HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-01-13 - AGENDA REPORTS - NEWHALL RANCH DEV PROJ (2)CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
AGENDA REPORT
UNFINISHED BUSINESS City Manager Approval: X&5��
Item to be presented b3/,/
1VIayor Heidt
DATE: January 13, 1998
SUBJECT: POTENTIAL APPEAL OF
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
DEPARTMENT: Planning & Building Services
RECOMMENDED ACTION
THE NEWHALL RANCH
Discuss a potential appeal of the Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commission's
approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Parcel Map relating to the Newhall
Ranch development project, and direct staff accordingly.
On December 17, 1997, the Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commission held its
final hearing on the Newhall Ranch development project. At that hearing, the Regional
Planning Commission took the following actions:
Approved a Conditional Use Permit to allow for development within a Significant
Ecological Area.
2. Approved a Tentative Parcel Map to allow for the subdivision of three. existing
lots into a total of 30 lots.
Certified the portion of the Final EIR that relates to the Conditional Use Permit
and Tentative Parcel Map applications.
4. Recommended to the Board of Supervisors approval of a General Plan
Amendment and Zone Change to redesignate 11,963 acres of land (approximately
19 square miles).
5. Recommended to the Board of Supervisors certification of the Final EIR that
relates to the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change.
The actions to approve the Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Parcel Map and to
certify the Final EIR relating to the Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Parcel Map
are final unless appealed to the Board of Supervisors. The Ventura County Board of
Supervisors filed an appeal of the Tentative Parcel Map due to concerns related to
potential impacts to Ventura County. Ventura County did not file an appeal of the
Conditional Use Permit approval.
The General Plan Amendment and Zone Change have not been approved and the Final
EIR for those applications has not been certified. The Regional Planning Commission
made recommendations to the Board of Supervisors; however, only the Board can
approve these actions. If the Board of Supervisors does not approve the General Plan
Amendment and Zone Change, then the Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Parcel
Maps approved by the Regional Planning Commission will become void.
According to Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning staff, the period to
Me an appeal of both the Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Parcel Map will expire
on Wednesday, January 14,1998. However, because the Tentative Parcel Map has been
appealed by Ventura County, Los Angeles County staff has indicated that they will place
both the Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Parcel Map before the Board of
Supervisors for their consideration along with the approval of the General Plan
Amendment and Zone Change. Therefore, the City will have another opportunity to
comment on all of these applications prior to the Board of Supervisors final actions. A
date for this hearing has not been set; however, the earliest date would be in February,
1998.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
There are no alternative actions as identified by staff.
FISCAL IMPACT
None by this action.
1. Summary of City of Santa Clarita Issues
2. Copies of previous correspondence is available in the City Clerk's reading file
9 A cd\council \newha11.ap1
SUMMARY OF CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
ISSUES IN REGARD TO THE NEWHALL RANCH PROJECT
January 1998*
ISSUE
STATUS
Build Newhall Ranch according to the City's
Hillside standards are county standards
development standards
and are close to the City's standards;
remaining standards will be reviewed
during future subdivisions
Santa Clara River and high country
A conservation and recreation easement
dedication to a public agency
will be granted to the County of Los
Angeles which will maintain public
oversight; land will be dedicated to the
Center for Natural Lands Management;
timing of dedication and Center for Natural
Lands Management remain outstanding
issues
Bank Stabilization alternatives
Newhall Ranch has agreed to add Specific
Plan language which will allow alternatives
such as buried bank stabilization
Non -motorized transportation alternatives
The Specific Plan allows for a variety of
non -motorized transportation alternatives
such as trails; language has been added to
encourage new transportation technologies
Metrolink line restoration
Metrolink right-of-way will be offered for
dedication with each subdivision
Future transit needs financing
Gasoline and Proposition A and C sales
taxes generated by the project will provide.
surplus revenues; however, these revenues
do not necessarily return to the Santa
Clarita Valley
Solid waste recycling
Standards have been incorporated in the
Specific Plan to require future subdividers
to provide adequately sized, accessible and
convenient areas for collecting and loading
recyclables
Describe the financing, maintenance and
The Fiscal Impact analysis indicates that
staffing of public parks
there would be surplus tax revenues
available for park recreation funding;
however, these revenues do not necessarily,
return to the Santa Clarita Valley
Tie the project's trail system into the Santa
Pedestrian and bicycle access will be
Susana Mountains from the Santa Clara
provided; the applicant is opposed to
River
equestrian access because of the presence of
endangered species and sensitive habitats
Directly connect the project's trail system
Newhall Ranch has agreed that the missing
and the City's trail system
segment will be precisely located, and trail
right-of-way will be designated when the
underlying property is developed
Additional issues have been identified
(see June 1997 list in the reading file)
which will require additional review at the
time each Newhall Ranch subdivision is
proposed in the future
This is only a summary of the main issues the City has raised. Copies of previous
correspondence containing complete issue and status descriptions has been placed in
the City Clerk's reading file.
JJL:lep
advance\nwhlrnchyl
City Manager Approval
Item to be presented by:
NEW BUSINESS
DATE: JULY 8, 1997
SUBJECT: NEWHALL RANCH PROJECT UPDATE
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
On June 11, 1997, the Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commission continued the
meeting schedule for the Newhall Ranch project to the date of July 28, 1997. Although the
public testimony portion of the hearing was technically closed on April 4,1997, -the Regional
Planning Commission left open the option to call upon individuals whom they would like to
question regarding the proposal. The July 28, 1997 meeting will be held to further discuss
the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan and to open up the public testimony portion of the project
discussing the Draft Development Agreement.
Los Angeles County planning staff and the Newhall Ranch Company have made the
following changes to the project:
Elimination of the 15 Estate lots from the High Country, totaling a reduction of 30
units (15 dwelling units and 15 second units).
Dedication of the High Country at the 3000th building permit issuance in Potrero
Valley Village, or at the mid -point of Newhall Ranch development; whichever occurs
first.
A requirement for environmental analysis and a conditional use permit if
construction of a road in the Salt Creek Canyon Wildlife corridor is later proposed.
Agreement to include public agency oversight for the High Country by granting an
easement to Los Angeles County for conservation of resources, public access, and
recreation, consistent with the proposed Resource Management Plan.
Agreement to grant an easement to Los Angeles County for both the conservation of
resources and for public access and recreation within the River Corridor consistent
with the Resource Management Plan.
The addition of an equestrian trail to the Regional River Trail along the north side
of the Santa Clara River.
Withdrawal of the proposed deletion of Pico Canyon Road from the County Master
Plan of Highways, with a stipulation that the Specific Plan will not be conditioned to
construct or fund any offsite portion of that highway.
A commitment to seek Caltrans approval and funding to construct a traffic signal at
the intersection of State Route 126 and Chiquito Canyon Road, along with first
construction at that intersection ( in response to the concerns of the Val Verde
community).
Agreement to withdraw the proposal to reorganize and annex the Riverwood Village
to the Newhall School District (at the request of the Castaic Union School District
and Town Council).
Reduction of development in the San Martinez Grande area by 5.6 acres, thereby
eliminating 190 Medium residential dwelling units.
Reduction of development between State Route 126 and the River corridor by 304
dwelling units, and 39,000 square feet of commercial area.
The combination of two neighborhood parks, along with the addition of ten acres to
the combined park site, adjacent to the Santa Clara River to create one larger
community park site.
A total of 867 residential units, along with 39,000 square feet of commercial area, have been
removed from the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan proposal.
Attached is Newhall Ranch's response to the issues the City raised in its April 1, 1997 letter
to Regional Planning Commissioner Sadie Clark. Staff has reviewed the attached status
report and has found it factually accurate.
Receive the information presented and provide staff direction with regard to the
future tracking of and/or position on the Newhall Ranch project.
Newhall Ranch Company Status Report of City Issues
GAC:JDR:lep counci1\arnrprg2.idr
SUMMARY OF CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
ISSUES IN REGARD TO THE NEWHALL RANCH
As of June 27, 1997
1. Build Newhall Ranch according to the City's development standards.
Resolved: 10side/Ridgeline standards are similar to City's and are much
higher than County grading ordinance minimums. Bicycle trails are
provided adjacent to all highways, which meets standard in draft
City. Circulation Plan
Continuing City to review Oak Banking Program, proposed in Section 4.3.4 of
Review: the Development Agreement. Newhall Ranch Company states the
program would result in planting of oaks many years in advance of
any tree removals, and would provide 5:1 replacement for any
heritage tree removals.
Future City will comment on conformance with other City standards when
Subdivision subdivisions are proposed in Newhall Ranch.
Issue:
2.
Resolved: A comprehensive (152 page) discussion of the project's conformity
with policies of each of the above General Plans is provided in
Appendix 2 of the DEIR and Chapter 7 of the Specific Plan
Newhall Ranch meets County policies for location of new
development: e.g., proximity to infrastructure, employment,
shopping, regional highways. Fiscal Impact Analysis for project
indicates the project pays for the services it requires and generates
a surplus of revenues to the County and the City. SCAG
projections for LA County indicate 3 million person increase by
2015. State -Department of Finance projections are similar,
indicating 4 million person increase by 2020. Increase in households
would require 25,900 housing units annually to 2015 Countywide,
and nearly 30,000 annually between 2015 and 2020. Newhall
Ranch meets only one year's housing needs in all of L. A County.
Not Resolved: Size of project is still an issue. A total 867 housing units have been
removed to resolve specific issues such as preserving riparian
vegetation and mesic meadow, improving views of River. A
complete, Est of project changes to date is being prepared for the
County Planning Commission and will be reviewed by City. City
staff will evaluate the public benefits provided by the project, as
listed in the Development Agreement (See Section 2.1).
3. Santa Clara River and High Country 11 dedicate to the Santa Monica
Mountains Conservancy or other Southern California agency and 2)
dedicate upon Specific Plan approval.
Resolved: An easement for the conservation of resources, public access and
recreation in the High Country will be granted to Los Angeles
County, which resolves the issue of ensuring that a local public
agency will have oversight for this area.
Continuing Center for Natural Lands Management was recommended by and
Review: manages land for The Nature Conservancy and others. Newhall
Ranch Company to provide additional background information and
references and will set meeting with Executive Director, Sherry
Teresa
Not Resolved: Original proposal was to dedicate the High Country after
recordation of the Visitor Center. NRC has made revised offer to
dedicate Ffigh Country at mid -point of Newhall Ranch
development, or sooner if Potrero Valley Village development has
reached 3,OOOth residential building permit. Dedication would be
delayed for period in which unsuccessful lawsuits hold up project
development. Successful lawsuits would not extend dedication
time.
