HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-06-24 - AGENDA REPORTS - NEWHALL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT (2)AGENDA REPORT
�
Manager Appr
62ty oval'-5�
Item to be presented by:
Ken Pulskamp
PUBLIC HEARING
DATE: June 24, 1997
SUBJECT: NEWHALL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
DEPARTMENT: Newhall Redevelopment Agency
FJXMMUI 1
In accordance with Section 33352 of the Community Redevelopment Law (the "CRL"), every
redevelopment plan submitted by a redevelopment agency shall be accompanied by a report that
summarizes the key elements of the proposed project. There are numerous elements required
to be in the report. These are listed in the introduction (Chapter 1.0) of the Report to City
Council (the "Report").
In essence, the Report comprises an overview of the entire redevelopment plan process. This
Report, which also incorporates the Redevelopment Plan, the Relocation Method, and the Final
Environmental Impact Report (the "FEIR"), is approved by the Agency and transmitted to the
City Council by an Agency resolution. The resolution neither approves the Plan nor certifies the
FEIR, but it does approve the Report and directs that it be transmitted to the City Council
before the joint public hearing.
The overall purpose of the joint public hearing is to take public testimony on the Redevelopment
Plan for the Newhall Redevelopment Project. In accordance with the CRL, redevelopment plans
are adopted by ordinance of the legislative body. It is anticipated thattheCity Council will
consider introduction of an ordinance to adopt the Redevelopment Plan on July 1, 1997, which
would be followed by a second reading and consideration for adoption on July 8, 1997. The
ordinance adopting the Redevelopment Plan for the Newhall Redevelopment Project would
become effective thirty (30) days following its second reading. Staff has included a draft
ordinance within the packet distributed to Council. This ordinance contains the detailed
findings needed to adopt the Redevelopment Plan. The draft ordinance will be summarized by
staff at the June 24 meeting.
The Plan would facilitate the elimination or alleviation of blighting conditions by providing
needed public improvements (many of which were identified in the Freedman Plan), assistance
for the development and rehabilitation of existing properties (such as facade improvement
programs and low interest rehabilitation loans), the provision of low and moderate -income
housing as required by law, and other activities authorized by the CRL.
�RO� c4(�FnAgenda ite : I
o
{,1
In alleviating the blighting conditions in the Project Area, the Redevelopment Plan will facilitate
the rehabilitation of existing buildings, and the development of new uses, all of which will be
consistent with the General Plan. The Redevelopment Plan includes the authority to acquire
property through the use of eminent domain, except on property occupied as a residence. Use
of eminent domain is considered to be a "last resort", and the Council has indicated that at this
time the City has no intentions to relocate businesses as a part of the implementation of the
redevelopment plan.
At or before the joint public hearing, individuals or groups may file written objections to the
proposed Redevelopment Plan. If this occurs, the Agency/Council may close the public hearing,
but must delay the adoption of the ordinance for at least one week for staff to prepare written
responses to the objections as mandated by the CRL.
This meeting also constitutes the public hearing on the Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
prepared for the Newhall Redevelopment Project.
The Newhall Redevelopment Committee has reviewed all of the information contained in the
Report to Council and Redevelopment Plan. The Committee is recommending approval of the
Redevelopment Plan. The Planning Commission has also reviewed the documents incorporated
into the Report to Council and is recommending approval of the Redevelopment Plan and
certification of the EIR. Copies of the Preliminary Report, Redevelopment Plan, and Draft EIR
were previously forwarded to Council and were discussed at the Council Study Session on the
Newhall Redevelopment Project on June 4, 1997.
GRC Redevelopment Consultants and staff will be providing the Council with a detailed
presentation on the Report to Council, Environmental Impact Report, Redevelopment Plan and
other documents associated with the Newhall Redevelopment Project at this meeting.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RECOMMENDATION
1) Receive the presentation on the Report to Council and adopt the attached resolution of the
City of Santa Clarita Redevelopment Agency approving and transmitting its report on the
Redevelopment Plan for the Newhall Redevelopment Project to the Santa Clarita City Council.
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RECOMMENDATION
1) Following the adoption of the Resolution transmitting the Report to Council, receive a
presentation on the Newhall Redevelopment Project and Environmental Impact Report.
2) Open the Joint Public Hearing on the Redevelopment Plan and EIR for the Newhall
Redevelopment Project.
3) Close the Joint Public Hearing.
4) Direct staff to return to the Special Council/Agency meeting on July 1, 1997 with Ordinance
No. 97-12 and Resolution No. 97-87 for Council adoption, and Resolution No. RDA 97-9 for
Agency adoption. The introduction and first reading of Ordinance No. 97-12 would be completed
on July 1, with the second reading and formal adoption of the Redevelopment Plan for the
Newhall Redevelopment Project occurring on July 8, 1997.
ATTACHMENTS
Report to Council
Resolution No. RDA 97-8
Draft Ordinance No. 97-12
Draft Resolution No. RDA 97-9
Draft Resolution No. 97-87
Final Environmental Impact Report
GAC:GEA:11
.whkdAau062997.1
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 97-8
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING AND TRANSMITTING
ITS REPORT ON THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
NEWHALL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT TO THE
SANTA CLARITA CITY COUNCIL
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency') has
prepared a Redevelopment Plan for the Newhall Redevelopment Project (the
"Redevelopment Plan") in compliance with the California Community Redevelopment Law
(Health and Safety Code, Sections 33000, et seq.); and
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Plan contains more than two acres of land in
agricultural production; and
WHEREAS, the CRL Section 33321.5 states that the Agency shall make certain
findings if more than two acres of land in agricultural use, as defined by Section 51201 of the
Government Code, are included in a redevelopment project area; and
WHEREAS, Section 33352 of the California Community Redevelopment Law states
that every redevelopment plan submitted by a redevelopment agency to the legislative body
shall be accompanied by a report on the Redevelopment Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared its report on the Plan for the Newhall
Redevelopment Project (the "Report") as required by law; and
WHEREAS, CRL Section 33352 (c) requires that the Agency's report contain an
implementation plan that describes specific goals and objectives of the Agency, specific
projects then proposed by the Agency, including a program of actions and expenditures
proposed to be made within the first five years of the Redevelopment Plan, and a description
of how these projects will improve or alleviate the conditions described in CRL Section
33031; and
WHEREAS, the Report contains such an implementation plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Santa Clarita Redevelopment Agency as
follows:
Sectionl. Pursuant to Section 33352 of the California Health and Safety Code, the
Agency has prepared its report on the Plan for the Newhall Redevelopment Project, attached
hereto as Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof.
Section2. The Agency hereby makes the following findings as. required by CRL
Section 33321.5(b).
(a) The land shown in the Report qualifies for inclusion in the
Redevelopment Plan, because 1) its inclusion will help alleviate threats
to public health, safety and welfare resulting from potential flooding; 2)
it is an integral part of an urbanized area that otherwise qualifies for
inclusion in a redevelopment project area; and, 3) its inclusion is
necessary for effective redevelopment because it links two developed
areas included in the Project Area.
(b) There is no other agriculture land in the vicinity of the parcels in
question, and thus will not contribute to the removal of any other land
in agricultural production from such use.
(c) The City of Santa Clarita General Plan designates this land for future
commercial development, and it is neither in an agricultural preserve,
nor enforceably restricted in any manner.
(d) The inclusion of this land will contribute to creating a more contiguous
and compact pattern of development in the immediate area, because it
is presently surrounded by urban development.
(e) The land around these parcels is either included in the Project Area, or
does not qualify for inclusion based on the provisions of the CRL.
Section 3. The Agency hereby adopts the implementation plan in the Report as the
implementation plan for the Redevelopment Plan, if said Redevelopment Plan should be
adopted by the City Council.
Section 4. The Agency hereby approves its Report on the Redevelopment Plan.
Section 5. The Executive Director of the Agency is hereby authorized and directed to
transmit the report and the Redevelopment Plan to the City Council of the City of Santa
Clarita.
Section 6. The Secretary shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution,
and it shall thereupon take effect and be in force.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of
is
Chairperson, Redevelopment Agency
ATTEST:
Secretary,Redevelopment Agency
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
)
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
) §
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
)
I, Sharon L. Dawson, CMC, Secretary of the City of Santa Clarita
Redevelopment Agency, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on
the day of , 19_ by the following vote of Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Secretary, Redevelopment Agency
GEA:
nxh1,&Vmo9M.g.
ORDINANCE NO. 97-12
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE NEWHALL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, The City Council has received from the City of Santa Clarita Redevelopment
Agency (the "Agency") the proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Newhall Redevelopment Project
(the "Redevelopment Plan"), together with the report of the Agency prepared pursuant to
Section 33352 of the California Health and Safety Code (the "Report to City Council") including,
among other things, a discussion of the reasons for the Redevelopment Plan, a method for the
relocation of those who may be temporarily or permanently displaced under the Redevelopment
Plan, the report and recommendations of the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita
(the "Planning Commission"), the minutes of consultations with affected taxing agencies, the
Environmental Impact Report on the Redevelopment Plan, and an implementation plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has submitted to the City Council of the City of
Santa Clarita its report and recommendations for approval of the Redevelopment Plan, and its
certification that the Redevelopment Plan conforms to the Santa Clarita General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Agency held a joint public hearing on June 24,
1997, concerning the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan and the certification of the Final
Environmental Impact Report on the Redevelopment Plan; and
WHEREAS, notice of the hearing was duly and regularly published in a newspaper of
general circulation in the City of Santa Clarita in accordance with Sections 33349 et seq. of the
California Health and Safety Code (the "CRL"), and a copy of said notice and affidavit of
publication are on file with the City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita and Secretary of the
Agency, and
WHEREAS, copies of the notice of joint public hearing, along with a statement that
properties will be subject to acquisition by condemnation under the provisions of the
Redevelopment Plan, except for the limitation or acquisition of residential property set forth in
the Redevelopment Plan, were mailed by first class mail to each resident, to each business, and
the last known address of each assessee, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll of the
Los Angeles County Assessor, of each parcel of land in the Project Area; and
WHEREAS, copies of the notice of joint public hearing were mailed by certified mail with
return receipt requested to the governing body of each taxing agency that receives taxes from
property in the Project Area; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the report and recommendations of the
Newhall Redevelopment Committee, the Planning Commission, the report of the Agency, the
Redevelopment Plan and its economic feasibility, and has provided an opportunity for all
persons to be heard and has received and considered all evidence and testimony presented for
or against any and all aspects of the Redevelopment Plan; and.
WHEREAS, the Agency and the City Council have reviewed and considered the Final
Environmental Impact Report for the Redevelopment Plan, prepared and submitted pursuant
to Public Resources Code Section 21151 and Health & Safety Code Section 33352, and have
adopted findings and a mitigation monitoring program and have certified the completion of said
Environmental Impact Report prior to adoption of this Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE SANTA CLARITA CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY FIND,
IMINE AND ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The overriding objective of this Plan is to eliminate or alleviate blighting
conditions by providing needed public improvements, assistance for the development and
rehabilitation of existing properties, the provision of low- and moderate4ncome housing and
other activities authorized by the CRL. In doing such, the Agency intends to mitigate the effects
of deteriorated structures, inadequate or obsolete design, irregularly shaped and inadequately
sized lots, declining property values, inadequate public improvements, and economic
maladjustment in the Project Area. In eliminating these blighting conditions, the
Redevelopment Plan will facilitate development as contemplated in the City of Santa Clarita
General Plan. The redevelopment goals for the Project Area include the following strategies and
objectives, from the Downtown Newhall Improvement Program, April 1996 (the "Freedman
Plan"). These include, but are not limited to:
(a) Expand the convenience and comparison/specialty economic niches.
(b) Create an attractive Main Street environment on San Fernando Road to attract
new shoppers and businesses.
(c) Create an attractive, memorable image that expresses Newhall's history and
character.
(d) Establish programs to promote private sector investment.
(e) Enhance the role of Newhall as a community center.
M Maintain and capitalize on the visibility and access associated with through
traffic.
(g) Improve the parking supply.
(h) Pursue opportunities for special facilities that attract a wide visitor base.
In addition to the foregoing, the Agency expects to pursue the following additional
objectives in the Project Area:
Eliminate blighting conditions and prevent the acceleration of blight in and about
the Project Area.
Develop programs and incentives for the rehabilitation of old, obsolescent, and
deteriorating structures in the Project Area.
Promote the comprehensive planning, redesign, replanning, reconstruction and/or
rehabilitation in such a manner as to achieve a higher and better utilization of
the land within the Project Area.
• Use redevelopment authority to promote development that is consistent with the
General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance.
• Promote the design and construction of a more efficient and effective circulation
system.
• Provide for adequate parcels and required public improvements to induce new
construction and/or rehabilitation by private enterprise.
• Promote the rehabilitation of existing housing units now affordable to persons
and families of low- and moderate -income, and promote the construction of
replacement housing units where existing units cannot be feasibly be
rehabilitated.
• Promote the development of new and diverse employment opportunities.
• Consolidate parcels -as needed to induce new or expanded, centralized,
commercial development in the Project Area.
• Upgrade the physical appearance of the Project Area.
