Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-09-08 - AGENDA REPORTS - MC 08-051 SHERATON HOTEL BLDG (2)Agenda Item: CITY OF SANTA CLARITA AGENDA REPORT PUBLIC HEARING City Manager Approval: Item to be presented by: DATE: September 8, 2009 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF MASTER CASE 08-051, A REQUEST FOR A 136,559 SQUARE FOOT HOTEL BUILDING WITH 200 ROOMS IN THE COMMERCIAL TOWN CENTER (VALLEY CENTER OVERLAY)ZONE DEPARTMENT: Community Development RECOMMENDED ACTION City Council conduct a public hearing, deny the appeal and affirm the Planning Commission's approval adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving Master Case 08-051 (Conditional Use Permit 08-006) to allow for (1) a Shared Parking Program and (2) construction of the seven -story hotel building at a height of 77'-8" with architectural tower elements up to +/- 88"-0," subject to the conditions of approval. BACKGROUND On March 21, 2008, the applicant, Brisam Valencia, LLC, submitted an application to the Planning Division requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow for the construction a Sheraton Hotel on the subject property, 26501 McBean Parkway (APN 2861-062-040), located in the community of Valencia. The existing Greens Bar and Grill and 27 -hole miniature, putting golf course are proposed to be removed with the approval of the proposed project. Planning Commission Approval On July 7, 2009, the Sheraton Hotel proposal was presented by City staff and the applicant to the Planning Commission for their consideration and review, and was approved with a 4-0 vote. During the public hearing for the proposed project, a total of six individuals spoke on the project, with two other individuals providing written comments. Of the six members that spoke'against the project at the meeting, one was the owner of the adjacent Galaxy Car Wash, two represented Continued To: a da other hotels in the Santa Clarita Valley and the remaining three public speakers and two written comments were property owners from the Woodlands residential community. The Galaxy Car Wash owners were concerned with dust and access as it relates to the construction phase of the project, representatives from surrounding hotels were concerned that the new hotel would create a negative economic impact on their business and the Woodland property owners had several concerns that included due to the building height, traffic impacts to the Valencia Boulevard/McBean Parkway intersection, the Shared Parking Program and construction and operational related noise. It should be noted that City staff and the Planning Commission did not receive any letters of objection or support for the project prior to the Planning Commission public hearing. The Planning Commission addressed the Galaxy Car Wash owner's concerns by incorporating additional conditions to the project that require the applicant to provide a Construction Management Plan that outlines the measures and systems that will be utilized to prevent negative impacts to neighboring properties and businesses during demolition, grading and construction activities. In addition, the Planning Commission added a second condition that outlines specific dust control measures that shall be used on-site during grading and construction. The Commission also added extra assurance to the conditions of approval to address the Woodland property owner's concerns with noise by restricting all noise intense construction activities for the project to weekdays only. The Planning Commission believed all other concerns and issues were addressed by the way of project design and the conditions and mitigation measures that have been placed on the project. A detailed discussion of the Shared Parking .Program, economic impacts and visual impacts (height), including the mitigation measures to the Valencia Boulevard/McBean Parkway intersection, are included in this report under the Analysis section. Appeal of the Planning Commission's Approval An appeal of the Sheraton Hotel project was submitted to .the City Clerk's Office on July 21, 2009 from the Positive Solutions Association. The letter sites three reasons for the appeal. City staff has reviewed the project against the appeal grounds outlined by the appellant and has included a response to each concern. The appeal grounds and staff's responses areas follows: 1. The approval is in violation of the requirements of the Santa Clarita Municipal Code Section 17.03.050, as it pertains to Conditional Use Permits. Section 17.03.050 in the Santa Clarita Unified Development Code is the Variances and Adjustments section of the code. The proposed project does not require a variance or adjustment. The project therefore, cannot be in violation of this code section as this section has no relevance to the proposed project or requested entitlements. The project requires a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the construction of a 77'-8" building with architectural elements up to +/- 88'-0" (Height— Section 17.15.030.13.3 — Footnote 5) and for a Shared Parking Program (Section 17.18.140.C). The proposed project meets all findings for a Conditional Use Permit as outlined in the attached Resolution for the �1 project. 2. The approval is inconsistent with numerous sections of the General Plan of the City of Santa Clarita. Some, but not all of the notable inconsistencies are to be found in the Safety Element, the Community Design Element, the Circulation Element, the Land Use Element, the Parks and Recreation Element, the Economic Development Element, and still others. Although the appellant does not identify any specific inconsistencies with the elements of the General Plan that City staff can specifically address, City staff does believe that the project is consistent with all of the City's General Plan elements which is a required finding of the City decisionmakers. City staff will highlight a few of the major elements as it relates to the project. The General Plan Land Use designation in the Land Use Element for the project site is Commercial Town Center (CTC) with a Valley Center Concept (VCC) Overlay. The project is well within the VCC overlay's objective to provide a "community -wide focus or center" and to allow for "higher intensity and density for both residential and commercial office use, thus allowing maintenance of lower profile, less intensive uses in the surrounding communities (Land Use Element L-55)." As identified in the General Plan Land Use Element, this project will "foster the City's identity while, at the same time, preserve and protect outlying areas from overly intensive development (Land Use Element L-55)." The General Plan Land Use Element further describes that the Overlay "focuses compatible higher intensities and densities of uses into the Valley Center Concept which becomes a growth management tool achieving greater environmental quality objective, both within and outside the Valley Center area (Land Use Element L-56)." Thus, the intensity and use of this project is consistent with all of the uses within the Overlay and Commercial Town Center area, while at the same time preserving outlying areas from overly intensive development. The project is also implementing and following the goals and policies of the Circulation Element of the General Plan by being required to improve the Valencia Boulevard/McBean Parkway intersection by widening Valencia Boulevard in front of the Valencia Town Center that will "move people and goods safely and efficiently throughout the City (Circulation Element C-16) and maintain appropriate levels of service at intersections in the City during peak hours to ensure that traffic delays are kept to a minimum (Circulation Element C-17)." This project is also consistent with Policy 1.15-C-18 that states improvements such as what is proposed with this project should, "maximize and improve the operating efficiency and safety of the existing roadway system wherever possible." In addition, the project's visual and aesthetic design was developed with taking both the residential and commercial community into consideration in order to continue to "protect and preserve the scale and character of existing neighborhoods while providing for new development (Community Design Element CD -14)." As discussed in the Analysis section of this report, City staff and the Planning Commission reviewed the visual and aesthetic design of the project extensively and found it to be consistent with the Community Design Element of the General Plan. The project is also consistent with the goals and policies of the Economic Development Element of the General Plan, most notably with the Policy 6.6 —ED -29 to "attract the development of community and regional serving retail and commercial services." This project will enhance and compliment the existing uses within the Town Center area. Further analysis of the economics of this project can be found in the Analysis section of this report. 3. The project fails to meet the standards for issuance of a "Mitigated Negative Declaration" of impact on the Environment. As clearly required by the California Environmental Quality Act, (C.E.Q.A.), a complete Environmental Impact Report on this project is mandatory. It was omitted in this case. As with the second concern, there are no specifics to the appellant's claim that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) should have been prepared. However, City staff will attempt to briefly address the appellant's general argument that an EIR should have been prepared. The Initial Study was completed for the project and determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was required. All project impacts consisted of "no impacts," "less than significant impact" and "less than significant impact with mitigation measures" thus concluding no EIR was necessary. As identified in the MND, Resolution and this report, all impacts have been analyzed and mitigation measures have been placed on those impacts related to the project. For a complete analysis of the impacts and analysis, please refer to the Initial Study and MND attached to this report. The environmental documents were posted for public review for a 21 -day review period, from June 16, 2009 to July 7, 2009. In addition, the appellant submitted a supplemental letter to City staff on July 24, 2009. The letter of appeal and the supplemental letter is attached to this agenda item for the Council's review. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project includes a request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to construct a 136,559 square foot, seven -story hotel building (the Sheraton) at 77'-8" in height with architectural tower elements up to +/- 88'-0" in height and to establish a Shared Parking Program for the project site. The building as proposed would have 200 rooms, a 120 -seat restaurant and approximately 7,600 square feet of banquet/meeting room area. The banquet/meeting room area includes 2,700 square feet of pre -function area, three banquet rooms, two meeting rooms and a 2,110 square foot ballroom. The hotel also has an indoor pool and spa, a fitness room and a club lounge on the seventh floor. Most of the conference facilities are to be located directly, adjacent to the McBean Parkway to help establish a pedestrian scaled entrance to the project from the street. The applicant is proposing mature landscaping throughout the project site, an employee break area, bike racks, outdoor tables and benches. Also proposed to be located along the IrA building frontage on McBean Parkway is a pedestrian courtyard area with enhanced paving, landscaping, a water feature and architectural wall details. Access to the property will be provided through the existing Mall Entrance Drive, located to the north of the project site and the Galaxy Car Wash. Access to both the car wash and the miniature golf course today is from a shared driveway from Mall Entrance Drive. The private shared driveway is proposed to be named Sheraton Court and it will lead to the hotel site entrance. All parking and vehicular drop-off areas for the Sheraton hotel is to be located along the western portion of the project site. As part of the project, the applicant is proposing a pedestrian pathway from the building to the McBean Transfer Station to promote transit use. The trash compactor and truck loading area will be screened from view by being located in an area between the conference facilities and the hotel building, behind a screen wall and doors that match and blend into the building architecture. Access to these areas will be off of Sheraton Court, in an area not easily viewed from any public streets or from patrons of the hotel. As part of the construction of the new hotel building, the applicant would demolish the existing restaurant and putting green facilities and export approximately 400 cubic yards of dirt to an off-site location. The applicant is also requesting approval to establish a Shared Parking Program for the project site due to the multiple uses on the project site with different demands at different hours and with patrons participating in more than one element of the mix of uses on the hotel property. The applicant proposes to provide 278 on-site parking spaces to meet the demand of the project as outlined in the shared parking study submitted by the applicant. Of the on-site spaces provided, 154 spaces are proposed to be used for valet parking. ANALYSIS Site Constraints The subject property has two major site constraints that limit the location of development on the project. They include the Restricted Use Area and a Los Angeles County Storm Drain Easement. The Restricted Use Area (RUA) traverses the project site running in a southeasterly direction starting at the northwest corner of the project site. No buildings are permitted within the RUA due to a seismic hazard. The only portion of the project site where buildings are permitted is in a portion of the parcel located directly adjacent to McBean Parkway. All buildings associated with the proposed project will remain clear of the RUA, will meet all building code requirements and follow all geotechnical recommendations in construction of the building to allow for a less than significant impact to the proposed project as it relates to seismic activity. In addition to the RUA, the project has a Los Angeles County Storm Drain Easement crossing the property. This easement is 25' wide and runs along the project frontage on McBean Parkway and crosses under the building and through the proposed parking lot to the southwest. This area S also restricts buildings from being constructed upon it, to ensure that if any issues arise with the storm drain in the future, it would be possible to gain access to the underground storm drain to make repairs. The applicant has designed the proposed hotel building in accordance with the requirements of the easement by removing the first floor of building in the area where the storm drain crosses under the building. This area will remain an open air pedestrian access from the parking area to McBean Parkway, and will have landscaping and decorative paving. Site Design Staff has worked with the applicant to make various changes to the project since the initial project submittal. Those changes include site design changes and architectural changes. Site design changes include removing a proposed vehicular turn-out/drop-off area on McBean Parkway, providing better pedestrian connections on-site including between the conference center and hotel uses, the extension of a pedestrian path to the bus transfer station, and providing a stronger street presence along McBean Parkway by introducing pedestrian scale facade elements to the building. The site plan is now designed with efficient on-site circulation, convenient pedestrian connections and well -landscaped areas. The proposed location of the building is oriented along the street and pulled to the front of the property, creating a strong street presence along McBean Parkway. The applicant has provided a pedestrian connection from the building to the McBean Transfer Station, Architecture Through the design review process, staff has also worked with the applicant to improve the architecture of the building. After reviewing building elevations submitted with the project application, both City staff and Newhall Land had significant concerns with the project's architecture. Over the past year, both RRM Design Group, the City's architectural consultant, and Altoon Architects, hired by Newhall Land, have provided multiple peer reviews and recommendations to the project architect to improve the building architecture. While it is understood that the ability to change the building massing is limited as a result of the site constraints, both the City and Newhall Land have worked with the applicant to improve the architecture of the building by incorporating the following changes: • Addition of building articulation on all sides of the building; • An architectural style to more closely compliment the existing buildings in the Town Center area; • Change to the placement of colors and the use of textures on the building to de-emphasize the vertical design features; • Provision of recessed windows and wall projections to break-up the massing of the building; • Addition of a stronger base element to reduce the visual massing of the building; • Trellises and canopies added along the base and the roof line of the building; • Variation of windows used along each elevation; and, • Addition of a porte-cochere to emphasize the building entry. Height The Unified Development Code (UDC) requires approval of a conditional use permit by the Planning Commission for a building that exceeds 35 feet in height. The proposed building is located within the Town Center area of the City, an area where the General Plan promotes additional density, height, and floor area ratios (FAR). The project site's land use designation of CTC (VCC) encourages FARs of up to 2:1. The proposed seven -story, hotel project would have a FAR of 0.84 and a building height of 77'-8" with architectural tower elements up to +/- 88'-0" tall. Located in the Commercial Town Center zone, the proposed building would be complimentary in height to nearby buildings including the Hyatt hotel, the Madison Condominium community, and the Princess Cruises buildings on Town Center Drive which range between 60 and 99 feet in height. Furthermore, as discussed above, the architecture and site design is enhanced to meet the City's design guidelines and to provide a well-designed hotel building and property with architecture that is similar and compatible to the existing buildings located in Valencia Town Center. Landscaping The preliminary landscape plans submitted by the applicant were reviewed by the City's landscape consultant to ensure conformance with the UDC and compatibility with the proposed building and surrounding landscaped areas. The proposed project provides substantial landscaping on the project site to. enhance the view of the proposed building and parking areas. Furthermore, the applicant is proposing landscape planters at a ratio of 1 tree per every 4 parking spaces with 36" box trees planted at the end of parking aisles throughout the surface parking areas. The applicant is providing a mixture of 24", 36" and 48" box trees surrounding the project site, with two 72" box Coast Live Oak trees proposed to be added flanking the vehicular entrance into the project. The applicant is also required to provide final landscape, lighting and irrigation plans for landscape plan review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. Parking Shared Parkin Due to the mix of uses being proposed for the hotel, the applicant has submitted a parking study to establish a shared parking program for the subject property. The study was prepared by Linscott, Law and Greenspan, the same parking consultants that have provided the studies to establish the Shared Parking Programs used for the Valencia Town Center area. The proposed Shared Parking Program, , using the methodology previously approved by the City for Town Center, concludes that the parking needs of the proposed project would be less than the supply of 278 parking spaces proposed to be provided on the subject property. The reduction in demand is attributed to the different uses on the project site being used by patrons at different times, and the knowledge that some patrons of the hotel will also use the restaurant and the banquet facilities in the same visit. The most conservative demand calculation for the project peaks at 247 spaces at 9:00 p.m. for both weekdays and weekends, which results in a residual surplus of 31 spaces on the project site. Therefore, the proposed supply would be adequate in meeting the shared parking demands of the project. 3 Valet Parkin The applicant initially submitted a proposal to develop another property directly west of the McBean Transfer Station into a second parking lot to aid in providing the required parking spaces for the project. The applicant worked to acquire the property from the owner (Newhall Land), however, because the property owner is proceeding through a bankruptcy, the property could not be purchased. In addition, the applicant has met with the Woodlands Homeowners Association Board, and has received feedback from the community that it preferred any proposed hotel development for the hotel be restricted to the east of the bus transfer station. As a result, the applicant has developed a site plan that will allow the placement of 278 parking spaces on the project site, with 154 of those spaces to be used only for valet parking. As a condition of approval, the applicant will be required to provide 24-hour, seven days a week, no -charge valet service to all patrons of the project site to ensure the proper and efficient use of all parking spaces on the property. The applicant will be required to provide a minimum of one valet attendant at all times, with 4-6 attendants being available during weekday peak times and 6-8 attendants to be provided during weekend peak times. Surrounding Land Uses The proposed seven -story hotel building would be located in a fully developed commercial town center community, that consists of the Valencia Town Center Mall, the Hyatt hotel, three office buildings over four stories in height, a three-story medical building and an approved four-story mixed-use development. The construction of the proposed hotel building will not create a significant impact to the surrounding area as its size, design and operating characteristics will be complimentary to the existing uses within the Valencia Town Center area. The project will be visible from residential areas such as the eastern portion of the Woodlands, the Portofino Apartments and northern portions of the Sienna Villas, however, the proposed building is approximately 500' from the Portofino Apartments, 700' from the Sienna Villas, and over 1000' from the closest Woodlands residential unit. The Portofino Apartments and the Sienna Villas would be separated from the project by Valencia Boulevard, a small paseo walkway, the Shell Gas Station and the Sienna Villas would be also separated from the project with a three-story medical office building and portions of the Portofino Apartments. The Woodlands would be separated from the project building with landscaping from both the project parking lot and the project boundary, the McBean Bus Transfer Station, and approximately 600 linear feet of undeveloped land. Any potential visual impacts to these residences would be alleviated through the project's distance from residences and the proposed site landscaping. Traffic It is anticipated that with the approval of the 200 -room hotel, that an increase of trips generated from the project site would be more than the restaurant and miniature golf course generates today. As a result, the applicant hired Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. to prepare a traffic impact analysis for the proposed project. The results of the study showed the surrounding roads and intersections would provide adequate capacity to handle the increased use on the project site, with the integration of a street improvement to install a fourth westbound through lane on 0 Valencia Boulevard at the McBean Parkway intersection. This mitigation measure has been incorporated into the conditions of approval for the project, and must be completed by the applicant prior to issuance of the occupancy for the project. Economic Development The addition of a hotel and conference center, as is proposed with the Sheraton Hotel project, is in line with the intent of the City of Santa Clarita's 21 -Point Plan for Progress business plan, which is designed to support the local economy and its businesses during the recession while positioning Santa Clarita for success as the community recovers. One of the 21 Points includes development of a Hotel Business Improvement District (BID), whereby City of Santa Clarita hotels collect a BID assessment of two percent (2%) from travelers, creating valuable dollars to re -invest in Santa Clarita's visitor attraction efforts. The City anticipates BID dollars could be up to $400,000 annually, supporting national and international sporting events such as the AT&T Champions Classic and Amgen Tour of California, in addition to regional and national advertising campaigns, designed to bring visitors to the area and heighten awareness about the Santa Clarita Valley as a Southern California destination. In addition to providing additional support for the BID, the additional 200 rooms and 7,000+ square feet of conference space at the Sheraton Hotel will support Santa Clarita's growing tourism business, which includes attraction of small conferences and other special events. The City of Santa Clarita will benefit from new Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) collected at the hotel, which is currently a 10 percent assessment on each room night sold. The City of Santa Clarita believes a partnership between the Sheraton and Hyatt Regency property would result in attraction of a variety of new conferences and events to the area. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Approve the appeal and deny Master Case 08-051, a request to construct a 200 -room Sheraton Hotel at the subject property. 2. Direct staff to work with the applicant on a revision to the project and continue the item to a future meeting to consider the revised project. 3. Other actions as determined by the City Council. FISCAL IMPACT No negative fiscal impact is anticipated. Any costs associated with development of the proposed project would be paid in full by the applicant. ATTACHMENTS Resolution Conditions of Approval Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study ElevationsNisual Simulations 11" X 17" Exhibit Package Site Plan 11" X 17" Exhibit Package Letter of Appeal/Supplemental Letter Planning Commission Staff Report available in the City Clerk's Reading File Planning Commission Resolution available in the City Clerk's Reading File /0 CITY OF SANTA CL-ARITA NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING/ APPLICATION: Master Case Number 08-051 Conditional Use Permit 08-006 PROJECT PROPONENT: Brisam Valencia, LLC PROJECT LOCATION: 26501 McBean Parkway (currently The Greens) Assessor Parcel Number 2861-062-040. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project hearing is for the appeal of the Planning Commission approval of a Sheraton Hotel proposed to be located at 26501 McBean Parkway. The project development is proposed to be a 136,559 square -foot building that includes a 200 - room hotel, a 120 seat restaurant, and 7,610 square feet of meeting room/banquet room area. The subject property is within the Commercial Town Center (CTC) zone in the Valencia community within the City of Santa Clarita. The proposed building is seven stories, or 77'-8" tall with architectural tower elements +/- 88'-0" in height, and will be located on a 3.74 acre parcel. Due to the anticipation of hotel patrons also using the banquet facilities and the restaurant, the applicant is requesting shared parking. There are 286 parking spaces proposed on the project site, 154 of those spaces are to be used for 24-hour, 7 days a week valet parking. The subject property is currently operating as a miniature golf course with a restaurant and bar (The Greens) and will be removed with the approval of this development. As required in the City of Santa Clarita Unified Development Code (UDC) the discretionary approval of a Conditional Use Permit is required to allow for the construction of a building 77'-8" in height with architectural tower elements +/- 88'-0" in height and to allow for a shared parking calculation to be used for the proposed project. A public hearing on this matter will be conducted by the City of Santa Clarita City Council on the date: DATE: September 8, 2009 TIME: At or after 6:00 PM LOCATION: City Council Chambers 23920 Valencia Boulevard, First Floor Santa Clarita, CA 91355 A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION has been prepared for the proposed office park development. The Mitigated Negative Declaration is available for public review at the Valencia Library 23743 W. Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita, CA, 91355; and also at Santa Clarita City Hall; Community Development Department; 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302; Santa Clarita, CA, 91355. If you wish to challenge the action taken on this matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues that you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or written correspondence delivered to the City of Santa Clarita at, or prior to, the public hearing. For further information regarding this proposal, please contact the City of Santa Clarita Community Development Department, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302, Santa Clarita, CA 91355. Telephone: (661) 255-4330. Project Planner: Jeff Hogan, AICP, Senior Planner. Sharon L. Dawson, MMC City Clerk Published Date: August 18, 2009 The Signal RESOLUTION NO. 09- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF MASTER CASE NO. 08-051 AND AFFIRMING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND TO APPROVE MASTER CASE NO. 08-051, CONSISTING OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 08-006 ALLOWING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SEVEN -STORY +/- 88'-0" TALL BUILDING TOTALING 136,559 SQUARE FEET AND SHARED PARKING ON THE PROJECT SITE LOCATED AT 26501 MCBEAN PARKWAY, SOUTH OF MALL ENTRANCE DRIVE, IN THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. FINDINGS OF FACT. The City Council does hereby make the following findings of fact: a. On March 21, 2008 an entitlement application was filed by the Brisam Valencia, LLC, (the "applicant") with the Community Development 'Department which included a request for the approval of (1) a conditional use permit (CUP) to allow for the construction of a seven -story hotel building at 77'-8" in height with architectural tower elements up to +/- 88'-0" tall, totaling 136,559 square feet and (2) a shared parking program for the project site; b. The project site is located on 3.74 acres on the west side of McBean Parkway, north of Valencia Boulevard, and south of Mall Entrance Drive. The project site is located at 26501 McBean Parkway (Assessor Parcel Number 2861-062-040) and currently houses a miniature golf course with a restaurant and bar; C. The General Plan and land use designations for the project site are CTC (Commercial Town Center) with a Valley Center Concept (VCC) overlay, corresponding to a wide range of retail, office, service, mixed-use and related activities with a floor area ratio of 2:1; d. The surrounding land uses consist of the Galaxy Car Wash, future location of VTC Square Building (a four-story mixed-use building), Valencia Country Club golf course and Mall Entrance Drive to the north of the project site, McBean Parkway and the Valencia Town Center Mall to the east of the project site, Valencia Boulevard and Shell gas station and Facey medical building to the south of the project site, and the McBean Transfer Station to the west of the project site; e. This project was reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California is Master Case 08-051 Page 2 of 9 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and an Initial Study was prepared. The City of Santa Clarita prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project which determined that the proposed mitigation measures will reduce the impacts associated with the project to a less than significant level; £ The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on this issue on July. 7, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita; g. At the hearing described above, the Planning Commission considered the staff presentation, staff report, applicant presentation and public testimony on the proposal and approved the project with a 4-0 vote; h. On July 21, 2009, the Positive Solutions Association submitted an appeal of the Planning Commission decision to approve the Sheraton Hotel to the City Clerk's office; The project was duly noticed for the City Council public hearing in accordance with the noticing requirements for a conditional use permit on August 18, 2009; and j. The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on this issue commencing on September 8, 2009, at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita and considered the staff presentation, agenda report, and the applicant, appellant and public testimony on the project proposal. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the City Council hereby find as follows: a. An Initial Study and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project have been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); b. The Initial Study has been circulated for review and comment by affected governmental agencies and the public, and all comments received, if any, have been considered. The Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted and advertised on June 16, 2009, in accordance with CEQA. The public review period was open from June 16, 2009 through July 7, 2009; C. There is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the City of Santa Clarita; d. The location of the documents and other material which constitutes the record of 2 1,3 Master Case 08-051 Page 3 of 9 proceedings upon which the decision of the City Council is the Master Case No. 08-051 project file within the Community Development Department and is in the custody of the Director of Community Development; and e. The City Council, based upon the findings set forth above, hereby finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project has. been prepared in compliance with CEQA. SECTION 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the City Council hereby finds as follows: a. That the proposed location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed use is in accordance with the purpose of this Development Code, the purpose of the zone in which the site is located, the Santa Clarita General Plan, and the development policies and standards of the City; The proposed hotel building has been designed in accordance with the City of Santa Clarita Unified Development Code (UDC), the City's Architectural Design Guidelines, and the City's General Plan. The UDC requires that buildings exceeding 35 feet in height obtain the approval of a conditional use permit. The proposed building will be 77'-8" in height with architectural tower elements up to +/- 88'-0" in height. The proposed building is designed in a fashion that incorporates varying roof heights, building face variations and architectural accents. The proposed hotel development is located in the Valencia Town Center community, which is designated by the City's General Plan with a Valley Center Concept (VCC) overlay. Within the VCC, proposed projects are permitted a floor area ratio (FAR) of 2:1. The proposed project consists of a FAR of 0.84:1 and meets the FAR standard for the VCC overlay. The Valencia Town Center corridor consists of a mix of commercial, hotel, office, and residential uses that are similar in height, design, density and land use as the proposed building. In addition, the proposed Shared Parking Program, consisting of a shared parking calculation for the restaurant, banquet facilities and hotel, and using the same methodology previously approved by the City with the Valencia Town Center development located to the north of the project site, concludes that the parking needs of the proposed project would fit the supply capabilities of the parking provided for the project site. Based on the enhanced design of the proposed hotel building, location within the VCC, and adherence to the UDC, the proposed project will be consistent with the General Plan and will operate in a manner consistent with the CTC zone and will be compatible with other existing adjacent uses located in the same zone with the approval of the conditional use permit. b. That the location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use 3 14 Master Case 08-051 Page 4 of 9 will be compatible with and will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent uses, residents, buildings, structures, or natural resources, with consideration given to; 1. Harmony in scale, bulk, coverage, and density; The proposed hotel building would be located on the McBean Parkway corridor within the Valencia Town Center area on property that is zoned CTC with a land use overlay designation of VCC (Valley Center Concept). In addition to conforming to the development standards for the CTC zone, the project would be designed with consideration given to uses in the immediate vicinity. Based on the Unified Development Code, the project site could - accommodate a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 2:1. The proposed building will total 136,559 square -feet on the project site which consist of 3.74 acres (or 162,914 square -feet), thereby providing a FAR of 0.84:1 which meets the allowable FAR. Furthermore, the proposed project adheres to development standards related to setbacks and landscaping. The proposed building would be compatible to adjacent uses which include a four —story mixed-use building and a six -story hotel to the north, a three-story medical office building to the south, the Valencia Town Center Mall located to the east and the McBean Bus Transfer Station to the west. The proposed height of the building at 77'-8" with architectural towers up to +/- 88'-0" would also be compatible with the heights of the Valencia Town Center buildings which consist of heights that range between 60 feet and 99 feet. The proposed development is conforming to all of the setback requirements and landscaping requirements for the CTC zone. 2. The availability of public facilities, services, and utilities; The project site is located in a developed portion of the City of Santa Clarita that is currently serviced by sewer, power, gas and water utilities and will not create a significant demand for additional utilities on the project site. Fire and police services are anticipated to be adequate for the area. 3. The harmful effect, if any, on desirable neighborhood character; The proposed hotel building would be located in a developed community within the Valencia Town Center area of Santa Clarita. . Furthermore, the project site is located on a corridor that consists of a number of other uses that are substantially consistent with the proposed hotel building, including a six -story hotel, a regional mall, an approved four-story mixed-use building known as VTC Square and a mixed-use development known as the Madison. Master Case 08-051 Page 5 of Other office and commercial uses located along McBean Parkway and Town Center Drive are substantially consistent with the proposed use, design and height of the proposed hotel building. The project will be visible from residential areas such as the Woodlands and the Sienna Villas, however, the proposed building is approximately 500' from the Sienna Villas and over 1000' from the closest Woodlands residential unit. The Sienna Villas would be separated from the project by Valencia Boulevard, a small paseo walkway, the Shell Gas Station and in some locations, a three-story medical office building. The Woodlands would be separated from the project with the McBean Bus Transfer Station, and approximately 600 linear feet of undeveloped land. Any types of negative impacts to these residences would be alleviated through the project's distance from residences and the proposed site landscaping. In addition, the proposed Shared Parking Program, consisting of a shared parking calculation for the restaurant, banquet facilities and hotel, and using the same methodology previously approved by the City with the Valencia Town Center development, concludes that the parking needs of the proposed project would fit the supply capabilities of the parking required for the project site. The proposed building and use will therefore be consistent with the surrounding uses and will not create a harmful effect on the neighborhood character. The proposed building is consistent with the City's Architectural Design Guidelines as well as all of the standards outlined in the Unified Development Code. 4. The generation of traffic and the capacity and physical character of surrounding streets; The proposed office building is located in a developed portion of the City that consists predominantly of commercial and office uses. The project frontage along McBean Parkway and Valencia Boulevard has been improved to the City standard in order to accommodate the type of densities of development along McBean Parkway as is proposed with this development. A traffic study prepared for the proposed project concludes that the project will require the applicant to add a fourth westbound through lane to Valencia Boulevard at McBean Parkway. With the applicant completing this improvement prior to building occupancy being granted, as required in the Conditions of Approval for the project, the nearby streets and intersections have been shown to have sufficient capacity to accommodate the project's traffic impacts. The project and the traffic study has also been reviewed by the City's traffic engineer to ensure that _the existing roadway network is sufficient to , handle the project -generated trips and that the recommendations of the traffic study are 5 A2 Master Case 08-051 Page 6 of 9 effective. 5. The suitability of the site for the type and intensity of use or development which is proposed; The proposed hotel building will be developed in accordance with the City's Unified Development Code and will be consistent with the mix of uses on the McBean Parkway corridor and the Valencia Town Center area. The project site is zoned CTC (Commercial Town Center) with a land use designation of VCC (Valley Center Concept). Projects proposed within the VCC are permitted an increased Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 2:1. The proposed project's FAR of 0.84:1 meets the Floor Area Ratio for development in the CTC (VCC) zone. In addition, the CTC zone permits for buildings that exceed 35 feet in height with the approval of a CUP. The proposed building will be constructed at a height of 77'-8" with architectural tower elements at +/- 88'-0" and will be consistent with the design of other buildings located in the Valencia Town Center area. Lastly, the proposed Shared Parking Program, consisting of a shared parking calculation for the restaurant, banquet facilities and hotel, and using the same methodology previously approved by the City with the Valencia Town Center development, concludes that the parking needs of the proposed project would fit the supply capabilities of the parking required for the project site. 6. The harmful effect, if any, upon environmental quality and natural resources; The project site has been previously graded, and currently houses a miniature golf course with a restaurant and bar and is not known to have any sensitive species, animal or plant, on the project site. The project proposes to export approximately, 400 cubic yards of dirt to an off-site location. All grading shall be conducted pursuant to the geotechnical recommendations outlined in the geotechnical study for the proposed seven -story building. No natural resources are anticipated to be disturbed with the proposed project. The proposed use could have an effect on the aesthetics of the project site with the construction of a building that is 77'-8" in height with tower elements at +/- 88'-0" in height on the project site. However, the applicant proposes enhanced architecture to break up the massing of the building using varying wall planes, varying colors and materials, and other architectural treatments that will eliminate any adverse visual impact. The proposed office building provides 360 degree architecture with a high level of articulation. Based on these treatments, as well as other mitigation measures identified in the initial study prepared for the project, the project is not anticipated to have a harmful Master Case 08-051 Page 7 of 9 effect on the environment. C. That the proposed location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; The project site is located within the Valencia Town Center area, is zoned CTC and has a land use designation of Valley Center Concept (VCC).The proposed seven -story hotel building would be located in a fully developed commercial town center community, that consists of the Valencia Town Center Mall, the Hyatt hotel, three office buildings over four stories, a three-story medical building and a four-story mixed use development. The construction of the proposed hotel building will not create a significant impact to the surrounding area as its size, design and operating characteristics will be complimentary to the existing uses within the Valencia Town Center area. The project requires the approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the proposed shared parking calculation and to allow for a building height in excess of 35 feet. The proposed building will be constructed at a height of +/-88'-0" and will be substantially consistent with similar uses and building heights in the area. The architectural treatments proposed for the building will address potential impacts that may be created by the construction of the proposed building. The proposed hotel building consists of 360 degree architecture to provide a well designed, highly articulated building. The project will be visible from residential areas such as the Woodlands and the Sienna Villas, however, the proposed building is approximately 500' from the Sienna Villas and over 1000' from the closest Woodlands residential unit. -The Sienna Villas would be separated from the project by Valencia Boulevard, a small paseo walkway, the Shell Gas Station and in some locations, a three-story medical office building. The Woodlands would be separated from the project with the McBean Bus Transfer Station, and approximately 600 linear feet of undeveloped land. Any types of negative impacts to these residences would be alleviated through the project's distance from residences and the proposed site landscaping. Therefore, the size and design of the proposed building will not be detrimental to properties in the vicinity. The proposed hotel building is proposed to have a reduction of required parking through the approval of a Shared Parking Program. A parking study was completed by the parking engineering firm Linscott, Law and Greenspan. The study determined that the combined uses proposed for the hotel building, including the restaurant, and banquet facilities would require a peak demand on weekdays and on weekends that is less than the total number of spaces available. The study concludes that in a worst -case -scenario, there would be a residual 7 / f Master Case 08-051 Page 8 of 9 parking surplus of at least 31 spaces. In addition, the project is required to complete a Transportation Demand Management program that would implement incentives for various alternative modes of transportation, including utilizing the adjacent transfer station, carpooling, and alternate work schedules. Therefore, operating characteristics as it relates to parking would not have a detrimental impact on neighboring uses. d. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the City of Santa Clarita Unified Development Code, except for an approved variance or adjustment; and The proposed use requires the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to exceed the 35 -foot permitted -by -right height for the proposed hotel building, which would be 77'-8" high, with tower elements up to +/- 88'-0" high; and to establish a Shared Parking Program for the uses on the property. With the approval of a CUP, the proposed use and development would be consistent with all regulations established in the City's Unified Development Code requirements as well as with the goals and policies outlined in the City's General Plan. No variance is required with the proposed development. SECTION 4. Based upon the testimony and other evidence, if any, received at the public hearing, and upon studies and investigations made by the City Council and on its behalf, the City Council further finds and determines that this proposal is consistent with the City's General Plan. SECTION 5. The City Council hereby denies the appeal and affirms the Planning Commission approval adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and approving Master Case 08-051 consisting of Conditional Use Permit 08-006 to allow for the (1) Shared Parking Program and (2) construction of the seven -story hotel building at a height of 77'-8" with architectural tower elements up to +/- 88'-0," subject to the Conditions of Approval as referenced herein as Exhibit A. SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and certify this record to be a full, complete, and correct copy of the action taken. 8 /9 Master Case 08-051 Page 9 of 9 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of September, 2009. MAYOR, FRANK FERRY ATTEST: CITY CLERK ao Master Case 08-051 Page 10 of 9 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss. CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ) I, Sharon L. Dawson, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of , 2009, by the following vote of the City Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY CLERK SACMCURRENI\!2008\08-051 (Sheraton)\City Council\08-051 CC Resolution.9.08.09.doc EXHIBIT A MASTER CASE 08-051 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 08-006 RESOLUTION P09-17 FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL CONDITIONS GCI. The approval of this project shall expire if not put into use within two (2) years from the date of this approval, unless it is extended in accordance with the terms and provisions of the City of Santa Clarita's Unified Development Code (UDC). GC2. The applicant may file for an extension of the approved project prior to the date of expiration. If such an extension is requested, it must be filed no later than sixty 60 days prior to expiration. GC3. The applicant shall be responsible for notifying the Director of Community Development in writing of any change in ownership, designation of a new engineer, or change in the status of the developer, within 30 days of said change. GC4. Unless otherwise apparent from the context, the term "applicant" shall include the applicant and any other persons, corporation, or other entity making use of this grant. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Santa Clarita, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this project, including any related environmental approvals. In the event the City becomes aware of any such claim, action, of proceeding, the City shall promptly notify the applicant, or if the city fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. Nothing contained in this Condition prohibits the City from participating in the defense of any claim, action, or proceeding, if both the following occur: 1) the City bears its own attorney's fees and costs; and 2) the City defends the action in good faith. The applicant shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement unless the settlement is approved by the applicant." GCS. The property shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the approvals granted by the City. Any modifications shall be subject to further review by the City. GC6. The owner, at the time of issuance of permits or other grants of approval agrees to develop the property in accordance with City codes and other appropriate ordinances such as the Building Code, Plumbing Code, Grading Code, Highway Permit Ordinance, Mechanical Code, Zoning Ordinance, Undergrounding of Utilities Ordinance, Sanitary Sewer and Industrial Waste Ordinance, Electrical Code and Fire Code. Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08 -051, -CUP 08-006 July 7, 1009 Page 1 of 13 GC7. This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the permittee and the owner of the property involved (if other than the permittee) have filed with the Director of Community Development, their affidavit (Acceptance Form) stating that they are aware of, and agree to accept, all of the conditions of this grant. GCB. Details shown on the site plan are not necessarily approved. Any details which are inconsistent with the requirements of state or local ordinances, general conditions of approval, or City policies and not modified by this permit must be specifically approved. GC9. It is further declared and made a condition of this permit that if any condition hereof is violated, or if any law, statute, or ordinance is violated, the City may commence proceedings to revoke this approval. PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PL 1. The applicant shall be granted approval to construct a seven -story, 139,559 square -foot hotel building in accordance with the approved site plan, elevation plan, landscape plan, and colors and materials board on file with the Planning Division. Any modifications shall be subject to the review and approval of the Director of Community Development and/or Planning Commission. PL2. The proposed hotel building shall not exceed seven stories with a building height of 77% 8". Architectural elements may extend to +/- 88'-0" in overall height with the approval of the Director of Community Development, including all parapet walls, equipment, mechanical devices. The applicant .shall work with City staff to further articulate the architectural treatments to the roof structure prior to issuance of building permits, subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development. Heights of the building and architectural treatments shall be in accordance with the approved elevation plan on file with the Planning Division. PL3. The applicant shall provide 278 parking spaces on the project site, as shown on the approved site plan and in accordance with the approved Shared Parking Study on file with the Planning Division. No changes to the proposed uses on file with the Planning Division shall occur without the prior written approval from the Director of Community Development. Any changes the applicant proposes in the future to intensify the uses on site must have a supplemental shared parking study completed and submitted for the review and approval of the Planning Division. This is to assure the required amount of parking is provided on the subject property at all times. PL4. A no -charge valet service shall be provided for the project site 24 hours a day, seven days a week. A minimum of one attendant shall be available at all times, with 4-6 attendants to be available during week -day peak times and 6-8 attendants to be provided during week- �3 Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08-051;CUP 08-006 July 7, 2009 Page 3 of 13 end peak times. PLS. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures and monitoring activities identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Master Case 08-051. PL6. Prior to the issuance of Building Permit, the applicant is required to develop and submit for review and approval to the Community Development Director, a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan to have the applicant implement programs and strategies to promote carpooling, use of the McBean Transfer Station, rideshare, bicycling and other alternative transportation modes upon issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. PL7. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall provide a handicap accessible shaded outdoor employee break area that includes tables, benches, trash containers and -walking paths subject to review and approval by the Director Community Development. PL8. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall provide a minimum of twelve (12) bicycle parking spaces on the project site. PL9. All light sources shall be directed downward and shielded to prevent glare and spillover from adjacent streets and properties. PL10. The applicant shall screen all mechanical devices, trash enclosures, utility boxes and other similar structures from the public right of way using mature landscaping or other architectural features. All screening shall be approved by the Planning Division prior to installation. PL11. All roof equipment shall be adequately screened from public view, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. PL12. Prior to the installation of signs, the applicant shall be required to submit a master sign program. The proposed signage shall compliment the architectural style of the building. The master sign program is subject to a separate sign review and approval process and would require submittal of a sign review application and fee to be reviewed by the Planning Division. Signage shall comply with the sign requirements per Chapter 17.19 of the UDC. PL13. Construction hours shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m, to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekends, unless traffic volumes or public safety issues warrant otherwise (as determined by City, County or State officials). As an additional restriction, all noise intense construction activities for the project shall be limited to the hours between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, with no noise intense construction occurring on the weekends. No construction on Sundays and legally proclaimed holidays shall occur. SWI Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08-051; CUP 08-006 July 7, 1009 Page 4 of 13 PL14. The applicant shall be aware that there are many sensitive uses in the vicinity of the project site, including residential dwellings, offices and a hotel. The applicant shall work to minimize the impacts of demolition and construction activities on site to nearby property owners. If a concern is brought to the City's attention regarding the disturbance of business or property owners, the applicant shall work with the City to resolve those issues. PL15. The applicant shall comply with all applicable noise standards for construction and operations of the proposed project. PL16. The applicant shall create a Construction Management Plan that will minimize impacts to the adjacent business owner, Galaxy Car Wash, as well as other surrounding property owners for the review and approval of the Director of Community Development, prior to demolition permit issuance for the Greens. This plan shall ensure minimal negative impact to adjacent businesses during grading and construction activities on the subject property. The management plan will include information on how pedestrian and vehicular access to adjacent properties will maintained, the location of stored construction vehicles and materials on the subject property, as well as dust control measures to be used. PLIT The Greens Restaurant and the Galaxy Car Wash currently share a trash enclosure that was constructed between the property lines. The Sheraton Hotel will no longer require use of this trash enclosure as all trash will be contained in another area on the subject property. The applicant shall work to ensure the car wash still has a trash enclosure with room two three -yard bins (one for recycling). This can be accomplished by not disturbing the existing structure that is located on both properties or assisting the car wash in constructing the required trash enclosure entirely on their property. PL IS. The applicant shall implement the following dust control measures during the demolition and construction of the project: ■ Sprinkling the ground surface with water until the ground is moist during grading activities and before hauling any dirt off-site. ■ Erect a wind break around the construction site to limit the potential for suspended particles. This may include adding a wind fence to the construction fencing around the perimeter of the project. ■ The addition of stone or gravel along construction entry, areas to reduce dirt and dust tracking off-site. LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS PL19. Prior to issuance of a building permit(s), the applicant shall provide final planting and irrigation plans for Planning Department/Landscape Review Consultant review and approval. The plan must be prepared by a California -registered landscape architect. Landscape plans shall contain all elements required by the Development Review for preliminary landscape plans, shall be materially similar to those approved by the Director, Planning Commission and/or City Council, and shall conform to the following: as Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08-051;CUP 08-006 July 7, 2009 Page 5 of 13 (a) Trees visible from the property's public street frontage shall be a minimum 24" box size, and shall include a proportionate number of 36," 48," and 60" box -size specimens (Santa Clarita Architectural Design Guidelines, adopted December 2002). (b) Trees planted within fourteen (14) feet of McBean Parkway shall conform to Municipal Code § 13.76.110 et seg (Parkway Tree Influence Area). Trees planted within City right-of-way shall conform to Municipal Code § 13.76 et seq (Parkway Trees). The property owner shall irrigate and maintain these trees according to City standards. (c) Landscape plans shall show at least one (1) 24" box tree per four (4) parking stalls in surface parking lots/areas, and 36" box trees in planters at the ends of parking aisles. The plans shall show tree species selection, distribution and spacing to provide 50% canopy coverage of all parking lots/areas within 5 years of planting (Municipal Code § 17.18.070(E)(10)). (d) All trash enclosures, transformer boxes, vault boxes, backflow devices, and other exterior mechanical equipment shall be screened. Screening material may include trees, shrubs (15 gallon minimum size), clinging vines, etc. Masonry block (concrete masonry unit) trash enclosures shall be screened with both shrubs and clinging vines (Municipal Code § § 17.15.040(B)(1-4). (e) Planting plan shall show all proposed lighting standards. (f) The applicant shall place water -conserving mulching material on all exposed soil in planting areas not covered by turfgrass or significant groundcover. Mulching material may'include, and is not limited to, shredded bark, river rock, crushed rock, pea gravel, etc., and must be at least three (3) inches deep. (g) The plant palette shall not include any plants listed as invasive exotic pest plants by the California Invasive Plant Council (lists available at http://groups.ucanr.org/ceppc/). PL20. The applicant shall receive Los Angeles County Flood Control approval of the preliminary and final landscape plan prior to issuance of grading permits. If changes to the preliminary landscaping plan is required for flood control approval, the applicant shall work with the City to adjust the hardscape and landscaping plan along McBean Parkway to provide the appropriate amount of landscaping for the project to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. If substantial removal of trees and landscaping is required along the project frontage on McBean Parkway by the agency, the applicant will be required to return to the Planning Commission to receive approval of the landscaping plan. PL21. Prior to planting, the applicant shall flag all tree locations along the project's street -facing frontage and call the Planning Department, Landscape Review official for a pre -planting inspection. PL22. The applicant shall design all irrigation systems for water conservation and minimize overspray onto paved areas. 5/9 Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08 -051, -CUP 08-006 July 7, 1009 Page 6 of l3 PL23. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall install all proposed irrigation and landscaping, including irrigation controllers, staking, mulching, etc., to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The Director may impose inspection fees for more than one landscape installation inspection. PL24. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall submit to the Director of Community Development a letter from the project landscape architect certifying that all landscape materials and irrigation have been installed and function according to the approved landscape plans. , ENGINEERING DIVISION EN 1. At issuance of permits or other grants of approval, the applicant agrees to develop the property in accordance with City codes and other appropriate ordinances such as the Building Code, Plumbing Code, Grading Code, Highway Permit Ordinance, Mechanical Code, Unified Development Code, Undergrounding of Utilities Ordinance, Sanitary Sewer and Industrial Waste Ordinance, Electrical Code, and Fire Code. EN2. Prior to issuance of building permits, a Certificate of Compliance prepared by or under the direction of a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor in the State of California shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder. The Certificate of Compliance shall be.reviewed and approved the City Engineer prior to recordation. EN3. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall show proof of legal access from a public street. Proof of legal access shall be in the form of a title report with accompanying documentation and exhibit map. EN4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall record a reciprocal access easement and maintenance agreement for all shared driveways and drive isles within the project site, as directed by the City Engineer. ENS. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall vacate the portion . of the Restricted Use Area for seismic building setback according to the approved fault study. EN6. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall obtain written permission from the Los Angeles County Flood Control District for encroachment of the proposed development into their easement. Prior to grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a notarized Letter of Permission for grading over all easements. GRADING, DRAINAGE AND GEOLOGY REQUIREMENTS ENT Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall submit a grading plan consistent with the approved site plan and conditions of approval. The grading plan shall be based on a detailed engineering geotechnical report specifically approved by the geologist and/or soils engineer that addresses all submitted recommendations. �i7 Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08-051, CUP 08-006 July 7, 1009 Page 7 of 13 EN8. The site is located within a mapped liquefiable area, per the State of California Seismic Hazard Zone Map. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall submit a geotechnical report which adequately addresses the Seismic Hazard Zone. All required mitigation measures shall be incorporated into the development plans. EN9. This project is a development planning priority project under the City's NPDES Municipal Stormwater Permit as a development with a parking lot 5,000 square feet or more or with 25 or more parking spaces. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall have approved by the City Engineer, an Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (USMP) that incorporates appropriate post construction best management practices (BMPs), maximizes pervious surfaces, and includes infiltration into the design of the project. Refer to the Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) guide for details. EN 10. This project will disturb one acre or more of land. Therefore the applicant must obtain coverage under a statewide General Construction Activities Stormwater Permit (General Permit). In accordance with the General Permit, the applicant shall file with the State a Notice of Intent (NOI) for the proposed project. Prior to issuance of grading permit by the City, the applicant shall have approved by the City Engineer a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a copy of the NOI and shall reference the corresponding Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) number issued by the State upon receipt of the NOI. EN 11. Prior to any construction (including, but not limited to, drive approaches, sidewalks, curb and gutter, etc.), trenching or grading within public or private street right-of-way, the applicant shall submit a street improvement plan consistent with the approved site plan, oak tree report and conditions of approval and obtain encroachment permits from the Engineering Division. EN 12. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall replace the existing street name sign at the intersection of McBean Parkway and the entrance to the site with a street name approved by the City Engineer. EN 13. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall repair any broken or damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk, and refurbish the half section of pavement on streets within or abutting the project, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. EN14. The site plan shows an export of 400 CY of dirt from the project. The applicant shall comply with the following requirements for the dirt hauling operation: a. Obtain an encroachment permit for the work. b. The hours of operation shall be between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm or as approved by the City Engineer. c. Provide non-stop street sweeping service on all City streets along the haul route during all hours of work to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08-051, CUP 08-006 July 7, 2009 Page 8 of 13 d. Provide traffic control and flagging personnel along the haul route to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. SEWER IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS EN15. The on-site sewer shall be a privately maintained system. All sewer lines shall have a minimum 2% slope and pipe inverts shall be 6 feet below the curb grade. Prior to grading plan approval, the applicant shall demonstrate that all sewer pipes meet these requirements with the proposed building pad elevations. Private on-site sewers are reviewed and approved by the City's Building & Safety Division. BONDS, FEES, AND MISCELLANEOUS REQUIREMENTS EN16. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall pay the applicable Bridge and Thoroughfare (B&T) District Fee to implement the highway element of the General Plan as a means of mitigating the traffic impact of this project. ENIT This project is located in the Valencia B&T District. The current rate for this District is $20,630. The B&T rate is subject to change and is based on the rate at the time of payment. The B&T Fee shall be calculated as follows: Commercial= the gross acres (3.7), times the district rate ($20,630), times 5.0; which is equal to $381,655 until June 30, 2010. TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TE 1. Adequate sight visibility is required at all project driveways and shall follow the latest Caltrans manual for applicable requirements. This shall be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit. TE2. Minimum width of all interior drive aisles shall be 26 feet and shall be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit. TE3. All project driveways shall intersect with the adjacent roadway at 90 degrees or as close to 90 degrees as topography permits (no less than 80 degrees). This shall be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit. TE4. The site shall be designed to adequately accommodate all vehicles (e.g. automobiles, vans, trucks) that can be expected to access the site. This includes, but is not limited to, adequate maneuvering areas around loading zones and parking spaces, and appropriate turning radii. TES. The location, width and depth of all project driveways and drive aisles shall conform to the approved site plan. This shall be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit. No additional driveways shall be permitted. Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08 -051, -CUP 08-006 July 7, 2009 Page 9 of 13 TE6. Any dead-end drive aisles shall have a hammerhead or turn -around area to facilitate vehicular movements. This shall be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit. TET Prior to issuance of the first building occupancy permit, the applicant shall pay a traffic - signal timing fee for the update of the traffic -signal timing at up to 4 intersections in the surrounding area. The cost is $4,000 per intersection ($16,000 total). This fee shall be used to improve traffic flow and minimize traffic congestion along the corridors impacted by project -related traffic, through traffic signal retiming and related infrastructure improvements. TES. Prior to the issuance of the first building occupancy permit, the applicant shall install system detection on all approaches at the McBean Parkway/Mall Entrance intersection. The system detection system shall be designed and installed to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. This shall be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit. TE9. Prior to the issuance of the first demolition permit, the applicant shall demonstrate that sufficient right-of-way can be acquired to construct the fourth westbound through lane per Condition 11 below. TE 10. Prior to the issuance of the first grading permit, the applicant shall demonstrate that sufficient right-of-way has been acquired to construct the fourth westbound through lane per Condition 11 below. TE 11. Prior to the issuance of the first building occupancy, the intersection listed below shall be in place and shall include the required number of lanes and operational traffic signal. All necessary transitions sections shall be provided to implement these improvements according to applicable City and Caltrans standards. McBean ParkwayNalencia Boulevard Eastbound: 2 left -turn lanes, 3 through lanes, 1 right -turn lane Westbound: 2 left -turn lanes, 4 through lanes, 1 right -turn lane Northbound: 2 left -turn lanes, 3 through lanes, 2 right -turn lanes Southbound: 2 left -turn lanes, 3 through lanes, 2 right -turn lanes BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION GENERAL COMMENTS BSI. Projects submitted to Building and Safety for plan review shall comply with the 2007 California Building (CBC), Mechanical and Plumbing Codes, the 2007 California Electrical Code, the 2007 California Energy Code, and the 2007 City of Santa Clarita amendments to the California codes. A copy of the City amendments is available at the Building and Safety public counter and on our website at www.santa-clarita.co'm. 3o Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08-051;CUP 08-006 July 7, 1009 Page 10 of 13 BS2. For plan submittal requirements, see the "Plan Requirement List for Building and Safety" available at the Building and Safety Public counter. BS3. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant is required to acquire additional clearances from the following agencies: a. William S. Hart School District and appropriate elementary school district, b. Castaic Lake Water Agency; c. L. A. County Sanitation District; d. L. A. County Environmental Services (Health Dept.); for the restaurant and the public swimming pool, and; e. L. A. Co. Environmental Programs (Industrial Waste). An agency referral list is available at the Building and Safety public counter. SPECIFIC COMMENTS BS4. Any construction on or over any easement will require a written agreement from that easement holder. The agreement shall grant permission for the specific construction that is proposed. Construction adjacent to an easement that may affect the use of the easement shall also be part of the written agreement. BSS. In the building analysis for the occupancy separations, please indicate if the separations are considered separated or non -separated. Also, please indicate all rooms or areas that are considered accessory occupancies and/or incidental uses. (CBC sec 508) BS6. The California Plumbing Code (CPC), Table 4-1, shall be used to determine the minimum number of required plumbing fixtures. DWV and on-site sewer lines and laterals shall have a minimum 2% slope per CPC. (The required number of plumbing fixtures was not reviewed as part of this DRC) BST The project shall fully comply with all applicable Disabled Access requirements of chapter 11 B for public accommodations per the California Building Code. BSB. Any buildings having an occupiable floor over 75 -feet above the lowest floor level shall be considered a High Rise Building. (this is just FYI, the proposed hotel is less than 75 - feet to the highest occupied floor and therefore, not considered a High Rise Building). ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ES 1. Provide sufficient trash enclosures to house at least eight 3 -yard bins. Half of the bins should be reserved for recyclable materials only. The enclosures should be shown on the site plan with dimensions, consistent with the surrounding architecture and shall be constructed with a solid roof. The enclosures shall be located to provide convenient pedestrian and collection vehicle access. 31 Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08-051; CUP 08-006 July 7, 2009 Page 11 of 13 ES2. Two trash compactors may be used in place of the eight 3 -yard bins. The compactors must have equal or greater capacity to the eight 3 -yard containers (24 cubic yards). A minimum of 12 cubic yards designated for trash and 12 cubic yards designated for recycling. ES3. All new construction projects valuated greater than $500,000 must comply with the City's Construction and Demolition Materials (C&D) Recycling Ordinance. ES4. If the project is valuated above $500,000 the applicant shall comply with the following: ■ A Construction and Demolition Materials Management Plan (C&DMMP) must be prepared and approved by the Environmental Services Division prior to obtaining any grading or building permits. ■ A minimum of 50% of the entire project's inert (dirt, rock, bricks, etc.) waste and 50% of the remaining C&D waste must be diverted from landfills. ■ A deposit of 3% of the estimated total project cost or $50,000, whichever is less, is required. The deposit will be returned to the applicant upon proving that 50% of the inert and remaining C&D waste was diverted. ESS. All projects within the City that are not self -hauling their waste materials must use one of the City's franchised haulers for temporary and roll -off bin collection services. Please contact Environmental Services staff for a complete list of franchised haulers in the City. ES6. It is advised that the California Integrated Waste Management Board's (CIWMB) Green Lodging standards be incorporated into this project. LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT FD1. The applicant shall provide the Fire Department access to a minimum of 28' feet in width to within 150' of all portions of the buildings. The centerline of the access roadway shall be located parallel to and within 30' of the exterior wall on at least one side of the building. FD2. The applicant shall show all existing public fire hydrants on McBean Parkway and any interior existing fire hydrants on the fire department reviewed site plan. The applicant is advised that additional fire hydrants may be required at that time. FD3. The required fire flow for public fire hydrants at this location is 2,500 gallons per minute, at 20 psi. FD4. If the proposed building will be gaining vehicular access off Sheraton Court, the building must have a Sheraton Court building address. FDS. The applicant shall provide a 20' wide driveway (entrance and exit) for fire department access from Sheraton Court to the hotel building. Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08-051;CUP 08-006 July 7, 2009 Page 12 of 13 FD6. These conditions are based upon the current submitted site plan and subject to change upon formal submittal for plan check to the Fire Department. SPECIAL DISTRICTS SDI. No on-site, private property landscaping will be maintained by the LMD. The applicant must clarify how the landscaping will be maintained prior to the issuance of final conditions. SD2. The applicant will work with the paseo (located behind the Shell gas station) property owner to improve pedestrian circulation into and from the project site. SD3. The applicant shall improve the paseo bridge's west landing to improve access to the project site. This includes modifying bridge abutment that is owned by the City or within the right of way. Should access to adjoining bridge abutment property (car wash), be acquired by the City or applicant, the paseo landing improvements may be expanded to this property. The extent of the refurbishment shall be agreed to by the applicant and the Deputy City Manager & Director of Administrative Services. SD4. The applicants project shall not, in any way impede the City's ability to hold public events on McBean Parkway between Magic Mountain Boulevard and Valencia Boulevard. SD5. All LMD landscaping or property removed or damaged during construction will be replaced with like material approved by the Deputy City Manager & Director of Administrative Services before the occupancy permit is issued. SD6. The applicant shall annex the property into the City's Streetlight Maintenance -District (SMD) for the operations and maintenance of street lighting and traffic signals: A minimum of 120 days is required to process the annexation, which must be completed prior to final map approval or building permit issuance, whichever occurs first. TRANSIT TRI. There is fixed route bus service between the hours of 4 a.m. and 11 p.m. on McBean Parkway and Valencia Blvd daily. In addition, this project is located directly next to the McBean Regional Transit Center. TR2. At this time, the Transit Impact Fee does not apply to commercial/industrial developments. This fee is currently under revision. Applicant shall pay the fee in place at the time of building permit issuance. TR3. Applicant shall construct a safe pedestrian path to/from the transit center platform and the proposed development. Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08 -051, -CUP 08-006 July 7, 2009 Page 13 of 13 URBAN FORESTRY OF 1. The applicant and their contractors are advised that all existing parkway trees are protected under the City of Santa Clarita Parkway Influence Area Ordinance 92-38 and Parkway Tree Ordinance 90-15. Every effort shall be made to protect and preserve all existing parkway trees. UF2. In the event that parkway irrigation is terminated for any period of time during construction, the applicant and their contractors shall provide supplemental irrigation to all parkway trees as needed to maintain the health and safety of the tree. UF3. Any existing parkway tree which is damaged as a result of construction shall be replaced with an approved replacement tree of equal value or as approved by the City Arborist. Currently there are two existing parkway trees within the public right of way. The applicant shall indicate on all sets of site plans as to weather the existing trees are to remain or are proposed for removal. UF4. At no time shall any form of construction material or equipment be placed or stored up against the trunk of a parkway tree. This shall include but is not limited to the placing of soil, rock, sand or gravel. UF5. Prior to the issuance of demolition and/or grading permits, the applicant shall submit a final landscape plan showing the location and size of all required oak trees. The species and size shall be shown in the planting legend. This site plan shall be stamped and approved by the City of Santa Clarita Oak Tree Specialist. U176. Plant material proposed for below the canopy of the proposed oak trees shall be replaced with natural woodchips or mulch. (Plant material directly below the canopy of an oak tree may lead to fungus which may be harmful to the tree.) UFT Prior to final sign -off and issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall contact the Urban Forestry Department/Oak Tree Specialist for a final inspection of all required trees planted on site. SACD\CURRENII!2008\08-051 (Sheraton)\PLANNING COMMISSION\08-051 Final Conditions of Approval.doc CITY OF SANTA CLARITA MITIGATED NEGATIVE D E C L A R A T 10 N [X] Proposed [ ] Final MASTER CASE NO; Master Case No, 08-051 PERMIT/PROJECT NAME: Conditional Use Permit 06-004 APPLICANT: Brisam Valencia, LLC c/o Michael Goldstein Packard Hospitality Group 8775 Aero Drive, Suite 335 San Diego, CA 92123 PROJECT LOCATION: 26501 McBean Parkway (APN: 2861-062-040) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is proposing the development of a 136,559 square -foot building that includes a 200 -room hotel, a 120 seat restaurant, and 7,610 square feet of meeting room/banquet room area. The subject property is within the Commercial Town Center (CTC) zone in the Valencia community within the City of Santa Clarita. The proposed building is seven stories, or 77'-8" tall with architectural tower elements up to 88'-0" in height, and will be located on a 3.74 acre parcel. Due to the anticipation of hotel patrons also using the banquet facilities and the restaurant, the applicant is requesting a reduction of required parking on the subject property by means of shared parking calculation. There are 286 parking spaces proposed on the project site, 154 of those spaces are to be used for 24-hour, 7 days a week valet parking. The subject property is currently operating as a miniature golf course with a restaurant and bar (The Greens) and will be removed with the approval of this development. As required in the City of Santa Clarita Unified Development Code (UDC) the discretionary approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission is required to allow for the construction of a building exceeding 35'-0" in height and to allow for a shared parking calculation to be used for the proposed project. Based on the information contained in the Initial Study prepared for this project, and pursuant to the requirements of Section 15070 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Santa Clarita [ ] City Council [X] Planning Commission [ ] Director of Community Development finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant effect upon the environment, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration shall be adopted pursuant to Section 15070 of CEQA. Mitigation measures for this project [ ] Are Not Required [X] Are Attached [ ] Are Not Attached LISA M. WEBBER, PLANNING MANA Prepared by: Jessica M. Frank, Associate Planner (Name/Title) Approved by: Jason Smisko, Senior Planner (Signature) (Name/Title) Public Review Period From June 16, 2009 To July 7, 2009 Public Notice Given On June 16; 2009. [X] Legal Advertisement [X] Posting of Properties [X] Written Notice CERTIFICATION DATE: SACD\CURRENTWO08\08-051 (Sheraton)\Environmental\08-051 MND.doc 35 Initial Study Page 1 of 41 Project Title/Master Case Number: Lead Agency name and address: Contact person and phone number INITIAL STUDY CITY OF SANTA CLARITA Sheraton Hotel Master Case 08-051 Conditional Use Permit 08-006 Initial Study 08-004 City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Blvd, Suite 302 Santa Clarita, CA .91355 Jessica M. Frank Associate Planner (661) 255-4330 Project location: The proposed hotel would be located at 26501 McBean Parkway, south of the intersection of McBean Parkway and Mall Entrance Drive (APN: 2861-062-040), in the City of Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County, CA. Applicant's name and address: General Plan designation: Zoning: Description of setting and project: Brisam Valencia, LLC c/o Michael Goldstein Packard Hospitality Group 8775 Aero Drive, Suite 335 San Diego, CA 92123 Commercial Town Center (CTC)/Valley Center Concept (VCC) Overlay Commercial Town Center (CTC) This initial study was prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The project requires the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The applicant proposes to construct a seven -story, 136,559 square - foot building that includes a.200 -room hotel, a 120 seat restaurant and 7,610 square feet of meeting room/banquet room area. The proposed building is seven stories, or 77"-8" tall with architectural tower.elements up to 88'-0" in height, Due to the anticipation of hotel patrons also using the banquet facilities and the restaurant, the applicant 'is requesting a reduction of required parking on the subject property by means of a shared parking calculation. There are 286 parking spaces proposed on the project site, 154 of those spaces are to be used for 24-hour, 7 days a week valet parking for site patrons. The subject property is zoned CTC (Commercial Town Center). As required in the City of Santa Clarita Unified Development Code (UDC) the construction of a building exceeding 35'-0" and to allow for a shared parking calculation the applicant must obtain approval of a CUP from the Planning Commission. Setting: The project site is located at the northwest comer of McBean Parkway and Valencia Boulevard just south of Mall Entrance Drive and comprises approximately 3.74 acres of previously disturbed, primarily flat land that is zoned CTC. The project site has been previously graded and currently is developed with a miniature golf course and a restaurant with a bar. It is proposed that the existing development be entirely demolished to allow for the construction of the hotel. The property currently has a various non-native vegetation, decorative water features, one building and paved parking lot and driveways. The project site is bound by the Galaxy Car Wash and by the Valencia Country Club Golf Course to the north, Shell Gas Station, a Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) maintained Paseo walkway, Valencia Boulevard, and Facey Medical Building to the South, McBean Parkway and the mall to the east, and the McBean Transfer Station borders the project on the west, as shown on the attached vicinity map. Initial Study Page 2 of 41 Surrounding land uses: The project -site is located in the Commercial Town Center (CTC) zone. The project site is bound to the north by the Galaxy Car Wash and the approved but not constructed VTC Square Mixed -Use Building zoned CTC, also partially bordered to the north by the Valencia Country Club Golf Course zoned OS, to the east by McBean Parkway and the Town Center Mall zoned CTC, to the south by Shell gas station zoned CTC, Valencia Boulevard and a Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) maintained paseo walkway, and to the west by McBean Bus Transfer Station zoned CTC and RM. Other public agencies whose The project plans are subject to approval from the Los Angeles approval is required: County Fire Department. No discretionary approvals from agencies other than the City of Santa Clarita are requested or required for the project. Figure 1 — Project Location Map Initial Study Page 3 of 41 FilZure 1 — Project Location Map t lNrj1, i c aMi': t F �• ?'-t 1 <t s a d tiv..>�' L71 Aerial Map Apn #2830.033-016 Legend t ✓ 1000 A.RadjUS �1 ,e } i `�` `✓/Gf �.,?'g/H / a i i c�ri 2861-062-040 *���k t ��nFI��R, 2 f,`p4� i.r'/ ✓ i,�y dt ! Sa �t'�"Sa.��'� ���� � � � � �✓ �� r ,j./�g�" lf�`✓ �f� "�^ ibj�j � t '�{t` O{{�spFx ON"; .t � f �,��u r !, ✓t' t r - 4.: r' � +. } r�{ t i'yF 6-t 1 fi sry��*� r �r ,1 � rr)T i✓ r �, r%� r r �� � §�i J _ a F r xr!' !a r f 7i� Yrl ii! � ✓?fir �:�9�F �! Y � II T r 26501 McBean Parkway s J ✓� # ,,1P ^ I + a:, �; »i... N R S „¢; '/ f ✓. ._.e%, ? '. y �D '�;8�. OBJ t�" , 0 200 a0p on n.eoo FeH pi � r GFrJ)ti""i Initial Study Page 4 of 41 A. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or a "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Measures Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. [X] Aesthetics [ ] Agriculture Resources [ ] Air Quality [ J Biological Resources [ ] Cultural Resources [X] Geology /Soils [ ] Hazards & Hazardous Materials [ ] Hydrology / Water Quality [ ] Land Use / Planning [ ] Mineral Resources [X] Noise [ ] Population / Housing [ ] Public Services [ ] Recreation [X] Transportation/Traffic [ ] Utilities / Service Systems [ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance . B. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: [ ] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [X] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [) I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. [ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. [ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the propnsed project, nothing further is required. 2 10q \..... Date Date 4 Initial Study Page 5 of 41 C. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: I. AESTHETICS - Would the. project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, primary/secondary ridgelines, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? e) Other Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation [] I [X] [] [] I [] [X] [] [X] [] [] [] [] [X] [] [] [] [] [X] II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES - In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the . California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural . use, or a [] [] [] [X] Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? d) Other [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] III. AIR QUALITY .- Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] quality plan?. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] an existing or projected air quality violation? 5 0 Initial Study Page 6 of 41 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any [ J [ ] [X] [ ] criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional . (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of thresholds for ozone precursors)? Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant [ ] [] [X] [] concentrations? wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of [ ] [ ] [ X] [] people? through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or f) Other [ ] [ ] [] [X] IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional . plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected [ J [ ] [ ] [X] wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Oak trees? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 6 ail Initial Study Page 7 of 41 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation g) Affect a Significant Ecological Area. (SEA) or Significant Natural Area (SNA) as identified on the City of Santa Clarita [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] ESA Delineation Map? h) Other [ ] V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance . of a [ ] historical resource as defined in '.15064.5? b) 'Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an [ ] archaeological resource pursuant to '15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy or impact a unique [ ] paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of [ ] formal cemeteries? e) Other [ ] VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS — Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse [ ] effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on [ ] the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? [ ] iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? [ ] iv) Landslides? [ ] b) Result in substantial wind or water soil erosion or the loss of [ ] topsoil, either on or off site? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that [ ] would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1.8-1-B of the [ ] Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or property? 7 [J [J [XJ [J [XJ [J [] [J [XJ I [] [X] [J [J [X] [J [Xl I [X] I [J I .[] [XJ I [X] I [X] I [J Initial Study Page 8 of 41 Potentially . Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic [ ] [ J [ ] [XJ tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? f) Change in topography or ground surface relief features? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] g) Earth movement (cut. and/or fill) of 10,000 cubic yards or [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] more? h) Development. and/or grading on a slope greater than 10% [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] natural grade? i) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] geologic or physical feature? j) Other [ J [ J [ ] [X] VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment [ ] [ J [] [XJ through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving explosion or the release of hazardous materials into the environment (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals, fuels, or radiation)? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 0 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Initial Study Page 9 of 41 g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? i) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards (e.g. electrical transmission lines, gas lines, oil pipelines)? j) Other Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation [] [] I [X] [] [] [] [X] VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge [ ] requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere [ ] substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or [ ] area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a. manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or [ ] area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off- site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the [ ] capacity of existing or planned stonnwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? [ ] g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped [ ] on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? I [] [X] [] [X] Initial Study Page 10 of 41 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation b) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury [ ] [] [) [X] or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] k) Changes in the rate of flow, currents, or the course and [ ] [ ] [X] [] direction of surface water and/or groundwater? 1) Other modification of a wash, channel creek or river? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] m) Impact Stormwater Management in any of the following ways: [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] i) Potential impact of project construction and project post- [ ) [ ] [X] [ ] construction activity on storm water runoff? ii) Potential discharges from areas for materials storage, [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas or loading docks, or other outdoor work areas? iii) Significant environmentally harmful increase in the flow [) [ ] [X] [ ] velocity or volume of storm water runoff? iv) Significant and environmentally harmful increases in [ ] [ ] [X ] [ ] erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? v) Storm water discharges that would significantly impair or [) [ ] [X ] [ ] contribute to the impairment of the beneficial uses of receiving waters or areas that provide water quality benefits (e.g. riparian corridors, wetlands, etc.) vi) Cause harm to the biological integrity of drainage systems, [ ] [ ] [X ) [ ) watersheds, and/or water bodies? vii) Does the proposed project include provisions for the [ ] [ ] [X ] [ ] separation, recycling, and reuse of materials both during construction and after project occupancy? `t5 Initial Study Page 11 of 41 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Disrupt or physically divide an established community [ ] (including a low-income or minority community)? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or [ ] regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan, natural [ ] community conservation plan, and/or policies by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? X. MINERAL AND ENERGY RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource [ ] that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral [ ] resource recovery site .delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? c) Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient [ ] manner? XI. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess [ ] of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive [] groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the [ ] project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise [ ] levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where [ ] such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 11 [] [] [X] [] I [X] [] [] [X] [] [X] [] [X] [] [] [] [Xl [] [] [X] [] [X] [] [] 0 Initial Study Page 12 of 41 0 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere (especially affordable housing)? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project result in: a) Substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i) Fire protection? ii) Police protection? iii) Schools? iv) Parks? XIV. RECREATION - Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 12 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation [] [) [] . [XI I [I [XI [l [] [] . [] [X] [] [] [X] [] [l [] [X] [] [] [] [] [XJ [] 11 [] [X] [J [] [X] [] [] [] [] [X] Ul Initial Study Page 13 of 41 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC — Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to [ ] [X] [ ] [ ) the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service [ ] [X] [ ] [ ] standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an [ ] [ ] [ ] [X) increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] 0 Result in inadequate parking capacity? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? h) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable [ ] [ ] [ ] [X) Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Its 13 Initial Study Page 14 of 41 e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves. or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: a) Does the project ,have the potential to degrade .the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 14 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation [] [] [X] [] []. [] [] [X] [l 1 [] [] [XI [] [] [X) 11 [] [] [] [X] Initial Study Page 15 of 41 D. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND/OR EARLIER ANALYSIS: Section and Subsections Evaluation of Impacts I. AESTHETICS a) Less Than Significant Impact: The project proposes to construct a hotel building that is 77'-8" tall with architectural tower elements up to 88'-0" in height. Within the City of Santa Clarita, a building may exceed 35'-0" in height with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed building would total 136,559 square feet in floor area on approximately 3.74 acres of previously disturbed land. The proposed building would be located on McBean Parkway with a portion of the property along Valencia Boulevard, and would be visible from both of these major highways. Major freeways and roadways serve a dual purpose as transportation corridors through the Santa Clarita Valley and as view corridors. Through portions of the Santa Clarita Valley, the freeways and canyon roads are surrounded by undisturbed mountains, ridgelines, and forestland, Much of the planning area along I-5, SR -14, SR -126, and various canyon roads affords scenic vistas. However, the land surrounding the project site is largely developed, and is in scale with additional development associated with the' Valencia Town Center. As such, the project site and vicinity do not contain mountains, ridgelines, forest or any other notable scenic features. Furthermore, the proposed project meets all established City building codes. In addition, colors, and materials have been reviewed and accepted by the City's urban design consultant and the proposed office building meets the City's Architectural Design Guidelines. Therefore, the proposed project will not have a significant adverse effect on a scenic vista. b) No Impact: The project is proposed on a previously graded parcel adjacent to McBean Parkway with no significant topographic features. McBean Parkway is not a designated or eligible state scenic highway. Regardless, no scenic resources are located on the project site or vicinity, including, but not limited to, significant ridgelines, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts on scenic resources within a state scenic highway. c) Less Than Significant with Mitigation: The proposed project is located within the Commercial Town Center (CTC) zone, and in the direct vicinity of the Valencia Town Center Mall and Town Center Drive area. Existing development located within the vicinity of this project are a large variety of mixed -uses including a six -story Hyatt hotel, multiple office buildings (including four, five and six -story heights) with commercial retail located on .the bottom floor, a regional shopping mall, a movie theatre, a large gym facility, and a multi -family development with both rentals and ownership units. South of the project site across Valencia Boulevard is a three-story medical office building. The proposed project will be consistent with the uses planned for the CTC zone, and with the existing development that is located in the project vicinity. The proposed project would however alter the existing aesthetics of the site by converting a miniature golf course and a restaurant with a bar into a seven -story hotel building. There are residential units located west and southwest of the project site that would have a view the proposed project from their property. The properties with the greatest view of the proposed hotel are located within the Woodlands community. While they are able to see the hotel from their homes, the hotel building would be over 1000' away from the nearest home in the Woodlands, or over 800' between the community and the subject property. The land separating the community and the subject property and the woodlands is a the McBean Bus Transfer Station and a large undeveloped area with non-native vegetation. While the homeowners' will be able to view the building, because the building will be located at a distance, it 15 Initial Study Page 16 of 41 is not anticipated that the building would create a substantial degradation of the project site or its surroundings. Although the existing visual character of the site would physically change, the proposed development would be designed in a fashion consistent with the City's Development Standards and Architectural Design Guidelines. The proposed building would be constructed within the Valencia Town Center area and compatible with the land uses in the area. The mixed-use hotel building is proposed to be 77'78" tall with architectural tower elements up to 88"-0" in height, would be designed with architectural details consistent with the City's design guidelines and would be compatible with surrounding development. Buildings within the City of Santa Clarita are permitted to exceed 35' in height with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Mitigation Measure I-1 would ensure that architectural treatments be installed to break the massing of the building by way of tower elements, varying wall planes, and balconies. As conditioned, the applicant would be required to plant 24", 36", 48" and 72" box evergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs along the frontage of the project as well as the parking areas to soften the views of the development. Conforming to these required standards and mitigation measures will ensure the proposed project would not result in significant impacts related to the degradation of the existing visual character of the site and its surroundings. Mitigation Measure I-1: Construction of architectural treatments to break up massing of the building visible from McBean Parkway and Valencia Boulevard shall be installed in accordance with the Santa Clarita Architectural Design Guidelines and per the approved elevations; photo simulations, and color and materials board. d) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project includes a 136,559 square -foot hotel building with 286 surface parking stalls. The project proposes light sources that will be scattered evenly throughout the landscape and surface parking areas. In accordance with the City's UDC, the proposed outdoor light sources will be covered and facing down in order to minimize creation of glare and ambient light sources that could impact surrounding commercial and residential areas. Therefore, the project would not cause significant lighting or glare impacts. e) Other: The project would not cause any other aesthetic impacts. II. AGRICULTURE a) No Impact: There are currently no agricultural operations being conducted on RESOURCES the project site, and the City of Santa Clarita's General Plan does not identify any important farmlands or any lands for farmland use. In addition, the site is zoned CTC (Commercial Town Center) and is not within an area of Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, Grazing Land, or Farmland of Local Importance as identified by the California Department of Conservation, Division. of Land Resource Protection on the Los Angeles County Important Farmland 2002 map (California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection, 2004). Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact to Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. b) No Impact: The City of Santa Clarita does not have any agricultural zoning designations, nor does the City's General Plan identify any agricultural land use designations. Further, there is no Williamson Act contract land in the City. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with zoning for agricultural use or Williamson Act contracts, and would have no related impacts. 16 51 Initial Study Page 17 of 41 c) No Impact: The vacant project site is not currently used for agricultural purposes, nor are there any agricultural uses in the project vicinity. Furthermore, the proposed project would not; in any way, hinder the operations of any existing agricultural practices. Therefore, the project will not have an impact that could result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. d) Other: The project would not cause any other impacts to agricultural resources. III. AIR QUALITY a) No Impact: The Santa Clarita Valley, an interior valley of southern California, is within the South Coast Air Basin, which is bounded by the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east, and the Pacific Ocean to the south and west. The air quality in the South Coast Air Basin is managed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The South Coast Air Basin has a history of recorded air quality violations and is an area where both state and federal ambient air quality standards are exceeded. Because of the violations of the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), the California Clean Air Act requires triennial preparation of an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP)to achieve the standards. The South Coast Air. Quality Management District (SCAQMD) prepares the basin's air quality management plans with technical and policy inputs from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the California Air Resource Board (CARR), and the Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG). The most recently adopted plan is the 2007 AQMP, adopted on June 1, 2007. This plan is the South Coast Air Basin's portion of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP outlines steps required to achieve the standards while allowing for growth projected by the Southern California Association of Governments. This plan is designed to achieve the 5 percent annual reduction goal of the California Clean Air Act. The AQMP accommodates growth based on SCAG's predictions, Future regional levels of vehicular air pollution identified in the AQMP are based on SCAG's growth forecasts in the Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) coupled with the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Thus, projects that are consistent with employment and population forecasts are consistent with the AQMP, These forecasts are predicted using local land use plans, particularly honing and general plan land use designations. The proposed project is consistent with the City of Santa Clarita's CTC (Commercial Town Center) Zoning and General Plan Land Use designations for the site. Thus, the project is consistent with the growth projections accommodated by the AQMP, Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan, and would have no associated impacts.. b) Less than Significant Impact: The project site is located within the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the boundaries which consist of 6,600 square miles throughout Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties. The project site is located within this district which is considered a non -attainable basin. The project will occur on a project area that is primarily vacant and will require construction activities that may temporarily increase pollution within this air quality district. However, the construction activities, including grading of 8,800 cubic yards of dirt, and the exportation of 400 cubic yards of dirt are short- term in nature. and air pollutant emissions will cease upon completion of the construction. The operation of the facility will require additional traffic to the project site. However, the project site is located within the CTC zone, which Initial Study Page 18 of 41 anticipates the proposed use on the project site. In addition, with the required compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 the proposed project would not exceed the thresholds of significance established by the SCAQMD, Furthermore, a project of this size and scope would not have a noticeable change in air quality conditions. Therefore, the project would not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to any air quality violation, and the proposed project would have no related significant impacts. c) Less than Significant Impact: The City. of Santa Clarita is within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). This basin is a non -attainment area for Ozone (03), Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5), Respirable Particulate Matter (PMio), and Carbon Monoxide (CO), and is in a maintenance area for Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2). The proposed project would not exceed the thresholds of significance established by the SCAQMD. The SCQAMD established these thresholds in consideration of cumulative air pollution in the SCAB. As such, projects that do not exceed the SCAQMD's thresholds are not considered a hindrance to the long-term attainment status of the basin and, therefore, do not significantly contribute to cumulative air quality impacts. Since, the proposed project would not exceed the SCAQMD's thresholds, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant, and the project would have no related significant impacts. d) Less than Significant Impact: Certain residents, such as the very, young, the elderly and those suffering from certain illnesses or disabilities, are particularly sensitive to air pollution and are considered sensitive receptors. In addition, active park users, such as participants in sporting events, are sensitive air pollutant receptors due to increased breathing rates. Land uses where sensitive air pollutant receptors congregate include but are not limited to schools, day care centers, parks, recreational areas, medical facilities, rest homes, and convalescent care facilities. The project site is bordered to the north by a car wash and a golf course, by the Mall to the east, a Valencia Boulevard and a gas station to the south and the McBean Bus Transfer Station to the west. All of these uses are considered sensitive air quality receptors. However, the project would not, in and of itself, violate any air quality standards and would not substantially contribute to the existing violations of air quality standards. These standards were developed by the USEPA and CARB to identify the levels of air quality considered safe to protect the public health and welfare. Specifically, these standards were designed to protect those people most susceptible to respiratory distress, the most sensitive receptors. Since, the project would not violate any air quality standards the project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. e) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed hotel development is not likely to create additional odors as a part of project operation. However, during grading and future building construction activities, additional odors from the use of various gasoline or diesel powered equipment that will emit exhaust fumes may occur. These impacts are short-term and temporary and .will cease upon completion of the project. Therefore, the impacts are considered less than significant. f) Other: The project would not cause any other air quality impacts. IV. BIOLOGICAL a) No Impact: The proposed project site is currently a miniature golf course with RESOURCES a small restaurant and bar located on McBean Parkway just south of the Valencia 5,5 Initial Study Page 19 of 41 Town Center area. The project site is relatively flat and has all been previously disturbed with no native vegetation. The site is surrounded on all sides by development. The site is not known or expected to contain any species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department.of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Further, the site does not contain any habitat capable of supporting special status species, Therefore, the project would have no impacts. b) No Impact: The proposed project site contains no riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish or Wildlife Service. The project site currently houses a miniature golf course and a restaurant and bar. All vegetation located on site is ornamental and not native to the Santa Clarita Valley. Therefore, the project would have no impacts. c) No Impact: The proposed project site does not contain any federally protected wetlands as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc,). Therefore, the proposed project would not have adverse effects on protected wetlands. d) No Impact: The project site currently holds a miniature golf course with a restaurant and bar. The project site is separated from any native habitat by McBean Parkway, Valencia Boulevard, the Santa Clarita Bus Transfer Station and existing urban development that exists around the site, As such, the area is not a known resident or migratory corridor nor is the area utilized for the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species. Therefore, no impacts would occur, e) No Impact: The City of Santa Clarita's Oak Tree Ordinance is the only local policy or ordinance that protects biological resources. The project site does not contain any oak trees. However, as part of the proposed landscape plan for the hotel, a number of oak trees are proposed to be installed on the project site. Therefore, the project would have no. impacts related to conflicts with local policies protecting biological resources. f) No Impact: The project site is not within a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Therefore, the project would not conflict with any adopted habitat conservation plans, and the project would have no related impacts. g) No Impact: The project site is not within a Significant Ecological Area identified on either the Exhibit. OS -2 of the City's General Plan or the Los Angeles County Significant Ecological'Area mapping. The project site is also not within. a Significant Natural Area identified by the CDFG. The project site is designated as CTC (Commercial Town Center) and is located in a commercial area flanked by major roadways and development. Therefore, the property is not a Significant Ecological Area or Significant Natural Area, and the proposed project would have no related impacts. h) Other: The project would not cause any other impacts to biological resources. V. CULTURAL a) No Impact: This portion of the Santa Clarita Valley is not known or expected RESOURCES to contain any historic resources, as the majority of historic resources in the valley are associated with railroad development and the Newhall community. The proposed development on .the project site would be limited to the project site, ILI 5y Initial Study Page 20 of 41 which currently is a miniature golf course and a restaurant with a bar, and therefore has been previously graded and disturbed by previous construction activities. The proposed project is not located near any historically significant sites and therefore will not cause an adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact to any historical resources. b) Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is not known or expected to contain prehistoric or historic archeological sites. However, the project will involve grading of approximately 8,800 cubic yards of earth for the construction of the seven -story building. Thus, there is a potential for construction of the project to encounter previously undiscovered archeological resources, however the potential is low. In the unlikely event that archaeological resources are encountered during grading or construction of the project, all project grading and construction efforts will be. required to cease until an archeologist recommends a course of action in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, the proposed project would not significantly impact archeological resources. . c) No Impact: The proposed project site is categorized as Disturbed/Developed as identified on Exhibit OS -3, showcasing Biological Resources Study Areas Showing Habitat Sensitive Ranks in the City's General Plan. No paleontological resource or unique geologic feature is known to exist on site. It is not anticipated that the proposed project would affect any paleontological resources and therefore, the project would have no impacts. d) No Impact: There are no known human remains on the site. The project site is not part of a formal cemetery and is not known to have been used for disposal of historic or prehistoric human remains. Thus, human remains are not expected to be encountered during construction of the proposed project. In the unlikely event that human remains are. encountered during project construction, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires the project to halt until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to the origin and disposition of the remains pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.. Compliance with these regulations would ensure the proposed project would not result in significant impacts. due to disturbing human remains. e) Other: The project would not cause any other impacts to cultural resources. VI. GEOLOGY AND a)i. No Impact: The project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo SOILS Earthquake Fault Zone. Regardless, the proposed project is required to comply with the California Building Code that establishes regulations for structures in potentially hazardous areas, in order to withstand impacts caused from localized earthquake activity. Therefore, the.proposed project would not expose people or structures to potential adverse effects from the rupture of a known earthquake fault and would cause no associated impacts. a)ii. Less Than Significant Impact: The City of Santa Clarita is within a seismically active region of southern California. Consequently, future development will likely be subject to strong seismic ground shaking. A.portion of the subject property has building restrictions due to proximity to a fault line. A fault line study was completed to determine a safe building setback from the vicinity of fault line and, as a result, all habitable structures for the proposed project are located outside of the setback line, only parking, drive aisles and landscaping are located within the setback area as allowed by the California Uniform Building Code. The proposed structure is required to comply with the 20 5,5 Initial Study Page 21 of 41 Uniform Building Code and other construction standard codes, and is subject to inspection during construction. By placing all buildings outside of the seismic setback zone and conforming to the required Uniform Building Code standards, it will ensure the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts due to strong seismic ground shaking, a)iii. Less than Significant with Mitigation: The project site is' within a designated Seismic Hazard Zone, as shown on the Seismic Hazard Zones map, City of Santa Clarita, The map includes earthquake -induced landslide hazard zones, and liquefaction hazard zones. The project site is within a liquefaction hazard zone, as shown on the aforementioned map. However, the proposed structure is required to comply with the Uniform Building Code and other applicable codes, and is subject to approval by the City engineer as well as inspection during construction. Furthermore, from a geology and soils study, titled Preliminary Geologic/Geotechnical Report, prepared by Allan E, Seward Engineering Geology, INC. for the proposed project site, there is a potential for liquefaction of some of the alluvial soil layers located deeper than 25 feet beneath the site surface during future earthquakes. However, potential at the site for surface manifestations of liquefaction (such as fissures and sand boils) is low. Likewise, the risk of lateral spreading at the site is low. Following future earthquakes, there is a potential at the site for up to about 3 inches of total surface settlement and for up to about 2 inches of differential settlement. The geology and .soils study contains recommendations for actions that would minimize potential damage related to seismic activities and associated liquefaction, and Mitigation Measures VI -1 requires the recommendation to be incorporated into the final plans. The recommendations included would mitigate impacts of settlement associated with compressibility of the alluvial site soils under static loading and potential post -earthquake settlement due to liquefaction. Conforming to these required standards will ensure the proposed project would not result in significant impacts related to ground failure, and including liquefaction. Mitigation Measure VI -1: In order to provide sufficient load capacity for the proposed seven -story hotel structure (and to mitigate impacts of settlement associated with compressibility of the alluvial site soils under static loading and potential post -earthquake settlement due to liquefaction), the applicant is required that the hotel be supported on driven, precast concrete, 14 -inch square, 60 -foot long, end -bearing piles that will be driven into the dense terrace deposits, a)iv. No Impact: The project site is not within a landslide hazard zone identified on City or State mapping. Furthermore, there are no unstable slopes on the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to potential adverse effects from landslides and would have no associated impacts. b) Less than Significant Impact: During construction of the proposed project, the soils on-site may become exposed, and thus subject to erosion. However, the project is required to comply with existing regulations that reduce erosion potential. The proposed project will. comply with SCAQMD Rule 403, which as described in Section III of this report, would reduce the potential for wind erosion. Similarly, water erosion during construction would be substantially reduced by complying with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination'System (NPDES). As further detailed in Section VIII of this report, NPDES requires the construction of the project to incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce erosion and prevent eroded soils from washing offsite. Thus, the potential to increase erosion during any construction activity would have a less than significant impact through the required compliance activities. 21 Ele Initial Study Page 22 of 41 c) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The proposed building is located on a flat, previously graded parcel that currently holds a miniature golf course and a restaurant and bar. The City's Seismic Hazard Zones Map denotes the project site is within a liquefaction hazard zone. However, the project has been reviewed by a soils engineer, and is required to meet all established building codes to ensure the project meets the City's established safety needs and requirements. In addition, the proposal for the seven -story structure is required to be constructed on multiple 60 -ft long precast concrete, 14 -inch piles. This will mitigate any impacts to the building and will transfer the compression loads for the building to the relatively dense Terrace Deposits that underlie the relatively compressible alluvial deposits, therefore removing the risk of building impact due to liquefiable soils. Conforming to these required standards and with the incorporation of. the mitigation measure below, will ensure the proposed project would not result in significant impacts related to the liquefaction hazard zone. Therefore, the.proposed project would not create a substantial risk to life or property due to liquefaction, and the project would have less than significant impacts with mitigation. Mitigation Measure VI -1: In order to provide sufficient load capacity for the proposed seven -story hotel structure (and to mitigate impacts of settlement associated with compressibility of the alluvial site soils under static loading and potential post -earthquake settlement due to liquefaction), the applicant is required that the hotel be supported on driven, precast concrete, 14 -inch square, 60 -foot long, end -bearing piles that will be driven into the dense terrace deposits. d) Less than Significant Impact: Per the project's geology and soils report (Preliminary Geological/Geotechnical Report) the project site includes contain coarse-grained soils with a relatively low expansion potential and fine-grained soils with relatively high expansion potential. It is considered that the expansion potential for the project site is medium. To mitigate the potential for expansive soils to impact the proposed building it to a less than significant impact for the seven -story structure is to be constructed on multiple 60<ft long precast concrete; 14 inch piles. This will transfer the compression loads for the building to the relatively dense terrace deposits that underlie the relatively compressible alluvial deposits. In addition a second mitigation measure is recommended by the soils report that requires the over -excavation of 5 feet deep of soil, .out to five feet beyond the footprint of the proposed building, and the upper 3 feet of parking lot areas. Thus removing any damage potential from expansive soils for the concrete slab on -grade. Conforming to these required standards will ensure the proposed project' would not result in significant impacts related to expansive soils. Therefore, with the incorporation of the below mitigation measures, the project will have a less than significant impact due to expansive soil and would not create substantial risks to life or property. Mitigation Measure VI -1: In order to provide sufficient load capacity for the . proposed seven -story hotel structure (and to mitigate impacts of settlement associated with compressibility of the alluvial site soils under static loading.and potential post -earthquake settlement due to liquefaction), the applicant is required that the hotel be supported on driven, precast concrete, 14 -inch square, 60 -foot long, end -bearing piles that will be driven into the dense terrace deposits. Mitigation Measure VI -2: The upper 5 feet of building pad areas, including 5 feet beyond the proposed building pad and the upper 3 feet of parking lot areas should be removed and replaced as compacted fill. e) No Impact: The project will be required .to connect to the existing. sewer 22 57 Initial Study Page 23 of 41 system, Therefore, soil suitability for septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems is not applicable in this case, and the proposed project would. have no associated impacts. f) Less than Significant Impact: The topography of the project site, as existing, is effectively flat. The site generally slopes downward towards the north east with elevations ranging from approximately 1,145 feet above mean sea level (amsl) to 1,135 feet amsl. The project proposes the grading of 8,800 cubic yards (yds3) of earth to prepare the site for construction and will require the exportation of 400 yds3 of earth off-site, at a location to be reviewed and approved by the City's Public Works Department. The proposed grading will be to prepare the site for development, and does not involve any landform changes. The site's minimum relief is man-made, and no natural topography features exist on-site, Therefore, although the project requires 8,800 yds3 of earthwork, the proposed topographic changes and earth movement have less than significant impacts. g) No Impact: The project does not involve more than 10,000 cubic yards of earthwork. The project is expected to instead have approximately 8,800 yds3 of grading on site, therefore would have no impact, h) No Impact: As discussed, the project site is largely flat, has no natural slopes greater than 10 percent natural grade. Therefore, the proposed project would not cause any impacts from development or grading slopes greater than 10% natural grade. i) No Impact: As discussed, the topography of the project site, as existing, is effectively flat. The site does not contain any ridgelines or other regionally notable topographic features. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical feature, and the project would have no related impact. j) Other: .The project would not cause any other impacts related to geology and soils. VII. HAZARDS AND a) No Impact: The proposed hotel building is not anticipated to store, use, or HAZARDOUS generate. substantial amounts of hazardous materials, and is not anticipated to MATERIALS utilize any acutely hazardous materials. The only hazardous materials expected to be utilized onsite are typical cleansers, solvents, pesticides, .and fertilizers for the normal maintenance of structures and landscaping. These chemicals are used for normal maintenance and are not typically of sufficient amount or concentration to pose hazards to the public. Therefore, the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and would have no associated impacts. b) No Impact: The site is not known or expected to contain any.underground storage tanks (USTs), aboveground storage tanks (ASTs), gas lines, or other hazardous material conduits or storage facilities. The site currently has a gas easement indicated on the title and the Los Angeles County Assessor's Map that crosses the south east portion of the subject property. However, staff has a letter on file from Southern California Gas that indicates the easement was abandoned in 2006 and a gas line no longer exists in the easement. The applicant is currently working to have a quit claim completed for the easement to have it removed. In addition, the project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to 65962.5. There exists no evidence of willful industrial abuse, legal/illegal dumping, mining, or oil and gas exploration/production. Furthermore, the project does not propose any industrial uses, waste 23 Initial Study Page 24 of 41 treatment/storage facilities, power plants, or other land uses that are typically associated with hazardous material accidents. Therefore, the proposed project would not create a hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment, and the project would have no related impacts. c) No Impact: The project site is not located within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Furthermore, as discussed in Section VII.a) of this report, the proposed uses are not anticipated to store, use, or generate substantial amounts of hazardous materials, and are not anticipated to utilize any acutely. hazardous materials. Therefore, the project would have no related impacts. d) No Impact: The project site is currently used as a miniature golf course and has a restaurant with a bar. The project site is not known to contain any hazardous materials. The site is not found on any list of hazardous materials sites.compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. e) No Impact: There are'no airports located within ten (10) miles of the project site; and the project site is not within an airport land use plan. Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in proximity to an airport, and the proposed project would have no associated impacts. f) No Impact: The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip. There are no airplane transportation facilities, public or private, within ten (10) miles of the project site. Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in proximity to a private airstrip, and the proposed project would have no associated impacts. g) No Impact: The proposed project involves the development of a hotel building on- a 3.74 -acre parcel located at the northwest corner of McBean Parkway and Valencia Boulevard. The construction and operation of the proposed project would not place any permanent or temporary physical barriers on any existing public streets. The site drive aisles and pathways for the proposed project are designed to provide adequate access to the building in case 'of fire or emergency, Furthermore, the project site is not utilized by any emergency response agencies, and no emergency response facilities exist in the project vicinity. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact to emergency response planning. h) No Impact: As identified on the City's Fire Hazards Zone map, the project site is outside the fire hazard zones. The site is surrounded a car wash and a golf course the north, McBean Parkway and the Town Center Mall to the east, Valencia Boulevard and a Gas Station to the south, and the McBean Bus Transfer Station to the west. The developed areas to the north, east, south and west of the project area act as buffers to wildfires. Furthermore, the project's development plans are subject to review and approval by the City's Community Development Department and the Los Angeles Fire Department. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, and the project would have no associated impacts. i) No Impact: As mentioned in section VII.b) of this document there is an abandoned easement for a gas line located on the subject property, however no gas line exists within the easement and the applicant and the Southern California is working together to have the easement vacated. The site is not known or expected to contain any electrical transmission lines, gas lines, oil lines, or other hazardous 24 S� Initial Study Page 25 of 41 material conduits or storage facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people to existing sources of potential. health hazards, and the project would have no related impacts. j) Other: The project would not cause any other impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND a) Less, than Significant Impact: Section 303 of the federal Clean Water Act WATER QUALITY requires states to develop water quality standards to protect the beneficial uses of receiving waters. In accordance with California's Porter/Cologne Act, the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) are required to develop water quality objectives that ensure their region meets the requirements of Section 303 of the Clean Water Act. Santa Clarita.is within the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles RWQCB. The Los Angeles RWQCB adopted water quality objectives in its Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SQMP). This SQMP is designed to ensure stormwater achieves compliance with receiving water limitations. Thus, stormwater generated by a development that complies with the SQMP does not exceed the limitations of receiving waters, and thus does not exceed water quality standards. Compliance with the SQMP is ensured by Section 402 of the Clean Water Act, which is known as the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Under this section, municipalities are required to obtain permits for the water pollution generated by stormwater in their jurisdiction. These permits are known as Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) pernlits. Los Angeles County and 85 incorporated Cities therein, including the City of Santa Clarita, obtained an MS4 (Permit # 01-182) from the Los Angeles RWQCB, most recently in 2001. Under this MS4, each permitted municipality is required to implement the SQMP. In addition, as required by the MS4 permit, the City of Santa Clarita has adopted a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) ordinance to ensure new developments comply with SQMP. The City's SUSMP ordinance requires new developments to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) that reduce water quality impacts, including erosion and siltation, to the maximum extent practicable. This ordinance also requires most new developments to submit a plan to the City that demonstrates how the project will comply with the City's SUSMP and identifies the project -specific BMP that will be implemented. This project is considered a development planning priority project under the City's NPDES Municipal Stormwater Permit with the construction of a mixed - used development greater than one acre in size. In accordance with the MS4 Permit and the City's SUSMP ordinance, a SUSMP that incorporates appropriate post construction BMPs into the design of the project must be prepared and approved prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Compliance with the MS4 permit and the SUSMP would ensure that the proposed project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, and the project would have no related significant impacts. b) Less than Significant Impact: The Santa Clara River and its tributaries are the primary groundwater recharge areas for the Santa Clarita Valley (City of Santa Clarita General Plan, 1991). The proposed project would add impermeable surfaces to a site that is currently a miniature golf course and a restaurant with a bar, which could reduce the site's groundwater recharge potential. However, the site's runoff currently flows into an engineered storm drain system, and is not part 25 Initial Study Page 26 of 41 of the natural drainage system that is largely responsible for recharging groundwater. The proposed project would alter the drainage of the site by adding impermeable surfaces; however, the proposed project would maintain the site's outflow into the supporting storm drain system. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, and the project would have no related significant impacts. c) Less than Significant Impact: Development projects that increase the volume or velocity of surface water can result in an increase in erosion and siltation. Increased surface water volume and velocity causes an increase in siltation and sedimentation by increasing both soil/water interaction time and the sediment load potential of water. As required by the City of Santa Clarita and the Countywide MS4 Permit, any development on the site will require that the final design of the development's drainage system is engineered so that post -development peak runoff discharge rates (a measure of the volume and velocity of water flows) are equal to or less than pre -development peak runoff rates. The proposed project would alter the site's drainage. The project site is relatively flat as it is currently being used as a miniature golf course with a restaurant and bar. Runoff currently drains from the site to a storm drain system. The proposed development would add impermeable surfaces to the existing field where water is conveyed as sheet flow. However, the project will include a drainage system that will comply with the MS4 permit to handle both the runoff that currently flows to the site from surrounding development and the increased runoff from the proposed impermeable surfaces onsite. The proposed drainage plan does not propose channelizing drainage courses or focusing surface water flows into areas of exposed soil. In addition, the onsite drainage system in accordance with the NPDES requirements discussed above in Section VIII(a), is also required to include Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce erosion and siltation to the maximum extent practicable. Therefore, with the application of standard engineering practices, NPDES requirements, and City standards, the project would not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite, and the project would have no related significant impacts. d) No Impact: As discussed in section VIII.c) of this report, the proposed project would include a drainage system that will comply with the MS4 permit to handle the increased runoff from the proposed impermeable surfaces onsite. Therefore, the project would not result in flooding on- or offsite, and the project would have no related impacts. e) No Impact: The proposed project will not increase runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Furthermore, as discussed above in Sections VIII.c) and VIIIA), the proposed development will comply with the City's SUSMP ordinance to ensure that post -development peak storm water runoff rates do not exceed pre -development peak storm water runoff rates; and to ensure that stormwater flows are properly treated before entering the storm drain system. Therefore, the proposed project would not affect the capacity of the stormwater drainage system and currently would not create any source of polluted runoff. f) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project will not alter the water sources on the site and the surrounding area. The proposed development will not be a point -source generator of water pollutants. Compliance with the City's SUSMP ordinance will ensure that the proposed project would not generate NO m Initial Study Page 27 of 41 stormwater pollutants that would substantially degrade water quality The project, however, has the potential to generate short-term water pollutants during construction, including sediment, trash, construction materials, and equipment fluids. The Countywide MS4 permit requires construction sites to implement BMPs to reduce the potential for construction -induced water pollutant impacts. These BMPs include methods to prevent contaminated construction site stormwater from entering the drainage system 'and preventing construction - induced contaminates from entering the drainage system. The MS4 identifies the following minimum requirements for construction sites in Los Angeles County:. 1. Sediments generated on the project site shall be retained using adequate Treatment Control or Structural BMPs; 2. Construction -related materials, wastes, spills or residues shall be retained at the project site to avoid discharge to streets, drainage facilities, receiving waters, or adjacent properties by wind or runoff, 3. Non -storm water runoff from equipment and vehicle washing and any other activity shall be contained at the project site; and 4. Erosion from slopes and channels shall be controlled by implementing an effective combination of BMPs (as approved in Regional Board Resolution No. 99-03), such as the limiting of grading scheduled during the wet season; inspecting graded areas during rain events; planting and maintenance of vegetation on slopes; and covering erosion susceptible slopes. In addition, projects with a construction site of one acre or greater, such as the project site, are subject to additional stormwater pollution requirements during construction. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) maintains a statewide NPDES permit for all construction activities within California that result in one (1) or more acres of land disturbance. This permit is known as the State's General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit or the State's General NPDES Permit. Since the proposed project involves greater than one (1) acre of land disturbance, the project is required to submit to the SWRCB a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with the State's General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit. This NOI must include a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that outlines the BMPs that will be incorporated during construction. These BMPs will minimize construction -induced water pollutants by controlling erosion and sediment, establishing waste handling/disposal requirements, and providing non -storm water management procedures. Complying with both the MS4's construction site. requirements and the State's General Construction Permit, as well as implementing an S WPPP' will ensure that future construction activity on the project site would not significantly impact water quality. g) No Impact: The project site is not within the 100 -year or 500 -year flood zones as shown on the City's "Flood Zones" map. Therefore, the proposed project would not place future housing in flood hazard areas and would have no related impacts. h) No Impact: The project site is not within the 100 -year or 500 -year flood zones as shown on the City's "Flood Zones" map. Therefore, the proposed project would not place future structures in a flood hazard area and would have no related impacts. No Impact: There are no levees, dams, or other water detention facilities in the 27 Initial Study Page 28 of 41 vicinity of the project site. Therefore, the proposed project or future related projects would not expose people or structures to a risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or darn, and the project would have no related impacts. j) No Impact: There are no bodies of water in the vicinity of the project site that are capable of producing seiche or tsunami. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact from seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. k) Less than Significant Impact: The project would alter the site's drainage patterns. However, as discussed above in Sections VIII.c) and VIIIA), compliance with the City's SUSMP ordinance would ensure that post - development peak storm water runoff rates do not exceed pre -development peak storm water runoff . rates. In addition, the project involves grading for .site preparation and subterranean parking. However, the project does not involve grading or excavation into the groundwater table, and would not place any subterranean structures or foundation that would encroach into groundwater aquifer. Consequently, groundwater flows would not be affected. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in significant impacts from changes in the rate of flow, currents, or the course and direction of surface water and groundwater. 1). No Impact: The. project would not cause any other impacts due to the modification of a wash, channel, creek, or river as the project site is not located near any of these bodies of water. m) Less than Significant Impact: As discussed above in Sections VIII.a), VIII.c); VIIIA), and VIII.e) of this report, the project is required to comply with the City's SUSMP ordinance, the Countywide MS4 permit, the State' NPDES General Construction Permit, and required to implement a SUSMP compliance plan and SWPPP. Compliance with these requirements of the Clean Water Act and the NPDES will ensure the proposed project would not significantly impact stormwater management. IX. LAND USE AND a) No Impact: The proposed project will not disrupt or physically divide an PLANNING established community, including a low-income or minority community. The subject property is located in the CTC (Commercial Town -Center) zone in the Valencia Town Center area, comprised of a mix of hotel, multi -family residential, commercial, and office uses. The proposed project would develop the site that is currently being used for commercial uses (a miniature golf course, restaurant and bar) with a hotel building, which is consistent . with the parcel's land use designation. The proposed project would also be consistent with the surrounding uses. Therefore, the proposed project would not physically divide an established community and would have no associated impacts. b) No Impact: The project site is not part of a specific plan or redevelopment plan, and the City of Santa Clarita is not within the Coastal Zone, as described in the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1966, or any other plan designed with the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The project site is zoned CTC (Commercial Town Center), which is consistent with the proposed uses for the property. Therefore, the proposed project would not cause impacts due to conflicts with applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations. c) No Impact: As discussed in Section IV.f) of this report, the project site is not within a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other approved environmental resource conservation plan. Therefore, the project would not conflict with any adopted environmental conservation plans, a Initial Study Page, 29 of 41 29 6y and the project'would have no related impacts. X. MINERAL AND a -b) No Impact: The project site is not within a mineral area identified on Exhibit ENERGY RESOURCES OS -5 "Mineral Resources" of the City's General Plan, and is not otherwise known to contain mineral resources. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource, and the project would have no related impacts. c) Less than Significant Impact: The project would utilize building materials and human resources for construction of the project. Many of the resources utilized for construction are nonrenewable, including manpower, sand, gravel, earth, iron, steel, and hardscape materials. Other construction resources, such as lumber, are slowly renewable. In addition, the project would commit energy and water resources as a result of the construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed. development. Much of the energy that will be utilized onsite will be generated through combustion of fossil fuels, which are nonrenewable resources. Market -rate conditions encourage the efficient use of materials and manpower during construction. Similarly, the energy and water resources that would be utilized by the proposed hotel development would be supplied by the regional utility purveyors, which participate in various conservation programs. Furthermore, there are no unique conditions that would require excessive use of nonrenewable resources onsite, and the project is, expected to utilize energy or water resources in the same manner as typical modem development. Therefore, the proposed project would not use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner, and the project would have no related significant impacts. XI. NOISE a) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation; The proposed project involves the development of a hotel building on the project site. Residential, office, and commercial .uses that would . typify the proposed building are considered sensitive noise receptors. The Noise Element in the City's General Plan (Exhibit N-1) identifies the City's normally acceptable noise level for commercial area -to be at or below 70 dBA. Based. on the City's Noise Contour Map (General Plan Exhibit N-3), the proposed hotel building would be placed within a 65 dBA contour area along McBean Parkway, an acceptable noise environment for commercial hotel building uses. McBean Parkway contains a large portion of commercially zoned properties. The proposed project will be consistent with the existing land uses along McBean Parkway as well as the parcel's existing land use designation of CTC (Commercial Town Center), therefore long term noise levels would not create a significant impact. However, as a result of the demolition of the existing site improvements and construction for a hotel building, the project would generate noise on-site from increased human activity and from increased construction vehicle trips entering and exiting the hotel development. Because of the size of the proposed building and the type of soil and the groundwater elevation on the subject property, it is necessary for piles to be installed by method of driving in the construction of the .hotel. The noise ordinance also establishes the fixed noise (non -transportation) sources to limit daytime noise levels to 65dBA Leq (1 -hour) at the nearest residential property or other sensitive land uses. In addition, Lmax noise levels cannot exceed 75 dBA for the daytime at the nearest residential uses. For this project, pile driving will be the noisiest construction activity and will be significantly louder than the other construction activities on the. project site. The maximum noise ` levels (Lmax) generated by pile driving are in the range of 90 to 105 dBA at 50 29 6y Initial Study Page 30 of 41 feet from the pile driver. Approximately between 10 and, 15 piles would need to be installed at the project site each day, and it is estimated that the pile driving will occur for approximately 6 to 8 weeks, In addition, the noise ordinance requires a -5 dB correction factor for repetitive noise, such as pile driving. Therefore, the acceptable levels from construction activities at adjacent residences are limited to 60 dBA Leq and 70 dBA Lmax. Residential uses exist to the north, south and west of the project site, with the closest resident located on the south side of Valencia Boulevard, across the street from the project site. Although the nearest residential property is located about 130 feet from the project site, the actual distance between the nearest residential property and the pile driving is about 530 feet. Based on this distance, it is determined that the nearest residences may experience in a worst case un- mitigated peak construction noise levels from 70 to 85 dBA Linax and between 65 .to 80 dBA Leq. Since the noise levels produced by the pile driver as part of the project construction causes a noise level at the adjacent residences that has potential to exceed the allowable daytime noise levels, there would be a significant temporary noise impact. However, with the incorporation of the mitigation measures below the noise levels will be reduced to less than significant levels and the project will not expose people to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Mitigation Measure XI -1: Control of Construction Hours — All construction activities should be limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. Monday through Friday and between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Saturday. As an additional restriction, all pile driving activities shall be limited to the hours between 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Saturday. Construction and demolition should be prohibited on Sunday and national holiday's. Mitigation Measure XI -2: Install Sound Curtains — Sound Curtains should be installed between the pile driving equipment and the residents southwest of the project. The preferred location of the curtains is near the pile driving equipment and needs to be high enough to break the line of site between the pile driver and the residences. The sound curtains should have Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 26 or better. Mitigation Measure XI -3: Perform Noise Monitoring — Noise monitoring near the residences should be conducted during the first day of pile driving. The noise levels should be monitored in a manner consisted with the City's noise ordinance. The purpose of the measurements is to verify that the mitigation measure are in place and that they are effective in reducing noise levels. The measurements data will help the developer and City respond to any citizen complaints if they arise. b) Less Than Significant Impact: There are no established vibration standards in the City of Santa Clarita. Once constructed, the proposed hotel development on the project site would neither generate, nor expose people to excessive groundborne vibrations or groundborne noise levels. Construction of the project may temporarily generate vibrations due to typical construction activities and the. proposed pile driving. Vibrations from the typical construction activities would be minimal and is expected to not have a significant impact on the adjacent properties. The, pile driving is expected to have a higher vibration than typical construction activities. However, the closest sensitive receptors (residential 30 Initial Study Page 31 of 41 property) is located approximately 350 feet away from the proposed pile driving. Because ground born vibrations typically diminish ata significant rate between origination site to receptor sites over distance, it is believed that no vibrations will impact or cause any damage to adjacent properties. As part of the condition of approval, ground vibration monitoring will be required to assess the vibration levels and if a higher level of vibration is measure the pile driving rig can be adjusted to reduce vibrations to an acceptable level. With the conditions of approval for the project, it is not anticipated that the vibrations will negatively impact adjacent properties or sensitive receptors located near the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not cause significant vibration impacts, e) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project consists of developing a hotel building on the project site. The project will generate trips that may increase traffic noise levels in the surrounding roadway areas.. However, the existing roadways surrounding the project site create substantial amounts of noise, and the increases in traffic volumes that would be caused by the proposed project would not cause a noticeable increase in roadway noise. Through compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance, no long-term impacts related to operations -related noise are anticipated as a result of this development. Therefore, long-term noise impacts are considered less than significant. d) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: Construction and demolition of the project is expected to generate short-term noise, As explained in Section XI. a) it is anticipated that the construction equipment, more specifically the pile driving is anticipated to have the largest noise impact during the construction. phase. With no mitigation measures it is expected that the noise levels caused would exceed those allowed by the City's General Plan. As explained, with the addition of the mitigation measures XI -1, XI -2 and XI -3 a less than significant impact would be created from all construction activities. With this mitigation, noise levels are not anticipated to adversely affect the neighboring uses. Mitigation Measure XI -1: Control of Construction Hours — All construction activities should be limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. Monday through Friday and between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Saturday. As an additional restriction, all pile driving activities shall be limited to the hours between 9 a.m, to 5 p.m. Monday through Saturday. Construction and demolition should be prohibited on Sunday and national holiday's. Mitigation Measure XI -2: Install Sound Curtains — Sound Curtains should be installed between the pile driving equipment and the residents southwest of the project. The preferred location of the curtains is near the pile driving equipment and needs to be high enough to break the line of site between the pile driver and the residences. The sound curtains should have Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 26 or better. Mitigation Measure XI -3: Perform Noise Monitoring — Noise monitoring near the residences should be conducted during the first day of pile driving. The noise levels should be monitored in a manner consisted with the City's noise ordinance. The purpose of the measurements is to verify that the mitigation measure are in place and that they are effective in reducing noise levels. The measurements data will help. the developer and City respond to any citizen complaints if they arise. e) No Impact: The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan 31 Initial Study Page 32 of 41 32 67 of within two miles of a public airport. f) No Impact: The proposed project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip and therefore would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. XII. POPULATION AND . a) Less than Significant Impact: Growth -inducing impacts are caused by those HOUSING characteristics of a project that foster or encourage population and/or economic growth. These characteristics include adding residential units or businesses, expanding infrastructure, and generating employment opportunities. The project would involve the construction of a 200 -room hotel with banquet facilities and a restaurant, with no residential uses proposed. The proposed activities will lead to an increase in local traffic and the congregation of people. However, the project conforms to the City's land use designation of Commercial Town • Center, and would be within the build -out limits as provided in the City's General Plan. Furthermore, the proposed project would not otherwise induce growth by expanding the capacity of the roadway network or utility infrastructure. Therefore, although the proposed project would add a connnercial hotel building, the project would not cause significant growth inducing impacts. b) No Impact: The project site is currently being used as a miniature golf course with a restaurant and bar. There are_no housing or residential uses on the subject property, and none would be removed or impacted as apart of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would not displace any housing, and would have no associated impacts. c) No Impact: The project site is currently being used as a miniature golf course with a restaurant and bar. There are no housing or residential uses on the subject property, and none would be removed or impacted as a part of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would not displace any people, and would have no associated impacts. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES ai) Less Than Significant Impact: As part of the Consolidated Fire Protection District, the City of Santa Clarita and the planning area receive fire protection and emergency medical service from the Los Angeles County Fire Department. The project site is within an area that is already served by existing fire stations. As such, response times would be acceptable and the incremental increase in demand associated with project implementation is not expected to adversely affect service or create the need for new facilities. In addition, the proposed development is not as significant in size and number to merit additional new construction of public services. aii) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project will not result in the need for additional new or altered police protection services and will not alter acceptable service ratios or response times. The proposed project would develop a currently commercial restaurant and bar with miniature golf into a 200 -room hotel with banquet facilities and a bar, and; in turn, would increase the structures served by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department. However, the project itself is not large enough to require the development of additional police facilities. Furthermore, the project applicant is required to pay development fees, which are established to offset incremental increases to police service demand. Therefore, the proposed project would not significantly impact police protection services. aiii) No Impact: The proposed project would add a 200 -room hotel with banquet facilities and a restaurant to a parcel currently being used as a miniature golf course with a restaurant and a bar. The project would be within the Saugus 32 67 Initial Study Page 33 of 41 33 Unified School District (SUSD) for elementary school, and the William S. Hart School District (WHSD) for junior high and high school. However, the proposed project would not develop any new residential dwellings and, thus, would not directly increase the population of school -aged children served by the SUSD and the WHSD. Therefore, the proposed project would not impact school services. aiv) No Impact: The proposed project would not contribute new residences to the area that would lead to an increase in the use of the local and regional parks systems. Therefore, the proposed project would have no adverse impact on park services. No significant impacts will result to public services from the project and, therefore, no further analysis is necessary. XIV. RECREATION a) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed development involves the construction of a 200 -room hotel with banquet facilities and a restaurant that would be utilized by visitors to the Santa Clarita Valley for business, special events and regional entertainment and tourism. While the City of Santa Clarita does have two regional parks, Central Park and the Santa Clarita Sports Complex/Aquatics Center, it is not expected the demand on these facilities will increase as a result of this hotel being constructed. As such, the proposed project is not expected to increase the use of public parks. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact to the recreational facilities in Santa Clarita and would not contribute to any physical deterioration of any existing recreational facilities. b) No Impact: The proposed project includes the construction. of a 200 -room hotel, banquet facility and a restaurant and does not include residential units that would require park development fees or implementation of new recreational facilities. Therefore, the project would not have an adverse physical effect on the environment from the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. No impacts will result to recreation from the project and, therefore, no further analysis is necessary. XV. TRANSPORTATION / a) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The City of Santa Clarita TRAFFIC adopted the Circulation Element of its General Plan in 1997. This Circulation Element includes a master plan for the City's highway and roadway system (General Plan Exhibit C-2). This master plan was developed to serve the City's existing transportation needs, as well as the City's projected transportation needs. The City's projected transportation needs were determined largely by evaluating build -out conditions of the City in accordance with land use designations. As such, the master plan for the City's highway and roadway system was established to accommodate the traffic generated by a built-up Santa Clarita. The project currently proposes a seven -story, 136,559 square foot building that. includes, a 200 -room hotel, a 120 seat restaurant and a 7,610 square foot meeting/banquet room area. The project site will be accessed via McBean Parkway, which currently has the capacity to handle increased trips, and Mall Entrance Drive, which is the private driveway that provides access to the Hyatt Hotel, the Galaxy Car Wash, the McBean Bus Transfer Station, and after construction is completed, a three story mixed-use building. In the traffic analysis prepared by Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. for the proposed project, it is determined that there would be an estimated increase of 1319 average daily trips, for the proposed hotel building. The traffic analysis also summarizes the intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values for the project and nearby 33 Initial Study Page 34 of 41 intersections. The traffic analysis concludes that the existing signalized intersection providing access to the project site has been shown to have sufficient capacity to accommodate the project's traffic. The nearby intersections including Magic Mountain Parkway, have been shown to have no measurable impact due to the proposed project. However, there was an indication that the Valencia Boulevard and McBean intersection would have a measureableimpact with the proposed development. As a result, the widening. of the westbound Valencia Boulevard as stated in the mitigation measure below. With the incorporation of the street improvements as outlined in the mitigation measure below, any impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the proposed project does not result in a significant impact to the. area's roadways and intersections. Mitigation Measure XV -1: The applicant shall install a 4`h westbound through lane (requires the widening of Valencia Boulevard along the Town Center Mall frontage) prior to issuance of occupancy for the project. b) Less Than Significant .Impact with Mitigation: As mentioned in Section XV.a), the intersection providing access to the project site and . nearby intersections would have sufficient capacity to accommodate the project's traffic with exception of the Valencia Boulevard and Mc Bean Parkway intersection. However with the incorporation of the Mitigation Measure XV -1 the proposed project will not exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. The subject property is located in an area already improved with respect to circulation and with the required mitigation can accommodate the proposed use. After the traffic study for the project was produced by Austin -Foust and Associates,. Inc and reviewed by the City's traffic engineer, the existing roadway network with the improvements outlined in Mitigation Measure XV -1. has proven determined to be sufficient to handle the project -generated trips. Therefore, the proposed project would not exceed, either individually or cumulatively, an established level of service standard for any designated CMP roadway, and would have a less than significant impact with mitigation listed below. Mitigation Measure XV -1: The applicant shall install a 4`h westbound through lane (requires the widening of Valencia Boulevard along the Town Center Mall frontage) prior to issuance of occupancy for the project. c) No Impact: The project site is not within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. Consequently, the proposed project would not affect any airport facilities and would not cause a change in the directional patterns of aircraft. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact to air traffic patterns. d) ) No Impact: The proposed project involves the construction of a 200 -room hotel with a banquet facility and a restaurant. The construction and operation of the proposed project would not place any permanent or temporary physical barriers on any existing public streets. Furthermore, all development for the. proposed project would occur onsite, and thus, the proposed project would not impose any physical barriers on any existing pedestrian, bicycle, or vehicle travel routes. The project site includes sidewalks along all onsite roadways that meet City standards; and the project also has a paseo-like Landscape Maintenance District corridor along the southern border of the project, located between the project site and the existing gas station at the corner of Valencia Boulevard and Mc Bean Parkway. As a condition of approval, the applicant would be required to erect temporary fencing around the perimeter of the construction area. CM 0 Initial Study Page 35 of 41 In addition, the final design would have pedestrian walkways and bike racks installed on site to support those types.of uses on the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not create hazards or barriers for vehicles, pedestrians or bicyclists, and the project would have no related impacts. Therefore, the project would have no impacts that would significantly increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use. e) No Impact: The proposed development would have one direct point of access onto McBean Parkway. The project's ingress/egress and circulation are required to meet the Los Angeles County Fire Department's standards, which ensure new developments provide adequate access for emergency vehicles. The project site and surrounding roadway network do not pose any unique conditions that raise concerns for emergency access, such as narrow, winding roads or dead-end streets. Thus, standard engineering practices are expected to achieve the Fire Department's standards. Furthermore, final project plans are subject to review and approval by the Fire Department to ensure that the site's access complies with all Fire Department ordinances and policies. With the required compliance with all Fire Department ordinances and policies, the project would not cause significant impacts due to inadequate emergency access. Therefore, the project would have no impact related to emergency access. f) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed hotel development includes 200 - guest rooms, a 120 -seat restaurant and a 7,610 square foot banquet area. The Unified Development Code requires l space per guest room for hotels, I space per 3 fixed seats for restaurants, and 1 space per 45 square feet of non -fixed seating area for banquet facilities. Under the City code, there is a total requirement for 409 parking spaces to be provided for the proposed development (comprised of 200 hotel spaces, 40 restaurant spaces, and 169 banquet spaces). However, the proposed project has a mix of uses and as a result the project site will have different peak parking demand times for each use. The City code rates are currently applied to `stand-alone' developments, and not in mixed-use developments. It is also reasonable to expect that patrons of the hotel would also be users of the restaurant and banquet facilities therefore reducing the need of actual parking for the project. The applicant has had Linscott, Law and Greenspan Engineers prepare a Shared Parking Study to determine what the actual need is for the project site and its various uses are. This Shared Parking Study (dated February 25, 2009) contains an analysis of the parking conditions within the project, As indicated in the.study, the parking supply will be sufficient to accommodate the anticipated demand based upon the existing and proposed mix of uses within the project site. It has been determined from that study that a conservative calculation of the peak demand of all of the uses would total need of 247 parking spaces. The proposed project is providing 286 parking spaces. Furthermore, in order to reduce the parking demand as well as vehicle traffic to and from the project site, the applicant is required to have completed prior to issuance of any Building Permit Transportation Demand Management Plan and implement upon issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy the strategies and incentives outlined in that plan. These strategies will include various incentives to use the McBean Transfer Station, carpools, vanpools, bicycling, alternative work schedules, and other alternative modes of transportation. As such, with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a shared parking calculation to be utilized for the mix of uses on the project site, the applicant will not cause significant impacts due to inadequate parking capacity on the project site. 35 0 Initial Study Page 36 of 41 g) Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed development would not conflict significantly with the adopted policies supporting alternative transportation. The McBean Transfer station is located within 300 feet of the proposed hotel building and would be heavily utilized by employees and visitors of the hotel. In addition, as a condition of approval the applicant is required to complete a Transportation Demand Management program that identifies various strategies that would incentivize employees of the hotel to further reduce vehicle traffic by utilizing transit, carpools, bicycling and other alternative transportation modes. In addition the project would be developed with bicycle racks for both visitors and employees to provide another alternative in transportation for the project. Therefore, the proposed project would assist the City in meeting objectives for implementing policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation, and the project would have a less than significant impact. h) No Impact: The proposed project involves development of a 136,559 square - foot hotel building with a restaurant and banquet facilities. The construction and operation of the proposed project would not place any permanent physical barriers on any existing public streets. All development for the proposed project would occur onsite, and thus, the proposed project would not impose any permanent physical barriers on any existing pedestrian, bicycle, or vehicle travel routes. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any impacts that would create hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists. XVI. UTILITIES AND a) No Impact: The proposed project proposes developing a 200 -room hotel with SERVICE SYSTEMS banquet facilities and a restaurant. The proposed project is in compliance with the existing zoning and General Plan designations. None of the proposed uses would generate atypical wastewater such as industrial or agricultural effluent. All wastewater generated by the proposed project is expected to be domestic sewage. Wastewater treatment facilities are designed to treat domestic sewage; and thus, typical domestic sewage does not exceed wastewater treatment requirements. Since the project would not generate atypical wastewater, and is consistent with the City's General Plan and zoning the project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements, and the project would have no associated impacts. b) No Impact: The proposed development would increase the demand for water and wastewater service. However, as discussed in Sections XVI. d) and e) of this report, the increase to water/wastewater service demand, is minimal in comparison to the existing service areas of the water and wastewater service purveyors. In addition, the facilities currently maintained by the service purveyors are adequate to serve the proposed increase in demand. The only water and wastewater improvements required for the project are onsite pipelines and unit connections to the infrastructure systems, which are subject to connection fees. Therefore, the proposed project would not require or result in the construction or expansion of new water or wastewater treatment facilities off-site, and the project would have no associated impacts. c) Less than Significant Impact: As discussed in sections VIII.c) and VIII.d) of this report, the proposed project would replace the site's existing engineered drainage system for the miniature golf facility with a restaurant and a bar with an engineered drainage system for the 200 -room hotel and parking lot. As required by the City of Santa Clarita and the Countywide MS4 Permit, the final design of the development's drainage system will be engineered so that post -development peak runoff discharge rates are equal to or less than pre -development peak runoff rates. The proposed drainage system would achieve this requirement. Therefore, the proposed project would not require or result in the construction of new offsite stormwater drainage facilities or the expansion of existing facilities offsite, and �el Initial Study Page 37 of 41 the project would have no related significant impacts. d) Less than Significant Impact: The Valencia Water. Company (VWC) provides water services to the project site. The VWC's water sources are derived from the State Water Project and local groundwater resources generated primarily from the Santa Clara River. These existing water supplies are sufficient to serve the proposed development. Therefore, the proposed project would not require new or expanded water entitlements, and the project would have no related significant impacts. e) Less than Significant Impact: The County Sanitation District of Los Angeles County (Sanitation District) provides wastewater services to the project site, The Sanitation District's existing facilities are sufficient to accommodate the proposed development. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that it has adequate capacity to serve the proposed development, and the project would have no related significant impacts. f) No Impact: The project would be served by a landfill (Sunshine Canyon) with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. g) No Impact: The California Integrated Waste Management Act requires that jurisdictions maintain a 50% or better diversion rate for solid waste. The City implements this requirement through the City's franchised Solid Waste Management Services. Per the agreements between the City and the franchised trash disposal companies, each franchisee is responsible for meeting the minimum recycling diversion rate of 50% on a quarterly basis. Franchisee's are further encouraged to meet the City's overall diversion rate goal of 75%. The proposed project is required to comply with the applicable solid waste franchise's recycling system, and thus, will meet the City's and California's solid waste diversion regulations. Therefore, the project would not cause any significant impacts from conflicting with statutes or regulations related to solid waste. XVII. MANDATORY a) Less than Significant Impact: As discussed in Section IV of this document, FINDINGS OF the proposed project would not have substantial impacts to special status species, SIGNIFICANCE: stream habitat, and wildlife dispersal and migration. Furthermore, the proposed project would not affect the local, regional, or national populations or ranges of any plant or animal species and would not threaten any plant communities. Similarly, as discussed in Section V of this document, the proposed project would not have substantial impacts to historical, archaeological, or paleontological resources, and thus, would not 'eliminate any important examples of California history or prehistory. Therefore, the proposed project does not have a Mandatory Finding of Significance due to impacts to biological or cultural resources, b) Less than Significant Impact: With the incorporation of mitigation measures the proposed project would not cause impacts that are cumulatively considerable. The project has the potential to contribute to . cumulative aesthetic, transportation/traffic, noise and geology impacts. However, due to the mitigation measures contained in the Aesthetics, Transportation/ Traffic, Noise and Geology and Soils sections of this document, none of these cumulative impacts are substantial, and the project would not cause any cumulative impacts to become substantial. Therefore, with the incorporation of mitigation measures the proposed project does not have a Mandatory Finding of Significance due to cumulative impacts. c) Less than Significant: As discussed in Sections VIII and XV of this 37 Initial Study Page 38 of 41 document, the proposed project would not expose persons to flooding or transportation hazards. Section VI of this document explains that residents and occupants of the proposed project could be exposed to strong seismic earth shaking due to the potential for earthquakes in Southern California. The site is within a liquefaction hazard area and the geotechnical investigation shows the area has a moderate chance of having some liquefaction on site. However, due to the. mitigation measures contained in the Geology and Soils sections of this document the impacts the project will have a less than significant in regards to environmental effects and would not cause substantial adverse effects on humans. 38 Initial Study Page 39 of 41 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Identification of Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Activities I. AESTHETICS Mitigation Measure I-1: Construction of architectural treatments.to break up massing of the building visible from McBean Parkway and Valencia Boulevard shall be installed in accordance with the Santa Clarita Architectural Design Guidelines and per the approved elevations, photo simulations, and color and materials board. Party Responsible for Mitigation: Project Applicant Monitoring Action/Timing: Prior to the issuance of Planning approval, the applicant shall have building elevations approved by staff. All architectural treatments shall be,installed prior to first certificate of occupancy. Enforcing, Monitoring Agency: City of Santa Clarita Planning Division II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES None Required III. AIR QUALITY None Required IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES None Required V. CULTURAL RESOURCES None Required VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Mitigation Measure VI -1: In order .to provide sufficient load capacity for the proposed seven -story hotel structure (and to mitigate impacts of settlement associated with compressibility ofthe alluvial site soils under static loading and potential post -earthquake settlement due to liquefaction), the applicant is required that the hotel be supported on driven, precast concrete, 14 -inch square, 60 -foot long, end -bearing piles that will be driven into the dense terrace deposits. Party Responsible for Mitigation: Project Applicant Monitoring Action/Timing: Review of Plans and Specifications prior to the issuance of both grading permit and building permits, and inspection during construction and prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Enforcing, Monitoring Agency: The City's Building and Safety Division Mitigation Measure VI -2: The upper 5 feet of building pad areas, including 5 feet beyond the proposed building pad and the upper 3 feet of parking lot areas should be removed and replaced as compacted fill. Party Responsible for Mitigation: Project Applicant Monitoring Action/Timing: Review of Plans and Specifications prior to the issuance of both grading permit and building permits, and inspection during construction and prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Enforcing, Monitoring Agency: The City's Building and Safety Division VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS None Required VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY None Required IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING None -Required. 39 Initial Study Page 40 of 41 Identification of Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Activities X. MINERAL AND ENERGY RESOURCES None Required XI. NOISE Mitigation Measure JAI -1: Control of Construction Hours — All construction activities should be limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. Monday through Friday and between 8 a.m, and 6 p.m. on Saturday. As an additional restriction, all pile driving activities shall be limited to the hours between 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Saturday. Construction and demolition should be prohibited on Sunday and national holiday's. Party Responsible for Mitigation: Project Applicant Monitoring Action/Timing: Inspection during construction. Enforcing, Monitoring Agency: The City's Building and Safety Division and Community Development Department Mitigation Measure XI -2: Install Sound Curtains — Sound Curtains should be installed between the pile driving equipment and the residents southwest of the project. The preferred location of the curtains is near the pile driving equipment and needs to be high enough to break the line of site between the pile driver and the residences. The sound curtains should have Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 26 or better. Party Responsible for Mitigation: Project Applicant Monitoring Action/Timing: Inspection during construction. Enforcing, Monitoring Agency: The City's Building and Safety Division and Community Development Department Mitigation Measure XI -3: Perform Noise Monitoring — Noise monitoring near the residences should be conducted during the first day of pile driving. The noise levels should be monitored in a manner consisted with the City's noise ordinance. The purpose of the measurements is to verify that the mitigation measure are in place and that they are effective in reducing noise levels. The measurements data will help the developer and City respond to any citizen complaints if they arise. Party Responsible for Mitigation: Project Applicant Monitoring Action/Timing: Inspection during construction. Enforcing, Monitoring Agency: The City's Building and Safety Division and Community Development Department XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING None Required XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES None Required XIV. RECREATION None Required XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Mitigation Measure XV -1: The applicant shall install a 4'h westbound through lane (requires the widening of Valencia Boulevard along the Town Center Mall frontage) prior to issuance of occupancy for the project. Party Responsible for Mitigation: Project Applicant Monitoring Action/Timing: Prior to occupancy Enforcing, Monitoring Agency: City of Santa Clarita Public Works Department and Community Development Department. M 915 Initial Study Page 41 of 41 Identification of Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Activities XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS None Required S:\CD\CURRENTV2008\08-051 (SHERATON)\ENVIRONMENTAL\08-051 INITIAL STUDY.DRAFT.DOC 41 z O a W J W F- cn W lz N z O H a W J W G W O O J O V a ca a oc a J C.) a z a C/) • CC W N Z W C.) W C.3 z W W LL O V z a W O z O F- a cc W N) C W Cl) O CL 0 oc CL Z O N Q W J W H cn l M V- Z 1 o c WKY-t-] cn z 0 a W J W 0 W cc O J O 0 a v a cc a J C..) Q H Z Q Nn • W Z W C.) W V W W LL Z O C.D D Z a J W I -- CD O Z Z O H a oc W cn G W cn O a 0 cc a W W W z W C cq as CA y W_ 5 Q C:) • a a V a Z a C/) • CC W H Z W C.) W C.) Z W W LL Z O C.) C Z a J W I -- CD O Z O H a oc W C/) G W C/) O CL O CL J W F- O 2 Z QO a w cn 3 m ►;R J W 0 Z 0 W E E FA J W F- 0 O z O w cx� E a� 0 CL 0 6- a O e 3 a� m O a O L- a. a 3 a� -a a� 0 Q. 0 I— CL a r— E V3 ttt F J W F- 0 Z qO L�C W 2 U) E 0 U> C d m E a A u N C 0 N R: d a� C r N X w E 3 as `J w O z O w 3 m as 0 CL 0 L— CL CL I 3 a� 13 W U) 0 CL 0 i J W H O 2 Z O Q w U) O uld'6067E0 NOIVM3HS:VIIHVI0 VINVS:sna(oid Z peolyoiV:slysolun 4 'VO V1121V70 V1NVS a� ac o{�f ; ,Imp {s{eouefes�l AVNU21Vd NV390W t 099 8 'lSVL loaielet »d - E� ,ul,u HmARLS'NUv EMB 7310HNO1V213HS 0558 L8Lf8t8) 101 akuwsld gaauw + w c- +� rt '09310 NYS llvt,BV�'sRnNuep; ww' �+ ssecsal $ {0{ MOOM3VSiLB MO -4 .� 077 V'ION37VA INIVSRl9 NV7d JNI4VZ 0 AHVN/W1732/d VIIYV70 V1NVS z(O ADO a b ��y °\, \ `/ \\A� `• \ �.. \ '�\� 0 '1 . /A�- 61 U, /l �;" C // /P � 'o o � C' -_ `I- _.` �� y-�,, ! �� �.. _ e 3. `�> .a �y \ •� \ \ , Cid C / / fti / r ^ z /_� iC �/ � / I �� rl .� a .,� �8����,• `� / �.. ,yrs //"">'i .s�. �A�.� i � -� F 'I` a �_ `y� �/ �V � d �r�� •�I/ ti ��'. �/V �"/ l .C(l sn )61 1-4 /: / / / , wr n f / I f _ - / M1 ,� 1 I I I / dD g ` / ° -✓/ ` �� �l/� //>) a / � ;7/� �rr t a�°sea rF��; / cC�. j �� � • � � --����. ,r �, �� � /,� I 1��' � � � � �� �T � r � � "R� �, , i 1 / �_."'-� i3 • \. a' � ��/ '� III sn `__-�1 �.Ip.. / lL_ke4' X r \ / / - (��1r :,g; � �'• ...�, . � J" , - I I - ,l i. 1 1 / ` rr / � / 0 / , / i c � N ^\ \\ JgJ�\ L ,tea ' `.\ � � � k • / � ` a � \ � t ..rte P / :• r 'sn 1 'll I ,� j , r � l � / �a'/IT 4i �- � �'r �.� i � \ (l. _i' ay I C •'n .\ �: _ •.�� . %yam � 1� �' r; 6 ` • / \ �� i I II ,- r �/ / � / / i "g, I i � �\ � � +�� � ' �� �a a is .IA � Y� � � y\ L ✓ �"'`" ,, � � aais �F� 1 I /V - � ./�/ ��/,"�� �/VI'�,�\ \� •� �.• 'V� � � t� `i/�� � � � �"� III / �' In / / � �; ``'.:/ �, • � , 1 (� �� '\ \ � -.!_ > �\ \ \ : � ,\J / / "'� /j �I l� � ' ' 1 ' ���� .(, s � \ 1� ^, � �,•. lrI -� :� � �� ��i /--'" i" � jos, -'% / � _ 4 11 � • , / ,.. � � � 1� � i 1 I � -r J=am.- � C i/ i / % � tJ II 1 -1 / �,1, � .ty � �� � .. � h-1 '. � rnnod Ymn �: � �_ � � • III 'I - _ ����`\\ � �` =•s�i^ `fie - o I I YIn( C -1310H NO1bI:I3HS u g 8 a u 4 1 H M u as cdm� Y6'CU o ox -1310H NO1bI:I3HS Oy� O y ° wzb : yZ oQZ.zO on w uj �¢OLL�Yt l Z O iO°ii O oa�iQ��ZWZ �yH]oZ�F y UnUyyyy�O WOW WOSSW 49 0 Q° U�0�5S¢ � N a IL pl ® ? Z y i Oy� O y ° wzb : yZ oQZ.zO on w uj �¢OLL�Yt l Z O iO°ii O oa�iQ��ZWZ �yH]oZ�F y UnUyyyy�O WOW WOSSW 49 0 Q° U�0�5S¢ i u J J - LD 0 �bdlsip3uy4' 2 R. I tn it I a � r� m W 0 �UON s�o�m ol c O c o ol aoa- J J - LD 0 �bdlsip3uy4' 2 R. I tn it I w W W 0 a O W W w CL 4 a ¢ DO J_ Wa F G E.. n Z W --� CO D Z fL O W Zcr Q K Q Q Q 2 LL a d a ~ O a� O 00 � Z Q�Q� w w �QW Ori Z W� O �N g� <C v; °o rn� a� Z K Q O OO o it ga°d a a¢o �r �M 0� e III w W W 0 a O W W w CL 4 a ¢ DO J_ Wa F G E.. n Z W --� CO D Z fL O W Zcr Q K Q Q Q 2 LL a d a ~ O a� O 00 � Z Q�Q� w w �QW Ori Z W� O uW.K W �N g� <C v; °o rn� a� Z K Q O OO o it ga°d a a¢o �r �M 0� E O 5 ! �=�s E pg Eg a�i'� CSa12,2 ffi85a €a LLI 0 a S. E J.bag E 6 8 Z W�@¢4¢4 5 p 5, @@ S SE e S paa Sett gm ? 6CL ?. LLB a€s y�o g $p EO n 1E jq�y gvCL z Ug 1g CV�U'OrcZin �iO N22os 6N� 41Z 0028120 F0F p2p F ll �IZ OZZ'S2yW poI�ga C ` 22 N W ZZW u°i WO ,flol � SOS Sa�22Z F m � Z.8. OFFx f/� 2 a f0pZ WWOw4w J�SfII za4p€pw � a 2 He U F b « � O F Q OI 'n Nm W 'gym oma+ W to m Ad 0a vwi x o on N o amo z m^ Z w mN¢ m rn N ���%U p Nma O�< OZ m NW =W Q Zr 0 5 FF �umi.NN� �nnn�n v�inN� umi, vmi. lmn lrmi lmn vmi um -i umi vmi vmi ��m muni- -PI-91 FF O_ 1ln ¢mmm. I;i vl gz Z b a i F F tll Q \ 6 r JJ O�E}LL U R� LIP Z V� ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^'-^ ^.-^ ^^^^ 000 000 C U-' 2 2 Z f -p nr no="W Q g WlOU m 5 m� Om�IUMM O1U a'Of`1r% mmn- On000 N-- m1�N �� �� Z. W �u 11��JJ�Uy WQ W O� rN -n mp11� mm M InMN �N^� MN mm Nl�m NN V V J ,�=,, ¢ 4 m0 [WJ I.j (y t`l �.=0 Cj CS6 �d06 Odd 0000 00 M)�O 17.=0 0 0 OWW N¢ Qw Namd- WZ O 0a O^ yS G 5 W 0 Wtn o o .- zw m� mW�z �¢f-' z c b iA ¢ 'n����u' N����'cV 0000 _ - io io o c 1� ^ ^ 'b� frN WN {-S U(Nll mm SO oa 8a zF! -ln m Si �<rtla m .- .- ^ ^.- ^ mmmOD In 1!) Ln ,, NNN NNN O O 1- J J mJ OJ OJ i -"m ZWm U¢Nw Z OJ wQ= TJ J �^ F y � 7 RTF ic4iZ o m m o vl a r p� Wa ZN aaW w�wN ¢o zr N� 1¢- 1¢- �V'�'57L�g''5 & �)) �f5 Z d MOIMOMMMM Mr7MY01mM IO'1hMM MY01MM MMOjMM MOM MMM �M� pI ooI Z W W GQJA wW WWW NOD i B�' 4 s 0� g b �F Q �Oj O O Z�Oj �O = WZw z�Olr � N Nww 'MN MEN OU3 20 �0-MO f5Z 3m O�Iw/1 �N N o� � ¢5 16 FT6 Ni ei' k1S ri OR �J Z N Z N N_ y16ti ���Y.} ^' 1�F-�xF-d IaHV-xH0 121-4 ZZ Y V� F WSF-d 000 000 z ^ � ^ mmm Inlnmin a�.i� `tcJ� to W Y m ea Z 2 Z O M y W Ne�a�<a b�5� ZviF mmm M�m NInN ¢VI ¢¢¢ ¢ SMMMZE3 3mmm mmmm 3;Emm mmmm mI I I I I I w d ¢F JF W N m2 OW o u7 vIN �N 6QQ6Q66¢6¢ ¢Q¢Q QQ¢¢ Q¢QQ Q UUU UVU W laJ r fA m 1-N WW h N W l� W O I wi d d V)V1NInNN N(n-MWW minln Vl wmf/IN Vltn tnN Vl to Wad WWW NN 01(1 6 Z DO O W x 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 O O t1 O N Iy IO O u O N U p < m¢ M UZ UZ r mmmle lcm lemmmmm mmm�c mmmm In acm m ao mmm mmm 1. I `/ m =V VlM M3 N In ciN c�N m - a 000000 000000 000 0000 0000 O O 000 000 N [A m mmmmmm mmmmmm mmmm mmmm mmmm mm n0i nmm yN LL.i . J N N >5 b 8 U U N VI YA l�J 000000 000000 0000 0000 0000 OC 000 000 w F F m m Y MMMMMM mmmmmm mK-K mmmm XMmm MM MMM MMM m m m 6 7,, EE w mmmmmm mmmmmm mmmm mmmm mmmm mm mmm mmm +�+�+ ~ S S gig Q $ b Y ZZZZZZ zzzzzz ZZZZ zzzz ZZZZ ZZ ZZZ ZZZ ZZ Z U W� WQ 0 0 0 p p 9 g� Q aaaaaa aaaaaa aaaa aaaa aaaa as aa¢ ¢Q¢ ¢ n f-' z d� M mmmmmm mmmmmm mmmm mmmm mmmm mm ¢�� ¢�� xx W v ¢ ¢ n c» coo g o m m aW k g qyq �a 1yy gg �.1..1 0 0 z O 3 z mid and 'i-'1 m me�+ 3 gqNN Fb Fat rrrrrr rrrrrr rrrr r >- rrrr rr �� 7d' mw 'J` a a ww� w � am am m a < a z z ��< ��� <.19 3 Q6Q66¢ aaaa¢¢ aaaa 6000 aaaa ¢¢ �Li si m m J W WO WO x m x m x Sc W �1 mmmmmm mmmmmm mmmm mmmm mmmm mm mmo mmar .mm �ri3�� ��WWWW WW aa WWa W W WW W V1NV1N ��wm1nN �W) Vl VI��VI ��tnN 1nN 00 000 00 XO 1-1-1- HHF• m m F SS LL3S �� WWWWWW WWWWWW WWWW WWWW WWWW W W 000 000 F� Fj o »»» »»» »» »» »» » mmm =mm M- D m -i �L�SS� €per IQyb ki g 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I p I� I I I I I I I I I po0o o? 000000 0o0000 0000 0000 0000 00 u4i u0'1 lOn lOno�o $$ 1�I m g m Q ¢Q ¢ N WWWWWW WWWWWW WWWW WWWW WWWW WW MnM M1f9 Y'Y Wd W O p O H w >» `- ¢ % 4 iG�AAI RE Z Lli o ...is.. c----- ---- (' 1 g wm Z za b m m m zmZ ¢ rd'z3<� i <� J`J`!tj LJ` J`J`J`yy`J� J�y.{�1y{�.{ `J�.{1y J`JJ"�J� p p o z p o o > j w W d��� �1[�y �kdE w �UULSpp c�c�c.�LSpp Lipc-S �i �j c�tS c� UUc�c-� UU LiU Ute �_ F 3 a 3 F w z w U� c.� O x cT5✓-ng g��+� Z mmmmmm mmmmmm mmgm �m�� mmmm mm mmm mm4ml .O O m O LJ k' �` 1- Q J Wm V�SaUV� UUaUCJU C�UVU LSUUU �UUU Gu UCJw UVF 00 � O m N Q Q OAF ONY Z 3 s� Q a ¢ ja �a� pJJ .pl Q w a {arJ a o aS2 LD a wZ LTJ =� ���bq�15 �3: x2 Wx0' Wx0 li li rn Om 3 m Q U 3 W W m -m N'b0 (n V 6 q S Q W m >->}>>">04o4)0+ m S� <3¢t S F 3 3a < a � � Z J J Qu cU �pO �� mO JJ ;�O dlaiW J U F b « � O F Q OI 'n Nm W 'gym oma+ W to m Ad 0a vwi x o on N o amo z m^ Z w mN¢ m rn N ���%U p Nma O�< OZ m NW =W Q Zr 0 5 FF �umi.NN� �nnn�n v�inN� umi, vmi. lmn lrmi lmn vmi um -i umi vmi vmi ��m muni- -PI-91 FF O_ 1ln ¢mmm. I;i vl gz Z b a i F F tll Q \ 6 r JJ O�E}LL U R� LIP Z V� ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^'-^ ^.-^ ^^^^ 000 000 C U-' 2 2 Z f -p nr no="W Q g WlOU m 5 m� Om�IUMM O1U a'Of`1r% mmn- On000 N-- m1�N �� �� Z. W �u 11��JJ�Uy WQ W O� rN -n mp11� mm M InMN �N^� MN mm Nl�m NN V V J ,�=,, ¢ 4 m0 [WJ I.j (y t`l �.=0 Cj CS6 �d06 Odd 0000 00 M)�O 17.=0 0 0 OWW N¢ Qw Namd- WZ O 0a O^ yS G 5 W 0 Wtn o o .- zw m� mW�z �¢f-' z c b iA ¢ 'n����u' N����'cV 0000 _ - io io o c 1� ^ ^ 'b� frN WN {-S U(Nll mm SO oa 8a zF! -ln m Si �<rtla m .- .- ^ ^.- ^ mmmOD In 1!) Ln ,, NNN NNN O O 1- J J mJ OJ OJ i -"m ZWm U¢Nw Z OJ wQ= TJ J �^ F y � 7 RTF ic4iZ o m m o vl a r p� Wa ZN aaW w�wN ¢o zr N� 1¢- 1¢- �V'�'57L�g''5 & �)) �f5 Z d MOIMOMMMM Mr7MY01mM IO'1hMM MY01MM MMOjMM MOM MMM �M� pI ooI Z W W GQJA wW WWW NOD i B�' 4 s 0� g b �F Q �Oj O O Z�Oj �O = WZw z�Olr � N Nww 'MN MEN OU3 20 �0-MO f5Z 3m O�Iw/1 �N N o� � ¢5 16 FT6 Ni ei' k1S ri OR �J Z N Z N N_ y16ti ���Y.