4. Describe Proposed changes to SEA 23
Resolved: Newhall Ranch Company provided information that total open
space along the River includes the adjusted SEA and adjacent Open
Area The combined area contains 155 more acres of sensitive
habitat types than did the original SEA boundary. River Corridor
Plan requires temporary removal of 41 acres of riparian vegetation,
which would be replaced. Future Corps of Engineers 404 permits
and Fish and Game permits are required prior to development.
Newhall Ranch Company will provide map illustrating SEA
changes as part of the Final EIR.
5. Discuss alternatives for bank stabilization of the River.
Future Newhall Ranch Company has agreed that other types of bank
Subdivision stabilization would be acceptable if approved for the Newhall
Issue: Ranch portions of the River by the County of L.A.; if the alterative
would provide a superior appearance to ungrouted rip -rap; and if
the alternative was proven to be cost effective in terns of
construction and maintenance costs. Specifications for bank
stabilization would be approved prior to construction of
individual subdivisions. This language will be added to Specific
Plan if acceptable to the County.
6. Ensure that future developers will provide for non -motorized modes of
transportation at future subdivision stages
Resolved: The Specific Plan reduces vehicle trips in several ways: it provides
an extensive trail system (approximately 50 miles in length);
dedicates or reserves Metrolink line and station site. (see below);
provides bus pull -ins on highways in locations determined by the
transit -provider, and provides standards under which home
occupations (home based businesses) can occur.
Newhall Ranch Company has also agreed to add the following
language to Section 2.4 Transit of the Specific Plan: "Developers
of future subdivisions in the Specific Plan are encouraged to
consider provisions for new transportation technologies which are
cost effective and for which there is sufficient consumer demand."
7. The applicant should be responsible for restoration of the Metrolink line.
Resolved: As requested by the City Council, the Development Agreement
Provides that Newhall Ranch subdivisions which contain a portion
of the Metrolink right-of-way and station site shall be conditioned
to offer the dedication of that portion of the right-of-way and/or
station site to MTA for a period of 6 months following approval of
the tentative subdivision map. If dedication is accepted, MTA must
landscape and maintain the dedicated area. If MTA does not.accept
dedication at the time of subdivision, MTA would be given right of
first refusal to purchase the right-of-way and station site at
appraised fair market value for the term of the Development
Agreement. ,
8. Address the financing of future transit need for the Project at buildout.
Resolved: The Fiscal Impact Analysis in the DEIR substantiates that gasoline
taxes and Proposition A and C Sales taxes generated by the project
would provide a surplus of tax revenues beyond expenses to
serve the project, from which the County could provide transit to
the project.
Not Resolved: County General Fund revenues do not necessarily return to the
Santa Clarita Valley. The City continues to seek assurance from
the County that the City will not have to subsidize transit service
in Newhall Ranch
9. Provide assurance that Newhall Ranch will require future subdividers to
incorporate residential design standards to accommodate solid waste
recycling efforts.
Continuing The Newhall Ranch DEIR contains mitigation measures which
Discussion: require applicants for future multi -family, commercial and
industrial subdivisions to provide adequately sized, accessible and
convenient areas for collecting and loading recyclable materials; to
meet all future state and county regulations and procedures for the
use, collection and disposal of solid and hazardous wastes; and to
provide educational/instructional materials to the first -purchaser of
each residential unit.
Not Resolved: In addition, City staff is drafting a policy oriented statement on
solid waste which Newhall Ranch Company will consider for
inclusion in the Specific Plan
10. Describe the financing, maintenance and staffing of Public Parks.
Resolved: The pmject will more than meet its 199 acre Quimby park
Obligation through the dedication of 334 acres of land for
community and neighborhood parks and provision of park
improvements under the Development Agreement totaling S 12.3
million dollars. (Unexpended dollars will be increased annually
according to the Consumer Price Index.) As discussed in the
Development Agreement, the project provides a total 2,482 acres
of Quimby credit.
Continuing City staff is continuing discussions with Newhall Ranch Company
Discussion: regarding specific park improvements.
Not Resolved: While the project Fiscal Impact Analysis indicates that there would
be surplus tax revenues available which could fund recreation
programs for Newhall Ranch residents, there is no guarantee that
the County would provide such programs. The City staff continues
to seek such assurances from the County.
11. Tie the oroiect's trail system into the Santa Susan* Mountains from the
Santa Clara River.
Resolved: Pedestrian and bicycle access will be provided from the regional
Santa Clara River trail across the River (on the Potrero Valley
Road bridge) and on Community and Local trails to the High
Country. - Trails in the High Country would be built by Newhall
Ranch Company. Newhall Ranch Company agrees to consult with
the City and other appropriate public agencies regarding the design
of trails to assure appropriate connections to the Santa
CMta Woodlands Park.
Not Resolved: Newhall Ranch Company and the project biologist are opposed to
equestrian access from the regional River Trail to the High Country
because of the presence of endangered species and sensitive
habitats in the River. However, the Specific Plan permits an
equestrian trail head to be sited at the Visitor Center at the entrance
to the High Country. Additionally, equestrian access could be
provided from the Pico. Canyon Trail through Grave Canyon (in the
lower elevations of the High Country), from which equestrians
could access other High Country trails which would provide
connections to trails in the Santa CMta Woodlands Park.
12. Directly connect the nroiect's trail system and the City's trail system
Resolved: Newhall Land has agreed that segments of the regional River Trail
on their property between I-5 and Newhall Ranch will be precisely
located, and trail right-of-way will be designated when the
underlying property is subdivided.
13. Discuss the effects of Proposition 218 on the proieet. and the effects of
Newhall Ranch on Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital
Resolved: The effects of Proposition 218, to the extent currently known; will
be included in the Final EIR and will be reviewed by City staff.
Proposition 218 effects on Newhall Ranch would not reduce the
tax surplus to the City, and the County will continue to receive a
significant surplus. Newhall Ranch Company indicates that
coordination between the Hospital and the Company has occurred
and that the Hospital is confident that locations for possible health
care facility expansion can be provided within the Specific Plan area
if desired in the future.
14. The following issues have been identified as requiring additional review at
the time each Newhall Ranch subdivision is proposed in the future:
• Project compliance with all applicable NPDES Permit requirements.
• Traffic performance evaluations at each subdivision stage.
• Proper phasing and financing for transit service to the site.
• Environmental review and public notification for any construction near the Salt
Creek corridor.
• Proper landform grading techniques.
• Project compliance with, and incorporation of, Best Management Practices.
• Minimization of non -point source pollutants throughout the Newhall Ranch site.
• Individual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Programs for subdivisions, where
appropriate.
• Designs accommodating transit service to all future development sites.
• The development of a major sports center for community tournaments/league play.
• Teen programs and anti -gang programs for the residents of Newhall Ranch.
• The inclusion of air quality mitigation measures at all stages of development.
City Of
Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd. Phone
Suite 300 (805) 259-2489
Santa Clarita Fax
Califomia 91355-2196 (805) 259-8125
April 1, 1997
Mrs. Sadie Clark, Chairperson
Regional Planning Commission
Los Angeles County
320 W. Temple Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Re: Newhall Ranch Specific Plan
Dear Mrs. Clark:
On February 18, 1997, the City of Santa Clarita presented Resolution No. 97-8
to the Regional Planning Commission. This Resolution addressed the
outstanding concerns the City has regarding the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan.
Since that time, City staff has met with regional planning staff, and with the
representatives of the Newhall Ranch plan, in order to more thoroughly discuss
the City's concerns.
Below is a list of concerns that still remain:
• builct Newh II Kanch according to the City's development standards. The
Newhall Ranch Company has attempted to design the project with oak tree
standards, hillside and ridgeline standards, and highway standards that more
closely resemble the standards of the City of Santa Clarita. Nevertheless, the
City will still be reviewing all future subdivisions and developments for
compliance with City standards.
• Provide iustification for the amendments to the Los Angels County General
Plan and the Rana Clarita Valley Area Plan, The Newhall Ranch Company
has stated that the projected population increase, the accessibility to the site;
the dedication of nine square miles of open space atno cost to the public, and
the development of needed infrastructure are justifications for a County
General Plan Amendment. However, the City feels that the SCAG population
projections are very high, and that the infrastructure being constructed in
conjunction with.this project specifically serves the residents of Newhall
Ranch; they do not constitute an overall public benefit. Furthermore, the
dedication of open space that is not accessible for many years, and parks that
are not staffed, funded, and/or programmed are not a benefit to the Santa
Clarita Valley.
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Dedicate immediately upon approval of the Specific Plan The Santa Clara
River corridor and Santa Susan^ Mountains to the Sana Monica Mountains
Conservancy or other similar public agency based in the Southern California
Leen Newhall Ranch has responded by granting an easement to Los Angeles
County over the Santa Susana Mountains High Country when the 4,000th
building permit is obtained within Potrero Valley Village. However, this
response does not address the dedication of the Santa Clara River Corridor,
nor does it specifically address the timing for dedication of the High Country.
Due to the lack of project phasing information, the City cannot determine or
even estimate.the length of time that could lapse between a pending project
approval and issuance of the 4,000th building permit in Potrero Valley Village.
■
Biota Section of the D .IR, The response from Newhall Ranch has been that
the Significant Ecological Area is being refined, and yet the language used to
describe the changes has not been presented in layman's terms. It could still
appear that riparian habitat is being removed from the River Corridor SEA.
The City has asked that a comprehensive graphic be included in the Response
to Comments that will address this issue.
Discuss alternatives for bank stabilization of the Santa Clara River and 3yhy
the use of ungrouted rip -rap is the pr fe rablp option Discuss with Fish and
Game. The Newhall Ranch Company has stated that ungrouted rip -rap is
more acceptable in biotic and aesthetic terms than concrete bank stabilization,
and has been approved by Los Angeles County for safety. The City, however,
is requesting that the developer incorporate flexibility in the Specific Plan for
other means of bank stabilization. Technology is changing rapidly: some
Southern California communities are incorporating soil cement for bank
stabilization efforts. Additionally, the portion of Santa Clara River that
traverses the Newhall Ranch property is large: some sections of the River may
work best with ungrouted rip -rap, others with soil cement or concrete
stabilization. Another recent trend also includes burying bank stabilization
efforts with soil, and then planting this area with native habitat. These
options should be investigated.
Ensure that f tare developers will provide for non-motori2 d modes of
transportation a ,tare subdivision stag a This should, at present, in 1 ud
the incornoration of Electric Vehicle Charpj_ng stations. Newhall Ranch has
not responded to this request. The City is very aware that technology changes
rapidly, and is not asking that the developer be specifically tied down to
requiring Electric Vehicle charging stations at each future subdivision stage.