• Remove economic impediments to land assembly and in -fill development in areas
that are not properly subdivided for development or redevelopment.
• Encourage the phasing -out of incompatible, and/or non -conforming land uses from
the Project Area.
• Mitigate potential relocation impacts resulting from changes in Project Area land
use from non -conforming and dilapidated uses to development in conformance
with the General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance.
• Provide replacement housing as required by law when dwellings housing low- or
moderate -income persons or families are lost to the low- or moderate -income
housing market.
• Encourage the cooperation and participation of Project Area property owners,
public agencies and community organizations in the elimination of blighting
conditions and the promotion of new or improved development in the Project
Area.
• Provide a procedural and financial mechanism by which the Agency can assist,
complement and coordinate public and private development, redevelopment,
revitalization and enhancement of the community.
Section 2: The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
(a) The Project Area is a blighted area, the redevelopment of which is necessary to
effectuate the public purposes declared in the CRL. The combinations of
conditions set- forth in Section 33031 of the CRL is so prevalent and so
substantial that it causes a lack of proper utilization of the area to such an extent
that it constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the community
which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private
enterprise or governmental action, or both, without redevelopment. While not
every building, improvement and parcel in the Project Area is detrimental to
public health, safety and welfare, such detrimental conditions predominate and
injuriously affect the entire area. In addition, the inclusion of each portion of the
Project Area is necessary for effective redevelopment of the entire area.
(b) This finding is based upon the research and facts contained in the Report to City
Council, on the testimony presented at the joint public hearing of the
Redevelopment Agency and the City CouncilheldJune 24, 1997, and upon other
relevant portions of the record before the City Council. All credible evidence
presented to the City Council discloses that the Project Area is characterized by
pervasive physical deterioration, economic stagnation, and social impairment.
While other areas of the community are rapidly developing, the Project Area
remains highly underutilized and poorly maintained, reflecting a lack of upkeep
and new investment. Service businesses needed by residents of the area are
leaving or have already gone from the Project Area, taking with them needed jobs
and transforming what was once a proud community center into an eyesore.
Because of the barriers to investment having to do with market demographics
and physical and economic impairment, private investment is not being attracted
the Project Area to any degree necessary to reverse or alleviate the blighted
conditions. Nor can the City with its limited revenues or any other government
program provide the tens of millions of dollars needed to improve the area and
restore economic vitality. Only redevelopment and the tax increment it creates
can provide the supplemental funding necessary to reverse the decline.
(b) The Project Area is a predominately urbanized area pursuant to Section 33320.1
of the Community Redevelopment Law.` This fording is based in part on the
research and facts contained in the Report to City Council.
(c) The Redevelopment Plan will redevelop the Project Area in conformity with the
Community Redevelopment Law and in the interests of the public peace, health,
safety and welfare. This finding is based in part .upon the fact that
redevelopment of the Project Area will implement the objectives of the
Community Redevelopment Law by aiding in the elimination and correction of
the conditions of blight, providing for planning, development, redesign,
reconstruction or rehabilitation of properties which need improvement, and
providing for higher economic utilization of potentially useful land.
(d) The adoption and carrying out of the Redevelopment Plan is economically sound
and feasible. This finding is based in part on the fact that under the
Redevelopment Plan no public redevelopment activity will be undertaken unless
the Agency can demonstrate that it has adequate revenue to finance the activity;
the Agency's Report to City Council further discusses and demonstrates the
economic soundness and feasibility of the Redevelopment Plan and undertakings
pursuant thereto. Although resources may not be sufficient to pay for all
contemplated improvements and programs, the Agency has defined (and will
refine from time to time) an implementation plan prioritizing expenditures which
will help to insure that available resources are targeted to the projects and
activities deemed most essential to revitalization of the Project Area.
(e) The Redevelopment Plan conforms to the General Plan of the City of Santa
Clarita, including, but not limited to, the Housing Element thereof. This finding
is based in part on the fact that the Redevelopment Plan incorporates by
reference the General Plan land use designations, as amended from time to time.
The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita found that the
Redevelopment Plan conforms to the General Plan General Plan of the City of
Santa Clarita.
(f) The carrying out of the Redevelopment Plan will promote the public peace,
health, safety -and welfare of the City of Santa Clarita and will effectuate the
purposes and policies of the Community Redevelopment Law. This fording is
based on the fact that redevelopment will benefit the Project Area and the
community by correcting conditions of blight and by coordinating public and
private actions to stimulate development, contribute toward needed public
improvements and improve the economic, and physical conditions of the Project
Area and the community.
(g) The limited condemnation of real property to the extent provided for in the
Redevelopment Plan is necessary to the execution of the Redevelopment Plan,
and adequate provisions have been made for payment for property to be acquired
as provided by law. This finding is based in part upon the need to assemble sites
for development which will result in new economic activity in the Project Area
and to prevent the recurrence of blight.
(h) The Agency has a feasible method for the relocation of any persons and families
displaced from the Project Area. The City Council and the Agency recognize that
the provisions of Sections 7260 to 7276 of the California Government Code would
be applicable to any relocation that: would occur due to the implementation by the
Agency of the Redevelopment Plan. The City Council finds and determines that
the provision of relocation assistance according to law constitutes a feasible
method for relocation. Displacement of persons and families has been minimized
by the Redevelopment Plan restriction on acquisition of residential property by
eminent domain. No project public improvements are proposed that would
displace a substantial number of low- or moderate -income persons.
(i) There shall be provided, within the Project Area or within other areas not
generally less desirable with regard to public utilities and public and commercial
facilities and at rents or prices within the financial means of any families and
persons who might be displaced from the Project Area, decent, safe and sanitary
dwellings equal in number to the number of and available to the displaced
families and persons, and reasonably accessible to their places of employment.
Families and persons shall not be displaced prior to the adoption of a relocation
plan pursuant to Health and Safety Code Sections 33411 and 33411.1. Dwelling
units housing persons and families of low- or moderate -income shall not be
removed or destroyed prior to the adoption of a replacement housing plan
pursuant to Health and Safety Code Sections 33334.5, 33413, and 33413.5. This
finding is based upon the Draft Relocation Method for the Redevelopment
Agency, which was adopted pursuant to Redevelopment Agency Resolution RDA
97-7, and the Housing Element of the General Plan.
(j) All areas of the Project Area are either blighted or necessary for effective
redevelopment and are not included for the purpose of obtaining the allocation
of taxes from the Project Area pursuant to Section 33670 of the Community
Redevelopment Law without other substantial justification for their inclusion.
This finding, is based in part upon the fact that, following careful study
documented in the Report to City Council, the Project Area was identified as an
area within the City of Santa Clarita suffering conditions of blight and physical,
social, and economic deterioration.
(k) Inclusion of any land, buildings or improvements which are not detrimental to
the public health, safety or welfare is necessary for the effective redevelopment
of the entire area of which they are a part, and any such area is not included for
the purpose of obtaining the allocation of tax increment revenues from such area
pursuant to Section 33670 of the Community Redevelopment Law without other
substantial justification for its inclusion. This finding is based in part upon the
fact that the boundaries of the Project Area were specifically drawn to include
only those lands that were underutilized because of blighting influences, or to
include land affected by the existence of blighting influences or land uses
significantly contributing to the conditions of blight, or to include land that is
necessary for effective redevelopment, which inclusion is necessary to accomplish
the objectives and benefits of the Redevelopment Plan.
(1) The elimination of blight and.the redevelopment of the Project Area would not
reasonably be expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone
without the aid and assistance of the Agency. This finding is based in part upon
the continued existence of blighting influences including, without limitation, the
demonstrated lack of private sector interest inredeveloping properties in the
Project Area, structural deficiencies and other indications of blight more fully
enumerated in the Agency's Report to City Council, and the infeasibility due to
cost of requiring individuals (by means of assessments or otherwise) to eradicate
or significantly alleviate existing deficiencies in properties and facilities and the
inability and inadequacy of other governmental programs and financing
mechanisms to eliminate the blighting conditions.
(m) The Redevelopment Plan contains adequate safeguards so that the work of
redevelopment will be carried out pursuant to the Redevelopment Plan, and it
provides for the retention of controls and the establishment of restrictions and
covenants running with the land sold or leased for private use for periods of time
and under conditions specified in the Redevelopment..Plan, which the City
Council deems necessary to effectuate the purposes of the Community
Redevelopment Law.
(n) The time limitations and financial limitations established for the Project Area are
reasonably related to. the projects proposed in the Redevelopment Plan and to the
ability of the Agency to eliminate blight within the Project Area. The plan limits
are selected to maximize resources as permitted by law, in light of the large cost
of projects and programs needed to address blighted conditions in the Project
Area.
Section 3: The City Council is satisfied that permanent housing facilities will be
available within three (3) years from the time occupants of the Project Area, if any, are
displaced, and that pending the development of such permanent facilities, there will be available
to any such displaced occupants temporary housing facilities at rents comparable to those in the
City of Santa Clarita at the time of their displacement. Not less than 20 percent of the
Redevelopment Agency's tax increment revenue will be set aside and earmarked exclusively for
improving, increasing and preserving the community's supply of housing affordable to persons
and families of low- and moderate -income. These funds would be available if necessary to pay
for temporary and permanent replacement housing.
Section 4: The City Council has considered written objections, if any, to the
Redevelopment Plan and all evidence and testimony forand against the adoption of the
Redevelopment Plan. All written objections, if any, have been considered and responded to the
frill satisfaction of the City Council.
Section 5 That certain document entitled "Redevelopment Plan for The Newhall
Redevelopment Project," the maps contained therein and such other reports as are incorporated
therein by reference, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Santa
Clarita, having been duly reviewed and considered, is hereby incorporated in this Ordinance by
reference and made a part hereof. The Redevelopment Plan is hereby designated, approved and
adopted as the official "Redevelopment Plan for The Newhall Redevelopment Project."
Section : In order to implement and facilitate the effectuation of the Redevelopment
Plan as hereby approved; and to express its purposes and intents with respect to the Project
Area, the City Council hereby:
(a) Pledges its cooperation in helping to carry out the Redevelopment Plan, and
including, but not limited to, the objectives, goals and implementation described
in Section 1 of this Ordinance,
(b) Requests the various officials, departments, boards and agencies of the City of
Santa Clarita having administrative responsibilities in the Project Area likewise
to cooperate to such end and to exercise their respective functions and powers in
a manner consistent with the redevelopment of the Project Area,
(c) Stands ready to consider and take appropriate action upon proposals and
measures designed to effectuate the Redevelopment Plan, including loaning funds
to the Agency to pay for startup and administrative costs pending receipt of tax'
increment by the Agency, and
(d) Declares its intention to undertake and complete any proceeding necessary to be
carried out by the City of Santa Clarita under the provisions of the
Redevelopment Plan.
Section 7: The City Clerk is hereby directed to send a certified copy of this Ordinance
to the Agency, whereupon the Agency is vested with the responsibility for carrying out the
Redevelopment Plan.
Section 8: The City Clerk is hereby directed to record with the County Recorder of Los
Angeles County a description of the land within the Project Area'and a statement that
proceedings for the redevelopment of the Project Area have been instituted under the
Community Redevelopment Law.
Section 9 The City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a copy of the description and
statement to be recorded by the County Clerk pursuant to Section 8 of this Ordinance, a copy
of this Ordinance and a map or plat indicating the boundaries of the Project Area, to the auditor
and tax assessor of Los Angeles County, to the governing body of each of the taxing agencies
which receives taxes from property in the Project Area, and to the State Board of Edualization.
Section 10: The Building Division of the City of Santa Clarita is hereby directed for a
period of two (2) years after the effective date of this Ordinance to advise all applicants for
building permits within the Project Area that the site for which a building permit is sought for
the construction of buildings or for other improvements is within a redevelopment project area.
Section 11: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days from and after
the date of final passage.
Section 12: If any part of this Ordinance or the Redevelopment Plan which it approves
is held to be invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portion of this Ordinance or of the Redevelopment Plan, or the Redevelopment Plan as it existed
prior to adoption of this Ordinance, and the City Council hereby declares it would have passed
the remainder of this Ordinance or approved the remainder of the Redevelopment Plan if such
invalid portion thereof had been deleted.
Section 13: This Ordinance shall be introduced at least five (5) days prior to the City
Council meeting at which this Ordinance is to be adopted. Within fifteen (15) days after the
adoption hereof, the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be
posted in at least three (3) public places within the City.
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of '19—.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §
CITY OF SANTA CLARM )
I, Sharon L. Dawson, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance No. was regularly introduced and placed upon its first reading
at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of
19 . That thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting
of the City Council on the day of 19 by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS
CITY CLERK
nwW&Nec97.12.rd
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 97-9 DRAFT
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CERTIFYING ADEQUACY OF THE
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE PROPOSED NEWHALL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT,
ADOPTING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND ADOPTING
A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
WHEREAS, a Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR), SCH. No.
