HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-11-04 - AGENDA REPORTS - TESORO DEL VALLE COUNCIL POSIT (2)AGENDA REPORT
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
DATE: November 4, 1997
City Manager Approval:
Item to be presented by: Jeffrey Lambert
SUBJECT: TESORO DEL VALLE - CITY COUNCIL POSITION
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Building Services
Receive project update presentation from staff and provide direction regarding the City Council's
position on this project.
In November 1996 the City Council heard a presentation from the applicant for the Tesoro del
Valle project. At this time the project consisted of 3,000 residential units. The City Council took
a strong position in opposition to this project and directed staff to hire legal counsel to assist
staff in preparing arguments against this project to the Los Angeles County Regional Planning
Commission and Board of Supervisors.
Staff has worked closely with its legal counsel, the County Planning Department and Supervisor
Antonovich's office over the last year to make significant changes to the project. On May 27,
1997 the Board of Supervisors passed a motion by Supervisor Antonovich which directed the
Tesoro del Valle applicant to significantly revise the project and work with the City of Santa
Clarita (this motion is attached). Staff has had several meetings with the applicant since May
to discuss the project description, number of units, amount of grading and amount of road and
other improvements associated with the project.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION CHANGES
Orieinal Proiect:
Units: 3,000
Gradine: 21 million cubic yards
Continued To:�
Current Project
17.8 million cubic yards
(50% reduction in planning
area B)
Road improvements:
YSA Fields
SEA Impact -
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Orieinal Proiect:
4 lanes of Copperhill
Revert back to developer
Should YSA default
No additional analysis of
impacts on the SEA of the
YSA fields alternative
Current Project
2lanes of Copperhill and
2 lanes of Newhall Ranch
Road to the I-5 Freeway
Revert back to the public
ownership should YSA default
Additional analysis will
be conducted prior to final
approval
• Maintain current position on this project and continue to oppose the project before the
County Board of Supervisors.
• Accept current project as significantly improved from previous project and direct staff
to report the City's neutral position to the County Board of Supervisors.
• Provide direction to staff of additional infrastructure improvements and additional
project changes necessary to change the City Council's position.
• Other direction as determined by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal impacts associated with City Council action on this project are based on additional legal
counsel costs should the Council continue to oppose this project and potential impacts on the
City's general fund should this project not fully mitigate its impacts on City infrastructure.
These figures are not yet known.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Previous issues raised by the City regarding this project (May 8, 1997 Letter)
2. Applicant's response to issues raised by the City and list of Community Benefits
3 Antonovich Motion.
JJL:lep
cd:council\tesomcc jj]
City of
Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd.
Phone
Suite 300
(805) 259.2489
Santa Clarita
Fax
Califomia 913554196
(805) 259.8125
May 8, 1997
Chair and Members of the Board of Supervisors
County of Los Angeles
Hall of Administration
500 West Temple Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Subject:.- Consideration of the Tesoro del Valle Project General Plan (Sub -
Plan) Amendment No. 924074 (5); Zone Change No. 92-074 (5);
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-074 (5); Oak Tree Permit No. 92-074
(5); Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 51644; Hearing Date: May 27,
1997
Dear Chair and Members of the Board of Supervisors:
I am writing to you on behalf of a unanimous Santa Clarita City Council to
express our strong objection to the urban sprawl proposal called the Tesoro del
Valle project. As you know, the Regional Planning Commission on a 3-2 vote
recommended approval of this project to construct 2,502 residential units at the
edge of the Santa Clarita Valley. The City of Santa Clarita has objected to
other "sprawl" projects in the past; but, perhaps this project is the most
objectionable. The Tesoro del Valle project seeks to triple the number of units
allowed according to the Los Angeles County General Plan and conduct
extensive grading to alter forever the character of the Santa Clarita Valley.
