Santa Clarita City Council
October 22, 2024

CITY OF SANTA CLARITA

CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING

Tuesday, October 22, 2024
6:00 PM
City Council Chambers
23920 Valencia Blvd.

Santa Clarita, CA 91355

AGENDA

Joint Meeting with
Board of Library Trustees

How to Address the City Council
Pursuant to Government Code section 54954.3 members of the public are afforded the opportunities to address the City Council. You may address the Council once per meeting during Public Participation on any matter within the Council's jurisdiction that is not listed on the agenda. Public Participation speaker's cards must be submitted to the City Clerk BEFORE this portion of the meeting begins. To address the Council regarding an item on the agenda, please fill out a speaker's card and submit it to the City Clerk BEFORE the Mayor announces the item.

Each person addressing the Council is given three minutes to speak (with double the time allotted to non-English speakers using a translator) indicated by a colored light system on the Council dais. If you wish to provide information to the Council, please present the City Clerk with 10 copies. Otherwise, your materials will simply be added to the official record. Please note use of City Council Chamber technology equipment to present electronic material during meetings is not allowed.
______________________________________________________________________________

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Office, (661) 255-4391. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. (28CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II)

Pursuant to Government Code 54957.5 any writings or documents distributed to a majority of the members of the City Council regarding any open session item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 120, during normal business hours. View public meeting agendas here, inclusive of all attachments and reading file material.
______________________________________________________________________________

INVOCATION
Weste

CALL TO ORDER

ROLL CALL

FLAG SALUTE

EXECUTIVE MEETING
This time has been set aside for Councilmembers to review the agenda and obtain any further information that may be needed. Council will also discuss each individual item during the course of the meeting with the exception of the Consent Calendar, which may be approved in its entirety by one motion, unless there is a request to pull an item for discussion. No action will be taken on public agenda items during the Executive Meeting.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
This time has been set aside for the public to address the City Council on items NOT listed on the agenda. The City Council will not act upon these items at this meeting other than to review and/or provide direction to staff. All speakers must submit a speaker’s card to the City Clerk PRIOR to the beginning of this portion of the meeting. Thirty minutes are allotted for public input at this time. The FIRST TEN people to submit a speaker card prior to the beginning of Public Participation will be heard.

STAFF COMMENTS

COMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS

PUBLIC HEARINGS

1. CONTINUATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE PROMENADE FLATS MIXED- USE PROJECT (MASTER CASE 21-086) - Public hearing for Appeal 24-003, regarding the Planning Commission's decision to deny the prior appeal and affirm the Hearing Officer's decision for the Promenade Flats Mixed-Use Project (Master Case 21- 086).

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

City Council:

1. Conduct the public hearing;

2. Determine that the project is exempt from environmental review pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines § 15332, as a Class 32 categorical exemption consisting of an in-fill development project;

3. Adopt a resolution, denying Appeal 24-003 and affirming the Planning Commission’s denial of Appeal 24-001 and affirmation of the Hearing Officer’s decision to approve

a request by Harvard 826 Property, LLC, to construct and operate the Promenade Flats Mixed-Use Project (Master Case 21-086); and

4. Take other action as determined by the City Council.

2. CONFORMANCE REVIEW OF THE RIVERVIEW PROJECT - MASTER CASE 21-205 - Conformance Review of the Riverview Project (Master Case 21-205), including 318 residential units and 127,000 square feet of commercial space located at the current Saugus Speedway property.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

City Council:

1. Conduct the public hearing;

2. Provide direction to staff on project-related issues; and

3. Continue the meeting to a date certain.

CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered routine and will be enacted by one motion by the City Council. The items are not individually discussed by the City Council unless a request is made by a member of the public or the Council, in which case, the item(s) will be removed from the Consent Calendar and will be considered separately.

3. APPROVAL OF REGULAR MEETING MINUTES – The minutes of the City Council are submitted for approval.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

City Council approve the minutes of the October 8, 2024 Regular Meeting.

4. CHECK REGISTER NO. 21 - Check Register No. 21 for Period 09/06/24 through 09/19/24 and 09/26/24. Electronic Funds Transfers for the Period 09/09/24 through 09/20/24.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

City Council approve and ratify for payment the demands presented in Check Register No. 21.

5. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE DESIGNATION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA AS A CLEAN CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY - The California Department of Transportation’s Clean California Community designation is intended to establish, recognize, and reward communities that demonstrate pride in keeping their environment clean, beautiful, and litter-free.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

City Council adopt a resolution supporting the designation of the City of Santa Clarita as a Clean California Community.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
This time has been set aside for any speakers that have turned in speaker cards and were not heard in the first thirty minutes allotted to address the City Council on items that are NOT on the agenda. Speaker cards may not be submitted relating to any items listed on the agenda.

STAFF COMMENTS

FUTURE MEETINGS
The next regular meeting of the City Council will be held November 12, 2024, at 6:00 PM in the Council Chambers, 1st floor of City Hall, 23920 Valencia Blvd., Santa Clarita, CA.

CERTIFICATION
On October 17, 2024, I, Mary Cusick, do hereby certify that I am the duly appointed and qualified City Clerk for the City of Santa Clarita and that the foregoing agenda was posted at City Hall.

_____________________________
Mary Cusick
City Clerk
Santa Clarita, California

Agenda Item: 1

CITY OF SANTA CLARITA

AGENDA REPORT

PUBLIC HEARINGS
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:

DATE: October 22, 2024
SUBJECT: CONTINUATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE PROMENADE FLATS MIXED-USE PROJECT (MASTER CASE 21-086)
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
PRESENTER: Andy Olson

RECOMMENDED ACTION

City Council:

1. Conduct the public hearing;

2. Determine that the project is exempt from environmental review pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines § 15332, as a Class 32 categorical exemption consisting of an in-fill development project;

3. Adopt a resolution, denying Appeal 24-003 and affirming the Planning Commission’s denial of Appeal 24-001 and affirmation of the Hearing Officer’s decision to approve a request by Harvard 826 Property, LLC, to construct and operate the Promenade Flats Mixed-Use Project (Master Case 21-086); and

4. Take other action as determined by the City Council.

BACKGROUND

REQUEST

On June 18, 2024, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing regarding an appeal for the Promenade Flats Mixed-Use Project. The Planning Commission voted 4-1 to deny the appeal and affirm the Hearing Officer’s approval of the project. The appellant, Cinema Park, LLC (Appeal 24-003; represented by Cornerstone Realty Advisors), now appeals the decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council.

1 Packet Pg. 5

The project was placed on the agenda for the regular City Council meeting on August 27, 2024.

Prior to opening the public hearing, the City Council voted 4-1 to continue the item to October 22, 2024, in order to provide additional time for review.

The proposed project is a request by Harvard 826 Property, LLC, for a Minor Use Permit (MUP), Development Review (DR), and Architectural Design Review (ADR) to construct on a

1.53-acre portion of the existing shopping center at 26111-26135 Bouquet Canyon Road (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 2811-003-016, -017, and -018), within the Mixed-Use Corridor (MXC) zone.

The proposed project meets the definition of a housing development in accordance with Senate Bill 330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019. This type of housing development cannot be denied if it meets the City’s objective standards for development, unless the project, based upon a written standard, creates a health and safety concern that cannot be mitigated. State law also requires, if the project does not meet objective standards, that the City identify those standards to the applicant within 30 days of the date the application was deemed complete, or conformance with those requirements is waived. No inconsistencies were identified by staff during this timeframe.

As such, the project is subject to and must be evaluated based on compliance with the objective standards of the Unified Development Code (UDC) for the MXC zone and the City’s Community Character and Design Guidelines (CCDG).

One Stop Preliminary Site Plan Review and Formal Project Application

In June 2019, the applicant submitted a preliminary One Stop Review application to construct a new mixed-use building behind the existing IHOP restaurant in the Santa Clarita Plaza shopping center. The applicant then submitted a formal application for the proposed project in April 2021.

The project subsequently underwent multiple rounds of review by the City of Santa Clarita’s (City) Development Review Committee (DRC); the applicant addressed the comments provided through the DRC process. The project requires an MUP to provide less commercial square footage than required by the MXC zone, to utilize carports, and to incorporate live-work units into the project. An MUP requires public noticing before a decision on the project.

Previous Administrative Hearing Officer Action

On February 26, 2024, the Type I public notice regarding the request for an MUP was sent to all tenants and adjacent property owners regarding the proposed project. During the noticing period, three written requests for an administrative hearing were received. As a result, an administrative hearing was conducted for the project on April 17, 2024. The Hearing Officer determined that the project was consistent with the City’s objective standards for a housing development project.

At the conclusion of the administrative hearing, the Hearing Officer approved the project, with an additional condition of approval addressing parking lot safety as follows:

AH1. The permittee must implement a safety and security plan for the project site, covering all parking areas, to include, but not limited to, incorporation of security lighting, cameras, and other security measures. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the permittee must submit a photometric lighting plan for review and approval of the Director of Community Development.
1 Packet Pg. 6

A copy of the Hearing Officer’s staff report is available in the City Clerk’s reading file.

Planning Commission Action

On April 29, 2024, the Planning Division received a formal letter of appeal (Appeal 24-001) from Cinema Park, LLC, represented by Cornerstone Realty Advisors, appealing the Hearing Officer’s decision to the Planning Commission, based on parking concerns. Thereafter, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing regarding the appeal on June 18, 2024.

The Planning Commission received staff’s presentation, opened the public hearing, and received comments from the applicant and members of the public. After closing the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted 4-1 to adopt Resolution P24-11, denying Appeal 24-001 and affirming the Hearing Officer’s approval of the proposed project. A copy of the Planning Commission’s staff report is available in the City Clerk’s reading file.

In addition to affirming the project approval, the Planning Commission added three new conditions of approval to the project and modified two existing conditions of approval. The conditions of approval added by the Planning Commission are as follows:

PC1. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the permittee must provide a Construction Management Plan (CMP) to the Director of Community Development for review. The CMP must include measures to ensure sufficient overall parking, ADA [Americans with Disabilities Act] parking, and ADA access are provided during construction.

PC2. Prior to any building construction, the permittee must fully construct and make available for parking the new parking lot containing 40 stalls in the southwestern corner of the site before any building construction may occur. This condition must be completed prior to any demolition of existing parking. No parking may be removed on-site until the new parking lot is completed.

PC3. Prior to building permit, the permittee must receive approval from the Director of Community Development for shade covers on the rooftop resident outdoor deck. Shade covers may incorporate and be combined with architecturally consistent photovoltaic elements. Shaded areas must comply with all height and architectural requirements of the UDC [Unified Development Code]. Prior to building occupancy, shade covers must be installed to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development.

The modifications to the conditions of approval are below, with underlined text representing the Planning Commission’s revisions to PL5 and PL7:

PL5. The permittee must implement and maintain a Parking Management Plan (PMP) to enforce parking requirements on-site. The permittee must incorporate appropriate signage, where deemed necessary to implement the PMP, such as signage restricting parking times or durations. The permittee must submit the PMP to the Director of Community Development for review prior to building occupancy. Eight months after 1 Packet Pg. 7

building occupancy, the permittee must provide an evaluation of the performance of the PMP, including any changes, to the Director of Community Development for review.

PL7. The permittee must market the units as live-work units for a minimum of 6 months one year after receiving their certificates of occupancy. If, after this timeframe, units are not rented as live-work space, the work component may be converted and rented as additional residential space for the unit. The work portions of the units must continue to meet all requirements for work space (including maintaining ADA accessibility requirements) so as not to preclude future non-residential use.

When a resident using the work space as living space terminates their lease, the permittee must make a good faith effort to rent the live-work unit as both live and work space, prior to re-renting the work space as residential space. Should the permittee apply and receive approval for a subdivision in the future to create and sell condominium units, additional live-work conditions may apply.

Appeal to City Council

After the Planning Commission hearing and decision, the City received two letters of appeal, appealing the project to the City Council. However, Appeal 24-004, filed by Luna & Glushon, on behalf of Las Flores Apartments, LLC, was formally withdrawn on August 21, 2024. A hearing has been scheduled before the City Council to consider the remaining appeal request by Cinema Park, LLC (Appeal 24-003). The decision of the City Council is final.

Appeal 24-003 was filed on July 1, 2024. Cinema Park, LLC (represented by Cornerstone Realty Advisors) previously requested the administrative hearing for the project and subsequently appealed the project to the Planning Commission. A copy of the appeal letter has been attached to this report for the City Council’s review. In summary, the appeal letter states the appellant’s concerns that:

• Infill development should be subject to further analysis; • The methodology used for the parking analysis is incorrect; • There will be no options to address parking issues after construction, should issues arise; • Construction of the southwest parking lot to be completed before any other work; • Parking enforcement should be 24 hours a day, seven days a week; • The one-time assessment of the PMP at eight months will not be effective; and • Noise, dust, and traffic control have not been sufficiently addressed.

PROJECT SETTING AND DESCRIPTION

Project Setting

The project site is a 1.53-acre portion of an existing 4.84-acre commercial shopping center known as Santa Clarita Plaza (shopping center). The shopping center is located at 26111 to 26135 Bouquet Canyon Road (APNs 2811-003-016, -017, and -018) and is located in the MXC zone. Santa Clarita Plaza includes several single-story commercial buildings located around courtyard areas, a standalone restaurant building (occupied by IHOP), and an undeveloped, 1 Packet Pg. 8

vacant lot in the southwest corner of the shopping center. Parking for the shopping center is provided via 253 stalls located on all sides of the existing commercial center, including existing parking stalls in the northwest corner of the shopping center behind the existing IHOP restaurant building.

Access to the shopping center is provided via two existing driveways entering and exiting from Bouquet Canyon Road. The Las Flores Apartment complex, located directly west (to the rear) of the project site, takes access through the existing shopping center, via an access gate to the west of the proposed new building.

Below is a summary of the existing zoning and General Plan designation for the proposed project and surrounding area.

Table 1 – Land Use, Zoning, and Existing Uses
General Plan Zoning
Designation Existing Uses
Project
Site MXC MXC Santa Clarita Plaza Commercial Shopping Center Vacant Lot
North MXC MXC Cinema Park Commercial Center
East
Public/Institutional
(PI)
Industrial (I)
PI
I
Railroad Right-of-Way
Industrial Uses (Burrtec)
South MXC MXC Apartments at 26087 Bouquet Canyon Road
Automotive Services and Commercial Businesses
West MXC MXC Las Flores Apartments
Self-Storage (Extra Storage)

Project Description

The proposed project includes the construction of a new four-story mixed-use building, located in the existing parking lot behind the IHOP restaurant, and a new parking lot located on the vacant southwest corner of the shopping center. The first floor would include 7,234 square feet of new commercial space, divided into several tenant spaces, as well as utility space and access to the upper residential floors. The upper floors include 26 one-bedroom apartments along with four live-work units and common space for residents. The live-work units would provide a total of 1,640 square feet of additional commercial space. A rooftop outdoor space would also be provided for residents. Covered resident parking would be constructed on the north and west sides of the new building, and screened from public view by the new and existing buildings. No existing commercial structures would be demolished or removed by the project.

With the construction of the new parking lot in the southwest corner of the shopping center, the parking provided on-site would meet the requirements of the UDC. This new parking lot would provide 40 parking stalls for use by commercial tenants and customers in the shopping center. A summary of parking for existing uses and the proposed project is provided in Table 2 below.

Detailed parking requirements for the existing shopping center and the proposed mixed-use building are provided in the Parking Analysis provided in the City Clerk’s reading file.

1 Packet Pg. 9

Table 2 – Parking Analysis
Land Use Required Parking Proposed Parking
Existing Commercial 156
249 Proposed Residential 49 1
Proposed Commercial 44
Total 249
1 Includes 34 covered parking spaces for residents

The proposed project would maintain the existing drive aisle through the northern portion of the site and would preserve the existing access point to the Las Flores Apartment complex. In addition, the build out of the new parking area would provide a second additional point of access, via an existing easement, to the Las Flores Apartments along the southerly drive aisle of the shopping center.

An aerial map depicting the location of the site, and the proposed site plans, floor plans, elevations, and renderings are provided as attachments.

Entitlement Summary

Implementation of the proposed project would require approval of the following entitlements:

Minor Use Permit 21-012

Required to permit construction of less commercial square footage than required by the MXC zone for the 1.53-acre project site, to permit the incorporation of live-work units into the project, and to permit the use of carports for covered residential parking.

Development Review 21-011 and Architectural Design Review 21-015

Required to ensure that the project complies with all of the provisions of the City’s UDC, Community Character and Design Guidelines, General Plan, and other applicable requirements.

ANALYSIS

A discussion of each area of concern identified in the appeal is provided below.

1. Infill development should be subject to further analysis;

Infill development is commonplace in the City and is subject to all applicable City standards for new development. The proposed project has been analyzed for consistency with all applicable UDC requirements, as described below, including, but not limited to, development standards for the MXC zone, architectural standards for Valencia, standards for mixed-use developments, and parking requirements.

The project site’s land use designation of MXC is intended to encourage revitalization of underutilized parcels. The development proposal is consistent with the intent and goals of the MXC land use designation. The project would provide opportunities for housing, new 1 Packet Pg. 10

commercial, and employment uses in an area intended for mixed-use development, and would provide both one-bedroom apartments along with live-work housing types. The proposed development increases the mix of uses on-site and in the areas immediately surrounding the project site.

The project meets the definition of a housing development project in accordance with the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (Government Code section 66300; added by Senate Bill 330).

Accordingly, the objective standards of the UDC for the MXC zone, as well as the City’s Community Character and Design Guidelines (CCDG), were applied to this project. The project complies with these objective standards. Table 3, below, summarizes the project’s compliance with the MXC zone’s density and floor area ratio (FAR) requirements.

Table 3 – Density and FAR
Standard Minimum Maximum Proposed Project Compliance
Floor Area
Ratio
16,662 SF
(0.25 FAR)
66,646 SF
(1.0 FAR)
14,322 SF
(8,874 SF new + 5,448 SF
existing IHOP)
- Less than minimum
- Project complies with
approval of MUP
Density 16 units
(11 units/ac)
45 units
(30 units/ac) 30 units - Project complies

The proposed project provides sufficient access and circulation. New drive aisles meet the UDC minimum width of 26 feet, and are 28 feet wide where required by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. The project utilizes the two existing driveways for the existing shopping center. The City’s Traffic Engineering Division verified that the existing driveways provide sufficient access to and from the project site. In addition, the transportation memorandum prepared for the project, and included in the Class 32 exemption memorandum, demonstrates that the proposed project would not impact traffic volumes or flows. The Engineering Services and Traffic Engineering Divisions conditions require that the applicant complete the following:

• Dedicate easements and improve the driveways to meet current ADA standards • Refurbish the existing no-stopping zone adjacent to the northern driveway • Extend the existing no-stopping zone adjacent to the southern driveway to ensure that sufficient sight lines are provided for ingress and egress

In addition, there is currently one access point to the Las Flores Apartments, located directly west of the project site, via the shopping center’s northern drive aisle. The proposed project would enhance internal circulation by providing a second means of access over an existing easement held by Las Flores Apartments through the new southwestern parking lot, improving access for those residents via the southern drive aisle.

The proposed architecture meets the requirements of the UDC and the CCDG for the community of Valencia through the following architectural features and enhancements:

• High-quality, 360-degree architecture on all elevations • Tower elements
• Horizontal and vertical articulation
• Prominent building corners
1 Packet Pg. 11

• Distinct ground floor architecture
• Curved balconies on multiple elevations
• Earth tone paint and materials
• Use of brick to provide texture and tie into the existing shopping center’s architecture

The development proposal also complies with the UDC’s requirements for landscaping and lighting/shielding. In addition to obtaining the necessary local land use entitlements, the applicant is required to comply with all applicable requirements of other government agencies, including, but not limited to, the Los Angeles County Fire Department, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, and all other required utilities. The Class 32 CEQA exemption memorandum prepared for the project demonstrates that the project can be adequately served by all utilities and public services.

