Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-04-21 - AGENDA REPORTS - BOUQUET SENIORS HOUSING (2)CITY OF SANTA CLARITA AGENDA REPORT PUBLIC HEARING City Manager Item to be pre DATE: April 21, 1998 SUBJECT: BOUQUET SENIORS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT (MASTER CASE 97-102: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97-0021 ZONE CHANGE 97-002 / CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-012/ DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 98-001 SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH# 97081065). DEPARTMENT: Planning & Building Services RECOMMENDED ACTION City Council open the public hearing regarding Master Case 97-102, receive the staff report and testimony, and continue the item to the meeting of April 28, 1998 for action, in order to consider the project's Final Environmental Impact report for a period of no less than ten (10) days, in accordance with the provisions of the California , Environmental Quality Act. BACK—QCROUNB' On April 7, 1998, the City of Santa Clarita Planning Commission adopted two resolutions: Resolution P98.11 recommending. that the City Council certify the Subsequent Focused Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Bouquet Seniors Affordable Housing Project, as well as recommending Council adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project; and Resolution P98-12 recommending that the City Council approve the requested entitlements for the Bouquet Seniors Affordable Housing Project. Master Case 97-102, otherwise referred to as the Bouquet Seniors Affordable Housing Project, includes a request for the following entitlements; An amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element Land Use Map to redesignate approximately 12.36 acres of RS (Residential Suburban) land use to RMH (Residential Medium High) land use; a zone change modifying the Unified Development Code zoning designation and standards of approximately 12.36 acres of property from RS (Residential Suburban — 5 dwelling units per acre) to RMH (Residential Medium High — 20 dwelling units per acre); a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a three story, 264 unit senior affordable housing apartment project, to permit a 25% density bonus .for the property, to provide an amenities bonus for partial waiver of development fees, and to allow for the installation of gates for the residential project; a development agreement restricting the project to a senior, low income population in perpetuity; and a review and certification of the Continued� Agenda Item -9— Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH#97081065) prepared for the project. The project site is located westerly and adjacent to Bouquet Canyon Road, between Festividad Drive and Espuella Drive, in the Saugus community of the City of Santa Clarita. The Planning Commission considered the project over the course of three meetings, prior to forwarding a recommendation to the City Council regarding an action on the project. The meetings were held on March 3, 1998, March 17, 1998, and April 7, 1998. During the course of these meeting, the Commission considered staff reports, public testimony and the Draft Subsequent Focused Environmental Impact Report (Draft Subsequent EIR) prepared for the project. Attached for your reference is a detailed project description and summarization of the project's environmental analysis. There was very little public controversy raised regarding the project. In actuality the project received a tremendous amount of community support, with the President of the Monteverde Homeowner's Association expressing approval of the project as designed. The majority of the Planning Commission's time was devoted to considering the project's request for fee waivers. In making their recommendation to the City Council, the Commission considered the following: Bridge and Thoroughfare District (B & T) Fees: These fees are calculated according to a setformula. This project is located in the Bouquet Canyon District, which has a rate of $5,300.00. Apartment projects have a per unit development factor of 0.7. For a 264 unit apartment project, the fee would be 264 (units) multiplied by the District rate of $5,300.00, multiplied again by the development factor of 0.7. 264 x $5,300.00 x 0.7 = $979,440.00 However, the B & T fee calculated above assumes that the project is a market rate apartment project. Seniors, on average, generate fewer trips than the average apartment renter. According to the Institute of Transportation Engineering manual, a senior oriented apartment project produces approximately 55% fewer trips than a typical apartment project. Therefore, the Planning Commission supported a 55% reduction in Bridge and Thoroughfare District fees. This reduction equals $440,748.00. 55% of $979,440.00 = $538,692 $979,440.00 - $538,692 = $440,748.00 The project's total of $440,748.00 paid towards the Bouquet Canyon Bridge and Thoroughfare District is more than the District would receive in funding based on the current RS (Residential Suburban) zoning designation of the site. This analysis is based on the existing 12.36 acre RS (Residential Suburban) site being developed with a maximum of 61 single family homes, which would then be responsible for a B & T payment of $323,000.00. Parkland Dedication Requirement Fees: The exact fees are difficult to determine without an appraisal of the property. However, the formula takes into account the number of units (264), multiplies the units by the number of people per unit (2.98), and multiplies 2 this figure by .003. The 2.98 people per unit factor is, used as an average. Therefore, 2:98 people per unit would be high for a senior project, but low for a single-family household. The multiplier of .003 represents the City's requirement of providing 3 acres of parkland for every 1,000 people (3 acres/1,000 = .003). 264 x 2.98 people/unit x.003 = 2.36 acres. Fair market value for the property could range between $200,000.00 to $400,000.00 per acre. While the fair market value of the property has not been determined,: an assumption could be made regarding the price of the property paid by the applicant, divided by the project's developable acreage. This assumption would value the property at approximately $204,545.00 per acre. Therefore, the project could be responsible for $482,726.00 in parkland dedication requirements. 2.36 x $204,545.00 = $482,726.00 Please consider this a rough estimate, as the fair market value of the property has yet to be determined. The Commission took into consideration the following information when determining a reduction in parkland dedication fees. The number of people per unit required in calculating parkland dedication fees is an average. However, the senior population project is estimated to generate approximately 1.41 people per unit, as identified in the project's fiscal impact analysis and Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report. The Planning Commission supported a lesser number of people per unit, which could reduce the applicant's parkland dedication requirement. 264 x 1.41 people/unit x .003 = 1.12 acres At $204,545 per acre, the parkland dedication requirement would be equal to $229,090.00. 1.12 acres x $204,545.00 = $229,090.00 Furthermore, the applicant is providing for on-site, active recreational amenities. The Unified Development Code grants staff the authority to credit projects up to 30% for parkland dedication. Therefore, with a dedication requirement of 1.12 acres, the project would need to provide approximately 1/3 of an acre (30%. of 1.12 acres) of active recreation area on the project site, or approximately 14,600 square feet of active area. The applicant would then receive a 30% reduction in parkland dedication fees, for a total requirement of $160,363.00 for parkland dedication fees. The applicant is currently designing the three inner courtyards of the project.to provide for on-site, active recreational amenities. Transit Mitigation Fees: The City's transit mitigation fee is calculated at $200.00 per unit. For the Bouquet Seniors Affordable Housing project, the transit mitigation fee would equal $52,800.00. 264 units x $200.00/unit = $52,800.00 The Planning Commission took into consideration the following information when calculating a reduction in transit fees. Transit staff compared the number of City Dial -A - Ride pick ups for senior apartment projects that have their own transit buses with senior projects lacking their own transit service. Complex Own Transit? Number of Units Dial -A -Ride Trips/Mo. Dial -A -Ride Trips/Unit Sterling Canyon Yes 130 36 Trips/Month 0.28 Trips/Unit Valley Oaks Yes 248 11 Trips/Month 0.48 Trips/Unit Capri Yes 90 42 Trips/Month 0.47 Trips/Unit Willows No 80 58 Trips/Month 0.73 Trips/Unit Whispering Oaks 1 No 65 71 Trips/Month 1.09 Trips/Unit Senior apartment projects that have their own transit bus service average 0.41 Dial -A - Ride trips per unit. Senior apartment projects without their own transportation services average 0.91 trips per unit. It is safe to assume that some of the residents of the Bouquet Seniors Affordable Housing project will use City transit services.. However, the Planning Commission is requesting the Council approve a 50% reduction in transit fees based on the fact that the project will be served by the Senior Center's para -transit system. The transit mitigation fee for the project would then equal $26,400.00. $52,800.00 x 0.5 = $26,400.00 CONCLUSION: The information presented above can be summarized as follows: FEE FULL FEE . - 'I . REDUCED FEE Bridge and Thoroughfare $979,44000 $440,750.00 Parkland Dedication $482,726.00 $160,363.00 Transit Mitigation $52,800.00 $26,400.00 TOTAL $1,514,966.00 $627,513.00 Once again, this is assuming that the fair market value of the property is at $204,545.00, and that the applicant receives a full 30% credit for on-site, active recreational amenities. The waivers presented above equal a total fee reduction of $887,453.00, or approximately a 59% reduction in the project's fees. The Commission voted to recommend approval of the Bouquet Seniors Affordable Housing Project with the aforementioned fee waivers by a vote of 3-1, with Commissioner Killmeyer dissenting (Commissioner Brathwaite was absent during the public hearing process for the project, and therefore was unable to vote). Commissioner Killmeyer was uncomfortable with the fee reductions for the project, and therefore did not recommend City Council approval of the project. 4 Staff is currently analyzing two procedural options that the Council could consider for reducing the project's fees. Due to timing constraints, staff was unable to include this information in your written materials, but will be able to present the options to the Council verbally at the meeting of April 21, 1998. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS There are no alternative actions as identified by staff. FISCAL IMPACT An independently prepared fiscal impact analysis indicates that the project will have a negative fiscal impact on the City's General Fund budget of $244,218.00 over the project's absorption period (five years). In determining the project's fiscal impacts to the City's budget, the analysis assumes that full mitigation fees have been paid. Therefore, any further waiver of fees will have an additional negative impact on the City's budget. Furthermore, in November of 1997, the City Council held a duly noticed Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) hearing. At this public hearing, the Council adapted Resolution No. 97-138 approving the issuance by the California Statewide Communities Development Authority (CSCDA) of not to exceed $17,000,000.00 aggregate principal amount of Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds for the project. The TEFRA hearing is required by the CSCDA. prior to their issuance of pass-through tax exempt bond financing for multi -family housing projects. By the Council's adoption of this inducement resolution, the project applicant was able to apply at the State level for $17,000,000.00 worth of pass-through, tax exempt bonds, thereby saving themselves a total of $12,000,000 in interest costs over a 30 year period of time. No financial or legal obligation/liability to the City exists in the approval of the above-mentioned resolution. ATTACHMENTS Letter from Hamilton -Larkin, LLC Project Analysis Summarization of Environmental Analysis Draft Subsequent EIR Final EIR (Response to Comments) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Pbs\counci1\w971021.doc 5 CITY OF SANTA CLAR.ITA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE PROPOSED BOUQUET SENIORS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT (MASTER CASE 97-102 [GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97-002 /ZONE CHANGE 97-002 / CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-012 / DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 98-0011). THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE SAUGUS COMMUNITY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, WESTERLY AND ADJACENT TO BOUQUET CANYON ROAD, BETWEEN FESTIVIDAD DRIVE AND ESPUELLA DRIVE. PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: The hearing will be held by the City Council in the City Hall Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Blvd., 1st Floor, Santa Clarita, the 21st day of April, 1998, at or after 6:30 p.m. Notice of Public Hearing regarding the proposed Bouquet Seniors Affordable Housing Project. This project is located in the Saugus community of the City of Santa Clarita. The proposed project includes the construction of 264 affordable senior apartment housing units on a 12.36 acre site. Entitlement requests include: an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element Land Use Map to redesignate the project site from RS (Residential Suburban) land use to RMH (Residential Medium High) land use; a zone change modifying the Unified Development Code zoning designation and standards of the site from RS (5 dwelling units per acre) to RMH (20 dwelling units per acre); a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a three story, 264 unit senior affordable housing apartment project, to permit a 25% density bonus for the property, to provide an amenities bonus for partial waiver of development fees, and to.allow for the installation of gates for the residential project; a development agreement restricting the project to a senior, low income population in perpetuity; and a review and certification of the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH#97081065) prepared for the project. The project is generally located westerly and adjacent to Bouquet Canyon Road, between Festividad Drive and Espuella Drive. Proponents, opponents, and any interested persons may appear and be heard on this matter at that time. Further information may be obtained by contacting the City Clerk's office, Santa Clarita City Hall, 23920 Valencia Blvd., 3rd Floor, Santa Clarita, California. If you wish to challenge this order 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 in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at or prior to the public hearing. Dated: March 24, 1998 Sharon L. Dawson, CMC City Clerk Publish Date: March 30, 1998 04/09/1998 14:30 7147216776 HAMILTON LARKIN PAGE 01 Hamilton Larkin, LLC FL Real Estare Development Thursday, April 09, 1998 Jennifer Reid City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Boulevard, St.. 300 Santa Clarita, CA 91355 Dear Jennifer. Corona Del Mar. California Newport Beach, Califon»a Akron, Ohio It is still early for us to have all our construction costs and expenses firmed up at this time. However our best guess estimates indicate the following possible scenarios: 1. Fee waivers of $887,453.00 will allow us to construct a 264 unit senior development with restricted rents that fall under the affordable guidelines for 30 years as described in the development agreement and providing a minimum of $70,000.00 in management fees to the Santa Clarita Valley Committee On Aging ("COA"). In addition, within the facility we will have 3,600 square feet of common areas which would include a lounge area, fitness room, examination room, recreation and multi-purpose rooms. 2. A grant of $887,453.00 would allow us to add in addition to the above a 3,000 square foot area which would provide office space for COA, and a 2,500 square foot assembly room. 3. A grant of $1,000,000 would allow us to provide a full service.commercial kitchen and dining room including an employee change room which would total approximately. 3500 square feet and 1,000 square foot recreation/lounge area for a total of 4500 square feet. 4. A full waiver of fees (1.5 million) would allow us in addition to the amenities outlined In item (3) to add a third story and provide the COA with an additional 4,500 square feet of space to be utilized for their needs ( assembly room, offices, game and learning rooms, etc.). I hope this breakdown is helpful for your report to the city council. Again, costs and funding sources may vary over the next 60 days which could alter our budget somewhat. Sincerely, Jules Swimmer 202 Seaward Road, Corona Del Mar, CA 92625 * (714) 721.6775 FAX (714) 721-6776 BOUQUET SENIORS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Bouquet Seniors Affordable Housing Project includes the following entitlement requests: An amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element Land Use Map to redesignate approximately 12.36 acres of RS (Residential Suburban) land use to RMH (Residential Medium High) land use; a zone change modifying the Unified Development Code (UDC) zoning designation and standards of approximately 12.36 acres of property from RS (Residential Suburban - 5 dwelling units per acre) to RMH (Residential Medium High -20 dwelling units per acre); and a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a three story, 264 unit senior affordable housing apartment project, to permit a 25% density bonus for the property, to provide an amenities bonus for partial waiver of development fees, and to allow for the installation of gates for the residential project. It was determined, per the standards of the City's UDC, that a development agreement was required in order to restrict the project. to a senior, low-income housing project in perpetuity. This restriction is due to the fact that the applicant is requesting certain allowances from the City (the density bonus and amenities bonus) based on the merits of providing a senior, low-income housing project. The development agreement entitlement was filed with the City on January 16, 1997. Site Plan/Zoning- The project site is located westerly and adjacent to Bouquet Canyon Road, between Festividad Drive and Espuella Drive. Located on a 12.35 gross acre site (8.8 net acres), the project is bounded on the west and south property lines by the Bouquet Channel and the Seco Channel, respectively. Approximately 264 units (183 one bedroom and 81 two bedroom units)are being proposed, which are to be built in a single, three story structure approximately 35 feet in height. Square footage of the units will range from 536 square feet to 716 square feet. Two courtyards with active recreational activities and a pool will be located in the central area of the structure. A recreation room, a common kitchen, and laundry facilities will also be provided. for the residents of the project, as well as an internal walking path that will tie directly into the sidewalk along Bouquet Canyon Road in order to provide the residents easy access to local transit routes. The southwestern portion of the site will be reserved for resident garden plots. Properties to the north and northwest of the project site are developed with single family residences. Bouquet Canyon Road is immediately east and adjacent to the project site. Beyond the roadway to the east is the southern tip of another single family residential neighborhood, the 141 foot wide concrete -lined Bouquet Canyon drainage channel, and the grounds of the Santa Clarita United Methodist Church. Approximately 900 feet to the southeast of the project site is the Bouquet Canyon Commercial Center. The concrete -lined Bouquet Canyon drainage channel runs on-site along the southern boundary, and beyond it approximately 400 feet from the site is the Bouquet Canyon Plaza. The Seco Canyon drainage channel runs on-site along the western project boundary. The overall elevation of the site is proposed at 1,190 feet. The project will take access off of Bouquet Canyon Road. The entrance will not be signalized, but will allow for right turns into and out of the project site, as well as permitting left turns into the site. Left turns out of the project site will be restricted, with the applicant required to modify the signal at Espuella Drive in order to permit U-turn vehicular movement at this intersection. Median modifications will be necessary in order to'access the site. Median landscaping improvements will also be required of the developer. Two gates are proposed, which will provide for remote controlled access Guest parking is provided on site, prior to entering the gated portion of the project. Approximately 132 residential parking and 58 guest parking spaces are being provided. The City's Dial-A-Ride vans will be able to pick up and drop off residents at the project's entrance, but will not go beyond the gated portion of the project unless given full and immediate access to the gate code(s). The UDC requires 132 resident parking spaces and 33 guest parking spaces, therefore the project provides more than its required share of parking. Carports will be provided for the residents of the project, while guest parking spaces are permitted to be uncovered. In order to avoid a long, linear and monotonous appearance, the applicant has been conditioned to incorporate a carport design which is not enclosed on at least three sides. The vehicles parked in such carports will be predominantly screened from view of the public street and neighboring residences by means of landscaping and other decorative design materials. Approximately 20% of the project site will be covered by buildings, with an additional 30% of the site covered by parking/paved surfaces.. The remaining 50% of the site will consist of open space and/or landscaping. The northern boundary of the project site abuts the back yards of nine residences. This area will consist of a landscaped slope, which will be developed and designed in cooperation with the owners of the neighboring residences. In addition to working with the residents on the construction type/style of a property line wall and northern slope landscaping, the applicant has agreed to cooperate with the property owners and the City with regard to the architectural style and colors of the proposed structure. The styles and colors of the proposed building will be reviewed for compliance with the City's draft design guidelines. The UDC specifies that the required setbacks for a residential zone include a 20 foot front yard setback, a five foot side yard setback, and a 15 foot rear yard