HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-01-13 - AGENDA REPORTS - ANNEX 38 ACRES RESO 98 7 ORD 9 (2)AGENDA REPORT
City Manager
Item to be pre:
PUBLIC HEARING
DATE: January 13, 1998
SUBJECT: PREZONE NO. 96-002 (MASTER CASE NO. 96-206), TO FACILITATE
ANNEXATION OF 38 ACRES OF INHABITED LAND LOCATED NORTH
AND EAST OF ABELIA, ADJACENT TO THE NORTHEAST CITY LIMITS
(CALIFORNIA CANYONS)
RESOLUTION NO, 98-7
ORDINANCE NO. 98-4
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Building Services
RECOMMENDATI
It is recommended that the City Council open the public hearing, adopt Resolution No. 98-07,
approving both the negative declaration prepared for the project with the finding that the
project will not have a significant effect on the environment, and General Plan Amendment No.
96-02, introduce Ordinance No. 98-04 approving Prezone No. 96-002, waive further reading, and
pass to a second reading.
BACKGROUND
At the request of area residents, the City of Santa Clarita has initiated the annexation of the
inhabited California Canyons tract in northeastern Canyon Country. Petitions circulated by
area residents in 1996 indicate that approximately 77% of the property owners in the tract
support annexation. The subject application proposes to prezone the 38 -acre site to the City of
Santa Clarita's RS (Residential Suburban) land use district, to allow for annexation to the City.
In addition to the need for a prezone, a General Plan Amendment is required to change the land
use designation from Residential Estate (RE) to Residential Suburban (RS), to reflect the
density currently constructed on-site.
On December 2, 1997, the Planning Commission held a public hearing for the proposed prezone
application. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council
approve the pre -zone and general plan amendment requests. The December 2, 1997, meeting
was noticed to both residents of the tract and property owners within 500 feet; however, there
were no members of the public in attendance.
AgendA, 11=1_8
FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact analysis prepared for the project, herein attached; indicates that the action
will result in a net cost to the City of $9,000 over the course of the next 30 years.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 98-7
Ordinance No. 98-4
December 2, 1997, Planning Commission Staff Report
Fiscal Impact Analysis for proposed California Canyons Annexation
s:\cd\annex\96-02s2.cdm
RESOLUTION NO. 98-7
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA
APPROVING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT FOR MASTER CASE NO. 96-206
FOR THE INHABITED AREA LOCATED ADJACENT TO AND OUTSIDE THE
EXISTING CITY LIMIT, GENERALLY NORTH AND EAST OF
ABELIA ROAD, IN THE NORTHEAST PORTION OF CANYON COUNTRY
WHEREAS, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby find, determine, and declare:
A. That the City has initiated Prezone No. 96-002 to bring the project area into
conformance with the City's General Plan land use designations of RS, pursuant
to approval of General Plan Amendment No. 96-01, to allow for the future
annexation of the area to the City of Santa Clarita; and
B. That the General Plan land use designation for the subject site is currently
Residential Estate (RE); and
C. That a General Plan Amendment is necessary to change the land use designation
from Residential Estate to Residential Suburban in order to reflect the existing
single family density constructed on-site; and
D. That an Initial Study has been prepared for the project and that said study found
that no adverse impact to the existing and future environmental resources of the
area would result from the proposal would be consistent with the City's adopted
General Plan and final EIR (SCH# 90010683 -certified and adopted June 1991);
and
E. That the Initial Study found that the proposed prezone would not have a
significant adverse effect on the environment based on CEQA Section 21083.3
and a proposed Negative Declaration was posted and advertised on October 27,
1997, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
F. That a proposed Negative Declaration was prepared for the project based on the
Initial Study findings and the determination that the proposed project would not
have a significant effect on the environment, would not impact resources
protected by the California Department of Fish and Game, and that a finding of
do
minimus impact on such resources was appropriate.
G. That the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita conducted a public
hearing on December 2, 1997, pursuant to applicable law, to consider the prezone
and general plan amendment for the City of Santa Clarita, and adopted
Resolution No. P97-24, with the finding that the Negative Declaration was in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and
RESOLUTION NO. 98-7
Page 2
recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment No. 96-02
and the Negative Declaration prepared for the project; and
H. That the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita conducted a public hearing on
January 13, 1998, pursuant to applicable law, to consider the prezone and
general plan amendment.
SECTION 2. Based upon the testimony and other evidence received, the Council further
finds as follows:
A. That the proposed Negative Declaration is consistent with the goals and policies
of the adopted General Plan, and that the Negative Declaration complies with all
other applicable requirements of state law and local guidelines.
B. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the City Council hereby determines
that the Negative Declaration is in compliance with CEQA and that the proposed
project will not have a significant impact on the environment.
SECTION 3. Based upon the testimony and other evidence received, the Council further
finds as follows:
A. This project will not adversely affect the health, peace, comfort, or welfare of
persons residing in the area, nor be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment,
or valuation of property in the vicinity of the project site, nor jeopardize,
endanger, or otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety, or
general welfare since the General Plan Amendment will change the land use
designation to one which reflects the density on-site and the surrounding area.
SECTION 4. The Negative Declaration for the project, attached hereto as Exhibit A and
by this reference incorporated herein, is hereby approved. The Director of Planning and
Building Services is hereby directed to file the Negative Declaration with the County Clerk of
the County of Los Angeles.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-7
Page 3
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of
MWIM
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
I, Sharon L. Dawson, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita at
a regular meeting thereof, held on the _ day of 19_ by the following
vote of Council:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
CITY CLERK
s: \ cd\ annex\96-02envr.cdm
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
[X] Proposed [] Final
--------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
MASTER CASE NO: Master Case No. 96-206
PERMIT/PROJECT NAME: Pre -Zone & Annexation No's. 1996-02, General Plan Amendment
No. 96-001
APPLICANT: City of Santa Clarita
LOCATION OF THE PROJECT: The project is located north and east of Abelia Road,
adjacent to the Pine Tree Annexation. Thomas Bros. Page 4462.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT: A request to annex a 38 -acre inhabited area consisting
of 70 lots and the existing street system. As a result of a density discrepancy, a General Plan
Amendment to change the land use designation to Residential Suburban is required in
conjunction with the prezone/annexation.
Based on the information contained in the Initial Study prepared for this project, and
pursuant to the requirements of Section 15065 of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), the City of Santa Clarita
[X] City Council [ ] Planning Commission [ ] Director of Community Development
finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant effect upon the
environment, and that a Negative Declaration shall be adopted pursuant to Section 15070
of CEQA.
Mitigation measures for this project
[X] Are Not Required [ ] Are Attached [ ] Are Not Attached
JEFF LAMBETZT, AICP
PLANNING LGEA
Prepared by: Conal McNamara, AICP. Assistant Planner II
(Signature) ' \./ (Name/Title)
Approved by: zr�Fred Follstad, AICP. Associate Planner
(Signature) (Name/Title)
Public Review Period From October 2
Public Notice Given On October 2
[X] Legal Advertisement [ ] Posting
CERTIFICATION DATE:
1997 By:
Properties [ ] Written Notice
Exhibit A
cd\advance\caca-nd.cdm
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
(Initial Study Form B)
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
Lead Agency: City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd. Ste. 300
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Contact Person 8: Phone Number: -Conal McNamara, (805) 255-4349
Master Case or CIP Number: Master Case No. 96-206 (Prezone No. 96-002, Annexation No. 1996-02,
and General Plan Amendment 96-001)
Entitlement Type(s): Pre -Zoning, Annexation, General Plan Amendment
Case Planner. Conal McNamara
Project Location: North and east of Abelia Road, adjacent to the northeast City limits in the County
of Los Angeles. Thomas Bros. Page 4462.
