HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-03-26 - AGENDA REPORTS - MC 12-132 HABITAT FOR HEROES (2)Agenda Item: 14
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
AGENDA REPORT
PUBLIC HEARING City Manager Approval:
Item to be presented by:
DATE: March 26, 2013
SUBJECT: MASTER CASE NUMBER 12-132: HABITAT FOR HEROES
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
RECOMMENDED ACTION
City Council:
1) Adopt a Resolution adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving Master Case
12-132 (General Plan Amendment 12-001, Tentative Tract Map 072039, Ridgeline Alteration
Permit 12-001, Hillside Review 12-001, Conditional Use Permit 12-009, Initial Study 12-006) to
change the General Plan land use designation from Business Park (BP) to a General Plan Land
Use Designation of Urban Residential 3 (UR3) to allow for the construction of 87 affordable
housing units located at Assessor's Parcel Number 2836-015-029, just south of the intersection
of Centre Point Parkway and Golden Triangle Road, in the City of Santa Clarita, with the
attached Zone Change (Exhibit "A"), General Plan Amendment (Exhibit "B") and Conditions of
Approval (Exhibit "C").
2) Introduce and pass to a second reading on April 9, 2013, an Ordinance entitled: "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA APPROVING
ZONE CHANGE 12-001 (MASTER CASE 12-132), TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP AND
CHANGE THE ZONING OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 2836-015-029 FROM
BUSINESS PARK (BP) TO RESIDENTIAL MODERATE (RM) ON THE PROJECT SITE
LOCATED JUST SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF CENTRE POINTE PARKWAY
AND GOLDEN TRIANGLE ROAD, IN THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA.
BACKGROUND
On February 19, 2013, a public hearing on the proposed project was held before the Planning
Commission. After staffs presentation, a presentation by the applicant, public comment and
deliberations, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution P13-001 recommending the City
Council approve Master Case 12-132. The Planning Commission did include an additional
condition for the project which requires the applicant to,conduct soil samples on the subject
property. The purpose of the soil analysis is to verify that no pollutants from the adjacent
Whittaker-Bermite property are impacting the subject property. The applicant completed soil
samples and provided the City with a report on March 14, 2013. Soils were tested from six test
pits located throughout the subject property. Laboratory analysis included in the report found no
evidence of any pollutants (tretrachloroethene, trichloroethene, and perchlorate). A copy of the
report is attached.
Also, subsequent to Planning Commission approval and in cooperation with the applicant,
Planning Condition 8 (PL8) was clarified to include language regarding the 30 -year deed
restriction that applies to resale of the proposed residential units on-site.
Projec[ Overview
The applicant, Habitat for Humanity, is proposing the development of a 22.8 acre site with an
87 -unit affordable housing development. The proposal includes the following components:
• General Plan Amendment/Zone Change: The project proposes a General Plan Amendment
and Zone Change that would result in a General Plan designation of Urban Residential 3
(UR3) and a zoning designation of Residential Moderate (RM) from the current General Plan
Land Use Designation and Zoning Designation of Business Park (BP);
• Tentative Tract Map: The project proposes creating a single -lot subdivision with 87
condominium lots;
• Hillside Development/Ridgeline Alteration Permit: The project has proposed development
on land with an average cross slope greater than 10% and within 1,000 feet of a General Plan
designated significant ridgeline and is therefore subject to the City of Santa Clarita's Hillside
Development Review / Ridgeline Alteration Permit;
• Conditional Use Permit — Haul Route: The proposed project would require the import of
over 100,000 cubic yards of earth requiring a Conditional Use Permit.
Specific elements of the project include:
Housing Units: The project proposes 11 single -story, detached and 76 two-story duplex
units. The maximum height of the two story units is 23 feet. The units will be made
available to American veterans and their families. Each residence will also have a back yard
in compliance with residential development requirements.
Green Space: The project proposes two passive green spaces and one central community
play area. The central play area will consist of a children's play area, gazebo and community
II
green space.
• Grading: The project proposes the movement of approximately 199,992 cubic yards of earth.
This is comprised of 68,005 cubic yards of on-site cut material and the import of 131,986
cubic yards of earth from an off-site source.
• Oak Trees: There is one dead oak tree on the subject property near the northern boundary of
the site. Six oak trees are adjacent to the subject property's northern boundary, two of which
are heritage sized. The canopy of one of the heritage sized oaks overhangs onto the subject
property. All of the oak trees on, or adjacent to the subject property are outside the grading
envelope.
• Retaining Walls: The project proposes several retaining walls, ranging from 3 to 12 feet
throughout the project.
• Entry Monument: The project proposes the creation of a significant entry monument feature
including green space and seating areas.
Site Description
All 22.8 acres of the subject property is currently vacant, undeveloped land with portions that
have been disturbed for fire prevention purposes. Under the current BP designation the project
site could develop a maximum of approximately 355,000 square feet of commercial/light
industrial space.
The project site is located on Centre Pointe Parkway north of Bowman High School on
Assessor's Parcel Number 2836-015-029. A vicinity map is included with this staff report.
Centre Pointe Parkway is an industrial collector road that serves to connect Soledad Canyon
Road, a major arterial, with Newhall Ranch Road, a major arterial, and provide access to a
variety of commercial uses in the area. The project site is bounded to the south by Bowman High
School. Bowman High School currently serves approximately 515 students in grades 11 and 12.
The normal class schedule begins at 8:00 AM and ends at 3:00 PM The project site is bounded
to the north by Creative Years Nursery School. The facility offers educational programming to
children as young as two years of age, through pre -kindergarten. Full day programs begin at 6:00
AM and end at 6:00 PM while half day programs begin at 9:00 AM and end at noon. The project
site is bounded on the east by Centre Pointe Parkway beyond which are various office and
commercial uses. The project site is bounded to the west by the vacant Whittaker-Bermite
property and is within a specific plan area.
Native vegetation exists on-site and a Significant Ridgeline as identified by the General Plan runs
roughly north and south along the western edge of the property. The site ranges from
approximately 1,160 feet in elevation on the eastern portion of the property to approximately
1,300 feet on the western. A majority of the project site contains an average cross slope of 50%
or more. However, the proposed project is focused on a relatively flat portion along the
southeastern portion of the project site. The proposed development footprint is 9.4 acres. There
are no current land uses on the project site.
General Plan Amendment and "Lone Change
G
The project proposes a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change that would result in a
General Plan designation of Urban Residential 3 and a zoning designation of Residential
Moderate (RM) from the current General Plan Land Use Designation and Zoning Designation of
Business Park (BP). Both the proposed General Plan land use designation and zoning
designation have a maximum density of 11 units per acre. Under the current BP designation the
project site could develop a maximum of approximately 355,000 square feet of commercial/light
industrial space.
State zoning law (Government Code Section 65913.1) requires localities to zone sufficient
vacant land for residential use with appropriate standards to meeting the housing needs identified
in the housing element and other sections of the general plan. Specifically, the project is
consistent with Goal H2, Policy H 2.1.3, Program H 2.7 and Policy LU 1.3.5 of the General Plan.
The proposed project is also consistent with all requirements for residential development as
identified by the Santa Clarita Unified Development Code (UDC) Sections 17.15 and 17.18.
Ridgeline Alteration
The project proposes to locate 87 residential units on-site in the vicinity of a General Plan
designated Significant Ridgeline. The residential units will be both single -story and two-story
with a maximum height of 23 feet. Grading on-site requires the creation of a flat pad
approximately 30 feet above street grade that continues up the existing significant ridgeline to a
point approximately 50 feet above street grade. A number of maintained slopes will be created to
accommodate the created pad. In addition, a small spur extending down from and below the
ridgeline will be cut to accommodate the pad.
Due to its proximity to the significant ridgeline, the project is subject to the City of Santa
Clarita's Hillside Development and Ridgeline Alteration Ordinances. These processes provide
hillside development standards to maximize the positive impacts of site design, grading,
landscape architecture and building architecture, maintain natural characteristics, landforms,
vegetation, wildlife communities hydrologic features, scenic qualities and retain the integrity of
predominant off-site and on-site views to retain the identity, image and environmental quality of
the City.
The project proposes to retain all significant ridgelines by clustering development near the
existing roadway, away from the ridge. Although the project site is nearly 23 acres in size, only
9.4 acres are proposed for development. The balance of the project site, approximately 13.6
acres, will remain undisturbed. The project will also not directly impinge upon the crest
ridgeline with the extent of the grading envelope extending no further than 33 feet below the
crest of the ridgeline.
Conditional Use Permit
A conditional use permit is required for the haul route associated with the import of
approximately 131,986 cubic yards of material from an off-site location. The site providing the
material is approximately ''A mile south of the project site along Centre Pointe Parkway at APN's
2+
2836-070-019 through 2836-070-022.
Mitigated Negative Declaration
An initial study was prepared for the project and determined that all impacts related to the
proposed projects are considered to be less than significant with mitigation. A mitigation plan
was incorporated to address air quality, biology, geotechnical, and noise related impacts.
An Initial Study was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). The Initial Study determined that all impacts related to the proposed projects are
considered to be less than significant with mitigation. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative
Declaration was prepared in accordance with Section 15070 of CEQA. The Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Initial Study were made available during a thirty -day public review period.
Documents were posted at the Permit Center at the City of Santa Clarita City Hall, and the City
of Santa Clarita Library, Valencia Branch.
Noticing
All noticing requirements for a public hearing have been completed. A 1/8th page advertisement
was placed in The Signal Newspaper on February 26, 2013. All property owners within 1,000
feet were also notified of the public hearing by mail and a sign was posted on-site on March 11,
2013. Staff received twelve correspondence from the public prior the Planning Commission
meeting, of which eleven were supportive of the project. Since the Planning Commission
meeting staff has received another two pieces of correspondence, both of which are in support.
Planning Commission Recommendation
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Other actions as determined by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommended action.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
Ordinance f
Exhibit A: Zone Change
Exhibit B: General Plan Amendment
Exhibit C: Conditions of Approval
Project Location
Initial Study
Soil Test Results
5
Letters of Support
Public Hearing Notice
0
RESOLUTION 13-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA TO ADOPT THE MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED FOR THE PROJECT AND APPROVE
MASTER CASE 12-132 (GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 12-001, TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 072039, RIDGELINE ALTERATION PERMIT 12-001, HILLSIDE
REVIEW 12-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 12-009, INITIAL STUDY 12-006) TO
CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM BUSINESS PARK
(BP) TO A GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION OF URBAN RESIDENTIAL 3
(UR3) AND A ZONING DESIGNATION OF RESIDENTIAL MODERATE (RM) TO
ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 87 AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS
LOCATED AT ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 2836-015-029, JUST SOUTH OF THE
INTERSECTION OF CENTRE POINTE PARKWAY AND GOLDEN TRIANGLE
ROAD, IN THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, WITH THE ATTACHED ZONE
CHANGE (EXHIBIT "A"), GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (EXHIBIT "B") AND
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (EXHIBIT C)
WHEREAS, in June 2011, the City Council adopted the General Plan of the City. of Santa
Clarita and certified the Environmental Impact Report. The City's General Plan Land
Use and Zoning Maps presently designate the subject property as Business Park (BP);
WHEREAS, on September 21, 2012, Habitat for Humanity (the applicant) filed an
application (Master Case 12-132) for the construction of a 87 affordable housing units located at
assessor's parcel number 2836-015-029, just south of the intersection of Centre Point Parkway
and Golden Triangle Road in the City of Santa Clarita;
WHEREAS, The project will provide low and very low income housing to veterans of the
United States Military and their families;
WHEREAS, the proposed residential units can be considered as part of the City of Santa
Clarita's Regional Housing Needs Assessment for affordable housing;
WHEREAS, the subject property has a gross acreage of approximately 22.8 acres. A
total of 9.4 acres will be disturbed by the project;
WHEREAS, the application includes General Plan Amendment 12-001 and Zone Change
12-001 to change the Zoning and General Plan land use designation of the subject site from
Business Park (BP) to a General Plan land use designation of Urban Residential 3 (UR3) and a
Zoning designation of Residential Moderate (RM), Tentative Tract Map 072039 for the creation
of a single lot subdivision with 87 condominium lots, Ridgeline Alteration Permit 12-001 and
Hillside Review 12-001 for development on an identified significant ridgeline, and Conditional
Use Permit 12-009 for the import of more than 100,000 cubic yards of earth for grading
purposes;
WHEREAS, the surrounding land uses include a Bowman High School to the south,
Creative Years Preschool to the north, professional office space to the east and undeveloped land
to the west;
WHEREAS, the application was deemed incomplete on October 8, 2012, lacking the
necessary information to process the development application. The applicant worked with staff
to provide the necessary information to deem the application complete on November 15, 2012;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on this project
commencing on February 19, 2013, at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa
Clarita;
WHEREAS, at the hearing described above, the Planning Commission considered the
staff report, staff presentation, applicant presentation, and public testimony on the proposal and
unanimously approved Resolution P13-001, recommending the City Council approve Master
Case 12-132;
WHEREAS, at the hearing described above, the Planning Commission directed staff to
include an additional Condition of Approval to require testing of soil for hazardous materials;
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on this project
commencing on March 26, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa
Clarita; and
WHEREAS, at the hearing described above, the City Council considered the staff report,
staff presentation, applicant presentation, public testimony and conducted their own
deliberations.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Santa
Clarita, California, as follows:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT. Based on the
foregoing facts and findings and the entire record, the City Council hereby finds as follows:
a. Following approval of General Plan Amendment 12-001 amending the Land Use Element
Land Use Map, Master Case 12-132 is consistent with the land use designation of Urban
Residential 3 (UR3). Furthermore, General Plan Amendment 12-001 is consistent with
the goals and policies established in the General Plan as follows:
• Goal H2: Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of
extremely low, very low, low and moderate income households;
The proposed project would provide 87 affordable housing units to be offered to
veterans of the United States military and their families. The proposed housing
product would be offered at or below Low Income (80% median income) or Very
2
Low Income (50% median income).
e Policy H 2.1.3: Encourage the development of housing affordable to lower income
groups in areas well served by public transportation, schools, retail, and other
services;
The proposed project is located within a regional commercial center containing
various retail uses, grocery uses and professional services. In addition to the
recreational amenities on-site, the subject property is within close proximity to the
City's George A. Caravalho Sports Complex which offers a wide variety of
recreational and community functions. The subject property is also in close proximity
to the bike path that runs along Soledad Canyon Road connecting the subject property
to nearly 70 miles of community -wide trails and paseos. Finally, the project site
would be served by a bus stop along the project frontage and is in proximity to the
Santa Clarita Metrolink station.
• Prop—ram H 2.7: Collaborate with Non -Profit Affordable Housing Developers;
Founded in 1976, Habitat for Humanity International is a non-profit organization that
develops affordable housing units for the community.
• Policy LU 1.3.5.• Encourage flexible siting and design techniques within hillside
areas in order to preserve steep slopes or other unique physical features, including
clustering of residential units provided all residential lots meet the applicable
minimum lots size requirements of the Land Use Element and the Zoning Ordinance,
including the Community Special Standards Districts;
The project proposes to retain all significant ridgelines by clustering development
near the existing roadway, away from the ridge on portions of the site that were
previously disturbed. Although the project site is nearly 23 acres in size, only 9.4
acres are proposed for development. The balance of the project site, approximately
13.6 acres, will remain undisturbed.
b. The RM zone allows for a density -maximum of 11 units per gross acre. However, given
the average cross slope of the subject property the maximum number of units is 88. The
proposal calls for 87 units is within the threshold. Further, the proposed project complies
with all of the standards and requirements for residential development as defined by the
Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 17.15.020.
SECTION 2 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FINDINGS. Based on the foregoing facts and
findings for Tentative Tract Map 072039, the City Council hereby find as follows:
a. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is
consistent with the City of Santa Clarita General Plan, Unified Development Code, and
any specific plan;
3
61
As identified and described in Section 1(a), the proposed project is consistent with the
General Plan Housing Element Goal H 2, Policy H 2.1.3, Program H 2.7 and Policy LU
1.3.5. It is also consistent with the density requirements of the proposed Urban
Residential (UR3) General Plan land use designation and Residential Moderate (RM)
zoning designation. The project is also consistent with all requirements for residential
development described in Sections 17.15 and 17.18 of the UDC.
b. The project site is physically suited for the type of development;
Following the approval of General Plan Amendment 12-001, the project site will be
suitable for residential development. The project site will assume a maximum density of
11 units per gross acre. Given the cross slope of the subject property the maximum
number of units is 88. The proposal calls for 87 units which is within the threshold. In
addition, the project is consistent with the allowable height for structures in the
Residential Moderate (RM) zone.
C. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development;
The proposed project calls for a one -lot subdivision including 87 condominium lots. The
project site will assume a maximum density of 11 units per gross acre. Given the cross
slope of the subject property the maximum number of units is 88. The proposal calls for
87 units which is within the threshold.
d. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife
or their habitat;
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the project and concluded
that all impacts to the environment, fish and wildlife can be mitigated to a level that is
less than significant. No special status plant or wildlife species were observed on-site
during a biological assessment performed for the project. However, there is a moderate
to high probability that five special status plant species and two special status wildlife
species could occur on site. Mitigation measures have been incorporated to reduce
impacts to a level that is less than significant.
e. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious health
problems;
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was completed for the project and concluded
that impacts associated with the project will have a less than significant impact on public
health. Furthermore, a Phase I Environmental assessment was completed for the project
and concluded that:
• The subject property is not expected to constitute the potential for recognized
4 `
I�
environmental conditions;
• The nature and extent of previous operations on the subject property are not expected
to constitute the potential for business environmental risk; and
The subject property does not constitute a material threat to public health or the
environment.
f. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not conflict with easements,
acquired by the public at large, or for access through or use of property within the
proposed subdivision;
The applicant shall dedicate all required rights-of-way and easements as required by the
project. As such, there is no conflict with easements acquired by the public at large.
SECTION 3 RIDGELINE ALTERATION PERMIT FINDINGS. Based on the foregoing
facts and findings for Ridgeline Alteration Permit 12-001, the City Council hereby finds as
follows:
a. The proposed use in in conformance with the various goals and policies of the General
Plan;
As identified and described in Section 1, the proposed project is consistent with the
General Plan Housing Element Goal H 2, Policy H 2.1.3, Program H 2.7 and LU 1.3.5.
b. The use or development will not be materially detrimental to the visual character of the
neighborhood or community, nor will it endanger the public health, safety or general
welfare;
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the project and concluded
that any impacts to visual character, public health and safety or the general welfare will
be less than significant. Further, as described in Section 2(e), a Phase I Environmental
assessment was completed for the project and concluded that the proposed project does
not constitute a material threat to public health or the environment.
The entire subject property is approximately 22.8 acres in size. The disturbed footprint of
the project is approximately 9.4 acres in size and is clustered toward the eastern edge of
the property, away from the ridgeline. Approximately 13.4 acres will remain undisturbed.
Further, no structures would extend beyond the ridge top, and structure height is within
the maximum allowable height for the Residential Moderate (RM) zone.
C. The appearance of the use or development will not be different than the appearance of
adjoining ridgeline areas so as to cause depreciation of the ridgeline in the vicinity,
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the project and concluded
that that any visual impacts as a result of the project would be less than significant. The
project site is in an urbanized area and between fully improved commercial and
5
institutional uses within an active business park. Under the current BP (Business Park)
General Plan land use designation and zoning designation, the development of 355,000
square feet of commercial space could potentially be supported. The proposed 87
residential units are less intensive than the highest use the current zone would allow. As
a result, the project would produce fewer visual impacts on the surrounding area than
what the current land use designation and zone could potentially support.
The entire subject property is approximately 22.8 acres in size. The disturbed footprint of
the project is approximately 9.4 acres in size and is clustered toward the eastern edge of
the property, away from the ridgeline. Approximately 13.4 acres will remain undisturbed.
Further, no structures would extend beyond the ridge top, and structure height is within
the maximum allowable height for the Residential Moderate (RM) zone.
d. The establishment of the proposed use or development will not impede the normal and
orderly development and improvement of surrounding property, nor encourage
inappropriate encroachments to the ridgeline area;
The proposed development is in an urbanized area and between fully improved
commercial and institutional uses within an active business park and, as a result, will not
impede the normal and orderly development of surrounding property nor encourage
inappropriate encroachments to the ridgeline area.
e. The proposed use or development will not violate the visual integrity of the ridgeline area
as has been demonstrated through precise illustration and depiction required in Unified
Development Code (UDC) Section 17.80.030;
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the project and, through the
use of a visual analysis and simulation prepared for the project, concluded that visual
impacts from the project will be less than significant.
f The use or development minimizes the effects of grading to the extent practicable to
ensure that the natural character of the ridgeline is preserved;
The entire subject property is approximately 22.8 acres in size. The disturbed footprint of
the project is approximately 9.4 acres in size and is clustered toward the eastern edge of
the property, away from the ridgeline on previously disturbed portions of the site.
Approximately 13.4 acres will remain undisturbed.
g. The proposed use or development maintains the appearance of natural ridgelines with
uses and development consistent with density requirements established in UDC Section
17.80.035:
As described in Section 2(b), the proposed project will comply with the City of Santa
Clarita's maximum density requirements for hillside development as identified by UDC
Section 17.80.035. The entire subject property is approximately 22.8 acres in size. The
6
12
disturbed footprint of the project is approximately 9.4 acres in size and is clustered
toward the eastern edge of the property, away from the ridgeline. Approximately 13.4
acres will remain undisturbed. Further, no structures would extend beyond the ridge top,
and structure height is within the maximum allowable height for the Residential
Moderate (RM) zone.
h. The proposed use or development utilizes or creates minimally invasive grading
techniques, creates visual interest in the project site design and/or spacing of
development that significantly exceeds the minimum standards identified in the City of
Santa Clarita Hillside Development Guidelines;
The proposed project will comply with the Hillside Development standards by:
• Retaining all significant ridgelines by clustering development near the existing
roadway. Although the project site is 22.8 acres in size, only 9.4 acres are proposed
for development
• Not resulting in any structures that would extend into the skyline above the ridge.
The extent of the project will extend no further than 33 feet below the crest of the
ridge;
• Keeping the proposed project from extending beyond the ridge top, and maintaining
structure height within the maximum allowable height for the Residential Moderate
(RM) zone; and
• Employing curvilinear street design.
i. The proposed use or development is designed to mimic the existing topography to the
greatest extent possible through the use of landform contour grading;
Grading for the project will follow the natural grand to the maximum extent possible and
manufactured slopes will be revegetated to soften the appearance of the slope and provide
soil stability.
j. The proposed use or development demonstrates creative and imaginative site design
resulting in a project that will complement the community character and provide a direct
benefit to current and future community residents of not only the proposed use or
development, but the residents of the City of Santa Clarita as a whole;
The project site is in an urbanized area and between fully improved commercial and
institutional uses within an active business park. Under the current BP (Business Park)
General Plan land use designation and zoning designation, the development of 355,000
square feet of commercial space could potentially be supported. The proposed 87
residential units is less intensive than the current zone would allow. As a result, the
project would produce fewer visual impacts on the surrounding area than what the current
land use designation and zone could potentially support. In addition, the area proposed
for development is clustered on the eastern portion of the subject property away from the
ridgeline. Finally, approximately 60% of the project site would remain undisturbed in
7
order to protect the existing character of the site for surrounding uses and aesthetic
impacts.
k. The proposed use or development does not alter natural landmarks and prominent
natural features of the ridgelines,
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the project and concluded
that impacts to natural landmarks and prominent natural features will be less than
significant.
1. The provisions and implementation of this section do not create an undue economic
hardship or deny the minimal use of the land;
The proposed project complies with the maximum unit density requirement based on the
cross slope analysis provided and all requirements of the UDC for residential
development. As a result, it does not create an undue economic hardship or deny the
minimal use of land.
The project proposes to provide affordable housing units to veterans of the United States
military and their families. The units will be available to low and very low income
families and be included toward the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment (REINA)
obligation.
SECTION 4. HILLSIDE REVIEW FINDINGS. Based on the foregoing facts and
findings for Hillside Review 12-001, the City Council hereby find as follows:
a. That the natural topographic features and appearances are conserved by means of
landform grading so as to blend any manufactured slopes or required drainage benches
into the natural topography;
The entire subject property is approximately 22.8 acres in size. The disturbed footprint of
the project is approximately 9.4 acres in size and is clustered toward the eastern edge of
the property, away from the ridgeline. Approximately 13.4 acres will remain undisturbed.
The manufactured slopes will be revegetated to blend into the existing site and reduce
visual impacts. Visual simulations prepared for the project demonstrate that aesthetic
impacts will be minimal.
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the project and concluded
that impacts to natural landmarks and prominent natural features will be less than
significant.
b. That natural, prominent topographic features are retained to the maximum extent
possible,
The entire subject property is approximately 22.8 acres in size. The disturbed footprint of
0
14
the project is approximately 9.4 acres in size and is clustered toward the eastern edge of
the property, away from the ridgeline. Approximately 13.4 acres will remain undisturbed.
As described in Section 2(b), the proposed project will comply with the City of Santa
Clarita's maximum density requirements for hillside development as identified by UDC
Section 17.80.035. The entire subject property is approximately 22.8 acres in size. The
disturbed footprint of the project is approximately 9.4 acres in size and is clustered
toward the eastern edge of the property, away from the ridgeline. Approximately 13.4
acres will remain undisturbed. Further, no structures would extend beyond the ridge top,
and structure height is within the maximum allowable height for the Residential
Moderate (RM) zone.
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the project and concluded
that impacts to natural landmarks and prominent natural features will be less than
significant.
C. That clustered sites and buildings are utilized where such techniques can be
demonstrated to substantially reduce grading alterations of the terrain and to contribute
to the preservation of trees, other natural vegetation and prominent landmark features
and are compatible with existing neighborhoods;
The entire subject property is approximately 22.8 acres in size. The disturbed footprint of
the project is approximately 9.4 acres in size and is clustered toward the eastern edge of
the property and on portions of the site that were previously disturbed, away from the
ridgeline. Approximately 13.4 acres will remain undisturbed.