The City's legal counsel has forwarded to you under separate cover the specific
objections we have raised in regards to this project. However, I believe it is
important that you understand the philosophical objections the City of Santa
Clarita has to this major project. First, and most important, is the extension
of urban development up to and beyond the natural edge of this valley. This
project seeks to alter the hills and valleys that surround the City of Santa
Clarita and form the borders of the Santa Clarita Valley by grading 21.5
million cubic yards of earth. The attached photograph should highlight the
natural beauty of this area and the importance of maintaining the natural land
forms.
Although this project is outside the current City boundary, its impacts are
directed entirely toward the City's center. For example, the project's traffic
must use City streets and the project's residents must use City recreation
services, thereby placing a burden on City residents. The City has asked that
this project not be approved in its current form and that it be reduced to
comply with the existing County General Plan. However, we have also
requested that should the .County approve this project, its impacts be
adequately mitigated. These mitigations have been described in more detail
in our counsel's letter. Specifically, the City has demanded that the Tesoro del
Valle project improve the roadway system to remove its burden on City streets.
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
To do this, this project must build its fair share of the Newhall Ranch Road
extension west to the interchange of SR 126 and I-5 before the first phase of
the project is complete. This road extension will provide the project's residents
a direct link to employment centers outside the City without impacting our
local streets.
The Tesoro del Valle project is an example of the City of Santa Claritas
continuing challenge to represent the Santa Clarita Valley, while having little
control over the majority of current development. These developments outside
our boundary directly impact the valley's quality of life and prevent the City
from having the local control it needs to plan for its future.
A respected California consultant':: firm has studied the fiscal impact of
residential development on counties. In a study of two counties, they have
found that new residences built in annexed areas do not cost counties, but can
actually be modest net revenue generators. However, if the same units are
built in the unincorporated area, they are net revenue losers for the county.
We all know the difficulties the County faces in providing essential services
and we believe the County should understand the fiscal impacts resulting from
the approval of the Tesoro.del Valle project.
This form of urban sprawl not only impacts suburban communities such as
Santa Clarita; it renders inevitable the continuing deterioration of the County's
urban communities. Decaying urban communities will place a greater burden
on the County for services and redevelopment. The County's urban
neighborhoods, represented by the entire County Board of Supervisors, need
the opportunity to prosper, projects like this development will prevent this
opportunity. If urbanized development is allowed to expand, the Los Angeles
region will continue to ignore the urban core. We must start looking at the
entire region as we make land use and infrastructure decisions.
The Tesoro del Valle project is not good for the Santa Clarita Valley and is not
good for Los Angeles County. On behalf of the Santa Clarita City Council, I
strongly urge the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to deny this project
as is and direct the applicant to redesign the project to comply with the County
General Plan.
Sincerely,
i--4 � �/ �.
G ' / f'�
Attachment: Photographs
Letter of January 27, 1997
McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen Issue List
HCS.JJL:Iep
cd\council\tewm.(tr
10/23/97 15:16 + CITY HALL 0002/007
TESORO del VALLE
Response to City of Santa ClariWS issues with Tesoro del Valle:
neral Plan Amendment
- "inconsistent with the General Plan in the following areas; -
Response:
- Number of units has been reduced from the original submittal of 3,000 and the
County of Los Angeles planning Commission Prefenvd Plan of 2502 units. In response
to Supervisor Antonovich's board motion and the City of Santa Clarita'S appeal, the
project has been modified to 1896. units or a 24% reduction (606 units) of the PIanning
Commission approved plan.
- Grading has been reduced overall from 21-5 million cubic yards to 17.8 million
cubic yards with the majority of the reduction as a result of 50% reduction in Planning
Area "B% The issue of significant land form alteration has been addressed with the 1896
mtit redesignated project (proposed contouring grading more in line with the major
ridgeIine separation between Wayside and San Francisquito Canyons) with reduced
development in Planning Area "B: while still maintaining the County's suggested footprint
of development in Planning Areas "A, C, and D".
