n..L-_V-_t Rule applied _d b- bhe Spee€€le piekn Area, -- ..L_ _h ease _.__t n..t___u. _ Ritle shall be deemed te be an _, _-L, _ ,1.., _ both Owner and City consent in writing. C. Administrative Modifications. City and Owner will -19- retain certain flexibility with respect to the details of Specific Plan Project development and therefore % 11 t1tab u agree that the following Administrative Modifications—" (within agreed uPOn _-- ___,.for each Planning Area may, unless otherwise provided in this Section IV C be approved by the Director of Planning and Building Services without public notice or hearing in _______nee ..i.... the Sreeifle Medifleatlerts to Eemmereiai, lrrdafftr' 1 an' a. e.._ pttyehaser of -tel nr et -parse!gAxea may K thei-een, be a!Eieel frem that sitewn en iiap die 519a3:'£e €+e; i ; r,a.------e€ the Speei€le plan pre7eeE, tate a.Eles agree -`_.J.0 The parties agree that, in order to accommodate the needs of third party purchasers the size and configuration Of the rrepesed lots or parcels and dimensions and/or locations of improvements may be ea modified at the Owner's discretion, and City shall fully cooperate therewith, subject to then provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, and provided that the aggregate total density and intensity of the particular Planning Area are not increased, etid the permitted uses thereon are not modified from those provided in the Project Approvals , and.the parcels and I lots and improvements thereon are in aeea --- consistent with the Applicable Rules and Project Approvals, including all set -back and construction standards set forth therein. -20- and Seu` : Rl `- ResideY(ii) The design and configuration of residential lots and related-improvements within the Lago de Valencia and South River Planning Areas may , witheut appreyel, be reconfigured and redesigned by Owner provided the number of dwelling units within each respective Planning Area is nct increased. Such reconfiguration and redesign may include making one or more tracts within either or both Planning Areas less dense, converting one or more lots from air space condominium purposes to individual fee lots e-r f,-indiy#dual fee lets to air spaee eendem_-_.._ purgei provided such conversion results in a lower density of development than specified for the original lot or lots and modifying the design of streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, drainage and affected utilities to be consistent with such reconfiguration and redesign so long as.each reconfiguration and redesign is otherwise consistent with design and configuration standards and requirements in the.Specific Plan and the Conditions of Approval. Agreement sets Eerth resi4enelal and eemmerelel let --' g Speelfle—Pian area G;t hereb L L l � l Y ib,r l� Ib' h h 1 L l L ___..._.. .. ,..� �.,� �,,. �,... ....., uNt.i ...�..� shall .,c..F,t,rvvccs preyidee the=_= '___'_�= (iii) City hereby agrees that any subsequent tentative subdivision map for a Planning Area or -21- portion thereof that is submitted for review and approval shall be approved provided the residential, commercial and industrial lot design and configuration standards set forth in Exhibit it E," in the Specific Plan and in the Conditions of Approval are met. iv City and Owner herebyagree that upon adoption of the Project Approvals, Owner shall have the vested right to develop the Specific Plan Area in any way that is consistent with the Project Approvals and this Development Agreement. City shall not require Owner to obtain, and expressly exempts Owner from obtaining, any discretionary approvals or permits for the development of the Specific Plan Area (other than the Project Approvals and this Development Agreement). City agrees to process and administratively approve any permits or approvals of any kind required for Owner to develop the Specific Plan Area consistent with the Project Approvals and this Development Agreement, and such administrative approvals are deemed to constitute ministerial acts, final and not appealable to the Planning Commission or City Council. Any amendments or modifications to the Project Approvals ("Future Approvals") shall become part of the Applicable Rules. JyL Notwithstanding any other provision of this Section IV.C, any change in the size and configuration of \ proposed lots in a Planning Area which would result in the conversion of two or more single family lots into an air space condominium lot, regardless of whether such conversion results in -22- greater or lesser density of development may be reviewed by the City Planning Commission, provided that the lot design and configuration standards set forth in Exhibit "E,11 the Specific Plan and the Conditions of Approval shall govern such review, and that City shall not condition approval of any such conversion with additional exactions, conditions or requirements which increase the obligations of Owner with respect to such Planning Area. D. Permitted Fees. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, and specifically excluding fees set by entities not controlled by City that are collected. by City, City shall only charge and impose those fees and exactions, including, without limitation, dedications and any.other fee or tax (including excise, construction or any other tax) relating to development or the privilege of developing, which are in effect on a City-wide basis as of the Applicable Rules Effective Date and only in such amounts as would have been imposed if the fees or exactions had been calculated on that Date. E. Term of Map(s) and Other Project Approvals. Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 66452.6(a) and 65863.9, the term of any subdivision or parcel map that may be .processed on all or any portion of the Specific Plan Area, including, - without limitation, Map No. 51931, and the term of each of the Project Approvals shall be extended for a period of time through the scheduled termination date of this Agreement as set forth in Section III.B. above. F. Timing of Development. Because the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of -23- Camarillo, 37 Cal.3d 465 (1984), that failure of the parties therein to provide for the timing of development resulted in a later -adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such parties' agreement, it is the parties' intent to -cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that Owner shall have the right (without obligation) to develop the Specific Plan Area in such order and at such rate and at such t9.mes as Owner deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment, subject only to the terms and conditions of. the Infrastructure Phasing Plan set forth in the Specific Plan. G. Moratorium. No City -imposed moratorium or other limitation (whether relating to the rate, timing or sequencing of the development or construction of all or any part of the Specific Plan Area, whether imposed by ordinance, initiative, resolution, policy, order or otherwise, and whether enacted by the City Council, the Planning Commission „ an agency of City, -the electorate, or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative or final), building permits, occupancy certificates or other entitlements to use or service (including, without limitation, water and sewer) approved, issued or granted within City, or portions of City, shall apply to the Specific Plan Area to the extent such moratorium or other limitation is in conflict with this Agreement. -24- H. Vesting of Owner's Rights. The rights and entitlements granted to Owner pursuant to this Agreement shall be and constitute "vested rights" or the equivalent of 'vested rights", as that term is defined under law applicable to the development of land or property and the right of a public entity to regulate or control such development of land or property, including, without limitation, vested rights in and to buildinu permits and certificates of occupancy. I. Infrastructure Capacity. City hereby acknowledges that it has sufficient capacity in its existing infrastructure, services and utility systems, including, without limitation, traffic circulation, flood control, sewer collection, sewer treatment, sanitation service and, except for reasons beyond City's control, water supply, treatment, distribution and service, to accommodate the Specific -Plan Project as provided in this Agreement. To the extent that City renders such services or provides such utilities, City hereby agrees.that it will serve the Specific Plan Project and that there shall be no restriction on hookups or service for the Specific Plan Project. J.. School Mitigation Obligations. School mitigation obligations shall be those set forth in agreements with the various school districts or as provided in the Project Approvals and no further school mitigation obligations shall be imposed on the Specific Plan Project or any Planning Area within the Specific Plan Project. K. Satisfaction of Park LandObligations. Pursuant to the Project Approvals, Owner will dedicate and improve a 12.4 acre community park within.the Lago de Valencia Planning Area, a -25- 2.7 acre park within the Lago de Valencia Planning Area adjacent to the River Trail and River Conservation Area and a 2 acre park within the South River Village Planning Area and will provide additional paseo bridges, paseos and extensive private recreational areas and facilities. In addition, Owner will convey approximately 295.6 acres of the Santa Clara River to City and will expend One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1.5 Million) on River Conservation Area landscaping and improvements for habitat enhancement and -recreational use. In addition, the Specific Plan Project includes development of and assured public access to Lake Park and continued use of the William S. Hart Pony League playing fields. City acknowledges that the foregoing dedications and improvements constitute a significant contribution to parks and other recreational opportunities within the Specific Plan Project and, as such, fully satisfy any and all parkland dedication requirements that may be applicable to development.of the Specific Plan Project and each of the Planning Areas. City will therefore require no further dedications or payment of in -lieu fees in order to develop the Specific Plan Project in accordance with the Project Approvals. In addition, City hereby agrees that the foregoing dedications and improvements to parks and other recreational opportunities within City shall fully satisfy any and all parkland dedication requirements that may be applicable to development of Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 44821, 44374 eftdi 52206 and 44830 and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 20795 and CUP No. 97014. L. Public Financing Districts. City agrees to cooperate with Owner to establish one or more Community -26- Facilities Districts, assessment districts, tax increment infrastructure financing districts, integrated financing districts, and/or other public financing mechanisms covering all or a portion of the Specific Plan Area to fund public infrastructure improvements and services, through the issuance of fixed or variable interest rate (taxable or tax exempt) bonds-, provided, however. City's cooperation with respect to public financing for any residential area within the Specific Plan Project shall be subject to provision being made to pay off any bonds issued which encumber any residence prior to occupancy of that residence, unless the City Council specifically approves otherwise. M. Bridge and Thoroughfare Fees and Roadway Improvements. 1. B&T District. City and Owner hereby confirm that they anticipate the formation of a Bridge and Thoroughfare District (a "B&T District"), subject to approval by County, to finance the acquisition, development and maintenance of transportation improvements. Certain additional transportation improvements lying outside of the B&T District may also be required to mitigate the Specific Plan Project's traffic impacts ("Non-B&T Improvements"). 2. B&T District Fees. Owner shall pay fees to fund the B&T District (the "B&T Fees") in an amount that shall not exceed the lesser of (i) those B&T Fees required by the City or (ii) those B&T Fees that would have been required for the specific Plan Project Area pursuant to County requirements, as of the Applicable Rules Effective Date. The B&T Fees shall be -27- subject to increase annually in accordance with the Consumer Price Index. B&T Fees and fees for Non-B&T Improvements shall be payable (or secured) at issuance of building permits. 3. Non-B&T Improvement Fees. Owner shall pay its share of the cost of Non-B&T Improvements as provided in the Project Approvals. 4. Calculation of Fees far Commercial. Industrial and Residential Areas. For commercial/industrial areas, B&T Fees shall be calculated and paid based on the square footage of actual construction in relation to total buildout of the particular commercial/industrial area. For residential sections of Planning Areas, B&T Fees shall be calculated and paid per residential dwelling unit. No B&T Fees or fees or improvements for Non-B&T Improvements shall be required for undevelopable parcels shown as "open space", "not a part" or any similar designation on any subdivision or parcel map. B&T Fees for senior residential units shall be calculated at a rate of ten per cent (10%-) of the B&T Fees for comparable residential units. 5. Pre-B&T Traffic Fees. In the event the B&T District has.not been formed at the time Owner applies for a building permit, then, as an alternative funding mechanism, traffic fees shall be payable to the City -in the amount and on the terms and conditions described in this Section and the Project Approvals, which shall constitute full mitigation of the Specific Plan Project traffic impacts: with respect to the B&T District and the Non-B&T Improvements. 