HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-03-22 - AGENDA REPORTS - VISTA CYN ANNEX (2)Agenda Item: I3
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
AGENDA REPORT
PUBLIC HEARING City Manager Approval:
Item to be presented by: Jeff Hogan
DATE: March 22, 2011
SUBJECT: THE VISTA CANYON ANNEXATION PROJECT,, INCLUDING
THE ANCILLARY ANNEXATION AREA (PORTIONS OF SAND
CANYON, FAIR OAKS RANCH, AND JAKES WAY)
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
RECOMMENDED ACTION
1. City Council receive the staff report.
2. City Council open the public hearing for testimony.
3. City Council provide direction to staff to return to the City Council on April 26, 2011
with resolutions and ordinances adopting the Planning Commission's recommendation of
approval of Vista Canyon and the Ancillary Annexation Area.
4. City Council continue the public hearing to April 26, 2011.
BACKGROUND
APPLICATION
An application for Master Case 07-127, the Vista Canyon project, was filed by the project
applicant with the City of Santa Clarita on June 29, 2007. The application includes an
annexation (including an amendment, to the City's Sphere of Influence), pre -zone, specific plan,
general plan amendment, tentative tract map, conditional use permit, and oak tree permit in order
to develop the 185 -acre project site with 1,117 residential units, and up to 950,000 square feet of
commercial and medical office, retail, theater, restaurant and hotel uses within four Planning
Areas.
Continued Too. `►-a��It
Staff processed the application, which included several development review committee meetings
with City staff and five Planning Commission meetings (including the site tour) between July
2010 and February 2011.
ANCILLAR Y ANNEXATION AREA
The City of Santa Clarita is also concurrently processing under Master Case 07-127 a separate
annexation application to annex the Ancillary Annexation Area ("AAA") to the City of Santa
Clarita. The AAA includes unincorporated County of Los Angeles property adjacent to and
surrounding the Vista Canyon project site, specifically Fair Oaks Ranch (approximately 1,082
acres), Jakes Way (approximately 260 acres), and portions of Sand Canyon (915 acres).
PUBLIC OUTREACH
The project applicant has held over 50 community meetings on the project. These meetings have
included multiple presentations to the La Veda Homeowners Association, Fair Oaks Ranch
Homeowners Association, Sand Canyon Property Owners Association and Board, Canyon
Country Advisory Committee, as well as numerous meetings with homeowners and community
members in the Sand Canyon and Canyon Country area.
In addition to the public scoping meeting and three EIR Notice of Preparation notices, the City
sent public hearing notices to over 4,300 property owners in the Sand Canyon, Fair Oaks Ranch
and Jakes Way areas once for the commencement of the Planning Commission public hearings
and again for tonight's meeting. Eleven public hearing signs have been placed on the Vista
Canyon property and in the Jakes Way, Sand Canyon and Fair Oaks Ranch areas (three signs
have been placed on the Vista Canyon project site). Public hearing notices were also placed in
the Signal for the commencement of the Planning Commission public hearings and for tonight's
meeting. In summary, the public outreach and noticing associated with this project have been
extensive.
CURRENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Substantial revisions have been made to the project as a result of input from public agencies,
members of the public, and the Planning Commission. A complete description of the project, as
revised and proposed, is set forth in the Draft Final EIR (Project Modifications and Project
Description), which was made available for public review and inspection in early February 2011.
A summary of the current project and entitlements is set forth below.
CURRENT PROJECT SUMMARY
The project now proposes the development of 1,091 dwelling units (reduced from the 1,117
units originally proposed) and 950,000 square feet of commercial floor area, together with related
infrastructure, including a Multi -Modal Transportation Station (Metrolink Station and Bus
Transfer Station) and water reclamation plant. Under the residential overlay provided in the
Vista Canyon Specific Plan, the project could be developed up to 1,324 residential dwelling units
and 700,000 square feet of commercial, floor area.
The project would provide approximately 21 acres of parks/recreation facilities, including the
Oak Park, Town Green, Community Garden, River Education/Community Center, private
recreation facilities, and project trails. Up to six private recreational facilities would be
constructed throughout the project. Further, there are approximately 10 acres of proposed public
streets, including the extension of Lost Canyon Road from Fair Oaks Ranch to Vista Canyon
Road and the construction of the Vista Canyon Road Bridge to connect Lost Canyon Road and
Soledad Canyon Road. The Specific Plan would permit flexibility in street design and location,
as well as residential and commercial product type and location. The proposed project also
includes buried bank stabilization/protection along the north and south side of the Santa Clara
River Corridor.
The project is broken into the following Planning Areas (PA).
Planning Area 1 (PA -1). PA -1 consists of approximately 12 acres located within the
southwest portion of the site. This area would be built out to accommodate a maximum
of 600 attached, multi -family condominiums. Up to 359 of these condominium units
may be leased or rented. Three private recreational areas, trails, water quality
improvements, surface and structure parking, and other open areas would be provided
within PA -1. The water reclamation plant would also be located in PA -1. The
maximum building height in PA=1 is 50 feet (excluding architectural elements, which
can extend up to a maximum height of 60 feet).
Planning Area 2 (PA -2). PA -2 consists of approximately 30 acres, located within the
south central portion of the site. PA -2 would be built out to accommodate up to 220
attached residential condominium units (e.g., apartments, live/work units, residential
flats), and two private recreation areas. All of the residential units in PA -2 may be
leased or rented. In addition, PA -2 includes 596,000 square feet of office space; 158,000
square feet of retail space (including restaurants and a theater); a 200 -room hotel
(approximately 140,000 square feet in size); up to four parking structures, and accessory
surface and subterranean parking; the Multi -Modal Transportation Station; Vista
Square; Pedestrian Plaza; Community Garden; Town Green; and associated parks, trails,
swales, private drives, and public streets. Recreational areas, trails, water quality
improvements and other open areas also would be provided within PA -2.
PA -2's mix of office, retail, and residential uses is oriented around "Main Street" (Vista
Square), "Plaza at Vista Square," and the theater. Vista Square includes diagonal
on -street parking, sidewalks, landscaping, public amenities (e.g., benches, bike racks,
and outdoor dining), and other � traffic calming features to balance the needs of
pedestrians with those of cars, and to enable pedestrian -oriented shops, restaurants, and
services.
Within PA -2, there is a residential overlay that allows for the conversion of up to
250,000 square feet of office uses to a maximum of 233 attached residential units. If the
conversion is implemented, the allowable development would be a maximum of 1,324
3
residential units and 700,000 square feet of commercial uses.
The maximum height in PA -2 for retail/commercial buildings is 55 feet (excluding
architectural elements which can extend up to a maximum height of 66 feet). Excluding
architectural elements, the maximum heights for the office buildings in PA -2 located
north of "C" Street is 95 feet, and 60 feet for office buildings located south of "C"
Street. Architectural elements could extend up to 114 feet and 72 feet, respectively. All
residential structures within PA -2 would have a maximum height of 50 feet (excluding
architectural elements which could extend up to 60 feet).
Planning Area 3 (PA -3). PA -3 consists of approximately 46 acres, located within the
southeast portion of the site. PA -3 would be built out to accommodate 271 single-family
or multi -family attached units. The maximum height of the residential structures within
PA -3 is 35 feet. The 10 -acre "Oak Park" within PA -3 would be improved and dedicated
to the City, while the private park and recreation facilities would be utilized by future
residents and maintained by a homeowners' association. Trails, water quality
improvements and other open areas also would be provided within PA -3.
Planning Area 4 (PA -4). PA -4 consists of approximately 12.8 acres, located within the
northeast portion of the site. PA -4 would be built out to accommodate up to 56,000
square feet of office, retail/commercial, restaurant, and recreation uses. Residential units
are prohibited in PA -4. This area also would include the River Education/Community
Center overlooking the Santa Clara River Corridor. Additionally, trails, water quality
improvements and other open areas would be provided within PA -4. The maximum
height of buildings within PA -4 is 35 feet (excluding architectural elements which could
extend up to 42 feet).
The existing Mitchell Family cemetery is located within PA -4, between SR -14 and the
Santa Clara River. The applicant would preserve and restore the cemetery and integrate
it with other development in PA -4.
Primar/Secondary Vehicular Circulation
Vista Canyon's roadway network is designed as an orderly extension of the regional circulation
pattern in the Santa Clarita Valley. The proposed development patterns within the site, integrated
with existing and proposed roadway alignments, form the basis for this network. The project is
designed to integrate modes of travel, accommodate anticipated traffic demands generated by the
Vista Canyon and surrounding development, and provide roadway extensions and improvements
that ultimately would connect existing development and the proposed project to the SR -14
corridor and the rest of the Santa Clarita Valley.
Vehicular access to and from Vista Canyon is proposed from four existing roadways. Primary
access to the site would be from: (a) Soledad Canyon Road, via the proposed Vista Canyon Road
Bridge, to the north; (b) the westerly Lost Canyon Road within Fair Oaks Ranch, which would be
extended to Vista Canyon, connecting ,with Jakes Way at a roundabout; (c) Jakes Way, which
would be extended easterly from its present terminus to Lost Canyon Road; and, (d) after the
Lost Canyon Road/Jakes Way roundabout, Lost Canyon Road would traverse easterly through
Vista Canyon and terminate at a roundabout with the new Vista Canyon Road. Secondary access
to and from the Vista Canyon would be from the easterly terminus of Lost Canyon Road near
existing La Veda Avenue; this access is designed with a roundabout, an internal traffic loop, and
other traffic calming features to minimize "cut -through" traffic.
Gradin
The total amount of soil to be cut from the project site is estimated at 590,000 cubic yards (cy).
The total amount of fill is estimated at 830,000 cy. This cut and fill grading would be in addition
to 1.7 million cubic yards of remedial grading required for the project. Approximately 500,000
cy of soil would be imported to the site; including the 240,000 cy difference between the
project's cut and fill and the additional fill needed to compensate for soil shrinkage associated
with soil compaction. Dirt would be hauled from off-site locations via Lost Canyon Road
through Fair Oaks Ranch. Additionally, grading activities will require import of dirt from
southern portions of the project site to northern portions of the project site for the construction of
the buried bank stabilization improvements. To facilitate this action, a temporary at -grade
internal haul route, at a width of 35 feet, would be constructed within the Vista Canyon. Road
Bridge corridor and used for up to nine months.
Transit
The project is designed to create a variety of alternatives to the use of automobiles. This would
be accomplished by providing the land and partnering financially with the City and Metrolink on
facilities needed for the Multi -Modal Transportation Station, to be located north of the existing
Metrolink rail line along the southern boundary in PA -2. The Multi -Modal Transportation
Station would consist of a Metrolink Station and Bus Transfer Station. Vehicular access to the
Multi -Modal Transportation Station would be primarily from Vista Canyon Road.
The project proposes to relocate the Via Princessa Metrolink Station to the Vista Canyon project
site as part of this "Transit Oriented Community." The proposed Metrolink Station would
include construction of the platforms'and accessory station improvements within the Metrolink
right-of-way. At build -out, one 4 -story; 5 -level parking structure, providing 750 parking spaces,
would be utilized for transit users during Metrolink's hours of operation and be part of the shared
parking pool for PA -2 during evening and weekend hours. The parking structure also would
include restroom facilities and a security/waiting room. The funding for the Metrolink Station
and parking structure would consist of contributions from the applicant, the MTA Call process,
and State/Federal funding related to transit oriented development.
The Bus Transfer Station would be similar to the station currently operated by the City at
McBean Parkway and Valencia Boulevard. The Bus Transfer Station would consist of seven bus
bays arranged around a loop road with covered passenger shelters.
Parks and Recreation
The project provides opportunities for active and passive recreational opportunities. The four
primary recreational amenities associated with Vista Canyon include the 10 -acre Oak Park,
1 -acre Town Green, Community Garden and River Education Center. Up to six private
5
recreational facilities would be provided in the project.
The project's trail system links all of the PAs to each other and the Santa Clara River Regional
Trail. The project proposes over 4 miles of bicycle, pedestrian, and equestrian trails throughout
the site. The primary trails include extensions of the Santa Clara River Trail and the Oak Park
Trail, which would extend from Oak Park in PA -3 westerly to the town center in PA -2. Another
trail, the Loop Trail would begin at Lost Canyon Road near the existing La Veda Avenue and
extend along the Vista Canyon's easterly and southerly boundaries terminating in PA -1. Finally,
the project includes the extension of a trail off-site easterly along the north side of Lost Canyon
Road to Sand Canyon Road. The trail system also would include direct connections to the City's
existing regional trail system and the Santa Clara River Regional Trail, providing recreation
opportunities for local residents and the region. The trails would provide connectivity to the
living, shopping, work, entertainment, office, park, and recreation facilities throughout the site.
It should be noted that most of the project's residential units would be located within '/4 mile of
commercial, transit and employment uses.
VISTA CANYON ENTITLEMENT SUMMARY
Annexation
The project would include the annexation of the 185 -acre project site into the City of Santa
Clarita. Additionally, the annexation request includes an amendment to the City's Sphere of
Influence to include the project site.
Pre -zone
The project would include the pre -zone of the Vista Canyon site to Specific Plan (SP)
Specific Plan
The project would include the adoption of a Specific Plan which the City Council received on
March 1, 2011. The Specific Plan would permit the development of the project site with 1,091
dwelling units and 950,000 square feet of commercial floor area. A residential overlay would
permit the conversion of up to 250,000 square feet of commercial office space to 233
multi -family dwelling units, permitting development of the site with up to 1,324 residential units
and 700,000 square feet of commercial area.
General Plan Amendment
The City's existing General Plan designation for the project site is Business Park. Under the
Business Park designation the site could be developed with approximately 4.35 million square
feet of business park uses.
The project would amend the General Plan Land Use Map and Circulation Element in order to
designate the project site as SP, revise the Significant Ecological Area (SEA) overlay to
correspond to the area proposed as Specific Plan -Open Space (SP -OS), and establish the
alignment and roadway classification for Lost Canyon Road and Vista Canyon Road.
1_01
Tract Map
The project would include the subdivision of the project site into various commercial, residential,
recreational, infrastructure and open space lots, as shown on TTM 69164 which the City Council
received on March 1, 2011.
Conditional Use Permit
A conditional use permit (CUP) is being requested to allow for the import of up to 500,000 cubic
yards of dirt to accommodate the development within the Vista Canyon site.
Oak Tree Permit
The applicant is requesting an oak tree permit to allow for the removal of nine oak trees, three of
which are heritage sized, of the 41 oak trees located on-site. In addition, the applicant is
requesting permission to encroach within the protected zone of nine additional on-site oak trees,
seven of which would require trimming. Implementation of three of the four Lost Canyon
Road/Sand Canyon Road intersection design options could require an additional oak tree removal
and/or up to two additional oak tree encroachments.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The City of Santa Clarita prepared a Draft EIR for the Vista Canyon project that addressed all
issues raised by the Initial Study and in comments received on the NOPs. The Draft EIR was
circulated for review and comment by affected governmental agencies and the public, in
compliance with CEQA. Specifically, the Notice of Availability/Notice of Completion for the
Draft EIR was filed, posted, and advertised on October 19, 2010, and the 45 -day public review
period ended on December 3, 2010.
The Draft EIR addresses the following issues: Geotechnical Hazards (Section 4.1), Flood
(Section 4.2), Traffic (Section 4.3), Air Quality (Section 4.4), Noise (Section 4.5), Biological
Resources (Section 4.6), Land Use (Section 4.7), Water Services (Section 4.8), Water Quality
(Section 4.8.1), Solid Waste Disposal (Section 4.9), Education (Section 4.10), Library Services
(Section 4.11), Parks and Recreation (Section 4.12), Fire Services (Section 4.13), Sheriff
Services (Section 4.14), Human -Made Hazards (Section 4.15), Visual Resources (Section 4.16),
Population, Housing and Employment (Section 4.17), Cultural Recourses (Section 4.18),
Agricultural Resources (Section 4.19), Santa Clara River Corridor Analysis (Section 4.20),
Wastewater Disposal (Section 4.21), Global Climate Change (Section 4.22), and Utilities
(Section 4.23). The Draft EIR also identifies the Project Description (Section 1.0),
Environmental Setting (Section 2.0), Project Alternatives (Section 6.0), Cumulative Impacts
(Section 3.0, and Sections 4.1-4.24), and Growth Inducing Impacts (Section 7.0). Potential
impacts associated with the AAA were analyzed in Section 4.24.
Unavoidable significant impacts have been identified in four environmental issue areas:
1. Traffic and Access — Project Phase I (Lost Canyon Road/Sand Canyon Road intersection),
Interim (SR -14 — Sand Canyon Road to Soledad Canyon Road segment), Cumulative
(SR -14 — Sand Canyon Road to Soledad Canyon Road segment; Soledad Canyon Road —
7
Sierra Highway to Golden Valley Road).
2. Air Quality — short-term/construction, operational, and cumulative impacts.
3. Noise — short-term (construction and vibration (on-site only)), cumulative (off-site
SR -14) impacts.
4. Solid Waste — short-term (construction), long-term (operational), and cumulative impacts.
The February 2011 Draft Final EIR which the City Council received on March 1, 2011, includes
the Draft EIR, comments on the Draft EIR and the following: responses to written comments on
the Draft EIR, responses to public testimony provided at the October 19, November 2, and
December 21, 2010 public hearings, and modifications to the Draft EIR text and mitigation
measures. (Late oral and written comments received on or after January 18, 2011 will be fully
responded to prior to certification and approval of the project by the City Council, if granted.)
The Draft Final EIR also explains that the project, as modified by the Planning Commission
revisions, reduces the original project's potential environmental impacts due to overall
development of the site with less intensive land uses.
The Draft Final EIR was made available on February 4, 2011 and forwarded to the Planning
Commission, members of the public who provided written comments prior to January 18, 2011,
members of the public who made oral comments at the October, November and December
Planning Commission meetings, and to commenting agencies, and was made available at local
libraries, City Hall and the City's website.
In recommending certification of the Final EIR and approval of the project, the Planning
Commission recommended that the City Council find that there is substantial evidence that
supports the conclusion that the Vista Canyon project will result in community benefits that
outweigh the unavoidably significant effects of the Vista Canyon project on the environment.
These benefits include the following:
The project will create a significant employment center in the eastern Santa Clarita
Valley. The project is expected to create between 2,500 and 4,000 permanent jobs, the
majority of these being associated with the corporate office campus and professional
office space. Additionally, the project will create temporary employment opportunities in
its development and construction stage. The project will assist the City in meeting its
desired jobs/housing balance.
2. The project will implement various Goals and Policies of the City's General Plan related
to the development of compact, mixed-use, transit -oriented development.
3. The project will provide various residential housing opportunities for different economic
levels, with a mix of housing types, as required by the Housing Element of the City's
General Plan, and the Housing Allocation for the City of Santa Clarita as set forth by the
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) in the Regional Housing Needs
10
Assessment (RHNA).
4. The project will provide significant traffic/circulation benefits which include:
a. The extension of Lost Canyon Road from Fair Oaks Ranch to Soledad Canyon
Road, via the Vista Canyon Road Bridge;
b. The construction of the Vista Canyon Road Bridge, substantially reducing traffic
impacts to Sand Canyon Road;
c. Traffic calming to reduce cut -through traffic from Jakes Way to Sand Canyon
Road; and,
d. Improvements to Lost Canyon Road from the eastern project boundary to Sand
Canyon Road to alleviate congestion, including the implementation of a
"roundabout" at the intersection of Lost Canyon Road and Sand Canyon Road.
5. The project will provide substantial recreational benefits, including expansion of the
City's River Trail system and on-site trails, the 10 -acre Oak Park, Town Green and the
preservation of 74.5 acres of the Santa Clara River corridor. The project will also include
significant private recreational facilities including the Community Garden and up to six
private recreational facilities.
6. The project will result in the creation of a permanent eastern Santa Clarita Valley
Multi -Modal Transportation Station (Metrolink Station and Bus Transfer Station). This
significant "public-private" partnership would result in the closure of the temporary Via
Princessa Metrolink Station and provide for an opportunity to convert the station along
with adjacent County -owned property to a regional park.
7. The project includes an extensive Sustainability Plan as follows:
a. The project's residential and commercial buildings will exceed the 2008 Title 24
building energy efficiency standards by at least 20%.
b. EnergyStar major appliances in all residential units and non-residential buildings.
c. An 80,000 square foot photovoltaic system (or equivalent) will be constructed on
the project site.
d. Consistent with the Governor's Million Solar Roofs Plan, the project developer
will offer all potential single-family home -buyers a solar energy system purchase
option.
e. Solar heating will be used for all on-site community pools.
f. The project will construct an on-site WRP, which will generate a water supply
equivalent to the applicant's estimated total potable demand. Recycled water will
be used for on-site irrigation purposes, and nonresidential non -potable purposes
(public restroom toilets). The Vista Canyon WRP will also produce an excess
supply of recycled water that ultimately would be utilized by the Castaic Lake
Water Agency as part of its recycled water system.
g. The project will install evapotranspiration (weather sensitive controllers)
irrigation controllers in all landscaped areas of the project. Additionally, the
project site will be vegetated primarily with a native and/or drought -tolerant plant
palette
h. The project will include a mix of land uses including residential, retail
commercial, office, recreation, transit and hospitality.
i. The project will include over four miles of trails, pathways, bicycle lanes to
encourage walking and bicycling within the project site.
j. Office uses within the project would include the use of van pools and car pools as
part of the required Transportation Demand Management Plan.
k. Permeable pavement and other innovative water quality improvements will be
utilized in on -street parking areas within the project.
8. The project includes a preservation of a north -south animal movement corridor from the
Santa Clara River to undeveloped properties to the south. Additionally, as concluded in
the Final EIR, the project will enhance the Santa Clara River corridor on-site improving
its overall biological function.
9. The project will bring upscale retail services and amenities to the eastern Santa Clarita
Valley which will include restaurants, shops, a hotel and theater.
10. The project applicant has negotiated a "Mitigation Agreement" with Caltrans to reduce .
project impacts to SR -14. Additionally, the Vista Canyon Metrolink Station and Bus
Transfer Station will further reduce commuter trips on SR -14
11. The project has been designed to minimize impacts to the Santa Clara River. The project
concentrates development on flatter, disturbed, terraces along the River corridor. Over 50
percent of the project site would be preserved as open space or dedicated to recreational
use. The project design preserves a majority of the oak trees on-site, incorporating them
into the project.
12. The Vista Canyon Specific Plan will result in the implementation of the City's adopted
architectural design guidelines for Canyon Country that ensures compatible development
and complimentary architecture to the surrounding neighborhoods.
10
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission held four public hearings on the Vista Canyon project (including the
AAA) and closed the public hearing on February 15, 2011, at which time it recommended
certification of the Final EIR and approval of the project to the City Council.
Of note, the following revisions were made to the project by the Planning Commission primarily
due to comments from public agencies, members of the public, and the Planning Commissioners:
• Elimination of 26 single-family lots located adjacent to the existing La Veda
neighborhood. Elimination of these lots increases the size of Oak Park to over 10 acres,
eliminates the removal of one heritage oak tree, and allows for the preservation and
enhancement of the north/south animal movement corridor from the Santa Clara River
through the project site to undeveloped land to the south. This project revision
incorporates aspects of Draft EIR Alternative 5 (Open Space Corridor), and was made in
response to public and agency comments regarding the preservation of a north/south
animal movement corridor.
• Selection of the "Roundabout" (Intersection Design Option 3) at the Lost Canyon
Road/Sand Canyon Road intersection. The Planning Commission selected this option
based on community and staff input. Additionally, they found that this option would,
from a traffic operation standpoint, be the best of the four intersection design options.
• Removal of the properties south of Placerita Canyon Road from the AAA, with the
exception of the City's Walker Ranch Open Space property. The Planning Commission
removed these properties at the request of staff and affected property owners.
• Require the project applicant to minimize potential dust and vibration impacts associated
with project -related construction to the existing La Veda neighborhood. The applicant
and residents on La Veda Avenue agreed to language addressing the above that was
incorporated into the Planning Commission's draft conditions of approval.
• Require the project applicant to retain a qualified biologist to prepare an animal
movement corridor plan, which would address corridor design, specifications for an
undercrossing under Lost Canyon Road, and plant materials for the corridor. This has
been incorporated into the Planning Commission's draft conditions of approval.
• Require the project applicant to construct an eight -foot tall wall/berm in locations along
the southerly Metrolink right-of-way adjacent to the proposed Metrolink Station to reduce
train -related noise to off-site properties. The change would further reduce noise levels to
the closest homes in Fair Oaks Ranch (approximately 300 feet away) from 63.5 db(A)
CNEL (Conditionally Acceptable) to 57.5 db(A) CNEL (Normally Acceptable), which is
well within the City's requirements. This has been incorporated into the Planning
Commission's draft conditions of approval.
• Require the applicant to fund a crossing guard for a temporary .time period after the
completion of the intersection improvements at Lost Canyon Road/Sand Canyon Road.
This condition was added to the Planning Commission's draft conditions of approval
based upon public comment.
FISCAL IMPACT
Overall, annexation of Fair Oaks Ranch, Jakes Way, portions of Sand Canyon, and the Vista
Canyon project would generate a neutral/no net fiscal impact on the City of Santa Clarita.
Anticipated public service expenditures (such as Parks and Recreation, Sheriff, and Community
Preservation) would be managed so as not to exceed the future projected revenues generated
from these communities, thus there would not be a negative impact to the City's General Fund.
Revenues from this annexation include property taxes, permit fees, sales tax on retail/leases,
transient occupancy taxes, and other taxable activities offsetting the cost of providing public
services to these communities.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Other action as determined by the City Council.
ATTACHMENTS
Colored Illustrative Map of Vista Canyon
Planning Commission AAA Resolution available in the City Clerk's Reading File
Planning Commission CEQA Resolution available in the City Clerk's Reading File,/
Planning Commission Vista Resolution available in the City Clerk's Reading File
Planning Commission Conditions of Approval available in the City Clerk's Reading File
Planning Commission CEQA Findings available in the City Clerk's Reading File ✓
October 19, 2010 Planning Commission Staff Report available in the City Clerk's Reading File
November 2, 2010 Planning Commission Staff Report available in the City Clerk's Reading File
December 21, 2010 Planning Commission Staff Report available in the City Clerk's Reading L-""
File
February 15, 2011 Planning Commission Staff Report available in the City Clerk's Reading File
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE VISTA CANYON
AND ANNCILLARY ANNEXATION PROJECT
APPLICATION: Master Case No. 07-127, Annexation 07-002A & B (includes amendments to the City's
Sphere of Influence), Pre-Zone/Zone Change 07-OOIA & B, General Plan Amendment 07-OOIA & B, Specific
Plan 07-001, Tentative Tract Map 69164, Conditional Use Permit 07-009, Oak Tree Permit 07-019,
Environmental Impact Report SCH No. 2007071039
PROJECT LOCATION: The Vista Canyon site is located in the County of Los Angeles and consists of
approximately 185 acres of mostly undeveloped land generally located at the southwest intersection of Sand
Canyon Road and State Route 14. The 2,257 -acre Ancillary Annexation Area (Fair Oaks Ranch,. portions of
Sand Canyon, and Jakes Way) also is located in the County of Los Angeles, and generally south of the City of
Santa Clarita limits between Sand Canyon and Golden Valley Ranch.
PROJECT APPLICANT: Vista Canyon, LLC - Vista Canyon project (City of Santa Clarita is the applicant on
the surrounding annexation (Fair Oaks Ranch, portions of Sand Canyon, and Jakes Way)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: On February 15, 2011, the City of Santa Clarita Planning Commission
recommended that the City Council approve this project, as revised. The Vista Canyon project, as revised,
includes amending the City's General Plan to Specific Plan (SP), pre -zoning the site as SP, and annexing
approximately 185 acres of land into the City. The annexation application would include an amendment to the
City's Sphere of Influence. The Vista Canyon project also, as revised, includes approval of a Tentative Tract
Map, Conditional Use Permit, and Oak Tree Permit to allow for the construction of a mixed-use/transit-oriented
development consisting of 1,091 residential dwelling units and 950,000 square feet of commercial and medical
office, retail, theater, restaurant, and hotel uses within four Planning Areas. A proposed residential overlay
would permit the conversion of 250,000 square feet of office floor area to 233 multi -family residential units,
resulting in a potential project mix of 1,324 residential units and 700,000 square feet of nonresidential floor area.
As part of the revised project, the applicant is proposing: (i) Santa Clara River dedication; (ii) parks, trails, and
buried bank stabilization; (iii) relocation of the Metrolink station from Via Princessa to the project site, and
development of an adjacent bus -transfer station; (iv) a water reclamation plant; and, (v) infrastructure and
amenities. Project entitlements also would allow the import of up to 500,000 cubic yards of dirt from two
potential off-site sources and would allow for the removal of up to nine (three of which are heritage sized trees)
of the 41 on-site oak trees.
In conjunction with annexation of the Vista Canyon project site, the City also is proposing to annex, as revised,,.
Fair Oaks Ranch (1,082 acres), the Jakes Way area (260 acres), and portions of the Sand Canyon area (915 '
acres) -- collectively, the Ancillary Annexation Area. The majority of this area is built out, though some limited
development potential remains. Annexation would require a pre-zone/zone change, General Plan Amendment,
and an amendment to the City's Sphere of Influence.
A Draft Final Environmental Impact Report (Draft FEIR) has been prepared for the project to identify potential
environmental impacts. The Draft FEIR has been available for public review since February 4, 2011. The Draft
FEIR includes all of the written comments received as of January 18, 2011, and detailed responses to the written
comment letters that were received by January 18, 2011. Responses to late comments are being prepared and
will be available for review prior to any City Council action on the project. A copy of the Draft FEIR is
available for review at the City of .Santa Clarita, DepartrYient of Community Development, 23920 Valencia
Boulevard, Suite 302, Santa Clarita, CA 91355; at the Los Angeles County Library, Valencia branch; and on
the City's website: www.cityofsanta-clarita.com.
The City of Santa Clarita City Council will conduct a public hearing on this matter on the following date:
I #
DATE: March 22, 2011
TIME: 6:00 p.m.
LOCATION: City of Santa Clarita, Council Chambers
23920 Valencia Boulevard, First Floor
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
If you wish to challenge the action taken on this matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you
or someone else raised at the public hearings described in this notice, or written correspondence delivered to the City
of Santa Clarita, at or prior to, the public hearing.
For further information regarding this proposal, please contact the case planner at the City of Santa Clarita Permit
Center, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 140, Santa Clarita, CA 91355. Telephone: (661) 255-4330. Project
Planner: Jeff Hogan, AICP, Interim Planning Manager.
Dated: February 24, 2011
Kevin Tonian
Acting City Clerk
Publish Date: March 1, 2011
/S
RESOLUTION NO. PII-03
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE MASTER CASE NO. 07-127 (PRE -ZONE 07-001B, ANNEXATION 07-002B,
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 07-001B) AND CERTIFY THE FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 2007071039) FOR THE ANCILLARY
ANNEXATION AREA (FAIR OAKS RANCH/JAKES WAY/PORTIONS OF THE SAND
CANYON COMMUNITIES) LOCATED ALONd THE BOUNDARY OF THE EXISTING
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA JURISDICTIONAL LIMITS FOR THE PURPOSE OF
ANNEXATION
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA 'CLARITA DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS OF FACT. The Planning Commission does hereby make the
following findings of fact:
a. The Ancillary Annexation Area ("project") is generally located south of State Route 14,
west of Sand Canyon Road, and north of Placenta Canyon Road.
b. The project consists of approximately 2,257 acres of land within the Fair Oaks Ranch,
Jakes Way and portions of the Sand Canyon communities contiguous to the limits of the
City of Santa Clarita.
c. The Fair Oaks Ranch portion of the project consists of approximately 1,082 acres and is
predominately built out. This master -planned residential community, with varying
residential product types (including single- and multi -family attached units), presently
includes a total of 1,670 residential units. The area also includes an elementary school,
park and several private recreational facilities. There are approximately 500 approved
residential units left to be constructed in Fair Oaks Ranch, and construction is ongoing.
d. The Jakes Way portion of the project consists of 3,225 multi -family residential units on
approximately 260 acres. The majority of the Jakes Way area is built out. However,
there is undeveloped property directly south of the western portion of the Vista Canyon
project site that could be developed with up to 436,000 square feet of business park uses
under the City's existing General Plan land use designation.
e. The Sand Canyon portion of the project is predominately rural and consists of 96 large -
lot, single-family homes on approximately 915 acres. A majority of the Sand Canyon
area is built out; however, it is estimated that up to 150 additional, single-family units
could be constructed on vacant or underutilized properties within this area under the
City's existing General Plan land use designation and taking into account environmental
constraints.