- Land Use for urban development of 1109 units was recognized in the 1990
County General Plan update, the County Planning Department recommendation was to
grant a partial request, bat stated that if the limited access problem could be solved then
additional urban land use would be considered in the future. This added urban land use
indicated the property's suitability and capability for development while being contiguous
EO existing (North Park) and future (West Creek) projects. This property is contiguous to
development to the south, southwest and east with Lockheed and the Valencia. Master
Plan.
Circulation is being improved with the accelerated construction of Copper Hill
Drive from Seco Canyon to Newhall Ranch Road at the present time. The proposal to
also accelerate Newhall Ranch Road from Rye Canyon to Interstate 5 will improve
circulation in the future, and thus enhance the development viability of Tesoro.
The City's concern is based on analysis performed using land use data and a
roadway network system which precedes current modeling efforts. Previous
modeling demonstcares severe congestion in several locations, providing little or
no capacity for adding projects such as Tesoro del Valle at 3,029 dwelling units.
Due to the dynamic nature of the project area, modeling is now being refined to
include actual and revised land use densities and foreseeable network connections
and geometries which were not previously considered in early models. For
example, the overall traffic in current modeling is reduced by 209,000 daily trips
from previous models. Dwelling unit density is reduced by approximately 6,700
units. Also, the Tesoro del Valle project is proposing a less dense development
by over 35% than previously modeled. The final Environmental Report will
reflect the traffic impact of the downsided project, reduced average daily trips, and
10/23/97 15:17 + + CITY HALL 0003/007
revised and augmented Master Plan of highways. All of the above changes should
result in an improved and less congested circulation plan at General Plan build -out.
- hTrasnucture will be available in the immediate future with Copper Hill Drive a
major highway bifurcating the property.
- Resource conservation will be accomplished by substantially avoiding most of
the higher valued resources onsite of oak trees, cherry woodlands, SEA area, major
ridgelines, and escarpments.
Hillside Gradin
- "issue of 21.5 million cubic yards of dirt and 18,000 truckloads of dirt"
R- Mnse.
- Grading has been induced from 21.5 to 17.8 million cubic yards as a result of the
major grading reduction in Planning Area `B". The project will be balanced onsite
therefore not necessitating truckloads of dirt to leave the property.
obs - Housing Balance
- This Project provides more housing without a balance of jobs. The Santa Clarita
Valley is already housing rich and jobs poor (although this is improving) and the City and
County have been working hard to bring more jobs, not more housing.
Resronse.
- Job housing balance must be evaluated on an areawide basis, not project by
project Every project site is not appropriate for employment uses. Factors such as access
to regional transpiration systems (freeway, tail), availability of labor, land prices,
development costs, and distance to markets typically determine the areas where its
employment uses are appropriate. Physical features such as topography also affect the
fens=-bility of employment uses, because of the costs associated with grading to prepare the
land for development Generally speakinghillside areas in the Santa Clarity area have not
been developed for employment uses, in either the City or the County. One of the
exceptions to this is the Lockheed site, which has been recently approved for expansion
and which will create additional jobs beyond those that currently exist at the location. The
housing proposed for the Tesoro del Valle site will provide a ready source of future
employees for Lockheed, who -will then have to commute a very short distance to work.
This situation will benefit traffic and circulation conditions in the immediate area as well as
other areas of the City that are more distant from the Lockheed site.
- Recent market studies indicate a strong demand for housing in the Santa Clarita
Valley, thus providing future employees for the planned employment land use in the
Valley -
Fire
- The mitigation measure are inadequate (because they) do not reduce demand for
fire protection nor do they impose the fees.
10/23/97 15:18 444 CITY HALL ID004/007
Response
- The Fire department has indicated that the mitigation measure and conditions of
approval developed for the Tesoro del Valle project adequately address the fire protection
needs of the proposed project. In addition, the proposed project will provide sites for a
new fire station, helipad and wildfire training area. The development of the property from
open space/vegetated areas to urban uses actually reduces the fire hazard and fire
insurance ratings for the site. The project's landscaping and fuel modification programs
(a significant buffer zone not present today) have been designed to comply with the most
recent changes to the county's fire code. The project is conditioned to provide funds for
fire protection facilities in accordance with standard County policy.
