The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2009-03-24 - RESOLUTIONS - NEWHALL REDEVELOPMENT PROJ (4)RESOLUTION NO. RDA 09-6 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND TRANSMITTING ITS REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO. THREE TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE NEWHALL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND CONSENTING TO A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING WHEREAS, on July 9, 1997, the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita, California, ("City Council") adopted Ordinance No. 97-12 establishing the Redevelopment Plan ("Redevelopment Plan") for the Newhall Redevelopment Project Area, and subsequently amended said Redevelopment Plan on June 26, 2007 by Ordinance No. 07-05 and May 13, 2008 by Ordinance No. 08-06; and WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clarita ("Agency") is proposing to amend the Redevelopment Plan to modify its eminent domain authority and has prepared a proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan ("Amendment No. Three") pursuant to California Community Redevelopment Law, Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq. ("Redevelopment Law"), in the form attached herewith as Exhibit "A"; and WHEREAS, the Agency has prepared a Report to the City Council ("Report") on the proposed Amendment No. Three that includes all information required by Sections 33352 and 33457.1 of the Redevelopment Law, also in the form attached as Exhibit "A"; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 33458 of Redevelopment Law, a joint public hearing on the Amendment No. Three may be held with consent of the City Council and Agency. NOW, THEREFORE, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clarita does hereby resolve as follows: SECTION 1. The Agency hereby approves its Report to the City Council for the proposed Amendment No. Three to the Redevelopment Plan for the Newhall Redevelopment Project Area and transmits said Report together with the proposed Amendment No. Three to the City Council for their consideration. SECTION 2. The Agency hereby consents to a joint public hearing with the City Council, on May 12, 2009 at 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as may be heard, for the purpose of considering the proposed Amendment No. Three to the Redevelopment Plan for the Newhall Redevelopment Project Area, and requests that the City Council call said joint public hearing of the Agency and City Council. SECTION 3. The Agency hereby directs staff to give notice of the joint public hearing in the form and manner required by Redevelopment Law. SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of March, 2009. ATTEST: -�-" a SECRETARY STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss. CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ) I, Sharon L. Dawson, MMC, Secretary of the City of Santa Clarita Redevelopment Agency, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 24th day of March, 2009, by the following vote: AYES: AGENCY MEMBERS NOES: AGENCY MEMBERS ABSENT: AGENCY MEMBERS Ender, Kellar, Weste, McLean, Ferry None None F) SECRETARY L 1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss. CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ) CERTIFICATION OF REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RESOLUTION I, Sharon L. Dawson, Secretary of the City of Santa Clarita Redevelopment Agency, do hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of the original Resolution No. RDA 09-6, adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clarita, California on March 24, 2009, which is now on file in my office. Witness my hand and seal -of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clarita, California, this day of , 20_. Sharon L. Dawson, MMC Secretary Susan Caputo, CMC Deputy Secretary '1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA 23920 VALENCIA BOULEVARD SANTA CLARITA, CA 91355 REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AMENDMENT NO. THREE TO NEWHALL REDEVELOPMENT PLAN Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clarita March 24, 2009 ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC www.webrsg com 1 1 1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE INTRODUCTION PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS PROJECTAREA DESCRIPTION CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT REASONS FOR THE AMENDMENT OVERVIEW REASONS FOR THE AMENDMENT DESCRIPTION OF THE PHYSICAL AND ECONOMIC BLIGHTING CONDITIONS IN THE PROJECT AREA OVERVIEW Physical Blight Economic Blight ANALYSIS OF BLIGI-MNG CONDITIONS Physical Blight Economic Blight Physical and Economic Burden on the Community METHOD OF RELOCATION PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACT REPORT Relocation Traffic Circulation Environmental Quality Availability of Community Facilities and Services Effect on School Population and Quality of Education Property Taxes and Assessments Low and Moderate Income Housing Program NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS HOUSING LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSEHOLDS EXPECTED TO BE DESTROYED OR REMOVED BY THE PROJECT NUMBER OF PERSONS AND FAMILIES OF LOW AND MODERATE INCOME EXPECTED TO BE DISPLACED GENERAL LOCATION OF REPLACEMENT LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING TO BE REHABILITATED, DEVELOPED, AND CONSTRUCTED NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS HOUSING PERSONS OF LOW AND MODERATE INCOME PLANNED FOR CONSTRUCTION OR REHABILITATION OTHER THAN REPLACEMENT HOUSING PROJECTED MEANS OF FINANCING REHABILITATION AND NEW CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSING FOR LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSEHOLDS PROJECTED TIMETABLE FOR MEETING THE PLAN'S RELOCATION, REHABILITATION, AND REPLACEMENT HOUSING OBJECTIVES SUMMARY OF CONSULTATIONS WITH AFFECTED TAXING AGENCIES APPENDIX A THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE NEWHALL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA APPENDIX B INITIAL STUDY AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION t. RSG 3 3 3 5 6 6 6 10 10 10 10 11 11 43 50 52 53 54 55 55 55 55 56 56 56 56 56 57 57 57 57 57 58 59 59 62 62 6 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE INTRODUCTION The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clarita ("Agency") has proposed to modify its eminent domain authority by Amendment No Three to the Redevelopment Plan ("Amendment") for the Newhall Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area"). The Agency's eminent domain authority within the Project Area will expire on July 8, 2009. The proposed Amendment would permit the use of eminent domain proceedings as a method for the Agency to acquire property, including two specific non -owner occupied residential structures in the.Project Area for a period -of 12 additional years. A map is included on the following page that identifies the Project Area [A copy of the proposed Amendment is included as Appendix A herein.] PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS The proposed Amendment will be considered by the Agency and the City Council at a joint public hearing currently scheduled for May 12, 2009. It is important to note that this date could change based on the City Council and Agency Board's final decision to move forward. Notice of the joint public hearing will be published and mailed to all Project Area property owners and affected taxing agencies, along with residents and businesses where mailing addresses are reasonably available, not less than 30 days prior to the public hearing. After the public hearing, the Agency and City Council may consider adopting the proposed Amendment. PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION The 913 63 -acre Project Area is located in the southwest portion of the City and comprises approximately three percent of the City's total area. It consists of retail, industrial, public and residential properties generally located along the Lyons Avenue and Railroad Avenue (formerly San Fernando Road) corridors. Table 0 shows a breakdown of land uses within the Project Area. Land Use Table i-1 Newhall Redevelopment Project Area Land Use Acreage % Parcels % Commercial 114.82 13% 231 18% Industrial 90.82 10% 46 4% Residential 209.93 23% 725 56% Public/Inst/Rec/Misc 41.72 5% 73 6% Agricultural 0.07 0% 1 0% Vacant 241.13 26% 218 17% Unknown (1) 444 0.5% 2 0.2% Right of Way (2) 210.70 23% Total 91363 100% 1,296 100% The Project Area contains nearly 2,000 residential units within the Project Area boundaries as well as two special planning areas: the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan Area and the North Newhall Specific Plan Area. Amenities in the area include the Newhall Metrolink station and convenient access to Interstate 5 and Highway 14. A map of the Project Area is included on the following page. 1 1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE Exhibit i-1 Newhall Redevelopment Project Area, City of Santa Clarita Mt,P U�ilericia Rivd � ` I k s { 1 'd r �.. 1 (Jr'� ,on St k p 1 1 1v1cB�an �+tttiv� � t `t F i � x"126 d � rx 110 lyonaA e I 4 7 1 'd« S4 .77p Lytt I t t j. �tM c< ` Project Area N City Boundary W E J 0,25 U;5 1 Miles s F �� cc RJG 2 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT This document is the Agency's Report to the City Council ("Report") for the proposed Amendment and generally describes the reasons for and implications of the proposed Amendment. The contents of this Reportare prescribed by Sections 33352 and 33457.1 of the Redevelopment Law -and provide information, documentation, and evidence to assist the City Council with their consideration of the proposed Amendment and in making the various determinations in connection with its adoption. The scope of the proposed Amendment is limited to reinstituting the Agency's use of eminent domain; no other changes are proposed. Consequently, several elements required by Section 33352 of the Redevelopment Law for this Report do not apply to the proposed Amendment and are not included in this Report, as Section 33457.1 of the Redevelopment Law requires that this report shall contain the information as warranted by the proposed amendment These excluded elements are the following- ■ Reasons for selecting the Project Area (Section 33352(a)): The proposed Amendment would not alter boundaries or authorize specific projects within the Project Area. The proposed Amendment would only authorize the Agency to commence -eminent domain proceedings within the, Project Area for a.period of 12 additional years. • Implementation plan that describes specific goals and objectives of the Agency, specific projects proposed by the Agency, and description of how these projects will improve or alleviate conditions (Section 33352(c)) On June 26, 2007, the Agency adopted its current Five Year (2007-08 through 2011- 12) Implementation Plan for the Project Area, which is not affected by the proposed Amendment, since the proposed Amendment only alters acquisition authority and does not propose new projects or programs. ■ Proposed method of financing the redevelopment of the Project Area (Section 33352(e))- The proposed Amendment would not change any aspect of financing or change the analysis prepared at the time the Redevelopment Plan was adopted. • Analysis of the preliminary plan (Section 33352(g)): The boundaries of the Project Area would not change with the proposed Amendment; therefore, analysis of a preliminary plan is not necessary. ■ Report and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Section 33352(h)): Because the proposed Amendment does not affect the Redevelopment Plan's land use provisions, and the Redevelopment Plan was previously determined to be in conformance with the adopted City of General Plan, it was not deemed necessary to require the Planning Commission to make additional findings for the proposed Amendment. • Conformity with the City's General Plan (Section 333520): The proposed Amendment would not alter the Redevelopment Plan's conformity with the adopted City General Plan, and findings made by the Planning Commission and City Council at the time of the adoption of the ordinance approving the Redevelopment Plan would not be altered by the proposed Amendment. • Report of the County Fiscal Officer (Section 33352(1)): Because the proposed Amendment would not alter the boundaries of the Project Area, it was not necessary for the Agency to request a base year report from the County of Los Angeles pursuant to Section 33328 of the Redevelopment Law and the Amendment does not alter the Project Area's 1996-97 base year value. The contents of this Report are presented in seven sections, which generally correspond to the subdivisions in Section 33352 of the Redevelopment Law. The sections included in this Report are as follows. • Reasons for the proposed Amendment (Section 33352(a)) • Description of the physical and economic blighting conditions in the Project Area (Section 33352(b)) • Method of Relocation (Section 33352(f)) ■ Proceedings of Project Area Committee (Section 33352 (i)) ■ Environmental Review (Section 33352(k)) ■ Neighborhood Impact Report (Section 33352(m)) • Summary of Consultations with Affected Taxing Agencies (Section 33352(n)) f,< !' 0 RSA, fl REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE REASONS FOR THE AMENDMENT OVERVIEW The Agency was created by the City of Santa Clarrta City Council ("City Council") on November 28, 1989, by Ordinance No. 89-27, to undertake redevelopment activities that remove physically and economically blighted conditions that inhibit private development and continue to plague the City. The Redevelopment Plan ("Plan") for the Project Area was adopted on July 8, 1997, by Ordinance No. 97-12. The Plan has been amended twice since its adoption The first amendment, adopted by the City Council on June 26, 2007, by Ordinance No. 07-05, addressed Senate Bill 53 ("SB 53") for the Project Area. SB 53, codified in Section 33342.7 of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq , "Redevelopment Law"), required the City Council to adopt an ordinance describing the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clarita's ("Agency") program to acquire real property by eminent domain. The second amendment, adopted by the City Council on May 13, 2008, by Ordinance No. 08-6, amended certain time limitations with respect to the Project Area pursuant to the provisions of Section 33333 2 of the Law As a result, the Plan was amended to extend the time limit on the effectiveness of the Plan to July 8, 2028. This third amendment has been proposed by the Agency to modify the Plan's eminent domain authority as described herein. Pursuant to the Plan, the authority of the Agency to initiate condemnation proceedings to acquire property expires on July 8, 2009 As authorized under Redevelopment Law, the Agency proposes to amend the Plan to extend this time limit by twelve years, or to July 2021 If adopted as proposed, the third amendment would permit the use of eminent domain to acquire non residential property in the Project Area as currently authorized by the Plan since 1997, plus extend eminent domain authority to two specific rental residential parcels located at the southwest corner of Magic Mountain Parkway and Bouquet Canyon/Railroad Avenue and the northwest corner of Drayton Street and Springbrook Avenue. No other existing residential units would be subject to eminent domain if the Amendment is adopted as proposed. A map has been included on the following page to identify the two non -owner occupied rental residential structures REASONS FOR THE AMENDMENT The proposed Amendment would allow redevelopment of the Project Area to proceed pursuant to the goa Is of the Redevelopment Plan. The Community Center, Farmer's Market, acquisition of the Moore's property for reuse, and improvements to Railroad Avenue are just a few of the successful projects that the Agency has been involved with. However, redevelopment of the Project Area has not been completed and several Redevelopment Plan goals established in 1997 remain unfulfilled such as improving the parking supply and creating a "Main Street" environment along Main Street. As identified in more detail in the following section of this Report, physical and economic blighting conditions remain in the Project Area. Specifically, buildings in the Project Area are unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work; conditions of lots in the Project Area hinder their viable use or capacity; property values are impaired by hazardous waste, the Project Area has abnormally low lease rates and high business vacancies, and the Project Area has a high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and welfare. Conditions in several critical areas of the Project Area create hazardous conditions and severe blight For example, several properties on Sprrngbrook and Drayton Avenues have inadequate infrastructure, parking that leads to safety or hindered use issues, and vehicular access due to parcels that are of an insufficient size to support the intensity of their uses Other serious problems include unsafe and unhealthy properties due to dilapidation and deterioration caused by long term neglect and high business vacancies and low lease rates that exceed City and County averages. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE Exhibit.A-1 ResiOential Parcels Subject. -to Eminent Domain Newhall .Redevelopment Projeet.Area, City .pf'Santa C1arita �/ Ileacla f31Vd ! ' r on �St - KC 1 i 10136, ARM vJL;unJy iviap I ! Residential Parcels GLf0)ecLto.Cntisent Dorraahi a s„ '`Project•A'n City.boundary or c j 0 0.25 0.5 1 WIGS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE As a result, the proposed Amendment would help accomplish the following Redevelopment Plan goals in the Project Area. • Expand the convenience and comparison/specialty economic niches. ■ Create an attractive "Main Street" environment on Main Street (formerly San Fernando Road) to attract new shoppers and businesses. • Create an attractive, memorable image that expresses Newhall's history and character. ■ Establish programs to promote private sector investment. ■ Enhance the role of Newhall as a community center. ■ Maintain and capitalize on the visibility and access associated with through -traffic. ■ Improve the parking supply. ■ Pursue opportunities for special facilities that attract a wide visitor base. Many of the projects currently under consideration by the City in the Project Area, especially the downtown Newhall area, have some level or component of Agency or City assistance as part of the development program. Many properties in the Project Area are too small to build modern commercial or industrial developments and are in mixed ownership. These hindering factors will be discussed in greater detail in subsequent sections of the Report. Parcel consolidation has often proven difficult for the private sector to accomplish alone, and is more easily facilitated through Agency assistance with the potential use of eminent domain authority. Because the Agency's eminent domain authority expires on July 8, 2009, the Agency will lose its ability to facilitate land assembly and acquisition, unless the proposed Amendment is adopted. As witnessed throughout the Project Area, property owners have failed to make needed investments in their properties that have a direct negative impact on surrounding properties as well. The Downtown Newhall Specific Plan makes specific mention of properties which are allowed to remain in a state of disinvestment by landlords. This matter was of significant importance at the community outreach meetings for the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan, and attendees agreed that eminent domain was a valuable tool to address these issues. By negatively affecting other properties and the Project Area as a whole, it is essential to have eminent domain as a potential economic tool with which to exercise the Agency's authority to redevelop the Project Area. Relying on the voluntary sale of properties by the private sector alone can often prove to be infeasible, especially in instances in which absentee owners have little invested in a property In addition, when a private developer alone enters into negotiation with land owners in a large parcel assembly, one land owner's unwillingness to sell often jeopardizes the entire proposed project With the Agency's proposed extension of eminent domain authority within the Project Area, as proposed by this Amendment, the Agency could help negotiate land acquisition and land assembly transactions necessary to facilitate private development and redevelopment within the Project Area Absent this ability, large scale development on multiple parcels could become severely limited One example of how Agency involvement with the private sector is critical for large-scale redevelopment efforts, the Agency is currently working with property owners in the downtown area as part of a larger project involving a new library Without the Agency's ability to utilize erninent domain as a tool, this project may never have been possible Eminent domain has not been used to condemn any properties as of the date of this report. However, eminent domain has been contemplated and authorized in limited instances which ultimately resulted in a settlement agreement with the property owner. This is one example of how Agency involvement via potential eminent domain action in redevelopment is necessary to bring multiple property owners together and the type of project that could not be accomplished by the private sector alone. Another reason for why this Amendment is needed is the prevalence of dilapidated and deteriorated buildings, depreciated and stagnant property values, and other adverse physical and economic conditions present in the Project Area. These conditions are described in further detail in subsequent sections These conditions are significant because they are affecting individual private properties and are themselves a direct indicator that �r , s l_J 1 0 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE the private sector alone has been unable to marshal the private debt and equity resources necessary to overcome such problems. The private sector needs a catalyst, in the form of strategic redevelopment investment by the Agency, to overcome these adverse private property conditions. The power of eminent domain is just the type of tool the Agency can utilize to provide this type of catalyst. The extension of the Agency's eminent domain authority is necessary to help acquire and consolidate parcels to make the Project Area more attractive and feasible for private redevelopment. In accordance with other -Redevelopment -Plan goals, --there -is an identified- need -to develop -programs -and incentives -for the rehabilitation of old, obsolescent, and deteriorating structures in the Project Area. The Redevelopment Plan also called for the consolidation of parcels, as needed, to induce new or expanded commercial development. The level of lot consolidation required to achieve the scope and type of development in the City and Agency wishes to achieve in the Downtown Newhall area is such that without eminent domain as a tool, development potentially could come to a standstill in the Project Area. With the proposed Amendment, the Agency's extended eminent domain authority would enable the Agency to facilitate land acquisition and assembly, which would prove to be the most efficient means to accomplish the private development and redevelopment of the Project Area. As described in more detail in the following section, deteriorating structures and a need for consolidation of parcels for effective redevelopment are still critical goals in the Project Area. Through the extension of the Agency's eminent domain authority, the proposed Amendment would help facilitate the consolidation of lots, remove obsolescent and deteriorating structures in the Project Area, and provide a power catalytic tool to help spur private sector investment. 1 1 tr R S G_ 1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE DESCRIPTION OF THE PHYSICAL AND ECONOMIC BLIGHTING CONDITIONS IN THE PROJECT AREA OVERVIEW Sections 33030 and 33031 of the Redevelopment Law describe the conditions that constitute blight in a redevelopment project area A blighted area is one that necessitates the creation of a redevelopment project area because the combination of conditions in the area constitutes a burden on the community that cannot be alleviated by private enterprise and/or governmental action Section 33333.2 (a)(4) provides that the twelve year time limitation on the power of eminent domain may be extended only by amendment of the redevelopment plan after the Agency finds, based on substantial evidence, both of the following. That significant blight remains within the Project Area, and That this blight cannot be eliminated without the use of eminent domain. For the purpose of the Amendment, the definition of "significant" Is assumed to be "of a noticeably or measurable large amount' to warrant Agency assistance.' For the purpose of this Report, blight findings will be analyzed in terms of the current definition of blight. Blighting conditions found in the Project Area Include unsafe and unhealthy buildings, conditions on lots that hinder their viable use or capacity, Impaired property values due to hazardous wastes, abnormally high business vacancies and low lease rates, and a high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and welfare. Physical Blight ■ Buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work. These conditions may be caused by serious building code violations, serious dilapidation and deterioration caused by long-term neglect, construction that is vulnerable to serious damage from seismic or geologic hazards, and faulty or inadequate water or sewer utilities ■ Conditions that prevent or substantially hinder the viable use or capacity of buildings or lots. These conditions may be caused by buildings of substandard, defective, or obsolete design, or construction given the present general plan, zoning, or other development standards ■ Adjacent or nearby incompatible land uses that prevent the development of those parcels or other portions of the project area. ■ The existence of subdivided lots that are In multiple ownership and whose physical development has been Impaired by their Irregular shapes and Inadequate sizes, given present general plan and zoning standards and present market conditions Economic Blight ■ Depreciated or stagnant property values. • Impaired property values, due in significant part to hazardous wastes on property where the agency may be eligible to use Its authority as specified in Article 12 5 of the Redevelopment Law (commencing with Section 33459) • Abnormally high business vacancies, abnormally low, lease rates, or an abnormally high number of abandoned buildings • A serious lack of necessary commercial facilities that are normally found in neighborhoods, Including grocery stores, drug stores, banks and other lending Institutions. ■ Serious residential overcrowding that has resulted in significant public health or safety problems. As used in this paragraph, 'overcrowding" means exceeding the standard referenced in Article 5 (commencing with Section 32) of Chapter 1 of Title 25 of the California Code of Regulations. ' "Significant' Merriam -Webster's Collegiate Dictionary 10'h ed 1998 10 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE • An excess of bars, liquor stores, or adult-oriented business that has resulted in significant public health, safety, or welfare problems. • A high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and welfare. Section 33030(c) of the Redevelopment Law also states that a blighted area may be one that contains inadequate public improvements or inadequate water or sewer utilities when other blighting conditions are present ANALYSIS OF BLIGHTING CONDITIONS Today, physical and economic blighting conditions remain in the Project Area and are summarized below Detaiis are described later in this section of the Report. ■ Buildings in which -it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work • Conditions that prevent or substantially hinder the viable use or capacity of buildings or lots • Impaired property values, due in significant part, to hazardous wastes • Abnormally low lease rates and high business vacancies ■ A high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to public safety and welfare The detailed analysis of blighting conditions is based on the definition of blight contained in the Redevelopment Law and consists of field inspections of the Project Area parcels that would be subject to eminent domain, discussion with City officials and real estate brokers, and research and analysis of local and regional economic data. Field surveys of the Project Area were conducted on November 25, 2008, and January 28, 2009, by consultants trained in identifying and analyzing blight. The primary focus of the blight survey concentrated on the Project Area parcels that would be subject to eminent domain. Because this proposed amendment is for the extension of eminent domain, and the Agency does not wish to utilize this power on other residential properties other than the two previously described, the field survey team did not evaluate the remaining residential properties for conditions of blight. The purpose of the field surveys was to locate and evaluate those exterior blighting conditions prevalent throughout the Project Area. Properties were evaluated based upon the physical condition of the structure, the condition of the lot, the land use, and the land use compatibility with surrounding uses. Only serious problems were noted, Properties needing repainting, new signage, or general cleanup were not included because these conditions are not deemed to be a reliable and consistent measure of physical and economic blighting conditions The following individuals were consulted: Paul Brotzman, Director of Community Development, Armine Chaparyan, Redevelopment Manager, Alex Hernandez, Administrative Analyst, Terasa Sullivan, Project Technician; Patrick Leclair, Associate Planner, Norm Sieger, Community Preservation, Officer; Tim Crissman, Crissman Commercial Services, and Mark Oliver, Oliver Commercial. The following reports and data sources were consulted. Business Analyst Online by ESRI, United States Census, City of Santa Clarita Municipal Code; California Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor Database; California Water Resources Control Board Geotracker Database; Environmental Protection Agency CERCLIS Database, Crime -statistics for Santa Clarita obtained from the City; local real estate market reports from real estate brokerage firms; Loopnet Commercial Real Estate Online, and Los Angeles County's 2008-2009 Assessor's Role from First American Real Estate Solutions MetroScan Physical Blight The Project Area exhibits physical blighting conditions consisting of unsafe and unhealthy buildings and conditions on lots that hinder their viable use or capacity. 11 1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE Buildings in the Proiect Area are Unsafe and Unhealthy for Persons to Live or Work Serious dilapidation and deterioration of structures has a negative effect on the economic development of the area. Businesses are less successful in an area that is dilapidated and deteriorated due to customer concerns about health and safety Most buildings in the Project Area are occupied by commercial, industrial, and residential uses The median age of commercial and industrial structures in the Project Area is 40 years, and at least one-quarter of the structures are over 50 years of age The two residential parcels that would be subject to eminent domain under this amendment are 52 and 78 years of age. As discussed previously, the Project Area covers 913.63 acres. Of this total, 114.82 acres contain commercial land uses and 90.82 acres contain industrial land uses. The field survey, which was conducted from the public right-of-way, revealed that five percent of commercial and industrial parcels in the Project Area contain seriously dilapidated and` deteriorated structures. According to County Assessor's data from First American Real Estate Solutions MetroScan, eight (8) of the fifteen (15) structures identified as seriously dilapidated and deteriorated are over 50 years of age, and all but one (1) are over 30 years of age. Due to the age of the structures in the Project Area, it is likely that more structures suffer from serious dilapidation and deterioration than was evident from the public right-of-way Over half of the structures with this condition are on Railroad Avenue. According to the Building and Safety Division, buildings in the Project Area are older and have a significant problem with inadequate maintenance and unpermitted improvements like electrical, plumbing and other installations that have not been inspected for safety and compliance with State Codes Proper maintenance is key to maintaining required safety levels for occupancy of buildings. Lack of proper maintenance typically starts becoming problematic when buildings are older than 20 to 30 years, and buildings in the Project Area are overall much older than that. During routine inspections conducted within the past year, observed problems include buildings having improper electrical installations, leaky roofs, faulty plumbing, inefficient or inadequate installation of mechanical equipment for heating and cooling, illegal detached structures, and inadequate ADA/accessibility for the disabled. Buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work can be caused by serious dilapidation and deterioration caused by long-term neglect and serious building code violations, among other things Dilapidation and deterioration is caused by neglect, deferred maintenance, and aging. For example, if exterior surfaces are not properly maintained to remove wood rot or replace cracked or missing siding or stucco, this lack of maintenance could expose the interior framing and foundation to the elements, weakening the structural integrity of the building. Deterioration of roofing materials, doors, and windows can make framing, rafters, and interior wiring susceptible to water damage and increases the deterioration of the entire structure, leaving it susceptible to fire and other damage. Water leakage resulting from deterioration also poses serious health risks to occupants by exposing them to dangerous molds and fungi. Examples of these conditions are shown in photos in this section of the Report Dilapidation and deterioration is considered serious when the physical condition of the structure is such that it could cause bodily harm to those within or near the structure. If proper regular maintenance is not done, first minor and then major failures will result over time, as demonstrated in Exhibit B-1 below. As the cost of renovating the building goes up over the years, structural failures occur and the building cannot be recovered. As Exhibit B-1 on the following page shows, the process of dilapidation and deterioration can be self- perpetuating. The presence of properties that exhibit signs of deterioration may deter neighboring business owners from improving and maintaining their properties because it appears any benefit that might accrue to their properties will be diminished or negated due to the condition of surrounding properties. When deteriorating conditions are prevalent throughout an area, it can be difficult for a properly maintained property to attract a buyer because the area's degenerating conditions send a message of apathy to potential investors, which presents a risk in terms of possible decreases in property values if these conditions persist. i� R J G 12 Exhibit B-1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE Structural failures occur -------------------- - ------------------ mol usable Start of maloi failmcs a u a Start of muwr failures ----- B Normal wear A ---------�-------- — ------- �� Mayor repair Tune in years Total cost of mayor repair (C) Total cost of minor repair (B) Total cost of preventive maintenance (A) ®® Minor repnir Preventive maintenance PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE (bottom line) not only costs markedly less in aggregate than repairing building failures, it reduces human wear and scar, A building whose systems are always breaking or threatening to break is depressing to the occupants, and that brings on another dimension of expense This diagram is adapted from Pievenfrve Maintenance ojBiuldings (Ncw York Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1991), p 3 Evidence of serious dilapidation and deterioration in the Project Area includes deteriorated roofing materials, rusted and deteriorated roofing and wall materials, cracked exterior walls, and holes In exterior walls. Specific examples of dilapidated and deteriorated structures are shown in the photographs on the following pages and summarized in a map on the next page as Exhibit B-2. Q-�f�'S(� 13 1 1 1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE Exhibit B-2 Unsafe & Unhealthy Properties Newhall Redevelopment Project Area, City of Santa C'l�ariitta Unsafe Unhealthy Project Area } City Boundary 0 0.1s 0.3 D•6Mks j �9) PSG Z t`N 14 w, a �+a ! W�u�V•`m4 emu ��! W ��GR,Ti ,e -x%11! ii 2 �q n REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2831 003 027, 24605 Railroad Avenue This building exhibits severe signs of external building material damage and deterioration. The building fagade is damaged and cracked from exposure to the elements, and the foundation also shows signs of distress. Several windows are broken or out of alignment, presenting a building in serious need of repair. The owner of this property has neglected to make needed repairs. ;moi} PSG 16 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2827 002 026, 23870 Pine Street This parcel contains both an industrial building and an office or residential structure. The industrial building has dilapidated corrugated metal for fencing, building and roofing material. Broken windows are clearly visible, and a variety of materials and vehicles are being stored outside. In addition, a small building which appears to be currently utilized as an office or a residential structure exhibits severe external building damage. The overhang has broken plywood panels, exposing the interior beams to the elements, and the gutter and eaves system are faulty. r 17 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2830 001 208, 25075 Peachland Avenue The roofing materials on this building are beginning to show signs of damage and deterioration. Sections of the eaves and gutters are exposed and have begun to rot from water damage. Should these conditions persist, water damage to the roof and ultimately the building itself will lead to a health and safety issue. i ,�..� P C3 M REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2830 014 005, 23228 Lyons Avenue This building shows signs of weather damage from exposed building materials. Buckling and rotting roofing , materials of this building pose a significant health and safety issue. These undesirable conditions will ultimately affect the building's value and lease rate. r19 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2830 016 032, 22950 Lyons Avenue This small retail location appeared to be vacant from the public right-of-way. Portions of the external building materials have begun to show serious signs of weather damage that need more than basic maintenance and a coat of paint to be repaired. These conditions lead to a lower building value, impacting the marketability of the structure and having a direct impact on surrounding property values. RSG 20 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2831 006 003, 24522 Railroad Avenue This property has several issues. The City has noted that portions of the structure and additions to the building exist over the public and sidewalk improvements external building materials, broken windows. ;. Pr G right-of-way. In certain portions, the City is unable to construct adequate road due to this encroachment. The buildings themselves show signs of damaged damaged eaves and gutters as a result of inadequate weather protection, and 21 7 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE AP 2831 023 045, 24048 Newhall Avenue While the appearance of the structure might be striving to achieve a visual theme, the conditions of the external building and roofing materials show signs of severe damage. Rusted and warped corrugated metal covers portions of the roof, sections of the eaves and gutters are beginning to sag and buckle, and the exposed wood fagade shows signs of deterioration that a simple coat of paint would not rectify. 