Project Description and Setting: A request to annex a 38 -acre Inhabited residential area consisting
of approximately 70 lots and the existing street system. As a result of a density discrepancy, a
General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Residentlal Estate (RE) to
Residential Suburban (RS) is required in conjunction with the prezone/annexation
General Plan and Zoning Designation(s): The project site is located in the Residential Estate (RE) land
use district.
Project Applicant (Name, Address, Phone): City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 300
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
(805)255-4330
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The surrounding area is characterized by existing single-family
residential development to the south of Jasmine Road and west of Sunrose Place, with the remaining
area vacant.
Other public agencies whose approval is required
(e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement)
-1-
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be affected by this project, involving at least one
impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
[ ]
Land Use and Planning
[ ]
Transportation/
[X]
Public Services
Circulation
[ ]
Population and Housing
[ ]
Biological Resources
[ ]
Recreation
[ ]
Geological Problems
[ ]
Noise
[ 1
Aesthetics
[]
Water
[]
Hazards
[]
Cultural Resources
[ ]
Air Quality
[ ]
Mandatory Tests of
[ ]
Utilities and Service
Significance
System
[ ]
Energy and Mineral
Resources
-2-
) a
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
[X] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect .on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the
mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the
project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant impact on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
[ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the
environment, but at least one effect 1) has been mitigated adequately in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant
unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, but it must analyze
only the effects that remain to be addressed.
[ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project.
Approved By:
(Signature)
13
Conal McNamara, A.P. II
(Namerritle)
Fred Follstad, Assoc. Planner
-3-
(Name(ritle)
10/16/97
(Date)
10/17/97
(Date)
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source # )
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
Policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over
the project?
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the city?
d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a lowancome or
minority community)?
e) Affect a Significant Ecological Area (SEA)? ( )
Q Other ( )
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the Proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? ( )
b) Create a net loss of jobs? ( )
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? ( )
d) Other ( )
III GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Will the proposal result in:
a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic
substructures? ( )
b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil? ( )
c) Change in topography or ground surface relief
features? ( )
d) The destruction, covering or modification of any
unique geologic or physical features? ( )
e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either
on or off the site? ( )
f) Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards
such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground
failure, or similar hazards? ( )
-4-
Potentially
significant
Impact
Potentially unless Lessthan
Significant Mftlgauon significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
[1
[I
11
VI
[l
[1
11
1x1
[1
p
II
IXI
II
Il
11
1X1
[]
[l
11
1x1
11
11
VI
[1
[1
11
1x1
Il
[I
II
1x1
[1
11
1X1
[1
[I
U
[xl
[1
❑
11
1x1
[l
[1
11
1x1
[1
[1
11
VI
[I
11
1X1
11
Ix]
11
Ixl
-5-
l�
Poterrtlally
Slgnincant
Impact
Potentially
Unless
Less than
Signlflcant
MltigatIon
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
g)
Changes in deposition, erosion or siltation? ( )
[]
[]
11
I(I
h)
Other modification of a wash, channel, creek, or
[]
[]
I
[X)
river? ( )
I)
Earth movement (cut and/or fill) of 10,000 cubic
[]
[]
I]
I(1
yards or more? ( )
j)
Development and/or grading on a slope greater than
[]
[]
[]
[X]
25% natural grade? ( )
k)
Development within the Aiquist-Priolo Special
[]
[]
I]
(X]
Studies Zone? ( )
1)
Other ( )
Il.
I]
❑
[XI
IV.
WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a)
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or
(]
11
I]
[X]
the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( )
b)
Exposure of people or property to water related
[ ]
[ ]
I1
p(]
hazards such as flooding? ( )
c)
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
(]
[]
I]
[X]
surface water quality (mg. temperature, dissolved
oxygen, or turbidity) ( )
d)
�ngesinthe amount of surface water in any water
[]
I
11
[X]
e)
Changes in currents, or the course of direction of
[]
[ 1
11
[X]
water movements? ( )
f)
Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either
[I
I]
I]
[X]
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability? ( )
g)
Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
I
I
I]
[X]
h)
Impacts to groundwater quality? ( )
[]
[]
I]
[X]
l
Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
[]
[]
I
[X]
otherwise available for public water supplies?
1
j)
Other ( )
[]
I1
❑
Pq
V.
AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a)
Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
[ 1
I 1
11
P(I
existing or projected air quality violation? ( )
-5-
l�
C3
Potentially
Slgniflcant
Impact
Potentially
Unless
Leu than
significant
Mitigation
significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
b)
Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( )
Il
Il
I
[X]
c)
Create objectionable odors? ( )
[]
[]
II
[X]
d)
Other ( )
I1
[1
I1
[X]
A.
TRANSPORTATIONICIRCULATION. Would the
proposal rewtt in:
a)
Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?( )
Il
Il
I]
]X] .
b)
Hazards to safety from design features (mg. sharp
[]
[]
[]
1X]
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses? ( )
c)
Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby
[]
[]
11
[X]
uses? ( )
d)
Insufficient parking capacity onsite or ofrsite?
[]
[]
I]
[X]
e)
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
( I
I I
[ I
11
IX]
1)
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting
[]
Il
I]
IX]
alternative transportation (e -g. bus stops, bicycle
racks)( )
g)
Disjointed pattern of roadway improvements ( )
[]
[]
11
[X]
h)
Other ( )
[1
Il
[]
[XI
VII.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to:
a)
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their
[]
[]
(]
[X1
habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish,
insects, animals, and birds) ( )
b)
Oak Trees( )
(]
[]
(]
[X]
c)
Wetland habitat or blueline stream? ( )
[]
[]
[]
1X]
d)
Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( )
[]
[]
[]
[X]
e)
Other ( )
(]
[1
II
IXI
VIII.
ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a)
Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
[]
[]
[]
[X]
b)
Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and
[]
[]
I]
[X]
inefficient manner! ( )
C3
-7-
Potentially
Slgnillcant
Impact
Potentially
Unless
Less than
significant
Mitigation
significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
c)
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
[]
[]
[]
(X]
resource that would be of future value to the region
and the residents of the State? ( )
d)
other ( )
Il
[]
I1
IX]
IX.
HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a)
A risk of accidental explosion or release of
[ ]
(]
I I
(X]
hazardous substances (including but not limited to
oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? ( )
b)
Possible interference with an emergency response
[ ]
[]
11
[X]
pian or emergency evacuation plan? ( )
c)
The creation of any health hazard or potential health
[]
[]
11
IX]
hazard? ( )
d)
Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
Il
Il
I1
1X1
health hazards (mg. electrical transmission lines,
gas lines, oil pipelines)? ( )
e)
Increased fire hazard in area with flammable brush,
[]
[]
[]
[X]
grass, or trees? ( )
f)
Other I )
[1
[1
[I
IX]
X.
NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a)
Increases in existing noise levels? ( )
[]
[]
I]
(X]
b)
Exposure of people to severe noise levels or
[ ]
[ ]
[ 1
[X]
vibration? ( )
c)
other ( )
[I
[]
11
IXI
XI-
PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an
effect on, err result to a treed for new w altered gove m ent
.
services in any of the following g areas:
a)
Fire protection? ( )
[]
(]
II
IX1
b)
Police protection? ( )
[]
11
[X]
11
c)
Schools? ( )
[1
I1
I]
IXI
d)
Maintenance of pubic facilities, including roads?
11
11
IX1
11
( )
e)
other government services? ( )
[]
[]
I]
[X]
XII.
UT1LMES. Would.the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or
substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a)
Power or natural gas? ( )
[ 1
[ I
11
VI
-7-
b) Communications systems? ( )
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? ( )
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( )
e) Storm water drainage? ( )
f) Solid waste disposal? ( )
g) Local or regional water supplies? ( )
h) Other ( )
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista open to public view? ( )
b) Have a negative aesthetic effect? ( )
c) Create tight or glare? ( )
d) Other ( )
XN. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological or archaeological
resources?
b) Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( )
c) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? ( )
d) Affect a recognized historical site? ( )
e) Other ( )
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
Wildlife population to drop below self sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
-fl-
Potentially
Significant
Less than
Impact
Potentially
Unless
Significant
Mitigation
Impact _
Incorporated
[I
[1
11
1X1
Less than
[1
Significant
No
Impact
Impact
Il
1X1
Il
1X1
[1
[1
[]
IXI
[1
[I
11
1X]
[I
[1
11
1X1
[]
[1
11
IX1
[1
[]
11
1X1
[]
[I
II
1X1
[1
[1
11
1X1
[1
11
11
IXl
[1
11
11
1X1
[]
Il
[]
IX1
[1
11
11
IX]
[7
11
11
IXl
Il
11
[]
1X1
[1
Il
11
VI
II
11
II
1X1
XVIII. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND/OR EARLIER ANALYSES:
Section and
Subsections
Evaluation of Impact
Potentially
The proposed application will involve an annexation and General Plan
PLANNING
significant
City's General Plan was adopted, the subject site was zoned
Impact
Residential Estate (RE); however, approvals and construction under
Potentially Unless Less than
at a Residential Suburban (RS) density. By recognizing the subject site
significant Mitigation significant No
as having RS density, the site will be consistent with the surrounding
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
b)
Does the project have the potential to achieve
[] [] I [X]
nor will the uses be incompatible with existing land uses.
short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
As an existing residential use in a residential land use designation, the
AND HOUSING
environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the
housing.
environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-term impacts will
endure well into the future.)
c)
Does the project have impacts which are individually
[] [] [] Ix]
limited but cumulatively considerable? (A project
may impact on two or more separate resources
where the impact on each resource is relatively
small, but where the effect of the total of those
impacts on the environment is significant)
d)
Does the project have environmental effects which
[] [] [] IXI
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
XVII. DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME "DE MINUMUS"
FINDING
a)
Will the project have an adverse effect either
[] [] [] [X]
individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife
resources? Wildlife shall be defined for the purpose
of this question as "all wild animals, birds, plants,
fish. amphibians, and related ecological
communities, including the habitat upon which the
wildlife depends for its continued viability."
XVIII. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND/OR EARLIER ANALYSES:
Section and
Subsections
Evaluation of Impact
I. LAND USE AND
The proposed application will involve an annexation and General Plan
PLANNING
Amendment to bring 70 lots on 38 acres into the City. At the time the
City's General Plan was adopted, the subject site was zoned
Residential Estate (RE); however, approvals and construction under
County of Los Angeles jurisdiction resulted in units being constructed
at a Residential Suburban (RS) density. By recognizing the subject site
as having RS density, the site will be consistent with the surrounding
single-family residential development. As the site and use are both
residential, there will no disruption of the community'sarrangement
nor will the uses be incompatible with existing land uses.
II. POPULATION
As an existing residential use in a residential land use designation, the
AND HOUSING
proposed project will neither generate nor deplete population, jobs, or
housing.
IQ
Section and
Evaluation of Impact
Subsections
111. GEOLOGIC
As a previously approved and constructed residential tract, the
PROBLEMS
standard engineering conditions placed on the project at the time
ensured that the proposed project would not result in unstable earth
conditions or changes in geologic substructures, changes in
topography, disruptions of the soil, modification of any geologic or
physical feature, increase in wind or water erosion, or exposure of
people to geologic hazards.
IV. WATER
Due to the fact that the site is currently constructed, there will be no
changes in absorption rates or drainage patterns, exposure of people
or property to water related hazards,. discharge into surface waters, or
impacts to groundwater.
V. AIR QUALITY
Given the fact that no construction is proposed for the project, there
will be no impact to air quality standards nor will the use expose
sensitive receptors to pollutants or create objectionable odors.
VI.
The proposed use is to be located in a site which has already been
TRANSPORTATION/
improved with respect to circulation. As such, there will be no hazards
CIRCULATION
to safety from design features, inadequate parking capacity or
emergency access, hazards for pedestrians or bicyclists, conflicts with
adopted policies supporting alternative transportation, or disjointed
pattern of roadway improvements.
VII. BIOLOGICAL
As an existing, constructed site, there will be no impacts to biological
RESOURCES
resources associated with this proposal.
VIII. ENERGY AND
As an existing, constructed site, it will not conflict with adopted energy
MINERAL
conservation plans, use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful manner,
RESOURCES
or result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource.
IX. HAZARDS
As an existing, constructed site, there will be no risk of explosion or
release of hazardous substances, interference with emergency
response plans, creation of health hazard, or increased fire hazard.
X. NOISE
The residential units will not exceed noise standards for the area.
Further, there are no construction activities which would pose any
noise impacts.
Xl. PUBLIC
One outcome of the annexation will be that the City will now be
SERVICES
responsible for police and public works services rather than the
County. The additional 70 lots and the minor street system will not
have a significant impact on the City's ability to provide services. The
corresponding Departments within the City will budget accordingly and
will be able to provide all necessary services.
XII. UTILITIES
As the site is located in an improved, urbanized area, the proposed use
is already serviced by utilities.
. t0.
as
Section and
Subsections
Evaluation of Impact
X111. AESTHETICS
The project site consists of existing residential units to be annexed and
are in keeping with the surrounding residential development within the
City. As such, there will be no impact to scenic vista open to public
view.
XN. CULTURAL
As an existing, improved residential subdivision, there are no known
RESOURCES
cultural or archaeological resources on-site.
aI
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES
APPLICATION:
PROJECT APPLICANT:
Master Case No. 96-206 (Prezone No. 96-002, Annexation
No. 1996 -OZ and General Plan Amendment 96-001)
City of Santa Clarita
PROJECT DESCRIPTION A request to annex a 38 -acre inhabited residential area
consisting of approximately 70 lots and the existing street
system. As a result of a density discrepancy, a General Plan
Amendment to change the land use designation from
Residential Estate (RE) to Residential Suburban (RS) Is
required in conjunction with the prezone/annexation.
