The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1999-11-09 - AGENDA REPORTS - NORTH VALENCIA SPECIFIC PLAN (2)AGENDA REPORT City Manager Approv Item to be presented PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 9, 1999 i SUBJECT: NORTH VALENCIA NO.2 SPECIFIC PLAN AND ANNEXATION (MASTER CASE NOS. 98-183, 99-055), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 98-002, ANNEXATION NO. 98-02, SPECIFIC PLAN (PREZONE) 98-003, ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 98- 001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (VTTM) 44831 OPTION A, VTTM 44831 OPTION B, VTTM 52667, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-006, OAK TREE PERMIT 98-020, HILLSIDE REVIEW 99-002, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH# 98111201 DEPARTMENT: Planning and Building Services Receive staff presentation to address issues raised at the October 26, 1999 meeting, receive public testimony, provide direction to staff for processing, continue the public hearing to a date certain. PURPOSE OF THIS MEETING The purpose of this meeting is to have staff and the applicant answer questions raised at the meeting of October 26, 1999, to allow for additional public testimony and Council discussion, and to schedule a date for a site visit prior to November 23, 1999. The City has made a request that a representative from the Hart School District be available at the November 9, 1999 meeting to address issues concerning the future junior high school site. If no further issues arise, staff recommends that the Council provide directives to staff to prepare documents for the adoption of the Specific Plan and related entitlements and certification of the FEIR. Staff recommends that the public hearing be continued to November 23, 1999 to allow for additional Council deliberation (if necessary), closure of the public hearing, and review and adoption of the approval documents. The ordinance second readings and adoption would follow on December 14, 1999. ContinuedT0: IL. � � t� eqna I 92 BACKGROUND On October 26, 1999 the City Council opened the public hearing on this item, received a presentation from staff and the environmental consultant, took public testimony and directed questions to staff. The following questions and issues were raised by Council and are addressed in this report (in italics) or will be answered verbally at the November 9, 1999 meeting: 1) Why will the City purchase the Upland Preserve Zone and what does this purchase entail? 2) Will the arrundo be removed from San Francisquito Creek and headwaters? Will the City look for grant funds for removal of arrundo? 3) Libraries should be included as uses in the Specific Plan commercial and mixed-use zones. Libraries are included as minor uses in the Specific Plan Permitted Use Chart under the heading "Public Facilities & Utilities" on Specific Plan page 7-7. Staff proposes adding "technology store -front libraries" to the list of uses identified under this heading. 4) The Specific Plan should include provisions for low maintenance, drought - tolerant landscaping. At least one model home in each development within the Specific Plan area should include this type of planting. Proposed Specific Plan Section 7.14 "Water Wise Landscaping" is attached to this staff report to address these landscaping concerns. 5) General concerns with the size of the community park and features. Need more parkland and a community building on the park site. Show options for more parkland or areas to accommodate a community building. Need to include sufficient parking. 6) How will this project affect Sheriff's Services? What will be the additional costs for policing this area? 7) School issues (location of future junior high school, liquefaction concerns, fault concerns, joint -use park, status of state review of site A at Newhall Ranch Road and McBean). How many students will this project generate and how many new classrooms will be needed to accommodate them? Would like a copy of the school mitigation agreements. Bob Lee, Superintendent of the Hart High School District, has been invited to the November 9, 1999 Council meeting to address school site issues. A copy of a conceptual plan for a joint -use school /park for site A and site B is attached to this report. A discussion of student generation rates for this project and classrooms needed are included in the DEIR beginning on page 4.13-4. An attachment with this information is attached to this report. A copy of the school mitigation agreements for both the Saugus School District and the Hart High School District are included in the Draft EIR Vol. II Appendix, Section 4.13. 8) What uses may occur on the MWD easement? 9) Will the trails in the Specific Plan area be meandering? Yes, the paseos and trails will meander similar to those existing in the Northbridge area and as approved in the first North Valencia Specific Plan project. 10) How will the trails on the project connect to the trails proposed in the project north of Copper Hill Drive (Tesoro del Valle)? How will these trails connect to the Angeles National Forest? Please provide an exhibit that shows how the trail crossings will occur at the Copper Hill Drive Bridge. Provide a trail map to Don -E -Brook farms. 11) Please define the open space for the Specific Plan area. 12) Various `safe routes to school' improvements including a pedestrian bridge on Dickason to connect Valencia High School and the trail, and bus stops on Dickason and Decoro fronting the school. Additionally, this agenda report includes letters (3), emails (4), a petition (4 pages), and written comment cards (3) addressed to the regarding this project. Additionally, a petition (7 pages) previously submitted to the Planning Commission and five other letters addressed to the Commission but received too late to be considered by the Planning Commission are also attached. ATTACHMENTS Letters, E-mail, Petitions and Public Comment Cards Received about Project Proposed Section 7.14 "Water Wise Landscaping (Issue # 4 above) Conceptual plan for a joint -use school/park for site A and site B (Issue #7 above) School Generation Rates and Classrooms Needed (Issue #7 above) S:\pbs\advance\nva2\nv2ar2.doc City. of Santa Clarifa - Request to .Register Written Comments Please complete the following, information to register your written comments to the City Council, in lieu of speaking orally. Your comments will be considered part of the official proceedings. (Please print) Meeting date: Agenda item number: Agenda Title or Subject to be addressed: c Please check one: ❑ . Support Recommendation Oppose Recommendation ❑ .Neutral. . Written Comment (Use other side if necessary):'. Name: //yy Street Addiess: C;7-. City la/ Council requires that persons registering. written comments, who represent other individuals, groups, or organizations disclose that relationship. ( I declare that th¢ foregoing is true and correct. Representing: �' `Oygi .=Signature: City of Santa Clarita - Request to Register Written Comments Please complete. the following information to register your written comments to'the.City Council, in lieu of speaking orally. Your comments will, be considered, part of the official proceedings.. /(Please print) Meeting date: Agenda item number: AgendaTitleor Subject to be addressed: Please check one: ❑ Support Recommendation 0. Oppose Recommendation ❑ Neutral' Written Comment (Use other side if necessary): Dllr�fiFfn writ ;, Street Address: t Council requires that persons registering written comments who represent other individuals, groups or, organizations disclose that relationship. I declare that the foregoing is true and correct.. Representing: TY. f •�Ifp i l% Signature:. `. kA,yr y (/rn [ ' • r Lj C�� Q G QJ j l'.C� , %"—" °c.GC��C; �'✓��zt: r��:. LL"�'.j C!