Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-03-27 - AGENDA REPORTS - GV RANCH (2)CITY OF SANTA CLARITA AGENDA REPORT City Manager App rov Item to be present y: Lisa Hardy PUBLIC HEARING DATE: March 27, 2001 SUBJECT: GOLDEN VALLEY RANCH DEVELOPMENT PROJECT MASTER CASE NO. 97-212, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97-003, PREZONE 97-001, ANNEXATION NO. 97-001, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 52414, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-017, OAK TREE PERMIT 97-024, HILLSIDE REVIEW NO. 97-022, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH# 97121037 DEPARTMENT: Planning and Building Services RECOMMENDED ACTION Receive staff presentation, applicant presentation, open the public hearing, receive public testimony, close the public participation portion of the public hearing, provide direction to staff for the selection of a project alternative (if any), and continue the item to April 24, 2001. BACKGROUND Purpose of Meeting The purpose of this meeting is to have staff and the environmental consultant introduce the Golden Valley Ranch development project, the requested entitlements and associated environmental impacts. PacSun, LLC, the project applicant, will also make a presentation to the City Council, highlighting the project components and benefits. This meeting would also provide an opportunity for Council to receive public testimony and allow for Council discussion and deliberation. Staff is seeking direction from Council regarding the requested entitlements and the selection of a project alternative so that staff can prepare the appropriate resolutions and ordinance for formal Council action. Staff recommends that the public hearing be closed and the item continued to the April 24, 2001, City Council meeting. The adoption of the resolutions and first reading of the ordinance would occur on April 24, 2001 with the ordinance second reading and adoption following on May 8, 2001. P r-�rr� Agenda Item: /S pC`z"A;t ' / Project Location & history The Golden Valley Ranch project area is located on 1,259 vacant and uninhabited acres in the Santa Clarita Valley, in unincorporated Los Angeles County. The site is situated east of and adjacent to the City of Santa Clarita. State Route 14 (Antelope Valley Freeway) borders the northwestern edge of the site. Placerita Canyon Road primarily runs along the site's southern edge. The Angeles National Forest is primarily east and south of the site. Placerita Canyon State Park, located within the forest, is south of the site. The Disney Company's Golden Oak Ranch is also located immediately south of the site along the north side of Placenta Canyon Road. The 1,800 -unit Fair Oaks Ranch development (Pardee), currently under construction, is located immediately north of the project site. The Canyon Country community is located to the north and the Sand Canyon community is located to the east. Two development projects were previously proposed for the 1,259 -acre project site: one submittal to the County of Los Angeles and one to the City of Santa Clarita. The "Santa Fe" development proposed by the property's previous owners included 1,979 dwelling units, a 100 -acre regional shopping complex, a golf course, schools, a fire station, and a park and open space and was originally submitted to the County of Los Angeles in 1986. In 1989, the County suspended processing of General Plan amendments in the Santa Clarita Valley and, as such, no action was taken on this proposal. In December 1989, the Santa Fe Development Corporation made an application to the City of Santa Clarita. As part of this application, the number of dwelling units proposed was reduced to 1,888. This second proposal included up to 2.4 million square feet of regional commercial uses, an 18 -hole golf course, and approximately 522 acres of open space. While the City's Planning Commission ultimately certified the EIR for this application, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council deny the project and the property was ultimately foreclosed on prior to Council action. Current Entitlement Process On November 6, 1997, PacSun LLC, the current applicant, submitted Master Case No. 97-212, requesting approval to construct 866 single-family detached units and approximately 50 net acres of commercial on 1,259 acres. Originally, the applicant was proposing to cluster development within three natural "bowls" on-site, while locating the 610,930 square foot commercial development along the Antelope Valley Freeway corridor. As part of this project, Golden Valley Road was proposed to be extended through the project site as a secondary highway from SR -14 to Placenta Canyon Road, connecting the three residential clusters. A 10.6 -acre elementary school site and a 9.9 -acre park site were proposed in the Cluster 3 area, northeast of the Placerita Canyon Road/Golden Valley Road intersection. Approximately 66 percent of the site (865 acres) was proposed to be left as open space with a series of hiking, biking, and equestrian trails. Project implementation would require 545 acres to be graded totaling 13,482,000 cubic