In conclusion, the project complies with all applicable objective standards and has been fully reviewed as required by the UDC.

2. The methodology used for the parking analysis is incorrect;

The parking analysis for the proposed project was prepared consistent with the City’s parking requirements and with prior approvals for the shopping center. Parking was calculated for all existing users at the time such uses were approved, and any new use proposed in the shopping center would be subject to the current parking ratios in effect at the time of approval. In addition, the new commercial space constructed as part of the new building is parked at a ratio of one space per 200 square-feet, and parking for the new residential units is provided consistent with the City’s requirements for mixed-use developments.

The development proposal would provide 249 parking spaces to accommodate the existing and proposed uses on-site, meeting the UDC requirements for parking on-site, as shown in Table 2 above. The proposed parking includes:

• 34 covered stalls for residents (one stall per one-bedroom unit and two stalls per live-work unit);
• 15 dedicated stalls for residential guests (one-half stall per unit); • 44 stalls for new commercial uses (parked at one stall per 200 square-feet); and • 156 stalls for the existing commercial uses (parked as required by the UDC for each existing use).

Staff has surveyed the existing parking lot on multiple occasions to evaluate the existing conditions. While 253 stalls are currently provided on-site, parking has not been fully utilized on any staff site visit. In addition to meeting the UDC requirements for parking, the applicant prepared a parking demand study (attached) evaluating the proposed mixture of uses on-site. The parking demand study utilized industry-standard calculations and determined that, at the peak (i.e., busiest) hours on both weekdays and weekends, surplus parking would be available based on anticipated demand. The study predicts that during the weekday peak hour a surplus of 19 stalls would be available, and during the weekend peak hour, a surplus of 25 stalls would be available.

1 Packet Pg. 12

The applicant also proposed a parking management plan (attached) in order to regulate and enforce parking on-site. Resident and guest parking are located in close proximity to the new mixed-use building, and commercial parking is provided throughout the shopping center. The proposed plan would include assigning residential spaces and prohibiting residents from parking in commercial parking spaces. The conditions of approval require the applicant to implement a parking management plan to address the parking concerns raised during the public noticing process (refer to PL5). In conclusion, the proposed parking for the project has been correctly analyzed, and sufficient parking is provided as required by the UDC.

3. There will be no options to address parking issues after construction, should issues arise;

Condition PL5 for the proposed project requires that the developer implement and maintain a Parking Management Plan (PMP) to enforce parking requirements on-site. This condition includes evaluating the PMP after eight months and implementing any necessary changes to ensure parking is properly utilized and managed. In addition, any future development or redevelopment would be required to comply with the City’s parking requirements prior to any approvals.

4. Construction of the southwest parking lot be completed prior to any other work;

Condition PC2, applied by the Planning Commission to the proposed project, requires that the developer must fully construct and make available the new parking lot before any building construction or demolition of existing parking.

5. Parking enforcement should be 24 hours a day, seven days a week;

The developer is conditioned to implement the PMP, as described above, including, as necessary, active enforcement of parking on-site. The PMP will be evaluated eight months after occupancy to ensure that parking enforcement is sufficient.

6. The one-time assessment of the PMP at eight months will not be effective;

The PMP will be evaluated after eight months. If parking on-site creates issue, the developer will be expected to update and modify the PMP to rectify these issues.

7. Noise, dust, and traffic control have not been sufficiently addressed.

Construction of the proposed project is subject to all standard requirements of construction, including the limitations placed by the City’s Municipal Code on construction noise and hours of construction. Noise, air quality, and traffic reports were prepared for the proposed project and have demonstrated that there would be no significant impacts related to air quality, noise, or traffic during construction or operation of the project. The project would be required to comply with all South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regulations regarding air quality, including regulations for fugitive dust control. The traffic study analyzed both construction and operational traffic and determined that there would be no significant impacts to traffic from the project. Furthermore, the project has been analyzed by the City’s Engineering Services and Traffic Engineering Divisions, and is conditioned to improve the existing 1 Packet Pg. 13

driveways and adjacent curbs in order to provide sufficient accessibility and safety sight lines.

The project is also conditioned to provide a CMP to ensure sufficient overall parking, ADA parking, and ADA access are provided during construction.

ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS

The project is exempt from CEQA as a Class 32 In-Fill Development Project exemption, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332. A memorandum documenting the project’s qualification for the Class 32 exemption was prepared by the City’s qualified environmental consultant is attached for reference along with the Notice of Exemption. The proposed project is consistent with the City’s General Plan and UDC, as described above, and is located on an urbanized project site. The proposed project would not have any significant effects on the environment, including but not limited to traffic, noise, air quality, and water quality. In addition, all required utilities can be provided, including sufficient sewer capacity.

PUBLIC NOTICING

On August 6, 2024, as required by UDC Sections 17.24.120 (D) and 17.06.110, public notices regarding the proposed project were mailed to all property owners and residents within 1,000 feet of the project site, as well as to all tenants on the project site and all parties requesting notification regarding the project. In addition, a notice was published in The Signal. On August 13, 2024, a notice of public hearing sign was posted on the project site. Two written comments were received prior to the August 27, 2024 meeting date. At the August 27, 2024 City Council meeting, the item was continued to a date certain, October 22, 2024, and no further noticing was required.

As of the writing of this staff report, no additional public comments have been received.

However, the applicant has provided a letter addressed to the City Council, which provides a discussion of the applicant’s considerations and actions since the continuation, along with a discussion of the appeal. All comments received prior to the agenda posting deadline are attached for reference.

CONCLUSION

As described above, the project is considered a housing development and must be evaluated based on the City’s objective standards for development. The proposed project is consistent with the objective standards identified in the City’s General Plan and UDC, would not endanger the public, and is physically suited to the subject site. Staff has drafted the necessary findings for approval of an MUP as set forth in UDC Section 17.24.120, subject to the attached conditions of approval in Exhibit A of the draft resolution.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION

Other actions as determined by the City Council.

b

1 Packet Pg. 14

FISCAL IMPACT

There is no fiscal impact to the General Fund associated with the recommended action. The applicant would be required to pay various development impact fees, including, but not limited to, Bridge and Thoroughfare and park dedication (Quimby) fees.

ATTACHMENTS
Resolution and Conditions
Aerial and Zoning Map
Site Plans
Appeal Request
Public Comments
Applicant Comment Letter
Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan
CEQA Notice of Exemption
Prior Hearing Documents (available in the City Clerk's reading file) 1 Packet Pg. 15

RESOLUTION NO. 24-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING APPEAL 24-003 AND AFFIRMING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO DENY APPEAL 24-001 AND AFFIRM THE HEARING OFFICER APPROVAL OF MASTER CASE 21-086, INCLUDING MINOR USE PERMIT 21- 012, ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW 21-015, AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 21-011, TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE THE PROMENADE FLATS MIXED-USE PROJECT LOCATED AT 26111-26135 BOUQUET CANYON ROAD (ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBERS 2811-003-016, -017, AND -018), IN THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA,

CALIFORNIA

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. FINDINGS OF FACT FOR MASTER CASE 21-086. The City Council makes the following findings of fact:

A. An application for Master Case 21-086 (Minor Use Permit 21-012, Architectural Design Review 21-015, and Development Review 21-011) was filed by Harvard 826 Property, LLC (hereinafter “applicant”), with the City of Santa Clarita (City) on April 3, 2021. The property affected by this application is located at Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 2811-003- 016, -017, and -018 (hereinafter “subject site”);

B. The application was deemed complete on July 14, 2021;

C. The applicant proposes to construct the Promenade Flats Mixed-Use Project on a 1.2-acre site at 26111-26135 Bouquet Canyon Road. The project would construct a new four-story mixed-use building in the parking lot behind the existing restaurant pad and would also construct a new parking lot on vacant land in the southwest corner of the commercial center. The new building would include 7,234 square feet of commercial space on the first floor with 30 one-bedroom apartments on the upper floors, along with rooftop amenity space for residents. Four of the apartments would be live-work units, providing an additional 1,640 square feet of commercial space, for a total of 8,874 new commercial square feet;

D. The zoning and General Plan designation for the subject site is Mixed Use Corridor (MXC);

E. The surrounding land uses include an existing commercial shopping center to the north, railroad right-of-way and industrial uses to the east, multifamily residences and commercial and automotive uses to the south, and multifamily apartments and self- storage to the west;

F. On April 17, 2024, a duly noticed administrative hearing was held before the City of Santa Clarita Hearing Officer at 2:00 p.m. at The Centre, Oak Room, 20880 Centre

1.a
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

Pointe Parkway, Santa Clarita, CA 91350;

G. During the administrative hearing, the Hearing Officer considered the staff report, the staff presentation, the applicant presentation, and public testimony, and approved Master Case 21-086, determining that it was consistent with the City’s objective standards for a housing development project and met the City’s parking requirements; H. On April 29, 2024, Ryan House of Cornerstone Realty Advisors, on behalf of Cinema Park, LLC, appealed (Appeal 24-001) the Hearing Officer’s decision to the City of Santa Clarita Planning Commission;

I. On June 18, 2024, a duly noticed public hearing regarding the appeal was held before the City of Santa Clarita Planning Commission at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita;

J. During this public hearing, the Planning Commission considered the staff report, the staff presentation, the applicant presentation, and public testimony. The Planning Commission voted 4-1 to adopt Resolution P24-11, denying Appeal 24-001 and affirming the Hearing Officer’s approval of the proposed project. The Planning Commission added three conditions of approval to the project: PC1, regarding a Construction Management Plan; PC2, regarding construction of the new parking lot before any other work; and PC3, regarding rooftop shade elements. The Planning Commission also modified conditions of approval PL5, regarding the Parking Management Plan signage, review process, and 8- month evaluation, and PL7, regarding a one-year marketing period for live-work units;

K. On July 1, 2024, Ryan House of Cornerstone Realty Advisors, on behalf of Cinema Park, LLC, appealed (Appeal 24-003) the Planning Commission’s decision to the City Council;

L. On August 27, 2024, the project was placed on the agenda for the regular meeting of the City of Santa Clarita City Council at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita;

M. Prior to opening the public hearing, the City Council voted 4-1 to continue the item to October 22, 2024;

N. On October 22, 2024, a duly noticed public hearing regarding the appeal was held before the City of Santa Clarita City Council at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita; and

O. During this public hearing, the City Council considered the staff report, the staff presentation, the applicant presentation, and public testimony. This Resolution, and its findings, are based upon the City Council’s de novo review of the entire administrative record including, without limitation, the staff reports, testimony, written evidence, and meeting minutes provided during the various public hearings.

1.a
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS. The City reviewed the environmental impacts of this Project under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code § 21000, et seq. “CEQA”) and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regs. § 15000, et seq., the “CEQA Guidelines”). Based upon the foregoing facts and findings, the City Council finds as follows:

A. The project is exempt from additional review under the California Environmental Quality Act as a Class 32 In-Fill Development Projects categorical exemption, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332. A Class 32 exemption consists of projects characterized as in-fill development. Consequently, a Notice of Exemption was prepared for this project in compliance with CEQA;

B. The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the decision of the City Council is based are in the Master Case 21-086 project file, located within the Community Development Department and in the custody of the Director of Community Development;

C. Based upon the findings set forth above, the City Council finds the Notice of Exemption for this Project was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and

D. This Resolution and its findings are made based upon the evidence presented to the City Council at its October 22, 2024, hearing, including, without limitation, the Staff Report submitted by the Community Development Director.

SECTION 3. GENERAL FINDINGS FOR MASTER CASE 21-086. Based on the foregoing facts and findings for Master Case 21-086, the City Council determines as follows:

A. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan;

The project site is designated as Mixed Use Corridor (MXC) under the Santa Clarita General Plan, which states that mixed-use development “will be encouraged along specified commercial corridors in which revitalization of underutilized parcels or aging buildings is desired, as shown on the Land Use Map, subject to the applicable requirements of the zoning ordinance.” The proposed project would introduce mixed-use development into an existing commercial site consisting of single-story development and surface parking.

The proposed project would be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan, including without limitation:

Objective LU 2.1: Provide adequate, suitable sites for housing, employment, business, shopping, public facilities, public utility facilities, and community services to meet current needs and the anticipated needs of future growth.

1.a
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

Objective LU 2.3: Increase mixed-use development where appropriate to create more livable neighborhoods, walkable business districts, and to reduce vehicle trips, while ensuring land use compatibility, through mixed-use zoning.

Policy LU 3.1.2: Provide a mix of housing types within neighborhoods that accommodate households with varied income levels.

Policy LU 3.1.3: Promote opportunities for live-work units to accommodate residents with home-based businesses.

The development proposal is consistent with the intent and goals of the MXC land use designation. The project would provide opportunities for both housing and new commercial uses in an area intended for mixed-use development, and would provide both one-bedroom apartments along with live-work housing types. The proposed development increases the mix of uses on-site and in the immediate surroundings.

B. The proposal is allowed within the applicable zone and complies with all other applicable provisions of the code:

A multi-family dwelling residential land use is permitted by right in the MXC zone. In addition, commercial and mixed-use development is permitted in the MXC zone, subject to the development standards in Unified Development Code (UDC) Chapters 17.51 and

17.55. Any future tenants in the new commercial spaces constructed by the project will be subject to the requirements of UDC Section 17.35.010(B), the permitted use chart for the MXC zone. The proposed project complies with the development standards for the MXC zone and is located on an existing parking lot and a vacant lot within an existing shopping center.

The UDC requires the project to provide 249 parking spaces, and 249 parking spaces are provided. The building meets the MXC zone’s height requirement of 50 feet, and would comply with the drive aisle, parking lot, and landscaping requirements for mixed-use development. The project provides an appropriate residential density for the MXC zone, and although the project provides less commercial square footage than required by the MXC zone, with the approval of an Minor Use Permit (MUP), the project would be consistent with the underlying zoning requirements.

C. The proposal will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare, or be materially detrimental or injurious to the improvements, persons, property or uses in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located:

The proposed project is not located on a hazardous site and would not include any hazardous materials. Standard construction materials and methods would be utilized to ensure safety during construction. The applicant will be required to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations, including, without limitation: the California Building Standards Code and Fire Code. Sufficient access for firefighting purposes has

1.a
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

been provided and verified by the Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County (LACFD), and the applicant must comply with all LACFD requirements. As described above, the proposed project complies with the zoning regulations for the MXC zone, including Floor Area Ratio (FAR), building height, residential density, and parking.

D. The proposal is physically suitable for the site. The factors related to the proposal’s physical stability for the site shall include, but are not limited to, the following:

• The design, location, shape, size, and operating characteristics are suitable for the proposed use:

The subject site includes existing commercial development and surface parking, along with a vacant lot. The proposed building and parking areas comply with the City’s standards for mixed-use development, including compliance with setbacks, building height, drive aisle width, and landscaping. The parking analysis for the project demonstrates that sufficient parking is provided for both the existing and proposed uses on-site as required by the UDC. In addition, a parking demand analysis for the project determined that at the peak hours on both weekdays and weekends, sufficient parking will be available on-site.

• The highways or streets that provide access to the site are of sufficient width and are improved as necessary to carry the kind and quantity of traffic such proposal would generate:

The project is accessed via the existing Bouquet Canyon Road, and no improvements to the roadway are required. The applicant must comply with all City-imposed engineering requirements when constructing any improvements in the right-of-way, such as sewer laterals, parkway tree installation, and ADA paths of travel at the driveways. The project will not have a significant effect on vehicle miles traveled (VMT) or traffic, and existing driveway ingress and egress from the site will be maintained.

• Public protection services are readily available:

The Project will have public protection services provided by both the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD) and LACFD, and will not require any additional resources or services from those organizations as a result of its operation.

The proposal would also be required to comply with all applicable requirements of the LACFD and LASD.

• The provision of utilities is adequate to serve the site:

The proposed use would be located within an existing commercial center, which is located within a developed area with available and adequate utilities to serve the site.

The proposed project would connect to this existing infrastructure on-site. As analyzed in the Class 32 California Environmental Quality Act exemption, water and

1.a
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

sewer capacity is available to serve the proposed project.

SECTION 4. APPROVALS. The City Council takes the following actions:

Adopt a resolution, denying Appeal 24-003 and affirming the Planning Commission’s denial of Appeal 24-001 and affirmation of the Hearing Officer’s decision to approve a request by Harvard 826 Property, LLC, to construct and operate the Promenade Flats Mixed-Use Project (Master Case 21-086), subject to the conditions of approval (Exhibit A).

SECTION 5: RELIANCE ON RECORD. Each and every one of the findings and determinations in this Resolution are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the project. The findings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.

SECTION 6: SUMMARIES OF INFORMATION. All summaries of information in the findings, which precede this section, are based on the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact.

SECTION 7: NOTICE. The City Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Resolution to the City Council and any other person requesting a copy.

SECTION 8: EFFECTIVE DATE. This Resolution becomes effective immediately upon adoption and memorializes the City Council’s final decision made on October 22, 2024.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this __ day of ________ 2024.

______________________________
MAYOR

ATTEST:

_______________________________

CITY CLERK

DATE:__________________________

1.a
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.

CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )

I, Mary Cusick, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 24- was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the __ day of ________ 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

______________________________

CITY CLERK

1.a
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

EXHIBIT A
MASTER CASE 21-086
MINOR USE PERMIT 21-012, ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW 21-015, AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 21-011

FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

In addition to all applicable provisions of the Santa Clarita Municipal Code (SCMC), Harvard 826 Property, LLC, agrees to comply with the following provisions as conditions for the City of Santa Clarita’s (City) approval of Master Case 21-086.

GENERAL CONDITIONS
GC1. The approval of this project will expire if the approved use is not commenced within two years from the date of this approval, unless it is extended in accordance with the terms and provisions of the City’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 is 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 two years or more terminates the approval of this use along with any associated vested rights to such use. The use may not be re-established or resumed after the two-year period. Discontinuation includes cessation of a use regardless of intent to resume.

GC3. The permittee may file for an extension of the conditionally-approved project before the date of expiration. If such an extension is requested, it must be filed not later than 60 days before the date of expiration.

GC4. Unless otherwise apparent from the context, the term “permittee” includes the permittee and any other persons, corporation, or other entity making use of this grant. The permittee must 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 by the City, including any related environmental approvals. In the event the City becomes aware of any such claim, action, or proceeding, the City will promptly notify the permittee. If the City fails to notify the permittee or if the City fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the permittee is not thereafter responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City.

Nothing contained in this condition prohibits the City from participating in the defense of any claim, action, or proceeding, if both of the following occur: 1) the City bears its own attorneys’ fees and costs; and 2) the City defends the action in good faith. The permittee is not required to pay or perform any settlement unless the settlement is approved by the permittee.

GC5. The permittee and property owner must comply with all inspections requirements as deemed necessary by the Director of Community Development.

1.a
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

GC6. The project site must be developed and/or used in the manner requested and must be in substantial conformity with the submitted plans date-stamped consistent with this approval, unless revisions and/or additional conditions are specifically required herein.

GC7. This approval runs with the land. All rights and obligations of this approval, including the responsibility to comply with the Conditions of Approval, are binding upon permittee’s successors in interest. The Conditions of Approval may be modified, terminated, or abandoned in accordance with applicable law including, without limitation, the SCMC.

GC8. Any proposed deviations from the Exhibits, Project Description, or Conditions of Approval must be submitted to the Director of Community Development for review and approval. Any unapproved deviations from the project approval will constitute a violation of the permit approval.