What we are asking is that, for an innovative project of this size, alternative
fuel vehicles, EV charging stations, and other future technologies be
encouraged by the Newhall Ranch Company in order to help reduce the
project's air quality impacts.
The applicantshould be r cnonaible for the restoration of tha DJetro ink ling,
as opposed to solely reserving right-of-way.Grant funds have been identified
by the Ventura Cn_unty Transportation Commission. and the applicant ghould
work with VCTC to secure the necessary funding for restoration of the rail
lim..Newhall Ranch has stated that they are making a financial commitment
by agreeing to reserve right-of-way, as the right-of-way creates a "fix" on the
property.which affects the design of future land uses, highways, trails, utilities
and the like. However, the City feels that a project which will generate
approximately 72,000 new residents should contribute more than just right-of-
way for a rail line: a commitment to restoring the MetroLink line, in
cooperation with the County of Los Angeles, will benefit the project's trip
reduction efforts, will reduce the project's air quality impacts, will provide the
County with CMP credits, and will serve as an overall public benefit for the
project.
Addresq the financing of future transitneed for the project at full h ,ild-o ,
The Newhall Ranch Company has stated that Proposition A and C Sales Tax,
and gasoline taxes,supplemented by farebox revenues will pay for transit
services. Also, the Company stated that the surplus revenue generated to the
County by the Newhall Ranch project, will help pay for services. However, the
County General Fund revenues do not necessarily return to the Santa Clarita.
Valley.. The City is seeking assurance that future transit service to the
Newhall Ranch site will not have to be subsidized by the City of Santa Clarita
taxpayers.
Establish specific measures that the project will take to red , / isnose of solid
waste. assuming that no new construction or expansion of existing lands
will occur- Additionally. providassurance that Newhall an h will r q, ,vire
future subdividers to incorporate residential d inn standards to accommodate
solid waste/recyclingeffortg. This issue has not been addressed to the City's
satisfaction. The Newhall Ranch Company is still reiterating their
commitment to meeting the minimum County requirements with regard to
handling solid waste.
Describp the financing- maintenance and staffing of public parks. Currently,
the Newhall Ranch Company has stated that park maintenance, staffing and
programs are expected to be funded by the County, and that the project's
surplus money to the County could be .used . for staffing and programs.
However, there is no guarantee that the project's revenues provided to the
County's General Fund will return to the Santa Clarita Valley. As the
developer has stated before, they are not a governmental agency, and thus do
not have control over the distribution of funds. The City provides extensive
parks and recreationprograms, is bound by agreement with the County which
preclude the City from charging non-resident fees, and cannot adequately
address the needs of additional population. Furthermore, the County does not
currently fiord any recreation programs in the Santa Clarita Valley. The City
is doubtful that revenues generated by the Newhall Ranch project.will return
to the Santa Clarita Valley for parks and recreation services.
Tie the project's rail system into the S nta S,san^ Mountains from the Santa
Clara River- The developer has stated that an equestrian connection between
the High Country and the River trail is problematic, as the horses would need
to traverse the Santa Clara River bottom. Newhall Ranch has not included
public recreation within the River bottom due to the presence of endangered
species and sensitive habitats, and has stated that the Project Biologist is
opposed to encouraging access within the River. However, the presence of an
equestrian trail along the Santa Clara River, and the presence of equestrian
trails in the Santa Susana Mountains High Country (which the developer
agrees to tie in to the Pico Canyon Trail) should. be connected in order to
provide a usable, logical regional trail system.
Directly connect the project's trail system and the it3's trail system. The
City is requesting that the gaps existing between the Newhall Ranch project
and the City of Santa Clarita be "filled -in" in order to provide for direct access
and a, once again, logical trail system. The Newhall Land and Farming
Company owns the properties that comprise these gaps. However, the
applicant has stated that filling inthe missing trail linkages will hinder all
future development of the properties containing such areas.
Two additional issues remain, including the effects of Proposition 218 on the
project, and the effects of Newhall Ranch on Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial
Hospital; these issues need to be covered in further detail. The Newhall Ranch
Company has assured the City that these concerns will be covered more
thoroughly in the Response to Comments.
The above issues do not constitute a complete list of concerns. Resolution 97-8,
the original City letter dated October 28, 1996, and the verbal testimony provided
by City Councilmembers Heidt and Majic represent our views and issues with the
Newhall Ranch project. Along with the aforementioned items, the City continues
to request that specific questions and concerns be addressed at future subdivision
stages, including, but not limited to, the following.-
Project
ollowing:
Project compliance with all applicable NPDES Permit requirements;
Traffic performance evaluations at each subdivision stage;
Proper phasing and financing for transit service. to the site;
Environmental review and public notification for any construction near the
Salt Creek corridor;
Proper landform grading techniques;
Project compliance with, and incorporation of, Best Management Practices;
Minimization of non -point source pollutants throughout the Newhall Ranch
site;
Individual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Programs for subdivisions, where
appropriate;
• Designs accommodating transit service to all future development sites;
• The development of a major sports center for community tournaments/league
play;
• Teen programs and Anti -Gang programs for the residents of Newhall Ranch;
• And the inclusion of air, quality mitigation measures at all stages of
development.
The developers of Newhall Ranch, along with the Los Angeles County regional
planning staff, have been very accommodating and open to suggestion thus far.
However, the City still feels that the above issues are important for the well-
being of the Santa Clarita Valley. A project as large and innovative as the
Newhall Ranch project should be responsible for more than just minimum
standards: uncontrolled growth and urban sprawl have extremely detrimental
effects on communities in Southern California. The Santa Clarita Valley
currently has a shortage of infrastructure, such as adequate sewers, roads, mass
transit, schools, fire, Sheriff facilities, libraries, parks, recreational programs,
and youth and adult services. This project, without appropriate mitigation, will
worsen our current infrastructure shortages.
Please take the City's concerns into consideration prior to forwarding a
recommendation to the Lo Angeles County Board of Supervisors. We should all
be working together for etter Santa Clarita Valley. Thank you very much for
your time �o i tion in this matter.
Sincerely,
cc: Michael Antonovich, Board of Supervisors
City of Santa Clarita Councilmembers
City of Santa Clarita Planning Commissioners
George Caravalho, City Manager, City of Santa Clarita
James Harter, Newhall Ranch Company
Lee Stark, Community Studies
Kerwin Chih, Impact Analysis
Frank Menses, Impact Analysis
Dave Vanatta, Planning Deputy
Kenneth Pulskamp, Assistant City Manager, City of Santa Clarita
Impact Sciences
Van Stephens, FORMA
current\nrreso.jdr
RESOLUTION No. 97.8
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, REQUESTING. THE
LOS ANGELES COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
WITHHOLD APPROVAL OF THE NEWHALL RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN
UNTIL SUCH TIME AS ISSUES RAISED BY THE
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA HAVE BEEN RESOLVED
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby make the following findings of fact:
a. The Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commission is currently considering
action to approve the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan (Project).
b. This Project is a large planned community with approximately 25,000
residential units located within the Santa Clarita Valley, outside the current _
City of Santa Clarita boundary.
C. This Project is located within the geographic area included in the City of Santa
Clarita General Plan and is designated RE (Residential Estate), RVL (Residential
Very Low), and BP (Business Park).
d. The City has reviewed this Project and the Draft Environmental Impact Report
(DEIR) and has submitted written comments to the Los Angeles County
Department of Regional Planning in a letter dated October 28, 1996.
e. Councilmember Jan Heidt testified on behalf of the City of Santa Clarita City
Council at the Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commission November 6,
1996 public hearing
f. The City Council has discussed the City's position regarding this project at the
City Council Study Sessions on November 5, 1996 and January 7, 1997.
g. The Santa Clarita Valley has a shortage of infrastructure such as sewers, roads,
mass transit, schools, fee, Sheriff facilities, libraries, parks, recreational
programs, and youth and adult services. This Project, without appropriate
mitigations, would worsen the current infrastructure shortages.
h. It is generally understood that urban sprawl has had, and will continue to have,
a detrimental effect on urban and rural communities in California This Project,
not adequately mitigated, may have a detrimental effect on the Santa Clarita
Valley and the City of Santa Clarita.
L The City has discussed its areas of concern with the Project applicant on several
occasions and has made little progress toward resolving the issues raised by,
the City.
Dedicate, immediately upon approval of the Specific Plan, the Santa Clara River corridor
and Santa Susana Mountains to the the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy or other
similar public agency based in the Southern California region.
Incorporate landform grading techniques in all hillside areas, as opposed to designing
the project with typical grading practices. In addition to using this grading technique,
the hillsides should be planted with native slope materials.
Address and incorporate the standards of the revised municipal stormwater NPDES
permit into the evaluation of potential water quality impacts for the project. This Permit
was adopted on July 15, 1996, a date which coincides with the release of the Newhall
Ranch DEIR for public review. We acknowledge that the requirements of the revised
Permit were not available to be addressed during the preparation of the DEER, but feel
that the revised Permit should be addressed prior to certification of the final EIR.
• Specification of criteria for the "Santa Clara River Corridor Concept" that good surface
runoff water quality be maintained through prevention or minimization of non -point
source pollutants. The proposed land uses will establish a new source of potential
surface runoff pollutants which may adversely impact the biological resources of the
Santa Clara River.
• The description of the functions of water quality basins throughout the Specific Plan
area. The DEIR stated that sixteen water quality basins are located throughout the
project site. The DEIR should also describe how they will maintain good surface water
quality, and if they will be used to provide data for program monitoring.
• The update and expansion of Best Management Practices in the DEIR. Pollution
preventionlreduction activities should also be incorporated in the Specific Planus an
ongoing community program.
• The preparation and approval of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program for the
project.
• Furthering the description of the project's use of reclaimed water, expanding upon the
possibility of integrating the Newhall Ranch reclaimed water system with other existing
and future Santa Clarita Valley reclaimed water systems.
• Describe the proposed changes to the Santa Clara River Significant Ecological Area. If
it is the case that the area being removed from this SEA is being eliminated because it
does not contain the sensitive habitat that a true Significant Ecological Area contains,
then that should be clearly stated in the Biota Section of the DEIR.