Resolution PII-03
Master Case 0 7-12 7
Page 2 of 5
f. Surrounding land uses consists of developed land uses, which include residential and
commercial uses. Golden Valley Ranch (a residential and commercial development) and
portions of the Angeles National Forest are located to the south; the Metrolink right-of-
way, SR -14 and Vista Canyon property are located to the north; the exiting Sand Canyon
community is located to the east; and, Sierra Highway and various residential and
commercial uses are located to the west.
g. General Plan Amendment 07-001 B and Prezone 07-001 B propose to amend the City's
Sphere of Influence and General Plan Land Use Map, and Prezone the Fair Oaks Ranch
area (1,082 acres) to SP (Specific Plan); the Jakes Way area (260 acres) to RM
(Residential Moderate) and BP (Business Park); and the Sand Canyon area (915 acres) to
RE (Residential Estate) and OS (Open Space).
h. In October 2009, the City of Santa Clarita circulated a Notice of Preparation ("NOP") for
the project.
A Draft Environmental Impact Report ("EIR;" State Clearinghouse No. 2007071039) for
the project was prepared and circulated from October 19, 2010 to December 3, 2010. The
Draft EIR addressed all comments and concerns submitted in response to the NOP.
j. A Final EIR for the project was prepared, and responded to all written and oral comments
provided in response to the environmental analysis presented in the Draft EIR.
k. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings on the project on
October 19, 2010; November 2, 2010; December 21, 2010; and February 15, 2011. The
public hearings were held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa
Clarita. At the hearings, the Planning Commission considered the staff presentation, the
staff report, the Draft EIR prepared for the project, and public testimony on the project.
1. Public participation and notification requirements pursuant to Sections 65090, 65391,
and 65854 of the Government Code of the State of California were duly followed.
SECTION 2. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FINDINGS. Based upon the foregoing
facts and findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council find as
follows:
a. The proposed General Plan Amendment 07-001 B is consistent with the goals, policies
and objectives of the General Plan in that the proposed land use change is consistent with
existing development and/or existing development entitlements for the subject site;
b. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the objectives of the Land Use
Element of the City's General Plan and development policies. More specifically, the
Land Use Element Policy 4.15 states, "Maintain or enhance the character of the various
communities through compatible land use standards and design guidelines, while
Resolution PII-03
Master Case 07-127
Page 3 of S
promoting an overall identity to the Santa Clarita Valley" (L-31). This proposed land use
designations comply with this policy as the designations will bring the developed area
into compliance with the City's Unified Development Code and General Plan;
c. The proposed General Plan Amendment 07-001 B complies with Section 65358(b) of the
Government Code in that the Land Use Element has been amended no more than four
times in the current calendar year; and
d. Based upon the testimony and other evidence, if any, received at the public hearing, and
upon studies and investigations made by the Planning Commission *and on its behalf, the
Commission further finds and determines that this project is consistent with the City's
General Plan.
SECTION 3. PREZONE FINDINGS. Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the
Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council find as follows:
a. The Prezoning is required under Section 56375(a)(3) of the Government Code in that
prior to the Local Agency Formation Commission taking an action on an annexation,
annexing land must be prezoned by the annexing city;
The proposed Prezone 07-001 B amending the City of Santa Clarita Zoning Map is
consistent with existing development and/or existing development entitlements for the
subject site; and
c. The proposed Prezone 07-OOIB is consistent with the objectives of the Unified
Development Code in that it implements the goals and objectives of the General Plan and
guides the future growth of the City in that it meets the development policies of the City
of Santa Clarita.
SECTION 4. CEQA FINDINGS. The Planning Commission, hereby finds that the Final
EIR for Master Case 07-127 (General Plan Amendment 07-001B, Annexation 07-002B and Pre -
Zone 07-OO1B) identifies and discloses project -specific impacts and cumulative project impacts.
Environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR, findings, and facts in support of findings are
herein incorporated as "Findings Required by CEQA," referred to as Exhibit "A" of Resolution P11-
02.
Most of the project area is built out. As such, the proposed changes to the land use designations in
the built out portion of the project area and the re -assignment of those areas to a different land use
jurisdiction, practically speaking, would not result in any potentially significant environmental
impacts.
Also, additional environmental review would be required before most of the currently undeveloped
portions of the project area could be built out. The subsequent environmental review processes
would evaluate impacts and identify mitigation measures in detail in light of the availability of
Resolution P11-03
Master Case 07-127
Page 4 of S
specific proposed development plans. At this point, however, it is not known whether, when or how
the undeveloped portions of the project area would be built out. Accordingly, in some respects, it is
difficult to forecast the indirect environmental impacts of the project.
That being said, design -level mitigation measures would be identified, as necessary and feasible,
during the subsequent proj ect-level environmental review that would be undertaken in conjunction
with any additional development in the project area, and specifically the Sand Canyon and Jakes
Way areas. It is reasonable to assume and recommend at this juncture that further development in
the project area AAA utilize mitigation measures comparable to those recommended for the Vista
Canyon project due to the similar nature of the development types. (See also Finding Required by
CEQA - Exhibit "A" to companion Resolution No. 11-02.)
SECTION 5. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council hereby adopt the
Final EIR (SCH No. 2007071039) for the project and approve Master Case 07-127 for General Plan
Amendment 07-OO1B and Prezone 07-OOIB (including an amendment to the City's Sphere of
Influence) as described in Sections 1 through 4 above.
SECTION 6. The Planning Commission Secretary shall certify the adoption of this
Resolution and certify this record to be a full, complete, and correct copy of the action taken.
Resolution PII -03
Master Case 07-127
Page 5 of 5
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 15th day of February, 2011.
TIM BURKHART, CHAIRPERSON
PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
JEFF W. HOGAN, SECRETARY
PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
I, Jeff W. Hogan, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita
at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 15th day of February, 2011 by the following vote of the
Planning Commission:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY
\\CITYHALL2\Dept\CD\CURRENT\!2007\07-127 (Planning Commission)\PCRESOFAIRIAKESANDANNEX
RESOLUTION NO. Pll-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF THE
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH #2007071039) FOR MASTER
CASE NO. 07-127 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 07-00IA, PRE -ZONE 07-00IA,
ANNEXATION 07-002A, SPECIFIC PLAN 07-001, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
69164, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 07-009, OAK TREE PERMIT 07-019),
INCLUDING REQUIRED FINDINGS OF FACT, AND ADOPTION OF THE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS OF FACT. The Planning Commission does hereby
make the following findings of fact, and recommends that the City Council make the
following findings of fact:
a. An application for Master Case 07-127, the Vista Canyon project, was filed by
the project applicant, Vista Canyon, LLC (the "applicant"), with the City of
Santa Clarita on June 29, 2007. The entitlement requests (collectively,
"Entitlements") include:
1. Annexation 07-002A to annex (and amend the City's Sphere of
Influence to include) Vista Canyon, an approximately 185 -acre site,
generally located southwest of Sand Canyon Road and State Route 14
(SR -14) in the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County.
2. Pre -zone 07-OOIA to pre -zone the Vista Canyon site to Specific Plan
(SP).
3. Specific Plan 07-001 to adopt a Specific Plan that includes
entitlements for 1,117 dwelling units (96 single-family detached, 1,021
multi -family attached), 646,000 square feet of commercial office,
164,000 square feet of retail, and a 200 -room hotel. A residential
overlay within the Specific Plan would permit the conversion of up to
250,000 square feet of the commercial office area to 233 additional
multi -family attached dwelling units, permitting development of the
project site with up to 1,350 dwelling units and 700,000 square feet of
commercial area.
4. General Plan Amendment 07-OOIA to amend the General Plan Land
Use Map and Circulation Element in order to designate the Vista
Canyon site as SP, revise the Significant Ecological Area (SEA)
overlay to correspond to the area proposed as Specific Plan -Open
,;
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 2 of 23
Space (SP -OS), and establish the alignment and roadway classification
for Lost Canyon Road and Vista Canyon Road.
Tentative Tract Map 69164 to subdivide the 185 -acre project site into
162 lots. In addition, each individual dwelling or commercial unit
would have the ability to be subdivided.
6. Conditional Use Permit 07-009 to allow for the import of up to
500,000 cubic yards of dirt to accommodate the development within
the Vista Canyon site.
7. Oak Tree Permit 07-019 to allow for the removal of 10, four of which
are heritage size, of the 41 oak trees located within the Specific Plan
area and to encroach into the protected zone of 10 oak trees. The
request would also permit the encroachment into the protected zone of
10 oak trees. Pruning or trimming of seven of these 10 oak trees
would also be permitted. Implementation of three of the four Lost
Canyon Road/Sand Canyon Road intersection options could require an
additional oak tree removal and/or up to two additional oak tree
encroachments.
b. The City of Santa Clarita is also concurrently processing under Master Case
07-127 a separate annexation application to annex the Ancillary Annexation
Area ("AAA") to the City of Santa Clarita. The AAA includes
unincorporated County of Los Angeles property adjacent to and surrounding
the Vista Canyon project site, specifically Fair Oaks Ranch (approximately
1,082 acres), Jakes Way (approximately 260 acres), and Sand Canyon (1,723
acres). .
The Vista Canyon project site is an approximately 185 -acre site generally
located southwest of Sand Canyon Road and SR -14 in unincorporated Los
Angeles County. The project originally proposed to develop 1,117 dwelling
units (96 single-family residential lots and 1,021 attached condominiums (up
to 579 of these attached condominium units may be rented or leased)), and up
to 950,000 square feet of commercial and medical office, retail, theater,
restaurant, and hotel uses within four Planning Areas (PA). A residential
overlay within the corporate office campus site would allow for the
conversion of up to 250,000 square feet of office floor area to 233 attached
residential units. If implemented, this conversion would permit a maximum of
1,350 residential units and 700,000 square feet of commercial floor area. The
project also would result in the construction of a new Metrolink station and
bus transfer station, as well as a wastewater reclamation plant (WRP). As
originally proposed, there would also be approximately 18 acres of
parks/recreation facilities, including the Oak Park, Town Green, Community
Garden, River Education/Community Center, up to six private recreation
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 3 of 23
facilities, and trails. Further, there are approximately 10 acres of proposed
public streets, including the extension of Lost Canyon Road from Fair Oaks
Ranch to Vista Canyon Road and the construction of the Vista Canyon Road
Bridge to connect Lost Canyon Road and Soledad Canyon Road.
d. Surrounding land uses include primarily residentially developed land.
Residential development, commercial development and SR -14, are located to
the north of the project site. The Colony Townhomes, a multi -family
residential community, is directly west of the project site. The Fair Oaks
Ranch community, which is comprised of single-family and multi -family
residential units, an elementary school, and community park, lies to the south
and west. The existing Metrolink rail line is located to the south of the project
site. The La Veda and Lost Canyon residential areas, which consist of homes,
and a public and private elementary school, lie to the east. The Santa Clara
River bisects the project site.
e. The approximately 185 -acre site is presently located in unincorporated Los
Angeles County, directly adjacent to the City of Santa Clarita. The Los
Angeles County Land Use Map (as amended through May 13, 2003)
designates the project site as M (Industry) and W (Floodplain/Floodway). The
property is currently zoned M-1.5 (Light Industrial), A-1-1 (Light Agriculture
— 1 acre minimum lot size), R -A-8,000 (Residential Agriculture — 8,000
square foot minimum lot size), and A-1-10,000 (Light Agriculture — 10,000
square foot minimum lot size). Under the existing County light industrial
zoning designation of M-1.5 and taking into account parking and landscaping
requirements, the project site could be developed with approximately 1.0
million square feet of light industrial uses. The agricultural and residential
zoned portions of the project site could be developed with approximately 170
single-family residential units.
f. On June 25, 1991, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-98, adopting
the General Plan of the City of Santa Clarita and certifying the Environmental
Impact Report. The City's General Plan presently designates the Vista
Canyon project site as Business Park with portions of the site covered by a
SEA overlay. The City's General Plan Land Use Concept identifies the
project site as a "major sub -center" with Business Park/Office Uses. Under
the Business Park designation and taking into account City parking and
landscaping requirements, the property could be developed with
approximately 4.35 million square feet of business park floor area.
g. The County of Los Angeles and City of Santa Clarita are presently completing
One Valley One Vision (OVOV) — a joint effort, initiated in 2000, between
the City and County to create guidelines for the future growth and
development of the Santa Clarita Valley while also preserving natural
resources. The jurisdictional planning boundaries established in OVOV
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 4 of 23
include the City and its four communities (i.e., Canyon Country, Newhall,
Saugus and Valencia), and the County communities of Stevenson Ranch,
Castaic, Val Verde, Agua Dulce, and the future Newhall Ranch. The draft
OVOV Land Use Plan (dated October 2008) issued by the County designates
the project site as UR2 (Urban2 - five dwelling units per acre) with an SEA
overlay over portions of the site. Under this draft land use designation, the
project site could be developed with up to 700 residential units. However,
various goals and policies within OVOV encourage transit oriented
development (TOD) through the permitting of higher densities and intensities,
and would allow for mixed-use, compact development in close proximity to
new or existing rail stations and/or multi -modal transit facilities. As proposed,
the Vista Canyon project includes new Metrolink and bus transfer stations.
h. The Vista Canyon site was originally a portion of Mitchell Ranch, which was
first settled in 1860 by Thomas Mitchell. Thomas Mitchell was born in
Virginia, subsequently moving to Texas where, in 1852, he served under Sam
Houston in the Texas Mounted Volunteers. He went to California shortly
thereafter, spending approximately eight years in the northern California
mining districts. In 1860, he moved to the Santa Clarita Valley to start a cattle
ranch. Initially, he transported a dismantled miner's cabin down from
Tehachapi and erected it on the property, more specifically in the southeastern
portion of the project site. A few years later he married Martha Taylor and
built a more commodious adobe, about 40 feet from the original cabin. The
adobe was 60 by 45 feet in size and redwood shingled.
Eventually, Mitchell increased his holdings to nearly a thousand acres, raising
cattle, producing honey, and farming. With increasing population, and thus
children, in the valley, the Sulphur Springs School District was founded, circa
1872. The school opened initially in the kitchen of the Mitchell's adobe, was
taught by Mrs. Mitchell, and was the first school building in the Santa Clara
Valley area. Circa 1885 the student population had outgrown the single room
and a wooden schoolhouse was constructed at Sulphur Springs, on land
donated by Mitchell. The Sulphur Springs school location is directly east of
the project site. Mitchell also built a two-story home on the project site in
1888, then using the adobe as a guesthouse. Bricks from the adobe were
eventually removed from the property and the school/adobe was reassembled
at Heritage Junction in Hart Park in Newhall.
In addition to the original miner's cabin, adobe, two-story wooden house, and
likely a number of outbuildings, a family cemetery was also present on the
Mitchell Ranch. This was used to inter the Mitchell family, and their friends
and neighbors. None of the buildings referenced above remain on the Vista
Canyon site. The cemetery, however, is still present and would be preserved
and enhanced by the project.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 5 of 23
Presently, the project site is comprised primarily of undeveloped, highly
disturbed land, including various utilities, an equipment storage yard and a
single-family residence located on the western side of the project site, and the
Mitchell family cemetery located on the small elevated terrace on the
northeastern portion of the project site.
i. The project site is irregularly shaped, and includes the sandy bottom of the
ephemeral Santa Clara River, a small elevated terrace on the northeastern
portion of the project site, and a larger elevated terrace that forms the southern
half of the project site. These terraces drain towards the River. Elevations on
the project site range from a high of 1,555 feet above sea level at the
northeastern portion of the site, to a low of 1,465 feet above sea level in the
middle of the Santa Clara River.
j. Environmental conditions on the project site have been altered substantially
by existing and historical uses of the property, including outdoor storage,
agricultural cultivation, grading, utility construction and maintenance, and
residential uses. Unauthorized dumping also has occurred on the project site.
There is little remaining natural vegetation remaining with the exception of a
vegetated area on the southeastern portion of the project site that includes oaks
and introduced grasses.
k. The Vista Canyon project concentrates development on the flatter, disturbed,
elevated terraces on the project site, thereby preserving a River corridor
averaging 775 feet in width. The majority of oak trees on the project site
would be preserved and incorporated into the project.
1. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA;" Pub.
Resources Code, §21000 et seq.), the City of Santa Clarita is the lead agency
and the City Council is the decision-making body for the Vista Canyon
project. The City's Planning Commission is a recommending body for the
Vista Canyon project.
m. The City of Santa Clarita prepared an Initial Study for the Vista Canyon
project, which determined that the project may have a significant effect on the
environment and that an environmental impact report ("EIR") must be
prepared. The Initial Study determined that the following areas must be
addressed in the EIR for the Vista Canyon project: geotechnical hazards,
flood, traffic/access, air quality, noise, biological resources, land use, water
services (including both water demand/supply and water quality), solid waste
disposal, education, library services, parks and recreation, fire services, sheriff
services, human made hazards, visual resources,
population/housing/employment, cultural resources, agricultural resources,
Santa Clara River corridor, wastewater disposal, global climate change and
utilities.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 6 of 23
n. An initial Notice of Preparation ("NOP") for the Entitlements was circulated
to affected agencies, pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal.
Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.), for thirty days, beginning on July 11,
2007. A revised NOP, reflecting various modifications made to the project
was circulated, pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, for thirty
days, beginning on February 26, 2008. And, yet another revised NOP,
reflecting the inclusion of the AAA, was circulated, pursuant to CEQA and
the State CEQA Guidelines, for thirty days, beginning on October 1, 2009.
Agencies that received the NOPs include, but are not limited to, the County of
Los Angeles, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, California
Department of Fish and Game, South Coast Air Quality Management District,
law enforcement agencies, school districts, waste haulers, water agencies and
transportation agencies serving the Santa Clarita Valley in accordance with
CEQA's consultation requirements. Numerous comments from public
agencies, organizations, and members of the public were received in response
to the NOPs.
A scoping meeting was held at the City of Santa Clarita Century Conference
Room on February 27, 2008, to obtain information from the public as to issues
that should be addressed in the EIR. Notice of the scoping meeting was
published in The Signal newspaper on February 6, 2008, and was mailed to all
property owners within 1,000 feet of the project site, in addition to
approximately 80 agencies. Approximately 25 people attended the scoping
meeting.
p. Ori July 20, 2010, at 3:30 p.m., the Planning Commission conducted a site
tour of the Vista Canyon project site.
q. The City of Santa Clarita prepared a Draft EIR for the Vista Canyon project
that addressed all issues raised by the Initial Study and in comments received
on the NOPs. The Draft .EIR was circulated for review and comment by
affected governmental agencies and the public, in compliance with .CEQA.
Specifically, the Notice of Availability/Notice of Completion for the Draft
EIR was filed, posted and advertised on October 19, 2010, and the 45 -day
public review period ended on December 3, 2010, 5:00 p.m. in accordance
with CEQA. Late written comments received prior to January 18, 2011 were
responded to in the Final EIR Responses to . Comments. Additionally, oral
comments expressed at the Planning Commission Public Hearings prior to and
including December 21, 2010 were responded to in the February 2011 Final
EIR Responses to Comments. Oral and written comments received on or after
January 18, 2011 will be fully responded to prior to certification and approval
of the project by the City Council, if granted.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 7 of 23
r. The Vista Canyon project was duly noticed in accordance with the noticing
requirements for each of the Entitlements. The project was advertised in The
Signal, through on-site posting 14 days prior to the hearing, and by direct
first-class mailing to property owners within 1,000 feet of the Vista Canyon
projectsite and AAA. In addition, the date and time of each public hearing
was posted on three signs at the project site, as well as eight off-site signs.
S. The Planning Commission held duly -noticed public hearings on the Vista
Canyon project on October 19, November 2, and December 21, 2010, and
February 15, 2011. These hearings were held at City Hall, 23920 Valencia
Boulevard, Santa Clarita, at 7:00 p.m. The Planning Commission closed the
public hearing on December 21, 2010.
i. On October 19, 2010, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing
for the Vista Canyon project; received a presentation from staff on the
Vista Canyon Specific Plan; received a Draft EIR presentation from staff
on several sections (Geotechnical Hazards, Land Use, Solid Waster
Disposal, Education Services, Library Services, Fire Services, Sheriff
Services, Human -Made Hazards, Population, Housing and Employment,
Cultural Resources, Agricultural Resource, Utilities, and Ancillary
Annexation Areas); received a presentation from the applicant, and
received public testimony regarding the project.
ii. On November 2, 2010, City staff responded to questions posed by the
Planning Commission and pubic on issues related to Schools, Traffic,
Grading, Solid Waste and Annexation. City staff also made a presentation
on various Draft EIR Sections (Flood, Traffic and Access, Air Quality,
Noise, Biological Resources, Water Services, Water Quality, Parks and
Recreation, Visual Resources, River Corridor, Wastewater Disposal,
Global Climate Change, and Project Alternatives). The Planning
Commission also received a presentation from the applicant and received
public testimony regarding the project.
iii. On December 21, 2010, City staff responded to questions and issues raised
by the Planning Commission related to Flood, Traffic, Air Quality, Noise,
Biological Resources, Water Services, Water Quality,. Parks and
Recreation, Visual Resources, River Corridor, Wastewater Disposal,
Global Climate Change, and Project Alternatives. In addition, the
Planning Commission considered potential site plan modifications, noise-,
dust- and traffic -related conditions, and additional public testimony on the
project. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission
directed staff and the applicant to bring back a site plan reflecting various
project modifications ' (detailed below), and directed staff to incorporate
the following specific requirements into the revised site plan and/or
conditions of approval for the project:
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 8 of 23
1: Elimination of the 26 single-family lots located in the area
adjacent to the existing La Veda neighborhood.
Elimination of these lots increases the size of the proposed
Oak Park to over 10 acres, eliminates the removal of one
heritage oak tree, and allows for the preservation and
enhancement of the north/south animal movement corridor
from the Santa Clara River through the project site to
undeveloped land to the south. This project revision
incorporates aspects of Draft EIR Alternative 5 (Open
Space Corridor).
2. Selection of the "Roundabout" (Intersection Design Option
3) at the Lost Canyon Road/Sand Canyon Road intersection
(Condition No. PC5).
3. Removal of the properties south of Placerita Canyon Road
from the AAA, with the exception of the City's Walker
Ranch Open Space property. Removal of these properties
reduced the size of the Sand Canyon annexation area from
1,723 acres to 915 acres.
4. Require, as a condition of approval, the project applicant to
minimize potential dust and vibration impacts associated
with project -related construction to the existing La Veda
neighborhood (Condition Nos. PC 1 and 2).
5. Require, as a condition of approval, the project applicant to
retain a qualified biologist to prepare an animal movement
corridor plan, which would address corridor design,
specifications for an undercrossing under Lost Canyon
Road, and plant materials for the corridor (Condition No.
PC3).
6. Require, as a condition of approval, the project applicant to
construct an eight -foot tall wall/beam in locations along the
southerly Metrolink right-of-way adjacent to the proposed
station to reduce train -related noise to off-site properties
(Condition No. PC4).
7. Require the applicant to fund a crossing guard for a
temporary time period after the completion of the
intersection improvements at Lost Canyon Road/Sand
Canyon Road (Condition No. PC6). °
t. On February 15, 2011, the modified site plan, draft Final EIR, resolutions and,
conditions of approval were presented to the Planning Commission. The
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 9 of 23
Commission also received public testimony regarding the project. As a result
of the project modifications made during the proceedings before the Planning
Commission, the revised site plan recommended by the Planning Commission
proposes a total of 1,091 residential units (1,324 under the residential
overlay), 950,000 square feet of commercial floor area (700,000 square feet
under the residential overlay), Metrolink and bus transfer stations, a 10 -acre
neighborhood park and other recreational amenities.
U. As a result of comments received from the Planning Commission and its staff,
governmental agencies and the public, the project was modified by the
Planning Commission as explained above in Paragraph "s."
V. The Final EIR, incorporated herein by reference, includes the Draft EIR,
comments on the Draft EIR, and the following: responses to written comments
on the Draft EIR, responses to public testimony regarding Draft EIR issues
raised at the October 19, November 2, and December 21, 2010 public
hearings, and modifications to the Draft EIR text and mitigation measures.
The Final EIR also explains that the project, as modified by the revisions
enumerated in Paragraph "s," reduces the original project's potential
environmental impacts due to the overall development of the site with less
intensive/dense land uses, does not increase the level of any previously
identified impacts, and creates no new significant impacts.
w. The Draft EIR was presented to the Planning Commission on October 19,
2010 and the remaining Final EIR documents were prepared and provided to
the Planning Commission at its February 15, 2011 meeting. On February 4,
2011, a copy of the responses to comments from the Final EIR was sent to
each agency and individual who submitted timely comments on the Draft EIR.
X. The Planning Commission has considered the Final EIR prepared for the Vista
Canyon project, as well as information provided in staff reports, presented to
the Planning Commission from experts, and presented in public testimony,
including letters submitted to the Planning Commission following the close of
the Draft EIR public comment period.
y. At its hearings on the Vista Canyon project, listed above, the Planning
Commission also considered staff and consultant presentations, staff reports,
applicant. presentations, information presented to the Commission to assist its
understanding of the Vista Canyon project, the EIR, and public comments and
testimony on the Vista Canyon project and EIR.
Z. Based upon the staff and consultant presentations, staff reports, applicant
presentations, and public comments and testimony, the Planning Commission
finds that the Vista Canyon project, as modified, will not adversely affect the
health, peace, comfort, or welfare of persons residing in the area; nor will the
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 10 of 23
Vista Canyon project be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment, or
valuation of property in the vicinity of the project site; nor will the Vista
Canyon project jeopardize, endanger or otherwise constitute a menace to the
public health, safety, or general welfare since the project conforms with the
zoning ordinance and is compatible with surrounding land uses. The Vista
Canyon projectproposes the extension of all utilities and services to the
project site. Currently, all required utilities and services are available at
locations adjacent to the project site.
aa. The location of the documents and other materials that constitute the record of
proceedings upon which the decision of the Planning Commission is based for
the Master Case 07-127 project file is with the Community Development
Department; the record specifically is in the custody of the Director of
Community Development.
SECTION 2. CEQA REQUIREMENTS. The Planning Commission of the City of
Santa Clarita does hereby recommend that the City Council make the following findings
of fact:
a. The California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA;" Pub. Resources Code,
§21000 et seq.) provides that "public agencies should not approve projects as
proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures
available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental
effects of such projects[.]" (Pub. Resources Code, § 21002, emphasis added.)
The procedures required by CEQA "are. intended to assist public agencies in
systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and
the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or
substantially lessen such significant effects." (Ibid.);
b. CEQA also provides that "in the event [that] specific economic, social, or
other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation
measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more
significant effects. (Pub. Resources Code, §21002.) CEQA provides that a
public agency has an obligation to balance a variety of public objectives,
including economic, environmental, and social factors, and in particular the
goal of providing a decent home and satisfying living environment for every
Californian. (Pub. Resources Code, §21081; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14,
§15021(d).) CEQA requires decision -makers to balance the benefits of a
proposed project against its significant unavoidable adverse environmental
impacts, and, if the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the significant
unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, the unavoidable adverse
environmental impacts may be considered "acceptable" by adopting a
Statement of Overriding Considerations. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §15093.)
The Statement of Overriding Considerations must set forth the project benefits
or reasons why the lead agency is in favor of approving the project and must
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P 11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 11 of 23
weigh these benefits against the project's adverse environmental impacts
identified in the Final EIR that cannot be mitigated to a less -than -significant
level;
C. CEQA's mandates and principles are implemented, in part, through the
requirement that agencies adopt findings before approving projects for which
EIRs are required. For each significant environmental effect identified in an
EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency must issue a written finding
reaching one or more of three permissible conclusions:
(1) "[c]hanges or alterations have been required in, 'or incorporated into,
the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR,"
(2) [s]uch changes or alterations are within the responsibility and
jurisdiction of another public agency or can and should be adopted by
such other agency," or
(3) [s]pecific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for
highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or
project alternatives identified in the final EIR."
(Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15091.) CEQA defines "feasible" to mean capable
of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of
time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, legal and
technological factors. (Pub. Resources Code, §21061.1; Cal. Code Regs., tit.
14,§15364.);
d. The concept of "feasibility" also encompasses the question of whether a
particular alternative promotes the underlying goals and objectives of a
project. "Feasibility" under CEQA, then, encompasses "desirability" to the
extent that desirability is based on a reasonable balancing of the relevant
economic, environmental, social, and technological factors;
e. CEQA requires that the lead agency exercise its independent judgment in
reviewing the adequacy of an EIR and that the decision of a lead agency in
certifying a Final EIR and approving a project not be predetermined. The
Planning Commission has conducted its own review and analysis, and is
exercising its independent judgment when acting as herein provided;
f. CEQA requires decision -makers to adopt a mitigation monitoring and
reporting program ("MMRP") for those mitigation measures identified in the
Final EIR that would mitigate or avoid each significant impact identified in
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 12 of 23
the EIR and to incorporate the mitigation monitoring and reporting program,
including all mitigation measures, as a condition of project approval;
g. CEQA requires that the responses to comments in the Final EIR demonstrate
good faith and a well -reasoned analysis, and not be overly conclusory. In
response to several of the comments received, portions of the Draft EIR have
been revised. Although new material has been added to the Draft EIR through
preparation of the Final EIR, this new material provides clarification to points
and information already included in the Draft EIR and is not considered to be
significant new information or a substantial change to the Draft EIR or to the
project that would necessitate recirculation; and
h. State CEQA Guidelines section 15003(c) and (i) note that state courts have
held that the purpose of an EIR is to inform other governmental agencies and
the public generally of the environmental impacts of a proposed project.
CEQA does not require technical perfection or exhaustive treatment of issues
in an EIR, but rather adequacy, completeness, and a good -faith effort at full
disclosure.
SECTION 3. CEOA FINDINGS. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend
that the City Council find that the Final EIR for Master Case 07-127 (Specific Plan 07-
001, General Plan Amendment 07-001A, Annexation 07-002A, Pre -Zone 07-001A,
Tentative Tract Map 69164, Conditional Use Permit 07-009 and Oak Tree Permit 07-
019) identifies and discloses project -specific impacts and cumulative project impacts.
Environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR, findings, and facts in support of
findings are herein incorporated as "Findings Required by CEQA," referred to as Exhibit
"A," and identified as follows:
a. The Final EIR identifies significant unavoidable adverse impacts of the
project, as set forth in Section 2.0 of Exhibit "A." Changes or alterations have
been required in, or incorporated into, the project that will avoid or lessen
certain of the project impacts, but that will not avoid or reduce all of the
potential impacts to a less -than -significant level. These remaining significant
impacts are balanced against project benefits and are found to be overridden
by the project benefits, as stated in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations in Section 6, below.
b. The Final EIR also identifies significant but mitigated impacts, as set forth in
Section 3.0 of Exhibit "A." Changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project that will avoid or reduce these potential impacts
to a less -than -significant level.
The Final EIR also identifies less -than -significant impacts, as set forth in
Section 4.0 of Exhibit "A."
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 13 of 23
d. As issues that are noted in Section 3(c), above, have no significant
environmental impacts and require no mitigation, those issues also will have
no contribution to cumulative impacts.
e. The MMRP, attached as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by this
reference, is required to mitigate project impacts.
SECTION 4. CONSIDERATION OF A REASONABLE RANGE OF
ALTERNATIVES. Based upon the above recitals and the entire record, including the
Vista Canyon Final EIR, oral and written testimony and other evidence received at the
public hearings held on the Vista Canyon project and. the Final EIR and otherwise, upon
studies and investigation made by the Planning Commission, and upon reports and other
transmittals from City staff to the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission
further finds and recommends that the City Council find that the Final EIR analyzes a
reasonable range of project alternatives that would feasibly attain most of the basic
objectives of the Vista Canyon project and would lessen any of the significant impacts of
the project, and adequately evaluates the comparative merits of each alternative.
The objectives of the Vista Canyon project are specified in the Final EIR and
Section 1.4 of Exhibit "A." These objectives are used as the basis for
comparing the project alternatives and determining the extent that the
objectives would be achieved relative to the proposed project. Only those
impacts found significant and unavoidable are relevant in making the final
determination of whether an alternative is environmentally superior or inferior
to the proposed project. The proposed project would result in significant and
unavoidable impacts in four environmental issue areas:
1. Traffic and Access — Phase I (Lost Canyon Road/Sand Canyon Road
intersection), Interim (SR -14 — Sand Canyon Road to Soledad Canyon
Road segment), cumulative (SR -14 — Sand Canyon Road to Soledad
Canyon Road segment; Soledad Canyon Road — Sierra Highway to
Golden Valley Road).
2. Air Quality -- short-term construction impacts (VOC, NOx, NO2, PM10,
and PM2.5 emissions), operational impacts (VOCs, NOx, CO, and PM10),
cumulative (VOCs, NOx, CO, PM2,5, and PM10 ).
3. Noise -- short-term (construction and vibration (on-site only)), cumulative
(SR -14 noise off-site).