23 J REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2836 008 001, 23109 Drayton Street This building is suffering from damaged eaves and roofing materials. Two unsecure ventilation units on the roof also pose a serious safety risk to people and the building itself. This property also has substandard parking and inadequate vehicular access that poses a safety risk to pedestrians and drivers. There is no separation between the roadway and the area where vehicles are parked. These conditions can be dangerous for people trying to enter or exit the building. Vehicles at the end of the parking area were also parked well into what should be the right-of-way and stick partially out into the roadway. 24 ^ 2 �#� � 22E� <«�~ -� � \ \.� . /� � � \� � � � � �a\ \ �� /��.��/��/� \ «4�1��:��\� � \\z»K � ��2��d � � �� " � ®� \\} � \ � f � m ;� ,�w. ��<«�y.y: �6��«v � ?� �� \,� ��.� � � \\.� � � ��G��=+��_ �� ,:: »`� � = � # . .: . . �_� � � ws *� x� � � � «� >».«;� z� .+e m�—� : , REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2855 013 044, 24811 Railroad Avenue The buildings in this shopping center have damaged overhangs. Portions of untreated wood are exposed to the elements, which can lead to wood rot. 1 G 26 XE . 1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2855 016 038, 24743 Railroad Avenue This building shows signs of serious external building damage and neglect. A broken window is visible at the far right of the picture, allowing for moisture and other natural elements to freely enter the structure. Large cracks are visible in the fagade and along the foundation. U-1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2861 003 001, 23208 Magic Mountain Parkway This is a non -owner occupied residential structure that would be covered under the Agency's proposed extended eminent domain authority. Laundry can be seen hanging on the back porch area. The property has a broken door that has been boarded with wood. The building is beginning to show signs of external physical damage and the roof shows signs of deterioration. This property is adjacent to and on the same parcel as a used automotive dealer, posing a serious health and safety risk as well as incompatible use. Furthermore, the property is not zoned for a residential use, and does not correspond with the Agency's plan for redevelopment in the area. `k �✓ .f F< J (J 29 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE Conditions of Lots in the Proiect Area Hinder Their Viable Capacity or Use Conditions that prevent or substantially hinder the viable use or capacity of buildings or lots, given the present general plan, zoning, or other development standards, is considered a blighting condition. Certain physical and ownership conditions of lots in the Project Area have hindered the viable use or capacity of these lots. Physical conditions include undersized and oddly configured lots, while ownership conditions include multiple, separate ownership of adjacent small or oddly configured lots. The Project Area is primarily zoned for commercial, industrial, and residential uses Each of these zones has certain development standards, including area requirements and intensity limitations pursuant to the City's General Plan and Municipal Code Parcels that have smaller than required area standards or exceed established intensities are of inadequate size for their present uses, a condition that likely hinders the viable use or capacity of the parcel. The City's Municipal Code does not set minimum lot size requirements for commercial and industrial uses. However, minimum required street frontage is 5 to 10 feet and the maximum intensity of development shall be equal to or less than a floor area ratio of .375 for most commercial uses and .675 for most industrial uses. The Municipal Code also includes requirements for setbacks depending on adjacent land uses, along with requirements for off-street parking and certain quantities based on building size and use. Several commercial and industrial lots may be inadequately sized for their present uses According to the 2008-09 County Assessor's Roll from First American Real Estate Solutions MetroScan, 37 percent of Project Area commercial and industrial properties (93 commercial and 9 industrial) exceed the maximum floor area ratio,defined`irf�the'City's Mohicipal'Code,"Which suggests the-ld't`sizes are too smal12--"These properties are shown in Exhibit B-3 They are mainly concentrated around Downtown Newhall, west of Railroad Avenue between Lyons Avenue and Park Street. Many of these businesses lack adequate off-street parking, have inadequate vehicular and pedestrian access, and have unscreened outdoor storage and production, which is additional evidence that lot sizes are too small Of these lots, 90 are individually owned and the buildings have already exceeded the capacity of the lots, therefore it is unlikely that those properties will be able to expand and grow, or redevelop. Businesses that do not have the space to expand may relocate to another city that has the space to accommodate the growing business. Mark Oliver, a local real estate broker for the area, said that inadequate parking in Downtown Newhall is a factor in lower lease rates. As shown on the next page in Exhibit B-3 and in the photograph on page 32, there are specific parcels along Railroad Avenue that are very long and narrow These lots are approximately 3,272 feet long and 43 feet wide. Currently, these lots are being used for small commercial businesses including hot tub sales The hot tubs are all being stored outside. While these lots are of sufficient size to accommodate structures of 7,000 to 50,000 square feet, this could only be accommodated by developing unconventionally long and narrow structures. Compared to a conventional rectangular parcel, this awkward shape is not efficient and further hinders the viable use of the lots. The 107 lots of inadequate size and/or irregular shape described in this section of the Report are owned by 92 different individuals, creating challenges to redevelopment. This represents 39 percent of all commercial and industrial parcels in the Project Area, 44 percent of commercial and industrial lots within the Downtown Newhall portion of the Project Area are of inadequate size. If those lots that are clustered together were under common ownership, redevelopment of these parcels to make them conform to present development standards and market conditions would be more feasible because a single developer could spread costs over a number of lots and take advantage of economies of scale The following photographs show examples of how inadequate lot size hinders the viable use and capacity of lots, such as inadequate parking and access and outdoor storage. z Other land uses were not analyzed because commercial and industrial uses are the main properties affected by the proposed Plan Amendment Pyr 30 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE Exhibit B-3 Conditions Hindering Viable Use -Exceeds Maximum Floor Area Ratio Newhall Redevelopment Proiect Area, Citv of Santa Cl@rita 0, E Lo 'al 'k Lyon, Av8 v M, k amJ ai M Irregularly Shaped IM Exceeds maxi-nimum FAR Rr�g. VI" City Boundary 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles 3 - The affected parcel In Area 3 is: APN 2825 016 13" 2,17,235 Wiley Canyon Rd This is unable to Il't'on the same map f q" R _S (3- 31 I I I REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2834 001 902, 24852 Railroad Avenue This long and narrow parcel shows signs of substandard design and suffers from a lack of parking. The picture shows how vehicles must park in such close proximity to fast moving traffic along Railroad Avenue, posing a serious safety risk for customers exiting and entering their vehicles. The lot is so shallow that only linited commercial uses are possible. Jacuzas and hot tubs, which appeared to be the primary product for sale, were all stored outside. 32 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE Along Springbrook Avenue. For many of the properties located along Springbrook Avenue, commercial, recreational and personal vehicles are left parked in a haphazard and potentially dangerous manner to pedestrians in the area. No clear areas were marked for parking and pedestrian walkways and sidewalks were non-existent. It was also evident that adequate parking for employees, let alone customers, was not available on-site and cars were left parked along the shoulder of the road. These arrangements lead to conditions that hinder the viable use and capacity of lots and surrounding parcels. Eleven properties on Springbrook Avenue exceed the maximum floor area ratio, and one has a short and narrow lot. 33 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE Vicinity of APN 2836 007 021, 25787 Springbrook Avenue ' The industrial area on the north side of the Project Area lacks adequate pedestrian and vehicular infrastructure to support the intensity of these uses. Vehicles are parked directly up against the sides of most of the buildings, and the area lacks any sidewalks or clearly marked pedestrian pathway system Vehicles are forced to back directly onto the busy roadway that is used by all types of car and truck traffic. The Agency's options in addressing these conditions would be limited without the ability to consolidate parcels or acquire parcels for off-street parking. In addition, redevelopment funding could be used to improve the infrastructure in the area to meet current design standards. (q PSG 34 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE Vicinity of 2836 008 011, 23051 Drayton Street This is another example of problems caused by high intensity development on inadequately sized lots. Vehicles are parked directly up against the sides of most of the buildings, and the area lacks any sidewalks or I clearly marked pedestrian pathway system. Vehicles are forced to back directly onto the busy roadway that is used by all types of car and heavy truck traffic. l REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2836 007 042, 25665 Springbrook Avenue Although this parcel does not exceed maximum floor area ratio requirements, it has been impacted by overflow from surrounding parcels that are of inadequate size. The storage of all types of vehicles and materials were clearly visible from all segments of Springbrook Avenue. In this picture, semi trucks and ' trailers are being stored for an indeternlnate amount of time. Garbage disposal units were also visible and stored outside in what appeared to be in significantly large numbers. These conditions point to a complete lack of uniform design, health or safety standards. RS)G Iq 36 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2836 007 042, 23644 Springbrook Avenue This picture shows large amounts of building materials being stored outside. Given any visible signs of covering or shelter, these materials would seem to be suffering from sun and moisture damage as a result of I direct exposure to the elements. These types of conditions can frequently lead to vermin and insect problems which can have a direct impact on the health and safety to workers and people in the immediate area. R S 37 parr.+,mar +$,�B'TIM, 1�'lyti `kat ,' 1� � a yb y L. •.. �r Lnrrvl.ru�i�*tin a.Mn ..V '^�"V��^� ''NOR icy y 1�"«-.may r«CxiSn * •. r kw� � '','T' s -'''r ?�' dK * r �.t�C. ry x_. r� s�;� �� REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2836 008 008, 25839 Springbrook Avenue Many automotive repair businesses are clustered along Springbrook Avenue. Given the small size of the parcel, there is inadequate room for a building, parking, and storage areas. This picture shows several inoperable vehicles waiting to be completely rebuilt. Without adequate covering and shelter, these vehicles can leech harmful chemicals, toxins, and automotive fluids into the ground which can have a direct impact on the health and safety of those that work on or near this parcel. 39 n i REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO, THREE APN 2836 008 018, 25838'/: Springbrook Avenue Outdoor storage can lead to health and safety problems. In this case, this picture shows outdoor storage being piled up to or above the roof of the building. The items appear to be heavy metal automotive components. Should these items shift, let alone become unstable during an earthquake, the safety of those working or visiting this parcel would be in jeopardy. The parcel itself is entirely consumed by either building or storage areas. The van shown here on the left was parked outside the property along Springbrook Avenue. The parcel was devoid of on-site parking and left employees and customers to park out on a busy road with heavy truck traffic. These types of conditions lead directly to a lack of adequate and safe access for vehicles and pedestrians. 40 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2834 009 047, 24622 Pine Street This parcel is located in an area where many properties contain structures whose total building area exceeds ' the maximum allowed by the City's Municipal Code. It contains a large u -shaped building with many individual garages that are being rented by different automotive repair businesses. The majority of on-site parking is devoted to storage of vehicles in some state of repair. Employees and customers are all forced to park off-site and along the street (see next picture). These parking arrangements can pose serious access and safety issues for people trying to cross the street and enter these businesses. c 41 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APN 2834 009 052, 24604 Pine Street This picture shows a lack of adequate infrastructure in this area. Sidewalks, curbs and gutters are completely lacking in this area. Additionally, the parcels do not provide adequate parking. When leaving, these vehicles must back directly into oncoming traffic. To make effective improvements in this area, the Agency would need to consolidate parcels to allow for buildings and parking that meet current design standards. (9P.SG 42 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE WhV Redevelopment? The private sector alone has been unable to eliminate the blighting conditions of the Project Area. Many properties are too small to build modern commercial and industrial developments, which typically require more space, and/or are in mixed ownership. As a result, businesses move out of the area to parcels that are of an adequate size to accommodate their needs and lease rates are lower for businesses that lack parking and have other Inadequacies Through -the -tools of -redevelopment, the Agency can implement programs to provide Incentives to facilitate additional development and redevelopment projects in instances where such projects are otherwise infeasible. For example, land needed for effective redevelopment and parcel consolidation could be addressed through the Agency's ability to utilize eminent domain -led efforts to create more developable lots. Economic Blight Today the Project Area is characterized by impaired property values due to hazardous wastes, abnormally high business vacancies and low lease rates, and a high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and welfare. Protect Area Property Values are Impaired by Hazardous Wastes Pursuant to CRL Section 33031(b)(2), Impaired property values due, in significant part, to hazardous wastes is an economic blighting condition. Redevelopment Law defines hazardous waste as any hazardous substance that is defined in Section 25281(h) of the California Health and Safety Code. The Department of Toxic Control Substance's ("DTSC") EnviroStor database, the State Water Resources Control Board's ("SWRCB") Geotracker database, and the Environmental Protection Agency's ("EPA') CERCLIS5 database list properties that have open and closed cases of hazardous waste contamination and remediation. The Project Area has four open cases -in these databases. Table B-1 lists the sites and provides a description of the nature of contamination. 3 EnviroStor is an online research and Geographic Information System tool that allows you to search for information on investigation, cleanup, permitting, and/or corrective actions that are planned, being conducted or have been completed under DTSC's oversight. The SWRCB's Geotracker is a similar online research tool as Envirostor but pulls information from different databases, such as Leaking Underground Storage Sites ("LUST') and Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups ("SLIC"). 5 CERCLIS is the acronym for the EPA's comprehensive environmental response, compensation, and liability information system. CERCLIS is the national database and management system that the EPA uses to track activities of hazardous waste sites considered for cleanup under the Comprehensive Environmental Response and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), which is commonly know as Superfund Superfund sites are land within the United States that has been contaminated by hazardous waste and identified by the EPA as a candidate for remediation because it poses a risk to human health and/or the environment. PjG 43 1 1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE Active Hazardous Waste Sites (1) Table B-1 Newhall Redevelopment Project Area Site Name Site Address Type of Site/Cleanup Contaminant Media Affected Santa Clanta Greenwaste Fire Pine St & Newhall Ave Federal Superfund Not identified in data sources Saugus Industrial Center 26000 Springbrook Ave Federal Superfund & Unspecified Aqueous Contaminated State DTSC Solution, Oxygenated Surface/Structure, Solvents, Organic Soil Vapor, Soil, Monomer Waste, Under Investigation Including Unreacted Res, Halogenated Solvents, Vinyl Chloride Thatcher Glass Manufacturing Cc 25655 Springbrook Ave Federal Superfund & State DTSC Chromium VI, Contaminated Polychlorinated Biphenyls Surface/Structure, (PCBS) Soil Vapor, Soil CalTrans Truck Maintenance 23922 Newhall Ave State Cleanup Program Diesel Under Investigation Yard (1) All cases were active as of February 12, 2009 Table B-2 compares the average assessed value by lot square footage of sites with active hazardous waste cases to those without active cases within the Project Area that are of the same land use. Two properties with active cases are notanalyzed-because one does not have a specfc address available and the -'other is owned by a public agency thus has a zero assessed value. Active Hazardous Waste Site Property Value Analysis (1) Table B-2 Newhall Redevelopment Project Area Average Assessed Value Per Lot Square Footage Land Use Non-HazMat Sites Active Hazmat Sites % Difference Industrial - Heavy Manufacturing $12.01 $6 90 -43% (1) Does not include the Santa Clarita Greenwaste Fire site (exact address unknown) or the CalTrans Truck Maintenance' Yard (the assessed value is zero because it is owned by a public agency). Hazardous waste contamination has significantly impaired property values on these sites. The assessed value per lot square footage of active hazardous waste sites within the Project Area is 43 percent lower than Project Area sites without hazardous waste. The presence of hazardous waste contamination can often be a major impediment to the redevelopment of a property. Hazardous waste contamination can severely delay the disposition and development of a property due to testing, remediation, difficulty In resolvinP existing or potential liability issues, and difficulty in obtaining financing According to author Glen R. Mueller , private developers have difficulty with up -front cleanup costs and have trouble finding capital investors willing to take on the risk associated with these types of Investments. J.C. Norby & Associates' has shown that case histories document devastating consequences for many who have purchased, invested in, or made loans on real estate impaired by chemicals and toxic compounds. In many cases, the cost of remediation exceeds the property's market value. As a result, properties that contain hazardous waste contamination are often left underutilized and difficult to redevelop as a result of the lengthy and costly process to remediate a hazardous waste site. If these hazardous waste sites are not remediated, they can also have a negative effect on surrounding property values and perpetuate a lack of investment by property owners and private enterprise Karen e Mueller, Glenn R. "Brownfields Capital -Unlocking Value in Environmental Redevelopment" Journal of Real Estate Portfolio Management. 