Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-09-25 - AGENDA REPORTS - SC FIRST INITIATIVE (2)CITY OF SANTA CLARITA AGENDA REPORT City Manager Approval Item to be presented by: Vince Bertoni UNFINISHED BUSINESS DATE: September 25, 2001 SUBJECT: SANTA CLARITA FIRST INITIATIVE DEPARTMENT: City Council RECOMMENDATION 1. Council receive presentation from the Mayor's Committee on Managed Growth for a Quality Community. 2. Council take one of the following actions: A. Approve Councilmember Ferry's recommendation as follows. 1) Direct staff to hire an environmental consultant to begin the environmental review process on the "Santa Clarita First Initiative". Transfer $20,000.00 from City Council Contingency Account Number 1240-7401 to Account Number 3120-8110. 2) Direct City staff and the City Attorney to analyze "Santa Clarita First Initiative" and amend initiative language so it is compliant with applicable state law. If the Council approves Councilmember Ferry's recommendation, than an item will need to be placed on a future Council agenda prior to January 11, 2002, for the Council to adopt the environmental review and direct the City Clerk to place the initiative on the April 9, 2002, ballot. B. Do not take the above actions as recommended by Councilmember Ferry to place the Santa Clarita First Initiative on the April 9, 2002, ballot. BACKGROUND At the August 28, 2001, City Council meeting, Councilmember Ferry presented the Council with the Santa Clarita First Initiative. This initiative would limit the number of new residential units constructed over a ten-year period, starting in 2002, to a total of 3,000 units, with some exemptions to that growth cap. The entire initiative is attached for your reference. In order for the City Council to place an initiative on a ballot, the City must A(or kypp. wi, r Agenda Item :.a 0 prepare the appropriate environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This CEQA review must be approved by the City Council prior to the City Council placing the initiative on the ballot. Councilmember Ferry has requested that the initiative be placed on the April 9, 2002, ballot which has a January 11, 2002, deadline to be submitted to the City Clerk. At the August 28� meeting, Councilmember Ferry requested that the City Council take the appropriate actions to place the item on the April 9, 2002, ballot. The City Council did not take any action on August 28° and continued the item to the September 25, 2001, meeting in order to give the Mayor's Committee On Managed Growth For A Quality Community time to evaluate the initiative. On September 12, 2001, the Mayor's Committee on Managed Growth for a Quality Community held a special meeting to evaluate the merits of the proposed Santa Clarita First Initiative, pursuant to a request of the City Council. The 16 -member Committee is comprised of Santa Clarita Valley representatives who have worked together for over one year through an extensive, publicly -accessible educational process in an effort to understand the variables of growth and to develop well-informed, tangible strategies for long-range growth management. The Committee's work will culminate in a report to the City Council which seeks to provide action -oriented policies, and balanced strategies related to environmental protection, housing, infrastructure and public services. The attached letter from the Committee offers several thoughts on both the potential effectiveness of the proposed initiative, as well as how it may, or may not be consistent with other growth management efforts currently in process. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS No alternative actions have been identified. FISCAL IMPACT $20,000 from the Council Contingency fund to contract for environmental review of the initiative if the City Council approves Councilmember Ferry's recommendation. ATTACHMENTS 1. Santa Clarita First Initiative 2. Letter to Mayor Weste and City Councilmembers from the Mayor's Committee on Managed Growth for a Quality Community, dated September 18, 2001 3. Mayor's Committee Vision Statement 4. Mayor's Committee Member Roster 5. Listing of Growth Management Strategy Issue Areas GAC:JJL: VPB \ \CITYHALL2\DEPT\PBS\C0UNCIL\SC First InitiativeMoc "Santa Clarita First" Residential Development Control System (Sponsored by — Mayor Pro Tem Frank Ferry) Section 1-10.01 Findings — The People of the City of Santa Clarita hereby find and declare as follows: (a) The City of Santa Clarita has adopted a General Plan and City ordinances relating to the regulations of residential development; (b) The City of Santa Clarita is experiencing a period of intense residential development which is adversely affecting the capacity of the streets and local freeway system to meet traffic demands, the capacity of appropriate schools to absorb children, the semi -rural character of the community, and the quality of life prevalent in the Santa Clarita Valley; (c) It is the intent of the People of the City of Santa Clarita to achieve a steady, rather than a fluctuating, overly rapid, rate of residential growth in order that the services provided by City, school, park, and/or service agencies operating in the City can be properly and effectively staged in a manner which will not overextend existing facilities, and will minimize costs of facility expansion through long-range planning; (d) It is the intent of the People of Santa Clarita to establish control over the quality, distribution, and rate of growth of the City in the interest of: insuring adequate school capacity; *preserving the character of the community; *protecting the open space of the Santa Clarita Valley; *insuring the adequacy of City facilities, recreation and park facilities, and services; *insuring a balance of housing types and values in the City which will accommodate