Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-03-10 - AGENDA REPORTS - EMERGENCY ACCESS TRACT 44452 (2)City Manager Approval: Item to be presented by: UNFINISHED BUSINESS DATE: March 10, 1998 SUBJECT: SECOND AMENDMENT - EMERGENCY ACCESS AND IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT TRACT 44452 (VIA PRINCESSA EXTENSION) AND RELATED RESOLUTION NO. 98-37 DEPARTMENT: City Manager of e 1) Approve the second amendment to the Temporary Emergency Access and Improvements Agreement - Tract 44452. 2) Adopt Resolution No. 98-37, authorizing a'loan in the amount of $1,300,000 from the Eastside Bridge and Thoroughfare District to the Via Princessa Bridge and Thoroughfare District. Repayment of the loan would include interest based on the current Monthly Treasurer's investment yield from future collections in the District. The resolution will also authorize the expenditure of an additional $1,600,000 from the Via Princessa Bridge and Thoroughfare District. A total City contribution of $2,900,000 will be used in conjunction with $4,100,000 contributed by Beazer Homes for the construction of the Via Princessa extension (Project No. 52037303-8001). A summary of the history of this extension is included within the packet. The Temporary Emergency Access Agreement between the City and Watt Homes (now Beazer) implemented Condition No. 8 of Tract 44452 (approved in 1987), which required the construction of Via Princessa extension from Circle J Ranch Road to Wiley Canyon Road, including a bridge over the railroad tracks, San Fernando Road, and South Fork of the Santa Clara River. Staff has been working with Beazer Homes over the last several months to finalize the financing issues for the extension. As you are aware, the City completed the Mitigated Negative c , Declaration for this project in May of 1997. The public review period for this document ended c =� on June 7,1997 and the Notice of Determination was filed on June 9,1997. The 30 -da y period c, in which to challenge the Mitigated Negative Declaration expired on July 9, 1997. The ( document analyzed a 76 -foot -wide road including one travel lane in each direction, a center median, sidewalks and a separated multi-purpose trail on the south side of the bridge (Phase fl--tiJI D. Phase 11 (widening to 116') would take place in the future, when warranted. The maximum cost of the Phase I extension is expected to be $7,000,000. - vrende ItulIN -' The important deal points of the proposed amendment are as follows: 1) In accordance with the adopted agreement, Beazer would contribute $3,700,000 towards the construction of the extension. The agreement initially required Beazer to contribute $4,500,000 towards the cost of the extension, but Beazer has since prepaid this obligation down in accordance with the agreement due to the payment of Bridge and Thoroughfare fees for Tract 44452 and due to design and permitting costs for the approved design. However, in the proposed second amendment Beazer has agreed to raise this contribution to $4,100,000 if the City approves pending Tentative Tract Map 44896 with conditions reasonably acceptable to Beazer and without conditioning occupancy of the units until the extension is in place. The Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the extension, which referenced and included a traffic study, clearly indicates that the development of an approximately 350 residential unit project without the extension in place would not result in significant impacts to nearby intersections, including San Fernando Road and Circle J Ranch Road and Circle J Ranch Road and Pia Princessa. This is largely due to the fact that, if approved, pending Tentative Tract Map 44896 would be conditioned to make significant modifications to Circle J Ranch Road (widening) and to the intersection of Circle J Ranch Road and San Fernando Road (potential widening and signal modification). These mitigation measures will mitigate the traffic impacts of Tract 44896 prior to completion of the extension. Finally, it is anticipated that homes in Tract 44896 would only be occupied for a short period of time before the extension is operational. The second amendment requires the extension to be operational by April 2000. Tentative Tract Map 44896 is presently being reviewed by stats. It includes the development of a 56 acre site with 252 residential units (which has been reduced from approximately 350 units). The above provision does not require the City to approve Tract 44896 or restrict our ability to restrict occupancy of the units. If we choose either of those courses, Beazees contribution will be reduced to $3,700,000. • •• • tiL !••� ! . •• . • . .• 2) Beazer will manaze theconstruction of the extension.This is of great benefit to the City as majority of the project management and other related administrative activities would shift from the City to Beazer. 3) To make up the shortfall for the extension, the City would use all of the available funds in the Pia Princessa Bridge and Thoroughfare District ($1,600,000). The extension is an identified improvement within the district. The City would also loan an additional $1,300,000 from the Eastside Bridge and Thoroughfare District to the Via Princessa District, resulting in a total City contribution of $2,900,000. The fund balance in the Eastside District is presently $3,300,000. 1 Language within the Via Princessa District report clearly indicates that half of the extension is being funded by a developer with the remaining half being funded by the District. State law exists to support the interpretation that the City may loan funds between road districts. The City has used this approach in the past with the Whites Canyon Bridge. Via Princessa is a key road in the Valley's roadway network and when r . . .- ..� YMMME r..D . •1 III .-•,• `- - . _. Phase I of the extension includes construction of a 76 -foot -wide bridge, which for all purposes is three-quarters of the extension. The extension, including the bridge, would be wide enough to accommodate a separated trail, sidewalks on both sides of the street, and a center median. Substructure work within the river for both Phase I and II of the bridge will be completed in conjunction with Phase I. The City would be using the Bridge and Thoroughfare funds to enhance the minimal roadway design required under the previous agreement (approximately 40 feet wide - one lane in each direction, no trail, no median, no substructure for expansion). The bottom line is that Bridge and Thoroughfare District funds are beine used to obtain the extra rift. -of -way width including a separated multi purpose trail sidewalks on both Sides and substructure for future expansion of the roadwav when warranted, 4) Beazer will spend their portion of the contribution fit This means that if the extension comes in for less than V.000,000, the Cites contribution is reduced, Conclusion This is the City's chance to build a road, one that has been planned for many years, shown to be critical to the City's road network.and is consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The City would be utilizing Bridge and Thoroughfare funds for what they are intended --construction of roads. There is a developer who is committed to fulfilling their responsibility and the Bridge and Thoroughfare District program can get a substantial improvement at a modest cost. Phase I of the extension will meet our traffic needs today and will meet the traffic needs 10-15 years into the future. The City will also be fulfilling its legal obligations as it relates to the implementation of the General Plan, the agreement between the City and Beazer, and the condition on Tract 44452. AL IMPACT 1. Loan of $1,300,000 from the Eastside Bridge and Thoroughfare District to the Via Princessa District resulting in fund balance of approximately $2,300,000.00 in the Eastside District. 