• Expand the project's traffic report to include:
An expansion of the Specific Plan Trip Components to show the percent of
Specific Plan trip -ends into the existing boundary of the.City of Santa Clarita,
including fluctuations of these trip -ends over the years;
The analysis of traffic impacts at different phases of project construction;
Further analysis of the traffic impacts caused by the potential deletion of Pico
Canyon Road from the Master Plan of Highways. The DEER shows no impact on
Lyons Avenue, McBean Parkway, Valencia Boulevard, Magic Mountain Parkway,
• Ensure that future developers will provide for non -motorized modes of transportation
at future subdivision stages. This should, at present, include the incorporation of
Electric Vehicle Charging Stations.
• Resolve and specifically describe the financing and/or reimbursement plan for the Water
Reclamation Plant.
• Establish specific measures that the project will take to reduce/dispose of solid waste,
assuming that no new construction or expansion of existing landfills will occur.
• Provide assurance that the developer will require future subdividers to incorporate
residential design standards to accommodate solid wastetrecycling efforts. It is not
enough to just reiterate the fact that Newhall Ranch will meet the minimum County
requirements with regard to handling solid waste.
• Incorporate standards for composting and material recovery facilities throughout the
project site.
• Provide for the addition of active parkland to the project site. Using City standards, the
developer would receive 30 percent credit towards Quimby requirements for private
facilities. At a total requirement of 230 acres of parkland, 30 percent credit would be
about 70 acres for a remaining balance of 160 acres. Neighborhood and community
parks with active uses total about 113 acres, leaving approximately 47 acres yet to be
credited towards Quimby requirements.
A major sports center should be added to the project which would accommodate
community tournaments or league play. Currently, there are no plans for such a facility.
Describe the financing and staffing of public parks. Who will maintain the parks? Who
will pay for the maintenance? What recreation programs/staff will be provided by the
applicant? As of right now, The City provides extensive parks and recreation programs
which are open to all residents of the Santa Clarita Valley. Additionally, the City is
bound. by agreements with the County which preclude the City from charging non-
resident fees. Many of the residents we serve live in Stevenson Ranch, Val Verde, North
Valencia, Saugus, and Agua Dulce. The County does not currently fund any recreation
programs in the Santa Clarita Valley,.and the City's Parks & Recreation services cannot
adequately address the needs of an additional population such as that of Newhall Ranch.
Publicly funded programs must be identified an funded for this project.
Describe the funding and staffing of additional programs. Programs such as teen Anti -
Gang programs, should be incorporated into the Newhall Ranch project.
Include equestrian trails along the Santa Clara River corridor. The Regional Santa
Clara River Trail spans from the San Gabriel Mountains to the east, west to the pacific
Ocean in Oxnard. The City has developed a portion of this trail which would also
traverse through the Newhall Ranch project. The DEER addresses the Santa Clara River
Trail as it relates to bicycles and pedestrians, but does not address the equestrian
element.
Tie the project's trail system into the Santa Susana Mountains to Pico Canyon Trail.
The applicant has stated that topography dictates this as an impossible task, but the
City is not convinced that this is so. The massive size of this project should be able to
somehow provide a route across the site to Pico Canyon Trail.
1927
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14 day of January
Gam:- •7 i
MAYOR
AT:
/� j
,� CI CLERg'- III
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
I, annrnp raraaal nn , 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 14 day of January , 1997 by the
following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
mundAres97-8.1ep
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEM 3ERS:
Heidt, Klaiic/ Darcy, Boyer, Smyth
R=.I
None
City of
Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd.
Suite 300
Santa Clanta
California 91355.2198
October 28, 1996
Phone
(805) 259-2489
Fax
(805)259-8125
Mr. James Hard
Director of Regional Planning
County of Los Angeles
320 West Temple Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
nPr,,,'
RE: CITY RESPONSE TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
("DEIR") AND SPECIFIC PLAN FOR THE NEWHALL RANCH PROJECT
Attention: Kerwin Chih, Impact Analysis Section
Dear Mr. Hartl:
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the County of Los Angeles's
environmental review of this project. The City of Santa Clarita has reviewed the
DEIR and Specific Plan for Project No. 94087 (Newhall Ranch), and offers the
following responses and suggested mitigation regarding areas and issues
germane to the City's interests.
The comments which follow are technical comments only, and do not reflect any
policy determinations or direction by the City Council of the City of Santa
Clarita: The following comments are intended solely to comply with the City's
responsibility to respond to the DEIR as required by CEQA.
The City of Santa Clarita has reviewed the Specific Plan for the Newhall Ranch
project on two different levels: one level incorporated a review in very broad
context terms, and one level involved the review of the Plan in specific detail.
In a broad context, the City has reviewed the Specific Plan with consideration to
future annexation proceedings. While the developer has stated that the
incorporation of Newhall Ranch into the City is unlikely, one can never predict
what the future may hold. One of the City's moat immediate goals is to annex
property located on the west side of Interstate -5. Fifty years from now, we may
have incorporated the Valencia Commerce Center, the Marketplace, and/or the
Magic Mountain Theme park. We also feel that the possibility exists that future
residents of Newhall Ranch may wish to be a part of our City. As such, we have
looked at the project as if future annexation of the community of Newhall Ranch
is a possibility.
PRIMED 001 IIECM1111 PMEI1
.Newhall Ranch DEIR and Specife plan
October 28, 1996
Page 2
The City of Santa Clarita suggests that the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan be built
according to the development standards currently established by the City.
Examples of such standards include integration of our standard street widths
throughout the project, grading activities consistent with our Hillside Ordinance
and Subdivision Ordinance, protection of the native oak trees according to our
Oak Tree Ordinance, and residential, commercial, and industrial developments
which would meet our Unified Development Code standards. - While these
examples are not all-inclusive, and while designating specific standards at this
time may seem premature in light of the generalized nature of the current project
under review, the City would encourage the use of such standards for all projects
at future subdivision stages. The City is proud of the development that has
occurred since our incorporation, and a simple drive through the Santa Clarita
Valley demonstrates the progress and improvements that we, as a city, have
made since December of 1987.
If the project is developed, the City suggests that the County of Los Angeles and
the project proponent continue to include the City of Santa Clarita in the
planning process. The Joint City -County Planning Program Background Report
(prepared jointly by the County of Los Angeles Regional Plan Department
and the City of Santa Clarita Community Development Department). was
accepted as a policy document in December of 1992. The Planning Program
states .that, "While the City of Santa Clarity was formed so that planning from
a local perspective could take place, the City shares the SCV with land governed
by Los Angeles County. As the City has grown, so has its awareness of the need
to work together with the County. Ultimately, the quality of life in the Santa
Clarita Valley will depend heavily on how this happens." The Planning Program
specifies goals which lead to this higher quality of life, including.
The promotion of compatible and sound planning and the
enhancement of the quality of life in both the incorporated and
unincorporated areas of the Santa Clarita Valley-,
The promotion of compatible land use policy and development
standards in the Santa Clarita Valley;
The enhancement of infrastructure planning, design, and installation
in incorporated and unincorporated areas;
The coordination of development fees for infrastructure and other
public facilities;
The utilization of locally -generated fees locally, both in the City and
in the unincorporated areas;
The maximization of opportunities for review and input on
discretionary projects; and,
The opportunity to provide fair and equitable means for public
representation and participation.
Newhall Raneh DEIR and Specific Plan
October28, 1996
Page 1
The implementation of these goals, with respect to the Newhall Ranch Specific
Plan, is imperative if the Santa Clarita Valley is to be developed in a consistent,
comprehensive and compatible mariner.
On a specific level, the City suggests that the following changes be incorporated
into the Specific Plan.
Section 2: Development Plan
• The designation of Special. Management Area ("SMA") should be an overlay
covering the Significant Ecological Area ("SEA") portions of the property.
However, the SEA designations should not be removed from the Santa Clara
River or the Santa Susana Mountains. The designation of Significant
Ecological Area more closely resembles the sensitivity of these environments,
as compared to a "Special Management Area" designation. While an SMA
designation could still govern management of these areas, the SEA designation
should be kept consistent throughout the Santa Clarita Valley, and should
remain.
• Aland use overlay for public service facilities is considered appropriate, in lieu
of establishing specific building locations for these facilities at this time.
Consideration should be given to possibly relocating the proposed library to
the mixed use village at the intersection of State Route -126 and proposed Long
Canyon Road. This would provide for greater accessibility to the general
public and the citizens of the community of Val Verde.
• No development of residential housing units should be permitted within the
High Country Special Management Area ("SMA'). This area is still considered
to be a significant ecological area, and the proposed 15 estate lots should be
eliminated from the Specific Plan. This would provide for a better
topographical buffer between the high Country and the project's residential
units.
• Proposed roadway(s) and / or designated right-of-way areas near the Salt
Creek Corridor should be eliminated. This is a major wildlife corridor which
should not be disturbed by any future construction or any occupation within
the corridor's immediate vicinity.
• While the Specific Plan states that the Regional River Trail will serve as a
transition area (between the proposed developments and the River Corridor),
the applicant should also incorporate language into the Specific Plan ensuring
a second transition area between the edge of the River Corridor and the
Regional River Trail. While this transition would be more limited in nature,
it would aid in the preservation of an area containing sensitive habitat.
• It is imperative that residential and commercial development within the
project area provide good pedestrian access to future transit stops that will be
established as a result of the proposed project. Particularly with land uses
which are prime transit trip generators, such as the four mixed-use villages,
Newhall Ranch DEIR and Specifc plan
October 28, 1996
Page 4
and the business park areas, pedestrian-, bicycle-, and transit -friendly design
should be incorporated. For example, within the mixed-use villages, design
should deviate from the typical parking -in -front, building -in -back model, which
does not promote pedestrian activity. In the business park areas, sidewalks
should be provided throughout, so that commuters can travel easily between
bus stopsandtheir offices. Furthermore, if the business park is comprised of
oversized "superblocks", pedestrian paths that cut through the blocks should
be provided Further comments regarding these and other design issues will
be provided at the subdivision map stage of the project.
Section 3: Development Regulations
• As stated above, the City of Santa Clarita recommends that the community of
Newhall Ranch be developed in compliance with the City's development
standards. This would be the most desirable situation for the City, as a
possible future annexation would result in less complication if the community
were built to City standards. However, if this is not accomplished, the Specific
Plan should be the governing document, and should be compared to existing
Los Angeles County zoning and development regulations. The Specific Plan
states that in areas of discrepancy, the Specific Plan would be the governing
document. Language should be incorporated into the Specific Plan that states
that the community is subject to regulations of the Specific Plan and the Los
Angeles County Subdivision Ordinance, and that in areas of discrepancy, the
most restrictive document shall prevail.