a variety of families, including families of moderate income and older families on limited, fixed incomes; *insuring balanced development in the City; * preventing further significant deterioration in the local air quality; *insuring that the traffic demands do not exceed the capacity of City streets; *insuring that the City does not grow in a pattern that places a severe strain on local freeway and street system, and *insuring the adequacy of fire and police protection; (e) It is the purpose of this ordinance to augment the policies of the City as recorded in the General Plan and City ordinances relating to the regulation of residential development; (f) That maintenance of clean and healthful air is essential to the community; therefore, adopting a residential growth -control system will allow the City time to find means to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the People of Santa Clarita; and (g) In order to accomplish the purposes of this title, the City must be able to control the rate, distribution, quality, and economic level of proposed development. To this end, the following residential development control system for the City shall be in effect from and after its effective date until December 31, 2012. 1-10.02 Applicability of the development control system — The provisions of the residential development control system shall apply from the effective date to all residential development in the City, with the exception of the following: (a) Projects of not more than twenty-five (25) residential dwellings, limited to only one such project per developer per calendar year, (b) Fourplexes or lesser numbered multiple dwellings on a single existing lot; (c) Single-family residential units on a single existing lot; (d) Rehabilitation, expansion, or remodeling of an existing dwelling, or conversion of apartments to condominiums, so long as no additional dwelling units are created; 2 (e) Housing developments found by the City Council, or body designated by the Council to make that finding, pursuant to Section 1-10.02.5 to be very low, low and/or moderate income or senior citizen dwelling unit projects, funded or subsidized pursuant to the provisions of applicable federal, state or local laws or program; (f) After December 31, 2002, that portion of developments for which a Development Agreement has been entered into with the City, which agreements provide a phasing plan for the maximum number of annual building permits to be issued on and after December 31, 2002. (g) Residential annexations approved by the City that do not involve the construction of new residential units. (h) Commercial, office, industrial, and institutional development; (i) On -campus student housing; and 0) Development projects approved by the City prior to December 31, 2002 Section 1-10.02.5 Low Income, moderate income, or senior citizen projects: Exemptions: Procedure. (a) Definitions. For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions are provided: (1) "Low Income" dwelling unit. A low income dwelling unit is a separate housing unit for rent or sale with a rental rate or consumer purchase cost which enables (after considering income to debt ratios of lenders with regards to "for sale" units) persons with a gross household income that exceeds fifty (50%) percent but does not exceed eighty (80%) percent of the Los Angeles County area median income as adjusted for family size, to rent or purchase that unit. (2) "Moderate income" dwelling unit. A moderate income dwelling unit is a separate housing unit for rent or sale with a rental rate or purchase cost which enables (after considering income to debt rations of lenders with regards to "for sale" units) persons, with gross household annual incomes that exceed eighty (80%) percent, but is less than one hundred twenty (120%) percent of the Los Angeles County area median income as adjusted for family size, to rent or purchase the unit. (3) "Median Income. " Median income shall be the last available HUD computation, or any substituted computation approved by the Council should that agency cease providing that data, for median family income for the County of Los Angeles area which shall be updated and adjusted by the City based upon City approved trending factors applied to those figures which reflect expected increased in incomes. (4) "Purchase cost. " The purchase cost shall be the monthly cost for the initial purchaser determined after considering the cumulative effect of the sales price, escrow fees, monthly homeowner association fees, property taxes, mortgages and homeowner premiums, mortgage (or deed of trust purchase loans) terms and interest rates, all other financing of the purchaser mortgage financing arrangement or program provided by the developer, and other similar fees determined by the City to be normally associated with a purchase of a dwelling unit. (5) "Subsidies and funding. " Subsidies or funding may be (1) waivers of City development standards producing related development cost savings to the project; (2) City fees reductions or waivers; (3) monies directly paid to the project by the City, Santa Clarita Redevelopment Agency or another government entity for the purpose of or under a program to provide or encourage low or moderate income housing; or (4) a deferred City 3 fee payment. The subsidies or funding savings are to be passed through to the buyers or renters of the units. Funding or subsidies include programs such as the federal Section 8 Rent Subsidies, Section 221 Below Market Rate and GNMA Mortgage Financing, Public Housing Construction Assistance, Section 202 Loans, Section 235 Homeowners Assistance Programs; State Housing Assistance funded programs; and such other programs as found acceptable by the Council in aiding or promoting in the construction or purchase of new very low, low, or