2. The expenditure of up to $2,900,000 from the Via Princessa Bridge and Thoroughfare District. 3. No impact on the General Fund. GEA:.wr.0.:..3.09&" VIA PRINCESSA EXTENSION BACKGROUND/HISTORY The Via Princessa extension (known also as the Wiley Canyon Bridge) has been identified as an important circulation improvement since the early 1970's. Via Princessa/Wiley Canyon Road, including this link has been identified as a major highway in the County of Los Angeles' Santa Clarita Valley Areawide Plans since 1975. The City's General Plan, including the last amendment, identifies this road as a major highway. The Via Princessa extension was conditioned on a phase of Circle J Ranch by the County of Los Angeles in 1987. The City reaffirmed.this requirement in 1989, through the adoption of a "Temporary Emergency Access Agreement" between the City and Ridgedale (Watt) homes. This agreement (including the 1990 amendment) allowed Watt to occupy homes in Tract 44452 while providing the City with certain guarantees in regards to the extension, the most prominent being the requirement of Watt to contribute $4,500,000 toward the contribution of the extension. Watt subsequently bonded for their contribution. The agreement also provided that the extension would be in place and operational by 1995. Other significant provisions of the agreement included: 1) The construction and maintenance of a temporary emergency access from Circle J Ranch to Placerita Canyon. 2) A loan of $4,500,000 to the City for the construction of Rio Vista, upon entering into a development agreement with the City for buildout of the remainder of Circle J Ranch. 3) Bridge and Thoroughfare fees paid in accordance with development of Tract 44452 would be credited against the $4,500,000 obligation. Additionally, design and permitting costs would also reduce this obligation. In November of 1992, the City Council formally adopted the Via Princessa Bridge and Thoroughfare District. One of the improvements identified in the district was the Via Princessa extension. The district report indicated that half of the extension was being funded by a developer, with remainder of the bridge being funded by the district. The City Council has had several lengthy discussions on this item at past meetings. Additionally, the Council identified this extension as the Priority No. 2 road in the City. At these meetings, the consensus of Council was that four conditions must be resolved before this extension is operational. The conditions include: realignment of Wiley Canyon Road south of Lyons Avenue; construction of a signal at La Glorita and Wiley Canyon Road; construction of sidewalk from Tournament Road to Lyons Avenue; and begin the design and environmental work for other major highways identified in the General Plan. All of the above conditions have been satisfied or are in the process of being satisfied. Design for the realignment of Wiley is moving forward with construction anticipated this calendar year. The signal at La Glorita and Wiley has been installed. Sidewalk has been installed from Tournament Road to Lyons Avenue. Design and environmental work is moving forward on Santa Clarita Parkway, Magic Mountain Parkway extension, Newhall Ranch Road and Golden Valley Road. Construction of portions of these roads are expected in the near future. The City is actively designing and building a circulation system. Staff and the City Attorney have also conducted an extensive review of the City's obligations related to the construction of the Via Princessa extension. Specifically, staff and the attorney have analyzed whether the City could excuse this requirement. The short answer to this question is no, for, including but not limited to, the following reasons: 1) The condition to construct the extension is a condition on a recorded tract. The extension was also assumed to be in place for several other approved projects. Removal of this requirement would require extensive revisions to certified environmental documents. 2) Both the City and developer have obligations under the tract map approval and later approved City agreements. These obligations are contractual in nature and exist for the benefit of citizens who would have standing to enforce the obligations through legal action. 3) Via Princessa/Wiley Canyon Road is identified as a major highway in the City's General Plan. Failure on the City's part to implement the General Plan could open the City up for costly, lengthy litigation. Additionally, the City may be required to amend the General Plan to reflect the loss of this key road. Staff has continued to meet with interested members of the public in regards to this project. The primary issue brought forth by several residents was whether the City had seriously evaluated alternatives to the approved design. In an effort to resolve this issue once and for all, staff directed Beazer Homes to prepare a detailed alternatives analysis. This analysis looked at four alternatives (three plus the present design). The executive summary of this analysis is attached. Alternative Nos. 1 and 2 are at -grade crossings. Alternative 3 was the approved grade -separated design. Alternative 4 was the future long-range grade separated design. The report concludes that the approved grade -separated design (Alternative 3) is by far and away the preferred alternative for the next 10-15 years. It implements the General Plan, implements conditions and assumptions made on approved development projects (including Tract 44452), has the fewest environmental effects, and has the best configuration from a traffic standpoint. Additionally, the report found that it would be very unlikely that any proposed at -grade design would receive the necessary approvals from affected outside agencies (Caltrans, Fish and Game, SCRRA, MTA). Staff distributed the report to the interested members of the public and conducted a follow-up meeting regarding the results of the report at City Hall on January 9, 1998. Staff informed those in attendance that the City would be moving forward with the approved design and would be returning to the City Council by March with an amendment which would finalize the financing issues associated with the extension. =nnt\aN31098.vp RESOLUTION 98-37 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA RELATING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE VIA PRINCESSA EXTENSION AND AUTHORIZING: 1) THE ADOPTION OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE EMERGENCY ACCESS AND IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT TRACT 44452, 2) A LOAN OF. $1,300,000 FROM THE THE EASTSIDE BRIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE DISTRICT TO THE VIA PRINCESSA DISTRICT AND 3) THE EXPENDITURE OF AN ADDITIONAL $1,600,000 FROM THE VIA PRINCESSA BRIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE DISTRICT, RESULTING IN A TOTAL BRIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE DISTRICT CONTRIBUTION OF $2,900,000 THAT WILL BE USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH $4,100,000 CONTRIBUTED BY BEAZER HOMES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE VIA PRINCESSA EXTENSION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council does hereby find, determine, and declare as follows: a. The City has entered into the Temporary Emergency Access Agreement and Related Amendments ("Access Agreement") with Ridgedale Watt Homes ("Watt") and its successor -in -interest Beazer Homes ("Beazer"). The purpose of the Access Agreement is to fulfill the County of Los Angeles' ("County") 1987 Condition of Approval No. 8 for WattBeazer's Tract 44452 subdivision, which condition required Watt/Beazer to contribute $4,500,000 toward the construction of the Via Princess Extension, also known as the Wiley Canyon Bridge or Project No. 52037303-8001, from Circle J Ranch Road to Wiley Canyon Road ("Extension"). The Extension includes construction of a bridge over the railroad tracks,. San Fernando Road, and the South Fork of the Santa Clara Rivera b. The Extension has been identified as an important transportation improvement in the Valley since the early 1970's. Via Princessa/Wiley Canyon Road, including the Extension, has been identified as a major highway in the County's Santa Clarita Valley Areawide Plans since 1975. The Circulation Element of the City's General Plan, including its last amendment, identifies the road as a major highway of Valley -wide importance. Further the Via Princessa Bridge and Thoroughfare District ("District"), formed in 1992, identifies the Extension. At build -out this east -west road is projected to carry approximately 40,000 vehicles per day. C. Pursuant to the Access Agreement and its status as Watt's successor -in - interest, -Beazer has agreed to contribute $4,500,000 toward the cost of the Extension.Beazer's obligation has been reduced to $3,700,000 due to payments by Beazer of other Bridge and Thoroughfare Fees for Tract 44452, design expenses, and permitting costs. However, in the event the City in its sole discretion approves pending Beazer Tentative Tract Map No. 44896 with conditions reasonably acceptable to Beazer, and without conditioning occupancy of units on completion of the Extension, Beazer has agreed to pay an additional $400,000 toward completion of the Extension for a total outstanding Beazer obligation of $4,100,000, not including expenses already incurred and paid by Beazer. d. After careful study of numerous design alternatives for the Extension, the City has determined that initial construction of a grade separated 76 -foot -wide road including one travel lane in each direction, a center median, sidewalks and a separated multi-purpose trail, also known as "Phase I," is the preferred alternative in that it implements the City's General Plan and meets the projected traffic demand for the next 10-15 years. e. Phase I of the Extension is currently estimated to cost a maximum of approximately $7,000,000 to construct. f. As a result of the estimated cost of Phase I of the Extension, supplementary funds, in addition to Beazer's contribution, may be required to fund construction of the Extension. Section 2. In consideration of the foregoing, the City Council hereby authorizes the following: a. Adoption of the Second Amendment - Emergency Access and Improvements Agreement Tract 44452 between the City of Santa Clarita and Beazer Homes. b. To the extent that Beazer's financial contribution toward Phase I of the Extension is not sufficient to fund its completion, that all currently available funds in the Via Princess Bridge and Thoroughfare District Fund, estimated to be $1,600,000, be expended to fund construction of the Extension. C. To the extent that Beazer's financial contribution toward Phase I of the Extension is not sufficient to fund its completion, that up to $1,300,000 in funds from the. City's Eastside Bridge and Thoroughfare District Fund be loaned to the Via Princessa District Fund to be expended to fund construction of the Extension. Such loan shall be repaid in full to the Eastside Bridge and Thoroughfare District Fund from future Via Princessa Bridge and Thoroughfare District Fees collected. In addition, the Eastside Bridge and Thoroughfare District Fund shall receive interest payments on a periodic basis at a rate equal to the then current Monthly Treasurer's Report investment yield. Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 19_. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF SANTA CLARITA I, Sharon L. Dawson, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of , 19_ by the following vote of Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCII.MEMBERS: CITY CLERK GEA: current\ree9837.ge SECOND AMENDMENT TO TEMPORARY EMERGENCY ACCESS ANDIMPROVEMENTSAGREEMENT TRACT 44452 This Second Amendment to Temporary Emergency Access and Improvements Agreement Tract 44452 ("Second Amendment'), dated , 1998, amends and modifies that certain Temporary Access and Improvements Agreement Tract 44452, dated August 22, 1989 ("Agreement"), entered into by and between RIDGEDALE PARTNERS, a California general partnership ("Ridgedale"), and the CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, a municipal corporation ("City"), as previously amended and modified by that certain Amendment to Temporary Emergency Access and Improvements Agreement Tract 44452, dated March 27, 1990, entered into by and between Ridgedale and City ("First Amendment'. RECITALS A. BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP., a Delaware corporation doing business as BEAZER HOMES CALIFORNIA ("Beazer"), is successor -in -interest to Ridgedale. B. Pursuant to Section 1 of the Agreement, Ridgedale posted a bond in the amount of $4.5 million to secure the construction of the Bridge (as defined in the Agreement). In accordance with Section 4 of the Agreement, upon issuance of the building permits for Tract 44452, fees in the amount of $408,000 were paid and credited against the Contribution (as defined in the Agreement) and reduced the bond to the amount of $4,092,000 ("Remaining Bond Amount"). (The Remaining Bond Amount, less credits for advances pursuant to Section 1(b) and (c) and fees pursuant to Section 4(d) of the Agreement, as amended below, is hereinafter referred to as the "Remaining Contribution.") C. City has adopted a mitigated negative declaration, approved final engineering of improvement plans and obtained permits necessary for the Bridge, the costs for which (totalling approximately $300,000) have been advanced by Beazer ("Predevelopment Costs"). Phase One of the Bridge (consisting of 76 -foot width, including sidewalks on both sides, a median, and a trail on one side) is estimated to cost a maximum of $7 million. Phase Two of the Bridge (consisting of widening to 116 feet) is to be constructed when warranted. D. The Development Agreement (as defined in the Agreement) for vesting the development rights for the Ranch (as defined in the Agreement) and for construction of Rio Vista (as defined in the Agreement) was not entered into by Ridgedale and City. Rather, City has amended its General Plan so as to eliminate Rio Vista from the circulation element, and Beazer has applied for a vesting tentative tract map for a portion of its remaining property within the Ranch ("Tract 44896"). . E. The parties desire to update the Agreement, as amended to date through the First Amendment. AGREEMENT In consideration of the above recitals and the mutual agreements contained in this Second