4. Solid Waste -- short-term (construction), long-term (operational), and
cumulative impacts.
b. Alternative I — No Project Alternative. This alternative is required by the
State CEQA Guidelines and compares the impacts that might occur if the site
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 14 of 23
is left in its present condition with those that would be generated by the
proposed project. Under this alternative, no development would occur, and
the existing storage yard and residence would remain on a portion of the site.
The No Project Alternative would avoid the significant and unavoidable
impacts identified in the Final EIR and all other identified significant impacts,
and, therefore, is considered environmentally superior.
This alternative would not attain the basic objectives of the project. That said,
some of the resource conservation objectives would be avoided through the
complete avoidance of direct and indirect environmental impacts. This
alternative is infeasible because it would not attain the basic project
objectives, and would not provide any of the project benefits.
C. Alternative 2 — Proposed County Land Use Designation (OVOV). This
alternative would develop a project allowed by Los Angeles County's
proposed land use designations for the site, as defined in the General Plan
Update (OVOV). The proposed designation would permit approximately 700
residential units on the project site; a 5 -acre neighborhood park and up to two
private recreation areas also would be provided. However, no commercial or
transit uses would be constructed as part of this alternative. Additionally, this
alternative would not include the water reclamation plant or Vista Canyon
Road Bridge. Consistent with OVOV, Lost Canyon Road would be extended
as a major highway from Fair Oaks Ranch to Jakes Way, and then as a
secondary highway from Jakes Way to Lost Canyon Road at La Veda
Avenue.
This alternative would result in less impacts than the project in 12 categories,
greater impacts in 5 categories, and similar impacts in 7 categories. In
general, this alternative is considered the "environmentally superior"
alternative for purposes of CEQA.
This alternative would not fully meet or impede the following project
objectives, which are defined in Section 1.4 of Exhibit "A" (attached): Land
Use Planning Objectives 1, 4, 6, 7, 9, and 14; and, Economic Objectives 1, 3,
and 4. Therefore, this alternative is infeasible because it would not fully
satisfy numerous project objectives, and would not provide all of the project
benefits.
d. Alternative 3 — Existing City of Santa Clarita General Plan Designation. This
alternative would develop a project allowed by the City of Santa Clarita's
existing General Plan land use designation for the site (i.e., Business Park
(BP)). Under the BP designation, the site could be developed with
approximately'4.35 million square feet of light industrial/business park uses.
This alternative would include construction of the Vista Canyon Road Bridge,
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 15 of 23
Metrolink Station, and Bus Transfer Station. Lost Canyon Road would be
extended from Fair Oaks Ranch to Lost Canyon Road at La Veda Avenue as a
major highway. This alternative would not include any parks or recreation
facilities.
This alternative would result in less impacts than the project in 8 categories,
greater impacts in 8 categories, and similar impacts in 8 categories.
Therefore, this alternative is not environmentally superior to the project.
This alternative would not fully meet or impede the following project
objectives, which are defined in Section 1.4 of Exhibit "A" (attached): Land
Use Planning Objectives 1, 3, 5, 6, 9, and 14; and, Economic Objectives 1.
Therefore, this alternative is infeasible because it would not fully satisfy
numerous project objectives, and would not provide all of the project benefits.
e. Alternative 4 — Reduced Development Footprint (Relocation of Southerly
Bank Stabilization). This alternative generally would move the bank
stabilization on the south side of the River Corridor back by an average of 100
feet, thereby increasing the width of the River Corridor as compared to the
proposed project. The Vista Canyon Road Bridge length would be extended
from 650 to 800 feet. The residential overlay also would be eliminated,
reducing the number of residential units from a maximum of 1,324 to 1,091.
Lost Canyon Road would be extended from Fair Oaks Ranch to La Veda
Avenue in a design (with traffic calming) similar to the proposed project. All
other components of the project would be incorporated into this alternative.
This alternative would result in less impacts than the project in 14 categories,
greater impacts in one category, and similar impacts in 9 categories.
Therefore, this alternative is considered to be environmentally superior to the
project.
This alternative would not fully meet or impede the following project
objective, which is defined in Section 1.4 of Exhibit "A" (attached):
Economic Objective 2. Therefore, this alternative is infeasible because it
would not fully satisfy one of the project objectives.
f. Alternative 5 — Open Space Corridor Alternative. This alternative would
create a north/south open space corridor from and through the project site to
undeveloped properties to the south, and would not include development in
PA -4 (Mitchell Hill). The alternative also would eliminate the extension of
Lost Canyon Road to La Veda Avenue; Lost Canyon Road would terminate in
the project site, though the alternative would still extend trail improvements
from the project site along the north side of Lost Canyon Road to Sand
Canyon Road. The alternative would increase the size of Oak Park (which
would include both active and passive areas) and would remove one less oak
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P 11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 16 of 23
tree, as compared to the project. In comparison to the project, 32 single-family
units would be eliminated. All other components of the project would be.
incorporated into this alternative.
This alternative would result in less impacts than the project in 12 categories,
greater impacts in one category, and similar impacts in 11 categories.
Therefore, this alternative is considered to be environmentally superior to the
project.
This alternative would not fully meet or impede the following project
objectives, which are defined in Section 1.4 of Exhibit "A" (attached): Land
Use Planning Objective 12; Economic Objective 2.
Components of this alternative were implemented by the Planning
Commission (i.e., elimination of 26 single-family lots, increased size of Oak
Park, and removal of one less oak tree). However, full implementation of this
alternative is infeasible because it would not fully satisfy two of the project
objectives.
g. Alternative 6 — Lost Canyon Road Alignment (parallel and adjacent to the
southerly bank stabilization). This alternative would extend Lost Canyon
Road from Fair Oaks Ranch to La Veda Avenue in an alignment running
parallel and adjacent to the southerly bank stabilization. Lost Canyon Road
would be constructed to serve as a secondary highway to the Vista Canyon
Road Bridge, and as a collector through the eastern portions of the project site.
All other components of the proposed project would be incorporated into this
alternative.
The environmental impacts of this alternative would be similar to the impacts
of the project, with the exception of traffic/circulation, which would be
slightly greater than the project. Accordingly, the alternative is not considered
environmentally superior to the project.
This alternative would not fully meet or impede the following project
objective, which is defined in Section 1.4 of Exhibit "A" (attached): Land Use
Planning Objective 3. Therefore, this alternative is infeasible because it
would not fully satisfy one of the project objectives, and would not provide all
of the project benefits.
h. Off -Site Alternatives. Alternative sites of generally the same size within or
directly adjacent to the City in the eastern Santa Clarita Valley do not exist,
are presently being utilized for other purposes, or are the subject of other
development proposals. The proposed project involves development of a
transit -oriented, mixed-use community in an infill site, surrounded on all sides
by development with the necessary infrastructure adjacent to the project site.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 17 of 23
A multi -modal transit station (Metrolink Station and Bus Transfer Station)
would be developed as part of the project. There are no potential alternative
project sites in the local vicinity that are similar in acreage, are close to
existing or planned infrastructure improvements, and are adjacent to the
Metrolink rail line. Potential alternative sites that provide access to similar
infrastructure and alternative transit are located beyond existing urbanized
areas and, therefore, would induce growth in these non -urban areas. As such,
off-site alternatives are considered infeasible.
Modification of Project Description Based on Alternatives Discussion. As
discussed in Section 1, above, during the Planning Commission consideration
of this project, there were extensive discussions regarding the preservation of
a north -south animal movement corridor through the project as part of the Oak
Park. As a result, the project was modified as detailed above in Section 1,
Paragraph "s," and in a manner consistent with certain aspects of Alternative
5.
SECTION 5. FINDINGS FOR CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL EIR.
Based upon the above recitals and the entire record, including, without limitation, the
Vista Canyon Final EIR, oral and written testimony and other evidence received at the
public hearings held on the Vista Canyon project and the Vista Canyon Final EIR, upon
studies and investigation made by the Planning Commission, and upon reports and other
transmittals from City staff to the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission
further recommends the City Council find.
a. That the Final EIR for the Vista Canyon project is adequate, complete, has
been prepared in accordance with CEQA, and should be certified on that
basis.
b. That the Planning Commission has independently reviewed and considered
the Final EIR in reaching its conclusions.
C. That the Final EIR was presented and reviewed prior to taking final action to
recommend certification of the Final EIR and approval of the Vista Canyon
project.
d. That, in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines sections 15091 and 15093,
the Final EIR includes a description of each potentially significant impact and
rationale for finding that changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect, as detailed in Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
The analyses included in the Final EIR to support each conclusion and
recommendation therein is hereby incorporated into these findings.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 18 of 23
e. That, in accordance with Public Resources Code section 21081, modifications
have occurred to the project to reduce significant -effects.
f. That, in accordance with Public Resources Code section 21081 and State
CEQA Guidelines section 15091, changes and alterations have been required
and incorporated into the Vista Canyon project that avoid or substantially
lessen its significant. environmental effects because feasible mitigation
measures, including those in the MMRP, are made conditions of approval for
the project.
g. The Statement of Overriding Considerations identifies and weighs the revised
project's significant impacts that cannot be mitigated to a level below
significant against the community benefits from this revised project, and
concludes based on substantial evidence in the record that the revised
project's benefits outweigh its unavoidable significant impacts.
h. That the Final EIR reflects the decision -maker's independent judgment and
analysis.
That a MMRP has been prepared and is recommended for adoption to enforce
the mitigation measures required by the Final EIR and project approvals.
The documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings
on which this decision is based are under the custody of the City Clerk and are
located at the City of Santa Clarita, Community Development Department,
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302, Santa Clarita, California 91355.
SECTION 6. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS.
Based upon the above recitals and the entire record, including the Vista Canyon Final
EIR, oral and written testimony and other evidence received at the public hearings held
on the Vista Canyon project and the Vista Canyon Final EIR and otherwise, upon studies
and investigation made by the Planning Commission, and upon reports and other
transmittals from City staff to the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission
further recommends the City Council find that there is substantial evidence that supports
the conclusion that the Vista Canyon project will result in community benefits, including
specific ecological, economic, legal, social, technical and other benefits, that outweigh
the significant effects of the Vista Canyon project on the environment that cannot be
mitigated to a level less than significant.
a. Significant unavoidable impacts include the following, as further described in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference:
1. Traffic and Access — Phase I (Lost Canyon Road/Sand Canyon Road
intersection), Interim (SR 14 — Sand Canyon Road to Soledad Canyon
Road segment), cumulative (SR -14 — Sand Canyon Road to Soledad
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 19 of 23
Canyon Road segment; Soledad Canyon Road — Sierra Highway to
Golden Valley Road).
2 Air Quality -- short-term construction impacts (VOC, NOx, NO2, PM10, -
and PM2.5 emissions), operational impacts (VOCs, NOx, CO, and PM�o ),
cumulative (VOCs, NOx, CO, PM2.5, and PMIo ).
3. Noise -- short-term (construction and vibration (on-site only)), cumulative
(SR -14 noise off-site.
4. Solid Waste -- short-term (construction), long-term (operational), and
cumulative impacts.
b. The benefits of the Vista Canyon project outweigh its significant unavoidable
impacts that cannot be mitigated to a level below significant. These benefits
include the following:
1. The project will create a significant employment center in the eastern
Santa Clarita Valley. The project is expected to create between 2,500 and
4,000 permanent jobs, the majority of these being associated with the
corporate office campus and professional office space. Additionally, the
project will create temporary employment opportunities in its development
and construction stage. The project will assist the City in meeting its
desired jobs/housing balance.
2. The project will implement various Goals and Policies of the City's
General Plan related to the development of compact, mixed-use, transit -
oriented development.
3. The project will provide various residential housing opportunities for
different economic levels, with a mix of housing types, as required by the
Housing Element of the City's General Plan, and the Housing Allocation
for the City of Santa Clarita as set forth by the Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG) in the Regional Housing Needs
Assessment (RHNA).
4. The project will provide significant traffic/circulation benefits which
include:
a. The extension of Lost Canyon Road from Fair Oaks Ranch to Soledad
Canyon Road, via the Vista Canyon Road Bridge;
b. The construction of the Vista Canyon Road Bridge, substantially
reducing traffic impacts to Sand Canyon Road;
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 20 of 23
c. Traffic calming to reduce cut -through traffic from Jakes Way to Sand
Canyon Road; and,
d. Improvements to Lost Canyon Road from the eastern project boundary
to Sand Canyon Road to alleviate congestion, including the
implementation of a "roundabout" at the intersection of Lost Canyon
Road and Sand Canyon Road.
5. The project will provide substantial recreational benefits, including
expansion of the City's River Trail system and on-site trails, the 10 -acre
Oak Park, Town Green and the preservation of 74.5 acres of the Santa
Clara River corridor. The project will also include significant private
recreational facilities including the Community Garden and up to six
private recreational facilities.
6. The project will result in the creation of a permanent eastern Santa Clarita
Valley Multi -Modal Transportation Facility (Metrolink Station and Bus
Transfer Station). This significant "public-private" partnership would
result in the closure of the temporary Via Princessa Metrolink Station and
provide for an opportunity to convert the station along with adjacent
County -owned property to a regional park.
7. The project includes an extensive Sustainability Plan as follows:
a. The project's residential and commercial buildings will exceed the
2008 Title 24.building energy efficiency standards by at least 20%.
b. EnergyStar major appliances in all residential units and non-residential
buildings.
c. An 80,000 square foot photovoltaic system (or equivalent) will be
constructed on the project site.
d. Consistent with the Governor's Million Solar Roofs Plan, the project
developer will offer all potential single-family home -buyers a solar
energy system purchase option.
e. Solar heating will be used for all on-site community pools.
f. The project will construct an on-site WRP, which will generate a water
supply equivalent to the applicant's estimated total potable . demand.
Recycled water will be used for on-site irrigation purposes, and
nonresidential non -potable purposes (public restroom toilets). The
Vista Canyon WRP will also produce an excess supply of recycled
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 21 of 23
water that ultimately would be utilized by the Castaic Lake Water
Agency as part of its recycled water system.
g. The project will install evapotranspiration (weather sensitive
controllers) irrigation controllers in all landscaped areas of the project.
Additionally, the project site will be vegetated primarily with a native
and/or drought -tolerant plant palette
h. The project will include a mix of land uses including residential, retail
commercial, office, recreation, transit and hospitality.
i. The project will include over four miles of trails, pathways, bicycle
lanes to encourage walking and bicycling within the project site.
j. Office uses within the project would include the use of van pools and
car pools as part of the required Transportation Demand Management
Plan.
k. Permeable pavement and other innovative water quality improvements
will be utilized in on -street parking areas within the project.
8. The project includes a preservation of a north -south animal movement
corridor from the Santa Clara River to undeveloped properties to the
south. Additionally, as concluded in the Final EIR, the project will
enhance the Santa Clara River corridor on-site improving its overall
biological function.
9. The project will bring upscale retail services and amenities to the eastern
Santa Clarita Valley which will include restaurants, shops, a hotel and
theater.
10. The project applicant has negotiated a "Mitigation Agreement" with
Caltrans to reduce project impacts to SR -14. Additionally, the Vista
Canyon Metrolink Station and Bus Transfer Station will further reduce
commuter trips on SR -14
11. The project has been designed to minimize impacts to the Santa Clara
River. The project concentrates development on flatter, disturbed, terraces
along the River corridor. Over 50 percent of the project site would be
preserved as open space or dedicated to recreational use. The project
design preserves a majority of the oak trees on-site, incorporating them
into the project.
12. The Vista Canyon Specific Plan will result in the implementation of the
City's adopted architectural design guidelines for Canyon Country that
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P 11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 22 of 23
ensures compatible development and complimentary architecture to the
surrounding neighborhoods.
SECTION 7. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council
review and,consider the Final EIR (SCH No. 2007071039), and hereby determines that it
is adequate and in compliance with CEQA. In compliance with Public Resources Code
section 12081 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15093, the Planning Commission
recommends the City Council consider the project benefits as balanced against its
unavoidable adverse environmental effects, and hereby determines .that the benefits
outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects; therefore, the Planning
Commission recommends the City Council determine that the unavoidable adverse
environmental effects are considered acceptable. The Planning Commission recommends
the City Council hereby certify the Final EIR and associated documents, and adopt the
MMRP and Statement of Overriding Considerations.
SECTION 8. By the adoption of this Resolution, the Planning Commission has
not granted any approval or entitlement on this project.
SECTION 9. The Planning Commission Secretary shall certify to the adoption
of this Resolution and certify this record to be a full, complete, and correct copy of the
action taken.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-02
February 15, 2011
Page 23 of 23
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 15h day of February, 2011.
TIM BURKHART, CHAIRPERSON
PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
JEFF W. HOGAN, SECRETARY
PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
I, Jeff W. Hogan, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of
the City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 15`h of February, 2011
by the following vote of the Planning Commission:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSION
SECRETARY
S:\CD\CURRENT\2007\07-127(VISTA CANYON)\PLANNINGCOMMISSION\PCRESOCEQA
RESOLUTION NO. 1`11-01
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE MASTER CASE 07-127 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 07-001A, PRE -ZONE
07-001A, ANNEXATION 07-002A, SPECIFIC PLAN 07-001, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
69164, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 07-009, OAK TREE PERMIT 07-019) FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT AND ANNEXATION OF THE VISTA CANYON PROJECT
INTO THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS OF FACT. The Planning Commission does hereby make the
following findings of fact, and recommends that the City Council make the following findings of
fact:
An application for Master Case 07-127, the Vista Canyon project, was filed by the
project applicant, Vista Canyon, LLC (the "applicant"), with the City of Santa Clarita
on June 29, 2007. The entitlement requests (collectively, "Entitlements") include:
Annexation 07-002A to annex (and amend the City's Sphere of Influence to
include) Vista Canyon, an approximately 185 -acre site, generally located
southwest of Sand Canyon Road and State Route 14 (SR -14) in- the
unincorporated area of Los Angeles County.
2. Pre -zone 07-OOIA to pre -zone the Vista Canyon site to Specific Plan (SP)
3. Specific Plan 07-001 to adopt a Specific Plan that includes entitlements for
1,117 dwelling units (96 single-family detached, 1,021 multi -family attached),
646,000 square feet of commercial office, 164,000 square feet of retail, and a
200 -room hotel. A residential overlay within the Specific Plan would permit
the conversion of up to 250,000 square feet of the commercial office area to
233 additional multi -family attached dwelling units, permitting development
of the project site with up to 1,350 dwelling units and 700,000 square feet of
commercial area.
4. General Plan Amendment 07-001 A to amend the General Plan Land Use Map
and Circulation Element in order to designate the Vista Canyon site as SP,
revise the Significant Ecological Area (SEA) overlay to correspond to the area
proposed as Specific Plan -Open Space (SP -OS), and establish the alignment
and roadway classification for Lost Canyon Road and Vista Canyon Road.
Tentative Tract Map 69164 to subdivide the 185 -acre project site into 162
lots. In addition, each individual dwelling or commercial unit would have the
ability to be subdivided.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 2 of 21
6. Conditional Use Permit 07-009 to allow for the import of up to 500,000 cubic
yards of dirt to accommodate the development within the Vista Canyon site.
7. Oak Tree Permit 07-019 to allow for the removal of 10, four of which are
heritage size, of the 41 oak trees located within the Specific Plan area and to
encroach into the protected zone of 10 oak trees. The request would also
permit the encroachment into the protected zone of 10 oak trees. Pruning or
trimming of seven of these 10 oak trees would also be permitted.
Implementation of three of the four Lost Canyon Road/Sand Canyon Road
intersection options could require an additional oak tree removal and/or up to
two additional oak tree encroachments.
b. The City of Santa Clarita is also concurrently processing under Master Case 07-127 a
separate annexation application to annex the Ancillary Annexation Area ("AAA") to
the City of Santa Clarita. The AAA includes unincorporated County of Los Angeles
property adjacent to and surrounding the Vista Canyon project site, specifically Fair
Oaks Ranch (approximately 1,082 acres), Jakes Way (approximately 260 acres), and
Sand Canyon (1,723 acres).
C. The Vista Canyon project site is an approximately 185 -acre site generally located
southwest of Sand Canyon Road and SR -14 in unincorporated Los Angeles County.
The project originally proposed to develop 1,117 dwelling units (96 single-family
residential lots and 1,021 attached condominiums (up to 579 of these attached
condominium units may be rented or leased)), and up to 950,000 square feet of
commercial and medical office, retail, theater, restaurant, and hotel uses within four
Planning Areas (PA). A residential overlay within the corporate office campus site
would allow for the conversion of up to 250,000 square feet of office floor area to
233 attached residential units. If implemented, this conversion would permit a
maximum of 1,350 residential units and 700,000 square feet of commercial floor area.
The project also would result in the construction of a new Metrolink station and bus
transfer station. As originally proposed, there would also be approximately 18 acres
of parks/recreation facilities, including the Oak Park, Town Green, Community
Garden, River Education/Community Center, up to six private recreation facilities,
and trails. Further, there are approximately 10 acres of proposed public streets,
including the extension of Lost Canyon Road from Fair Oaks Ranch to Vista Canyon
Road and the construction of the Vista Canyon Road Bridge to connect Lost Canyon
Road and Soledad Canyon Road.
d. Surrounding land uses include primarily residentially developed land. Residential
development, commercial development and SR -14, are located to the north of the
project site. The Colony Townhomes, a multi -family residential community, is
directly west of the project site. The Fair Oaks Ranch community, which is
comprised of single-family and multi -family residential units, an elementary school,
and community park, lies to the south and west. The existing Metrolink rail line is
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 3 of 21
located to the south of the project site. The La Veda and Lost Canyon residential
areas, which consist of homes, and a public and private elementary school, lie to the
east. The Santa Clara River bisects the project site.
e. The approximately 185 -acre site is presently located in unincorporated Los Angeles
County, directly adjacent to the City of Santa Clarita. The Los Angeles County Land
Use Map (as amended through May 13, 2003) designates the project site as M
(Industry) and W (Floodplain/Floodway). The property is currently zoned M-1.5
(Light Industrial), A-1-1 (Light Agriculture — 1 acre minimum lot size), R -A-8,000
(Residential Agriculture — 8,000 square foot minimum lot size), and A-1-10,000
(Light Agriculture — 10,000 square foot minimum lot size). Under the existing
County light industrial zoning designation of M-1.5 and taking into account parking
and landscaping requirements, the project site could be developed with approximately
1.0 million square feet of light industrial uses. The agricultural and residential zoned
portions of the project site could be developed with approximately 170 single-family
residential units.
f. On June 25, 1991, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-98, adopting the
General Plan of the City of Santa Clarita and certifying the Environmental Impact
Report. The City's General Plan presently designates the Vista Canyon project site as
Business Park with portions of the site covered by a SEA overlay. The City's
General Plan Land Use Concept identifies the project site as a "major sub -center"
with Business Park/Office Uses. Under the Business Park designation and taking into
account City parking and landscaping requirements, the property could be developed
with approximately 4.35 million square feet of business park floor area.
g. The County of Los Angeles and City of Santa Clarita are presently completing One
Valley One Vision (OVOV) — a joint effort, initiated in 2000, between the City and
County to create guidelines for the future growth and' development of the Santa
Clarita Valley while also preserving natural resources. The jurisdictional planning
boundaries established in OVOV include the City and its four communities
(i.e., Canyon Country, Newhall, Saugus and Valencia), and the County communities
of Stevenson Ranch, Castaic, Val Verde, Agua Dulce, and the future Newhall Ranch.
The draft OVOV Land Use Plan (dated October 2008) issued by the County
designates the .project site as UR2 (Urban2 - five dwelling units per acre) with an
SEA overlay over portions of the site. Under this draft land use designation, the
project site could be developed with up to 700 residential units. However, various
goals and policies within OVOV encourage transit oriented development (TOD)
through the permitting of higher densities and intensities, and would allow for mixed-
use, compact development in close proximity to new or existing rail stations and/or
multi -modal transit facilities. As proposed, the Vista Canyon project includes new
Metrolink and bus transfer stations.
g. The Vista Canyon site was originally a portion of Mitchell Ranch, which was first
settled in 1860 by Thomas Mitchell. Thomas Mitchell was born in Virginia,
Master Case 07-127
Resolution PI1-01
February 15, 2011
Page 4 of 21
subsequently moving to Texas where, in 1852, he served under Sam Houston in the
Texas Mounted Volunteers. He went to California shortly thereafter, spending
approximately eight years in the northern California mining districts. In 1860, he
moved to the Santa Clarita Valley to start a cattle ranch. Initially, he transported a
dismantled miner's cabin down from Tehachapi and erected it on the property, more
specifically in the southeastern portion of the project site. A few years later he
married Martha Taylor and built a more commodious adobe, about 40 feet from the
original cabin. The adobe was 60 by 45 feet in size and redwood shingled.
Eventually, Mitchell increased his holdings to nearly a thousand acres, raising cattle,
producing honey, and farming. With increasing population, and thus children, in the
valley, the Sulphur Springs School District was founded, circa 1872. The school
opened initially in the kitchen of the Mitchell's adobe, was taught by Mrs. Mitchell,
and was the first school building in the Santa Clara Valley area. Circa 1885 the
student population had outgrown the single room and a wooden schoolhouse was
constructed at Sulphur Springs, on land donated by Mitchell. The Sulphur Springs
school location is directly east of the project site. Mitchell also built a two-story
home on the project site in 1888, then using the adobe as a guesthouse. Bricks from
the adobe were eventually removed from the property and the school/adobe was
reassembled at Heritage Junction in Hart. Park in Newhall.
In addition to the original miner's cabin, adobe, two-story wooden house, and likely a
number of outbuildings, a family cemetery was also present on the Mitchell Ranch.
This was used to inter the Mitchell family, and their friends and neighbors. None of
the buildings referenced above remain on the Vista Canyon site. The cemetery,
however, is still present and would be preserved and enhanced by the project.
Presently, the project site is comprised primarily of undeveloped, highly disturbed
land, including various utilities, an equipment storage yard and a single-family
residence located on the western side of the project site, and the Mitchell family
cemetery located on the small elevated terrace on the northeastern portion of the
project site.
h. The project site is irregularly shaped, and includes the sandy bottom of the ephemeral
Santa Clara River, a small elevated terrace on the northeastern portion of the project
site, and a larger elevated terrace that forms the southern half of the project site.
These terraces drain towards the River. Elevations on the project site range from a
high of 1,555 feet above sea level at the northeastern portion of the site, to a low of
1,465 feet above sea level in the middle of the Santa Clara River.
i. Environmental conditions on the project site have been altered substantially by
existing and historical uses of the property, including outdoor storage, agricultural
cultivation, grading, utility construction and maintenance, and residential uses.
Unauthorized dumping also has occurred on the project site. There is little remaining
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P 11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 5 of 21
natural vegetation remaining with the exception of a vegetated. area on the
southeastern portion of the project site that includes oaks and introduced grasses.
j. The Vista Canyon project concentrates development on the flatter, disturbed, elevated
terraces on the project site, thereby preserving a River corridor averaging 775 feet in
width. The majority of oak trees on the project site would be preserved and
incorporated into the project.
k. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA;" Pub..
Resources Code, §21000 et seq.), the City of Santa Clarita is the lead agency and the
City Council is the decision-making body for the Vista Canyon project. The City's
Planning Commission is a recommending body for the Vista Canyon project.
The City of Santa Clarita prepared an Initial Study for the Vista Canyon project,
which determined that the project may have a significant effect on the environment
and that an environmental impact report ("EIR") must be prepared. The Initial Study
determined that the following areas must be addressed in the EIR for the Vista
Canyon project: geotechnical hazards, flood, traffic/access, air quality, noise,
biological resources, land use, water services (including both water demand/supply
and water quality), solid waste disposal, education, library services, parks and
recreation, fire services, sheriff services, human made hazards, visual resources,
population/housing/employment, cultural resources, agricultural resources, Santa
Clara River corridor, wastewater disposal, global climate change and utilities.
in. An initial Notice of Preparation ("NOP") for the Entitlements was circulated to
affected agencies, pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code
Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.), for thirty days, beginning on July 11, 2007. A revised
NOP, reflecting various modifications made to the project was circulated, pursuant to
CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, for thirty days, beginning on February 26,
2008. And, yet another revised NOP, reflecting the inclusion of the AAA, was
circulated, pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, for thirty days,
beginning on October 1, 2009. Agencies that received the NOPs include, but are not
limited to, the County of Los Angeles, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control
Board, California Department of Fish and Game, South Coast Air Quality
Management District, law enforcement agencies, school districts, waste haulers,
water agencies and transportation agencies serving the Santa Clarita Valley in
accordance with CEQA's consultation requirements. Numerous comments from
public agencies, organizations, and members of the public were received in response
to the NOPs.
n. A scoping meeting was held at the City of Santa Clarita Century Conference Room
on February 27, 2008, to obtain information from the public as to issues that should
be addressed in the EIR. Notice of the scoping meeting was published in The Signal
newspaper on February 6, 2008, and was mailed to all property owners within 1,000
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 6 of 21
feet of the project site, in addition to approximately 80 agencies. Approximately 25
people attended the scoping meeting.
o. On July 20, 2010, at 3:30 p.m., the Planning Commission conducted a site tour of the
Vista Canyon project site.
p. ,The City of Santa Clarita prepared a Draft EIR for the Vista Canyon project that
addressed all issues raised by the Initial Study and in comments received on the
NOPs. The Draft EIR was circulated for review and comment by affected
governmental agencies and the public, in compliance with CEQA. Specifically, the
Notice of Availability/Notice of Completion for the Draft EIR was filed, posted and
advertised on October 19, 2010, and the 45 -day public review period ended on
December 3, 2010, 5:00 p.m. in accordance with CEQA. Late written comments
received prior to January 18, 2011 were responded to in the Final EIR Responses to
Comments. Additionally, oral comments expressed at the Planning Commission
Public Hearings prior to and including December 21, 2010 were responded to in the
February 2011 Final EIR Responses to Comments. Oral and written comments
received on or after January 18, 2011 will be fully responded to prior to certification
and approval of the project by the City Council, if granted.
q. The Vista Canyon project was duly noticed in accordance with the noticing
requirements for each of the Entitlements. The project was advertised in The Signal,
through on-site posting 14 days prior to the hearing, and by direct first-class mailing
to property owners within 1,000 feet of the Vista Canyon project site and AAA. In
addition, the date and time of each public hearing was posted on three signs at the
project site, as well as eight off-site signs.
r. The Planning Commission held duly -noticed public hearings on the Vista Canyon
project on October 19, November 2, and December 21, 2010, and February 15, 2011.
These hearings were held at City Hall, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita, at
7:00 p.m. The Planning Commission closed the public hearing on December 21,
2010.
On October 19, 2010, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing for the
Vista Canyon project; received a presentation from staff on the Vista Canyon
Specific Plan; received a Draft EIR presentation from staff on several sections
(Geotechnical Hazards, Land Use, Solid Waster Disposal, Education Services,
Library Services, Fire Services, Sheriff Services, Human -Made Hazards,
Population, Housing and Employment, Cultural Resources, Agricultural
Resource, Utilities, and Ancillary Annexation Areas); received a presentation
from the applicant, and received public testimony regarding the project.
ii. On November 2, 2010, City staff responded to questions posed by the Planning
Commission and pubic on issues related to Schools, Traffic, Grading, Solid Waste
and Annexation. City staff also made a presentation on various Draft EIR
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P 11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 7 of 21
Sections (Flood, Traffic and Access, Air Quality, Noise, Biological Resources,
Water Services, Water Quality, Parks and Recreation, Visual Resources, River
Corridor, Wastewater Disposal, Global Climate Change, and Project
Alternatives). The Planning Commission also received a presentation from the
applicant and received public testimony regarding the project.
iii. On December 21, 2010, City staff responded to questions and issues raised by the
Planning Commission related to Flood, Traffic, Air Quality, Noise, Biological
Resources, Water Services, Water Quality, Parks and Recreation, Visual
Resources, River Corridor, Wastewater Disposal, Global Climate Change, and
Project Alternatives. In addition, the Planning Commission considered potential
site plan modifications, noise-, dust- and traffic -related conditions, and additional
public testimony on the project. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning
Commission directed staff and the applicant to bring back a site plan reflecting
various project modifications (detailed below), and directed staff to incorporate
the following specific requirements into the revised site plan and/or conditions of
approval for the project:
1. Elimination of the 26 single-family lots located in the area adjacent
to the existing La Veda neighborhood. Elimination of these lots
increases the size of the proposed Oak Park to over 10 acres,
eliminates the removal of one heritage oak tree, and allows for the
preservation and enhancement of the north/south animal movement
corridor from the Santa Clara River through the project site to
undeveloped land to the south. This project revision incorporates
aspects of Draft EIR Alternative 5 (Open Space Corridor).
2. Selection of the "Roundabout" (Intersection Design Option 3) at
the Lost Canyon Road/Sand Canyon Road intersection (Condition
No. PC5).