6. Credits. Owner shall receive full credit for all costs of transportation improvements constructed by Owner OWE that benefit the B&T District or the Non-B&T Improvements toward Owner's B&T Fees or Owner's obligations for Non-B&T Improvements, whichever is applicable. The full amount of fees payable on account of traffic mitigation (including B&T Fees and any fees for Non-B&T Improvements) with respect to any of the Planning Areas shall be fully credited against such Planning Area's obligations to mitigate its traffic impacts. 7. Transfer of Credits. If the cost of transportation improvements constructed by Owner exceeds the established B&T Fees, Owner may elect to transfer all or any portion of such excess as a credit for B&T Fees for other Planning Areas. If transferred as a credit toward existing obligations of Owner, City shall immediately release secured or unsecured agreements, including bonds, letters of credit, etc., equal to the amount of the transferred credit. N. Infrastructure Improvements. 1. Infrastructure Phasing Plan. The Specific Plan includes an Infrastructure Phasing Plan that sets forth the infrastructure improvements that will be required for the Specific Plan Project Area. 2. Reservation of Infrastructure Capacity. To the extent that infrastructure (traffic, drainage, sewers, water, utilities, etc.) constructed or paid'for by Owner in connection with the buildout of the Specific Plan Project exceeds that required to mitigate the Specific Plan Project, or that portion of the Project which is developed at the time the infrastructure is constructed or paid for, Owner may transfer the right and credit for such excess capacity to other developments within the -29- Specific Plan Project on to other development projects within the Santa Clarita.Valley owned (or controlled) by Owner. 3. Reimbursement and Annortionment. City shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with Owner providing.for reimbursements to .Owner from the City and/or other developers on a fair share basis for the portion (if any) of the cost of any dedications, public facilities and/or infrastructure that City may require as conditions of the Project Approvals or the Future Approvals, to the extent that they are in excess of those reasonably necessary to mitigate the impacts of the Specific Plan Project, whether such improvements are within or outside of the annexation area. O. Development Agreement/Prosect Approvals. In the event of any inconsistency between any Project Approval and this Agreement, the.provisions of this Agreement shall control. Section V. Cooperation/Implementation. A. further Assurances• Covenant to Sign Documents. Each party shall take all actions and do all things, and execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit, if required, any and all documents and writings, that may be necessary or proper to achieve the purposes and objectives of this Agreement. B. Processing. Upon satisfactory completion by Owner of all required preliminary actions and payments of appropriate processing fees, if any, City shall, subject to all legal requirements, promptly initiate, diligently process, complete at the earliest possible time all required steps, and expeditiously grant any approvals and permits necessary for the development by Owner of the_Specific Plan Area in accordance with this -30- Agreement, including, but not limited to, the following: (i) the processing of applications for and issuing of all discretionary approvals requiring the exercise of judgment and deliberation by City, including without limitation, the Future Approvals; (ii) the holding of any required public hearings; (iii) the processing of applications for and issuing of all ministerial approvals requiring the determination of conformance with the Project Approvals, this Agreement, and Applicable Rules, including, without limitation, site plans, development plans, land use plans, grading plans, improvement plans, building plans and specifications, and ministerial issuance of one or more final maps, zoning clearances, grading permits, improvement permits, wall permits, building permits, lot line adjustments, encroachment permits, conditional and temporary use permits, certificates of use and occupancy and approvals and entitlements and related matters as necessary for the completion of the development of the Specific Plan Area ("Ministerial Approvals"). C. Processing During Third Party Litigation. The filing of any third party lawsuit(s) against City or Owner relating to this Agreement or to other development issues affecting the Specific Plan Area shall not.delay or stop the development, processing or construction of the individual ili�ejeeb Planning Areas, approval of the Future Approvals, or issuance of Ministerial Approvals, unless the third party obtains a court order preventing the activity. City shall not stipulate to the issuance of any such order. -31- D. State. Federal or Case Law. Where any state, federal or case law allows City to exercise any discretion or take any act with respect to that law, City shall, in an expeditious and timely manner, at the earliest possible time, (a) exercise its discretion in such a way as to be consistent with, and carry out the terms of, this Agreement and (b) take such other actions as may ha necessary to carry out in good faith the terms of this Agreement. E. Other Governmental Bodies. To the extent -that City, its Council, Planning Commission or any other City agency constitutes and sits as any other board or agency, it shall not take any action that conflicts with City's obligations under this Agreement. -32- F. Defense of Agreement. Cte_i _ agrees be take -11 aftd eitgereeabi ity of -this Agreement. ` any third1 r i ehallefsgeis brought against -the -Ageeement, Gwner may, at its Ei,rtirAr r a do€ei at its eim eest af:d with eettitsel ef- its eheiee. to de€enol sneh aet#eft, Eity shall +-ifs etreh de€efts- if ewner e3:eets no#= a atte _ n _ felly tL the .. ._ assist the Fite-ift defending Sueh aetierx The Owner shall indemnify, defend (with counsel selected by Owner and approved -by the City, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld) and hold harmless City and its officers employees and agents from and against anv and all losses, liabilities fines penalties costs, claims, demands, damages injuries or judgments arising out of, or resulting from City's approval of this Agreement or either party's performance pursuant to this Agreement City further irrevocably agrees not to assert any representation in such action by Owner's counsel as a potential conflict of interest in any future proceeding involving t -he City and hereby irrevocably waives any actual or potential conflict of interest. If this Agreement is adjudicated or determined to be invalid or unenforceable, City agrees, subject Co all legal requirements, to consider modifications to this Agreement to render it valid and enforceable to.the extent permitted by applicable law. Section VI. General Provisions. -33- A. Covenants Run with the Land. All of the pro- visions, agreements, rights, powers, standards, terms, covenants and obligations contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties and their respective heirs, successors (by merger, reorganization, consolidation or otherwise) and assigns, devisees, administrators, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring the Specific Plan Arca, or any portion thereof, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever, and shall inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective heirs, successors and assigns. All of the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute covenants running with the land. B. Transfers and Assignments. 1. Right to Assign. Owner shall have the right to sell, assign or transfer all or portions.of the real property comprising the Specific Plan Area to any person at any time during the term of this Agreement. z. Liabilities Upon Transfer. .Upon the delega- tion of all duties and obligations and the sale, transfer or assignment of all or any portion of the Specific Plan Area, Owner shall be released from its obligations under this Agreement with respect to the Specific Plan Area, or portion thereof, so transferred arising subsequent .to the effective date of such transfer if (i) owner has provided to City ten days' written notice of such transfer and.(ii) the transferee has agreed in writing to'be subject to all of the provisions hereof applicable to the portion of the Specific Plan Area so transferred. Upon any transfer of any portion of the Specific Plan Area and the -34- express assumption of Owner's obligations under this Agreement by such transferee, City agrees to look solely to the transferee for compliance by such transferee with the provisions of this Agreement as such provisions relate to the portion of the Specific Plan Area.acquired by such transferee. A default by any transferee shall only affect that portion of the Specific Plan Area owned by such transferee and shall not cancel or diminish in any way Owner's rights hereunder with respect to any portion of the Specific Plan Area not owned by such transferee. The transferee shall be responsible for the reporting and annual review requirements relating to the portion of the.Specific Plan Area owned by such transferee, and any amendment to this Agreement between City and a transferee shall only affect the portion of the Specific Plan Area owned by such transferee. Nothing in this.Section shall affect or diminish Owner's rights under the provisions of Section V.R.2 IV.N.2. above (Reservation of Infrastructure Capacity). C. Mortgagee Protection. The parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit Owner, in any manner, at Owner's.sole discretion, from encumbering the Specific Plan Area or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to the Specific Plan Area. City acknowledges that the lender(s) providing such financing may require certain Agreement interpretations and modifications and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with Owner and representatives of such lender(s) to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. City will not -35- unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and -purposes of this Agreement. Any mortgagee of a mortgage or a beneficiary of a deed of trust ("Mortgagee") of the Specific Plan Area shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges: 1. Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any mortgage or deed of trust on the Specific Plan Area made -in good faith and for value. 2. The -Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the.Specific Plan Area, or any part thereof, who has submitted a request in writing to City in the manner specified herein for giving.notices, shall be entitled to receive written notification from City of any default by Owner in the performance of Owner's obligations under this Agreement. 3. If City timely receives a request from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given to Owner under the terms of this Agreement, City -shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten days of sending the notice of default to Owner. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure the default during the remaining cure period allowed such party under this Agreement. 4. Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Specific.Plan Area, or any part thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or deed in lieu of such foreclosure, shall take the Specific Plan Area, or part -36- thereof, subject.to the terms of this Agreement; provided, however, in no event shall such Mortgagee be liable for any defaults or monetary obligations of Owner arising prior to acquisition of title to the Specific Plan Area by such Mortgagee, except that any such Mortgagee or its successors or assigns shall not be entitled to a building permit or occupancy certificate until all delinquent and current fees and other monetary obligations due under this Agreement for the Specific Plan Area, or portion thereof, acquired by such Mortgagee have been paid to City. D. Statement of Compliance. Within thirty days following any written request which either City or Owner may make from time to time, the other shall execute and deliver to the requesting party a statement certifying that: (1) this Agreement is unmodified and in full force and effect or, if there have been modifications hereto, that this Agreement is in full force and effect, as modified, and stating the date and nature of such modifications; (2) there are no current uncured defaults under this Agreement or specifying the.dates and nature of any such defaults; and (3) any other reasonable information requested. The failure to deliver such statement within such time shall be conclusive upon the party which fails to deliver such statement that this Agreement is in full .force'and effect without modification and that there are no uncured defaults in the performance of the requesting party.. The City Manager shall be authorized to execute any certificate. E. Default. Failure by City or Owner to perform any term or provision of this Agreement for a period of thirty days -37- from the receipt of written notice thereof from the other shall constitute a -default under this Agreement, subject to extensions of time by mutual consent in writing. Said notice shall specify in detail the nature of the.alleged default and the manner in which said default may be satisfactorily cured. If the nature of the alleged default is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within such 30 -day period, the commencement of the curewithin such time period and the diligent prosecution to completion of the cure shall be deemed a cure within such period. Subject to the foregoing, after notice and expiration of the 30 -day, period without cure, the notifying party, at its option, may institute legal proceedings pursuant to this Agreement and/or give notice of intent to terminate this Agreement pursuant to Government Code Section 65868. Following such notice of intent to terminate, the matter shall be scheduled for consideration and review by the City Council within thirty calendar days in the manner set forth in Government Code Sections 65867 and 65868. Following consideration of the evidence presented in said review before the City Council, the party alleging the default by the other party may give written notice of termination of this Agreement to the other party. F. Annual Review. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65865.1, throughout the. term of this Agreement, good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement by Owner shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission at the regularly scheduled 'Planning Commission meeting next following each annual anniversary of the Effective Date. If as a result of such review, City reasonably determines, on the basis of substantial Bir -M evidence presented at such meeting, that owner has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions hereof, City shall provide written notice thereof ("Notice of Non -Compliance"), stating in specific detail and specific reasons for such finding. After City delivers the Notice of Non -Compliance, Owner shall have the right to cure such non-compliance as provided in Section VI.E. above. In the event that Owner does not timely cure the non-compliance after a Notice of Non -Compliance is delivered by City or, if during the period.which Owner must cure such default, Owner ceases to make reasonable efforts to effect such cure, City may proceed to terminate this Agreement on ten days' prior written notice to Owner in accordance with the termination procedure set forth in Section VI.E. above. City's failure to conduct an annual review shall not constitute a default under this Agreement. G. Default by City. In the event 6-irt� either Darty defaults (as defined in Section VI.E. herein) under the terms of this Agreement, 6imer either Party shall have all rights and remedies.provided herein or under applicable law, including the specific performance of this Agreement. H. Legal Action. Any party may, in addition to any other rights or remedies, institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any default, enforce any covenant or agreement herein, enjoin any threatened or attempted violation hereof, or enforce by specific performance the obligations and rights of the parties hereto. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 638, et -39- seg., all legal actions shall be heard by a referee who shall be a retired judge from either the Los Angeles County Superior Court, the California Court of Appeal; the United States District Court or the United States Court of Appeals, provided that the selected referee shall have experience in resolving land use and real property disputes. Owner and City shall agree upon a single referee who shall then try all issues, whether of fact or law, and report a finding and judgment thereon and issue all legal and equitable relief appropriate under the circumstances of the controversy before such referee. If Owner and City,are.unable to agree on a referee within ten days of a written request to do so by either party hereto, either party may seek.to have one appointed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 640. The cost of such proceeding shall initially be borne equally by the parties. Any referee selected'pursuant to this Section VI.H. shall be considered a temporary judge appointed pursuant to Article 6, Section 21 of the California Constitution. -40- I. Waiver: Remedies Cumulative. Failure by City or Owner to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provi- sions of this Agreement, irrespective of the length of time for which such failure continues, shall not constitute a waiver of the right to demand strict compliance with this Agreement in the future. No waiver by City or Owner of a default or breach of any other party.shall be effective or binding upon it unless made in writing, and no such waiver shall be implied from any omission by City or Owner to take any action with respect to such default or breach. No express written waiver of any defaults or breach shall affect any other default or breach, or cover any other period of time, other than any default or breach and/or period of time specified in such express waiver. One or more written waivers of a default or breach under any provision of this Agreement shall not be a waiver of any subsequent default or breach, and the performance of the same or any other term or provision contained in this Agreement. Subject to notice of default and opportunity to cure under Section VI.E., all of the remedies permitted or available under this Agreement, at law or in equity, shall be cumulative and alternative, and invocation of any such right or remedy shall not constitute a waiver or elec- tion of remedies with respect to any other permitted or available right or remedy. J. Future Litigation Expenses. -41- 1. Payment to Prevailing Party. If City -or Owner brings'an action or proceeding (including, without limita- tion, any motion, order to show cause, cross-complaint, counter- claim, or third -party claim) by reason of defaults; breaches, tortious acts, or otherwise arising out of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action or proceeding shall be entitled to its costs and expenses of suit including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees and expert witness fees. 2. Scope of Fees. Attorneys' fees under this Section shall_ include attorneys' fees on any appeal and, in addition, a party entitled to attorneys' fees shall be entitled to all other reasonable costs and expenses incurred in connection with such action. In addition to the foregoing award of attorneys' fees to the prevailing party, the prevailing party in any lawsuit shall be entitled to its attorneys' fees incurred in any post -judgment proceedings to collect or enforce the judgment. This provision is separate and several and shall survive the merger of this Agreement into any judgment on this Agreement. K. Non -Recourse: The obligations of Owner under this Agreement shall be without recourse to the assets of the general Partners or of any general Partner, officer, shareholder, director, unitholder or emDlovee of Owner or any general Partner of Owner. The sole recourse of Citv'for any obligation of Owner under this Agreement shall be limited -solely to the Specific Plan Area. L. Permitted Delays; Supersedure by Subsequent Laws. 1. Permitted Delays. In addition to any specific provisions of this Agreement, performance of obligations -42- hereunder shall be excused and.the Term of this Agreement shall be similarly extended during any period of delay caused at any time by reason of: acts of God such as floods, earthquakes, fires, or similar catastrophes; wars, riots or similar hostilities; strikes and other labor difficulties beyond the party's control (including the party's employment force); the enactment of new laws or restrictions -imposed or mandated by other governmental or quasi -governmental entities preventing this Agreement from being implemented; litigation involving this Agreement, the Project Approvals, the Future Approvals or the Ministerial Approvals, which directly or indirectly delays any activity,contemplated hereunder; or other causes beyond the party's control. City and Owner shall promptly notify the other party of any delay -hereunder as soon as possible after the same has been ascertained. 2. Supersedure by Subsequent Laws. If any federal or state law, made or enacted after the Effective Date prevents or precludes compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement,, then the provisions of this Agreement shall, to the extent feasible, be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such new law. Immediately after enactment or promulgation of any such new law, City and Owner shall meet and confer in good faith to determine the feasibility of any such modification or suspension based on the effect such modification or suspension would have on the purposes and intent of this Agreement. Owner and City shall have the right to challenge the new law preventing compliance with the terms of this Agreement, and in the event such challenge is successful, this Agreement -43- shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect. At Owner's sole option, the term of this Agreement may be extended for the duration of the period during which such new law precludes compliance with the provisions of this Agreement. -44- M. Amendment of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended from time to time by mutual consent of the parties to this Agreement, in accordance with the provisions of Government Code Sections 65867 and 65868; provided, however, that any amend- ment which does not relate to the term, permitted uses, density or intensity of use, height or size of buildings, provisions for reservation and dedication of land, or monetary ccntributions.by Owner shall not require notice or public hearing, before the par- ties may execute an amendment hereto. N. Operating Memoranda. The provisions of this Agreement require a close degree of cooperation between City and Owner and the refinements and further development of the Planning Areas may demonstrate that clarifications are appropriate with respect to the details of performance of City and Owner. If and when, from time to time, during the term of this Agreement, City and Owner agree that such clarifications are necessary or appropriate, they shall effectuate such clarifications through operating memoranda approved by City and Owner, which, after execution, shall be attached hereto. No such operating memoranda shall constitute an amendment to this Agreement requiring public notice or hearing. The City Attorney shall be authorized to make the determination whether a requested clarification may be effectuated pursuant to this Section or whether the requested clarification is of such a character to constitute an amendment hereof pursuant to Section VI.M. The City Manager may execute any operating memoranda hereunder without City Council action. Section VII. Miscellaneous. -45- A. Negation of Partnership. The Specific Plan Project constitutes private development, neither City nor Owner is acting as the agent of the other in any respect hereunder, and City and Owner are independent entities with respect to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. None of the terms or provi- sions of this Agreement shall be deemed to create a partnership between or among the parties in the bus_nesses of owner, the affairs of City, or otherwise, nor shall it cause them to be considered joint venturers or members of any joint enterprise. B. No Third Party Beneficiary. This Agreement is not intended, nor shall it be construed, to create any third -party beneficiary rights in any person who is not a party, unless expressly otherwise provided. C. Entire Agreement. This Agreement sets forth and contains the entire understanding and agreement of the parties, and there are no oral or written representations, understandings or ancillary covenants, undertakings or agreements which are not contained or expressly referred to herein. No.testimony or evidence of any such representations, understandings or covenants shall be admissible in any proceeding of any kind or nature to interpret or determine the terms or conditions of this Agreement. D. Severability. Invalidation of any of the provisions contained .in this Agreement, or of the application thereof to any person, by judgment or court order shall in no way affect any of the other provisions hereof or the application thereof to any other person or circumstance, and the same shall remain in full force and effect, unless enforcement of this Agreement, as so invalidated, would be unreasonable or grossly -46- inequitable under all the.circumstances or would frustrate the purposes.of this Agreement and the rights and obligations of the parties hereto. E. Construction of Agreement. The provisions of this Agreement and the Exhibits hereto shall be construed as a whole according to their common meaning and not strictly for or against Owner or City and consistent with the provisions hereof, in order to.achieve the objectives and purposes. Wherever required by the context, the singular shall include the plural and vice versa, and the masculine gender shall include the feminine or neuter genders, or vice versa. F. Section Headings. All section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect any construction or interpretation of this Agreement. G. Applicable Law and Interpretation. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the.laws of the State of California. This Agreement shall be construed as a whole according to its fair language and common meaning to achieve the objective and purposes of the parties hereto and the rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be.employed in interpreting this Agreement, all parties having been represented by counsel in the negotiation and preparation hereof. H. Notices. Any notice shall be in writing and given by.delivering the same in person or by sending the same by registered, or certified mail, return receipt requested, with postage prepaid, by overnight delivery, or by facsimile to the respective mailing addresses, as follows: -47- City: City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 300 Santa Clarita, California 91355 Attention: City Manager Facsimile: {3-(805) 259-8125 Copy to: Burke, Williams & Sorensen 611 West Sixth Street Los Angeles, California 90017 Attention: Carl K. Newton, Esq. Facsimile: (213) 236-2700 Owner: The Valencia Company 23823 Valencia Blvd. Valencia, California 91355 Attention: Randy Wheeler Facsimile: (805) 255-2355 Copy to: Cox, Castle & Nicholson, LLP 2049 Century Park East,.28th Floor Los Angeles, California 90067 Attention: Ronald I. Silverman, Esq. Facsimile: (310) 277-7889 and to: Nossaman, Guthner, Knox & Elliott, LLP 18101 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 1800 Irvine, California 92612-1047 Attention: Robert I. McMurry, Esq. Either City or Owner may change its mailing address at any time by giving written notice of such change to the other in the manner provided herein at least ten days prior to the date such change is effected. All notices under this Agreement shall be deemed given, received, made or communicated on the earlier of the.date personal delivery is effected or on the delivery date or attempted delivery date shown on the return receipt, air bill or facsimile. I. Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement and of each and every term and condition hereof. -48- J. Recordation. In order to comply with Section 65868.5 of the Government Code, the parties do hereby direct the City Clerk to record a copy of this Agreement against the Specific Plan Area with the County Recorder of Los Angeles County within ten (10) days after the Effective Date. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owner and City have executed this Agreement as of the date first hereinabove written. "City" CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, a political subdivision of the State of California By: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk By: Assistant Approved as to Form: By: City Attorney -49- "Owner" THE NEWHALL LAND AND.FARMING COMPANY, a California limited partnership By:NEWHALL MANAGEMENT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, A California Limited Partnership, its Managing General Partner By:NEWHALL MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, A California Corporation, its Managing General Partner By: Name Title By: Name Title STATE OF CALIFORNIA Fq1*1FJTkV-*T4ff*fi ss. ) On , 1997, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the within instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss. COUNTY OF Notary Public On , 1997, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the within instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SPECIFIC PLAN AREA EXHIBIT "B" SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT S AiZ4- PLANNING AREAS MAP EXHIBIT "C" SYSTEM FOR LANDSCAPING AND IMPROVEMENT OF RIVER CONSERVATION AREA EXHIBIT "D" APPLICABLE RULES EXHIBIT "E" LOT DESIGN AND CONFIGURATION STANDARDS Mester Case 95342 Drat Conditions o'Appro a4 Page 1 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 51931 GENERAL CONDITIONS GC 1. The approval of this Vesting Tentative Tract Map (Map) shall expire two years from the date of conditional approval unless modified with a approved development agreement. GC 2. The subdivider may file for an extension of the conditionally approved Map prior to the date of expiration for a period of time not to exceed one year. If such an extension is requested, it must be filed no later than 60 days prior to expiration. Subsequent extensions may be requested and could be granted as provided by law or an approved development agreement. GC 3. The applicant shall be responsible for notifying the Department of Planning and Building Services in writing of any change in ownership, designation of a new engineer, or change in the status of the developer, within 30 days of said change. GC 4. Unless otherwise apparent from the contest, the term "applicant" shall include the applicant and any other persons, corporation, or other entity making use of this grant. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Santa Carita, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul theapproval: of this Subdivision by the City, which action is provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37. In the event the City becomes aware of any such claim, action, or proceeding, the City shall promptly notify the applicant, or if the City fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. Nothing contained in this Condition prohibits the City from participating. in the defense of any claim, action, or proceeding, if both the following occur. 1); The City bears its own attorney's fees and costs; and, 2) the City defends the action in good faith. The applicant shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement unless the settlement is approved by the applicant. GC5. Details shown on the Vesting Tentative Tract Map are not necessarily approved. Any details which are inconsistent with the requirements of ordinances, general conditions of approval, or City policies and not modified by the adopted specific plan must be specifically approved.. GC 6. At any point in the development process, a stop -work order shall be considered in effect upon the discovery of any historic artifacts and/or remains, at which time the City shall be notified. The applicant shall hire a qualified consultant that the City approves to study the site and recommend a course of action, to the satisfaction of the City. Master Case 96345 Draft Conditions of Approval Page 3 GC 7. In lieu of establishing the final specific locations of structures on each lot at this time, the owner, at the time of issuance of building permits, agrees to develop the property in conformance with the City Code, the Specific Plan, and other appropriate ordinances, including but not limited to the Building Code, Plumbing Code, Grading Ordinance, Highway Permit Ordinance, Mechanical Code, Zoning Ordinance, Oak Tree Ordinance, Undergrounding of Utilities Ordinance, Sanitary Sewer and Industrial Waste Ordinance, Electrical Code, and Fire Code. Improvements and other requirements may be imposed pursuant to such codes and ordinances in accordance with vested rights as provided for in the Government Code. GC 8. A grading permit shall be required for any and all grading to occur for the purpose of this project. GC 9. This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the permittee and the owner of the property involved (if other than the permittee) have filed with the Planning and Building Services Department, their affidavit stating that they are aware of, and agree to accept, all of the conditions of this grant. GC 10. The Sanitation Districts are empowered by the California Health and Safety Code to charge a fee for the privilege of connecting to the Sanitation Districts' Sewerage System or increasing the existing strength and/or quantity of wastewater attributable to a particular parcel or operation already connected. A connection fee is required to construct an incremental expansion of the Sewerage System to accommodate the proposed project which will mitigate the impact of this project on the present Sewerage System. Payment of a connection fee will also be required before a permit to connect to the sewer is issued. GC 11. Individual developments associated with the proposed project may require a Districts' permit for Industrial Wastewater Discharge. Project developers should contact the Sanitation Districts' Industrial Waste Section in order to reach a determination. on, this matter. If this permit is necessary, project developers shall forward 'a.copy of final plans for proposed development(s) to the Districts for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. GC 12. The applicant may establish a Community Services District or other entity in addition to or in place of a Homeowner's Association to ensure maintenance of facilities described in the Specific Plan subject to the approval of the City. PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICES PR 1. The applicant is required to provide approximately 18 acres of park land that fulfill their Parkland Dedication requirements as identified in the Subdivision Ordinance. rJ Master Case 9620 Draft Conditions ofApprooat page 3 PR 2. A Homeowners Association (HOA) shall have responsibility and authority of property owned by the HOA, including but not limited to, slope maintenance, landscaping, irrigation, recreation facilities and trees. PR 3. A special landscape maintenance assessment district shall be formed having the responsibility and authority of all maintenance, including, but not limited to, landscaping, irrigation, street trees, trails and medians within the City right of way. The Landscape Maintenance District shall be annexed into the City-wide major arterial Landscape Maintenance District. PR 4. Trees planted within fourteen (14) feet of the City right-of-way in commercial developments on major arterials will be subject to theParkwayInfluence Area as identified in City Ordinance 90-15. Trees planted within this area will be maintained to City standards by the property owner. PR 5. The applicant shall provide access to, and egress fram, slopes which are to be maintained by a Landscape Maintenance District or HOA by the dedication of easements or other legal means satisfactory to the City Attorney. PR 6. Street trees shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Department. Use trees from the Cities approved Master Street Tree List, available from the City Arborist. The irrigation and maintenance of these trees shall be per City Ordinance 90-15. PR 7. Provide final landscape and irrigation plans for review and approval of the Parks, Recreation,. and Community Services Department. Drought resistant plant material and water efficient irrigation systems should be utilized in the design.. PR 8. Median. construction and landscaping improvements shall be made within and adjacent to the tract frontage. Such improvements shall be made in accordance with City standards and to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Parks, Recreation;: and Community Services. These improvements shall include the median improvements on Avenue Scott, McBean Parkway, Magic Mountain Parkway, Valencia Boulevard and Bouquet Canyon Road and other streets containing possible traffic calming features. An increased median landscaping program on Newhall Ranch Road including some mature trees and shrubs shall be implemented. MULTI-USK TRAIL CORRIDORS; CLASS I BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN AND EQUESTRIAN PATHS PR 9. The applicant will be required to provide for multiple -use and bike trail right-of- way, including trail improvements such as trail surfacing, signing, striping and fencing as depicted in the Specific Plan to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Department and the City Engineer. Master Care 95-749 Draft Conditions ofApproval Page 4 The applicant, with approval from the Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services, may be granted minor reductions in the width of trail due to topographic or biologic considerations. The Class I bike trails shall be 12 feet in width and the Class 11 bike trails shall provide for 12 feet of additional right. of -way (six feet on each side of the street). All multiple use trails shall be constructed with a minimum 16 foot wide section (12 feet paved bike trail and 4 feet paved for pedestrians) to a 30 foot wide section ( 12 feet of paved bike trail, 4 feet paved pedestrian, 4 feet of landscaping and 10 feet of equestrian trail). All trails are to be constructed as identified in the project's EIR. These improvements shall include: A. The Newhall Ranch Road bridge over San Francisquito Creek and Bouquet Creek shall accommodate Class I bike trail crossings on the south side of these bridges. The Newhall Ranch Road bridge shall also be modified to include a 12 foot wide Class I bike train bridge undercrossing on the west side of San Francisquito Creek. These improvements will be initiated when these bridges are widened triggered by traffic demand. B. The McBean Parkway bridge over the Santa Clara River shall be modified to include a 10 foot wide Class 1 bike trail on the east side of the bridge with a seperation connection between the existing River Trail terminus on the south side of the river and the new River Trail on the north side of the river proposed as part of this project Once the bridge is widenened, an enhanced sidewalk on the west shall be constructed. C. The applicant shall provide a bond for a Class I bikeway undercrossing on Bouquet Canyon Road bridge on the north side of the Santa Clara River. This condition maybe eliminated should this same condition subsequently be added to a different project such as the Central City Specific Plan. D. The applicant shall provide a 10 foot paseo on the north side of Magic Mountain Parkway from McBean Parkway along the project's frontage. In addition, a Class 11 bike lane shall be provided on both sides of McBean Parkway from Newhall Ranch Road to the Santa Clara River and on the west side between the: Santa Clara River and Magic Mountain Parkway. E. The applicant shall replace the portion of temporary Class I bike trail on the north. side of Newhall Ranch Road and construct a permanent Class I bike trail between Hillsborough Parkway and the Newhall Ranch Road bridge over San Francisquito Greek. On the portion from Grandview Drive to McBean Parkway, the bike lanes' surface will be asphalt until the adjacent property is developed at which time the bike lane will be upgraded to a concrete surface. However, if the asphalt deteriorates significantly prior to the development of the adjacent property, the applicant will upgrade the bike lane at that time. 0 Mester Came 95.218 Drat Conditiam ofAppmoa! Page 5 F. A Class II bike trail shall be constructed on the north or south side of Avenue Scott between McBean Parkway and the bridge over San Francisquito Creek to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services. G. The applicant shall construct a bike trail along the existing Los Angeles County Flood Control District access road located on the west side of San Francisquito Creek from Newhall Ranch Road southbound past Avenue Scott and will continue as a 16 foot wide trail (12 feet paved and striped. for bikes and 4 feet paved for pedestrians) south along the eastern boundary of the Valencia Industrial Center to the west edge of the. annexation area. The Limit of improvements to the existing flood control access road shall be fenced, signed and striped. All such improvements shall be subject to the approval of the Los Angeles County Flood Control District. H. A 16 foot wide .trail (12 