97021002, was prepared for the Newhall Redevelopment Project to address the
environmental effects, mitigation measures, and project alternatives associated with the
adoption and implementation of the proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, the Final Program EIR was prepared pursuant to the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act (hereinafter "CEQA" Public Resources Code
Section 21000 et seq.), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section
15000 et seq. hereinafter "Guidelines"), and local procedures adopted by the Agency; and
WHEREAS, in April of 1997, notice to all interested persons and agencies inviting
comments on Draft Program EIR was published in accordance with the provisions of CEQA;
and
WHEREAS, written comments on the Draft Program EIR were received from the
public during the 45 -day public review period and such comments were responded to through
a response to comments section included in the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita Planning Commission is recommending
certification of the EIR prepared for the project; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") as the
designated Lead Agency has reviewed all environmental documentation comprising the Final
Program EIR and has found that all environmental effects of the proposed project have been
considered and that the document is complete and adequate and fully complies with all
requirements of CEQA and the Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Draft and Final EIR reflect the independent judgement of the
Agency; and
WHEREAS, Section 21081 of CEQA and Section 15090 of the Guidelines require that
the Agency make one or more of the following findings prior to approval of a project for
which an EIR has been completed identifying one or more significant effects of the project,
along with statements of facts supporting each finding:
FINDING 1- Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impacts
identified in the Final EIR..
FINDING 2 - Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and
jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding.
Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be
adopted by such other agency.
FINDING 3 - Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible
the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.
WHEREAS, the mitigation measures included in the Final Program EIR have been
designed to reduce or eliminate the environmental impacts described therein, according to
the criteria in Section 15370 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the mitigation monitoring
program has been prepared in accordance with the requirements in Section 21081.6 of
CEQA; and
WHEREAS, Section 15903(a) of the CEQA Guidelines requires the Agency to balance
the benefits of a proposed project against its environmental risks in determining whether to
approve the project; and
WHEREAS, Section 15903(b) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that, where the
decision of the Agency allows the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the
Final EIR but are not mitigated, the Agency must state in writing the reasons to support its
action based on the Final EIR and other information in the record; and
WHEREAS, the Agency, in order to gauge the full scope of potential environmental
impacts, considered alternatives to the project in the Alternatives to the Proposed Project
section in the Final EIR.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Santa Clarita Redevelopment Agency does resolve
as follows:
Section 1. The Agency hereby certifies the Final Program EIR for the Newhall
Redevelopment Project as adequate and complete in that it addresses all environmental
effects of the proposed project and fully complies with the requirements of CEQA and the
CEQA Guidelines.
Section 2. The Agency adopts the Findings of Fact with respect to each significant
environmental effect and identified in the Final EIR and the explanation of its rationale with
respect to each such finding set forth in that portion of Exhibit "A" entitled "Significant
Environmental Effects and Mitigation Measures".
Section 3. The Agency adopts the Findings of Fact with respect to alternatives set
forth in that portion of Exhibit "A" entitled "Alternatives to the Proposed Project," including
the findings that Alternative 2: Reduced Newhall Redevelopment Project Area, is feasible
and environmentally superior to the proposed project.
Section4. The Agency adopts the Findings of Fact with respect to the overriding
considerations set forth in that portion of Exhibit "A" entitled "Statement of Overriding
Considerations" and adopts all other findings set forth in Exhibit "A".
Section 5. The Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program for the Newhall Redevelopment Project attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and made a
part hereof.
Section 6 The City staff is hereby authorized and directed to file a Notice of
Determination with the Los Angeles County Clerk pursuant to the provisions of Section
21152 of CEQ AL
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 1997.
Chairperson, Redevelopment Agency
ATTEST:
Secretary, Redevelopment Agency
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
I, Sharon L. Dawson, CMC, Secretary of the City of Santa Clarita
Redevelopment Agency, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on
the day of , 1997 by the following vote of Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Secretary, Redevelopment Agency
nwhlydv\... 07-9.,.
RESOLUTION NO. 97-87 ®RAFT
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA CLARITA CERTIFYING ADEQUACY OF THE
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE PROPOSED NEWHALL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT,
ADOPTING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND ADOPTING
A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
WHEREAS, a Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR), SCH. No.
97021002, was prepared for the Newhall Redevelopment Project to address the
environmental effects, mitigation measures, and project alternatives associated with the
adoption and implementation of the proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, the Final Program EIR was prepared pursuant to the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act (hereinafter "CEQA" Public Resources Code
Section 21000 et seq.), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section
15000 et seq. hereinafter "Guidelines"), and local procedures adopted by the City; and
WHEREAS, in April of 1997, notice to all interested persons and agencies inviting
comments on Draft Program EIR was published in accordance with the provisions of CEQA;
and
WHEREAS, written comments on the Draft Program EIR were received from the
public during the 45 -day public review period and such comments were responded to through
a response to comments section included in the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita is recommending
certification of the EIR prepared for the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita (the "Council") as a
Responsible Agency under CEQA has reviewed all environmental documentation comprising
the Final Program EIR. and has found that all environmental effects of the proposed project
have been considered and that the document is complete and adequate and fully complies
with all requirements of CEQA and the Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Draft and Final EIR reflect the independent judgement of the City;
and
WHEREAS, Section 21081 of CEQA and Section 15090 of the Guidelines require that
the Council make one or more of the following findings prior to approval of a project for
which an EIR has been completed identifying one or more significant effects of the project,
along with statements of facts supporting each finding:
FINDING 1- Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impacts
identified in the Final EIR.
FINDING 2 - Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and
jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding.
Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be
adopted by such other agency.
FINDING 3 - Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible
the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.
WHEREAS, the mitigation measures included in the Final Program EIR have been
designed to reduce or eliminate the environmental impacts described therein, according to
the criteria in Section 15370 of the CEQA Guidelines, and the mitigation monitoring
program has been prepared in accordance with the requirements in Section 21081.6 of
CEQA; and
WHEREAS, Section 15903(a) of the CEQA Guidelines requires the Council to balance
the benefits of a proposed project against its environmental risks in determining whether to
approve the project; and
WHEREAS, Section 15903(b) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that, where the
decision of the Council allows the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the
Final EIR but are not mitigated, the Council must state in writing the reasons to support its
action based on the Final EIR and other information in the record; and
WHEREAS, the Council, in order to gauge the full scope of potential environmental
impacts, considered alternatives to the project in the Alternatives to the Proposed Project
section in the Final EIR.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Santa Clarita City Council does resolve as follows:
Section 1. The Council hereby certifies the Final Program EIR for the Newhall
Redevelopment Project as adequate and complete in that it addresses all environmental
effects of the proposed project and fully complies with the requirements of CEQA and the
CEQA Guidelines.
Section 2. The Council adopts the Findings of Fact with respect to each significant
environmental effect and identified in the Final EIR and the explanation of its rationale with
respect to each such finding set forth in that portion of Exhibit "A" entitled "Significant
Environmental Effects and Mitigation Measures".
Section 3. The Council adopts the Findings of Fact with respectto alternatives set
forth in that portion of Exhibit "A" entitled "Alternatives to the Proposed Project," including
the findings that Alternative 2: Reduced Newhall Redevelopment Project Area, is feasible
and environmentally superior to the proposed project.
Section 4. The Council adopts the Findings of Fact with respect to the overriding
considerations set forth in that portion of Exhibit "A" entitled "Statement of Overriding
Considerations" and adopts all other findings set forth in Exhibit "A".
Section 5. The Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program for the Newhall Redevelopment Project attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and made a
part hereof.
Section 6 The City staff is hereby authorized and directed to file a Notice of
Determination with the Los Angeles County Clerk pursuant to the provisions of Section
21152 of CEQA.
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 Redevelopment Agency of the
City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of
, 1997 by the following vote of Council:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS
City Clerk
o.nt�a��kas�a�.a
TI IN t9 'q7 11 t71 AM CRA PARADFNA
EXMBIT A
FINDINGS OF FACT
REGARDING SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 'UNDER THE
PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULA110IN
SECTION 15901
NEWIL%LL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Consistent with the requirements of CEQA amd the Guidelinea the Final Program EIR for the
Newhall Redevelopment Project addresses environmental effects in proportion to their severity
and probability of occurrence. The Final Program EIR identifies certain potentially significant
adverse environmental effects of the project. These effects are summarized below. The Final
Program EIR also identifies mitigation measures -which will reduce or eliminate certain potential
significant effects. These mitigation measures aro- listed below. The determination whether or
not to incorporate such mitigation measures and the rationale for such determination is set forth
below. In making these findings, all of the rationale and database contained in the Final Program
EIR has not been repeated. The Final Program EIR and other source documents referenced
therein are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full herein. Except to the extend they
conflict with the findings and determinations set forth in this document, the analysis and
conclusions of the Final EIR, including the responses to comments and any supplemental
responses provided City staff and consultants in connection with the adoption of the project, are
hereby adopted as findings of the City and Redevelopment Agency.
Air Quality
Significant Impact. Short-term YMI0 emissions from grading and excavation activities could
affect sensitive uses. Long-term emissions of air pollutants primarily from vehicles will be
added to the Basin's air, which is a non -attainment area for federal and state air quality standards.
Mitigation Measures
For all individual development projects. construction -related exhaust and dust emissions
will be controlled. All unpaved demolition and construction areas shall be wetted as
necessary during excavation to reduce dust emissions and meet SCAQMD Rule 403.
Wetting twice a day will reduce particulate emissions (dust) by about 50 percent. All
TI IN 19 '9^ 11:P1AM CRA PASADENA
P.R/.qF,
grading activities shall cease when wind speed exceeds 25 mph. To the maximum extent
feasible, reclaimed water will be used for this purpose.
2. All grading, excavation, and other activities involving the use of fossil -fuel powered
equipment shall cease during second and third stage smog alerts as designated by the
SCAQMD.
3. Individual development projects shall be dcaigned and operated to conserve energy in
keeping with Title 24 requirements.
4. Imple.mentatinn of the following Transportation Systems Management actions will
minimize the air pollution impact of new development and reduce trip making fxom
existing develupmcm;
• Transit signal synchronization of all major arterials and collectors in coordination
with the County of Los Angeles, and surrourading ritiec;
• Development of park and ride facilities to encourage transit use;
6 Traffic flow improvements;
Bus transit improvements in the form of pads, shelters, and lighting; and
• Bicycle routes.
Implementation of any future nir quality measures which will reduce air quality
impacts of new development in the project area.
I.w .l ofSignif:cance After Mitigation: Significant and umavoidable. The foregoing adopted
mitigation measures will mitigate or avoid some, but not all, of the significant air quality impacts
idendfiod itu the Final EIR. Additional measures to reduce project -related vehicular emissions to
a less than significant level are beyond the technological, legal, and economic ability of the City
and Agency.
Transportation
Significant Impact. Addition of traffic to local street network.
Mitigation Measures
The intersection of Orchard Village Road/Lyons Avenue is projected to worsen form a V/C of
0.91 (LOS E) to 0.99 during the PM peak hour due to project -related traffic. Future -year
2
TI IN 19 197 11:PPAM CRA PW;AT)FNA P.4/:7f
analysis of this intersection already assumed that it would be £ally built out No additional
geometric improvements are feasible at this location.
Overall Program Implementation. Prior to approval of any major development project
(any project greater than 100,000 square feet in floor area, greater than 100 dwelling
units, or greater than 100 peak -hour trips inbound and outbound) the City will have in
place a circulation improvements plan for projects within the Newhall Redevelopment
Project area.
2. Implementation Funding, The City will fund the improvements below based on
funding available from development fees or other revenues as appropriate. based on the
need considering the location of projects from which fees were collected, development
within the Newhall Redevelopmenl Project Arra, and other criteria as outlined in a public
improvements program for the project area.
Regular Program Review. Every Eve years, or after development of prnjerts resuiting
in a total of 2,000 peak -hour trips since the most recent major traffic study revision, the
City will comprehensively evaluate the remaining capital improvements required to
provide an acceptable level of traffic service within and to the Newhall Redevelopment
Project Area, and adjust the list of improvement projects and development fees as
appropriate to achieve the level of service objectives outlined in the City's General Plan.
4. Capital Improvements to Support Newhall Redevelopment Project. The following
specific traffic improvements are needed to provide the level of service outlined in this
EIR. These measures shall be included in an improvements program with associated
development fees, and shall be implemented as their need is identified and as
development takes place in the Newhall Redevelopment Project Area so that the Rill list
of improvements can be completed at the time the anticipated development is complete.
The need for these improvements shall he evaluated in each regular program review. and
the improvements list and developer fee modified as appropriate based on current
conditions at the time of the review.
4.1. I-5 SB off-ramp/Lyons Avenue: This intersection is projected to worsen from a
V/C of 1.26 (LOS F) to 1.27 during the PM peak hour due to project -related
traffic. in order to mitigate this impact, the off -ramp should be restriped from one
left -turn land, one through left -turn land, one right -turn lane to two left -tum lanes
and one throuWright-turn lane. Implementing this mitigation will improve the
projected V/C ratio to 1.18 during the evening peak hour.
4.2. I-5 NB ramps/Lyons Avenue: This intersection is projected to worsen from a
V/C of 0.99 (LUS E) to 1.01 (LOS F) during the PM peak hour due to project -
related traffic.. In order to mitigate this impact, a right -turn only land onto the
ramp should be provided in the westbound direction. Implementing this
.TI IN 19 '47 11:P AM r'AA PA(;PT)FNA
P..5/.';i;
mitigation will improve the projected VIC ratio to 1.18 during the evening peak
hour.