3. Removal of the properties south of Placerita Canyon Road from
the AAA, with the exception of the City's Walker Ranch Open
Space property. Removal of these properties reduced the size of
the Sand Canyon annexation area from 1,723 acres to 915 acres.
4. Require, as a condition of approval, the project applicant to
minimize potential dust and vibration impacts associated with
project -related construction to the existing La Veda neighborhood
(Condition Nos. PC 1 and 2).
5. Require, as a condition of approval, the project applicant to retain a
qualified biologist to prepare an animal movement corridor plan,
which would address corridor design, specifications for an
undercrossing under Lost Canyon Road, and plant materials for the i
corridor (Condition No. PC3).
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P 11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 8 of 21
6. Require, as a condition of approval, the project applicant to
construct an eight -foot tall wall/berm in locations along the
southerly Metrolink right-of-way adjacent to the proposed station
to reduce train -related noise to off-site properties (Condition No.
PC4).
7. Require the applicant to fund a crossing guard for a temporary time
period after the completion of the intersection improvements at
Lost Canyon Road/Sand Canyon Road (Condition No. PC6).
S. On February 15, 2011, the modified site plan, draft Final EIR, resolutions and
conditions of approval were presented to the Planning Commission. The Commission
also received public testimony regarding the project. As a result of the project
modifications made during the proceedings before the Planning Commission, the
revised site plan recommended by the Planning Commission proposes a total of 1,091
residential units (1,324 under the residential overlay), 950,000 square feet of
commercial floor area (700,000 square feet under the residential overlay), Metrolink
and bus transfer stations, a 10 -acre neighborhood park and other recreational
amenities.
As a result of comments received from the Planning Commission and its staff,
governmental agencies and the public, the project was modified by the Planning
Commission as explained above in Paragraph "r."
U. The Final EIR, incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit "A," includes the Draft
EIR, comments on the Draft EIR, and the following: responses to written comments
on the Draft EIR, responses to public testimony regarding Draft EIR issues raised at
the October 19, November 2, and December 21, 2010 public hearings, and
modifications to the Draft EIR text and mitigation measures. The Draft EIR was
presented to the Planning Commission on October 19, 2010 and the remaining Final
EIR documents were prepared and provided to the Planning Commission at its
February 15, 2011 meeting. On February 4, 2011, a copy of the responses to
comments from the Final EIR was sent to each agency and individual who submitted
timely comments on the Draft EIR. The Planning Commission has considered the
Final EIR prepared for the Vista Canyon project, as well as information provided in
staff reports, presented to the Planning Commission from experts, and presented in
public testimony, including letters submitted to the Planning Commission following
the close of the Draft EIR public comment period up to January 18, 2011, prior to
recommending approval of the Vista Canyon project.
V. The Final EIR, including a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Vista
Canyon project recommended by the Planning Commission, set forth in Resolution
P11-02, have been prepared and circulated in compliance with CEQA.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 9 of 21
w. The Planning Commission has recommended that the City Council adopt a Statement
of Overriding Considerations for those impacts of the Vista Canyon project that
cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels, and has recommended certification
of the Final EIR and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan ("MMRP"), by
Resolution No. P 11-02, adopted on February 15, 2011.
X. At its hearings on the -Vista Canyon project, listed above, the Planning Commission
considered staff and consultant presentations, staff reports, applicant presentations,
information presented to the Commission to assist its understanding of the Vista
Canyon project, the Vista Canyon EIR, and public comments and testimony on the
Vista Canyon project and Final EIR.
y. Based upon the staff and consultant presentations, staff reports, applicant
presentations, and public comments and testimony, the Planning Commission finds
that the Vista Canyon project, as modified, will not adversely affect the health, peace,
comfort, or welfare of persons residing in the area; nor will the Vista Canyon project
be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment, or valuation of property in the
vicinity of the project site; nor will the Vista Canyon project jeopardize, endanger or
otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety, or general welfare since the
project conforms with the zoning ordinance and is compatible with surrounding land
uses. The Vista Canyon project proposes the extension of all utilities and services to
the project site. Currently, all required utilities and services are available at locations
adjacent to the project site.
Z. The location of the documents and other materials that constitute the record of
proceedings upon which the decision of the Planning Commission is based for the
Master Case 07-127 project file is with the Community Development Department; the
record specifically is in the custody of the Director of Community Development.
SECTION 2. FINDINGS FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 07-001A. Based on
the above findings of fact and recitals and the entire record, including, without limitation, the
entire Vista Canyon EIR, oral and written testimony and other evidence received at the public
hearings, reports and other transmittals from City staff to the Planning Commission, and upon
studies and investigations made by the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission
recommends that the City Council find, as follows:
a. Following approval of General Plan Amendment 07-OOIA to the Land Use Element
Land Use Map, the Vista Canyon project is consistent with the General Plan Specific
Plan designation for the project site.
Furthermore, General Plan Amendment 07-001 A is consistent with the City's General
Plan, as documented in the Vista Canyon EIR. Section 4.7 (Land Use) of the Vista
Canyon EIR contains a detailed analysis documenting the project's consistency with the
City's General Plan.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 10 of 21
b. The proposed General Plan Amendment 07-OOIA is in compliance with Section
65358(b) of the Government Code in that the Land Use Element has been amended no
more than four times in the current calendar year.
c. Based upon the testimony and other evidence, if any, received at the public hearing, and
upon studies and investigations made by. the Planning Commission, the Planning
Commission further finds and determines that this proposal is consistent with the City's
General Plan.
SECTION 3. FINDINGS FOR PREZONE 07-001A. Based on the above findings of
fact and recitals and the entire record, including, without limitation, the entire Vista Canyon EIR,
oral and written testimony and other evidence received at the public hearings, reports and other
transmittals from City staff to the Planning Commission, and upon studies and investigations
made by the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council
find, as follows:
a. The Prezoning is required under Section 56375(a)(3) of the Government Code in that
prior to the Local Agency Formation Commission taking an action on an annexation,
annexing land must be prezoned by the annexing city.
b. The proposed Prezone 07-OOIA amending the City of Santa Clarita Zoning Map is
consistent with existing development and/or existing development entitlements for the
subject site.
c. The proposed Prezone 07-OOIA is consistent with the objectives of the Unified
Development Code in that it implements the goals and objectives of the General Plan
and guides the. future growth of the City in that it meets the development policies of the
City of Santa Clarita.
With respect to Annexation 07-002A, the proposed annexation of the Vista Canyon site provides
for the orderly extension of the City of Santa Clarita's jurisdictional boundaries. Additionally,
public services and facilities are available to serve and accommodate the future development
contemplated within this annexation area.
SECTION 4. FINDINGS FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 07-001. As documented in the Vista
Canyon Specific Plan and based on the above findings of fact and recitals and the entire record,
including, without limitation, the entire Vista Canyon EIR, oral and written testimony and other
evidence received at the public hearings, reports and other transmittals from City staff to the
Planning Commission, and upon studies and investigations made by the Planning Commission,
the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council find, as follows:
a. The Vista Canyon Specific Plan would promote and protect the public health, safety
and welfare.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 11 of 21
b. The Vista Canyon Specific Plan would implement the objectives and policies of the
General Plan.
c. The Vista Canyon Specific Plan would safeguard and enhance environmental
amenities, such as oak trees and significant ridgelines, and enhance the quality of
development.
d. The Vista Canyon Specific Plan would -attain the physical, social and economic
advantage resulting from comprehensive and orderly planned use of land resources.
The Vista Canyon Specific Plan would lessen congestion and assure convenience of
access; secure safety from fire, flood and other dangers; provide for adequate light, air,
sunlight and open space; promote and encourage conservation of scarce resources;
facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community; attain a
desirable balance of residential and employment opportunities; and expedite the
provision of adequate and essential public services.
f. The Vista Canyon Specific Plan would facilitate development within the City in
accordance with the General Plan by permitting greater flexibility and, consequently,
more creative and imaginative designs for large-scale development projects than
generally are possible under conventional zoning regulations.
g. The Vista Canyon Specific Plan would promote more economical and efficient use of
the land while providing a harmonious variety of housing choices and commercial and
industrial activities, a high level of urban amenities and preservation of natural and
scenic qualities of open space.
h. The Vista Canyon Specific Plan would provide a process for initiation, review and
regulation of large-scale comprehensively planned communities that affords the
maximum flexibility to the developer within the context of an overall development
program and specific, phased development plans coordinated with the provision of
necessary public services and facilities.
SECTION 5. FINDINGS FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 69164. Based on the above
findings of fact and recitals and the entire record, including, without limitation, the entire Vista
Canyon EfR, oral and written testimony and other evidence received at the public hearings,
reports and other transmittals from City staff to the Planning Commission, and upon studies and
investigations made by the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission recommends that
the City Council find, as follows:
a.
The proposed Vista Canyon project, together with the provisions for its design and
improvements, is consistent with the City of Santa Clarita's General Plan, as amended by
General Plan Amendment 07-001A, and the Santa Clarita Unified Development Code, as
amended by Pre -zone 07-001 A.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 12 of 21
The project proposes to develop 1,091 dwelling units, and up to 950,000 square feet of
commercial and medical office, retail, theater, restaurant, and hotel uses within four PAs.
A residential overlay over the corporate office campus site would allow for a conversion
of up to 250,000 square feet of office floor area to 233 attached residential units. If
implemented, this conversion would permit a maximum of 1,324 residential units and
700,000 square feet of commercial floor area. The project would result in the
construction of a new Metrolink station and bus transfer station. There would also be
approximately 21 acres of parks/recreation facilities, including the Oak Park, Town
Green, Community Garden, River Education/Community Center, private recreation
facilities, and project trails. Up to six private recreational facilities would be constructed
throughout the project. Further, there are approximately 10 acres of proposed public
streets, including the extension of Lost Canyon Road from Fair Oaks Ranch to Vista
Canyon Road and the construction of the Vista Canyon Road Bridge to connect Lost
Canyon Road and Soledad Canyon Road. All of the proposed uses listed above are not
uses known to create public health problems.
The proposed project design has been reviewed by the appropriate City departments and
external agencies, including the Los Angeles County Fire Department, for compliance
with applicable codes and regulations. Conditions of approval and mitigation measures
have been placed on the project to ensure compliance with state and local regulations.
Additionally, the design of the subdivision and types of improvements are not likely to
cause serious health problems.
b. The Vista Canyon project site is physically suitable for the type of development
proposed.
Development within the site will be concentrated within four PAs, three of which are
adjacent to each other. The fourth (PA -4) is separated from the other three by the Santa
Clara River corridor. The project is designed to deliver a premier mixed-use, transit -
oriented neighborhood to the eastern Santa Clarita Valley. The project will create a
unique, environmentally sensitive neighborhood where people can live, work, play and
shop. The project's design includes a new multi -modal transit hub, entailing a Metrolink
station and bus transfer station to facilitate transit use and reduced automobile trips
Additionally, the project creates a one -of -a -kind opportunity for new employment in the
eastern Santa Clarita Valley with premier office, retail and residential uses integrated
within a street system oriented around a "Main Street."
The Vista Canyon project has been designed to preserve the Santa Clara River corridor
with over 50% of the site being dedicated to open space or recreation. Over four miles of
trails would be constructed by the project including significant extensions of the Santa
Clara River Trail.
Residential neighborhoods have been located on the project site in areas that are in close
proximity to regional roadways, transit, recreation and commercial uses.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P 11 -0 1
February 15, 2011
Page 13 of 21
Development within the PAs has also been designed to preserve most of the oak trees on-
site and preserve a river corridor with an average width of 775 feet. Of the 41 oak trees
on-site, nine will be removed, and one of those will be relocated on site.
c. The Vista Canyon project site is physically suitable for the proposed density of
development.
With approval of the General Plan Amendment 07-001 A and Pre -zone 07-001A, the
proposed project is appropriate for the subject property.
The project site consists of approximately 185 acres, directly adjacent to the City of Santa
Clarita. The project site is surrounded by developed land uses, which are primarily
residential and commercial development.. The project site is located between the
Metrolink rail tracks and SR -14. Existing roadways provide access to the project site.
From the west is Lost Canyon Road (a major highway), which presently terminates just
beyond the Metrolink right-of-way. Access from the east also is provided by Lost
Canyon Road, which presently terminates directly west of La Veda Avenue. Access to
the north would be from Soledad Canyon Road (a major highway) via the proposed Vista
Canyon Road.
The project site is characterized by generally flat land on elevated terraces along both
sides of the Santa Clara River. The site includes a reach of the Santa Clara River
between Lost Canyon Road to the west and La Veda Avenue to the east. Surface flows
within this portion of the Santa Clara River are seasonal, generally occurring during the
winter months after periods of heavy rainfall. Additionally, the project site, including
this reach of the River, has been disturbed by various utility easements, illegal dumping
and unauthorized off-road vehicles.
Under the existing County light industrial zoning designation of M-1.5 and taking into
account parking and landscaping requirements, the project site could be developed with
approximately 1.0 million square feet of light industrial uses. The agricultural and
residential zoned portions of the project site could be developed with approximately 170
single-family residential units. Industrial development of the property would not be
compatible with surrounding primarily residential land uses.
Project development would occur primarily in the flat, disturbed, elevated terraces along
the River and will be concentrated around the project's proposed Metrolink and bus
transfer stations. The City's General Plan strongly encourages the development of
transit -oriented, mixed-use projects that reduce vehicle trips and encourage pedestrian
mobility. Additionally, the project would provide a diversity of housing types oriented
around services, transit and employment and recreational uses, while preserving and
enhancing the Santa Clara River corridor.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 14 of 21
d. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish and
wildlife or their habitat.
The potential environmental impacts of the Vista Canyon project are analyzed in detail in
the EIR. The project includes many measures specifically designed to avoid
environmental impacts and to reduce the level of potential biological impacts to less than
significant. In fact, all of the project's biological impacts have been reduced to a less -
than -significant level due to project design and imposition of mitigation measures.
The project tailors its development to the site's physical features to minimize impacts to
the site's significant natural topographic prominent feature (Santa Clara River). Over
50% of the project site would be preserved as open space or recreational uses, including
preservation and enhancement of the Santa Clara River corridor through the project site.
Additionally, the project has been modified by the Planning Commission to include a
north/south animal movement corridor through the project's proposed Oak Park. The
majority of oak trees located on-site would be preserved by the project.
e. The design of the subdivision and types of improvement will not conflict with easements,
acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision.
Adjacent properties can be accessed from the surrounding system of public streets and
roads. The Vista Canyon project site will be served by an internal street system with
primary access from Lost Canyon Road and Soledad Canyon Road (via Vista Canyon
Road). The project would also include over four miles of trails, including significant
extensions of the Santa Clara River Trail on both sides of the River.
SECTION 6. FINDINGS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 07-009. Based on the
above findings of fact and recitals and the entire record, including, without limitation, the entire
Vista Canyon EIR, oral and written testimony and other evidence received at the public hearings,
reports and other transmittals from City staff to the Planning Commission, and upon studies and
investigations made by the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission recommends that
the City Council find, as follows:
a. That the proposed location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the Vista
Canyon project are in accordance with the purpose of the City's Unified Development
Code, the purpose of the zones in which the project site is located, the City's General
Plan, as amended by General Plan Amendment 07-001A, and the development policies
and standards -of the City.
The Vista Canyon Specific Plan includes, residential, commercial, transit, open space and
recreational uses that are consistent with the proposed General Plan land use designations
and pre -zoning for the project site, as amended. Compliance with the Specific Plan zone
and the project's Specific Plan is required as a condition of project approval.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 15 of 21
b. That the location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use will be
compatible with and will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent
uses, residents, buildings, structures, or natural resources, with consideration given to:
i. Harmony in scale, bulk, coverage, and density;
ii. The availability of public facilities, services, and utilities;
Ili. The harmful effect, if any, upon desirable neighborhood character;
iv. The generation of traffic and the capacity and physical character of surrounding
streets;
v. The suitability of the site for the type and intensity of use or development which is
proposed;
vi. The harmful effect, if any, upon environmental quality and natural resources.
The conditional use permit is necessary to permit the import of up to 500,000 cubic yard
of dirt to the project site to implement the Specific Plan.
The Vista Canyon project is in harmony in scale, bulk, coverage and density with
adjacent uses. Development within the site will be concentrated within four Planning
Areas as follows:
• PA -1, located near the westerly project boundary, would include up to 600 multi-
family, attached units. These multi -family units would be located adjacent to
existing. multi -family neighborhoods to the west. Three private recreational
facilities, trails, water quality improvements, surface and structure parking also
would be located in PA -1. The maximum building height in PA -1 is 50 feet
(excluding architectural elements, which can extend up to 60 feet). The project's
water reclamation plant would also be located in PA -1. Building heights would be
compatible with adjacent attached residential neighborhoods to the west.
• PA -2, located in the center of the project, includes up to 220 attached residential
units, 596,000 square feet of office space, 158,000 square feet of retail space and
a 200 -room hotel. Up to four parking structures, the multi -modal transit hub,
Vista Square and the Town Green would be located within PA -2. PA -2 includes a
unique mix of office, retail and residential uses within a street system oriented
around a "Main Street." All residential structures within PA -2 would have a
maximum height of 50 feet (excluding architectural elements, which can extend
up to 60 feet). The vast majority of commercial structures in PA -2 would be
limited to a maximum height of 55 feet (architectural elements could extend up to
66 feet). The office structures located on "C" street would vary in height from 60
feet to 95 feet (not including architectural elements). These office buildings are
located 1,100 feet from the existing Fair Oaks neighborhood and 2,000 feet from
the La Veda Avenue neighborhood.
• PA -3 is located in the southeast portion of the project site and includes up to 271
residential units, which can either single-family or multi -family units. PA -3 also
includes the project's primary private recreational facility and the 10 -acre Oak
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 16 of 21
Park. Building heights in PA -3 would be limited to 35 feet, consistent with
existing residential development to the east. One of the modifications directed by.
the Planning Commission included the elimination of 26 single-familyhomes
adjacent to the La Veda Avenue neighborhood. This modification increased the
size of the Oak Park from seven acres to 10 acres. The residential structures in
PA -3 would be separated from the La Veda Avenue neighborhood by the Oak
Park and would be located approximately 450 feet from the nearest existing
home.
PA -4 would be located in the northeastern portion of the project site adjacent to
SR -14. PA -4 includes commercial- and recreational uses (including the River
Education Center). Maximum building heights in PA -4 would be 35 feet
(excluding architectural elements which could extend up to 42 feet).
Public facilities, services and utilities are available to the Vista Canyon project and the
provision of these facilities, services and utilities will not adversely affect or be
detrimental to adjacent residents, buildings, structures, or natural resources. The project
site is in, a sensible location for development. The project site is located in an area
surrounded by development is adjacent to existing infrastructure, utilities and other urban
services, public transit, and transportation corridors. The site has already been disturbed
and a portion of the site is being presently used for residential and storage uses. The
project includes mitigation measures and recommended conditions of approval that
provide for the coordination of public infrastructure development with development of
the site.
The Vista Canyon project has been designed to preserve the Santa Clara River corridor
and to provide extensive open space and recreational areas. Over 50% of the project site
would be retained as open space or recreational uses including the Santa Clara River
Corridor, Oak Park, Town Green, Community Garden and up to six private recreational
areas.
The Vista Canyon project is compatible with and will not adversely affect or be
materially detrimental to adjacent residents due to the generation of traffic and physical
character of surrounding streets. Vehicular access to and from the Specific Plan site
would be from four existing roadways. Primary access to the site would be from: (a)
Soledad Canyon Road, via the new Vista Canyon Road Bridge, to the north; (b) the
westerly Lost Canyon Road within Fair Oaks Ranch which would be extended into the
project site; (c) Jakes Way, which would be extended easterly from its present terminus
to Lost Canyon Road; and, (d) secondary access via Lost Canyon Road, from its present
terminus near La Veda Avenue would be extended into the site as a residential connector
with extensive Access to the Vista Canyon project The EIR includes all feasible
mitigation to minimize or reduce traffic impacts.
The Vista Canyon site is suitable for the type and intensity proposed and will not
adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent residents or uses. Under the
existing County light industrial zoning designation of M-1.5 and taking into account
Master Case 07-127
Resolution PH -01
February 15, 2011
Page 17 of 21
parking and landscaping requirements, the project site could be developed with
approximately 1.0 million square feet of light industrial uses. The agricultural and
residential zoned portions of the project site could be developed with approximately 170
single-family residential units. Industrial development of the property would not be
compatible with the surrounding land uses, which are predominately residential.
Project development would occur primarily in the flat, elevated terraces along the River
and will be concentrated around the project's proposed Metrolink and bus transfer
stations. The City's General Plan strongly encourages the development of transit -
oriented, mixed-use projects that reduce vehicle trips and encourage pedestrian mobility.
Additionally, the project would provide a diversity of housing types oriented around
services, transit and employment and recreational uses, while preserving and enhancing
the Santa Clara River corridor.
The Vista Canyon project will be compatible with and not adversely affect or be
materially detrimental to adjacent residents, buildings, structures, or natural resources
with consideration given to the harmful effect of the project on the environment and
natural resources. The potential environmental impacts of the Vista Canyon project are
analyzed in the EIR. The project includes many mitigation measures specifically
designed to avoid environmental impacts, or to reduce the level of potential impacts to
less than significant. Of the project's potential impacts, the majority are either less than
significant or have been reduced to a less -than -significant level through imposition of
feasible mitigation measures. Compliance with the conditions of approval and the
mitigation measures contained in the MMRP for the Vista Canyon project ensures that
the project will be compatible with and that it will not be materially detrimental to
adjacent uses, residents, buildings, structures, or natural resources.
c. That the proposed location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use
and the conditions under which it, would be operated or maintained will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
The Vista Canyon project's potential impacts on the public health, safety and general
welfare and on properties or improvements in the vicinity were analyzed in the EIR.
Those impacts were either less than significant or were significant but reduced to a level
below significant through mitigation. The project site will not contain uses that will be
engaged in hazardous activities or that will be permitted to emit substantial amounts of
hazardous contaminants or pollutants. into the air or water. The EIR found that the
proposed location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the project's proposed
uses and the conditions under which they would be operated or maintained would not be
materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
d. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the City's
Unified Development Code, except for an approved variance or adjustment.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 18 of 21
The Vista Canyon project includes a Specific Plan. The Vista Canyon Specific Plan
establishes the development plans, development regulations, design guidelines, and
implementation program necessary to achieve orderly and compatible development of
Vista Canyon. The Specific Plan has been prepared in conjunction with a pre -zone
request to designate the project site as SP. The City of Santa Clarita Municipal Code,
section 17.16.030, establishes provisions for the SP zone and the project is consistent
with those provisions. Therefore, the proposed project, with an approved General Plan
Amendment, Pre -zone, Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Conditional Use Permit, and Oak
Tree Permit is consistent with the objectives of the Unified Development Code, the
General Plan, and development policies of the City of Santa Clarita.
SECTION 7. FINDINGS FOR OAK TREE PERMIT 07-019. Based on the above
findings of fact and recitals and the entire record, including, without limitation, the entire Vista
Canyon EIR, oral and written testimony and other evidence received at the public hearings,
reports and other transmittals from City staff to the Planning Commission, and upon studies and
investigations made by the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission recommends that
the City Council find, as follows:
a. The condition or location of the oak tree(s) requires cutting to maintain or aid its health,
balance or structure.
As described in the oak tree reports and addenda prepared for the proposed project, 41
oak trees exist on project site. Of these oaks, the majority would not be removed. Nine
oaks are proposed for removal and nine would be would be encroached upon. Of the
removals, three would be heritage oaks. Two off-site oak trees would be encroached
upon, one for the extension of a multi-purpose trail along Lost Canyon Road and the
other for "roundabout" intersection improvements at Lost Canyon Road/Sand Canyon
Road.
The proposed removals and encroachments are necessary in order to grade and develop
the project site under the Specific Plan. With regard to pruning and cutting of oak
trees, remaining oak trees which require clearance pruning necessary for oak tree
preservation during construction shall be completed in the presence of the project
arborist and/or by an approved qualified tree trimming contractor with ISA certified
staff. This will ensure that pruning take place as necessary and under the supervision of
a licensed arborist.
b. The condition of the tree(s) with respect to disease, danger of falling, proximity to
existing lots, pedestrian walkways or interference with utility services cannot be
controlled or remedied through reasonable preservation and/or preventative procedures
and practices.
Project grading and implementation requires the removal of nine on-site oak trees to
allow reasonable use of the property. All of the oak trees proposed for removal are
located in PA -2 on a small hill that is being cut as part of project improvements. The
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P 11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 19 of 21
removal of these oaks could not be remedied with any reasonable preservation or
preventative practices.
c. It is necessary to remove, relocate, prune, cut or encroach into the protected zone of an
oak tree to enable reasonable use of the subject property which is otherwise prevented
by the presence of the tree and no reasonable alternative can be accommodated due to
the unique physical development constraints of the property.
The Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance is intended to prevent uncontrolled and
indiscriminate destruction of oak trees. Development on the Vista Canyon project site
has been designed to avoid or minimize removals of and encroachments to the 41
protected oak trees on-site, 21 of which are heritage oaks as defined by the City. The
majority of oaks on-site occur in two locations, the first being the proposed Oak Park
and the second on a small hill located in the middle of the project site. Due to Vista
Canyon's design, 13 of the oak trees, which are located within the proposed Oak Park,
will not be affected by development. The nine oak trees proposed for removal are all
located on the small hill within the middle of the project site. Three of these trees are
heritage oak trees. Due to the trees being located on the side of the hill, relocation of
eight of the nine trees is not feasible. One of the trees is proposed for relocation. The
request would also permit encroachment into the protected zone of nine oak trees on-
site, as well pruning or trimming of seven of these nine trees. Off-site, encroachment
would occur on two oak trees related to project trail and roadway improvements.
Alternatives to avoid these trees would require a substantial modification to the project
design and would result in the loss of the Metrolink station, bus transfer station and a
majority of the project's office and retail uses. Therefore, it is necessary to remove,
prune and encroach into the protected zone of oak trees to enable the reasonable use of
the subject property that is otherwise prevented by the presence of the trees and no
reasonable alternative can be accommodated due to the unique physical development
constraints of the property.
d. The approval of the request will not be contrary to or in conflict with the general
purpose and intent of the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance.
The Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance is intended to prevent uncontrolled and
indiscriminate destruction of oak trees. Development on the Vista Canyon project site
has been designed to avoid or minimize removals of and encroachments to the 41
protected oak trees on-site, 21 of which are heritage oaks as defined by the City. Please
see discussion related to finding a. above.
The approval of the requested Oak Tree Permit would not conflict with the general
purpose and intent of the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance or with the adopted policies
of the General Plan. The proposed oak tree removals are . necessary in order to
construct the necessary project improvements.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 20 of 21
To mitigate for impacts to oak trees as a result of the proposed project, the applicant is
required to mitigate for the entire ISA (International Society. of Arboriculture) dollar
value as required by the EIR. Adherence to the mitigation measures in the EIR ensures
consistency with the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance.
e. No heritage oak tree shall be removed unless one or more of the above findings are
made and the decision maker also finds that the heritage oak tree's continued existence
would prevent any reasonable development of the property and that no reasonable
alternative can be accommodated due to the unique physical constraints of the property.
It shall further be found that the removal of such heritage oak tree will not be
unreasonably detrimental to the community and surrounding area.
As described in the oak tree reports and addenda prepared for the proposed project, 41
oak trees exisron project site, including 21 heritage -sized oak trees. Of these oaks, the
majority would not be removed. The nine oak trees proposed for removal are all
located on the small hill within the middle of the project site. Four of these trees are
heritage oak trees. Alternatives to avoid these trees would require a substantial
modification to the project design and would result in the loss of the Metrolink station,
bus transfer station and a majority of the project's office and retail uses. Therefore, it is
necessary to remove, prune and encroach into the protected zone of oak trees, including
heritage oak trees, to enable the reasonable use of the subject property that is otherwise
prevented by the presence of the trees and no reasonable alternative can be
accommodated due to the unique physical development constraints of the property.
SECTION 8. WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT. Pursuant to California Water Code
Section 10911, the Planning Commission hereby determines and recommends to the City
Council that, based on the above findings of fact and recitals and the entire record, including,
without limitation, the entire Vista Canyon EIR, oral and written testimony and other evidence
received at the public hearings, reports and other transmittals from City staff to the Planning
Commission, and upon studies and investigations made by the Planning Commission , including,
without limitation, the water supply assessment prepared for the project and attachments thereto,
projected water supplies will be sufficient to satisfy the demands of the Vista Canyon project, in
addition to existing and planned future uses.
SECTION 9. The Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council approve
Master Case 07-127; General Plan Amendment 07-001A, Pre -Zone 07-001A, Annexation 07-
002A, Specific Plan 07-001 (Exhibit C), Tentative Tract Map 69164 (Exhibit A), Conditional
Use Permit 07-009, and Oak Tree Permit 07-019 for the development and annexation of Vista
Canyon Project, into the City of Santa Clarita, subject to the Conditions of Approval (Exhibit B).
SECTION 11. The Planning Commission Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this
Resolution and certify this record to be a full, complete, and correct copy of the action taken.
Master Case 07-127
Resolution P11-01
February 15, 2011
Page 21 of 21
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 15h day of February, 2011.
TIM BURKHART, CHAIRPERSON
PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
JEFF W. HOGAN, SECRETARY
PLANNING COMMISSION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
I, Jeff W. Hogan, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Santa Clarita, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of
the City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 15th of February, 2011 by the
following vote of the Planning Commission:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY
JWH:ms
SAMCURREN V2007\07-127 (Vista Canyon)\PlanningCommission\peresoentitlements
EXHIBIT B OF RESOLUTION P11-01
MASTER CASE NO. 07-127
VISTA CANYON
DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL CONDITIONS
GC 1. Unless otherwise apparent from the context, the term "applicant" shall include the
applicant and any other persons, corporation, or other entity making use of this grant.
The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Santa Clarita, its
agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or
its agents, officers, or employees to attach, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this
Project by the City, which action is provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37.
In the event the City becomes aware of any such claim, action, or proceeding, the City
shall promptly notify the applicant, or if the City fails to cooperate fully in the defense,
the applicant shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless
the City. Nothing contained in this Condition prohibits the City from participating in the
defense of any claim, action, or proceeding, if both of the following occur: 1) The City
bears its own attorney's fees and costs; and 2) the City defends the action in good faith.
The applicant shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement unless the settlement
is approved by the applicant.
GC2. The property shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the
approvals granted by the City. Any modifications shall be subject to further review by
the City.
GC3. It is further declared and made a condition of this permit that if any condition hereof is
violated, or if any law, statute, or ordinance is violated, the City may commence
proceedings to revoke this approval.
PLANNING DIVISION
PL1. The approval of Tentative Tract Map 69164, and other accessory entitlements, shall
expire if a Tract Map is not recorded within two (2) years from the date of conditional
approval, unless it is extended in accordance with the terms and provisions of the City of
Santa Clarita's Unified Development Code (UDC).
PL2. The applicant may file for a one-year extension of the approved project during the initial
two-year approval, prior to the date of expiration. If such an extension is requested, it
must be fled no later than 60 days prior to expiration.
PL3. The applicant shall sign and have notarized the attached Acceptance Form. This form
shall be returned to the City's Planning Division.
PL4. The applicant shall be granted approval to construct the proposed project in accordance
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 2 of 35
with the approved Specific Plan. The applicant shall comply with all of the requirements
of the Specific Plan, including the project's Sustainability Plan. All buildings and
parking areas and other site improvements and elements are subject to the approval of a
Development Review and approval of the Director of Community Development to ensure
conformance with the Specific Plan and all relevant development codes unless otherwise
stated in the Specific Plan.
PLS. All mitigation measures identified in the approved Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP) for the project shall be considered conditions of approval and
implemented in conformance with the approved MMR -P.
PL6. Prior to project grading the City shall hire a mitigation monitoring consultant to ensure all
mitigation measures are completed in conformance with the requirements of the EIR.
All costs associated with this mitigation monitoring consultant shall be borne by the
applicant.
PL7. The applicant shall be responsible for notifying the Department of Community
Development, in writing, of any change in ownership, designation of a new engineer, or
change in the status of the developer, within 30 days of said change.
ENGINEERING DIVISION
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
EN 1. At issuance of permits or other grants of approval, the applicant agrees to develop the
property in accordance with City codes and other appropriate ordinances such as the
Building Code, Plumbing Code, Grading Code, Highway Permit Ordinance,
Mechanical Code, Unified Development Code, Undergrounding of Utilities Ordinance,
Sanitary Sewer and Industrial Waste Ordinance, Electrical Code, and Fire Code.
EN2. Prior to issuance of building permits, a Tract Map prepared by or under the direction of a
person licensed to practice land surveying in the State of California shall be filed in the
Office of the County Recorder, in compliance with applicable City of Santa Clarita,
County of Los Angeles, and State of California Codes.