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the project and found that:
• Seven oak trees are in the vicinity of the project site. Oak tree #4, which is on the
project site, is dead. Oak Tree #6, a heritage oak, is located off of the project site,
but a portion of its canopy extends over the northern boundary of the project site.
The remaining five oaks are located entirely off of the project site to the north.
Neither Oak Tree #4 nor Oak Tree #6 is within the grading envelope of the
proposed project and will not be encroached upon. No oak trees will be removed
as part of the proposed project. Impacts to oak trees will be less than significant;
• The project will not extend further than 33 feet below the ridgeline; and
• Impacts to natural landmarks and prominent natural features will be less than
significant.
d. That building setbacks, building heights and compatible structures and building.forms
that would serve to blend buildings and structures with the terrain are utilized;
The proposed project complies with all requirements for residential development as
identified by the Santa Clarita UDC Sections 17.15 and 17.18. As a result, all setbacks,
6
V5
heights and building forms within the proposed project are appropriate for the subject
property. The maximum height of the proposed structures is 23 feet which is within the
maximum allowable height for the Residential Moderate (RM) zone. None of the
proposed structures will extend into the skyline beyond the top of the ridge.
e. That plant materials are conserved and introduced so as to protect slopes from slippage
and soil erosion and to minimize visual effects of grading and construction on hillside
areas, including the consideration of the preservation of prominent trees and, to the
extent possible, reduce the maintenance cost to public and private property owners,
Conditions of approval for the project require all final landscape plans to:
• Demonstrate the application of jute netting to all graded slopes five feet in
elevation and elsewhere as needed for erosion control; and
• Demonstrate that all graded slopes shall be landscaped to prevent slope erosion at
a rate of one 24" box tree per 150 square feet of slope area and one 1 -gallon sized
shrub per 100 square feet of slope area (pending fuel modification requirements).
f. That curvilinear street design and improvements that serve to minimize grading
alterations and emulate the natural contours and character of the hillsides are utilized,
Grading for the project will follow the natural grand to the maximum extent possible and
manufactured slopes will be revegetated to soften the appearance of the slope and provide
soil stability.
g. That grading designs that serve to avoid disruption to adjacent properties are utilized,'
Grading for the project will follow the natural grand to the maximum extent possible and
manufactured slopes will be revegetated to soften the appearance of the slope and provide
soil stability.
That site design and grading that provide the minimum disruption of view corridors and
scenic vistas from and around any proposed development are utilized,
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the project and concluded
that that any visual impacts as a result of the project would be less than significant. The
project site is in an urbanized area and between fully improved .commercial and
institutional uses within an active business park. Under the current Business Park (BP)
General Plan land use designation and zoning designation, the development of 355,000
square feet of commercial space could potentially be supported. The proposed 87
residential units are less intensive than the highest use the current zone would allow. As
a result, the project would produce fewer visual impacts on the surrounding area than
what the current land use designation and zone could potentially support. Further, the
project is not on or adjacent to any state scenic highways, and will not encroach further
10
than 33 feet below the ridgeline. Impacts to view corridors as a result of the proposed
project are less than significant.
SECTION 5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS. Based on the foregoing facts
and findings for Conditional Use Permit 12-009, the City Council hereby find as follows:
a. The proposed location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed project
is in accordance with the purpose of the Unified Development Code, the purpose of the
zone in which the site is located, the Santa Clarita General Plan, and the development
policies and standards of the City;
The proposed residential project is consistent with the intent of the Unified Development
Code (UDC) outlined in Section 17.01.020 and 17.11.010.A of the UDC in that it
provides additional affordable housing units for the community while sustaining a
balance of residential, commercial, and transportation options. Further, the project will
support the goals and policies outlined in the Housing Element of the General Plan which
encourage the development of affordable housing projects, throughout the City while
encouraging the use of alternative transportation modes to reduce vehicle miles traveled
throughout the City.
The proposed project is consistent with the standards for residential development
identified in the Santa Clarita Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 17.15 and will
not require approval of any variances. The project requires the approval of a Conditional
Use Permit to allow for the import of approximately 131,000 cubic feet of earth from an
off-site location approximately'/4 of a mile from the subject property. A Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) is required for the import of earth exceeding 100,000 cubic yards. With the
approval of the proposed CUP, the project will be consistent with all regulations
established in the City's UDC, as well as with the goals and policies outlined in the City's
General Plan. Impacts will be minimized given the import site's proximity to.the subject
property.
b. The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed project will be
compatible with and will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent
uses, buildings, structures, or natural resources, with consideration given to:
1. Harmony in scale, bulk, coverage, and density;
Following approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment, Master Case
12-132 is consistent with the designation of Residential Moderate (RM). The RM
zone allows for a density -maximum of 11 units per gross acre. However, given
the average cross slope of the subject property the maximum number of units is
88. The proposal calls for 87 units is within the threshold. Further, the proposed
project complies with all of the standards and requirements for residential
development as defined by the Unified Development Code (UDC) Sections 17.15
and 17.18.
I+
2. The availability of public facilities, services and utilities;
The project site is located in a developed portion of the City of Santa Clarita that
is currently serviced by sewer, power, gas and water utilities and will not create a
significant demand for additional utilities on the project site. Fire and police
services are anticipated to be adequate for the area.
3. The harmful effect, if any, upon desirable neighborhood character,
The project site is located on a commercial corridor in the City and is currently
vacant. The construction of the proposed housing units on the project site will be
compatible with and be served by the surrounding commercial uses and
transportation infrastructure and will provide affordable housing units for the
community.
The proposed project complies with all requirements for residential development
as identified by the Santa Clarita UDC Sections 17.15 and 17.18. As a result, all
setbacks, heights and building forms within the proposed project are appropriate
for the subject property. The maximum height of the proposed structures is 23
feet which is within the maximum allowable height for the Residential Moderate
(RM) zone. None of the proposed structures will extend into the skyline beyond
the top of the ridge.
4. The generation of traffic and the capacity and physical character of surrounding
streets;
The project site will take access from Center Pointe Parkway. The current zone
and existing traffic system could support 355,000 square feet commercial or light
industrial space. The proposed project calls for 87 multi -family units and is less
traffic intensive than the current zone contemplates. The existing roadway
network in the vicinity of the project site will accommodate the proposed project.
The traffic study prepared for the project was reviewed by the City's Traffic
Engineering Division and the proposed project was found to have no significant
impact on the City's roadways.
5. The suitability of the site for the type and intensity of use or development which is
proposed;
The project site is located on a commercial corridor in the City and is currently
vacant. The construction of the proposed housing units on the project site will be
compatible with and be served by the surrounding commercial uses and
transportation infrastructure and will provide affordable housing units for the
community.
12 i
I�
The proposed project complies with all requirements for residential development
as identified by the Santa Clarita UDC Sections 17.15 and 17.18. As a result, all
setbacks, heights and building forms within the proposed project are appropriate
for the subject property. The maximum height of the proposed structures is 23
feet which is within the maximum allowable height for the Residential Moderate
(RM) zone. None of the proposed structures will extend into the skyline beyond
the top of the ridge.
6. The project will not have a harmful effect upon environmental quality and natural
resources;
An MND was completed for the project and concluded that impacts associated
with the project will have a less than significant impact on public health.
Furthermore, a Phase I Environmental assessment was completed for the project
and concluded that:
• The subject property is not expected to constitute the potential for recognized
environmental conditions;
• The nature and extent of previous operations on the subject property are not
expected to constitute the potential for business environmental risk; and
• The subject property does not constitute a material threat to public health or
the environment.
C. The proposed location, size, design, and operating characteristics 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;
A MND was prepared for the project. All impacts associated with the project were found
to either be less than significant or will be brought to a level of significance through the
implementation of mitigation measures.
d. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of this Code and does
not require approval of a variance or adjustment;
The proposed project will comply with the Unified Development Code (UDC) including
Section 17.15 (Property Development Standards) regarding the development of
residential structures in the City and will provide the required parking consistent with
Section 17.18 (Parking Standards) of the UDC. The project will not require a variance or
adjustment.
SECTION 6. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS. Based
on the foregoing facts and findings, the City Council find as follows:
a. An Initial Study and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project have been prepared
13
101
in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA);
b. The Initial Study has been circulated for review and comment by affected governmental
agencies and the public, and all comments received, if any, have been considered. The
MND was posted and advertised on January 21, 2013, in accordance with CEQA. The
public review period was open from January 21, 2013 through February 19, 2013;
C. There is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the
environment. The MND reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission
of the City of Santa Clarita;
d. The location of the documents and other material which constitutes the record of
proceedings upon which the decision of the City Council is made is the Master Case
12-132 project file within the Community Development Department and is in the custody
of the Director of Community Development; and
e. The City Council, based upon the findings set forth above, hereby finds that the Mitigated
Negative Declaration for this project has been prepared in compliance with CEQA.
SECTION 7. APPROVAL:
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Master Case 12-132 (General Plan Amendment 12-001,
Tentative Tract Map 072039, Ridgeline Alteration Permit 12-001, Hillside Review 12-001,
Conditional Use Permit 12-009, Initial Study 12-006) to change the General Plan land use
designation from Business Park (BP) to a General Plan Land Use Designation of Urban
Residential 3 (UR3) to allow for the construction of 87 affordable housing units located at
Assessor's Parcel Number 2836-015-029, just south of the intersection of Centre Point Parkway
and Golden Triangle Road, in the City of Santa Clarita, are approved subject to the attached Zone
Change (Exhibit "A"), General Plan Amendment (Exhibit "B") and Conditions of Approval
(Exhibit C).
14
W
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2013.
ATTEST:
INTERIM CITY CLERK
DATE:
15
MAYOR
ZI
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA)
I, Arming Chaparyan, Interim City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita at
a regular meeting thereof, held on the
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
day of 2013, by the following vote:
ILO
INTERIM CITY CLERK
ORDINANCE 13 -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 12-001 (MASTER CASE 12-132), TO AMEND THE
ZONING MAP AND CHANGE THE ZONING OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER
2836-015-029 FROM BUSINESS PARK (BP) TO RESIDENTIAL MODERATE (RM) ON
THE PROJECT SITE LOCATED JUST SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF
CENTRE POINTE PARKWAY AND GOLDEN TRIANGLE ROAD, IN THE CITY OF
SANTA CLARITA.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS OF FACT. The City Council does hereby make the following findings
of fact:
a. On September 21, 2012, Habitat for Humanity (the applicant) filed an application (Master
Case 12-132) for the construction of a 87 affordable housing units located at assessor's
parcel number 2836-015-029, just south of the intersection of Centre Point Parkway and
Golden Triangle Road in the City of Santa Clarita;
b. Zone Change 12-001 will change the zoning designation of APN 2836-015-029 from
Business Park (BP) to Residential Moderate (RM). The zoning will be consistent with
the proposed General Plan classification;
c. A Mitigated Negative Declaration for Master Case 12-132 has been prepared and
circulated in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA);
d. On February 19, 2013 the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on
Master Case 12-132. The Planning Commission voted 5-0 recommending that the City
Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and that the City Council approve the
Entitlements, per Resolution No. P13-001;
e. On March 26, 2013, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on this issue,
commencing at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, located at 23920 Valencia Boulevard, City of
Santa Clarita;
f. On March 26, 2013, the. City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration and,
approved Master Case 12-32 with the associated entitlements for the development of an
87 -unit affordable housing project. The Council approved, and passed the ordinance to a
second reading on April 9, 2013;
g. All public hearings and meetings on Master Case 12-132 held by the Planning
Commission were at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, located at 23920 Valencia
�3
Boulevard, City of Santa Clarita. All public hearings and meetings held by the City
Council were at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council. Chambers, located at 23920 Valencia
Boulevard, City of Santa Clarita. All public hearings were advertised in The Signal
newspaper and by direct first-class mail to property owners within 1,000 feet of the
subject property. In addition, the date and time of the public hearings were posted on the
subject site; and
h. The documents and other materials, which constitute the record of proceedings upon
which the decision of the City Council is based, are on file within the Community
Development Department and are in the custody of the Director of Community
Development.
SECTION 2. FINDINGS FOR A ZONE CHANGE. Based on the above findings of fact and
recitals and the entire record, including, without limitation, the Mitigated Negative Declaration
prepared for Master Case 08-194, oral and written testimony and other evidence received at the
public hearings held on the project, reports and other transmittals from City staff to the City
Council, and upon studies and investigations made by the Planning Commission and on its
behalf, the City Council finds, as follows:
a. The proposed zone change is consistent with the objectives of the City's Unified
Development Code, the City's General Plan, and the development policies of the City of
Santa Clarita.
Following approval of Zone Change 12-001 amending the City's Zoning Map, Master
Case 12-132 is consistent with the designation of Residential Moderate (RM). The RM
zone allows for a density -maximum of 11 units per gross acre. However, given the
average cross slope of the subject property the maximum number of units is 88. The
proposal calls for 87 units is within the threshold. Further, the proposed project complies
with all of the standards and requirements for residential development as defined by the
Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 17.15.020.
SECTION 3. Based on the consistency with the UDC, the City Council approves the request to
re -designate the project site and specifically APN: 2836-015-029 from Business Park (BP) to
Residential Moderate (RM).
SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days from its passage and
adoption.
SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance and shall cause the
same to be published as required by law.
2
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2013.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
INTERIM CITY CLERK
DATE:
Z6�
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
I, Armin6 Chaparyan, Interim City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Ordinance 13- was regularly introduced and placed upon its first reading at
a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of 2013. That thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day
of 2013, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
AND I FURTHER CERTIFY that the foregoing is the original of Ordinance and
was published in The Signal newspaper in accordance with State Law (G.C. 40806).
INTERIM CITY CLERK
El
A
O
N
• •
4'
v
c
4,
tx
O
•�
p
a
_
m
tf
Y
L
•�
O
)
m
CL
N
=
4J
cn
N
N
N
d1
O
p�
r,
A
O
N
• •
o
•�
c
a
_
m
h
GJ
Y
L
•�
)
m
CL
C
cn
V)
CU
N
C:
N
V)
m
2--
Eo
RENO
00
•1�
m
m
D
v
m
4�
c
CU
-a
CL)
m
c
m
rl
01
EXHIBIT C
MASTER CASE 12-132
FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL CONDITIONS
GCI. The approval of this project shall expire if the approved use is not commenced within two
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).
GC2. To the extent the use approved with this project is a different use than previously
approved for the property, the prior approval shall be terminated along with any
associated vested rights to such use, unless such prior approved use is still in operation,
or is still within the initial pre -commencement approval period. Once commenced, any
discontinuation of the use approved with this project for a continuous period of 180
calendar days or more shall terminate the approval of this use along with any associated
vested rights to such use. The pre-existing legal use shall not be re-established or
resumed after the 180 day period. Discontinuation shall include cessation of a use
regardless of intent to resume.
GC3. The applicant shall be responsible for notifying the Director of Community Development
in writing of any change in ownership, designation of a new engineer, or change in the
status of the developer, within 30 days of said change.
GC4. Unless otherwise apparent from the context, the term "applicant" shall include the
applicant and any other persons, corporation, or other entity making use of this grant.
The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Santa Clarita, its
agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or
its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this
project, including any related environmental approvals. In the event the City becomes
aware of any such claim, action, 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 the following occur: 1) the City bears its own
attorney's fees and costs; and 2) the City defends the action in good faith. The applicant
shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement unless the settlement is approved
by the applicant.
GCS. The property shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the
approvals granted by the City. Any modifications shall be subject to further review by the
City.
GC6. This grant shall not be effective for any purpose until the permittee and the owner of the
property involved (if other than the permittee) have filed with the Director of Community
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case 412-131
March 26, 1013
Page 2 of 17
Development, their affidavit (Acceptance Form) stating that they are aware of, and agree
to accept, all of the conditions of this grant.
GC7. Details shown on the site plan are not necessarily approved. Any details which are
inconsistent with the requirements of state or local ordinances, general conditions of
approval, or City policies and not modified by this permit must be specifically approved
in writing.
GCB. 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. Guest parking shall be provided on the project site at a ratio of one guest parking stall for
every two units. Based on the 87 proposed units, a minimum of 44 guest parking stalls.
PL2. The applicant shall provide open space/recreational amenities on the project site in
addition to, or in place of, the area designated as a community garden. The closest
recreational opportunities for the development are at the City of Santa Clarita Sports
Complex and Aquatics Facility nearly one mile away from the project site. Open space is
required to be provided for each residential unit in accordance with Section 17.15.020.7.4
of the Unified Development Code as follows:
a) Studio Units — 200 square feet
b) One Bedroom Units — 300 square feet
c) Two (or more) Bedroom Units — 400 square feet
d) Single-family Detached/Townhome Units — 650 square feet
Please be aware that at least 50% of the open space mentioned above must be provided as
exclusive use area for each residential unit, with the remaining open space to be provided
for the use of recreational amenities for the community as a whole.
PL3. Each residential unit shall have a two -car garage measuring a minimum of 20 feet by 20
feet measured on the interior wall of each garage.
PL4. All buildings are required to provide 360° architecture. In addition, the City has adopted
Community Character and Design Guidelines that can be found at http://www.santa-
clarita.com/Index.aspx?page=674.
KFA
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case #12-132
March 26, 2013
Page 3 of 17
PL5. Setbacks shall be provided as follows:
a) A minimum setback from Centre Pointe Parkway shall be 20'-0"
b) A minimum setback from all side property lines (the daycare and school properties)
of 5'-0"
c) A minimum setback of 10'-0" shall be provided between each residential
unit/structure on the project site.
PL6. All on-site lighting shall be directed down and shall be screened from adjacent properties,
including the public street.
PL7. The applicant shall demonstrate that on-site lighting will not spill over on to adjacent
properties as demonstrated in a photometric plan.
PL8. All units shall be sold to veterans and their families within HUD Income Limits at or
below "Low Income (80%)" or "Very Low Income (50%)" for the region as defined by
Los Angeles County and the property shall be deed restricted for 30 years to require any
resale of a unit within that 30 year period would require recordation of a new 30 year
deed restriction for such unit on the same terms.
PL9. The applicant shall work with the adjacent schools during grading and construction to
limit exposure to students and faculty.
PLIO. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures outlined by the Mitigation Plan
included with the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this
project.
PL1I. Any environmental alterations from project related grading shall be restored to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Landscape Requirements
General Comments
LR 1. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall provide final landscape, lighting
and irrigation plans (Landscape Document Package) for the Director of Community
Development Department review and approval. The plan must be prepared by a
California -registered landscape architect and shall be designed with the plant palette
suitable for Santa Clarita (Sunset Western Garden Book Zone 18, minimum winter night
temperatures typically 20° to 30° F; maximum summer high temperatures typically 105° F
to 110° F). The landscape design plan shall meet the design criteria of the State Water
3(
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case #12-131
March 26, 1013
Page 4 of 17
Efficiency Landscape Ordinance as well as all other current Municipal Code / Unified
Development Code requirements.
LR2. The applicant shall be aware that additional fees will be required to be paid by the
applicant for the review of required landscape and irrigation plans by the City's
landscape consultant based on an hourly rate. An invoice will be provided to the
applicant at the completion of the review of the plans. The applicant will be required to
pay all associated fees to the City of Santa Clarita prior to the release of the approved
landscape and irrigation plans for the project.
LR3. The planting and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the City Arborist/Oak Tree
Specialist for review and approval for compliance with the Oak Tree Preservation
Ordinance (17.17.90).
Standard Landscape Requirements and Conditions
LR4. Required Landscape Plan Elements. Final landscape plans shall contain all elements as
listed in the checklist for preliminary landscape plans and shall conform to the following:
(a) The plant palette shall not include any plants listed as invasive exotic pest plants
by the California Invasive Plant Council (lists available at
http://groups.ucanr.org/ceppc�, or other plants determined to be invasive by a
competent botanist or biologist.
(b) Landscape plans shall show plant material to screen at maturity all trash
enclosures, transformer boxes, vault boxes, backflow devices, and other exterior
mechanical equipment. Screening material may include trees, shrubs (15 gallon
minimum size), clinging vines, etc. Masonry block (concrete masonry unit) trash
enclosures shall be screened with both shrubs and clinging vines.
(c) Landscape plans shall show all lighting fixtures, base dimensions, and typical
finish elevations.
(d) The applicant shall apply jute netting to all graded slopes five feet (5') and
higher in vertical elevation and elsewhere where needed for erosion control, and
shall landscape graded slopes.
(e) The faces of cut and fill slopes more than five feet in height shall be protected
against damage by erosion by installing jute netting and planting with
groundcover. In addition, slopes shall be planted with one (1) 24" -box tree per
150 square feet of slope area and one (1) 1 -gallon sized shrub per 100 square
feet of slope area. Should this requirement become impossible or impracticable
because of fuel modification requirements, the applicant may substitute a
proportionate number of appropriate larger specimen trees to the satisfaction of
the Director of Community Development.
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case #12-132
March 26, 1013
Page 5 of 17
(f) The applicant shall place water -conserving mulching material on all exposed
soil in planting areas not covered by turf grass. Mulching material may include,
and is not limited to, shredded bark, river rock, crushed rock, pea gravel, etc.,
and must be at least three (3) inches deep.
(g) Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall install all proposed irrigation and
landscaping, including irrigation controllers, staking, mulching, etc., to the
satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The Director may
impose inspection fees for more than one landscape installation inspection.
Fuel Modification Zone
LRS. The project site is located within the high fire severity fuel modification zone. As a result,
the landscape and irrigation plans will require the review and approval of the Los
Angeles County Fuel Modification Unit. The applicant shall submit the final set
landscape and irrigation plans for review to the Fuel Modification Unit and the City at the
same time to allow for a concurrent review of the plans.
ENGINEERING DIVISION:
General Requirements
ENl. 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. At map check submittal, the applicant shall provide a preliminary Tract Map guarantee.
A final Tract Map guarantee is required prior to Tract Map approval.
EN4. Prior to Tract Map approval, 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.
ENS. Prior to Tract Map approval, 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
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case #12-132
March 26, 1013
Page 6 of 17
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.
EN6. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall provide a Will Serve Letter from all
necessary utilities, stating that service will be provided to this property.
ENT 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.
Condominium/Lease Requirements
ENB. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall submit a notarized affidavit to the
City Engineer, signed by all owners of record at the time of filing of the map with the
City, stating that any proposed condominium building have not been constructed or that
all buildings have not been occupied or rented and that said building will not be occupied
or rented until after the filing of the map with the County Recorder.
Grading. Drainage & Geology Reguirements
EN9. 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.
EN10. The site plan shows an import of 131,986 CY of dirt to the project.
A. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for this project, the applicant shall submit a copy
of the grading permit for the exporting 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:
1. Obtain an encroachment permit for the work.
2. The hours of operation shall be established and approved by the City Traffic
Engineer.
3. 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.
4. 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
Ni
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case 412-132
March 26, 2013
Page 7 of 17
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.
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.
EN11. Prior to the issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall obtain approval and connection
permit from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Land Development
Division to connect the on-site storm drain system to a public storm drain system.
EN12. 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.
EN13. Prior to grading permit, the applicant shall have approved by the City Engineer, a
drainage study demonstrating that post -development flows from the site will not be
increased from pre -development flows, or mitigate for the increase.
EN14. Prior to grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a notarized Letter of Permission for
grading over any easements.
EN15. 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.
EN16. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall construct all grading and
drainage facilities within the project site.
EN17. 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. 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.
EN18. On November 8, 2012, a new Los Angeles County storm water NPDES permit was
adopted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Under the provisions of this
N
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case #12-132
March 26. 2013
Page 8 of 17
permit, applicants will be required to install Low -Impact Development (infiltration) post -
construction BMPs and address hydro -modification. This permit may impact the project
in the future, depending on grading permit issuance timeline.
EN19. 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 (NOT) 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 NOT and shall
reference the corresponding Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) number issued by
the State upon receipt of the NOT.
Street Improvement Requirements
EN20. 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 tentative
map, oak tree report and conditions of approval and obtain encroachment permits from
the Engineering Division.
EN21. 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.
EN22. 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.
EN23. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall record an irrevocable offer of dedication,
for the future Golden Triangle Road right-of-way within the project site, a total width of
70 feet from railroad's (MTA) right-of-way limits, as directed by the City Engineer.
EN24. Prior to Tract Map approval, the applicant shall record an irrevocable offer of dedication
for a slope easement within the project site, to accommodate the future extension of
Golden Triangle Road, as directed by the City Engineer.
EN25. 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.
101019
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case #12-131
March 16, 2013
Page 9 of 17
EN26. Prior to street plan approval, the applicant shall show on the street plan drive approaches
using a modified commercial driveway design (APWA 110-1, Type C or equivalent) that
will provide a street/drive approach transition with a maximum algebraic grade difference
of 7%. Construction details shall be shown on the street plan providing a transition no
greater than this maximum.
EN27. 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
EN28. The on-site sewer shall be a privately maintained system. All sewer lines shall have a
minimum 2% slope and pipe inverts shall be 6 feet below the curb grade. Prior to
grading plan approval, the applicant shall demonstrate that all sewer pipes meet these
requirements with the proposed building pad elevations. Private on-site sewers are
reviewed and approved by the City's Building & Safety Division.
EN29. 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.
EN30. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall annex the property into the
County Sanitation District. The applicant shall provide the City's Building & Safety
Division with written confirmation from the Sanitation District that the property has been
annexed.
EN31. Prior to issuance of building permits, the proposed building(s) shall be connected to the
existing sewer main in Centre Pointe Parkway (PC 10044).
EN32. Prior to building final, the applicant shall construct any sewer upgrades per the approved
sewer area study, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Bonds. Fees and Miscellaneous Requirements
EN33. 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.
EN34. 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.