2006. J C Norby & Associates is a professional real estate appraisal company. "GO , • RSG 44 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE Swanson of the National Association of Realtors reports that, "The presence of hazardous waste and its associated stigma can have serious ramifications on the value of the subject property, not to mention the values of surrounding properties and neighborhoods."8 Authors Michael Greenberg and Justin Hollanders wrote in the Appraisal Joumal that superfund hazardous waste sites have a negative stigma 10, whi6 -'reduces the value and marketability of a site as well as adjacent land. Both Greenberg and Hollander argue that the time it takes to remediate a site, proximity to a contaminated site, and the type of contamination are major constraints that can negatively impact the value and/or marketability of the contaminated site and surrounding properties. — - - - - Remediation of these active hazardous waste sites is necessary to facilitate redevelopment in the Project Area. The existence of active hazardous waste sites will continue to impair property values in the Project Area. Exhibit B-4 on the following page illustrates active,and closed hazardous waste sites located In the Project Area. 1 0 Swanson, Karen "Field Guide to Effects of Hazardous Wastes of Property Values". National Association of Realtors March 2007. e Greenberg, M and J Hollander. "Neighborhood Stigma Twenty Years Later: Revsihng Superfund Sites in Suburban New Jersey " Appraisal Journal 2006 10 According to Greenberg and Hollander, Stigma is defined as an environmental condition that reduces the value and/or marketability of a site and sometimes adjacent land. RSG 45 1 �I u REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO, THREE 1 Exhibit B-4 Active Hazardous Waste Sites Newhall Redevelopment Project Area, City of Santa Clarita - }�, A I5 1; �t .,*..'�..ti t; i-, Akil - } v :.,r `',,...,-' jj =-� ' y •,{ ',5 ' I xz y tiM06n dra B led C� 1� rYik t` : I 1 l k I I "w,... t"✓.:.;r ti i % l x a P11•: t I I Ii�TIj �I�! 4 j .:mitt ,.!'.r .U9. i_ 1. ?`� � %t `<�� + tt�-5 `.,.✓ t� rh�7 C�i�`•Nd wit i�k� r I I l 'OW,1 Mf t ° ` rr r";�;�j� MS`'`Sfr��li -�Idl 4 'f✓5 t 't,�y} .. i M�� ' r lf;�'i7 � F "� ry `��f•'r`''��,y7 4.�.. a ��jY� I I r r ! � � i� � r .-.—'�-1`4fr�>�t:�,-tic-;`1r•.—::`. ,�µ��rtj 171pJ1,1 (,��3' ('�,CY��t ��tt$.s �ft- 7-7-- Fill ,�� 6t xA`ti�f.I, :.� T>�,�F �{ - �1� 5kYa + 1.J.2.'.,i1 6 i�l,n7,yr ,,? C4� ! �rf -_ -• ,.,�y! sSC,S uiRl 1 t,tj, }tip '—_.._illi;�;—ti _._ �11 I ?,•. tt¢ r� - + ',j rt+' '� +,may r F41 -t `°"" I�ryt "+.1•' ( i 44� 1P.1�>~Wl1 S�V7 "j� NuzA't�1Sr�u�u1jeL- x� ,�c:�, 'WNP k �—�+, ril 1 - Lt - I S � Ez7 � Sys I {rh�l�yr+� �'ry~� � �l f j --��j -_i• .>;i �� "1—+' Tdd➢ :7T -L r �, L'F`_ 1-ll:1I _.u- 'c •_ri.' _ }I} . �'sTa to to I � , .•��, <,/ E C` '`4 }, r!( -�r'till: F �1 ° 1f I i ii,-�•�-- `w�-i �1 ��71k' Lit A - r �y- � � r —� �;-- hiirl�'.e�, s 1� ' r�J(Y' �-J�il -�(`ul i� a�.•.,,j"'-f..._ `i ,. ws 'QG�y, �9�+ li ' j' �.I��L r��l ipc `�G J i '. � s 1 �ii4 '•,-1 I �. `7�-;:. I r h5 ,�A ��lt�x.u,i '',7�ilIL'i �C ``•-'- r -i I t ;r I ' �' '-- • Active Hazardous Waste Sites � pit 1 t � Project. Area N jl tI City Boundary l t I u 0 0.25 0:5 1 Miles RSG 46 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE The Project Area has Abnormally High Business Vacancies and Abnormally Low Lease Rates Vacant businesses present several problems to communities First, they give the community a distressed appearance, particularly when located on primary streets or -in highly visible locations within the community. Second, vacant businesses tend to attract vandals and vagrants because they are often unmonitored. The building and other properties can more easily be damaged or destroyed and become targets for graffiti. _Several instances- of _graffiti and -,.other property vandalism were -noted_ in -the -Project Area, Finally, vacant businesses can be a disincentive for potential business owners to locate to the area, who may view such properties as evidence it is difficult to make a living and remain in business in the community. RSG reviewed and analyzed several sources to compare the rate of office, industrial, and retail vacancies in the Project Area with City and Los Angeles region averages Vacancy rates for Los Angeles County as a whole are from the published real estate market report identified in Table B-3 below. RSG calculated the Project Area's business vacancies by comparing the number of vacant office, industrial and retail facilities offered on LoopNet Commercial Real Estate Online with the number of parcels zoned for those uses. Project Area Vacancy Rate Comparisons Table B-3 Newhall Project Area vs. Santa Clarita 40.0% 350% a 300% 25.0% c 20.0% 15.0% > 10.0% 50% 00% Protect Area Santa Clarita Los Angeles County Market Area (1) Does not include all vacancies observed during RSG's field surveys. (2) Average rates for Santa Clarita/Palmdale/Lancaster * Percent difference of Project Area from region Sources: LoopNet, Metro Scan, Marcus & Millichap Market Update, 3Q 2008 �i RSG 47 Retail Vacancy Market Area Rate %* Project Area (1) 36.1% Santa Clarita (2) 11.4% 217% Los Angeles'County 7.8% 363% 40.0% 350% a 300% 25.0% c 20.0% 15.0% > 10.0% 50% 00% Protect Area Santa Clarita Los Angeles County Market Area (1) Does not include all vacancies observed during RSG's field surveys. (2) Average rates for Santa Clarita/Palmdale/Lancaster * Percent difference of Project Area from region Sources: LoopNet, Metro Scan, Marcus & Millichap Market Update, 3Q 2008 �i RSG 47 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE The Project Area has 231 commercial parcels, comprising 13 percent of the Project Area. As Table B-3 demonstrates, the Project Area vacancy rate for retail/commercial space is abnormally high. The rate is 217 percent higher than the City and 363 percent higher than the County average. The Project Area office and industrial vacancy rates are not abnormally high compared to the City. Lease rates in the Project Area for office, industrial, and retail/commercial space were compared with lease rates for properties with the same use in the City, Los Angeles North, and the County. "Los Angeles North" includes Santa Clarita, Simi Valley, and parts of Ventura and San Fernando. RSG calculated the average asking monthly rate per square foot based on data from Loopnet Commercial Real Estate Online Results are shown in Table B-4 Asking lease rates are typically higher than actual lease rates after a property is leased. Project Area Lease Rate Comparisons Table B-4 Newhall Project Area vs. Santa Clarita $3.00 0 0 $2.50 Q $200 `m $1 50 a $1.00 o: v0i $0.50 m —J $0.00 Project Area Santa Clarita Los Angeles North Market Area-- , --- (1) -- (1) Asking lease rates based off listings on LoopNet. Actual lease rates are typically lower than asking lease rates. (2) Average rates for the Santa Clarita Valley (3) Average rates for Los Angeles North, which includes Santa Clarita, Simi Valley, and parts of Ventura and San Fernando. * Percent difference of Project Area from region Sources: LoopNet, Metro Scan, Grubb & Ellis Market View Reports, 4Q 2008 As Table B-4 demonstrates, average lease rates for office space in the Project Area are 20 percent lower than the City and 19 percent lower than Los Angeles North. Approximately four percent of Project Area parcels have an industrial use. Average lease rates for industrial and retail uses are not abnormally low in the Project Area compared to the City. According to several brokers who were interviewed for this Report, lease rates for office and retail space in the Downtown Newhall Area in particular are lower than other parts of the City and surrounding areas. The age of the buildings, lack of adequate infrastructure and Insufficient parking were all noted as conditions that led to lower lease rates in the downtown. Given this feedback, lower lease rates in the Project Area are not due simply to the national economic downturn; they are a symptom of undesirable physical blighting RSG 48 Office Lease Rate Market Area (price per s/f) %* Project Area (1) $2.08 Santa Clarita (2) $2.60 -20% Los Angeles North (3) $2.57 -19% $3.00 0 0 $2.50 Q $200 `m $1 50 a $1.00 o: v0i $0.50 m —J $0.00 Project Area Santa Clarita Los Angeles North Market Area-- , --- (1) -- (1) Asking lease rates based off listings on LoopNet. Actual lease rates are typically lower than asking lease rates. (2) Average rates for the Santa Clarita Valley (3) Average rates for Los Angeles North, which includes Santa Clarita, Simi Valley, and parts of Ventura and San Fernando. * Percent difference of Project Area from region Sources: LoopNet, Metro Scan, Grubb & Ellis Market View Reports, 4Q 2008 As Table B-4 demonstrates, average lease rates for office space in the Project Area are 20 percent lower than the City and 19 percent lower than Los Angeles North. Approximately four percent of Project Area parcels have an industrial use. Average lease rates for industrial and retail uses are not abnormally low in the Project Area compared to the City. According to several brokers who were interviewed for this Report, lease rates for office and retail space in the Downtown Newhall Area in particular are lower than other parts of the City and surrounding areas. The age of the buildings, lack of adequate infrastructure and Insufficient parking were all noted as conditions that led to lower lease rates in the downtown. Given this feedback, lower lease rates in the Project Area are not due simply to the national economic downturn; they are a symptom of undesirable physical blighting RSG 48 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT'TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE conditions. The combination of low lease rates and high business vacancies suggests the Project Area is a less desirable area for businesses to locate. High Crime Rate Section 33031(b)(7) defines a high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and welfare as an economic blighting condition. Table -B=5 presents the number -of -Part I -and -II -crimes -in the Project -Area -and -the -City -from 2004 to -2008. Part I and Part II crimes are categories used by the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Reports classification system. Part I crimes are violent and property crimes, including murder, manslaughter, robbery, forcible rape, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny/theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson. Part II crimes are less serious offenses, including but not limited to simple assault, disorderly conduct, driving under the influence, drug offenses, fraud, gambling, liquor offenses, prostitution, public drunkenness, sex offenses, stolen property, vandalism, vagrancy, and weapons offenses, Crime Comparison Table B-5 Newhall Redevelopment Project Area vs. City Year Project Per 1000 City Per 1000 % in % Higher Area Persons Part II Crimes Persons PA in PA 1,018 43 4,691 Part I Crimes 22% 52% 2004 681 29 3,536 21 19% 35% 2005 830 35 3,916 23 21% 49% 2006 713 30 3,861 23 18% 30% 2007 690 29 4,183 25 16% 16% 2008 631 27 3,530 21 18% 26% Total 3,545 149 19,026 114 19% 31% Part II Crimes 2004 1,018 43 4,691 28 22% 52% 2005 1,115 47 5,131 31 22% 53% 2006 1,304 55 5,593 33 23% 64% 2007 1,357 57 5,711 34 24% 67% 2008 1,185 50 5,313 32 22% 57% Total 5,979 251 26,439 158 23% 59% Acreage 914 36,352 3% Population (1) 23,783 167,047 14% „ 80% 70% a 60% p 50% d 40% C a, 30% rn 20% = 10% 0% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Total ® Part I Crimes ®part II Crimes (1) Population based on U S Census 2005 estimates The figure reported under Project Area Is the population of 16 census block groups that overlap the Project Area, which includes areas outside the Project Area. Source. City of Santa Clarita, SSRI GIS Census Data DD R'S G 49 1 1 L7 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE The Project Area has a high rate of serious crime in relation to the City. Although the Project Area constitutes only 3 percent of the City's total area and approximately 14 percent of the population, it had 19 percent of the City's Part I crimes and 23 percent of Part II crimes over the last five years. The rate of Part I crimes per 1000 persons over the last five years is 31 percent higher in the Project Area than the City The rate of Part II crimes is 59 percent higher in the Project Area than the City. The high rate of violent and property crimes in the Project Area over the last five years pose a serious threat to the public safety and welfare. Brokers interviewed for the amendment report a perception of higher crime in Newhall and the downtown area compared to other surrounding markets. Several instances of graffiti and other property vandalism were noted, particularly in the Downtown Newhall area. When prospective tenants or buyers feel the property they are looking at is in a high crime area, they will in turn expect lease rates to be lower or will look elsewhere According to the brokers, people do not want to pay an average market rate for property in a high crime area or a perceived high crime area when they can go elsewhere. Why Redevelopment? It is unlikely that new development or redevelopment within the Project Area will occur without assistance from the Agency because business vacancies tend to lower the property values of the area, diluting any economic incentive for developing the area. The disparity of the numbers of serious crimes that occur in the Project Area compared to the City as whole is another blighting condition that can be remediated through redevelopment. Furthermore, even though lease rates in the Project Area are lower than in the surrounding areas, business vacancies remain high, which suggests business owners do not find the Project Area a desirable area in which to locate a business. The Amendment would enable the Agency to continue to have eminent domain available as a redevelopment tool and provide assistance to private sector in terms of property acquisition and consolidation. Because of stagnant property values and lower overall incomes, Project Area property owners do not have the incentive or ability to develop their properties or make improvements. The power of eminent domain, however, would give the Agency a potential tool to acquire and assemble property to provide a catalyst for private development. As the area's economic value increases, the related blighting conditions will be alleviated. Physical and Economic Burden on the Community Pursuant to Section 33030(b) of the Redevelopment Law, to be blighted an area must meet the following criteria. The Project Area meets each criterion and is therefore a blighted area The area must be predominantly urbanized. The Project Area was found to be predominantly urbanized at the time the Redevelopment Plan was adopted. Because the Amendment does not change the boundaries of the Project Area, a determination as to whether the Project Area is predominantly urbanized is not required. 2. Physical and economic blighting conditions must be present. As described in this section of the Report, the',Project Area continues to exhibit unsafe and unhealthy buildings due to serious dilapidation and deterioration caused by long-term neglect and serious building code violations; lot and ownership conditions -that substantialiy hinder�their viable use or capacity; impaired property values due to hazardous waste's; abnormally high business vacancies and low lease rates; and a high crime rate that poses a serious threat to the public safety and welfare. 3. Blighting conditions must cause a lack of proper utilization of the area. As shown throughout this section of the Report, the Project Area suffers from unsafe and unhealthy buildings, lot conditions that hinder viable use or capacity, impaired property values due to hazardous wastes, low lease rates, a high business vacancy rate, and a high crime rate. These characteristics inhibit the viability of individually affected lots and structures, as well as the economic vitality of the entire Project Area. (q RSG 50 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE These blighting conditions do not act in isolation, but are dynamic and influence each other _ For example, the physical deterioration of a commercial building may contribute to lower lease rates, or may cause a tenant to relocate. Or conversely, a business may wish to expand, but does not have the means to do so on its small lot. This situation may cause the business to relocate, leaving a vacant building. The loss of lease income may impair the property owner from performing structural upkeep on the building, leading to a physically deteriorated unit. Dilapidated units tend to influence the value of neighboring properties as well Thus, a single blighting condition can escalate into much more pervasive issues, causing a lack of proper utilization of the Project -Area. The improper utilization must be a serious physical and economic burden on the community. Individual properties have a, powerful influence on the value of neighboring lots, such that parcels where well- maintained structures are adjacent to lots with dilapidated structures, both properties can experience lowered market values. Lower property values, conditions of lots, and physical decline of structures cause the Project Area as a whole to remain blighted. Though structural dilapidation and business vacancies are easily observed, certain conditions of commercial properties render sites obsolete and are a major factor in the economic welfare of the area. Private investors would, in many cases, need to assemble several parcels in order to construct commercial buildings that meet current development standards, including the structure of the building, adequate parking, and safe ingress and egress. The industrial area on the north side of the Project Area is a perfect example of this scenario. Thus, certain lot conditions discourage new development and make the Project Area uncompetitive with neighboring communities. 5. The burden cannot be reversed by private enterprise alone, the public sector alone, or both together, without redevelopment. The blighting conditions found in the Project Area are not new, but the product of decades' worth of social and economic struggle. The private sector has had ample opportunity to improve the area through parcel assembly or structural rehabilitation, but has not. The physical and economic conditions continue to deter private investment. In the most basic of terms, the overarching purpose of redevelopment is to make the Project Area a viable area that can compete with neighboring communities for commercial and industrial uses. This requires a holistic approach to improvements that stretches from traditional capital projects to those that make the area a pleasant, safe place that businesses want to locate in. The presence of physical and economic blighting conditions cause a reduction in utilization of the Project Area to such an extent that it constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the community. This has not been, and cannot reasonably be expected to be, reversed or alleviated by private enterprise, governmental action, or both, without redevelopment. By implementing projects to abate the blighting conditions affecting the Project Area, the public sector will signal its confidence in the area and provide a catalyst for private investment. 