��.QLt�r :.:. ' s City of Santa Clani ta Request to. Register Written Comments Please complete the following information to register your wTitten.cornments to I the City Council, in lieu of speaking orally. Your -comments will be considered part of the official proceedings. (Please print) Meeting date: _L_L.Q% 0 (cJZ Agenda item number/ Agenda Title or Subject to be addressed: Please check one: U'Support.Recomaiendation 0!46ppose Re c*ommendation. Written Comment (Use other side if necessary): Name: Street Address: Council requires that persons register! individuals, groups or organi; N written comments who represent . other ions disclose that relationship. I declare that the foregoing is true and correct. Represen ng: km 5 .i/xf-1L "U'Ll 8-1-99 PETITION We understand that developers are proposing 1900 more housing units in to the City and 2500 more housing units to the County in San Francisquito Canyon. This is too much! Our schools are over -crowded and the roads will not handle the traffic. We ask the City Council and the County to deny the approval for these projects. y/ NAME. ADDRESS PHONE# AILl- RETURN PETITIONS TO: SCOPE, PO BOX 1182, SANTA CLARITA, 91386 *PLEASE RETURN PETITIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE* z 8-1-99 PETITION We understand that developers are proposing 1900 more housing units in to the Q and 2500 more housing units to the County in San Francisquito Canyon. This is t, much! Our schools are over -crowded and the roads will not handle the traffic. V ask the City Council and the County to deny the approval for these projects. MAr RETURN PETITIONS TO: SCOPE, PO BOX 1182, SANTA CLARITA, 91386 *PLEASE RETURN PETITIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE* 8-1-99 PETITION 4 We understand that developers are proposing 1900 more housing units in to the City and 2500 more housing units to the County in San Francisquito Canyon. This is too much! Our schools are over -crowded and the roads will not handle the traffic. We ask the City Council and the County to deny the approval for these projects. NAME ADDRESS I ONE# es teq47P ¢rdcrc (2-13)31.)-2.72f. �J �52Yi Qccr(Ar1, J rZ�i��i _z�DccFvjZo%, 23�g /3«aoico D4 « �i/3Sy -zs� s�iz� 1 5 3f> 66( 1 , Rte,, C,1�15 '1g31� i:a •5 lcn �.nn2 Sa v, ;;,5'�\35� 661�2�i6. 332 5 Zsl�Go 7r. �i�Ss �e Z59-79/8 le�� dem, 2�f�7z �'�ycc.cl i� e✓�l� e%3R/ rr/-ZS3 CYSIi /iLi%l J\%FWi�+— 7v'Ci A� UVL& \ 'ttg J•�F�, �, Y RETURN PETITIONS TO: SCOPE, PO BOX 1182, SANTA CLARITA, 91386 *PLEASE RETURN PETITIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE* ,14 2 PETITION We understand.that developers are proposing 1900 more housing units in to the Cit) and 2500 more housing units to the County in San Francisquito Canyon. This is toc much! Our schools are over -crowded and the roads will not handle the traffic. We ask the City Council and the County to deny the approval for these projects.. ADDRESS RETURN PETITIONS TO: SCOPE, PO BOX 1182, SANTA CLARITA, 91386 *PLEASE RETURN PETITIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE* Date: 10/25/99 12:39 PM Sender: carol22@yahoo.com (Temporarily Insane) To: Laura Stotler; lweste@santa-clarita.com; fferry@santa-clarita.com; Csarro@santa-clarita.com; jeidt@santa-clarita.com; sdawson@santa-clarita.com; JKlajic@santa-clarita.com Priority: Normal Subiect:No more construction --Valencia 2 Maar City fnnnnil I am fairly new to the city of Santa Clarita and I am very happy with my move to this valley. I purchased a home that was built 15 years ago. I have always loved this community because it had a good plan. I am, however, extremely concerned about the direction that this valley;Es management is turning. I came from the San Fernando Valley, where overcrowding and congestion were unbearable. ,S figured that 'this community would give me a better quality of life. However, with the incredible amount of building that is going on at all points of this valley, I wonder how long it will take to mirror the situation in the SFV. I don Et want to be one of those people who want to turn off the growth once I have arrived. However, urban sprawl is a serious matter for all cities. Communities must be cognizant of controlled growth for the sake of our environment. Lancaster and Palmdale had a similar building boom in the 1980s, and now they must contend with severe traffic, crime, and overcrowding. This community was built with a better plan which is why I chose to move here. But these problems can easily infest SCV too. All you have to do is sit in the morning traffic on the southbound 5 freeway to realize the delicacy of our little slice of Eden. When I first heard about the lake community next to the Santa Clara river, I was appalled that a dessert community would permit such an extravagant use of natural resources which will no doubt change the ecology of the valley. Next, I heard that building of Pico Canyon was to commence and cut down so many majestic oak trees for the purpose of more houses. Then the farm community along the 126 highway is in jeopardy for more track homes and golf courses. Finally, San Franscisquito Canyon is to have its lovely hills covered with 6000 stucco homes. When will it stop? It is in peoples nature to want to move to a rural area and be with nature. Then when nature is threatening their comfort with tipped over garbage cans and missing pets, people want to secure their space from nature. This will always continue unless ourcommunity leaders make a stand and start voting for quality instead of quantity. There are many homes in the SCV that are already built but need a little TLC. It is time that we change our focus from a disposable community and re -direct our energy to making what we already have, better. Please slow it down and let the construction dust settle for a while. We are already sorely in need of schools, roads, open space, and water. Our future is in your hands. Sincerely, Carol Clark Concerned Resident Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at htto://auctions.vahoo.com Date: 10/25/99 12:30 PM Sender: sstola@dwp.ci.la.ca.us To: Laura Stotler Priority: Normal Subiect:San Francisquito Canyon Project Hello Ms. Stotler..I am writing to you on behalf of many, many people who very concerned regarding all of the development that is impacting our traffic patterns, air quality, and overall open spaces for recreation. The schools are already overcrowded. Just going out shopping has become a big ordeal..too many cars, long traffic lines & parking availability has been effected. What about water? What wells will dry up first because more & more water is being pumped out to the other outlying areas? All of this should be downsized quite a bit. There is money for recreation and parks, and we need our open space for trail usage, hiking, bycyling, horseback riding, 4x4 driving, motorcycling..Please, please think about what is happening in Santa Clarita and help to downsize and keep our air quality, traffic, and quality of life at its best!! Friends of San Francisquito Cyn..Don-E-Brook Ranch, Amber Rose, Northpark Ranches, Summerhill Ranch, all of the people living within the canyon and around it now north of Copperhill..the traffic will be horrendeous just to reach these places.. Date: 10/26/99 9:26 AM Sender: JEisenb836@aol.com To: Laura Stotler; Jill Klajic; Sharon Dawson; Janice Heidt; Frank Ferry; Laurene Weste; Carmen Sarro Priority: Normal Subject: Slowing the growth in Santa Clarita Please accept the attached as one person's, of many, opinion. I've reproduced it below in case you are unable to download the word.doc. Date: October 26, 1999 To: Mayor Joanne Darcy Members of Santa Clarita City Council Subject: Growth in and around Santa Clarita First and foremost, thank you for the opportunity to address you through this medium. I am deeply concerned about the rapid rate of growth we are experiencing here in the Santa Clarita Valley. On April 26, 1999, I sent a letter to Ms. Klajic regarding the approval of 21,600 residential units and 4,500 commercial units to be developed over the next 20 years. .This, in addition to the 40,000 units already approved. Next, there is the West Creek project and others expanding the San Francisquito Canyon area by some 6,000 units. Now, I hear about 2,000 more new housing units next to Northbridge and Northpark. IRm guessing that there are more permits pending and likely to be approved adding to the count of approximately 70,000 new housing units in the valley. Recognizing that not all of these are within the city limits of Santa Clarita, but also understanding that you have influence on this part of Los Angeles County, you must be concerned about