moderate income dwelling units. (6) "Very low income" dwelling unit. A very low income dwelling unit is a separate housing unit for rent or sale with a rental rate or consumer purchase cost which enables (after considering income to debt rations of lenders with regards to "for sale" units) persons with a gross household income that does not exceed fifty (50%) percent of the median income as adjusted for family size, to rent or purchase that unit. (7) "Window period." The term "window period" refers to specific intervals during which residential projects seeking Development Allotments under this chapter shall be filed, as defined by Council resolution. (b) Procedure. Any governmental funded or subsidized proposed housing project designed exclusively for person of very low income, low income, moderate income, or for senior citizens, may file for City subdivision or project development approval outside of the window period if that project, the project costs, sales program, rental rates, purchase costs, and speculation controls are first reviewed and approved for a Section 1-10.02(E) affordable housing exemption by the Council pursuant to this section. The developer shall pay the applicable City processing fee and submit an affordable housing exemption application and all needed development cost and sales information to the City Community Development Department. From time to time, and consistent with housing goals of the Housing Element, the City Council shall survey the approved very low, low, and moderate income housing projects, assess community needs for ownership and rental units within those income ranges and set very low, low and/or moderate income housing goals (as to approved rental rates or purchase costs within those ranges). Each exemption request shall be reviewed and must be found to be consistent with those goals. For sale (non -rental) developments shall have or will have, at the time the affordable housing agreement is entered into, a mortgage loan financial commitment providing individual purchaser loans at Council approved interest rates, terms and loan fees. If City development standard subsidies are requested, the project shall be evaluated to determine (1) what City or Agency subsidies shall be granted, if any; (2) the resulting development cost reduction; and (3) the ultimate consumer rental or sales priced reduction to be imposed upon the project in consideration of the City or Agency subsidy. If found exempted, prior to requesting, and as a condition precedent to any building permit for the project, the developer shall enter into an affordable housing agreement with the City committing the development to the approved maximum dwelling unit purchase costs, rental rates (if any), a very low, low and moderate income sales preferential program and speculation controls. The council may adopt, by resolution or motion, further procedures, definitions, goals and rules for the implementation of this exemption and section. 4 Section 1-10.03 Establishment of Residential Development Evaluation Board — In order to administer the system set forth herein, and especially to make the valuations set forth in Section 1-10.06 of this chapter, a Residential Development Evaluation Board (hereafter called the Board) is hereby consistent of the duly appointed members of the Planning Commission of the City. The procedures and bylaws of the Board shall be developed by the Board subject to the approval of the City Council (hereafter called the Council). The Planning Department of the City shall serve as the staff of the board. Section 1-10.04 Establishment of annual residential development allotments — Except as provided in Section 1-10.02 (paragraphs (d) and (e)), Section 1-10.08 and this section, during the calendar years December 31, 2002 through December 31, 2012, the City shall award no more than three thousand (3000) total development allotments, each allotment authorizing construction of one residential dwelling unit, and for the following years to December 31, 2012, except as may be modified by this section. 1-10.05 Development allotment application — Development allotment applications shall be filed and processed during the window periods or other periods of time and in such manner as the City Council may authorize by resolution. A filing fee shall be charged in an amount sufficient to cover the City's costs of processing the application. No development allotment application shall be required for any project or dwelling unit which is exempt from the residential development control system pursuant to Section 1-10.02. Except for said exempted projects, no building permit or grading permit shall be issued, no building permit or development approval or other City entitlement shall be issued, and no final regular or vesting tract map shall be approved or recorded, for a dwelling unit or lot which is subject to the residential development control system until and unless a corresponding development allotment has been awarded by the City Council or Planning Commission. 