setback. As currently designed, the project incorporates 95 foot setback from Bouquet Canyon Road, a 130 foot setback from the northern property line (133 feet from the nearest residence), a 75 foot setback from the Seco Channel, and a 95 foot setback from The Bouquet Channel. REQUESTED ENTITLEMENTS. The applicant is requesting the following entitlements: an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element Land Use Map to redesignate approximately 12.36 acres of RS (Residential Suburban) land use to RMH (Residential Medium High) land use; a zone change modifying the UDC zoning. designation and standards of approximately 12.36 acres of property from RS (Residential Suburban - 5 dwelling units per acre) to RMH (Residential Medium High - 20 dwelling units per acre); a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a three story, 264 unit senior affordable housing apartment project, to permit a 25%, density bonus for the property, to provide an amenities bonus for partial waiver of development fees, and to allow for the installation of gates for the residential project; and a development agreement restricting the project to a senior, low-income population in perpetuity. General Plan Amendment/Zone Change: The requested General Plan amendment and zone change increases the density permitted on the site. Under the current RS zoning, approximately 61 single family residential homes could be constructed (Residential Suburban zoning allows for five dwelling units per acre). By re-designating the project site to the RMH (Residential Medium High) zoning designation, the density is increased to 20 units per acre. Below is a chart representing the current zoning density, the proposed zoning density, and the proposed zoning plus the density bonus: Amenities Bonus: The gross density of the 12.35 acre project site equals approximately 21 units per acre. The net density of the site; discounting the flood control channels, is equal to 30 dwelling units per acre. The requested RMH land use designation, under the General Plan, allows a range of densities from 15.1 dwelling units per acre to 25.0 dwelling units per acre, with 20 dwelling units per acre designated as the midpoint density. Under the amenities bonus provisions of the UDC, the midpoint density of a project may be exceeded where exceptional and overriding community benefits would be achieved from higher densities. The Bouquet Seniors Affordable Housing Project fulfills many of the listed amenities, including roadway dedication and improvements along Bouquet Canyon Road, on-site mature landscaping, 50% open space on the project site, recreational facilities for residents and other seniors in the community, infrastructure improvements to Bouquet Canyon Road, public services through the Senior Center, and the availability of a low-income senior housing source within the City ofSanta Clarita. The low-income, senior status of the project as well as the services provided by the Senior Center are discussed in more detail below. Density Bonus: Through the approval of a conditional use permit, the applicant is requesting a 25% density bonus for the project site. The RMH zoning designation permits a density of up to 20 dwelling units per acre. The 8.8 net acreage of this project, however, creates a density of approximately 30 dwelling units per acre. The Density Bonus provisions of the UDC are intended to facilitate the construction of senior, very low, and low-income senior housing units that will serve the current and long term City need while maintaining a high degree of quality in project design, construction, and environmental protection: The proposed project meets all of the density bonus applicability requirements of the UDC. Furthermore, the developer is entering into a Development Agreement with the City of Santa Clarita in order to ensure the availability of the units to low-income seniors in perpetuity. The City may grant a density bonus of 25% in excess of the maximum density of the zone, which would allow a density of 25 dwelling units per acre. However, in areas where higher densities are appropriate and services are available, densities of up to 35 dwelling units per acre may be permitted. Re -designating the project site to the RMH designation is therefore consistent with UDC. Also being requested under the provisions of the City's Density Bonus requirements is a reduction in fees. Projects submitted may receive, depending upon the size, nature and scope, a reduction or waiver of some or all City imposed development submittal and processing fees. Such reductions or waivers may affect development application fees, park fees, and other fees. The fee reduction recommended by the Planning Commission is discussed in further detail in the City Council's staff report. The General Plan amendment, zone change, and B & T fee reduction could be found consistent with the UDC's Density Bonus provisions as the project provides a significant community benefit in addition to fulfilling the minimum affordability standards identified in the UDC. Gross Density Maximum No.. of Units RS 5 du/acre 61 units RMH 20 du/acre 247 units RMH + Density Bonus 25 du/acre 309 units Proposed Project 21 du/acre 264 units Amenities Bonus: The gross density of the 12.35 acre project site equals approximately 21 units per acre. The net density of the site; discounting the flood control channels, is equal to 30 dwelling units per acre. The requested RMH land use designation, under the General Plan, allows a range of densities from 15.1 dwelling units per acre to 25.0 dwelling units per acre, with 20 dwelling units per acre designated as the midpoint density. Under the amenities bonus provisions of the UDC, the midpoint density of a project may be exceeded where exceptional and overriding community benefits would be achieved from higher densities. The Bouquet Seniors Affordable Housing Project fulfills many of the listed amenities, including roadway dedication and improvements along Bouquet Canyon Road, on-site mature landscaping, 50% open space on the project site, recreational facilities for residents and other seniors in the community, infrastructure improvements to Bouquet Canyon Road, public services through the Senior Center, and the availability of a low-income senior housing source within the City ofSanta Clarita. The low-income, senior status of the project as well as the services provided by the Senior Center are discussed in more detail below. Density Bonus: Through the approval of a conditional use permit, the applicant is requesting a 25% density bonus for the project site. The RMH zoning designation permits a density of up to 20 dwelling units per acre. The 8.8 net acreage of this project, however, creates a density of approximately 30 dwelling units per acre. The Density Bonus provisions of the UDC are intended to facilitate the construction of senior, very low, and low-income senior housing units that will serve the current and long term City need while maintaining a high degree of quality in project design, construction, and environmental protection: The proposed project meets all of the density bonus applicability requirements of the UDC. Furthermore, the developer is entering into a Development Agreement with the City of Santa Clarita in order to ensure the availability of the units to low-income seniors in perpetuity. The City may grant a density bonus of 25% in excess of the maximum density of the zone, which would allow a density of 25 dwelling units per acre. However, in areas where higher densities are appropriate and services are available, densities of up to 35 dwelling units per acre may be permitted. Re -designating the project site to the RMH designation is therefore consistent with UDC. Also being requested under the provisions of the City's Density Bonus requirements is a reduction in fees. Projects submitted may receive, depending upon the size, nature and scope, a reduction or waiver of some or all City imposed development submittal and processing fees. Such reductions or waivers may affect development application fees, park fees, and other fees. The fee reduction recommended by the Planning Commission is discussed in further detail in the City Council's staff report. The General Plan amendment, zone change, and B & T fee reduction could be found consistent with the UDC's Density Bonus provisions as the project provides a significant community benefit in addition to fulfilling the minimum affordability standards identified in the UDC. Conditional Use Permit: The conditional use permit being requested by the developer not only covers the provisions of the proposed density bonus and amenities bonus, but is required to permit a senior housing land use in the proposed RMH zone. The conditional use permit would also allow the applicant to construct a three story structure in a residential zone. While the height of the structure does not exceed 35', the approval of a three story building in a residential zone still requires a conditional use permit. A two story structure, up to 35 feet in height, may be permitted in a residential zone without a conditional use permit: the entitlement, in this instance, is being triggered by the number of proposed stories. Lastly, the conditional use permit would allow for the installation of two gates for the residential project., Such gates were approved by the Planning Commission, with a condition that they be installed only upon the request of the majority of project residents. Development Agreement: Under the provisions of the Density Bonus requirements, the UDC requires the developer to enter into a development agreement with the City per California Government Code Sections 65864 through 65869.5 to ensure that the units will remain available and affordable. Development incentives granted by the City to a developer utilizing the Density Bonus requirements are predicated upon the long term availability of the affordable housing. Due to the fact that the developer is requesting a density bonus, an amenities bonus, and fee waivers/reductions, the development agreement is proposed as a 30 year agreement between the City and the applicant. However, the development agreement specifically states that the project will remain a 100% affordable housing project for a term of 30 years, but that after that time, up to 100% of the units may be opened for market rate seniors, subject to the approval of the City Council. The proposed development agreement not'only ensures a senior, affordable housing project, but also ensures a partnership with the Santa. Clarita Committee on Aging for management of the project. It also lists the services which will be provided by such management corporation, establishes a fee that will be paid annually to the Committee on Aging; and outlines the partial waiver of B & T fees provided by the City for the project. The deal points of the development agreement are included in the draft City Council ordinance, which would effectively initiate the development agreement. RENTAL HOUSING - AGE AND INCOME: According to the City's General Plan, household income is the most important socioeconomic indicator of households in need. The federal government has divided household income status into four categories: very low, low, moderate, and upper._ The very low, and low-income categories are defined as follows: Very Low-income Households: Earning less than 50 percent of the regional or county median income. Low-income Households: Earning between 51 and 80 percent of the regional median. The development agreement restricts the units to residents whose