the entire valley. I have not studied the burden put on our water supply, the amount of dust pollution during construction or the loss of natural habitat, although; I know these are concerns of many of my neighbors. My issues are much more banal. I18m concerned about the simple matters of traffic, overpopulating our schools and the fact that excessive growth will do more to destroy our community than to help it. I wish I had the time to research all of the hard data to support my many suppositions on the detriment of rapid growth in our valley. Since I donAt , I can only offer you my opinion which is founded on fundamental intelligence and common sense. In my twenty five years of real estate and financial management, IRve yet to see an individual or business succeed that grows at a rate beyond the foundation or infrastructure that supports it. They either take on too much debt, spread their management expertise too thin or simply lose sight of their core business which brought them their success in the first place. Hence, the foundation crumbles and so too go the goodies. In the case of a municipality, the goodies would be the quality of your educational facilities, the quality of the education we give to our children, the quality of life in our community and the ultimate quality of your constituency. What is presently a community which attracts new business, a populous serving all sectors and still on the list of the five best and safest towns to live in, will too quickly turn into another San Fernando Valley, instead of a Conejo Valley, if we donlEtstart limiting our growth. In fact, the Conejo Valley implemented a stringent slow growth ordinance in the early 801Es, which I attribute to their success today. I too want to see us grow, but it must be measured growth. Driving to work today (I have plenty of time to think in the hour and a half it takes me to go 42 miles), I had many thoughts on the hazards of overpopulating a specific geographic area. The foregoing is very generalized, indeed, but important to note and think about. Let us now think about the biggest headache I have to deal with G getting to and from work. Aside from the financial and infrastructure burdens, I thought about how the Golden State Freeway is the only way to go South from this area and how that freeway is fed by the Antelope Valley Freeway. How Los Angeles County could care less about our part of the county as long as "the county" has a place to put the people they want to bring out here to maintain their own growth objectives. Now hereAs an interesting idea to think about. As I havenAt established my credibility yet, I should probably withhold this thought. Suffice it to say, it would cost less than the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority;Es 20 year plan at a cost of $72 billion. We already know the cost overruns and problems associated with this. But why should this mean anything when our illustrious MTA bypassed an above ground rail system at one-third the cost. If Los Angeles County wants to grow, as well it should, let the county subsidize the growth with the necessary financial and infrastructure aid by building new arteries into the city from and to more isolated areas in the county. Specifically, the Antelope Valley. Here is an area that has been waiting to blossom for years, but for the lack of ease of travel to the heart of Los Angeles. The answer is in opening this area up with a direct link to Los Angeles. At least that would alleviate a substantial portion of our traffic problems. How would they do this? Okay, IRll tell you, but don9t scoff at this so fast. Just remember, the English Channel Tunnel runs 31 miles, 150 feet under the seabed. They tunneled from England to France and France to England and met in just three years. Four years later they were open for business. The distance from Palmdale to Sierra Madre is only 28 miles, as the crow flies or straight through the Angeles Forest!!! Don1Et tell me it canet be done. Technologically it can be done and I assure you, with the amount of money that can be"made from development in the Antelope Valley and along the North County Tunnel Toll Road (my name for it), the right politics can be put in place to negotiate with the Forestry Department for the necessary rights of way. How do I know it will cost less than the MTAXs debacle a it has to; the English Channel Tunnel only cost $15 billion. Surely we can tunnel and build equally efficiently as our European neighbors. Something more than $15 billion perhaps, but surely less than the $72 billion plan of the MTA.. Now weAve alleviated the traffic problem coming out of the Santa Clarita Valley and lessened the demand for pushing the population into our valley. LetAs start limiting the future growth of our valley so we can step back and take stock of what we have to grow on, grow from within and keep the quality of our community as high as it is today. ■ Board of Directors Ron Bottorff. Chair Barbara Wampole Vice -Chair Lynne Plambeck. Treasurer Affiliated Organizations California Native Plant Society L.A./Santa Monica. Friends of the Santa Clara River 660 Randy Drive, Newbury Park, California 91320-3036 • (805) 4984323 October 28, 1999 Mayor 7o Anne Darcy. and Santa Clarita City Council City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Blvd. Santa Clarita, CA 91355 Re: North Valencia 2 Protect Dear Mayor Darcy and City Council Members, COPIES TO CITY COUNCIL, CITY hIANAGER, CITY CLERIC Date This letter is follow-on to our FAX to the City Council of October 25, 1999. Friends of the Santa Clara River is extremely concerned about the cumulative impacts of growth along San Francisgpito Creek. North Valencia 2 adds another 1,900 units to existing development with Northbridge and Northpark also in the hopper.' Each additional project furthers the fragmentation and degradation of the creek and its associated riparian habitat, with the heavy irony that this creek is one committed water supply. The Santa Clara River alluvial aquifer is already in overdraft. Adequate water for 6,000 additional units along San Francisquito Creek is a highly doubtful proposition without further state water. The EIR states that water entitlement is in place, BUT entitlement is NOT supply, since it is well established that state water delivery is only 50 % reliable. Solutions for water transfer and storage must be identified before further state water imports are implemented. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, -alp mloe--170-1 Ron Bottorff, Chair 0 From: Ron Bottorff To: Joanne darcy Date: 10/25/99 Time: 16:04:21 Page 1 of 1 PLEASE COPY TO ALL CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS October 25, 1999 To: Mayor Joanne Darcy City of Santa Clarita From: Ron Bottorff, Chair Friends of the Santa Clara River 660 Randy Drive Newbury Park, CA 91320 Re: North Valencia 2 Project COPIES TO CITY COUNCIL, CITY� --L—�----CITY CLERK J � irate Friends of the Santa Clara River is extremely concerned about the cumulative impacts of growth along San Francisquito Creek, North Valencia 2 adds another 1,900 units to existing development with Northbridge and Northpark also in the hopper. Each additional project furthers the fragmentation and degradation of the creek and its associated riparian habitat, with the heavy irony that this creek is one of Los Angeles County's Significant Ecological Areas! This is not the way to treat an SEA. COPIES TO CITY COUNCIL, CITY NANA ER, CITY CLf.RK Date: 10/25/99 1:02 PM Sender: sstola@dwp.ci.la.ca.us Date To: Carmen Sarro Priority: Normal Subject. Oppose the North Valencia 2 Project Dear Mayor Joanne Darcey..2 am pleading w/you & Council Members to oppose or drastically reduce development of North Valencia 2 Project due to the overcrowding, lack of water, traffic, air quality, and the preservation of open public land use, parks, and recreational use trails to this valley. We have enough development already. Our schools are so overcrowded and there is nothing but building, building, and building going on..it is overwhelming, unnecessary, and will reduce the quality of life (it already has due to overcrowding) that we have at present. Please consider this opposition from many