PROJECT LOCATION: North and east of Abelia Road, adjacent to the northeast
City limits in the County of Los Angeles.
A public hearing on this matter will be conducted by the City of Santa Clarita City Council
on:
DATE: January 13, 1998
TIME: 6:30 p.m.
LOCATION: City Council Chambers
23920 Valencia Blvd., First Floor
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
A DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION has been prepared for the proposed development and
has been available for public review since 4:00 p.m. on October 27, 1997, at:
City Hall
Department of Planning and Building Services
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
If you wish to challenge the action taken on this matter in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this
notice, or written correspondence delivered to the City of Santa Clarita at or prior to, the
public hearing. Written correspondence received by Tuesday, January 6, 1998, will be
included in the written materials received by the City Council prior to the public hearing.
For further information regarding this proposal, you may contact the City of Santa Clarita,
Department of Planning and Building Services, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Third Floor, Santa
Clarita, CA 91355: Telephone: (805) 255-4330. Project Planner: Conal McNamara
Ken Pulskamp
Assistant City Manager
Posted: Santa Clarita City Hall
Jeffrey Lambert
Planning Manager
Published: The Newhall Signal
on December 19, 1997
CRUZAN MESA
y �J
I/ r
1 'yr D
SANTA
in
• c
ORDINANCE NO. 98-4
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP (PREZONE 96-002)
FOR THE INHABITED AREA LOCATED ADJACENT TO AND OUTSIDE THE
EXISTING CITY LIMIT, GENERALLY NORTH AND EAST OF
ABELIA ROAD, IN THE NORTHEAST PORTION OF CANYON COUNTRY
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita has proposed and initiated prezoning of
approximately 38 acres of inhabited land, located adjacent to and outside the existing City
limits, generally north and east of Abelia Road, in the northeast portion of Canyon Country; and
WHEREAS, such prezoning, as described in Exhibit A (Legal Description) and mapped
in Exhibit B, would become effective upon annexation and designated upon the Zoning Map
incorporated within and made a part of the City's Unified Development Code; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita Planning Commission set December 2, 1997, at the
hour of 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita,
California, as the time and place for a public hearing before said Planning Commission, and
notice of said public hearing was given in the manner required by the .Santa Clarita Municipal
Code; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita Planning Commission adopted Resolution P97-24
recommending that the City Council approve the proposed prezoning of the project area to allow
for future annexation; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita City Council set January 13, 1998, at the hour of
6:30 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita, California,
as the time and place for a public hearing before said City Council, and notice of said public
hearing was given in the manner required by the Santa Clarita Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, testimony was received, if any, for, and/or against the
proposed prezone; and
WHEREAS, at. said public hearing, said prezone was duly heard and considered.
THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby find and determine as follows:
A. The prezone is a change from Los Angeles County designation R-3 Multi -Family
to City of Santa Clarita designation RS in conformance in conformance with the
City's General Plan and Final EIR (SCH# 90010683) adopted June 1991, and with
the City's zoning designations which became effective December 24, 1992.
B. A Negative Declaration was prepared for the project and circulated for review
and comment by the public, with no comments received. The public review period
was from October 27, 1997, to November 18, 1997.
Ordinance No. 98-4
Page 2
C. Public participation and notification requirements pursuant to Sections 65090,
65091and 65854 of the Government Code of the State of California were duly
followed.
SECTION 2. Based upon the testimony and other evidence, if any, received at the public
hearing, and upon studies and investigations made by the Planning Commission and the City
Council and on their behalf, the City Council further finds and determines that, with approval
of the General Plan Amendment, the project is consistent with the General Plan and complies
with all other applicable requirements of State law and local ordinance.
SECTION 3. In acting on the prezoning application, the City Council has considered
certain principles and standards, and finds and determines as follows:
A. That a need for the prezone to the City zone exists within the project area.
B. That the subject property is a proper location for the City land use designation.
C. That public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good planning practice
justify the prezoning designation.
D. That the proposed prezoning designation is consistent with existing land uses in
the area and would not result in a substantive change to the existing zoning of
the subject site.
E. That the proposed Prezone 96-002 consists of 38 acres of inhabited land located
adjacent to, and outside of the existing City limits, generally north and east of
Abelia Road, in the Canyon Country area of the Santa Clarita Valley, as
identified in Exhibit B.
SECTION 4. The City of Santa Clarita City Council has reviewed and considered the
Initial Study prepared for the project and finds and determines as follows:
A. Said study found that no adverse impact to the existing and future environment
of the area would result from the proposed prezone.
B. The proposed prezone would not have a significant adverse effect on the
environment and the proposed Negative Declaration was prepared, posted, and
advertised in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
SECTION 5: Based upon the foregoing, the City Council does hereby ordain that the
application for a prezone is approved, and that the Official Zoning Map of the City of Santa
Clarita is hereby amended to designate the subject property as identified in Exhibit C.
SECTION 6. This ordinance shall become effective at 12:01 a.m. on the thirty-first day
after adoption, or upon the effective date of the annexation of the subject property to the City
Ordinance No. 98-4
Page 3
of Santa Clarita, whichever occurs last.
SECTION 7. The City Clerk shall certify as to the passage of this Ordinance and cause
it to be published in the manner prescribed by law:
Ordinance No. 98-4
Page 4
PASSED AND.APPROVED this day of , 19_.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
I, Sharon L. Dawson, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. was regularly introduced and 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
annex\96-2ord.uhn
Exhibit B
DESCRIPTION OF ANNEXATION 1996-02
TO THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
As Modified by the Local Agency Formation Commission
THAT PORTION OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP
4 NORTH, RANGE 14 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE UNINCORPORATED
TERRITORY OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS
AS FOLLOWS:
ALL OF TRACT 44344 AS SHOWN ON MAP FILED IN BOOK 1161 PAGES 76 THROUGH
83 IN THE OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR -RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF LOS
ANGELES.