1 RSG 51 1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE METHOD OF RELOCATION Section 33352(f) of the Redevelopment Law requires the Agency to prepare a relocation plan for families and persons who may be temporarily or permanently displaced from housing facilities within the Project Area. In the event the proposed Amendment is adopted and implementation actions include relocation of residents or nonprofit local community institutions, the Agency will adhere to the State Relocation Guidelines, consisting of the State Relocation Law (Government Code 7260 through 7277), and the California Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Guidelines as established in the California Code of Regulations, Title 25, Chapter 6 ("Relocation Guidelines"). If relocation is necessary to implement the Redevelopment Plan in order to eliminate blighting conditions, the Relocation Guidelines ensure the Agency will meet its relocation responsibilities to any families, persons, businesses, or nonprofit local community institutions to be temporarily or permanently displaced as a consequence of the Redevelopment Plan's implementation. No persons or families of low and moderate -income shall be displaced unless and until there is a suitable housing unit available and ready for occupancy by the displaced person or family at costs comparable to those at the time of their displacements. The Agency's relocation responsibilities are not limited to eminent domain acquisition alone. For example, the Agency may have relocation responsibility for displacement of residents if their properties are purchased by voluntary sale. q, RSG 52 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE Pursuant to Section 33385.3 of Redevelopment Law, a Project Area Committee ("PAC") is required if an agency proposes to amend a redevelopment plan to: 1) grant the authority to the Agency to acquire by eminent domain property on which a substantial number of low and moderate income persons reside; or 2) add territory in which a substantial number of low and moderate income persons reside and grant the authority to the agency to acquire, by eminent domain, property on which persons_ reside, in the _added territory A PAC does not exist for the Project Area and is not required as part of this amendment. However, the Newhall Redevelopment Committee's ("NRC") purpose is to review, advise and make recommendations to the Agency on redevelopment issues affecting the Project Area Because the NRC performs many of the same functions as a PAC, the Agency has worked with the NRC on.the Amendment. The NRC is aware of the Agency's -long-term efforts to utilize all the tools available through redevelopment to revitalize the Project Area. Staff has presented the Amendment process to the NRC and will continue to engage the NRC throughout this endeavor. NRC members will be informed of the meeting to present and discuss the Amendment at a community meeting, and the Agency's public hearing and may attend and participate actively Overall, the Amendment would not subject a substantial number of residential units in which low and moderate income persons reside to eminent domain. Field surveyors and City staff identified only two parcels containing up to five units in the Project Area that may consist of possible living quarters potentially occupied by low or moderate income persons. For these reasons, a PAC is not required. 1 1 'RSG 53 1 1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Section 33352(k) of the Redevelopment Law requires the inclusion of the report prepared pursuant to Section 21151 of the Public Resources Code. Reporting for the proposed Amendment consists of an Initial Study and Negative Declaration ("IS/ND") prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq , "CEQA" ). The IS/ND found the proposed Amendment would not have significant impacts on the Project Area The IS/ND reviewed all potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Amendment Topics include: aesthetics; agriculture resources; air quality; biological resources; cultural resources, geology and soil; hazards and hazardous materials; hydrology and water quality; land use and planning; mineral resources; noise; population and housing; public services, recreation, transportation and traffic; and utilities and service systems. The IS/ND also addresses all other topics and sections as required by CEQA. The IS/ND was transmitted to the affected taxing entities on March 25, 2009. The 30 -day review period is from March 25, 2009, through April 24, 2009. The City Council and Agency will consider the IS/ND at a joint public hearing scheduled for May12, 2009. The IS/ND is included in Appendix B. RSG 54 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACT REPORT Section 33352(m) of the Redevelopment Law requires that a Neighborhood Impact Report discuss the impact the proposed Amendment would have on low- and moderate -income persons or families residing in the Project Area in the following categories. relocation, traffic circulation, environmental quality, availability of community facilities and services, effect on school population and quality of education, property assessments and taxes, and other matters affecting the physical and social quality of the neighborhood. Additional issues the Neighborhood Impact Report must address include. the number of low- or moderate - income dwelling units to be removed or destroyed; the number of low- or moderate -income persons or families expected to be displaced; the general location of .housing to be-, rehabilitated, developed, or constructed; the number of dwelling units planned for construction or rehabilitation to house persons and families of low- or moderate -income ,(other than replacement housing); the projected_ means of financing the aforementioned dwelling units, and the,projected timetable for meeting a redevelopment plan's relocation, rehabilitation, and replacement housing objectives. RELOCATION At this time, the Agency does not have any plans to relocate residents or businesses in the Project Area. If relocation activities are undertaken, the Agency will handle those activities on a case-by-case basis, in accordance with its method of relocation, as contained in this Report. As a public agency formed under the provisions of State law, the Agency is required to adhere to the State Relocation Law (Government Code Sections 7260 through 7277) and follow the California Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Guidelines as established in the California Code of Regulations, Title 25, Chapter 6 ("Relocation Guidelines"). Prior to commencement of any acquisition activity that may cause substantial displacement (other than an insignificant amount of non-residential displacement), the Agency would adopt a specific relocation plan in conformance' with the Relocation Guidelines. To the extent appropriate, the Agency may supplement those provisions provided iri the Relocation Guidelines to meet particular relocation needs of a specific project. Such supplemental policies, if adopted in the Agency's sole discretion, will not involve reduction, but'instead enhancement of the relocation benefits required by State law. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION An Initial Study and Negative Declaration ("IS/ND") was prepared to assess traffic and other environmental impacts of the proposed Amendment, a copy of which is included in Appendix B of this Report. In general, because -the proposed Amendment addresses the manner in which eminent domain may be used in the Project'Area, the IS/ND concluded the proposed Amendment would result in no significant traffic impacts. The Redevelopment Plan would permit the Agency to implement projects to improve traffic circulation. Such projects would improve circulation, mitigate traffic deficiencies, and provide general benefits to the Project Area consistent with the circulation element of the General Plan and other related documents. The City's General Plan would control the land use designations and intensities of the Redevelopment Plan; its implementation would not create locally or cumulatively significant impacts beyond what is anticipated pursuant to the General Plan The Redevelopment Plan would not alter or intensify the General Plan's land uses, traffic generation, levels of service, or intersection capacities. Redevelopment Plan implementation would not cause traffic or circulation impacts that were not considered and mitigated in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report. The Agency, via the Redevelopment Plan, would adhere to policies in the circulation element of the General Plan in lessening traffic and circulation impacts. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY The IS/ND reviewed the environmental impacts of the proposed Amendment and concluded the proposed Amendment itself would not result in any significant impacts. RSG 55 1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE As stated in the Redevelopment Plan, all development must conform to the City's General Plan and other applicable State and local building codes and controls Because the proposed Amendment does not propose uses or intensities beyond the General Plan and other related land use policy documents, adherence to adopted General Plan and land use policies will ensure that implementation of the proposed Amendment would lessen or avoid potential impacts. This would ensure that quality of the environment is maintained During implementation of the Redevelopment Plan, specific redevelopment proposals may warrant further environmental analysis as required by CEQA. AVAILABILITY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES The IS/ND determined the proposed Amendment would not have a significant impact on public facilities including fire protection, police protection, water, wastewater, storm drain, solid waste services,,schools, and parks. The proposed Amendment provides that any redevelopment activity is subject to, and consistent with, the policies set forth in the City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and local codes and ordinances, as they now exist or are hereafter amended, the General Plan incorporates policies to mitigate impacts on public services and facilities. Implementation of the Redevelopment Plan and its proposed projects are expected to improve the City's existing community facilities and services. The Redevelopment Plan would allow the Agency to utilize tax increment revenues to provide for the upgrading of existing, and construction of new, community facilities, which would benefit the Project Area. EFFECT ON SCHOOL POPULATION AND QUALITY OF EDUCATION The Project Area is served by the Newhall School District, Saugus Union School District, and William S. Hart Union High School District (collectively, the "Districts"). The IS/ND assessed the direct and cumulative impacts of the proposed Amendment on area schools and concluded adoption of the proposed Amendment would not result in any significant impacts, Furthermore, Section 33607.5 of the Redevelopment Law provides for statutory payments from generated tax increment to any affected school districts, irrespective of, whether the district suffers impacts from the Redevelopment Plan. This revenue may be used for capital and operational purposes, including school facilities. PROPERTY TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS The Redevelopment Plan calls for various methods of financing implementation, none of which are affected by the proposed Amendment. Because redevelopment agencies do not have the constitutional authority to impose taxes, implementation of the Redevelopment Plan would not cause an increase in property tax rates. Rather, the principal method of financing redevelopment would be the utilization of tax increment revenues generated by the Project Area. Tax increment financing reallocates property tax revenues generated by increases in the assessed value of property in the Project Area. Although redevelopment of the Project Area would increase assessed valuations, Project Area property owners would not experience increases in property taxes beyond those normally allowed by other state law and state constitutional provisions. LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING PROGRAM NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS HOUSING LOW -AND MODERATE -INCOME HOUSEHOLDS EXPECTED TO BE DESTROYED OR REMOVED BY THE PROJECT The Agency does not have the authority to acquire owner -occupied residential properties by eminent domain. In addition, there are two parcels with approximately five dwelling units between them that would be subject to the Agency's eminent domain authority, The Agency anticipates that not more than five dwelling units could be removed at some point in the next 12 years if the proposed Amendment is adopted. If redevelopment implementation results in removal of housing units, the Agency would be responsible for providing relocation assistance and ensuring replacement housing for occupants of affected units. ('RSG 56 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE NUMBER OF PERSONS AND FAMILIES OF LOW- AND MODERATE -INCOME EXPECTED TO BE DISPLACED Based on the assumptions above, the Agency estimates that up to 15 persons of low and moderate income could be displaced by project implementation if the proposed Amendment is adopted based on the average number of persons per household in the City as reported by the 2000 United States Census. GENERAL LOCATION OF REPLACEMENT LOW- AND MODERATE -INCOME HOUSING TO BE REHABILITATED, DEVELOPED, AND CONSTRUCTED For destruction or removal that occurs as a result of an Agency project pursuant to applicable sections of the Redevelopment Law, it is the Agency's intention that replacement housing units be located within the Project Area or in nearby areas that permit residential uses. Any new units may be constructed in areas within the Project Area where such uses are permitted. NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS HOUSING PERSONS OF LOW -AND MODERATE -INCOME PLANNED FOR CONSTRUCTION OR REHABILITATION OTHER THAN REPLACEMENT HOUSING The Agency will invest its housing fund resources into a variety of housing programs At this time, the Agency does not have any specific plans for construction or rehabilitation of any low- and,.moderate-income housing units in the Project Area. PROJECTED MEANS OF FINANCING REHABILITATION AND NEW CONSTRUCTION -OF HOUSING FOR LOW- AND MODERATE -INCOME HOUSEHOLDS The Agency intends to utilize not less than 20 percent of its tax increment revenues to finance the rehabilitation, construction, purchase, and mortgage assistance of housing for low- and moderate -income households, in accordance with the provisions of the Redevelopment Law as it now exists or may hereafter be amended. PROJECTED TIMETABLE FOR MEETING THE PLAN'S RELOCATION, REHABILITATION, AND REPLACEMENT HOUSING OBJECTIVES If any units are destroyed or removed as a result of an Agency project pursuant to applicable sections of the Redevelopment Law, replacement housing would be completed within four years following the demolition of any occupied affordable unit. F -J �01Q RSG 57 1 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE SUMMARY OF CONSULTATIONS WITH AFFECTED TAXING AGENCIES According to records from the County of Los Angeles Auditor -Controller, the following 15 taxing entities levy taxes within the Newhall Redevelopment Project Area and are eligible to receive notice of the public hearing on the proposed Amendment: • County of Los Angeles ■ City of Santa Clarita ■ Los Angeles County Public Library ■ Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department ■ Los Angeles County Fire Department ■ Los Angeles County Public Works ■ Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District ■ Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts • Castaic Lake Water Agency ■ Newhall County Water District ■ Los Angeles County Office of Education ■ Newhall School District ■ Saugus Union School District ■ William S. Hart Union High School District ■ Santa Clarita Community College District Because the proposed Amendment only reinstitutes the Agency's eminent domain authority and does not change time or financial limitations of the Redevelopment Plan, the proposed Amendment would not detrimentally impact the affected taxing entities. In accordance with Section 33452 of the Redevelopment Law, notice of the public hearing on the proposed Amendment will be mailed to the governing body of each affected taxing entity on March 25, 2009. In addition, the Initial Study/Negative Declaration was transmitted to the governing body of each affected taxing entity on March 25, 2009. To date, the Agency has not yet received any questions or comments from taxing entities regarding the proposed Amendment, but will update the City Council at the staff presentation during the public hearing. q RSG 58 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APPENDIX A THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE NEWHALL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA I. BACKGROUND The Redevelopment Plan ("Plan") for the Newhall Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") was adopted on July 8, 1997, by Ordinance No. 97-12. The Plan has been amended twice since its adoption. The first amendment, adopted by the Santa Clarita City Council ("City Council") on June 26, 2007, by Ordinance No 07-05, addressed Senate Bill 53,("SB •53") for the Project Area. SB 53, codified in Section 33342.7 of -the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq., "Law"), required the City Council to adopt an ordinance describing the Santa Clarita Redevelopment Agency's ("Agency") program to acquire real property by eminent,domain. The second amendment, adopted by the City Council on May 13, 2008, by Ordinance No. 08-6, amended certain time limitations with respect to the Project Area pursuant to the provisions,of Section 33333.2 of the Law, As a result,.the Plan was amended to extend the time limit on the effectiveness -of the Plan to July 8, 2028. A third amendment has been proposed by the Agency to modify the Plan's eminent domain authority as described herein. Pursuant to the Plan, the authority of the Agency to initiate condemnation proceedings to acquire property expires on July 8, 2009. As authorized under the Law, the Agency proposes to amend the Plan to extend this time limit by 12 years, or to July 2021. If adopted as proposed, the third amendment would permit the use of eminent domain to acquire Project Area property that is not occupied as a residence, as well as two specific residential parcels located in nonresidential zones at the southwest corner of Magic Mountain Parkway and Bouquet Canyon/Railroad Avenue -and the northwest corner of Drayton Street and Springbrook Avenue. The third amendment is consistent with Proposition 99. Pursuant to Proposition 99, which was passed by California voters on June 3, 2008, State and local governments cannot use eminent domain to acquire an owner -,occupied residence.to convey.it to.a,private person or -entity. State and local -governments retain the right to acquire non -owner occupied residential, properties for similar purposes. Furthermore, State and local governments may acquire owner -occupied residences to protect public health and safety, prevent serious and repeated criminal activity, respond to an emergency, remedy environmental contamination that poses a threat to public health and safety, and for a public work or improvement. II. AMENDMENT TO THE PLAN Effect- Upon the Plan. Unless otherwise expressly amended by this Third Amendment, the Plan remains in full force and effect according to its terms. From and after the City Council's adoption of this Third Amendment, wherever the terms "Plan" or "Redevelopment Plan" appear in the Plan, it shall be understood to mean the Plan as amended by this Third Amendment. The following identifies all of the proposed changes to the Redevelopment Plan Italicized sections indicate existing wording in the Redevelopment Plan. Underlined sections indicate new wording in the Redevelopment Plan. Slfirike##reugh sections indicate wording to be removed from the Redevelopment Plan. Amendment to Section 321 of the Plan 321— Acquisition of Real Property The Agency may acquire, but is not required to acquire, any real property located in the Project Area by gift, devise, exchange, purchase or any other lawful method, including eminent domain q. RSG 59 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE subject to the limitations descnbed below. Pte`. (i) Eminent domain may be used to acquire any properly that does not contain a legal residential use or residential structure in the Project Area existing as of the _date of this Amendment. Eminent domain proceedings, if used, must be commenced within twelve (12) years from the effective date of rdinance No approving Redevelopment Proiect Area. Such time limit may only be extended by further amendment to this Plan. The Agency is authorized to acquire structures without acquiring the land upon which those structures are located. The Agency is also authorized to acquire any interest in Real Property less than a fee Properties may be acquired and cleared by the Agency if a determination is made that one or more of the following conditions exist: 1. The buildings and/or structures must be removed in order to assemble land into parcels of reasonable size and shape to eliminate an impediment to optimal land development; 2. The buildings and/or structures are substandard as demonstrated by an inspection of the property by the Building and Safety Division of the City of Santa Clarita; 3. The buildings and/or structures must be removed in order to eliminate an environmental deficiency, including, but not limited to, incompatible land uses and small and irregular lot subdivisions; 4 The buildings and/ or structures must be removed to provide land for needed public facilities, including among others, rights-of-way, public parking facilities, open space, or public utilities; 5. The acquisition of property is allowed by the California Community Redevelopment Law and will promote the implementation of the Plan. Other provisions of this section notwithstanding, the Agency shall not acquire from any of its members or officers any property or interest in property except through eminent domain proceedings. Amendment to Section 330 of the Plan. 330 — Relocation of Persons, Families and Businesses The following provisions relative to the relocation of persons, families and businesses are required by CRL. The Plan does not: 9PSG REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE (�) Contain authority for the Agency to acquire by eminent domain any property on which persons reside mth the exception of two specific parcels described in Section 321. Contain any public projects that will displace a substantial number of low- or moderate - income persons. Include the recommendation that existing automotive businesses in the downtown Newhall area be relocated, including, but not limited to, that recommendation as it is described and found in the Downtown Newhall Improvement Program, April 1996 (the Freedman Plan) Amendment to Section 340 of the Plan 340 - Demolition, Clearance, Site Preparation,' Project Improvements and Public Improvements The following provisions relative to the demolition, clearance and site preparation are required by CRL. The Plan does not: (i) Contain authority for the Agency to acquire by eminent domain any property on which persons reside with the exception of two specific parcels described in Section 321., or; (ii) Contain any public projects that will displace a substantial number of low- or moderate - income persons. 