EN3. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall record a reciprocal access easement and
maintenance agreement for all shared driveways and drive isles within the project site, as
directed by the City Engineer.
EN4. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall remove existing structures.
ENS. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall quitclaim or relocate easements running
through proposed structures, as directed by the City Engineer.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 3 of 35
EN6. At map check submittal, the applicant shall provide a preliminary Tract Map guarantee.
A final Tract Map guarantee is required prior to Final Tract Map approval.
ENT Prior to final map approval, the applicant must inform the City if they intend to file
multiple final maps. The boundaries and phasing plan of these maps shall be designed, as
directed by the City Engineer and the Director of Community Development.
EN8. Prior to final map approval, the applicant is tentatively required to grant easements on the
final map (or if located outside the map boundary, the applicant shall grant easements by
means of separate document). The easements shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Engineer.
EN9. Prior to the sale of any proposed lot, the applicant shall establish a Property/Home
Owners' Association (POA/HOA), or similar entity, to ensure the continued maintenance
of all shared/common lots and drainage devices not transferable to the County Flood
Control District.
EN 10. Prior to the sale of any proposed lot, the applicant shall obtain approval from the City
Engineer and the City Attorney for Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for
this development. The applicant shall reimburse the City for the City Attorney's review
and approval fee. The CC&Rs shall include a disclosure to comply with the Geologist's
recommendations in the Geology Report concerning restrictions on watering, irrigation,
and recommend plant types.
ENI 1. This tentative map approval is subject to the applicant's acceptance of the following
conditions for acquisition of easements/right-of-way:
A. The applicant shall secure, at the applicant's expense, sufficient title, or interest in
land to permit construction of any required off-site improvements.
B. If the applicant is unable to acquire sufficient title or interest to permit
construction of the required off-site improvements, the applicant shall notify the
City of this inability not less than six months prior to approval of the Tract/Parcel
Map. In such case, the City may thereafter acquire sufficient interest in the land,
which will permit construction of the off-site improvements by the applicant.
C. The applicant. shall pay all of the City's costs of acquiring said off-site property
interests pursuant to Government Code Section 66462.5. Applicant shall pay such
costs irrespective of whether the Tract/Parcel Map is recorded or whether a
reversion occurs. The cost of acquisition may include, but is not limited to,
acquisition prices, damages, engineering services, expert fees, title examination,
appraisal costs, acquisition services, relocation assistance services and payments,
legal services and fees, mapping services, document preparation, expenses, and/or
EXHIBIT B of Resolution I1-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 4 of 35
damages as provided under Code of Civil Procedures Sections 1268.510-.620 and
overhead.
D. The applicant agrees that the City will have satisfied the 120 -day limitation of
Government Code Section 66462.5 and the foregoing conditions relating thereto
when it files its eminent domain action in superior court within said time.
E. At the time the applicant notifies the City as provided in "B" hereinabove, the
applicant shall simultaneously submit to the City in a form acceptable to the City
all appropriate appraisals, engineering specifications, legal land descriptions,
plans, pleadings, and other documents deemed necessary by the City to
commence its acquisition proceedings. Said documents must be submitted to the
City for preliminary review and comment at least 30 days prior to the applicant's
notice described hereinabove at "B"
F. The applicant agrees to deposit with the City, within five days of request by the
City, such sums of money as the City estimates to be required for the costs of
acquisition. The City may require additional deposits from time -to -time.
G. The applicant shall not sell any lot/parcel/unit shown on the Tract/Parcel Map
until the City has acquired said sufficient land interest.
H. If the superior court thereafter_ rules in a final judgment that the City may not
acquire said sufficient land interest, the applicant agrees that the City may initiate
proceedings for reversion to acreage.
I. The applicant shall execute any agreements mutually agreeable prior to approval
of the Tract/Parcel Map as may be necessary to assure compliance with the
foregoing conditions.
Failure by the applicant to notify the City as required by `B" hereinabove, or
simultaneously submit the required and approved documents specified in
"E" hereinabove, or make the deposits specified in "F" hereinabove, shall
constitute applicant's waiver of the requirements otherwise imposed upon the City
to acquire necessary interests in land pursuant to Section 66462.5. In such event,
subdivider shall meet all conditions for installing or constructing off-site
improvements notwithstanding Section 66462.5.
EN12. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall provide a Will Serve Letter stating that
Community Antenna Television service (CATV) will be provided to this project.
EN13. Prior to building final, the applicant is required to install distribution lines and individual
service lines for Community Antenna Television service (CATV) for all new
development.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 5 of 35
EN14. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall dedicate to the City the right to prohibit
the erection of building(s) and other structures within open space/common lots.
GRADING, DRAINAGE & GEOLOGY REQUIREMENTS
EN15. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall submit a grading plan consistent
with the approved tentative map, oak tree report and conditions of approval. The grading
plan shall be based on a detailed engineering geotechnical report specifically approved by
the geologist and/or soils engineer that addresses all submitted recommendations.
EN16. The project includes an import of up to 500,000 CY of dirt.
A. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for this project, the applicant shall submit a
copy of the grading permit for the export site and an exhibit of the proposed haul
route. The applicant is responsible to obtain approval from all applicable agencies
for the dirt hauling operation.
B. The applicant shall comply with the following requirements for the dirt hauling
operation:
Obtain an encroachment permit for the work.
2. The hours of operation shall be between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm.
Provide non-stop street sweeping service on all City streets along the haul
route during all hours of work to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Provide traffic control and flagging personnel along the haul route to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. .
C. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall pay a Haul Route
Pavement Repair Security Cash Deposit (Deposit) of $100,000, which may be
increased or decreased based upon an estimated cost to complete the repairs of
streets damaged during the dirt hauling operation. The limits and scope of the
repairs shall be determined by the City Engineer. In order to receive a refund of
the Deposit, the applicant or subsequent property owners shall complete the
pavement repairs to the satisfaction of the City Engineer within one year from the
completion of the dirt hauling operation. If the pavement repairs are not
completed within one year, the City may use the Deposit to complete the repairs.
Any funds remaining at the completion of the repairs will be refunded to the
applicant. If the Deposit is insufficient to complete the repairs, the City shall seek
additional funds from the applicant.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 6 of 35
D. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall repair any pavement
damaged by the dirt hauling operation to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The
limits of the road repairs shall be consistent with the approved haul route.
EN 17. Prior to storm drain plan approval, the applicant shall obtain written approval from the
Los Angeles County Flood Control District of all easements needed for future
maintenance by the District.
EN 18. Prior to grading permit, the applicant shall obtain approval of a drainage concept .study
for the proposed public storm drain system from the Los Angeles County Department of
Public Works, Land Development Division.
EN 19. Prior to issuance of grading permits affecting MTA right-of-way, the applicant shall
submit written approval from Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) for the
proposed construction and the proposed drainage facilities within MTA right -of- way.
EN20. Prior to issuance of grading permits affecting Caltrans right-of-way, the applicant shall
submit written approval from Caltrans for the proposed construction within Caltrans
right -of- way.
EN21. Maintenance responsibilities for all slopes, retaining walls, drainage devices, and SUSMP
devices/systems not transferable to the County Flood Control District shall be the
responsibility of the POA/HOA.
EN22. Prior to grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a notarized Letter of Permission for
grading over all easements.
EN23. Prior to grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a notarized Letter of Permission for
grading outside of the property lines/tract boundary from the adjacent property owner(s).
EN24. Prior to grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a notarized Acceptance of Drainage
Form from adjacent property owners if drainage is being diverted to an adjacent property.
EN25. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall record in the Office of the County
Recorder slope easements from adjacent property owners, as directed by the City
Engineer.
EN26. Prior to issuance of grading permits in jurisdictional areas, the applicant shall acquire
permits from the Army Corps of Engineers, .California Department of Fish and Game,
and the Regional Water Control Board for any work within any natural drainage course.
A copy of the permits, or a response letter from each agency indicating a permit is not
required, shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of grading permits.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 7 of 35
EN27. Prior to the City's release of any bond monies posted for the construction of storm drain
infrastructure, the applicant or subsequent property owners shall be responsible for
providing all required materials and documentation to complete the storm drain transfer
process from the City of Santa Clarita to the Los Angeles County Flood Control District.
The applicant or subsequent property owners shall also be responsible for providing
regularly scheduled maintenance of the storm drain infrastructure, as directed by the
City Engineer, until such time that full maintenance is assumed by the Flood Control
District.
EN28. Prior to recordation of the Tract Map, the applicant shall form an assessment district to
finance the future ongoing maintenance and capital replacement of SUSMP
devices/systems identified on the project's approved storm drain plan. The applicant shall
cooperate fully with the City in the formation of the assessment district, including,
without limitation, the preparation of the operation, maintenance, and capital replacement
plan for the SUSMP devices/systems and the prompt submittal of this information to City
for review and approval. The applicant shall pay for all costs associated with the
formation of the assessment district. SUSMP devices/systems shall include but are not
limited to catch basin inserts, debris excluders, biotreatment basins, vortex separation
type systems, and other devices/systems for stormwater quality. The applicant shall be
responsible for the maintenance of all SUSMP devices/systems until the district has been
established.
EN29.. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall place a note on the map, prohibiting the
lot owners within this development from interfering with the established drainage and
from erecting concrete block walls or similar solid constructions, except as approved by
the City Engineer.
EN30. This project is a development planning priority project under the City's NPDES
Municipal Stormwater Permit as a development with 10 or more dwelling units, a
commercial development greater than one acre in size and a parking lot 5,000 square feet
or more or with 25 or more parking spaces. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the
applicant shall have approved by the City Engineer, an Urban Stormwater Mitigation
Plan (USMP) that incorporates appropriate post construction best management practices
(BMPs), maximizes pervious surfaces, and includes infiltration into the design of the
project. Refer to the Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) guide for
details.
EN31. This project will disturb one acre or more of land. Therefore, the applicant must obtain
coverage under a statewide General Construction Activities Stormwater Permit (General
Permit). In accordance with the General Permit, the applicant shall file with the State a
Notice of Intent (NOI) for the proposed project. Prior to issuance of grading permit by the
City, the applicant shall have approved by the City Engineer a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a copy of the NOI and shall
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 8 of 35
reference the corresponding Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) number issued by
the State upon receipt of the NOI.
FLOOD PLAIN/HAZARD AREA REQUIREMENTS
EN32. The project is located in FEMA Flood Zone (A) in accordance with the Federal Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs).
A. Prior to grading plan approval, the applicant shall have approved by the City
Engineer and Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, a floodplain
analysis for FEMA flood zone(s) on the property. The floodplain analysis shall
analyze the 100 -year storm event and the proposed improvements shall contain
the more critical storm event. The study shall analyze upstream and downstream
of the proposed project to a point where the post=development flows and
velocities equal the pre -development flows and velocities. The design of the bank
protection and/or levee shall meet the design requirements of CFR Title 44
Chapter 65. 10, as applicable.
B. The applicant is required to comply with FEMA requirements to revise the Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRMs). Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant
shall complete a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR). Prior to building
final, the applicant shall complete a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR).
STREET IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS
EN33. All streets shall be designed and built in accordance with the Specific Plan and City street
design criteria; construction shall be completed prior to building final.
EN34. Mitchell Hill Road shall be shown on the final tract map as a private street.
EN35. Prior to any construction (including, but not limited to, drive approaches, sidewalks, curb
and gutter, etc.), trenching or grading within public or private street right-of-way, the
applicant shall submit a street improvement plan consistent with the approved Specific
Plan and the conditions of approval and obtain encroachment permits from the
Engineering Division.
EN36. Prior to building final, all new and existing power lines and overhead cables less than 34
KV within or fronting the project site shall be installed underground.
EN37. Prior to street plan approval, the applicant shall submit a" street tree location plan to the
City's Urban Forestry Division for review and approval. The location of the street trees
shall not conflict with sewer or storm drain infrastructure. The plan shall include
proposed sewer lateral locations and storm drain infrastructure for reference.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution l l -01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 9 of 35
EN38. Prior to the Tract Map being filed with the County Recorder, the applicant shall not grant
or record easements within areas proposed to be granted, dedicated, or offered for
dedication for public streets or highways, access rights, building restriction rights, or
other easements; unless subordinated to the proposed grant or dedication. If easements
are granted after the date of tentative map approval, subordination must be executed by
the easement holder prior to the filing of the Tract Map.
EN39. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall dedicate sidewalk easements sufficient to
encompass ADA requirements for sidewalks installed with drive approaches in
accordance with the current City standard APWA 110-1, Type C, or equivalent.
EN40. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall construct street pavement in
accordance with one of the following options:
A. The applicant shall construct the full pavement section including the final lift of
asphalt to finish grade in conformance with the design TI. Prior to building final;
the applicant shall refurbish the pavement to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
B. The applicant shall construct a pavement section that is a minimum of 1'/2" lower
than finish grade, in conformance with the design TI. Prior to building final, the
applicant shall refurbish the pavement, and complete the final lift of asphalt to
meet finish grade to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
EN41. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall acquire and dedicate to the City the right-
of-way required for all street improvements as identified in the Traffic Study, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
EN42. Prior to building final, the applicant shall construct full street improvements as shown in
the Specific Plan within the affected portion of the project site, as well as the required
offsite street improvements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
EN43. Prior to issuance of the 300th building permit or equivalent trip generation, the applicant
shall submit a bridge design plans for the Vista Canyon Bridge to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer. The bridge plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.
EN44. The Vista Canyon Road Bridge shall be constructed and operational by the 680th
occupancy or equivalent trip generation in the project to the. satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
EN45. Prior to building final, the applicant shall construct the final lift of asphalt on all public
streets using asphalt rubber hot mix (ARHM) in accordance with section 302-9 of the
latest edition of the Standards and Specifications for Public Works Construction and City
Standards. The design of the ARHM shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Engineer.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 10 of 35
EN46. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall pay fees for signing and striping of
streets as determined by the City Engineer or shall prepare signing and striping plans for
all multi -lane highways/roadways within or abutting the project, as directed by the
City Engineer.
EN47. Prior to building final, the applicant shall install mailboxes and posts in accordance with
the City's standards, and secure approval of the U.S. Postal Service prior to installation.
EN48. Prior to building final, the applicant shall construct wheelchair ramps at intersections, as
directed by the City Engineer.
EN49. Prior to building final, the applicant shall repair any broken or damaged curb, gutter and
sidewalk, and refurbish the half section of pavement on streets within or abutting the
project, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
SEWER IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS
EN50. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall dedicate all necessary sewer easements.
The sewer plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Los Angeles County Department
of Public Works (Sewer Maintenance Division), Los Angeles County Sanitation District,
and the City Engineer.
EN51. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall construct main -line sewers with
separate laterals to serve each lot/parcel.
EN52. The main -line sewers located in the public/private streets shall be a publicly maintained.
All other sewer lines shall be privately maintained.
EN53. Prior to recordation of the Tract Map, the applicant shall form an assessment district to
finance the future ongoing operation, maintenance and capital replacement of the
proposed sewer treatment facility and the percolation ponds. The applicant shall
cooperate fully with the City in the formation of the assessment district, including,
without limitation, the preparation of the operation, maintenance, and capital replacement
plan for the proposed sewer treatment facility and the percolation ponds and the prompt
submittal of this information to City for review and approval. The applicant shall pay for
all costs associated with the formation of the assessment district. Timing of the turnover
of the water reclamation plant to the City and potential reimbursement costs from District
funds to the applicant will be subject to the review and approval of the Director of Public
Works.
EN54. The applicant shall secure permits from the California Department of Health and the
Regional Water Quality Control Board (Los Angeles Region) for the operation of the
project's water reclamation plant and use of recycled water within the project site.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 11 of 35
EN55. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall dedicate all necessary easements for the
sewer treatment facility and percolation ponds. The sewer treatment plans and reports
shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.
EN56. Prior to the first building occupancy, the applicant shall construct the sewer treatment
facility and the percolation ponds
EN57. Prior to final map recordation the applicant shall enter into an agreement with Newhall
County Water District ("NCWD") to establish easements and/or convey fee property to
NCWD (at no cost to NCWD) within Planning Area 4 of the project to facilitate future
sewer related improvements. The agreement shall be to the satisfaction of the City's
Director of Public Works.
EN58. The project proposes to connect to the existing Newhall County Water District sewer in
Soledad Canyon Road. The applicant shall secure approval from Newhall County Water
District for this connection.
EN59. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall send a print of the land division map to
the County Sanitation District with the request for annexation in writing.
EN60. Prior to sewer plan approval, the applicant shall provide a sewer area study in accordance
with City policies for review and approval by the City Engineer. .
EN61. Prior to first building final, the applicant shall construct all sewer upgrades in accordance
with the approved sewer area study, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
BONDS, FEES AND MISCELLANEOUS REQUIREMENTS
EN62. Prior to issuance of encroachment permits for public improvements (Street, Sewer, Storm
Drain, Water), the applicant, by agreement with the City Engineer, shall guarantee
installation of the improvements through faithful performance bonds, letters of credit or
any other acceptable means. Building final shall be withheld if the improvements are not
completed.
EN63. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall amend the Eastside B&T District to
include Lost Canyon Road and the Vista Canyon Road Bridge.
EN64. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall pay the applicable Bridge and
Thoroughfare (B&T) District Fee to implement the Circulation Element of the General
Plan as a means of mitigating the traffic impact of this project.
This project is located in the Eastside B&T District. The current rate for this District is
$16,850. The B&T rate is subject to change and is based on the rate at the time of
payment.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 12 of 35
Standard B&T Fee Calculation:
Commercial = the gross acres x the district rate ($17,190) x 5.0 = $ until June 30, 2011.
Single Family = the number of units x the district rate ($17,190) _ $ until June 30, 2011.
Townhouse = the number of units x the district rate ($17,190) x 0.8 = $ until June 30,
2011.
EN65. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall pay street maintenance fees to cover the
cost of one-time slurry seal of public streets within the development.
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION
TE 1. Adequate sight visibility is required at all intersections (street -street intersections or
driveway -street intersections) and shall follow the latest Caltrans manual for applicable
requirements. Adequate sight visibility (including corner sight visibility) shall be
demonstrated on the final map and grading plan. All necessary easements for this purpose
shall be recorded with the final map. This shall be shown on all applicable plans prior to
issuance of first building permit.
TE2. All private driveways and roadways shall intersect with a public street at 90 degrees or as
close to 90 degrees as topography permits (no less than 80 degrees). This shall be shown
on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit.
TE3. All driveways shall have a minimum stacking distance of -
0
£
• 20 feet from face of curb off of residential local collectors.
40 feet from face of curb off of secondary or major highways.
100 feet from face of curb off of secondary or major highways with a potential traffic signal.
TE4. No access will be permitted within curb return. This shall be included as a note on all
applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit.
TES. Minimum width of all interior driveways and drive aisles shall be a minimum of 26 feet
and shall be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit.
TE6. Prior to issuance of the first building occupancy permit, the applicant shall obtain
approval from the L.A. County Fire Department for any private driveway sections.
TET Prior to issuance of the first building occupancy permit, the applicant shall post "No
Parking— Fire Lane" signs along all driveways with a curb -to -curb width of less than 34
feet. This shall be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 13 of 35
TE8. The location, width and depth of all project driveways shall conform to the approved site
plan. This shall be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building
permit. No additional driveways shall be permitted.
TE9. Any dead-end drive aisles shall have a hammerhead or turn -around area to facilitate
vehicular movements. This shall be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of
first building permit.
TE10. The site shall be designed to adequately accommodate all vehicles (e.g. automobiles,
vans, trucks) that can be expected to access the site. This includes, but is not limited to,
adequate maneuvering areas around loading zones and parking spaces, and appropriate
turning radii.
TEI1. No single family or detached condominium residential driveways shall be permitted
along residential collector streets, residential roadways with greater than 60 -foot right-of-
way, or along residential roadways projected to carry over 2,000 vehicles per day (per
UDC Section 16.07.020). Such a restriction is subject to the discretion of the City
Engineer.
TE12. Any gates on private residential streets shall be designed and located to provide adequate
stacking and turn -around areas. Prior to issuance of the first residential building
occupancy permits, the design for all residential gates shall be submitted to the City
Engineer prior to approval and subject to Los Angeles County Fire Department approval.
The necessary right-of-way shall be dedicated prior to map recordation. All residential
gates on private streets.shall be shown on all applicable plans prior to approval.
TE13. The project applicant shall implement the mitigation measures identified in the Traffic
Section of the Final EIR.
TE 14. Prior to issuance of the first building occupancy permit, the applicant shall pay a traffic -
signal timing fee for the update of the traffic -signal timing at up to 20 intersections in the
surrounding area. The cost is $4,000 per intersection ($80,000 total). This fee shall be
used to improve traffic flow and minimize traffic congestion along the corridors impacted
by project -related traffic, through traffic signal retiming and related infrastructure
improvements.
TE15. The Vista Canyon Ranch EIR concludes that the Vista Canyon Ranch project will have a
significant unavoidable cumulative impact on a segment of Soledad Canyon Road
(between Sierra Highway and Soledad Canyon Road). This roadway segment is
constrained by right-of-way limitations and presently cannot be widened. In lieu of
mitigating impacts on this segment, the applicant has agreed to prepare a corridor study
for Soledad Canyon Road. The corridor study shall include, but not be limited to, an
analysis of the following potential improvements along Soledad Canyon Road, between
Golden Valley Road and Sierra Highway: 1) traffic signal operations (adaptive signal
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 14 of 35
systems, ATSAC-type systems); 2) public transit operation (bus turnouts, bus stop
locations); 3) striping improvements to enhance capacity; 4) access management -
median modifications (potential closures or turn restrictions); 5) alternative modes of
transportation (identify gaps in the corridor that impede non -motorized travel); 6)
incorporate/promote Non -Motorized Plan.
TE16. Prior to issuance of the first commercial building occupancy permit, the applicant shall
provide a travel demand management (TDM) plan for approval by the Director of Public
Works and the Director of Community Development. Programs in the TDM plan shall
include, but not be limited to, carpooling, vanpooling, public and/or private transit,
alternative work hours, walk/bike to work and telecommuting. The TDM plan shall
contain trip reduction goals and programs/incentives in an effort to meet those goals.
Specific measures may include bicycle racks and bicycle lockers at key locations within
the project, showers and change facilities within non-residential buildings, direct and
convenient pedestrian connections to public streets and transit stops, and conveniently -
located information kiosks providing current transit information (e.g. transit maps,
schedules, etc.). In addition, the applicant shall include applicable global change
strategies as indicated in the March 2006 Climate Action Team Report to Governor
Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Legislature from Cal EPA within the TDM plan. The
applicant shall submit an annual report on the TDM program to the City.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION
BSI. At the time of application for a building permit, the applicant shall submit to the Building
and Safety Division the following construction documents for plan review:
A. Two sets of plans that include architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical and
plumbing plans.
B. Two sets of truss drawings & calcs, if used.
C. One set structural calculations, energy calculations and a copy of the soil report.
BS2. All buildings and structures shall comply with the detailed requirements of the 2007
California Building (CBC), Mechanical (CMC), Electrical (CEC) and Plumbing (CPC),
2008 Energy Codes, and the 2008 City of Santa Clarita amendments to the California
codes. A copy of the City amendments (including structural amendments) are available
at the Building and, Safety public counter and on the city website at wwwT.saiit
clarsta.com.
BS3. All new buildings will require a soils and geology investigation report. The report shall
be formally submitted to the Development Services Division (Engineering) for review
and approval. Include one copy of the report to building and safety when the plans are
submitted for review.
BS4. Prior to issuance of building permits the following shall be completed regarding grading:
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 15 of 35
A. Obtain a grading permit and perform rough grading and/or recompaction.
B. A final compaction report and a Pad Certification shall be submitted to and
approved by the Development Services Division (Engineering).
BSS. The project shall fully comply with the disabled access requirements as specified for
Housing Accessibility per chapter 11A and for public accommodations in Chapter 11B of
the California Building Code. The Federal ADA requirements are not reviewed by
California jurisdictions. However, ADA compliance is the responsibility of the owner,
architect and contractor.
BS6. The applicant shall show the disable access requirements including site accessibility
information and details on the architectural plans (vs. the civil plans) which will be
reviewed by the Building and Safety division. Civil plans used for grading purposes are
not reviewed or approved for site accessibility requirements.
BST Residential accessibility requirements shall apply to apartment buildings containing 3 or
more dwelling units and condominium buildings containing 4 or more condos. All
ground floor single -story units and all units within an elevator building shall comply with
chapter 11A of the California Building Code. All common use areas, such as recreation
areas, pools, walkways, etc shall be made accessible for the disabled with a path of travel
to the public way and at least one disabled accessible parking space.
BSB. Accessibility requirements now apply to multi -story dwelling units, such as townhomes
(formally exempt). At least 10% of such multi -story units on a single parcel or site shall
be accessible which includes an accessible path to the primary level entrance, all ground
floor requirements, and at least one accessible bathroom on the primary entry level. All
public and common use areas such as recreation areas, pools, walkways, etc shall be
made accessible for the disabled with a path of travel to the public way and at least one
disabled accessible parking space.
BS9. Prior to submitting plans to Building and Safety, please contact Deanna Hamrick, (661)
255-4935, for project addressing.
BS10. For an estimate of the building permit fees and the backlog time for plan review, please
contact the Building and Safety division directly.
BS 11. Prior to issuance of building permits, additional clearances from agencies will be required
from:
A. William S. Hart School District and appropriate elementary school district,
B. Castaic Lake Water Agency,
C. L. A. County Fire Prevention Bureau,
D. L. A. County Sanitation District,
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon '
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 16 of 35
E. L. A. County Environmental Services (Health Dept. for restaurants),
F. L. A. County Environmental Programs (Industrial Waste),
G. State of California Division of Oil and Gas.
An agency referral list is available at the Building and Safety public counter.
BS12. The site plan submitted to building and safety shall.show all lot lines, any easements,
restricted use areas, flood hazard areas, etc. Any construction proposed in an easement
shall obtain the easement holders written permission.
BS13. The submitted plans to building and safety shall have a Building Code Analysis
containing the following minimum information: types of construction, occupancy groups,
occupant loads, a floor area justification (including any area increases from frontage
and/or fire sprinklers), 'height of building, number of stories, summary of the fire rated
walls, occupancy separations (or non -separated uses), identify any accessory occupancies
and incidental uses, and all other related data.
BS14. The footings for all new buildings and other structures, including retaining walls and
fences, shall be setback from any adjacent ascending or descending slopes. See section
1805.3 CBC and/or the Slope Setback handout.
BS 15. The California Plumbing Code (CPC) shall be used to determine the minimum number of
plumbing fixtures. Horizontal drainage piping shall have a minimum slope of '/4" per
foot, or 2%, to the point of disposal. (CPC sec 708.0) Slopes shallower than 2% will not
be approved by the Building Official.
BS16. The project is located within the city's Fire Zone and shall comply with the City's Fire
Hazard Zone requirements. See the city's website at tiwwNN-.s�itil:a-clarita.coiii.
BS17. For all non-residential buildings, please provide a means of egress plan indicating the
occupant load of all rooms and the means of egress system.
BS18. For any Medical Office Building or future medical tenants that will be a licensed medical
clinic shall comply with OSHPD 3 requirements and must be identified as such at the
time of plan submittal of those buildings or tenant improvement plans.
BS19. For any Medical Office Building or future medical tenants that will be providing
outpatient services or services to the mobility impaired, additional accessible parking
spaces shall be required per Section 112913.2 of CBC.
BS20. Each separate detached structure, such as trash enclosures, fences, retaining walls, shade
structures require separate applications and building permits. These other structures need
not be on separate plans, but may be part of the same plans for the main project.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution I 1 -0 1
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 17 of 35
BS21. Each tenant space in a multiple tenant building will be required to obtain a separate
certificate of occupancy from the Building and Safety Division prior to occupancy.
BS22. The Building and Safety Division has begun scanning plans for permanent storage.
Please incorporate the following information into the plans on the full size sheets:
A. The Plan Check Number, Sheet Title, and the Sheet Number of the Total Number
of Sheets shall be located in the lower right hand corner of each sheet of the plans.
B. A copy of the Planning Conditions.
C. The Recommendation Section of the Soils/Geology Report.
D. ICC, ICBO, UL and other outside testing agency reports when those reports
contain information required by the contractor for construction or installation of
items or materials that are not otherwise shown or detailed on the plans.
E. The Truss drawing layout. (if used)
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
ES 1. Based on the square footage of the proposed buildings on the submitted plans, the
applicant shall provide sufficient trash enclosures for the following planning areas:
PA -1
Buildings -1, 2A, 2B, and 3
• For Multi -Family Developments, the City Standard is one three -yard recycling bin
and one three -yard trash bin for the first 10 units with one three -yard recycling bin
and one three -yard trash bin for each 10 units thereafter. Always round up to an even
# of bins. Bins should be arranged in solid waste enclosures large enough to house
either two or four bins. Half of the bins in each enclosure should be reserved for
recycling.
An underground parking structure is an inappropriate location for the bins unless it
provides a minimum of 20 feet overhead clearance.
PA -2
Mixed Use Buildings- 5A, 6A, 6B
• These buildings must have separate trash enclosures for commercial and residential
use. Having separate enclosures will allow the City's Commercial and Residential
Franchised haulers to provide the appropriate services to their customers. Every
effort shall be made to plan for adequate space to accommodate the franchised
haulers.
The trash enclosures for the commercial portion of this Mixed -Use Project must have
two 3 -yard bins for the first 10,000 sq.ft. and 1 for each additional 20,000. Always
round up to an even # of bins.
Projects shall be designed in such a manner so that trash vehicles will not need to
back-up as part of the normal trash collection process.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution I 1 -0 1
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 18 of 35
• The trash enclosures for the residential portion of this project must meet the City
Standard of housing one 3 yard recycling bin and one 3 yard trash bin for each 10
units. Bins should be arranged in solid waste enclosures large enough to house the
bins. Half of the bins in each enclosure should be reserved for recycling.
• The Residential and Commercial trash enclosures should be shown on the site plan
with dimensions, consistent with the surrounding architecture and shall be
constructed with a solid roof. Remember to incorporate the size of the bins you
choose to use when designing enclosures. The enclosures shall be located to provide
convenient pedestrian and collection vehicle access.
• An underground parking structure is an inappropriate location for the bins unless it
provides a minimum of 20 feet overhead clearance.
Commercial Buildings- 513, 6C, 8, 9A, 913, 10A, 11A, 1113, 12A, 12B, 13A, 13B, 14
• For Commercial and Industrial Developments, the City standard is to have a
minimum of two three -yard bins for the first 10,000 square feet and one bin for each
additional 20,000 square feet. Always round up to an even # of bins.
• The enclosures to house the bins should be shown on the site plan with dimensions,
consistent with the surrounding architecture and shall be constructed with a solid
roof. The enclosures shall be located to provide convenient pedestrian and collection
vehicle access.
• An underground parking structure is an inappropriate location for the bins unless it
provides a minimum of 20 feet overhead clearance.
Multi -Family Buildings- Bldg 4, Bldg 7,
• For Multi -Family Developments the appropriate level. of collection services will be
determined by the number of number of units. The City Standard is one three -yard
recycling bin and one three -yard trash bin for the first 10 units with one three -yard
recycling bin and one three -yard trash bin for each 10 units thereafter. Always round
up to an even # of bins. Bins should be arranged in solid waste enclosures large
enough to house either two or four bins. Half of the bins in each enclosure should be
reserved for recycling.
• An underground parking structure is an inappropriate location for the bins unless it
provides a minimum of 20 feet overhead clearance.
PA -3A
• All single family residential dwellings shall be designed with space provided for three
90 -gallon trash bins.
PA -313
• All single family residential dwellings shall be designed with space provided for three
90 -gallon trash bins.
PA -3C
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 19 of 35
• All single family residential dwellings shall be designed with space provided for three
90 -gallon trash bins.
PA -3D
• All single family residential dwellings shall be designed with space provided for three
907gallon trash bins.
o Projects shall be designed in such a manner so that- trash vehicles will not need to
back-up as part of the normal trash collection process. This issue needs to be
addresses at the end of the street in Lot 119.
PA -4
• Building 1 (River Education Center) - Provide sufficient trash enclosures to house at
least 2 three yard bins. One of the bins should be reserved for recyclable materials
only.
• Building 2 (2 -story commercial) - Provide sufficient trash enclosure to house at least
4 three yard bins. Two of the bins should be reserved for recyclable materials only.
• Building 3 (2 -story commercial) - Provide sufficient trash enclosure to house at least
4 three yard bins. Two of the bins should be reserved for recyclable materials only.
• Building 4 (2 -story commercial) - Provide sufficient trash enclosure to house at least
2 three yard bins. One of the bins should be reserved for recyclable materials only.
• Building 5 (2 -story commercial) - Provide sufficient trash enclosure to house at least
4 three yard bins. Two of the bins should be reserved for recyclable materials only.