Sewer
- The mitigation measures are inadequate because the project relies on the local
district's future capacity to accommodate existing demand. They require availability at
building permit but at this stage the Project has reached an "ecological point of no remm".
Response:
- The EIR indicates that the proposed project at buildout would generate
approximately 0.6 million gallons per day of sewage. Either Sanitation District No 26 or
32 would serve the site after annexation proceedings are completed. Either district will
have adequate, capacityavailable from its existing (or under construction) facilities to serve
the project. Project sewage would represent approximately 3 percent of total system
capacity for sewage treatment upon buildout. The project's required sewage capacity
would be allocated by the District to which it annexes, thereby `protecting" the sewage
treatment capacity it needs until project buildout is completed. The County's
Development Monitoring System (DMS) has verified the availability of this capacity.
Finally, the project is conditioned to be annexed into a sanitation district prior to issuance
of building permits.
Library Services
- The project mitigation measures are inadequate. Mitigations suggest that the
developer should enter into an agreement which is only an "agreement to agree", not a
mitigation.
Response:
- The mitigation measures referenced in this comment is conditioned in the
Mitigation Monitoring Plan (February 1997) to complete a library agreement `prior to
approval of building permits" (page 1-55). This requirement provides assurance that
library impacts are properly mitigated -
Water
- "there is no evidence such a water source exists".
Resmnse:
The Monterey Amendments to the Site Water Project Contracts provides a
provision for permanent sale of entitlement: that states that agricultural contractors
commitment allows up to 130,000 acre feet of entitlement to be sold to urban contractors
on a willing buyer - willing seller basis. Only 30,000 acre feet has been transferred under
10/23/97 15:18
4-- CITY HALL Q005/007
this principle up to now. Potential water sources have been identifed and confidential
negotiations are inprogress.
lar acts on the SEA
-'the project will significantly impact the SEA"_
Response
- The draft and final. EIR's acknowledge that development of the 27 acre portion .
of Area D in the southern area of the property would potentially impact SEA 19 and the
unannofed threespine stickleback and its habitat within the flood plain areas of the SEA.
The EIR indicates that these impacts would be both direct and indirect Direct impacts,
prior to mitigation, would.occur from the encroachment into the floodplain (and therefore
into SEA 19) from construction of the bridge abutments and related bank stabilization for
extension of "Mr Street from Area A through the sports complex area to a connection to
San Francisquito Canyon Road. Direct impacts would also occur, prior to mitigation,
from bank stabilization measures around the edge of the sports complex The EIR
provides a series of mitigation measures to reduce these impacts to less than significant
Ievels' The EIR also indicates that significant and unavoidable indirect impacts to the SEA.
would result from human activities connected with the proposed project and the sports
complex
In Spring 1997, the applicant conducted further biological resource studies for the project
site in response to the City's request Directed surveys were performed to determine the
Presence of California gnatcatchers onsite accordmg to the required protocol of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service. These studies indicated that there were no gnatcatchers onsite.
Further studies were also conducted in the SEA floodplain areas adjacent to the proposed
sports complex in Area D. No unatni'ored thmespine sticklebacks CUTS) were detected-
The
etectedThe biological consultant that surveyed for the DTs is widely recognized as an expert on
this species_ This consultant has recommended specific measures that will be incorporated
into the subsequent detailed design of the sports complex to reduce impacts to SEA 19
from bank stabilization measures along the edges of the complex and from human activity.
Such measures include; but would not;be limited to use of Ardosflex for bank stabilization
and establishment of riparian vegetation in this area increasing the buffer area between the
sports fields and the bank stabilizatio[ border and use of native vegetation and
incorporation of fencing to limit access from the sports complex into the adjacent
floodplain and SEA 19. These measures will effectively address the potential direct and
indirect effects of development of the sports complex on the SEA Development of the
balance of the Tesoro del Valle project is sufficiently removed from the SEA to not pose
any significant effects that cannot be avoided by mitigation already included in the EIEL
_ 10/23/97 15:19
E
Project / Community Benefit
+++ CITY HALL 0006/007
ORO det VALDE.; .