GC9. When exhibits and/or written Conditions of Approval are in conflict, the written Conditions of Approval prevail.

GC10. The effectiveness of this project will be suspended for the time period that any Condition of Approval is appealed whether administratively or as part of a legal action filed in a court of competent jurisdiction. If any Condition of Approval is invalidated by a court of law, the project must be reviewed by the City and substitute conditions may be imposed.

GC11. The permittee is responsible for ascertaining and paying all City fees as required by the SCMC. This condition serves as notice, pursuant to Government Code § 66020(d) that the City is imposing development impact fees (DIFs) upon the project in accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code § 66000, et seq.) and the SCMC. The permittee is informed that it may protest DIFs in accordance with Government Code § 66020.

GC12. The permittee must sign these Conditions of Approval, as set forth below, to acknowledge acceptance, within 30 days from the date of approval.

GC13. The City will only issue permits for the development when the construction documents (e.g., building plans) substantially comply with the approved plans.

Substantial conformity is determined by the Director of Community Development.

GC14. This decision is not effective until permittee acknowledges acceptance of all project conditions and any appeal period has lapsed, or a waiver of right to appeal is filed or if there is an appeal, until a final decision has been made on the appeal.

By use of the entitlements granted by a development application, the permittee acknowledges agreement with the Conditions of Approval.

GC15. Anything which is not shown on the application/plans, or which is not specifically approved, or which is not in compliance with this section, is not approved. Any application and/or plans which are defective as to, without limitation, omission, dimensions, scale, use, colors, materials, encroachments, easements, etc., will render any entitlements granted by this approval null and void. Construction must

1.a
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

cease until all requirements of this approval are complied with. Development entitlements may be withheld until violations of the SCMC are abated.

GC16. The City will not issue a final certificate of occupancy until the permittee complies with all project conditions.

GC17. Permittee must reimburse the City for all attorneys' fees expended by the City that are directly related to the processing of this project. The City will not issue a Final Certificate of Occupancy or other final occupancy approval until all attorneys' fees are paid by the permittee.

PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS
PC1. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, the permittee must provide a Construction Management Plan (CMP) to the Director of Community Development for review. The CMP must include measures to ensure sufficient overall parking, ADA parking, and ADA access are provided during construction.

PC2. Prior to any building construction, the permittee must fully construct and make available for parking the new parking lot, containing 40 stalls, in the southwestern corner of the site, before any building construction may occur. This condition must be completed prior to any demolition of existing parking. No parking may be removed on-site until the new parking lot is completed.

PC3. Prior to building permit, the permittee must receive approval from the Director of Community Development for shade covers on the rooftop resident outdoor deck.

Shade covers may incorporate and be combined with architecturally consistent photovoltaic elements. Shaded areas must comply with all height and architectural requirements of the UDC. Prior to building occupancy, shade covers must be installed to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development.

ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING CONDITIONS
AH1. The permittee must implement a safety and security plan for the project site, covering all parking areas, to include, but not limited to, incorporation of security lighting, cameras, and other security measures. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the permittee must submit a photometric lighting plan for review and approval of the Director of Community Development.

PLANNING DIVISION
PL1. The permittee is hereby granted approval to construct the Promenade Flats Mixed-Use Project, including a four-story mixed use building located in the existing northern parking lot at 26111-26135 Bouquet Canyon Road and a new parking area in the southwest corner of the site. The project includes 7,234 square feet of first-floor commercial space and 30 residential units, including four live-

1.a
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

work units, on floors two through four. The four live-work units comprise 1,640 square-feet of nonresidential space (410 square feet per unit).

PL2. The construction of the project must be consistent with the approved plans, elevations, colors, materials, and other elements on file with the Planning Division. Any modification to the approved project and plans is subject to further review and approval of the Director of Community Development.

PL3. The building is approved at the heights shown on the approved elevations, and must not exceed 50 feet in height.

PL4. The permittee must provide a minimum of 249 parking stalls on-site, including 34 covered parking spaces for apartment residents, at all times. Guest parking for the residential use may be shared with commercial parking on-site.

PL5. The permittee must implement and maintain a Parking Management Plan (PMP) to enforce parking requirements on-site. The permittee must incorporate appropriate signage, where deemed necessary to implement the PMP, such as signage restricting parking times or durations. The permittee must submit the PMP to the Director of Community Development for review prior to building occupancy. Eight months after building occupancy, the permittee must provide an evaluation of the performance of the PMP, including any changes, to the Director of Community Development for review.

PL6. The permitted uses in the commercial building are subject to the permitted use chart for the underlying MXC zone.

PL7. The permittee must market the units as live-work units for a minimum of one year after receiving their certificates of occupancy. If, after this timeframe, units are not rented as live-work space, the work component may be converted and rented as additional residential space for the unit. The work portions of the units must continue to meet all requirements for work space (including maintaining ADA accessibility requirements) so as not to preclude future non-residential use.

When a resident using the work space as living space terminates their lease, the permittee must make a good faith effort to rent the live-work unit as both live and work space, prior to re-renting the work space as residential space. Should the permittee apply and receive approval for a subdivision in the future to create and sell condominium units, additional live-work conditions may apply.

PL8. Permitted uses for the live-work units include arts/crafts uses, professional office uses (lawyer, accountant, architect, interior design, real estate agents, computer industry consultants, and similar) and other limited small-scale business activities as approved by the Director of Community Development and as permitted in the MXC zone.

PL9. The hours of operation for customer/client visits and for commercial deliveries for the live-work units are limited to 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays.

1.a
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

Changes to the hours of operation must be requested in writing and will be subject to the discretion of the Director of Community Development.

PL10. Each live-work unit must be occupied and used only by the owner or residential tenant of each unit. The work space may be occupied by only one business. The work operator may have one additional employee, excluding the residential tenant.

PL11. All roof-mounted and ground-mounted equipment must be screened from public view.

PL12. During construction, prior to painting of buildings, the permittee must provide paint color samples for all paint colors for review by Planning staff in the field. If at any time a color or material is proposed to be changed, the permittee must provide updated samples to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to making the change.

LANDSCAPING
LR1. Prior to issuance of grading permit(s), the permittee must provide final landscape, lighting and irrigation plans (Landscape Document Package) for Planning Division review and approval. The plan must be prepared by a California- registered landscape architect and must be designed with the plant palette suitable for Santa Clarita (Sunset Western Garden Book Zone 18, minimum winter night temperatures typically 20º to 30º F; maximum summer high temperatures typically 105º F to 110º F). The landscape design plan must meet the design criteria of the State Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance as well as all other current Municipal Code/UDC requirements.

LR2. The permittee must be aware that additional fees will be required to be paid by the permittee for the review of required landscape and irrigation plans by the City’s landscape consultant. An invoice will be provided to the permittee at submittal of the landscape and irrigation plans. The permittee 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 permittee must coordinate with the City’s Special Districts Division regarding any landscaping installed on City right-of-way. Special Districts must review the landscape and irrigation plans when submitted, and all such landscaping must be approved by Special Districts prior to installation. The permittee must receive final approval for the installed landscape prior to final building occupancy on-site.

LR4. Prior to occupancy, the permittee must 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.

1.a
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

LR5. Prior to occupancy, the permittee must submit to the Director of Community Development a letter from the project landscape architect certifying that all landscape materials and irrigation have been installed and function according to the approved landscape plans.

ENGINEERING SERVICES DIVISION
General Requirements
EN1. At issuance of permits or other grants of approval, the permittee 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 building final, all new and existing power lines and overhead cables less than 34 KV within or fronting the project site must be installed underground.

Grading and Geology Requirements
EN3. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the permittee must submit a grading plan consistent with the approved plans oak tree report, and conditions of approval.

The grading plan must be based on a detailed engineering geotechnical report specifically approved by the geologist and/or soils engineer that addresses geologic hazards and all submitted recommendations.

EN4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the permittee must construct all grading and drainage facilities within the project site, obtain rough grade certifications, and a compaction report approved by the City Engineer.

EN5. The Preliminary Plan shows an export of 1500 CY of dirt from the project.

A. Before the City Engineer, or designee, issues a grading permit for this project, the permittee must submit a copy of the grading permit for the export/receiving site and an exhibit of the proposed haul route. The permittee is responsible to obtain approval from all applicable agencies for the dirt hauling operation.

B. The permittee must 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 between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm.

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.

1.a
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

4. Provide traffic control and flagging personnel along the haul route to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

C. Before the City Engineer, or designee, issues a grading permit, the permittee must pay a Haul Route Pavement Repair Security Cash Deposit (Deposit) of $50,000, 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 must be determined by the City Engineer.

In order to receive a refund of the Deposit, the permittee or subsequent property owners must 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 will seek additional funds from the permittee.

D. Before the building final, the permittee must repair any pavement damaged by the dirt hauling operation to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The limits of the road repairs must be consistent with the approved haul route.

Drainage Requirements
EN6. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the permittee must 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 to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

Water Quality Requirements
EN7. This project will disturb one acre or more of land. Therefore, the permittee must obtain coverage under a statewide General Construction Activities Stormwater Permit (General Permit). In accordance with the General Permit, the permittee must file with the State a Notice of Intent (NOI) for the proposed project. Prior to issuance of grading permit by the City, the permittee must have approved by the City Engineer a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP must include a copy of the NOI and must reference the corresponding Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) number issued by the State upon receipt of the NOI.

EN8. This re-development project is a development planning priority project under the City’s NPDES Municipal Stormwater Permit as a development that results in the creation, addition, or replacement of 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area on an already developed site. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the permittee must 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

1.a
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

infiltration (and maintenance) into the design of the project. Refer to the Low Impact Development ordinance and the County of Los Angeles Low Impact Development manual for details.

Street Light Requirements
EN9. Prior to building final, the permittee must install street lights along the frontage of property on Bouquet Canyon Road.

EN10. Prior to street plan approval, the permittee must submit a Street Light Plan to the Engineering Services Division for review and approval. Street-lighting systems must be designed as City-owned and maintained on the LS-2 rate schedule, using LED fixtures approved by the City’s Street Lights Maintenance District.

Street Improvement Requirements
EN11. Prior to any construction (including, but not limited to, drive approaches, sidewalks, sewer laterals, curb and gutter, etc.), trenching or grading within public street right-of-way, the permittee must submit a revised street improvement plan consistent with the approved Plan, oak tree report, and conditions of approval; and obtain encroachment permits from the Engineering Services Division.

EN12. Prior to issuance of building permits, the permittee must dedicate sidewalk easements sufficient to encompass ADA requirements for sidewalks installed with drive approaches per the current City standard APWA 110-2, Type C, or equivalent.

EN13. Prior to building final, the permittee must construct the ADA compliance path across the two driveways abutting the project. Revision to street improvement plan and encroachment permit must be required to do this work.

EN14. Prior to building final, the permittee must repair any broken or damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk abutting the project, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

An encroachment permit will be required from the Engineering Services division to do any work within the public right of way.

Sewer Improvement Requirements
EN15. The on-site sewer must be a privately maintained system. Prior to Grading Plan approval the permittee must submit an “on-site sewer plan.” The “on-site sewer plan” must be designed per the California Plumbing Code and approved by the City’s Building & Safety Division prior to Grading Plan approval.

EN16. Prior to issuance of building permits, the proposed building lateral line must be connected to the existing onsite sewer main (8-inch sewer per PC 9971). Prior to issuance of building permits, the permittee must coordinate with the Building & Safety Division regarding payment of additional annexation fees, if required, to annex the property into the County Sanitation District.

1.a
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

EN17. Prior to building final, the permittee must construct all sewer upgrades per the approved sewer area study, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

EN18. The permittee must also obtain a permit from Los Angeles County Building & Safety Division to install a new saddle by Los Angeles County Sewer Maintenance Division, if the wye does not exist.

TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION
TE1. The location, width, and depth of all project driveways, access locations and drive aisles must conform to the approved site plan. This must be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit. No additional driveways or access locations must be permitted.

TE2. The permittee must be aware that the site must 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.

TE3. Minimum width of all interior drive aisles must be 26 feet and must be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit. All drive aisle dimensions must be shown on the site plan. (Note: Fire Department may require drive aisles wider than 26 feet.)
TE4. Any dead-end drive aisles must have a hammerhead or turn-around area to facilitate vehicular movements. This must be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit. If a hammerhead or turn-around area is not provided, the permittee must demonstrate that vehicles can adequately maneuver into and out of the parking spaces at the terminus of a dead-end drive aisle.

TE5. The permittee must extend and refurbish the existing No Stopping/No Parking Zone, located north of the southerly driveway, by an additional 40 feet, for a total of 60 feet. The permittee must also refurbish the existing No Stopping/No Parking Zone, located north of the northerly driveway.

TE6. Prior to issuance of building permits, the permittee must pay the applicable Bridge and Thoroughfare (B&T) District Fee to implement the Circulation Element of the General Plan as a means of mitigating the traffic impact of this project. This project is located in the Valencia B&T District. The current rate for this District is $28,710. The B&T rate is subject to change and is based on the rate at the time of payment.

Standard B&T Fee Calculation:

B&T District fees for non-residential uses on an under-utilized parcel that does not include a land division will be calculated as follows:

Retail Commercial = 14,321 sf x $28,710 x 5 = $ 125,850 16,335

1.a
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

Apartment = the number of units (30) x the district rate ($28,710) x 0.7 = $602,910
Total = $125,850 + $602,910 = $728,760
Note: Live/Work units may result in reduced B&T Fee.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT
FD1. All on-site Fire Apparatus Access Roads must be labeled as “Private Driveway and Fire Lane” on the site plan along with the widths clearly depicted on the plan.

Labeling is necessary to assure the access availability for Fire Department use.

The designation allows for appropriate signage prohibiting parking.

FD2. Fire Apparatus Access Roads must be installed and maintained in a serviceable manner prior to and during the time of construction (Fire Code 501.4).

FD3. All fire lanes must be clear of all encroachments and must be maintained in accordance with the Title 32, County of Los Angeles Fire Code.

FD4. For buildings where the vertical distance between the access roadway and the highest roof surface exceeds 30 feet from the lowest level of the Fire Apparatus Access Road, provide a minimum unobstructed width of 28 feet, exclusive of shoulders and an unobstructed vertical clearance “clear to sky” Fire Apparatus Access Roads to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. At least one required access route meeting this condition must be located such that the edge of the Fire Apparatus Access Roadway, not including shoulders, that is closest to the building being served, is between 10 feet and 30 feet from the building, as determined by the Fire Code Official, and must be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. The side of the building on which the Fire Apparatus Access Road is positioned must be approved by the Fire Code Official (Fire Code 503.1.1; 503.2.1.2; 503.2.1.2.2 & 503.2.1.2.2.1).

FD5. The dimensions of the approved Fire Apparatus Access Roads must be maintained as originally approved by the Fire Code Official (Fire Code 503.2.2.1).

FD6. Fire Apparatus Access Roads must be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus weighing 75,000 pounds and must be surfaced to provide all-weather driving capabilities (Fire Code 503.2.3).

FD7. Dead-end Fire Apparatus Access Roads in excess of 150 feet in length must be provided with an approved Fire Department turnaround. Refer to Figure 503.2.5(2) in Chapter 5 of the Fire Code. The turnaround must be orientated on the access roadway in the proper direction of travel (Fire Code 503.2.5).

FD8. The Fire Apparatus Access Roads must be provided with a minimum of a 32-foot centerline turning radius (Fire Code 503.2.4).

1.a
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

FD9. A minimum 5-foot-wide approved firefighter access walkway leading from the Fire Apparatus Access Road to all required openings in the building's exterior walls must be provided for firefighting and rescue purposes (Fire Code 504.1).

FD10. Security barriers, visual screen barriers or other obstructions must not be installed on the roof of any building in such a manner as to obstruct firefighter access or egress in the event of fire or other emergency. Parapets must not exceed 42 inches from the top of the parapet to the roof surface on more than two sides. These sides should face an access roadway or yard sufficient to accommodate ladder operations (Fire Code 504.5).

FD11. Approved building address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification must be provided and maintained to be plainly visible and legible from the street fronting the property. The numbers must contrast with their background, be Arabic numerals or alphabet letters, and be a minimum of 4 inches high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch (Fire Code 505.1).

FD12. All fire hydrants must measure 6”x 4"x 2-1/2" brass or bronze, conforming to current AWWA standard C503 or approved equal, and must be installed in accordance with the County of Los Angeles Fire Code.

FD13. The required fire flow for the public fire hydrants for this project is 2000 GPM at 20 psi residual pressure for 2 hours. Two (2) public fire hydrants flowing simultaneously may be used to achieve the required fire flow. An approved automatic fire sprinkler system is required for the proposed building within this development (Fire Code 507.3 & Appendix B).

FD14. The required fire flow for a single private fire hydrant is 1,250 GPM @ 20 psi residual pressure for 2 hours. One (1) on-site fire may be used to achieve the required fire flow (Fire Code 106.1).

FD15. Install one (1) private on-site fire hydrant as noted by the Fire Department. All required private on-site fire hydrants must be installed, tested, and approved prior to building occupancy (Fire Code 901.5.1).

FD16. Plans showing underground piping for private on-site fire hydrants must be submitted to the Sprinkler Plan Check Unit for review and approval prior to installation (Fire Code 901.2 & County of Los Angeles Fire Department Regulation 7).

FD17. All private fire hydrants must be installed a minimum of 25 feet from a structure or protected by a 2-hour rated firewall. For fully sprinkled multi-family structures, private fire hydrants may be installed a minimum of 10 feet from the structure (Fire Code Appendix C106.1).

1.a
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

BUILDING & SAFETY DIVISION
Plans and Permits
Construction drawings must be prepared and submitted to the Building & Safety Division for plan review and building permit issuance. Supporting documents; such as structural and energy calculations, and geotechnical reports must be included with the plan submittal.

Construction drawings submitted for plan review must show full compliance with all applicable local, county, state, and federal requirements and codes. The project must comply with the building codes in effect at time of building permit application submitted to Building & Safety Division. Projects submitted to Building & Safety after January 1, 2023 must comply with the following: the 2022 California Building (CBC), Mechanical (CMC), Plumbing (CPC), Electrical (CEC), Fire (CFC), Energy Code, and the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (CalGreen).

Construction drawings submitted for plan review must be complete. Submitted plans must show all architectural, accessibility, structural, mechanical, plumbing, and electrical work that will be part of this project. Civil plans, if prepared, may be submitted for reference and for review by City Engineering Services.

Landscape plans, if prepared, may be submitted for reference and for review by the City’s Planning Division.

Construction drawings must be prepared by qualified licensed design professionals (California licensed architects and engineers).

The City of Santa Clarita has amended some portions of the California Building Codes. A copy of these amendments is available at the Building & Safety public counter and on our website at:
https://santaclarita.gov/building-safety/building-codes-design-criteria/.

Construction drawings may be submitted electronically or by submitting paper plans. In either case an “eService Account” must be created to access our permitting system. Please log in to the following link and create an account by clicking “register for an Account.”:
https://aca-prod.accela.com/SANTACLARITA/Default.aspx.

For general information on how to obtain a building permit for tenant improvement projects, an informative presentation may be seen at:
https://santaclarita.gov/building-safety/training-and-informational-videos/.

Construction drawings submitted to Building & Safety must include a complete building code analysis and floor area justification for the proposed building per chapters 5 and 6 of the California Building Code. The code analysis and justification must contain the following minimum information: types of construction, occupancy groups, occupant loads, any required area increases,

1.a
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

height of building, number of stories, summary of all fire rated walls, occupancy separations and all other related data.

The submitted site plan must show all parcel/lot lines, easements, fire separation distances, restricted use areas, etc. Any construction proposed in an easement must obtain the easement holder’s written permission or the easement must be removed. Parcel lines that overlap any proposed buildings must be removed (lot line adjustment) prior to building permit issuance.