• The enclosures should be shown on the site plan with dimensions, consistent with the
surrounding architecture, and shall be constructed with a solid roof. The enclosures
shall be located to provide convenient pedestrian and collection vehicle access.
ES2. All new construction projects valuated greater than $500,000.00 must comply with the
City's Construction and Demolition Materials (C&D) Recycling Ordinance.
ES3. If the project is valuated above $500,000.00 the applicant shall:
• Divert a minimum of 50 percent of the entire project's inert (dirt, rock, bricks, etc.)
waste and 50 percent of the remaining C&D materials.
• Have a Construction and Demolition Materials Management Plan (C&DMMP)
approved by the Environmental Services Division prior to obtaining permits.
• Submit a deposit of three percent of the estimated total project cost or $50,000.00,
whichever is less. The deposit will be returned to the applicant upon proving that 50
percent of the inert and remaining C&D waste was diverted.
ES4. All projects within the City that are not self -hauling their waste materials must use one of
the City's franchised haulers for temporary and roll -off bin collection services. Please
contact Environmental Services staff for a complete list of franchised haulers in the City.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 20 of 35
SPECIAL DISTRICTS/ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
SD 1. The applicant shall annex the property into the City's Streetlight Maintenance District
(SMD) for the operations and maintenance of streetlight and traffic signals. A minimum
of 120 days is required to process the annexation, with must be completed prior to final
map approval or build permit issuance, whichever occurs first. Should efficient street
lighting technologies like convection or LED be in use by Southern California Edison,
the applicant agrees to install such reduced energy lighting technology.
SD2. The applicant shall annex into the City wide Open Space Preservation District at the time
of annexation..
SD3. Should the City become responsible for channels, devices or drainage areas which have
the purpose of dealing with ground, nuisance or storm water, the applicant shall form a
Drainage Benefit Assessment District (DBAA) for the maintenance of repair of channels,
devices or drainage areas.
SD4. All landscape required under these conditions and within the public rights of way or
where a landscape easement exists shall be maintained by the Landscape Maintenance
District (LMD). The applicant shall form a new City LMD zone to be for the
maintenance and repair of the landscape.
SDS. Areas to be landscaped include: medians, parkways, side panels, open areas and
roundabouts. Features within these areas could include but not be limited to:
landscaping, planting, shrubbery, trees, grass, other ornamental vegetation, irrigation
systems, hardscapes, and fixtures; statuary, fountains and other ornamental structures and
facilities: public lighting facilities; facilities which are appurtenant to any of the
foregoing or which are necessary or convenient for the maintenance or serving thereof,
including, gutters, wall sidewalks, or paving or water irrigation, drainage, or electrical
facilities; and park or recreation improvement, including but not limited to playground
equipment, play courts, public restroom and paseos/trails.
SD6. The applicant shall submit landscaping 80% plans for areas to be maintained by LMD to
the Special Districts Office for approval for the entire project prior to issuance of grading
plans.
SD7. Should the project's development be phased, the applicant shall submit completed
landscaping plans to the Special Districts Office for the phase under development before
the building permit is issued for that phase. If a phased development approach is not
pursued, the developer shall submit completed landscaping plans to the Special Districts
Office for the entire development before the first building permit is issued.
SD8. All improvements to be maintained by the LMD shall be installed in accordance to LMD
standards or by approval of the Landscape Maintenance District Administrator.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 21 of 35
LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT
FDL Access shall comply with Section 503 of the Fire code, which requires all weather access.
All weather access may require paving.
FD2. Fire Department Access shall be extended to within 150 feet distance of any exterior
portion of all structures.
FD3. Where driveways extend further than 150 feet and are of single access design,
turnarounds suitable for fire protection equipment use shall be provided and shown on the
final map. Turnarounds shall be designed, constructed and maintained to insure there
integrity of Fire Department use. Where topography dictates, turnarounds shall be
provided for driveways that extend over 150 feet in length.
FD4. Private driveways shall be indicated on the final map as "Private Driveway and Firelane"
with the widths clearly depicted and shall be maintained in accordance with the Fire
Code. All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested , and accepted prior to
construction.
FDS. Vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction to
all required fire hydrants. All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and
accepted prior to construction.
FD6. This property is located within the area described by the Fire Department as "Very High
Fire Hazard Severity Zone, " (formerly Fire Zone 4). A "Fuel Modification Plan," shall
be submitted and approved prior to final map clearance, (Contract Fuel Modification
Unit, Fire Station #32, 605 North Angeleno Avenue, Azusa, CA 91702-2904, Phone
(626) 969-5205, for details).
FD7. The applicant shall provide the Fire Department or City with approved street signs and
building access numbers prior to occupancy.
FD8. The applicant shall provide water mains, fire hydrants and fire flows as required by the
County of Los Angeles Fire Department, for all land shown on map which shall be
recorded.
FD9. The required fire flow for public fire hydrants at this location is 3500 gallons per minute
at 20 psi for a duration of 3 hours, over and above maximum daily domestic demand. 2
Hydrant(s) flowing simultaneously may be used to achieve the required fire flow.
FD10. The required fire flow for private on-site hydrants is 2500 gallons per minute at 20 psi.
Each private on-site hydrant must be capable of flowing 1250 gallons per minute at 20
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 22 of 35
psi with two hydrants flowing simultaneously, one of which must be the furthest from the
public water source.
FD 11. Fire hydrant requirements are as follows:
A. Install 59 public fire hydrants.
FD12. All hydrants shall measure 6"x4"x2-1/2" brass or bronze, conforming to current AWWA
standard C503 or approved equal. All on-site hydrants shall be installed a minimum of
25' feet from a structure or protected by a two (2) hour rated firewall.
A. Location: As per map on file with the office. The location of the on-site fire
hydrants will be based on further development of each lot.
FD 13. All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted or bonded for prior to
Final Map approval. Vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable
throughout construction.
FD14. Additional water system requirements. will be required when this land is further
subdivided and/or during the building permit process.
ADDITIONAL ACCESS REQUIREMENTS
FD15. Due to the size of the proposed development, multiple means of access points are
required.
FD16. On-site vehicular access is required for any building exceeding 150 feet from the public
street.
FD17. For buildings that are less than three stories and/or less than 35 feet in height, the
applicant shall provide a minimum unobstructive driveway width of 26 feet, clear -to -sky,
to be posted "No Parking -Fire Lane."
FD 18. For buildings that are more than three stories and/or 35 feet or greater, the applicant shall
provide a minimum unobstructive driveway width of 28 feet, cldar-to-sky, to be posted
"No Parking -Fire Lane." The center -line of access roadway shall be located parallel to
and within 30 feet of the exterior wall on at least one side of each proposed building.
FD 19. For streets or driveways separated by an island, the applicant shall provide a minimum
unobstructive driveway width of 20 feet, clear -to -sky, to be posted "No Parking -Fire
Lane." This includes the eastern connection to Lost Canyon Road.
FD20. The Fire Department Turnarounds shall be clearly identified, posted and red curbed "No
Parking -Fire Lane.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 23 of 35
FD21. Additional access issues will be addressed with the submittal of the revised plans and
during building plan check.
ADDITIONAL WATER SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
FD22. The Fire Flow Requirement for Planning Area 1 is 3500 GPM at 20 PSI for 3 hours. All
proposed structures and buildings are required to be fully fire sprinklered and have
minimum of Type V-1 hour construction or greater.
FD23. The Fire Flow Requirement for Planning Area 2 is 3500 GPM at 20 PSI for 3 hours. All
proposed structures and buildings are required to be fully fire sprinklered and have
minimum of Type V-1 hour construction or greater.
FD24. The Fire Flow Requirement for Planning Area 3A & 313 is 2500 GPM at 20 PSI for 2
hours. All proposed structures and buildings are required to be fully fire sprinklered and
have minimum of Type V-1 hour construction or greater. The exact fire flow with a
possible flow reduction will be determined during the building plan.
FD25. The Fire Flow Requirement for Planning Area 3C & 3D is 1500 GPM at 20 PSI for 2
hours.
FD26. The Fire Flow Requirement for Planning 4 is 2500 GPM at 20 PSI for 2 hours. All
proposed structures and buildings are required to be fully fire sprinklered and have
minimum of Type V-1 hour construction or greater. The exact fire flow with a possible
flow reduction will be determined.
PARKS AND RECREATION
GENERAL CONDITIONS
PRI. The applicant shall comply with the City's Parkland Development Fee (PDF)
requirements. Prior to map recordation, the applicant will be required to provide an
appraisal of one acre of land within the project site to establish the fair market value and
this will be used as the basis for the PDF. Also prior to recordation of any map, the
applicant shall offer. for dedication the Oak Park property to the City of Santa Clarita as
partial fulfillment of its parkland or park fee requirement. If at any time a map triggers
fees in excess of those satisfied by credits associated with this parkland, a fee payment
will be required prior to map approval. The applicant shall receive PDF credit for the
portion of the ten -acre park property that meets the local park criteria as determined by
the Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services.
PR2. All water quality basins are to be fenced and screened from public view with
landscaping. No water quality basins, or improvements should be located within the
boundaries of the park, except those required to mitigate water quality impacts associated
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 24 of 35
with development of the park. Water quality basins or improvements required for the
park shall not be excluded from the project's PDF eligible acreage.
PR3. Separate lots shall be provided for City dedicated park land, for all river trails, and for
open space lots to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks, Recreation and Community
Services.
PR4. Property between residential/commercial property and the river trail shall not be
maintained Parks, Recreation, and Community Services.
PRS. Prior to the issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall provide a letter from the
project archaeologist certifying what archaeological limitations may be on any property
proposed for dedication to the City. This letter shall specifically detail limitations related
to grading, trenching, maintenance, and landscaping.
PR6. Prior to issuance of any grading permit for the proposed development of City parcel
2840-006-270 the applicant shall obtain approval from the State of California to acquire
the property for commercial development, if commercial development of this property is
approved. The property was purchased by the City with a State Resources Prop 12 grant
and has a deed restriction that requires the State to approve any change of use.
PR7. Prior to the approval of the Tentative Map, the applicant shall provide a preliminary Park
and Trails Master Plan for the review and approval of the Director of the Parks,
Recreation and Community Services.
PRB. Prior to issuance of 1 st building permit, the applicant shall provide preliminary landscape
and irrigation plans for the park, trail areas, and open space for the review and approval
of the Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services.
PR9. Prior to issuance of the first occupancy of residential or commercial unit within an
approved phase of the project, the applicant shall provide a Park and Trails Master Plan,
landscape and irrigation plans for parks, trails, and open space areas within that phase for
the approval of the Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services. All park and
trail amenities in approved phase shall be completed prior to the last occupancy permit
for said phase. Additionally, the applicant shall provide a Parks and Trail Plan
illustrating how parks and trails in the applicable phase integrate with the overall Master
Plan.
PR10. Prior to the 150th issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy in Planning Area 3 (PA -3) of
the project, the applicant is required to have completed construction of the Oak Park, the
River Education Center and the Santa Clara River Trail on both sides of the River or
provide acceptable security (bonds, etc.) for said improvements equal to an agreed upon
amount to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks, Recreation and Community Services.
In any event the Oak Park, River Education Center and River Trail shall be completed by
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 25 of 35
the 5001h residential occupancy in the project. The applicant shall receive full PDF credit
for construction costs associated with the development of the Oak Park and River
Education Center. Internal trails, private recreational facilities and private parks shall be
completed in conjunction with development of each phase.
PRI 1. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, the applicant shall purchase approximately 12
acres of the City owned property which would be utilized by the project applicant for the
construction of the Vista Canyon Road Bridge, portions of the buiied bank stabilization
and residential and recreational uses.. The purchase price shall be based up a fair market
appraisal at the time of purchase. Upon completion of all river improvements required
for the project the applicant shall dedicate in fee and at no cost to the City the applicant's
River Corridor property, which when combined with the City's property will total
approximately 74.5 acres. The applicant shall be responsible for temporary maintenance
of the re -vegetated areas within the River Corridor consistent with mitigation
requirements and permits.
PR12. No manufactured slopes on project site shall be accepted for City ownership as open
space lots. All manufactured slopes must be maintained by the HOA unless it has been
accepted into the LMD maintenance district.
PR13. The applicant shall provide project signage as it pertains to the City of Santa Clarita's
Beautification Master Plan for park, trails and open space. Prior to the issuance of the
first building permit, a final signage plan including the locations, content, and design of
the signs shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Director of the Parks,
Recreation and Community Services Department. Signs to be provided include a City of
Santa Clarita park monument sign at the corner of Lost Canyon Road and B Drive,
directional signs, four small trail monument signs, and any required environmental
interpretive signs to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks, Recreation and Community
Services.
PR14. The applicant shall comply with all details of the Tentative Tract Map subject to any
modifications permitted by the Vista Canyon Specific Plan..
PR15. The applicant shall bond for public park and trail improvements in each phase at the
appropriate time in conjunction with other bonding requirements, i.e. grading, street
improvements, depending on the type of improvement. Bonds shall be processed through
Public Works, Development Services section.
PR16. Private parks including Lots 15, 49, 64 and 65 shall be maintained by an HOA or POA.
Subject to approval of each applicable phase, the project's private recreational facilities
shall be identified and may count toward the 30% maximum PDF credit.
PARK CONDITIONS
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 26 of 35
PR17. The applicant shall dedicate and build the Oak Park. The Oak Park amenity plan may
include the following amenities: Standard City park monument sign, off-street parking
lot containing 10 parking spaces, playground, splash pad, basketball court, tennis courts,
perimeter trail with benches and drinking fountains, trash receptacles, bike racks, horse
shoe pits, trellis shade structure with picnic tables, restroom building, multi-purpose field,
and connection to all trails and paseos to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks,
Recreation, and Community Services. The amenities list may be modified and amenities
may be substituted upon mutual agreement of the City and the applicant.
PR18. As proposed, the Vista Canyon project does not include any developed park area within
the 10 year floodplain. No developed park area will be allowed to be located within the
10 year floodplain. This includes turf areas, pedestrian paths, vehicular paths, or any
structures.
PR19. If the development requires any approval from outside agencies the applicant is to
provide the City of Santa Clarita with copies of all applicable permits and letters of
authorization that may include any portion of the dedicated park or trail/paseo areas.
PR20. The applicant shall create a park maintenance district fund to cover City maintenance
costs for the public park. Maintenance costs shall be based upon an approved
Engineering Report detailing the project's percentage for maintenance of the Park.
TRAILS AND PASEOS
PR21. Prior to the issuance of the first residential occupancy permit for each phase, the
applicant shall complete all private parks, trails, paseos, and bike paths within that phase
to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks, Recreation, and Community Services.
PR22. Prior to the issuance of the 150`" occupancy permit for Planning Area 3 of the project, the
applicant shall construct a minimum 8' wide stabilized decomposed granite trail
connecting the Santa Clara River Trail on the south side of the river to Sand Canyon
Road along the north side of Lost Canyon Road to the satisfaction of the Director of
Parks, Recreation, and Community Services.
PR23. The applicant shall reconstruct the Lost Canyon Trailhead next to SR14 to the
satisfaction of the Director of Parks, Recreation, and Community Services.
PR24. All lighting, including lighting near the Santa Clara River corridor, shall be directed
down, back shielded, or fully hooded.
PR25. All feeder trails and paseos shall be maintained by HOA or POA. Trial surfaces shall be
approved prior to installation to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks, Recreation, and
Community Services. The applicant shall provide a detailed circulation map showing all
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 27 of 35
public and private paths of travel. All pathways shall be identified on the tentative tract
map and or final map.
TRANSIT DIVISION
BUS STOP
TS 1. The applicant shall provide a bus stop at the location of Southbound Lost Canyon Road
as shown on Tentative Tract Map 69164. A sidewalk shall be constructed on the south
side of Lost Canyon Road, providing pedestrian access to the bus stop from Fair Oaks
Ranch, the adjacent apartments and the Vista Canyon project.
TS2. The bus stop shall be constructed as follows:
• A bus turnout/pullout shall be constructed to the required dimensions as determined
by the Department of Public Works and the City's Transit Division.
•_ A 10'x25' concrete passenger waiting pad placed behind the sidewalk.
• A permanent stylized structure (no pre -fabricated), that compliments the architecture
of the Vista Canyon development, and consists o£
o a 10'x20' concrete pad placed behind the sidewalk.
o bench,
o trash receptacle,
o lighting (all electrical conduits shall be located within the shelter structure)
TS3. Color elevations and materials board for the proposed bus shelter structure shall be
supplied to the Transit and Planning Divisions, for their review and approval, prior to
construction.
TS4. The bus stop shall comply with all ADA regulations as specified in the most recent
version of the California Disabled Accessibility Guidebook (Ca1Dag). Proposed disabled
access shall be drawn on all construction plans.
TS5. At the location of the bus stop, the sidewalk shall be directly adjacent to the street for no
less than 30'.
TS6. The bus stop location shall be a minimum of 100' from the intersection of Lost Canyon
Road and Jakes Way to the satisfaction of the Director of Administrative Services.
TS7 The applicant shall construct an in -street concrete pad within the street pursuant to the
current city standard and APWA 13 1 -1 at the bus stop location.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 28 of 35 .
METROLINK STATION/BUS TRANSFER STATION/TRANSIT FEE
TSB. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City of Santa Clarita detailing the
project's funding and land dedication responsibilities for the Bus -Transfer Station and
Metrolink Station as well as timing of these improvements. This agreement shall be to
the satisfaction of the City's Director of Administrative Services: At a minimum, the
project would provide funding and/or land at a value equal to the City's proposed Transit
Development fees for residential and commercial property.
URBAN FORESTRY DIVISION
UF 1. The applicant and all their contractors shall be in compliance with the City of Santa.
Clarita Oak Tree Ordinance and Preservation and Protection Guidelines at all times
throughout the project. Failure to comply with these requirements shall be considered non
compliant and may result in the issuance of a Stop All Work notice, construction delays
and additional fees.
UF2. The applicant and all their contractors shall adhere to all recommendations issued by the
applicant's Arborist of Record (AOR) both during on-site monitoring as well as those
listed within the project's oak tree reports and addendums. Failure to comply with these
recommendations shall be considered non compliant and may result in the issuance of a
Stop All Work notice, construction delays and additional fees.
UF3. The project applicant shall have permission to remove the following oak trees on the
project site: Tree Nos. 4, 25(H), 26, 27(H), 28, 29(H), 30, 31, and 32.
U174. The project applicant shall have permission to encroach within the protected zone
(consistent with the project oak tree reports) of the following oak trees on the project site:
Tree Nos. 1, 3(H), 33, 34(H), 38(H), 47(H), 50, 52(H) and 71.
UFS. The project applicant shall have permission to trim live wood in excess of 2" in diameter,
consistent with the recommendations of the project's oak tree reports, on the following
oak trees on the project site: Tree Nos. 1, 3(H), 33, 34(H), 38(H), and 52(H).
UF6. If the City Council selects the Lost Canyon Road/Sand Canyon Road Intersection Design
Option No. 4, the project applicant shall have permission to remove off-site Oak Tree.
No. 25B.
UF7. If the City Council selects Lost Canyon Road/Sand Canyon Road Intersection Design
Option Nos. 1-3, the project applicant shall have permission to encroach within the
protected zone of both oak trees and trim live wood in excess of 2" in diameter
(consistent with the project's oak tree reports) on' off-site Oak Tree No. 45.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista. Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 29 of 35
UF8. Mitigation for the oak tree impacts referenced above shall include dedication to the City
of Santa Clarita of the two -acre oak tree preserve located adjacent to the Oak Park. The
value of the two -acre property shall be appraised prior to dedication to the City with said
appraisal submitted to the City for review and approval. Dedication- of this two -acre
property to the City shall occur in conjunction with dedication of the Oak Park. A deed
restriction shall be recorded over this two -acre preserve restricting its use to open space
only and prohibiting any future development or grading (excluding mitigation activities).
Signage shall be posted along the trail adjacent to the preserve indicating that this area is
an oak tree preserve/mitigation area.
Additionally, the applicant shall be required to plant mitigation oak trees on this two -acre
parcel as well as a portion of the Town Green parcel to the satisfaction of the Director of
Community Development. The oak preserve and Town Green shall be the primary oak
mitigation areas for the project. Secondary oak tree mitigation or planting areas shall
include trail corridors throughout the project site. Group plantings of native oaks are
encouraged in areas that will accommodate the trees for future growth. Examples are
passive parks, break areas, open 'landscape areas, new trails and the entrance to
commercial and residential portions of the project.
The planting of on-site mitigation oak trees referenced above shall be equal to or exceed
the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) dollar value of all oak trees proposed for
removal per the Oak Tree Report (includes the nine oak trees on-site and the one
potential oak tree off-site). Prior to the issuance of grading permits and the start of any
construction, the applicant shall be required to bond for the International Society of
Arboriculture (ISA) dollar value of all oak trees proposed for removal.
UF9. Prior to the issuance of grading permits and the start of any construction, the applicant
shall have all required protective fencing installed around the oak trees. Oak trees that are
proposed for encroachment shall have the protective fence placed at the furthest point
away from the trunk that will allow for the necessary construction. All remaining oak
trees shall have the fence installed at the protected zone located five (5') feet out from
edge of dripline.
UF 10. Protective fencing shall consist of five (5') foot standard chain link material supported by
steel post driven directly into the ground and evenly spaced at eight (8') feet on center.
36" inch silt fencing shall be installed at the base of all protective fencing and be
maintained in good repair throughout all phases of construction.
OF 11. A maximum of one non -gated three foot wide opening shall be left open on the opposite
side of construction to allow for required monitoring by City Staff and the applicant's
Arborist of Record. Openings shall be spaced every 100 feet or at a rate of one per tree.
OF 12. The applicant shall be required to install proper signage that reads "THIS FENCE IS
FOR THE PROTECTION OF OAK TREES AND SHALL NOT BE REMOVED OR
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 30 of 35
RELOCATED WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION BY THE CITY
ARBORIST".
UF13. The applicant shall be required to submit a copy of all future site plans including but not
limited to grading plans, street improvement plans, construction plans and landscape
plans to the City of Santa Clarita Oak Tree Specialist. All site plans shall require written
approval from the City's Urban Forestry Division.
UF14. Any oak tree approved for relocation (presently Tree No. 31 is proposed for relocation)
shall be completed by an approved qualified tree relocating company.
OF 15. Any oak tree which is proposed for relocation shall be considered a removal. Any oak
tree that has been approved for relocation shall require an up to 90 day side box waiting
period before bottom roots may be removed. The final waiting period shall be
established by the Arborist of Record and the City's Oak Tree Specialist.
OF 16. Any oak tree which has been approved for relocation shall require a minimum five year
mitigation period, which shall include the submittal of all maintenance and monitoring
records completed on the tree. Monitoring reports shall be submitted at the end of each
month for the first two years, quarterly (four times per year) for the following two years
and biannually for the final year. The bond (based upon a value equivalent to the oak
tree's ISA value) for the relocated tree will not be exonerated until the completion of the
required mitigation period.
OF 17 The applicant shall be required to incorporate large scale trees which include 48 inch and
60 inch box trees. This may also include the installation of specimen size trees that range
from 72" box size to 84" box size.
OF 18. Mitigation oak trees may include the following native species of oak; Coast live oak
(Quercus agrifolia), Canyon oak (Quercus chrysolepis) and Blue oak (Quercus douglasii).
Incorporating additional native species in areas immediately adjacent to where
established oak trees are present, may have a negative impact on the existing oak trees
and is not permitted.
LANDSCAPE
OF 19. All proposed irrigation shall be placed outside the protected zone of any existing oak tree.
UF20. Any landscape improvements including but not limited too plant material, walkways,
trails, water features, patios, lighting, statues or art that are proposed for within the
protected zone of an existing oak tree shall be approved by the City of Santa Clarita Oak
Tree Specialist.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 31 of 35
UF21. Only drought tolerant native species of plant material may be placed within the protected
zone of an oak tree. This includes all mitigation oaks, relocated oak trees and existing oak
trees.
UF22. A minimum ten (10') foot critical zone (measured from the trunk) shall be maintained for
all non heritage oak trees and fifteen (15') feet for all heritage oak trees. Only landscape
boulders and approved mulch may be installed within this critical zone and shall be
approved by the City of Santa Clarita Oak Tree Specialist.
UF23. At no time shall any overhead irrigation be permitted to come in contact with an oak tree.
Only direct contact irrigation (drip and/or bubbler) systems may be installed within the
protected zone of an oak tree. Overhead irrigation which has been approved for outside
the protected zone shall be directed away from the canopy of the oak tree.
UF24. The minimum protected zone for any non -established or existing oak tree is fifteen (15')
feet. This includes all new oak trees that were planted for required mitigation. All turf
shall be kept a minimum of 15 feet from any oak tree. Lineal root barriers shall be
required along the edge of any proposed walkways, trails, drive approaches, street and
any other form of hardscape that is approved for within the protected zone of an oak tree.
UF25. Walkways and bike trails or any other form of hardscape that is approved for within the
protected zone of an oak tree shall consist of an approved material such as permeable
landscape pavers and asphalt. In some cases, subject to the approval of the City's Oak
Tree Specialist, the applicant shall be required to install approved aeration tubes.
UF26. Native trees, including but not limited to Platanus racemosa, Cercis occidentalis, Populus
fremontii, Rhus integrifolia, Heteromeles arbutifolia and Quercus species, shall be
incorporated near project trails along the Santa Clara River and the Metrolink right-of-
way to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development.
UF27. Prior to grading and/or as required by the Community Development Department, the
applicant shall be required to submit a full set of preliminary landscape plans to the City
of Santa Clarita Urban Forestry Division for review. The final landscape plans shall be
reviewed and approved by the City of Santa Clarita Urban Forestry Division.
UF28. Prior to bond exoneration and upon completion of the installation of all required
mitigation oak trees, the applicant shall be required to submit a detailed GPS site plan,
(consistent with the City's system) with the location of all mitigation oak trees.,Included
on this site plan shall be a detailed legend identifying the number, size, species and cost
of all oak trees planted on site. This is required to confirm that all mitigation has properly
been documented and completed.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 32 of 35
CONSTRUCTION & PRESERVATION:
UF29. At no time shall the applicant or their contractors be permitted to place or store any form
of construction material, equipment, machinery or vehicles within the protected zone of
an oak tree.
UF30. At no time shall the applicant or their contractors be permitted to wash, rinse, clean or
service any form of construction equipment, tools vehicles or machinery within 100 feet
of an oak tree.
UF31. At no time shall any form of liquid or dry contaminates including but not limited to oils,
gasoline, diesel fuel, concrete, plaster and mortars be permitted to enter the protected
zone of an oak tree.
UF32. The applicant shall be required to have approved on-site concrete rinse out stations
located throughout the project site. These and all other rinse out stations shall be located a
minimum of 100' feet from any oak tree.
UF33. All work completed within the protection zone of an oak tree shall be monitored by the
applicant's Arborist of Record.
UF34. Any root or roots that are encountered during construction including grading, excavation
and trenching that are two (2") inches in diameter or larger shall be preserved at all times
unless waived by the City of Santa Clarita Oak Tree Specialist.
UF35. Exposed roots shall be immediately covered with moistened layers of burlap until backfill
can be completed. Burlap may be removed or left on the root. Backfill shall consist of
original native soil only.
UF36. Any root which has been approved for removal shall be cut clean with a proper pruning
device. Proper pruning device will vary depending on the size of the root. All pruning of
roots shall be completed by or in the presence of the applicant's Arborist of Record.
UF37. Any oak tree that has been approved for trimming shall be completed by an approved
qualified tree trimming contractor certified through the International Society of
Arboriculture (ISA) or in the presence of the applicant's Arborist of Record.
UF38. All non -infested wood chips generated from pruning shall be recycled and used as mulch
for existing oak trees.
UF39. The applicant and their contractors shall adhere to the American National Standards
Institute (ANSI) A300 Part I, Best Management Practices and the ISA Pruning Standards
for all oak tree care operations.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 33 of 35
UF40. The applicant and their contractors shall adhere to ANSI A300 Part IV (Management of
Tree and Shrubs During Site Planning, Site Development and Construction) and Best
Management Practices (Managing Trees During Construction) throughout the project.
STREET TREES:
UF41. The applicant shall be required to install street trees within the parkways and medians of
all public and private streets. Street trees shall be a minimum size 24" box standard trunk
tree free from any incorrect pruning, stake damage, trunk damage, girdled roots and
broken branches.
UF42. All street trees shall be approved by the City of Santa Clarita Urban Forestry Division
(Oak Tree Specialist), Special Districts (LMD) and the Community Development
Department (Planning).
UF43. All trees shall meet and/or exceed the minimum requirements set forth in the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Specification Guidelines for Container -
Grown Landscape Trees and Shrubs.
UF44. All trees planted within the public right of way shall be planted in accordance with the
City of Santa Clarita Tree Planting and Staking Detail Sheet. This sheet may be obtained
from the City Oak Tree Specialist.
UF45. The applicant shall be required to install and maintain irrigation to all trees planted within
the public right of way.
UF46. Prior to bond exoneration, the applicant shall submit a final landscape plan which shows
all existing oak trees, proposed mitigation ,oak trees, required oak trees and all parkway
trees. The landscape plan shall have a detail planting legend identifying all proposed oak
trees, size of proposed trees, number of species and individual symbols.
UF47. The applicant shall be required to provide a GPS spread sheet which identifies the
location, genus, species, height, trunk diameter and canopy spread of all trees planted
within the public right of way.
UF48. Upon completion of the project and completion of all required mitigation, the bond for
oak tree mitigation will be exonerated..
PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS
P1. When grading or other construction activities occur within the project's boundaries the
applicant shall be required to apply sufficient quantities of water or a stabilizing agent to
minimize the generation of visible dust plumes. Additionally, prior to initiating grading
or other construction activities within 2,500 feet of the western property lines for La
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 34 of 35
Veda Avenue, the applicant shall send a letter to each of the La Veda Avenue property
owners identifying a contact person, their phone number and e-mail address to file dust
complaints related to project grading. The applicant shall promptly respond, within one
business day, to these complaints and use its best efforts to resolve them. In the event a
verifiable and measurable impact is visible at a homeowner's property, developer shall
immediately remedy the situation at its own cost and expense. The applicant and
homeowners shall work together in a reasonable manner to resolve any complaints or
concerns.
PC2. The portion of the project site adjacent to La Veda Avenue is proposed for the
development of a trail, the extension of Lost Canyon Road, the Oak Park and 26 single
family homes. The project applicant shall be required to minimize, to the extent feasible,
the use of loaded trucks or heavy excavating equipment within 300 feet of residences
located along La Veda Avenue. If it is necessary to use heavy equipment within 300 feet
of these residences, the applicant shall provide advanced notice to the residents advising
that there will be the potential for construction activity. Additionally, the project
applicant shall install vibration monitors along the project boundary with the residences
along La Veda Avenue to ensure that peak particle velocity (PPV) does not exceed 0.2
PPV at the project boundary. A PPV equal to or greater than 0.2 PPV which is equal to
or greater then a vibration at a magnitude of 2.0 inches per second has the potential to
cause superficial damage to structures. The vibration monitors will be maintained in
proper calibration and these records will also be made available to the City on a monthly
basis. The results of these vibration monitors shall be made available to the City on a
monthly basis.
The following two vibration "action level" threshold values will be used:
• "warning" vibration threshold value of 0.2 inches per second PPV,
• "stop work" vibration threshold value of 0.5 inches per second PPV,
These are described below.
• The vibration "warning" threshold level is 0.2 inches per second PPV. If
this level is exceeded then the situation will be reviewed to identify the
potential cause.
• The vibration "stop work" threshold is 0.5 inches per second PPV. This
threshold level is the U.S. Bureau of Mines vibration criteria to avoid
possible cosmetic damage to structures with concrete foundations, timber
framing. The potential causes of such vibration will be reviewed and
possible mitigation methods investigated.
Prior to initiating grading activities the applicant agrees to record (via videotape or digital
technology) the existing condition of the properties and exteriors of the structures along
La Veda Avenue, where expressed permission is granted to enter such properties. The
applicant will make available copies of these recordings to the City. A copy of each
recording will also be sent to each corresponding property owner.
EXHIBIT B of Resolution 11-01
Vista Canyon
Conditions of Approval
Master Case 07-127
Page 35 of 35
If damage is documented to a respective property as evidenced by the vibration monitors
or the recordings, the applicant shall remedy the situation in a timely manner at its own
cost and expense. The work will be performed by a licensed Contractor or other
individual agreeable to both parties.
PC3. The project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to prepare an animal movement
corridor plan which will address corridor design, specifications for an undercrossing
under Lost Canyon Road, and plant materials for the north/south corridor extending from
the Santa Clara River to undeveloped properties to the south on a portion of the Oak
Park.
PC4. As shown on TTM 69164, the project applicant shall construct an eight -foot tall
wall/berm in locations along the southerly Metrolink right-of-way adjacent to the
proposed Metrolink Station to reduce train related noise to off-site properties.