Co
.i
" :::.
Project Coimparison
EDUCATON• S
School Site - Elementary (11 Acres) ;
School Site - Jr. H S. (20 Acres)
Construct Elementary School
School Fees • State Mandate !
ROADS: t
Copper Hill Drive - Seco to Newhall Randa
- RO.W- - Major Highway
- Full Width Grade-
- Construct Lanes 1 & 2
- COnstract Bridge with FaI! RO.W. I
- Support and Abutments. and two lane platform
- Accelerate eonstruc6oa prior to 1st building permit
Newhall Ranch Road -'Rye Canyon to 1-5
• Full Width Grade
- Lanes 1 and 2 of Pavement with drainage
• Accelerate construction prior to 1110th
McBean Parkway - North of Copper Hill
- R O. W. - Secondary Highway
1109 Units..
1896 Units
. increased .
Required
• Community_ •'
F.�onontic.
Condition ;
geneSts:'
$15:O1VI
Traffic impact Fee .
Bridge and Thoroughfare Fee @ $52400
Sub -Total Ro1.Improvements
Footnotes
(1) Substantial rednction of busing costs 1
(2) W.S. Hart School District has been gr
(3) School Agreements signed with Saugt
Califon a assistance .
(4) Not a project condition;; per four party
(A) The economic impact of community bi
public obligation_ •
No Yes dt
No Yes (z)
No Yes $5.OM
Yes yes 0)
No
yes
No
Yes
Yes (4)
Yes
$15:O1VI
Yes
Yes
$4.OM
No:
No:
$2.OM.:.
NO:
Yes
No
. Yes
$9.OM ".
No
Yes.
Lh the 1896 Unit Project.
ted a site reservation..
and HartSchool districts with no guarantee of.Star$;of . '
3vate development agreement
efits contriibuted, by private foods that otherwise.would be a,
10/23/97 15:19 44- CITY HALL 1@007/007
W
--A
-A
i p
------ 1. I.Z
r A
am.
Project Commignity Benefit ...
.Units 1596 Units
crease&
J
Im
k�
Jim um
MOO
Ben
ACTIVE PARKS
A.
Quimby Act - Land Dedication.. � I , i --.� - 103 Aii:res 17S.Acres
Community Regior,W" Psr1 = 30 Acrej'[Multj!por 'Ose -
•$4
p
Community Regionki Fi&k,- 20 Acrcs
No
Lmprove & Mawtain.Q Y.
No.
Main yes
tain Quimby Parks
No,
Trails - Sari &-axicsz�
Nfaster-Trail, .-.,. . . ......
Equestrian Traft
No,
yes.:.,
County Equestrian
Sites
No:
YM,
Cross CounntftrUy e 3- N6'
PROTECTION:FIRE
Dedicate Fire Station Site,- '(2.3' Acres) No;
— Yes,.
Dedicate Hellpad Site (0.SAcres)
NO. L YM
Enhanced Wildfire Safety Features'
NO. --.Y—es
Wild Fire Training Area
NO..i. -kyes..•
`0 i Z:
41
CULTURAL:
Dedicate Historic Complex (!Oth 3 B dings)
on a 1.1 Acre Site and donation n U4 effy
o &6n m
or museum
Nq-!, Yes
. ...... .
$
OPEN SPACE: T
Dedication of SEA #19' laxi'd (73.0 Acres) No ..Yes
Dedication or land for open sli):-aw'
Yes.;
tal Co13 33H qty, J
Be
Footnotes
(5) (6) Letter of iaienfsigned
for $1.00 per year cost; with -E
reappointment for active park
(7) Estimated mumal . ni':ain'teii
7
:
(8) Total open space equ-at-eit
Clan Valle ,Youth Sp
, . : .