4.3. Via P riwoessa/Circle J Ranch Road: This intersection was assumed to contain
two through lanes in the eastbound and westbound directions in the future. Under
this configuration, the intersection would operate with a V/C of 0.82 (LOS D) and
0.85 without and with project -related traffic, respectively. Providing a third
castbouad and westbound through land would improve the projected V/C ratio to
0.63 during the evening peak hour.
4.4. Lyynns Avenne/Ran Fernandn Rnad: This intersection is prnjected to wnrsen
from a V/C of 0.94 (LOS E) to 1.08 (LOS F) during the PM peak hour due to
project -related traffic. Railroad Avcnuc runs just cast of San Fernando Road and
just west of the MTA railroad tracks. This parallel facility to San Fernando Road
is planned to be improved to become a two- or four -lane upgraded roadway. This
improvement will provide additional capacity along the San Fernando Road
corridor in this area. Sufficient traffic should divert from San Fernando Road to
Railroad Avenue to improve the projected operation of Lyons Avenue/San
Fernando Road such that additional geometric improvements would not be
necessary.
4.5. SR -14 SB rampslSan Fernando Road: This intersection is projected to worsen
form a V/C of 1.59 (LUS k) to 1.66 during the 1'M peak hour due to project -
related traffic. In order to mitigate this impact, a third through land in the
westbound direction would be needed to accommodate the projected traffic
volumes exiting the northbound off -ramp. Implementing the mitigation would
improve the projected V/C ratio to 1.23 during the evening peak hour.
5. Mitigation Measures for Reduced Project Area Alternative
5.1. 7-5 off-ramp/Lyous Avenue: This iutersectiaa is projected to worseu fiotu a V/C
of 1.26 (LOS F) to 1.27 during the PM peak hour due to project -related traffic.
Implementing the proposed mitigation will improve the projected V/C ratio to
1.17 during the evening peak hour.
5.2. Orchard Village Road/Lyons Avenue: This intersection is projected to worsen
from a V/C of 0.91 (LOS E) to 0.95 during the PM peak hour due to project -
related traffic. Future -year analysis of this intersection already assumed that it
would be fully built out. No additional geometric improvements are feasible.
5.3. Via Princessa/Circle J ]Ranch Road: This intersection was assumed to contain
two through lanes in the eastbound and westbound directions in the future. Under
this configuration, the intersection would operate with a V/C of 0.82 (LOS D) and
MIN 1q 'q7 11:2'flAM CRA PACATIFNR
P. F✓qF.
0.85 without and with project -related traffic, respectively. Providing a third
eastbound and westbound through lane would improve the projected V/C ratio to
0.63 du--ing the evening peal: hour.
5.4. Lyons Avenue/San Fernando Road: This intersection is projected to worsen
from a V/C: of 0.94 (LOS F) to 10 1 (LAS F) during the PM peak hour due to
project -related traffic. Railroad Avenue runs just east of San Fernando Road and
j ubt wcbt of Qie MTA rdilruad trauk.s. This parallel facility to San Fernando Road
is planned to be improved to become a two- or four -land upgraded roadway. This
improvement will provide additional capacity along the San Fernando Road
corridor in this area. Sufficient traffic should divert from San Fernando Road to
Railroad Avenue to improve the projected operation of Lyons Avenue/San
Fernando such that additional geometric improvements would not be necessary.
S.S. SR -14 SB rampslSan Fernando Road: This intersection is projected to worsen
from a V/C of 1.59 (LOS F) to 1.62 during the PM peals hour due to project -
related traffic. Implementing the proposed mitigation would improve the
projected VIC ratio to 1.'0 during the evening peak hour.
6. Transit Compatibility of Development and Public Improvement Projects. Each
development project, street widening or improvement project; and strecucape project will
be reviewed with attention to the need for transit improvements such as bus bays, transit
shelters, waiting areas and information systems; pedestrian access and circulation to
transit; shuttle/circulation access and drop off/waiting areas; Preferential 14OV parking
areas and other design aspects to encourage use of public transportation and discourage
ube vfiudividual mutur vcluulcb. All major projects grid all projects along existing or
anticipated transit or shuttle/circulation routes will be coordinated with MTA and other
transit agencies as appropriate to ensure that project designs anticipate existing and future
transit needs
1vTTA and SCRRA Right -of -Way Impacts. All development projects and public
improvements along the Metrolink rail lines will be coordinated with MTA to ensure that
safety and operation of the rail line are maintained.
Level of Significance After Mitigation_ Significant and unavoidable at Orchard Village
Road/Lyons Avenue. Additional measures to reduce proj ect-related traffic impact at this
location to a less than significant level are beyond the economic, technological, and legal ability
o£ihe City and Agency. The foregoing mitigation measures incorporated into or required in the
project will reduce the project -related traffic impact at all other study locations to a less than
significant level, resulting in acceptable Level of Service at all such said intersections.
SI IN t q 'q7 i t : P4AM CRR PASADFNA
Hazards
Signtf cant Impact: Potential contamination on Metrolink site.
Mitigation Measure: A Phase 11 environmental site characterization will be conducted and
necessary site remediation will be completed prior to construction
P.7/ r,
Level of Sign fcance After Mitigation: The foregoing arutigation measures required in the project
will reduce the contamination hazard at that location to a less than significant level, resulting in
compliance with all applicable safety requirements.
Biological Resources
Significant Impact: Potential for construction of public improvements within the south fork of
the Santa Clara River, Placerita Creek, and Newhall Creek. Future development may ocrur nn
sites adjacent to natural habitat areas.
Mitigation Measures
Each individual development proposal shall provide setbacks, buffering, or any other
features on sites within, adjacent to, or in close vicinity to nattual riparian, live oak, sage
scrub, and other habitat, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development.
2. Each individual development shall preserve natural riparian, live oak, sage scrub, or other
habitat on the site as determinecd appropriate by the Director of Community Development_
Any loss of habitat shall be compensated through the provision of habitat off-site or other
measures determined appropriate and satisfactory by the Director of Community
Deve.lnpment.
3. Any grading, uumiruction, ox other activity associated with public improvement projects
and private development projects within the Santa Clara River drainage channels or
easements shall be required to revegetate all graded and disturbed areas with native
vegetation as determined appropriate by the Director of Community Development.
Revegetation plans shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Community
Development.
4. The City will ensure that drainage improvements do not result in the elimination of
watercourses or their channelizatien or conversion to subsurface drains, as determined
appropriate by the City in consultation with appropriate state and federal agencies. All
wetlands and watercourses, intermittent or perennial, shall be retained and provided with
setbacks which preserve the riparian and aquatic habitat value and maintain their value to
on-site and off-site wildlife populations.
9
TI IN 19 '97 11:?4AM CRA PAc;AT)FNA P.A/RF
5. Each individual development shall incorporate native species into landscape plans to the
extent feasible. All landscape plans shall be subject to review and approval by the
Dircetor of Community Development.
6. The City shall continue to participate in the regional Santa Clara River Study. Upon
completion of the study, the City shall implement the study's recommendations as
appropriate.
7. All development is required to comply with the City's Oak Tree Ordinance and
guidelines.
Level of Significance Afrer Mitigation: The foregoing mitigation measures required in the project
will reduce the project -related impact on biological resources to a less lhau sisluficaut level,
resulting in protection of biological resources.
Noise
Significant Impact: Construction noise will be generated near sensitive receptors for some
development projects in the Newhall redevelopment project area. Traffic increases will increase
noise levels along arterial ntreets. Residential development is permitted in high noise areas.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures will reduce noise impacts associated with construction of
development projects, public facilities, streets and utilities occurring within the Project Area. All
projects must comply with the City's noise ordinance, which restricts the hours of construction.
To the extent feasible, construction activities expected to last two weeks or more will be
screened from adjacent noise -sensitive land uses with a solid barrier.
2. All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, operated within 1000 feet of a dwelling unit,
school, hospital or other noise -sensitive land use shall be equipped with properly
operating and maintained muffler exhaust systems.
3. Stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be locatud as far as practical front occupied
dwellings or other sensitive receptors.
Construction routes should be established where necessary and practicable to prevent
noise impacts on sensitive receptors
5. Locations where widening of arterial streets is conducted adjacent to sensitive receptors
located near the roadway and cumulative traffic increases will result in noise increases of
TI IN 19 '97 11:P5AM CRA PAPAnFNA
P. 9/.iii
3 dB or more, sound insulation mitigation will be evaluated for installation at the time of
street widening. If building construction of sensitive uses is such that sound insulation is
determined to be necessary and appropriate to provide acceptable interior noise levels,
sound insulation to compensate for the noise increase resulting from traffic and street
widening will be evaluated. If sound insulation mitigation is determined to be feasible
and justified based on the specific conditions, insulation will be made available at the
option of the owner of the sensitive use. Sufficient additional sound insulation would
nurinally W provided by improving weathoratripping, providing heavier doors, and by
providing a second pane of glass or other window material over single -pane windows.
6. Projects involving major street widening and si gnificant increases in traffic volume will
be required to mitigate impacts on existing sensitive receptor to the extent feasible.
Title 24 building code standards will provide acceptable noise levels for new residential
construction in high -noise areas.
Level of Signrftcance After Mitigation_ The foregoing mitigation measures incorporated into or
required in the project will reduce the project -related noise impacts to a less than significant
level, resulting in adequate noise protection for sensitive receptors -
Public Services - Schools
Signifrnant impact_ Project will generate additional need for school facilities beyond those that
can be financed with development impact fees.
Mitigation Measures:
The Agency will pay pass-tbmngh revenue as established by law to school districts. The
Newhall School District and William S. Hart Union High School District should utilize
mandatory redevelopment tax increment pass-throughs to acwuuuodate additional
students by adding portable classrooms or constructing permanent facilities.
As applicable under the State law, the school districts should levy maximum fees or
require additional mitigation measures for new residential development, and the
maximum amount of developer fees for all industrial and commercial construction
allowed by State law to help fund new or temporary facilities construction.
3. The school districts should continue to rrrake regular and timely application to the State- of
California for funding to construct new classrooms and other facilities in response to
enrollment growth.
TI IN 1 q ' W 11 : PAOM CRA PARAT)MA
P. 1 R/qr
4. To the extent that alternate means of financing new schools are made available to the
districts through changes in state law, the district tivill vigorously pursue these methods to
provide adequate facilities to support enrollment growth.
S. The districts will use year-round schedules and double sessions as necessary and
appropriate to maximize the capacity of existing facilities if funding is not available for
new school or classroom construction.
The State of California should continue to finance construction of new schools and
classrooms in response to enrollment increases.
7. The Redevelopment Agency will include public benefit projects which also benefit the
school districts among ubu pwiccts eholble fur L" hicre"It"i financing florn the iaewball
Redevelopment Project.
Level ofSignif cane After ,3ditigation: The foregoing mitigation measures requirrd in the project
will reduce the project -related school impacts to a less than significant level, resulting in
adequate school facilities for the project -generated students..
Cultural Resources
Significant Impact: Some properties in the project area may be of historical value; the proposed
project has the potential to result in a significant impact on historic resources.
Mitigation Measures:
prior to issuance of a demolition permit, the City shall examine building records to
determine whether a stnlcture is 50 years or older and if so, whether such structure is of
potential historic significance. For structures determined to be of potential historic
significance, the City shall forward the application fir a delxiolitiou permit to the State
Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for further evaluation. Based upon the SHPO's
evaluation the City shall either issue a demolition permit, require the project proponent to
provide archival documentation including photos and exictirlg records pertaining to
history and architecture of the structum(s) prior to demolition, consider reuse and
integration of such structare(s) into the project, or implement any other recunuucudatiolls
of the SHPO as determined appropriate by the City.
Level of ftnif canoe After Mitigation: The foregoiug mitigation measures required in the project
will reduce the project -related impact on cultural resources to a less than significant level
resulting in compliance with the requirements of the State Historic Preservation Office.
TI IN 19 '97 11:21;AM CMA PARAT)FNR P.1 i/:;Ai
Parks and Recreation
Significant Impact: Additional recreation demand in project area.
Mitigation Measures:
The Agency and the City shall encourage proponents of individual development projects
to ycovide pocket parks, :pini -parks, or other open spaces on-site for use by residents
and/or employees.
2. The Agency will make rerrearinnal amenities and a Permanent community center in
Downtown Newhall projects eligible for tax increment financing.
Level of Significurce After .kfitigation: The foregoing mitigation measures required into the
project will reduce the project -related impacts on parks and recreation to a less than significant
level by promoting and facilitating the development of park and recreation facilities in the project
area.
10
TI IN 1q '97 11:P7AM r.RA PAgAnFNA P.1r�/RF,
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Four alternatives to the proposed project are discussed in the Final EIR. These alternatives
have been reviewed and considered in light of the adverse environmental effects which may
result from the project and the reduction or elimination of such effects which might be
accomplished by selection of the alternatives. The review and consideration of the alternatives
concluded that the selection of Alternative 2: Reduced.Newha]l Redevelopment Project Area,
will reduce the adverse onviromnental impacts when compared to the proposed project.