1 1 q, RSG 61 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR AMENDMENT NO. THREE APPENDIX B INITIAL STUDY AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1 1 INITIAL STUDY CITY OF SANTA CLARITA Project Title/Master Case Number: Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan Lead Agency name and address: City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 302 Santa Clarita, CA 91355 Contact person and phone number: Alex Hernandez Administrative Analyst (661) 255-4030 Patrick Leclair Associate Planner (661)255-4349 Project location: Newhall Redevelopment Plan Area (see attached map exhibit) Applicant's name and address: Redevelopment Agency of the City of Santa Clarita 23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 302 Santa Clarita, CA 91355 General Plan designation: N/A Zoning: N/A Description of project and setting: The City of Santa Clarita is preparing updates to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. The Redevelopment Plan for the Newhall Project area was adopted on July 8, 1997, establishing the authority of the City's Redevelopment Agency (RDA) to use eminent domain as a tool to acquire non-residential property. At this time, the City is proposing amendments to the Plan that would extend the Redevelopment Agency's eminent domain authority by 12 years, or until July 2021. The Redevelopment Agency currently possesses eminent domain authority on non-residential property within the 913.63 -acre Newhall Redevelopment Plan Area. Amendments are being proposed at this time to extend this existing authority on non-residential n 1 1 Amendment No Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 2 of 37 property by 12 years, granting the Redevelopment Agency eminent domain until July 2021. In addition, an amendment is proposed that would allow for a limited expansion to the Redevelopment Agency's eminent domain authority to allow eminent domain powers on two specific non -residentially designated properties that may have existing residential uses that appear to be either illegal, or non -conforming with the City's General Plan land use designations. The two parcels that have been identified at this time include the property located on the southwest corner of Magic Mountain Parkway and Railroad Avenue (APN: 2861- 003-001) and the property located on the northwest corner of Drayton Street and Springbrook Avenue (APN:2836-008-002). The Magic Mountain Parkway/Railroad Avenue property totals 3.9 acres and is identified as a "Restaurant" use on the Los Angeles County Tax Assessor tax rolls with structures built on the proj ect site in 1931. The Drayton Street/Springbrook Avenue property totals 0.13 acres (5,497 square feet) and is identified as a "Quadruplex" on the Los Angeles County Tax Assessor tax rolls with structures built in 1957. The Newhall Redevelopment Plan primarily addresses land that has been previously developed; however, undeveloped, vacant property east of Railroad Avenue and north of 12th Street is also within the area affected by the Redevelopment Plan. No other amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan are proposed at this time. In 2005, the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan (DNSP) was adopted encompassing 297.3 acres of the 913.63 - acre Newhall Redevelopment Plan Area. The DNSP enabled the redevelopment of a higher density commercial and residential transit oriented development around the existing Jan Heidt Metrolink Station. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the DNSP to address any environmental impacts associated with the future development of the DNSP. Therefore, future projects that are consistent with the DNSP have been analyzed and will not require further review under CEQA. The amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will not amend the DNSP. The amendments will only affect the eminent domain authority within the Newhall Redevelopment Plan Area, of which the DNSP is a part. Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 3 of 37 The proposed changes are regulatory in nature. No changes to the physical environment or the existing community are proposed with the amendment to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan; however, extending and expanding eminent domain power as proposed is intended to stimulate redevelopment. Therefore, approval of these amendments could have an indirect impact on the enviromnent. Because it is not known what properties, if any, will redevelop during the life of the plan, these impacts are considered to be less than significant. Redevelopment projects will be evaluated on a case by case basis as redevelopment is proposed. Surrounding land uses: The Magic Mountain Parkway/Railroad Avenue parcel of land (APN:2861-003-001) is surrounded by vacant, commercially zoned property to the north across Magic Mountain Parkway, developed, industrial zoned property to the east across Railroad- Avenue and. the . Southern Pacific rail line, developed, commercially zoned property to the south of the project site, and the South Fork of the Santa Clara River to the west of the project site. The Drayton Street/Springbrook Avenue parcel (APN:2836-008-002) is surrounded on all sides by developed industrial zoned property. Other public agencies whose N/A approval is required: 1 1 1 1 Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 5 of 37 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 "Less than Significant with Mitigation" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. [ ] Aesthetics [ ] Agriculture Resources [ ] Biological Resources [ ] Cultural Resources [ ] Hazards & Hazardous [ ] Hydrology / Water Materials Quality [ ] Mineral Resources [ ] Noise [ ] Air Quality [ ] Geology / Soils [ ] Land Use / Planning [ ] Population / Housing [ ] Public Services [ ] Recreation [ ] Transportation / Traffic [ ] Utilities / Service Systems [ ] Mandatory Findings of Significance B. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: [X] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [ ] 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. 1 1 1 Amendment No Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 6 of 37 [ ] 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 proposed project, nothing further is required. Patrick Leclair, Associate Planner Date Sharon Sorensen, Senior Planner Date i 1 Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 7 of 37 C. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? [ ] [ ] IN [ ] b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] 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 [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? e) Other [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] 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 [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] Farmland of 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 [ ] [ ] [ ] IN a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 8 of 37 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation d)Other [] I I [] 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 [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] number of people? ()Other [] [] I I IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] through 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? Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 9 of 37 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] 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 and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] protected 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 [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] native resident 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 [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] protecting 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? g) Affect a Significant Ecological Area (SEA) or [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] Significant Natural Area (SNA) as identified on the City of Santa Clarita ESA Delineation Map? h)Other [] [] I [] V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] significance of a historical resource as defined in '15064.5? Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 10 of 37 1 J Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to '15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy or impact a unique [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] outside of formal cemeteries? e)Other [] [] I [] VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS — Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] 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? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] liquefaction? iv) Landslides? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] b) Result in substantial wind or water soil erosion or the [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] loss of topsoil, either on or off site? 1 J Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 11 of 37 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] 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 18- [ ] [ ] 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the [ ] [ ] use of septic 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? g) Earth movement (cut and/or fill) of 10,000 cubic [ ] [ ] yards or more? h) Development and/or grading on a slope greater than [ ] [ ] 10% natural grade? i) The destruction, covering or modification of any [ ] [ ] unique geologic or physical feature? J) Other [ ] [ ] VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the [ ] [ ] environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? [X] [X] 1 7 L 1 1 1 Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 12 of 37 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the [ ] environment 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 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 [ J hazardous 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 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 project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 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 [XJ [XJ Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 13 of 37 i) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards (e.g. electrical transmission lines, gas lines, oil pipelines)? Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation [] I IN I j) Other [ ] 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 stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 0 Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? [X] 1 1 Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 14 of 37 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] loss, injury 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 [ ] [ ] IN [ ] and direction of surface water and/or groundwater? i) Other modification of a wash, channel creek or river? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] 1) Impact Stormwater Management in any of the [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] following ways: i) Potential impact of project construction and [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] project post -construction activity on storm water runoff? ii) Potential discharges from areas for materials [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] storage, 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? ill) Significant environmentally harmful increase in [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] the flow velocity or volume of storm water runoff? iv) Significant and environmentally harmful [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? Amendment No Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 15 of 37 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation v) Stonn water discharges that would significantly [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] impair or 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 [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] drainage systems, watersheds, and/or water bodies? vii) Does the proposed project include provisions [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] for the separation, recycling, and reuse of materials both during construction and after project occupancy? IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Disrupt or physically divide an established [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] community (including a low-income or minority community)? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] 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 [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] 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 [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 16 of 37 1 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] 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 [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] inefficient manner? XI. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels [ ] [ ] IN [ ] 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 [ ] [ ] IN [ ] groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in [ ] [ ] 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 [ ] [ ] [ ] IN 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? 0 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 1 Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 17 of 37 XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] 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, [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere (especially affordable housing)? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] 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? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] ii) Police protection? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] iii) Schools? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] iv) Parks? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] XIV. RECREATION - Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 1 1 1 1 1 1 Amendment No Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 18 of 37 b) Include recreational facilities or require the [ J construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in [ relation to 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 [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including [ ] [ ] [ J [X] either an 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., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? [ ] f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [ ] g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs [ ] supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? h) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [ ] XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the [ ] applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? [] [X] [] [] IN [] [] [X] [J [] [XJ [] [] [X] [] [] [X] [] Amendment No Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 19 of 37 b) Require or result in the construction of new water or [ ] 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 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 from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 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? [X] I 1 1 1 1 1 1 Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 20 of 37 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? XVII. DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME `DE MINIMUS' FINDING a) Will the project have an adverse effect either [ ] [ ] individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife resources? Wildlife shall be defined for the purpose of this question as "all wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians, and related ecological communities, including the habitat upon which the wildlife depends for it's continued viability." [X] [X] [X] Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 21 of 37 D. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND/OR EARLIER ANALYSIS: Section and Subsections Evaluation of Impacts I. AESTHETICS a.) Less than Significant Impact: The City of Santa Clarita is located within Southern California's Santa Clarita Valley, which is bounded by the San Gabriel Mountains to the south and east, the Santa Susanna Mountains to the southwest, and the mountains of the Los Padres and Angeles National Forests to the north. The surrounding natural mountains and ridgelines, some of which extend into the City, provide a visual backdrop for the City. Other scenic resources within or visible from the City include the Santa Clara River corridor, forested/vegetated land, and a variety of canyons and natural drainages in portions of the City. The proposed modifications to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will extend the eminent domain authority for the City's Redevelopment Agency (RDA) by 12 years, including a limited expansion to the eminent domain authority on the two non -residentially designated properties (the Magic Mountain Parkway/Railroad Avenue parcel and the Drayton Street/Springbrook Avenue parcel) to enable the potential acquisition of land within the Plan Area. These modifications in and of themselves will not affect any scenic vistas or other scenic resources within the City of Santa Clarita. Rather, the modifications proposed may further enable the RDA to improve aesthetics within the Plan Area by assisting redevelopment within blighted portions of the City. Future development proposals will be evaluated on a project by project basis pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan would have a less than significant impact on scenic vistas. b.) Less than Significant Impact: The Newhall Redevelopment Plan Area is located in a primarily urbanized portion of the City. While the segment of the Interstate 5 (1-5) Freeway extending from the I-210 Freeway interchange to the SR126/Newhall Ranch Road interchange and the SR 126 from the City's boundary at the 1-5 west to SR 150 in Ventura County are designated as "Eligible State Scenic Highways" in the California Department of Transportation's State Scenic Highway program, the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan affect properties that are not within this corridor and will not have an impact on these vistas. Further, there are no outcroppings, ridgelines, or trees approved for alteration with the proposed amendments. Any impacts to these resources would be 1 1 1 i 1 Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 22 of 37 associated with future development and would be evaluated at the time approval is requested from the City. One or more buildings with historic or potentially historic significance are located within the Newhall Redevelopment Plan area. However, the proposed amendments to the Redevelopment Plan will not authorize, nor will the City authorize any development or construction that would impact any historic structure within the plan area with approval of these amendments. Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan would have a less than significant impact on scenic resources within a state scenic highway, ridgeline, rock outcropping, tree, or historic structure. c.) Less than Sil4nificant Impact: The proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will enable the potential acquisition of properties within the Plan Area for redevelopment of blighted conditions. All future development within the Redevelopment Plan Area would be required to comply with the development standards of the City, including the Uniform Building Code, the City's Unified Development Code and the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan, and would be subject to review at the time that permits are requested. As previously stated, the proposed changes are regulatory in nature and do not propose any changes to the physical environment or the existing community. While extending and expanding eminent domain power as proposed could stimulate redevelopment, it is not known what properties, if any, will redevelop during the life of the plan. Redevelopment projects will be evaluated on a case by case basis as redevelopment is proposed. Therefore, a less than significant impact to the visual character of the plan area is anticipated with the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. d.) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed amendments do not alter the City standards for outdoor lighting and do not authorize any new construction that would create a new source of light or glare in the plan area. The proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan are anticipated to have a less than significant impact on light and glare. II. AGRICULTURE a. -c.) No Impact — No farmland is located within the primarily RESOURCES urbanized community of Newhall. Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will not affect any Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 23 of 37 farmland identified by the California Resources Agency, farmland designated under a Williamson Act Contract, and will not convert any farmland to non-agricultural use. Therefore, no impact to farmland is anticipated as a result of the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. III. AIR QUALITY a.) Less than Significant Impact: The City of Santa Clarita is within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), 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. More specifically, the City of Santa Clarita is located in northern Los Angeles County, generally between the Interstate 5 Freeway and State Route 14 and south of Copperhill Drive. The air quality in the SCAB is managed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAB 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). The AQMP analyzes air quality on a regional level and identifies region -wide attenuation methods to achieve the air quality standards. These region -wide attenuation methods include regulations for stationary -source polluters; facilitation of new transportation technologies, such as low -emission vehicles; and capital improvements, such as park-and-ride facilities and public transit improvements. 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). This plan is designed to implement the California Clean Air Act an in turn implement the Federal Clean Air Act administered by the EPA. The AQMP accommodates population growth and transportation projections based on the predictions made by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Thus, projects that are consistent with employment and population forecasts are consistent with the AQMP. The proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will not alter the AQMP. The proposed amendments will extend the Redevelopment Agency's eminent domain authority to allow for the potential acquisition of commercial and specifically identified residential parcels within the Newhall Redevelopment Plan Area to facilitate redevelopment. Potential air quality impacts of any future i 1 1 1 1 Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 24 of 37 redevelopment projects however, are too speculative to evaluate at this time. Regardless, subsequent development projects will be required to adhere to the General Plan, the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan, and the standards set forth in the UDC, and must be evaluated in compliance with CEQA. Therefore, a less than significant impact is anticipated with respect to any applicable air quality plan with the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. b.) Less than Significant Impact: Santa Clarita is located in a non - attainment area, an area that frequently exceeds national ambient air quality standards. The proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan area do not affect the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) land use, construction, and mobile emission thresholds for significant air quality impacts, according to the 1993 updated SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook in and of themselves. The proposed amendments will modify the City's eminent domain authority and will not authorize any development or redevelopment within the Plan Area. Any air quality impacts as a result of any development or redevelopment within the plan area are speculative at this time. Unless otherwise evaluated under any previously certified CEQA document, any future development would need to be evaluated in compliance with CEQA at the time that development is proposed. Therefore, a less than significant impact to any air quality standard is anticipated as a result of the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. c.) Less than Significant Impact: As discussed is Section III.b), the proposed amendments in and of themselves, 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 to significantly contribute to cumulative air quality impacts. The amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan do not propose or entitle any development at this time. However, future redevelopment projects will be evaluated pursuant to CEQA, addressing project -related air quality impacts. Therefore, a less than significant impact to ambient air quality is anticipated as a result of the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. Amendment No Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 25 of 37 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 schools, day care centers, parks, recreational areas, medical facilities, rest homes, and convalescent care facilities. The proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan do not include any physical development at this time. Further, the proposed amendments do not remove any odor -related regulations and would not foreseeably lead to a change in the generation of odor. The proposed amendments would not place sensitive land uses adjacent to substantial air pollution sources as no development is proposed at this time. All future development or redevelopment will be required to comply with all of the applicable provisions of CEQA. Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan would have a less than significant impact to air quality impacts on sensitive receptors. e.) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will not, in and of themselves, result in locating any sensitive land uses adjacent to odor producing facilities or uses. The proposed amendments are regulatory in nature and all future land use proposals will be required to comply with all applicable regulations of the AQMD, the City of Santa Clarita General Plan, UDC, and the DNSP. Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan would have a less than significant impact due to objectionable odors within the plan area. IV. BIOLOGICAL a. -d.) Less than Significant Impact — The Newhall Redevelopment RESOURCES Plan Area is located within a primarily urbanized portion of the City of Santa Clarita. The amendments proposed at this time will extend the eminent domain authority within the plan area to enable the potential acquisition of non-residential property and specifically identified properties with potential nonconforming residential uses to enable development and redevelopment within the Plan Area. The Plan Area is predominantly developed and does not contain natural open spaces that will be affected by the proposed amendments. There are endangered species located in the region; 1 Fil 1 1 1 Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 26 of 37 however, no habitat for these species is known to be located within the plan area. The proposed amendments will extend and expand the City's eminent domain authority only and do not authorize any development at this time. Any future development proposals would be subject to further review under CEQA at the time permits are requested. Further, the proposed amendments will not have any adverse affect on any riparian habitat or wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, any wildlife corridor, or any migratory fish corridor. Therefore, the proposed amendment to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan is anticipated to have a less than significant impact to sensitive species, sensitive natural community, riparian habitat, and/or wetlands. e.) Less than Significant Impact — The City of Santa Clarita has an Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance that regulates development adjacent to and under oak trees that are found in the region. No modifications to the City's Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance are proposed at this time. Further, the amendment to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will not authorize any impact to an oak tree, protected or otherwise, in the City. While oak trees are found in the plan area, none are proposed for modification at this time. Any future development involving an oak tree must comply with the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance and must comply with all requirements of CEQA. Therefore, a less than significant impact to oak trees is anticipated with the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. f.) No Impact — The amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan are consistent with to any local and regional habitat conservation plans and would not result in any alterations to these plans. Further, the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will extend the City's eminent domain authority only and will not authorize any construction or development that will have any potential impact on the environment. Therefore, no impact to any habitat conservation plan is anticipated with the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. g.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan are regulatory in nature, extending the City's eminent domain authority for primarily developed areas of the community of Newhall. No new development or redevelopment will be entitled or approved with the proposed amendments. The Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 27 of 37 proposed amendments will not affect any property designated as an SEA (Significant Ecological Area) or SNA (Significant Natural Area) on the City's ESA (Environmentally Sensitive Area) Delineation Map. While the amendments proposed at this time could create the opportunity for future development or redevelopment, potential impacts are too speculative to evaluate at this time. Future development proposals would need to be evaluated to determine their impacts, if any, on the environment at the time development is requested. Therefore, a less than significant impact is anticipated with respect to any SEA or SNA as identified on the City's ESA map. V. CULTURAL a. -d.) Less than Significant Impact — The Newhall Redevelopment RESOURCES Plan is located in a primarily urbanized portion of the City of Santa Clarita. Structures that are designated as having historical significance exist in the Redevelopment Area, however, there are no plans to disturb or modify these structures as a part of the Redevelopment Plan. Further, the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan are intended to extend the City's eminent domain authority for the potential acquisition of property within the plan area to enable redevelopment to occur and to reduce blight. The proposed amendments have not identified any development projects that could impact any buildings with the potential for historical significance. However, as development projects are proposed, the appropriate environmental work, including a Cultural Study or other assessment detailing the historical significance of structures in the project area, must be completed. Further, the proposed amendments, in and of themselves, will not alter any unique geological feature, paleontological resource, impact any human remains, or otherwise impact any archeological resource. While the proposed amendments will extend and expand eminent domain authority of the Redevelopment Agency to encourage redevelopment, it is unclear which properties will develop or redevelop as a result of these amendments. Therefore, the potential impact of future development is too speculative to evaluate at this time. All future development activity within the established areas would be required to comply with Goal 10 of the City's Open Space and Conservation Element, to protect the historical and culturally significant resources, which contribute to community identity and a sense of history. Therefore, a less than significant impact to archeological, historical or cultural resources would occur as a result of the approval of the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. 1 1 1 1 1 1 Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 28 of 37 VI. GEOLOGY AND a. -i.) Less than Significant Impact — Southern California has SOILS numerous active and potentially active faults that could affect the City. As stated in the City's General Plan, the City is susceptible to geologic hazards in the event of a major earthquake along the San Andreas Fault. This could result in ground failure and liquefaction. However, the proposed amendment to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan would not change any approved land use entitlements, and would not change the requirements of future development to follow all state and City building codes/regulations. Any future development would be required to be evaluated in compliance with CEQA, evaluating any potential impacts affecting soils and geology. Therefore, the proposed amendment to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan would have a less than significant impact related to exposure of people or structures to any adverse effects of seismic activity, erosion, unstable or expansive soil, or any topographical features. VII. HAZARDS AND a. -d.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed amendments to HAZARDOUS the Newhall Redevelopment Plan would not directly, or indirectly, MATERIALS expose people to health hazards or hazardous materials and would not interfere with any emergency response plans. The proposed amendment to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will extend the City's eminent domain authority for the potential future acquisition of property within the Plan area to enable redevelopment within the plan area. However, subsequent developments in the City would be required to comply with the City's General Plan and development codes and all federal, state, and local hazardous material regulations. Furthermore, no new development is associated with these amendments and potential future effects would be evaluated on a case by case basis. Therefore, a less than significant impact as a result of exposure to hazardous materials is anticipated with the proposed amendment to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. e. -f.) No Impact — The proposed amendments include no change to land use or development standards for land within 2 miles of an airport and airfield or otherwise within an airport land use plan. Further, no airport of airfield is located within 2 miles of the City boundaries. Therefore, the proposed amendment to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan would not affect the risks of land uses adjacent to airports or airfields and the proposal would have no related impacts. Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 29 of 37 g. -i.) Less than Significant Impact — The Newhall Redevelopment Plan area is located in a primarily urbanized area of the City of Santa Clarita. Property within the plan area is not located within proximity to a natural wildland area and is not subject to any wildland fires. Emergency services and plans are currently in effect in the plan area and will not be affected by the proposed amendments to the Redevelopment Plan. There are existing utility structures that are known to be present in the Plan area including power transmission lines, natural gas lines, and oil pipelines. The proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will extend the eminent domain authority of the City and will not authorize any development at this time. Future development impacts are speculative at this time and can not be evaluated with this project. Any future development will be required to analyze any potential impacts associated with any natural wildland areas, utility infrastructure, or any emergency plan in compliance with CEQA. Therefore, any future impacts will be addressed at the time development occurs. The proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan would have a less than significant affect the on the implementation of emergency response plans, wildland areas, or any existing utility structures. VIII. HYDROLOGY a. -b.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed amendments to AND WATER the Newhall Redevelopment Plan would not impact water quality QUALITY standards, nor affect groundwater supplies. The proposed amendments would extend the City's eminent domain authority for potential acquisition of properties within the Plan area for the purpose of redevelopment and therefore could have an indirect impact on the envornment. Subsequent redevelopment projects are unknown at this time and their impacts are therefore speculative; however, they would be required to comply with the development impact standards put forth in the City's General Plan and all Clean Water Act Requirements, including the National Pollutant discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will have a less than significant impact to water quality or ground water supplies. c.