gross income equals no more than 60% of the area median income. Furthermore, each unit shall be a low-income unit, with rent restricted to 30% of 60% of the area median income. The area median income is approximately $47,800.00, with such area being defined as Los Angeles County and Long Beach According to the applicant, net rents at 60% of the median income equal $537.00 for one bedroom and $642.00 for two bedroom apartments. The applicant's goal is to set a cap on rents, in 1998 dollars, at $500.00 for a one bedroom apartment, and $600.00 for a two-bedroom apartment. These rents would be maximum rents based on low-income status, however, the applicant is also proposing to maintain a number of very low-income units. Rents on these units would be lower, as the earnings for very low-income status equal less than 50% of the regional median income. The State of California provides two age options in order to be considered a senior population project: ages 55 and 62. The project will be restricted to active seniors, ages 55 and above. When a housing project is restricted to ages 55 and above, all tenants of the project must meet the age restriction. If the age restriction on the project is 62, then only one resident of a unit needs to be 62, and the partner of the resident can be of any age. While the restriction on age may seem low, it guarantees that all of the residents of the project are of senior status. The 55 year age restriction was chosen by the developer over the -62 age restriction, to guarantee a 100% senior resident population FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: Economic Research Associates (ERA) prepared an independent fiscal impact analysis for the project. In the report, it was assumed that the 264 -unit project would house about 374 people, and would support five full-time employees. It was also assumed that the project would be 80% occupied in the fust year and would reach annual stable occupancy rates in the second full year of operations. Because the facility and all associated improvements will be owned and operated as a private, non-profit entity, the project will be exempt from property tax assessment. Despite the lack of property taxes, spending by project residents will generate sales taxes. Sales tax projections were based on estimated annual expenditures by residents, accounting for both their limited incomes and mobility. The primary fiscal contributions from the proposed development program come from both the sales taxes generated by the residents and by fees and subventions. Total annual revenue ranges from $9,488.00 during the first year to $11,857.00 by buildout (in 1997 dollars). Fiscal operating costs are estimated by multiplying the project's population by the per -capita and per - acre cost factors. The average cost approach is based on the assumption that low -to -moderate income seniors will generally have a differing demand for public services than Santa Clarita residents. Also, the average cost approach assumes that City overhead costs will increase proportionately with population growth, even though there may be economies of scale for some services. Taking into account all of the aforementioned factors, the project will generate an annual deficit for the City's general fund ranging from $33,747.00 in the first year to $42,094.00 by buildout (in 1997 dollars), for a cumulative deficit of $244,218.00 over the absorption period (the absorption period being five years). SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY THE SENIOR CENTER: As was previously mentioned, the development agreement provides that the developer form a partnership with the Santa Clarita Committee on Aging ("COX') for management of the project. During the first year of operation of the project, however, the developer does reserve the right to partner the Committee on Aging with an experienced management company, dividing the payment for such management services in a manner reasonably acceptable to the developer, the management company, and the COA. A letter forwarded to staff from the Executive Director of the Senior Center has preliminarily outlined services that are to be provided to the residents of the project and other seniors in the Santa Clarita Valley. These services include specialized exercise programs, health and wellness programs, supportive . services, volunteer and employment opportunity coordination, and home -delivered meals on an as -needed basis. The Santa Clarita Valley Committee on Aging will also provide for para -transit services running on a fixed -route system every day between the project and the Senior Center. The COA and representatives from the Senior Center envision a co -located operation where both residents of the project and other senior center participants can take advantage of recreational, and health/wellness activities at each site. This is anticipated to alleviate crowded conditions at the Senior Center and allow for increased socialization opportunities at the project site. THE NEED FOR SENIOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Under the direction of the City Council, the applicant hired an independent marketing company to assess the need for senior affordable housing within the Santa Clarita Valley. According to the study prepared by Peyton Reed and Company, demographic characteristics for seniors 62+ within the Santa Clarita market show that the majority of senior households (59%) in this area are in the 65-74 age group. The population age distribution indicates that these seniors are relatively young with 66% under age 75. Income distribution for all seniors is skewed toward the lower levels, with 60% having annual household incomes of less than $31,000.00 per year (this is equal to an average income of 68% of the regional median, which falls within the parameters for qualifying as low-income status). Overall, 77% of the seniors own their homes, but for the lower income groups, nearly all will rent when moving from their current residence. The City's 1995-2000 Consolidated Plan provides another indicator that there is currently a need for low-income senior housing in the Santa Clarita Valley. The Consolidated Plan, which incorporates statistical data from the federal Comprehensive' Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) is submitted to the U.S: Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in order to continue receiving federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) fonds. The Consolidated Plan's Housing component identifies the City's housing, community development and social service needs in the community for a five year time period. According to the Consolidated Plan, there is a demonstrated need for housing to serve low and very -low-income families in the City. Eleven percent of the City's households are very -low- income status and another 9% are low-income status. For all low and moderate households who rent, 47% have housing problems. Of that total, over half of the rental group with housing burdens consist of the elderly. Barriers to affordable housing developments include, but are not limited to, land use controls, building codes and enforcement, fees and exactions, housing conversions, permit processing procedures, development standards, financing constraints, developer profit margin, land prices, and social acceptability constraints. The Consolidated Plan's "Strategic Plan" lists specific objectives for affordable housing: one such objective listed as a high priority item is the encouragement of very low and low-income senior rental housing. Specifically, "The City will seek to encourage and facilitate the construction of very low and low- income senior rental housing. Working with private developers for the construction of these units and seeking funding sources at the Federal, State and Local levels are efforts that will be undertaken to provide for the housing needs of seniors." Held on February 7, 1998, the City's "Share the Vision IIP' Community Strategic Plan also addressed senior needs as a high priority item. Listed by members of the community as one of the top twelve priority issues slated for action, senior needs (including provisions for affordable senior housing) were identified by many as an important aspect to consider when trying to maintain the vitality and diversity of the City of Santa Clarita. Furthermore, the demographics presented during the Strategic Plan indicate that the senior population within the United States will grow by more than 60% between now and the year 2050: providing for our growing senior population can only benefit the City in the long run. Lastly, the City's General Plan encourages the provision of affordable senior housing through the following goals and policies, listed in the Housing Element: Goal 1: To provide opportunities.for the production of a range of new housing in the planning area to meet the needs of all income groups. Policy 1.1: Review and support, as appropriate, programs to increase the supply of housing throughout the region. Give full consideration to the impacts on environmental, market, infrastructure, public services, utilities, human resources, and other factors. Goal 2: To provide sites suitable for a variety of housing types. for all income levels and assist in the development and provision of affordable and proportionally priced and sized homes to meet the needs of all community residents, including low and moderate income, large families, handicapped, families with female heads of households, and the elderly. Policy 3.7: Provide opportunities for the development of adequate housing to provide the City's fair share of low and moderate income households. Policy 3.8: Encourage and participate in low and moderate income and senior citizen housing programs financed by other levels of government. Policy 3.9: Promote the dispersal of low and moderate income housing throughout the Santa Clarita planning area. The proposed low-income senior housing apartment project helps the City to achieve the noted goals from the General Plan Housing Element and is in compliance with the noted policies. Pbs\council\bqtsnenv SUM[MIARIZATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS On June 18, 1997, an entitlement was filed with the Planning & Building Services Department which included the following requests: An amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element Land Use Map to redesignate approximately 12.36 acres of RS (Residential Suburban) land use to RMH (Residential Medium High) land use; a zone change modifying the Unified Development Code zoning designation and standards of approximately 12.36 acres of property from RS (Residential Suburban - 5 dwelling units per acre) to RMH (Residential Medium High - 20 dwelling units per acre); and a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a three story, 261 unit senior affordable housing apartment project, to permit a 25% density bonus for the property, to provide an amenities bonus for partial waiver of development fees, and to allow for the installation of gates for the residential project. The project was later modified to include a proposal for 264 units, as opposed to the 261 units originally proposed. During staffs preliminary review of the proposal and through the preparation of an Initial Study, it was determined that the preparation of a Draft Subsequent EIR., focused on seven environmental issues, was necessary in order to fully address the project's potential impacts to the environment. It was also determined, per the standards of the City's Unified Development Code, that a development agreement was required in order to restrict the project to a senior, low income housing project in perpetuity. This restriction is based on the fact that the applicant is requesting certain allowances from the City (the density bonus and amenities bonus) based on the merits of providing a senior, low income housing project. The development agreement entitlement was filed with the City on January 16, 1997. The project was previously approved under the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County as a 192 unit market rate senior housing project, with the development of the site consisting of the construction of 12 separate housing structures. Under Los Angeles County, the project underwent a zone change from A-2-5, an agricultural zoning designation, to RPD -5,000-23U, a zoning designation allowing for residential units with a 5000 square foot minimum lot size, up to 23 units per acre. The project was approved by the Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commission on November 25, 1992. Along with the approval of the site plan, the Regional Planning Commission also approved Tentative Tract Map 44830, dividing the site plan into one condominium lot with 192 fee in ownership parcels. The conditional use permit approved for the project established conditions for design criteria required by the RPD zoning designation. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the previous project. The previous EIR (SCH#89091306) was finaled and certified upon project approval in November of 1992. Areas of impact addressed in the EIR included: geotechnical, flood, rioise, air quality, biota, cultural resources, visual qualities, traffic/access, water and sewer services, education, fire services, sheriff services, utilities, solid waste, and library services. However, the previous EIR analyzed the project as a 192 unit market -rate, multi -family attached apartment complex, with a senior housing project only identified as an alternative. The proposed project increases the number of previously -approved housing units by 72 units, which will be developed as one, large residential structure, and also includes a proposal for a 100% affordable (low income) senior housing project. Under the original project approval, the only environmental area identified with an Unavoidable Significant Impact was air quality. The County of Los Angeles adopted a Statement of Overriding Consideration for the project's impacts to regional air quality. Upon drafting the Initial Study for the proposed project, staff determined that a focused Draft Subsequent EIR would sufficiently identify environmental impacts associated with the changes in the project. According to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), "A Subsequent EIR can be prepared when substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR ... due to the involvement of new, significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. A Subsequent EIR ... shall be given the same notice and public review as required under Section 15087, and shall state where the previous document is available and can be reviewed". A Draft Subsequent EIR. for this project has been prepared for the City by The Planning Consortium. The environmental process began in June 1997 with the staff preparation of an Initial Study. Due to the. fact that the proposed project included a request for a General Plan amendment and zone change, proposed an increase in density, a change in building footprint and a change in resident population, the Initial Study identified seven environmental areas which may be significantly impacted by the proposed project. A Notice of Preparation (N.O.P.) was circulated in September 1997, in order to incorporate information regarding the concerns of local public agencies and other interested parties into the Draft Subsequent EIR.. The Draft Subsequent EIR was released for a 45 day public review beginning on January 23, 1998 and ending on March 8, 1998. Copies of the Draft Subsequent EIR are available for review at the Planning Counter, the Valencia Library, the Canyon Country Library, and the Newhall Library. Also available for review is the previously certified EIR: this document is available at the Planning Counter. Written comments received during the public review period, as well as Draft Subsequent EIR. comments received from the Planning Commission are incorporated into the Final EIR.. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is also included in your materials. The Commission has recommended that the City Council certify the Final EIR and adopt of a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) for the project's cumulative impact to air quality. Air quality impacts are discussed in further detail below. Environmental impact analysis issue areas addressed in the Initial Study include: water, plant life, animal life, light and glare, natural resources, risk of upset/man made hazards, population, housing, energy, utilities, human health, recreation, and cultural resources. With the implementation of mitigation measures, no significant impacts were found in any of these environmental areas. The Initial Study prepared for the project is included in Section 13 of the Draft Subsequent EIR. Environmental impact analysis issue areas addressed in the Draft Subsequent EIR. include: earth/grading; air quality, noise, land use, traffic/access, public services, and aesthetics/visual qualities. The following information contains a summary of the seven focused issue areas and environmental impacts associated with the proposed project, as addressed. in the Draft Subsequent EIR.. It should be noted that, with the implementation of mitigation measures, all environmental impacts of the proposed project can be reduced to a less than significant level. Earth/Grading (Draft Subsequent EIR. Section 4.1): The 12.36 gross acres of the project site include approximately 8.8 acres of previously disturbed, irregularly -surfaced open ground bounded on the west and south by two concrete -lined drainage courses which cover 3.55 acres of the site. The entire project site was previously disturbed through grading and ground clearance for the construction of the improved drainage courses. An approximately 16 foot high mound of excess fill dirt left over from improving the two adjacent drainage courses covers most of the center of the site. The total on-site elevation gain is 30 feet (from 1,170 to 1,200 feet, south to north, respectively). Because the property has been previously disturbed through grading and ground clearance, there are no significant or unique landforms or topography found on the project site. A geotechnical investigation was performed on the project site in October 1997, and the following information contains the results of such study. No known active earthquake faults traverse the project site. Extensive subsurface exploration indicates that the active San Gabriel Fault is not present within the project boundaries. However, the site is subject to shaking and associated ground motion from. earthquakes on nearby and distant faults, which is characteristic for all of Southern California. Field exploration and laboratory tests were performed on site in October 1997 to aid in the classification of the soils and to determine the pertinent engineering properties of the foundation soils. Soil conditions were determined to be of medium dense to very dense sand and silty sand. The on-site fill and upper natural soils are classified as having low expansion potential and no special precautions for expansive soils are expected to be needed for project site development. An analysis for liquefaction was also performed. It was found that some layers of soils beneath the project site may liquefy in the event of a major earthquake on a nearby fault. In addition, some. settlement of the ground surface may occur as a result of seismically - induced shaking. It is anticipated that the amount of settlement will be less thanoneor two inches. These layers lie some 20' below the ground surface level and are overlain by sufficient thickness of non -liquefiable soils such that significant surface damage due to liquefaction is not expected to occur. A third party review of the geotechnical report was conducted by Leighton and Associates, with the conclusion that the liquefaction analysis was adequate, and that surface damage would not be significant because of the thickness of overlying, non -liquefiable soils. One primary difference between the previously -approved project and the current project is the amount of grading. The current project is designed to balance on-site, while the previously - approved project involved the import of 18,000 to 54,000 cubic yards of earth material. Also, the graded elevation of the previously -approved project was shown to be 1,185 feet on the site plan, with the proposed project designed at an elevation of 1,190 feet. Engineering staff analyzed the information presented and determined that a grade lower than 1,190 would not suffice as the proposed project's sewer system would not operate properly. The final difference between the two projects is that the previously -approved project was designed with 12 separate residential structures, while the proposed project is designed as a single, three story structure. In its current condition, the ground surface of the project site is unsuitable for the proposed construction of the, apartment building and would most likely result in unstable ground conditions due to the large mound of uncertified, uncompacted fill materials. The project applicant proposes to grade the site to prepare the ground surface for the construction of the three-story building. Although the project site is subject to severe ground shaking due to earthquakes and the ground surface could settle one to two inches in liquefiable soil layers beneath the site, it was found in the geotechnical report that these impacts could be mitigated through project design. With the inclusion of appropriate mitigation measures, potential significant geotechnical/seismic impacts can be reduced to a less than significant level. Air Quality (Draft Subsequent EIR. Section 4.2) The following air quality assessment for the proposed project was prepared by Mestre Greve Associates (MGA), dated November 10, 1997. Assuming that the construction phase for the project will be approximately one year, temporary air quality impacts will result from project construction activities. Air pollutants will be emitted by construction equipment and fugitive dust will be generated during grading and site preparation. With 8.8 gradable acres, a three month grading cycle, and a one year project buildout, approximately 5 tons of Particulate Matter 10 microns (PM10) will be produced per year. During the three month grading cycle, the daily peak emission is estimated to be 29 pounds of PM10. This estimate represents a worst case annualized estimate. The peak emission of 29 pounds per day of PM10 generated by the grading of the project is minor when compared to the total average annual of 416 tons per day of particulate matter currently released in the whole South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). According to the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) CEQA Handbook, PM10 emission greater than 150 pound per day should be considered; significant. However, the PM10 emission due to the construction activities of the project is projected to be less than this threshold, and therefore, is not considered to be significant. It should be noted