PC5. The applicant shall construct Intersection Design Option 3 ("Roundabout") at the
intersection of Lost Canyon Road/Sand Canyon Road to the satisfaction of the Director
of Public Works.
PC6. For a period of six months following the completion of the intersection improvements at
Lost Canyon Road/Sand Canyon Road, the applicant shall fund a crossing guard at the
intersection during morning and afternoon hours (prior to and after school being in
session) to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Public Works.
SXMCURREN71t2007\07-127 (Vista Canyon Ranch)\Planning Comm ission\COAFINAL
Exhibit "A" To Resolution No. P11-02
Vista Canyon: Findings Required By CEQA
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE
Public Resources Code section 21081 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15091 require that the
lead agency, in this case the City of Santa Clarita ("City"), prepare written findings for identified
significant impacts, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding.
Specifically, State CEQA Guidelines section 15091 states, in part, that:
(a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has
been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of
the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each
of those significant effects accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for
each finding. The possible findings are:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into,
the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effects as identified in the final EIR.
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and
jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the
finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and
should be adopted by such other agency.
(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for
highly trained workers, make infeasible. the mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the final EIR.
In accordance with Public Resource Code section 21081 and State CEQA Guidelines section
15093, whenever significant impacts cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance, the
decision-making agency is required to'balance, as applicable, the benefits of the project against
its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the
benefits of a project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse effects
may be considered "acceptable."
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 2 of 86
The Final EIR for the Vista Canyon project identified potentially significant effects that could
result from project implementation. The City finds that the inclusion of certain mitigation
measures as part of the project approval will reduce most, but not all, of those effects to less -
than -significant levels. Those impacts that are not reduced to less -than -significant levels are
identified and overridden due to specific project benefits.
As required by CEQA, the City, in adopting these findings, also adopts a Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program ("MMRP") for the project. The City finds that the MMRP, which is
incorporated by reference and made a part of these findings, meets the requirements of Public
Resources Code section 21081.6 by providing for the implementation and monitoring of
measures' intended to mitigate potentially significant effects of the project.
In accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City adopts these findings as part
of its certification of the Final EIR for the project. Pursuant to Public Resources Code section
21082. 1, subdivision (c)(3), the City also finds that the Final EIR reflects the City's independent
judgment as the lead agency for the project.
1.2 ORGANIZATION/FORMAT OF FINDINGS
Section 1.0 contains a summary description of the project and background facts relative to the
environmental review process. Section 2.0 identifies the significant impacts of the project that
cannot be mitigated to a less -than -significant level (even though all feasible mitigation measures
have been identified and incorporated into the project), while Section 3.0 identifies the
potentially significant effects of the project that will be mitigated to a less -than -significant level
with implementation of the identified mitigation measures. Section 4.0 identifies the project's
potential environmental effects that were determined not to be significant. Section 5.0 discusses
the feasibility of the project alternatives. And, Section 6.0 addresses the environmental impacts
associated with the Ancillary Annexation Area (AAA).
1.3 SUMMARY OF PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project applicant proposes to develop the approximately 185 -acre Vista Canyon project site
with 1,091 dwelling units (70 single-family detached units and 1,021 multi -family attached
units), and up to 950,000 square feet of commercial and medical office, retail, theater, restaurant
and hotel uses within four Planning Areas (PA). A residential overlay within the corporate office
campus site in PA -2 would allow for the conversion of up to. 250,000 square feet of office floor
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 3 of 86
area to 233 attached residential units. If implemented, this conversion would permit a maximum
of 1,324 residential units and 700,000 square feet of commercial floor area.
The project also includes approximately 21 acres of parks/recreation facilities, including the
approximately 10 -acre Oak Park and the 1 -acre River Education Center, both of which would be
dedicated to the City. Other recreational facilities include the Community Garden, Town Green
and up to six private recreational facilities. Further, there are approximately 10 acres of proposed
public streets, including the extension of Lost Canyon Road from Fair Oaks Ranch to Vista
Canyon Road and the construction of the Vista Canyon Road Bridge to connect Lost Canyon
Road and Soledad Canyon Road.
The applicant also is proposing construction of a water reclamation plant (WRP), located
adjacent to the western project boundary and directly north of Lost Canyon Road, which would
provide recycled water for use in the project's landscaped areas and toilets within public
restroom areas in commercial areas of the project.
Finally, the City proposes to annex various properties surrounding and including the Vista
Canyon site, all of which currently are located under the jurisdiction of the County of Los
Angeles. In total, the AAA includes approximately 2,257 acres, including the Fair Oaks Ranch
(approximately 1,082 acres), Jakes Way (approximately 260 acres), and portions of the Sand
Canyon (approximately 915 acres) communities.
For a detailed discussion of the project description and setting, please see Section 1.0, Project
Description, of the EIR.
1.4 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The project objectives include the following:
Land Use Planning Objectives
1. Create a new, transit -oriented community with interrelated neighborhoods that allows for
residential, retail/commercial, office, hotel, and recreational uses, while preserving and
enhancing significant natural and historical resources.
2. Provide a sensitive and protective interface with the Santa Clara River by utilizing
appropriate setback, grading, landscape, buried bank stabilization, and water quality
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 4 of 86
treatments.
3. Provide development and transitional land use patterns that do not conflict with surrounding
communities and land uses.
4. Arrange land uses to reduce vehicle miles traveled and energy consumption, and to
encourage the use of transit.
5. Design neighborhoods to create a unique identity and sense of place.
6. Design neighborhoods to locate a variety of residential and non-residential land uses in close
proximity to each other and major road corridors, transit, and trails.
7. Provide a rich set of public spaces, including roadways that range from lively streetscapes to
pedestrian passages.
8. Implement sustainable development principles, including greater energy efficiency, waste
reduction, drought -tolerant landscaping, use of water efficiency measures, and use of
recycled materials and renewable energy sources.
9. Create and enhance opportunities for non -vehicular travel and encourage pedestrian mobility
by providing an internal pedestrian circulation system that links residential neighborhoods to
nearby schools, neighborhood parks, trail systems, neighborhood retail/commercial and
adjacent park and recreation areas.
10. Foster the design and integration of a mutually beneficial relationship between the natural
and built environments, and implement sensitive land use transition treatments, attractive
streetscapes, and high quality design themes.
11. Provide a meandering trail with public access adjacent to the Santa Clara River Corridor.
12. Integrate a new community into the City's existing and planned circulation network.
13. Provide a landscape design emphasizing a pleasant neighborhood character and inviting
streetscapes.
14. Facilitate the expansion of transit facilities by providing property and participate in the
funding of a new City/Metrolink transit center and associated facilities, and direct pedestrian
access to such facilities from the Specific Plan's commercial, retail, office, and residential
areas.
15. Provide neighborhood parks and improvements that offset park dedication requirements and
meet the recreation needs of local residents.
Economic Objectives
1. Enhance and augment the housing market by providing a variety of housing types and
densities to meet the varying needs of future residents.
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 5 of 86
2. Adopt development regulations that provide flexibility to respond and adjust to changing
economic and market conditions.
3. Provide a tax base to support public services and infrastructure.
4. Provide a project jobs/housing balance of at least two jobs for everyone residential unit.
5. Adopt development regulations and guidelines that allow site, parking and facility sharing,
and other innovations that reduce the costs of providing public services.
Resource Conservation Objectives
1. Restore and minimize impacts to important biotic resources.
2. Maintain the use of the Santa Clara River as a major east/west open space corridor.
3. Establish a Santa Clara River Corridor and adopt measures to maintain, enhance, and protect
important river habitat values and functions.
4. Provide native revegetation of river and setback areas when temporarily disturbed due to
development activities.
5. Minimize impacts to the Santa Clara River and its resources.
6. Minimize impacts to oak trees and incorporate, where possible, oak trees into public spaces.
The City has considered the statement of the objectives sought by the project as found in Section
1.0, Project Description, of the EIR. The City adopts these objectives as part of the project.
1.5 INITIAL STUDY AND NOTICE OF PREPARATION
Preliminary environmental review of the Vista Canyon project was conducted by the City's
Community Development Department. In the initial Notice of Preparation (NOP) and subsequent
revised NOPs, the City determined that the proposed Vista Canyon project may have potentially
significant effects on several environmental impact categories, including: (a) hazards
(geotechnical, flood, and noise); (b) resources (water quality, air quality, biological, cultural
resources, agricultural resources, and visual resources/aesthetics); (c) services
(transportation/circulation, sewage disposal, education, fire/sheriff and utilities); and (d) other
categories (general, environmental safety/hazardous materials, land use and demand for new
recreation facilities).
The initial NOP was circulated for a 30 -day review period from July 11, 2007 to August 10,
2007. Revised NOPs were circulated from February 26, 2008 to March 21, 2008, and October 1,
2009 to November 2, 2009, due to revisions to the project. These NOPs were circulated pursuant
to the requirements of the State CEQA Guidelines in order to solicit input from responsible and
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 6 of 86
interested public agencies and the community regarding the content of the EIR. In addition, to
facilitate local participation, the City held a scoping meeting on the project and solicited
suggestions from the public and other agencies on the scope and content of this Draft EIR. The
meeting took place at the Century Room at the Santa Clarita City Hall, 23920 Valencia
Boulevard, Santa Clarita, California, on February 27, 2008.
In response to the NOPs and scoping meeting, comment letters and other input were received
from interested agencies, organizations and others, copies of which are presented in Appendix I
to the Draft EIR. Based on the results of the City's NOPs and scoping efforts, the following
topics were evaluated in the EIR:
1.
Geotechnical Hazards
14.
Sheriff Services
2.
Flood
15.
Human -Made Hazards
3.
Traffic and Access
16.
Visual Resources
4.
Air Quality
17.
Population, Housing, and
5.
Noise
Employment
6.
Biological Resources
18,
Cultural Resources
7.
Land Use
19.
Agricultural Resources
8.
Water Service/Water Quality
20.
Santa Clara River Corridor Analysis
9.
Solid Waste Disposal
21.
Wastewater Disposal
10.
Education
22.
Global Climate Change
11.
Library Services
23.
Utilities
12.
Parks and Recreation
24.
Ancillary Annexation Area
13.
Fire Services
1.6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The City prepared the EIR in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The EIR
is a full -disclosure informational document which informs public agency decision -makers and
the public of the significant environmental effects of the project. Possible ways to minimize
significant effects are identified in the EIR and reasonable alternatives to the project are
evaluated.
The EIR is intended as a "project EIR" under CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. A project
EIR is typically prepared for a specific construction -level project. (See State CEQA Guidelines
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 2 of 86
§15161.) Under CEQA, a project EIR "should focus primarily on the changes in the
environment that would result from the development project ... [and] examine all phases of the
project including planning, construction, and operation." (Ibid.)
The Draft EIR was made available to the public for review and comment for a 45 -day period.
The review and comment period began on October 20, 2010 and concluded on December 3,
2010.
Copies of the Draft EIR were available for public review at the following locations: (a) City of
Santa Clarita City Hall, Community Development Department, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite
140, Santa Clarita, CA 91355; (b) Los Angeles County Library, Canyon Country Branch, 18601
Soledad Canyon Road, Santa Clarita CA 91351; and (c)1� yti'��.saiita-clarita.c�<1r i/pI,ail11'
All comment letters received in response to the Draft EIR were reviewed and are included in the
Final EIR, along with written responses to each of the comments. In accordance with State
CEQA Guidelines section 15132, the Final EIR for the project consists of. (i) the Draft EIR; (ii)
comments received on the Draft EIR; (iii) a list of the persons, organizations, and public
agencies commenting on the Draft EIR; (iv) written responses to significant environmental issues
raised during the public review and comment period and related supporting materials; and, (v)
other information contained in the administrative record.
2.0 FINDINGS ON SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS OF THE
PROJECT
This section identifies the significant unavoidable impacts that require a statement of overriding
considerations to be issued by the City if the project is approved. Based on the substantial record
evidence, the following impacts have been determined to fall within this "significant unavoidable
impact" category.
2.1 TRAFFIC AND ACCESS
2.1.1 Unavoidable Significant Impacts
Phase 1 (2012) of the project would cause significant impacts at five study intersections, but no
freeway segments. Implementation of the mitigation measures listed below would reduce these
impacts to less -than -significant levels at four of the five intersections. At one of the intersections
(Sand Canyon Road/Lost Canyon Road), the project would have a temporary significant and
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 3 of 86
unavoidable impact because the recommended improvement would not be completed until after
completion of Phase 1.
Project build -out (2015) would cause significant impacts at eight study intersections.
Implementation of the mitigation measures listed below would reduce these impacts to less -than -
significant levels at seven of the eight intersections. The impacts at one intersection (Sand
Canyon Road/Lost Canyon Road), however, could be significant and unavoidable, depending
upon the City's ultimate selection of the mitigation design option. (If Option 1, Four -Way Stop,
is selected, impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Selection of Options 2, 3, or 4 would
reduce impacts to a level below significant.) The project also would significantly impact one
SR -14 segment, Sand Canyon Road to Soledad Canyon Road. However, because there are
neither planned and programmed improvements for SR -14, nor an established funding program,
the project's payment of an in -lieu fee to Caltrans would not fully mitigate the identified impact.
Under long-range cumulative conditions (2030), the project would cause significant impacts
along Soledad Canyon Road between Sierra Highway and Golden Valley Road. No feasible
improvements, however, are available as this arterial already is constructed to its ultimate width.
The Circulation Element in the City's General Plan recognizes that, in some cases, street
improvements to accommodate additional traffic are not capable of being implemented due to
right-of-way limitations and existing development. The project also would significantly impact
one SR -14 segment during the P.M. peak hour (northbound direction, Sand Canyon Road to
Soledad Canyon Road. As noted above, because there are neither planned and programmed
improvements for SR -14, nor an established funding program, the project's payment of an in -lieu
fee to Caltrans would not fully mitigate the identified impact.
2.1.2 Mitigation Measures
4.3-1 Prior to the completion and occupancy of project Phase 1, the project applicant
shall convert the westbound left -turn lane on Soledad Canyon Road onto the
SR -14 southbound on-ramp from a permitted to protected signal phase, and
retime this traffic signal and the adjacent Sand Canyon Road/Soledad Canyon
Road signal to optimize traffic flow.
4.3-2 Prior to the completion and occupancy of project Phase 1, the project applicant
shall take those steps necessary that result in retiming the traffic signals at the
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 4 of 86
Via Princessa/SR-14 SB ramps and Via Princessa/SR-14 NB ramps
intersections to optimize traffic flow.
4.3-3 Prior to the completion and occupancy of project Phase 1, the project applicant
shall install a westbound right -turn overlap arrow at the Via Princessa/Lost
Canyon Road intersection.
4.3-4 Prior to project completion and full occupancy .(beyond Phase 1), the project
applicant shall construct the following improvements at the Sand Canyon
Road/Soledad .Canyon Road and SR -14 SB Ramps/Soledad Canyon Road
intersections:
• Restripe Soledad Canyon Road to include a third through lane in each
direction from just east of the SR -14 ramp intersection to west of the Sand
Canyon Road intersection.
• Install a right -turn overlap arrow on the northbound Sand Canyon Road
approach to Soledad Canyon Road.
• Retime and optimize operations of both traffic signals based on the revised
lane geometries and signal phasings.
4.3-5 Prior to the completion and full occupancy of the project (beyond Phase 1), the
project applicant shall install the selected Intersection Design Option (No. 2, 3
or 4) at the Sand Canyon Road/Lost Canyon Road intersection. If Intersection
Design Option No. 1 is selected, the project would have a significant,
unavoidable impact.
The four design options are:
• Option 1 (Four -Way Stop) — this design option (see Exhibit 4.3-16 and
4.3-16a) is presently in place at the intersection. The intersection is
presently congested in the morning and afternoon when Pinecrest School
and Sulphur Springs Elementary School are in session due to student drop-
off and pick-up. Under this design option, the operation of this intersection
in the future would worsen to a Level of Service (LOS) F with or without
the Vista Canyon project. If this option is selected, the project would result
in a significant unavoidable impact at the intersection.
• Option 2 (Signalized Intersection "Look Ahead Signal") — this design
option (see Exhibit 4.3-17) would result in a signalized intersection, with a
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 5 of 86
"look ahead" signal at the southwest cornet to address northbound "line of
sight" requirements. Minimal widening of the intersection would occur
with this design option, with right-of-way necessary at the northwest and
southeast corners. Encroachment within the protected zone of the heritage
oak tree located along the eastern edge of Sand Canyon Road would
remain similar to the existing condition. A fence, located within the right-
of-way, would have to be removed to adhere to "line of sight"
requirements. Option 2 would result in the improved operation of the
intersection in the future (LOS D) even with future growth (including
Vista Canyon), as compared to the existing four-way stop design.
• Option 3 (Roundabout) — this design option (see Exhibit 4.3-18 and 4.3-
18a) would include the installation of a "roundabout" or traffic circle at
the intersection. This option would involve the relocation of the
intersection to the north and west to adhere to northbound "line of sight"
requirements. Right-of-way acquisition would be necessary on all four
corners; most of it would come from the northwest corner (which is
presently vacant). Encroachment within the protected zone of the heritage
oak tree located along the eastern edge of Sand Canyon Road would still
occur, consistent with the existing condition. From a traffic operational
standpoint, this design option would be the best of the four, improving the
future LOS F under the existing design to an LOS C in the AM peak hour
and LOS B in the PM. peak hour even with future growth (including the
Vista Canyon project).
• Option 4 (Signalized Intersection - Standard Configuration) — this design
option (see Exhibit 4.3-19) improves the intersection of Lost Canyon
Road/Sand Canyon Road with a right -turn lane extension. This option
would require the acquisition of right-of-way on the northwest and
southeast corner. A "line of sight" easement would be needed from three
properties located east of Sand Canyon Road and south of the intersection.
All vegetation and fencing within this easement would need to be
removed, including the heritage oak tree located along the eastern edge of
Sand Canyon Road. Similar to the "Look Ahead Signal" design option,
this option would result in the improved operation of the intersection
(LOS D), as compared to the existing design, even with future growth
(including the Vista Canyon project).
4.3-6 Prior to project completion and full occupancy (beyond Phase 1), the project
applicant shall construct the following improvements at the Soledad Canyon
Road/Lost Canyon Road intersection:
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 6 of 86
• Install a traffic signal with signal equipment placed in locations that
accommodates the planned restriping of the road to six lanes.
• Construct an exclusive right -turn lane on the eastbound Soledad Canyon
Road approach consistent with the condition of approval previously placed
on the undeveloped parcel adjacent to this intersection.
• Construct two left -turn lanes and one right -turn lane (with a right -turn
overlap phase) on the Vista Canyon Road approach. Each lane should
provide 125 feet of storage.
• Lengthen the westbound left -turn lane on Soledad Canyon Road from 140
feet to 200 feet to accommodate the projected 95th percentile vehicle
queue of 140 feet and to provide opportunities for deceleration.
4.3-7 Prior to project completion and full occupancy (beyond Phase 1), the project
applicant shall construct the following improvement at the Via Princessa/Lost
Canyon Road intersection:
• Restripe the southbound approach to include a second left -turn lane.
4.3-8 Prior to project completion and full occupancy (beyond Phase 1), the project
applicant shall construct the following improvement at the Soledad Canyon
Road/Sierra Highway intersection:
• Install a right -turn overlap arrow on the southbound Sierra Highway
approach to Soledad Canyon Road.
4.3-9 The applicant shall execute and adhere to the terms of the mitigation
agreement with Caltrans to minimize the project's impacts to SR 14.
2.1.3 Findings
Based on the explanation provided in Section 2.1.1, and even with implementation of the
mitigation measures identified in Section 2.1.2, the City finds there are no. feasible mitigation
measures that will reduce the identified significant impacts to a level below significant.
Therefore, these impacts must be considered unavoidably significant even after implementation
of all feasible transportation/circulation mitigation measures. Pursuant to Public Resources Code
section 21081, subdivision (a)(3), the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social,
technological, or other considerations make infeasible the alternatives identified in the EIR and
the identified traffic and access impacts are thereby acceptable because of specific overriding
considerations.
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 7 of 86
2.2 AIR QUALITY
2.2.1 Unavoidable Significant Impacts
Construction -related emissions, which occur on- and off-site, include all emissions associated
with the construction equipment, grading and demolition activities, as well as worker trips, on -
road diesel trucks, and architectural coating. Based on air quality modeling utilizing
conservative data inputs prepared by a qualified environmental consultant, construction -related
emissions would exceed SCAQMD significance thresholds for VOCs, NOx, PMZ.5 and PM1o,
and would exceed the localized significance thresholds for NO2, PM2.5, and PM 10.
Operational emissions would be generated by both stationary and mobile sources as a result of
normal day-to-day activity on the project site. Based on air quality modeling, operational
emissions also would exceed SCAQMD significance thresholds for VOCs, NOx, CO, and PM)o
during the summer and winter.
Finally, the project also would result in regional emission levels that are cumulatively
considerable for VOCs, NOx, CO, PM2.5, and PM10 in light of its exceedances of the above -
referenced SCAQMD thresholds. ,
2.2.2 Mitigation Measures
4.4-1 The project applicant shall prepare a Construction Traffic Emission
Management Plan to minimize emissions from vehicles including, but not
limited to, scheduling truck deliveries to avoid peak hour traffic conditions,
consolidating truck deliveries, and prohibiting truck idling in excess of 5
minutes, and ensuring that all off-road equipment is compliant with the
CARB's in -use off-road diesel vehicle regulation and SCAQMD Rule 2449.
4.4-2 The project contractor shall use electric or alternative fueled mobile equipment
for on-site uses instead of diesel equipment if suitable equipment is
commercially available and the necessary power and refueling infrastructure
can reasonably be installed on site.
4.4-3 The project contractor shall maintain construction equipment by conducting
regular tune-ups according to the manufacturers' recommendations.
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 8 of 86
4.4-4 The project contractor shall use electric welders to avoid emissions from gas or
diesel welders if suitable equipment is commercially available and the
necessary power infrastructure can reasonably be installed on site.
4.4-5 The project contractor shall use on-site electricity or alternative. fuels rather
than diesel -powered or gasoline -powered generators if suitable equipment is
commercially available and the necessary power and refueling infrastructure
can reasonably be installed on site.
4.4-6 Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference.
4.4-7 Provide temporary traffic controls such as a flag person, during all phases of
construction to maintain smooth traffic flow.
4.4-8 Provide dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction trucks and
equipment on- and off-site.
4.4-9 Schedule construction activities that affect traffic flow on the arterial system to
off-peak hour to the extent practicable.
4.4-10 Reroute construction trucks away from congested streets or sensitive receptor
areas.
4.4-11 Consistent with measures that other lead agencies in the region (including Port
of Los Angeles and Port of Long Beach) have enacted, require all on-site
construction equipment to meet U.S. EPA Tier 2 or higher emissions standards
according to the following:
• April 1, 2010 to December 31, 2011: All off-road diesel -powered
construction equipment greater than 50 horsepower (hp) shall meet Tier 2
off-road emissions standards. In addition, all construction equipment shall
be outfitted with the BACT devices certified by CARB. Any emissions
control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions
that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 2 or Level 3 diesel
emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine as defined by
CARB regulations.
• January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014: All off-road diesel -powered
construction equipment greater than 50 hp shall meet Tier 3 off-road
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon.
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 9 of 86
emissions standards. In addition, all construction equipment shall be
outfitted with the BACT devices certified by CARE. Any emissions
control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions
that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 3 diesel emissions
control strategy for a similarly sized engine as defined by CARB
regulations.
• Post -January 1, 2015: All off-road diesel -powered construction equipment
greater than 50 hp shall meet Tier. 4 off-road emissions standards, where
available. In addition, all construction equipment shall be outfitted with
the BACT devices certified by CARB. Any emissions control device used
by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than
what could be achieved by a Level 2 or Level 3 diesel emissions control
strategy for a similarly sized engine as defined by CARB regulations.
A copy of each unit's certified tier specification, BACT documentation,
and CARB or AQMD operating permit shall be provided at the time of
mobilization or each applicable unit of equipment.
4.4-12 The project constructor shall limit PM10 and PM2.5 fugitive dust emissions by
implementing the following measures:
• Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit the construction site
onto paved roads or wash off trucks or any equipment leaving the site each
trip;
• Suspend all excavating and grading operations when wind speeds (as
instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mph;
• All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be
covered;
• Pave road and road shoulders;
• Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as possible;
• Sweep streets at the end of the day if visible soil is carried onto adjacent
public paved roads (recommend water sweepers with reclaimed water);
and
• Appoint a construction relations officer to act as a community liaison
concerning on-site construction activity including resolution of issues
related to PM 10 generation.
4.4-13 The project constructor shall limit VOC emissions by implementing the
following measures:
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 10 of 86
• Use coatings and solvents with a VOC content lower than required under
SCAQMD Rule 1113;
• Construction/build with materials that do not require painting;
• Require the use of pre -painted construction materials; and
• Contractors shall use varying -pressure -low-volume (HPLV) paint
applicators or other application techniques with equivalent or higher
transfer efficiency.
2.2.3 Findings
Although the above -enumerated mitigation measures would reduce the magnitude of impacts, the
City finds there are no feasible mitigation measures that will reduce the identified significant
impacts to a level below significant. Therefore, these impacts must be considered unavoidably
significant even after implementation.of all feasible air quality mitigation measures. Pursuant to
Public Resources Code section 21081, subdivision (a)(3), the City has determined that specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the alternatives
identified in the EIR and the identified air quality impacts are thereby acceptable because of
specific overriding considerations.
2.3 Nom
2.3.1 Unavoidable Significant Impacts
Construction of the project would require site preparation, grading, and the construction of
roadways, infrastructure, and buildings. Each of these construction activities typically involves
the use of heavy-duty equipment, all of which could expose off-site residents and other noise
sensitive receptors to temporary, but significant and unavoidable noise impacts due to the
exceedance of noise standards set forth in the Noise Element of the City's General Plan.
Construction activities also would result in vibration impacts. Since ground -borne vibration
could be generated during construction in excess of the Federal Transit Administration vibration
standards, impacts to on-site sensitive uses (i.e., residential) would be significant and
unavoidable.
Traffic associated with the project also would contribute to a cumulatively considerable noise
increases along SR -14, but not other local roadways. This noise increase would significantly
impact off-site sensitive receptors located adjacent to or near to portions of SR -14.
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 11 of 86
2.3.2 Mitigation Measures
4.5-1 Pursuant to Section 11.44.080 of the City's Noise Ordinance, construction
work shall occur within 300 feet of occupied residences only between the
hours of 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM Monday through Friday, and between 8:00
AM and 6:00 PM on Saturday. No construction work shall occur on Sundays,
New Year's Day, Independence Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day,
Memorial Day, and Labor Day.
4.5-2 The project applicant shall require by contract specifications that the following
construction best management practices (BMPs) be implemented by the
construction contractor to reduce construction noise and vibration levels:
• Two weeks prior to the commencement of construction, notification must
be provided to surrounding land uses of the project site disclosing the
construction schedule, including the various types of activities that would
be occurring throughout the duration of the construction period.
• Ensure that construction equipment is properly muffled according to
industry standards and in good working condition.
• Place noise- and vibration- generating construction equipment and locate
construction staging areas away from sensitive uses, where feasible
(particularly away from the residential uses located north and east of the
project site).
• Use electric air compressors and similar power tools rather than diesel
equipment, where feasible.
• Construction -related equipment, including heavy-duty equipment, motor
vehicles, and portable equipment, shall be turned off when not in use for
more than 30 minutes.
• Construction hours, allowable workdays, and the phone number of the job
superintendent shall be clearly posted at all construction entrances to allow
for surrounding owners and residents to contact the job superintendent. If
the job superintendent receives a complaint, the superintendent shall
investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the action taken
to the reporting party. Contract specifications shall be included in the
proposed project construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the
City of Santa Clarita prior to issuance of the grading permit.
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 12 of 86
2.3.3 Findings
Although the above -enumerated mitigation measures would reduce the magnitude of
construction -related impacts, the City finds there are no feasible mitigation measures that will
reduce the identified significant noise and vibration impacts to a level below significant.
Therefore, these impacts must be considered unavoidably significant even after implementation
of all feasible noise mitigation measures. Further, no feasible mitigation exists to reduce the
cumulative noise impacts along SR -14 to a level below significant. Pursuant to Public Resources
Code section 21081, subdivision (a)(3), the City has determined that specific economic, legal,
social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the alternatives identified in the
EIR and the identified noise impacts are thereby acceptable because of specific overriding
considerations.
2.4 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
2.4.1 Unavoidable Significant Impacts
The project would generate solid waste, including hazardous waste, requiring disposal during the
construction and operational phases. As an adequate amount of landfill space has not been
identified to accommodate long-term solid waste generation at current disposal rates, project -
and cumulative -level impacts would be significant. Nonetheless, it is worth noting that it is
reasonable to assume that the market forces that drive the waste disposal industry will put
pressure on the industry and governmental agencies to continually identify new economically
feasible means of waste disposal in the future.
2.4.2 Mitigation Measures
4.9-1 Recycling/separation areas will be located in close proximity to dumpsters for
non-recyclables, elevators, loading docks, and primary internal and external
access points.
4.9-2 Recycling/separation areas will not conflict with any applicable federal, state,
or local laws relating to fire, building, access, transportation, circulation, or
safety.
4.9-3 Recycling/separation areas will be conveniently located for those persons who
deposit, collect, and load the recyclable materials.
4.9-4 Recycling containers/bins will be located so as to not block access to each
other.
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 13 of 86
4.9-5 Yard waste will be reduced through the use of xeriscaping techniques and the
use of drought -tolerant and native vegetation in common area landscaping,
wherever possible.
4.9-6 For commercial developments and residential buildings having five or more
living units, no refuse collection or recycling areas will be located between a
street and the front of a building.
4.9-7 On-site trash compactors will be installed for non-recyclables in all
restaurants/food services areas.
4.9-8 The project will comply with City recycling requirements, including the
number and location of recycling and waste bins.
4.9-9 First-time buyers and businesses will receive educational material on the City's
waste management efforts. Educational material shall be passed to consecutive
buyers using the CC&Rs.
4.9-10 The applicant shall comply with all applicable state, regional, and local
regulations and procedures for the use, collection, and disposal of solid and
hazardous wastes.
4.9-11 During construction, recycling bins for glass, metals, paper, wood, plastic,
greenwastes, and cardboard will be placed on site to ensure their use by
construction workers and will be trucked to recycling/processing facilities.
4.9-12 In construction specification and bid packages, building materials made of
recycled materials will be required, to the extent possible and feasible.
2.4.3 Findings
Although the above -enumerated mitigation measures would reduce the magnitude of solid waste -
related impacts, the City finds there are no feasible mitigation measures that will reduce the
identified impacts to a level below significant. Therefore, these impacts must be considered
unavoidably significant even after implementation of all feasible mitigation measures. Pursuant
to Public Resources Code section 21081, subdivision (a)(3), the City has determined that specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the alternatives
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 14 of 86
identified in the EIR and the identified solid waste disposal impacts are thereby acceptable
because of specific overriding considerations.
3.0 FINDINGS ON SIGNIFICANT BUT MITIGATED IMPACTS
This section identifies significant adverse impacts of the project that require findings to be made
under Public Resources Code section 21081 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15091. Based
on substantial record evidence, the City finds that adoption of the mitigation measures set forth
below will reduce the identified significant impacts to less -than -significant levels.
3.1 GEOTECHNICAL HAZARDS
3.1.1 Potential Significant Impacts
Topographic changes attributable to various grading activities on the project site would occur to
accommodate the proposed project. However, mitigation measures specifying the grading
techniques would ensure that impacts due to earth movement are less than significant. These
same mitigation measures would reduce liquefaction impacts to a level below significant by
requiring that potentially liquefiable soil layers be overlain by non -liquefiable soils of sufficient
thickness, and construction -related erosion impacts to a less -than -significant level. (Of note, the
project would result in a long-term decrease in on-site erosion and would not increase wind and
water erosion due to the placement of non-erosive surfaces on the site.)
Due to its location, ground shaking on the project site is anticipated. In order to lessen impacts
associated with ground shaking, building design and construction would adhere to the California
Building Code, City of Santa Clarita Building Code, and pertinent professional engineering
standards. In addition, Mitigation Measure 4.1-22 requires compliance with Section 1613 of the
International Building Code. Compliance with the referenced standards would ensure that
impacts attributable to strong seismic ground shaking are reduced to a less -than -significant level.
Finally, impacts attributable to lateral spreading, differential settlement, corrosive soils,
expansive soils, and subsidence would be reduced to a level below significant through the
implementation of various mitigation measures.
3.1.2 Mitigation Measures
4.1-1 Grading: The applicability of the preliminary recommendations for foundation
and retaining wall design shall be confirmed at the completion of grading.