OT
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case #12-132
March 26, 2013
Page 10 of l7
This project is located in the Via Princessa B&T District. The current rate for this District
is $18,890. The B&T rate is subject to change and is based on the rate at the time of
payment.
Standard B&T Fee Calculation:
Townhouse/Condo = the number of units (87) x the district rate ($18,890) x 0.8 =
$1,314,744 until June 30, 2013.
EN35 Soils testing equivalent to that performed on hauled -in soil, but with such additional
testing as is necessary to test for perchlorates and volatile organic compounds, shall be
performed prior to disturbing any of the site for grading. Such testing shall take place at
six (6) different locations on the project site, subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
Any contaminated soil will be remediated prior to issuance of building permits.
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION:
TEL Adequate sight visibility is required at all project driveways and shall follow the latest
Caltrans manual for applicable requirements.
TE2. Minimum width of all interior private driveways/fire lanes shall be 26 feet.
TE3. All project driveways shall intersect with the adjacent roadway at 90 degrees or as
close to 90 degrees as topography permits (no less than 80 degrees).
TE4. The site shall be designed to adequately accommodate all vehicles (e.g. automobiles,
vans, trucks) that can be expected to access the site. This includes, but is not limited
to, adequate maneuvering areas around loading zones and parking spaces, and
appropriate turning radii.
TES. The location, width and depth of all project driveways and drive aisles shall conform
to the approved site plan. No additional driveways shall be permitted.
TE6. Any dead-end drive aisles shall have a hammerhead or turn -around area to facilitate
vehicular movements.
LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT:
FDI. The applicant shall comply with the following Conditions of Approval provided by the
Los Angeles County Fire Department:
A. The applicant shall provide the required fire flow of 1,500 gallons per minute for 2
hours.
B. The applicant shall provide water mains in the street fronting the subject property
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case #12-132
March 26, 2013
Page 11 of 17
capable of delivering a fire flow of 20 pounds -per -square -inch residual pressure.
C. The applicant may use 2 hydrants flowing simultaneously to achieve the required fire
flow.
D. The applicant shall provide fire hydrants 6" x 4" x %:" in size and conform to
American Water Works Association (AW WA) C503-75 or equivalent standards.
E. The applicant shall install all fire hydrants to meet Fire Department specifications.
F. The applicant shall install all fire hydrants in accordance with the Utility Manual of
Ordinance 7834.
G. The applicant shall have all installed fire hydrants inspected and flow tested prior to
final approval.
H. The applicant shall install 3 public fire hydrants.
1. The applicant shall provide a Fire Flow Test for 3 existing fire hydrants.
J. The applicant shall provide a complete Form 195 with required fire flow from
existing public fire hydrants located on Centre Pointe Parkway.
K. The applicant shall indicate private driveways on the final map as "Private Driveway
and Fire Lane" with widths clearly depicted. These shall be maintained in accordance
with the Fire Code.
L. The applicant shall have all required fire hydrants installed, tested and accepted prior
to project construction.
M. The applicant shall post "No Parking Fire Lane" signs throughout the development.
N. The applicant shall submit 4 sets of drawings showing required fire hydrant locations
to be installed.
BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION:
General Comments
BSI. Plans for all new buildings and structures shall be submitted to the Building and Safety
Division for plan review and building permits. Any detached accessory buildings or
structures will receive separate permits.
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case #12-131
March 26, 2013
Page 11 of 17
BS2. Plans submitted for plan review shall show full compliance with the California Building
Codes in effect at the time the building permit application is submitted. The current
California codes are: 2010 California Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, and Electrical
Codes, and the 2008 California Energy Code.
BS3. Single Family Residences and dwelling units shall also comply with the detailed
architectural requirements of the 2010 California Residential Code and the 2010
California Green Building Standards Code.
BS4. The City of Santa Clarita has amended some portions of the California Building &
Residential Codes. A copy of these amendments is available at the Building and Safety
public counter and on our website at: www.sant i-clarita.com/Index.aspx?nage=552.
BS5. Plans submitted to Building and Safety for plan review shall be 100% complete. The
submitted plans shall include architectural and structural plans, structural and energy
calculations, soil/geology report, and truss drawings and calculations if used.
BS6. Plans for new buildings shall be prepared by a licensed Architect or Engineer unless the
building fully complies with conventional framing requirements. Incomplete plans or
plans prepared by unqualified individuals may delay your project.
BST All new residential dwelling units shall have a fully automatic fire sprinkler system
installed.
BS8. Prior to submitting plans to Building and Safety, please contact a Permit Specialist at
(661) 255-4935, for project addressing.
BS9. A complete soils and geology report will be required for the project. The report shall be
formally submitted to Development Services Division (Engineering) for review and
approval with a copy of the report submitted to Building & Safety at time of plan
submittal.
BS10. Prior to issuance of building permits: any rough grading and/or re -compaction that are
recommended in the soil/geology report must be completed. A final compaction report
and pad certification shall be submitted to and approved by the Engineering Division.
BS 11. On-site drain, waste and sewer lines and laterals shall have a minimum 2% slope per the
California Plumbing Code.
BS12. Prior to issuance of building permits, additional clearances from these agencies will be
required:
a. L.A. County Fire Prevention Bureau,
b. William S. Hart School District and appropriate elementary school district,
c. Castaic Lake Water Agency,
IN
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case #12-132
March 26, 2013
Page 13 of 17
d. L. A. County Sanitation District,
An agency referral list is available at the Building and Safety public counter.
Specific Comments
BS13. The site for this project is located within City's Fire Hazard Zone. All new construction,
alterations, additions and remodels shall comply with the California Residential Code
Section R327: MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION METHODS FOR EXTERIOR
WILDFIRE EXPOSURE. A summary of these requirements are available at the
Building and Safety's public counter or on the city's website at: www.santa-
clarita.comllndex.aspx?pat,e=552. The plans submitted to Building & Safety shall show
all Fire Zone requirements.
BS14. The new development shall be connected to the public sewer system unless the available
sewer connection is over 200 feet from the building. (CPC Section 713.4)
BSI 5. The proposed project is located adjacent to graded slopes. All structures (including pools
and fences) adjacent to slopes shall comply with Section 1808.7 of the California
Building Code. Depending on the height of slopes, buildings may need to be setback up
to 15 feet from the toe of slopes and up to 40 feet from the top of slopes.
BS16. These conditions are based on a review of conceptual plans submitted by the applicant for
this DRC. Additional comments and more detailed building code requirements will be
listed during the plan review process when plans are submitted to Building and Safety.
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION:
ESI. All new construction projects valuated greater than $500,000 must comply with the
City's Construction and Demolition Materials (C&D) Recycling Ordinance.
ES2. C&D Materials Recycling Ordinance:
• A Construction and Demolition Materials Management Plan (C&DMMP) must be
prepared and approved by the Environmental Services Division prior to obtaining any
grading or building permits.
• A minimum of 50% of the entire project's inert (dirt, rock, bricks, etc.) waste and
50% of the remaining C&D waste must be recycled or reused rather than disposing in
a landfill.
• A deposit of 3% of the estimated total project cost or $25,000, whichever is less, is
required. The full deposit will be returned to the applicant upon proving that 50% of
the inert and remaining C&D waste was recycled or reused.
41
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case #11-132
March 26, 2013
Page 14 of 17
ES3. 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 at 661-286-4098 for a complete list of franchised
haulers in the City.
ES4. The applicant shall provide trash enclosures in place of individual cart service if space
can be provided for a sufficient number of trash enclosures to house the required number
of 4 -yard bins for trash, recycling, and green waste. If the applicant decides to use this
option, the trash enclosures must meet the following guidelines.
• Shown on the site plan with dimensions
• Designed consistent with the surrounding architecture
• Constructed with a solid roof
• Provide convenient pedestrian and collection vehicle access.
The applicant is encouraged to work with the City and the City's residential franchised
waste hauler to determine the best solution for all parties.
SPECIAL DISTRICTS:
Landscape Maintenance and Special Districts
SDI. No on-site private property landscaping shall be maintained by the Landscape
Maintenance District (LMD).
SD2. The applicant shall annex the property into the City's Streetlight Maintenance District
(SMD) for the operations and maintenance of streetlighting and traffic signals. A
minimum of 120 days is required to process the annexation, which must be completed
prior to final map approval or building permit issuance, whichever occurs first.
Oak Trees
SD3. The presence of native oak trees (including scrub oak species) does not exist in the area
shown on the current site plan that was submitted. There are native oak trees located to
the north, northeast and west of the proposed development. Any impact to these oak trees
shall require the applicant to apply for an oak tree permit. This would include the
submittal of an oak tree report as required by the City of Santa Clarita Oak Tree
Ordinance and Preservation and Protection Guidelines.
Street Trees
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case #12-132
March 16, 2013
Page 15 of 17
SD4. The applicant shall be required to make all landscape improvements to the existing
parkway that fronts the project site that have not already been installed as part of the
original landscape for Centre Pointe Business Park.
SD5. Landscape improvements shall include the planting of parkway trees within the public
right of way along the frontage of the property.
SD6. All landscape improvements shall be consistent with the Centre Pointe Business Park
master landscape plan.
SD7. Prior to planting, parkway trees shall be inspected and approved by the City of Santa
Clarita Urban Forestry Division. Trees that do not meet or exceed City of Santa Clarita
specifications shall be returned to nursery at no cost to the city. Applicant shall give the
Urban Forestry Division 48 hour prior notice of any trees arriving on site.
SD8. All trees planted within the parkway shall meet and / or exceed the California Department
of Forestry and Fire Protection Specification Guidelines for container -grown nursery
trees. Trees that have been topped or are infested or diseased, damaged, have broken
limbs or girdled roots shall not be accepted.
SD9. All trees shall be planted and staked according to the City of Santa Clarita Tree Planting
and Staking Detail Sheet which may he obtained by contacting Urban Forestry at (661)
294-2548.
SDIO. Tree species shall be the approved tree for Centre' Pointe Drive. The Chinese flame tree
(Koelrueteria bipinnata) is the approved tree at this time.
SDI 1. The applicant shall be required to install and maintain approved irrigation to all parkway
landscape including all parkway trees planted within the public right of way. Irrigation to
parkway trees shall consist of two bubblers per tree. All landscape and irrigation plans
shall be reviewed and approved by Community Development and Urban Forestry.
SD12. Parkway trees that are planted within a turf landscape shall have a minimum 36" inch
diameter mulched tree well installed at the base of the tree. Arbor guards no less than
eight (8") inches tall shall be installed at the base of each tree.
SD13. The presence of native oak trees (including scrub oak species) does not exist in the area
shown on the current site plan that was submitted. There are native oak trees located to
the north, northeast and west of the proposed development. These oak trees shall be
shown on all future site plans including but not limited to Grading, Construction, Street
Improvement Plan, Landscape and Tract Maps.
45
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case #12-132
March 16, 2013
Page 16 of 17
SD14. Any impact to these oak trees shall require the applicant to apply for an oak tree permit.
This would include the submittal of an oak tree report as required by the City of Santa
Clarita Oak Tree Ordinance and Preservation and Protection Guidelines.
SD15. The applicant shall be required to incorporate native species of oak on any cut or fill
slope that requires hillside landscape. Oak Trees shall be planted at a 1:5 ratio for every
tree required on a slope, subject to County of Los Angeles Fire Department requirements
for Fuel Modification. Approved species include Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia Blue
oak Quercus douglasii, or Canyon oak Quercus chrysolepis.
SD16. The applicant may contact the City of Santa Clarita Urban Forestry Division for any
questions related to the above comments. The Oak Tree Specialist may be reached at
(661) 294-2548.
PARKS PLANNING DIVISION:
PR 1. Prior to the recordation of an applicable final tract/parcel map, the applicant shall pay the
required Park Dedication Fee equal to the value of the amount of land established per the
City's General Plan, "Parks and Recreation Element." The applicant shall be required to
provide a certified MAI real estate appraisal to establish the fair market value (FMV) of
an acre of land within this project.
TRANSIT DIVISION:
TRI. At this time the Transit Impact Fee does apply to this project. Currently the rate is $200
per residential unit. The applicant shall pay the current fee at the time of building permit
issuance.
TR2. Applicant shall provide a bus stop at the location of:
• Southbound Centre Pointe Parkway near -side of "A" Place (first driveway).
TR3. Applicant shall construct a pedestrian path from the bus stop to the development's
residential units that is compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
TR4. The bus stop shall consist of a 10' x 25' concrete passenger waiting pad placed behind the
sidewalk.
TRS. The bus stop location shall be a minimum of 60' from the curb return or as specified by
City staff.
I-
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Master Case 412-132
March 16, 1013
Page 17 of 17
TR6. At the location of the bus stop, the sidewalk shall meet the street for no less than 25'.
TR7. Applicant shall construct an in -street concrete pad pursuant to the current City standard
and APWA 131-1.
TR8. The bus stop shall comply with all ADA regulations as specified in the most recent
version of the California Disabled Accessibility Guidebook (CalDag). Proposed disabled
access shall be drawn on all plans.
TR9. Bus stop shall be shown and labeled on the site plan.
TRIO. Prior to occupancy of the first building, the bus stop/s shall be installed to the satisfaction
of city staff.
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
[X] Proposed [ ] Final
MASTER CASE NO: Master Case 12-132
PERMIT/PROJECT Habitat for Heroes
NAME: Master Case No. 12-132, General Plan Amendment 12-001, Zone
Change 12-001, Tentative Tract Map 072039, Ridgeline Alteration
Permit 12-001, Hillside Review 12-001, Conditional Use Permit 12-009,
Initial Study 12-006
APPLICANT: Habitat for Humanity
213031 Ventura Boulevard #610
Woodland Hills, CA 91364
LOCATION OF THE
PROJECT: The subject property is located on Centre Point Parkway, south of the
intersection with Golden Triangle Road and north of Bowman High School
(APN: 2836-015-029) in the Business Park (BP) zone.
DESCRIPTION OF
THE PROJECT: The applicant is requesting the development of a 22.8 acre site with an 87 -unit
affordable housing development. The current General Plan Land Use
designation and zoning designation on the project site is Business Park (BP).
The project proposes a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change that would
result in a General Plan designation of Urban Residential 3 (UR3) and a zoning
designation of Residential Moderate (RM).
Based on the information contained in the Initial Study prepared for this project, and pursuant to the requirements of
Section 15070 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Santa Clarita
[XI City Council [ ] Planning Commission [ ] Director of Planning and Building Services
finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant effect upon the environment, and that a
Mitigated Negative Declaration shall be adopted pursuant to Section 15070 of CEQA.
Mitigation measures for this project
[ ] Are Not Required [X] Are Attached [ j Are Not Attached
Lisa M.WPht,Pr AW13
PLANNII
Prepared
Approvec
David Peterson, Assistant Planner Il
(Name/Title)
Patrick Leclair. Associate Planner
(Name/Title)
Public Review Period From January 21, 2013 To February 19, 2013
Public Notice Given On January 21. 2013
[X] Legal Advertisement [X] Posting of Properties [X] Written Notice
CERTIFICATION DATE:
Z+T
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 2 of 68
INITIAL STUDY
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
Project Title/Master Case Number: Habitat for Heroes
Master Case #12-132,
General Plan Amendment 12-001,
Zone Change 12-001, Tentative Tract Map 072039,
Ridgeline Alteration Permit 12-001,
Hillside Review 12-001,
Conditional Use Permit 12-009, Initial Study 12-006.
Lead Agency name and address: City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 300
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Contact person and phone number: David Peterson
Assistant Planner II
(661) 284-1406
Project location: The subject property is located on Centre Point Parkway,
north of Bowman High School (APN: 2836-015-029) in
the Business Park (BP) zone. The location of the subject
property is also identified on Exhibit A, as provided
below.
Applicant's name and address: Habitat for Humanity
213031 Ventura Boulevard #610
Woodland Hills, CA 91364
General Plan designation: The current General Plan land use designation of the
subject property is Business Park (BP). The proposed
project would amend the current land use designation to
Urban Residential 3 (UR3).
Zoning: The current zoning designation of the subject property is
Business Park (BP). The proposed project would amend
the zoning designation to Residential Moderate (RM).
Description of project and setting:
This initial study was prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for
a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Tract Map, Ridgeline Alteration Permit,
Conditional Use Permit, and Hillside Review for the development of a 22.8 acre site with an 87 -
unit affordable housing development and various on-site amenities including three community
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 3 of 68
green spaces. All 22.8 acres of the subject property is currently vacant, undeveloped land with
portions that have been disturbed for fire prevention purposes. The current General Plan Land
Use designation and zoning designation on the project site is Business Park (BP). The project
proposes a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change that would result in a General Plan
designation of Urban Residential 3 and a zoning designation of Residential Moderate (RM). Both
the proposed General Plan land use designation and zoning designation have a maximum density
of I 1 units per acre. Under the current BP designation the project site could develop a maximum
of approximately 355,000 square feet of commercial/light industrial space.
The following is a description of the project and the setting for the proposed 87 -unit development:
Setting:
The proposed project consists of a 22.8 -acre site that is located in a developed portion of the City.
The project site is located on Centre Pointe Parkway north of Bowman High School on Assessor's
Parcel Number 2836-025-029. Centre Pointe Parkway is an industrial collector road that serves to
connect Soledad Canyon Road, a major arterial, with Newhall Ranch Road, a major arterial, and
provide access to a variety of commercial uses in the area. The project site is bounded to the
south by Bowman High School. Bowman High School currently serves approximately 515
students in grades 11 and 12. The normal class schedule begins at 8am and ends at 3 p.m. The
project site is bounded to the north by Creative Years Nursery School. The facility offers
educational programming to children as young as two years of age through pre -kindergarten. Full
day programs begin at 6 a.m. and end at 6 p.m. while half day programs begin at 9 a.m. and end at
noon. The project site is bounded on the east by Centre Pointe Parkway beyond which are
various office and commercial uses. The project site is bounded to the west by the vacant
Whittaker-Bermite property. The property is within a specific plan area and will eventually be
developed as either residential, commercial, or mixed use with the future Santa Clarita Parkway
as a major arterial roadway, proposed just west of the site.
The project site is currently vacant and in its natural condition with some disturbance from brush
clearing for fire prevention. Native vegetation exists on-site and a Significant Ridgeline as
identified by the General Plan runs roughly north and south along the western edge of the
property. The site ranges from approximately 1,160 feet in elevation on the eastern portion of the
property to approximately 1,300 feet on the western. A majority of the project site contains an
average cross slope of 50% or more. However, the proposed project is focused on a relatively flat
portion along the southeastern portion of the project site. There are no current land uses on the
project site.
Project:
The project proposes 87 multi -family units on the 22.8 acre site. Approximately 9.4 acres of the
subject property are proposed to be developed. The project includes the following entitlements:
General Plan Amendment / Zone Change: The project proposes a General Plan
Amendment and Zone Change that would result in a General Plan designation of Urban
Residential 3 and a zoning designation of Residential Moderate (RM) from the current
�fl
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001,14R 12-001, CUP 12.009, IS 12-006
Page 4 of 68
General Plan Land Use Designation and Zoning Designation of Business Park (BP). Both
the proposed General Plan land use designation and zoning designation have a maximum
density of 11 units per acre.
• Tentative Tract Map: The project proposes creating a single lot subdivision with 87
condominium lots.
• Hillside Development / Ridgeline Alteration Permit: The project has proposed
development on land with an average cross slope greater than 10% and within 1,000 feet
of a General Plan designated significant ridgeline and is therefore subject to the City of
Santa Clarita's Hillside Development / Ridgeline Alteration Permit.
• Conditional Use Permit — Haul Route: The proposed project would require the import of
over 100,000 cubic yards of earth requiring a Conditional Use Permit.
The project proposes 87 multi -family, affordable housing units including the following
components:
• Housing Units: The project proposes 11 single story detached and 76 two story duplex
units. The maximum height of the two story units is 23 feet. The units will be made
available to wounded American veterans and their families.
• Green Space: The project proposes two passive green spaces and one central community
play area. The central play area will consist of a children's play area, gazebo and
community green space.
• Grading: The project proposes the movement of 199,992 cubic yards of earth. This is
comprised of 68,005 cubic yards of on-site cut material and the import of 131,986 cubic
yards of earth from an off-site source.
• Oak Trees: There is one oak tree on the subject property near the northern boundary of
the site, however the tree is dead. Six oak trees are adjacent to the subject property's
northern boundary, two of which are heritage sized. The canopy of one of the heritage
sized oaks overhangs onto the subject property. All of the oak trees on, or adjacent to the
subject property are outside the grading envelope.
• Retainine Walls: The project proposes several retaining walls, some as a high as 12 feet
throughout the project.
• Entry Monument: The project proposes the creation of a significant entry monument
feature including green space and seating areas.
�0
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 5 of 68
Exhibit A: Project Location & Vicinity
,)I
Mester Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TrM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12406
Page 6 of 68
Exhibit B: Existing General Plan Landuse Designation
Business Park (BP)
Exhibit C: Existing Zoning Designation
Business Park (BP)
SGG.
# �Y
z
P F1 t 4
1
yY
i�
4
Mester Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-0O1, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 7 of 68
Exhibit D: Proposed General Plan Landuse Designation
Urban Residential 3 (UR)
Exhibit E: Proposed Zoning Designation
Residential Moderate(RM)
"Ale
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 8 of 68
A. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant. Impact' or a "Less than
Significant Impact with Mitigation" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
[ ] Aesthetics
[X] Biological Resources
[ ] Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
[ ] Agriculture Resources
[ ] Cultural Resources
[ ] Hydrology / Water
Quality
[ ] Mineral Resources [X] Noise
[X] Air Quality
[X] Geology /Soils
[ ] Land Use / Planning
[ ] Population / Housing
[ ] Public Services [ ] Recreation [ ] Transportation/Traffic
[ ] Utilities / Service Systems [X] Mandatory Findings of Significance
B. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
[ ] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[X] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the
project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
[ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
[ ] I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one
effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis
as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,
but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, T7M 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 9 of 68
[ ] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately
in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and
(b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required.
( Ic5 l�
David Petersok Assistant Planner II Date
Az )% r?—/13
Patrick�Assoclate Planner Date
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
OP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 10 of 68
C. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
I. AESTHETICS - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
not limited to, primary/secondary ridgelines, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state
scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or, [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of subst [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
antial light or glare that would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
e) Other
[] [] [] [X]
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES - In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California
Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California
Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or [ ] [ ] [] [X]
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
a Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
d) Other [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page I 1 of 68
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
III. AIR QUALITY - Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable
air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the
following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non -attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people? -
f) Other
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES _ Would the
project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service?
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 12 of 68
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian [ ] [ j [X] []
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified
in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish
and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh,
vemal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat [ ] (X] [ ] [ ]
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
g) Affect a Significant Ecological Area (SEA) or
Significant Natural Area (SNA) as identified on the [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
City of Santa Clarita ESA Delineation Map?
g) Other [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the [ ] [ ] ( ] [X]
significance of a historical resource as defined in
'15064.5?
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 13 of 68
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the [ ]
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to
'15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy or impact a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
e) Other
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on
the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based
on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial wind or water soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil, either on or off site?
[1 [1 [X]
[X1
11 [X] 11
[] [X] 11 11
11 1X1 11 11
11 11 [X7 11
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, [ ]
or that would become unstable as a result of the project,
and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
[X] [1 [1
Master Case # 12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 14 of 68
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- [] [X] [ ] [ ]
1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the disposal
of wastewater?
f) Change in topography or ground surface relief [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
features?
g) Earth movement (cut and/or fill) of 10,000 cubic [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
yards or more?
h) Development and/or grading on a slope greater than [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
10% natural grade?
i) The destruction, covering or modification of any [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
unique geologic or physical feature?
1) Other [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS- Would the
project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the [ ] [ J [X] [ ]
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
emissions of greenhouse gasses?
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the (] [ ] [X] [ ]
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 15 of 68
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the [ ]
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving explosion or the release
of hazardous materials into the environment (including,
but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals, fuels, or
radiation)?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or [ ]
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of [ ]
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan [ ]
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, [ ]
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with [ ]
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of []
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
[1 [X]
[1 [X]
[X]
W
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 16 of 69
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
i) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
health hazards (e.g. electrical transmission lines, gas
lines, oil pipelines)?
]) Other [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such
that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a
lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the
production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop
to a level which would not support existing land uses or
planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
0 Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 17 of 68
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as [ ]
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
h) Place, within a 100 -year flood hazard area, structures [ ]
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of [ ]
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? [ ]
k) Changes in the rate of flow, currents, or the course [ ]
and direction of surface water and/or groundwater?
i) Other modification of a wash, channel creek or river? [ ]
1) Impact Stormwater Management in any of the
following ways:
i) Potential impact of project construction and project [ ]
post -construction activity on storm water runoff?
ii) Potential discharges from areas for materials storage, [ ]
vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment
maintenance (including washing), waste handling,
hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas
or loading docks, or other outdoor work areas?
iii) Significant environmentally harmful increase in the [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
flow velocity or volume of storm water runoff?
iv) Significant and environmentally harmful increases [] [ ] [X] []
in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas?
01??
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 18 of 68
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
v) Storm water discharges that would significantly [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
impair or contribute to the impairment of the beneficial
uses of receiving waters or areas that provide water
quality benefits (e.g. riparian corridors, wetlands, etc.)
vi) Cause harm to the biological integrity of drainage [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
systems, watersheds, and/or water bodies?
vii) Does the proposed project include provisions for [] I [X] I
the separation, recycling, and reuse of materials both
during construction and after project occupancy?
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the
project:
a) Disrupt or physically divide an established [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
community (including a low-income or minority
community)?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general plan,
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
plan, natural community conservation plan, and/or
policies by agencies with jurisdiction over the project?
XI. MINERAL AND ENERGY RESOURCES - Would the
project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
M
Master Case 412-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 19 of 68
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally (] [ ] [ ] [X]
important mineral resource recovery site delineated on
a local general plan, specific plan or other land use
plan?
c) Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and (] [ J [] [X]
inefficient manner?