that the impact due to grading is very localized. Care should be taken to minimize the generation' of dust.. Common practice for minimizing dust generation is watering prior to and during grading. Without watering, PM10 emission generation would be double the amount mentioned previously (2 x 5 tons/year = 10 tons/year). Construction emission data is summarized in Table 4 on page 48 of the Draft Subsequent EIR. It should be noted that potential worst-case nitrogen oxides (NO,) emissions are greater than the Significance Emission Thresholds established by the SCAQMD in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Mitigation measures for the construction activities of the project recommended by the SCAQMD are incorporated into the project: the proposed project is not considered to create a significant air quality impact. Long term air quality emissions fall well below the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook significance threshold, as shown in Table 7 on page 54 of the Draft Subsequent EIR. Since the project's daily emissions will not exceed any of the emission significant thresholds, according to the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook the project is not considered to be significant.' No significant long-term adverse impact upon the regional air quality is projected due to the proposed project. As a result, no mitigation measures are recommended for long-term impacts. The 1997 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) lists strategies designed to improve air quality throughout the region. These measures examine solutions to regional air quality concerns. A two tiered approach is used in the 1997 AQMP. The first tier includes short -and -medium term measures, and the second tier involves long-term measures which will rely on new technology. Since the project's long-term emissions are projected to be less than the thresholds of significance for all primary pollutants, no significant long-term adverse impact upon the regional air quality is projected due to the proposed project. Therefore, no long-term mitigation measures are recommended. To summarize, the previous project's Environmental Impact Report analyzed a 192 unit market rateapartmentproject, with a senior population less fully analyzed as a project alternative. Los Angeles County approved the senior population project, but adopted a SOC for air quality based on the information presented in the EIR for the market rate project, which has a much higher air quality impact than the senior population project. According to the SCAQMD, the proposed project does not create a significant impact to air quality. However, due to the fact that an air quality.SOC was adopted for the 192 unit senior apartment project,and the proposed project includes 72 additional units (264 units total) reserved for a senior population, a conservative approach should be taken and a SOC for air quality should also be adopted for the proposed project. Noise (Draft Subsequent EIR Section 4.3) The criteria used to assess the acceptability of community noise levels varies with the municipality. The City of Santa Clarita uses 65 Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) as the critical noise criterion for assessing the compatibility of residential land uses with noise sources. The City requires that the exterior living areas (yards and patios) for new residential land uses do not exceed 65 CNEL. In addition, for multi -family residential projects, the California Noise Insulation Standard requires that the indoor noise levels in multi -family residential developments not exceed a CNEL of 45 decibels (dB). The City of Santa Clarita indoor noise standard is consistent with the State standard. The City requires that both single family and multi -family development achieve an indoor noise standard of 45 CNEL. Short term impacts will result from construction noise, with the closest sensitive land uses being the existing homes located immediately north of the project site. These homes could be as close as approximately 50 feet from the construction area. Noise levels at these residences could range from 70 dB to 95dB for most of the heavy equipment that could be used on the project site. It is important to note that these noise levels are based upon worst case conditions. Noise could be subdued at the construction site. Typically, construction noise levels on the site would be less, however, the potential noise levels are dependent mainly on the location of the equipment on the site, and the actual number and type of equipment used during construction. Mitigation measures, including. the installation of temporary noise barriers, limitations of on-site truck speed, and local control of construction hours, will reduce the short-term noise impacts of the project site to less than significant. Long term noise impacts are most directly related to the increases in traffic generated by the project. Increases in noise due solely to the proposed project indicate that the changes in noise levels due to the proposed project will all be less than the 3 dB threshold often identified as significant. Noise increases due to the proposed project are projected to be approximately 0.2 dB or less. As a result, the project -related noise increases are not considered to be significant. Therefore, no adverse long-term noise impacts are projected due to the proposed project. Future traffic noise levels impacting the project site are also presented in the Draft Subsequent EIR. The data show that limited portions of the project site along Bouquet Canyon Road (including approximately 24 residential units) will experience traffic noise levels greater than 65 CNEL. However, with the incorporation of mitigation measures, including acoustical design standards and sound attenuation measures for the building, no significant impact is anticipated. Land Use (Draft Subsequent EIR Section 4.4) The City of Santa Clarita's General Plan designates the 12.36 gross acre project site as RS (Residential Suburban). The City's Unified Development Code (UDC) also designates the project site as RS. The RS designation would currently allow the project site to be developed with 61 single-family detached residential units, at a density of 5 dwelling units per gross acre. The RS zone corresponds to the single-family detached tract home. Additional uses are permitted that are complementary to, and can exist in harmony with a residential neighborhood. Since the time of the original approval, the project site was annexed into the City and the land use designation changed from RPD-5,000-23U to the current RS designation. The 12.36 gross acre project site is located on the west side of Bouquet Canyon Road near the confluence of the Bouquet Canyon drainage course and the Seco Canyon drainage course in the northern part of the City. The project site is approximately 0.5 miles north of the Santa Clara River. To the north of the project site is an existing neighborhood of single -family homes, with the rear yards of nine homes adjacent to the project site. Five of these homes are single-story structures, and four of the homes are two stories in height. Immediately to the east of the project site is the 130 foot wide right-of-way for Bouquet Canyon Road (currently developed width is 90 feet). Beyond the roadway to the east of the site is. the southern tip of another single -family residential neighborhood, the 141 foot wide concrete-lined Bouquet Canyon drainage channel, and the grounds of the Santa Clarita United Methodist Church. Approximately 900 feet to the southeast of the project site, across Bouquet Canyon Road, is the Bouquet Canyon Commercial Center. The concrete-lined Bouquet Canyon drainage channel runs on-site along the southern boundary and beyond. Another 400 feet south of the project site is the Bouquet Canyon Plaza, a large community commercial center. The 72 foot wide concrete- lined Seco Canyon drainage course runs on-site along the western boundary, and beyond it is a 36 acre property currently being developed with 288 attached condominium units. Requested project approvals include: 1) a General Plan amendment to change the site's land use designation from RS (Residential Suburban) to RMH (Residential Medium High); a Zone Change to change the site's zoning designation and standards from RS (Residential Suburban - 5 units per acre) to RMH (Residential Medium High - 20 units per acre); and a conditional use permit to allow for senior housing land use, a 25% density bonus, an amenities bonus for partial fee waivers, the installation of gates for the residential project, and a three story (35') structure. Also requested is a Development Agreement, which will tie the project to a senior, affordable housing population in perpetuity. The General Plan designation for the requested RMH zone sets a range of densities from 15.1 dwelling units per acre to 25 dwelling units per acre. With a'25% density bonus, the project proposes a density of 21 dwelling units per acre. According to the City's Density Bonus and Amenities bonus provisions, the project falls within the parameters set by the General Plan, but above the General Plan midpoint density of 20 unit per acre. This density may be permitted with an approved conditional use permit for projects which provide exceptional and overriding community benefits. General Plan Consistency: The City's General Plan includes a number of goals and policies regarding the provision of affordable senior housing within the Santa Clarity Valley area. The following relevant goals and policies are included in the City's Housing Element: Goal 1: To provide opportunities for the production of a range of new housing in the planning area to meet the needs of all income groups. Policy 1.1: Review and support, as appropriate, programs to increase the supply of housing throughout the region. Give full consideration to the impacts on environmental, market, infrastructure, public services, utilities, human resources, and other factors. Goal 2: To provide sites suitable for a variety of housing types for all income levels and assist in the development and provision of affordable and proportionally priced and sized homes to meet the needs of all community residents, including low and moderate income, large families, handicapped, families with female heads of households, and the elderly. Policy 3.7: Provide opportunities for the development of adequate housing to provide the City's fair share of low and moderate income households. Policy 3.8: Encourage and participate in low and moderate income and senior citizen housing programs financed by other levels of government. Policy 3.9: Promote the dispersal of low and moderate income housing throughout the Santa Clarita planning area. The proposed low-income senior housing apartment project helps the City to achieve the noted goals from the General Plan Housing Element and is in compliance with the noted policies. With the approval of the requested land use entitlements, the project could be found in compliance with the General Plan and Unified Development Code. In general, because the currently -proposed project proposes less grading activity than the previously -approved project, the proposed project would have less short-term, grading phase air quality, traffic and noise impacts. On the other hand, the currently -proposed project would have approximately one-third more average daily trips (ADT) during its long-term operational phase than the previously -approved project (729 ADT as opposed to 539 ADT, respectively). However, both of these senior