• Below is a list of recommended changes to the permitted use matrix in the
Specific Plan. The recommendations provided by the City result from the
experiences of the City's Planning Division staff, and would be beneficial to the
community of Newhall Ranch, and the Santa Clarita Valley in general, upon
implementation.
-All mechanical repair, boat, car or otherwise, should be required to be
performed within a structure.
-Maintenance yards and storage yards should be required to be screened
from public view with a block masonry wall
-Rifle ranges should be subject to residential compatibility, unless the range
is specified as an indoor shooting range.
-Concrete batch plants should be subject to the approval of a conditional use
permit.
-Bars and microbreweries should be subject.'to compatibility of surrounding
uses, including residences, schools, churches, hospitals, public playgrounds,
and youth facilities.
-The developer should add provisions regarding recycling facilities to the
permitted use matrix. ,, Such provisions should include standards for
Newhall Ranch DEIR and Specific plan
October 28, 1998
Page 5
Portable recycling containers in commercial and industrial zones, manned
recycling bins in commercial and industrial zones, recycling yards,
composting yards, and wormiculture operations.
-Explosives should be governed by the number of pounds of materials being
stored (e.g. gunpowder stored in excess of 750 lbs., other explosives stored
in excess of 100 lbs.).
Section 5: Specific Plan Implementation
•
Adjustment/ Transfer/ Conversion provisions are sensible and acceptable for
a project of this size and scope. However, public participation procedures
should be incorporated into certain "conversions" related to the Specific Plan.
In particular, public participation should be included within procedures for the
conversion(s) of land use(s) throughout the project site. As proposed, the
Specific Plan is basically administering the right to process zone changes
without public participation. At a minimum, property owners who abut land(s)
being converted from residential to commercial, should be notified in writing
of the intent to change boundary lines separating land uses. Furthermore, the
property owners should be given a certain number.of days to respond with
comments/concerns regarding such conversions. If'property owners voice
concern about proposed land- use conversions within the specified time frame,
then the decision to convert acreage should be subject to Regional Planning
Commission approval. A provision could be added that, in the case of land use
conversions, the Planning Commission is the final acting authority, and that
appeal of the Commission's determination to the Board of Supervisors is not
possible. Obviously future residents buy property/houses in particular
locations based upon many factors, one of which is often adjacent property
designations and permitted uses on neighboring lands. The City is in
agreement that the 'non-specific" Specific Plan should allow for flexibility, but
not at the expense of future residents.
Director -approved changes to all administrative actions should be subject to
the same public notification process as stated above. The Director should be
responsible for implementing a system in which all property owners originally
notified of a public hearing for an administrative action are informed that
specific changes (to an action that has. been approved by the Commission) are
occurring regarding the previous action. Director -approved changes should be
subject to a 15 day appeal. period, with appellants being subject to an appeal
fee. Stated conflicts could then be addressed by the Regional Planning
Commission, with the Commission, once again, being the final acting
authority.
As a point of clarification, the Specific Plan should incorporate examples of
what constitutes a "minor" change in roadways which are subject to Director
review. Do minor changes address roadway widths, alignment, or designation
changes from secondary to collector? Stating examples in the Specific Plan
could provide clarification for developers who wish to make what they consider
minor changes, but which the Director may consider to be major changes.
Newhall Ranch DEIR and Specific Plan
October 28, 1996
Page 6
The aforementioned items should be considered prior to the Regional Planning
Commission forwarding a recommendation to the Los Angeles County Board of
Supervisors. If such recommendations are implemented, then the EIR should
address the changes made to the Specific Plan.
The following information contains a review of the Draft Environmental Impact
Report ("DEIR") for the Newhall Ranch project. Such information consists of
areas to be studied further and/or addressed in the DEIR, and suggested
mitigation measures which will lessen the impact of the project on the City of
Santa Clarita.
Section 4.1 • Geotechnical and Soil Resources
• The DEIR should address the use of alternative design concepts that might
better mitigate the common problems created by typical grading practices.
The major concerns. regarding such are .aesthetics and. long term slope
maintenance.
Aesthetic concerns should be addressed by incorporating landform grading
techniques in all hillside areas. Along with this proposed grading technique,
areas that are to be revegetated should be planted with native slope materials
to minimize the contrast between developed and natural areas. Landform
grading will result in a much more natural looking area than standard grading
practices, which create stark, contrasting angular hillside formations that
appear as abrupt changes to the adjacent natural areas. After standard
grading practices are completed, the angular slopes are often planted with
non-native materials that create glaring coloration changes from the adjacent
natural areas. These non-native materials often have difficulty surviving,
their. maintenance can create a financial burden on residents, and large
quantities of water and other resources are needed to help them survive.
In nature, native plants help prevent the erosion of slopes. Wind, rain, and
gravity constantly work to erode natural hillside slope areas. This is a never-
ending process that had been continuing for millions of years: the steeper the
slope, the more susceptible it is to erosion and instability. Therefore, a look
at past standard grading practices tells us that changes in these practices
should be made if the long-term maintenance of the slopes is considered.
Although the Soils Engineer or Geologist may state that the slopes will be
stable at certain maximum gradients, in the long run, constant maintenance
of the slopes may prove too costly, and deferred of discontinued maintenance
may result in conditions that will allow failures to occur.
The DEIR should address whether the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan will
incorporate such landform grading techniques, and if not, should state the
manner in which the aforementioned problems_, with standard grading
practices will be handled by future developers:;_
Newhall Ranch DEIR and Specife Plan
October 28, 1996
Page 7
Section 4.2 - Flood
In the. Summary portion of the DEIR (Section 4.2 - Flood) Section b.(3),
Potential Impacts, is misleading because the DEIR compares the new proposed
impervious areas to the entire watershed, but not to the proposed project
developed area alone. In this case, the impervious area would be 58% of the
developed area. This section is also misleading because the statement,
"...construction of Newhall Ranch would not increase site runoff during a
Capital storm..." is based on theoretical calculations, not what occurs in
reality. Actually, since the design requirements make the engineer calculate
runoff for undeveloped areas by including huge unrealistic burn and bulk
factors, and these same factors are not included in calculations for developed
areas, the numbers may be lower. However, as stated later in Section 3.a.(2),
Method of Drainage Analysis, `Buildings, driveways, patios, and roads all
create new impervious covers to the natural ground which prevents the ground
from absorbing rain water. This overcovering of the natural ground not only
results in small storms creating a higher amount, or volume, of runoff, but also
a higher flow rate of runoff (identified as the "Q") in developed areas than in
undeveloped areas." The increased volume and flow rates created by the
increase in impervious areas. result in shorter concentration times for runoff
flows. As a result, runoff leaves the site faster and has less opportunity to get
into the ground. As a cumulative effect, the peak flow rates in the river
increase and the flow durations decrease. The river remains dry more of the
year and the water flows for less of the year.
Because the revised municipal stormwater NPDES permit is now available
(NPDES Permit No. CAS614001), it should be addressed and incorporated into
the evaluation of potential water quality impacts for this project. The revised
Permit has established prohibitions and limitations, and requirements for the
following; connection and discharge; development planning and construction;
public agency program requirements; public information and participation;
monitoring; and program reporting and evaluation. The revised NPDES
permit was adopted on July 15, 1996, a date -which coincides with the release
of. the Newhall Ranch DEER for public review. We acknowledge that the
requirements of the revised Permit were not available to be addressed during
the preparation of the DEER, but feel that the revised Permit should be
addressed prior to certification of the final EIR. The evaluation of the project's
compliance with the NPDES permit should include: how the project does or
does not comply with the Permit; to what extent the proposal meets the
requirements for surface runoff water quality and control of non -point source
pollutants in an urban area; compliance of erosion and sedimentation control
measures with the Permit (for grading and other construction activities); and
an ,expansion upon the water quality requirements to address Permit
requirements, including prohibitions and -limitations, County Stormwater
Management Program requirements, and standard provisions. The DEIR
analysis of NPDES Permit compliance must distinguish between the. municipal
stormwater NPDES. Permit and other types of discharge- .permits (such as
construction and industrial permits) required under the NPDES program.
,Newhall Ranch DEIR and SPeceflc Plan
October 28, 1996
Page 8
The DEIR discusses proposed bank stabilization for the Santa Clara River on
30% of the southern side and 80% of the northern side of. the River Corridor
to protect adjacent development from erosion. The DEIR states that the bank
stabilization is proposed to consist. of ungrouted rock. The DEIR should
discuss whether or not other alternatives to this type of bank stabilization
have been discussed with the State Department of Fish and Game. If so, then
the DEIR should discuss the alternatives, and should address the reasoning
behind selecting ungrouted rock for bank stabilization efforts. If no
alternatives have been discussed, then the project developer should initiate
such discussions with the State Department of Fish and Game, and the EIR
should incorporate alternatives prior to final certification.
Criteria for the "Santa Clara River Corridor Concept" should specify that good
surface runoff water quality be maintained through prevention or
minimization of non -point source pollutants. This should be applied to all
proposed ongoing land uses (including residential, commercial and business
park uses) as required by the County's current municipal stormwater permit
(NPDES No. CAS614001). The proposed land uses will establish a new source
of potential surface runoff pollutants which may adversely impact the
biological resources of the Santa Clara River. Because the Santa Clara River
has been identified as a Significant Ecological Area (SEA), the County's
existing SEA requirements should also be incorporated as part of this criteria.
• Figure 4.2-5 (map) shows sixteen water quality basins located throughout the
specific plan area. The DEIR should describe their function(s) and how they
will maintain good surface water quality, and if they will be used to provide
data for program monitoring.
• Reference is made to the implementation of Best Management Practices
(BMP's) for the specific plan. This information should be updated and
expanded in the DEIR. Pollution prevention / reduction activities should be
incorporated in the specific plan as an ongoing community program. These
programs and physical BMP's can be refined to a greater level of detail and
incorporated into the design of each future subdivision map.
• Mitl98tien_MMefl8ure: The project developer should ensure the preparation and
approval of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for the project
Section 4.6 - Biota
• The Biota Section of the DEIR is very thorough in its technical analysis of the
project site. However, it tends to lose sight of the fact that CEQA requires an
EIR to present information in a format that is understandable to the lay
person. While the vast majority of information presented in the Biota Section
cannot be presented in non-technical terms, the DEDZ should attempt to
address the issue of eliminating area from the River Corridor SEA in a manner
that would be understandable to the average reader. As it stands right now,
one could assume that the elimination of area from SEA 23 is being pursued
Newhall Ranch DEIR and Specific Pfan
October 28, 1996
Page 9
in order to accommodate the developer's vision for the project. This may or
may not be the case. Documents that the City and County currently possess
depict the SEA areas inconsistently. If it is the case that the area being
removed from SEA 23 is. being eliminated because it does not contain the
sensitive habitat that the true SEA contains, then that should be clearly
stated in the DEIR.