7
t
in
n
P
v
ui
AUREL
OURT
N 8'P 24' 55' W 1343.36'
TRACT MM 44344
«-4�./-1
N 88°54' 19' V 675.97' a OZ' W V 337.47
9g�CIq YGddACY iNO. 28OQ2 U
94 ¢
ROAD J
MINI R0 M II�� 2
ME
® LEGEND
iidaoasyiie AMME A4V®Gd B®6DG1®dWTl
EM37M C= WMA"
P.O.B. PC9fT OF Bl'(momR'Dma va7 x
XXV MAP
(PROPOSED)
ANNMATIOON NO. ICN -02
'(� THE CITY MJF SANTO Cl dRiITF�
Exhibit C
.M
lu
2
E�aoaoY a = 2
HAMHUHC.SEE SHEET 9
m T
N
C
SNO DROP. COURT
3 �/mawa W maw
= N m
'ma.... cl of
Z 1 LAfyHI � N
mM.e
O
O
Im
JA
S 88013'08- E 311.38'
®
LEGEND:
viii�iiaaaai MHmT9�D(4n ®®6 mmy
----mw7mcffvmWmmy
P.O.B. POCHT CF swim?m
COMM
(PROPOSED)
ANHE BION Ho.loom
®
iiq. SHE' ff OF SAWA : LPRdTA
COMM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
CASE PLANNER:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
STAFF REPORT
MASTER CASE NO. 96-206
PREZONE NO. 96-002
(ASSOCIATED WITH ANNEXATION NO. 1996-02)
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 96-001
December 2, 1997
Ch rperson Hoback and Members of the Planning Commission
Jey Lambert, AICP, Planning Manager
Ch
McNamara, AICP, Assistant Planner II
City of Santa Clarita
North and east of Abelia Road, adjacent to the northeast City limits in the
County of Los Angeles
REQUEST: A request to prezone from Los Angeles County Multi -Family (R-3) zoning
to City of Santa Clarita Residential Suburban (RS) in order to annex the
38 -acre inhabited residential area consisting of approximately 70 lots and
the existing street system. As a result of a density discrepancy, a General
Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Residential
Estate (RE) to Residential Suburban (RS) is required in conjunction with
the prezone and annexation
Waw&ftf�
At the request of area residents, the City of Santa Clarita has initiated the annexation of the
California Canyons tract in northeastern Canyon Country. Petitions circulated, by area
residents in 1996 indicate that approximately 77% of the property owners in the California
Canyons area support annexation. Annexation to the City is regulated by the Cortese -Knox
Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985 (revised 1996) and the Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCO). LAFCO requires that the City prezone the territory prior to annexation.
Prezone No. 96-002 is a proposal to prezone the 38 -acre area ("California Canyons Annexation")
to the City of Santa Clarita's RS (Residential Suburban) land use district, in conformance with
the City's General Plan to allow for annexation of the site to the City. The project site is located
north and east of Abelia Road, adjacent to the northeast City limits in the Canyon Country area.
In addition to the need for a prezone, a General Plan Amendment is required to change the land
use designation from Residential Estate (RE) to Residential Suburban (RS). At the time the
City's General Plan was adopted, the subject site was designated RE; however, approvals and
construction under the County of Los Angeles jurisdiction resulted in units being constructed
at a RS density. By recognizing the subject site as having an RS density, the site will be
consistent with the surrounding single-family residential development.
�
r—L
Agenda lte .
California Canyons Annexation
December 2, 1997
Page 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A petition has been received from homeowners of the California Canyons tract in northeast
Canyon Country to annex their County of Los Angeles approved' subdivision into the City of
Santa Clarita. The subdivision, which was constructed in 1994, lies just outside the City limits
on the northeast border of Canyon Country. The petitioners are requesting a prezone,
annexation, and General Plan Amendment to establish the subject site as a Residential
Suburban land use district on the General Plan Map. There will be no development associated
with this request, as the site is completely built -out
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION. SURROUNDING
LAND
USE, ZONING
General Plan
Zoning
Land Use
PROJECT:
RE'
RE
Existing SFR Subdivision
North
OS
OS
Open Space
South
RS
RS
Existing SFR Subdivision
West
RE
RE
Open Space
East
RE
RE
Open Space
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS
As part of the project review, an environmental assessment was made to evaluate the impacts
of the project. It was determined that the proposed project could not have a significant effect
on the environment. As such, a Negative Declaration was prepared by staff and circulated for
public review and comment on October 27, 1997. As of the date of preparing this staff report,
no comments on the Negative Declaration were received.
INTERDEPARTMENT/INTERAGENCY REVIEW
The project has been distributed to the affected City Departments and outside agencies.
Subsequently, the Community Development Department has received comments which have
been incorporated into conditions of approval.
'General Pian Amendment No. 96-001 requested to change designation to Residential Suburban
(RS) to be consistent with existing single-family housing density on-site.
a
California Canyons Annexation
December 2, 1997
Page 3
I.\M\T1`M
The site is located outside the City limits in the Residential Estate (RE) land use district and
is bordered on the north, west, and east by open space and on the south by existing single-family
residential development. The proposed project specifically implements General Plan Land Use
Policy 2.1 which seeks to "encourage the development of a broad range of housing types to meet
the needs of the existing and future residents of the planning area, including but not limited to,
the development of single-family detached homes, condominiums, apartments, and
manufactured housing."
Ability to Provide Services
All applicable City departments have reviewed the proposal and determined that the City can
provide the public services necessary to accommodate the annexation. The subject site is an
island surrounded by City services and the additional 38 acre area will require a minimal
expenditure of funds.
General Plan Amendment
In reviewing the application, staff believes that a General Plan Amendment is justified for the
proposed project. The designation of Residential Estate (RE) for the site not only fails to take
into consideration the existing single family residential units on-site but also the density of the
surrounding community. By establishing the General Plan land use designation as Residential
Suburban, with a mid-range density of 5 units/acre, consistency with both the units on site and
the surrounding community will be ensured.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
1) Recommend that the City Council adopt the Negative Declaration.
2) Adopt Resolution P97-24, recommending that the City Council approve Master Case 96-
206 which consists of Prezone No. 96-002 and General Plan Amendment No. 96-001.
JJL:CDM:lep
advance\caca-sl.cdm
3
F � �
r
RESOLUTION NO. P97.24
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE MASTER CASE NO. 96-206, CONSISTING OF
PREZONE NO. 96-002, ANNEXATION NO. 1996-02, GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT NO. 96-001, AND THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION,
TO.ALLOW FOR THE PREZONING OF THE CALIFORNIA CANYONS TRACT
(PROPERTY LOCATED GENERALLY NORTH AND EAST OF ABELIA ROAD,
ADJACENT TO THE NORTHEAST CITY LIMITS IN THE CANYON COUNTRY
AREA)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita has proposed and initiated prezoning of
approximately 38 acres of inhabited land, located adjacent to and outside the existing
City limits, generally north and east of Abelia Road in northeast Canyon Country; and
WHEREAS, such prezoning, as described in Exhibit A and mapped in Exhibit B,
would become effective upon annexation and designated upon the Zoning Map
incorporated within and made a part of the City's Unified Development Code; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clarita Planning Commission set December 2,
1997, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard,
Santa Clarita, California, as the time and place for a public hearing before said City
Council, and notice of said public hearing was given in the manner required by the Santa
Clarita Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, testimony was received, if any, for, and/or
against the proposed prezone and general plan amendment; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, said prezone was duly heard and considered.
THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa
Clarita as follows:
SECTION 1. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council does
hereby find and determine as follows:
A. The General Plan Amendment is a change from Residential Estate to
Residential Suburban to be consistent with the existing residential units
and surrounding development;
B. The prezone is a change from Los Angeles County multi -family R-3 zoning
to City RS (Residential Suburban) zoning, in conformance with the City's
General Plan.
C. The Initial Study prepared for the project has been circulated for review
and comment by affected governmental agencies and the public, and no
comments were received. The public review period was from October 27,
1997, to November 18, 1997.
C. Public participation and notification requirements pursuant to Sections
65090, 65351, and 65854 of the Government Code of the State of
California were duly followed.
SECTION 2. Based upon the testimony and other -evidence, if any, received at
the public hearing, the Planning Commission finds and determines that, with adoption
of the General Plan Amendment, the project is consistent with the General Plan and
complies with all other applicable requirements of State law and local ordinance.