For an estimate of the building permit fees and the estimated time for plan review, please contact the Building & Safety Division directly at (661) 255-4935.

Prior to submitting plans to Building & Safety, please contact a Permit Specialist at (661) 255-4935, for project addressing.

Electric Vehicle, Bicycle, and Clean Air Parking – Commercial Electric Vehicle (EV) parking spaces (EV capable spaces and EV stations) must be provided for the commercial portions of the building with the infrastructure installed to facilitate EV charging per CalGreen 5.106.5.3. EV capable spaces and EV charging stations must be identified on the site plan.

EV capable parking spaces (without charging equipment), and EV charging stations (with charging equipment installed), must be provided based on the total number of actual parking spaces provided and the number of EV capable spaces provided per CalGreen section 5.106.5.3.1. For the new 20 parking spaces provided for the new commercial portion of the new building, 4 EV capable parking spaces must be provided. For the 4 EV capable spaces required, no EV charging stations are required to be installed.

A. For the additional 41 new commercial parking spaces provided, 8 EV Capable parking spaces must be provided. For the 8 EV Capable spaces required, 2 EV Charging Stations must be installed.

Short-Term Bicycle Parking must be provided for the commercial portions of the project is based on 5 percent of the total number of anticipated visitor (customer) parking spaces with a minimum of one two-bike rack.

Long-term bicycle parking (lockable) must be provided based on 5 percent of the total number of tenant-occupant (employee) parking spaces with a minimum of one bicycle parking facility (CalGreen 5.106.4.1.2).

A. Clean Air Vehicle parking spaces are not required. The previous CalGreen Code (2019) section 5.106.5.2 has been deleted in the new 2022 CalGreen Code.

Electric Vehicle Parking – Multifamily
For new multifamily projects, ten (10) percent of the total number of residential parking spaces provided must be EV capable charging spaces, capable of

1.a
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

supporting future Level 2 electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). An additional 25 percent of the total number of parking spaces must be EV ready, and equipped with low power Level 2 EV charging receptacles (CalGreen 4.106.4.2).

For the proposed 49 new residential parking spaces, 5 spaces must be EV capable and 13 spaces must be EV ready.

A. When the multifamily project has over 20 dwelling units, an additional five (5) percent of the parking spaces must be equipped with Level 2 EV charging stations (CalGreen 4.106.4.2.2).

Where common use parking is provided at least one EV space must be located in the common use area and available for use by all residents.

Agency Clearances
Prior to issuance of building permits, clearances from the following agencies will be required:

A. Santa Clarita Planning Division;
B. Santa Clarita Engineering Services (soil report review and grading); C. Santa Clarita Environmental Services (Construction & Demolition Plan deposit);
D. Santa Clarita Traffic & Transportation Planning;
E. Santa Clarita Parks Planning
F. Los Angeles County Fire Prevention Bureau;
G. Los Angeles County Environmental Programs (Industrial Waste); H. Los Angeles County Sanitation District;
I. Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency; and
J. William S. Hart School District and appropriate elementary school district An agency referral list with contact information is available at the Building & Safety public counter. Please contact the agencies above to determine if there are any plan review requirements and/or fees to be paid. Clearances from additional agencies may be required and will be determined during the plan review process.

Accessibility
All applicable disabled access requirements of CBC Chapter 11B for commercial portions, and CBC Chapter 11A for the multi-family residential portions of the project (including live/work units), must be shown on the architectural plans versus civil plans.

The accessible parking spaces must be calculated separately for each parking facility (residential, new commercial, and existing commercial with new parking),

1.a
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

and must be dispersed and located on the shortest accessible route to accessible entrances. Accessible parking spaces for the residential portion of the project will be based on the following:

A. Where assigned parking spaces are provided, accessible parking spaces must be provided at the rate of 2 percent of all assigned parking.

B. Where unassigned and visitor parking spaces are provided, accessible parking spaces must be provided at the rate of 5 percent of all unassigned parking.

Designated guest or visitor parking must be provided with at least one accessible parking space.

C. Accessible parking spaces must be located and dispersed to be on the shortest possible accessible route to accessible building entrances.

D. Accessible parking spaces must be dispersed proportionately between the various types of parking amenities (surface, carport, and garages).

At least one EV Charging Station (or future EV Charging Space) must be provided for each parking facilities (residential, new commercial, and existing commercial with new parking) and must be sized to be van accessible and located on an accessible route to the building entrance(s). The van accessible EV parking space(s) must be 12-foot wide with a 5-foot side aisle on the passenger side.

When less than five EV spaces are provided at a facility, no disabled access signage is required. The side access aisle for any accessible EV parking space must not overlap the side access aisles required for the regular accessible parking spaces (CBC sections 11B-228.3 and 11B-812).

Buildings containing multi-family dwelling units must also follow all applicable accessibility regulations including federal requirements that may be more restrictive. Please refer to the following:

A. Fair Housing Act (FHA) Design Manual.

B. Joint Statement of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued April 30, 2013 (www.hud.gov).

C. Dwelling units constructed as senior citizen housing may also be subject to the Unruh Civil Rights Act. Refer to Division 1, Part 2 of the California Civil Code. For additional information regarding application, interpretation and enforcement, contact the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing.

FHA, HUD and DOJ regulations are not enforced by the local Building & Safety jurisdictions. However, they are the responsibility of the designer, architect, owner and developer.

1.a
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

Soil Reports and Grading
A complete soils and geology investigation report will be required. The report must be formally submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval.

The recommendations of the report must be followed and incorporated into the construction drawings. A copy of the report must be submitted to Building & Safety at time of plan submittal.

All grading, compaction and building pad certification must be completed prior to the issuance of building permits.

All new buildings, additions, and other structures, including retaining walls and fences, must be setback from any adjacent ascending or descending slopes. See Section 1808.7 CBC and the Slope Setback handout.

Hazard Zones
Indicate in the project data of the plans that this project IS NOT LOCATED in a Fire Hazard Zone, IS NOT LOCATED in a Flood Hazard Zone, and IS NOT LOCATED in the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake fault zone.

Additional Information
After the project receives a final building inspection, a Certificate of Occupancy will be issued. Shell portions of the building will receive separate Certificate of Occupancies after each tenant improvement is completed.

Each separate new detached building or structure, such as carports, trash enclosures, fences, retaining walls, shade structures, will require separate applications and building permits. These other structures need not be on separate plans, but may be part of the same plans of the main project.

Live/work units must comply with Section 508.5 of the 2022 CBC.

These general comments are based on a review of conceptual plans submitted by the permittee. Additional comments and more detailed building code requirements will be listed during the plan review process when a building permit application and plans are submitted to Building & Safety.

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
ES1. Commercial Component: Provide sufficient trash enclosures to house at least two 3-yard bins. One of the bins should be reserved for recyclable materials only. In addition, space must be added for organics/food waste recycling per AB1826/SB1383.

ES2. Residential Component: Provide sufficient trash enclosures to house at least six 3- yard bins. Three of the bins should be reserved for recyclable materials only. In

1.a
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

addition, space must be added for organics/food waste recycling per AB1826/SB1383.

ES3. Current plans reviewed by the City as of January 31, 2024, are sufficient to meet Environmental Services requirements.

ES4. The enclosures must be shown on the site plan with dimensions and bin layout/floor plan, consistent with the surrounding architecture and must be constructed with a solid roof. The enclosures must be located to provide convenient pedestrian and collection vehicle access.

ES5. All demolition projects regardless of valuation, all commercial construction projects valuated greater than $200,000 or over 1,000 square feet for new construction, all new residential construction projects, and all residential additions and improvements that increase building area, volume, or size must comply with the City’s Construction and Demolition Materials (C&D) Recycling Ordinance.

ES6. C&D Materials Recycling Ordinance:

A. 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.

B. A minimum of 65 percent of the entire project’s inert (dirt, rock, bricks, etc.) waste and 65 percent of the remaining C&D waste must be recycled or reused rather than disposing in a landfill.

C. For renovation or tenant improvement projects and new construction projects, a deposit of 2 percent of the estimated total project cost or $15,000, whichever is less, is required. For demolition projects, a deposit of 10 percent of the estimated total project cost or $15,000, whichever is less, is required. The full deposit will be returned to the permittee upon proving that 65 percent of the inert and remaining C&D waste was recycled or reused.

ES7. Per the California Green Building Standards Code, 100 percent of trees, stumps, rocks and associated vegetation and soils resulting primarily from land clearing must be reused or recycled. For a phased project, such material may be stockpiled on-site until the storage site is developed.

ES8. 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 or visit GreenSantaClarita.com for a complete list of franchised haulers in the City.

PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION
Prior to issuance of the building permit, the permittee must 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.” An estimate is attached. The

1.a
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

permittee may 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.

Credit for private open space. Where private open space usable for active recreational purposes is provided in a proposed planned development, real estate development, stock cooperative, community apartment project, or condominium project, partial credit, not to exceed thirty percent, may be given against the requirement of land dedication or payment of fees in lieu thereof. Credit will only be given when the approving authority finds that it is in the public interest to do so and that all standards are met.

TECHNOLOGY SERVICES DIVISION
TS1. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, the permittee must demonstrate compliance with UDC Section 17.51.007 (Connected City Infrastructure Program) requiring conduit from a location to be determined in the public right‐ of‐way to the Minimum Point of Entry (MPOE) or similar location within the project area that serves as the main telecommunications closet.

TRANSIT DIVISION
TR1. The Transit Impact Fee does apply. Currently the rate is $200 per residential unit.

This fee is currently under revision. The permittee must pay the fee in place at the time of building permit issuance. At this time the Transit Impact Fee does not apply to commercial/industrial developments. This fee is currently under revision.

The permittee must pay the fee in place at the time of building permit issuance.

TR2. The permittee must provide a bus stop Southbound Bouquet Canyon Road, on the project frontage before the existing driveway and in front of the existing IHOP restaurant.

TR3. The permittee must construct a pedestrian path from the bus stop to the development. The bus stop may require additional right-of-way (ROW) as approved by the City Engineer.

TR4. At the location of the bus stop, the permittee must provide a permanent stylized shelter structure. The bus stop must consist of: a 10' x 25' concrete pad placed behind the sidewalk, a bench, a trash receptacle, and lighting. Proposed shelter structure and all bus stop amenities must be approved by City Transit staff prior to installation. All specifications and appropriate paperwork must be supplied to the Transit Division prior to installation.

TR5. The permittee must provide a site plan showing amenities within a 100-foot radius of the bus stop. This plan must show the locations of all utility meters, utility structures, landscaping, buildings, pedestrian walkways, and parking spaces. This plan must also show all other items not listed above located within the 100-foot radius of the bus stop.

1.a
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

TR6. All mechanical devices (including electric meter) or vault boxes must be screened from public view either by location or with mature landscape, vines, etc (please contact the Parks Division for information). Shelter design, structure and amenities must be approved by appropriate City staff including Transit, Planning, Building & Safety, and Engineering. All specifications and appropriate paperwork for the bus stop must be supplied to the Transit Division prior to installation.

TR7. A color elevations and materials board for the proposed bus shelter must be provided for review and approval by the Director of Economic Development.

TR8. The bus stop location must be a minimum of 100 feet from the curb return or as specified by City staff.

TR9. At the location of the bus stop, the sidewalk must meet the street for no less than 25 feet.

TR10. The permittee must construct an in-street concrete pad pursuant to the current city standard and APWA 131-1.

TR11. The bus stop must comply with all ADA regulations as specified in the most recent version of the California Disabled Accessibility Guidebook (CalDag).

Proposed disabled access must be drawn on all plans.

TR12. The bus stop must be shown and labeled on the site plan.

TR13. Prior to occupancy, the bus stop must be installed to the satisfaction of City staff.

SPECIAL DISTRICTS DIVISION
Urban Forestry – Parkway Trees
The permittee is required to install parkway trees within the public right-of-way along Bouquet Canyon Road fronting the property / project site. The permittee is required to work with Special Districts (Urban Forestry) with the location, spacing, and number of parkway trees required.

Before issuance of grading permits, or as required by Planning, the permittee must submit a final landscape plan for review and approval by Special Districts (Urban Forestry). Landscape plan must be prepared by a California Licensed Landscape Architect.

The permittee is required to install concrete tree wells along Bouquet Canyon Road to accommodate the required, approved number of parkway trees. Minimum size tree well must be no less than 4-feet by 6-feet, and must not exceed 4-feet by 8-feet. All tree wells must be the same size.

The permittee is required to install and maintain an approved irrigation system to all required parkway trees. Irrigation must be approved by Special Districts (Urban Forestry). Irrigation must be included with the final landscape plans.

1.a
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

The permittee is required to tunnel below any existing concrete as needed to install the required irrigation to each tree. One two-inch (2”) schedule 80 sleeve must be installed below any / all concrete to allow for all lateral lines to reach the tree well.

Irrigation to the required parkway trees must consist of schedule 40 PVC pipe, with two Rainbird RWS-B-C-1401 watering systems per tree. Each watering tube must be placed on opposite ends of the root ball and run parallel with the sidewalk.

The permittee is required to install 24-inch lineal root barrier at the inner edge of the tree well. Root barrier must overlap a minimum of six inches or as required by manufacturer specifications. Century Root Barrier, NDS, and Villa are all acceptable products. Irrigation lines must enter the tree well below the bottom of the root barrier to eliminate having to cut into the root barrier.

Parkway trees must consist of 24-inch box, standard trunk trees. Each tree must have a natural canopy, with strong central leader, with a minimum in-ground height of 6-7 feet at time of planting. Parkway trees must also meet and or exceed the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection; Guideline Specifications for Nursery Tree Quality.

Approved parkway tree species for this location must not exceed a 25-30-foot maximum height, and be approved / recommended for planting below powerlines.

Approved species for this location includes the following trees; Coral Gum (Eucalyptus torquata), Purple Orchid Tree (Bauhinia variegate), Eastern Red Bud (Cercis canadensis), Narrow-Leaf Pittosporum (Pittosporum phillyraeoides).

Parkway trees must be planted according to the City of Santa Clarita Tree Planting & Staking Detail Sheet and / or the APWA (American Public Works Association) “Standard Plans for Public Works Construction”.

Prior to planting, all parkway trees must be inspected and approved by a qualified representative of Urban Forestry. Trees which do not meet the minimum specifications will be rejected and must be returned to the nursery and replaced at no cost to the City of Santa Clarita. Permittee must give a minimum of 48 hours prior notice for the delivery date and time.

Parkway trees, as it specifically relates to trimming is the responsibility of the City of Santa Clarita Special Districts (Urban Forestry). The permittee and their tenants are advised that parkway trees will not be trimmed for sign visibility.

Upon completion of irrigation and planting, the tree well must be mulched with natural woodchips (Foothill Soils Forest Floor or similar product with same specifications).

The parkway tree(s) are a shared responsibility between the property owner and the City of Santa Clarita. Maintaining the tree well and keeping it free of weeds and debris, making any necessary repairs to the irrigation, and making sure the tree is not over or under watered, is the primary responsible of the permittee and / or current and future property owners. It is the responsibility of the City of Santa

1.a
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

Clarita Urban Forestry Division to trim the tree(s) as needed during regular grid trimming.

The permittee is required to reach out to the City of Santa Clarita Urban Forestry Division to discuss the recent pruning to the on-site oak trees which took place on or around October 2023. These oak trees are protected under both the Oak Tree Ordinance, and the Parkway Tree Influence Ordinance. City Arborist will provide available resources to correct and repair the damage that was done to the trees as a result of the recent pruning.

Landscape Maintenance District
This parcel is located within Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) Zone 2008-1, which was established to fund the construction and maintenance of landscaped medians on major thoroughfares throughout the City of Santa Clarita.

Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee is required to financially contribute to Zone 2008-1 in a manner reflective of this LMD zone’s assessment methodology.

The permittee is advised that these parcels are currently being assessed based upon the current land use. As a result of the proposed project, the current assessment rate will be adjusted to reflect the changes based upon the zones current methodology.

Streetlight Maintenance District
Pending the requirement of having to underground any existing utilities, or make street improvements, the permittee will be required to install replacement streetlights to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, Director of Public Works, and the Director of Administrative Services.

These parcels were originally annexed by County of Los Angeles into a Lighting District with a maximum assessment of $12.38 per EBU (Equivalent Benefit Unit) without a cost of living index/escalator. The permittee will be required to annex the parcel into the Santa Clarita Landscaping and Lighting District (SCLLD), Streetlighting Zone “Original”. The District funds the operation and maintenance of various landscaping and lighting improvements throughout the City that provide special benefits to properties within the District.

The annexation will bring the EBU rate current (FY 22/23, $93.91) and add the cost of living escalator (CPI). There is a one-time annexation fee of $500.00 + $100.00 per Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU). Benefit Units are based on land use and vacant/unimproved parcels are not assessed. Additional information may be required from the permittee to calculate the fee.

A. Following the completed annexation there will be an annual assessment included on the property tax bill. The assessments are based on land use, see

1.a
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Final Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

attached EBU rate sheet. The proposed assessment to be calculated by assessment engineer.

B. A minimum of 120 days is required to process the annexation, which must be completed prior to final map approval, grading or building permit issuance, whichever occurs first.

C. Developer will work with Special Districts and obtain approval on the LED light fixtures, if any, to be installed on public streets.

D. Ownership of all new streetlights installed on public streets will be transferred to City of Santa Clarita.

E. Developer will work with Special Districts to determine if the streetlights will be metered or unmetered.

1.a
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Master Case 21-086; MUP21-012, ADR21-015, and DR21-011
Conditions of Approval
October 22, 2024

Attachment A – Estimated Parks Dedication Fee

1.a
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Resolution and Conditions [Revision 1] (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats MC21-086
Aerial Map

PROJECT
SITE
Cinema Drive

1.b
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Aerial and Zoning Map (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) MC21-086
Zoning Map

PROJECT
SITE
Cinema Drive
MX-C
OS
PI
I

1.b
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Aerial and Zoning Map (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

PROJECT
NORTH
SD1.0

OVERALL SITE
PLAN
1 OVERALL SITE PLAN
26575 Ruether Ave 2nd floor
CHARC
d e s i g n
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
661.383.2352 - 818.919.2248
2022

NEW BUILDING LOT VIEW

OVERALL VIEW

PROMENADE FLATS

1.c
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: Site Plans (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) UP
UP
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT

EXITEXITEXITEXITEXIT
EXIT
EXIT

ENTRENTRENTRENTR
ENTR
ENTR
ENTR
ENTR
EXIT
EXIT
UP

CONTROLLER

CONTROLLER
A
1 B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
23456789101112131415
UP
UP
A
1 B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
23456789101112131415

CONTROLLER

CONTROLLER
123456789101112131415
SD1.1

LANDSCAPE &

COMMERCIAL
AREAS
26575 Ruether Ave 2nd floor
CHARC
d e s i g n
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
661.383.2352 - 818.919.2248
2022

SITE & BLDG PARKING LANDSCAPING AREAS
2 LANDSCAPE AREAS
1 NEW PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING AREAS

L E G E N D

FIRST FLOOR - COMMERCIAL AREAS

COMMERCIAL AREAS
3 L E G E N D
4 2ND LEVEL - LIVE / WORK COMMERCIAL AREA
5 3RD LEVEL - LIVE / WORK COMMERCIAL AREA
6 TYP LIVE / WORKS UNITS - WORK PORTION
NOTE: PLEASE SEE A5.1 FOR MORE DETAILS

PROMENADE FLATS

1.c
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: Site Plans (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

PROJECT
NORTH
26575 Ruether Ave 2nd floor
CHARC
d e s i g n
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
661.383.2352 - 818.919.2248
2022 1 PARKING PLAN & ANALYSIS
SD1.2

PARKING
PLAN
1 ACCESIBLE PARKING TYP1 FUEL EFFICIENT
V.P.