. o
Glalise I will mverM the
:for acres o
active parkland_ r
f the p ject which exceeds
—Unty:-standard of � 1�6305t
Z
4.
SYN. NO,
AGN. NO. 8
MOTION BY SUPERVISOR MICHAEL D. ANTONOVICH May 27, 1997
TESORO DEL VALLE
I have given this proposal a great deal of study as part of my preparation for today's
Board meeting. I have met with both the proponents and some of the opponents and, quite
frankly, the size and impact of the proposed Plan Amendment troubles me greatly. The primary
issues in this case involve the need for a Plan Amendment; the amount of grading proposed, and
the suitability of the mitigations being offered by the applicant to address the impacts upon the
various service systems in the Valley.
The initial concern relates to the need for 1,400 additional units. The existing Plan, I am
advised, permits the applicant up to 1,100 units for this property. I am not clear as to what
justification exists for such a large expansion of the project.
In addition, there are a number of identified adverse impacts resulting from the project
that need to be addressed. For example, the traffic studies and reports from our Public Works
-MORE-
Molina
Burke
Knabe
Antonovich
Yaroslaysky
TESORO DEL VALLE
May 27, 1997
Page 2
Department conclude that traffic circulation in the area would be adversely affected through the
addition of these 1,400 new units. Moreover, I am concerned that this amendment would permit
the cutting and filling of up to 21 million cubic yards. Finally, the project design warrants
another look. Too many of the single family properties are on 5,000 and 6,000 square foot
parcels which --given the rural nature of San Francisquito Canyon --are out of character with that
community.
The Regional Planning Commission shared theseconcernsand instructed the applicant to
revise his design accordingly. However, more needs to be done.
I am going to recommend that we begin the hearing process today so as to establish in the
record the community's concems--both pro and con --but I intend to move at the conclusion of
today's session that the matter be continued for 60 days with an instruction that the applicant
work with our Planning, Public Works, Fire and Parks Departments to develop a revised design
that would take into account the following goals:
The grading in Area B would be reduced by 50-75%, thereby providing for the
saving of as many oak trees as possible;
2. All urban density development would be confined to Area A. None of the units
removed from Area B are to be transferred to other areas on the property;
3. The applicant should consider revising the design in both areas B and C to include
"estate" type lots of 2- and 5 -acres;
-MORE-
N.
TESORO DEL VALLE
May 27, 1997
Page 3
4. The applicant should provide on- and off-site road improvements pursuant to a
schedule to be developed with the Public Works Department that would minimize
to the extent practical the impacts upon streets and highways in the area;
5. The applicant would provide fully improved park sites, trails and soccer fields
with each phase of his project, to the satisfaction of the County Parks Department;
6. The project include a completed fire station facility to be completed at an
appropriate time and location to be determined by the Fire Chief; and
7. The final unit count to be a product of the above design revisions and such other
recommendations to be made by the Department of Regional Planning to assure
consistency with the urban expansion policies of the Santa Clarita and County-
wide General Plans --taking into account the impacts on infrastructure and the
significant environmental resources found in that area.
These are significant revisions, but the applicant is seeking a General Plan Amendment which
carries a higher standard of performance. Other developers who.were approved for Plan
Amendments had agreed to a number of significant community improvements, such as the
accelerated completion of roads like Plum Canyon Road and Copper Hill Road. These were
offered by the applicants in response to acknowledged infrastructure needs and their recognition
of their responsibility to fully mitigate the impacts of their respective projects on the surrounding
communities. While I remain open to recommending approval of a suitable Plan Amendment,
-MORE-
TESORO DEL VALLE
May 27, 1997
Page 4
this application must meet the same burden that has been placed on his predecessors.
I, THEREFORE, MOVE that this case be continued to July 22 with an instruction that
the applicant work with the afore -mentioned County departments to develop a revised proposal
for our consideration.that takes into account the above concerns.
NIDA: dvd
teso=2/mot