yards of earthen material. Entitlement requests included an annexation to the City of Santa Clarita, an annexation/prezone, General Plan amendment, tentative tract map, a conditional use permit, hillside review, and an oak tree permit. As part of the environmental review process for this project, the City of Santa Clarita completed and circulated a Draft Environmental Impact Report from August 9, 1999 to September 22, 1999. During the Planning Commission hearing process, a number of issues were identified regarding traffic and circulation, risk to upset/human health and safety, and geology. In addition, several alternatives (beyond those included in the Draft EIR) to the proposed project were developed and recommended for further environmental analysis. This warranted preparation and circulation of a Revised Draft EIR, which includes revisions to five sections of the original Draft EIR. The Revised Draft EIR was recirculated for a 45 -day review and comment period from November 27, 2000 to January 10, 2001. Planning Commission Process & Recommendations The Planning Commission held nine public hearings on the proposed project which involved several discussions of the environmental impacts, project design, land use density, and other requested entitlements (oak tree permits, hillside grading, General Plan amendment and tentative tract maps). The primary concerns expressed by the Planning Commission included: the density of the development; on-site geologic -related hazards; increased traffic along Placerita Canyon Road; the extension of Golden Valley Road to Placenta Canyon Road; preservation of on-site biological resources, including the wildlife corridor; the protection of oak trees; and the economic viability of the proposed commercial development and potential economic impacts to existing Canyon Country businesses. In response to community concerns and direction from the Planning Commission, the applicant proposed Alternative 5B as their preferred project alternative. Alternative 5B, Modified Project Design, eliminates several components of the original project including Cluster 2, the Golden Valley Road extension between Via Princessa and Placerita Canyon Road, and Cluster 3, including the school and park sites. Therefore, residential development would occur only within the Cluster 1 area. This alternative would include development of 392 single-family detached units and 242 townhomes in Cluster 1. The total number of units would not exceed 634 units. The commercial portion of the project would remain, as originally proposed, totaling 610,930 square feet. In addition, a 15 -gross -acre park site and a fire station site were added to the Cluster 1 development plan. Due to the elimination of Cluster 2, Cluster 3, and the roadway extension, the acreage of natural open space would increase to 974 acres. Alternative 5B would require an additional entitlement — an amendment to the City of Santa Clarita General Plan Circulation Element for the removal of the Golden Valley Road connection between Via Princessa and Placerita Canyon Road. On July 5, 2000, with direction from the Commission, staff presented five resolutions to the Planning Commission in support of Alternative 5B. Although the Commission expressed preliminary preference for Alternative 5B, the Commission was divided as to which alternative should be recommended for further consideration by the Council. For this reason, one resolution was denied and two resolutions resulted in a no action (2-2-1 split). The Commission made three recommendations to the City Council. These are as follows: 1. The Commission voted 3-1-1 to recommend certification of the Final EIR SCH No. 97121037and adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations, prepared for the Golden Valley Ranch project and related entitlements. 2. The Commission voted 4-0-1 to recommend that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment No. 97-003 'B", an amendment to the Circulation Element text and Master Plan of Highway & Roadway System Map to allow for the elimination of the Golden Valley Road link between Via Princessa and Placenta Canyon Road. 3. The Commission voted 3-1-1 to recommend that the City Council deny Prezone 97-001 for the Golden Valley Ranch annexation area (Annexation 1997-001). The Commission was split with a 2-2-1 vote on the following two staff recommendations, resulting in a "no action" on the part of the Commission. The recommendations are as follows: 1. Adopt Resolution P00-24, recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment No. 97-003 "A", an amendment to the Land Use Element Land Use Map. 2. Adopt Resolution P00-27, recommending that the City Council approve Tentative Tract Map 52414, Oak Tree Permit 97-024, Conditional Use Permit 97-017, and Hillside Review 97-022. The commissioners who recommended denial of the above staff recommendations expressed concerns related to the appropriateness of the use of the site for commercial development and the density of the clustered residential development on property with a Residential Estate (RE) General Plan land use designation. Because the Commission