XII. NOISE - Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels [ J [X] [ ] [ ]
in excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in [ ] [X] [ ] [ ]
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan [ ] [ J [ ] [X]
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
would the project expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels?
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 20 of 68
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, [ J [ ] [X] [ ]
either directly (for example, by proposing new homes
and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, [ ] [ ] [ ] [XJ
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere (especially affordable housing)?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating [ ] [ ] [ ] [X]
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project
result in:
a) Substantial adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered governmental
facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
i) Fire protection? [ J [ ] [ ] [X]
ii) Police protection? [ ] [ J [ ] [X]
iii) Schools? [ ] [ ] [ ] [XJ
iv) Parks? I I I [XJ
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 21 of 68
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
XV. RECREATION - Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and [ ] [ ] IN [ ]
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
b) Include recreational facilities or require the [ j [ j [X] ( ]
construction or expansion of recreational facilities
which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
XVI. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC - Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads or
highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including [ ] [ ] IN [ ]
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature [ ] [ ] [X] [ ]
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
0:1—
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 22 of 68
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? [ ] [ j [X]
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [ ] [ ] [X]
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs [ ] [
] [X] [ ]
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
h) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [ ] [
] [X] [ ]
XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the
project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the [ ] [
] [X] [ ]
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or [ ] [
] [X] [ J
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm [ ] [
] [X] []
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the [ ] [
] [X] [ ]
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater [ ] [
] [X] [ ]
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project's projected demand in addition to the provider's
existing commitments?
0 Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted [ ] [
] [X] [ ]
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 23 of 68
Potentially Less Than Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes, and [ ] [ J [XJ [ ]
regulations related to solid waste?
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the [ J [XJ [ J [ ]
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually [ J [XJ [ J [ J
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which [ J [X] [ J [ J
will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
XIX. DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME `DE MINIMUS' FINDING
a) Will the project have an adverse effect either [ J [XJ [ ] [ J
individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife
resources? Wildlife shall be defined for the purpose of
this question as "all wild animals, birds, plants, fish,
amphibians, and related ecological communities,
including the habitat upon which the wildlife depends
for it's continued viability."
X61
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 24 of 68
D. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND/OR EARLIER ANALYSIS:
Section and Subsections
Evaluation of Impacts
I. AESTHETICS
a) Less than Significant Impact: The City of Santa Clarita is
located within Southern California's Santa Clarita Valley, which is
bounded by the San Gabriel Mountains to the south and east, the
Santa Susana Mountains to the southwest, and the mountains of the
Los Padres and Angeles National Forests to the north. The
surrounding natural mountains and ridgelines, some of which extend
into the City, provide a visual backdrop for much of the City. Other
scenic resources within or visible from the City include the Santa
Clara River corridor, forested/vegetated land, and a variety of
canyons and natural drainages in portions of the City.
The project site is located in an urbanized area of the City with
existing development to the north, east and south. The property west
of the project site is currently a brownfield and is not visible from the
project area. While the proposed project will alter the existing
condition of the project site for the construction of the 87 -unit
development, it is not located in proximity to any scenic vistas. The
extent of the project will extend no further than 33 feet below the
crest of the ridge along the western boundary of the proejct.
Therefore, the development of the project site will have a less than
significant impact on scenic vistas.
b) Less than Significant Impact: The project site is not located
on, or adjacent to, any state scenic highway. Potential scenic
resources in the vicinity of the project site include the Santa Clara
River located approximately to the northwest of the project site
beyond the existing industrial park. No historic buildings or rock
outcroppings are located on or near the project site. One ridgeline
runs along the western edge of the site, however the extent of the
project will extend no further than 33 feet below the crest of the
ridge. The nearest designated scenic highway is the Interstate 5
Freeway (I-5). The project site is located approximately 3.4 miles
east of the I-5.
Therefore, the proposed project would have less than significant
impacts on scenic resources.
c) Less than Significant Impact: The project proposes to locate
87 residential units on-site and alter a General Plan designated
Significant Rid eline. The residential units will be both single story
40
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 25 of 68
and two story with a maximum height of 23 feet. Grading on-site
requires the creation of a flat pad approximately 30 feet above street
grade that continues up the existing Significant Ridgeline to a point
approximately 50 feet above street grade. A number of maintained
slopes will be created that will encroach onto the Significant
Ridgeline to with a maximum cut extending to a point approximately
100 feet above street grade. However, slopes will not impair the
ridge itself and will not be detrimental to the aesthetics of the site.
These proposed improvements and associated construction activities
will result in visual impacts visible from the surrounding areas,
specifically from the preschool adjacent to the project site to the
north and the high school adjacent to the project site to the south.
Visual impacts will also be observed from the office uses to the east.
The project site is in an urbanized area and between fully improved
commercial and institutional uses within a thriving business park.
Under the current BP (Business Park) General Plan land use
designation and zoning designation, the development of 355,000
square feet of commercial space could potentially be supported. The
proposed project includes a General Plan Amendment and rezone of
the property to UR3 (Urban Residential 3) and Residential Moderate
(RM), respectively. The proposed 87 residential units is less
intensive than the highest use the current zone would allow. As a
result, the project would produce fewer visual impacts on the
surrounding area than what the current land use designation and zone
could potentially support.
The project is subject to the City of Santa Clarita's Hillside
Development and Ridgeline Alteration Ordinances. These processes
provide hillside development standards to maximize the positive
impacts, of site design, grading, landscape architecture and building
architecture, maintain natural characteristics, landforms, vegetation,
wildlife communities hydrologic features, scenic qualities and retain
the integrity of predominant off-site and on-site views to retain the
identity, image and environmental quality of the City.
To comply with the Hillside Development and Ridgeline Alteration
Ordinances the project will:
• Retain all significant ridgelines by clustering development
near the existing roadway. Although the project site is nearly
23 acres in size, only 9.4 acres are proposed for development;
• Not result in any structures that would extend into the skyline
above the ridge. The extent of the project will extend no
:T'
Master Case # 12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 26 of 68
further than 33 feet below the crest of the ridge; and
• Employ curvilinear street design;
As a result, the proposed project would result in less than significant
impacts to the visual character of the site and its surroundings.
d) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project includes
the construction of 87 residential units and various on-site amenities
including three community green spaces. In accordance with the City
of Santa Clarita's Unified Development Code, all proposed outdoor
lighting will be covered and facing down in order to minimize the
creation of glare. A condition of approval will require a lighting
study to demonstrate that there will be no lighting spillover onto
adjacent properties. Given the hours of operation of the adjacent
preschool and high school uses, it is anticipated that the proposed on-
site lighting will have no impact those uses. In addition, the
proposed project is located within a business park with existing street
lighting, parking lot lighting, and lighting on commercial buildings.
The proposed use will not add a significant amount of lighting to the
existing lighting of the area.
All residential parking will be provided by attached garage spaces.
This reduces the need for exterior lighting associated with parking
lots.
The project site is in an urbanized area and between fully improved
commercial and institutional uses within a thriving business park.
Under the current BP (Business Park) General Plan land use
designation and zoning designation, the development of 355,000
square feet of commercial space and associated parking areas could
potentially be supported. The proposed project includes a General
Plan Amendment and rezone of the property to UR3 (Urban
Residential 3) and Residential Moderate (RK, respectively. The 87
proposed residential units is less intensive than the highest use the
current zone would allow. As a result the project would produce less
substantial light or glare than what the current land use designation
and zone could potentially support.
Therefore, the proposed project would have less than significant
impacts on light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area.
II. AGRICULTURAL a -c) No Impact: The proposed project includes the construction
RESOURCES of 87 residential units and various on-site amenities including three
community green spaces. Neither the proposed General Plan land
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, 7TM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 27 of 68
use designation of UR3 (Urban Residential 3) nor the proposed
zoning designation RM (Residential Moderate) allow for horticultural
uses for commercial sale. Further, there is no prime farmland or land
under a Williamson Act contract within the annexation area.
Therefore, no impact related to agricultural resources is anticipated as
a result of the proposed project.
AIR QUALITY a) Less than Significant Impact: The Santa Clarita Valley,
and interior valley of Southern California, is within the South Coast
Air Basin, which is bounded by the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and
San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east, and the Pacific Ocean to
the south and west. The air quality in the South Coast Air Basin is
managed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD).
The South Coast Air Basin has a history of recorded air quality
violations and is an area where both state and federal ambient air
quality standards are exceeded. Because of the violations of the
California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), the California
Clean Air Act requires triennial preparation of an Air Quality
Management Plan (AQMP) to achieve the standards. The South
Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) prepares the
basin's air quality management plans with technical and policy inputs
from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the
California Air Resource Board (CARB), and the Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG). This plan is the South Coast
Air Basin's portion of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP
outlines steps required to achieve the standards while allowing for
growth projected by the Southern California Association of
Governments.
The AQMP accommodates growth based SCAG's predictions. Future
regional levels of vehicular air pollution identified in the AQMP are
based on SCAG's growth forecasts in the Regional Comprehensive
Plan (RCP) coupled with the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).
Thus, projects that are consistent with employment and population
forecasts are consistent with the AQMD. These forecasts are predicted
using local land use plans, particularly zoning and general plan land use
designations.
Although the proposed project requires a General Plan Amendment and
Zone Change, the proposed project is less intensive and will result in
fewer vehicle trips than the current General Plan landuse designation
and zoning designation. Thus, the project is consistent with the growth
15
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CW 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 28 of 68
projections accommodated by the AQMP. Therefore, the proposed
project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan, and would have less than significant
associated impacts.
b) Less than Significant with Mitigation: Air quality standards
in Southern California are identified by both the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the California Air Resources
Board (CARB) in the California Ambient Air Quality Standards
(CAAQS). These standards have been established for five pollutants
— ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur
dioxide (SO2), fine particulate matter (PM,o), and lead. The South
Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is managed by the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD).
Emissions for the project will be created both in the short term during
the grading and construction process as well as during the operation
of the project once grading and construction is completed and the
proposed homes are occupied. An air quality study was performed
that considered short and long term impacts to regional air quality as
well on local air quality. Specific consideration was provided for the
two school sites located adjacent to the proposed project: Bowman
High School and Creative Years Preschool.
Impacts from Grading and Construction Activities
Dust is typically the primary concern during construction of new
buildings. Because such emissions are not amenable to collection
and discharge through a controlled source, they are called "fugitive
emissions." Emission rates vary as a function of many parameters
(soil silt, soil moisture, wind speed, area disturbed, number of
vehicles, depth of disturbance or excavation, etc.). These parameters
are not known with any reasonable certainty prior to project
development and may change from day to day. Any assignment of
specific parameters to an unknown future date is speculative and
conjectural.
Average daily PM -10 emissions during site grading and other
disturbance are shown in the CalEEMod.2011.1.1 computer model to
be about 10 pounds per acre. This estimate presumes the use of
reasonably available control measures (RACMs). The SCAQMD
requires the use of best available control measures (BACMs) for
fugitive dust from construction activities.
�N
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 29 of 68
i
Current research in particulate -exposure health suggests that the most
adverse effects derive from ultra -small diameter particulate matter
comprised of chemically reactive pollutants such as sulfates, nitrates
or organic material. A national clean air standard for particulate
matter of 2.5 microns or smaller in diameter (called "PM -2.5") was
adopted in 1997. A limited amount of construction activity
particulate matter is in the PM -2.5 range. PM -2.5 emissions are
estimated to comprise 10-20 percent of PM -10.
The CaIEEMod was developed by the SCAQMD and provides a
model to calculate both construction emissions and operational
emissions from a residential land use project. It calculates both the
daily maximum and annual average emissions for criteria pollutants
as well as total or annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The
CaIEEMod 2011. 1.1 computer model was used to calculate emissions
from the indicated prototype construction equipment fleet and
schedule. The equipment fleet used in the analysis is CaIEEMod's
default fleet for a residential project of this size. The off-road
equipment emissions load factors were adjusted in CaIEEMod to
account for a 33 percent reduction attributable to overestimation of
load factors, which CARB has indicated to be appropriate. The.table
below demonstrates emission levels from grading and construction
activities and compares them to adopted SCAQMD thresholds of
significance by emission type. None of the emissions exceed the
defined significance thresholds.
Construction Activity Emissions (lbs./day)
ROG Emissions: 6.8 (Threshold=75)
NOx Emissions: 54.3 (Threshold=100)
CO Emissions: 31.8 (Threshold=550)
SO2 Emissions: 0.1 (Threshold=150)
PM10 Emissions: 21 (Threshold=150)
PM 10 Emissions (mitigated): 10
PM2.5 Emissions: 12.6 (Threshold=55)
PM2.5 Emissions (mitigated): 6.5
The SCAQMD has developed analysis parameters to evaluate
ambient air quality on a local level in addition to the more regional
emissions -based thresholds of significance. These analysis elements
are called Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs).
Use of an LST analysis for a project is optional. For the proposed
project, the primary source of possible LST impact would be during
construction. LSTs are applicable for sensitive receptors which
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 30 of 68
include residences, schools, medical facilities, day care centers or
other locations where children, chronically ill individuals or other
sensitive persons could be exposed to air pollution. LSTs include
shorter exposure periods for NOz and CO, and 24-hour exposure
periods for PM -10 and PM -2.5. The worst-case assumption is that
the receptor remains outdoors for the duration of the exposure period
because indoor air pollution levels, particularly for particulate matter,
are much lower than outdoors. For the proposed project site, students
would be target sensitive receptors for hourly outdoor recreation
activities.
An analysis utilizing LSTs was applied to the project and related to
the surrounding school uses. Emissions for the proposed project for
site preparation, earth hauling, grading and construction were all
found to be less than significant.
However, even though the air quality analysis has demonstrated that
emissions will not exceed defined SCAQMD significance thresholds
either regionally or locally, the applicant will be required to take
additional steps to further reduce impacts to children and faculty at
the adjacent schools. The following mitigation measures will further
reduce impacts and shall be followed by the applicant during grading
and construction activities:
AQ1: All grading and construction emission mitigations
included in the Air Quality Impact Analysis prepared by Hans
Groux & Associates shall be adhered to at all times and in all
appropriate circumstances; and
AQ2: The applicant shall develop a plan with Bowman High
School and Creative Years Preschool to the satisfaction of the
City of Santa Clarita to minimize exposure of students and
faculty to emissions from grading and construction activities
on the proposed project site. The creation of this plan shall be
included as a Condition of Approval for the proposed project
and may include, but not be limited to, the following
strategies:
o During periods of construction or grading, Creative
Years preschool should use outdoor play areas closest
to Centre Point Parkway;
o Grading, construction and recess schedules should be
coordinated to minimize emissions during outdoor
play periods;
o Grading and construction activities adjacent to or near
property lines that adjoin the proposed project site and
either school site should be performed to minimize
Master Case # 12-132, Habitat for Heroes -
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, 71-M 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 31 of 68
impact including, but not limited to, weekends when
school is not in session; and
o Temporary plywood barriers should be erected on or
near property lines that adjoin the project site and
school sites to block line of site from the schools onto
the project site.
Impacts from Operation of the Proposed Project
The proposed project includes the construction of 87 residential units
and various on-site amenities including three community green
spaces. The project site is in an urbanized area and between fully
improved commercial and institutional uses within a thriving
business park. Under the current BP (Business Park) General Plan
land use designation and zoning designation, the development of
355,000 square feet of commercial space and associated parking
areas could potentially be supported. The proposed project includes a
General Plan Amendment and rezone of the property to UR3 (Urban
Residential 3) and Residential Moderate (RM), respectively. The
proposed 87 residential units is less intensive than the highest use the
current zone would allow. As a result the proposed project would
produce significantly less air quality emissions than that
contemplated by the existing General Plan.
Given that emissions will not exceed SCAQMD defined thresholds of
significance and combined with the implementation measures of
AQ1 and AQ2, impacts to air quality standards will be less than
significant.
C) Less than Significant Impacts with Mitigation: The City of
Santa Clarita is within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). This
basin is a non -attainment area for Ozone (03), Fine Particulate Matter
(PM2.$), Respirable Particulate Matter (PMIo), and Carbon Monoxide
(CO), and is in a maintenance area for Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2). The
proposed project would generate 03, PM2,5, PMio, CO, and NO2
during both construction and operation. During the construction of
the proposed project, it is anticipated that .there will. be an increase in
dust and vehicle emissions related to the grading and construction
equipment used on the project site. With the Mitigation Measures
AQ1 and AQ2, the short term increase in pollutants will be reduced
to a less than significant impact. However, the City's General Plan
anticipated the development of this project site for all future
projections.
As discussed in question "b"
lT
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, KLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 32 of 68
construction of 87 residential units and various on-site amenities
including three community green spaces. The project site is in an
urbanized area and between fully improved commercial and
institutional uses within a thriving business park. Under the current
BP (Business Park) General Plan land use designation and zoning
designation, the development of 355,000 square feet of commercial
space and associated parking areas could potentially be supported.
The proposed project includes a General Plan Amendment and
rezone of the property to UR3 (Urban Residential 3) and Residential
Moderate (RM), respectively. The 87 residential proposed units and
is much less intensive than the highest use the current zone would
allow. As a result the proposed project would produce significantly
less air quality emissions than that contemplated by the uses
associated with the existing General Plan landuse designation.
Therefore, with mitigation the project will have less than significant
impacts on criteria pollutants.
d) Less than Significant with Mitigation: Two school sites are
located adjacent to the project site to the north and south. Young
children are considered sensitive receptors due to the developmental
condition of their lungs and cardiovascular system.
An air quality analysis conducted for the project site has determined
that the short and long term impacts to air quality from construction,
grading and operation of the proposed project will produce air quality
impacts that are less than significant. However, even though the air
quality analysis has demonstrated that emissions will not exceed
defined SCAQMD significance thresholds either regionally or
locally, the applicant will be required to take additional steps to
further reduce impacts to children and faculty at the adjacent schools.
This will be accomplished by implementing mitigation measures
AQl and AQ2 above.
Therefore, with the implementation of mitigation, the project will
have less than significant impact to sensitive receptors.
e) No Impact: The proposed use of the site and the surrounding
uses are not shown on Figure 5-5 "Land Uses Associated with Odor
Complaints" of the 1993 SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
Therefore, the proposed project would not create objectionable odors,
and would have no associated impacts.
IV. BIOLOGICAL a) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The
RESOURCES I proposed project site covers 22.8 acres of undeveloped land of which
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 33 of 68
9.4 acres is proposed for development. The site ranges from
approximately 1,160 feet in elevation on the eastern portion of the
property to approximately 1,300 feet on the western. An identified
significant ridgeline runs north -south along the western portion of the
site. However, a significant portion of the site is relatively flat. The
flatter areas on-site are disturbed, supporting primarily non-native
annual grassland vegetation and slopes support chaparral and sage
scrub. The majority of the disturbance has likely been caused by
required fuel modification for development adjacent to the site.
A biological assessment of the property determined that five special
status plant species and two special status wildlife species have a high
or moderate potential to occur on the project site. However, no
special status plant or wildlife species were observed on-site during
the field survey phase of the assessment.
Three specific vegetation communities were observed on the subject
property: Chamise Chaparral, Black Sage Scrub and Annual
Grasslands. Few wildlife species were observed directly on the
subject property and given the relatively small size of the parcel and
presence of surrounding development, the diversity of wildlife on-site
was low.
Special Status Plant Species
The following special status plant species have a high probability of
occurring on-site based on suitable quantity and quality of habitat and
recently known records of occurrences in the vicinity of the property:
• Slender Mariposa Lilly (CNPS Rare Plant Rank 1B.2);
and
• Plummer's Mariposa Lilly (CNPS Rare Plant Rank
1B.2).
The following special status plant species have a moderate
probability of occurring on-site based on suitable quality and quantity
of habitat and known records of occurrences in the region of the
property, but not necessarily in the immediate vicinity:
• San Fernando Valley Spineflower (CNPS Rare Plant Rank
1B.1);
• Piute Mountains Navarretia (CNPS Rare Plant Rank
1B.1); and
• Chaparral Ragwort (CNPS Rare Plant Rank 2.2)
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 34 of 68
Status
The following special status wildlife species have a moderate
probability of occurring on-site based on suitable quality and quantity
of habitat and known records of occurrences in the region of the
property, but not necessarily in the immediate vicinity:
• Southern California Rufous -Crowned Sparrow (CDFG
Watch List); and
• San Diego Desert Woodrat (CA Species of Special
Concern).
Impacts to Special Status plant and wildlife has the potential to be
significant but reduced to a level less than significant by
implementation of the following mitigation measures:
BRI: Prior to the development of the subject property,
rare plant surveys should be conducted during the peak
blooming periods for each of the species with a potential
to occur on-site. At least two surveys shall be completed
between early to mid-April and late June by a qualified
biologist. Based on the results of the surveys the applicant
shall follow the recommendations of the biologist for
preservation of the identified plant species.
BR2: Construction and grading activities planned for bird
nesting season (February 1 through August 30) shall be
overseen by a qualified biologist who conducts on-site
surveys for active nests prior to any disturbance of on-site
vegetation. Surveys shall be conducted weekly beginning
30 days prior to initiation of ground -disturbing activities,
with the last survey conducted no more than three days
prior to the start of clearance/construction work. If
ground -disturbing work is delayed, additional pre -
construction surveys shall be conducted so that no more
than three days have elapsed between the survey and
ground -disturbing activities.
BR3: Protected bird nests that are found within or
adjacent to the construction zone should be protected by a
buffer deemed suitable by a qualified biologist and
verified by the California Department of Fish and Game.
Buffer zones should remain intact and maintained while
the nest is active (i.e., occupied or being constructed and
until young birds have fledged and no continued use of the
nest is observed, as deemed by a qualified biologist).
W
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 35 of 68
impacts with
mitigation.
b) Less than Significant Impact: The project site is located
approximately 1,200 feet from the nearest riparian habitat, the Santa
Clara River. The project site is not located in a Significant Ecological
Area (SEA). The project site does not contain any sensitive natural
communities identified in local or regional plans, policies or
regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US
Fish and Wildlife Service.
Therefore, the proposed project will have less than significant
impacts on riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities.
c) No Impact: The project is not located within a federally
protected wetland as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
and does not propose direct removal, filling or hydrological
interruption of any kind.
d) Less than Significant Impact: The subject property is
situated among existing development to the north, east, and south. It
does not provide any link between two or more nearby open space
areas and there are no waterways on site. Though wildlife can access
the site from the west, wildlife activity is expected to be minimal on-
site due to the proximity of adjacent development and human
disturbance. As such, the site is not considered part of a wildlife
movement or migration corridor.
Therefore, the project will result in less than significant impacts to
movement of native resident migratory fish or wildlife species.
e) Less than Significant Impact: The subject property does not
conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy.
The purpose of the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance is to protect and
preserve oak trees in the City and to provide regulatory measures
designed to accomplish this purpose. The ordinance indicates that it
shall be the policy of the City of Santa Clarita to require the
preservation of all healthy oak trees, unless compelling reasons
justify the removal of such trees. The ordinance applies to the
removal, encroachment upon and pruning of oak trees.
Seven oak trees are in the vicinity of the project site. One of the
seven, identified by an Oak Tree Report completed for the project as
�i
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 36 of 68
Oak Tree #4, is on the project site but is dead. Oak Tree #6, a
heritage oak, is located off of the project site, but a portion of its
canopy extends over the northern boundary of the project site. The
remaining five oaks are located entirely off of the project site to the
north. Neither Oak Tree #4 nor Oak Tree #6 is within the grading
envelope of the proposed project and will not be encroached upon in
any way. No oak trees will be removed as part of the proposed
project. A potential future right-of-way project for the extension of
Golden Triangle Road may occur adjacent to the northern boundary
of the project site, but this project will be subject to separate
environmental review under the California Environmental Quality
Act and is not a part of the proposed residential project.
Therefore, the proposed project will have less than significant
impacts to oak trees and will not conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources.
f) Less than Sieniiicant with Mitieation: As discussed in
item "a" above, a biological assessment of the property determined
that five special status plant species and two special status wildlife
species have a high or moderate potential to occur on the project site.
Any impacts will be mitigated to less than significant levels through
the implementation of Mitigation Items BRI, BR2 and BR3 as
outlined above.
Therefore the project will have less than significant impacts with
mitigation.
g) No Impact: The project site is not located in a Significant
Ecological Area as identified by the City of Santa Clarita General
Plan and will therefore have no effect on a Significant Ecological
Area or Significant Natural Area.
V. CULTURAL a -d) No Impact: The proposed project would not directly cause a
RESOURCES substantial adverse change in the significance of any known cultural
or archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the
Government Code. A Phase I environmental study found no record
of significant cultural resources. However, if evidence of significant
cultural resources are found during grading or construction activities,
all localized activities would cease until such time as an authorized
expert could identify and protect such resources as needed.
On December 6, 2012 a Tribal Consultation Request form was sent to
the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and the
appropriate tribes have been contacted. However, an initial screening
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 37 of 68
by the NAHC indicates that no known sites are located on the project
site.
Because no evidence suggests the project will directly or indirectly
destroy or impact a unique paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature, the project is not anticipated to have an impact
related to cultural resources.
VI. GEOLOGY AND I In September of 2012, a Geologic and Geotechnical study was
SOILS performed for the subject property. The study concluded that:
• Based on the results of the investigation and review of the
proposed development, the project is suitable for the intended
use providing recommendations generated by the report are
followed and maintained; and
• Based upon field observations, laboratory testing and
analysis, the bedrock and alluvium found in the explorations
should possess sufficient strength to support the proposed
compacted fill and development,
a)
i) Less than Significant Impact: The project site is not located
within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Further, no known
active fault zone is mapped on the subject site. Regardless, the
proposed project is required to comply with the California Building
Code that establishes regulations for structures in potentially
hazardous areas, in order to withstand impacts caused from localized
earthquake activity. Therefore, the proposed project would not
expose people or structures to potential adverse effects from the
rupture of a known earthquake fault and would cause less than
significant associated impacts.
ii) Less than Significant Impact: The subject property is located
in Seismic Zone 4. Consequently, future development will likely be
subject to strong seismic ground shaking. The proposed structures
are required to comply with the Uniform Building Code and other
construction standard codes, and are subject to inspection during
construction to ensure proper construction. Conforming to these
required standards will ensure the proposed project would result in
less than significant impacts due to strong seismic ground shaking.
iii) Less than Significant with Mitigation: The subject property
is located within areas with the potential for liquefaction as identified
on the City's Seismic Hazard Zones map. All construction activities
�1�
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 38 of 68
will need to be properly engineered to address this potential hazard.