Amendment, City and Beazer agree as follows: Constriction of Phase One of the Bridee. (A) The last two sentences of Section 1 of the Agreement are hereby deleted, and the remaining existing text of Section 1 is hereby labeled as Paragraph (a) to said Section 1. (B) Paragraph (b) is hereby added to Section 1 to read as follows: "Upon submittal of evidence satisfactory to City of the Predevelopment Costs advanced by Beazer, the amount of such Predevelopment Costs shall be credited against the Remaining Contribution; provided, however, that in the event that City approves Tract 44896 with conditions reasonably acceptable to Beazer and without conditioning occupancy upon completion of Phase One of the Bridge, Beazer agrees to waive credit of its Predevelopment Costs against its Remaining Contribution upon expiration of all applicable periods of appeal and statutes of limitation without a challenge to Tract 44896." (C) Paragraph (c) is hereby added to Section 1 to read as follows: "City shall be responsible for providing or acquiring any property interests and obtaining any approvals from other agencies necessary for Phase One of the Bridge. Any out-of-pocket costs therefor incurred by City shall be advanced by Beazer and credited against the Remaining Contribution." (D) Paragraph (d) is hereby added to Section 1 to read as follows: "Beazer agrees to accept responsibility for managing construction of Phase One of the Bridge, provided, however, that Beazer shall not accept a bid for construction of Phase One in excess of $7 million, in which case the parties agree to negotiate in good faith to amend this Agreement. Grading for Phase One of the Bridge shall commence concurrently with grading for Tract 44896, and construction of Phase One of the Bridge shall be completed by April 2000. Upon construction payments by Beazer totalling its Remaining Contribution, Beazer's bond shall be released and exonerated. Following exhaustion of Beazer's Remaining Contribution, Beazer shall timely pay invoices submitted by -2- C:WMS\CKR283U65755000 W GRM'n0275298.02 contractors constructing Phase One and promptly submit invoices for reimbursement to City, which City shall pay Beazer within thirty days." 2. Termination of Temporary Access. Section 2(d)(i) is hereby amended to read as follows: "Following construction of the Temporary Access, Beazer shall, at its sole expense, keep the Temporary Access in good condition and repair (in addition to paying for the guard services provided in Paragraph 2(b)) until the date Phase One of the Bridge is completed and becomes operational (the "Termination Date")." 3. Fee Credit and Waiver. Section 4(d) of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: "The fees payable pursuant to this paragraph and all Bridge and Thoroughfare Assessment District fees and assessments paid for property in the Ranch owned by Beazer, as identified in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein, shall constitute a credit to be applied against the Contribution, and the required bond amount for the Bridge will be reduced accordingly, on an annual basis, on the anniversary of the date this document is signed by both parties. Any Bridge and Thoroughfare Assessment District fees and assessments attributable to development of the properties identified in Exhibit A after exoneration of Beazer's bond pursuant to Section 1(d) hereof shall be waived by City." 4. Advance Funding. (A) Section 5(a) of the Agreement, as amended through the First Amendment, is hereby deleted. (B) The last two sentences of Section 5(b) of the Agreement, as amended through the First Amendment, are hereby deleted. 5. Ratification. Except as otherwise modified in this Second Amendment, the terms and provisions of the Agreement, as amended through the First Amendment, shall remain in full force and effect. -3- C:\DOCS\CKR283\26575\000\AGRMT\0275298.Q2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Second Amendment as of the date and year set forth above. "CITY" CITY OF SANTA CLARITA By: _ Name: Title: `BEAZER" BEAZER HOMES HOLDINGS CORP., a Delaware corporation doing business as BEAZER HOMES CALIFORNIA By: _ Name: Title: By: _ Name: Title: C:\DOCS\CKR283\26575\OOMGRM'n0275298.02 -- EXHIBIT "A" words deleted words added TE14P EMERGENCY ACCEAA INPROVP..HENT AGREENeNT — TRnCT 4141U 8-2- LThis agreement (the "Agreement")• is entered into as of - 1909, between Ridgedale Partners, a California general PartrieYshiP ("Ridgedale"), (Watt -America, Inc. is mann in P `t � ); and the City of Santa Clarity g g general (the "city,,) with reference to the followingfacts:corporation / A. Ridgedale has an approved tentative map (the "Tentative Map") for Tract No. 44452 ("Tract 44452" Was approved under the )• The said Tentative liap on of L "county") prior to incorporationofthe cit os Angeles County (the . represents that -all conditions to the Tentative Hap have beenRidgedale gsatisfied except for condition No., 8 which requires an agreement to be red of development known as enter regarding certain improvements, particulaly the construction ed a Permanent secondary access (the "Permanent Access") for the Circle J Ranch of which Tract 44452 is a part. Unless a final tract map (the "Final Map") for Tract 44452 is recorded prior to August 12, 1959, the Tentative Map will e>:oire. The . purpose of ir.plementa,this Agreement is to assist the pblic health, th, of No. 8 in a manner which promotes the safety -and general welfare. B• On May 27, 1989, the City Council adopted a project schedule regarding circulation improvements including the Lift rincessa-w+lev Canyon n a e (the Bridge) Based upon the -project schedule, and other circumstances the Bridge is expected to be constructed by 1995. Until that time, a temporary secondary means to Circle J is needed to permit ingress and egress by emergency vdhicles and rn¢�,y�}.y �k xve VWXXXsl, Circle J paneH `es`de is a Crossing at Circle J�Road and Sann the Fernandouthern Road isacific blockedabyrthe train activity. C. Ridgedale has agreed to contribute $4,500;000 (the' "Cant_ibution") toward the construction of the Bridge. Upon the execution of a development agreement (the "Development Agreement" vesting development rights in Ridgedale .for the remainder of Circle J propertj (the "Ranch"), Ridgedale has agreed to provide advance funding of an additional $4 const=ucti,500,000 (the "Advance Funding") for the on of a portion of a separate, additional means of access to the Ranch, known as Rio Vista Road ("Rio Vista"), subject to reir..bursement and upon other terms to be agreed upon by Ridgedale and the City. D• in order to permit the recordation of. the Final Hap and the development of Tract 44452, Ridgedale and the City desire to Prov -.;e for the bonding of the Contribution toward the construction O the Bridge, for the construction and maintenance of the temporary emergency access (the "Temporary Access") for Circle J and the advance funding for Rio vista, upon the terms and conditions set forth herein. M1 VOW;'THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals and the mutual covenants set forth herein, the parties hereto. agree as follows: 1. Approval and Recordation of 'Final Tract Hap No 44452 As soon as possible following execution of this Agreement, Ridgedale shall part bonds and agreements satisfactory to the City to assure its Contribution toward the Bridge and its construction of the Temporary Access in accordance with the .requirements set forth in Paragraph 2 of this Agreement. At such time thereafter as Ridgedale has posted.all required bonds or other security with the City to secure the Contribution and construction of the Temporary Access and provided that all other conditions of the Tentative Map are satisfied, the City shall approve and permit the recordation of the Final Map. The City and Ridgedale shall take all actions required under this Paragraph 1 in a timely manner such that all necessary documents are ready.for inclusion in the City Council agenda by July 19, 1989. The bonds and agreements for the Contribution shall insure that Ridgedale commences or causes the commencement of the construction of the Bridge within four years of the signing of this agreement, and diligently proceeds to completion by 1995. 