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 15 of 86
Paving studies and soil corrosivity tests shall be performed at the completion
of rough grading to develop detailed recommendations for protection of
utilities, structures, and for construction of the proposed roads.
4.1-2 Site Preparation: Prior to performing earthwork, the existing vegetation and
any deleterious debris shall be removed from the site. Existing utility lines
shall be relocated or properly protected in place. All unsuitable soils,
uncertified fills, artificial fills, slopewash, upper loose terrace deposits, and
upper loose alluvial soils in the areas of grading receiving new fill shall be
removed to competent earth materials and replaced with engineered fill. The
depth of removal and recompaction of unsuitable soils is noted in the Project
Geotechnical Report. Any fill required to raise the site grades shall be properly
compacted.
4.1-3 Removal Depths: The required depth of removal and recompaction of the
existing compacted fill or natural soils are indicated in -the Project
Geotechnical Report. Deeper removals shall be required if disturbed or
unsuitable soils are encountered during project grading as directed by the
Project Geotechnical Consultant. After excavation of the upper natural soils on
.hillsides and in canyons, further excavation shall be performed, if necessary,
and as directed by the Project Geotechnical Consultant, to remove slopewash
or other unsuitable soils. Additional removals will also be required for
transition lots (a transition lot occurs on a graded pad where relatively shallow
or exposed bedrock materials and compacted fills soils are both present on a
lot.) and where expansive bedrock occurs as directed by the Project
Geotechnical Consultant. The Project Geotechnical Consultant may require
that additional shallow excavations be made periodically in the exposed
bottom to determine that sufficient removals have been made prior to
recompacting the soil in-place. Deeper removals may be required by the
Project Geotechnical Consultant based on observed field conditions during
grading. During grading operations, the removal depths shall be observed by
the Project Geotechnical Consultant and surveyed by the Project Civil
Engineer for conformance with the recommended removal depths shown on
the grading plan.
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 16 of 86
4.1-4 Material for Fill: The on-site soils, less any debris or organic matter, may be
used in the required fills. Any expansive clays shall be mixed with non -
expansive soils to result in a mixture having an expansion index less than 30 if
they are to be placed within the upper 8 feet of the proposed rough grades.
Rocks or hard fragments larger than 4 inches shall not be clustered or compose
more than 25 percent by weight of any portion of the fill or a lift. Soils
containing more than 25 percent rock or hard fragments larger than 4 inches
must be removed or crushed with successive passes (e.g., with a sheepsfoot
roller) until rock or hard fragments larger than 4 inches constitute less than 25
percent of the fill or lift.
4.1-5 Oversized Material: Rocks or hard fragments larger than 8 inches shall not be
placed in the fill without conformance with the following requirements: Rock
or material greater than 8 inches in diameter, but not exceeding 4 feet in largest
dimension shall be considered oversize rock. The oversize rocks can be
incorporated into deep fills where designated by the Project Geotechnical
Consultant. Rocks shall be placed in the lower portions of the fill and shall not
be placed within the upper 15 feet of compacted fill, or nearer than 15 feet to
the surface of any fill slope. Rocks between 8 inches and 4 feet in diameter
shall be placed in windrows or shallow trenches located so that equipment can
build up and compact fill on both sides. The width of the windrows shall not
exceed 4 feet. The windrows shall be staggered vertically so that one windrow
is not placed directly above the windrow immediately below. Rocks greater
than 1 foot in diameter shall not exceed 30 percent of the volume of the
windrows. Granular fill shall be placed on the windrow, and enough water
shall be applied so that soil can be flooded into the voids. Fill shall be placed
along the sides of the windrows and compacted as thoroughly as possible.
After the fill has been brought to the top of the rock windrow, additional
granular fill shall be placed and flooded into the voids. Flooding is not
permitted in fill soils placed more than 1 foot above the top of the windrowed
rocks. Where utility lines or pipelines are to be located at depths greater than
15 feet, rock shall be excluded in that area. Excess rock that cannot be included
in the fill or that exceeds 4 feet in diameter shall be stockpiled for export or
used for landscaping purposes.
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 17 of 86
4.1-6 Import Material: Import material shall consist of relatively non -expansive soils
with an expansion index less than 30. The imported materials shall contain
sufficient fines (binder material) so as to be relatively impermeable and result
in a stable subgrade when compacted. The import material shall be free of
organic materials, debris, and rocks larger than 8 inches. A bulk sample of
potential import material, weighing at least 25 pounds, shall be submitted to
the Project Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 hours in advance of fill
operations. All proposed import materials shall be approved by the Project
Geotechnical Consultant prior to being placed at the site.
4.1-7 Compaction: After the site is cleared and excavated as recommended, the
exposed soils shall be carefully observed for the removal of all unsuitable
material. Next, the exposed subgrade soils shall be scarified to a depth of at
least 6 inches, brought to above optimum moisture content, and rolled with
heavy compaction equipment. The upper 6 inches of exposed soils shall be
compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density obtainable by the
ASTM D 1557-02 Method of Compaction. After compacting the exposed
subgrade soils, all required fills shall be placed in loose lifts, not more than 8
inches in thickness, and compacted to at least 90 percent of their maximum
density. For fills placed at depths greater than 40 feet below proposed finish
grade a minimum compaction of 93 percent of the maximum dry density is
required. The moisture content of the. fill soils at the time of compaction shall
be above the optimum moisture content. Compacted fill shall not be allowed to
dry out before subsequent lifts are placed. Rough grades shall be sloped so as
not to direct water flow over slope faces. Finished exterior grades shall be
sloped to drain away from building areas to prevent ponding of water adjacent
to foundations.
4.1-8 Shrinkage and Bulking: In computing fill quantities, about 10 to 15 percent
shrinkage of the upper 5 feet is estimated for on-site natural alluvial soils,
slopewash, and unsuitable soils. That is, it will require approximately 1.15
cubic yards of excavated alluvium to make 1 cubic yard of fill compacted to 90
percent of the maximum dry density. About 10 percent shrinkage of the
alluvium between depths of about 5 to 10 feet is estimated, as well as 5 percent
shrinkage below a depth of about 10 feet. Additional loss of material may be
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 18 of 86
due to stripping, clearing, and grubbing. A bulking value of about 5 to 10
percent is anticipated for materials generated from the bedrock when placed as
compacted fill. The removal of oversize material generated by excavation of
the bedrock may affect volume losses.
4.1-9 Temporary Slopes: For purposes of construction, the soils encountered at the
site shall not be expected to stand vertically for any significant length of time
in cuts 4 feet. or higher. Where the necessary space is available, temporary
unsurcharged embankments may be sloped back at a 1:1 without shoring, up to
a height of 45 feet in competent bedrock with favorable bedding. Where any
cut slope exceeds a height of 50 feet within competent bedrock, a bench at
least 10 feet wide shall be located at mid -height. Within alluvial or compacted
fill material, temporary excavations may be made at a 1.25:1 cut to a height of
25 feet. If the temporary construction embankments are to be maintained
during the rainy season, berms are recommended along the tops of the slopes
where necessary to prevent runoff water from entering the excavation and
eroding the slope faces. Where sloped embankments are used, the tops of the
slopes shall be barricaded to prevent vehicles and storage loads within 5 feet of
the tops of the slopes. A greater setback may be necessary when considering
heavy vehicles, such as concrete trucks and cranes; in this case, the Project
Geotechnical Consultant shall be advised of such heavy vehicle loads so that
specific setback requirements can be established. All applicable safety
requirements and regulations, including OSHA regulations, shall be met.
4.1-10 Permanent Slopes: Permanent cut and fill slopes may be inclined at 2:1 or
flatter. The current bulk grading plan indicates that the steepest slope to be
constructed at the site during grading will be 2:1.
4.1-11 Proposed Cut Slopes: Cut slopes proposed for the rough grading of the subject
site have been designated as shown in the Project Geotechnical Report. Each
cut slope is discussed with specific recommendations presented in the "Slope
Stability Analyses" section of the Project Geotechnical Report. All grading
shall conform to the minimum recommendations presented in the Project
Geotechnical Report. If these slopes are modified from those that are discussed
in the Project Geotechnical Report, the modifications shall be reviewed by the
Exhibit A of Resolution l 1-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 19 of 86
Project Geotechnical Consultant to ascertain the applicability of project
recommendations or to revise recommendations. The cut slope designation,
gradient, and proposed mitigation are summarized in the Project Geotechnical
Report.
4.1-12 Fill Slopes: If the toe of a fill slope terminates on natural, fill, or cut, a keyway
is required at the toe of the fill slope. The keyway shall be a minimum width of
12 feet, be founded within competent material, and shall extend a horizontal
distance beyond the toe of the fill to the depth of the keyway. The keyway
shall be sloped back at a minimum gradient of 2 percent into the slope. The
width of fill slopes shall be no less than 8 feet and under no circumstances
shall the fill widths be less than what the compaction equipment being used
can fully compact. Benches shall be cut into the existing slope to bind the fill
to the slope. Benches shall be step-like in profile, with each bench not less than
4 feet in height and established in competent material. Compressible or other
unsuitable soils shall be removed from the slope prior to benching. Competent
material is defined as being essentially free of loose soil, heavy fracturing, or
erosion -prone material and is established by the Project Geotechnical
Consultant during grading.
Where the top or toe of a fill slope terminates on a natural or cut slope and the
natural or cut slope is steeper than a gradient of 3:1, a drainage terrace with a
width of at least 6 feet is required along the contact. As an alternative, the
natural or cut portion of the slope can be excavated and replaced as a stability
fill to provide an all -fill slope condition.
When constructing fill slopes, the grading contractor shall avoid spillage of
loose material down the face of the slope during the dumping and rolling
operations. Preferably, the incoming load shall be dumped behind the face of
the slope and bladed into place. After a maximum of 4 feet of compacted fill
has been placed, the contractor shall backroll the outer face of the slope by
backing the tamping roller over the top of the slope and thoroughly covering
all of the slope surface with overlapping passes of the roller. The foregoing
shall be repeated after the placement of each 4 -foot thickness of fill. As an
alternative, the fill slope can be over built and the slope cut back to expose a
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 20 of 86
compacted core. If the required compaction is not obtained on the fill slope,
additional rolling will be required prior to placement of additional fill, or the
slope shall be overbuilt and cut back to expose the compacted core.
4.1-13 Slope Planting: In order to reduce the potential for erosion, all cut and fill
slopes shall be seeded or planted with proper ground cover as soon as possible
following grading operations in accordance with Section 7019 of the County of
Los Angeles Building Code, 1999, or latest edition. The ground cover shall
consist of drought -resistant, deep -rooting vegetation. A landscape architect
shall be consulted for ground cover recommendations, plant selection,
installation procedures, and plant care requirements.
4.1-14 Subdrains: Canyon subdrains are required to intercept and remove groundwater
within canyon fill areas. All subdrains shall extend up -canyon, with the drain
inlet carried to within 15 feet of final pad grade. Specific subdrain locations
and recommendations shall be provided as part of the future rough grading
plan review.
4.1-15 Bedrock shall be over -excavated to a minimum depth of 5 feet below lots and
streets. Bedrock shall be overexcavated to a depth of at least 3 feet below
proposed soil subgrade areas receiving pavement or hardscape improvements.
4.1-16 Mint Canyon Formation bedrock materials exposed at pad grade may contain
expansive claystone beds that could cause differential expansion. Therefore,
within building areas at locations where expansive Mint Canyon Formation
units are exposed at pad grade, it is required that the bedrock be removed and
recompacted to a depth of at least 8 feet below the proposed final pad
elevations or 5 feet below the bottom of proposed footings, whichever is
greater. The soils generated by these over -excavations shall be mixed with
non -expansive soils to yield a relatively non -expansive mixture. Shall the
resulting fill soil still be expansive, special construction techniques such as pad
subgrade saturation or post -tensioned slabs may be required, at the discretion
of the Project Geotechnical Consultant, to reduce the potential for expansive
soil related distress.
Exhibit A of kesolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 21 of 86
4.1-17 To reduce the potential for cracking and differential settlement, the portion of
the lot in bedrock shall be over -excavated to a depth of at least 5 feet below the
proposed finished pad elevation; or 3 feet below the bottom of proposed
footings, whichever is greater. The over -excavation shall extend at least 5 feet
laterally beyond the building limits. Where removal and recompaction for
potentially expansive soils or bedrock is also required, it is recommended that
the 8 -foot removals be performed as described in the "Expansive Bedrock"
section of the Project Geotechnical Report.
Foundation and floor slabs for structures located within a transition zone shall
also contain special reinforcement as designed by the Project Structural
Engineer. Continuous footings located across the transition zone and 20 feet on
either side of the contact shall incorporate a minimum of two No. 4 bars, one at
the top and one at the bottom.
Floor slabs located across the transition zone and 20 feet on either side of the
contact shall have a minimum slab thickness of at least 4 inches and shall
contain as a minimum No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center.
As an alternative, post -tensioned floor slabs may be used.
4.1-18 General: Residential and commercial buildings up to three stories in height
may be supported on continuous or individual spread footings established in
properly compacted fill. The following recommendations shall be considered
preliminary since fill will be used in some lots to raise the site grade and the
final design values will depend upon the engineering characteristics of the fill
soil. The. preliminary design values are based upon the site investigation,
experience with the soils in the area, and the site preparation and grading
recommendations for this project.
4.1-19 Bearing Capacity: It is assumed that the proposed buildings will be founded at
approximately final planned grades, with column loads less than 100 kips, and
have normal floor loads with no special requirements. Individual column pads
or wall footings for buildings shall have a width of at least 12 inches and be
placed at a depth of at least 18 inches below the lowest final adjacent grade.
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 22 of 86
Structures may be placed on spread footings designed using a bearing value of
2,000 pounds per square foot (psf). The recommended bearing value is a net
value, and the weight of concrete in the footings may be taken as 50 pounds
per cubic foot (pcf). The weight of soil backfill may be neglected when
determining the downward loads from the footings. A one-third increase in the
bearing value may be used when considering wind or seismic loads.
While the actual bearing value of the fill placed at the site will depend on the
materials used and the compaction methods employed, the quoted bearing
value will be applicable if acceptable soils are used and are compacted as
recommended. The bearing value of the fill shall be confirmed during grading.
4.1-20 Lateral Resistance: Lateral loads may be resisted by soil friction and by the
passive resistance of the soils. A coefficient of friction of 0.4 applied to the
dead loads may be used between the footings, floor slabs, and the supporting
soils. The passive resistance of properly compacted fill soils may be assumed
to be equal to the pressure developed by a fluid with a density of 250 pcf. The
frictional resistance and the passive resistance of the soils may be combined
without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance.
4.1-21 Foundation Observations: To verify the presence of satisfactory soils at
foundation design elevations, the excavations shall be observed by the Project
Geotechnical Consultant. Excavations shall be deepened as necessary to extend
into satisfactory soils. Where the foundation excavations are deeper than 4 feet,
the sides of the excavations shall be sloped back at 0.75:1 or shored for safety.
Inspection of foundation excavations may also be required by the appropriate
reviewing governmental agencies. The contractor shall be familiar with the
inspection requirements of the reviewing agencies.
4.1-22 ' Under Section 1613, "Earthquake Loads" of the International Building Code
(IBC), the following coefficients and factors apply to the seismic force design
of structures on the project site.
Latitude 34.41599
Longitude -118.4342
Site Class D
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 23 of 86
Ss
1.810
Sl
0.673
SMs
1.810
SMI
1.009
SDs
1.207
SDI
0.673
The parameters were determined using the Ground Motion Parameter
Calculator (Version 5.0.8) at the United States Geologic Survey (USGS)
Earthquake Hazards website.
4.1-23 General: Backfill placed behind retaining walls shall be compacted to a
minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM
D 1557. When backfilling behind walls, it is required that the walls be braced
and heavy compaction equipment not be used closer to the back of the wall
than the height of the wall.
4.1-24 Lateral Earth Pressures: For design of non -building retaining walls, where the
surface of the backfill is level and the retained height of soils is less than 15
feet, it may be assumed that drained, non -expansive soils will exert a lateral
pressure equal to that developed by a fluid with a density of 35 pcf. Where the
surface of the backfill is inclined at 2:1, it may be assumed that drained soils
will exert a lateral pressure equal to that developed by a fluid with a density of
47 pcf.
In addition to the recommended earth pressures, the walls shall be designed to
resist any applicable surcharges due to any nearby foundations, walls, storage
or traffic loads. A drainage system, such as weepholes or a perforated pipe
shall be provided behind the walls to prevent the development of hydrostatic
pressure. Recommendations for wall drains are presented as follows.
If a drainage system is not installed, the walls shall be designed to resist an
additional hydrostatic pressure equal to that developed by a fluid with a density
of 60 pcf against the full height of the wall. In addition to the recommended
earth and hydrostatic pressures, the upper 10 feet of walls adjacent to vehicular
traffic areas shall be designed to resist a uniform lateral pressure of 100 psf.
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 24 of 86
This pressure is based on an assumed 300 psf surcharge behind the walls due
to normal traffic. If the traffic is kept back at least 10 feet from the walls, the
traffic surcharge is not required.
4.1-25 Wall Drainage: A drainage system shall be provided behind all retaining walls
or the walls shall be designed to resist hydrostatic pressures. Retaining wall
backfill may be drained by a perforated pipe installed at the base and back side
of the wall. The perforated pipe shall be at least 4 inches in diameter, placed
2
with the perforations down, and be surrounded on all sides by at least 6 inches
of gravel. The pipe shall be installed to drain at a gradient of between 0.5 to 1
percent and shall be connected to an outlet device. A filter fabric such as
Mirafi 140 or equivalent shall be placed on top of gravel followed by a
minimum 2 -feet thick compacted soil layer. Alternatively, the filter fabric and
gravel is not required when using a continuous slotted pipe and graded sand
which conforms to Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) "Fl
" Designated Filter Material.
The backside of the wall shall be waterproofed. A 6 -inch vertical gravel
chimney drain, Miradrain, or equivalent, shall be placed behind retaining walls
and extend to within 18 inches below the top of the wall backfill to provide a
drainage path to the perforated pipe. The top of the vertical drain shall be
capped with 18 inches of on-site soils.
The drainage system shall be observed by the Project Geotechnical Consultant
prior to backfilling the retaining wall. Inspection of the drainage system by the
City of Santa Clarita will also be required.
4.1-26 General: The proposed development includes a proposed buried soil cement
channel liner. Detailed construction plans for the soil cement channel liner are
not yet available and will be geotechnically reviewed in a future report to
ensure consistency with the findings in the Project Geotechnical Report. The
following preliminary recommendations can be used in the planning of the
proposed bank protection. The grading recommendations presented in the
preceding sections are also applicable to the proposed channel lining.
Overexcavation of the natural soils is not expected to be required for the lining,
though existing fill soils shall be excavated and replaced with compacted fill.
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 25 of 86
The backcut for the channel lining may be sloped back at 1.25:1. Concrete
lined and soil -cement channel liners may be inclined at 1.5:1 or flatter.
Grouted and ungrouted rip -rap liners may be inclined at 2:1 or flatter.
4.1-27 Soil Cement: It is expected that portions of the on-site alluvial soils will be
suitable for use in soil -cement. For estimating purposes, a cement content of 8
to 12 percent, by weight, may be used. To determine the actual required
cement content, the granular soils that are to be used in a soil -cement channel
lining shall be stockpiled. Representative samples of the stockpiled material
shall be mixed with varying amounts of cement, compacted, and cured for
different time intervals. Based on the results of unconfined compression tests
on the samples of the soil -cement mixtures, the Project Geotechnical
Consultant shall determine during grading activities the percentage of cement
content to be used during construction. This testing shall take place when soil
intended for soil cement manufacture has been stockpiled on site. The soil -
cement shall be placed in layers not more than 8 inches in thickness and shall
be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density at a moisture
content of no more than 2 percent over optimum for the soils: The placement
of the soil -cement shall be performed under the observation of the Project
Geotechnical Consultant, who shall perform sieve analyses, compaction,
unconfined compression, and moisture -density tests.
4.1-28 The Vista Canyon Road Bridge shall be constructed to extend the existing Lost
Canyon Road across the Santa Clara River. Final construction plans shall be
reviewed to ensure consistency with the Project Geotechnical Report. It is
anticipated that the bridge will be founded on driven or cast -in -drilled -hole
piles at bents and abutments.
4.1-29 The grading operations shall be observed by the Project Geotechnical
Consultant. The Project Geotechnical Consultant shall, at a minimum, have the
following duties:
• Observe the excavation so that any necessary modifications based on
variations in the soil/rock conditions encountered can be made;
• Observe the exposed subgrade in areas to receive fill and in areas where
excavation has resulted in the desired finished subgrade. The
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 26 of 86
representative shall also observe proof -rolling and delineation of areas
requiring overexcavation;
• Evaluate the suitability of on-site and import soils for fill placement;
collect and submit soil samples for required or recommended laboratory
testing where necessary;
• Observe the fill and backfill for uniformity during placement;
• Test fill for field density and compaction to determine the percentage of
compaction achieved during fill placement;
• Geologic observation of all cut slopes, keyways, backcuts and geologic
exposures during grading to ascertain that conditions conform to those
anticipated in the report; and
• Observe benching operations; observe canyon cleanouts for subdrains, and
subdrain installation.
3.1.3 Findings
The City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible, are adopted, and will reduce these
potential geotechnical hazard -related impacts of the project to less -than -significant levels.
Accordingly, the City finds that, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081, subdivision
(a)(1), and State CEQA Guidelines section 15091, subdivision (a)(1), changes or alterations have
been required in, or incorporated into, the project that mitigate or avoid potentially significant
geotechnical hazard -related impacts of the project identified in the Final EIR.
3.2 FLOOD
3.2.1 Potential Significant Impacts
Project -related increases in sedimentation and debris production, erosion and sedimentation
during construction could result in a potentially significant impact; mitigation is recommended to
reduce impacts to a level below significant.
3.2.2 Mitigation Measures
4.2-1 During all construction phases, temporary erosion control shall be
implemented to retain soil and sediment on the project site, and the bank
stabilization areas, as follows:.
• Re -vegetate exposed areas as quickly as possible;
0 Minimize disturbed areas;
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 27 of 86
• Divert runoff from downstream drainages with earth dikes, temporary
drains, slope drains, etc.;
• Reduce velocity through outlet protection, check dams, and slope
roughening/terracing;
• Implement dust control measures, such as sand fences, watering, etc.;
• Stabilize all disturbed areas with blankets, reinforced channel liners, soil
cement, fiber matrices, geotextiles, and/or other erosion resistant soil
coverings or treatments;
• Stabilize construction entrances/exits with aggregate underdrain with filter
cloth or other comparable method;
• Place sediment control BMPs at appropriate locations along the site
perimeter and at all operational internal inlets to the storm drain system at
all times during the rainy season (sediment control BMPs may include
filtration devices and . barriers, such as fiber rolls, silt fence, straw bale
barriers, and gravel inlet filters, and/or with settling devices, such as
sediment traps or basins); and/or
• Eliminate or reduce non-stormwater discharges (e.g., pipe flushing, fire
hydrant flushing, and over -watering during dust control, vehicle and
equipment wash down) from the construction site through the use of
appropriate sediment control BMPs.
4.2-2 All necessary permits, agreements, letters of exemption from the USACE
and/or the CDFG for project -related development within their respective
jurisdictions must be obtained prior to the issuance of a grading permit, which
permits grading within their respective jurisdictions.
4.2-3 By October 1st of each year, a separate erosion control plan for construction
activities shall be submitted to the local municipality describing the erosion
control measures that will be implemented during the rainy season (October 1
through April 15).
4.2-4 A final developed condition hydrology analysis (LACDPW Drainage Concept
Report [DCR] and Final Design Report [FDR]) shall be _ prepared in
conjunction with final project design when precise engineering occurs. This
final analysis will be completed to confirm that the final project design is
consistent with the approved drainage concept and this analysis. Those final
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 28 of 86
calculations shall establish design features for the project that satisfy the
criterion that post -development peak stormwater runoff discharge rates,
velocities, and duration in natural drainage systems mimic pre -development
conditions. All elements of the storm drain system shall conform to the policies
and standards of the LACDPW, Flood Control Division, as applicable.
4.2-5 Final project hydrology and debris production calculations shall be prepared by
a project engineer to verify the requirements for debris basins and/or desilting
inlets consistent with the approved drainage concept and this analysis.
3.2.3 Findings
The City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible, are adopted, and will reduce these
potential flood -related impacts of the project to less -than -significant levels. Accordingly, the
City finds that, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081, subdivision (a)(1), and State
CEQA Guidelines section 15091, subdivision (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required
in, or incorporated into, the project that mitigate or avoid potentially significant flood -related
impacts of the project identified in.the Final EIR.
3.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
3.3.1 Potential Significant Impacts
The project would significantly impact the following vegetation communities: coast live oak
associations; cottonwood associations; big sagebrush associations; riparian scrub; alkali rye
series; and, alluvial scrub (terrace). Additionally, because the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the
California Fish and Game Code prohibit the take of bird nests with eggs or young, the project
could significantly impact the active nests of common bird species. The project also could
significantly impact the slender mariposa lily, Plummer's mariposa lily, oak trees, and special -
status wildlife.
The project could result in indirect impacts to biological resources attributable to increased
human and domestic animal presence along the River Corridor, increased populations of non-
native species, increased light and glare, stormwater runoff, and construction -related activities.
The project also would result in cumulative impacts attributable to reductions. in total habitat
area, limitation of species diversity, restriction of animal movement corridors, and overall loss of
sensitive vegetation communities, wildlife habitat, and open area in the Santa Clarita Valley.
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 29 of 86
However, with implementation of the mitigation measures enumerated below, as well as those
identified for water quality, all direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of the project would be
reduced to a level below significant.
3.3.2 Mitigation Measures
4.6-1 The applicant shall mitigate for alkali rye at a ratio of 0.5:1 through on-site
habitat restoration. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit for the project, the
applicant shall provide to the City Community Development Department for
review and approval a detailed mitigation and monitoring plan for the
restoration of alkali rye. The mitigation plan shall encompass comparable
general habitat attributes and acreage of useable wildlife habitat on the subject
property (approximately 0.35 acres), and include documentation to monitor the
success of the restoration through performance standards over a five-year
period. The proposed mitigation site would be in natural areas within or
adjacent to the Oak Park or other suitable open space areas within the project
site.
The applicant shall implement the Lily Plan, 2009, that includes salvaging and
re-establishment of slender mariposa population on the mitigation site
designated in the plan.
If discovered during pre -construction surveys, the applicant shall prepare and
implement a Plummer's mariposa lily mitigation plan that would include
salvaging and re-establishment of Plummer's mariposa population on an on-
site mitigation site designated in the plan.
4.6-2 The applicant shall mitigate for the loss of riparian scrub and big sagebrush
scrub through implementation of the Wetlands Plan, 2009 to the satisfaction of
the City's Community Development Department.
4.6-3 All stream flows traversing a construction site or temporary access road shall
be diverted around the site and under access roads (using a temporary culverts
or crossings that allow fish passage). A temporary diversion channel shall be
constructed using the least damaging method possible, such as blading a
narrow pilot channel through an open sandy river bottom. The removal of
wetland and riparian vegetation to construct the channel shall be avoided to the
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 30 of 86
greatest extent possible. The temporary channel shall be connected to a natural
channel downstream of the construction site prior to diverting the stream. The
integrity of the channel and diversion shall be maintained throughout the
construction period. The original stream channel alignment shall be restored
after construction, provided suitable conditions are present at the work site
after construction. Any temporary stream diversion plan shall be consistent
with the USACE and CDFG permits required for project implementation.
4.6-4 A qualified biologist shall be present when any stream diversion takes place,
and shall patrol the areas both within, upstream, and downstream of the stream
diversion work area. Under no circumstances shall the unarmored threespine
stickleback be collected or relocated, unless USFWS personnel or their agents
implement this measure or authorized by USACE in a subsequent Clean Water
Act section 404 permit or streambed alteration agreement issued by CDFG.
4.6-5 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall employ a qualified
biologist to implement the Spadefoot Plan, 2009, with review and oversight
provided by the City Planning Department. Any substantive revisions to or
deviations from the Spadefoot Plan, 2009, shall be provided to .CDFG for
consideration and input.
4.6-6 Sixty days prior to grading activities, a qualified biologist shall contact CDFG
and consult with CDFG staff regarding the timing of pre -construction surveys.
In any event, no later than thirty days prior to grading activities, a qualified
biologist shall conduct a survey within appropriate habitat areas to capture and
relocate individual silvery legless lizard, coastal western whiptail, rosy boa,
San Diego banded gecko, San Bernardino ringneck snake, coast horned lizard,
coast patch -nosed snake, and San Diego black -tailed jackrabbit in order to
avoid or minimize take of these sensitive species. Individuals shall be relocated
to nearby undisturbed areas with suitable habitat, as identified by the qualified
biologist in consultation with CDFG staff. Results of the surveys and
relocation efforts shall be provided to the City with a copy to CDFG.
Collection and relocation of animals shall only occur with the proper scientific
collection and handling permits.
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 31 of 86
4.6-7 Beginning 30 or more days prior to the removal of any suitable riparian habitat
that will occur during the riparian bird breeding and nesting season of March
15th through September 1st, the applicant shall arrange for weekly bird
surveys to detect the above riparian bird species in the habitats to be removed,
and any other such habitat within 300 feet of the construction work areas. The
surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist using CDFG or USFWS
survey protocols. The surveys shall continue on a weekly basis, with the last
survey being conducted no more than 7 days prior to the initiation of
construction work.
If an active nest is found, clearing and construction within 300 feet of the nest
shall be postponed until the nest is vacated and juveniles have fledged, and
when there is no evidence of a second attempt at nesting. Limits of
construction to avoid a nest site shall be established in the field with flagging
and stakes or construction fencing. Construction personnel shall be instructed
on the ecological sensitivity of the area.
Results of the surveys, including surveys to locate nests, shall be provided to
the USACE and CDFG. The results shall include a description of any nests
located and measures to be implemented to avoid nest sites.
4.6-8 Signage shall be installed along the River Corridor indicating that no pets of
any kind are allowed within the preserved River Corridor.
4.6-9 Fencing of sufficient height and design (i.e., ranch -rail) shall be constructed
between the edge of developed areas and the River Corridor to deter humans
and pets from entering habitat areas within the River Corridor.
Locally indigenous native shrubs shall be planted along the fence to further
deter access. Final fence design shall be approved by the City Planning
Department. Fencing shall not be placed within the USACE or CDFG
jurisdictional areas of the site.
The potentially palette of local indigenous native plant species to be used along
the fence include the following, observed on site during the course of
biological surveys: California juniper, blue elderberry, four -wing saltbush,
Exhibit A of Resolution 11-02
Vista Canyon
Finding Required by CEQA
Master Case 07-127
Page 32 of 86
quailbush, skunk bush, California sagebrush, Great Basin sagebrush, coyote
bush, mulefat, white -stem rabbitbrush, thick -leaf yerba santa, bladderpod, cane
cholla, coastal prickly pear, coast live oak, golden currant, chaparral currant,
black sage, western sycamore, California buckwheat, thick -leaf ceanothus,
wedgeleaf ceanothus, chamise, Freinont's cottonwood, Gooding's willow,
arroyo willow, and Whipple's yucca.
4.6-10 Human access into the River Corridor shall only occur in designated locations
(i.e., existing and future trails). All motorized vehicles and off -trail bike riding
shall be prohibited from entering the preserved River Corridor with the
exception of authorized emergency or maintenance vehicles, and signs shall be
posted along the River Corridor prohibiting such uses.
4.6-11 Prohibitions against human, domestic animal, and motorized vehicleibike entry
into the River Corridor shall be established by ordinance or recorded CC&Rs.
4.6-12 Interpretative signs shall be constructed and placed in appropriate areas, as
determined by a qualified biologist, that explain the sensitivity of natural
habitats and the need to minimize impacts on these natural areas. The signs
will state that the River Corridor is a protected natural area and that all
pedestrians must remain on designated trails, all pets are to be restrained on a
leash, and that it is illegal to harm, remove, or collect native plants and
animals. The project applicant shall be responsible for installation of
interpretive signs and fencing along the River Corridor.
4.6-13 A qualified restoration specialist shall ensure that the proposed landscape
plants will not naturalize and cause maintenance or vegetation community
degradation in open -space areas of the project site. Container plants to be
installed within public areas shall be inspected by a qualified restoration
specialist for the presence of disease, weeds, and pests, including Argentine
ants. Plants with pests, weeds, or. diseases shall be rejected. In addition,
landscape plants shall not be on the Cal -IPC California Invasive Plant
Inventory (http://www.cal-ipc.org/ip/inventory/index.php). Except as required
for fuel modification, irrigation of perimeter landscaping adjacent to the River
Corridor with native plant communities shall be limited to temporary irrigation
(i.e., until plants become established).