Section 4.7 - Visual Qualities
• As stated above, the City of Santa Clarita requests that the Specific Plan be
built in compliance with development standards adopted by the City. As such,
we are requesting that the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan take the City's
Ridgeline Preservation and Hillside Development Ordinance into consideration
during development stages. The Visual Qualities section of the DEIR provides
numerous viewshed analyses of the project at buildout, which show a disregard
for the importance of protecting significant ridgelines in development.
• The City's Ridgeline Preservation and Hillside Development Ordinance was
developed in order to:
Provide hillside development standards to maximize the positive impacts
of site design, grading, landscape architecture and architecture, and provide
development consistent with the goals and policies of the City of Santa
Clarita's General Plan;
Provide ridgeline preservation and development standards to protect
certain ridges and minimize the adverse impacts of development;
Maintain the essential natural characteristics of the area such as major
landforms, vegetation and wildlife communities, hydrologic features, scenic
qualities and open space that'contribute to a sense of place; and,
Retain the integrity of predominant off-site and on-site views in hillside
areas in order to maintain the identity, image and environmental quality
of the area.
Mitigation Measure; The Newhall Ranch Specific Plan should be built in
accordance with the development standards listed in the City of Santa
Clarita's Ridgeline Preservation and hillside Development Ordinance,
especially with respect to grading design, landscape design, and perimeter
ridgeline shielding design.
Section 4.8 • Traffic
• The traffic report in the DEIR indicates that the Specific Plan will generate an
approximate average daily trip (ADT) of 387,000 trips. An internal I external
summary of averagedailytrip-ends for the Specific Plan is as follows:
NetvWl Ranch DEIR and Specifu pian
Occobv 28, 1996
Page 10
Specific Plan Trip Components
SPECIFIC
PLAN
Internal to Specific Plan 201,240 (52%)
Within Santa Clarita Valley 147,060 (38%)
Outside Santa Clarita Valley 38.700 (10%,)
TOTAL 387,000 (100%)
The report includes the following information which we feel needs to be
expanded or modified to ensure that the project would not adversely impact
the City of Santa Clarita:
1. The above `Specific Plan Trip Components" table needs to be expanded to
show the percent of the Specific Plan trip -ends into the existing boundary
of the City of Santa Clarita and also should depict fluctuations over the
years.
2. The project analysis includes the future ADTs of links within the site and
the surrounding areas at buildout of the City and the Newhall Ranch
Project- This methodology has been used in numerous studies and is well.
accepted. Due to the proximity of the proposed site and the City, and due
to the fact that the travel patterns in the Valley will change by the time this
project is completed and self -served, it is recommended that the report
include other types of analysis in the study, such as link directional traffic
in peak hours and even in every (x) number of years. It is suggested that
the report be prepared to analyze the different phases of the project. It
should be noted that the analysis of project phasing can also be done in
later dates when more specific portions of the project development are
proposed, but that this later analysis may cause the City to state that the
individual projects create significant impacts on other roads and links.
3. The Specific Plan is proposing the deletion of the extension of Pico Canyon
Road to SR4W. Reviewing the discussion of this deletion in Appendix 4.8,
it shows no traffic volume change on Lyons Avenue, McBean Parkway,
Valencia Boulevard. Magic Mountain Parkway, or Newhall Ranch Road east
of the I-5 within the City area. This needs to be revisited for accuracy and
should also include a.m. / p.nL peak& .The City always recommends that
sites / projects contain various access points, and discourages the deletion
of such.
4. The Conceptual Alternative Highway Plan, as indicated in the study, could
vary since the City is in the process of amending the General Plan / .
Circulation Element. There are significant deletions / changes in the
Proposed alternatives which we do not anticipate will take place. Some of
the alternatives might be controversial, such as the deletion of the
Newhall Ranch DEIR and Specific Plan
October 28, 1996
Page 1l
extension of Avenue Tibbits to Tourney Road at Magic Mountain parkway.
This road is a major link to the industrial area, and its deletion has a
significant impact on McBean Parkway: it causes McBean Parkway to carry
over 70,000 cars per day. Another correction regards the connection of
Magic Mountain Parkway to Via Princessa, which is a correction already in
the design stages, and is part of the City's Capital Improvement Projects.
5. In the discussion of land use on Page 4.8.19, it should be noted that other
recent City and County GPA's need to be included, such as Tesoro Del Valle
a new "conceptually approved" subdivision.within the County.
6. All proposed roadways on-site, along with the connection links, should have
adequate width to accommodate on -street bike lanes.
7. The DEIR should include the corrections and/or suggestions on the attached
marked -up copies of Section 4.8 - Traffic.
The City is not prepared at this time to request specific mitigation regarding
the project's traffic impacts to our jurisdiction. Once the aforementioned
issues.have been addressed, the City could request the implementation of
certain mitigation measures to lessen the impacts of the Newhall Ranch
project on City circulation. However, the possibility also exists that the
additional information provided in the revised traffic report could satisfy the
City that the project's impacts to the City may be less than significant.
Transit Impacts
Althoff the Proposed Project area is not currently included in Santa Clarita
Transit's service area, it is likely that any future transit service provided to
and through the project site would be provided by Santa. Clarita Transit under
contract with Los Angeles County. There is likely to be a certain amount of
interdependence, and therefore travel, between Santa Clarita and Newhall
Bch, Particularly prior to full build -out. As stated in the DEIR, even at full
buildout, only 35% of the 387,000 average daily trips (ADTe) generated in the
Specific Plan area will also terminate in the Specific Plan area (page 4.8-31).
Althoff specific Project Phasing was not presented in the DEIR, it is common
for residential development to occur prior to the construction of supporting
community land uses. In the interim, Newhall Ranch residents will be
dependent an schools, retailers, banks, churches, and other facilities located
outside the new Community. Accordingly, Newhall Ranch residents will need
adequate means of trai spoiting themselves between the two communities.
Thus, roadways which connect the two communities, such as Magic Mountain
Parkway, Pico Canyon Road, Valencia Boulevard, and S1:1-126 / Newhall Ranch
Road will need to be adequately expanded to carry the passenger cars, service
vehicles, and public transit buses generated -by the proposed project.
It is understood that the initial transit demand, and therefore the transit
resources requited to provide service, prior to full build -out will differ from the
transit demand at full project build -out. For example, during the first few
Newhall Ranch DEIR and Specific Plan
October 28, 1996
Pa,¢e 12
Years of construction, the number of transit trips generated by Newhall Ranch
residents may be relatively low, but a large percentage of trips will be to and
from destinations within the City of Santa Clarita. In later years, as
community -supporting services such as shopping centers, schools, and parks
are constructed in Newhall Ranch, there may be less of a need for services
which formerly. connected Newhall Ranch residents to such facilities in the
City of Santa Clarita, and more need for trips between destinations within the
Newhall Ranch project. However, at full -buildout of the project, the City of
Santa Clarita will still provide for regional consumer needs, thus transit
service between the City and. Newhall Ranch will remain necessary. In order
to more accurately anticipate the geographic distribution of transit trips, the
DEIR should address project phasing. This will enable agencies, such as MTA
and Los Angeles County, and in turn the local providers (Santa Clarita Transit
and Metrolink) to plan for potential public transit service expansion to the
project area.
In the absence of phasing information, the full -build -nut scenario was
evaluated in order to estimate the future transit needs of the proposed project.
The Traffic I Access section of the DEIR states that "...actual transit impacts
to transit services will be evaluated at the subdivision map level as
development occurs within. the Specific Plan site. At this detailed
level... transit operators can -assess the capacity and demand of transit
services" (page 4.8-81). While some of the decisions regarding exact routing,
frequency of service (headway), and bus stop locations can be made closer to
project construction, there are other longer-term decisions which greatly affect
the ability to provide transit service to and through the Specific Plan area
(such as. the layout of the road network) which must be made prior to the
subdivision map stage. For this reason, it is necessary at this level of project
review to provide an estimate of future transit needs.
As proposed, Newhall Ranch is planned to contain 24,680 dwelling units and
5,720,000 square feet of retail, office and industrial development. Commercial
centers, which coves 90.7 gross acres of the project area, are to be located near
major highways (page 4.8-25). It is anticipated that residential areas will be
accessed off the major roadways by many smaller residential -scale streets. It
is likely that any public transit service in the Newhall Ranch project would be
provided along the main thoroughfares, sucli as Potrero Canyon Road, Magic
Mountain Parkway, Commerce Center Drive, and Long Canyon Road.
However, it is important that good'pedestrian access between the residences
and these major roadways be provided- in order for residents to have
satisfactory access to transit stops located on the major roadways.
The proposed project is estimated to generate 387,000 ADrs. Multiplying this
number by an occupancy factor of 1.4 converts the figure to 541,000 ADT
person trips, of which 3.5% (or 18,963 ADT person trips) will become trips
assigned to transit, per Metropolitan Transit Authority guidelines. Using a
representative peak hour factor of 10 percent, the DEIR estimated that this
would yield approximately 1900 peak hour transit trips for each peak hour to
be potentially generated by the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan (page 4.8-81).
Newhall Ranch DEIR and Speciftc plan
October 28, 1996
Page 13
Although these figures from the DEIR do not identify transit trip origins and
destinations, or describe how the transit demand will be distributed
throughout the day, they do help us to make estimates regarding resource
requirements. Just to accommodate the 1900 transit trips per peak -time hour
generated by the Newhall Ranch project, Santa Clarity Transit's fleet would
need to be expanded by approximately 48 buses (1900 peak -hour transit trips
divided by 40, which is the average number of passengers per transit vehicle,
equals 48 buses required).
The hourly cost to provide such service, which does not include equipment cost,
would be approximately $42 per hour in 1996 dollars. The costs identified
above also do not take into account the cost of roadway improvements needed
to ensure that Santa Clarita Transit's currently -operating routes are not
impacted by the Newhall Ranch project. For example, without roadway
capacity expansion, the routes currently operated along Valencia Boulevard,
Magic Mountain Parkway, The Old Road, Newhall Ranch Road, and SR -126,
would be negatively impacted by the additional automobile traffic added to the
roadways as a result of the Newhall Ranch project. Such routes would be
slowed down, and public transit riders throughout. the rest of Santa Clarita
Transit's service area would experience a decrease in the level of service.