SECTION 3 In acting on the prezoning application, the Planning Commission
has considered certain principles and standards, and finds and determines as follows:
A. That a need for the prezone classification to RS (Residential Suburban),
exists within the project area.
B. That the subject property is a proper location for the RS designation.
C. That public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good planning
practice justify the prezoning designation of RS.
D. That the proposed prezoning designation of RS is consistent with existing
land uses in the area and would not result in a substantive change to the
existing zoning of the subject site.
E. That the proposed Annexation No. 1996-02 prezoning consists of 38 acres
of inhabited land located adjacent to, and outside of the existing City
limits, north and east of Abelia Road in Canyon Country as identified in
Exhibit A.
SECTION 4. The City of Santa Clarita Planning Commission has reviewed and
considered the Initial Study prepared for the project and finds and determinesas follows:
A. Said study found that no adverse impact to the existing and future
environment of the area would result from the proposal.
B. The proposed prezone would not have a significant adverse effect on the
environment and the proposed Negative Declaration was prepared,
posted, and advertised in accordance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
SECTION 5. Based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission recommends
that the City Council hereby ordain that the application for a prezone be approved, and
that the Official Zoning Map of the City of Santa Clarita is hereby amended to designate
the subject property RS.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of December, 1997.
Darla Hoback, Chairperson
Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Ken Pulskamp
Secretary, Planning Commission
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
I, Sharon L. Dawson, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Santa Ciarita, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa
Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 2nd day of December 1997 by the following vote
of the Planning Commission:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
eurtmE\fau-rL dm
CITY CLERK
6
KRFNCity of Santa Clarita
c
California Canyons
Fiscal Impact Analysis
California Canyons
City of Santa Clarita
Scenario:
Tax Transfer -.06
Scenario Description:
First Draft
REPORT
-
PAGE
SCHEDULE
TITLE
NUMBER
A
Summary of Fiscal Impacts
1
B
Analysis Assumptions
2
C
Residential Development Profile
3
D
Commercial Development Profile
4
E
Development Potentials by Land Use Type
5
F
Projected Development Absorption
6
G
Summary of Projected Revenue Sources
7
H
Summary of Projected General Fund Expenc
8
Prepared For:
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Prepared By:
Michele Hansen, Accountant
December 23, 1997
File: CALCAN.WK4 Tax Transfer -.06: First Draft
12/23/97
KRWCity of Santa Clarita
IMPACTS OF AREA DEVELOPMENT 1998
DEMOGRAPHIC IMPACTS
Califomia Canyons
Summary of Fiscal Impacts
Year
Population Growth
216
216
216
216
216
216
216
216
216
216
216
Employment Growth
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
FISCAL IMPACTS (millions of constant 1997 S) 1/
Annual Revenues to City General Fund
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
Z03
Annual Service Expenditures Incurred by City
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
SURPLUS OR (DEFICIT):
($0.01)
($0.01)
($0.01)
($0.01)
($0.01)
($0.01)
($0.01)
($0.01)
($0.01)
(saol)
($0.01)
T PRESENT VALUES
Discount Rate: 7.0%
Revenues to City (millions of 97 $)
$0.19
Expenditures Incurred by City (millions of 97 $)
$0.24
Difference
($0.05)
20 -Year Time Period (Annex. through Year 2018)
Revenues to City (millions of 97 $)
$0.27
Expenditures Incurred by City (millions of 97 $)
$0.35
Difference
($0.08)
30 -Year Time Period (Annex. through Year 2028)
$0.31
Revenues to City (millions of 97 $)
Expenditures Incurred by City (millions of 97 $)
$0.40
Difference
($0.09)
1/ Average annual consumer price index value of 3.0% used
for discounting projected revenues and expenditures.
Tax Transfer -,06
12123197
Yeor20
Year30,
2016
2028
216
216
0
0
$0.02
$0.02
$0.03
$0.04
(S0.01)
($0.01)
Tax Transfer -,06
Millions $ FISCAL IMPACT OF ANNEXATION
+ Gen. Fund Revenues
e City Service Demand
1998 2003 2008 2013 2018 2023 2028
Years
File: CALCAN.WK4 Tax Transfer -.06: First Draft
KRM/City of Santa Clanta California Canyons 12/23197
Schedule B: Analysis Assumptions
PROJECT IDENTIFICATION GENERAL DEVELOPMENT ASSUMPTIONS
City Jurisdiction:
Study Identification:
Scenario:
Scenario Description:
Analyst Identification:
Current Calendar Year:
Year of Annexation to City:
DEMOGRAPHIC ASSUMPTIONS
Santa Clarita
California Canyons
Tax Transfer - .06
First Draft
Michele Hansen, Accountant
1997
1998
Ratio of net to gross project acreage (Net excludes r. 85%
HOTEL DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION
Efficiency Rate:
85%
Average Room Size (sf)
500
Average Dally Room Rate
$65
Estimated Average Occupancy Rate
70%
Santa Clarita Transient Occupancy Tax Rate
10%
Santo Clarita Population as of Jan. 1, 194
141,690
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ABSORPTION SCHEDULE
Current Private Employment In Santa Clc
41,223
start mole r Yr.
Years
RESIDENTIAL USES Yemfl) Foraeveloo
to Absorb
ECONOMIC PARAMETERS
Multi -Family Rental 1
1999
1
Inf. Rate - Sale Prices for New Constructi,
3.0%
Muttl-Famlly, Sale 1
1999
1
Inf. Rate - Taxable Retail Sales
3.0%
Multi -Family Seniors 2
2000
1
Inf. Rate - Hotel Room Rates:
3.0%
Single Family High Density 6
2004
2
Inf. Rote - State Subvention Revenues
2.0%
Single Family Medlum Density 2
2000
3
Inf. Rate - misc. local fees and taxes
2.0% _
Single Family Low Density 3
2001
10
Int. Rate - City Provided Services
3.5%
Single Family Estate 10
2008
3
Inf. Rate - Avg. C.P.I. (used for discountlr
3.0%
RETAIL AND RELATED
PROPERTY VALUE ASSUMPTIONS
Local Retail 2
2000
5
Value per sf of improved commercial lal
$9.00
Community Retail 3
2001
10
Regional Retail 3
2001
1
CanMallzotion Rates
Automobile Dealership 1
1999
1
Apartments
10.5%
Service Station 1
1999
1
Retail
10.0%
Commercial Office
9.0%
OFFICE, BUS. PK INDUS. & HOTEL
Business Park
9.0%
Light lndustrlaf
10.5%
Commercial Office 1
1999
5
Business Park 10
2008
15
Monthly Rents for Commercial Soo (NNNea
r SF 1
Light IndusMal 10
2008
15
Hotel 15
2013
1
Local Retail
$1.63
Community Retail
$1.25
CITY STREET AND PARK ASSUMPTIONS
Regional Retail
$1.45
Commercial Office
$1.10
Total Miles of Public Streets wA Santa Clarita:
258.6
Business Park
$1.00
Acres of CIH Serviced Park Land w/I Santa Clarita
400.5
Light Industrial
$0.45
New Pork Development (for project area)
Develop new park acreage every 'X' years:
3
Construction Value Per unit
First year of new park development: (1f)
3
Auto Dealership (sq. ft.)