gave unclear direction as to which project alternative the Council should consider, staff is requesting that the Council select a preferred project alternative (if any) for formal Council action. After the Council has identified a preferred project, staff will prepare the appropriate resolutions and ordinance that reflect Council's direction. Revised Project Description As previously stated, the applicant has reduced the scope of the original proposal and has identified Alternative 5B, Modified Project Design, as their preferred project alternative. This project alternative would allow development in the Cluster 1 area only, for a total of 634 units (392 single-family detached units and 242 townhomes) in Cluster 1. The total number of units would not exceed 634 units. The commercial portion of the project would remain, as originally proposed, totaling 610,930 square feet. Due to the elimination of Cluster 2, Cluster 3, and the roadway extension, the acreage of open space would increase to 974 acres. In addition, a fully -improved neighborhood park would be provided within Cluster 1 and a fire station site would be provided within the commercial area. The requested entitlements include the following: 1. A General Plan amendment (GPA 97-003 "A") was filed to change the current Residential Estate land use designation on the 1,259 -acre Golden Valley Ranch project site, as shown on the General Plan Land Use Map. The applicant requests that approximately 90 acres be changed to a Community Commercial (CC) land use designation and 1,169 acres be changed to a Residential Suburban (RS) land use designation. 2. A General Plan amendment was filed (GPA 97-003 "B") to modify the Circulation Element text and the Master Plan of Highway & Roadway System Map for the purpose of eliminating the Golden Valley Road link between Via Princessa and Placerita Canyon Road. 3. A Prezone request (PZ97-001) was filed to for the purpose of designating Residential Suburban (RS) zoning on 1,169 acres, and Community Commercial (CC) zoning on 90 acres, to allow for annexation of uninhabited land commonly known as Golden Valley Ranch Annexation (Annexation 1997- 001) to the City of Santa Clarita. 4. An Annexation request was filed with the City of Santa Clarita to annex all of the proposed 1,259 -acre Golden Valley Ranch prezone area; 5. Tentative Tract Map 52414 (Alternative 5B) was proposed to subdivide the subject site into the following: - 392 single-family residential parcels; - 11 multi -family parcels to accommodate 242 townhomes; - two commercial parcels; - one park site; - one water tank site; - one fire station site; and - numerous open space lots. 6.' A Conditional Use Permit was filed to allow grading activity over 100,000 cubic yards and for the clustering of residential development. The proposed clustered development is concentrated within a natural "bowl" in order to minimize the disruption to ridgelines and biological resources. 7. An Oak Tree Permit is requested to allow the removal of up to 23 live oak trees. The oak tree report indicates that the project would require the removal of three dead trees and 18 live oak trees within the graded area. An additional five oak trees located adjacent to the graded area may require removal. Of the 23 live oak trees, three are heritage oak trees. The 1.259 -acre project site contains 3,616 oak trees, of which 88 trees are heritage oaks. 8. A hillside review was filed to allow grading on slopes in excess of 10%. 9. The applicant has requested the review and certification of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for this project. Environmental Impact Report The City of Santa Clarita prepared an Initial Study for the project which determined that the project may have a significant effect on the environment and that an environmental impact report must be prepared. A Notice of Preparation (NOP) for this project was circulated for a 30 -day review period on December 10, 1997 to affected agencies. A scoping meeting attended by approximately 10 community members was held on March 9, 1998 to obtain information from the public as to issues that should be addressed in the environmental document. Subsequently, a Draft EIR was prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc. which analyzes 12 environmental issue areas raised through the NOP and scoping meeting process. The Draft EIR identified three environmental areas that would have significant impacts that could not be mitigated to a less -than -significant level. These are Air Quality (both construction and operations -related), Biology, and Aesthetics/Light and Glare. Eight environmental areas were identified where significant impacts would occur; however, mitigation measures have been recommended to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. These are Hydrology, Noise, Land Use/Population, Traffic, Public Services, Public Utilities, Hazards, and Cultural Resources. The draft environmental impact report (Draft EIR) was circulated for public comment from August 9, 1999 to September 22, 1999 (45 days). Late written comments received during the Planning Commission public