While the issue of roadway capacity has been discussed above, it is raised
again here to note that the level of service concept applies not only to roadway
networks, but also to the transit route. network.
Section 4.10 - Air Quality
• The DEIR states that the project is air quality friendly, even though the
impacts to air quality will be unavoidably significant. While the DEIR
addresses the project design standards leading to "less of a significant air
qty impact' throughout many sections of the document, the DEIR should
provide specific examples of such within the Air Quality Section of the report.
For example, the DEIR could expand upon page 4.10-21, when discussing the
concentration of development within core area, about how trails systems will
link the commercial and residential areas. This area could also include the
number of jobs that will be created by the project, and what types of jobs will
be created. As was stated above, these may be addressed in other sections of
the DEER, but should be provided in the Air Quality Section in order to create
a more comprehensive document that the average reader can understand.
Page 4.10.-25 discusses'the Specific Plan's Mobility System which will aid in
the reduction of emissions, and references emission reduction efficiencies in
the SCAQMD's CEQA Air QualityHandbook The DEER should explain how
the project's mobility system accomplishes a reduction in noxious air
emissions, instead of just claiming that the mobility system does such The lay
person may not be familiar with land use / design / rail impacts, or the use of
park-and-ride lots. The DEIR should explain these aspects of the project and
expand upon their beneficial impacts.
,Newhall Ranch DEIR and Specific plan
October 28, 1996
Page 14
Page 4.10-31 states that the proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the
AQMP and that is does not jeopardize attainment of the air quality standards
predicted in the AQMP "...because the Specific Plan is consistent with the
goals, objectives, and assumptions outlined in the AQMP." The DEIR should
provide the goals, objectives and assumptions of the AQMP, and should
address exactly how the project is consistent with these goals, objectives, and
assumptions.
Mitigation Meas =: The project proponent should ensure that future
subdividers (or the project proponent) provide electric vehicle charging stations
at future park-and-ride lot(s), at commercial: centers, and at industrial
buildings. Future residences should also be equipped to handle, where
appropriate, electric vehicle charging outlets within interior garages.
•
INlitieation Men sure: The project proponent should pay, or ensure the payment
of, the project's pro -rata share for transit service to and from the project site.
Section 4.12 - Wastewater Disposal
After reviewing the Wastewater Disposal section, it appears that the
construction of the proposed wastewater treatment plan, identified in the
DEIR as the water reclamation plant (WRP), is a necessary infrastructure
component to provide adequate service for the specific plan buildout. The
analysis of the capacity demands appears to be reasonable, and it would make
sense for the project proponent to bear the costs of providing this needed
infrastructure to exclusively serve the project. The DEIR also indicated that
new County initiated connection fees would be utilized to finance the proposed
WRP. Details should be provided concerning the way the project will be
financed and how any related reimbursement mechanisms will work. Will the
County be paying for initial construction and start-up costs, or will that be
financed up front by the Newhall Land and Farming Company? Will these
fees be collected only from the new residents of Newhall Ranch for
reimbursement to the initial financing entity? . Will any other Santa Clarita
Valley resident outside of the Newhall Ranch project be impacted by the
financing of the WRP?
It is encouraging to see that the development of a reclaimed water system is
included as a part of the WRP function; the City would support this for on-site
irrigation where the level of water quality is acceptable and meets established
State standards.. However, we are sensitive to the issue of reclaimed water
development on a valley -wide basis. The DEIR should address this issue, and the
issue that the Castaic Lake Water Agency and the Newhall County Water
District are currently researching and preparing their own reclaimed water plans.
These issues should be addressed in the DEIR,relative to these agencies (and any
other agencies considering the development of a reclaimed water system for the
Santa Clarita Valley) in terms of the comprehensive development, distribution,
and use of reclaimed water for the Santa Clarity Valley.
Newhall Ranch DEM and Specific plan
October 28, 1996
Page 13
As a Publicly owned or privately owned service provider, the WRP has the
Potential to provide service downstream to properties in the County of Ventura.
This issue should be addressed in the DEM. This is a relevant question to us
because the DEM has identified a "tributary area" of the proposed WRP, and
anticipates requests for annexation to the proposed new Sanitation District for
service (DMS Buildout Scenario, page 4.12.9). Additionally, the DMS Buildout
Scenario should address valley -wide impacts due to the comprehensive nature of
the County's DMS methodology.
Two scenarios are analyzed in the DEER: One for buildout under the County
Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County under their proposed SCVJSS
facilities expansion; and, one for cumulative buildout under the land use
designations for both the County's Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan and the City
of Santa Clarita General Plan. The SCVJSS facilities' proposed expansion is
based upon SCAG population projections for the year 2015. This scenario
addresses future needs exclusive of the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan. Because
the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan has defined parameters for development
intensity, we feel that this scenario can be adjusted to include the additional
service demand created by this project. Cumulative buildout scenarios that
address both County and.City General Plans seem to be the most conservative
approach in identifying the most intense service demind. The City prefers this
scenario to assess cumulative impacts because it tends to consider planning and
development activities in both the City and the County, thereby being a
comprehensive method assessing the Santa Clarita Valley as a whole (instead of
segmenting community growth).
Section 4.15 - Solid Waste
The Project, as proposed, would produce a maximum of 53,524 tons of solid waste
annually, upon buildout. Currently, the City spent five years educating the public
on alternatives to land filling, and initiated a progressive curbside recycling
Program. These efforts, though, have resulted in the diversion of only 30 tons of
solid waste per year. The project, with its mitigation factors listed in the DEM
could cause diversion efforts on a Santa Clarity Valley -wide basis to go
backwards. It is recommended that the DEIR discuss and take a leadership role
in determining how the project's solid waste will be handled The DEER should
address innovative solid waste planning, as opposed to reiterating the fact that
the project will comply with Los Angeles County standards for waste
management
The City greatly encourages developers to incorporate innovative concepts for
solid waste diversion efforts in their proposals, as opposed to relying on
existing landfill capacities and/or future landfill expansions to handle a
Project's solid waste. Furthermore, community outcry on the issue of
landfilling is strong. Thus, the DEM should address a worst-case scenario in
which no expansions and/or new construction of facilities are approved. The
DEIR should specifically discuss how the project would dispose of or reduce the
solid waste generated by the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan if no expansions
and/or construction of landfill facilities occurs over the next 25 years.
.Newhall Ranch DEIR and Specific plan
October 28, 1996
Page 16
• biitiPation*V aa„ra: All future subdividers should incorporate residential
design standards which accommodate solid waste and recycling efforts. Such
designs should be incorporated into interior living space as well as residential
street design.
• i igntion Measure: The project proponent should incorporate standards for
composting and material recovery facilities within specified zoning
designations throughout the project site.
Section 4.20 • Parks, Recreation, and Trails
• The parkland dedication requirement as identified in the DEIR totals 202.235
acres of.parkland. This number was derived by using 3.17 persons per single
family dwelling unit. The City of Santa Clarity Unified Development Code
(UDC) uses 3.588 persons per single family dwelling unit, which would change
the parkland range to approximately 230-250 acres of required parkland.
The Newhall Ranch project proposes to fulfill parkland, requirements by
Providing 12 neighborhood parks, three community parks, trails, open space,
and high country and river corridor special management areas. The total
Quimby credit requested by the developer applying the Los Angeles County
Quimby approach for this project is 2,472 acres, far above the actual amount
of required parkland. Preservation of open space, significant ecological areas,
and the Santa Clara Rivercorridor is consistent with the City of Santa
Clarity's General Plan and would generally be supported. However, applying
the City's UDC requirements for parkland dedication, the developer would
receive 30 percent credit towards Quimby requirements for the private
facilities provided. At a total requirement of 230 acres, b percent credit
would be about 70 acres for a remaining balance of 160 acres. Neighborhood
and community parks with active uses total about 113 acres, leaving
approximately 47 acres yet to be credited towards Quimby requirements.
Approximately 125 acres of community parks and a lake, which the DEIR
suggests should receive credit, are .considered passive and are located in
restricted areas such as utility easements.
There does not appear do be any major sports center which would
accommodate community tournaments or league play. With the addition of
approximately 70,000 people, there would be demand for organized youth and
adult baseball, softball, football, soccer, and/or other league sports. There is
minimal discussion in the DEIR related to the operations and maintenance of
the public parks or the commitment of the County to provide these services.
Currently, the County is downsizing its park and recreation program, and is
turning many park facilities over to local governments to maintain and
operate. These issues should be addressed in the DEIR.
A point of clarification would be appreciated on page 4.20-1. The DEIR states
that the current deficit in planning area (135, which includes Newhall Ranch,
is 246.6 acres of parkland: Page 4.20 -19 -states that the project provides 2,472
Newhall Ranch DEIR and SpeciJu Plan
October 28, 1996
Page 11
acres of creditable parkland for a surplus of 2,266 acres over identified
requirements. Page 4.20-33 states under Cumulative Impact that "The
existing parkland deficit of 246.6 acres would remain."
Regarding the Newhall Ranch Master Trails Plan, the Plan includes the
regional river trail, community trails, pathways, local trails, and unimproved
trails. The Regional Santa Clara River Trail spans from the San Gabriel
Mountains to the east, west to the Pacific Ocean in Oxnard. The City of Santa
Clarita has developed a portion of this trail which would also traverse through
the Newhall Ranch project. The DEIR addresses the Santa Clara River Trail
as it related to bicycles and pedestrians, however, it does not address the
equestrian element. Equestrian use is part of the multi -use system that is the
Santa Clara River Regional Trail, and needs to be included in the planning of
this project.
The Newhall Ranch project proposes tainclude approximately 6,000 acres of
open space area accessible to the public. These include.the High Country
Special Management Area, Santa Clara River Corridor, open area, golf course,
and a lake. The operations and maintenance of these areas can be addressed
through homeowners associations, maintenance districts, and private and/or
public agencies. Restrictions -on the use of open space within the Newhall
Ranch project should be further described in the DEIR As it stands right now,
the City is not convinced that dedicating the High Country SMA and the River
Corridor SMA to the Center for Natural Lands Management provides for the
best public use of these areas. To provide the greatest public use of the areas,
access should be encouraged to the greatest extent possible.