L E G E N D

PROMENADE FLATS

1.c
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: Site Plans (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) UP

PROPOSED

BUILDING

EXISTING

BUILDING

EXISTING

BUILDING

EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING BUILDING

EXISTING

BUILDING
PROPERTY BOUNDARY @ EXISTING WALL

BOUQUET CANYON ROAD

EXISTING

PARKING

EXISTING

PARKING

RIGHT OF WAY

EXISTING APARTMENTS
PROPERTY BOUNDARY @ EXISTING WALLPROPERTY BOUNDARY @ EXISTING WALL

EXISTING APARTMENTS
36" BOX
36" BOX
36" BOX
36" BOX
36" BOX36" BOX36" BOX
36" BOX
36" BOX
36" BOX
36" BOX
36" BOX36" BOX36" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
36" BOX36" BOX36" BOX36" BOX36" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
DATE:

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Jordan T. Crystal
PE
SCA
HC
TECT I
AR
AND

L ICENSED
L
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
A
RNI
L CA
IFO
STATE
OF
JORDAN T. CRYSTAL 5843
NOV 30, 2025
JAN. 29, 2024
ADDRESS: 3639 HARBOR BLVD. SUITE 202
VENTURA, CA. 93001
PHONE: (805) 232-5218
EMAIL: [email protected]
WEB ADDRESS: WWW.CVADESIGNCONSULTANTS.COM
PROJECT NAME:

SANTA CLARITA PLAZA APARTMENTS
PROJECT ADDRESS:
26111-26135 BOQUET CANYON ROAD
SANTA CLARITA, CA. 91350
SHEET TITLE:

SCALE:

DRAWN BY:

JOB NUMBER:

SHEET:

CLIENT:

THE MADISON GROUP
9631W. OLYMPIC BLVD
BEVERLY HILLS, CA. 90212
01/29/2024
2021122701
NORTH
0'48' 32' 24' 16'
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"
4' 8' 12'
NOTES:DATE:

DRC SUBMITTAL #1 02/15/22
JC
DRC SUBMITTAL #2 01/16/23
DRC SUBMITTAL #3 07/26/23
DRC SUBMITTAL #4 01/29/24

PLANTING
PLAN
1/16" = 1'-0"
L-3.01
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L-3.02

EXISTING PLANTING TO REMAIN

PROTECT IN PLACE

EXISTING PLANTING TO REMAIN

PROTECT IN PLACE

EXISTING OAK TREE TO REMAIN

PROTECT IN PLACE

EXISTING OAK TREE TO REMAIN

PROTECT IN PLACE

EXISTING COURTYARD PLANTING TO REMAIN

PROTECT IN PLACE

EXISTING SEQUOIA COURTYARD TREES TO REMAIN

PROTECT IN PLACE

EXISTING BIRCH TREES TO REMAIN

PROTECT IN PLACE

PET FACILITY

SYNTHETIC TURF

BICYCLE PARKING
(6) SPACES

EMPLOYEE BREAK AREA

ROOT BARRIER

ROOT BARRIER

EXISTING HOLLYWOOD JUNIPER TREES ALONG NORTH PROPERTY BOUNDARY

SHALL BE REMOVED DUE TO SITE CONSTRAINTS

1.c
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: Site Plans (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

EXISTING

BUILDING

EXISTING

BUILDING
PROPERTY BOUNDARY @ EXISTING WALL

BOUQUET CANYON ROAD

EXISTING

PARKING

EXISTING

PARKING

EXISTING

PARKING

RIGHT OF WAY
PROPERTY BOUNDARY @ EXISTING WALL
36" BOX36" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
24" BOX
PROPERTY BOUNDARY @ EXISTING WALL

PROPERTY BOUNDARY
36" BOX 36" BOX 36" BOX
36" BOX
36" BOX
36" BOX 36" BOX 36" BOX 36" BOX
DATE:

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Jordan T. Crystal
PE
SCA
HC
TECT I
AR
AND

L ICENSED
L
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
A
RNI
L CA
IFO
STATE
OF
JORDAN T. CRYSTAL 5843
NOV 30, 2025
JAN. 29, 2024
ADDRESS: 3639 HARBOR BLVD. SUITE 202
VENTURA, CA. 93001
PHONE: (805) 232-5218
EMAIL: [email protected]
WEB ADDRESS: WWW.CVADESIGNCONSULTANTS.COM
PROJECT NAME:

SANTA CLARITA PLAZA APARTMENTS
PROJECT ADDRESS:
26111-26135 BOQUET CANYON ROAD
SANTA CLARITA, CA. 91350
SHEET TITLE:

SCALE:

DRAWN BY:

JOB NUMBER:

SHEET:

CLIENT:

THE MADISON GROUP
9631W. OLYMPIC BLVD
BEVERLY HILLS, CA. 90212
01/29/2024
2021122701
NORTH
0'48' 32' 24' 16'
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"
4' 8' 12'
NOTES:DATE:

DRC SUBMITTAL #1 02/15/22
JC
DRC SUBMITTAL #2 01/16/23
DRC SUBMITTAL #3 07/26/23
DRC SUBMITTAL #4 01/29/24

PLANTING
PLAN
1/16" = 1'-0"
L-3.02
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET L-3.01

MATCHLINE SEE SHEET BELOW

MATCHLINE SEE SHEET ABOVE

EXISTING PLANTING TO REMAIN

PROTECT IN PLACE

EXISTING OAK TREE TO REMAIN

PROTECT IN PLACE

EXISTING PLANTING TO REMAIN

PROTECT IN PLACE

EXISTING SYCAMORE COURTYARD TREES TO REMAIN

PROTECT IN PLACE

EXISTING PINE TREE TO REMAIN

PROTECT IN PLACE

EXISTING PLANTING TO REMAIN

PROTECT IN PLACE

ROOT BARRIER

ROOT BARRIER

1.c
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: Site Plans (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) UP
UP
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT

EXITEXITEXITEXITEXIT
EXIT
EXIT

ENTRENTRENTRENTR
ENTR
ENTR
ENTR
A
1 B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
23456789101112131415
ENTR
EXIT
EXIT

CONTROLLER

CONTROLLER
UP
A
1 B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
23456789101112131415
CM
SD
SD
G
SD
CM
SD
G
CM
SD
SD
G
SD
CM
SD
CM
SD
G
SD
CM
SD
CM
SD
SD
SD
CM
SD
SD
G
EXIT
CM
SD
CM
SD
SD
GG
SD
G
EXIT
CM
SD
G GG
G

CONTROLLER

CONTROLLER
26575 Ruether Ave 2nd floor
CHARC
d e s i g n
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
661.383.2352 - 818.919.2248
2022
1 1ST FLOOR
2 2ND FLOOR
A1.0
1ST & 2ND

FLOOR PLAN

PROJECT
NORTH

PROJECT
NORTH

PROMENADE FLATS

1.c
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: Site Plans (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) CM
SD
SD
G
SD
CM
SD
G
CM
SD
SD
G
SD
CM
SD
CM
SD
G
SD
CM
SD
CM
SD
SD
SD
CM
SD
SD
G
EXIT
CM
SD
CM
SD
SD
GG
SD
G
2 - HRS SHAFT
5'x5' CLR

IN FRONT

OF LIFT
EXIT
CM
SD
G GG
G
UP
UP
A
1 B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
23456789101112131415

CONTROLLER

CONTROLLER
A
1 B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
23456789101112131415
CM
SD
SD
G
SD
CM
SD
G
CM
SD
SD
G
SD
CM
SD
8 CM
SD
G
SD
CM
SD
CM
SD
SD
SD
CM
SD
SD
G
EXIT
CM
SD
CM
SD
SD
GG
SD
G
EXIT
CM
SD
G GG
G
UP
UP

CONTROLLER
26575 Ruether Ave 2nd floor
CHARC
d e s i g n
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
661.383.2352 - 818.919.2248
2022
1 3RD FLOOR
2 4TH FLOOR
A1.1
3RD & 4TH

FLOOR PLAN

PROJECT
NORTH

PROJECT
NORTH

PROMENADE FLATS

1.c
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: Site Plans (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) A
1 B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
23456789101112131415
7 EXIT
CM
SD
EXIT
CM
SD
DOWN

CONTROLLER
DOWN
DOWN
A
1 B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
23456789101112131415
26575 Ruether Ave 2nd floor
CHARC
d e s i g n
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
661.383.2352 - 818.919.2248
2022
1 5TH FLOOR
2 ROOF PLAN
A1.2
5TH FLOOR

PLAN & ROOF
PLAN

PROJECT
NORTH

PROJECT
NORTH

PROMENADE FLATS

1.c
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Site Plans (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) 26575 Ruether Ave 2nd floor
CHARC
d e s i g n
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
661.383.2352 - 818.919.2248
2022
1 NORTH ELEVATION
2 SOUTH ELEVATION

ELEVATIONS IN
COLOR
A4.0
4 WEST ELEVATION3EAST ELEVATION

PROMENADE FLATS

1.c
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: Site Plans (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) 26575 Ruether Ave 2nd floor
CHARC
d e s i g n
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
661.383.2352 - 818.919.2248
2022

TOP VIEW

RENDERS
A4.1

RESIDENCIAL ACCESS VIEW

LIVE / WORK UNIT ACCESS VIEW & RESIDENTIAL PARKING VIEWCOMMON SPACE - PET AREA VIEW

RESIDENTIAL ACCESS VIEW & RESIDENTIAL PARKING WITH SOLAR CARPORT VIEWRESIDENTIAL ACCESS VIEW - CARPORTS & BIKE LOCKERS VIEW

PROMENADE FLATS

1.c
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: Site Plans (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) 26575 Ruether Ave 2nd floor
CHARC
d e s i g n
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
661.383.2352 - 818.919.2248
2022

RENDERS
A4.2

RETAIL AREA & NEW COMMERCIAL PARKING VIEWEMPLOYEE AREA VIEW

CONTEXT VIEWNEW PARKING LOT VIEW

ILLUMINATION VIEW BUILDING ROOF TOP COMMON OPEN SPACE - BBQ ZONE - RESIDENTIAL USE ONLY

PROMENADE FLATS

1.c
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: Site Plans (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) 26575 Ruether Ave 2nd floor
CHARC
d e s i g n
Santa Clarita, CA 91350
661.383.2352 - 818.919.2248
2022

ELEVATIONS IN
COLOR
A4.3

VALENCIA COMMUNITY CHARACTER &

DESIGN GUIDELINES NOTES

BUILDING LOCATION IN THE

VALENCIA COMMUNITY
1 NORTH ELEVATION (CINEMA FACADE)
2 SOUTH ELEVATION (SANTA CLARITA PLAZA FACADE)
4 EAST ELEVATION (IHOP FACADE)3 WEST ELEVATION (LAS FLORES FACADE)

PROMENADE FLATS

1.c
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: Site Plans (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Request for Appeal

1.d
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Appeal Request (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.d
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Appeal Request (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.d
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: Appeal Request (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Comment Letters Received During Appeal
Public Noticing Period

1.e
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: Public Comments (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) 1 Andy Olson
From: Bob Lasher <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2024 3:32 PM
To: Andy Olson
Subject: FW: Harvard project
CITY WARNING: This email was sent from an external server. Use caution clicking links or opening attachments.

Subject: Harvard project

1.            Does the city actually need another 7200 square feet of office/retail space?  Drive around and see how many open and ‘for lease’ spaces there are.

2.            What will happen to all the small businesses that are currently occupying space in the proposed area?  Some of them have been there for a number of years.

3.            Parking!  With 30 proposed one bedroom apartments, how many parking places have been proposed for this project.  The residential units should have 50 to 60 parking places assigned to them.  What about the commercial customers and employees of the businesses that will occupy the building.  How much parking will be allotted to IHOP.  That business can be busy with parking for its customers.  What about ADA compliant (handicapped) spaces?  Whatever formula the city uses to determine the quantity of those spaces required is severely flawed.  Check the handicapped parking situation near the Olive Garden restaurant.

4.            Are there tenants ready to occupy the commercial spaces or will these join the growing list of vacant spaces?  How long will these remain vacant?

I am opposed to this project For the above reasons.

Regards,
Robert Lasher
(310) 741‐7049

1.e
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: Public Comments (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) DOC 7293019.DSCV
August 12, 2024
Ref. DOC 7291769
VIA EMAIL [email protected]
Mr. Andy Olson, Project Planner
City of Santa Clarita
Community Development Department
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Dear Mr. Olson:

NOPH Response to Appeal 24-003 and Appeal 24-004 regarding Master Case 21-086:

Minor Use Permit 21-012, Architectural Design Review 21-015, and Development Review 21-011 This is in reply to your notice, which was received by the Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District (District) on August 9, 2024. Previous comments submitted by the District in correspondence dated June 4, 2024, (copy enclosed) to your agency, still apply to the subject project. • All information concerning District’s facilities and sewerage service contained in the document is current.

If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at (562) 908-4288, extension 2708, or at [email protected].

Very truly yours,
Shirly Wang
Annexation and Will Serve Desk Coordinator
Property Management Section
SW:sw

Enclosure

1.e
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: Public Comments (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) DOC 7236770.DSCV
June 4, 2024
Ref. DOC 7236030
VIA EMAIL [email protected]
Mr. Andy Olson, AICP, Associate Planner
City of Santa Clarita
Community Development Department
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Dear Mr. Olson:

NOPH Response to Master Case 21-086:

Minor Use Permit 21-012, Architectural Design Review 21-015, and Development Review 21-011 This is in reply to your notice, which was received by the Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District (District) on May 30, 2024. The proposed project is located within the jurisdictional boundary of the District. We offer the following comments regarding sewerage service:

1. The project proponent is advised that the subject project is located less than half a mile from the District’s Saugus Water Reclamation Plant, a publicly owned wastewater treatment plant.

2. The wastewater flow originating from the proposed proj ect will discharge to a local sewer line, which is not maintained by the District, for conveyance to the District’s “District #26 Interceptor Trunk Sewer”, located in a private right-of-way west of Bouquet Canyon Road north of Cinema Drive. The District’s 33– inch diameter trunk sewer has a capacity of 16.3 million gallons per day (mgd) and conveyed a peak flow of 5.8 mgd when last measured in 2018.

3. The District operates two water reclamation plants (WRPs), the Saugus WRP and the Valencia WRP, which provide wastewater treatment in the Santa Clarita Valley. These facilities are interconnected to form a regional treatment system known as the Santa Clarita Valley Joint Sewerage System (SCVJSS). The SCVJSS has a capacity of 28.1 mgd and currently processes an average flow of 18.6 mgd.

4. The expected increase in average wastewater flow from the project, described in the notice as 8,874 square feet of commercial space and 30 residential apartment units, is 7,564 gallons per day. For a copy of the Districts’ average wastewater generation factors, go to www.lacsd.org, under Services, then Wastewater Program and Permits and select Will Serve Program, and click on the Table 1, Loadings for Each Class of Land Use link.

5. The District is empowered by the California Health and Safety Code to charge a fee to connect facilities (directly or indirectly) to the District’s Sewerage System or to increase the strength or quantity of wastewater discharged from connected facilities. This connect ion fee is used by the District for its capital facilities. Payment of a connection fee may be required before this project is permitted to discharge to the District’s Sewerage System. For more information and a copy of the Connection Fee Information Sheet, go to www.lacsd.org, under Services, then Wastewater (Sewage) and select Rates & Fees. In determining the

1.e
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: Public Comments (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Mr. Andy Olson 2 June 4, 2024
DOC 7236770.DSCV
impact to the Sewerage System and applicable connection fees, the District will determine the user category (e.g. Condominium, Single Family Home, etc.) that best represents the actual or anticipated use of the parcel(s) or facilities on the parcel(s) in the develo pment. For more specific information regarding the connection fee application procedure and fees, the developer should contact the District’s Wastewater Fee Public Counter at [email protected] or (562) 908-4288, extension 2727.

6. In order for the District to conform to the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), the capacities of the District’s wastewater treatment facilities are ba sed on the regional growth forecast adopted by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Specific policies included in the development of t
he SCAG regional growth forecast are incorporated into clean air plans, which are prepared by the So uth Coa
st and Antelope Valley Air Quality Management Districts in order to improve air quality in the South Coast and Mojave Desert Air Basins as mandated by the CAA. All expansions of District’s facilities must be sized and service phased in a manner that will be consistent with the SCAG regional growth forecast for the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial. The availabl e
c
apacity of the District’s treatment facilities will, therefore, be limited to levels associated with the approved growth identified by SCAG. As such, this letter does not constitute a guarantee of wastewater service, but is
to advise the applicant that the District intends to provide this service up to the levels that are legally permitted and to inform the applicant of the currently existing capacity and any proposed expansion of Distri
ct’s facilities.

If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at (562) 908-4288, extension 2708 or at [email protected].

Very truly yours,
Shirly Wang
Customer Service Specialist
Facilities Planning Department
SW:sw

1.e
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: Public Comments (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Applicant Letter to City Council

1.f
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: Applicant Comment Letter (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

Writer’s email: [email protected]

October 15, 2024,

VIA EMAIL:
[email protected]
Mayor Cameron Smyth
City of Santa Clarita
23929 Valencia Blvd., Ste 300
Santa Clarita, CA 91355

Re: October 22, 2024 Council Meeting. Continuation of August 27, 2024 Appeal of Planning Commission Approval of Harvard 826 Property, LLC Master Case 21-086 Santa Clarita Plaza 26111-26135 Bouquet Canyon Road

Dear Mayor Smyth and Members of the City Council,

I am submitting this letter on behalf of the applicant Harvard 826 Property, LLC for Master Case 21-086 for your consideration at the Appeal Hearing from the approval, by a vote of 4 to 1, of our project at the June 18, 2024, Planning Commission Hearing.

As you know, this Hearing was originally scheduled for August 27, 2024, but prior to the Public Hearing and consideration of the Appeal, Councilmembers Weste and McLean requested a continuance to explore with the applicant potential changes to the project. The Council then continued this Appeal Hearing to October 22nd.

We testified against the continuance because no specific changes had been presented to us as part of the Appeal or by the councilmembers requesting the continuance. The response from some members of the City Council that night was that there was tremendous opposition to the project, that the Planning Commission had a lot of issues (even though they approved the project 4 -1), that the continuance would allow for consensus and was the best way to make the project better. The rationale for the continuance was not based on any of the items which had been raised in the Appeal.

Since August 27 the applicant has waited patiently to hear what specific changes to the project councilmembers and Planning staff would propose. On October 9 th the Applicant and I met with Councilwoman Weste and City staff at her request to discuss potential changes to the project. At this meeting we were presented with the potential for increased residential units and the concern of the future of the existing IHOP restaurant. There was no discussion regarding any of the issues raised by the Appellants. Rather for the first time we received a proposal for more residential units and to replace the existing IHOP restaurant building. The applicant gave these potential changes very careful consideration and balanced the costs of additional residential development with revenue from

1.f
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: Applicant Comment Letter (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) October 15, 2024
Mayor Cameron Smyth

L:\Client Files\1005\2070 - HARVARD 826 PROPERTY, LLC\CORRESPONDENCE\Final Leter Mayor Smyth Promenande Letter 10-15-24.docx the existing restaurant. However, it believes strongly that the existing proposed project will complement the existing commercial center and that the IHOP restaurant, either with the existing tenant or a new tenant, will be able to be successful in the fu ture. We understand that there is disagreement about the future viability of the restaurant, but at the end of the day it is a business decision by the Applicant to deal with the risk of the future of all its commercial property.