2. Construction of Temporary Access; Relocation (a) Upon the execution of this agreement, Ridgedale shall, at its expense, acquire a right-of-way for.the Temporary Access in substantial conformity with the location shown on Exhibit A. Ridgedale shall thereafter, at its expense, diligently construct the Temporary Access substantially as shown on Exhibit A, in accordance with all standards and requirements of the City and the Metropolitan Water District (upon whose right-of-way the Temporary Access will be located and adjacent). Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Temporary Access shall be paved and fenced on both sides along its entire length substantially as shown on Exhibit A. Ridgedale shall complete construction of the Temporary Access by October 1, 1989. Such temporary access may be relocated from time to time in a manner satisfactory to the City and in accordance with the requirements of the property owner on whose property the temporary access will be constructed. Any such relocation will not reduce the function and utility of the temporary access -road. (b) Following construction of the Temporary Access and subject to Paragraph 2(d) below, Ridgedale shall, at its expense, maintain a 24-hour per day guard service at the junction of the Temperary Access and Via Princessa to prevent use of the Temporary Access by other than emergency vehicles and Circle J residents when. Circle J Road is, in the judgement -of the guard, blocked for an excessive period of time at the southern Pacific Railroad Crossing. _8.2 (c) The southerly terminus of the Temporary Access shall be gated and locked at all times that the Temporary Access remains in operation in order to prevent access by other than emergency vehicles, under. the circumstances described in 2(b) above, and Circle J residents. (d) (i) Following construction of the Temporary Access, Ridgedale shall, at its sole expense, keep the Temporary Access -in good condition and repair (in addition to paying for the guard service provided in Paragraph 2(b)) until the earlier to occur of (A) the date the Bridge is completed and becomes operational or (B) the date that. the Rio Vista access becomes operational (the first to occur. of such dates is hereinafter referred to as the "Termination Date").. (ii) Following the Termination Date, Ridgedale shall no longer be obligated to provide guard service for the Temporary Access and shall no longer be required to maintain the Temporary Access. .(e) Ridgedale shall 11,aXp ,X) g YXOKt to at its expense remove the Temporary Access XIP% Road, immediately following the Termination Date. 3. Building Permits (a) As soon as possible on or after the date that the Temporary Access is completed in accordance with all applicable requirements and becomes operational, and subject to receipt by the City of the fees specified in Paragraph -4(a) below, upon ,proper application, the -City shall issue to Ridgedale 41 building permits • for the construction of detached single-family residential, homes within the Tract 44452. (b) Subject to receipt by the City of the fees specified in Paragraph 4(b) below, on January- 2, 1990, and upon proper application, the City shall issue to. Ridgedale 41 additional building permits for the construction of detachedsingle-family residential homes within Tract 44452. 4. Fees. 'I 1, (a) Upon the city's issuance of the first 41 building permits, as set forth in Paragraph, 3(a), and as a condition thereto, Ridgedale shall, concurrently with the release by the City of sur_h permits, pay to the City the sum of $270,000. (b) Concurrently with the issuance by the City of the .41 building permits, as .set forth in Paragraph 3(b), and as a condition thereto, Ridgedale shall pay to the City the sum of $246,000. = �v G,an Fee D.U. ME and 4 (c) The fees payable by Ridgedale under Para {b) shall be in lieu of an graph 4{a) Assessment District fees and assessments and road and traffic: required to attain a buildingd imposed th Thoroughfare City in connection with the development of Tract 44452 fees are calculated at the that y be imposed by the within Tract 44452 rate. of $6,000 per unit to be The fees ucted 33087 and the {as well as $6, 000 each for the 3 units ninr ract The Cit 1 unit in P.2i: 17528 currently under construction)t Y agrees to hold fees paid pursuant to Paragraph 4 a 4(b) and the Bridge Fees paid with respect to the Ranch for use on the Bridge, the Cit { ) and discretion as allowed b y use the interest on those any rights or y law. This agreement does funds in its responsibilities the not contradict Subdivision Agreement for Tract 44452, parties have under the fees payable dr�e ftp � x�pm0r7� Rf1Yog"d¢rt'tg "t"90 trtr Thorou hfare pursuant to this paragraph and all Bridg9The e/ and g Assessment District fees and assessments and road and traffic fees paid under the Development Agreement shall.constitute bond amoun a credit to beapplied pplied against the Contribution, an t the Bridge will d the required annual basis, on the be reduced accordingly, on an anniversary of the date this document parties. is signed by both 5• Develo Ment Actreement, The City shall not be required to issue any releases for occupancy for the and not constructed on Tract 44452 until such time Agreement on t as Ridgedale the City have entered into the Development he remainder of the Circle J property which shall Provide, among other things, for the timing of the construction of units and, a schedule for release of occupancy leading to anticipatedphased and other terms anconditions relatin conclusion of Occupancy in December 1990 „ Advance Funding, The Development AgreementshallContribution and the real ay the Advance Funding to the Cit quire Ridgedale property described in Exhibir a y' and Shall relate to the to proceed diligently and The City and Ridgedale agree Development Agreement by October good faith to e9.nter into the Time of Essence. Ridgedale and the City hereby acknowledge time is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term,•condition, obligation and g and agree that provision hereof. 7, Entire Agreement. This instrument contains the entire agreement between the parties as to the rights herein granted and the obligations herein assumed and supersedes any and all prior written or oral communi- or a cations cs•tAny modification of this instrument shall be of no force or eff, except it shall be in writing, signed by all parties. g4 I 8• Exhibits All exhibits attached to' -and referred to in this Agreement are incorporated.into and form a part of this Agreement. 