The alternatives are summarized below. specific economic, social, or other considerations that
render Alternative 1: No Project. Alternative 3: Development with Emphasis on Additional
Employment, and Alternative 4: Alternate Redevelopment Project Areas, infeasible are set forth.
Alternative: No Project
7 A: Continuation of Existing Conditions
If existing conditions in the project arca remained into the future, the intensity and types of
development and their impact on the environment would remain uncbanged. Blighting
conditions including dilapidated and obsolete structures and utilities would remain in the area.
Because of these blighting conditions, the project area would be expected to continue to decline,
with increasing vacancies and abandonment of pioperties, and higher public costs for operation
and maintenance of utilities and services.
If existing conditions remained, the project area would not include additional development or
employment, and would not generate additional traffic from people traveling to and from homes,
places of employment or other destinations. Additional residents would not be able to move into
the area. No additional demands on public facilities and aervices which depend on population,
such as schools, libraries and parks, would result.
This alternative would also mean that no additional revenue from redevelopment tax increment
and developer fees or increases in sales tax, property tax, of other fees would be available to fund
public improvements and blight removal. In the absence of such investment, the area would be
expected to continue to decline, and would not be expected to return to as high a level of
productive use for employment and economic activity. This alternative would not meet the
objectives of the City or the Agency for use of the area.
In addition, maintairurig the status quo in the area would require unusual measures to preserve
existing uses, preserve vacant buildings in a vacant condition, etc. This limitation on private
activity on private property is substantially more restrictive than the City's current development
regulations. If the City were to require vacant buildings and properties to remain unoccupied,
this alternative would require compensation to owners of such property. Therefore,. this
11
MIN 19 '97 11:27AM CRA PASAT)FNA
alternative is not considered a realistic, legally or financially feasible option, and is therefore,
rejected.
IB: Continuation of Expected Development under Current Regulations
Under this alternative, development would continue in the project area under the current General
Plan_ and Zoning for the area. The implementation powers of the Newhall Redevelopment
Project would not be enacted.
Under this option, development would be expected to proceed at a slower pace in the project area
than under the proposed project. Although development to a similar intensity would be
permitted under current regulations, development would not be expected to include the same
quality of planning and design, or to happen as soon, without the redevelopment powers in place.
In particular, existing blighting conditions in Downtown Newhall would be expected to continue
or worsen over time in the absence of public redevelopment actions, since the private market by
itself was found to be incapable of revitalizing and redeveloping the area. Implementation of the
revitalization plan for this district may be severely limited or economically infeasible. Overall,
this option would be likely to result in less recycling of obsolete or marginal uses, less
development with modem business and industrial parks, and less housing development than the
proposed Newhall Redevelopment Project. For these reasons this alternative is rejected.
Alternative 2: Reduced Newhall Redevelopment Project Area
This alternative considers reducing the project area by excluding subareas that are affected by
physical and economic blight to a lesser extent that the rest of the area. This alternative
represents the reduced project area approved by the Santa Clarita Redevelopment Agency on
April 8, 1997. This alternative also includes the possibility of further reductions in the project
arca. Such reductions would reduce the impacts resulting from development within the Project
Area in proportion to the reduction in size of the project area. Development of areas removed
ftom the Project Area would be expected to take place in accordance with the City's General
Plan, but at a slower pace and with less planning and design effort than if those areas were kept
within the project area, however; such reductions in the Project Area would further reduce the
ability to apply redevelopment measures to elimination of blight and %would farther reduce the
potential tax increment revenue available for revitalization of Downtown Newhall and
surrounding areas.
Under this alternative the following subareas would be excluded from the Newhall
Rcdcvelopment Project arca:
Hart High School, Placerita Junior High School, Newhall Elementary School and Wiley
Canyon Elementary School, and Newhall Park. Exclusion of these facilities from the
project area will not preclude cooperative efforts between the Agency and the school
districts or City.
12
TI IN 1q 'q7 11 :PRAM CRA PASADFNA
P. 14/=R
Property located in and near Circle J Ranch. A pending development application for a
substantial portion of this subarea is moving forward creating the potential for eliminating
existing blighting conditions at this location through the private market, without the need
for public action. The application is for residential development with a mix of single-
family and multi -family units, potentially with up to 350 units.
• Green Thumb nursery property on San Fernando Road near Valle Del Oro. This property
is not likely to change its use in the near future. Since it is not essential to the
development of neazby sites, its removal from the project area will not effect the
feasibility of the overall project.
• Pino Street properties south of the Newhall County Water District offices. The potential
for future development of these properties, even with redevelopment actions, is limited
due to existing environmental constraints, including oak trees and drainage.
• Commercial properties along the south side of Lyons Avenue, from Peachland Avenue to
Apple Street. The majority of existing commercial developments at this location appear
to be currently viable, reducing the need for immediate public action.
• Residential neighborhoods south of Lyons Avenue between Wheeler and 1.5 and
commercial developments along Lyons Avenue between' Wheeler and Wiley Canyon
Road. While a number of dwelling units in the residential neighborhoods are in need of
significant rehabilitation, these blighting conditions do not appear to be as widespread as
to require immediate public action. The majority of commercial developments at this
location appear to be currently viable, reducing the need for immediate public action.
A mix of commercial, residential, and office development north of Lyons Avenue, from
Wiley Canyon Road to I-5 Freeway. This mix of commercial, residential, and office
developments exhibits some characteristics of blight, but overall does not appear to
require immediate public action.
Exclusion of these subareas would reduce the size of the project area by approximately 453 acres,
from 1,350 acres to 917 acres. This represents a 34 percent decrease in the size of the project
area The smaller project area would basically be comprised of land designated for future
commercial and industrial uses, with no residential neighborhoods proposed. Under this
alternative, very limited housing development with about 62 units would occur in the project area
since the potential opportunity sites for larger residential development would be excluded firom
redevelopment actions. The potential commercial development could also be somewhat less due
to the exclusion some commercial areas that have the potential to recycle to higher uses over
time, and industrial development would be less - primarily because a site of about 15 acres in
size projected to redevelop with such uses would not be included in the project area. However,
since most vacant opportunity sites for commercial, office, business park and industrial Park
13
.TI IN 19 1q7 1 1 : ?9RM CRR PRSRIIFNR
P.15/qR
development would be retained under this alternative, it is anticipated that up to 0.95 million
square feet of retail/commercial and 2.0 million square feet of business and industrial park
development could occur in this smaller project area. This is approximately 16% less total
square footage of potential development when compared to the proposed project. Areas removed
from the project area would be expected to develop ultimately in accordance with the General
Plan, but possibly at.a slower pace. As with the proposed project, most of this development
would be anticipated to occur within the first twenty years of the redevelopment plan.
The tax increment generated in this reduced project area that would be available for necessary
public infrastructure, improvements and programs, would be also be reduced in rough proportion
to the reduction in land area, pardcularly the land that would have been redeveloped with
commercial and industrial uses. Such land generates most of the tax increment. Some public
improvements may, therefore, be limited under this alternative. As with the proposed project,
any public improvements and programs to revitalize Downtown Newhall and areas along San
Fernando Road and Interstate 5, would be constructed as redevelopment funds become available.
The environmental effects of this alternative would be. slightly less than those of the proposed
project. The reduction in housing development within the project area boundaries, would be
offset by private residential development on sites previously included in the project area.
Therefore, while project -related population impacts would be reduced, the cumulative effects
related to population growth would remain basically unchanged.
However, environmental impacts resulting from future development with commercial, office, and
industrial uses would be reduced in rough proportion to reduction in the square footage of future
development. Vehicular trips are directly related to the square footage of development.
Therefore, under this alternative, the volume of vehicular trips and the resultant vehicular air
pollutant emissions would be reduced by about 16 percent. With less traffic, impacts on the
area's roadways and intersections would also be somewhat reduced. Demand for utilities would
be reduced, as less water and energy would be consumed, and less sewage and solid waste
produced.
However, in comparison with the proposed project, this alternative would reduce generation of
jobs from 9400 to 8,000 jobs, reducing employment opportunities for the residents of Santa
Clarita, in the area which currently is, and is projected to continue to be, housing -rich and jobs -
poor. This reduced employment would reduce the secondary impact of generation of housing
demand in the Santa Clarita area. However, in comparison with the proposed project, this
alternative would provide a lesser benefit to the region's jobs/housing balance.
Overall, since this alternative would reduce some of the project's environmental impacts,
including traffic, air pollution, and demand for public services and utilities, it is considered
environmentally superior to the proposed project. This alternative, which includes all.
reductions in the project area as adopted by the City of Santa CMta, is considered feasible and it
is hereby selected as environmentally preferable to the prnpnged project.
14
JI IN 14 'q7 111: 79AN CRA PAfiADFNA P. 1 F✓RF,
Alternative 3: Deveiopment with Emphasis on Additional EmpIovment
This alternative considers the policy emphasis on development of additional employment within
the project area. To create more jobs, more redevelopment of industrial areas for more intensive
employment -generating uses would be required, such as more intensive research and
development for industrial parks, higher proportion of business parks versus low intensity
industrial parks, and more office development within those parks. Such development would
gcncratc more jobs bencfating the region's jobs/housing balance and the City!a residents. By
providing jobs within the City, the amount of commuting to work outside the City could be
reduced, with the resultant reduction in vehicular air pollutant emissions. The decrease in
commuter travel could have a beneficial effect of reducing soma traffic impacts on the City
roadways. However, business and industrial parks would generate additional vehicular trips and
vehicular emissions that could offset the benefits of reduced commutes. More intensive
development could be more indueive to the use of commuter rail, particularly if the Metrolink
station is located in Downtown Newhall. Additional employment would also generate additional
demand for housing, and thus demand for schools and other public services. More intensive
development could generate higher tax increment revenues which would provide for more public
improvements and programs benefitting the project area and the community. This alternative has
mixed environmental effects compared to the proposed project and is considered neither
environmentally superior or inferior.
However; the City of Santa Clarita already has several industrial park areas, which limits the
potential for substantial increase in industrial park development. Aiso, eine the project area
does not have a direct freeway access, it would result in substantial additional peak hour traffic
on San Fernando Road, which does not have the capacity to accommodate such increases.
Significant improvements, including substantial roadway widening, would be required to provide
adequate capacity. These improvements could adversely affect the character of Downtown
Newhall, and could interfere with the project objectives which include implementation of
revitalization goals and strategies identified in the Downtown Newhall Improvement Program,
and preservation and enhancement of the historical character of the area For these reasons, this
alternative is hereby rejected,
Alternative 4: Alternate Redcbclopment Project Areas
'the Newhall Redevelopment Project Area is an interrelated project area functionally related to
Downtown Newhall. It includes much of the physically and economically blighted area in the
City of Santa Clarita. The project area was developed as a result of evaluation of the areas of the
City which are most blighted and in need of public assistance for revitaiiration. While other
areas may be suitable for redevelopment, the proposed project was selected as the first focus of
redevelopment activities in the City.
Larger project areas could be considered which incorporate additional commercial and residential
areas of older Santa Clarks. A project area was originally considered by the City which included
15
J1 IN 19 IW 11:-AG1AM CAR PRFAr)FNA
P.1—, I;F
substantial additional area east of the proposed Newhall project area and substantial additional
residential area north and south of Lyons Avenue, This area would not provide the focus on
Newhall that is the focus of this proposed project, and therefore was rejected.
A smaller project area could be chosen which included just the urea that is the fucus of the
downtown Newhall Improvement Program and immediately adjacent areas. Such a small
project area would not provide the tax increment revenue that is needed to provide incentives and
revitalization in a declining commercial area, and would not be evpected to he feaeiWe..
T
TI IN 1 q 'q7 11 :R 1 AM CRA PGSGI7FTIA P. 1 Ri1F
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The finding is hereby made that mitigation measures listed in the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program will, when implemented, mitigate or substantially reduce most of the
significant environmental effects identified in the Final SIR. Nonetheless, certain significant
environmental impacts of the project are unavoidable, even after incorporation of all feasible
mitigation measures. For such effects, the benefits of the project have been balanced against
such unavoidable environmental effects in its approval. The unavoidable impacts associated
with this project are short and long-term air quality effects resulting from construction and
operation activities generating air pollutant emissions, and addition of tratiic to Orchard Village
Road/Lyons Avenue intersection. Potential mitigation measures to reduce these impacts below a
level of significance, such as mandating use of cleaner fuel burning engines in all motor vehicles
or major right-of-way takes to reconfigure the Orchard Village Road/Lyons intersection, are
beyond the financial resources of the City and Agency, especially in light of the fact that passing
those costs along to local tax -payers would, even 1f legal, be contrary to the redevelopment plan's
Roals of promoting development and economic revitalization.
In this regard, a finding is hereby made that all feasible mitigation measures identified in the
Final EIR will be implemented with the project, and that any significant unavailable effects
remaining are outweighed and are found to be acceptable due to the following specific ccunuuiiu,
social, and other considerations based upon the facts set forth above, in the Final EIR, and in the
public record of the considerations of this project, as follows:
The proposed project.oiil provide additional housing units, including affordable housing.