The continuance of the Public Hearing by the City Council without any specifics suggested changes has caused hardship to the applicant in spite of representations that was not the goal of the continuance. The facts are that the applicant has invested a large amount of funds in this project for the past 4 years and the appeals of first the Administrative Hearing approval and then the Planning Commission approval and now the Council continuance has caused the unnecessary delay resulting in the Applicant incurring additional interest, legal and consultant fees. In addition, these delays put the project at risk to a change in market conditions which will adversely affect them financially.

As a result, we will be proceeding with our project as approved by the Planning Commission and will once again ask the City Council to deny the Appeal and affirm the Planning Commission’s approval of this project.

The entitlement being requested is a Minor Use Permit, Architectural Design Review and Development Review. Your Planning staff has consistently recommended approval of this project and these entitlement requests are usually approved administratively. The staff report for the Planning Commission Hearing stated that this project was first submitted to the City for consideration for a One Stop Review on June 6, 2019, and that the formal application for the MUP was submitted on April 3, 2021. After the City sent the Notices of its plan to approve the MUP, it was appealed by the adjacent property owner Cinema Park.

The City then held an Administrative Hearing on April 17, 2024. After testimony the Hearing Officer approved the project and included an additional Condition of Approval regarding parking safety which the Applicant agreed to.

The Applicant subsequently met with Cinema Park in an attempt to address their concerns regarding parking and the IHOP restaurant’s affect on their property. We were unsuccessful and Cinema Park appealed the project to the Planning Commission without spec ifically citing how the project was deficient in parking.

The Planning Commission considered this appeal on June 18, 2024. After hearing extensive testimony and discussion the Commission denied the appeal and approved the Project on a 4-1 vote.

This support counters the representation at the August 27 City Council meeting that the Commission “had a lot of issues”. The issues the Commission had were addressed with the additional Conditions of Approval which are outlined in the Council’s Staff Report and which the Applicant has agreed to.

1.f
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: Applicant Comment Letter (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) October 15, 2024
Mayor Cameron Smyth

L:\Client Files\1005\2070 - HARVARD 826 PROPERTY, LLC\CORRESPONDENCE\Final Leter Mayor Smyth Promenande Letter 10-15-24.docx

APPEALS

On July 1 st Cinema Park once again appealed this project. In addition, another adjacent property owner the Las Flores Apartments appealed the project.

The Applicant met with the Las Flores Apartments and their counsel and had numerous discussions. As a result, Las Flores was satisfied that their concerns about the project and their continued easement access through the Applicant’s property had been resolved. As a result, Las Flores withdrew their appeal and sent a support letter which is attached.

Regarding Cinema Park, the Applicant’s efforts to try and resolve any of their issues were unsuccessful.

The Applicant believes that the Staff Report provides a clear explanation why there is no basis for the Appeal and that this Project meets all of the requirements for approval by the City Council. I have provided our analysis below.

PARKING

The arguments contained in the appeal and some other communications center almost entirely on concerns with adequate parking. These included:

• There is not sufficient parking.
• The new Residents of this project and customers of the center will park at the appellant Cinema Park shopping center.
• Concern regarding customer and employee safety
• Concern regarding traffic through the project site as well as traffic safety entering and existing the site.

The Applicant had the well respected firm LSA perform a traffic analysis which confirmed that the existing commercial project along with the new residential and commercial project provided the required 249 parking spaces which are provided. The applicant is providing 41 new spaces on a vacant parcel in the southwest corner of the property. The project provides required code parking for the new residential units. LSA provided a Parking Demand Study which found that at the peak hours there would be surplus parking.

Although the project meets the City’s Parking requirement and the Parking Demand Study confirmed there would be surplus parking even during the busiest time periods, the applicant has agreed to a parking management plan (Condition of Approval PL 5 ) to further ensure that there is

1.f
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: Applicant Comment Letter (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) October 15, 2024
Mayor Cameron Smyth

L:\Client Files\1005\2070 - HARVARD 826 PROPERTY, LLC\CORRESPONDENCE\Final Leter Mayor Smyth Promenande Letter 10-15-24.docx sufficient parking. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT PLANNING STAFF HAS

INDICATED THAT THIS CONDITION HAS NEVER BEEN IMPOSED ON ANY OTHER PROJECT, INCLUDING THE MALL.

This plan will in part provide the following:

• Residential and Commercial spaces will be clearly designated and restricted for that use. • That the residents of the new residential complex will have a parking permit only to park in the residential spaces.
• Guests of the residential complex must have passes and park in the designated guest parking spaces.
• Have implementation plans which can result in the towing of any vehicle improperly parked in a residential or commercial designated space. This would include any vehicles belonging to the adjacent apartment complex.
• Work with the tenants of the center to have its employees park in the new 41 space lot and provide security and lighting for that area.

Although Cinema Park claims that IHOP patrons and the new residents will park within their lot, they have provided no studies or evidence that it is currently occurring or is likely to occur in the future. The studies conducted on behalf of this project and the Parking Management Plan they will provide and implement will deal with any of the concerns about parking which have been made.

UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT CODE CONSISTENCY

The Staff report correctly points out this project falls under the provision of the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (Senate Bill 330) and the objective standards review required by the City has been met.

As a result, the Council has no discretion but to approve this Project since it meets the objective standards of the City. Nothing in the Appeal counters this determination which has been consistently made by City Planning Staff and the City Attorney.

CEQA

This is an in-fill project and as a result is exempt from CEQA.

CONCLUSION

The Staff Report and this letter have clearly shown that none of the issues raised by the Appeal are valid. The Parking has been sufficiently dealt with and in fact we have not heard from any councilmember since the continuance that Parking needed to be resolved. Rather the sole focus was on the future viability of the IHOP restaurant, either with the existing tenant or a future tenant. The

1.f
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: Applicant Comment Letter (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) October 15, 2024
Mayor Cameron Smyth

L:\Client Files\1005\2070 - HARVARD 826 PROPERTY, LLC\CORRESPONDENCE\Final Leter Mayor Smyth Promenande Letter 10-15-24.docx Applicant has met with IHOP and its representatives and reached an agreement regarding its lease and the proposed construction. While the Applicant appreciates the point of views which have been expressed by the City regarding the restaurant, once again it has made the business decision to proceed with this project.

For the reasons stated in this letter, the staff report, and various studies and analysis provided, the City should approve the requested entitlements for this project.

Sincerely,

Hunt C. Braly

Cc: Andy Olson, Associate Planner
Harvard 826 Property, LLC
Karen Hallock, Of Counsel, DLA Piper LLP

1.f
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: Applicant Comment Letter (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

LUNA & GLUSHON
A Professional Corporation

16255 VENTURA BOULEVARD, SUITE 950
ENCINO, CALIFORNIA 91436
TEL: (818) 907-8755
FAX: (818) 907-8760

August 21, 2024

VIA EMAIL ([email protected])

Patrick Leclair, Planning Manager
City of Santa Clarita
Community Development Department
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302
Santa Clarita, CA 91355

Re: Appeal of Master Case 21-086

Dear Mr. LeClair:

Our law firm represents Las Flores Apartments , LLC (“Las F lores Apartments”), one of the appellants to the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project (MC21-086) (the “Project”). Our appeal is scheduled to be hear d by the City Council on August 27, 2024.

After meeting with the owners/developers, Harvard 826 Property, LLC , and reaching an agreement regarding our client ’s concerns, Las Flores Apartments no longer opposes the Project and no longer wishes to pursue the appeal.

Please let us know if there is anything else you need from us.

Very truly yours,

LUNA & GLUSHON
A Professional Corporation

KRISTINA KROPP

cc: Andy Olson, Associate Planner

DENNIS R. LUNA
(1946-2016)

1.f
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: Applicant Comment Letter (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Parking Analysis

1.g
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) New Construction Residential Units or SF Parking Ratio Parking Required 1 Bedrooms 26 1 per unit 26
Joint‐Live Work  4 2 per unit 8
Guest Spaces 30 0.5 per unit 15
Commercial Square Feet
First Floor 7233.7 1:200 36.1685
Rooftop 0 1:200 0
Joint‐Live Work  1640 1:200 (4 units @ 410 SF) 8.2
8,874
Existing Site Building / Unit Business Name Land Use Category Area (Square Feet) Parking Ratio Parking Required B005 CA Spectrum Care Business Support Service 1,340                               1:400 3.35 D003B Zoom Room Instructional G1634/R2028=3662 1:200/1:250 16.28 G003 Santa Clarita Chiropractic Medical 1,710                               1:200 8.55 G001 Military & Veterans Affairs Office 2,838                              1:400 7.10 H001 Military & Veterans Affairs Office 2,697                              1:400 6.74 D005 VIP Veterinary Services Veterinar
y 3126 1:250 12.50
A005 Farmers Insurance Personal Service 640 1:400 1.60
B005 Finally the Right Salon Salon 486 1:250 1.94
B004 Gold Buyer Depot Personal Service 487 1:400 1.22
I000 IHOP Restaurant 5448 County approved 30.00
C001 Jill’s Cake Creations Retail 810 1:250 3.24
A001 Math Support Services Office 1453 1:400 3.63
A003 N Style Salon Salon 1320 1:250 5.28
B001 Numero Uno Pizzeria Restaurant 1386 1:100 13.86
D003 Santa Clarita Flooring Retail 4141 1:400 10.35
H003 Santa Clarita Uniserv Office 3293 1:400 8.23
A007 The Tea Gardens Restaurant 1687 1:100 16.87
G005 California Spectrum Care Office 997 1:400 2.49
G006 Vacant Vacant 997 1:400 2.49
Totals Required Parking Provided Parking Surplus
New Residential 49
New Commercial 44
Existing Commercial 156
Total 249 249 0
Existing Parking Demand
(no project) 155.74
Existing Parking Supply 253

1.g
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Parking Demand Study

1.g
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.g
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.g
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.g
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.g
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.g
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Parking Management Plan

1.g
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.g
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.g
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.g
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.g
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.g
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.g
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.g
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.g
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Parking Analysis, Demand Study, and Management Plan (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

NOTICE OF EXEMPTION

TO: FROM:

[X] County Clerk City of Santa Clarita
County of Los Angeles Community Development
12400 E. Imperial Hwy., Rm. 2001 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite #302 Norwalk, CA 90650 Santa Clarita, CA 91355

[X] Office of Planning and Research
1400 Tenth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
DATE: October 22, 2024

PROJECT NAME: Master Case 21 -086: Minor Use Permit 21 -012, Architectural Design Review 21 - 015, and Development Review 21-011

PROJECT APPLICANT: Harvard 826 Property, LLC

PROJECT LOCATION: 26111-26135 Bouquet Canyon Road
(Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 2811-003-016, -017, and -018)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant, Harvard 826 Property, LLC, is requesting a Minor Use Permit (MUP) to construct the Promenade Flats Mixed -Use Project on a 1.2 -acre site at 26111 -26135 Bouquet Canyon Road. The project would construct a new four -story mixed -use building in the parking lot behind an existing restaurant building and would also construct a new parking lot on vacant land in the southwest corner of the commercial center. The new building would include 7,234 square feet of commercial space on the first floor with 30 one - bedroom apartments on the upper floors, along with rooftop amenity space for residents. Four of the apartments would be live-work units, providing an additional 1,640 square feet of commercial space. The project site is within the Mixed-Use Corridor (MXC) zone. The project was approved at an administrative hearing on April 17, 2024 and was then appealed to the Planning Commis sion. On June 18, 2024, the Planning Commission voted 4-1 to deny the appeal and affirm the project approval. Subsequently, Cornerstone Realty Advisors, on behalf of Cinema Park, LLC filed an appeal of the Planning Commission decision to the City Council.

This is to advise that the [ ] Hearing Officer [ ] Planning Commission [X] City Council of the City of Santa Clarita approved the above project on October 22, 2024. Review of the project by the City Council found that the project is categorically exempt from additional environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act.

EXEMPT STATUS: The project is exempt from additional review under the California Environmental Quality Act as a Class 32 In -Fill Development Projects categorical exemption, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332. A Class 32 exemption consists of projects characterized as in-fill development.

Person or agency carrying out the project: City of Santa Clarita, Community Development Department

This is to certify that the No tice of Exemption with comments/responses and record of project approval is available for public review at:

City of Santa Clarita
Community Development Department
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302
Santa Clarita, California 91355
(661) 255-4330

Contact Person/Title: Andy Olson, Associate Planner

Signature:

1.h
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

MEMORANDUM
Date
: November 16, 2023
To: City of Santa Clarita Planning Department
From: Envicom Corporation, CEQA Environmental Consultants Subj: Assessment of Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01) This document has been prepared for the City of Santa Clarita, as the CEQA lead agency, for consideration of the proposed Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project (the project) located at 26111 Bouquet Canyon Road in the City of Santa Clarita as eligible for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as an infill project . The following documentation and justifications have been compiled pursuant to the 2023 CEQA updates.

Categorical exemptions are defined in CEQA for various types of projects which the Secretary of the Resources Agency of the State of California has determined do not have a significant effect on the environment, and therefore are not subject to further environmental review under CEQA.

The Class 32 exemption (Section 15332 of the State CEQA Guidelines) is intended to promote infill development within urbanized areas. The class consists of environmentally benign infill projects, which are consistent with local general plan and zoning requirements.

Pursuant to Section 15332 of the State CEQA Guidelines, for a project to be eligible for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In -fill Development project, it must meet the following conditions or “Criteria”:

A. The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.

B. The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.

C. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.

D. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.

E. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

1.h
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)

In addition, pursuant to CEQA Section 15300.2, to qualify for a Class 32 Exemption under CEQA, none of the following “Exceptions” can apply to the project:

A. The project and successive projects of the same type in the same place will result in cumulative impacts.

B. There are unusual circumstances creating the reasonable possibility of significant effects.

C. The project may result in damage to scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within an officially designated scenic highway.

D. The project is located on a site that the Department of Toxic Substances Control and the Secretary of the Environmental Protection have identified, pursuant to Government code section 65962.5, as being affected by hazardous wastes or clean-up problems.

E. The project may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource.

The justification for use of a Class 32 Categorical Exemption for the proposed project as an infill development in compliance with CEQA is provided below in the following format: I. Project Description, II. Evaluation of Class 32 Exemption Criteria, III. Consideration of Ex ceptions, and IV. Conclusion.

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Existing Conditions
The project site comprises a total of approximately 1.2 acres located on an existing parking lot for the Santa Clarita Plaza, a small, one -story shopping center with an address of 26111 Bouquet Canyon Road in the Saugus community of the City of Santa Clarita . The project site is located between Santa Clarita Plaza to the south, Cinema Park shopping center to the north, the Las Flores Apartments to the west and an IHOP restaurant to the east. The proposed building is located on the same parcel as the IHOP restaurant. Access is provided from two existing driveways to Bouquet Canyon Road. Bouquet Canyon Road is a six -lane major arterial running north-south. It connects to Valencia Boulevard, a nine -lane major arterial, approximately 0.25 miles to the north. West of the intersection Valencia Boulevard curves south behind the project site approximately 0.25 miles away. Cinema Drive, a three-lane road located 200 feet north of the project site, runs east -west and connects Bouquet Canyon Road to Valencia Boulevard. Magic Mountain Parkway, another major arterial connects to Bouquet Canyon Road approximately .25 miles south.

The south fork of the Santa Clara River is approximately 400 feet west of the project site, and the Santa Clara River itself a little over .25 miles to the north. T o the east on the other side of Bouquet Canyon Road are railroad tracks and a series of hills. Apart from these physical barriers buildable land surrounding the project site is mostly developed. Industrial, light industrial, and commercial uses are located south of the site below Magic Mountain Parkway. Southwest of the site below the Parkway are large residential subdivisions. North and west of the site commercial developments appear to occupy all of the available buildable land.

1.h
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)

Project
The proposed project consists of the construction, operation, and maintenance of a 52,418 square- foot, four -story mixed -use building with 26 one -bedroom residential units, four one -bedroom live/work units, and seven commercial suites. Total residential floor area is 43,512 square -feet and total commercial floor area is 14,394 square -feet. Commercial floor area includes 7,266 square-feet of commercial suites, 1,640 of live/work area, and 5,488 square -feet for the existing IHOP restaurant located on the east end of the parcel. The first floor of the new building will contain the commercial suites plus a residential lobby, the second and third floors will contain eight one-bedroom units, two live/work units, and a residential amenity room, the fourth floor will contain 10 one-bedroom units plus a terrace, and there will be a deck with BBQ area on the rooftop for residents. In addition to the mixed-use building 41 new parking spaces will be built on a 0.33-acre vacant parcel south of the project site behind (west) the Santa Clarita Plaza shopping center.

The project would require the following land use entitlements from the City of Santa Clarita:

• A Development Review (DR) to review the proposed development; • An Architectural Design Review (ADR) to review the proposed architecture; and, • Minor Use Permit (MUP) for development in the MXC zone that does not meet the minimum commercial square footage and for live/work quarters.

Construction
The site of the proposed building is previously developed, and the site of the proposed parking lot has been previously graded. The asphalt parking lot will be removed, but no import or export of soil is proposed as earthwork is expected to be balanced on site with existing soils excavated and recompacted.

II. EVALUATION OF CLASS 32 EXEMPTION CRITERIA
The following subsections provide discussion and analysis of the project’s consistency with the criteria listed in Section 15332 of the State CEQA Guidelines, for a project to be eligible for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-fill Development project.

A. The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.

The project site is zoned MXC (Mixed-Use Corridor), and the land use designation is Mixed-Use Corridor (MXC)

1. Both the zoning and the land use designation allow a residential density up to 30 dwelling units per acre and maximum FAR of 1.0 for a non -residential component. The proposed project has 25 units per acre and a FAR of approximately 0.27.

1 City of Santa Clarita, Mapping Your City application, Accessed June 21, 2023 at https://maps.santa- clarita.com/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=4b3cfb271314475db6518999b4747876

1.h
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)

The project meets the development standards for the zone and is contextually appropriate for the location given the existing adjacent commercial and residential uses , and there fore is consistent with the applicable policies and regulations of the General Plan and zoning designation and meets criteria A.

B. The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.

The project site is approximately 1.2 acres and is located within an urbanized area within the City of Santa Clarita. The project site is an existing parking lot located between Santa Clarita Plaza shopping center to the south, Cinema Park shopping center to the north, the Las Flores Apartments to the west and an IHOP restaurant to the east. Physical barriers such as the Santa Clara River and its south fork to the north, south and west, and railroad tracks and hills to the east preclude development in those locations , but the area is otherwise nearly completely urbanized.

The area bordered by Valencia Boulevard to the north and west, Bouquet Canyon Road to the East, and Magic Mountain Parkway to the south , where the project site is located, is fully developed primarily with commercial uses, but also includes some multi-family residential south of the project site . East of Valencia Boulevard along Magic Mountain Parkway are a string of auto dealerships and more large commercial shopping centers. Therefore, the project meets criteria B.

C. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.

The site of the proposed mixed-use building is a paved parking lot with some minor landscaping.

There is no potential habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species on the site. The vacant lot where the new parking will be constructed is surrounded by asphalt pavement and buildings and is covered in non-native annual grasses and ruderal species. There are no shrubs or trees or native flowering plants that may attract native species for nesting or feeding , and therefore no habitat that could potentially support some endangered, rare or threatened species , as these are species with specific habitat needs. The project therefore meets criteria C.

D. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.

Traffic Effects
The project would have a significant impact if it would conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 150 64.3(b)(1) relating to Vehicle M iles Traveled (VMT). A transportation memorandum by LSA
2 determined, per the City’s Transportation Analysis Updates in Santa Clarita document published May 2020, that the project meets the City’s VMT screening criteria.