feet paved and striped for bikes and 4 feet paved for pedestrians) shall be constructed along the eastern edge of San Francisquito Creek from Newhall Ranch Road running along the west, south and east boundaries of "Lago de Valencia". The trail would continue easterly across Bouquet Creek and continue southbound around the western and southern perimeter of the "Bouquet South" planning area. At the undercrossing of the trail on both east and west sides of Avenue Scott, both east and west side of Newhall Ranch Road and the north side of Bouquet Canyon Road and the north side of McBean Parkway the trail may be reduced to 12 feet in width plus any additional width for fencing and signage that is required. L The applicant shall modify the existing temporary trail along Valencia Boulevard from Bouquet Canyon Road to the eastern limits of the "Pony League". planning area to make a 16 foot wide trail (12 feet paved and striped for bikes and 4 feet paved for pedestrian uses) where the trail will be re-routed around the proposed: commercial development and the trail width will be increased to 30 feet (12 foot paved and striped for bikes, 4 foot paved pedestrian, 4 feet of landscaping and 10 feet for equestrian uses) along the eastern boundary of the existing baseballfields. From this point to the South Fork of the Santa Clara River, the trail reverts to a 16 foot wide trail. An alternative to the relocation of this trail' around the proposed commercial development may be considered provided access is made to the Pony League and this alternative is approved by the Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services and the Director of Planning and Building Services. J The applicant shall construct a 16 foot wide trail (12 feet paved and striped for bikes and 4 feet paved for pedestrians) along the northern boundary of the "South River" planning area from McBean Parkway to the western edge of the project area At a point connecting with the equestrian trail the trail widens to 30 feet in width (12 feet striped and paved for bikes, 4 feet paved for pedestrians, 4 feet of landscaping and 10 feet for equestrians) and continues westerly to the project boundary. M A paseo S feet wide shall be constructed a point beginning at the southeast comer of Newhall Ranch Road and McBean Parkway extending southbound on Maier Case 95-249 Draft Conduians o/Apprwal Page B McBean Parkway and connecting to the existing 10 foot wide sidewalk on the McBean Parkway bridge south of the Santa Clara River. The applicant would also provide a pedestrian bridge across McBean Parkway midway between Avenue Scott and Newhall Ranch Road. L. The applicant shall install a paseo (8 feet width - paved) from the existing paseo north of Newhall Ranch Road through the park to the school including a pedestrian bridge across Newhall Ranch Road. M. The applicant shall install equestrian ramps on the entrances to the river west of McBean Parkway and near the Pony League fields to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services. In addition, the applicant shall install trail marker posts every, 1,320 feet along the equestrian trails through the project site. OPEN SPACE AREA PR 10. The applicant will be required to provide access to designated Significant Ecological Areas (SEA's) and the upland preserve area as depicted in the Specific Plan to the satisfaction of the Director of the Park, Recreation, and Community Services Department and Director of Planning and Building Services. PR 11. The applicant willbe required to provide property access control to the upland preserve zone as specified in the Specific Plan to the satisfaction of the Director of the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services and Director of Planning and Building Services:. NATIONAL: POLLUTANT DISCHARGE AND ELUMNATION SYSTEM (NPDES) NP 1. All on-site activities shall be subject to the City's stormwater management program and 'the "best management practices" identified in the City's NPDES permit. NP 2. The project applicant shall be responsible for providing all required materials and documentation to satisfactorily complete the storm drain transfer process recognized by the City of Santa Clarita. Complete acceptance of the storm drain for ongoing maintenance, by the County of Los Angeles, is required before the City of Santa Clarita will release any bond monies posted for the construction of said storm drain infrastructure. NP 3. Provide a stormwater program identification stencil, subject to the approval of the City Engineer, at all catch basins adjacent to or constructed in conjunction with this project. 0 Matter Case 96242 Draft Conditions ofAppro ai Page 7 CONSTRUCTION PHASE NP 4. Keep debris and pollutants off exposed surfaces; provide and use trash cans and recycling receptacles at the construction site. Sweep and remove debris, litter, and any dry materials; do not hose -off surfaces or bury wastes. Dispose of all wastes properly at approved facilities. NP 5. Keep dumpsters covered and check for leaks. Provide a retention curb or .wall around dumpsters to contain any leakage. Never clean a dumpster by hosing - down. NP 6. Designate and use one area for construction parking, vehicle and equipment refueling and maintenance. This area should be located away from gutters, catch basins, or storm drains. Major maintenance and repair, and vehicle/equipment washing must be performed off-site at an approved facility. NP 7. Maintain portable toilets in good working order, check frequently for leakage. NP 8. Water for dust control during construction activities may be sprayed on exposed soil, but not to the extent that surface runoff results. NP 9. Contain and clean-up minor spills with absorbent materials for proper disposal. Report any significant spills to the Los Angeles County Fire Department Hazmat Unit by calling (805) 257-4144 or 911. Any significant spill which reaches the Santa Clara River: must be reported to the National Response Center at (800) 424,8802. NP 10. Properly dispose of all industrial and construction waste, recycle all used oil and filters, and. participate in oil recycling programs being implemented by the City to the satisfaction of the City's Solid Waste Coordinator. Call the City's Waste Division at. (805);:294-2500 for requirements. NP 11. All hazardous. materials used during, and wastes resulting from, construction shall be protected from vandalism and shall be stored in an enclosed area under lock and key in marked covered containers until they can be removed and disposed: of in the. appropriate manner at an approved facility. NF 22 Educate the project manager and construction staff. The City will provide copies of "best management practices" (BMP) brochures and information on recycling and storm drain protection. The employer shall use the information in these brochures to provide water quality training, and spill prevention and .clean-up as part of construction worker orientation. Contact the Stormwater Utility Public Information Officer at (805) 286-4133 for assistance. Master Case 96242 Draft Conditions ofAPPsvoa! Page 8 RESIDENTIAL USES NP 13. Keep dumpsters covered and check for leaks. Provide a retention curb or wall around dumpsters to contain any leakage. Never clean a dumpster by hosing. down. NP 14. On-site landscaping activities shall be subject to the "best management practices" identified in the City's NPDES permit. NP 15. The project applicant shall form a homeowner's association. The, homeowner's association shall provide information to the owners of all dwelling units regarding the pollution prevention and system maintenance requirements of the City's NPDES permit. The City will provide copies of "best management practices" (BMP) brochures and information on recycling and surface water runoff pollution control. The homeowners association shall use the information in these brochures to provide water quality awareness, and spill prevention and clean-up as part of residential orientation and ongoing grounds and building maintenance. Contact the City's Stormwater Utility Public Information Officer at (805) 286-4133 for assistance. NP 16. Contain and clean-up minor spills with absorbent materials for proper disposal. Report any significant spills to the Los Angeles County Fire Department Hazmat Unit by calling (805) 257.4144 or 911. Any significant oil spill which reaches the Santa Clara River must be reported to the National Response Center at (800) 424-8802. NP 17. Properly dispose of all waste, recycle all used oil and filters, and participate in oil recycling programs being implemented by the City. Prior to construction, contact the City's Solid': Waste Division at (805) 294-2500 for requirements. NP 18. All parking areas are to be cleaned and maintained to minimize surface runoff pollution.. This shall include regular sweeping of all parking areas to remove solid wastes All liquid contaminants (such as vehicle or machine fluids) shall be contained: on the site for cleanup and disposal at an approved waste site.. Do not clean parking areas by hosing down, or any other method that results in washing over the parking surface and into the City's municipal storm drain system - NP 19. Fof parking lots having more that twenty-five parking spaces and located in areas potentially exposed to stormwater, submit a parking facilities management plan. for review and approval by the City Engineer.. The parking facilities management plan must include scheduled sweeping, oil clarifiers, wastewater collection sumps, or other equally effective measures to remove debris from parking lots and prevent contamination to storm drainage systems. NP 20. Vehicle washing facilities shall be paved and well marked as the washing area. Signs shall be posted indicating that oil changing and washing with solvents is prohibited within the washing area. The facility shall be designed to collect all water from washing activities and be contained on-site to prevent transmission r_1 Master Came 95242 Draft Conditionm ofApproeal Page 9 to the storm drain system. Vehicles shall be washed with a biodegradable, phosphate -free detergent. NP 21. Vehicle wash wastewater must be recycled or conveyed to a sewage treatment plan through an approved wastewater collection system (sanitary sewer). The applicant does have the option of obtaining a site specific NPDES permit for the wastewater discharge from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board in lieu of this condition. NP 22. All waste receptacles on the exterior of the building shall be maintained in an enclosure that is constructed with a retention curb to coniine any potential leakage. NP 23. All maintenance activities shall prevent the transmission to any stormdrain infrastructure of any oil, grease, fuel, acid, lubricant, antifreeze, detergent, paint, or other material identified under the NPDES permit as a pollutant. The storage, handling, recycling, and/or disposal of these materials must be done in a safe manner according to industry standards, and in compliance with the City's Solid Waste Program requirements. COMMERCIAL USES NP 24. All parking areas are to be cleaned and maintained to minimize surface runoff pollution. This shall include regular sweeping of all parking areas to remove solid wastes. All liquid contaminants (such as vehicle or machine fluids) shall he contained on the site for clean up anddisposalat an approved waste site. Do not: clean parking areas by hosing down, or any other method that results in washing over the parking surface and into the City's municipal storm drain system. NP25. For parking lots having more than twenty-five parking spaces and located in areas potentially exposed to stormwater, submit a parking facilities management plan for review and approval by the City Engineer. The parking facilities management pian must include scheduled sweeping, oil clarifiers, wastewater collection sumps, or other equally effective measures to remove debris from parking lots and prevent contamination to storm drainage systems. NP 26. Vehicle washing facilities shall be paved and well marked as the washing area Sigm shall be posted indicating that oil changing and washing with solvents is prohibited within the washing area. The facility shall be designed to collect all water from washing activities and be contained on-site to prevent transmission to the storm drain system. Vehicles shall be washed with a biodegradable, phosphate -free detergent. NP 27. Vehicle wash wastewater must be recycled or conveyed to a sewage treatment plant through an approved wastewater collection system (sanitary sewer). The Molter Case 96243 Draft Conditions ofApprooal Page 10 applicant does have the option of obtaining a site specific NPDES permit for the wastewater discharge from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board in lieu of this condition. NP 28. Hazardous materials and wastes shall be protected from vandalism, and be stored in an enclosed area under lock and key in marked covered containers. NP 29. The City will provide copies of "best management practices" (BMP) brochures and information on recycling and storm drain protection. The employer shall use the information in these brochures to provide water quality training, and spill prevention and dean -up as part of new -employee orientation; the employer shall also conduct annual review training sessions for all employees. Contact the Stormwater Utility Public Education Officer at (805) 286-4133 for assistance. NP 30. All waste receptacles on the exterior of the building shall be maintained in an enclosure that is constructed with a retention curb to confine any potential leakage. NP 31. All automotive uses (including fueling, repair, parts, and related services) shall prevent the transmission to any stormdrain infrastructure any oil, grease, fuel, acid, lubricant, antifreeze, detergent, paint,or other material identified as a pollutant. The storage, handling, recycling, and/or disposal of these materials must be done in a safe manner according