2. The proposed project will provide employment opportunities for the residents of Santa
Clarita and surrounding communities.
3. The proposed project will facilitate transition to modem commercial, office, and
industrial uses that are economically viable, compatible, and of high quality of design.
4. The proposed project will provide for improvement of needed public facilities; including
improvements to school facilities, park facilities and the library system.
5. The proposed project will provide needed public improvements including roadways and
utility infrastructure.
6. The proposed project will increase safety and security in the Newhall project area due to
elimination of blighting conditions, and recycling of old and unsafe industrial and
commercial uses and structures to modern "clean" uses and structures constructed in
accordance with current fire codes and equipped with safety and security features.
The proposed project will au<xlerate hazardous materials cicanup on redevelopment sites.
17
TI IN 19 '97 11:AlAM CRA PARATFNA P..19/RR
8. The proposed project will eliminate or alleviate blighting renditions in the project area
through the construction of certain improvements and implementation of certain
programs.
9. Tne proposed project will significantly assist in the implementation of the Downtown
Newhall Improvement Pmgrnm
18
THN 19 197 11:g1AM CRA PP;PDF*NA
EXHIBIT B
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Newhall Redevelopment Project
P.PP/�A
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared in accordance with the
requirements of the.California Envirozamental Quulity Act (CEQA) Scction 210$1.6. Its purpose
is to provide for accomplishment of mitigation measures required by the Final Environmental
Impact Report for the Newhall Redevelopment Project (State Clearinghouse'Number 47021002).
0
The Santa Clarita Redevelopment Agency (Agency) and the City of Santa Clurita (City) have
adopted the mitigation measures included in the Final EIR in order to mitigate or avoid
significant impacts on the environment. This program has been designed to ensure compliance
during project implementation.
Mitigation ineaburcs idcutnG:s iii dic Final EIR far the Newhall Redevelopment Project have
been incorporated into a checklist. Each mitigation measure is listed separately on the checklist
with appropriate spaces for monitoring the progress of implementation of each measure. The
following information is identified for each measure,
• Whether the measure will be applied to individual development projects (project -level
implementation), to the Newhall Redevelopment Project (program -level implementation),
or to both.
• When the measure will be implemented, Le, one time only, prior to construction, during
construction, prior to operation, or during operation of the project.
• How the measure will be implemented, i.e. through existing code and other requirements;
new plans and progrrm 3; requirement3 imposed on all new individual projects, or as
needed.
• What City departments or agencies are responsible for mitigation and for responding to
violations.
• Monitoring and reporting schedule identifying how frequently each measure will be
monitored and reported.
The mitigation measures in the table are listed by environmental impact area in the sane order as
they are listed in the Tinal EIR.
MIN t9 '97 17:R7AM CRA PASADFNA P- 21 lgrl
Mitigation Monitoring Program Management
The Newhall Redevclupmunt ProiceL is a long-term program which includes a large number of
mitigation measures. Some of these measures are applicable at the individual development
proiect level, and others are applicable to the overall program or plan. In order to coordinate
implementation of the Mitigation Monitoring program, a regular review of the progross ofthc
program is required.
Annual Review of Mitigation Monitoring Program
The overall management of the Mitigation Monitoring Program will be managed by the Agency,
which will undertake an annual review of the Mitigation Monitoring Program and prepare a brief
progress memorandum based on that review. The memorandum should be transmitted to the
Executive Director of the Agency for action. The reviewer will check each mitigation measure in
the Mitigation Monitoring Program to determine whether or not that implementation ureaaure is
complete. If the mitigation measure has been completed for the project, the reviewer should line
through the mitigation measure on the form, initial and date the line indicating that the mitigation
measure has been completed.
Fur measures that require a report, prvgrazu, or plan, Lim reviewer should determine if that report,
program, or plan is due based on the progress of implementing the program to date. If the report,
program, or plan is timely, that fact should be reported in the review memorandum to the head of
the Department. If no such program is necessary at this time, the memorandum should so state.
For measures that are ongoing measures, the memorandum should report whether these measures
are actively being pursued, and if not, what action is appropriate. If the measures are no longer
appropriate or necessary because the environmental effect is no longer an issue, then that fact
should be reported in, the review memorandum, and the discontinuation of the mitigation
measure recommended. If measures are not being implemented adequately, recommendations
should be made to improve the application of the mitigation measure.
For measures that apply at the project level, the memorandum should report whether or not such
measure, are being actively applied to individual projects. If the measures are no longer
appropriate or necessary because the environmental effect is no longer an issue, then that fact
should be reported in the review memorandum, and the discontinuation of the mitigation
measure recommended. If measures are not being implemented adequately, recommendations
should be made to improve the application of the mitigation measure.
TI IN 19 '97 11:9RRM CRA PRSRT)FNR P. PP/ F,
Implementation of Program -Level Mitigatinn Measures
Program-lovcl mitigation measures arc measures which do not apply to individual development
projects, but which apply at the overall program level. They are implemented through the
regular actions of the Agency, the City of Santa Clarita Community Development Department, or
other applicable departments. They are reviewed and monitored through the annual program
review discussed above_
Implementation of Project -Level Mitigation Measures
Project -level mitigation measures will be monitored by the Agency in cooper4tion with the
Planning Division. When a development project in the Newhall Redevelopment Project Area is
submitted to the Agency and City, the Agency/Planning Division will have a copy of the
Mitigation Monitoring Checklist, including all pages which contain measures applicable to that
project, The mitigation measures which apply to that specific project should be highlighted on
the checklist. As each drawing or specification is reviewed, plans will be checked fur
compliance with each mitigation measure required within the Project Area to be shown on plans
as indicated in the checklist. Mitigation measures are divided into one-time measures
(incorporated into project design, no further checking required nnee enmtnTctinn is verified),
construction measures to mitigate construction impacts, and operational measures that require
continuous iuiplernerrtation once the, project is iu operation. Each type of measure may require
different monitoring techniques, but will be monitored using the checklist
Project Design Mitigation Measures
A project design mitigation measure is a measure that needs to be incorporated into the project
design, for example, traffic improvements or exterior lighting plans. Such measures will
normally be shown on the building plans, site plans, public improvement plans, specifications, or
other project documents. The mitigation monitoring checklist will be used to check off those
mitigation measures shown on the plans. If a mitigation measure is not sho'Am on the appropriate
plan sheets, plans will be sent back for incorporation of those mitigation measures or approved
equivalents. Plans will not be approved until each mitigation measure is incorporated into the
project design.
After plans are approved, and before any component of design is approved as complete by the
City in its inspection, the project proponents will submit proof that each mitigation measure
shown on the plans has been installed or incorporated into the constructed project. Verification
of compliance will then be noted on the monitoring checklist and signed off, completing the
process for this category o£rnitigation measure.
.TI IN 1 q ' W 11 : RRAM r.RA PASAT)FNA P. ?R/RA,
Construction Mitigation Measures
Construction mitigation measures are measures designed to reduce the impacts of construction,
and are generally required to be maintained in operation continually during construction. (These
measures in some cases must also be noted on plans or specifications for the project, as indicated
on the mitigation monitoring checklist). Monitoring will be verified by building, public works,
or grading inspectors as appropriate during their regular visits to the sites during construction.
Rcporting of compliance with mitigation measures should be required at least monthly, with
reports of violations made immediately to the appropriate department.
Operational Mitigation Measures
Op=tiuuul uutigation measures are intended to verify the implementation of mitigation
measures that will continue after the project is occupied and in operation. These mitigation
measures should be verified on an annual basis, and if problems are noted, reinspected on a more
regular basis until the measure is operating effectively. Monitoring of sueh.measures may be
certified by the applicants with verification by the Agency or a third party.
The monitoring program for measures to be incorporated into project design is the same program
that is currently used to verify compliance with applicable City codes in design and construction.
No additional staffing is required, except that training may be appropriate to alert impectars to
the new requirements and the use of the monitoring checklist In case of some specific unique or
unusual mitigation measures, it may be appropriate or necessary to contract with consultants fur
inspection or verification of mitigation measures.
The completed mitigation monitoring program checklist will be retained in the project file and
will be available for public inspection on proper request.
Monitoring Program Fees
For major projects for which the mitigation monitoring effort is substantial, it may be appropriate
to charge mitigation monitoring fees to support the actual costs of project -level mitigation
monitoring. In such cases, the Agency will charge and collect from the project proponent a fee in
the amount of the anticipated actual cost to the City or Agency for monitoring all mitigation
measures, iuicluding consultant services and costs of administration, for a project as described in
this program: A deposit maybe required by the Agency to be applied toward this fee. Any
unused portion of the deposit will be refunded. In the case of a project where the applicant will
not be associated with the project after construction, the Agency will charge the anticipated cost
of operation of the mitigation monitoring program for an appropriate period in advance.
G!
TI IN 19 '97 11:34AM CRA PAfiADFNA P.74iAF
Sanctions/Penalties
The Agency or City may levy sanctions or pcnalties foi wiolatium of conditions lis.ed in the
monitoring program. These sanctions and penalties may include:
I. Civil rena1thn/,6ries according to City codes.
2. "Step work" orders.
3. Revocation of permits.
4. Holding issuance of Certificate of occupancy until completion of work.
5. Forfeiture of performance bond.
E. Implementation of measures with appropriate charges to the applicant based on
mitigation monitoring program agreements.
Dispute Resolution
In the event of a disagreement between the Agency and project applicants regarding the
monitoring program, including manner of'payment, penalties for noncompliance, and financial
security arrangements, the following procedure, or other appropriate procedure as provided for in
the Implementation Agreement will be followed:
1. The Agency's representative will attempt to resolve the disagreement. If the disagreement
cannot be resolved, the Agency's representative will prepare a report documenting the source
of the dicpnte and the Agenry'c pmitinn.
2. The Agency's representative will take the report before the Executive Director of the Agency
as appropriate, who will determine the resolution of the disagreement.
3. The decision of the. Executive Director of the Agency may be appealed to the City Council on
payment of the City's standard fee for appeal to the City Council. The decision of the City
Council shall determine the outcome of the appeal.
DRAFT
City of Santa Clarita Redevelopment Agency
Newhall Redevelopment Project
Mitigation Monitoring And Reporting Program Checklist
When Applied:
Pcon - Prior to construction.
Pocc - Prior to occupancy.
Tcon - Throughout
construction.
fmp'.ementation Method
A - City/Agency option to implement as
needed.
R - Required by codellawlexisting
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Report required.
AR - City/Agency to require on all projects.
Monitoring Frequency. Reporting Frequency.
ND - With each new development. C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion. V - On violation.
V - On violation. A - Annually
A - Annually
When Applied
Individual Develop-
ment Projects
Overall
Program
Potential
Significard
Impla-
men-
Monitor-
ingi
Monitor-
ing
Report-
Ing
One-
Consi
Opera-
One
Opera-
Environmental
tation
Reporting
Fre-
Fre-
Effects
Mitigation Measures
Time
Only
ting
Time
ting
Mothod
Agency
quency
quency
Air Quality
1. For all individual development projects, construction -related ex-
Tcon
R
Bulding
NO, V
V
Shon-term PM,,
haust and dust emissions wit be controlled. All unpaved demoli-
enassions from
tion and construction areas shall be wetted as necessary during
grading and ex-
excavation to reduce dust emissions and meet SCAQMD Rule
cavalion activitl ^
403. Wetting twice a day will reduce particulate emissions (dust)
could affect sen-
by about 50 percent. All grading activities shall cease when wind
sitive uses,
speed exceeds 25 mph. to the maximum extent feasible, re-
claimed water will be used for this purpose.
2. All grading, excavatIoR and other activities involving the use of
TconR
Building
ND, V
V
fossti•fuei powared equipment shall cease during second and third
stage smog alerts as designated by the SCAOMD.
When Applied:
Pcon - Prior to construction.
Pocc - Prior to occupancy.
Tcon - Throughout
construction.
fmp'.ementation Method
A - City/Agency option to implement as
needed.
R - Required by codellawlexisting
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Report required.
AR - City/Agency to require on all projects.
Monitoring Frequency. Reporting Frequency.
ND - With each new development. C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion. V - On violation.
V - On violation. A - Annually
A - Annually
When Applied:
Peon - Prior to consUuclion.
Poco -Prior to occupancy.
Tcon - Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A City/Agency option to implement as
needed.
R Required bycode/laviMsdng
standards
P Plan, Program, or Report required -
AR - City/Agency to require on all pntiecls.
Monitoring Frequency: Reporting Frequency.
ND - With each new development. C - Once, en complelion-
C - On completton. V - On violation.
V - Onviol3tion. A - Annually
A - Annually
WhenApplled
Individual Develop-
ment Projects
Overall
Program
Potential
SigniUeant
Environmental
Imple-
men-
tatlon
Monitor-
ingt
Reporting
Monitor-
Ing
Fre-
Report-
Ing
Fre-
One-
Corisl
Opera-
One
Opera-
Effects
Mitigation Measures
Time
Only
Ung
Time
ting
Method
Agency
quency
quency
Air Quality
3. Individual development projects shall be designed and operated to
Pocc
R
Building
ND, V
V
(continued)
conserve energy in keeping with Title 24 requirements.