of us in and around Stevenson Ranch, Plum Cyn, Bouquet Cyn, San Francisquito Cyn, Green Valley, Leona Valley, and Newhall.. OCT -26-1999 0?:18 COPIES YO CITY COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER, CITY CLERK Date: 10/25/99 9:58 AM /0/,u - Sender: gail@scvnet.com (GailEisenberg) To: Carmen Sarro Priority: Normal Subiect: No on North Valancia 2 project >Dear Mayor Darcy >I am opposed to the North Valencia 2 project for many reasons. Water, >roads, schools, to much TRAFFIC already, it should have a lower population >denisty. I am for slow growth. I am also feel we need space. I don't >want our valley to turn into the San Fernando Valley. Where any open space >is quickly turned into housing. We need to breathe in open space. Please >hear us!!!!! We need to be heard and represented. > >SLOW GROWTH, PLEASE. NO ON NORTH VALENCIA 2 PROJECT. >I would come to the city council meeting, however I work on Tuesday evenings. >Thank you for your ears and support! >Gail Eisenberg >GailEisenberg >gail@scvnet.com OCT -26-1999 0?:18 FROM CHATSWORTH H S TO 16612598125 CHATS WORTH HIGH FAX (818)709-6952 TF -L. NO. (818) 341-6211 P. 01/02 SCHOOL 's FROM CHATSWORTH H S TO 16612598125 CHATS WORTH HIGH FAX (818)709-6952 TF -L. NO. (818) 341-6211 P. 01/02 SCHOOL OCT -26-1999 07:18 FROM CHRTSWORTH H S Mayor Joanne Darcy Santa Clarita City Hall 23920 Valencia Blvd. Santa Clarita, CA 91355 TO 16612598125 P.02i02 Marlene E. Kasahara 26723 Mocha Dr. Santa Clarita, CA 91350 Dear Mayor Darcy, October 25, 1999 In 1992, 1 purchased an older home in one of the oldest housing tracks in Santa Clarita. Since then I've been more than just a little surprised and Increasingly alarmed at the rapid rate of growth in this valley. What was.once clusters of small, friendly neighborhoods surrounded by gentle rolling hills, dotted with oaks and creased with cottonwoods is doing a vanishing act. It as If growth and development took on a mind of Its own and Is now In control of the communities leaving its citizens to stand and watch its dizzying dance as more of this particular natural environment Is forever changed. This may be all well and Good for develanera and raalrnrc_ but i niioctann whn+ +hie 4. . Lotus cc:Mail for Sharon Dawson Date: 10/25/99 12:39 PM Sender: carol22@yahoo.com (Temporarily Insane) To: Sharon Dawson; lweste@santa-clarita.com; fferry@santa-clarita.com; Csarro@santa-clarita.com; jeidt@santa-clarita.com; JKlajic@santa-clarfta.com; LStotler@santa-clarita.com Priority: Normal Subiect:No more construction --Valencia 2 Dear City Council, I am fairly new to the city of Santa Clarita and I am very happy with my move to this valley. I purchased a home that was built 15 years ago. I have always loved this community because it had a good plan. I am, however, extremely concerned about the direction that this valleyeEs management is turning. I came from the San Fernando Valley, where overcrowding and congestion were unbearable. I figured that this community would give me a better quality of life. However, with the incredible amount of building that is going on at all points of this valley, I wonder how long it will take to mirror the situation in the SFV. I donlEt want to be one of those people who want to turn off--Eh-e-g-r-o-w-t-h-o-n-c-e--f have arrived. However, urban sprawl -is 6 --serious matter for all cities. Communities must be cognizant of controlled growth for. the sake of our environment. Lancaster and Palmdale had a similar building boom in the 1980s, and now they COPIES TO GTT COUNCIL, WY MANAGER, Ciff CLERK 10- 15-99 Lotus cc:Mail for Sharon Dawson We are already sorely in need of schools,'roads, open space, and water. Our future is in your hands. Sincerely, Carol Clark Concerned Resident Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at htto://auctions,vahoo.com Lotus cc:Mail for Sharon Dawson Date: 10/25/99 8:05 AM Sender: gail@scvnet.com (Gail Eisenberg) To: Sharon Dawson Priority: Normal Subject:No on North Valencia 2 project I write this letter because I am concerned about the North Valencia 2 project. The over crowding of this project, the water issue, the roads, the schools. We need the open space. We don't need to be over populated. I believe in slow growth!! I believe in responsible growth!!! Our TRAFFIC is already a problem!! Please think of the whole picture. We don't need our community to look like the San .Fernando Valley. Crowded and crime ridden. Please lets leave our valley a place of warmth and charm and responsible government!! I would come to the meeting on Tuesday however I need to work!! Sincerely Gail Eisenberg Resident of Santa Clarita for over 25 years Gail Eisenberg gail@scvnet.com COPIES TO CITY COUNCIL, GTT MANAGER, CITY CLERK Friends of the Santa Clara River 660 Randy Drive, Newbury Park, California 91320-3036 • (805) 4984323 October 28, 1999 Mayor 7o Anne Darcy. and Santa Clarita City Council I COPIES TO CITY COUNCIL, City of Santa Clarita CITY bIANACER, C177 CLERK Board of Directors 23920 Valencia Blvd. Santa Clarita, CA 91355 irate Ron Bottorff - Chair Barbara Wampole Re: North Valencia 2 Project Vice -Chair Lynne Plambeck. Treasurer Dear Mayor Darcy and City Council Members, Affiliated This letter is follow-on to our FAX to the City. Council of October 25, 1999. Friends of the Santa Clara River is extremely concerned about the cumulative Organizations impacts of growth alongSan Francisquito Creek. North Valencia 2 adds another 1,900 units to existing development with Northbridge and Northpark also in the California Native hopper. Each additional project furthers the fragmentation and degradation of the Plant Society L.AJsanta Monica creek and its associated riparian habitat, with the heavy irony that this creek is one committed water supply. The Santa Clara River alluvial aquifer is already in overdraft. Adequate water for 6,000 additional units along San Francisquito Creek is a highly doubtful proposition without further state water. the EIR states that water entitlement is in place, BUT entitlement is NOT supply, since it is well established that state water delivery is only 50 % reliable. Solutions for water transfer and storage must be identified before farther state water imports are implemented. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Ron Bottorff, Chair Enc. From: Ron Bottorff To: Joanne darcy Date: 10/25/99 Time: 16:04:21 Page 1 of 1 PLEASE COPY TO ALL CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS October 25, 1999 To: Mayor Joanne Darcy City of Santa Clarita From: Ron Bottorff, Chair Friends of the Santa Clara River 660 Randy Drive Newbury Park, CA 91320 Re: North Valencia 2 Project COPIES TO CITY COUNCIL, CITY -CITY CLERK J � Yate Friends of the Santa Clara River is extremely concerned about the cumulative impacts of growth along San Francisquito Creek. North Valencia 2 adds another 1,900 units to existing development with Northbridge and Northpark also in the hopper. Each additional project furthers the fragmentation and degradation of the creek and its associated riparian habitat, with the heavy irony that this creek is one of Los Angeles County's Significant Ecological Areas! This is not the way to treat an SEA. Date: 10/25/991:02 PM Sender: sstola@dwp.ci.la.ca.us To: Carmen Sarro Prioritv: Normal rth Valencia 2 Pi Darcey..I am COPIES TO CITY COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER, CITY CLERK 0�/ n Date — w/you oppose or drastically reduce development of North Valencia 2 Project due to the overcrowding, lack of water, traffic, air quality, and the preservation of open public land use., parks, and recreational use trails to this valley. We have enough development already. Our schools are so overcrowded and there is nothing but building, building, and building going on..it is overwhelming, unnecessary, and will reduce the quality of life (it already has due to overcrowding) that we have at present. Please consider this opposition from many of us in and around Stevenson Ranch, Plum Cyn, Bouquet Cyn, San Francisquito Cyn, Green Valley, Leona Valley, and Newhall.. :i copics To carr couNCIL, CITY MANAGER, CITY CLERK Date: 10/25/99 9:58 AM Sender: gail*scvnet.com (Gail Eisenberg) To: Carmen Sarro Priority: Normal Subject: No