9. rovnr.ni.i�_Law. The parties expressly agree that this Agreement shall be governed by, interpreted under, and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 10. Attornevst Fees Should either party hereto institute any action or proceeding in court to 'enforce any provision hereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to receive from the losing party its costs and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by the prevailing party in such action or proceeding. 11. Notices All written notices required.to be given pursuant to the terms hereof shall be either personally delivered, or deposited in the United States first class mail and registered or certified with return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: To Ridgedale: Watt America, Inc. 22402 Via Princessa Santa Clarita, CA 91350 Attention: Richard Urso Emerick Properties Corp., A California corporation, partner 1901.Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1555 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Attention: Brian Weber. To the.City: City of Santa •.23920 Valencia Santa Clarita, Attention: Clarita Blvd. CA 91355 ITESs WHEREOF Agreement��tor{be execu ed'astofParties hereto the date have caused this first set forth above. RIDGEDALE RIDGEDALE JOIIIT VE14TURE a California general partnership By: watt America, Inc. a California cor oration, BYn in P[1ePar partners' . , By: BY: EMERICK properties Corp. a California corporation, gra partner By: Its 7 its ns9r. E Tv�/ CITY. CITY OF SANT CLARITA By: I t sem. vn r ,6 AMENDMENT TO TEMPORARY EMERGENCY ACCESS TO IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT TRACT 44452 This Amendment to Temporary Emergency Access and ImprovemenLS Ayleeiuent (the "Amendment") dated March 27, 19900 1990, amends and modifies that certain Temporary Access and Improvements Agreement, dated August 22, 1989 (the "Agreement"), entered into by and between RIDGEDALE PARTNERS, a California general partnership ("Ridgedale"), and the CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, a municipal corporation (the "City"). RECITALS: A. Ridgedale has -performed all of its obligations for Lhe 1juutitig of bonds and security under Paragraph 1 of the Agreement. B. Ridgedale has performed all of its obligations for the construction of the Temporary Access.(as defined in the Agreement) under Paragraph 2(a) of the Agreement. C. Ridgedale has performed all of its obligations for the payment of fees under Paragraph 4 of the Agreement. D. The parties desire to provide an alternative arrangement to the mutual obligations described in Section 5 of the -Agreement. nrRs�q,: In consideration of the above recitals and the mutual agreements contained in this Amendment, the City and Ridgedale agree as follows: 1. The existing text of Section 5 is hereby labeled as Paragraph (a) to said Section 5, 2. Paragraph (b) is added to Section 5 to Lead as follows: (b) In lieu of, and as an alternative to, the obligations described in Paragraph 5(a) above, the City may issue releases for occupancy for the homes constructed in Tract cash to the 44452 upon Ridgedale: (i) paying $100,000 in .school district; (ii) paying $250,000 to the City for street improvement Purposes; and (iii) donating, providing, and delivering one thousand (1,000) trees, in good health, 24 inch box minimum size, to the City for general landscaping purposes, and at such times, as determined by the City in its sole discretion. Ridgedale agrees to provide the trees in groups of at least SO trees as requested by the City. It fs understood that the City may request, delivery of such trees at any time after execution of this Agreement and that requests for a portion of such all of°such trees, may occur after ttrees, or has released all of he City the homes in the tract for OfanyallhofCthe'homeseinethertractpshall not release Ridgedale from its obligations under.this Agreement to provide the trees in the manner and at the time requested. It is also understood that Ridgedale may first satisfy its obligation to provide trees under this paragraph from tho tree farm owned and maintained by Ridgedale, but only,to the extent that such trees have been selected and approved by qualified City Park Department Officials or employees. To the extent that -2- -D Z Ridgedale is unable to provide any or all of the requested trees from Ridgedale's tree farm, kidgedale shall provide trees Crom a reputable nursery or supplier, approved by the City, and Such tcec8 811,111 be consistent with the specifications contai-.%ed in this paragraph and of a variety or varieties approved by the City. The City and Ridgedale shall proceed diliycully and in yvod Faith to enter into a statutory Development Agreement containing the terms and provisions described in paragraph 5(a), including payment of the Advance Funding, for the remainder of Circle J Ranch from and after the.execution of this P.mendment. The negotiation and execution of such Development Agreement shall have no effect whatsoever on the release of occupancy of homes for Tract 44452. 3. Exceot as otherwise modified in this Amendment, the terms and provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS 'WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date and year first hereinabove set forth. "RIDGEDALE" RIDGEDALE JOINT VENTURE, a California general partnershin By: Watt America, Inc., a California corporation, Managing General Part etship n , By: L L -l4 Urso i /ts: idem By: [�t11&��yn Andrea Its: Asst. Secretary -3- D3 doh/AMD29105 By: EMERICK PROPERTIES CORP , a California9rat' n, Partne�� / By: By: y Its: "CITY" CITY OF 'SANTA C ARITA By: � its : -4- 1� k I CITY OF SANTA CLARITA CERTIFICATION BY THE CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ) I. Georgie Caravalho s . City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby.certify that the attached is a complete and correct copy of the City Council decision regarding Watt America/Circle J -Agreement Modification approved by the City Council at'the City Council meeting of March 13, 1990. George A. Caravalho City Clerk ana M. Grindey Assistant City Clerk D3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS - VIA PRINCESSA.ROAD INTRODUCTION This report is a summary of the Alternatives Analysis - Extension of Via Princessa Road prepared for the City of Santa Clarita (City) by Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. (AFA) and Vista Community Planners (VISTA). The alternatives analysis report was prepared at the request of the City and several of the City's residents. The alternatives analysis report evaluates three alternatives to the existing approved alignment. This executive summary includes this introduction, the location of the project, descriptions of each alternative, major findings of the analysis, and a summary of each alternative analyzed. LOCATION The proposed project site is located in the City of Santa Clarita in Los Angeles County, California. The proposed project site is located at the terminus of Via Princessa Road and extends to Wiley Canyon Road. The proposed project site is generally bounded by: vacant land; Circle J Ranch Road, the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) right-of-way, San Fernando Road, the South Fork of the Santa Clara River, and other vacant properties to the north; Wiley Canyon Road to the west; vacant property, the SCRRA right-of-way, San Fernando Road, the South Fork of the Santa Clara River, and other vacant properties to the south; and existing Via Princessa Road to the east. Exhibit 2 provides a project site local vicinity map. DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES This report summarizes our evaluation of four (4) alternatives for the extension of Via Princessa Road from the existing terminus to Wiley Canyon Road These alternatives are listed below: • Alternative 1- Via Princessa Road - At Grade Existing Alignment; • Alternative 2 _ Via Princessa Road - At Grade Northerly Alignment; • Alternative 3 - Via Princessa Road - Existing General Plan Alignment; and • Alternative 4 - Via Princessa Road - Existing General Plan Alignment with Ramps (Potential Long Range Alternative). The Traffic Study prepared by AFA, Inc. evaluated Alternatives 1 and 2 together. FINDINGS Base on the information contained in this report, Alternative 3 -.Via Princessa Road - Existing General Plan Alignment is the preferred alignment for the roadway for the short(midrange timeframe. The alignment meets project objectives, is consistent with the City's General Plan, has the fewest environmentally effects, and has the best configuration from a traffic operation standpoint. 