} ^' 1�F-�xF-d IaHV-xH0 121-4 ZZ Y V� F WSF-d 000 000 z ^ � ^ mmm Inlnmin a�.i� `tcJ� to W Y m ea Z 2 Z O M y W Ne�a�<a b�5� ZviF mmm M�m NInN ¢VI ¢¢¢ ¢ SMMMZE3 3mmm mmmm 3;Emm mmmm mI I I I I I w d ¢F JF W N m2 OW o u7 vIN �N 6QQ6Q66¢6¢ ¢Q¢Q QQ¢¢ Q¢QQ Q UUU UVU W laJ r fA m 1-N WW h N W l� W O I wi d d V)V1NInNN N(n-MWW minln Vl wmf/IN Vltn tnN Vl to Wad WWW NN 01(1 6 Z DO O W x 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 O O t1 O N Iy IO O u O N U p < m¢ M UZ UZ r mmmle lcm lemmmmm mmm�c mmmm In acm m ao mmm mmm 1. I `/ m =V VlM M3 N In ciN c�N m - a 000000 000000 000 0000 0000 O O 000 000 N [A m mmmmmm mmmmmm mmmm mmmm mmmm mm n0i nmm yN LL.i . J N N >5 b 8 U U N VI YA l�J 000000 000000 0000 0000 0000 OC 000 000 w F F m m Y MMMMMM mmmmmm mK-K mmmm XMmm MM MMM MMM m m m 6 7,, EE w mmmmmm mmmmmm mmmm mmmm mmmm mm mmm mmm +�+�+ ~ S S gig Q $ b Y ZZZZZZ zzzzzz ZZZZ zzzz ZZZZ ZZ ZZZ ZZZ ZZ Z U W� WQ 0 0 0 p p 9 g� Q aaaaaa aaaaaa aaaa aaaa aaaa as aa¢ ¢Q¢ ¢ n f-' z d� M mmmmmm mmmmmm mmmm mmmm mmmm mm ¢�� ¢�� xx W v ¢ ¢ n c» coo g o m m aW k g qyq �a 1yy gg �.1..1 0 0 z O 3 z mid and 'i-'1 m me�+ 3 gqNN Fb Fat rrrrrr rrrrrr rrrr r >- rrrr rr �� 7d' mw 'J` a a ww� w � am am m a < a z z ��< ��� <.19 3 Q6Q66¢ aaaa¢¢ aaaa 6000 aaaa ¢¢ �Li si m m J W WO WO x m x m x Sc W �1 mmmmmm mmmmmm mmmm mmmm mmmm mm mmo mmar .mm �ri3�� ��WWWW WW aa WWa W W WW W V1NV1N ��wm1nN �W) Vl VI��VI ��tnN 1nN 00 000 00 XO 1-1-1- HHF• m m F SS LL3S �� WWWWWW WWWWWW WWWW WWWW WWWW W W 000 000 F� Fj o »»» »»» »» »» »» » mmm =mm M- D m -i �L�SS� €per IQyb ki g 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I p I� I I I I I I I I I po0o o? 000000 0o0000 0000 0000 0000 00 u4i u0'1 lOn lOno�o $$ 1�I m g m Q ¢Q ¢ N WWWWWW WWWWWW WWWW WWWW WWWW WW MnM M1f9 Y'Y Wd W O p O H w >» `- ¢ % 4 iG�AAI RE Z Lli o ...is.. c----- ---- (' 1 g wm Z za b m m m zmZ ¢ rd'z3<� i <� J`J`!tj LJ` J`J`J`yy`J� J�y.{�1y{�.{ `J�.{1y J`JJ"�J� p p o z p o o > j w W d��� �1[�y �kdE w �UULSpp c�c�c.�LSpp Lipc-S �i �j c�tS c� UUc�c-� UU LiU Ute �_ F 3 a 3 F w z w U� c.� O x cT5✓-ng g��+� Z mmmmmm mmmmmm mmgm �m�� mmmm mm mmm mm4ml .O O m O LJ k' �` 1- Q J Wm V�SaUV� UUaUCJU C�UVU LSUUU �UUU Gu UCJw UVF 00 � O m N Q Q OAF ONY Z 3 s� Q a ¢ ja �a� pJJ .pl Q w a {arJ a o aS2 LD a wZ LTJ =� ���bq�15 �3: x2 Wx0' Wx0 li li rn Om 3 m Q U 3 W W m -m N'b0 (n V 6 q S Q W m >->}>>">04o4)0+ m S� <3¢t S F 3 3a < s � Z J J O 'Al l U �..Q. t s QU) U.I Z V a: LU }oo . u -1310H NOIV133HS Z Z 9-0 �b31s�03tl *ya 0 4 w W Z G s G A in a -j 8 U F b « � O F Q OI 'n Nm W 'gym oma+ W to m Ad 0a vwi x o on N o amo z m^ Z w mN¢ m rn N ���%U p Nma O�< OZ m NW =W Q Zr 0 5 FF �umi.NN� �nnn�n v�inN� umi, vmi. lmn lrmi lmn vmi um -i umi vmi vmi ��m muni- -PI-91 FF O_ 1ln ¢mmm. I;i vl gz Z b a i F F tll Q \ 6 r JJ O�E}LL U R� LIP Z V� ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^'-^ ^.-^ ^^^^ 000 000 C U-' 2 2 Z f -p nr no="W Q g WlOU m 5 m� Om�IUMM O1U a'Of`1r% mmn- On000 N-- m1�N �� �� Z. W �u 11��JJ�Uy WQ W O� rN -n mp11� mm M InMN �N^� MN mm Nl�m NN V V J ,�=,, ¢ 4 m0 [WJ I.j (y t`l �.=0 Cj CS6 �d06 Odd 0000 00 M)�O 17.=0 0 0 OWW N¢ Qw Namd- WZ O 0a O^ yS G 5 W 0 Wtn o o .- zw m� mW�z �¢f-' z c b iA ¢ 'n����u' N����'cV 0000 _ - io io o c 1� ^ ^ 'b� frN WN {-S U(Nll mm SO oa 8a zF! -ln m Si �<rtla m .- .- ^ ^.- ^ mmmOD In 1!) Ln ,, NNN NNN O O 1- J J mJ OJ OJ i -"m ZWm U¢Nw Z OJ wQ= TJ J �^ F y � 7 RTF ic4iZ o m m o vl a r p� Wa ZN aaW w�wN ¢o zr N� 1¢- 1¢- �V'�'57L�g''5 & �)) �f5 Z d MOIMOMMMM Mr7MY01mM IO'1hMM MY01MM MMOjMM MOM MMM �M� pI ooI Z W W GQJA wW WWW NOD i B�' 4 s 0� g b �F Q �Oj O O Z�Oj �O = WZw z�Olr � N Nww 'MN MEN OU3 20 �0-MO f5Z 3m O�Iw/1 �N N o� � ¢5 16 FT6 Ni ei' k1S ri OR �J Z N Z N N_ y16ti ���Y.} ^' 1�F-�xF-d IaHV-xH0 121-4 ZZ Y V� F WSF-d 000 000 z ^ � ^ mmm Inlnmin a�.i� `tcJ� to W Y m ea Z 2 Z O M y W Ne�a�<a b�5� ZviF mmm M�m NInN ¢VI ¢¢¢ ¢ SMMMZE3 3mmm mmmm 3;Emm mmmm mI I I I I I w d ¢F JF W N m2 OW o u7 vIN �N 6QQ6Q66¢6¢ ¢Q¢Q QQ¢¢ Q¢QQ Q UUU UVU W laJ r fA m 1-N WW h N W l� W O I wi d d V)V1NInNN N(n-MWW minln Vl wmf/IN Vltn tnN Vl to Wad WWW NN 01(1 6 Z DO O W x 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 O O t1 O N Iy IO O u O N U p < m¢ M UZ UZ r mmmle lcm lemmmmm mmm�c mmmm In acm m ao mmm mmm 1. I `/ m =V VlM M3 N In ciN c�N m - a 000000 000000 000 0000 0000 O O 000 000 N [A m mmmmmm mmmmmm mmmm mmmm mmmm mm n0i nmm yN LL.i . J N N >5 b 8 U U N VI YA l�J 000000 000000 0000 0000 0000 OC 000 000 w F F m m Y MMMMMM mmmmmm mK-K mmmm XMmm MM MMM MMM m m m 6 7,, EE w mmmmmm mmmmmm mmmm mmmm mmmm mm mmm mmm +�+�+ ~ S S gig Q $ b Y ZZZZZZ zzzzzz ZZZZ zzzz ZZZZ ZZ ZZZ ZZZ ZZ Z U W� WQ 0 0 0 p p 9 g� Q aaaaaa aaaaaa aaaa aaaa aaaa as aa¢ ¢Q¢ ¢ n f-' z d� M mmmmmm mmmmmm mmmm mmmm mmmm mm ¢�� ¢�� xx W v ¢ ¢ n c» coo g o m m aW k g qyq �a 1yy gg �.1..1 0 0 z O 3 z mid and 'i-'1 m me�+ 3 gqNN Fb Fat rrrrrr rrrrrr rrrr r >- rrrr rr �� 7d' mw 'J` a a ww� w � am am m a < a z z ��< ��� <.19 3 Q6Q66¢ aaaa¢¢ aaaa 6000 aaaa ¢¢ �Li si m m J W WO WO x m x m x Sc W �1 mmmmmm mmmmmm mmmm mmmm mmmm mm mmo mmar .mm �ri3�� ��WWWW WW aa WWa W W WW W V1NV1N ��wm1nN �W) Vl VI��VI ��tnN 1nN 00 000 00 XO 1-1-1- HHF• m m F SS LL3S �� WWWWWW WWWWWW WWWW WWWW WWWW W W 000 000 F� Fj o »»» »»» »» »» »» » mmm =mm M- D m -i �L�SS� €per IQyb ki g 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I p I� I I I I I I I I I po0o o? 000000 0o0000 0000 0000 0000 00 u4i u0'1 lOn lOno�o $$ 1�I m g m Q ¢Q ¢ N WWWWWW WWWWWW WWWW WWWW WWWW WW MnM M1f9 Y'Y Wd W O p O H w >» `- ¢ % 4 iG�AAI RE Z Lli o ...is.. c----- ---- (' 1 g wm Z za b m m m zmZ ¢ rd'z3<� i <� J`J`!tj LJ` J`J`J`yy`J� J�y.{�1y{�.{ `J�.{1y J`JJ"�J� p p o z p o o > j w W d��� �1[�y �kdE w �UULSpp c�c�c.�LSpp Lipc-S �i �j c�tS c� UUc�c-� UU LiU Ute �_ F 3 a 3 F w z w U� c.� O x cT5✓-ng g��+� Z mmmmmm mmmmmm mmgm �m�� mmmm mm mmm mm4ml .O O m O LJ k' �` 1- Q J Wm V�SaUV� UUaUCJU C�UVU LSUUU �UUU Gu UCJw UVF 00 � O m N Q Q OAF ONY Z 3 s� Q a ¢ ja �a� pJJ .pl Q w a {arJ a o aS2 LD a wZ LTJ =� ���bq�15 �3: x2 Wx0' Wx0 li li rn Om 3 m Q U 3 W W m -m N'b0 (n V 6 q S Q W m >->}>>">04o4)0+ m S� <3¢t S F 3 3a < W 0 U W A w gigs 25 M C ui } Q luwst � 0 Ix !zIE 29 z :3 iii C; IIZN� N H8 ¢L�tU 2� Z2.O J�a§L Z=Z�NF�n wso T1. Sw°-0 0 g52H ow °s N s � Z J O 'Al l U �..Q. t s W 0 U W A w gigs 25 M C ui } Q luwst � 0 Ix !zIE 29 z :3 iii C; IIZN� N H8 ¢L�tU 2� Z2.O J�a§L Z=Z�NF�n wso T1. Sw°-0 0 g52H ow °s N ~� 1 J O 'Al l U W 0 U W A w gigs 25 M C ui } Q luwst � 0 Ix !zIE 29 z :3 iii C; IIZN� N H8 ¢L�tU 2� Z2.O J�a§L Z=Z�NF�n wso T1. Sw°-0 0 g52H ow °s N Z'n z 15 U, ztj � Fl;:�;71 F-771 I LU D/ 46F C w 18 g 1, 11. uld 606ZCO NOiVld9HS:Vlli:b OVINVS:Gl3Gfojd Zt Pa !LlwV.sluawnooCI:PBJO'49:s asn:aH LiscluPSV4 ' I ,�' I I III •� \ -- IL ;0^ d / `'- r i - rx/� .0\ ✓I\ I\ /\ _ �I f Z W -- Z d % f - W eHIHON 0. v p > .• tJ W MIN El 13 N 5 r \ 7 04 o� y / lH" ilk,/.✓i / C� J 0 OC rryZ.1 •`•k ,,�,,� is ^'U .'� • 4 -� -' • - - I \ LL � Z 04 U IL I• f,-1-�,f�; �` ; Vii.:: • / _._._ .-._d�._._._ _��.:: _ _. .i��, o _ I �1/`�; / / /• \/ \/ ,;��lw is /'�"�LP D X >\. - :X= - 2ga oc ca � C7 y - KN ra I` HE LU LU v - - - <> 0 W W z CD W A x` i> \ W C H � •\ \ %-/ouUA .1d 606ZE0 NOiVdZ]HS:VI18Vl0 V1NVS:sloafold A P231gmV:sluawnooO:pejeys:sjasO:OH 4sOlupeyy QQ I Q QQ W Ml IS N d o tl M6 ; o I I u ON 4 pp IE g tl° II it e� Jim 3�w i Z o " — — — s1EC o. w- t Z 99s Fa V d HIUON LU ON- -L - - --- - -- - �� li oloc C.3 C4 a LU ZfIN i CL -i i ,Ll g - - cc rH— X / o W mm IN ! i I I0 d----��1� -- - - W RU W INz IN ®0 o ui -IN - -- - - - - d z o� _=UBE d on -, W O � I I uId 606ZE0 N0lVil3HS:VlILM0 V1NVS:sloelad'Z L Peo!4oN:sluewnoop:peieys:siesN:OH ysowueyy Ow T T T T T T I III IT I I tl - - ----._._._ - - -- -- - -- - Z I `II I otl 8� II m� I =m sm I �' mM -# o0 I I ' 1 I I ----- -°-------- -- -s----------r-- 09 I - - - - I x - -�- - m Z � o o2c �� _ " W Ja Cy a w- - - -- - - - - #q .- - - - --------- ------------------- HAON m H1HON d IN - - - -- EJ - - Z? LU Vf s I s B Q tin a #LIM p. ---7nlzr4 r, ._. —. m H i'.. 1 — ._. -- - O II I: � II II I _® em y cc cc Lrl C - ` LL l" O C O O! J n� LL N 1771 Nca tall", T N V g z m� y I! Q� WLJ II 21f� a N N 9 \_& - -_ _ -- d u -- -._ r _ W _ CC = N P W W � aim big _ I � S� S� $® S I-, r �\ g® ii ul gm I ^-, s 8m I _--- o LU LU 91 ��ellll 5 1 W aim o 1 cLU - — --- - —^ _. UJ W H U. I IL ca I I � - - W I I uld'606Z£0 NOIVH3HS:V1R1VlO V1NVS:sIoafad Zl peoiyays�uawnooO:pe�eyssias�:OH yso�upey� ii ii Tli iiii III II Ii 11 I II I I % s 5 pj 3 C c - ti in r— --I j ---�----------- a d W O am K, #o #� 4 — 4 '— I i• k' -_- M: _ _ t - i ---- a 3SOOH1N3d m HO1VA313 - I--- - ------�-- I I I I � -- -�----------f - Q I Z o o�c s-_ —®--------- -w----------I -- a �� o W W O H HlaON bin I HlaON n— U Z ,."3 R• s' Lu E ? 4 i tin Y r � p 8� 'H -- —0 — —v _cc a ke a .I 0 am m LL.Qg O S II �• �! � v a U a �p L p� an T N m N ••�v Y �vElm N N 9 3snOH1N3d I, HO1VA313 5' - d� do --- O-------- Fd Ii in > a W 0 ---------- - N I: O ® G do bin i LL =� am did k' Z 9 aN� 4 W LU UJ Z Z C W a I W pC L -- — W C W cc v IL ou0 W 1 — — >_ Q u� O a.9 m la d1 I I ujd 606ZE0 NOlV' d3HS:ViI 1WIO V1NVS:sI--(old ZL q-moepy n r1l n n n n n W=M Lm . I M 81UN em mo 0 M 0 OM RME. go a .11 ON BE(III6196 I OR I I NMI 011911 0 A 0 I" Z Now, ISI atl SII MOO 11311® miffli I� I E M11®11 WAI ------------ Mon. DUMB can,1211 ... III ®I .FB.I LU EIRON, I I I I Run a v 11, 1 I uld6O6ZEONOI"3HS:VIIHVIOVINVS:q-!-dZLP-14W-s4u9-n-a:PW04s:wesn:OH4sOlu!3EVi HUI I as !!!!!! BE(III6196 0 A 0 L Z �� I ISI atl SII 11311® IN, I� I E LU z Z LU L z LU NQ \ v Na OEM LqUI Z W -M ISI 00 z LN U z i 1 011 I® oil �� as WIN 1111 ISI I f I I I6 0 IBM j 1€9M ®I I®1�11�1 ®1 M I I0I�I®1 low 10 No BOB Im 0 Ill 11-2,800 Imago 1901 13111 gal iumme 902110119111 01 11 MEN= uld6O6ZEONOI"3HS:VIIHVIOVINVS:q-!-dZLP-14W-s4u9-n-a:PW04s:wesn:OH4sOlu!3EVi HUI I as !!!!!! uld6O6ZEONOI"3HS:VIIHVIOVINVS:q-!-dZLP-14W-s4u9-n-a:PW04s:wesn:OH4sOlu!3EVi !!!!!! uld6O6ZEONOI"3HS:VIIHVIOVINVS:q-!-dZLP-14W-s4u9-n-a:PW04s:wesn:OH4sOlu!3EVi 0 A 0 Z atl IN, E LU z Z LU L z LU NQ \ v Na Z 00 z LN U z C-4 as uld6O6ZEONOI"3HS:VIIHVIOVINVS:q-!-dZLP-14W-s4u9-n-a:PW04s:wesn:OH4sOlu!3EVi I_ I�� 1 i •�-VA '�' I I I �i �I � ■�®SII ia'B'BSA .. Iilli� 'ri iii �e e, 1IC� 411 I �I II ��:t � a ®■�� S l,ll � j 1._ I■ gloom � a I I €I 1 aI 21, s �- _IIB ®D r �g I■1■ Ilfiilic II■1® i® ■1 I � C IBI Irr■ €� �� � ��' O 6 IhD ®1 ® �sI f � � ®I■■I�'� - I! . lj{a: U O a v 11 z N CW $�^ UNION O N S l,ll � j 1._ I■ gloom � a I I €I 1 aI 21, s �- _IIB ®D r �g I■1■ Ilfiilic II■1® i® ■1 I � C IBI Irr■ €� �� � ��' O 6 IhD ®1 ® �sI f � � ®I■■I�'� - I! . JIM a KD HOUR U O a v 11 z N CW / UNION O N CY WWd IL " \Ea U Z J� 7 - LU N YI �I el ' v JIM a KD CC H x 3 W Lil CU W x0 x W W C C � d111�x Ir O LU 1• O u!d 606Z£o N0M-9HS:V11UV-j0 VjWS:9130lwd Zl Pm!4wMs!uawrnoa:PmRLis:slasp:OH 4solup2w a �aY t 2 O a v z N CW / W O N CY WWd IL " CC H x 3 W Lil CU W x0 x W W C C � d111�x Ir O LU 1• O u!d 606Z£o N0M-9HS:V11UV-j0 VjWS:9130lwd Zl Pm!4wMs!uawrnoa:PmRLis:slasp:OH 4solup2w v a .ZE CW / W O N IL " \Ea U Z J� 7 - LU N YI �I el ' v LU 0"m N N V sc' �• F v aoz WN \/ l� z N N . ,) ,a. m CC H x 3 W Lil CU W x0 x W W C C � d111�x Ir O LU 1• O u!d 606Z£o N0M-9HS:V11UV-j0 VjWS:9130lwd Zl Pm!4wMs!uawrnoa:PmRLis:slasp:OH 4solup2w �8 I II I� II iR . ufGfGG.� /®� b \ Ep- Z N r / �\ - o, ° UJ LU , to CA CD Naa > yq L. cn V N y km a r( \ V r u� m lu \ \ W G��\®'\ W lu z W CC y . CL Z I ` - TT LEIFE�;�® v`� d _ oti F 71.au. I" 1_I—�0 _- _ ` I i i I i i i i I I I I I I i � i uld'606ZE0 NOIVN3HS:VlINVIO V1NVS:slaeload Zt pmlyaj{:s,uewnxO:peieUs:s asp:OH USOlupery AVMHVd NY383W :' ----------— -- —- --- W id'; :\�E cd cd 15+97.41 S- 03SpdO \ u � _ x � \l Ham-. dd ' /•� � W W Ir LU us + ifl.e tA AA cR A. !! t --- --- -- - qq uj ©1 4� Lo i t s } � ) I 2,0 s gQ ',Y% I m. + > 1+00.00 ui ui \ Vip W 3 v _ju W 'Ha S N13N3� O gg. , NMI CA LL. �< o� W N O uld'606ZCO NOIVH9HS:ViIMVIO VINVS:MBfmd Zl pm!UoN:sluewnmCl:peleys:slesn:aH ysolupeV4 I 1 1 1 1 G� •� I I I 11 N a Q I I I I I I I I I I \ Z I 1 I 1 1 1 1 JI I I I I W 90 Q m x MIND IISNVUI ca W d `s J V= N 3 O fit1 O in "c f � I Z W > W y cc \ Q a ¢ W _•`mom 0 r T tri V oC C y f� V Na Or_ a ax vN CC m %Q m ^ Q J N TATS V19N31VA ccF — —© Z W V W LU Z •oo ® W W �. ca LU U. z d O Q �.I. / C6 CO m I I I 1� CO V \ W Q \ 0 W J,2 UId'606ZE0 NOlV83HS:VmR C) V1NVS:sP-1-d Z� p-!gwV:sluawnoo0:pweys:s asn:dH ysoryoepy Positive Solutions Associati bIF "" WA CLARITA 26893 Bouquet Canyon Road, Suite B452 "'JI -�1 % I P 5: 1 b Santa Clarita, CA 91350 PIT ' ._.EF;K JrFiC� July 21, 2009 Sharon Dawson, City Clerk City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 300 Santa Clarita, California 91355 RE: Appeal to the City Council of Planning Commission Action on Master Case 08-051 Dear City Clerk Ms. Dawson: On behalf of the Positive Solutions Association, supported by all of the undersigned, and accompanied with a check that pays the required fee, please consider this letter a formal appeal of the Santa Clarita City Planning Commission action of July 7, 2009 to approve Master Case Number 08-051, Conditional Use Permit Number 08-006, and all other associated actions taken by the Planning Commission. The Positive Solutions Association has among its membership many of the individual people who participated in the Public Hearing process, and did submit testimony into the administrative record during the Planning Commission Hearing now under appeal. PSA files this appeal on behalf of all these individuals as well as our Association. With the filing of this timely appeal, we are requesting a "Hearing De Novo" before the Santa Clarita City Council on all aspects of this case. Although the time has been short, many people have contributed to the research that justifies this appeal. All of us have considerable respect for the staff, management and commissioners of our great City. There is no question that they have been misled by this developer, who has used great cleverness. We fully expect that we will be joining with our fine City staff in crafting a positive solution and a very different project on this strange property. Page I of �pages 1 b� Page 2 of 1+4 pages - PSA Appeal, Brisam Project /(v Some, but by no means all of the reasons for this appeal are as follows: 1. The approval is in violation of the requirements of Santa Clarita Municipal Code Section 17.03.050, as it pertains to Conditional Use Permits. 2. The approval is inconsistent with numerous sections of the General Plan of The City of Santa Clarita. Some, but not all of these notable inconsistencies are to be found in the Safety Element, the Community Design Element, the Circulation Element, the Land Use Element, the Parks and Recreation Element, the Economic Development Element, and still others. 3. The project fails to meet the standards for issuance of a "Mitigated Negative Declaration" of impact on the environment. As clearly required by the California Environmental Quality Act, (C.E.Q.A.), a complete Environmental Impact Report on this project is mandatory. It was omitted in this case. Still other major defects in the approval of this case will be presented and verified at the City Council Appeal Hearing. We are aware that during Appeal Hearings, such as the one filed for here, the "burden of proof' on the case rests with the applicant. This sometimes results in a larger portion of time being granted during the hearing to the case proponents. The parties who filed the appeal are sometimes granted far less time in the hearing to submit and explain all the proof for their assertions. We are also aware that it is within the power of the City Council to establish their own rules for each such proceeding. We have no objection to the Project Applicants receiving as much time as they seek to try to explain as best they might, why their project is not as defective as the evidence proves. We are, however, now asking the City Council to grant to us sufficient time as well (as the record shows has occurred in some appeal hearings) so that our extremely valid case can be adequately presented. As long as our case can be made, we will have no objection to more time being allotted to the Developer. The Positive Solutions Association has just been formed to make certain that a land use proposal at the comer of Valencia Blvd, and McBean Parkway is beneficial to everyone in our Community. 16( , 4 0 Page 3 of N pages - PSA Appeal, Brisam Project 6 The group is expanding rapidly, and is comprised of people who care about this specific area, and all of Santa Clarita Valley. We are joining with other like minded individuals and groups who share our concerns, located throughout our Valley and beyond. We look forward to your notification of the date for our Appeal Hearing. As a group the undersigned request that you direct all correspondence about this appeal to our chosen spokesperson, who is: Donald Stevens, PhD. Environmental Engineering, & Woodlands Community Homeowner Positive Solutions Association 26893 Bouquet Canyon, Suite B452 Santa Clarita, California 91350 Sincerely Donald Stevens, Spokesperson, the Positive Solutions Association, and our other supporters, who join in this appeal, as indicated by their signatures included herein below: (Please refer to the final page of this letter for the list of people and organizations who are receiving courtesy copies.) 1 �r. r 1 ` � a 4 1 v i 06 /J? d E ofp V 3 N � V T V IL /J? //U s Jo q c E 4 ^` H U IL � �\ Fl //U V c � o v \ 00 C m E E 3 N `Y N 3 Zz ii J\ 41 u1 IIJL E Z - E 92 �l� Ep U \ 1 Ja 5 a J z � nz JI e u fi � U s� a •_h �l� /f3 cr 4 40 o 31 a s s � � r S s LA �W iz Z nn't 6 /f3 A , 1 � �1 � � 1 I \\ 1� //s V n �y 1 //s w T�°l`"~� G6 �Ac AJAIvAGE/1 NWsr ccGve v , Rej tAJ cf JAI ckA l+ CL/F/LciA- �� aj- SG,.idc, IF SArti1 U-AP21TP w u,,. � 2es�den�ce ��a ��. '/UQ� c y Qc��rQ G) rCgide r� � yic�-ar �y�lct �es���l v�l(0ty a T a 7� cd a lq cc: The Honorable Frank Ferry, Mayor The Honorable Laurene Weste, Mayor Pro -Tem The Honorable Bob Kellar, City Council Member The Honorable Marsha McLean, City Council Member The Honorable Laurie Ender, City Council Member City Manager Ken Puiskamp Assistant City Manager Ken Striplin Director of Community Development Paul Brotzman Planning Manager Lisa Webber City Attorney Carl Newton Deputy City Clerk Susan Caputo Lila Littlejohn, The Signal Carl Goldman, KHTS Gerry Berrios, The Daily News Dave Bossert, The West Ranch Beacon Sierra Club, Santa Clarita Group Santa Clarita Organization for Planning and the Environment (SCOPE) Santa Clarita Valley Coalition of Neighborhoods The Placenta Canyon Property Owners Association The Calgrove Corridor Coalition Smart Growth SCV Canyon County Advisory Committee Saugus Action Committee Newhall Redevelopment Advisory Committee Agua Dulce Town Council West Ranch Town Council Castaic Town Council Santa Clarita Valley Chamber of Commerce The Valley Industrial Association Michael Goldstein Robert Silverstein, Esquire /v v i 26893 Bouquet Canyon Road, Suite B452 Santa Clarita, CA 91350 July 24, 2009 The Honorable Frank Ferry, Mayor City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 300 Santa Clarita, CA 91355 RECEOVED PLANNING DIVISION JUL 2 4 2009 c6TY ®F SANTA CL:ARITA RE:. Why the "Brisam/Sheraton" outrage happened, & the schedule date for our Council Appeal Hearing on this mistake. VIA: EMAIL, and US MAIL Dear Mayor Ferry, As proud, pleased residents of our great City, we have been astonished that a project as fatally flawed as this so called "Brisain/Sheraton Hotel ever got as far as a planning commission hearing let alone approval. This has been even more puzzling, since the staff of our City has an outstanding, well deserved first class reputation for professionalism, great work, courtesy, and more. Why would such "pros" fall for this? We now have the answers. The trust of these good people would appear to have been abused by Brisa.m/Sheraton through hiriuig the former head of the City Planning Department, Mr. Jeff Lambert. It is quite understandable that City people would uncritically accept from their former boss, things they would reject and laugh out the door coming from someone else. In addition, the head of the entire Santa Clarita City Planning Department, Mr. Paul Brotzman, was for many years, the actual City Manager of the City of West Hollywood. Jeff Lambert evidently was a member of the West Hollywood City Planning la i PSA - page 2 of 3 Commission. Some of our members are very familiar with West Hollywood, and feel that Mr. Brotzman has much to be proud of for what he achieved there. However, Brisarn/Sheraton also used Mr. Lambert's old friendship with Mr. Brotzman instead of proving the merits of this Hotel project. We want all of our friends on the staff at the City to know that we still have faith in them, and don't blame them for what has happened. Mr. Brotz nan can also certainly be forgiven for accepting things that are wrong, when they come from someone he thought he could trust. Itis understandable why someone might initially support this "hotel". Times are tough. A new, huge hotel might help the local economy.. The facts will show, however, that this project isn't real, and provides only damage and no benefits at all. This brings us to the vital question of the schedule date for the Appeal Hearing that our hard earned dollars financed. We have not been able to figure out why so much technical information that should have been a part of the decision about this defective hotel deal is missing. Then we understood. The missing technical information would conclusively prove that the "hotel" should be denied. We are going to provide you with the missing analysis that you should have gotten from the "Brisam/Hotel" people. The "Brisam" people had as . much time as they pleased to make their case. They took a year or more, and they have omitted much more then they supplied. The Positive Solutions Association is asking for 90 days to do what "Brisam" didn't do in more than a year. We have heard that our hearing might be scheduled for Tuesday, August 25, the first Council.ineeting after your summer break. We have just learned that another highly controversial real estate development project is set for that same date and will apparently take up much of the evening. All of the overwhelming information that will conclusively prove why denial is your only option simply won't be ready until the middle of October, at the earliest. Therefore, please schedule our appeal hearing date no earlier than the latter part of October, 2009. Jeff Lambert was quoted in the newspaper saying that ".only a lawsuit will stop this project". As long as you have all of the missing information, which we will give to you, we are confident that a lawsuit will not even be necessary. We are also highly confident, and have faith that you will honor the wishes of a large numbers of your constituents, over the "rush to judgment" desires of an out of town developer fronting such an inferior project. PSA - page 3 of.3 Please let us know your decision right away, since even a late October date will be difficult for us to meet, given the wealth of information you deserve to get, and which we intend to give you. Sincerely Lir. Ronald Stevens, Ply, Environmental Engineering, Spokesperson, The Positive Solutions Association, Woodlands Homeowner cc: The Honorable Lauren `Neste, Mayor Pro Tem The Honorable Marsha Mclean, Councilinember The honorable Laurie Ender, Councilmember The Honorable Bob Kellar, Councilmember Ken Pulskarnp, City Manager Ken Striplin, Assistant City Manager Paul Brotzman, Director of Community Development I isa Webber, Planning Manager Carl Newton, City Attorney Robert Silverstein, Esquire The Positive Solutions Association Membership Our other new Santa Clarita Allies I.Q3 CITY OF SANTA CLARITA STAFF REPORT MASTER CASE NO. 08-051 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 08-006 DATE: July 7, 2009 TO: Chairperson Kennedy and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Lisa M. Webber, AICP, Planning Manager CASE PLANNER: Jessica Frank, Associate Planner APPLICANT: Brisam Valencia, LLC LOCATION: 26501 McBean Parkway (APN 2861-062-040) REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the development of a 136,559 square -foot building that includes a 200 -room hotel, a 120 -seat restaurant, and 7,610 square feet of meeting room/banquet room area. The subject property is within the Commercial Town Center (CTC) zone in the Valencia community within the City of Santa Clarita. The proposed building is seven stories, or 77'-8" tall with architectural tower elements up to +/- 88'-0" in height, and will be located on a 3.74 acre parcel. The subject property is currently operating as a miniature golf course with a restaurant and bar (The Greens) and will be removed with the approval of this development. As required in the City of Santa Clarita Unified Development Code (UDC), the discretionary. approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission is required to allow for the construction of a building exceeding 35'-0" in height and to allow for shared parking to be used for the proposed project. BACKGROUND On March 21, 2008, the applicant, Brisam Valencia, LLC, submitted an application to the Planning Division requesting a CUP to allow for the construction a Sheraton Hotel on the subject property, 26501 McBean Parkway (APN 2861-062-040), located in the community of Valencia. Subject Property Information The subject property is located northwest of the intersection of McBean Parkway and Valencia Boulevard. The 3.74 acre parcel was created under Parcel Map 20795, along with all adjacent parcels for the Valencia Town Center, Town Center East and Town Center West. The parcel is zoned Commercial Town Center (CTC) with a Valley Center Concept (VCC) overlay. On December 2, 1997, the Planning Commission approved the development of The Greens Bar and Grill to be constructed on the subject property under MC 97-175. This 27 -hole miniature putting Master Case 08-051; CUP 08-006 July, 7, 2009 Page 2 of 8 golf course with 4,400 square foot building used for a restaurant and bar are currently operating on the project site today, and is proposed to be demolished/removed with the approval of the proposed project. Surrounding properties include a paseo walkway, a Shell gas station, and the three-story Facey Medical Building to the south, with a portion of the Sienna Villas, a multi -family residential development, that borders Valencia Boulevard to the southwest. To the north is the Galaxy Car Wash, the site of the approved four-story mixed-use building (VTC Square), Valencia Country Club Golf Course and the six -story Hyatt hotel. To the east, across McBean Parkway is the Valencia Town Center Mall, and to the west the McBean Bus Transfer Station, approximately 600' of undeveloped vacant land and the Woodlands single-family residential development. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project includes a request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to construct a 136,559 square foot, seven -story hotel building (the Sheraton) at 77'-8" in. height with architectural tower elements up to +/- 88'-0" in height and to establish a Shared Parking Program for the project site. The building as proposed would have 200 rooms, a 120 -seat restaurant and approximately 7,600 square feet of banquet/meeting room area. The banquet/meeting room area includes 2,700 square feet of pre -function area, three banquet rooms, two meeting rooms and a 2,110 square foot ballroom. The hotel also has an indoor pool and spa, a fitness room and a club lounge on the seventh floor. Most of the conference facilities are to be located directly adjacent to the McBean Parkway to help establish a pedestrian scaled entrance to the project from the street. The applicant is proposing mature landscaping throughout the project site, an employee break area, bike racks, outdoor tables and benches. Also proposed to be located along the building frontage on McBean Parkway is a pedestrian courtyard area with enhanced paving, landscaping, a water feature and architectural wall details. Access to the property will be provided through the existing Mall Entrance Drive, located to the north of the project site and the Galaxy Car Wash. Access to both the car wash and the miniature golf course today is from a shared driveway from Mall Entrance Drive. The private shared driveway is proposed to be named Sheraton Court and it will lead to the hotel site entrance. All parking and vehicular drop-off areas for the Sheraton hotel is to be located along the -western portion of the project site. As part of the project, the applicant is proposing a pedestrian pathway from the building to the McBean Transfer Station to promote transit use. The trash compactor and truck loading area will 'be screened from view by being located in an area between the conference facilities and the hotel building, behind a screen wall and doors that match and blend into the building architecture. Access to these areas will be off of Sheraton Court, in an area not easily viewed from any public streets or from patrons of the hotel. As part of the construction of the new hotel building, the applicant would demolish the existing restaurant and putting green facilities and export approximately 400 cubic yards of dirt to an off-site location. The applicant is also requesting approval to establish a Shared Parking Program for the project site due to the multiple uses on the project site with different demands at different hours and with Master Case 08-051; CUP 08-006 July, 7, 2009 Page 3 of 8 patrons participating in more than one element of the mix of uses on the hotel property. The applicant proposes to provide 286 on-site parking spaces to meet the demand of the project as outlined in the shared parking study submitted by the applicant. Of the on-site spaces provided, 154 spaces are proposed to be used for valet parking. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION AND ZONING The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Commercial Town Center (CTC) with a Valley Center Concept (VCC) Overlay. The VCC overlay "is used to designate that central portion of the City which has the potential for creating a Valley -wide focal point. The purpose of the overlay is to permit and encourage master planning at a more detailed level than the general plan providing for a wide range of Valley -wide activities." (Section L-53 of the City of Santa Clarita, General Plan). The zoning designation of the project site is Commercial Town Center (CTC). The CTC zone "permits a wide range of retail, service, and related activities which are of a community and regional nature and are located in and around a large regional shopping center." (Section 17.11.020.I of the City of Santa Clarita Unified Development Code). General Plan PROJECT CTC (VCC) North CTC (VCC) East CTC (VCC) South CTC (VCC) West CTC (VCC) ANALYSIS Site Constraints Zoning Land Use CTC Restaurant/Putting Green CTC Car Wash CTC Town Center Mall CTC Car Wash/ Paseo/ Medical Building CTC Bus Transfer Station The subject property has to two major site constraints that limit the location of development on the project. They include the Restricted Use Area and a Los Angeles County Storm Drain Easement. The Restricted Use Area (RUA) traverses the project site running in a southeasterly direction starting at the northwest corner of the project site. No buildings are permitted within the RUA due to a seismic hazard. The only portion of the project site where buildings are permitted is in a portion of the parcel located directly adjacent to McBean Parkway. All buildings associated with the proposed project will remain clear of the RUA, will meet all building code requirements and follow all geotechnical recommendations in construction of the building to allow for a less than significant impact to the proposed project as it relates to seismic activity. In addition to the RUA, the project has a Los Angeles County Storm Drain Easement crossing the Master Case 08-051; CUP 08-006 July, 7, 2009 Page 4 of 8 property. This easement is 25' wide and runs along the project frontage on McBean Parkway and crosses under the building and through the proposed parking lot to the southwest. This area also restricts buildings from being constructed upon it, to ensure that if any issues arise with the storm drain in the future, it would be possible to gain access to the underground storm drain to make repairs. The applicant has designed the proposed hotel building in accordance with the requirements of the easement by removing the first floor of building in the area where the storm drain crosses under the building. This area will remain an open air pedestrian access from the parking area to McBean Parkway, and will have landscaping and decorative paving. Site Design Staff has worked with the applicant to make various changes to the project since the initial project submittal. Those changes include site design changes and architectural changes. Site design changes include removing a proposed vehicular turn-out/drop-off area on McBean Parkway, providing better pedestrian connections on-site including between the conference center and hotel uses, the extension of a pedestrian path to the bus transfer station, and providing a stronger street presence along McBean Parkway by introducing pedestrian scale facade elements to the building. The site plan is now designed with efficient on-site circulation, convenient pedestrian connections and well -landscaped areas. The proposed location of the building is oriented along the street and pulled to the front of the property, creating a strong street presence along McBean Parkway. The applicant has provided a pedestrian connection from the building to the McBean Transfer Station. Architecture Through the design review process, staff has also worked with the applicant to improve the architecture of the building. After reviewing building elevations submitted with the project application, both City staff and Newhall Land had significant concerns with the project's architecture. Over the past year, both RRM Design Group, the City's architectural consultant, and Altoon Architects, hired by Newhall Land, have provided multiple peer reviews and recommendations to the project architect to improve the building architecture. While it is understood that the ability to change the building massing is limited as a result of the site constraints, both the City and Newhall Land have worked with the applicant to improve the architecture of the building by incorporating the following changes: ■ Addition of building articulation on all sides of the building; ■ An architectural style to more closely compliment the existing buildings in the Town Center area; ■ Change to the placement of colors and the use of textures on the building to de-emphasize the vertical design features; ■ Provision of recessed windows and wall projections to break-up the massing of the building; ■ Addition of a stronger base element to reduce the visual massing of the building; ■ Trellises and canopies added along the base and the roof line of the building; ■ Variation of windows used along each elevation; and, ■ Addition of a porte-cochere to emphasize the building entry.. Master Case 08-051; CUP 08-006 July, 7, 2009 Page 5 of 8 The applicant has made significant improvements to the architecture, and has gained support of the current architectural design from both City staff and Newhall Land. At this time, City staff is still working with the applicant to make changes to the roof line of the building by requesting the use of additional roof -line treatments and enhancements to help break up the building massing from a distance. The changes needed are small but will make a significant improvement to the overall building and, at this time, staff believes those changes can be made after the Planning Commission's approval of the overall project, with the applicant making adjustements to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The applicant is conditioned to work with City staff to further articulate the architectural treatments to the roof structure prior, to issuance of building permits, subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development. With the additional adjustments made to the roof elements, the proposed building and site design. meet the requirements of the City's Architectural Guidelines to provide a project suitable for the Commercial Town Center zone and its architecture will complement the existing buildings in the area. Height The Unified Development Code (UDC) requires approval of a conditional use permit by the Planning Commission for a building that exceeds 35 feet in height. The proposed building is located within the Town Center area of the City, an area where the General Plan promotes additional density, height, and floor area ratios (FAR). The project site's land use designation of CTC (VCC) encourages FARs of up to 2:1. The proposed seven -story, hotel project would have a FAR of 0.84 and a building height of 77'-8" with architectural tower elements up to +/- 88'-0" tall. Located in the Commercial Town Center zone, the proposed building would be complimentary in height to nearby buildings including the Hyatt hotel, the Madison Condominium community, and the Princess Cruises buildings on Town Center Drive which range between 60 and 99 feet in height. Furthermore, as discussed above, the architecture and site design is enhanced to meet the City's design guidelines and to provide a well-designed hotel building and property with architecture that is similar and compatible to the existing buildings located in Valencia Town Center. Landscaping The preliminary landscape plans submitted by the applicant were reviewed by the City's landscape consultant to ensure conformance with the UDC and compatibility with the proposed building and surrounding landscaped areas. The proposed project provides substantial landscaping on the project site to enhance the view of the proposed building and parking areas. Furthermore, the applicant is proposing landscape planters at a ratio of 1 tree per every 4 parking spaces with 36" box trees planted at the end of parking aisles throughout the surface parking areas. The applicant is providing a mixture of 24", 36" and 48" box trees surrounding the project site, with two 72" box Coast Live Oak trees proposed to be added flanking the vehicular entrance into the project. The Master Case 08-051; CUP 08-006 July, 7, 2009 Page 6 of 8 applicant is also required to provide final landscape, lighting and irrigation plans for landscape plan review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. Parking Shared Parking Due to the mix of uses being proposed for the hotel, the applicant has submitted a parking study to establish a shared parking program for the subject property. The study was prepared by Linscott, Law and Greenspan, the same parking consultants that have provided the studies to establish the Shared Parking Programs used for the Valencia Town Center area. The proposed Shared Parking Program, using the methodology previously approved by the City for Town Center, concludes that the parking needs of the proposed project would be less than the supply of 286 parking spaces proposed to be provided on the subject property. The reduction in demand is attributed to the different uses on the project site being used by patrons at different times, and the knowledge that some patrons of the hotel will also use the restaurant and the banquet facilities in the same visit. The most conservative demand calculation for the project peaks at 247 spaces at 9:00 p.m. for both weekdays and weekends, which results in a residual surplus of 39 spaces on the project site. Therefore, the proposed supply would be adequate in meeting the shared parking demands of the project. Valet Parking The applicant initially submitted a proposal to develop another property directly west of the McBean Transfer Station into a second parking lot to aid in providing the required parking spaces for the project. The applicant worked to acquire the property from the owner (Newhall Land), however, because the property owner is proceeding through a bankruptcy, the property could not be purchased. In addition, the applicant has met with the Woodlands Home Owners Association Board, and has received feedback . from the community that it preferred any proposed hotel development for the hotel be restricted to the east of the bus transfer station. As a result, the applicant has developed a site plan that will allow the placement of 286 parking spaces on the project site, with 154 of those spaces to be used only for valet parking. As a condition of approval, the applicant will be required to provide 24-hour, 7 -days a week, no -charge valet service to all patrons of.the project site to ensure the proper and efficient use of all parking spaces on the property. The applicant will be required to provide a minimum of one valet attendant at all times, with 4-6 attendants being available during weekday peak times and 6-8 attendants to be provided during weekend peak times. Surrounding Land Uses The proposed seven -story hotel building would be located in a fully developed commercial town center community, that consists of the Valencia Town Center Mall, the Hyatt hotel, three office buildings over four stories in height, a three-story medical building and an approved four-story mixed use development. The construction of the proposed hotel building will not create a significant impact to the surrounding area as its size, design and operating characteristics will be complimentary to the existing uses within the Valencia Town Center area. The project will be visible from residential areas such as the eastern portion of the Woodlands and the Sienna Villas, Master Case 08-051; CUP 08-006 July, 7, 2009 Page 7 of 8 however, the proposed building is approximately 500' from the Sienna Villas and over 1000' from the closest Woodlands residential unit. The Sienna Villas would be separated from the project by Valencia Boulevard, a small paseo walkway, the Shell Gas Station and in some locations, a three- story medical office building. The Woodlands would be separated from the project building with landscaping from both the project parking lot and the project boundary, the McBean Bus Transfer Station, and approximately 600 linear feet of undeveloped land. Any potential visual impacts to these residences would be alleviated through the project's distance from residences and the proposed site landscaping. The size and design of the proposed building will be complementary to existing buildings in the Valencia Town Center area. . Traffic It is anticipated that with the approval of the 200 -room hotel, that an increase of trips generated from the project site would be more than the restaurant and miniature golf course generates today. As a result, the applicant hired Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. to prepare a traffic impact analysis for the proposed project. The results of the study showed the surrounding roads and intersections would provide adequate capacity to handle the increased use on the project site, with the integration of a street improvement to install a fourth westbound through lane on Valencia Boulevard at the McBean Parkway intersection. This mitigation measure has been incorporated into the conditions of approval for the project, and must be completed by the applicant prior to issuance of the occupancy for the project. . Economic Development The addition of a hotel and conference center, as is proposed with the Sheraton Hotel project, is in line with the intent of the City of Santa Clarita's 21 -Point Plan for Progress business plan, which is designed to support the local economy and its businesses during the recession while positioning Santa Clarita for success as the community recovers. One of the 21 Points includes development of a Hotel Business Improvement District, whereby City of Santa Clarita hotels collect a BID assessment of two percent (2%) from travelers, creating valuable dollars to re -invest in Santa Clarita's visitor attraction efforts. The City anticipates BID dollars could be up to $400,000 annually, supporting national and international sporting events such as the AT&T Champions Classic and Amgen Tour of California, in addition to regional and national advertising campaigns, designed to bring visitors to the area and heighten awareness about the Santa Clarita Valley as a Southern California destination. In addition to providing additional support for the BID, the additional 200 rooms and 7,000+ square feet of conference space at the Sheraton Hotel will support Santa Clarita's growing tourism business, which includes attraction of small conferences and other special events.. The City of Santa Clarita will benefit from new Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) collected at the hotel, which is currently a 10 percent assessment on each room night sold. The City of Santa Clarita believes a strong partnership between the Sheraton and Hyatt Regency property would result in attraction of a variety of new conferences and events to the area. Master Case 08-051; CUP 08-006 July, 7, 2009 Page 8 of 8 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND NOTIFICATION Community Response Property owners within 1,000 feet of the proposed project site were notified of the proposed project. In addition, a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in a local newspaper and two signs were posted on-site. The applicant has met with the Woodlands HOA on several -occasions and City Planning staff also attended one of the meetings. Staff has had conversations with two property owners from the Woodlands neighborhood with concerns regarding the proposed building height. As of the writing of this staff report, staff has received no additional correspondence either in support or against the proposed project. Environmental Review An initial study was completed for the project. Based on the initial study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared. The environmental documents were posted for public review for a 21 -day review period, from June 16, 2009 to July 7, 2009. At the time this staff report was prepared, staff had not received any agency or public comments. RECOMMENDATION Based on the project compliance with the City of Santa CIarita General Plan, Unified Development Code, and the City's Architectural Design Guidelines, staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1) Open the public hearing; 2) Receive testimony. from the public; and 3) Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Resolution P09-17, approving Master Case 08-051, Conditional Use Permit 08-006 with the associated Conditions of Approval (Exhibit A). ATTACHMENTS Resolution P09-17 Conditions of Approval (Exhibit A) Vicinity Map/Aerial Map Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study Linscott, Law, and Greenspan Parking Study Site Plan, Preliminary Landscape Plan, Preliminary Grading Plan, Floor Plans, and Elevation Plans Colored Elevations Photo Simulations S:\CD\CURRENTV2008\08-051 (Sheraton)\PLANNING COMM ISS ION\08-051 PC Staff Report.doc LMW:JMF:ms RESOLUTION NO. P09-17 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING MASTER CASE NO. 08-051, CONSISTING OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 08-006 ALLOWING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SEVEN -STORY +/- 88'-0" TALL BUILDING TOTALING 136,559 SQUARE FEET AND SHA_ RED PARKING ON THE PROJECT SITE LOCATED AT 26501 MCBEAN PARKWAY, SOUTH OF MALL ENTRANCE DRIVE, IN THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. FINDINGS OF FACT. The Planning Commission does hereby make the following findings of fact: a. On March 21, 2008 an entitlement application was filed by the Brisam Valencia, LLC, (the "applicant"). with the Community Development Department which included a request for the approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) to allow for the construction of a seven -story hotel building at 77'-8" in height with architectural tower elements up ,to +/- 88'-0".tall, totaling 136,559 square feet, and the reduction in required parking through the adoption. of a shared parking program for the project site; b. The project site is located on 3.74 acres on the west side of McBeanParkway, north of Valencia Boulevard, and south of Mall Entrance Drive. The project site is located at 26501 McBean Parkway (Assessor Parcel Number 2861-062-040) and currently houses a miniature golf course with a restaurant and bar•, C. The General Plan and land use designations for`the project site are CTC (Commercial Town Center) with a Valley Center Concept (VCC) overlay, corresponding to a wide range of retail, office, service, mixed-use and related activities with a floor area ratio of 2:1; d. The surrounding land uses consist of the Galaxy Car Wash, future location of VTC Square Building (a four-story mixed-use building), Valencia Country Club golf course and Niall .Entrance Drive to the north of the project site, McBean Parkway and the Valencia Town Center Mall to the east of the project site, Valencia Boulevard and Shell gas station and Facey medical building to the south of the project site, and the McBean Transfer Station to the west of the project site; This project was reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and an Initial Study was prepared. The City of Santa Clarita prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project which determined that the proposed mitigation measures will reduce the impacts associated with the project to a less than significant level; Resolution P09-17 Master• Case 08-051 Page 2 of 9 f. The project was duly noticed in accordance. with the noticing requirements for a conditional use permit on June 16, 2009; g. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed- public hearing `on this issue commencing on July 7, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. at'City Hall, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita; h. At the hearing described above, the Planning Commission "considered the staff presentation, staff report, applicant presentation and public testimony on the proposal. SECTION�I CALIFORNIA -ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT FINDINGS: Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the Planning Commission hereby find as follows: a " An Initial Study and a`IVlitrgated` Negative Declaration for this project have been prepared incompliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); b. The' Initial Study has been' circulated fo'r'�review and comment by affected governmental agencies and the public, and all comments received, if any, have been considered. The lVhtigated Negative'Declarat on was posted ai d'advert sed on June 16, 2009, in accordance with CEQA. The public review period was open from June 16, 2009 through July 7; 2009; C. There is no `subs'tantial evidence that the pro�ect'will have a significant effect on the environment. The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the City of Santa Clarita; d. The ockio n of `the documents and other material which constiiufes the record of ' proceedings'upon'which the decision ofthe Planning'Commission is'the Master Case No. 08-051 project file within the Community Development Department and is in the custody of the Director of Community Development; .and e The Planning Commission;`based uponthe findirfgs set forth above, `hereby finds that the Mittgated Negative Decl'aration`for thisproject has been'prepared`in compliance with CEQA. SECTION 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the Planning Commission hereby finds as follows: a. That the proposed'location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed " use is in accordance with'the' purpose' of this Development Code, the purpose of the zone'in which the site is located, the Santa Clarita General Plan, and the development policies and standards of the City; . Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08-051 Page 3 of 9 The proposed hotel building has been designed in accordance with the City of Santa Clarita Unified Development Code (UDC), the City's Architectural Design Guidelines, and the City's General Plan. The UDC requires that buildings exceeding 35 feet in height obtain the approval of a conditional use permit. The proposed building will be 77'-8" in height with architectural tower elements up to +/- 88'-0" in height. The proposed building is designed in a fashion that incorporates varying roof heights, building face variations and architectural accents. The proposed hotel development is located in the Valencia Town Center community, which is designated by the City's General Plan with a Valley Center Concept (VCC) overlay. Within the VCC, proposed projects are permitted a floor area ratio (FAR) of 2:1. The proposed project consists of a FAR of 0.84:1 and meets :the FAR standard for the VCC overlay. The Valencia Town Center corridor consists of a mix of commercial, hotel, office, and residential uses that are similar in height, design, density and land use.as the proposed building. In addition, the proposed Shared Parking Program, consisting of a shared parking calculation for the restaurant, banquet facilities and hotel, and using the same methodology previously approved by the City with the Valencia Town Center development, located to the north of the project site, concludes that the parking needs of the proposed project would fit the supply capabilities of the parking provided for the.. project site. Based on the. enhanced design of the proposed hotel building, location within the VCC, and adherence to the UDC, the proposed project will be consistent with the General Plan and will operate in a manner consistent with the CTC zone and will be compatible with other existing adjacent uses located in the same zone with the approval of the conditional use permit. b. That the location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use will be compatible with and wilI not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent uses, residents, buildings, structures, or natural resources, with consideration given to; 1. Harmony in scale, bulk, coverage, and density; The proposed hotel building would be located on the McBean Parkway corridor within the Valencia Town Center area on property that is zoned CTC with a land use overlay designation o.f . •VCC (Valley Center Concept). In addition to conforming to the development standards for the CTC zone, the project would be designed with consideration given to uses in the immediate vicinity. Based on the Unified Development Code, the project site could accommodate a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 2:1. The proposed building will total 136,559 square -feet on the project site which consist of 3.74 -acres (or 162,914 square -feet), thereby providing a FAR of 0.84:1 which meets the- allowable FAR. Furthermore, the proposed project adheres to development standards related to setbacks and landscaping. The proposed .building would be compatible to adjacent uses which include a four — Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08-051 Page 4 of 9 story mixed-use building and a six -story hotel to the north, a three-story medical office building to the south, the Valencia Town Center Mall located to the east and the McBean Bus Transfer Station to the west. The proposed height.of the building at 77' -8'? -with architectural towers up to +/- 88'-0" would also be compatible with the heights of the Valencia Town Center buildings which consist of heights that range between 60 feet and 99. feet. The proposed development is conforming to all of the setback requirements and: landscaping requirements for the CTC zone. 2. The availability of public facilities, services, and utilities; The.project site is located in'a developed.portion of the,City of Santa Clarita that is currently serviced .by. sewer, --.power, gas and water utilities and will not create a significant: demand additional: utilities ,on,the project site. Fire and police 'services arelanticipated to be "adequate for the area. 3., The harmful effect; if any, on desirable neighborhood character; The proposed hotel building.woul&belocated in a developed community within the Valencia Town; Centercarea of'Sarita Clanta::,Furthermore,:the project site is located on a corridor that consists of:a numberf of other uses that are substantially consistent.with the�propos'ed hotel building;!including a six=story hotel, a regional mall; --an-'approved approved four=story :mixed-use..building knowii.,,as ,.VTC Square and a ixed-usedevelopmentkn wn as the Madison: Other -off ce and,commercial uses are located along McBean Parkway. -and; Towm:-Center Drive are substantially consistent with the proposed use, design and height of the proposed hotel building. The project will be visible -from residential.�areas suchas the 'Woodlands and the Sienna Villas, however, the proposed building is approximately 500' from the Sieiula Villas and over -1000' from the closest Woodlands residential unit. The Sienna Villas would be separated from the project by Valencia Boulevard, a small paseo walkway, the Shell :Gas_Station and in some locations, a three-story medical office building. The Woodlands would be separated from the project with the McBean'Bus Transfer Station .and 4ppr`6ximately600 linear feet of undeveloped land: Any typesof negative impa'cts'to these residences would bealleviated through the project's distance: from residences and the proposed site landscaping. In addition, the proposed Shared Parking Program, consisting of a shared parking calculation for the restaurant, banquet facilities and hotel, and using the same methodology previously approved by _the City with the Valencia Town Center development, concludes that the parking needs of the proposed project would fit the supply capabilities of the parking required for -the project site. The proposed building and use will therefore be consistent with the surrounding uses and will not create �a harmful effect on the neighborhood character. The proposed building is Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08-051 Page 5 of 9 consistent with the City's Architectural Design Guidelines as well as all of the standards outlined in the Unified Development Code. 4. The generation of traffic and.the capacity and physical character of surrounding streets; The proposed office .building is located in a developed portion of the City that consists predominantly of commercial and office uses. The project frontage along McBean Parkway and Valencia Boulevard has been improved to the City standard in order to accommodate the type of densities of development along McBean Parkway as is proposed with this development. A traffic study prepared for the proposed project -concludes that the project will require the applicant to add an fourth westbound through lane to Valencia Boulevard at McBean Parkway. With the applicant completing this improvement prior to building :occupancy being granted, as required in the Conditions of Approval for the prof ect, the nearby streets and intersections have been shown to have sufficient capacity to accommodate the: project's traffic impacts. The project and the traffic study,has-also been reviewed by -the City's traffic engineer to ensure that the existing roadway network is sufficient to handle the proj ect-generated trips and that the recommendations of the.. traffic study are effective. 5. The suitability of the site for the type and intensity of use or development which is proposed; The proposed hotel building will be developed in accordance with the City's Unified Development Code.and will be consistent with,the mix of uses on the McBean Parkway corridor and the ValenciaTown Center:area:. The project site is zoned CTC (Commercial 1 Town Center) with a land use designation of VCC (Valley Center Concept). Projects proposed within the VCC are pennitted an increased Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 2:1. The proposed, project's FAR of 0.84:1 meets the Floor Area Ratio for, development in the CTC (VCC) zone. In addition, the CTC zone permits for buildings that�exceed 35 feet in height with the approval of:al CUP. The proposed building will. be constructed at a.height of 77'-8" with architectural tower elements at.+/- 88'-0" and will be consistent with the design of other buildings located. in the Valencia Town Center area. Lastly, the proposed Shared Parking .Program; consisting of a shared parking calculation for the restaurant, banquet facilities and hotel, and using the same methodology previously approved by the City with the Valencia Town Center development, concludes that the parking needs of the:proposed-project would fit the supply capabilities of the parking required for the ,prof ect site. 6. The harmful effect, if any, upon environmental quality and natural resources; Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08-051 Page 6 of 9 The project site has been previously graded, and currently houses a miniature golf course with a restaurant and bar and is not known to have any sensitive species, animal' or plant; on the project site. The project proposes to export approximately 400 cubic yards of dirt to an offsite location. All grading ,shall be conducted pursuant to the geotechnical recommendations outlined in the geotechnical study for the proposed seven -story building..No natural resources are anticipated to be disturbed with! the proposed project,. 1The.proposed`use:couldhave an.effect on thel.aesthetics of.-the.project site with the construction'o''f abuilding that is 77''8" iri heightwith tower elements at +/- 88'-0" e'jm_heighf on the project site.: 'Hovr,6er:the•..#plicant :proposes enhanced architecture to :break ,up; the massing' of.the;,building.using varying wall planes, varyirig:colors and, materials; and other architecturaltreatments- that will eliminate any :.adverse visual impact.:;. The.proposed,:off ce.:buildingi,proyides 360 degree architecture with -a high-level of articulation;. Based omthese'treatments, as well as otherirnitigation measures:identified.i the initial study prepared for the project, the project is not anticipated to have a,harinful effect on the environment. C. That the proposed location, size, design, and operating: characteristics of the proposed use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare; or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; The-project:site is located within the Valencia Town Centerwea, is'z'oned CTC and has a land use` designation,of Valley'Center Concept (VCC).The proposed seven -story hotel building. would be located in a fully developed commercial, town i0enter community, that consists ofthe dlencia Town CenterMall; the Hyatt,hotel; three office buildings over -four stories: a three-story: medical.: building ,and a, .four=story mixed use development . The!. construction of the proposed hotel building . will not create a significant ;impact `to : the-; <surrouridirig� : area :.as its size:' ;design and operating characteristics -will be.'complimentary.to'',thde'ex sting:uses witl7inahe Valencia Town `Center•area..:The:project requires the approval of a' -conditional .use:permit to allow for the proposed shared parking calculation and toallow- fora+building height in excess of 35: feet. The�proposed buildin"g will`be.constructed at.atheight of +%-88'-0" and will be substantially consistent with similar uses and,.building.heights in the area. The architectural treatments! proposed for the building wilt address potential impacts that may: bei create&by the construction of the ,proposed building: The proposed hotel building consists: of 360 degree architecture to provide a: well designed, highly articulated building. The project will Abe:!visible;`from, residential; areas such as the n Woodlands and the Siena Villas, however, the proposed building is approximately 500', from -the Sienna Villas and over 1000' from ih&closest Woodlands residential Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08-051 Page 7 of 9 unit. The.Sienna Villas.would be separated from the project by Valencia Boulevard, a small paseo walkway, the Shell Gas, Station and in some locations, a :three-story medical office building. The Woodlands would be separated from the project with the McBean Bus Transfer Station, and approximately 600 linear.feet of undeveloped land. Any types of negative impacts to .these residences would .be alleviated through the project's distance from residences and the proposed site landscaping. Therefore, the size and design of the proposed building will not be detrimental to properties in the vicinity. The proposed hotel building is proposed to have a reduction of required parking through the approval of a Shared Parking Program. A parking study was completed by the parking engineering firm Linscott, Law and Greenspan. The study determined that the combined uses proposed for the hotel building, including the restaurant, and . banquet facilities would require a peak demand on weekdays and on weekends that is less than the total number of spaces available. The study concludes that in a worst- case -scenario, there would be a residual parking surplus of at least 39 spaces. In addition, the project is required to complete a Transportation Management Demand program that would implement incentives for various alternative modes of transportation, including utilizing the adjacent transfer station, carpooling; and alternate work schedules. Therefore, operating characteristics as itrelates to parking would not have a detrimental impact on neighboring uses. d. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the City of Santa Clarita Unified Development Code, except for an approved variance or adjustment; and The proposed use requires the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to exceed the 35 -foot permitted -by -right height for the proposed hotel building, which would be 77'-8" high, with tower elements up to +/- 88'-0" high; and to establish a Shared Parking Program for the uses on the property.. With the approval of a CUP, the proposed use and development would be consistent with all regulations established in the City's Unified Development Code requirements as well as with the goals and policies outlined in the City's General Plan. No variance is required'with the proposed development. SECTION 4. Based upon the testimony and other evidence, if any, received at the public hearing, and upon studies and investigations made by the Planning Commission and on its behalf, the Commission further finds and determines that this proposal is.consistent with the City's General Plan. SECTION 5. The Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and. approves Master Case 08-051 consisting of Conditional Use Permit 08-006 to allow for the (1) reduction of required parking through a Shared Parking Program and (2) construction of the seven- Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08-051 Page 8 of 9 story,hotel building at a height of 77'-8" with architectural tower elements up to +/- 88.'-0,' subject to the Conditions of�Approval as referenced herein as Exhibit A: SECTION 6: The Planning'Commission Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and certify`this record to be a- full, complete, and correct copy of the action taken. Resolution P09-17 Master Case 08-051 Page 9 of 9 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7t' day of July, 2009. ATTEST: 1SAM. WEBBER ._-SEETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ) I, Lisa M. Webber, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita ata regular meeting thereof, held on the 7t' day of July, 2009, by the following vote of the Planning Commission: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BURKHART, KENNEDY, OSTROM, TRAUTMAN NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: JACOBSON PLA G COMMISSION SECRETARY SAMCURREN WO08\08-051 (Sheraton)\PLANNING COMMISSION\08-051 PC Resolution.doc CHAIKPERSON KENNEDY PLANNING COMMISS N I, Lisa M. Webber, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita ata regular meeting thereof, held on the 7t' day of July, 2009, by the following vote of the Planning Commission: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BURKHART, KENNEDY, OSTROM, TRAUTMAN NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: JACOBSON PLA G COMMISSION SECRETARY SAMCURREN WO08\08-051 (Sheraton)\PLANNING COMMISSION\08-051 PC Resolution.doc