on North Valancia 2 project >Dear Mayor Darcy >I am opposed to the North Valencia 2 project for many reasons. Water, >roads, schools, to much TRAFFIC already, it should have a lower population >denisty. I am for slow growth. I am also feel we need space. I don't >want our valley to turn into the San Fernando Valley. Where any open space >is quickly turned into housing. We need to breathe in open space. Please >hear us!!!!! We need to be heard and represented. >SLOW GROWTH, PLEASE. NO ON NORTH VALENCIA 2 PROJECT. >I would come to the city council meeting, however I work on Tuesday evenings. > >Thank you for your ears and support! >Gail Eisenberg > >Gail Eisenberg >gail@scvnet.com OCT -26-1999 07:18 FROM CHATSWORTH H S TO 16612598125 CHATS WORTH HIGH FAX ($18)709-6952 TEL NO. (818) 841-6211 SCHOOL OCT -26-1999 07:19 FROM CHRTSWORTH H S Mayor Joanne Darcy Santa Clarita City Hall 23920 Valencia Blvd. Santa Clarita, CA 91355 TO 16612598125 P.02i02 Marlene E. Kasahara 26723 Mocha Dr. Santa Clarita, CA 91350 Dear Mayor Darcy, October 25, 1999 In 1992, 1 purchased an older home in one of the oldest housing tracks In Santa Clarita. Since then I've been more than just a little surprised and Increasingly alarmed at the rapid rate of growth in this valley. What was.once clusters of small, friendly neighborhoods surrounded by gentle rolling hills, dotted with oaks and creased with cottonwoods is doing a vanishing act. It Is as if growth and development took on a mind of Its own and Is now in control of the communities leaving its citizens to stand and watch its dizzying dance as more of this particular natural environment is forever changed. This may be all well and rood for develonera and raaltnec but i nnuctinn wknf fhie :, .,, Lotus cc:Mail for Sharon Dawson Date: 10/25/99 12:39 PM 7��/� Sender: carol22@yahoo.com (Temporarily Insane) To: Sharon Dawson; iweste@santa-clarita.com; fferry@santa-clarita.com; Csarro@santa-clarita.com; jeidt@santa-clarita.com; JKlajic@santa-clarita.com; LStotler@santa-clarita.com Priority: Normal Subiect:No more construction --Valencia 2 Dear City Council, I am fairly new to the city of Santa Clarita and I am very happy with my move to this valley. I purchased a home that was built 15 years ago. I have always loved this community because it had a good plan. I am, however, extremely concerned about the direction that this valleyAs management is turning. I came from the San Fernando Valley, where overcrowding and congestion were unbearable. I figured that this community would give me a better quality of life. However, with the incredible amount of building that is going on at all points of this valley, I wonder how long it will take to mirror the situation in the SFV. I doLzEt want to be one of those people who want to turn off e growth once have arrived. However, urban sprawl is a serious matter for all cities. Communities must be cognizant of controlled growth for the sake of our environment. Lancaster and Palmdale had a similar building boom in the 1980s, and now they COPIES rO CITY COUNCIL, CITY MAIIACER, Cl" CLERK 10-a5-99 Dade C-f•R• Lotus cc:Mail for Sharon Dawson We are already sorely in need of schools,'roads, open space, and water. Our future is in your hands. Sincerely, Carol Clark Concerned Resident Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at htto:.//auctions.vahoo.com Lotus cc:Mail for Sharon Dawson r Date: 10/25/99 8:05 AM Sender: gaii@scvnet.com (Gail Eisenberg) To: Sharon Dawson Priority: Normal Subiect:No on North Valencia 2 project I write this letter because I am concerned about the North Valencia 2 project. The over crowding of this project, the water issue, the roads, the schools. We need the open space. We don't need to be over populated. I believe in slow growth!! I believe in responsible growth!!! Our TRAFFIC is already -a problem!! Please think of the whole picture. We don't need our community to look like the San .Fernando Valley. Crowded andcrime ridden. Please lets leave our valley a place of warmth and charm and responsible government!! I would come to the meeting on Tuesday however I need to work!! Sincerely Gail Eisenberg Resident of Santa Clarita for over 25 years Gail Eisenberg gail@scvnet.com - comes rio CITY courcn. CITY M, IMAGE t, crrr c>T.eler Date: 10/28/99 7:25 AM Sender: Jeffrey Lambert To: Vince Bertoni Priority: Normal Subject:Fwd:Council mtg 10/26 Vince, I would suggest a quick e-mail to Sally telling her that these and many other questions will be answered as part of the 11/9 City council agenda report and hand out at the meeting. We can make .sure a copy of this is available for her on the 9th. Jeff Forward H Subject: Council mtg 10/26 Author: Jill Klajic Date: 10/27/99 10:15 PM Hi! Jeff, can you forwaed this to Vince, thanks, Jill Forward Header Subject: Council mtg 10/26 Author: sally.clark@csun.edu at INTERNET -MAIL Date: 10/27/99 4:12 PM How do I contact the city staff who gave the report on San Francisquito Canyon (Vince?)? I want to know the formula used to determine children per household. And who devised the formula? Is it a standard? Also, when is the school required to be built? Before or after the houses are completed? And to accommodate how many? Is it an elementary, secondary, or senior high school? And where do the other children go if it's only one of these? And where will it be built, anyway? That was pretty funny. If they put it on rollers they can move it from one location to another as suits their whim. And if a location is not safe enough for a school, should anything be there? Re the park: if it doesn't meet city standards, why would the city even consider accepting it? That seems to me an invitation. to put in other substandard parks in other areas. They only meet Quimby standards because of set aside private use land. How does restricting use benefit the rest of the community? Can it actually be shown that it eliminates impact on city properties? Or is this just more 3 -card monty? I was nearly weeping over the bounty of the developers. Good thing Ferry was there to point it out to us. Can we supply him with a violin for the next meeting? Just some of my thoughts and questions. It was instructive as usual. R E CEI En PLANNING DIVISIOI OCT 19 1999 PLANNING AND BUILDING SERV �q CITY OF SANTA CLARITA CEA ll 1CaR FOR protecting and restoring the west's oceans, deserts, rivers, forests, oceans, and wildlife VIA CERTIFIED MAIL: RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED October 12, 1999 TO: Laura Stotler City of Santa Clarita 29320 Valencia Blvd. Santa Clarita, Ca. 91355 Re: North Valencia II, State Clearinghouse #98-111201 - General Plan Amendment, Zone Change PLEASE COPY TO ALL COMMISSIONERS Dear Ms. Stotler: Center for Biological Diversity ("CBD" - formerly Southwest Center for Biological Diversity) is a non-profit organization whose mission is to conserve imperiled native species and their threatened habitat and to fulfill the continuing educational goals of its membership and the general public in the process. Because of our concern for the diminishing biodiversity of flora and fauna throughout the United States and especially in high growth areas such as the Santa Clarita Valley, we have decided to take an active roll in the land use approval process for West Creek Project #98-008. This 1900 unit project in San Francisquito Canyon will substantially degrade this watershed and impact the habitat of the Unarmored Three-spined Stickleback, ("UTS") a federally listed endangered species. 