Long-term emis-
sions of air pol-
lutants primarily
from vehicles will
be added to the
Basin's av,which
is a non-atteln-
mem area for
federal and state
air quality slan-
dards
4. Implementation of the following Transpodatlon Systems Manage-
Pcon
& AR
Boding,
A, ND
AV
ment actions will minimize the air pollution impact of new develop-
Commu-
ment and reduce trip making from existing development:
nity Dev.1
Engineer-
• Transit signal synduonlzation of all major arterials and coltec-
ergfriansit
tors In coordination with the County of Los Angeles, and sur-
Division
rounding cities;
• Development of park and ride facilities to encourage transit
use;
• Traffic flow improvements,
• Bus Bansk improvements In the form of pads, shcltors, and
CrghUng; and
• Blcycle routes.
When Applied:
Peon - Prior to consUuclion.
Poco -Prior to occupancy.
Tcon - Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A City/Agency option to implement as
needed.
R Required bycode/laviMsdng
standards
P Plan, Program, or Report required -
AR - City/Agency to require on all pntiecls.
Monitoring Frequency: Reporting Frequency.
ND - With each new development. C - Once, en complelion-
C - On completton. V - On violation.
V - Onviol3tion. A - Annually
A - Annually
When Applied:
Peon - Prior to construction.
Pox - Prior to occupancy.
Tccn - Throughout
construction
Implementation Method:
A - City/Agency option to implement as
needed.
R - Required bycodellaw/existing
standards
P - Plan, Program, orRepod required.
AR - City/Agency to require on all projects.
Monitoring Frequency: Reporting Frequency.
ND - With each neer development. C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion V - On violation.
V - On violation. A - Annually
A - Annually
When Applied
Ind' vdualDevelop-
Overall
Potential
Imple-
Monitor-
Monitor-
Report-
Significant
mend Projects
Program
men.
Ing/
ing
Ing
One-
Const
Opera-
One
Opera-
Environmental
talion
Ropcding
Fre-
Fre-
Effects
Mitigation Measures
Time
Only
ting
Time
ling
Method
Agency
quency
quency
Alr Ouatity
5. implementation of any future air quality measures which will reduce
X
X
A
Planning/
A
A, V
(continued)
air quality impacts of new development in the project area
Aedev.
Agency
Traffic
1. Overall Program Implementation. -Prior to approval of any major
x
A+P
Planning/
C
C
Addition of traffic
development project (any project greater than 100,000 square feet
Redev.
to local street
in floor area, greater than 100 dwelling units, or greater than 100
Agency/
network,
peak-hour trips inbound and outbound) the City WA have in place a
Traffic En-
circulation improvements plan for projects within the Newhall
gineering
Redevelopment Project area.
2_ ImplementatfaoFunding. The City will fund the improvements
H
A
Planning/
A
A
below based on funding available from development fees or other
Traffic Err
revenues as appropriate, based on the need considering the
glrreeringf
location of projects horn which fees were collected, development
Public
within the Newhall Redevelopment Project Area, and other crileria
Works
as outlined in a public Improvements program for the project area.
3. Regular Program Review. Every five years, or after development
X
P
Planning!
QA
C,A
of projects resulting in a local of 2,000 peak-hour trips since the
Traffic En-
most recent major traffic study revision, the City v ll comprehen-
gineering
sively evaluate the remaining capital improvements required to
provide an acceptable level of traffic service within and to the
Newhall Redevelopment Project Area, and adjust the Sst of im-
provement projects and development fees as appropriate to
achieve the level of service objectives outlined in the City's General
Plan.
When Applied:
Peon - Prior to construction.
Pox - Prior to occupancy.
Tccn - Throughout
construction
Implementation Method:
A - City/Agency option to implement as
needed.
R - Required bycodellaw/existing
standards
P - Plan, Program, orRepod required.
AR - City/Agency to require on all projects.
Monitoring Frequency: Reporting Frequency.
ND - With each neer development. C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion V - On violation.
V - On violation. A - Annually
A - Annually
When Applied:
Pcon - Prior to construction
Peoc - Prior to occupancy.
Tcon - Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A - Gty/Agency option to Implement as
needed.
R - Required by codeAaw/odsting
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Report required.
AR - City/Agency to require on all projects.
Monitoring Frequency: Reporting Frequency.
ND - With each new development. C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion. V - On violation.
V - On violation. A - Annually
A - Annually
When Applied
Individual Develop-
overall
Potential
Imple.
Monitor-
Monitor-
Report -
Significant
Ment Projects
Program
men-
Mgt
Ing
Ing
One-
Cow
Opera-
One
Opera-
Envronmental
tation
Reporting
Fre-
Fro -
Effects
Mitigation Measures
Time
Only
tini;;
Time
King
Method
Agency
quency
quency
Traffic
4. Capital Improvements to Support Newhall Redevelopment Pro-
X
A
Planning/
CA
CA
(con(inuod)
]ect. The following specific traffic improvements are needed to
Traffic En -
provide the level of service outlined in this EIR. These measures
gineeringt
shall be included in an Improvements program with associated
Public
development fees, and shall be Implemented as their need is
Works
identified and as development takes place in the Newhall Redevol-
opmeM Project Area so that the full fist of improvements can be
completed at The time the anticipated development is complete.
"the need for these improvements shall be evaluated in each
regular program review, and die Improvements list and developer
fee modified as appropriate based on current conditions at the
time of the review.
4.1.1-5 SB cif-ramp/Lyons Avenue
X
A
Planning!
C
C
The off -ramp should be restriped from one reft-turn lane, one
Traffic En-
lhrouglOeft-tun, one right -hum lane to: two left -Tum lames and
gincering/
one througWright-turn lane.
Public
Works
4.2.1-8 NB ramps/Lyons Avenue
X
A
Planning!
C
C
A right-lu rn only lane onto die ramp should be provided in the
Traffic En -
westbound direction.
gineeringt
Public
Works
4.3. Via Pr ncessa(Cirde J Ranch Road
X
A
Plannmgl
CC
Provide a third eastbound and westbound through lane.
Traffic En-
gineering/
Publio
Works
When Applied:
Pcon - Prior to construction
Peoc - Prior to occupancy.
Tcon - Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A - Gty/Agency option to Implement as
needed.
R - Required by codeAaw/odsting
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Report required.
AR - City/Agency to require on all projects.
Monitoring Frequency: Reporting Frequency.
ND - With each new development. C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion. V - On violation.
V - On violation. A - Annually
A - Annually
When Applied:
Pcon - Prior to constnrcticn-
Pocc - Prior to occupancy.
Tcon-Throughout
constriction.
Implementation Method:
A - CitylAgency option to Implement as
needed.
R - Required by code/lawjerasting
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Reporl required.
AR - City/Agency to require on all projects.
10
Monitoring Frequency:
Reporting Frequency:
When Applied
C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion.
V - Onviciaticn.
V - On violation.
Individual Develop-
mentPro{ects
Overall
Program
Potential
Significant
Imple-
men-
Monitor-
ingf
Manftor-
ing
Report -
ing
One-
Cons
Opera-
One
Opera-
Environmental
talion
Reporting
Fre-
Fre-
Effects
Mitigation Measures
Time
Only
tirg
Time
Eng
Method
Agency
quency
quency
Traffic
4.4. SR-14SO ramps/San Fernando Road
X
A
Planning/
(continued)
Athird through lane in the westbound direction would be
Traffic En -
needed to accommodate the projected traffic volumes exiting
gineering/
the nolhbound off -ramp.
Public
Works
S. Mitigation Measures for Reduced Project Area Alternative
5.1. Via Princessa/Circte d Ranch Road
X
A
Planning/
Provide a third eastbound and awesibound through lane.
Traffic En-
gineering/
Public
Works
5.2. SR -14 SS ramps/San Fernando Road
X
A
Planning/
Add a Mord through lane in ft westbound direction.
Traffic En-
gineering/
Public
Works
When Applied:
Pcon - Prior to constnrcticn-
Pocc - Prior to occupancy.
Tcon-Throughout
constriction.
Implementation Method:
A - CitylAgency option to Implement as
needed.
R - Required by code/lawjerasting
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Reporl required.
AR - City/Agency to require on all projects.
10
Monitoring Frequency:
Reporting Frequency:
ND - With each new development.
C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion.
V - Onviciaticn.
V - On violation.
A - Annually
A - Annually
When Applied:
Peon - Prior to construction.
Pocc - Prior to occupancy.
Icon -Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A - City/Agency option to implement as
needed.
R - Required by codellawfexistkrg
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Report required
All - Cityftency to require on all projects.
11
Monitoring Froquencq: Reporting Frequency:
NO - With each new development. C - Once, on cwmplelion.
C Oncompletion. V - Onviolation.
V Onviclagon. A - Annually
A Annually
When Applied
Potential
Individual Develop-
Overall
Imple-
Monitor-
Monitor-
Report -
Significant
moot Projects
Program
men-
ingl
Ing
ing
One-
Cons
Opera-
One
Opera-
Environmental
talion
Reporting
Fre-
Fre-
Effects
Mitigation Measures
Time
Only
ting
Time
tog
Method
Agency
quency
quency
Traffic
S. Transit Compatibility of Development and Pudic Improvement
Peon
X
AR
Transil
C
C
(continued)
Projects. Each development project, street widening or improve-
Division
ment project, and straetscape project will be reviewed with atten-
tion to the need for transit improvements such as bus bays, transit
sheliers, waiting areas and information systems; pedestrian access
and circulation to transit; shutIlelcirculator access and drop
off/waiting areas; preferential HOV parking areas and other design
aspects to encourage use of public transportation and discourage
use of individual motor vehicles. All major projects and all projects
along existing or anticipated transit or shuttlelcirculalof routes will
be coordinated with MTA and other kaneit agencies as appropriate
to ensure that project designs anticipate existing and future transit
needs.
7. MTA and SCRRA Right -of -Way Impacts. All development pro-
X
X
R
Transit
C
V
jects and public improvements along the Mouolink rail Tines will be
Divisw
coordinated with MTA to ensure that safety and operation of the rad
Public
line are maintained.
Works
Haaardsj
1. . A Phase II environmental site characterization will be conducted
Peon
X
A
Transit Di-
C
C
Potential centam-
and necessary site remediation+rrilt be completed prior to construe-
vision
inationon
tion
fvtetrofnk site.
When Applied:
Peon - Prior to construction.
Pocc - Prior to occupancy.
Icon -Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A - City/Agency option to implement as
needed.
R - Required by codellawfexistkrg
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Report required
All - Cityftency to require on all projects.
11
Monitoring Froquencq: Reporting Frequency:
NO - With each new development. C - Once, on cwmplelion.
C Oncompletion. V - Onviolation.
V Onviclagon. A - Annually
A Annually
When Applied
Pcon - Prior to construction.
Poco - Prior to occupancy.
Icon - Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A - C+lyjAgency option to Implement as
needed.
R - Required bycode/laWaxisting
standards
P - Plan. Program, or Report required.
AR - CiWAgency to require on all projects.
12
Monitoring Frequency; Reporting Frequency:
ND - With each new development. C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion. V - On violation.
V - On violation. A - Annually
A - Annually
When Applied
Individual Develop-
ment Projects
overall
Program
Potential
Significant
Imple-
men-
Monitor-
ingr
Monitor-
Ing
Report -
Ing
One-
CDnst
Opera-
One
Opera
EnWronmental
taidon
Reporting
Fro-
Fre-
Effects
Mftigatlon Measures
Time
Only
ting
Time
ting
Method
Agency
quency
quency
Biological Re-
1. Each individual development proposal shall provide setbacks,
Pcon
X
A
Commu-
C, V
C, V
sources
butfering , or any elher features on sites within, adjacent to, or in
nity DeV./
Potential for con-
close vicinity to natural riparian, We oak sage scrub, and other
Redev.
struclion of pub-
habitat, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Develop.
Agency
lic improvements
ment.
within the south
fork of the Santa
Clara River,
Placenta Creek,
and Newhall
Creek. Future
development
may occur on
sites adjacent to
natural habitat
areas.
2. Each individual development shall preserve natural riparian, five
Pcon
X
A
Commu-
C, V
C, V
oak, sage scab, or other habitat on the site as determined appro-
nity Dev./
priato by the Director of Community Developmenl. Any loss of
I]]
Redev.
habitat shall he compensated through the provision of habitat off-
Agency
site or other measures determined appropriate and satisfactory by
the Director of Community Development
When Applied
Pcon - Prior to construction.
Poco - Prior to occupancy.
Icon - Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A - C+lyjAgency option to Implement as
needed.
R - Required bycode/laWaxisting
standards
P - Plan. Program, or Report required.
AR - CiWAgency to require on all projects.
12
Monitoring Frequency; Reporting Frequency:
ND - With each new development. C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion. V - On violation.
V - On violation. A - Annually
A - Annually
When Applied:
Pcon - Prior to construction.
Poco - Prior to occupancy,
Teen -Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A CitylAgency option to implement as
needed.
R Required by code/taw/existing
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Report required.
AR - City/Agency to require on an projects.
13
Monitoring Frequency'. Reporting Frequency:
ND - With each new development. C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion- V - On violation.