The Transportation Analysis Updates in Santa Clarita recommends that locally serving retail uses (less than 50,000 sf) and residential uses located in a low VMT area are screened from a VMT analysis. The project is located in a low VMT area and includes 8,906 square-feet of commercial floor space in the building (first floor commercial plus live/ workspace). If the existing IHOP

2 Transportation Memorandum for the Santa Clarita Plaza Project, LSA, April 28, 2022.

1.h
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)

restaurant located on the same parcel was included in the calculation the total would only amount to 14,394 square-feet, well below the screening criteria. Because construction traffic is temporary, there is no permanent increase in VMT and effectively no VMT related impacts. The memorandum discusses other transportation considerations but for the purposes of a Class 32 Categorical Exemption traffic impacts are limited to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b)(1) .

Therefore, there would be no significant effects relating to traffic.

Noise Effects
A noise study was prepared for the project by LSA Associates to evaluate potential noise impacts expected to result from the proposed project.
3 Both construction and operational impacts were
assessed.

Existing Conditions
Short-term and long-term noise measurements were made in order to determine existing ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project site. Short term noise measurements were conducted on a Wednesday and Thursday, January 25 and 26, 20 21 at three locations adjacent to the project site. Long term noise measurements were conducted on the same dates for 24 hours at two locations. The results are shown in Table 1, Project Site Ambient Noise Measurements.

Table 1
Project Site Ambient Noise Measurements
Number Location1 Leq2 Lmax3 Lmin4 Primary Noise Sources Short Term-1 26135 Bouquet
Canyon Road

69.1 84.0 52.0 Traffic on Bouquet Canyon Road
Short Term-2 26135 Bouquet
Canyon Road

51.8 66.4 46.2 Traffic on Bouquet Canyon Road
Short Term-3 26123 Bouquet
Canyon Road

52.3 71.4 44.6 Traffic on Bouquet Canyon Road
Number Location Leq CNEL5 Primary Noise Sources
Long Term-1 26135 Bouquet
Canyon Road

47.9-59.7 62.0 Traffic on Bouquet Canyon Road,
Metrolink trains, commercial activity.

Long Term-2 26135 Bouquet
Canyon Road

46.1-61.9 60.4 Traffic on Bouquet Canyon Road,
Metrolink trains, commercial activity.

Source: LSA Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis Memorandum, Attachment B. 1 See noise study for precise locations.
2 Leq is the average noise level equivalent to the energy content of the time period. 3 Lmax is the maximum measured sound level
4 Lmin is the minimum measured sound level
5 CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level, a weighted average of noise over a 24 hour period

3 LSA, Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis Memorandum for the proposed Promenade Flats Project at 26135 Bouquet Canyon Road in Santa Clarita, California, August 9, 2023

1.h
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)

Noise Standards
Section 11.44.040 of the City’s Municipal Code has established daytime and nighttime exterior noise limits in regions designated as residential, and commercial and manufacturing, as shown in Table 2, Santa Clarita Maximum Exterior Noise Limits.

Table 2
Santa Clarita Maximum Exterior Noise Limits
Area Time Period dBA
Residential Day 7AM – 9PM 65
Night 9PM-7AM 55
Commercial &
Manufacturing
Day 7AM – 9PM 80
Night 9PM-7AM 70
Source: Santa Clarita MC Section 11.44.040

Construction
The Santa Clarita Municipal Code requires construction to take place between 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM on weekdays, 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM on Saturdays , and no construction is allowed on Sundays or national holidays (SCMC Section 11.44.080). The City does not set any limits on the level of construction noise, only allowed hours . Provided the project respects the allowed construction hours, as it must, it would comply with the standards . However, a significant increase in noise above accepted nuisance thresholds could constitute an impact. Therefore, project construction noise was estimated and compared to the 80 dBA Leq standard for noise impacts at a residential use utilized by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). The FTA does not have jurisdiction over the project, however, it is helpful to compare the project to a standardized threshold to evaluate potential impacts.

The noise study calculates that the worst-case combined noise level during construction would be during the grading phase if/when a grader, bulldozer, and water truck are in use at the same time.

The combined noise generated during such a scenario would be 88 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from the active construction area. When the usage factor of the equipment is added to the equation (the percentage of time during construction that a piece of equipment is operating at full power, i.e., producing peak noise), the worst -case scenario drops to 84 dBA Leq at a distance of 50 feet. Noise energy dissipates over distance so any receptor further than 50 feet away would experience less noise than the projected Lmax and Leq. The nearest residences are approximately 175 feet west of the proposed new building, and 75 feet north of the proposed new parking lot.

Max noise emanating from the site of the new building would be 73 dBA Leq (77 Lmax) at the residences, and max noise emanating from the site of the new parking lot would be 78 dBA Leq (82 Lmax) at the residences. The average noise level (Leq) in both instances would be below the 80 dBA Leq FTA standard, therefore, project construction would not result in significant effects relating to noise.

1.h
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)

Operation
The project will introduce new traffic trips to the area which will add to existing traffic noise, and introduce new stationary equipment, such as HVAC equipment, to the project site. Existing traffic noise on Bouquet Canyon Road was calculated in the Noise Study. With an estimated ADT (average daily trips) of 37,650 daily trips at 112 feet from the centerline of the road the noise level is calculated at 70 dBA CNEL. The project is anticipated to add 636 ADT to the area, resulting in an estimated 38,286 ADT. This increase would not change perceptible noise levels as a doubling of traffic is necessary to produce a 3 dBA increase in noise, which is a change perceptible to the human ear only in an enclosed environment. The addition of 636 ADT would only increase noise by 0.07 dBA and therefore would not be perceptible and not result in an impact. Noise generated by the coming -and-going of vehicles from the new development would add to noise in the existing driveways and parking lots, however, the amount of activity would not be intense enough to create a doubling of noise in the immediate area and should not create a perceptible increase in noise. Vehicles traveling at a slow speed, as through a parking lot, do not generate the same amount of noise as high speed traffic, and impacts from the general activity of the proposed project would not result in a significant noise impact.

New stationary noise sources introduced by the project would primarily be 40 new HVAC units on the rooftop. According to the noise study each commercial HVAC unit would generate a sound power level (SWL) that ranges between 76.0 dBA and 79.0 dBA, which would be equivalent to noise levels of 44.4 dBA Leq and 47.4 dBA Leq at a distance of 50 ft. Each HVAC unit associated with residential uses would generate a sound pressure level (SPL) ranging between 36.3 dBA Leq and 39.3 dBA Leq at a distance of 50 ft . The composite noise level of all 40 HVAC units would be 56.2 dBA at a distance of 50 ft. As the units are on top of the roof they are attenuated by the roofline, and the parapet surrounding the roofline, which would reduce noise by a minimum of 8 dBA. At the existing residential units the noise generated by HVAC units on the proposed building would result in 37.6 dBA Leq, and the nearest commercial structure would experience 49.1 dBA Leq. The amount of noise generated by HVAC units would therefore be below the noise measured (Leq) at each short- term monitoring location as shown in Table 1 .

Therefore, noise from the HVAC units would not result in a noticeable change in the intensity of noise (3 dBA or greater), would not violate City noise limits shown in Table 2, and would not result in a significant impact.

Therefore, as demonstrated, neither project construction nor project operation would not result in significant noise impacts.

Potential vibration impacts were also assessed in the noise study but are not presented here as they are not considered in the evaluation of a Categorical Exemption. The study found no significant impacts according to thresholds not applicable to the project’s Class 32 exemption.

1.h
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)

Air Quality Effects
An air quality study was prepared for the project by LSA Associates to evaluate potential air quality impacts expected to result from the proposed project. 4 Both project construction and operations were assessed.

Air Quality
The primary regulator of air quality in the area is the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), the agency responsible for air pollution control within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), of which Los Angeles County is part of. Rules and regulations promulgated by the SCAQMD are derived from the federal Clean Air Act and state Clean Air Act which mimics the federal legislation and provides stricter controls in certain instances. The primarily regulatory and policy document the SCAQMD is tasked with implementing is the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) which is developed by the SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). SCAG develops portions of the AQMP that address transportation control measures, land use, and growth projections within districts that have not met air quality standards.

The 2022 AQMP relies on the growth estimates and transportation control measures found in the SCAG 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2020 -2045 RTP/SCS). The SCAQMD has established project-level significance thresholds which are used to assess regional and localized impacts of project -related criteria pollutant emissions. Non - exceedance of these thresholds is used to determine consistency with the AQMP. According to the AQMP, the principal contributor to air quality challenges in the air basin is mobile source emissions.

The project’s maximum daily emissions of criteria air pollutants during construction w ere estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2011.1. Projects in the SCAQMD with daily emissions that exceed any of the following emission thresholds may be considered significant for purposes of an evaluation under CEQA.

Table 3
SCAQMD CEQA Daily Emissions Thresholds
Pollutant Construction Operations
Reactive Organic Gasses (ROG) 75 55
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) 100 55
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 550
Particulate Matter (PM-10) 150 150
Particulate Matter (PM-2.5) 55 55
Sulphur Oxides (SOX) 150 150
Source: SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Significance Thresholds. Revision March 2023.

Construction activity emissions are modeled based on the size of the project site, the amount and character of demolition activities , the estimated soil excavation and export, and construction of

4 LSA, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis Memorandum for the proposed Promenade Flats Project in Santa Clarita, California, August 23, 2023

1.h
Packet Pg. 100
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)

site features. The following table summarizes the project’s maximum daily emissions estimated by CalEEMod for short-term construction.

Table 4
Maximum Daily Construction Emissions (pounds/day)
Daily Emissions VOC NOX CO SO2 PM-10 PM-2.5
Construction1
Max. Daily Construction Emissions 3 19 18 <1 4 2
SCAQMD Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55
Significant Impact? Y/N No No No No No No
Source: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis Memorandum, Attachment C 1 Construction emissions reflect required compliance with fugitive dust control per SCAQMD Rule 403.

As shown in the table, the project would not exceed SCAQMD significance thresholds for air quality impacts.

Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) were developed to evaluate ambient air quality on a local level in addition to the more regional emissions -based thresholds of significance. The LST methodology addresses specific emissions, namely oxides of nitrogen (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM -10 and PM-2.5). LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard, and they are developed based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each source receptor area and distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. Sensitive receptors are populations with the greatest sensitivity to air pollution exposure and include elderly, young children, the acutely and chronically ill, and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise. The closest sensitive receptors that could potentially be subject to localized air quality impacts associated with construction of the proposed project would be the residences to the west, because they may be occupied for extended periods, and residents may be outdoors when exposure is highest.

This evaluation is based on maximum daily onsite construction emissions that would occur during any phase of project construction. Daily averages would be lower than the reported maximum amounts. Table 5, Project Construction Related LST Evaluation below shows the relevant threshold and the estimated peak daily onsite emissions during the construction phases that would generate the highest level of onsite emissions for each pollutant evaluated for LST impacts.

As shown in the table, the project’s maximum daily onsite construction emissions would not exceed the relevant LST screening table thresholds for LST -related criteria pollutants, and impacts would be less than significant.

1.h
Packet Pg. 101
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)

Table 5
Project Construction Related LST Evaluation
LST 1.2 acre/25 meters Project Construction LST Emissions (pounds/day) NOx CO PM-10 PM-2.5
Peak Onsite Daily Emissions 16 16 1 1
LST Threshold 124 647 4 3
Significant Impact? Yes/No No No No No
Source: LSA Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis Memorandum, Attachment C LST variables: Santa Clarita Valley, 1.2 acre, 25 meter receptor distance Construction emissions reflect required compliance with fugitive dust control per SCAQMD Rule 403.

Operational air quality impacts were assessed and the results are presented in Table 6, Maximum Daily Operations Emissions (pounds/day).

Table 6
Maximum Daily Operations Emissions (pounds/day)

As shown above, project operations would not result in the violation of any SCAQMD thresholds and there would be no significant impacts.

Odors
During construction h eavy‐duty equipment use would emit odors, however, construction‐ produced odors would be intermittent and cease to occur after each workday and once construction is completed. No other sources of objectionable odors would be present during construction. During operations the project would not be expected to produce objectionable odors as the use, residential units and a commercial component are not the type of use that results in the production of significant odor impacts such as oil refineries, agricultural use, or some industrial uses. Odor impacts would be less than significant.

Potential greenhouse gas impacts were also assessed in the LSA study but are not presented here as they are not considered in the evaluation of a Categorical Exemption. The study found no significant impacts according to analysis that is not applicable to the project’s Class 32 exemption.

Emissions Sources VOC NOX CO SO2 PM-10 PM-2.5
Area 1 <1 2 <1 <1 <1
Energy <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Mobile 2 1 15 <1 3 <1
Total 3 0.16 17 <0.00 3 <1
SCAQMD Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55
Significant Impact? Y/N No No No No No No
Source: LSA Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis Memorandum, Attachment C

1.h
Packet Pg. 102
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)

Water Quality Effects
The proposed project would add a structure and landscaping to a site that is currently covered by impervious surfaces and would add an impervious surface to a lot that is currently undeveloped.

This w ill not result in significant effects to water quality either during construction or post - construction. According to Section 10.04.070 of the Santa Clarita Municipal Code the project must produce a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to issuance of grading or building permits. The plan must demonstrate which Best Management Practices (BMPs) are to be employed to retain sediments from areas disturbed by construction; retain construction -related materials, wastes, spills, or residues; contain runoff from equipment and vehicle washing; and control any potential erosion. The project will be required to submit a SWPPP, to demonstrate code compliance to the satisfaction of the City prior to final plan approval. Compliance with these regulations would ensure no significantly impacts to water quality during construction.

A hydrology report from CRC Enterprises
5 evaluated the existing conditions of the site, the
proposed conditions, and the proposed stormwater system and determined the project meets the requirements of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works LID Manual. The proposed building is not adding any new impervious surfaces to the site, as the site is currently paved. As such, runoff from the new building will be routed into the existing drainage network as the system adequately handles the required 50 -year storm event threshold (0.95 inches). The new parking lot adds new impervious area to the site and as such adds an underground infiltration trench within the confines of the new lot to capture stormwater from a 0.95 inch rain event within its drainage area. The report determines the overall drainage design of the site is adequately designed to handle runoff from a 50-year storm event, and is consistent with the requirements of the County of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works. T herefore, operation of the project would not result in significant impacts to water quality.

E. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

The project site is located within an existing shopping center surrounded by commercial buildings to the north, south, and east, and a multifamily residential complex to the west. All necessary utilities are present and serving the shopping center or existing apartment complex and will be available for the new development. Water and sewer capacity is available for the project. As stated in the SCV Water 20 20 Urban Water Management Plan existing and planned water supplies are adequate to meet demand during normal, single and multiple -dry year periods through 2050 within the SCV Water service area, based upon their growth assumptions. Project sewage will be treated at the Saugus Water Reclamation Plant which has a design capacity of 6.5 million gallons of wastewater per day (MGD) and is currently processing 5.2 MGD, and therefore has capacity to serve the project.
6 5
Hydrology Report, 2611-26135 Bouquet Canyon Road, CRC Enterprises, April 18, 2023 6 5.2 MGD estimate from email correspondence with Basil Hewitt, Public Information Supervisor with Los Angeles County Sanitation District on June 28, 2023.

1.h
Packet Pg. 103
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)

A small mixed -use residential building would not require an expansion of any necessary public services, such as police, fire, or garbage collection, all of which currently serve the site and area.

Therefore, the site can be adequately served by required utilities and public services.

III. CONSIDERATION OF EXCEPTIONS
Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Statutes and Guidelines provides a list of exceptions for consideration of a project as categorically exempt. As listed in the City’s Class 32 Requirements, those exceptions relevant to the Class 32 Categorical Exemption, and justification that none of the Exceptions would apply to the proposed project are discussed below:

A. Cumulative Impact – The project and successive projects of the same type in the same place would not result in cumulative impacts.

The project would be constructed within an urbanized area of the City on a previously developed site, consistent with the General Plan land use designation and zoning , and consistent with the land use assumptions that underlie the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy , the regional document certified by CARB to meet the State’s 2035 GHG reduction targets. The project therefore falls within anticipated growth rates for the City and region. In the 6 th cycle Regional
Housing Needs Allocation Santa Clarita has been allocated 10,031 housing units for which it must identify suitable sites to accommodate that amount of new housing. The project provides 30 housing units toward th e allocation and projects of the same type in the same area would add more. As infill redevelopment the project is providing new housing and commercial space in the most efficient and environmentally benign manner possible. As such, the project and others of its type would contribute to the required housing needs of the City in an efficient manner and would not be anticipated to result in cumulative impacts.

B. Unusual Circumstances – There are no unusual circumstances that would create a reasonable possibility of significant effects.

The project site is already developed, as are the parcels surrounding it, and the existing shopping center and apartments have been in operation for decades. There is nothing unusual about the project site or setting with the exception of the south fork of the Santa Clara River west of the project site. This is unusual only in that it is not typical. All of the development in the immediate area is in proximity to the south fork or the main channel, and as far as the project is concerned, as infill redevelopment surrounded by development that is near the south fork, it is not an unusual circumstance of concern. Regardless, the presence of the south fork nearby is not an unusual circumstance that could reasonably be argued to result in the project creating a significant impact.

C. Scenic Highways – The project would not result in damage to scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within an officially designated scenic highway.

The closest potential State Scenic Highway to the project site is a portion of Interstate 5 that is eligible for designation, beginning where it intersects Highway 14 and ending where it intersects

1.h
Packet Pg. 104
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)

Highway 126. The project site is not near or visible from the interstate and would not result in damage to any scenic resources associated with it.

D. Hazardous Waste Sites – The project is not located on a site that the Department of Toxic Substances Control and the Secretary of the Environmental Protection have identified, pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5, as being affected by hazardous wastes or clean-up problems.

The Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database 7 indicates there are no
existing or past hazardous waste facilities or cleanup sites within 1,000 feet of the project site.

The State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker 8 database indicates that the United Oil gas station located at 26015 Bouquet Canyon Road is the site of a former LUST (leaking underground storage tank) cleanup. A leak was detected in 1986 and a vapor extraction well was installed in 1987. The site underwent soil vapor extraction from 1989 to 1991. The USTs present at the site were all removed and replaced in 1999. The case was closed in 2006 when there were no detectable traces of pollutants in nearby monitoring wells.

The project site itself is not associated with any record in the Cortese List (the resource list compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5), as indicated via the EnviroStor database and the State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker database. The United Oil station is not close enough to the project site to have been affected by it, and the case has been closed at the satisfaction of the DTSC. Therefore, the project is not located on a site that the Department of Toxic Substances Control and the Secretary of the Environmental Protection have identified, pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5, as being affected by hazardous wastes or clean-up problems.

E. Historical Resources – The project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource.

Neither the project site nor any properties in the immediate vicinity of the project site have been designated as historic resource s or identified as a potential historic resources in the Cultural and Historical Resources section of the Conservation and Open Space element of the General Plan, or the Historic Preservation Survey & Planning Analysis from August 2009. There are no structures on the site , construction of the project would not require demolition or modification of any structures, and none of the adjacent structures are identified as potential historic resources nor would they be eligible as such as all were constructed in or after 1987, therefore, the project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource.

7 Department of Toxic Substances Control, EnviroStor, Accessed June 22, 2023 at:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/.
8 State Water Resources Control Board, GeoTracker, Accessed June 22, 2023 at:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress=26111+bouquet+canyon+rd.

1.h
Packet Pg. 105
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)

IV. CONCLUSION
Based on the above information and attached documentation, this analysis shows t hat development of the proposed Canyon Countr y Energy Storage project would be consistent with the criteria for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption per CEQA Statute Section 15332.