The extent of the impacts associated with construction in a
liquefaction hazard zone will be addressed at the time that building
permits are requested.
A geotechnical report prepared for the subject property concludes
that, based upon their analysis, liquefaction should not pose any
significant hazard to the proposed development provided that
recommendations within the report are followed and maintained.
Impacts will be less than significant by implementing the following
mitigation measures:
• GSL The applicant shall follow and maintain the
recommendations contained within the Preliminary Geologic
and Geotechnical Engineering Investigation prepared by
GeoConcepts dated September 7, 2012.
• GS2: The applicant shall subsequently follow and maintain
the recommendations contained within any final geologic and
geotechnical and/or soils reports generated for the project and
approved by the City.
iv) Less than Significant with Mitigation: A geotechnical report
prepared for the subject property includes a landslide analysis. The
subject property is located within an earthquake -induced landslide
hazard zone on the State of California Seismic Hazard Map. No
ancient or recent bedrock landslides were observed on the proposed
development area and no surficial slope failures or slumps were
observed within the proposed project area. A slope stability analysis
contained within the report concludes that based upon observation,
laboratory testing and analysis, the soil should possess sufficient
strength to support the proposed project provided that
recommendations within the report are followed and maintained.
Therefore, associated impacts are less than significant by
implementing mitigation measures GSI and GS2 above.
b) Less than Significant Impact: During construction of the
proposed project, the soils on-site may become exposed, and thus
subject to erosion. However, the project is required to comply with
existing regulations that reduce erosion potential. The proposed
project will comply with SCAQMD Rule 403, which would reduce
the potential for wind erosion. Similarly, water erosion during
construction would be substantially reduced by complying with the
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The
0
Master Case 1112-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 39 of 68
NPDES requires the construction of the project to incorporate Best
Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce erosion and prevent eroded
soils from washing off-site. Thus, the potential to increase erosion
during any construction activity would be effectively mitigated
through the required compliance activities.
Therefore, a less than significant impact to wind or water soil erosion
is anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
c) Less than Significant with Mitigation: A geotechnical report
prepared for the subject property includes a landslide analysis. The
subject property is located within an earthquake -induced landslide
hazard zone on the State of California Seismic Hazard Map. No
ancient or recent bedrock landslides were observed on the proposed
development area and no surficial slope failures or slumps were
observed within the proposed project area. A slope stability analysis
contained within the report concludes that based upon observation,
laboratory testing and analysis, the soil should possess sufficient
strength to support the proposed project provided that
recommendations within the report are followed and maintained.
Therefore, associated impacts are less than significant by
implementing mitigation measures GS 1 and GS2 above.
d) Less than Significant with Mitigation: The grading work
required as a part of the proposed project will require the cut of
68,005 cubic yards, the fill of 199,992 cubic yards. Approximately
131,986 cubic yards of cut material will be imported onto the project
site from an off-site source. The project will require the preparation
of a soils report for review and approval of the City Engineer. The
project will be required to comply with all recommendations outlined
in the report, including, but not limited to expansive soils. Further,
all projects are required to be designed and built in compliance with
all of the applicable building codes in place at the time of permit
issuance.
Therefore, the project is anticipated to have a less than significant
impact by implementing mitigation measures G 1 and G2 above.
e) No Impact: The project will be required to connect to the
existing sewer system. Therefore, soil suitability for septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems is not applicable in this case,
and the proposed project would have no associated impacts.
Fi
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 40 of 68
fb&i) Less than Significant with Mitigation: The proposed project
is located near a significant ridgeline as identified by the City of
Santa Clarita. While the project will alter the existing topography on
the project site, all slopes will be engineered and will be planted to
ensure stability and subject to mitigation measures GSI and GS2
above.
In addition, the project is subject to the City of Santa Clarita's
Hillside Development and Ridgeline Alteration Ordinances. These
processes provide hillside development standards to maximize the
positive impacts of site design, grading, landscape architecture and
building architecture, maintain natural characteristics, landforms,
vegetation, wildlife communities hydrologic features, scenic qualities
and retain the integrity of predominant off-site and on-site views to
retain the identity, image and environmental quality of the City.
To comply with the Hillside Development and Ridgeline Alteration
Ordinances the project will:
• Retain all significant ridgelines by clustering development
near the existing roadway;
• Not result in any structures that would extend into the skyline
above the ridge. The extent of the project will extend no
further than 33 feet below the crest of the ridge; and
• Employ curvilinear street design;
As a result, impacts to topographical and geological features and
development on graded slopes will result in less than significant
impacts with the implementation of mitigation items GS 1 and GS2.
g) _Less than Significant with Mitigation: The proposed project
would require the cut of approximately 68,005 cubic yards of earth
and fill of 199,992 cubic yards of earth. Approximately 131,986
cubic yards of earth is proposed to be imported from off-site.
The proposed project is located near a significant ridgeline as
identified by the City of Santa Clarita. While the project will alter the
existing topography on the project site, all slopes will be engineered
and will be planted to ensure stability and subject to mitigation
measures GS 1 and GS2 above.
In addition, the project is subject to the City of Santa Clarita's
Hillside Development and Ridgeline Alteration Ordinances. These
processes provide hillside development standards to maximize the
positive impacts of site design, grading, landscape architecture and
building architecture, maintain natural characteristics, landforms,
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 41 of 68
and retain the integrity of predominant off-site and on-site views to
retain the identity, image and environmental quality of the City.
To comply with the Hillside Development and Ridgeline Alteration
Ordinances the project will:
• Retain all significant ridgelines by clustering development
near the existing roadway;
• Not result in any structures that would extend into the skyline
above the ridge. The extent of the project will extend no
further than 33 feet below the crest of the ridge; and
• Employ curvilinear street design;
As a result, impacts to topographical features and development on
graded slopes will result in less than significant impacts with the
implementation of mitigation items GS 1 and GS2.
VII. GREENHOUSE a -b) Less than Significant Impact: "Greenhouse gases" (so
GAS EMISSIONS called because of their role in trapping heat near the surface of the
earth) emitted by human activity are implicated in global climate
change. These greenhouse gases contribute to an increase in the
temperature of the earth's atmosphere. The principal greenhouse
gases (GHGs) include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, and nitrous
oxide. Collectively GHGs are measured as carbon dioxide equivalent
(CO2e).
Fossil fuel consumption in the transportation sector (on -road motor
vehicles, off-highway mobile sources, and aircraft) is the single
largest source of GHG emissions, accounting for approximately half
of GHG emissions globally. Industrial and commercial sources are
the second largest contributors of GHG emissions with about one-
fourth of total emissions.
California has passed several bills and the Governor has signed at
least three executive orders regarding greenhouse gases. GHG
statues and executive orders (EO) include Assembly Bill (AB) 32,
Senate Bill (SB) 1368, Executive Order (EO) S-03-05, EO S-20-06
and EO S-01-07.
AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, is one
of the most significant pieces of environmental legislation that
California has adopted. Among other things, it is designed to
maintain California's reputation as a "national and international
leader on energy conservation and environmental stewardship."
a�
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 42 of 68
2020, California's GHG
emissions be reduced to 1990 levels.
In August, 2012 the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita passed
the Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan (CAP). The CAP
demonstrated that the City of Santa Clarita will be able to reduce
local greenhouse gas emissions to a level consistent with AB 32.
This will be accomplished by implementing the goals, objectives and
policies of the General Plan and by continuing to implement existing
programs. Therefore, the CAP is consistent with the General Plan.
As a result, proposed projects that are consistent with the General
Plan are also consistent with the CAP. However, proposed projects
that include a General Plan amendment and zone change must
demonstrate compliance with the CAP. As established by the CAP,
this can be achieved by the proposed project reducing its greenhouse
gas emissions by 12%.
The current business as usual scenario assumes the potential to
develop 355,000 square feet of commercial/light industrial space and
associated parking areas on-site. This is based on the land use
designation (BP) and zoning designation (BP) that was in place
during the CAP's base year of 2005. Based on emission modeling
completed using CalEEMod, the proposed project was calculated to
produce approximately 1,100 MTCO2(e) while the business as usual
scenario development could generate 6,109 MTCOZ(e). The result is
a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of approximately 600%.
Because the proposed project is within the criteria established by the
CAP, it will not result in greenhouse gas emissions that directly or
indirectly impact the environment. Furthermore, because the
proposed project is compliant with the CAP it does not conflict with
an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Therefore, the proposed project will result in less than significant
impacts to greenhouse gas emissions.
VIII. HAZARDS AND A Phase I environmental assessment was performed on the property
HAZARDOUS in 2012 and determined that:
MATERIALS
The subject property is not expected to constitute the potential
for recognized environmental conditions;
• The nature and extent of previous operations on the subject
property are not expected to constitute the potential for
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, 77M 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 43 of 68
business environmental risk; and
The subject property does not constitute a material threat to
public health or the environment.
a) Less than Significant Imaact: The proposed project includes
the construction of 87 residential, units and various on-site amenities
including three community green spaces. The proposed use is not
anticipated to store, use, or generate substantial amounts of hazardous
materials, and is not anticipated to utilize any acutely hazardous
materials. The only hazardous materials expected to be utilized on-
site are typical cleansers, solvents, pesticides, and fertilizers for the
normal maintenance of residential structures and landscaping. These
typical chemicals are not typically of sufficient amount or
concentration to pose hazards to the public.
Therefore, the proposed project will result in a less than significant
hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,
use or disposal of hazardous materials.
b) Less than Significant Imnact: The site is currently vacant.
The site is not known or expected to contain any underground storage
tanks (USTs), aboveground storage tanks (ASTs), gas lines, or other
hazardous material conduits or storage facilities. Similarly, the
project does not propose any industrial uses, waste treatment/storage
facilities, power plants, or other land uses that are typically
associated with hazardous material accidents. Therefore, the
proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into
the environment, and the project would have less than significant
related impacts.
C) Less than Significant Impact: Both Bowman High School
and Creative Years Preschool are adjacent to the southern and
northern boundaries of the subject property respectively. However,
the proposed uses are not anticipated to store, use, or generate
substantial amounts of hazardous materials, and are not anticipated to
utilize any acutely hazardous materials. Therefore, the proposed
project would not handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school, and the project would have less than significant
related impacts.
d) Less than Significant Impact: The subject property is not
included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001,TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 44 of 68
Government Code Section 65962.5 although there are two sites
within one-half mile of the subject property (Whittaker-Bermite)
which are included. However, a Phase I environmental assessment
that was performed on the subject property in 2012 concluded that: 1)
A recognized environmental condition is not expected on-site; 2) the
potential for business environmental risk is not expected on-site; and
3) a material threat to the public health or the environment does not
exist.
Therefore the project site would have less than significant related
impacts.
e -f) No Impact: The project area is not located within an airport
land use plan nor is it within two miles of a public airport or public
use airport. The proposed project would not result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area because the project
area is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip.
g) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project involves
a residential development on an isolated 22.8 acre site. The
construction and operation of the proposed project would not place
any permanent or temporary physical barriers on any existing public
streets. Furthermore, the project site is not utilized by any emergency
response agencies, and no emergency response facilities exist in the
project vicinity. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less
than significant impact to emergency response planning.
h) Less than Significant Impact: The site is surrounded by
commercial development to the north and south. These developed
areas act as buffers to wildfires. In addition, the proposed
development of the site will reduce the wildfire fuel on-site, by
eliminating the weeds and other annual grasses that cover a large
portion of the site. Furthermore, the project's landscape plan is
subject to review and approval by the City's Community
Development Department and Los Angeles County Fuel Modification
Unit. This review ensures the proposed landscape plan is appropriate
for the conditions at the subject site. Therefore, the proposed project
would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wild land fires, and the project would have
less than significant associated impacts.
i) Less than Significant Impact: The subject property does not
contain any electrical transmission lines, gas lines or oil pipelines. A
Phase I environmental assessment was performed for the site in 2012
and concluded that:
CIO
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 45 of 68
• The subject property is not expected to constitute the potential
for recognized environmental conditions;
• The nature and extent of previous operations on the subject
property are not expected to constitute the potential for
business environmental risk; and
• The subject property does not constitute a material threat to
public health or the environment.
Therefore, there will be less than significant related impacts.
IX. HYDROLOGY a) Less than Sienificant Impact: Section 303 of the federal
AND WATER Clean Water Act requires states to develop water quality standards to
QUALITY protect the beneficial uses of receiving waters. In accordance with
California's Porter/Cologne Act, the Regional Water Quality Control
Boards (RWQCBs) of the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB) are required to develop water quality objectives that
ensure their region meets the requirements of Section 303 of the
Clean Water Act.
Santa Clarita is within the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles RWQCB.
The Los Angeles RWQCB adopted water quality objectives in its
Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SQMP). This SQMP is
designed to ensure stormwater achieves compliance with receiving
water limitations. Thus, stormwater generated by a development that
complies with the SQMP does not exceed the limitations of receiving
waters, and thus does not exceed water quality standards.
Compliance with the SQMP is ensured by Section 402 of the Clean
Water Act, which is known as the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES). Under this section, municipalities are
required to obtain permits for the water pollution generated by
stormwater in their jurisdiction. These permits are known as
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) permits. Los
Angeles County and 85 incorporated Cities therein, including the
City of Santa Clarita, obtained an MS4 (Permit # 01-182) from the
Los Angeles RWQCB, most recently in 2001. Under this MS4, each
permitted municipality is required to implement the SQMP.
In accordance with the County -wide MS4 permit, all new
developments must comply with the SQMP. In addition, as required
by the MS4 permit, the City of Santa Clarita has adopted a Standard
Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) ordinance to ensure
new developments comply with SQMP. The City's SUSMP
ordinance requires new developments to implement Best
Master Case # 12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, KLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 46 of 68
Management Practices (BMPs) that reduce water quality impacts,
including erosion and siltation, to the maximum extent practicable.
This ordinance also requires new developments to submit a plan to
the City that demonstrates how the project will comply with the
City's SUSMP and identifies the project -specific BMP that will be
implemented.
The proposed project includes the construction of 87 residential units
and various on-site amenities including three community green
spaces. None of the proposed uses are point source generators of
water pollutants, and thus, no quantifiable water quality standards
apply to the project. As an urban development, the proposed project
would add typical, urban, nonpoint-source pollutants to storm water
runoff. As discussed, these pollutants are permitted by the County-
wide MS4 permit, and would not exceed any receiving water
limitations.
b) Less than Significant Impact: The Santa Clara River and its
tributaries are the primary groundwater recharge areas for the Santa
Clarita Valley (City of Santa Clarita General Plan, 1991).
The proposed project would add impermeable surfaces to a currently
undeveloped site, which could reduce the site's groundwater recharge
potential. However, the amount of impermeable surface the proposed
project would install is negligible in comparison to the total size of
the Santa Clara River recharge area. In addition, approximately 13.4
acres of the project site would be left as open space. Therefore, the
proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, and the
project would have less than significant related significant impacts.
c) Less than Significant Impact: Development projects that
increase the volume or velocity of surface water can result in an
increase in erosion and siltation. Increased surface water volume and
velocity causes an increase in siltation and sedimentation by
increasing both soil/water interaction time and the sediment load
potential of flowing water.
The proposed project would alter the sites drainage by installing
impermeable surfaces. However, the proposed development includes
an engineered drainage system to manage stormwater flows. This
drainage system will handle both the runoff that currently flows to
the site from surrounding development and the increased runoff from
the proposed impermeable surfaces on-site.
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 47 of 68
As required by the City of Santa Clarita and the Countywide MS4
Permit, the final design of the development's drainage system will be
engineered so that post -development peak runoff discharge rates (a
measure of the volume and velocity of water flows) are equal to or
less than pre -development peak runoff rates. Due to the drainage
features included in the proposed pond feature, and the detention
capabilities of the proposed wetland mitigation site, standard
engineering practices are expected to achieve this requirement.
Consequently, the project would not substantially increase erosion or
siltation off-site.
Furthermore, the project does not propose channelizing any drainage
courses or focusing surface water flows into any areas of exposed
soil. In addition, the on-site drainage system, in accordance with the
NPDES requirements discussed above in Section VIII(a), is also
required to include BMPs to reduce erosion and siltation to the
maximum extent practicable.
Therefore, with the application of standard engineering practices,
NPDES requirements, and City standards, the project wound not
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site, and the project
would have less than significant related impacts.
d) Less than Significant Impact: As required by the City of
Santa Clarita and the Countywide MS4 Permit, the final design of the
development's drainage system will be engineered so that post -
development peak runoff discharge rates are equal to or less than pre -
development peak runoff rates. By adhering to these standards and
with the incorporation of the pond area for runoff collection, the
project would not result in flooding on or off-site, and the project
would have less than significant related significant impacts.
e) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project could
increase runoff by increasing the impermeable surfaces on-site.
However, compliance with the City's SUSMP ordinance would
ensure that post -development peak storm water runoff rates do riot
exceed pre -development peak storm water runoff rates. Therefore,
the off-site drainage network that supports the parcel and surrounding
watershed will be adequate to handle the project's post -development
runoff.
Similarly, the project would generate only typical, non -point source,
urban stormwater pollutants. These pollutants are covered by the
County -wide MS4 permit, and the project, through the City's
SUSMP ordinance, is required to implement BMPs to reduce
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 48 of 68
stormwater pollutants to the maximum extent practicable. Therefore,
the proposed project would not create runoff that would exceed the
capacity of the stormwater drainage system and would not provide a
substantial additional source of polluted runoff.
f) Less than Significant Impact: As discussed above, the
proposed development will not be a point -source generator of water
pollutants. The only long-term water pollutants expected to be
generated on-site are typical urban stormwater pollutants.
Compliance with the City's SUSMP ordinance will ensure these
stormwater pollutants would not substantially degrade water quality.
The project, however, also has the potential to generate short-term
water pollutants during construction, including sediment, trash,
construction materials, and equipment fluids. The Countywide MS4
permit requires construction sites to implement BMPs to reduce the
potential for construction -induced water pollutant impacts. These
BMPs include methods to prevent contaminated construction site
stormwater from entering the drainage system and preventing
construction -induced contaminates from entering the drainage
system. The MS4 identifies the following minimum requirements for
constructions sites in Los Angeles County:
1. Sediments generated on the project site shall be retained
using adequate Treatment Control or Structural BMPs;
2. Construction -related materials, wastes, spills or residues
shall be retained at the project site to avoid discharge to
streets, drainage facilities, receiving waters, or adjacent
properties by wind or runoff;
3. Non -storm water runoff from equipment and vehicle
washing and any other activity shall be contained at the
project site; and
4. Erosion from slopes and channels shall be controlled by
implementing an effective combination of BMPs (as
approved in Regional Board Resolution No. 99-03), such
as the limiting of grading scheduled during the wet
season; inspecting graded areas during rain events;
planting and maintenance of vegetation on slopes; and
covering erosion susceptible slopes.
In addition, projects with a construction site of one acre or greater,
such as the proposed project, are subject to additional stormwater
pollution requirements during construction. The State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB) maintains a statewide NPDES
permit for all construction activities within California that result in
q+
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 49 of 68
one (1) or more acres of land disturbance. This permit is known as
the State's General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit or the
State's General NPDES Permit. Since the proposed project involves
greater than one (1) acre of land disturbance, the project is required to
submit to the SWRCB a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with the
State's General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit. This NOI
must include a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that
outlines the BMPs that will be incorporated during construction.
These BMPs will minimize construction -induced water pollutants by
controlling erosion and sediment, establishing waste
handling/disposal requirements, and providing non -storm water
management procedures.
Complying with both the MS4's construction site requirements and
the State's General Construction Permit, as well as implementing an
SWPPP will ensure that construction of the proposed project would
have less than significant impact to water quality.
g) No Impact: The project does not involve construction within
the identified flood hazard area. Therefore, the proposed project
would not place housing in a flood hazard area and would have no
related impacts.
h) No Impact: The project site is not within the 100 -year or 500 -
year flood zones as shown on the City's "Flood Zones" map.
Therefore, the proposed project would not place structures in a flood
hazard area and would have no related impacts.
i) No Impact: There are no levees, dams, or other water detention
facilities in the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, the proposed
project would not expose people or structures to a risk of loss, injury,
or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or
dam, and the project would have no related impacts.
j) Less than Significant Impact: There are no bodies of water in
the vicinity of the project site that are capable of producing seiche or
tsunami. A geotechnical report prepared for the subject property
includes a landslide analysis. No ancient or recent bedrock landslides
were observed on the proposed development area and no surficial
slope failures or slumps were observed within the proposed project
area. A slope stability analysis contained within the report concludes
that based upon observation, laboratory testing and analysis, the soil
should possess sufficient strength to support the proposed project
provided that recommendations within the report are followed and
maintained. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than
q' J
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 50 of 68
seiche, tsunami, or
k) Less than Significant Impact: The project would alter the site's
drainage patterns. However, compliance with the City's SUSMP
ordinance would ensure that post -development peak storm water
runoff rates to not exceed pre -development peak storm water runoff
rates. Furthermore, the project does not involve grading or
excavation into the groundwater table, and would not place any
subterranean structures or foundation that would encroach into
groundwater aquifer. Consequently, groundwater flows would not be
changed. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in
significant impacts from changes in the rate of flow, currents, or the
course and direction of surface water and groundwater.
I)
i -vii) Less than Significant Impact: The project is required to
comply with the City's SUSMP ordinance, the Countywide MS4
permit, the State' NPDES General Construction Permit, and required
to implement a SUSMP compliance plan and SWPPP. Compliance
with these requirements of the Clean Water Act and the NPDES will
ensure the proposed project would have less than significant impact
stormwater management.
X. LAND USE AND a) No Impact: The proposed project consists of 87 affordable
PLANNING housing units located in an urbanized area of the City of Santa
Clarita. The project site is currently vacant and its development will
not serve to divide any existing community and there are no other
residential communities within the area surrounding the project. The
proposed project will, therefore, not disrupt or divide an established
community.
b) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project will comply
with all applicable City plans and policies adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating environmental affect.
The proposed project calls for both a General Plan amendment and
zone change (GPA/ZC) as follows:
• Existing General Plan Landuse Designation: Business Park
• Proposed General Plan Landuse Designation: Urban
Residential 3
• Existing Zoning Designation: Business Park
• Proposed Land Use Designation: Residential, Moderate.
le
Master Case # 12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 51 of 68
The proposed GPA/ZC would downzone the property from a
commercial/industrial use to a residential use with a maximum of 11
units per acre.
The project site is in an urbanized area and between fully improved
commercial and institutional uses within a thriving business park.
Under the current BP (Business Park) General Plan land use
designation and zoning designation, the development of 355,000
square feet of commercial/light industrial space could potentially be
supported. The proposed project includes a General Plan
Amendment and rezone of the property to UR3 (Urban Residential 3)
and Residential Moderate (RM), respectively. The 87 residential
proposed units and is much less intensive than the highest use the
current zone would allow. As a result the project is anticipated to
produce less impact on the environment than the current land use
designation and zoning designation allows. The project will also
comply with all applicable plans and policies or, where impacts are
potentially significant, mitigate to a level that is less than significant.
The proposed GPA/ZC would result in a General Plan Land Use
designation and zoning designation that is consistent with the
surrounding land uses, infrastructure, and services. The proposed
project is located within a regional commercial center containing
various retail uses, grocery uses and professional services. In
addition to the recreational amenities on-site, the subject property is
within close proximity to the City's George A. Caravalho Sports
Complex which offers a wide variety of recreational and community
functions. The subject property is also in close proximity to the bike
path that runs along Soledad Canyon Road connecting the subject
property to nearly 70 miles of community -wide trails and paseos.
Finally, the project site would be served by a bus stop along the
project frontage.
Therefore, the proposed project will not conflict with any plans or
policies adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating
environmental impact.
c) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project will not
conflict with any local conservation plan or policy. A Biological
Assessment, Oak Tree Study, and Visual Resource Study were
completed for the proposed project. Impacts to biological resources
are anticipated to be less than significant with mitigation, there will
be no impacts to oak trees, and less than significant aesthetic impacts.
Although the proposed project calls for a GPA/ZC, the proposed
T-
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 52 of 68
4?",
project will result in a much less intense development than the
current landuse and zoning designations allow. Further, the subject
property is not included in any local conservation plan.
Therefore, any conflict with existing conservation plan or policy will
be less than significant.
XI. MINERAL AND
a -c) No Impact: Gold mining and oil production historically have
ENERGY
been the principal mineral extraction activities in and around the
RESOURCES
Santa Clarita Valley. Other minerals found in the planning area
include construction aggregate, titanium, and tuff. The proposed
project includes the construction of 87 residential units and various
on-site amenities including three community green spaces.
The proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a
locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan and would not use
nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner.
Therefore, no impact related to mineral and energy resources is
anticipated with this project.
XII. NOISE
• Less than Sianificant with Mitigation: Noise impacts are
considered significant if they expose persons to levels in
excess of standards established in local general plans or noise
ordinances. The exterior noise standard for the City of Santa
Clarita for residential uses is 65 dBA in usable outdoor space
such as backyards, decks, patios, etc. If required, attenuation
through setback and project perimeter barriers is anticipated
to be used to reduce traffic noise to the 65 dBA goal.
However, an inability to achieve this goal through the
application of reasonably available mitigation measures
would be considered a significant impact.