-1.) Less than Significant Impact — The Newhall Redevelopment Plan area is located in a primarily urbanized portion of the City. However, there are areas within the plan area that are located in, or adjacent to the Newhall Creek, a designated blueline stream. FEMA is currently in the process of updating the Flood Insurance Rate Maps 1 1 1 1 1 1 Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 30 of 37 (FIRM) within the City of Santa Clanta. The first step in this process is digitizing the existing FIRM maps that the City and County of Los Angeles currently use. This process has been completed and FEMA has begun to re -study areas within the Santa Clarita Valley. This process is currently underway and has not been finalized. However, the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will extend the City's eminent domain authority for the potential acquisition of property within the plan area and will not directly authorize the construction or development of any structure that will impact a drainage pattern, stream, river, or stonnwater drainage system. Further, the amendment will not directly locate structures within any 100 -year flood hazard area and will not expose people or structures to significant risk due to flooding, any seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will have a less than significant impact with respect to flooding, drainage pattern, river or stream, or any stormwater infrastructure. IX. LAND USE AND a.) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed amendments to the PLANNING Newhall Redevelopment Plan will extend the timeline and expand the existing eminent domain authority within the plan area to include two potential additional properties. In and of itself, the proposed amendments to the Redevelopment Plan will not directly result in changes to the physical environment. The proposed amendments will enable the potential acquisition of properties in the plan area to allow for the potential redevelopment of blighted properties. Further, the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will not authorize any construction. Any future development/redevelopment will be required to be evaluated in compliance with CEQA and must comply with the City's General Plan, Downtown Newhall Specific Plan, and Unified Development Code. Therefore, a less than significant impact in anticipated with respect to any established community as a result of the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. b.) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed amendments may further enable development and/or redevelopment within the Newhall Redevelopment Plan Area by extending the eminent domain authority of the Redevelopment Agency to allow for the potential acquisition of property within the plan area. Since the establishment of the Newhall Redevelopment Plan, the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan has been adopted within the Newhall Redevelopment Plan boundary. The proposed amendments will further enable redevelopment consistent with the City's General Plan and the development standards outlined Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 31 of 37 in the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan and the City's Unified Development Code. However, the proposed amendments will not authorize the development of any property. Subsequent development projects on property acquired by the agency must be reviewed in compliance with CEQA to determine any environmental impacts and would further need to be reviewed to be compliant with the City's General Plan and zoning standards. Therefore, a less than significant impact related to land use and planning is anticipated with the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. c.) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan do not affect current City standards regarding habitat conservation plans, natural community preservation plans, and/ or the policies of agencies with jurisdiction over resources and resource areas within the City. No development or redevelopment is approved, and no entitlements granted with approval of the proposed amendments. Development of any property acquired as a result of the City's eminent domain authority would be required to process the appropriate CEQA documentation to evaluate the impacts on the environment associated with the specific projects. At this time, any potential development is unknown, and therefore too speculative to evaluate at this time. However, the proposed amendments are consistent with, and do not directly impact any conservation plan in and of themselves. Therefore, the project is anticipated to have a less than significant impact on conservation plans as a result of the proposed modifications to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. X. MINERAL AND a. -c.) Less than Significant Impact — Gold, sand, and gravel mining ENERGY along with oil production historically have been the principal mineral RESOURCES extraction activities in and around the Santa Clarita Valley. The City's General Plan and Zoning Code have identified locations within the City that have historical oil and mining activities with a Mineral Oil Conservation Area (MOCA) overlay zone. Other minerals found in the Santa Clarita Valley include construction aggregate, titanium, and tuff. Mineral resources and extraction areas are shown in Exhibit OS -5 of the City's General Plan. The amendments to the Redevelopment Plan will not affect mineral and energy resources as the proposed amendments will only affect the City's eminent domain authority within the Redevelopment Plan Area. No modifications to current mining operations within the City are anticipated at this time and therefore, will not affect mineral 1 1 1 1 1 1 Amendment No Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 32 of 37 resources in the City. Further, no property within the Plan Area has the MOCA zoning overlay designation. Therefore, a less than significant impact related to mineral and energy resources is anticipated with the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. XI. NOISE a. -d.) Less than Significant Impact — The amendments do not propose or authorize any development at this time. Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will not expose persons to the generation of excess noise levels, groundborne vibration, or increase ambient noise in the City of Santa Clarita. Any future development would be required to conduct all applicable environmental studies in accordance with CEQA, including noise studies. The proposed amendments do not remove any noise -related regulations, and therefore would not foreseeably lead to a change in the generation of noise. Therefore, no significant impact is anticipated with relation to noise as a result of the proposed amendment to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. e. & f.) No Impact — The Newhall Redevelopment Plan Area is not located within an airport land use plan, two miles of an airport, or within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, no impact relating to noise generated by an airport or airstrip is anticipated to occur as a result of the approval of the proposed amendments. XII. POPULATION a.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed amendments to the AND HOUSING Newhall Redevelopment Plan will extend the City's eminent domain authority until year 2021 and add two potential residential structures that could potentially be acquired by the RDA, and will not entitle or approve new development at this time. However, the use of eminent domain has the potential to create development opportunities in the future. In 2005, the City adopted the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan (DNSP) encompassing approximately 297 acres of the 913 -acre Redevelopment Plan Area. The DNSP created greater flexibility for land uses including the allowance for mixed use developments with commercial, office, and retail uses incorporated with residential units. Upon buildout of the DNSP it is anticipated that an additional 712 residential units could be developed which would increase the population within the Redevelopment Plan Area. However, the amendments proposed at this time are regulatory in nature and do not Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 33 of 37 allow for development of these units at this time. Future development within the DNSP, while possible, is too speculative to be evaluated at this time. Development in the Newhall Redevelopment Plan Area, outside of the DNSP, is foreseeable in the future. However, the proposed amendments to the Redevelopment Plan will not authorize any development at this time. Any future development within the Newhall Redevelopment Plan area would need to be evaluated in conjunction with each development application to comply with CEQA. The Redevelopment Agency has established a 5 and 10 year implementation plan that identifies the goals of the Agency. This plan identifies the Agency's obligation to provide, maintain, and replace affordable housing within the Redevelopment Plan Area. The proposed amendments could affect the success of the implementation plan by creating opportunities for additional affordable housing units in the Plan Area. While the proposed amendments could potentially assist in the future development and/or redevelopment within the Newhall Redevelopment Plan area, it is not possible at this time to anticipate the type or scope of development of affordable housing that could potentially occur following approval of these amendments, and therefore can not be adequately evaluated at this time. Therefore, a less than significant impact with respect to population growth is anticipated as a result of the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. b & c.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed modifications to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will extend the eminent domain authority of the City. The City's current eminent domain authority only applies to non-residential property. With the proposed amendments to the Redevelopment Plan, the non-residential eminent domain authority will be extended by an additional 12 years. In addition, the eminent domain authority will be extended to two specific commercially designated parcels (APN: 2861-003-001 & 2836-008-002) that appear to have been constructed without permits or are legal non -conforming residential uses. The use of eminent domain throughout the Plan Area has the potential to displace residential units. At this time it is anticipated that up to five (5) residential units could be affected by the proposed amendments. However, it is anticipated that any units that would be displaced would be units that may currently be illegal, or non -conforming with the City's Unified Development Code, General Plan, and/or the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan. Should residential units be displaced as a result of the use of eminent domain, the City has adopted a strategy for relocation and replacement of residential units known as the Relocation Method that would serve as a blueprint for 7" 1_ 1 1 1 1 1 Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 34 of 37 the relocation of these residents. Further, Proposition 99 was passed by California voters on June 3, 2008, to help protect residents. Proposition 99 prohibits State and local governments from using eminent domain to acquire an owner -occupied residence. Should eminent domain be used by the Redevelopment Agency, all applicable provisions of the State of California regarding the use of eminent domain and relocation of affected residents must be complied with. Due to the low number of housing units potentially involved, and the adopted relocation and replacement plans in place, the impacts associated with the proposed amendments are anticipated to be less than significant. Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan area anticipated to have a less than significant impact to the displacement or replacement of people or housing units. XIII. PUBLIC a)i.-iv. Less than Significant Impact — The proposed amendments to SERVICES the Newhall Redevelopment Plan project will not directly increase the need for fire protection, police protection, schools, libraries, or parks within the Plan Area. The Plan Area is located in a primarily urbanized portion of the City that is currently provided services by the Los Angeles County Fire and Sheriff Departments, the existing school districts, and the City's Parks and Recreation facilities and programs. The proposed amendments to the Redevelopment Plan will affect the City's eminent domain authority within the Plan Area and will not create additional demand for these services within the Plan Area. Future redevelopment within the Plan Area could consist of additional residential units that might increase the need for additional schools and parks in the City. However, these projects are unknown and therefore too speculative at this time and will be evaluated at the time entitlements are requested. Further, any new residential units would be required to pay the applicable statutory fees to mitigate potential impacts to school or park facilities as a result of the increased population. Therefore, a less than significant impact to public services is anticipated as a result of the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. XIV. RECREATION a. -b.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed changes to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan will not result in the approval of any entitlement or authorize the construction of any development project and will further not authorize the addition of any new residential units. While the majority of the Plan Area is non-residential in nature, redevelopment within the Plan Area could consist of Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 35 of 37 additional residential units that would increase the need for additional recreational facilities. At this time it is too speculative to anticipate the number of residential units that could forseeably be developed in the Plan Area. Any approval for development would be required to evaluate the impacts to recreational facilities and would be required to pay the appropriate statutory fees to the City for the establishment of additional recreational facilities within the City in accordance with the Parks and Recreation Element in the City's General Plan, the City's Unified Development Code, the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan, and would be subject to the City's park impact fees. Therefore, a less than significant impact to recreational facilities is anticipated with the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan at this time. Xv. a. -b.) Less than Significant Impact — The proposed amendments to TRANSPORTATION / the Newhall Redevelopment Plan are regulatory in nature, extending TRAFFIC the City's eminent domain authority for the potential acquisition of property within the Plan Area. The proposed amendments are not anticipated to have immediate developmental impacts that alter traffic load or capacity on street systems. Future development activity in the Plan Area would be regulated by the City's UDC, General Plan, Downtown Newhall Specific Plan, and all applicable transportation policies. Further, any future development or redevelopment projects as a result of the proposed amendments are speculative at this time and can not be adequately evaluated. At the time projects are proposed, additional CEQA review will be conducted to determine project related impacts to any traffic capacity or level of service standards. Therefore, a less than significant impact to the traffic load, capacity, and level of service standards is anticipated at this time. c.) No Impact — The Newhall Redevelopment Plan Area is not located near any airports and will therefore not impact any air traffic patterns. Further, the proposed amendments do not entitle any development at this time; they only authorize a regulatory expansion to the City's eminent domain authority within the Plan Area. Therefore, no impact to air traffic patterns is anticipated with the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan Area. d. -h.) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan extend the City's eminent domain authority and do not authorize any development at this time. Therefore, the proposed amendments would have no impacts on City 1 1 1 1 1 Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 36 of 37 traffic systems including emergency routes, parking capacity, pedestrian or bicycle routes, or increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use. Any development and/or redevelopment that would occur in the Plan Area would still need to comply with the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan, the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan, the City's roadway design and parkway standards, and all adopted policies, plans, and programs supporting alternative transportation. Therefore, the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan are anticipated to have a less than significant impact to transportation and traffic. XVI. UTILITIES AND a. -g.) Less than Significant Impact – The Newhall Redevelopment SERVICE SYSTEMS Plan area is located in a primarily urbanized portion of the City that is currently serviced by existing utility and service systems including stormwater drainage systems, wastewater treatment facilities, and solid waste treatment facilities. The proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan extend the City's eminent domain authority and does not approve any land use entitlements or include any development at this time that would impact these existing utility and service systems. Any subsequent development would be required to comply with the City's General Plan and the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board and all applicable utility purveyors. Compliance with these requirements would ensure all federal, State and local statutes and imposed regulations are met. Therefore, a less than significant impact to utilities or service systems is anticipated with approval of the proposed amendments to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan. XVII. MANDATORY a. -c.) Less than Significant Impact – The proposed amendments to FINDINGS OF the Newhall Redevelopment Plan are not anticipated to have a SIGNIFICANCE significant impact on the environment that would lead to a substantial reduction in habitat of a fish or wildlife species, or reduce or restrict the number of rare, threatened or endangered species. The proposal does not involve any physical development at this time. The proposed amendments may apply to future development projects within the City. However, the proposed amendments do not remove any established City regulations that protect any plant and animal species. Due to the nature of the proposed amendments, the proposal would not contribute to any cumulative impacts and would not cause environmental effects that would adversely affect humans. Rather, the proposed amendments are intended to extend the City's eminent domain authority to allow for the potential future acquisition and Amendment No. Three to the Newhall Redevelopment Plan May 2009 Page 37 of 37 S \CD\CURRENTV2009\1utea1 Study - RDA Amendments doc 1 1 1 redevelopment of property in the Plan Area. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact that could result in a Mandatory Findings of Significance. XVIII. DEPARTMENT a.) No Impact — The legislative intent of'the Department of Fish and OF FISH AND GAME Game `De Minimus' Finding is "to extend the current user -based `DE MINIMUS' funding system by allocating the transactional costs of wildlife FINDING protection and management to those who would consume those resources through urbanization and development..." (AB 3158, Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990, effective January 1, 1991, Section 1(c)). The proposed amendments would not entitle any new development; and any future development proposal seeking discretionary approval would remain subject to CEQA and the CDFG Code. Since, the proposed amendments are not anticipated to have a significant adverse effect either individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife resources, the project's impacts on fish and wildlife are de minimus. S \CD\CURRENTV2009\1utea1 Study - RDA Amendments doc 1 1 1