0 ALTERNATIVE 1 DESCRIPTION Alternative 1 provides for the grading of Via Princessa Road from the existing intersection with Circle J - Ranch Road to achieve an at grade crossing of the SCRRA railroad right-of-way. This alternative requires raising San Fernando Road out of the flood way/ flood plain up to eight feet (8') for 500 feet on both sides of the new at -grade intersection. Alternative 1 will require the construction of a bridge across the South Fork of the Santa Clara River and the construction of the roadway from the river to Wiley Canyon Road. Alternative 1 is depicted below. l� &I - CYN. RAV.. �d tM OF R RADE CROSSING ; tS BRIDGE OVER RIVER A7—GRADE INTERSECTION A ALTERNATIVE 1 MAJOR FINDINGS Land Use Alternative 1 is inconsistent with the City of Santa Clarita General Plan. The City's General Plan indicates a grade -separated interchange at this location. This alternative will conflict with the applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The Southern Californian Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) and Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) strongly discourage an at -grade crossing of the railroad due to operational and safety issues. A letter from SCRRA in opposition to an at -grade intersection is attached. Alternative 1 would require more grading than the preferred alternative and increase impacts related to biology and ridgeline preservation. The grading would be required to raise San Fernando Road to meet with Via Princessa outside of the flood zone. Alternative1 will significantly impact the proposed residential design of the adjacent vacant Circle J Ranch site. Impacts on the Circle J Ranch site include: increased grading, drainage, and lot design. Noise Alternative 1 will increase existing noise levels and expose people. to short-term severe noise levels. Alternative 1 will have greater short-term construction related transportation noise impacts than the preferred alternative (Alternative 3) because of additional grading activities. Alternative I will result in a substantially increased ambient noise level created by vehicular traffic (truck trips for grading activities). Hazards Alterative 1 will increase hazards by providing an at - grade crossing of the railroad. Existing and future residents of Circle J Ranch will only be served by an at -grade crossing of the railroad. This increases hazards related to emergency response and evacuation planning when train block the at -grade intersection. Vii Traffic The at -grade intersection of Via Princessa and San— Fernando Road requires widening of San Fernando Road to allow the intersection to operate satisfactory. Alternative 1 would require an at -grade crossing of the SCRRA railroad tracks. The Alternative I at -grade crossing has operational and safety concerns. Operationally, the railroad crossing will limit the efficient movement of traffic through the intersection . of Via Prince= and San Fernando Road . by preempting the traffic signal for each train that passes, potentially causing the stacking of up to seventy-five cars. From a safety standpoint, any design that requires vehicles to share right-of-way with trains introduces the possibility of vehicle/train collisions. This segment of Via Princesssa is forecasted to have 25,000 Average Daily Trips (ADT) in the near future and over 40,000 ADT when buildout of the Santa Clarity Valley occurs. It is not recommended to create an at -grade intersection on an arterial planned to have such an ADT. Other Physical Design Features Alternative I will have,a greater impact on air quality that the preferred project. Alternative 1 will impact existing absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface runoff. Permitting/Planning The selection Alternative 1 would require the preparation of several studies and numerous approvals. The approvals include a General Plan Amendment (GPA), - amendments to approved development programs (i.e., Circle J Ranch, Porta Bella, etc), revisions to the City's Traffic Model, and other similar actions. Approval from the following agencies would be required: SCRRA, MTA, United States Army Corp of Engineers, United States Department of the Interior - Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the State of California Departments of Fish and. Game and Transportation. ALTERNATIVE 2 DESCRIPTION Alternative 2 provides for the grading of Via Princessa Road from the existing intersection with Circle J Ranch Road to achieve an at grade crossing of the SCRRA railroad right-of-way approximately 800 feet to the north, raising San Fernando Road out of the flood way/flood plain to provide a new intersection, and the construction of a bridge across the South Fork of the Santa Clara River, and the construction of the roadway from the river to Wiley Canyon Road. 1 I .1 I�� 3 • � PRINCFSg,4 � r � O C `MLE:y CYN. RD , AT—GRADE CROSSING i OF R.R. 1� BRIDGE OVER RIVER Z\ AT—GRADE INTERSECTION viii ALTERNATIVE 2 MAJOR FINDINGS Land Use Alternative 2 is inconsistent with the City of Santa Clarita General Plan. The City's General Plan indicates a grade -separated interchange at this location. This alternative will conflict with the applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project The Southern Californian Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) and Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) strongly discourage an at -grade crossing of the railroad due to operational and safety issues. A letter from SCRRA in Opposition to an at -grade intersection is attached. Alternative 2 would require more grading than the preferred alternative and increase impacts related to biology and ridgeline preservation The grading would be required to raise San Fernando Road to meet with Via Princessa outside of the flood zone. Alternative 2 Will significantly impact the proposed residential design of the adjacent vacant Circle J Ranch site. Impacts on the Circle J Ranch site include: increased grading, drainage, and lot design. Noise Alternative 2 will increase existing noise levels and expose people to short-term severe noise levels. Alternative 2 will have greater short -tern construction related transportation noise impacts than the preferred alternative (Alterative 3) because of additional grading activities. Alternative 2 . will result in a substantially increased ambient noise level created