population projects would have significantly less long-term operational phase traffic, noise, and air quality impacts than the 61 single family residential units which could be permitted on the site under its current zoning. The single housing structure under the proposed project would be setback 133 feet from the closest adjacent single-family home. The previously -approved project contained a minimum 65 foot setback. Additionally, the setback area would be more heavily landscaped under the proposed project as compared to the previously -approved project. The greater setback and landscaping would lessen visual impacts, noise, air quality, and privacy impacts to the adjacent single-family homes. Overall, the proposed project results in lessor similar impact to adjacent single-family dwelling units than the previously -approved project. In general; the currently proposed project places human activities and residential structures at a greater distance from residential uses. With the implementation of mitigation measures, no significant impact is anticipated. The commercial, residential and institutional land uses surrounding the project site will not generate significant adverse impacts to the proposed project. The most disruptive use in the area is Bouquet Canyon Road, however, its potential noise impacts to the proposed residential uses can be reduced to a less than significant level with mitigation measures. Based upon the approval of the requested land use entitlements and the incorporation of the mitigation measures in the Draft Subsequent EIR, the currently proposed senior low-income rental housing project would not result in significant adverse land use impacts. The granting of the requested General Plan amendment, zone change and conditional use permit would bring the proposed project into compliance with all applicable plans, codes and requirements of the City of Santa Clarita. Since the proposed project, with the mitigation measures recommended in the Draft Subsequent EIR, will not adversely impact surrounding land uses and the surrounding land uses will not, in turn, adversely impact the proposed project, additional mitigation measures are not required. Traffic/Access (Draft Subsequent EIR Section 4.5): Located westerly of Bouquet Canyon road, between Festividad Drive and Espuella Drive, access to the completed project will be provided via a driveway onto Bouquet Canyon Road. The existing raised median on Bouquet Canyon Road will be modified to accommodate a left -turn pocket for northbound vehicles to enter the project. The project driveway and raised median will be configured such that left -turns out of the project will not be permitted. The project is estimated to generate 729 average daily trips (ADT) as well as 45 trips in the AM peak and 74 trips in the PM peak. The previously -approved project would generate 530 ADT, with 32 trips in the AM peak and 54 trips in the PM peak. Therefore, the proposed project represents an increase in trips of approximately 38% over the previously -approved project. The City has a target Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) of .90 (Level of Service [LOS] 'D"). The intersections of Seco Canyon Road/Bouquet Canyon Road and Bouquet Canyon Road/Soledad Canyon Road currently exceed LOS "D". The ICU Summary chart shown in Table 15 on page 99 of the Draft Subsequent EIR shows that no locations are significantly impacted by the proposed project. Only one location, the intersection of Bouquet Canyon Road and Espuella Drive, shows a measurable increase in ICU. At that location, the PM ICU increases from .84 to .85 with the inclusion of project trips. The level of service at that location remains LOS "D" with the increase. The City identified projects which are expected to be built and occupied by approximately the same time as the proposed project in order to identify cumulative project impacts. The expected time frame is approximately two years from the present. In order to accurately forecast the traffic conditions in this time frame with the cumulative projects, the Santa Clarita Valley Consolidated Traffic Model, short.term version, was utilized. This database was most recently used in the traffic study for the North Valencia Annexation Area EIR. The short-term forecasts represent the existing plus ambient plus cumulative scenario for the traffic study. Notable cumulative projects include new development in the Valencia Town Center area as well as the first two years of development in the North Valencia Annexation area. In comparing the existing plus ambient plus cumulative conditions with and without the project, it is found that ADT volumes increase by no more than 1,000 ADT due to the project. Furthermore, the PM peak hour ICU only increases by .01 at two locations when compared to no project conditions. Each of these locations (Bouquet/Espuella intersection and Bouquet/Newhall Ranch Road intersection) continue to operate at an acceptable level of service with the inclusion of project trips. The proposed project does not cause a significant impact given existing plus ambient conditions. None of the study intersections require mitigation due to the proposed project. However, as part of the project's conditions of approval, the signal at Espuella Drive will need to be modified in order to provide for IJAurns, as the project will not permit left turns across Bouquet Canyon Road. When the proposed project's trips are added to cumulative conditions, there are again no intersections significantly impacted by the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project does not contribute to the need for mitigation at any of the study intersections. The addition of project -related traffic generated by the proposed project and related cumulative projects to the local and regional circulation system would not result in significant adverse impacts. Due to the absence of significant adverse traffic/access impacts, project -specific mitigation measures are not warranted. However, the project shall be required to make its fair share payment for two standard traffic mitigation fee programs: the Bridge and Thoroughfare District Fee and the Transit Mitigation Fee. Public Services (Draft Subsequent EIR. Section 4.6) The proposed project's initial study indicated that the project could have an adverse effect upon fire/paramedic services, sheriffs services, education services, library services, and transit services. Fire Protection and Paramedic Services: Fire protection and paramedic service is provided to the Santa Clarita Valley by the County of Los Angeles Fire Department. Of the seven existing fire stations, two would serve the project site. The jurisdictional engine company for the project site is Fire Station #111 located at 26829 Seco Canyon Road, approximately 0.25 miles from the site. Fire Station #111 will provide both fire protection and paramedic services to the project site. Response times from Station #111 are anticipated to be approximately 0.6 minutes. Additional fire protection services would be provided by Fire Station 73, approximately 3.2 miles from the project site. Response times from Station #73 are anticipated to be approximately 5.6 minutes. The level of service provided for areas within Consolidated Fire Protection District of Battalion 6 is considered adequate by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. The development of all residential projects within the Santa Clarita Valley area must comply with all applicable code and ordinance requirements for construction, access, water mains, fire flows and fire hydrants. The Fire Department requires sufficient capacity for multi -residential fire flows of 5,000 gallons per minute (g.p.m.) at 20 pounds per square inch (psi) for a five-hour duration. The Valencia Water Company has stated their ability to provide adequate fire flows in addition to meeting anticipated domestic demands. Paramedic services are also provided by the County Fire Department, from Station #111. Typically, response times to the project site would be very quick due to the close proximity of the station to the site, however, response times could be hampered by heavy peak hour traffic on Bouquet Canyon Road. Project implementation would result in increased calls for fire pictection and paramedic services to Los Angeles County Fire Station #111. In addition to standard demands for service generated by a residential project, the project's all -senior resident population would result in additional demands on fire protection and paramedic services given its demonstrated increased need for such services. However, implementation of mitigation measures required by the Fire Department and mitigation measures recommended in the Draft Subsequent EIR would reduce the magnitude of fire protection impacts to a less than significant level Sheriffs Services: The City contracts for city-wide police services provided by the County of Los Angeles Sheriffs Department. Funding for the Sheriffs Department in the City is provided by the City under the terms of a vesting contract. Sheriffs service demands for the City are adequately being met by the SCV Sheriffs station at this time. The central Sheriffs station is located approximately 0.9 miles southwest of the project site, maintaining a staff of 166 sworn officers and serving a population of approximately 170,000 persons. The Sheriffs Department has indicated that the desired level of service at the Santa Clarita Valley Station is one sworn officer per 1,000 population, and that the station is currently operating very close to the desired officer -to -population ratio of one sworn officer per 1,024 population. The Sheriffs Department has established an optimal response time for services of 10 minutes or less for emergency or immediate response incidents, and 20 minutes or less for a routine response. The Sheriffs Department currently has a response.time to the project site for emergency calls of approximately 5 to 10 minutes, and non -emergency calls take approximately 15 to 40 minutes. The primary factor for such a lengthy potential response time for non- emergency calls, according to the Sheriffs Department, is the amount of traffic on local roadways and the time of day (i.e. rush hour). Therefore, non -emergency response times to the project site currently may exceed the optimal response times as defined by the Sheriffs Department. However, it is important to note that emergency and non -emergency calls to the vicinity of the project site are infrequent, and most often related to traffic enforcement and accident responses. The construction and operational phases of the proposed project will increase the demand on existing Sheriffs services, as the potential for vandalism and theft is greater. The occupation of the site by the residential population will also increase the need for Sheriffs services on the project site for both emergency and non -emergency related calls. Because the proposed project would be developed in an area that is surrounded by similar and compatible types of land uses and would not expand the service area of the Sheriffs station, response times for emergency and non -emergency calls would not change from the acceptable response times currently experienced. As the proposed project is developed, tax revenues from property and sales taxes would be generated and deposited in the City of Santa Clarita General Fund. A portion of these revenues could then be allocated, in accordance with the City of Santa Clarita and County of Los Angeles contractual services agreement, to maintain