to industry standards. NP 32. All facility operations with food preparation and serving uses shall provide for the proper disposal of food wastes and of waste water generated from cleaning activities. Disposal of wash water shall be made to the sanitary sewer, including the washing of all kitchen equipment, dishware, utensils, floors, and mats. Disposal of food. bp -products and/or wastes may also be for pick-up by an approved waste hauler.Food wastes must not be washed into any part of the storm: drain infrastructure system. LANDSCAPE AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT NP 33. Apply and -handle pesticides and herbicides and keep detailed records in accordance with existing state regulations (California Title 3, Division 6, Pesticides and Pest Control Operation). The regulations cover a list of approved chemicals, product and application, information, equipment use and maintenance Procedures, and record keeping. NP 34. Apply and handle fertilizers in strict accordance with the label directions. NP 35. Use mechanical control of vegetation whenever possible, such as mowing with tractor -type or pushmowers and hand cutting with gas or. electric powered weed trimmers. NP 36. Use hand weeding where practical and feasible. r bfarter Care 95242 Drat Conditions ofdppnwal Page 11 NP 37. Consider the use of beneficial insects to control pests as part of a Preventative Maintenance Program. NP 38. Store materials in enclosed sheds or buildings or under cover on an impervious surface. NP 39. Provide secondary containment around materials if stored outdoors or if material from a spill could flow outdoors. NP 40. Keep only the minimum amount of hazardous materials on site. NP 41. Periodically check areas for spills, leaks, or unsafe storage methods. NP 42. Do not overwater landscaped areas, : especially when irrigating after fertilizer/pesticide applications. Adjust watering locations and amounts to minimize non-stormwater runoff. NP 43. Avoid chemical applications during the wet season to minimise the amount of pollutant runoff in stormwater. NP 44. Require all employees and contractors who generate landscape waste to dispose of it at a Permittee -approved composting location or permitted landfill; include such provisions in landscape maintenance contracts. NP 45. Place temporarily stockpiled material away from water courses, and berm or cover stockpiles to prevent material releases to the storm drain system. NP 46. Maintain trash receptacles to hold refuse generated by the public. NP 47. Collect trash and debris from bins and along water bodies to minimize the amount of trash and debris that may contact the water. NP 48. Collect trash: and debris from within waterbodies. TRAFFIC ENGINEERING GENERAL TR 1. Ali driveways shall have a minimum stacking distance of: & 20 feet from face of curb off of residential, local collectors. b. 40 feet from face of curb off of secondary or major highways. c. 100 feet from face of curb off of secondary or major highways with potential traffic signal. Master Care 96842 Dpi Conditions ofApptova! Page t8 TR 2. All access points to residential shall have landing area of: a. Minimum of 50 feet (stacking) with maximum 6% grade with no driveways or access to the side. b. Minimum of 20 feet (stacking) with maximum 6% grade with no driveways or access to the sides of the access points in a short cul-de-sac. c. Minimum of 100 feet (stacking) with 6% grade at signalized intersection and no driveways or access. TR 3. Check all sight visibility requirements at all intersections (street with street/ driveway with street). Follow the latest Caltrans manual for applicable requirements. TR 4. Access should intersect with a public street at 90 degrees or as close to 90 degrees as topography permits (no less than 80 degrees). TR 5. No access will be permitted within curb return. TR 6. If the project has a frontage facing a major road and also a side street, the access points are preferred to be on the side street. TR 7. If the access point is off of the roadway with a speed of 35 mph or higher, the inbound driveway lane should have a minimum of 16 feet to allow right turns not to interfere with outgoing traffic TR 8. Curb radii for the access points should be large enough to allow trucks in and out in a reasonable manner. Useapplicable templates for size and type of development. Fora ort T231L TR 9. Prior to the issuance of building Occupancy Permits for any units, the intersections listed below shall be in place and shall include their required number of lanes and operational traffic signals. The applicant may phase such improvements as appropriately determined by subsequent traffic studies, subject to the approval of the Director of Transportation and Engineering Services and the Director of Planning and Building Services. Such intersection improvements are required at the following locations: a. I-6 Southbound Ramps & Magic Mountain Parkway: Convert Southbound Right to shared Southbound Left/Southbound Right. b. I-5 Northbound Ramps & Magic Mountain Parkway: Convert 2nd Northbound Left to shared Northbound Left/Northbound Right. 0 Master Case 9&249 Draft Conditions ofApprooal Page 13 C. I-5 Southbound Ramps & Valencia Blvd. (applicant to bond for fair share only): Add 2nd Southbound Left, 2nd & 3rd Eastbound Through, direct Southbound on ramp and 2nd & 3rd Westbound through. Convert Westbound Right to free right. d. I-5 Northbound Ramps & Valencia Blvd. (applicant to bond for fair share only): Add 2nd Northbound Left, 2nd Northbound Right, 2nd and 3rd Eastbound Through, Eastbound Right, and 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Westbound Through. e. Bouquet Canyon Road & Newhall Ranch Road.- Convert oad.Convert 2nd Eastbound Through to 2nd Eastbound Right. f. Bouquet Canyon Road & Soledad Canyon Road: Convert 3rd Westbound Through to shared Westbound Through/Westbound Right. g. McBean Parkway & Magic Mountain Parkway. Add 4th Northbound Through. Add Eastbound Right. h. Valencia Blvd. & Magic Mountain Parkway (applicant to pay fair share only): Add 2nd Southbound Right. i. McBean Parkway & Valencia Blvd (applicant to pay fair share only): Convert the 3rd Southbound Through to shared Southbound Through/Southbounet Right. j. Grandview Drive &: Newhall Ranch Road (applicant to pay fair share only): Add 3rd Westbound Through & Eastbound Through lanes. k. Hillsboroug}, Parkway & Newhall Ranch Road (applicant to pay fair share only): Add 3rd Westbound Through & Eastbound Through lanes, add Eastbound Right. 1. Rockwell Canyon Road & McBean Parkway (applicant to pay fair share only): Add -2nd Southbound Left. Convert Southbound Through to Southbound Right. Convert 2nd Southbound Through to shared Southbound Through/Southbound Right. m. Tourney Road & Valencia Blvd. (applicant to pay fair share only): Add 3rd Westbound Through. Marler Care 95247 Draft Condition of Approval Page 14 n. McBean Parkway & Newhall Ranch Road: Add 4th Southbound Through. TR 10. Prior to the issuance of a building Occupancy Permit for any unit of this project, the applicant shall modify the following intersections (if an access) with the minimum indicated number of lanes: a. McBean Parkway & Creekside Road: North & South Bound with 3 Through lanes,'1 Right, and I Left. East & West Bound with 1 Through, 1 Right, and 1 Left. b. Valencia Blvd. & Cinema Drive: Southbound, add 1 Right lane. Northbound, add 1 Left lane. TR 11. The applicant is obligated to signalize the following intersections at the time that traffic signal warrants are met: a. McBean Parkway & Avenue Scott with following minimum number of lanes: North & South Bound: 3 Through lanes, I Left, and 1 Right. Eastbound: 2 Left, 1 Right, and 1 Through/Right shared. Westbound: 1 Through, 1 Left, and 1 Right. b. Avenue Scott & "B"!"C" Streets. East & West Bound: 3 Through lanes, 1 Left; and 1 Right. C. Magic Mountain Parkway & Town Centerf'H" Street: East & West Bound : 3 Through lanes, 1 Left, and 1 Right. d. Magic Mountain Parkway & South River VillagerTF Street: East & West Bound: 3 Through lanes, 1 Left, and 1 Right. TR 12. The applicant is required to install 3 -inch traffic signal conduits with 12 pair #19 interconnect cable along all secondary and major arterials (on and off site), between the proposed traffic signals and the closest adjacent traffic signal, at least on two directions. This interconnect conduit and cable shall also be required along new frontage improvements to interconnect existing traffic signals.:,._ All improvement plans for the above interconnect shall be approved by the City Engineer. TR 13. The applicant is required to construct the extension of Avenue Scott -Hillsborough Drive from McBean Parkway to Newhall Ranch Road with operational traffic signals at each end. This road to be with minimum of two lanes (one each direction), and shall meet all other City standards. TR 14. Prior to any building Occupancy Permit of the second phase, the applicant shall submit to the City Traffic Engineer a Supplemental Traffic Study demonstrating that (a) all indicated roads with required number of lanes, as shown on Figure III -9 of the traffic study (interim setting roadway system) are in place and operational (copy Master Cale 96.242 Dmft Conditions afApproaal page is attached); or (b) the specified roads which are not in place are not needed to mitigate the traffic impacts of the project under the circulation conditions at the time the permit is to be pulled. TR 15. Prior to any building Occupancy Permit of the second phase, the applicant shall submit to the City Traffic Engineer a Supplemental Traffic Study demonstrating that (a) all indicated intersections, with required number of lanes, as shown on Figure III - 10 of the traffic study (intersection lane configurations interim setting) are in place, signalized and operational (copy attached); or (b) the specified intersections which are not in place are not needed to mitigate the traffic impacts of the project under the circulation conditions at the time the permit is to be pulled. TR 16. The applicant is to pay the calculated fair -share to improve and mitigate the impacted intersections and roadways by this project , as shown on Table V-5 and Table V-6 of the traffic study contained in the approved. Environmental Impact Report. TR 17. The applicant may install traffic calming features which may include narrow street and private driveway sections, which shall be of a method and location to the satisfaction of the Director of Transportation and Engineering Services and Director of Planning and Building Services. Roadway designs including traffic calming features shall be submitted to the City Traffic Engineer prior to approval. TR 18. No gates for residential areas are approved other than one gate on "A" Street to serve the island in Planning Area 8 in the Logo de Valencia Area (two gates should a second means of access be provided to the island), one gate on "B" Street to serve Planning Area 1 in the Lago de Valencia Area and one gate at the terminus of "E" Street to serve lot 64 on South River. TR 19. The applicant is limited to traffic signals identified in the Specific Plan and analyzed in the EiR; TR 20. Driveway access to Lot 25 in the Lago de Valencia area (which is designated residential but may have limited commercial uses) shall be taken from "I" Street. TR 21. Access and parking for the elementary school and park site shall be subject to the review and approval of the Director of Transportation and Engineering Services and the Director of Planning and Building Services prior to recordation of the final map. TR 22. The applicant is allowed to install two roadways to access the island on Planning Area 8 in the Lago de Valencia Area. The design of these roadways shall be to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building Services and the City Engineer. TR 23. The applicant shall record an easement for reciprocal access between adjacent commercial and industrial lots within the project boundary. Umter Case 96.242 Drat Conditiom o/Approoal Page 16 ENGINEERING CONDITIONS EN 1. The owner, at the time of issuance of permits or other grants of approval agrees to develop the property in accordance with vested City codes and other appropriate ordinances such as the Building Code, Plumbing Code, Grading Code, Highway Permit Ordinance, Mechanical Code, Zoning Ordinance, Undergrounding of Utilities Ordinance, Sanitary Sewer and Industrial Waste Ordinance, Electrical Code and Fire Code. EN 2. The applicant shall file a map which must 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. *EN 3. The applicant shall label driveways as "Private Driveway and Fire Lane" to the satisfaction of the Department as applicable to any portion or phase of the final map. EN 4. The applicant shall quitclaim or ielocate easements running through any proposed structures. . EN 5. If the subdivider intends to file multiple final maps; the applicant must provide a phasing plan that must be approved by the planning division. EN 6. The applicant shall show the remainder of the last legally created lot as a "Remainder Parcel" on. the final map to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. EN 7. The applicant shall extend lot lines to the center of private. and future streets where condominium lots are not proposed EN 8. If the signatures of record title interests appear on the map, the applicant shall submit a preliminary guarantee. If said signatures do not -appear re rt/final Ppear on the map, a title report/final guarantee. is needed showing all fee owners and interest holders. EN 9. Prior to final aotRoval''of the tract/barrel man the applicant shall submit a notarized affidavit to the City Engineer, signed by all owners of record at the time of filing of the map with the City, stating that any proposed condominium building has not been constructed or that all buildings have not been occupied or rented and that said building.,wili'not be occupied or rented until after the filing of the map with. the