Current On -Site Ambient Noise Levels
Noise measurements were made in order to document existing
baseline levels in the area. These help to serve as a basis to
determine noise exposure from ambient noise activities upon the
proposed project. Long term (24-hour) noise measurements were
conducted on Thursday, October 25, to Friday, October 26, 2012, at
three on-site locations.
Long-term noise measurement locations were selected to document
the daily trend in noise levels generated by area roadways, the
neighboring reschooI and the adjacent continuation high school.
4?",
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 53 of 68
Train hom noise is also audible at the project site, particularly along
the northern perimeter.
These meters yielded existing noise levels of 60-62 dB within the
project site (including noise generated by trains). These noise
readings are within the "conditionally acceptable" compatibility
guidelines for residential use and do not pose a noise constraint for
residential use as long as an evaluation of noise reduction measures
are analyzed (typically conventional construction with closed
windows will suffice). Even allowing for growth in traffic (road and
rail), future buildout noise conditions are not anticipated to pose any
substantial constraint to meeting the City's general plan noise
policies for residential use.
For existing site zoning, the allowable noise level at the shared
property line with the continuation high school or the pre-school is a
non-residential standard of 80 dB by day and 70 dB at night (25h
percentile). Daytime levels may deviate for up to 20 dB for
progressively briefer periods. With approval of a general plan
amendment to convert the site to residential, the allowable level
would drop to 65 dB day/55 dB night. Since neither the continuation
high school nor pre-school operate from 9 p.m. to 7 a.m. (night), the
65 dB L25 standard would be in effect.
Neither school facility generates noise levels exceeding 65 dB at the
project property line. Any outdoor student assembly at the
continuation high school is shielded by the school buildings. There
are no competitive athletic events that would have students cheering,
band music, amplified voice, etc. Measurement data at the
continuation school property line did not indicate any substantial
single event noise that was not likely traffic related.
Impacts from Construction
Temporary construction noise impacts will vary markedly because
the noise strength of construction equipment ranges widely as a
function of the equipment used and its activity level. Short-term
construction noise impacts tend to occur in discrete phases dominated
initially by demolition of existing structures and large earth -moving
sources, then by foundation and parking lot construction, and finally
for finish construction. The demolition and earth -moving sources are
the noisiest, with equipment noise typically ranging from 75 to
90 dBA at 50 feet from the source.
According to the City of Santa Clarita Municipal Code, permissible
c1l,
_ Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 54 of 68
hours of construction within 300 feet of a residentially zoned
property are 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays and on 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. on
Saturdays. The nearest residential zone to the proposed project is
approximately 1,500 feet away.
Although the noise ordinance does not specifically identify school
uses as meriting equal construction noise protection as residences,
heavy equipment noise may be intrusive into indoor learning and
outdoor recreational use.
The construction activities may occur as close as 25 feet to the pre-
school property line and 65 feet from the continuation high school.
Outdoor activities at the high school occur within a sheltered
courtyard on a lightly used outdoor court/field several hundred feet
away from planned construction plus being blocked by the school
building itself.
Because the classrooms are air conditioned, the structural attenuation
of rooms with heavy duty plate windows is 30 dB or more. A typical
indoor classroom hourly noise level is 55 dB. An 80 dB exterior
equipment noise level would be reduced to below 50 dB (hourly
average) in the continuation high school classrooms. The pre-school
is closer to proposed construction and has outdoor play areas located
potentially within less than 50 feet from possible heavy equipment
operations. However, even as close as 50 feet, indoor levels will be
attenuated to less than the "normal' indoor standard. The possible
noise issue is that equipment noise would adversely affect the routine
outdoor play experiences when the machines operate close to the
several outdoor play yards. An outdoor noise level of 70 dB is
considered by the EPA to be excessive for active outdoor recreational
play. An 80 dB source strength is reduced to 70 dB by geometrical
spreading losses at a source -receiver distance of 160 feet.
The applicant will be required to take additional steps to further
reduce impacts to children and faculty at the adjacent schools. The
following mitigation measures reduce impacts and shall be followed
by the applicant during grading and construction activities:
• N1: All grading and construction emission mitigations
included in the Noise Impact Analysis prepared by Hans
Groux & Associates shall be adhered to at all times and in all
appropriate circumstances; and
• N2: The applicant shall develop a plan with Bowman High
School and Creative Years Preschool to the satisfaction of the
City of Santa Clarita to minimize exposure of students and
_ Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 55 of 68
faculty to noise and vibration from grading and construction
activities on the proposed project site. The creation of this
plan shall be included as a Condition of Approval for the
proposed project and may include, but not be limited to, the
following strategies:
o During periods of construction or grading, Creative
Years preschool should use outdoor play areas closest
to Centre Point Parkway;
o Grading, construction and recess schedules should be
coordinate to minimize noise impacts during outdoor
play periods;
o Grading and construction activities adjacent to or near
property lines that adjoin the proposed project site and
either school site should be performed to minimize
impact including, but not limited to, weekends when
school is not in session; and
o Temporary plywood barriers should be erected on or
near property lines that adjoin the project site and
school sites to block line of site from the schools onto
the project site.
Impacts from Operation of the Proposed Project
The project itself will not cause any roadway segment to exceed the
+5 dB threshold. The largest project related noise increase is +0.2 dB
at 50 feet from the roadway centerline. This segment is along Golden
Triangle Road near the Centre Pointe Parkway intersection.
The largest cumulative traffic noise increase is +1.0 dB along
Soledad Canyon Road which is less than the +3 dB threshold.
Therefore, both project only traffic noise impacts and cumulative
traffic noise impacts are considered to be less -than -significant at any
off-site receiver.
Therefore, with mitigation the exposure of persons to noise levels in
excess of standards established by the general plan and noise
ordinance both on-site and off-site and in both the long and short
term will be less than significant.
b) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation: There are no
established vibration standards in the City of Santa Clarita.
Furthermore, the proposed commercial uses at the specified location
would neither generate, nor expose people to excessive groundbome
vibrations or groundbome noise levels. Construction of the project
may temporarily generate vibrations and will be subject to mitigation
01
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 56 of 68
measures N1 and N2 above.
The proposed project does not involve construction practices that are
typically associated with vibrations, such as pile driving and large-
scale demolition. Therefore, with mitigation the proposed project
would cause less than significant vibration impacts.
c) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project consists
of 87 residential units. The project will generate trips that may
increase traffic noise levels in the surrounding roadways. However,
as discussed in section "a" above, the existing roadways surrounding
the project site create substantial amounts of noise, and the increases
in traffic volumes that would be caused by the proposed project
would not cause a noticeable increase in roadway noise. Therefore,
no significant long-term noise impacts are anticipated from the
project.
d) Less than Significant Impacts with Mitigation: As discussed
in section "a" above, the project will result in temporary construction
noise from construction and grading activities. These impacts will be
mitigated by implementing mitigation measures NJ and N2.
Therefore, with mitigation the proposed project would result in less
than significant temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise
levels.
e) No Impact: The proposed project is not located within an
airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport.
f) No Impact: The proposed project is not located within the
vicinity of a private airstrip.
XIII. POPULATION a) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project calls for
AND HOUSING the construction of 87 multi -family residential units and various on-
site amenities. Census data collected in 2011 for the state of
California has established an average of 2.89 persons per household.
The estimated population increase from this project is 251 persons.
However, because it cannot be assumed that all of the inhabitants of
the proposed project would come from outside of the City Santa
Clarita, the actual number of new residents of the City as a result of
the proposed project is unknown.
With a population of 203,000 the City of Santa Clarita is currently
the third largest city in Los Angeles County by population. The
City's_ population would increase by .001% as a result of the
i ��
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 57 of 68
0!)
proposed project.
Therefore, the proposed project will result in less than significant
impacts to population growth.
b -c) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project will
neither displace people or existing housing. All of the proposed 87
units will be affordable housing units available for wounded veterans
and their families and will result in less than significant impacts.
XIV. PUBLIC
a. Wv) No Impact: The proposed project would not create any
SERVICES
significant adverse impacts to public services, nor would it
necessitate the construction of new facilities for fire, police, school
services or parks.
Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in an
impact related to public services.
XV. RECREATION
a -b) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project includes
the construction of 87 residential units and various on-site amenities
including three community green spaces. No significant incremental
increase in the use of public parks is expected as a result of the
proposed project. Payment of parks impact fees by the applicant will
offset any impacts.
Therefore no significant impacts are expected that would lead to
physical deterioration of any existing recreational facilities as a result
of the project.
Payment of parks impact fees by the applicant will contribute to
future construction or expansion of recreational facilities. The
appropriate environmental process and documentation will be
completed at the time any expansion or construction to recreational
facilities occur and will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
Therefore less than significant impacts are expected that would
require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that
might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.
XVI.
a -b) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project includes
TRANSPORTATION /
the construction of 87 residential units and various on-site amenities.
TRAFFIC
A traffic analysis conducted as part of the proposed project
concluded that the project will generate a maximum of 505 daily trips
with 38 trips during the morning peak and 45 trips during the evening
eak hours. Six intersections and two roadway segments that were
0!)
Master Case # 12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 58 of 68
determined to be the most likely for significant impact were
considered as part of the analysis. It was determined that the
proposed project would not reduce the level of service at any of the
six intersections or roadway segments.
Furthermore, it is anticipated that the number of daily trips as part of
the proposed project would be considerably less than the number of
trips associated with 355,000 square feet of commercial/industrial
space that could be contemplated as part of the current general plan
landuse and zoning designation.
Therefore, the proposed project would have less than significant
impacts on traffic loads and capacity of the existing street system.
c -h) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project includes
the construction of 87 residential units and various on-site amenities
including. The proposed project will not impact change air traffic
patterns, including any design feature (sharp curves, dangerous
intersections or incompatible uses) that will result in inadequate
emergency access or parking capacity. The proposed project will
also not conflict with any policy plan or program supporting
alternative transportation or present hazards or barriers for
eaestnans or otc casts.
XVII. UTILITIES a) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project
AND SERVICE includes the construction of 87 residential units and various on-site
SYSTEMS amenities including three community green spaces. None of the
proposed uses would generate atypical wastewater such as industrial
or agricultural effluent. All wastewater generated by the proposed
project is expected to be domestic sewage. Wastewater treatment
facilities are designed to treat domestic sewage; and thus, typical
domestic sewage does not exceed wastewater treatment requirements.
Since the project would not generate atypical wastewater, the project
would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements, and the project
would have less than significant impacts.
b) Less than Significant Impact: The proposed development
would increase the demand for water and wastewater service.
However, the increase to water/wastewater service demand is
minimal in comparison to the existing service areas of the water and
wastewater service purveyors. In addition, the facilities currently
maintained by the service purveyors are adequate to serve the
proposed increase in demand. The only water and wastewater
improvements required for the project are on-site pipelines and unit
connections to the infrastructure systems, which are subject to
connection fees. Therefore, the proposed project would not require
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 59 of 68
or result in the construction or expansion of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities off-site, and the project would have less than
significant associated impacts.
C) Less than Significant Impact: As required by the City of
Santa Clarita and the Countywide MS4 Permit, the final design of the
development's drainage system will be engineered so that post -
development peak runoff discharge rates are equal to or less than pre -
development peak runoff rates. Due to the drainage features included
in the proposed site plan, and the detention capabilities of the
proposed pond feature, standard engineering practices are expected to
achieve this requirement. Therefore, the proposed project would not
require or result in the construction of new off-site stormwater
drainage facilities or the expansion of existing facilities off-site, and
the project would have less than significant related significant
impacts.
d) Less than Significant Impact: The Santa Clarita Water
District (District) provides water services to the project site. The
District's water sources are local groundwater and the State Water
Project. These existing water supplies are sufficient to serve the
proposed development. Therefore, the proposed project would not
require new or expanded water entitlements, and the project would
have less than significant related significant impacts.
e) Less than Significant Impact: The County Sanitation
District of Los Angeles County (Sanitation District) provides
wastewater services to the project site. The Sanitation District's
existing facilities are sufficient to accommodate the proposed
development. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a
determination by the wastewater treatment provider that it has
adequate capacity to serve the proposed development, and the project
would have less than significant related significant impacts.
f) Less than Significant Impact: The project would be served
by a landfill (Chiquita Canyon) with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. Chiquita
Canyon Landfill is not expected to reach capacity for more than a
decade.
g) Less than Significant Impact: The California Integrated
Waste Management Act requires that jurisdictions maintain a 50% or
better diversion rate for solid waste. The City implements this
requirement through the City's franchised Solid Waste Management
Services. Per the agreements between the City and the franchised
uCi
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 60 of 68
trash disposal companies, each franchisee is responsible for meeting
the minimum recycling diversion rate of 50% on a quarterly basis.
Franchisee's are further encouraged to meet the City's overall
diversion rate goal of 75%. The proposed project is required to
comply with the applicable solid waste franchise's recycling system,
and thus, will meet the City's and California's solid waste diversion
regulations. In addition, the City of Santa Clarita has initiated a
construction waste diversion program to encourage the diversion of
construction debris to recycling programs. Based on the valuation of
the proposed project, the applicant will be participating in this
program and will be diverting construction debris to recycling
programs in accordance with the City's Environmental Services
Division. Therefore, the project would result in less than significant
impacts from conflicting with statutes or regulations related to solid
waste.
XVIII. MANDATORY a) Less than Sianificant with Mitization: A biological
FINDINGS OF assessment of the property determined that five special status plant
SIGNIFICANCE species and two special status wildlife species have a high or
moderate potential to occur on the project site. However, no special
status plant or wildlife species were observed on-site during field
survey phase of the assessment. Few wildlife species were observed
directly on the subject property and given the relatively small size of
the parcel and presence of surrounding development, the diversity of
wildlife on-site was low. The subject property is situated among
existing development to the north, east, and south. It does not
provide any link between two or more nearby open space areas.
Though wildlife can access the site from the west, wildlife activity is
expected to be minimal on-site due to the proximity of adjacent
development and human disturbance. As such, the site is not
considered part of a wildlife movement or migration corridor.
Further, the applicant will be required to implement mitigation
measures BRI and BR2 to further reduce impacts on-site should
special status or protected plant or wildlife species are identified on-
site.
The proposed project would not directly cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of any known cultural or archaeological
resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the Government Code. A
Phase I environmental study found no record of significant cultural
resources. However, if evidence of significant cultural resources are
found during grading or construction activities, all localized activities
would cease until such time as an authorized expert could identify
and protect such resources as needed.
with the
of mitigation measures the
�00
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 61 of 68
proposed project does not have a Mandatory Finding of Significance
due to impacts to biological or cultural resources.
b) Less than Significant with Mitigation: With the
incorporation of mitigation measures the proposed project would not
cause impacts that are cumulatively considerable. The project has
the potential to contribute to cumulative air quality, biological,
geologic, and noise impacts. However, due to the mitigation
measures contained in this document, none of these cumulative
impacts are substantial, and the project would not cause any
cumulative impacts to become substantial.
Therefore, with the incorporation of mitigation measures the
proposed project does not have a Mandatory Finding of Significance
due to cumulative impacts.
c) Less than Significant with Mitigation: The proposed project
will not significantly cause substantial adverse effects to human
beings directly or indirectly. The project will not subject human
beings to flood hazards nor will it general significant exposure to
hazardous materials. The project will be subject to strong seismic
earth shaking activities, but will be design to meet all current building
codes. Further, based upon field observations, laboratory testing and
analysis, the bedrock and alluvium found in the explorations should
possess sufficient strength to support the proposed compacted fill and
development. Mitigation measures GSI and GS2 will be
implemented to reduce impacts from the project to geology and soils
are reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation measures AQl
and AQ2 will be implemented to insure impacts from the proposed
project are reduced to a less than significant level.
Therefore, with the incorporation of the mitigation measures, the
proposed project would not have a Mandatory Finding of
Significance from environmental effects that will cause substantial
adverse effects on humans.
XIX. DEPARTMENT a) Less than Significant with Mitigation: A biological
OF FISH AND GAME assessment of the property determined that five special status plant
`DE MINIMUS' species and two special status wildlife species have a high or
FINDING moderate potential to occur on the project site. However, no special
status plant or wildlife species were observed on-site during field
survey phase of the assessment. Few wildlife species were observed
directly on the subject property and given the relatively small size of
the parcel and presence of surrounding development, the diversity of
wildlife on-site was low. The subject property is situated among
existing development to the north, east, and south. It does not
V1—
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 62 of 68
provide any link between two or more nearby open space areas.
Though wildlife can access the site from the west, wildlife activity is
expected to be minimal on-site due to the proximity of adjacent
development and human disturbance. As such, the site is not
considered part of a wildlife movement or migration corridor.
Further, the applicant will be required to implement mitigation
measures BRl and BR2 to father reduce impacts on-site should
special status or protected plant or wildlife species are identified on-
site. Therefore impacts on plant and wildlife species will be less than
significant with mitigation.
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 63 of 68
MASTER CASE #12-132, HABITAT FOR HEROES:
MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN
Identification of Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Activities
I. AESTHETICS
None Required
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
None Required
III. AIR QUALITY
Mitigation Measure AOl:
All grading and construction emission mitigations included in the Air Quality Impact Analysis
prepared by Hans Groux & Associates shall be adhered to at all times and in all appropriate
circumstances.
Mitigation Measures Identified by the Air Quality Impact Analysis:
Fugitive Dust Control
• Apply soil stabilizers or moisten inactive areas.
• Prepare a high wind dust control plan.
• Stabilize previously disturbed areas if subsequent construction is delayed.
• Water exposed surfaces as needed to avoid visible dust leaving the construction site
(typically 3 times/day).
• Cover all stock piles with tarps at the end of each day or as needed.
• Provide water spray during loading and unloading of earthen materials.
• Minimize in -out traffic from construction zone
• Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, or loose material and require all trucks to
maintain at least two feet of freeboard
• Sweep streets daily if visible soil material is carried out from the construction site
• Heavy equipment operations shall not occur within 160 feet of occupied student
outdoor recreational areas (noise and nuisance protection set -back)
Exhaust Emissions Control
• Utilize well -tuned off-road construction equipment.
01
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 64 of 68
Identification of Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Activities
• Establish a preference for contractors using Tier 3 or better heavy equipment.
• Enforce 5 -minute idling limits for both on -road trucks and off-road equipment.
Operational Emissions
• Utilize gas hearths rather than wood burning fireplaces.
At the option of the applicant, install rooftop solar panels capable of reducing
energy consumption by 80%.
Party Responsible for Mitigation: Project Applicant
Monitoring Action/Timing: Varies by mitigation item as follows:
• Fugitive Dust Control: Review of Plans and Specifications prior to the issuance of
a grading permit; and random site inspection to ensure compliance.
• Exhaust Emissions Control: Review of Plans and Specifications prior to the
issuance of a grading permit; and random site inspection to ensure compliance.
• Operational Emissions: Review of Plans and Specifications prior to the issuance of
building permit; and random site inspection to ensure compliance.
Enforcing, Monitoring Agency: City of Santa Clarita, Department of Community
Development and Department of Public Works.
Mitlsation Measure A02:
The applicant shall develop a plan with Bowman High School and Creative Years Preschool to
the satisfaction of the City of Santa Clarita to minimize exposure of students and faculty to
emissions from grading and construction activities on the proposed project site.
The creation of this plan shall be included as a Condition of Approval for the proposed project
and may include, but not be limited to, the following strategies:
• During periods of construction or grading, Creative Years preschool should use
outdoor play areas closest to Centre Point Parkway;
• Grading, construction and recess schedules should be coordinate to minimize
emissions during outdoor play periods;
• Grading and construction activities adjacent to or near property lines that adjoin the
proposed project site and either school site should be performed to minimize impact
including, but not limited to, weekends when school is not in session; and
• Temporary plywood barriers should be erected on or near property lines that adjoin
the project site and school sites to block line of site from the schools onto the
project site.
hu
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 65 of 68
Identification of Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Activities
Party Responsible for Mitigation: Project Applicant
Monitoring Action/Timing: Prior to project approval; and random inspection to
ensure compliance.
Enforcing, Monitoring Agency: City of Santa Clarita, Department of Community
Development and Department of Public Works,
I IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES I
Mitieation Measure BRI:
Prior to the development of the subject property, rare plant surveys shall be conducted during
the peak blooming periods for each of the species with a potential to occur on-site. At least
two surveys shall be completed between early to mid-April and late June by a qualified
biologist. Based on the results of the surveys the applicant shall follow the recommendations
of the biologist for preservation of the identified plant species.
Party Responsible for Mitigation: Project Applicant
Monitoring Action/Timing: Prior to issuance of grading permit; and random
inspection to ensure compliance.
Enforcing, Monitoring Agency: City of Santa Clarita, Department of Community
Development and Department of Public Works.
Mitigation Measure BR2:
Construction and grading activities planned for bird nesting season (February 1 through
August 30) shall be overseen by a qualified biologist who conducts on-site surveys for active
nests prior to any disturbance of on-site vegetation. Surveys shall be conducted weekly
beginning 30 days prior to initiation of ground -disturbing activities, with the last survey
conducted no more than three days prior to the start of clearance/construction work. If
ground -disturbing work is delayed, additional pre -construction surveys shall be conducted so
that no more than three days have elapsed between the survey and ground -disturbing activities.
Party Responsible for Mitigation: Project Applicant
Monitoring Action/Timing: Prior to grading permit; and random inspection to ensure
compliance.
Enforcing, Monitoring Agency: City of Santa Clarita, Department of Community
Development and Department of Public Works.
Mitigation Measure BR3:
Protected bird nests that are found within or adjacent to the construction zone shall be
protected by a buffer deemed suitable by a qualified biologist and verified by the California
Department of Fish and Game. Buffer zones shall remain intact and maintained while the nest
is active (i.e., occupied or being constructed and until young birds have fledged and no
continued use of the nest is observed, as deemed by a qualified biologist).
Party Responsible for Mitigation: Project Applicant
Monitoring Action/Timing: Prior to grading permit; and random inspection to ensure
Master Case 412-132, Habitat for Heroes
OP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009,18 12-006
Page 66 of 68
Identification of Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Activities
compliance.
Enforcing, Monitoring Agency: City of Santa Clarita, Department of Community
Development and Department of Public Works.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
None Required
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Mitigation Measure GSI: The applicant shall follow and maintain the recommendations
contained within the Preliminary Geologic and Geotechnical Engineering Investigation
prepared by GeoConcepts dated September 7, 2012 and attached to this initial study.
Party Responsible for Mitigation: Project Applicant
Monitoring Action/Timing: Prior to issuance of grading permit; and random
inspection to ensure compliance.
Enforcing, Monitoring Agency: City of Santa Clarita, Department of Community
Development and Department of Public Works.
Mitigation Measure GS2: The applicant shall subsequently follow and maintain the
recommendations contained within any final geologic and geotechnical and/or soils reports
generated for the project and approved by the City.
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
None Required
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
None Required
D{. LAND USE AND PLANNING
None Required
X. MINERAL AND ENERGY RESOURCES
None Required
XI. NOISE
Mitigation Measure NI: All grading and construction emission mitigations included in the
Noise Impact Analysis prepared by Hans Groux & Associates shall be adhered to at all times
and in all appropriate circumstances.
I12,
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 67 of 68
Identification of Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Activities
Mitigation Measures by the Noise Impact Analysis:
Habitable interior space will be adequately noise protected to achieve 45 dB CNEL
consistent with General Plan Noise Policy N 3.1.1 to be demonstrated at plan
check. For those units where window closure is needed for policy compliance,
supplemental fresh air ventilation will be provided at rates specified in the
California Building Code.
• For all units contained in the proposed project, property transfer and tenant lease
documents will disclose the presence of train activity and possible single event
noise disturbance.
Through an agreement, and to the satisfaction of the City of Santa Clarita, Habitat
for Humanity will agree to not hold the school district or the Creative Years Pre -
School operators to a more stringent noise standard than the current
commercial/commercial standard at their shared property lines.
Party Responsible for Mitigation: Project Applicant
Monitoring Action/Timing: Prior to grading permit; and random inspection to ensure
compliance.
Enforcing, Monitoring Agency: City of Santa Clarita, Department of Community
Development and Department of Public Works.
Mitigation Measure N2: The applicant shall develop a plan with Bowman High School and
Creative Years Preschool to the satisfaction of the City of Santa Clarita to minimize exposure
of students and faculty to noise and vibration from grading and construction activities on the
proposed project site.
The creation of this plan shall be included as a Condition of Approval for the proposed project
and may include, but not be limited to, the following strategies:
• During periods of construction or grading, Creative Years preschool should use
outdoor play areas closest to Centre Point Parkway;
• Grading, construction and recess schedules should be coordinate to minimize noise
impacts during outdoor play periods;
• Grading and construction activities adjacent to or near property lines that adjoin the
proposed project site and either school site should be performed to minimize impact
including, but not limited to, on weekends when school is not in session; and
• Temporary plywood barriers should be erected on or near property lines that adjoin
the project site and school sites to block line of site from the schools onto the
project.site.
Master Case #12-132, Habitat for Heroes
GP 12-001, ZC 12-001, TTM 072039, RLA 12-001, HR 12-001, CUP 12-009, IS 12-006
Page 68 of 68
Identification of Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Activities
Party Responsible for Mitigation: Project Applicant
Monitoring Action/Timing: Prior to project approval; and random inspection to
ensure compliance.
Enforcing, Monitoring Agency: City of Santa Clarita, Department of Community
Development and Department of Public Works.
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
None Required
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
None Required
XIV. RECREATION
None Required
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
None Required
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS
None Required
S9CMQIRREM112O I ZI12-132(H,bbn rw Hv )up mnm mR12-1221nnitl StWy dm
' AEH Project No.
VET612A
ATKINS ENVIRONMENTAL H.E.L.P., INC. '
Phase I ESA
Supplemental -
Subsurface Investigation
Final Report
ForthePirpe VLocatedat.-
I.A vwtty 283"IM29 (TRACT#72039)
COMM Pointe Parkway,
Santa C7arila, CA 91350
Prq-�for-'
Habitat for Humanity
Habitat for Heroes Project
San Fernando /Santa Clarita Valley
21031 Ventura Blvd, Suite 610
Woodland Hills, CA 91364
Prepared by:
Atkins Environmental HELP, Inc.