35 Fed. Reg. 16047. Degradation will occur due to the severe grading of hillsides (approximately 8 million cubic yards of earth will be moved) and intensifying run-off into the Santa Clara River. Urban run-off and increased flows will severely damage or destroy the habitat required to support this endangered species. The County Area Plan for the Santa Clarita Valley states that over -draft of ground water supply should not be allowed. Based on hydrological studies previously submitted into the record by the Sierra Club, this watershed cannot support the additional pumping by these wells. Therefore your Commission may not approve this project without an adequate source of imported water and California & Pacific Office P.O. Bos 40090 Berkeley, CA 94704-4090 (510) 841-0812 storage facilities for that water in case of drought. This supply and storage for it do not currently exist. This project is clearly inconsistent with the Area Plan and should not be approved. Impacts to surface flows and to upstream and downstream UTS habitat must be investigated and disclosed in the EIR. Pumping that diminishes or eliminates surface flows may constitute an illegal take of this endangered species. Hillside grading should also be substantially reduced before this project is allowed to go further. This will serve the dual propose of reducing run-off and reducing air pollution from fugitive dust which is estimated to be 8,700 pounds per day during grading. Failure to consider this project and the neighboring West Creek Project that is simultaneously naming through the County Planning process disguises the substantial cumulative impacts of these two projects. This division constitutes project segmentation specifically prohibited by the California Environmental Quality Act, and is therefore illegal. CBD has been actively seeking protection for the UTS and its habitat for some time. (See, e.g. Southwest Center v. Sprague, C-98-2434) and has recently filed a 60 day notice of intent to sue to establish critical habitat designations for the UTS (see attached). UTS Populations exist in San Francisquito Canyon and in the Santa Clara River downstream from this project. When critical habitat is established as required by law, it may affect entitlements currently in process. To avoid delays, we suggest that large buffer zones be established along the Creek and again, that the project not be approved without an adequate outside source of water. Since it is our understanding that such a source does not currently exist, we request that you delay or deny this project at this time. Thank -you for your consideration of these important issues. Sir}gerely, Peter Galvin enc: May 10, 1999 Notice of Intent to Sue the USFWS Brendan Cummings LAW OFFICES OF BRENDAN CUMMINGS 2325 Carleton St., Suite B Berkeley, 8- COPY PY (51.0) 848-5436 Facsimile: (510) 848-5499 :May 10, 1999 VIA CER11FIFD MAIL ET RN RFCEJPT REOi1F5TFD Bruce Babbitt Secretary of the Interior U.S. Department of the Interior 18' and C Streets, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20240 Jamie Clark, Director U,S. Fish and Wildlife Service 18'11 and C Streets, N. W. Washington, D.C. 20240 RE: Notice of Violation the Endangered Species Act; Failure to Finalize Critical Habitat for the Unarnoured Threespine Stickleback. Dear Mr. Babbitt and Ms. Clark, This letter serves as a sixty (60) day notice requirement on behalf of the. Center for Biological Diversity ("CBD") and Uie Southwest Center for Biological Diversity ("SWC") of intent to sue the United States Fish and Wildlife Service ("FWS") for violations of the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1.544 ("ESA"). The FWS has failed to designate critical. habitat for the unarmoured threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculealus wilhamsoni) as required by Section 4 of the ESA. The failure to issue the final rule is arbitrary, capricious, and in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. §706. This letter is provided pursuant to the 60 day notice requirement of the citizen suit provision of the ESA, to the extent such notice is deemed necessary by a court. 16 U.S.C. §1540(g). The reasons for this letter are set out more fully below. On October 13, 1970, the unarmoured threespine stickleback was listed as endangered under the ESA. 35 FR 16047, On. November 17, 1980, the FWS proposed critical habitat for the unarmoured threespine stickleback. 45 FR. 76012. Section 4(b)(6)(A) of the ESA requires the Secretary to publish in the Federal. Register a final. rule either implementing the critical habitat designation or extending the time period for consideration within one-year of the date of the proposed rule. 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(6)(A)(ii). The Secretary of Interior and the FWS are in violation of the ESA for failure to take final action within the one year statutory deadline for the proposed critical habitat designation FWS' failure to comply with. the ESA's deadlines has deprived this species of statutorily -mandated protection vitally necessary for its survival. This species is threatened with extinction, and occurs only in two southern California counties. The proposed rule designated three stream zones in Upper Santa Clara River watershed in northwestern 'Los Angeles county, and the .lower segment of the San. Antonio Creek on Vanderberg Air Force Military Reservation in Santa Barbara county as critical habitat. 45 FR 76012, 76014. The proposed rule further identified at least six activities that could adversely modify such critical habitat. These include (])stream channelization, (2)increased urbanization, (3)increased groundwater pumping, (4)increased agricultural. impacts, (5)the addition of water to the streams, depending upon the amount, and (6)the introduction of predators. 45 FR 76012, 7601.3. FWS' prompt compliance with the ESA's one-year deadline is necessary to protect the species and to fulfill the intent of Congress. Any further delay by the FWS frustrates the intent of the ESA, because extirpation of this species is likely. The members of the SWC are vitally concerned about and actively involved in the protection of the unarmoured threespine stickleback and its habitat. There are SWC members that reside near and engage in recreational, aesthetic and scientific activities involving this species in southern California where it is found. On behalf of these adversely affected members I urge you to take prompt action to finalize critical habitat as required by, the ESA. If the FWS does not act within sixty days to correct the above violations, the CBC and SWC plan to pursue legal action. An appropriate remedy would be to immediately issue a final rule designating critical habitat for the unarmoured threespine stickleback. If you have any questions, or'%vould like to discuss this matter further, please contact me at (510) 848-5486. Sincerely Brendan Cummings Attorney at Law 2 October 12, 1999 To: Ms. Ellen Fitzgerald Project #98-008 Department of Regional Planning 320 W. Temple Street Los Angeles, CA 90012 and Ms. Laura Stotler North Valencia II Annexation Community Development City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Boulevard Santa Clarita, CA 91355 From: Peter J. Saputo 24841-A Apple St. Newhall, CA 91321 RE: San Francisquito Development Project To All Interested Parties: R E C E 9 V EjD PLANNING DIVISION OCT 13 1999 'TANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES CRY OF SANTA CLARITA I am writing this letter. in adamant protest to the proposal now being considered for the San Francisquito Canyon area. An addition of four thousand four hundred MORE housing units in this area?? This is a disaster for the entire Santa Clarita Valley. Water is already an environmental issue for the entire state of California. We are further up to our ears in legal battles with the citizens of both Santa Clarita and Ventura County over this very issue. Traffic and noise pollution is endemic to this county and fast becoming the norm for our beautiful city. Air pollution is terrible now and will only get worse. You cannot just keep adding housing units to a community already bursting at the seams. There already is a critical lack of roadways, of schools, of police and fire facilities and personnel, and of open and free green areas. It will irreparably damage the full environmental spectrum of life, flora and fauna, in this area. This entire area is already being woefully overdeveloped. Those of us who live here are already up in arms about the direction the city planning is taking. An undertaking of a project of this size, which can only contribute to the further deterioration of our community is unthinkable. cerely, Peter J.ial�to --- ��yOrr/ uo /{4� W F. or- _ eel� Tim -cam ea L (f x45! TTI � / N l C�CC-'CE l 71s 0/4/ s��T v moo.'" •?J l�.Q�u/�C -,s Wig- 6U`F 19-1Z 7XASVIVG out p L 7�in F Lia.. _erwA1644.c s 7- ,�S au 71 .