Countg:Recorder. EN 10. The applicant shall place standard condominium/residential planned development/ commercial planned development notes on the final map to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Planning and Building Services Department. EN 11. The applicant shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit the construction of structures within open space%mmon lots. • Master Case 96249 Draft Coaditiaas o/AppmVal Page 17 EN 12. Applicant's street and grading plans and all construction permitted by such plans shall comply with the requirements of the approved oak tree_ report and be in full compliance with the approved tentative map. EN 13. The applicant shall design intersections with a tangent section from "beginning of curb return" (BCR) to BCR. EN 14. The applicant shall dedicate future streets beyond the turnarounds on all streets to the tract boundary or extend turnarounds beyond the tract boundaries within the adjacent ownerships. EN 15. Where applicable, the applicant shall pay fees for signing and striping of streets as determined by the City Traffic Engineer or shall prepare signing and striping plans for all multi -lane highways within or abutting the subdivision to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. EN 16. The applicant shall record reciprocal access and maintenance agreements to encumber specific parcels as approved by the City Engineer and the City Attorney. EN 17 The subdivider is required to install distribution lines and individual service lines for community antenna television service (CATV) for all new development. EN 18. The applicant shall install mailboxes and posts per City standards. Secure approval of U.S. Postal Service prior to installation. EN 19. The applicant shall contact the City Department of Parks, Recreation and Community Services for street tree location, species,. and approved method of installation and irrigation. EN 20. The applicantshall 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 dedications 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. EN 21- The applicant shall provide letter(s) of slope easement(s) and drainage acceptance as directed'. by the City Engineer. EN 22. The applicant shall obtain approval of the City Engineer and the City Attorney for proposed homeowners association maintenance agreements prior to recordation of any final map phase. Mfaater Case 95247 Deaf! Conditions ofAPPioaal Page 18 EN 23. The applicant shall include a disclosure in the CC&R's to comply with the Geologist's recommendations in the Geology Report for. restrictions on watering, irrigation, planting and recommend types of plants. EN 24. The subdivider, by agreement with the City Engineer, may guarantee installation of improvements as determined by the City Engineer through faithful performance bonds, letters of credit or any other acceptable means. EN 25. The applicant shall construct off-site improvements as designated by the mitigation monitoring plan for this project. It is the sole responsibility of the developer to acquire the necessary right-of-way and/or easements subject to the provisions of the State Subdivision Map Act. EN 26. The applicant shall provide a horizontal and vertical alignment to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and.the City Traffic Engineer. EN 27. The applicant shall provide for sight distance along extreme slopes or curves to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer: EN 28. The applicant shall design the intersections of local streets with General Plan Highways to provide a 35 mph sight distance from the local street. Additional right- of-way may be necessary to fulfill this requirement. EN 29. The applicant shall place above -ground utilities, outside sidewalks, or provide a minimum of four feet clear path of travel along sidewalks. Additional dedication and/or grading may be required - EN 30. The applicant shall 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 right-of-way changes from 58 to.60 feet. EN 31. The applicant shall construct full -width sidewalks at all walk returns EN 32. The applicant shall design a 350 -foot minimum centerline radius on all local public streets with a minimum distance of 40 feet between curbs and a 350 -foot minimum radius on all streets where grades exceed ten percent. EN 33. The appli cant shall design the minimum centerline radius on a local public street withan. intersecting street on the concave side to comply with design speeds per City of Santa Clarita 'Requirements ' for Street Plans" and sight distance per City standards. EN 34. The applicant shall design local public streets to have minimum centerline curve radii which will provide centerline curves of 100 feet minimum length. Reversing curves need not exceed a radius of 1,500 feet and any curve need not exceed a radius U Master Case 96242 Draft Conditions QfApprooal Page 19 of 3,000 feet. The length of curve outside of the BCR is used to satisfy the 100 -foot minimum requirement. EN 35. Compound curves are preferred over broken -back curves. The applicant shall design broken -back curves to be separated by a minimum of 200 feet tangent (1,000 feet for multi -lane highways). EN 36. The central angles of the right-of-way radius returns shall not differ by more than ten degrees on local public streets. EN 37. The applicant shall provide standard property line return radii of 13 feetat all local street intersections, including intersection of local streets with General Plan Highways, and 27 feet where all General Plan Highways intersect. EN 38. The applicant shall construct a slough wall outside the street right-of-way when the height of slope is greater than five feet above the sidewalk and the sidewalk is adjacent to the street right-of-way. EN 39. The applicant shall construct drainage improvements and offer easements needed for street drainage or slopes. EN 40. The applicant shall replace driveways to be abandoned with standard curb, gutter, and sidewalk EN 41. The applicant shall not construct driveways within 25 feet upstream of any catch basins when street grades exceed six percent. EN 42. Prior to bond release; the applicant shall repair any broken or damaged curb, gutter, sidewalk and pavement on streets within or abutting the subdivision. EN 43. The applicant shall constructadditional pavement on partially improved highways to provide a striped;,(left-turn/right-turn) lane at entrance street intersections as approved by the City; Traffic Engineer. EN 44. The applicant shall provide and install street name signs prior to occupancy of building(s). EN 45. The applicant shall dedicate the right to restrict vehicular access on all properties abutting, major or secondary highways within the limits of the subdivision. EN 46. The applicant shall construct wheelchair ramps at all intersections within theproject site. EN 47. Details related to typical street sections shown on the tentative map are not necessarily approved. Complete improvements will be required on all roads identified on the tentative map and must be constructed per City standards or any alteration Master Case 96249 Drat Conditions ofApprova! Paee 20 thereof approved by the City Engineer. Specific requirements for the sequence of improvements will be made during each phase of the project and final map. Sidewalks are required on both sides of all streets unless their deletion is specifically approved by the location of an adjacent trail or paseo on the same side of thestreet unless provided otherwise in the Specific Plan. EN 48. The subdivider shall install and dedicate main line sewers and serve each lot or structure with a separate house lateral orhave approved and bonded sewer plans on file with the City Engineer prior to approval of the final map. EN 49. The subdivider shall send a print of the land division map to the County Sanitation District, with the request for annexation. If applicable, such annexation must be assured in writing. EN 50. 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. EN 51. Off-site improvements are tentatively required as determined by the City Traffic Engineer and consistent with the. mitigation monitoring plan. EN 52. The applicant shall grant easements to the City, appropriate agency or entity for the purpose of ingress, egress, construction and maintenance of all public infrastructure constructed for this land division to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. EN 53. Easements are tentatively required, subject to review by the City Engineer to determine the final locations and requirements. EN 54. The applicant shall pay a deposit as required to review documents and plans for final map clearance in accordance with Section 21.36.010(c) of the Subdivision Ordinance. EN 55. The applicant shall submit a grading plan which must be approved prior to approval of each phase of thefinalmap. EN 56. The applicant's grading plan shall be based on a detailed engineering geotechnical report which must be specifically approved by the geologist and/or soils engineer and show all recommendations submitted by them. It must also substantially agree with the tentative map and conditions.as approved by the Advisory Agency. EN 57. The. applicant shall eliminate all geologic hazards associated with this proposed development, or delineate restricted use areas approved by the consultant geologist to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. EN 58. The applicant shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit the erection of buildings or other structures within all restricted use areas. rJ Master Cme 96243 Drof! Conditions ofApp?mca Page 21 EN 59. 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. EN 60. Specific recommendations will be required from the consultant(s) regarding the suitability for development of all lots/parcels designed as ungraded site lots. The applicant shall file a report with the State Real Estate Commissioner indicating that additional geologic and/or soils studies may be required for ungraded site lots/parcels by Lhe Soils and Geology Section. EN 61. 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. EN 62. The applicant shall place a note of flood hazard on the final map and delineate the areas subject to flood hazard. The applicant must dedicate to the City the right to restrict the erection of buildings in the flood hazard areas. EN 63. The applicant shall show on the map the City's/Flood Control District'sright-of-way for all revised floodway/floodplain areas. A permit- will be required for any construction affecting the right-of-way or facilities. EN 64. The applicant shall provide for the proper distribution of drainage. EN 65. The applicant shall show and label all natural drainage courses on lots where a note of flood hazard is allowed. EN 66. Specific drainage requirements for the site will be established at grading permit application. EN 67. The applicant' shall adjust; relocate, and/or eliminate lot lines, lots, streets, easements, gradings geotechnical protective devices, and/or physical improvements to comply with ordinances, policies, and standards in effect at the date the City determined the application to be complete all to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. EN 68. All non single family residential driveways shall be constructed using the City of Santa Claritaalley intersection design #101-0 Type "C". The applicant shall obtain approval from the City Traffic Engineer for the location of all driveways. Driveways along major highways will be limited to those shown on the approved specific plan. EN 69. Prior to final approval, unless superseded by an approved development agreement, the applicant shall enter into a written agreement with the City of Santa Clarity whereby the subdivider agrees to pay to the City a sum (to be determined by the City Council) times the factor per development unit for the purpose of contributing to the proposed Bridge and Thoroughfare Benefit District to implement the highway element of the General Plan as a means of mitigating the traffic impact of this and Minter Case 95219 - Draft Conditions ofAPP+'aval Page 99 other subdivisions in the area. The form of security for performance of said agreement shall be as approved by the City. The agreement shall include the following provisions: Upon establishment of the District and the area of benefit, the fee shall be paid to a special Engineering and Transportation Services fund. In the event funds are required for work prior to formation of the District, the City Engineer may demand a sum of $5,300.00 (or greater as determined by the City Council), times the factor per development unit to be credited toward the final fee established under the District. The subdivider may construct 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 Acre 5.0 Industrial Per Acre 3.0 The project is in the City's Proposed Valencia Bridge and Thoroughfare District. EN 70. The area. includedwithin the project shall be annexed to an existing landscape maintenance district or, form a new district to finance the cost of annual maintenance of the median. and parkway landscape. The applicant will be responsible for all common area and median landscaping until such time .that homeowners associations and districts are formed and implemented. EN 71. Applicant shall acquire: permits from the Army Corps of Engineers and the California Department of Fish, & Game prior to issuance of grading permits or the commencement of any work within any natural drainage course. EN 72. Applicant shall comply with all state requirements for construction within a special studies zone. A site specific geology report must be submitted for any structures for public occupancy to be constructed within the.special zone. The reports must be reviewed and approved by a City representative. Once approved, copies of the report must be sent to the state geologist to be kept on permanent file. EN 73. The project applicant shall be responsible for providing all required materials and documentation to satisfactorily complete the storm drain transfer process recognized by the City of Santa Clarity . Unless modified by an approved development agreement, complete acceptance of the storm drain for ongoing maintenance, by the 0 U"ter Case 96249 Draft Condition, o/Apprava! Page= County of Los Angeles, is required before the City of Santa Clarita will release any bond monies posted for the construction of said storm drain infrastructure. TRANSIT PLANNING GENERAL TS 1. Where feasible along all arterials, landscaped strips separating sidewalks from the curb shall be i-tstalled, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. TS 2. For all cul de sacs which back up to arterials, a pedestrian linkage to the arterial shall be provided. TS 3. For all blocks which exceed 1,000 feet in length and are located between parallel streets, a mid -block pedestrian linkage between the two. parallel streets shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building Services. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS TS 4. For all multi -family complexes which border an intersection involving one or more arterials, a. pedestrian access point shall be provided within 200 feet of the intersection. TS 5. The $200 per unit transit mitigation fee shall be charged or credit given for improvements made as identified in the adopted ordinance for each residential unit and is payable upon recordation of the Final Map. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONSFOR COMMERCIAL PROJECTS TS 6. Direct and separate pedestrian linkages shall be provided between the public right-of- way and entrances to commercial buildings, and between commercial buildings within a develbpmenL- TS 7. For all non -retail:; commercial buildings (i.e.: office or industrial uses), required parking should be located to the side or rear of the building. TS & For all non -retail commercial buildings, the main entrance of the building should be oriented ta;the street, and shall be highly visible from the street. TS S. For alf "non -retail commercial buildings, a pedestrian linkage between the main entrance and the sidewalk shall be provided. TS 10. For all retail commercial projects which do not front on major highways, the main entrance of the building shall be oriented to the street, and shall be highly visible from the street. r, Matter Case 96242 Draft Conditions of Approval Page 24 • TS 11. For all retail commercial projects which do not front of major highways, a pedestrian linkage between the main entrance and the sidewalk shall be provided. The following conditions, which are specific to the project, shall apply: TS 12. At proposed major bus stops in the project area, bus benches and/or shelters and trash receptacles which reflect the architecture of adjacent development shall be installed, to the satisfaction of the Transit Division. TS 13. Pedestrian access shall be provided to all public amenities in the project (i.e.: lake, park; schools, zipper walkway system, paseos) from the adjacent public street. TS 14. In accordance with the City's Transportation Development Plan and the Circulation Element of the General Plan, pedestrian -friendly site design shall be encouraged throughout the project area. SOLID WASTE REFUSE/RECYCLABLES WM I. Each enclosure shall consist of an adequate container capacity sufficient to accommodate projected refuse/recyclables design and shall be located in appropriate areas to serve the building's use per City standards. WM 2. A sufficient number of bins and/or containers shall be provided to allow for the collection and loading of refuse and. recyclable materials generated by the project. The number and container type shall be as described below. WM 3. Developers and property, owners are encouraged to include design features in the collection systems for projects= to assist in the removal and separation of refuse and recyclables.. Such features may include: roll-out compartments below the sink; built- in recycling receptacles; fireproof, cleanable, secure chutes for collecting and loading recyclable materials. WM 4. For multi -family unit apartment projects, refuse/recycling enclosure(s) shall be designed to comply with the physically. disabled. requirements of Title 24. WM 5. Refusehvcycling enclosures shall not be placed immediately adjacent to residential structures unless otherwise authorized by the Planning & Building Services and Fire Departments. WM 6. For rental projects, the owner or agent shall inform all tenants about recycling, the refuselrecycling collection program including the location of the enclosure(s), and the materials to be recycled. e Marten Case 95249 ' Dmj! Conditions of Approval Page 25 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS FOR REFUSE/RECYCLING WM 7. Dimensions of the refuse/ recycling enclosure shall accommodate containers per City standards. WM 8. The design and selection of building materials for enclosures shall be compatible with surrounding building architecture. WM 9. Multi -Family attached residential unit refuse collection and recycling space shall be provided for two three -cubic yard collection bins, one for refuse and one for recyclables (107' X 84") for the first 20 units and two additional three -cubic yard bins for each additional 20 units, thereafter subject to review by the Director of Planning & Building Services. WM 10. Office and General Commercial refuse collection and recycling space shall be provided for two three -cubic yard collection bins (107'X 84" or 168" X 53.5") for the first 10,000 square feet of gross floor area and (84" X 53.5") one three -cubic yard collection bin for the nest 20,000 square feet.. Space for drop boa collection of recyclables may be provided in lieu of three -cubic yard bin service.. Projects in excess of 40,000 square feet shall be reviewed on a case by case basis. WM 11. Retail refuse collection and recycling space shall be provided for two three -cubic yard collection bins (107' X 84" or 168" X 53.5") for the first 8,000 square feet and two additional three -cubic yard bins for each 8,000 square feet or fraction thereafter. Refuse space for drop box collection of recyclables may be provided in lieu of three - cubic yard bin service... WM 12. Industrial refuse collect"' and recycling space shall be provided for two three -cubic yard collection bins for. the first 20,000 square feet of gross floor area (107" X 84" or 168" X 53.5") and one three -cubic yard collection bin (84" X 53.5") for each 10,000 square feet or fraction thereafter. Space for drop box collection of recyclables may be provided in lieu of three -cubic yard bins. WM 13. Institutional - Refuse collection and recycling space shall be provided in the form of allocated space for a minimum of two three -cubic yard collection bins (107' X 84"). WM 14. The walls of each refuse/recycling enclosure shall be six (6) feet in height, with an exterior surface finish compatible to the main structure(s). WM I5. Signs that clearly identify recyclables. and refuse collection and loading area(s) and the materials accepted therein shall be posted at points of access to each recycling enclosure area per City standards. WM 16. Each enclosure shall have metal frames and gates with self-closing hinges designed with cane bolts in front of the block walls to secure gates when in the open position. The main gate opening of any bin enclosure must be at least 84 inches wide. Master Case 96249 Draft Conditions of Approval Page 26 WM 17. The full width of the pavement area in front of each refuselrecycling enclosure shall have a maximum 2% slope away from the enclosure to allow manipulation of bins and drainage. WM 18. Driveways or travel aisles shall be designed to provide sufficient, unobstructed collection vehicle and personnel movement. WM 19. A six (6) inch high continuous concrete curb shall be provided around the bottom interior perimeter of the enclosure per City standards. WM 20. A minimum four (4) foot wide, six (6) inch thick concrete apron with 2% slope shall be constructed in front of each refuse/recycling enclosure at the point where collection service is provided per City standards. WM 21. All new enclosures for multi -family apartment projects shall be designed with a separate pedestrian access to avoid use of the main enclosure gates. WM 22. Wherever feasible, developers are encouraged to use building materials made of recycled materials to construct the enclosures per City standards. WM 23. A minimum vertical clearance of at least fourteen (14) feet shall be maintained at all truck pick-up areas. WM 24. No enclosure shall be designed with gates oriented and visible to or observable from a public right of way. WM 25. Each enclosure and pedestrian access shall be adequately illuminated by a free standing light fixture or as determined appropriate by the. Planning & Building Services Departmenk WM 26. All single family detached developments shall be designed to include individual area for composting - RECYCLING PLAN WM 27. The developer and/or owner of proposed developments utilizing refuseirecycling enclosures in their project shall submit a written recycling plan in coordination with the Public:! Works Department. This plan shall be submitted 60 days prior to occupancy per City standards. PLANNING DIVISION PL 1. The Final Map shall be developed in substantial conformance with the Vesting Tentative Tract Map approved by the Planning Commission. 0 Matter Care 95-242 Drat Conditions of Approval Page 27 PL 2. It is hereby declared and made a condition of this permit that if any condition hereof is violated, or if any law, statute, or ordinance is violated, the permit shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse, provided that the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for a period of 30 days. PL 3. All requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, approved Specific Plan and of the specific zoning of the subject property must be complied with unless set forth in the permit and/or shown on the submitted site plan. PL 4. All mitigation measures identified in the approved environmental impact report and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the project shall be met to.the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building Services. PL 5. The applicant -shall include a disclosure in the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions informing prospective homeowners that living within a gated community does not provide or imply that additional safety is being provided beyond a similar non -gated community. PL 6. The applicant shall provide language within the CC&R's indicating that a light rail transportation system could be constructed within the project site at a future date. PL 7. The applicant shall provide vehicular access to the existing Pony League ball fields during all phases of construction of the adjacent parcels of land. PL 8. The applicant shall implement the buried bank stabilization alternative as identified in the approved Environmental Impact Report with the exception of the required bridge abutments. PL 9. For oak tree preservation and mitigation, any grading or construction activity within 200 feet of any oak tree shall require the applicant to submit a plan subject to the approval of the Director of Planning and Building Services. PL 10. Lots for each commercial project area, each residential planning area and each industrial lot shall, be submitted for Development Review and approval to the Planning and Building Services prior to the issuance of building permits. PL 11.. The applicant shall submit plans and obtain approval for any construction or landscaping with the Metropolitan Water District's property or easements. The applicant shall notify the utility a minimum of two working days prior to any work within these properties. PL 12 The City shall hire an On -Site Environmental Monitor prior to site development within any riparian or upland preserve area. This person shall be an environmental consultant and will be conducting on-site inspections during project development to ensure compliance with the approved Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with hiring and payment of the On -Site Environmental Monitor. PL 13. Construction of Avenue Tibbetts shall be limited to those areas outside the biological resource line as approved by the Planning Commission. The applicant shall post a bond for construction of Avenue Tibbetts within the biological resource line because Master Case 96242 Draft Conditions ofApprooal Poge 28 this roadway is identified in the City s General Plan Circulation Element. However, the General Plan also requires the protection of Significant Ecological Areas. Therefore, the Planning Commission requests that the City Council initiate a General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element to develop alternatives to the future extension of Avenue Tibbetts in this area and across the Santa Clara River. Avenue Tibbetts shall only be constructed within the biological resource area if no alternative is approved through the General Plan Amendment process. PL 14. The applicant will be permitted to use gunite, grouted rip -rap, ungrouted rip -rap or other approved bank stabilzation material for the buried bank stablization to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. PL 15. The applicant may modify multiple family parking standards from the existing Unified Developemnt Standards subject to verification by a parking study and approval of the Director of Planning and Building Services. PL 16. Note "h" shall be added to Tentative Map No. 51931 as follows: "A large lot parcel map for conveyance purposes only (such as the river) may be recorded without. any improvement requirements. Residential parcels except for water company lots are to be 20 acres minimum size. Commercial and industrial lot minimum acreage will be the aggregate area of lots shown on tentative map. River and buffer lots will include trails.where appropriate. FLFdep current/novalcoa.flf 0