staffing and equipment levels for the Santa Clarita Valley Sheriffs Substation in response to related demands. As the current City revenue base provides for adequate Sheriffs service in the City of Santa Clarita, it is anticipated that this same level of service could be provided for the proposed project'through existing funding sources as long as the City and the County maintain service agreements. Although the proposed project would increase demands for Sheriffs services, these service demands can be met through the allocation of revenues collected from the project using existing sources. With the increased tax revenue and the implementation of mitigation measures, no significant impacts are anticipated. Such mitigation measures would include adequate project lighting„ appropriate low -growing landscaping and shade trees, visible and illuminated address signs, and complete and unrestricted access for emergency services. Education Services: The project site is located within the jurisdictions of the Saugus Union School District and the William S. Hart Union High School District. The proposed project involves senior housing development and would not generate any .school -aged students. Although the project would not generate any student to these school districts, standard development fees set by the districts would have to be paid by the project applicant. The implementation of the proposed project would not result in any adverse impacts to the Saugus Union School District or the William S. Hart Union High School District. The payment of a commercial rate development mitigation fee of $.0.30 per square foot would still apply for the proposed project. Of this $0.30 per square foot fee, $0.165 per square foot would go to the William S. Hart Union High School District, and $0.135 per square foot would go to the Saugus Union School District. Library Services: According to officials with the County Library District, senior citizens tend to be heavy users of library services and facilities, and the residents of the proposed senior project are anticipated to heavily utilize library services. The City of Santa Clarita contracts with the County of Los Angeles for public library services, with the project site being served primarily by the Valencia Library, located near the intersection of Valencia Boulevard and Magic Mountain Parkway, approximately 0.9 miles to the southwest of the site. The County library has indicated that library services and facilities are inadequate to keep pace with the growth that is occurring throughout the Santa Clarita Valley area. Library space is currently below the County Library District's internal planning standards of 0.34 square feet per capita; however, library items exceed the planning standard of 2.0 items per capita. Funding for the County Public Library system comes directly from the County General Fund which, in turn, is funded by various forms of taxes. These funds are allocated by the Board of Supervisors annually to all County -funded public services, including the library system. In 1992, the State shifted property tax revenues from library operations to help finance education. In response to this lost revenue, the County Board of Supervisors adopted in 1994 a community facilities district for extending library services and facilities in the unincorporated areas of the County and twelve cities, including the City of Santa Clarita. 'On June 3, 1997, Proposition L was passed by a two-thirds majority which assesses a special yearly tax of $22.00 a parcel for library service. The County Public Library intends to commission a study to determine whether a permanent library impact fee, to be assessed of new developments, is needed to fund new library construction and to purchase new library items. Until the study is complete, and the Board of Supervisors acts on the issue, the County is imposing an interim fee of $336.00 per dwelling unit on all new residential development to reduce impacts to the library system to a less than significant level. Mitigation requiring the developer to pay the County library mitigation fee of $336.00 per dwelling unit will reduce the impacts of the proposed project,to a less than significant level. Transit Services: The senior residents of this project are anticipated to be heavy users of public transit services. Fixed route bus services and dial -a -ride services through the Santa Clarita Valley Transit System are available to the project site. There is currently a fixed bus route north and south -bound along Bouquet Canyon Road adjacent to the site and an east and west- bound fused bus route along Newhall Ranch Road to the south. The nearest bus stops to the project site are at Festividad Drive on the west side of Bouquet Canyon Road and at Espuella Drive on the east side of Bouquet Canyon Road. Dial -a -ride drop off and pick up service would typically occur on-site in multi -family senior residential projects. While the usage generated by the proposed project will not significantly impact the provision of public transit services within the City of the vicinity of the project site, the applicant shall be conditioned to provide residents with clear and safe pedestrian access to both off-site bus stops and on-site dial -a -ride pickup locations. If on-site pick up service is requested, the dial -a -ride operators will be provided with full gate access into the residential project.. With the implementation of these mitigation measures, no significant impact is anticipated. Further reducing the project's impacts to public transportation services is the anticipated fixed route transportation system running on a daily basis between the proposed project and the Santa Clarita Valley Senior Center. The fixed route system will be provided by the Senior Center which will be managing the residential project in cooperation with the developer. The aforementioned system will allow for an exchange of participants between the project site and the Senior Center, allow for shopping excursions, day trips to destinations such as the Farmer's Market, and specialized transportation for such needs as doctors' appointments. Aesthetics/Visual Qualities (Draft Subsequent EIR Section 4.7) In its currently disturbed state, the project site does not offer any distinctive open space views and is what is considered an "urban vacant lot." Its topography has been altered by ground clearance and the dumping of a large mound of stockpiled earth material in the center of the site. The disturbed site supports weedy and ruderal vegetation that is dominated by non-native plant species and has low wildlife values. The most prominent general public view of the project site are from Bouquet Canyon Road. The rear yards of the nine existing single family homes along the northern boundary have direct views of the project site and over the project site south to the foothills of the valley in the distance. The western four homes are two stories with additional second story views to the south over the project site. The views of the project site and beyond to the south are screened by existing mature tree vegetation for the homes at the end of the Lugar de Oro Drive cul-de- sac. The two-story multiple family condominiums being constructed on the property to the west beyond the Seco Canyon drainage will have distant views of the project site once they are completed and occupied. As the site is located near the confluence of the Bouquet Canyon drainage course and Seco Canyon drainage course, the concrete lined channels dominate the site when viewed from west to east and south to north. The large, approximately 16 foot high mound of stockpiled fill dirt with its weedy vegetation also dominates the center of the site. With the existing RS land use designation on the project site, the 12.36 gross acre project could support up to 61 detached single-family homes up to 35 feet in height. The minimum rear yard depth from a property line could be 15 feet under the UDC. This would result in the obstruction of most of the existing views from the rear yards of the nine single-family homes along the northern boundary of the property. The development of the property with the previously - approved project would result in structures set back from the northern property line a minimum of 65 feet from residential property lines. This would effectively obstruct the southward views from the rear yards of the nine existing single-family homes along the northern boundary of the project site. The proposed project involves the mass grading of the 8.8 net acre site and the construction of a three story, 35 foot high large apartment building. The building would be set back a minimum of 133 feet from the property lines of the existing single-family homes along the northern boundary of the project site. Three viewshed analyses are presented in the Draft Subsequent EIR, with computer visualizations depicting the site both before and after project development. These viewsheds are shown on pages 124, 125, and 126 of the document. One view looks northwest across Bouquet Canyon Road, one looks south across the project site from the terminus of Lugar de Oro Drive, and one looks northeast across the project site generally from the confluence of the concrete -lined channels of the Bouquet Canyon and Seco Canyon drainage courses. The computer visualizations do not reflect the full landscaping of the project, architectural features of the building to break up the bulk and scale of the building, or acolor scheme and is therefore representing the worst-case scenario. The lower photograph in Figure 25 shows the simulated appearance of the proposed project from the terminus of the Lugar de Oro Drive cul-de-sac. The proposed three-story residential building would effectively block long-range views of the distant foothills from the rear yards of the single-family homes along the project sites northern boundary. However, the construction of the previously -approved project would create similar or more significant blockage of residential views from this perspective. Although the approved buildings were only 30 feet in height, they were approved to be located closer to the rear property lines of the adjacent single- family homes (65 feet as compared to 133 feet under the proposed project). This would result in similar or more -significant blockage of views from this perspective. In addition, development of the site as allowed could result in 35 foot high single-family homes. While this would appear to result in less impacts than the currently proposed project, the allowed rear yard setback of 15 feet would create similar or more -significant view blockage impacts in comparison to the proposed project. Furthermore, the currently -proposed project would result in less impacts to the privacy of the adjacent single-family homes with its 133 foot setback over the previously - approved project or.the currently allowed development. The mass grading of approximately 8.8 net currently disturbed acres, the removal of the majority of the ruderal on-site vegetation and the construction of 264 senior attached rental units would significantly alter the aesthetic resources of the project site, however, the change is not adverse. Considering that the impacts of the currently proposed project.would be similar or less than the view blockage impacts associated with the property's existing development potential and the previously -approved project, the incorporation of mitigation measures will reduce the projects visual and aesthetic impacts to a less than significant level. Pbs\council\bqtsnenv