__70 P u 7 ALL 7 COW E )025<04 Z of dL ids CP<) C'ry /7// Gl / V AVIA Cl�IL.g 7- 7 sem_ _z4w 7 /A/ ox- sGoyv<!T _-�c7w�l - G�%c-GE ,SCC 1 T is C��-r2��E �oe/1�c mom ec-5 rA ��s �"i E _ _moo 5 77�Vd �� r Sep -29-99 11:01A Dear SCV Planning Commission: As a long time resident of SCV; as a father, and as one of those you claim to represent, I ask you to consider the following: Our schools are overcrowded and the smog and traffic are both getting worse. I have a child who attends school in Santa Clarita. There are health issues being investigated relating to the mobile and temporary classrooms. These units are being used because our schools cannot support the increasing population. This will only be worsened by a massive increase in construction. The pace of growth in this valley is sky-high. Please do not approve additional construction in the San Francisquito Canyon. We need a time to slow down and take a look at the problems in the valley. Finally, any decisions made by the commission should be made with as much awareness in the community as possible. This should be your goal if your intent is to serve the community. Especially decisions such as this one concerning 1,900 units currently under consideration. If these meetings are not televised, your integrity cannot fail to be questioned. The people whom you claim to serve have a voice in this and you should be listening. Slow it down. Our community needs time to adapt itself to the growth already in progress. The beauty of Santa Clarita is being choked by this unchecked growth. Progress can be a positive action, but unchecked it could destroy the very reason people moved here in the first place. Deny approval for the new construction. Santa Clarita deserves your support. You should be thinking of SCV's children, its environmental health, and the quality of life of the people living here, not your wallets. And please do not leave our valley in the hands of those.who would decimate it in favor of financial gain. Sincerely, Warren George To: FAX #(661)259-8125 P. 01 FROM : COEN/LOVELRND PHONE NO. : 818780 3704 Sep. 29 1999 10:22RM P1 VICTORLA LOVELAND-COEN cx; September 29, 1999 Dear SCV Planning Commission: Our schools are overcrowded and the smog and traffic are both getting worse. The pace of growth in this valley is unchecked; Please do not approve additional construction in the San Francisquito Canyon. we need a time to slow down and take a look at the problems in our valley. Finally, any decisions made by the commission should be made with as much awareness in the community as possible. This should be your goal if your intent is to serve the community. Especially decisions such as this one concerning 1,900 units currently under consideration. These meetings ought to be televised. The citizens of this community must know if you are serving them or special interest. Slow it down. Deny approval for the new construction. Sincerely, 16 Victoria Loveland -Coen 26510.S7rambino Court Valencia... CA 91-35.5 661.288-1999 ISAAC LIEBERMAN 27517 Wei Isley Way Valencia, CA 91354 Tel: (661) 296-3940 e-maih Isaa0q csLcom Tuesday, September 28,1999 Dear SCV Planning Commission: Our schools are overcrowded and the smog and traffic are both getting worse. The pace of growth in this valley is sky-high. Please do not approve additional construction in the San Francisquito Canyon. We need a time to slow down and take a look at the problems in the valley. Finally, any decisions made by the commission should be made with as much awareness in the community as possible. This should be your goal if your intent is to serve the community. Especially decisions such as this one concerning 1,900 units currently under consideration. If these meetings are not televised, your integrity cannot fail to be questioned. Regardless of why they're not, it just smells bad. I personally asked 23 people, many of them strangers, if they were interested in signing a petition protesting the rapid pace of growth here and requesting . DENIALS of both the current city and county construction proposals in San Francisquito Canyon. All but one enthusiastically signed. That told me something loud and clear. Slow it down. Deny approval for the new construction. Thanks, Isaac Lieberman GAMY d.c Sep -28-99 12:37P LITTON R AND M 818 6787695 P_01 September 28, 1999 To: City of Santa Clarita Planning Commission From: Phil Hof, resident Subject: Tonight's meeting re: 1900 units in San Francisquito Canyon. Commissioners: am unable to attend tonight's meeting. I have also noted that due to the timing of this meeting, we residents will not be able to watch the proceedings on our local SCV-TV station tonight. This large project; so devastating to the canyon area, is apparently going to be approved without the public oversight that our usual open planning process affords us. am told that in fact this is not the first such meeting to be held away from the glare of the cameras, and therefore from the public—a public that will be so affected by the traffic, overcrowding, environmental degradation, and over-. extension of public services that this project will impose on us. I also note that none of the related documents, EIRs, staff reports, etc., are available on the City web site. This exclusion of the public, requiring the burden of taking time off work to appear and gather information, is not the kind of open planning and open government that this City was founded on. . I ask that you consider delaying the approval of this project until such time that meaningful public oversight and participation can be implemented. I am aware that all the proper rules have been followed, but this defeats the intent and spirit of out open meeting rules. Phil Hof, Valencia, CA (661) 296-1207 TEL No.2133672634 Sep 28,99 14:18 No.002 P.01 To the Ylann.iT'Tg Commission Re: 1900 Housing Units San f••rdru:isquito Cyn. 9/ r)W7 When wi1J enough be enough for all. this development, traffic, air quality, etc.? Can't this be downsized to perhaps 700 units? Why so much in so little of space? and then the 2,500 units also, and then al.l t.}ie oi.hor home developments here, there, everywhere? The trdffic:.is horrendous now and going out to get things is a real ordoill, Please rethink your position on the these units, etcnuTnber of :. Thanks for your time/consideration. Please also reptember that Gray Davis is signing juoney over to Santa ClariLa for parks and recreation and the preservation of public lard. Lets keep some land so we do have .a place to get away from it all and a place to hike, bicycle, and place for horseback riding, and mountain biking. Priends of San Francisqui.to Cyn, FROM $-1-99 FRX NO. : Sep. 2e 1999 01:44PM P2 PETITION We understand that developers are proposing 1900 more housing units in to the City and 2500 more housing writs to the County in San Francisquito Canyon. This is too much! Our schools are over -crowded and the roads will not .handle the traffic. We ask the City Council and the County to deny the approval for these projects. ADDRESS RETURN PETITIONS TO: SCOPE, PO BOX 1182, SANTA CLA.RITA, 91386 *PLEASE RE'T'URN PETITIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE* S& FROM : FAX NO. : Sep. 28 1999 01:44PM P3 8-1-99 PETITION We understand that developers are proposing 1900 more housing units in to the City and 2500 more housing units to the County in San Francisquito Canyon. This is- too much! Our schools are over -crowded and the roads will not handle the traffic. We ask the City Council and the County to deny the approval for these projects. NAME ADDRESS PHONE# AMA 1=1010.1 _R/ RETURN PETITIONS TO: SCOPE, PO BOX 1182, SANTA CLARITA, 91386 *PLEASE RETURN PETITIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE* FROM : 117,02 8-1-99 PETITTION Sep. 28 1999 01:45PM P4 We understand that developers are proposing 1900 more housing units in to the City and 2500 more housing units to the County in San Francisquito Canyon, This is too much! Our schools are over -crowded and the roads will not handle the traffic. We ask the City Council and the County to deny the approval for these projects. NAME ADDRESS ..1 1R. , .-... J 7i 340-x7U .94 �yK� nim 092& 727# Sr W. [4:0u4 Y4ice, 52,4 F 66l -»o -o87 - GY6- f , 2 1,551 JC-? i zW-zx�e- '00Ar3d/ .i AA /J -N. 1 i )A(n anOLf4 1 >> •, ..