hearings (through May 30, 2000) were accepted for inclusion in the Final EIR Response to Comments. The Planning Commission held 10 public hearings to discuss various sections of the Draft EIR and characteristics of the project. These public hearings included some focused presentations and discussions on a variety of topics such as geology, biological resources, land use compatibility, and traffic. During the Planning Commission hearing process, a number of issues were identified regarding traffic and circulation, risk to upset/human health and safety, and geology. In addition, several alternatives (beyond those included in the Draft EIR) to the proposed project were developed and recommended for further environmental analysis. This warranted preparation and circulation of a Revised Draft EIR, which includes revisions to five sections of the original Draft EIR. The Revised Draft EIR was recirculated for a 45 -day review and comment period from November 27, 2000 to January 10, 2001. On July 5, 2000, the Planning Commission recommended certification of the Final EIR and adoption of a statement of overriding considerations, following circulation of the Revised Draft EIR prior to City Council's consideration of the project. Circulation Element Amendment As previously stated, the project applicant reduced the project scope to respond the concerns of the community, state agencies and the Planning Commission. This involved the removal of the Golden Valley Road link between Via Princessa and Placerita Canyon Road, which is designated as a secondary highway. In addition, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council amend the Circulation Element to eliminate this roadway link. The City's Transportation and Engineering Services Department has conducted an analysis of the removal of this link from the City's circulation network. Their analysis found that removal of this roadway link would redistribute traffic to other roadway links within the area including Soledad Canyon Road, Sierra Highway, Lost Canyon Road, Sand Canyon Road and portions of Placenta Canyon Road. Though the traffic increases would be small and would not change the level of service (LOS) at General Plan buildout, they would add to a condition that is projected to be undesirable. A memorandum prepared by the City's Transportation & Engineering Services Department, which quantifies and summarizes the impacts to the City's circulation network, is attached. Dedication & Management of Open Space As part of the proposed project, the applicant is proposing to dedicate 974 acres to the City as permanent open space. This area would be used for passive recreation uses, transitioning to the Angeles National Forest and Placenta Canyon State Park facility to the south. There are a number of options before the City regarding the ownership, management and maintenance of this open space area. The City has identified four options for further consideration: 1) City retains ownership; 2) partial City ownership in joint powers agreement, 3) City dedicates land to another agency, 4) City retains ownership with HOA maintenance funds. A memorandum from Rick Putnam, Deputy City Manager, outlining the pros and cons of each option, is attached to this agenda report. School District Mitigation PacSun, LLC, the project applicant, has executed a School Facilities Funding and Mitigation Agreement with the Sulphur Springs Elementary School District, dated February 21, 2001, and the William S. Hart Union High School District dated January 17, 200,1 for the proposed 634 -unit Golden Valley Ranch development. FISCAL IMPACT Golden Valley Ranch Economic Analysis An economic analysis for the Golden Valley Ranch project was prepared by Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. in response to Commission concerns related to the commercial component and how this may affect existing commercial establishments along Soledad Canyon Road. Specifically, the analysis addresses the three following questions: 1) What is the market support for the 600,000 square foot commercial center over the 2000 to 2010 period? 2) What is the potential market impact on competitive retail businesses in the primary market area, primarily along Soledad Canyon Road within approximately three miles of the site? 3) What are the fiscal impacts to the City of Santa Clarita? In general, the analysis concluded that retail uses along Soledad Canyon Road would not be significantly affected by the Golden Valley Ranch commercial center because: grocery store sales are not anticipated at the proposed center; there is little head-to-head competition between Costco and some of the general merchandise tenants being considered for the proposed center; and other competitive uses in the market area, particularly those that are well located to the local population, are expected to remain viable. In addition, there is projected supportable demand of between 1,484,000 and 1,584,000 square feet of commercial space in the market area based upon the current and projected new households, business -to -business sales, and anticipated increases in household incomes over the next 