$55
MUNI. SERVICE EXPENDITURES (Fiscal Year 97/98 Budget)
Service Station (sq. ft.)
$75
Hotel (sq. ft.)
$125
Police and Fire Contract Services
$9,595.000
Public Works - Streets &Roads
$11,823,536
Real perty Aporenlanon A=mnfions
General Governmental SeMces
City Council
$171,140
Residential property resale every 'X' y
7
City Manager
$1,066.840
Commercial property resale every 'X'
10
City Attorney
$705,000
Max. AV escalation for unsold properl
2.0%
- City Clerk
$430.730
Avg. yearly residenfial appreciation rc
3.0%
Personnel
$410,890
Avg. yeah commercial appreciator
3.0%
Finance Administration
$1,043,455
General Services
$5,417,595
TAXABLE SALES ASSUMPTIONS
Computer Services
$1,575,095
Parks and Recreation
$8.602695
Local Retail (per st):
$225
Community Retail (per sf):
$185
MISC. MUNI. REVENUES (Fiscal Year 97/98 Bud et)
Regional Retail (per st):
$250
_ _
Automobile Dealership (per sf):
$1
Business License Tax Revenues
S 182000
Service Station (per sf):
$75
Cigarette Tax Revenue
$1
Commercial Office (per sf):
$1
Motor Vehicle License Fee Revenue
$5,277,000
Business Park (per st):
$15
Off -Highway Motor Vehicle License Revenue
$2300
Light Industrial (per sf):
S5
Highway Users (Gas) Tax Revenue
$2679.390
Motor Vehicle Fines
$106,000
Hotel (per hotel guest):
$15
Other Fins, Penalties
$6,120
Franchise Fee Revenues
$3,462B00
TOTAL TAXABLE RETAIL SALES FOR CITY:
$1,470.000.000
Parks and Recreation Service Charges
$1.630.940
File: CALCAN.WK4 Tax Transfer -.08: Frs[Drati
KAWCity of Santa Clarlta California Canyons
Schedule Q Residential Development Profile
12/23/97
Plan Area By Name
Anticipated Land Use
By Residential
Property Type
Total
Gross
Acres
Total Units
Existing or
Planned
Estm. AV.. at
Completion of Devi
(Constant 1997 S)
it
I
i
I
California Canyons
Sin le Family -Low Dens!
38.0
69
$12,352.000
.I
1
I
Source: City of Santa Clarito
File: CALCAN.WK4 Tax Transfer -.06: First Draft
KRM/City of Santa Clarita California Canyons 12J23/97
Schedule D: Commercial Development Profile
Esfm. AV.. at
Plan Area By Name Existing or Planned Land Use. (000's of SF) Total Completion of DevelpJ
Retail off./Bus Pk Light Ind. Hotel Acres (Constant 1997 $) II
i
i
I
I
i
i
ii
i
I
'I
I
I
i
y
Source: City of Santa Clarita
File: CALCAN.WK4 Tax Transfer -.06: First Draft
KRM/City of Santa Clarita California Canyons 12/23/97
Schedule E: Development Potentials by Land Use Type.
RESIDENTIAL LAND USE
Multi -family Rental
Multi -Family Sale
Multi -Family Seniors
Single Family High Density
Single Family Medium Density
Single Family Low Density
Single Family Estate
Subtotals
COMMERCIAL LAND USE
Retail and Related
Local Retail
Community Retail
Regional Retail
Automobile Dealership 1/
Service Station
Office/Business Park/Light Industrial
Commercial Office
Business Park
Light Industrial
Hotel
Subtotals
Residential Units
Gross Acres
Avg, Assd Value Per DU
Existing Planned
Existing Planned
Existing Planned
Units Units
Development Development
Development Development
0
0 0.0 0.0
$0 $0
0
0 0.0 0.0
$0 SO
0
0 0.0 0.0
$0 $0
0
0 0.0 0.0
$0 $0
0
0 0.0 0.0
$0 $0
69
0 38.0 0.0
$179,014 $0
0
0 0.0 0.0
$0 $0
69
0 38.0 0.0
Total Potential Sq. Ft.
Gross Acres
Assd. Value Per SF Built
Existing Planned
Existing Planned
Existing Planned
Development Development
Development Development
Development Development
0
0 0.0 0.0
$0 $0
0
0 0.0 0.0
$0 $0
0
0 0.0 0.0
$0 $0
0
0 0.0 0.0
$0 SO
0
0 0.0 0.0
$0 $0
0
0 0.0 0.0
$0 $0
0
0 0.0 0.0
$0 $0
0
0 0.0 0.0
$0 $0
0
0 0.0 0.0
$0 $0
0
0 0.0 0.0
1 / Dealerships consists of a surplus lot used to house excess inventory. No new structures are planned.
ERR
File: CALCAN.WK4 Tax Transfer -.06: First Draft
KRM/City of Santa Clarita - California Canyons 12/23/97
Schedule F: Projected Development Absorption
TOTAL NEW UNITS
LAND USE BY CATEGORY POSSIBLE
Resldentlal Uses
Mufti-Famlly Rental 0 DUs
MuBI-Famlly Sole 0 DUs
Muttl•Fomlly Seniors 0 DUs
Single Family High Density 0 DUs
Single Family Medium Density 0. DUs
Single Family Low Density 0 DUs
Single Famlly Estate 0 DUs
Annexa8on I
1998
_
0
0
0
0
0
69
0
year 1
1999
0
0
0
•0
0
0
0
Year 2
2000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Year 3
2001
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Year 4
2002
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Veor 5
2003
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Year 6
2004
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Year 7
2005
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Year 8
2006
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Year 9
2007
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Year 10
2008
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Year 20
2018
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Year 30
2028
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Subtotal: All dwellings 0
69
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
- 0
0
Cum. Subtotal: All dwellings
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
- 69
69
69
Subtotal: For -Sale dwellings
69
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cum. Subtotal: All ForSole dwellings
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
69
Retail and Related
Local Retoll 0
s.f.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Community Retall 0
s.f.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Regional Retail 0
s.f.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Automobile Dealership 0
s.f.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Service Station 0
s.f.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Office/Business Park/Light Industrial
Commercial Office 0
s.f.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Business Park 0
s.f.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Light Industrial 0
s.f.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Commercial Lodalna
Hotel 0
s.f.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Subtotal: Commercial - 0
s.f.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cum. Subtotal: Commercial
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
CUMULATIVE TOTALS
Cumulative Population within Annexed Area
216
216
216
216
216
216
216
216
216
216
216
216
216
Cumulative Children of School Age
Elementary School Age
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
Jr. High School Age
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
- 7
7
7
7
High School Age
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14 '
14
14
14
14
Cumulative Private Sector Employment
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cumulative Built Hotel Rooms
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
File: CALCAN.WK4 Tax Transfer -.06: First Draft
KRWCity of Santa Clarita
City Revenue Sources
(millions of Current Yr. $)
Property Tax Revenue 1/
Sales Tax Revenue 2/
Other Local Taxes
Property Transfer Tax:
Business License Tax:
Transient Occupancy Tax 3/
State Subventions
Cigarette Tax:
Motor Vehicle License Fee:
Off -Highway Motor Vehicle License Fee:
Highway Users (Gas) Tax:
Fines, Forfeitures, Penalties
Motor Vehicle Fines:
Other Fines. Penalties:
Franchise Fees:
Parks and Recreation Service Charges
NET ANNUAL REVENUES TO CITY
Estm. Investment Income @ 4% of Total Revenues:
TOTAL REVENUES TO CITY ( Current Year $ ):
TOTAL REVENUES TO CITY (1997 Constant S) 4/
California Canyons 1223/97
Schedule G: Summary of Projected Revenue Sources
Amezaflon
Vear 1
Vear 2
Vear 3
year 4
Vear 5
Yea 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 20
Year W
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2018
2028
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 -
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00.