Date Prepared.
March 15, 2013
11
P.0 Box 222320 . Santa Clarita . CA 91322-2320
661.260.2260 • 800.750.0622 • Fax 661.253.3555 www.atkinsonvironmental.com
Final Report
Table of Contents
1.0
Site Information...................................................................................................1
2.0
Facility Maps.......................................................................................................3
3.0
Geology and Hydrogeology................................................................................3
4.0
Sampling..............................................................................................................4
5.0
Chain of Custody.................................................................................................5
6.0
Laboratory Results..............................................................................................6
7.0
Boring Logs.........................................................................................................7
8.0
Permits.................................................................................................................7
9.0
Manifests..............................................................................................................7
10.0 Plume Illustration................................................................................................7
11.0 Residual Contamination......................................................................................8
12.0 Quarterly Progress Reports ............................. ......... ...... __................................. 8
13.0 Conclusions and Recommendations.................................................................8
14.0 Professional Certification...................................................................................9
15.0 Qualifications.......................................................................................................10
i
16.0 References..................................................... _.................................................... 11
Appendix A — Vicinity Map
Appendix B — Site Map / Facility Map (Solt Sampling Locations)
Appendix C — Site Photographs
_ � G:WHhSE_1 dT50.51VEfb1Y (NFH611A1�Osurfece
InvesUgatim.doc
PHASE 1 ESA SUPPLEMENTAL - SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION FINAL REPORT
Habitat for Humanity # Habitat for Heroes Project # Santa Clarita, CA 91350
1.0 Site Information
The subject property is a vacant twenty-two (22) acre site located adjacent to, south and west
of Centre Pointe Parkway in the City of Santa Clarita, CA. The undeveloped site is among
rolling hills with a limited amount of trees but abundant shrubs and weeds covering most of the
parcel
The entire parcel is wedged between Centre Pointe Parkway to the north and east; and a
topographic ridge flanking the property to the south and west. From Centre Pointe Parkway
the property slopes up to the ridge separating this parcel from a little used area of what has
become known as the Whittaker — Bermite Property (East Soledad Valley).
1.1 Site Address and Responsible Party
As described above this is an undeveloped parcel with only about 50% considered
buildable due to a hillside to the southwest. A physical street address has not yet been
assigned, only LA County APN 2836-015-029 (Tract #72039) applies to the site
presently. The target property is directly across from the Child and Family
Development Center located at 21545 Centre Pointe Parkway, Santa Clarita, CA
91350.
The responsible party for the site is the Executive Director of Habitat for Humanity, Ms.
Donna Duetchman (818)884-8808.
1.2 Summary of Site History Relative to the Investigation
The target property is vacant land. No evidence of oil and hazardous materials (OHM)
ever having been at this site was identified. No evidence of releases associated with
usage, handling or disposal of OHM was identified on the property or near enough to
impact the target property.
Previous munitions manufacturing on the adjacent Whittaker Bermite property (to the
west of the target property) resulted in confirmed subsurface impacts involving
perchlorate and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as tetrachlorethylene or PCE
and trichloroethene or TCE. In the East Soledad Valley, which is west of the ridge from
the target property, the closest known subsurface contamination has been documented
in areas 51 and 41, nearly 0.5 miles to the west / southwest. The relative contribution
of pollutants in these two areas is small when compared to other areas on the
Whittaker Bermite site and therefore considered limited in scope.
The conceptual site model developed for East Soledad Valley indicates groundwater
flowdirection to the north and west, away from the target property. In addition,
geographical separation (> 600 lineal feet), topography and vapor barrier building code
minimum standards eliminate effectively any potential for a vapor intrusion condition
within the structures contemplated for the target property as part of the Habitat for
Hero's project.
- 1 G:\ WE 7 & TSASXVE 617A (WH612A)ISubwdaw
Im tlga6on.dm
PHASE I ESA SUPPLEMENTAL - SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION FINAL REPORT
Habitat for Humanity 0 Habitat for Heroes Project 1 Santa Clarita, CA 91350
1.3 Past and Present Business Activities
The property is currently and appears to have always been vacant with the possible
exception of limited amounts of agricultural operations (alfalfa farming) on small
portions of the property in aerial photographs taken about 1947. There are no past or
present business activities which are expected to represent the potential for residual
environmental impact capable of human health effects on the target property.
1.4 Description of the Surrounding Community
There are developed sites adjacent to the target property which range from a pre-
school; medical offices and a continuation high school, to name a few.
This parcel is surrounded by Bowman High School to the south, Creative Years
Preschool to the north and the Child and Family Development Center across Centre
Pointe Parkway to the northeast. The target property is surrounded by either vacant
land or religious, institutional or commercial buildings of various kinds.
1.5 Storage, Handling, Usage 8 Disposal Procedures of all Site Chemicals
No evidence of storage, handling, usage or disposal of oil, hazardous materials or
chemicals was identified, following rigorous site assessment techniques and thorough
site inspection performed by senior level environmental professionals. No evidence of
current or past releases associated with usage, handling or disposal of OHM was
identified on the property or near enough to impact the target property.
1.6 Dates of Building and Paving Completion
No buildings are present on the property currently and no evidence of buildings having
been on the property in the past was identified. Similarly, no paving was observed on
the property now, and no evidence of past paving was observed.
1.7 Proposed Future Uses of the Area Relative to Subsurface Impact(s)
Future uses of the area relative to this subsurface investigation include the building 87
affordable homes for returning military personnel and their families. The SCV Habitat for
Heroes project will be a community of 11 one-story houses and 76 duplex units. With
broad support the development is a unique, first -of -its -kind housing project for veterans.
-2 G.WHASE 1&TSWVETSM(HF 617A)19uDaudsm
l�veS69etlan.Coc „
sl `
PHASE I ESA SUPPLEMENTAL - SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION FINAL REPORT
Habitat for Humanity I Habitat for Heroes Project 0 Santa Clarita, CA 91350
2.0 Facility Maps
2.1 Vicinity Map
Appendix A shows the site location relative to the surrounding area.
2.2 Site Map (Soil Sampling Locations)
Appendix B depicts the sampling locations for the sampling event which occurred
on February 28, 2013.
3.0 Geologv & Hydrogeology
3.1 Geology
Professional Geologists at US Geological Survey, the California Department of
Conservation and other professional geologists who contribute to the www.usas.gov
and www.conservation.ca.gov websites (courtesy of Mr. Michael Ballard) provide the
following geologic description for the area of Saugus, CA in Los Angeles County:
Most of the valley is composed of sedimentary rocks. The valley floor is composed
of alluvium from rivers and streams. During the Pliocene Epoch, much of this area was
covered by the Pacific Ocean. Drastic changes started around 1.5 - 2 million years
ago, when mountains formed which exist today as the Coast Ranges. The uplift which
helped to create the Coast Ranges also caused the strata to be tilted followed by
dissection of the older valley floor creating many stream terraces visible today. The San
Gabriel Mountains (transverse range to the south) started forming during
the Paleocene Epoch. Most of their uplift has occurred only in the last three million
years.
One of southern California's major fault lines, the San Gabriel Fault an inactive branch
of the San Andreas Fault system, is close. One can trace its' path from Pacoima
Canyon, through Bear Divide, Placenta Canyon to just west of Violin Summit on 1-5.
Most of Saugus rests upon the Plio-Pliestocene Saugus Formation. The canyon floors
are composed of recent alluvium. Uplift and erosion have left only a few traces of the
old valley.
_ 3 GWHASE-1&TSAaWET612A(WHSI2A)15uba ffaw
I "Ogatw.doc
11c1
PHASE 1 ESA SUPPLEMENTAL - SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION FINAL REPORT
Habitat for Humanity ♦ Habitat for Heroes Project 0 Santa Clarita, CA 91350
4.0
3.2 Hydrogeology
Hydrologic conditions were provided by the Los Angeles County Department of Public
Works, Water Resources Division. Listed below Is Information provided by the
Watermaster on the closest active well to the property. Since the closest well is nearly
% mile north and considerably downgradient of the Target Property, it cannot represent
accurately the depth to groundwater at the Target Property. The only way to know the
depth to groundwater with accuracy is to install a well on the property. The best
estimate for depth to groundwater is 75 -150' bgs at the Target Property.
Reporting Agency: L.A. county Dept. of Public works. Water Resources Division, watarmaster
Closest well
7078F
Thomas Guide Map page # /grid
4550 / J3
Direction from target property
West
Distance from target property (miles)
0.25
Reported depth to Ground Water (bgs)
32'
Probable groundwater flow direction at target prop"'
WNW
Date last measured
8/31/09
Ground Surface Elevation (above msl)
1200'
'Can only be confined through well Installation and mwitodng
bgs = below ground surface msl = mean sea bvel
NOTE.., The above geologic and Hydrogeologic descriptions were gratefully provided by registered professional
gaologists/hydrogeologistsrgeohydmiogists of the CA Department of Conservation and Department of Water Resources,
Los Angeles Water District, Water Resources Division, Hydrologic Records and the LA County Wetermaster.
4.1 Soil Matrix Sampling
Six soil sampling locations were selected. Soil samples were extracted at a depth of
36" in undisturbed soil to the degree practicable, from the teeth of a backhoe used for
this purpose. Composite samples were taken from each excavation to represent the
soil column for the first 36" below ground surface (bgs) at each of the six locations. In
all, twelve samples were extracted and submitted to American Environmental Testing
Laboratories (AETL), a California State Certified lab for analysis. The six soil
composite soil samples were analyzed initially. If VOCs or perchlorate was detected in
any sample, the sample from 36' bgs would also be analyzed. None of the chemicals
of concern described later were detected above the method detection limits in any of
the composite samples.
-4 QAPKSEie TSAv\VEr81TA(HFHa11A)15ussuface
Investtgasm.doc
PHASE I ESA SUPPLEMENTAL - SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION FINAL REPORT
Habitat for Humanity 1 Habltat for Heroes Project ♦ Santa Clarita, CA 91350
5.0 Chain of Custody
5.1 Dates and Times of Sampling and Receiving
All soil sampling occurred on Thursday February 28th, 2013.
All soil matrix samples were packaged by Mr. B.J. Atkins of Atkins Environmental
HELP, Inc or his trained designee. The samples were picked up by a representative of
American Environmental Testing Laboratories (AETL) at the end of this sampling event
for delivery back to AETL's facility in Burbank, CA.
5.2 Sample ID Correlating to Field and Laboratory ID
Please see section 6.2 below for this correlation.
5.3 Signatures of Personnel Relinquishing and Receiving Samples
Mr. B.J. Atkins of Atkins Environmental HELP, Inc collected or supervised the collection
of soil matrix samples, retained sample custody responsibility and assured samples
were transferred appropriately to an AETL representative for transport from the Habitat
for Heroes site to AETL's offices in Burbank, CA. Mr. Atkins' signature can be found at
the bottom of the chain of custody forms.
5.4 Requested Analytical Methods
The requested analytical methods are affixed to the chains of custody. Soil matrix
samples were analyzed using EPA Method 82608 (for VOCs) and EPA Method 314.0
for perchlorate.
5.5 Nature of the Samples
To rule out the presence of recognized environmental conditions (RFC's) existing at the
target property, it was necessary to determine if surface deposition or subsurface
impact had occurred. To establish if a pervasive deposition problem has occurred over
time, soil composite samples at six different locations were collected and analyzed. To
enable discrete sample analysis (if warranted) independent soil samples were taken at
about 36" bgs at each location in undisturbed soil (to the degree possible). If either
VOCs or perchlorate was detected in any of the composite samples, the discrete 36"
bgs sample was to be analyzed. VOCs and Perchlorate were not detected in any of the
samples.
5.6 Size and Type of Sample Containers
The composite soil samples were gathered in 1.5" x 6" brass soil sleeves, the ends
capped, labeled and each placed in a separate zip-loc baggie.
The discrete soil sample taken from 36" bgs at each location was placed in a separate
4 oz. glass sampling jar which was "certified clean" (with a teflon lid liner). Each jar
was then labeled and placed in a separate zip-loc baggie. All samples were then
chilled to 4° C. in a cooler during transport to the lab.
5 G.TWE_I& TSMWETMA(HFH61 M)%SubsuAm
PHASE I ESA SUPPLEMENTAL - SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION FINAL REPORT
Habitat for Humanity ♦ Habitat for Heroes Project ♦ Santa Clarita, CA 91350
6.0 Laboratory Results
6.1 Laboratory Data
Original soil matrix samples were analyzed by EPA Methods 8260B and 314.0 at
American Environmental Testing Labs (AETL) in Burbank, a California Certified Lab
(DOHS/Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program — ELAP # 1541). A summary
tabulation of the laboratory results is provided in Tables 1 and 2 below.
The laboratory method for Volatile Organics is known as EPA Method 8260B. It looks
for the presence of 68 different volatile compounds. The EPA Method used for
Perchlorate is known as 314.0, which looks for perchlorate alone. In each case the
results showed "ND" or non -detect meaning the constituent was not found in the
sample analyzed. This is important as the method is capable of detecting
concentrations in soil in the part per billion range. The method detection limits used for
this project varied from 1.0 to 25 ppb which is far below the risk-based target
concentration (RBTC) developed for the Whittaker-Bermite site and approved by the
Cal EPA — Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). The results are even
further below USEPAs Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs) which are considered
screening levelstriggering remedial action if exceeded. Analysis for perchlorate
provided similar results, namely non -detect for each soil sample analyzed, again in the
part per billion range.
6.2 Tabulation of Soil Matrix Lab Results for Volatile Organic Compounds
Table 1
Tabular Summary of Soil Matrix PCE + TCE Concentration Data*
Volatile Organic Compounds, Method 82608
Dates Sampled: 2128113
PRG far the Direct Contact EVosure Pathways for Industrial Soil = 1.3 mglkg (for PCE) and 0.11 mg/kg (for TCE). These
may be the negotiated clean-up targets at this property, however no dean up appears needed because the PRGs were
not exceeded.
- 6 G.WHASE 16TW3WET612A(HFH612A)14ub5udace
In.9gatlun.doe
I lz2
PHASE i ESA SUPPLEMENTAL - SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION FINAL REPORT
Habitat for Humanity ♦ Habitat for Heroes Project ♦ Santa Clarita, CA 91350
6.3 Tabulation of Soil Matrix Lab Results for Perchlorate
Table 2
Tabular Summary of Soil Matrix Perchlorate Concentration Data
Perchlorate, Method 314.0
Dates Sampled: 2128113
Sample Lab ID
ID
nit I
Perchlorate
7.0 Boring Logs
No soil borings were completed during this subsurface investigation, so soil boring logs were
not prepared.
8.0 Permits
Due to the nature of the subsurface investigation no formal permits were required as no work
was performed under public roadways. No subsurface structures were encountered during
this subsurface investigation.
9.0 Manifests
The backhoe used to extract samples was used to backfill each excavation. No wastes were
generated, and none needed to be transported off-site. This eliminated the need for a
Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest(s).
10.0 Plume Illustration
Subsurface sampling indicated no evidence of VOC subsurface impacts. No PCE I TCE
(degreaser solvent) or perchlorate (rocket fuel oxygenate) was detected above method
detection limits in the samples analyzed. Based on the data generated by this project, no
contaminant plume exists and a plume illustration was deemed unnecessary.
7 G.APHASE 16TSAMVM1M(HFHS1M)1,%h Uu M
InaslipetlanAx
I ��
PHASE 1 ESA SUPPLEMENTAL - SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION FINAL REPORT
Habitat for Humanity ♦ Habitat for Heroes Project 0 Santa Clarita, CA 91350
11.0 Residual Contamination in Soil
PCE & TCE
Sampling was performed as described above in six (6) locations. None of the samples
analyzed detected the presence of PCE or TCE above a method detection limit set well below
the RBTC which was developed for the Whittaker-Bermite Site and approved by the Cal EPA —
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) for PCE. The results were even more
favorable for TCE.
Perchlorate
None of the samples analyzed detected the presence of perchlorate above a method detection
limit set well below the RBTC for Perchlorate.
No contamination of soil residual or otherwise was detected at this site.
12.0 Quarterly Proaress Reports
No contamination or subsurface impact was identified. No quarterly progress reports are
required to be prepared at this time.
13.0 Conclusions & Recommendations
Upon completion of the fieldwork, this written report was prepared containing field
observations, laboratory data, conclusions, and recommendations. This report also contains a
tabular summary of all analytical results, vicinity and site maps, plus other graphics as heeded.
VOCs — PCE & TCE especially and perchlorate were NOT detected in the soil matrix samples
analyzed for this project.
It can be concluded there is no obvious reason to delay redevelopment. It seems clear based
on analysis of soil samples at the proposed SCV Habitat for Heroes location, its' proximity to
the Whittaker — Bermite clean-up project has had no impact, and cannot be expected to impact
the target property reasonably.
Recommendations
Based on the lack of contaminants, further subsurface investigation is not warranted. No
further action is recommended at this time.
- $ - GAPHME I & TSMWEf61TA (HFH617A)lSubs rf"
lnmbgabon.do
PHASE 1 ESA SUPPLEMENTAL - SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION FINAL REPORT
Habitat for Humanity 0 Habitat for Heroes Project ♦ Santa Clarita, CA 91350
14.0 Professional Certification
Report Prepared by.
B.J. Atkin
Atkins fn onmentalllELP, Inc.
9 G.WRASE 18TSAMVE1517A(HFH512A)15ubwHe
PHASE 1 ESA SUPPLEMENTAL - SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION FINAL REPORT
Habitat for Humanity 1 Habitat for Heroes Project ♦ Santa Clarita, CA 91350
15.0 Qualifications of Environmental Professional(s)
Being responsible environmentally for the acquisition of nearly one billion dollars in petroleum,
commercial, industrial, and residential properties, principals at AEH actively participated in this
soil gas survey and subsurface investigation.
The principal investigator, Mr. B.J. Atkins, is the Principal Owner of Atkins Environmental
HELP, Ina (AEH). He has over 33 years of experience with Phase I and Phase II
Environmental Site Assessments, industrial environmental compliance consulting, subsurface
investigations and remediation projects. He has performed numerous environmental site
assessments for various private interests including purchasers, lenders and municipalities.
His abbreviated list of Registrations/Certifications follows:
• Certified Indoor Air Quality Professional (CIAQP No. 448)
• Certified Indoor Environmental Consultant (CIEC No. 0604003)
• Califomia State Registered Environmental Assessor II (REA II - 20182);
• Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP No. 03000016);
• Certified Hazardous Material Manager (CHMM No. 3412);
• Califomia Certified Asbestos Consultant (CAC No. 95-1767); and
• Certified Asbestos Building Inspector (ABI No. 02181).
DISCLAIMER
This report has been prepared solely for the use of the Habitat for Humanity as it pertains to property APN 2836-
015-029 (TRACT #72039) Santa Clarita, California. Any reliance on this report by third parties shall be at such
party's sole risk. Our services have been performed in accordance with applicable state and local ordinances, and
generally accepted practices in the environmental sciences. No other warranty, either express or Implied, is made.
Atkins Environmental HELP, Ina is not responsible or liable for any claims or damages associated with
interpretation of available information. Site exploration identifies actual subsurface conditions only at those points
where samples are taken, when they are taken. Data derived through sampling and analytical testing are
extrapolated by geoscientists who then render an opinion about overall subsurface conditions. Actual conditions in
areas not sampled may differ from predictions. This report should not be regarded as a guarantee no further
contamination, beyond which was detected in our investigation, is present beneath the property. In the event
changes to the property occur, or additional, relevant information about the property is brought to our attention, the
recommendations contained In this report may not be valid unless these changes and additional relevant
information are reviewed and the recommendations of this report are modified or verified in writing.
10 a:PHASE-1 ATSA31VET612A(HFH612 )l%bawHem
Inmfig"wn.E
�nx
PHASE 1 ESA SUPPLEMENTAL - SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION FINAL REPORT
Habitat for Humanity ♦ Habitat for Heroes Project ♦ Santa Clarita, CA 91350
16.0 REFERENCES
Published referenced sources relied upon in preparing this Phase I ESA Supplemental —
Subsurface Investigation Final Report includes but is not limited to:
— 11 GAPH E 1 8 TSA WE -%M (MFWM)'Sub.ur
Jm igatwAoc
1)
California Environmental Quality Act Initial Study;
Cal EPA / DTSC —.Region 4
Draft Remedial Action Plan for Operable Units 2
through 6 Former Whittaker-Bermite Facility
2)
Preliminary Remediation Goals — PRG Tables
USEPA - Region 9
Su erfund Region 9 9105
3)
ASTM Standards: E-1527-94 (6/94)
Annual Book
Practice for Environmental Site Assessments:
of ASTM Standards
Transaction Screen Process
Section 11
4)
Groundwater Protection — Interim Site
Los Angeles Regional Water
Assessment and Cleanup Guidebook 5/96
Quality Control Board
5)
ASTM Standards: E-1527-97 (5/97)
Annual Book
Practice for Environmental Site Assessments:
of ASTM Standards
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process
Section 11
6)
ASTM Standards: E-1527-05 (7/96)
Annual Book
Practice for Environmental Site Assessments:
of ASTM Standards
Phase 11 Environmental Site Assessment Process
Section 11
7)
ASTM Standards:
Annual Book
Draft Guide for:
of ASTM Standards
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process
Section 11
8)
Site Auditing: Environmental (1991)
Specialty Technical
Assessment of Property
Publishers
as Revised by Laura McHugh, P.E. R.E.A.
9)
Environmental Site Assessment
Real Estate Law Institute and
Fourth Edition (11/94)
Lincoln Graduate Center
bv Geor a R. Harrison, Ph.D.
10)
Real Estate Environmental Screening
Real Estate Law Institute and
Third Edition (11/94)
Lincoln Graduate Center
by Marvin T. Deane J.D.
11)
Residential Environmental Screening
Real Estate Law Institute and
First Edition (9/93)
Lincoln Graduate Center
by Marvin T. Deane, J.D.
12)
Standard Handbook of Environmental Engineering
McGraw-Hill, Inc.
(1989)
by Robert A. Corbitt
13)
Guide to Environmental Risk Management
Vista Environmental
Policies & Procedures for Financial Institutions
Information, Inc.
(1993)
(Version 1.1)
14)
40 CFR §312 — All Appropriate Inquiry (effective
Code of Federal Regulations
November 1 2006
15)
ASTM Standards: E-1528-93 (5/93)
Annual Book
Practice for Environmental Site Assessments:
of ASTM Standards
Transaction Screen Process
Section 11
— 11 GAPH E 1 8 TSA WE -%M (MFWM)'Sub.ur
Jm igatwAoc
PHASE 1 ESA SUPPLEMENTAL - SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION FINAL REPORT
Habitat for Humanity ♦ Habitat for Heroes Project ♦ Santa Clarita, CA 91350
Appendix A
Vicinity Map
-12 WHASE_1&TS0.1N 12A(HF.H612A)1Scll
Subsurteca I Wlgatlon URAFT.dm
1 y1
m
N
1 y1
PHASE 1 ESA SUPPLEMENTAL - SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION FINAL REPORT
Habitat for Humanity ♦ Habitat for Heroes Project ♦ Santa Clarlta, CA 91350
Appendix 8
Site Map/ Facility Map
Figure 1- Site Map with Sampling Locations
-13- GAPMABE 18 T&WVETBJP (HF M)4Scil
SUEsu .ln a gw. DR .t
ci
C
V
T
m 0
E
V
t: I
N N
m 0)N
m
' y c
ma
E N
�
aa,9
v
c Q o
fr O
d 'C N
a c
U mZ
V m Q
N U
L
PHASE 1 ESA SUPPLEMENTAL - SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION FINAL REPORT
Habitat for Humanity ♦ Habitat for Heroes Project ♦ Santa Clarita, CA 91350
Appendix C
Site Photographs
-14- G1PHRSE_I &TSMXVE l8 (HFW11A)1Sa
Subsurlaml wsfigWim DRAT-r.doc
LO
0
0
m
0
_O
0
O.
E
c0
CD
O
U)
m
D1
C
'U
C
c6
Q
.' A Window Between Worlds
February 7, 2013
Dear Donna,
A Window Between Worlds (AWBW) is proud to partner with SCV Habitat for Heroes to add healing art.
workshops to the Enrichment Services they provide. The collaboration between AWBW and SCV Habitat
for Heroes began in October of 2012 at which time Pamela Braly completed the Children's Windows
Leadership Training and submitted a formal collaboration agreement for the organization. Going forth
Pamela will serve as the liaison for the SCV Habitat for Heroes AWBW program. As the liaison Pamela
will service as the main contact for all communications with AWBW including but not limited to
workshop reporting and changes in other program leaders.
AWBW is the only national non-profit organization dedicated to using art to help end domestic violence
and sexual assault. Working in collaboration with over 300 organizations in the Los Angeles area and
beyond, we provide healing art programs for adults and children recovering from abuse. Art provides a
direct, gentle, and effective way for abuse victims and their children to reconnect with parts of
themselves that they shut off in order to survive the violence. By telling their stories through art,
survivors are able to express and release feelings of anger, hurt, shame, and betrayal. Collaborating
partners have found the AWBW art program to be one of their greatest assets in helping survivors move
forward toward violence -free lives.
With the domestic violence field focusing increasingly on developing a coordinated community response,
more and more agencies are working alongside domestic violence and sexual assault service providers to
address the needs of survivors and combat abuse. AWBW has and continues to provide training and
support to several police departments, military programs, school districts and various other programs
that offer counseling and other resources for survivors of abuse and trauma. The staff at AWBW is
excited about the possibility of SCV Habitat for Heroes bringing the AWBW art workshops to at risk
students via local high schools. Please let me know if we can be of any assistance in bringing this
possibility into fruition.