1-10.06 Development allocation evaluation — The Board shall consider annually all applications properly submitted and shall make recommendations to the Council based on the criteria set forth below: (a) Availability of public facilities and service. The board shall examine each application for its relation to, or impact upon, local public facilities and services and shall rate each development at the assignment of from zero to ten (10) points (zero indicating a "very poor," ten (10) points indicating "excellent") on each of the following attributes: (1) The capacity of the water system to provide for the needs of the proposed development without system extensions beyond those normally installed by the developer. (2) The capacity of the sanitary sewers to dispose of the wastes of the proposed development without system extensions beyond those normally installed by the developer. (3) The capacity of the drainage facilities to adequately dispose of the surface runoff of the proposed development without system extensions beyond those normally installed by the developer. (4) The ability of the County Fire Department to provide fire protection according to the established response standards of the City without the necessity of establishing a new station or requiring additions of major equipment or housing facilities to an existing station. (5) The capacity of the appropriate school to absorb the children expected to inhabit a proposed development without necessitating or adding to double sessions or other unusual scheduling or classroom overcrowding. (6) The capacity of major street linkage to provide for the needs of the proposed development without substantially altering existing traffic patterns or overloading the existing street system, and the availability of other public facilities (such as parks, playgrounds, etc.) to meet the additional demands for vital public services without extensions of services beyond those provided by the developer. (7) The capacity of Highway 5 within the City limits to provide for the needs of the proposed development without substantially altering the freeway level of service. (8) The capacity of Highway 14 within the City limits to provide for the needs of the proposed development without substantially altering the freeway level of service. (9) The ability of the County/City Sheriff Department to provide police protection according to the established response standards of the City without the necessity of establishing a new station or requiring additions of major equipment or housing facilities to an existing station (b) Quality of design and contribution of public welfare and amenity. The Board shall examine each application which has not been withdrawn by the applicant for failure to meet criteria A, and shall rate each development by the assignment of from zero to ten (10) points (zero indicating "very poor," ten indicating "excellent") on each of the following attributes: (1) Site and architectural design quality which may be indicated by the harmony of the proposed buildings in terms of size, height, color, and location with existing neighboring development. (2) The amount and character of open -space and slope landscaping. (3) Site and architectural design quality which may be indicated by the arrangement of the site for efficiency of circulation, on and off-site traffic safety, privacy, etc. (4) The provision of pubic and/or private usable open space. (5) Contributions to and extensions of existing systems of foot or bicycle paths, equestrian trails and facilities, and/or greenbelts. (6) The provision of needed public facilities, such as critical linkages in the major street system, school rooms, functional parks, or other vital public facilities. (7) Site and architectural design quality which may be indicated by the amount and character of modification of the topography, including quantity of grading, extent of natural slopes cut and/or filled, and impact on ridgeline, (8) Impact on oak trees and archeological sites. (9) The provision of significant water conservation features. (10) The provision of energy generation and conservation features, such as additional insulation, house siting and design, solar techniques, and other innovative techniques. (11) The construction with recycled products and/or design of the project to facilitate the recycling of household refuse. (12) The design of the project to accommodate access by the physically handicapped to greater extent than required by state law and local ordinance. (13) The extent to which the project is developed at a density less than the maximum permitted by the applicable zoning of the project site. (14) The degree to which the project provides housing for very low and low income households. (15) The location of the project as it may qualify as in -fill project, as defined by City council resolution. (c) The Board shall consider the application before it at a public hearing, notice of which shall be given in the manner required by City Ordinance. (d) After evaluating each development in accordance with the foregoing criteria and making initial point assessments on a project -by -project basis as the individual projects before the Commission, the Board shall hold a public hearing to: (1) To allow any applicant to request the Board to reevaluate to point and assignment made on any or all of the criteria. (2) Allow any applicant, who is dissatisfied with the Board's re-evaluation to submit written notification of such dissent, which will be furnished to the Council prior to awarding of development allotments. (e) Having evaluated each development and clarified all point assignments to the applicants, the Board shall present its lists of evaluations, along with the decisions reached on any appeals, to the Council for the awarding of development allotments. (f) The schedule for the submission and consideration of applications shall be established by the Council. Section 1-10.07 Evaluation of development allotment applications and award of allotments by the City Council and/or Planning Commission — (a) The Council shall consider the Board's recommended point assignments for all development allotment applications at a public hearing, notice of which shall be given in the manner required by City Ordinance. (b) After considering the Board's recommended point assignments and any testimony presented at the hearing, the Council shall determine point assignments for each development allotment application, and shall compile a list ranking the applications in order of point assignment. (c) The Council shall award development allotments to applications on that list, subject