The City of Santa Clarita currently provides extensive parks and recreation
programs which are open to all residents of the Santa Clarita Valley, The
existing fee scale does not discriminate between City residents and residents
of the unincorporated area. Additionally, the City is currently bound by
agreements with the County of Los Angeles which preclude the City from
charging "non-resident' fees for services provided by the City in City parks,
and in County parks under long-term lease to the City. Many residents of the
unincorporated areas of Stevenson Ranch, Castaic, Val Verde, North Valencia,
Saugus and Ague Duke participate in these programs. Due to ongoing budget
and funding deficits experienced by the County of Los Angeles, several
community parks in the unincorporated areas have been closed because funds
for their operation and maintenance are unavailable. Additionally, this does
not address the fact that the County does not currently fund. any recreation
programs in the Santa Clarita Valley. The project proponent has indicated
that private finding of parks and recreation services may be funded privately
by future residents of the project While the City encourages such innovations,
this does not preclude the need for publicly firnded facilities and programs.
Based on current experience and project trends, the City must anticipate
serving the future residents of the Newhall Ranch project as well
Newhall Ranch DEIR and Specific plan
October 28, 1996
page 18
The City, and the Santa Clarity Valley by extension, currently experiences a
severe deficit of park facilities. Existing facilities and programs are strained
to over -capacity; many recreation programs often have long waiting lists of
People who wish to participate. The addition of approximately 70,000 people
generated by this project will seriously affect the City's ability to provide
recreation programs to all who request them, let alone enhance such services.
The DEER should identify any proposed recreation and cultural arts
programming and staffing to fulfill community needs at the public park sites
within the project. As stated above, the City of Santa Clarity currently serves
numerous residents of the adjacent unincorporated areas at no additional cost
to the County, but at increased, and unfunded cost to City residents.
Effectively, this means that City residents are subsidizing, through property
tax payments, the recreational activities of non -City residents.
• Mitigation Mans: The project proponent should include equestrian trails
along the Santa Clara River Corridor outside the river bottom wherever
possible, and should tie into the High Country Special Management Area to
Pico Canyon Trail.
• Mitigation Mansura: Rest stops, scenic overlooks, staging areas, etc., are
amenities that the project proponent should locate along the regional trail
corridor.
• Mitigation M as gra: The project proponent should provide for, or ensure
Provisions for, a direct connection from the project's trails system to the City's
trails system, to the satisfaction of the City of Santa Clarity
• ligation M asnra: The project proponent should fund, or ensure provisions
for funding, for City programs to be provided or facilitated by the applicant in
anticipation of the project's residents' future use of City Recreation services.
Section 4.16 - Education
Educating the youth in our community is of vital importance in ensuring a
Prosperous future for the Santa Clarita Valley. The DEIR for the Newhall
Ranch Specific Plan has. adequately mitigated school impacts. within the
Newhall School District, however, has not adequately addressed the project's
school impacts within the William S. Hart High School District or the Castaic
Union School District.
Regarding developer fees imposed to provide for adequate school funding,
Government Code Sections 65995 and 65996 apply specifically to development
Projects which are not legislative in nature. Since the approval of the Newhall
Ranch Specific Plan requires legislative actions, the Courts have held that
local governments do have the authority to deny a land use application (which
require a legislative action) on the basis of the adequacy of available school
facilities, or to phase the development of projects. A'Valley,-Wide Joint Fee
Resolution" was adopted by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, the
Vewhall Ranch DEIR and Specific plan
October 28, 1996
page 19
City Council of the City of Santa Clarita, and the William S. Hart Union High,
Sulphur Springs Union, Castaic Union, Newhall, and Saugus Union School
Districts in 1991 establishing a fixed fee in excess of the State statutory fee in
order to mitigate the effects of growth on school capacity throughout the Santa
Clarita Valley. However, in late 1995 the Newhall School District, William S.
Hart Union High School District, Castaic Union School District, and Saugus
Union School District all withdrew from the Valley -Wide Joint Fee Resolution,
thus rendering it ineffectual. The DEIR, states that the Valley -Wide Joint Fee
Resolution applies to legislative actions, and yet the Resolution has been
dissolved, and the Courts have upheld decisions (Mira Development Corp. V.
City of San Diego, 205, Cal. App. 3d 1201, 1217 (1988)1 that the prohibition of
a City to levee fees in excess of the State statutory school fee is not binding
where a general plan amendment or rezoning is requested. The City suggests
that the developer willingly provide for full mitigation of school impact on the
Newhall School District, the William S. Hart Union High School District, and
the Castaic Union School District, possibly with a provision for reimbursement
of funds at the time that State school funding is made available.
Regarding the specific impacts of the Newhall Ranch project on local schools,
the DEIR analyzes two different methodologies for determining possible
effects. One includes the School Districts' Methodology, and the other includes
Los Angeles County DMS Methodology. The DEIR tends to favor the Los
Angeles County DMS Methodology, which states a lesser impact to the local
schools than the School Districts' Methodology. Due to the importance of
educating our youth, and the years of direct .experience that the school
districts have over Los Angeles County, it is suggested that the DEIR base the
Project's impacts on the School Districts' Methodology. As of this moment, the
impact of the project. on the local school districts is considered to be
unavoidably significant by the William S. Hart Union School District and the
Castaic Union School District. Full mitigation for the project's impacts on
schools should be based on the School Districts' methodology.
The DEIR should, in some manner, address the phasing for development of
school facilities. The DEER does not discuss the timing for development of the
five elementary schools, junior high, and high school, thus it is anticipated that
the City will be negatively affected by the buildout of the project in the short-
term, or until the facilities are developed and operational, however long that
may be. Specific mitigation for school impacts should be addressed in relation
to the Phasing of the project, as well as the mechanism being proposed for the
implementation ofschool.facility development.
Section 4.17 • Police Servicer
The City of Santa Clarita presently, and for the foreseeable future, contracts
with the County of Los Angeles for Sheriff services. It is anticipated that the
development of the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan, with a residential population
of up to 70,000people, will affect both response tines and performance
standards in the incorporated and unincorporated area of the Santa Clarita
Valley. At this time,* the City is inclined to recommend that the Newhall
4
YewWl Ranch DEIR and Specific plan
October 28, 1996
Page 20
Ranch Specific Plan include a fully staffed Sheriff station within the Specific
Plan boundary. This would ensure an adequate response time for all
emergencies within and around the Specific Plan site, without a decrease in
service to the City and the existing developments within the unincorporated
area. The addition of 70,000 residents along with commercial / .industrial
developments will have a major effect on the level of police services currently
provided in the Santa Clarita Valley. In the population range of 100,000 to
200,000 persons, the City of Santa Clarita currently stands as the fifth safest
city Nation-wide. The outstanding service that our officers provide is one of
the major draws for both residents and businesses to the Santa Clarita Valley.
The addition of a fully -staffed Sheriff station on the Newhall Ranch site will
serve to provide excellent community service to the future residents of
Newhall Ranch, as well as to the City, and will help us maintain our
distinctive reputation as a safe, clean community.
In addition to the request for a fully -staffed Sheriff station, the City
recommends that a traffic or similar analysis demonstrating emergency routes
for public safety and emergency evacuation routes for the public should be
addressed in the DEIR.
Because the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan is not curtently proposing the
development of a Sheriff station, the DEIR should analyze the potential for
increased cost to City -provided Sheriff services, at currently contracted levels,
for traffic control and crime prevention in the City and its immediate environs.
Once again, due to the fact that the DEIR does not address phasing for the
project, and does not discuss the mechanism proposed that would trigger the
employment of additional Sheriff personnel, the City is anticipating that the
project will negatively affect the services currently provided within the Santa
Clarita Valley.
Mitigation Measure: The Newhall Ranch Specific Plan should provide for a
My -staffed Sheriff Station within the boundary of the Specific Plan site.
Section 4.18 - Fire Services and Hazards .
A correction needs to be made to the DEIR in the summary section of Section
4.18 - Fire Services and Hazards. The first paragraph states that, 'One
additional station (Fire Station 126) is in the design stage of development, and
will be located at the intersection of Mc Bean Boulevard and Magic Mountain
Parkway.' It is the City's understanding that the Los Angeles County Fire
Department has rejected this location as a possibility for the development of
a fire station, and that the Fire Department is investigating and/or has located
a different location for the future station.
Due to the lack of information regarding project phasing in the DEIR, the City
is requesting that a minimum of one Fire Station be constructed and
operational prior to the approval of any development projects related to the
Specific Plan. The construction of such Fire Station should be financed by the
developer, with the funding of applicable staff being guaranteed by the County
of Los Angeles.
Newhall Ranch DEIR and Spec,j,e pian
October 28, 1996
Page 21
The City and the County,: in the unincorporated areas in the Santa Clarita
Valley, currently collect a developer fee of $0.1884 per square foot on new
development for the fire district protection program. This fee is based on Fire
Department budget, in which monies are accumulated for future acquisition,
construction, improvement, and equipment needs of fire station facilities, but
not for ongoing operations and maintenance. We request that the DEIR
address the manner in which allocations from the project's funding will be
dispersed during the buildout of the project. Furthermore, the DEIR should
address whether the project will affect the rate the City pays for Fire Services
when capital equipment needs and personnel costs for the project area are
calculated to serve the new urbanized area.
Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital and ancillary facilities presently
provide hospital services to the residents of the Santa Clarita Valley and
environs. The DEIR shquld address potential impacts to this and other
hospital and emergency care facilities existing in the Santa Clarita Valley,
with respect to the anticipated buildout of the 1990 Santa Clarita Valley
Areawide plan as amended, to include the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan.
Various transportation routes and travel time to the hospital should also be
identified in the DEIR.
Newhall Ranch DEIR and Specific Plan
October 28, 1996
Page 22
Thank you again for the opportunity to review the Draft Environmental Impact
Report and Specific Plan for the Newhall Ranch Project, and for your
consideration of our requests. As we understand, the official comment period has
been extended to December 5, 1996, and we wish to thank you again for doing so;
we hope that the additional time will prove useful.to all interested parties. The
City will likely provide additional comments and mitigation measures in response
to any additional or new information that is provided to us, and we submit this
early request that any future comments by the City based on this additional
information also be included in and.addressed by the DEIR.
If you have any questions, or require clarification of anything requested in this
letter, please contact either Jeffrey Lambert, Planning Manager, or Jennifer
Reid, Assistant Planner II of the Community Development Department, at
(805)255-4330.
Sincerely,
Ken kamp
Assistant City Manager
KP:JL:JDR:Iep
cc: Lee Stark, Community Studies
Kerwin Chih, Impact Analysis
Frank Menses, Impact Analysis
Michael Antonovich, Board of Supervisors
Dave Vannatta, Planning Deputy
George Caravalho, City Manager, City of Santa Clarita
City of Santa Clarita Councilmembers
City of Santa Clarita Planning Commissioners
James Harter, Newhall Ranch Company
Impact Sciences
Vag Stephens, Forma
advance\spacpian.jdr