If you have any further questions, or need any additional information, please do not hesitate to call me at
(310) 396-0317 extension 208 or e-mail me at cturek@awbw.org.
Towards a violence free future,
Christy Turek
Los Angeles Regional Manager
A Window Between Worlds
710 4th Avenue, Suite 5 1 Venice, California 90791 1 T 3101396-0317 1 info@awbw.orq 1 www.awbw.org
1�14
THE AMERICAN LEGION
NEWHALL-SAUGUS POST 507 • 29527 SPRUCE STREET r SANTA CLARITA, CA 91321
PHONE: 661.259.8507 E FAx: 661.259.9380 # WWw,P0ST507,oRc
Donna Deutchman
Habitat for Humanity SF/SCV
21031 Ventura Blvd. Ste 610
February 1, 2013
Dear Ms. Deutchman,
Newhall American Legion Post 507 is proud to declare its full support of the 87 -home SCV
Habitat for Heroes community being built by Habitat for Humanity SF/SCV in partnership with
the California Department of Veteran Affairs. We have been in full supportof the; Habitat for
Heroes program since its inception and will continue to offer suppO.rt to Habttat'(or Humanity
SF/SCV and this new neighborhood.
Our valley is currently home to over 10,000 US Military Veterans. With the drawdown of the War
on Terror, we will see an influx of hundreds more. As a Veteran Service Organization dedicated
to serving our community through mutual helpfulness, we are proud of our partnership with
Habitat for Humanity. We look forward to assisting them with providing our nation's heroes with
a first of its kind, state of the art housing community.
We are excited to help build this community with our fellow SCV veterans and ask that the City of
Santa Clarita join in our partnership.
Sincerely,
JD Kennedy
Commander, Newhall American Legion
February 7, 2013
To Whom It May Concern:
WM. S. HART UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT
Bowman High School
A Model Condnaadon High School
21508 Centre Pointe Parkway *Santa Clarita, CA 91350
Phone (661) 253-4400 • Fax (661) 253-4125
www.ha ndistrict.o rg/bowman
"A NEW OPPORTUNRYFOR SUCCESS"
I am writing this letter of support for the Habitat for Humanity's Habitat for Heroes
Project in the Santa Clarita Valley. Jereann Bowman High School is next door to the
proposed, 87 home development for veterans, and we are in support of this valuable
partnership which enriches both our school and community.
Habitat for Humanity is an active community partner with Bowman High School,
involving our students in the Habitat for Heroes Project in a number of ways, including
working with our student leadership (ASB); participating in our WASC accreditation;
providing ROP classes in project design, development, and construction; and with art
workshops. A Window Between Worlds is a therapeutic art support program sponsored
by Habitat for High School Students, developed for "at risk" students who have
experienced separation, trauma, or loss.
In addition, the Hart District and Habitat for Humanity are hoping to submit a plan for a
joint usage gymnasium in Phase II of the project, helping both our school and the
veterans residing in the new homes. Since many Bowman High School graduates have
served or are serving in the military, Habitat for Heroes is a particularly good fit as a
partnership for our school.
If I can be of any further assistance, please feel free to contact me at (661) 296-2670
Sincerely,
U�
Robin Geissler
Principal
i :�
CHILD
&FAMILY
CENTER
BUILDING HEALTHY
MINDS ANO FAMILIES
February 11, 2013
Donna Deutchman
Executive Director
Habitat for Humanity
San Fernando/Santa Clarita Valley
21031 Ventura Blvd., Suite 610
Woodland Hills, CA 91364
Dear Donna,
I'm writing this letter In support of Habitat for Humanity's 87 home community being presented to the
Santa Clarita City Planning Council. The project is proposed on the property directly across the street
from the Child & Family Center, Centre Pointe Parkway site.
The Child & Family Center Is excited about the partnership we are developing with Habitat for Humanity
to provide mental health services to the veterans and their families that will reside In the proposed
community.
Please do not hesitate to call me if I can be of any further support.
Sincerely,
,cuw(�
V
Darrell Paulk
President/CEO
❑ MAIN SITE • 21545 C.FNTRE POINTE PARKWAY. SANTA CLARITA. CA 91350 • (661) 259-9439 • FAX (661) 2.59-9658
n23504 LYONS AVENUE 4204 []13501 LYONS AVENUE k304 El 23504 LYONS AVENUE #404
NEWT TALL. CA 91321 NEWHALL. CA 91321 NEWHALL. CA 91321
(6011 286 2550 • FAX (661) 2862567 (661) 2862562 • FAX 166112227709 16611 259 94.19 • FAX (66 1) 154 2033
W W W.CHILDFAMILYCENTEK.UKC
1251—
/��
COLLEGE OF THE CANYONS
September 18, 2012
Dr. Dianne G. Van Hook Chancellor
26455 Rockwell Canyon Road, Santa Clarita, California 91355 • (661) 362-3400 • www.canyons.edu
Ms. Donna Deutchman
Chief Executive Officer
Habitat for Humanity, SF/SCV
21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 610
Woodland Hills, CA 91364
Dear Ms. Deutchman:
College of the Canyons is pleased to participate as a member of the SCV Habitat for Heroes Coalition.
We are very excited for our College to be part of this major project for Santa Clarita veterans, which will
enrich their lives while bringing vital and meaningful resources to our best and brightest nonprofit
agencies. We stand ready to help and are committed to working with you to identify and access new
funding to provide academic and career counseling, as well as technical support, to help veterans
succeed.
As you know, the passage of the Post -9/11 Educational Assistance Act (also known as the "new GI Bill")
to assist the over 2 million veterans returning to college is the most comprehensive education benefit
since World War II. Unfortunately, the bill addresses only the affordability of a college education.
College of the Canyons is already supporting these veterans, through group orientations; guest speakers
for students, faculty and staff; a Military Club on campus for all students returning to the college with a
military background or interest; and outreach to let veteran students know about our program on
campus. But there is a wide array of challenges for our veterans who are returning to Santa Clarita,
aside from education. This project will create an amazing support network for our veterans and
together find resources and grants outside Santa Clarita to support our local efforts in addition to this
current opportunity.
We are happy to be an education partner in this effort. College of the Canyons will provide student
interns to assist in the following ways:
• Interior Design students will assist with the design aspects of this project.
• Solar and Plumbing students will assist with the construction of the homes in regards to these
fields. Students will be hired as paid interns by the contractors working on the project.
We look forward to continuing to work on this project with you. Please contact me for additional
Information, if needed, at (661) 362-3400. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Dr. Dianne G. Van Hook
Chancellor
SANTA CLARITA COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Michael D. Berger • Bruce D. Fortine • Michele R. Jenkins • Joan W. MacGregor • Scott Wilk
NA
r 4.Creative i •
�rrzlRr I
To Whom It May Concern,
February 13, 2013
We are excited about the 87 -home veteran Habitat For Heroes community being built on
Centre Pointe Pkwy next to our school. We are glad that residential housing is being built
next door instead of an office building or business park.
We discussed grating with Habitat for Humanity and worked out days that we would be
comfortable for them to do that. We look forward to future collaborations with Habitat
for Humanity for years to come. We will work together to come up with ways to solve
access and any other issues that may arise in the future.
Sincerely,
-
Cindy Le
Co -Owner
Katri Tyni
Co -Owner
11710 Golden Triangle Road, 5anto Ctartta, CA 81350 • (661)1511-0718 • www.crectiveyecir5.com
HOMETOWNSTATION.COM
i February 11, 2013
Dear City Planning,
we are proud to serve as the SCV Advisory Committee for the Habitat for Humanity San
Fernando/Santa Clarita Valleys'special SCV Habitakor Heroes project. We are in full support of
the 87 -home community being built on Centre Pointe, and what it will bring to veterans and all
Santa Clarita residents in the community.
Best,
Carl and Jeri Goldman, Adoisory Committee Chairs
Fred Arnold, CA Assoc. of Mortgage Brokers
, Paul Becker, Santa Clarita Sheriff
Hunt Braly, Hunt C. Braly Attorney at Law
Kerry Carmody
Kristie Carmody, MFT Marriage Counselor
Tom Christensen, Santa Clarita Rotary Club
Ed Colley, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
— Dana Cop, AT&T
Steve Corn Newhall Escrow Company
Mike Derderian, Valencia Electric
Oscar Dominguez Union Bank
Don Fleming Valencia Acura;
Jasmine Foster, College of the Canyons
Janice France -Petit, Union Bank
Kim Goldman, Santa Clarita Youth Project
Barry Gribbons, College of the Canyons
Debbie Gregory, MilitaryConnection.com
Taman Gurney, Mission Valley Bank
Jeff & Kiki Hacker, Attorney
Mo & Linda Haftzi, Santa Clarita Magazine
Arif Halaby. Total Financial Soltdions
Jerry Hartstoek, CW3, US SF (Ret.)
David Roffman, Hoffman Patent Group
Dick Jeffrey. SCV Senior Center
Renee Kseboy
JD Kennedy, Congressman McKeon's Office
RJ Kelly, Veterans Group
David Kline, Boy Scouts of America
Marlee Lauffer, Newhall Land
Steve Lavaeddin, First Republic Bank
Jim Lentink Rotary Club
Steve Lindberg, Santa Clarita Stake
President
Scott Luna, American Medical Response
Ho
Joe Messiaa, Hart School Board
Mike Mimbl, SoCalGas Company
Mike & Rosemary Murphy, Beyond
Harmony Day Spa
Kathy Norris, Valley Tndustrial Association
Donna Nuxti, American Cancer Society
Janis Pusic, S M Sales, Inc.
Cary Quashes, ACTION
Neel Schmitt, U.S. Air Force (Ret.)
Jack & Doreen Shine, American Beauty
Development
J
Brad Spahr, Specialty Motors
Candy Spahr, American Cancer Society
Tony Tartaglis, SoCalGas Company
Renard Thomas, College of the Canyons
Rosalind Wayman, LA County Mayor
Antonovich's Office
Ken Wiseman, AMS Fulfillment Inc.
Leon Worries, SCVTV
Mark & Sue Younger, Real Life Church
Donna Deutchman, CEO, Habitat for
Humanity SFISCV
IN
27225 Camp Plenty Road Unit #8
Santa Clarits, CA 91351
(661)298-1220
14{
William S. Hart Union High School District
February 13, 2013
City of Santa Clarita
Planning Commission
23920 Valencia Boulevard
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Dear Commissioners:
The Hart District is excited about the Habitat for Humanity SF/SCV Habitat for Heroes 87 -home
community being built in Santa Clarita on Centre Pointe Parkway. This project will provide wonderful
housing for our returning heroes while providing a worthwhile volunteer opportunity for students. The
District also welcomes the opportunity to serve new students in the community.
Because of the project's proximity to Bowman High School it is the District's hope that the project will
be able to move through the approval process quickly so that grading can begin in June and be
completed before students return to school in August. Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Robert R. Challinor
Superintendent
RC/dd
21515 Centre Pointe Parkway, Santa Clarita, California 91350-2948 (661) 259-0033 FAX (651) 254-8653
���
Public Interest Communication, Privileged Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure
425.16
October 3, 2012
Dear Mr. Hogan and Mr. Diaz,
saw the on-line news stories yesterday, that a consortium of groups are going to buy a 24 acre parcel
on Centre Pointe Parkway in the City of Santa Clarita, immediately to the east of part of the Whittaker
Bermite remediation project (DTSC #19281087) and next to Bowman High School. According to the
news story the consortium is going to build a housing development of 87 duplexes to be sold to
Veterans with children.
The news article says the development will include a "Victory Garden" where the project's residents can
grow vegetables in the soil on the property.
See: http://scynews.com/?p=36779
The residential housing project property at Issue directly abuts Bermite on Bermite's east side.
I am writing to you now to allow you to protect the public health by adopting economically reasonable
measures to Insure that the adults and children who ultimately live on the property are not exposed to
toxics contaminated soil which may exist on the upper slope of the property.
Private Investigation by Lawyer & Toxicologist for Sick Teacher at Bowman High School
Back when the Whittaker Bermite Community Advisory Group (CAG) established by DTSC was working
on Bermite related issues around 2001 or 2002, there was a teacher at Bowman High School who was
very ill with an immune disorder and she was suing the William S. Hart High School District claiming that
she got sick because the soil at Bowman High School was contaminated with toxic chemicals, which blew
dust and fumes into the school. The teacher had a fairly competent lawyer and a toxicologist.
The teacher contacted certain CAG members, and said that a private investigator and the toxicologist
had gone on to the Bowman High School property and on the adjacent property (this Veterans family
housing development property). The teacher said that the toxicologist and private investigator had
taken soil samples, which came up with traces of toxic chemicals which might have been attributable to
Bermite. The teacher's personal injury lawyer wanted to know how to get documents about what had
gone on at Bermite. I told him to do Public Records Act Requests to DTSC for the information they had
concerning on -foot investigations and soil tests along the East Side of Bermite which were "recent" as of
2000-2001.
I told the teacher's lawyer the generic story old time employees of Bermite had publicly told, and that
long time residents of Newhall had repeatedly said they heard ... that Bermite employees would take
barrels of toxic chemicals up on top of ridges along Bermlte's property line and then dump them down
the slopes to dispose of the toxic chemicals on adjacent landowners' property.
Previous Owner's Concerns & Investigation Concerning "Spill Over" Contamination of Subject
Property's Slopes Adiacent to Bermlte
During the 2000's, the owner of the subject property (now to be developed for Veteran's family housing)
was a partnership/LLC between John Laing Homes (a company owned by a royal investment company
from Dubai) and a Senior Citizen housing developer named Jules Swimmer. I talked to Jules in or about
2004, when he wanted information about historical off-site chemical dumping by Bermite's employees.
Jules was trying to decide whether to do a Phase 2 Environmental Assessment on the subject property,
and he was worried about liability to future tenants if they became ill from chemicals in the soil. Jules
later told me he had a consultant do a Phase 2 Environmental Assessment, but he didn't tell me what
the Phase 2 reported.
John Laing Homes went through a Chapter 11 bankruptcy a few years ago, and ownership of the subject
property ended up In the hands of another Investment company (eliminating Jules' ownership interest).
The bankruptcy court records showed the post -bankruptcy land -buyer was an entity owned by the Sheik
of Dubai. Jules died and the Phase 2 Environmental Assessment he said he obtained on this Berrmite-
adjacent property disappeared.
According to the current CAG Chairman, Jules Swimmer is believed to have given some documentation
on the property to the City of Santa Clarita staff, including a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment for the
property, in connection with his proposed development of the property for Senior Citizen housing with
fee waivers from the City of Santa Clarita.
No Customary Regulatory Requirement for Soil Testing Prior to Residential Development
In my 35 years as a lawyer involved in real estate cases, it has been very clear that no City or County in
California regularly requires soil contamination testing before allowing residential construction, unless
DTSC happens to be involved. [I first learned that fact as a lawyer for my firm's client, FDIC. By way of
foreclosure FDIC became the owner of a very contaminated 200+ unit apartment project in Oildale, CA,
where the town houses and apartments were built on land which Chevron had previously used as an
earthen floored petrochemical storage reservoir. Kern County had not required any soil testing prior to
a national apartment developer building that project.]
Suitability of Site for Senior Housing Different That Suitability of Site for Active Children and Adults
Jules Swimmer repeatedly told Glo Donnelly and me that he was willing to develop the part of the
subject property farthest away from Bermite, along Centre Pointe Parkway as a Senior Citizen project
because he felt it highly unlikely that the Seniors would be climbing up the slope at the back of the
property where it abuts Bermite, or rolling around in the native dirt on the slope or on the developable
partof the site. Jules said he thought that if the developable part of the site had 'not -contaminated
soil'that he and his partner could take the risk of property's slope up to Bermite being contaminated
with Bermite toxic chemicals which were residual from old-time barrel dumping.
However now as that same property on Centre Pointe Parkway is developed for Veterans and their
children to live in, there is a high possibility the Veterans and their children will be recreating on the
project's "open space" slope which has not been tested for Bermite's toxic discharges of chemicals Into
the soil. God forbid they eat vegetables out of a "Victory Garden" grown in this project's untested soil.
Reading yesterday's news story on the Veteran's housing project, it's clear to me that the people
involved with the groups developing the Veterans housing project may clueless about it being
immediately adjacent to a toxic remediation site, clueless about allegations of barrel dumping, and
clueless about the claims of the sick teacherfrom Bowman High School.
How to Address the Bermite Issues Responsibly and Economically
My practical suggestion to you Jeff, as the Planning Manager for the city with jurisdiction over the
Veterans family housing site, and to you Jose as the DTSC project manager for the Bermite site, is that
the two of you:
(1) Require some level of rudimentary soil testing of the development foot print, taking soil samples on
the development foot print area nearest Bermite and
(2) Require the recording of a deed restriction on all of the duplexes and on the "common area" of the
project, i.e. the slope up to Bermite, mandating rules regulating Veterans housing development
residents' conduct, saying that no one can climb or play or garden on the Bermite-adjacent slope
(thereby avoiding the cost of testing or remediation on the land immediately adjacent to Bermite).
Putting a high fence on the subject property, dividing the developed area from the Bermite adjacent
slope, would certainly help.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Kilpatrick
cc: GID Donnelly (Whittaker Bermite CAG), Councilwoman Laurene Waste, Javier Hinojosa (DTSC)
1 4j
HOWARD P. "BUCK" McKEON
25, D.T.I. CAarnonnln
" .
aC(1`..,'.,' 'h
i
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
.�
[� T7
K1• 4
COMMITTEE ON EDUCA TION
AND TIIE WOPKFORCE
WRCOMMTEC ON IIIOHFN rDU1 TION
gFO1NEIBLICA
Tonguss of the `United tater
MEMBER OF NEI'UDLICAN WIpP 1HAM
W
p V�
MEMBER OF REPUBLICAN STUDY COMMITTEE
.ouse of `1K.cpre�entatioeo
CONGRESSIONAL UNMANNED SYSTEMS CAUCUS_
9901119011, BC 20515-0525
Donna Deutchman
Habitat for Humanity SF/SCV
21031 Ventura Blvd. Ste 610
February 1, 2013
Dear Ms. Deutchman,
yl, n PAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
WAPHINDTON, DC2515
1209722E-1950
26850 THE OLD ROAD, BUTTE 203
SANTA CLARMA, CA B13B1
10011256-2111
1008 WEST AVENUE M-14.$UI'F E -I
PALMUAU,CA9355'
IU11214-r,I00N
www mc4M+n houw.gw
1 am proud to declare my full support of the 87 -home SCV Habitat for Heroes community
being built by Habitat for Humanity SF/SCV in partnership with the California Department
of Veteran Affairs. As you are aware, I have been in full support of the Habitat for Heroes
program since its inception and will continue to offer support to Habitat for Humanity
SF/SCV and this new neighborhood.
Santa Clarita is currently home to over 10,000 US Military Veterans. With the war in Iraq
behind us and the drawdown of troops in Afghanistan, we are already experiencing an
influx of hundreds more. As the representative for California's 25Eh Congressional District, I
am proud of my partnership with Habitat for Humanity and I look forward to assisting
them with providing our nation's heroes with a first of its kind, state of the art housing
community.
1 am excited to help build this community for our SCV veterans and ask that the City of
Santa Clarita join in honoring our nation's heroes.
Sincerely,
w
Howard P. "Buck" McKeon
Member of Congress
rwy ii a4- Wwrnm w::a MAm O'
24q,10 AVFNLII STANFORD. SANTA CLARITA. CALIFORNIA 91355
661.294-53DO / W W WsnucUS. KI2.CA.US
MISSION STATEMENT
November 8, 2012
n't
Mr. Jeff Lambert
uuc:w u,Kr+swuawTucE i
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd.
wF p uM„„
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
T1IE HOMF.VII)((1N41WRC
Dear Mr. Lambert,
w ttWENPRYEIXKAIRRI
Subject: SCV Habitat for Heroes
i
The purpose of this letter is to confirm that the homes being developed for Habitat for
Heroes are located within the boundaries of the Saugus Union School District. The
VISION school of residence will be Emblem Elementary located a122635 Espuella Drive,
i.
Saugus, CA 91355.
WK;nMurtRRl,Mi
Mr. Carl Goldman presented to the Board of Trustees on Tuesday, November 6, 2012,
R0.YA5"'R tniC'DiRR the Habitat for Heroes project. It was well received by the board and they are very
supportive of the project.
Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions.
i
CORE VALUES ( 9J=M'
Most since elly,
. Lucid,
Superintendent
TiAAMWK
FN x�R JML:pd
cc: Saugus Union School Board of Trustees
Carl Goldman, KHTS Radio
BOARD OFTRUSFEES ' DOUGLAS A BRYCE • PAUL DE LACERDA • ROSE KOSCIELNY • JUDY EGAN UMECK • STEPHEN S. WINKI FR
SUPFRINTENDENT. JOAN M LUCID. ED.D.
�ceCleitca. cii, F�ac2iian,
4+
FEB -12-2013 15:22 FROM SANTA CLARITA SHERIFF STA TO 18188848838
County of Los Angeks
Sheriff's Department Headquarters
4700 Ramona Boulevard
• MonwM Park, California 91754-2169
(661) 255-1121
February 12, 2013
To Whom It May Concern:
/LLIBC PCY[N
T M2 NO.
P.002
The Los Angeles County Shcrifrs Department, Santa Clarita Valley Sheriff's Station has been
advised of the current plans and have been included in planning meetings for the Habitat for
Humanity SF/SCV, 87 -home veteran neighborhood to be built in Santa Clarita on Centre Pointe
Parkway. Based on our analysis, we believe the impact on local law enforcement will be very
low.
This project appears to benefit the community as well as the leen and women who have served our
country through military service. Santa CMta Valley Station supports the Habitat for Humanity
in their goal of providing housing for veterans in the Centre Pointe Parkway plan.
Should you have any questions, please contact me at (661) 255-1121.
Sincerely,
LEROY D. BACA, SHERIFF
Paul Becker, Captain
Santa Clarita Valley Station
7 `7i-adilion o`cService cSiocs /ASO
TOTAL P.002
41b
0
r k.' i:..' P i l �1 1
am: rar Women
February 11, 2013
Re: Habitat For Humanity
To Whom It May Concern,
Somptimist International of Santa Clarita Valley would like to give their support to the
Habitat For Humanity project and the 87 -home veteran community they are working on.
Our club feels this is a very valuable project and will not only help out our veterans, but
the community as a whole. This project will help assimilate our veterans when they come
home and give them a needed hand up. This type of project helps to keep people off the
street and gives them a fighting chance at being a responsible citizen to our wonderful
city.
We hope that you will give your support to this very important project
Sincerely,
Cyndi Diaz
President
Soroptimist International of Santa Clarita Valley
somphinis I InTema hanol
of Sanln Clank Valley
P.O. Bae 8021:5
511,11.1 C1.04f, CA 91?80
a'wW,lippv.Cnli1
lml> mrmg he trams
of rramrn anIghis.
nr In; of rnmmf"pli"
mad throi,ghoui
111::1"r"J,
Veterans Advocacy Network
February 11, 2013
To Whom it May Concern;
Veterans Advocacy Network, Inc fully supports Habitat for Humanity SF/SCV in their proposal to assist
veterans and their families in the County of Los Angeles and the City of Santa Clarita. The need is
great for veterans housing, pride of ownership and financial education. In reviewing their project i
can understand that the importance of a single story home for the disabled Is a great opportunity to
give back to the more severely injured in our community.
This program is greatly needed especially now that more veterans are expected to return to Los
Angeles from the war in the Middle East.
Veterans Advocacy Network will support Habitat for Humanity SF/SCV by informing and referring
prospective veterans looking for the American dream of owning a home.
If you have any questions please contact RJ Kelly @ 661/510-1025
Respectfully,
RJ Kelly
Board President
r
PO Box 801621 - Valencia, CA 91380�Owl-
661-373-4770 i vets-advocacy.org
� a� seMr� ci Ar
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA '
NOTICE OF PUBLIC BEARING & NOTICE OF INTENT `
TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
a^�ubo"'F M
PROJECT TITLE: Habitat for Heroes
APPLICATION: Master Case 12-132, General Plan Amendment 12-001,
Zone Change 12-001, Tentative Tract Map 072039, Ridgeline Alteration Permit
12-001, Hillside Review 12-001, Conditional Use Permit 12-009, and Initial Study
12-006
PROJECT APPLICANT: Habitat for Humanity
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative
Tract Map, Ridgeline Alteration Permit, Conditional Use Permit, and Hillside Review for the development of a
22.8 acre site with an 87 -unit affordable housing development for United States military veterans.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: On February 19, 2013, the City of Santa Clarita Planning
Commission unanimously recommended the City Council approve the proposed project with the
addition of on-site soil testing.
PROJECT LOCATION: Centre Point Parkway, north of Bowman High School (APN: 2836-015-029)
A DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION has been prepared for this proposed project and
is available for public review. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all supporting
documents are available at the Planning Division public counter, located in the City Hall Building at
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 140, Santa Clarita, California. A copy of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration is also available at the Santa Clarita Library, Valencia Branch at 23743 Valencia Boulevard,
Santa Clarita, California.
The City of Santa Clarita City Council will conduct a public hearing on this matter on the following
date:
DATE: March 26, 2013
TIME: At or after 6:00 p.m.
LOCATION: City Council Chambers, City Hall, 23920 Valencia Blvd., 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 hearing described in this notice, or in written
correspondence delivered to the City of Santa Clarita at, or prior to, the public hearing.
For further information regarding this proposal, you may contact the City of Santa Clarita, Department
of Community Development, 23920 Valencia Blvd., First Floor, Room 140 Santa Clarita, CA 91355;
Telephone: (661) 255-4330, David Peterson, Assistant Planner II.
Dated: February 26, 2013 Publish Date: February 26, 2013
Armine Chaparyan, Interim City Clerk
SICDICURPEN111201512132(346 for Fe )TC Notice ofW wHwiu61Y132.&c