to the following: (1) Maximum allotment available. The number of development allotments shall not exceed the base number determined in accordance with Section 1-10.04. (2) Single development allotment limit. No single developer shall be awarded a number of development allotments, in excess of a number which the City Council may establish by resolution. (3) Minimum point rating. No development allotments may be awarded to any application unless the Council has assigned it at least fifty-six (56) points under Section 1-10.06, subsection (a), and at least seventy (70) points under Section 1-10.06. subsection (b) (d) The Council may award development allotments at such time or time(s) during the year as it selects. (e) Once the Council has awarded development allotments to a project, allotments will terminate if modifications are made to the underlying project, which when modified produce a total score of evaluation points less than the original application for which the development allotment was awarded. This modification rating shall be determined and based upon a review of the corresponding tract map or development permit modification by the director of Planning and Building Services, Planning Commission or City Council before whom the modification was heard. (f) If construction has not been initiated within forty-eight (48) months after award of development allotment, the Council, after a public hearing may rescind all or some of the development allotments. Section 1-10.07.010 Expiration of development allotments — Except for allotments rescinded pursuant to Section 10.07(d), development allotments awarded to a project shall remain in effect and be valid only so long as the underlying project approval is in effect and un -expired. For purposes of this chapter, the term "underlying project approval' means either a tentative map, residential planned development permit, hillside planned development permit, or trailer park development permit, granted in conjunction with the same project for which the development allotments were awarded. If the underlying project approval expires, all development allotments awarded to that project shall automatically expire without notice. Section 1-10.07.020 Reallocation of expired or rescinded development allotments — At any time after expiration or a Council recession of any awarded development allotments, the Council may elect to reallocate and reuse such allotments at any subsequent development allotment award hearings with regards to all competing projects or only to those projects within identified special categories. Notwithstanding Section 1-10.04, the reallocated expire development allotments may be awarded in any amount per year as the Council may determine. Section 1-10.08 Additional regulations — Should the arrangement of projects as provided in Section 1-10.07, subsection (a), product the situation in which two (2) projects have equal evaluation point scores, but only one project can be permitted without the quota, the Council may offer those applicants a pro rata share of the number of units available within the quota, or may dispose of such a tie in any other manner deemed equitable by the Council. Section 1-10.09 Judicial Review — Any legal action to challenge any decision or denial of the Board or any other governmental body performing a function under this ordinance must be filed in a court of competent jurisdiction within thirty (30) days immediately following the action challenged. Section 1-10.10 Modification — The Council may, after a public hearing, by a four fifths (4/5) vote, change any part of this residential development control system by amendment, providing the amendment is consistent with the intent of this ordinance. Section 1-10.11 Future extensions of this chapter — Since the need for this growth control system cannot be reasonably predicted for years after 2012, a further extension of this chapter shall be considered by the City Council at a noticed public hearing prior to that date. If it is determined by the Council that this chapter should be extended, after making the appropriate findings required by law, any tentative tract map (regular or vesting), approved after April 30, 2002, and up to the effective date of such extensions, shall be subject to such extension and the ordinance codified in this section. Mayor's Committee on Managed Growth for Quality LJ c unity f Quality Community September 18, 2001 Mayor Laurene Weste Members of the City Council City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Blvd Santa Clarita, CA 91355 Subject: Mayor's Committee on Managed Growth for a Quality Environment - Response to the Proposed Santa Clarita First Initiative Dear Mayor Weste and City Councilmembers: On September 12, 2001, the Mayor's Committee on Managed Growth for a Quality Community held a special meeting to evaluate the merits of the proposed Santa Clarita First Initiative, pursuant to the request of the City Council. As you are aware, the 16 - member Committee is comprised of a diverse group of Santa Clarita Valley citizens who have worked together for over one year through an extensive, publicly -accessible educational process in an effort to understand the variables of growth and to develop well- informed, tangible strategies for long-range growth management. The Committee's work will culminate in a report to the City Council which seeks to provide action -oriented policies and balanced strategies related to environmental protection, housing, infrastructure and public services. The Committee's vision statement (attached) clearly reflects the direction and broad scope of the Committee's efforts and demonstrates a commitment to responsible, coordinated planning for the entire Santa Clarita Valley. The Santa Clarita First Initiative focuses on the placement of numeric limitations