-ao URN PETITIONS TO: SCOPE, PO BOX 1182, SANTA CLARYTA, 91386 4 *PLEASE RETURN PETITIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE* FROM FRX NO. : 8-1-99 Sep. 28 1999 01:45PM PS PETITION We understand that developers are proposing 1900 more housing units in to the City and 2500'more housing units to the County in San Francisquito Canyon. This is too much! Our schools are over -crowded and the roads will not handle the traffic. We' ask the City Council and the County to deny the approval for these projects. �ar ff=�,m b/ J,S 1I 7/ ite -Q;,_ -) a - 7 owl Fm a�-;27o 77,1 )/7, T•I WIN EAKAW.01 0A WWWR �2�70011P-SIVVAMW.Ve 004 RETURN PETITIONS TO: SCOPE, PO BOX 1182, SANTA CLARITA, 91386 *PLEASE RETURN PETITIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE* nom JhPrrne 1fvl % FROM FRX NO. Sep. 28 1999 01:46PM P6 8-1-99 �TrN:-jjleh F(Prct� ,cies C�.rt'e P"c ",JL 077 8` PETITION We understand that developers are proposing 1900 more housing units in to the City and 2500 more housing units to the County in San Francisquito Canyon. This is too much! Our schools are over -crowded and the roads will not handle the traffic. We ask the City Council and the County to deny the approval for these projects. S. .... AC. I U'u D k' I tii�,riddi9lliPH�% asp-�8=�`�. f11=f y a _ -c3 a-.- RETURN PETITIONS TO: SCOPE, PO BOX 1182, SANTA CLARITA, *PLEASE RETURN PETITIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE* FROM : FAX NO. : Sep. 28 1999 01:46PM P7 PETITION We understand that developers are proposing 1900 more housing units in to the City and 2500 more housing units to the County in San Frandsquito Canyon. This is too much! Our schools are over -crowded and the roads will not handle the traffic. We ask the City Council and the County to deny the approval for these projects. NAME ADDRESS riv�wrmu RETURN PETITIONS TO: SCOPE, PO BOX 1182, SANTA CLARITA, 91386 *PLEASE RETURN PETITIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE* FROM : 8-1-99 FAX NO. Sep. 28 1999 01:47PM P8 PETITION We understand that developers are proposing 1900 more housing units in to the City and 2500 more housing units to the County in San Francisquito Canyon. This is too much! Our schools are over -crowded and the roads will not handle the traffic. We ask the City Council and the County to deny the approval for these projects. ADDRESS PHONE# RETURN PETITIONS TO: SCOPE, PO BOX 1182, SANTA CLARITA, 91356 *PLEASE RETURN PETITIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE* QNorth Valencia No. 2 Specific PlanDevelopment Standards 7.14 WATER WISE LANDSCAPING To promote low water use and improve plant survival rates, the following guidelines have been established to direct irrigation and planting techniques during North Valencia No. 2 Specific Plan implementation: ❖ Choose plants adapted to existing on-site climatic conditions. Use of native species and drought tolerant species is encouraged. ❖ Locate plants with similar water requirements together and consider their total cultivation needs in their placement. ❖ Use irrigation systems with the latest technology to ensure system efficiency (LMD and HOA irrigated areas shall follow City Standards). ❖ Utilize mulch to retain soil moisture. Use permeable paving material such as decomposed granite, where feasible, to allow the penetration of natural rainfall into the soil (i.e., common areas). Limit lawn areas. Place turf areas prudently where needed for sports activities, exercising and sitting areas. •S Design grading to minimize runoff. ❖ At least one model home for each development project shall be landscaped with water wise, drought tolerant plant materials. ❖ All oak tree habitats shall be planted in accordance with the Unified Development Code and the Standards in Section 7.10. ❖ All Upland Preserve Areas shall be revegetated in accordance with the concept outlined in Section 6.6 and approved by the Project Biologist. :• Fuel modification zones shall be implemented to the standards of the Los Angeles County Fire Department. October 1999 Page 7-39 V N on 4� M t 0 C P= V STUDENT GENERATION RATE AND CLASSROOMS NEEDED The number of additional students that may be generated by any given development project is determined by the number and type of residential units to be developed. The project and Option B include 1,400 single family units and 500 multi -family units. These units would be served by the Saugus District for elementary school services and the Hart District for junior high and high school services. b Student Generation Rates The number of students that would be generated by each new housing unit is referred to as the "student generation rate." Student generation rates are largely calculated by categorizing the existing number of students within the particular school district by the type of home in which they live (single family, multi -family, and apartment), and then dividing the total number of students in each category by the total number of homes of each type. Student generation rates per housing type for the Saugus District and Hart District are provided in Table 4.131, Student Generation Rates. Table 4.13-1 Student Generation Rates I Agreed upon by the Saugus thio School District and The Newhall land and Farming Company for planning purposes. 2Davis Demographics and Planning (December 12, 1995). These represent actual student ggmenen tion rata and are from the October 1998 School Facilities Funding Agreement SMwan The Newhall Land and Farming Company and the Hart District. c Total Number of Additional Students and Needed Classrooms Based on the number and type of housing units to be generated by the project and the student generation rate for each type of housing unit, the project would generate a total of 567 elementary students, 156 Junior high school students and 271 senior high school students. Based on each district's standard for classroom size (30 students for elementary schools and 32 students for high schools), the project would generate the need for 18.9 additional elementary school classrooms, 4.9 additional junior high school classrooms, and 8.5 additional senior high school classrooms. These facilities would be provided under the School Facilities Funding Agreements (discussed above) such that no -direct or cumulative project impacts to either the Saugus District or the Hart District would occur. From North Valencia DEIR pages 4.13-4 and 4.13-5 NOTICE OF CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF SANTA CLARITA CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita, at its regular meeting held November 9, 1999, continued a public hearing on 17, NORTH VALENCIA NO.2 SPECIFIC PLAN AND ANNEXATION (MASTER CASE NOS. 98.1839 99-055), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 98-002, ANNEXATION NO. 98-02, SPECIFIC PLAN (PREZONE) 98.003, ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 98-001, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (VTTM) 44831 OPTION A, VTTM 44831 OPTION B, VTTM 52667, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-006, OAK TREE PERMIT 98.020, HII.LSIDE REVIEW 99-002, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH#98111201— Continued public hearing to consider approval of the North Valencia No. 2 Specific Plan and North Valencia 2 annexation and related entitleinents. The 596 -acre project is generally located north of Newhall Ranch Road, south of Decoro Drive and Copper Hill Drive, west of McBean Parkway, and east of Copper Hill Drive. to November 23, 1999. The continued public hearing will be held at or after 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber at 23920 Valencia Blvd., Santa Clarita, California. Dated this 16th day of November, 1999. ./". SHARON L. DAWSON, CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ) SHARON L. DAWSON, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that she is the duly appointed and qualified City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita and that on November 16, 1999, she caused the above notice to be posted at the door of the Council Chamber located at 23920 Valencia Blvd., Santa Clarita, California. V �';? SHARON L. DAWSON, CITY CLERK Santa Clarita, California -contph