V - Onviolation. A - Annually
A - Annually
When Applied
Individual Develop-
overall
Potential
Imple•
Monitor-
Monitor-
Report -
Significant
ment Projects
Program
men-
ingl
ing
Ing
One-
Corral
Opera-
One
Opera-
Environmental
talion
Reporting
Fre-
Fre-
Effects
Mitigadon Measures
Time
Only
ting
Time
ting
Method
Agency
quency
quency
Biological
3. Any grading, ConsWction, or other activity associated with public
x
x
A
Crmamu-
C
C
Resources
improvement projects and private development projects within the
Filly Dev.1
(continued)
Santa Clara River drainage channels or easements shall be re-
Planning
quired to revegetate all graded and disturbed areas with native
vegetation as determined appropriate by The Director of Commu-
nity Development. Revegetation plans shall be subject to review
and approval by the Director of Community Development.
4. The City will ensure that drainage improvements do not result in the
Pcon
x
R
Planning/
&V
A, V
elimination of watercourses or their channeliaation or conversion to
Redev.
subsurface drains, as determined appropriate by the City in con-
Agency/
sultation with appropriate state and federal agencies. All wetlands
Public
and watercorirses, intermittent or perennial, shall be retained and
Works
provided with setbacks which preserve the riparian and aquatic
habitat value and maintain their value to on,-ite and off -sire wildlife
populations.
B. Each individual development shall incorporate native species into
Pocc
x
AR
Commu-
ND, V
V
landscape plans to the extent feasible. All landscape plans shall
nity Dev.
be subject to review and approval by the Director of Community
Development.
6. The City shall continue to participala in the regional Santa Clara
x
P
Flaming/
A
A
River Study- Upon completion of the study, the City shall imple-
Redev.
ment the study's recommendations as appropriate.
Agency
7. At development is required to comply with the City's Oak Tree
x
R
N D, V
V
Ordinance and guidelines.
When Applied:
Pcon - Prior to construction.
Poco - Prior to occupancy,
Teen -Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A CitylAgency option to implement as
needed.
R Required by code/taw/existing
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Report required.
AR - City/Agency to require on an projects.
13
Monitoring Frequency'. Reporting Frequency:
ND - With each new development. C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion- V - On violation.
V - Onviolation. A - Annually
A - Annually
When Applied:
Peon - Prior to construction.
Poce - Prior to occupancy.
Tcon-Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A - CitylAgency option to Implement as
needed.
R - Required bycod0aw/existing
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Report required.
AR - City/Agency to require on all projects.
14
Monitoring Frequency Reporting Frequency:
ND With each new development. C - Once, an completion.
C On completion. V - On violation.
V On violation A - Annually
A Annually
When Applied
Individual Develop-
Overall
Potential
Imple-
Monitor-
Monitor-
Report-
Signincant
merit Projects
Program
M011-
ing/
ing
Ing
One,
0=1
Opera-
One I
Opera-
Environmental
lotion
Reporting
Fre-
Fre.
Effects
Mitigation Measures
Time
Only I
ting
Timej
ting
Method
Agency
quency
quency
Noise
1. To the extent feasible, construction activities expected to last two
Toon
AR
Plamingl
ND
V
weeks or more will be screened from adjacent noise-sensitive land
Redev.
Construction
uses with a solid barrier.
I
Agency/
noise will he ger-
I
Building
erated near sen-
2 All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, operated within 1000
Tcon
AR
Planning!
ND
V
sitive receptors
feet of a dwelling unit, school, hospital or other noise-sensitive land
Redev.
for some devel-
use shall be equipped with property operating and maintained
Agency/
opment projects
muffler exhaust systems
Building
in the Newhall
redevelopment
3. Stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located as far as
Tcon
AR
Planning!
ND
V
project area.
practical from occupied dwellinRgs or other sensitive receptors.
Radev.
Agency/
Building
4. Construction routes should be established where necessary and
Tcon
X
APlanningif
A
A
practicable to prevent noise impacts on sensitive receptors.
Traffic En-
gineering
When Applied:
Peon - Prior to construction.
Poce - Prior to occupancy.
Tcon-Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A - CitylAgency option to Implement as
needed.
R - Required bycod0aw/existing
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Report required.
AR - City/Agency to require on all projects.
14
Monitoring Frequency Reporting Frequency:
ND With each new development. C - Once, an completion.
C On completion. V - On violation.
V On violation A - Annually
A Annually
When Applied:
Peon - Prior to construction.
Pocc - Prior to occupancy.
Toon - Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A - City/Agency option to implement as
needed.
R - Required bycodeilawlexisling
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Report required.
AS - . Cify/Agency to require on all projects.
15
Monitoring Frequency: Reporting Frequancy:
ND - With each new development. C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion- V - On violation.
V - Onviolation. A - Annually
A - Annually
When Applied
Ind lvidual Develop-
ment Projects
Overall
Program
Potential
Significant
Imple-
men-
Monitor-
irngi
Monitor-
Ing
Roport-
Ing
One-
Cansi
Opera-
One
Opera-
Environmental
talion
Reporting
Fie-
Fie-
Effects
Mitigation Measures
Time
Only
ting
Time
ting
Method
Agency
quency
quoncy
Residential de-
5. Locations where widening of arterial streels is conducted adjacent
Pcon
x
A
Planning(
A
A
velopment is per-
to sensitive receptors located near the roadway and cumulative
Reday.
mitted in high
traffic increases will result in noise Increases of 3 d8 or more.
Agency!
noise areas
sound insulation mitigation Wil be evaluated for installation at the
Public
time of street widening. If building construction of sensitive uses is
Works
such that sound insulation is determined to he necessary and
appropriate to provide acceptable interior noise levers, sound
insulation to compensate for the noise increase resull ing from
traffic and street widening will be evaruated. If sound insulation
mitigation is determined to be feasible and justified based on the
specific conditions. insulation wiul be made available at the option
of the armor of the sensitive use- Sufficienl additional sound
insulation would normally be provided by improving weatherstrip-
ping, providing heavier doors, and by providing a second pane of
glass or other window material over single-pane windows.
Public Services-
1. The Agency will pay pass-through revenue as established by law to
x
Redev.
A
A
Schools
school districts. The Newhall School District and William S. Hart
Agancyl
Union High School District should utilize mandatory redevelopment
School
Project will gen-
tax increment pass-dnroughs to accommodate additional students
Districts
erate additional
by adding portable classrooms or constructing permanent facili-
need for school
ties.
facil ities heyond
those [hat can be
financed with
development
impact fees.
When Applied:
Peon - Prior to construction.
Pocc - Prior to occupancy.
Toon - Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A - City/Agency option to implement as
needed.
R - Required bycodeilawlexisling
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Report required.
AS - . Cify/Agency to require on all projects.
15
Monitoring Frequency: Reporting Frequancy:
ND - With each new development. C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion- V - On violation.
V - Onviolation. A - Annually
A - Annually
WhenApplled:
Poon - Prior to construction.
Poor: - Prior to occupancy.
Tcon - Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A - CTy/Agency oplion to Implement as
needed.
R - Required by codeAavlexisling
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Report required.
AR - City,+Agency to require on all projects.
E
Monitoring Frequency: Reporting Frequency:
ND - With each new development. C - Once, on completion.
C - Oncomplation. V Onviolaticn.
V - Onviolation. A - Annually
A - Armra9y
When Applied
tndividual Develop-
ment Projects
overall
Program
Potential
SigniBcard
Impte-
men-
Moniior-
iagi
Monitor-
Ing
Reporl-
Ing
One-
Cons
Opera-
One
Opera-
Environmental
tation
Reporting
Fre-
Fre-
Effects
Mitigation Measures
Time
Only
ting
Time
ting
Method
Agency
quency
quency
Public Services -
2. As applicable, the school distiicis should levy maximum fees under
x
P. R
School
A
A
Schools
State Law or require additional mitigation measures for new tesi-
Districts
(continued)
dentialdevelopment. and the maximum amount atdeveloper fees
For all indushial and commercial construction allowed by State lzrm
to help fund new or temporary facirdies construction.
3. The school districts should continue to make regular and timely
x
P
School
A
A
application to the State of California for funding.to construct new
Districts
classrooms and other facilities In rosponse to enrollment growth.
4. To the extent that alternate means of financing new schools are
x
P
School
A
A
made available to the districts through changes in state law, the
Districts
dlsldcl will vigorously pursue these methods to provide adequate
facilities to support enrollment growth
5. The districts will use year-round schedules and double sessions as
X
P
School
A
A
necessary and appropriate to maximize the capacity of existing
Districts
facilities if funding is riot available for new school or classroom
construction.
5. The Stale of California should continue to finance construction of
R
Slate of
A
A
new schools and classrooms in resporu^e to enrollment increases.
California
7. The Redevelopment Agency will include public benefit projects
x
A
Redev.
A
A
which also benefit the school districts among the projects eligible
Agency
for lax increment financing from the Newhall Redevelopment
Project,
WhenApplled:
Poon - Prior to construction.
Poor: - Prior to occupancy.
Tcon - Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A - CTy/Agency oplion to Implement as
needed.
R - Required by codeAavlexisling
standards
P - Plan, Program, or Report required.
AR - City,+Agency to require on all projects.
E
Monitoring Frequency: Reporting Frequency:
ND - With each new development. C - Once, on completion.
C - Oncomplation. V Onviolaticn.
V - Onviolation. A - Annually
A - Armra9y
When Applied.
Peon - Prior to construction
Pdoc - Prior to occupancy.
Toon - Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A - City/Agency option to implement as
needed.
R Required bycodehaw/existing
standards
P Plan, Program, or Report required.
AR - CWAgency to require on all projects.
17
Monitoring Frequency: Reporting Frequency:
ND - With each new development. C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion V - Onviolatlon.
V - Onviofalion. A - Annually
A - Annually
When Applied
tndividual Develop-
Overall
Potential
Imple-
Monitor-
Monitor-
Report -
Significant
ment Projects
Program
men.
ingf
Ing
Ing
One-
Cons
Opera-
One
Opera
Environmental
tation
Reporting
Fre-
Fre-
Etfoct,
Mitigation Measures
Time
Only
Eng
Tim
ting
Methal
Agency
quency
quenay,
Parks,
t. The Agency and the City shall encourage proponents of individual
Pocc
X
AR
Parks and
NO
A
Recreation,
development projects to provide pocket parks, mini-parl's or other
Rears.
Community Ser-
open spaces on-site for use by residents and/or employees.
atfon/
vices
Redev.
Additional recce•
Agency
affon d emand in
project area.
2 The Agency will make recreational amenities and a permanent
X
A
Parks and
A
A
community center in Downtown Newhall projects eligible for tax
Recre-
increment financing,
ation/
Redev.
Agency
Cultural
1. Prior to fssuanoe of a demolition permit, the City shall mrnino
Peon
X
AR
Comma-
NO
Cy
Resources
building records to determine whether a structure is 50 years or
nfty Oevei-
Some properties
older and If so, whether such structure is of poton ial historic
opment
in the project
significance. For structures determined to be of potential historic
area may be of
significance, the Cily.sholl forward the application for a demolition
historical value.
permit to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for further
The proposed
evaluation. Based upon the SHPO's evakuatfon the City shall either
project has the
issue a demolition permit, requfre the project proponent to provide
potential to result
ardhival documentation Including photos and existing records
in a significant
pertaining to history and architecture of the stnrclure(s) prior to
Impact on his-
demolition, consider reuse and integration of such structure (s) Into
toric resources,
the project, or Implement any other recommendations of the SHPO
as determined appropriate by the City.
When Applied.
Peon - Prior to construction
Pdoc - Prior to occupancy.
Toon - Throughout
construction.
Implementation Method:
A - City/Agency option to implement as
needed.
R Required bycodehaw/existing
standards
P Plan, Program, or Report required.
AR - CWAgency to require on all projects.
17
Monitoring Frequency: Reporting Frequency:
ND - With each new development. C - Once, on completion.
C - On completion V - Onviolatlon.
V - Onviofalion. A - Annually
A - Annually
.�, '� g,nA�a,y mL�keii5� SS��$ �4 � E 8'• @ $FRn �� �"ea'�e2 )9ty 6m did.&^&'di&ree�a9.�ff
pg��� ya�'a �� yyy1����ggq[ � ■yyyy■ d � �
d•* W`&Po1a�d;^g*i+i ld .5kpq@t
�' �61A P& g'A �'&'Ft
Division Title
Ori final Or .Code
New Or .Code
Economic Development
3200/3211
1821/1822
Newhall Redevelopment Agency
3600
1900
CDBG - Entitlement Program
3300
2500
CDBG - Supplemental Program
3400
2600
HOME Program
3500
2700
Crossing Guards Program
2410
7400
Transit
5400
4600
Building & Safety
4210
3710
Code Enforcement
4220
3720
Animal Control
2410
3720
Solid Waste
5300/5301
380113802
NPDES Administration
4500
3900
Landscape Maintenance District
Operations
4350
7500
Facility Maintenance
2410/7300/5400
5500
Urban Forestry
7300
5600
JINENED XND A
7A�R'r� OFA �-? T MEETING
ITEM NO o2