on residential development, stating that these development restrictions will address such growth -related issues as school overcrowding, poor air quality, deficient infrastructure and lack of parkland. With the benefit of the afore -mentioned yearlong education, the Committee cannot agree that such action will result in a higher quality of life in the Santa Clarita Valley. Effective growth management strategies need to be far-reaching and employ flexible and balanced decision guidelines, in addition to encompassing strategies that specifically target each of these issues. The placement of a generalized growth cap on residential construction only will not solve existing or anticipated system deficiencies and, in fact, could compromise or undermine other measures established to encourage the correction of such deficiencies. The Initiative does not provide any logical connection between the identified growth issues and the proposed solutions and fails to consider the impact that existing developed areas have upon the Valley's public facilities and services. The Committee feels that the long-term solution to fiscally responsible environmental protection and future planning for land use, infrastructure and public services lies with the One Valley One Vision Joint City/County General Plan efforts that have been underway for some time. We believe that the Initiative may, in fact, be perceived as divisive in nature, and as such, have a negative effect on the interagency cooperative progress that is being made with the preparation of the Valleywide General Plan, as well as this Committee's efforts. Over the next month and one half, the Committee will finalize its recommendations for dealing with the pressures and challenges of growth and will present a comprehensive report to the Council. These long-term sustainable growth strategies, which will examine fifteen (15) specific issues, seek to provide a wide range of solutions and measures that can be pursued to alleviate current concerns, and ensure responsible, long-range planning. These strategies touch on many aspects of our living environment including biological resources, housing, open space, roads/trails, hospital services, schools, and energy, among others. In comparing the Initiative with the draft strategies, the Committee feels that the Initiative limits the community's choices in how to address Valleywide growth, and would not be an effective tool in reconciling the demands of a growing population with public facility and service shortfalls. In conclusion, the Committee finds that this Initiative, as it is currently proposed, is limited in its scope and effectiveness, does not embrace the concept of sustainable, planned growth, and is not compatible with the Committee's vision or in the best interest of the Valley at large. The Committee urges the Council to continue their support for the One Valley One Vision Joint City/County General Plan process, which has built-in mechanisms for long-range planning and growth management. We reiterate our previous request for the opportunity to produce our findings prior to "definitive" action by the Council on the Santa Clarita First Initiative. Thank you for providing the Committee with the opportunity to provide input on the Initiative and for your continued consideration of this matter. Sincerely, ' John D. Hoskinson Chairman of the Mayor's Committee on Managed Growth For a Quality Community Attachments: Mayor's Committee Vision Statement Mayor's Committee Member Roster Listing of Growth Management Strategy Issue Areas cc: Mayor's Committee on Managed Growth for a Quality Community Vince Bertoni, Planning Manager Lisa Hardy, Senior Planner Troy Brown, Management Analyst MAYOR'S COMMITTEE ON MANAGED GROWTH FOR A QUALITY COMMUNITY VISION STATEMENT Managed growth means planned growth that maintains and improves the Santa Clarita Valley's quality of life. Managed growth balances the proactive preservation of environmental resources with the future development of various housing types, job opportunities, infrastructure systems, educational facilities, and a full range of public services for a healthy, sustainable and economically viable community. Balance is achieved through responsible, collaborative decision-making with sensitivity to the greater Valleywide community. Our vision includes the long-term provision for natural open space, visual resources, clean and available water, clean air, affordable housing, excellent schools, appropriate infrastructure and public services, quality medical care, safe neighborhoods, recreational opportunities, and a strong economic base throughout the Santa Clarita Valley. Preservation of the community heritage and unique environmental character of the Valley's ridgelines, canyons, oak woodlands and the Santa Clara River shall remain a priority. MAYOR'S COMMITTEE ON MANAGED GROWTH FOR A QUALITY COMMUNITY MEMBER ROSTER Chair John Hoskinson Councilmember Jo Anne Darcy City Manager George Caravalho Planning & Building Jeffrey Lambert Services Director County Appointee Conal McNamara Regional Planning Director Jim Hartl Parks, Trails, Open Space Barbara Wampole Development Community Bill Ratazzi Environmental/Cultural Darla Hoback Business/Chamber Doug Sink Schools Laurence Strauss Water Community Robert DiPrimio Homeowner Representative Diane Wilson Homeowner Representative Jeff Stevenson Agua Dulce Town Council Diane Terito Castaic Town Council Stacey Gordon MAYOR'S COMMITTEE ON MANAGED GROWTH FOR A QUALITY COMMUNITY GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES ISSUE AREAS Biological resources Open space Air quality River/watershed management Water supply Schools Library services Fire & emergency medical services Solid waste Hospital services Roads/trails Parks Housing Energy and natural resources Financial viability