0.00
0.00
$0.03
50.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0. 03
50.03
$0.03
$0.04
$0.06
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
50.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.03
$0.02
$0.02
1 / resold every 10 years. Resole price averages 12% above prior year's assessed value. Taxable assessed value for residential property excludes $7,000
homeowner's exemption on all non -rental properties.
2/
Projected sales tax revenues are for on-site, polntof-purchase transactions only.
3/ Assumes on average daily room rote of $65, average daily occupancy at 70% and a Santa Clarita hotel tax rate of 10%.
4/ Average annual consumer price Index value of 3,0% used for discounting projected revenues.
File: CALCAN.WK4 Tax Transfer -.061 First Draft
KFM/City of Santa Clarita California Canyons
Schedule H: Summary of Projected General Fund Expenditures
12/23/97
Regolentlal Property 80%
Cont Ncld Proper 20%
SERVICE EXPENDITURE BURDENS 1/
Annexation
Yeorl
Year2
veva
Year4
VearS
Vear6
veer]
vear8
Yea
Veer 10
Year 20
veer 30
(millions of Current Yr. $)
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
200,1
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2018
2028
Police and Fire Contract Services
Per Capita Factor at $54.17
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
Per Employee Factor at $46.55
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total Annual O & M Expenditures:
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
OA1
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
Public Works - Streets & Roads
Roadway Development Schedule:
Existing streets on. miles):
0.14.
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
0.14
New Streets (cum In. miles): 2/
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total Annual 0 & M Exp. at $46.000 per In. in
0,01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
- 0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
Public Works - Administratlon
Average of 3,8% of program budget
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ODD
0.00
0.00
0.00
General Governmental Services
City Council
Per Capita Factor at $0.97
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Per Employee Factor at $0.83
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total Annual O & M Expenditures:
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
City Manager
Per Capita Factor at $6.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00.
0.00
0.00 -
0.00
Per Employee Factor at $5.18
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total Annual O & M Expenditures:
0.00
0.00
_ 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
City Attorney
Per Capita Factor at $3.98
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Per Employee Factor at $3.42
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
.0.00
Total Annual 0 & M Expenditures:
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.DO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
City Clerk
Per Capita Factor at $2.43
0.00
OAO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
OAO
0.00
0.00
0.00
Per Employee Factor at $2.09
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.DO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total Annual O & M Expenditures:
0.00
OAO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
(CONTINUED ON FOLLOWING PAGE)
File: CALCAN.WK4 Tax Transfer -.06: First Draft
KRWCity of Santa Clarita
Personnel
Per Capita Factor at $2.32
Per Employee Factor at $1.99
Total Annual O & M Expenditures:
Finance Adminislratlon
Per Capita Factor at $5.89
Per Employee Factor at $5.06
Total Annual O & M Expenditures:
General Services
Per Capita Factor at $30.59
Per Employee Factor at $26.28
Total Annual O & M Expenditures:
Computer services
Per Capita Factor at $8.89
Per Employee Factor at $7.64
Total Annual O & M Expenditures:
Park Development Schedule (In cum acres) 3/
-
0.00
0.00
$0.06
$0.09
$0.03
$0.04
i
0.00
0.00
0.00
California Canyons
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ODD
0.00
12123197
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
OAO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
CAO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
CAO
O.DO
0.00
0.00
0.00
ODD
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0 -DO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.DO
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
OCT
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ODD
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
Park Development Schedule (In cum acres) 3/
-
0.00
0.00
$0.06
$0.09
$0.03
$0.04
Existing Park Acreage within Project Area
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ODD
0.00
New Park Acreage
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
- 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total Annual O & M Exp. at $21,000 per acrf
0.DO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
TOTAL EXPENSES TO CITY (current yr. $) $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.04 $0.04 $0.04 $0.04 $0.04 $0.04 $0.04 $0.05
TOTAL EXPENSES TO CITY ( 1997 Constant $ ) 4, $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 50.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03 $0.03
NOTES
1/ Residential density at buildout projected at 3.13 persons per household. Employment
density projected at 0.00 employees per 1,000 sq, ft, of commercial/Industrial space.
2/ Project area highways, collector roads and local streets estimated at 0 gross acres. Total
R -O -W acreage estimated to be approximately 0.0 linear miles.
3/ approximately 0 acres of new park area will be added every 3 years, beginning In year
2001.
4/ Average annual consumer price Index value of 3.0% used for discounting projected expenditures.
File: CALCAN.WK4 Tax Transfer - .06: First Draft
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
$0.06
$0.09
$0.03
$0.04
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on January 13, 1998, the City Council of the City of
Santa Clarita introduced Ordinance 98-4 entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA,
CALIFORNIA AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP (PREZONE 96-002)
FOR THE INHABITED AREA LOCATED ADJACENT TO AND OUTSIDE THE
EXISTING CITY LIMIT, GENERALLY NORTH AND EAST OF ABELIA ROAD, IN
THE NORTHEAST PORTION OF CANYON COUNTRY
A certified copy of the complete text of the ordinance is posted and may be read in the City
Clerk's Office, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 301, Santa Clarita, and/or a copy may be
obtained from that office.
Dated this 16th day of January, 1998.
Sharon L. Dawson, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Clarita
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
Sharon L. Dawson, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that she is the duly
appointed and qualified City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita and that by Friday, January
16, 1998, she caused a certified copy of the subject ordinance to be posted and made
available for public review in the City Clerk's office and a copy of the ordinance summary to
be published as required by law.
9. -
Sharon L. Dawson, CMC, City Clerk
City of Santa Clarita
California
Canyons
Mapscale 1:3300
1 inch = 275 feet
�1
t 1995 County of los Angeles. All Rights Resen�ed. The data contained herein Is the
tf the Cauntyof Los Angeles supplied under license and may not 6e used or reproduced
the County of Los Angeles. 5trcet and parcel lriformatlon is pra✓ided the Office of
tyAssessorand the los Angeles County Deparhnent of Pub it c Works. s Angeles County
rany_errors oromisslons In such information.
e
t�
California
Canyons
Mapscale 1:3300
1 inch = 275 feet
�1
t 1995 County of los Angeles. All Rights Resen�ed. The data contained herein Is the
tf the Cauntyof Los Angeles supplied under license and may not 6e used or reproduced
the County of Los Angeles. 5trcet and parcel lriformatlon is pra✓ided the Office of
tyAssessorand the los Angeles County Deparhnent of Pub it c Works. s Angeles County
rany_errors oromisslons In such information.