by vehicular traffic (truck trips for grading activities). Hazards Alternative 2 will increase hazards by providing an at. grade crossing of the railroad. Existing_ and future residents of Circle J Ranch will only be served by an at -grade crossing of the railroad. This increases hazards related to emergency response and evacuation planning when train block the at -grade intersection. ix Traffic The at -grade intersection of Via Princessa and San Fernando Road requires widening of San Fernando Road to allow the intersection to operate satisfactory. Alternative 2 would require an at -grade crossing of the SCRRA railroad tracks. The Alternative 2 at -grade crossing has operational and safety concerns. Operationally, the railroad crossing will limit the efficient movement of traffic through the intersection of Via Princessa and San Fernando Road by preempting the traffic signal for each train that passes, potentially causing the stacking of up to seventy-five cars. From a safety standpoint, any design that requires vehicles to share right-of-way with trains introduces the possibility of.vehiclehrain collisions. This segment of Via Princesssa is forecasted to have 25,000 Average Daily Trips (ADT) in the new future and over 40,000 ADT when buildout of the Santa Clarita Valley occurs. It is not recommended to create an at -grade intersection on an arterial planned to have such an ADT. Other Physical Design Features Alternative 2 will have a greater impact on air quality that the preferred project Alternative 2 will impact existing absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface runoff. Permitting/Planning The selection Alternative 2. would require the preparation of several studies and numerous approvals. The approvals include a General Plan Amendment (GPA), amendments to approved development programs (i.e., Circle J Ranch, Porta Bella, etc.), revisions to the City's Traffic Model, and other similar actions. Approval from the following agencies would be required: SCRRA, MTA, United States Arty Corp of Engineers, •United States Department of the Interior - Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the State of California Departments of Fish and Game and Transportation. ALTERNATIVE 3 DESCRIPTION Alternative 3 the City's General Plan is the preferred alternative. Alternative 3 provides for the grading_ of Via Princessa Road from the existing intersection with Circle J Ranch Road to a bridge structure that will extend over. the SCRRA railroad right-of-way San Fernando Road, and the South Fork of the Santa Clara River, and the construction of the roadway from the river to Wiley Canyon Road ISI . a . Y 2 RD BRIDGE AVER RIVER, SAN FERN DO ROAD AND R.R. x ALTERNATIVE 3 MAJOR FINDINGS Land Use Alternative 3 is consistent with the City of Santa Clarita General Plan. Alternative 3 implements the City's General Plan and conditions of approval related to the existing residential development in the Circle J Ranch projects. This alternative is included in the - City's Traffic Model and has been assumed as a future roadway in several City approved projects. This alternative will not conflict with the applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The Southern Californian Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) and Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) support this grade -separated crossing of the railroad. Noise While Alternative 3 will increase existing noise levels and expose people to short-term severe noise . levels, it will have fewer short-term construction related transportation noise impacts than Alternatives 1, 2, or 4. Alternative 3 will result in a substantially increased ambient noise level created by vehicular traffic. This impact can be mitigated to a less than significant level. Alternative 3 is consistent with the City's General Plan Noise Element. Hazards Alternative 3 will significantly reduce hazards by providing a grade -separated crossing of the railroad This alternative benefits emergency. responses and evacuations. xi Traffic The grade -separated intersection of Via Princessa and San Fernando Road provides the best configuration from a traffic operation standpoint as it eliminates conflicts. Alternative 3 results in a smallest increase in traffic on the existing portion of Wiley Canyon Road. Other Physical Design Features Alternative 3 will have the least impact on air quality of the alternatives evaluated. Alternative 3 will have the least impact on existing absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface runoff of the alternatives evaluated ALTERNATIVE 4 POTENTIAL LONG RANGE ALTERNATIVE DESCRIPTION Alternative 4 is City's General Plan with ramps to San Fernando Road. Alternative 4 is the potential long range alternative for the circulation system. Alternative 4 provides for the grading of Via Princessa Road from the existing intersection with Circle J Ranch Road to a bridge structure that will extend over the SCRRA railroad right-of-way and San Fernando Road (SR -126). A connection to San Fernando Road via a ramp system would be developed. The bridge would then cross the South Fork of the Santa Clara River and extend from the river to Wiley Canyon Road ll ISI RAMP TO / FROM �b} BRIDGE AND SAN h FERNANDO RD. n v' 0 WIL.EY• RD__ •t� 8 10 R BRIDGE OVER RIVER, SAN FERNANOD ROAD AND R.R. Xi i ALTERNATIVE 4 POTENTIAL LONG RANGE ALTERNATIVE MAJOR FINDINGS Land Use Alterative 4 is consistent with the City of Santa CMta General Plan. Alterative 4 implements the City's General Plan and conditions of approval related to the existing residential development in the Circle J Ranch projects. This alternative will not conflict with the applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The Souther Californian Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) and Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) support a grade -separated crossing of the railroad. Approval of the SCRRA, MTA and Caltrans would be required to implement this alternative. This alternative will not impact the proposed residential use of the vacant property located on the Circle J Ranch site. Noise While Alternative 4 will increase existing noise levels and expose people to short-term severe noise levels, it will have fewer short-term construction related transportation noise impacts than Alternatives 1 or 2 as the alternative has reduced grading.. Alternative 4 will result in a substantially increased ambient noise level created by vehicular traffic. This impact can be mitigated to a less than significant level. Hazards Alternative 4 will significantly reduce hazards by providing a grade -separated crossing of the railroad This alterative benefits emergency responses and evacuations. Traffic The grade -separated intersection of Via Princessa and San Fernando Road provides the best configuration from a traffic operation standpoint. Alterative 4 eliminates most of the negative effects of Alternatives 1 and 2. The access roads results in a significant increase in construction cost due to it placing a three-way intersection on the bridge structure. This results in the bridge needing to accommodate at least one (1) additional lane and additional bridge structure for the access road. Other Physical Design Features Alternative 4 will have an impact on air quality. Alternative 4 will have an impact on existing absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface runoff of the alternatives evaluated