10 years. The Executive Summary of the Golden Valley Ranch Economic Analysis is included as an attachment to this agenda report. A copy of the full document is available in the Council's reading file. Fiscal Impact Analysis The City of Santa Clarita Administrative Service's Finance Division has reviewed the Golden Valley Ranch Economic Analysis report and has completed an independent analysis of its own in order to better understand the fiscal impacts that this development will have on the City. The fiscal impact analysis shows that the project would yield a net positive impact to the City's General Fund ranging from $1.13 million to $1.16 million annually based on the buildout of 50 commercial acres and the 634 residential lot development plan. The development planned for the Golden Valley Ranch project is phased over a four-year period. The City calculations and the report's revenues show a positive net impact to the City after expenditures are considered. In evaluating the impacts, the City's projected revenues are slightly higher than the report's due to an assumption of more retail square footage. In addition, the City used a higher annual recurring costs amount, as stated in the economic analysis report, to evaluate the use of City services. However, even with the more conservative assumption used by the economic report, there still remains a net positive impact of up to $1.13 million at project buildout. The large amount of sales tax that this development will produce compared to the recurring cost makes the impacts of this development fiscally positive. ATTACHMENTS (included with Anda Report) 1. Memorandum dated January 8, 2001 from City of Santa Clarita Transportation & Engineering Services Department 2. Executive Summary, Golden Valley Ranch Economic Analysis, prepared by Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, December 2000 3. Memorandum from Steve Stark, Director of Administrative Services, dated March 21, 2001, regarding City's review of Golden Valley Ranch Economic Analysis 4. Memorandum from Rick Putnam, Deputy City Manager, to Jeff Lambert, Director of Planning & Building Services, dated March 20, 2001, regarding Golden Valley Ranch open space alternatives ATTACHMENTS (distributed separately) 1. Revised Tentative Tract Map 52414 — Alternative 5B 2. Draft EIR, July 1999 3. Revised Draft EIR, November 2000 4. Response to Comments on Draft EIR & Revised Draft EIR, February 2001 READING FILE 1. Planning Commission Resolutions 2. Golden Valley Ranch Economic Analysis, prepared by Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, December 2000 3. Planning Commission Staff Reports 4. Correspondence LMA S: \pbs\current\gvr\ccar97212a.doc CITY OF SANTA CLARITA NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE PROPOSED GOLDEN VALLEY RANCH PROJECT - MASTER CASE NUMBER 97-212; GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97-003; PREZONE AND ANNEXATION 97-001; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 52414; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-017; OAK TREE PERMIT 97-024; HILLSIDE REVIEW 97-022 PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: A Public Hearing will be held before the City of Santa Clarita City Council regarding the proposed Golden Valley Ranch Project — Master Case No. 97-212 (General Plan Amendment 97-003, Prezone and Annexation No. 97-001, TTM 52414, CUP 97-017, OT? 97-024, HR 97-022). The project location is approximately 1,259 acres located in the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County adjacent to the City of Santa Clarita bounded on the south by Placerita Canyon Road and on the northwest by State Route 14. The. Project Applicant is PacSun,LLC. The proposed Golden Valley Ranch Project includes two large commercial pads (50 net acres), 392 single family detached residential lots, and 242 townhomes. A total of 634 units would be built on 178 acres. In addition a nine -acre (net) park site would be located at the eastern edge of Cluster 1 which transitions to the passive open space area totaling 974 acres. The extension of Golden Valley Road east of Via Princessa to Placenta Canyon Road would be eliminated, which requires a General Plan Amendment. Requested entitlements include an annexation, a General Plan Amendment, a prezone, Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 52414, a Hillside Review Permit, an Oak Tree Permit, and a Conditional Use Permit. For further information regarding this project, please contact the Department of Planning and Building Services, Project Planner — Lisa Hardy — (661) 255-4330. The hearing will be held by the Santa Clarita City Council in the City Hall Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Blvd., 1st Floor, on the 27th day of March, 2001, at or after 6:00 p.m. Proponents, opponents, and any interested persons may appear and be heard on this matter at that time. If you wish to challenge the action taken on this matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council, at, or prior to, the public hearing. Dated: February 27, 2001 Sharon L. Dawson, CMC City Clerk Publish Date: March 2, 2001 Phgoldenval