Attachments:

Attachment A – Transportation Memorandum
Attachment B – Noise Study
Attachment C – Air Quality Study
Attachment D – Hydrology Report

1.h
Packet Pg. 106
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)

Attachment A
Transportation Memorandum

1.h
Packet Pg. 107
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

CARLSBAD
CLOVIS
IRVINE
LOS ANGELES
PALM SPRINGS
POINT RICHMOND

RIVERSIDE

ROSEVILLE
SAN LUIS OBISPO
20 Executive Park, Suite 200, Irvine, California  92614     949.553.0666     www.lsa.net

MEMORANDUM
DATE:  April 28, 2022
TO:  Robert Neman, Harvard 826 Property LLC, Manager
FROM:  Dean Arizabal, LSA, Principal
SUBJECT:  Transportation Memorandum for the Santa Clarita Plaza Project (LSA Project No. HAV2001)
The purpose of this transportation memorandum is to describe and document potential transportation impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed Santa Clarita Plaza Project (project). This technical information is provided for project review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Harvard 826 Property LLC is proposing to construct 30 multifamily residential units (inclusive of four live/work units), 7,266.1 square feet (sf) of first‐floor retail space, and a 3,027.4 sf rooftop yoga studio in a four‐story building at 26135 Bouquet Canyon Road in Santa Clarita (Figures 1 and 2; all figures are in Attachment
A). The approximately 1.2‐acre project site is located along the west side of Bouquet Canyon Road, north of Magic Mountain Parkway and south of Cinema Drive (Assessor’s Parcel No. 2811‐003‐018) in the community of Valencia. Access to the project site will be provided via an existing full‐ access driveway on Bouquet Canyon Road.

TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
This section includes an analysis of the project’s impacts to the transportation system based on the significance thresholds in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines and provides a thorough justification for the conclusions provided herein.

Regulatory Setting
The following is a summary of State, regional, and local regulations that apply to transportation and circulation within the project study area.

State
Senate Bill 743. On September 27, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill (SB) 743 into law and codified a process that revises the approach to determining transportation impacts and mitiga
tion measures under CEQA. SB 743 directed the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to administer new CEQA guidance for jurisdictions by replacing the focus on automobile vehicle delay and level of service (LOS) or other similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic

1.h
Packet Pg. 108
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

4/28/22 «P:\HAV2001\Traffic\Transportation Memo2.docx»
2 congestion in the transportation impact analysis with vehicle miles traveled (VMT). This change shifts the focus of the transportation impact analysis from measuring impacts to drivers, such as the amount of delay and LOS at an intersection, to measuring the impact of driving on the local, regional, and statewide circulation system and the environ ment. This shift in focus is expected to better align the transportation impact analysis with the statewide goals related to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, encouraging infill development, and promoting public health through active transportation. As a result of SB 743, the California Office of Administrative Law cleared the revised State CEQA Guideli
nes on December 28, 2018, with a statewide implementation date of July 1, 2020. The OPR Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (OPR Technical Advisory)1 provides a resource for agencies to use at their discretion.

Regional
Southern California Association of Governments. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is an association of county and city governments to address regional transportation issues. Its members include six counties (Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura) and 191 cities in an area covering more than 38 ,000 square miles. As the federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization and the State‐designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency, SCAG is responsible for developing long‐range regional transportation plans, including sustainable communities strategy and growth forecast components, regional transportation improvement programs, regional housing needs allocations, and a portion of the South Coast Air Quality
Management District plans.

Local
City of Santa Clarita. The project is located in Santa Clarita. As such, the Circulation Element of the City of Santa Clarita General Plan2 and Transportation Analysis Updates in Santa Clarita3 are the guidance documents for the City of Santa Clarita (City) transportation system. These guidelines are intended to ensure that the traffic impacts of a development proposal on the existing and/or planned major street system are adequately addressed. Transportation Analysis Updates in Santa Clarita states that intersections where a project would add 50 or more net new trips durin g the a.m. and p.m. peak hours should be included in a Local Transportation Assessment (LTA).4

1   Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. 2018. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. December. p. 12.
2   City of Santa Clarita. 2011. Circulation Element. City of Santa Clarita General Plan. June. Website:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SantaClarita/html/SantaClaritaGP/4%20‐%20Circulation%20 Element.pdf (accessed December 2020).
3   City of Santa Clarita. 2020. Transportation Analysis Updates in Santa Clarita. May. Website: https://santa‐ clarita.com/Home/ShowDocument?id=18536 (accessed December 2020). 4   Ibid.

1.h
Packet Pg. 109
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

4/28/22 «P:\HAV2001\Traffic\Transportation Memo2.docx»
3 Environmental Setting
Existing Circulation System
Bouquet Canyon Road is a five‐lane, north‐south roadway (three northbound lanes and three southbound lanes) along the project frontage. Bouquet Canyon Road is classified as a Major Highway in the Circulation Element of the City of Santa Clarita General Plan.1 A sidewalk is provided on the west side of the street. On‐street parking is permitted in select locations on the west side of the street.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. In order to assess the impact of the project on the surrounding circulation system, vehicle trips were generated for temporary construction activities based on the anticipated nu
mber of workers and trucks, as well as for typical operations of the project.

Construction of the project is anticipated to take approximately 66 weeks and will include the following five phases (daily worker and truck estimates and phase durations):
 Phase 1: Site Preparation (8 workers per day for 1 week)  Pha
se 2: Grading (10 workers per day for 1 week)
 Phase 3: Building Construction (32 workers and 7 vendor trucks per day for 58 weeks)  Phase 4: Paving (15 workers per day for 3 weeks)
 Phase 5: Architectural Coating (6 workers per day for 3 weeks) It is assumed that workers would arrive at the site in the a.m. peak hour and dep art the site during
the p.m. peak hour. Truck trips are anticipated to occur throughout the day. A passenger car equivalent (PCE) factor of 2.0 has been applied to the trucks.

Tables A and B (all tables provid ed in Attachment B) present the construction and operational trip generation for the project.

As shown in Table A, Phase 3 (Building Construction) is the period of construction with the highest trip generation. Over approximately 58 weeks, Phase 3 is anticipated to generate 92 average daily trips (ADT), i
ncluding 36 trips (34 inbound and 2 outbound) in the a.m. peak hour and 36 trips (2 inbound and 34 outbound) in the p.m. peak hour, in PCEs. All other construction phases would generate 30 or fewer ADT, including 15 or fewer peak‐hour trips, in PCEs.

1   City of Santa Clarita. 2011. Circulation Element. City of Santa Clarita General Plan. June. Website:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SantaClarita/html/SantaClaritaGP/4%20‐%20Circulation%20 Element.pdf (accessed December 2020).

1.h
Packet Pg. 110
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

4/28/22 «P:\HAV2001\Traffic\Transportation Memo2.docx»
4 The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition,1 is a nationally recognized source for estimating site‐specific trip generation. The ITE trip rates for Land Use Code 221 (Multifamily Housing [Mid‐Rise]), Land Use Code 822 (Strip Retail Plaza), and Land Use Code 492 (Health/Fitness Club) were applied to the project uses. As shown on Table B, the project has the potential to gene
rate 636 ADT, including 32 trips (15 inbound and 17 outbound) in the a.m. peak hour and 70 trips (37 inbound and 33 outbound) in the p.m. peak hour.

The project would generate a maximum of 36 peak‐hour trips for any period of construction and a maximum
of 32 a.m. and 70 p.m. peak‐hour trips once the project is operational. According to Transportation Analysis Updates in Santa Clarita, intersections where a project would add 50 or more net new trips during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours should be included in an LTA.2 The project would not generate 50 or more trips during both peak hours, and the project would not contribute 50 or more peak‐hour trips to any surrounding intersections. As such, the project is not anticipated to result in any LOS or operational deficiencies to the surrounding circulation system based on its low number of trips for temporary cons
truction and typical operations.

The project would not make any changes to the public right‐of way in the project vicinity or generate a substantial number of daily or peak‐hour vehicle trips for construction or typical operations to warrant modifications to any transportation facili ties (e.g., vehicular, transit, bicycle, or pedestrian). The project would not preclude alternative modes of transportation or facilities (e.g., transit, bicycle, or pedestrian). Therefore, the project would not conflict with the Circulation Element of the City of Santa Clarita General Plan. No mitigation is required. b. Would the project conflict or be inc onsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, Subdivision (b)?
Less Than Significant Impact. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), states that transportation impacts for land use projects are to be measured by evaluating the project’s VMT or the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to the project, as outlined in the following:

Vehicle miles traveled exce
eding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact. Generally, projects within one‐half mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high‐quality transit corridor should be presumed to cause a less than significant t ransportation  impact.

The OPR Technical Advisory and Transportation Analysis Updates in Santa Clarita both provide guidance for screening land use projects from a detailed VMT analysis and the presumption of a less than significant transportation impact, such as project size, locally serving retail use, and project located in a low VMT area.

1   Institute of Transportation Engineers. 2021. Trip Generation Manual. 11th ed. 2   City of Santa Clarita. 2020. Transportation Analysis Updates in Santa Clarita. May. Website: https://santa‐ clarita.com/Home/ShowDocument?id=18536 (accessed December 2020).

1.h
Packet Pg. 111
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

4/28/22 «P:\HAV2001\Traffic\Transportation Memo2.docx»
5 Transportation Analysis Updates in Santa Clarita recommends that locally serving retail uses (less than 50,000 sf) and residential uses located in a low VMT area (a City‐identified area that is already 15 percent below the baseline VMT) are screened from a VMT analysis.1 The project includes 10,293.5 sf of locally serving retail use (7,2661 sf of first‐floor retail space and a 3,027.4 sf yoga studio) and is located in a low VMT area (as shown in Figure 5 of Transportation Analysis Updates in Santa Clarita [provided in Attachment C]). Because the project meets the City’s VMT screenin
g criteria, it is not subject to a VMT analysis and is presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact.

As such, the proposed would not conflict or be inconsistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b). Potential impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. c. Would the project s
ubstantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less Than Significant Impact. Regional access to the project is provided by Bouquet Canyon Road.

Site access is provided via an existing full‐access driveway on Bouquet Canyon Road. A ccess would not change as part of the project. As such, the project would not substantially increase hazards for vehicles due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses, and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
d. Would the project result in inadequate eme rgency access? Less Than Significant Impact. Site access would not change as part of the project and would continue to be provided from a full‐access driveway on Bouquet Canyon Road. Since the project would not modify the existing configuration of the driveway along Bouquet Canyon Road, emergency access to the si te would not be affected. Therefore, impacts associated with emergency access would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Attachments:  A: Figures 1 and 2
B:  Tables A and B
C:  Figure 5 of Transportation Analysis Updates in Santa Clarita

1   City of Santa Clarita. 2020. Transportation Analysis Updates in Santa Clarita. May. Website: https://santa‐ clarita.com/Home/ShowDocument?id=18536 (accessed December 2020).

1.h
Packet Pg. 112
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) T RANSPORTATION   M EMORANDUM
A PRIL   2022
S ANTA   C LARITA   P LAZA   P ROJECT
S ANTA   C LARITA ,   C ALIFORNIA

P:\HAV2001\Traffic\Transportation Memo2.docx «04/28/22» ATTACHMENT A

FIGURES 1 AND 2

1.h
Packet Pg. 113
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) SOURCE: ArcGIS Online Topographic Map (2020)
Ven tu ra
County
Los
Angeles
County
27 170
126
14 118
405
210
5 I:\HAV2001\G\Project_LocaƟon.ai (6/1/2021)
FIGURE 1
Santa Clarita Plaza
Project LocaƟon
Project Vicinity
FEET
LEGEND
Project Site
0 500 1000
Project Location

1.h
Packet Pg. 114
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

BUILDING DATA

SANTA CLARITA PLAZA APARTMENTS

L E G E N D
[E] IHOP
23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14
12 11 10 9 8765 4 3 2 113
24 27
28 29
30 OPEN
SPACE
12 11
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
13 31
32 33
34 36
37 35
38 127 126 125 124 123 122 121 120 119 118 117 116 115 114 113 112
134
135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 131
130
landscaping landscaping
NEW PARKING AREAlandscaping
74 73 72 71 70 69 68 67 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 59 58 57 56 55 54 189
192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209
149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 75 77
78 76
79 80
82 83
81 84
85 86
91 93
92 94
96 95
97 99
98 100
102
101
103
105
104
106
108
107
109
111
110
87 89
88 90
230
228
227
229
226
225
224
223
222
231
233
234
232
235
237
238
236
221
220
219
218
216
215
214
213
212
211
210
6 8
9 10
11 12

TRANSFORMER

OPEN SPACE

SEPARATED FROM

PARKING BY A WALL
42" HIGH

LANDSCAPE PLANTER
AT THREE (3) FEET IN
WIDTH
SIX (6) FOOT HIGH

MASONRY WALLS
SIX (6) FOOT HIGH

MASONRY WALLS
20' MAX. BETWEEN

TREES, BETWEEN

RESIDENTIAL AND

COMMERCIAL

PATH OF TRAVELPATH OF TRAVEL

LOADING SPACE
IHOP
13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 54 32 125 26
1 2 3
4 5
39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53
7 PATH OF TRAVEL
EXIT

EXIT EXIT EXIT EXIT EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
ENTR
EXIT

ENTR ENTR ENTR
ENTR
ENTR
ENTR
ENTR

PATH OF TRAVEL PATH OF TRAVEL PATH OF TRAVEL

PATH OF TRAVEL

PATH OF TRAVEL
129 128
133
132
187 188
190 191
239

VAN ACCESIBLE
EVCS

STANDARD

ACCESIBLE
EVCS

NOT PART

OF THE PROJECT
SOURCE: CHARC Design
FEET
60300
FIGURE 2
I:\HAV2001\G\Site_Plan.ai (6/1/2021)
Santa Clarita Plaza
Site Plan
LEGEND
Project Site

1.h
Packet Pg. 115
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use T RANSPORTATION   M EMORANDUM
A PRIL   2022
S ANTA   C LARITA   P LAZA   P ROJECT
S ANTA   C LARITA ,   C ALIFORNIA

P:\HAV2001\Traffic\Transportation Memo2.docx «04/28/22» ATTACHMENT B

TABLES A AND B

1.h
Packet Pg. 116
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Duration1
Description No. Type PCE ADT In Out Total In Out Total
Site

1. Preparation 1 week Workers 2
8 Passenger 1 16 8 0 8 0 8 8

2. Grading 1  week Workers 2
10 Passenger 1 20 10 0 10 0 10 10
Workers 2
32 Passenger 1 64 32 0 32 0 32 32
Building Vendor Trucks 2
7 Truck 2 28 2 2 4 2 2 4

3. Construction 58  weeks Total 92 34 2 36 2 34 36

4. Paving 3 weeks Workers 2
15 Passenger 1 30 15 0 15 0 15 15
Architectural

5. Coating 3  weeks Workers 2
6 Passenger 1 12 6 0 6 0 6 6
1 Construction is anticipated to occur from August 2022 to December 2023. 2 Workers are assumed to arrive during the a.m. peak hour and depart during the p.m. peak hour.

Truck trips are assumed to occur throughout the day.

ADT = average daily trips
PCE = passenger car equivalent. A worker vehicle has a PCE of 1 and a truck has a PCE of 2.

PM Peak Hour
Description
Table A: Construction Trip Generation
Construction Phase Daily Vehicles AM Peak Hour
P:\HAV2001\Traffic\xls\trip generation.xlsx\Construction_Apr 2022 (4/28/2022)

1.h
Packet Pg. 117
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) In Out Total In Out   Total
Multifamily Mid‐Rise du 4.54 0.09 0.28 0.37 0.24 0.15 0.39 Retail TSF 54.45 1.42 0.94 2.36 3.30 3.29 6.59
Health/Fitness Club TSF 34.50 0.67 0.64 1.31 1.97 1.48 3.45 Multifamily Mid‐Rise 30 du 136 3 8 11 7 5 12
Retail 7.2661 TSF 396 10 7 17 24 24 48
Health/Fitness Club 3.0274 TSF 104 22464 1 0
Total 636 15 17 32 37 33 70
1 Trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual,  11th Edition (2021).

Land Use Code 221 ‐ Multifamily Housing (Mid‐Rise) ‐ Between 4 and 10 Levels Land Use Code 822‐ Strip Retail Plaza ‐ Less than 40 TSF of Gross Leasable Area Land Use Code 492 ‐ Health/Fitness Club
ADT = average daily trips
du = dwelling unit
TSF = thousand square feet
Trip Rates1
Project Trip Generation
Table B: Project Trip Generation
Land Use Size Unit ADT
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
P:\HAV2001\Traffic\xls\trip generation.xlsx\ITE 11th (4/25/2022)

1.h
Packet Pg. 118
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) T RANSPORTATION   M EMORANDUM
A PRIL   2022
S ANTA   C LARITA   P LAZA   P ROJECT
S ANTA   C LARITA ,   C ALIFORNIA

P:\HAV2001\Traffic\Transportation Memo2.docx «04/28/22» ATTACHMENT C

FIGURE 5 OF TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS UPDATES IN SANTA CLARITA

1.h
Packet Pg. 119
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) /0 /1 /2 /3 /1 /i255 /5 /6 /1 /7 /8 /3 /1
/9/10/10 /11 /6 /1 /2 /11 /12 /i255 /13 /1 /7 /14
/15 /2 /16 /17 /6 /17 /12 /i255/18/19
/20/21/22/23/24/23/20/24
/25/22/26/21/27/28/29/30
/31/27/28/32/33/27/28/34/23/28/35/23/27/32
/31/23/36/21/32/27/32/33/27/28/34/23/28/35/32
/37/38/21/39/36/32/35/23/27/32
/29/36/27/22/21/24/40/41/27/33/27/28/34/23/28/35/23/27/32 /39/36/40/42/21/43/40/21/30
/20/24
/44/40/36/21/34/33/27/28/34/23/28/35/32
/45/23/23/41/38/40/36/36/46/36
/47 /42 /21 /28 /48 /21 /i255 /31 /22 /23 /41 /41
/33 /27 /36 /50 /24 /23 /42 /21 /i255 /46 /36
/33 /23/51/51/21/24 /22 /21 /i255 /33 /21 /28 /41 /21 /24 /i255 /20 /24 /52/34/23/28/53/47/42
/54/21/30/38/27/36/36/47/42
/25/27
/50 /40 /22 /i255
/25/23
/48 /28 /41 /27 /40 /28 /i255 /29 /30
/31/23/36/21/32/27/32/33/27/28/34/23/28/35/23/27/32
/43 /40 /27 /i255 /29 /24 /40 /28 /22 /21 /53 /53 /27
/55/53/22/23/28/32/40/32/23/33/27/28/34/23/28/35/23/27/32 /31/40/21/24/24/27/56/30
/54/21/30/38/27/36/36/35/27/28/22/38/35/32
/33/23/57/57/21/24/56/40/36/36/20/24/40/42/21
/31/40/21/24/24/27/56/40/50/38/30/27/34
/29/23/21/29/30
/47/50/48/27/20/48/36/22/21/33/27/28/34/23/28/35/23/27/32 /25/27/40 /28 /i255 /31 /41
/47 /36 /41 /27 /i255 /43 /40 /53 /41 /27 /i255 /47 /42/37/38/21/39/36/32/35/32 /58 /23 /36 /32 /21 /28 /i255 /43 /27 /36 /36 /21 /34 /i255 /35 /32 /31/21/22/23/33/27/28/34/23/28/35/23/27/32
/25/27
/36 /36 /23 /24 /34 /i255 /20 /24
/20 /27 /42 /21 /28 /57 /23 /24 /41 /i255 /35 /23 /27 /32 /44/21
/53 /41 /24 /40 /32 /50 /21 /i255 /29 /30
/33 /27 /28 /34 /23 /28 /i255 /29 /27 /24 /59 /i255 /46 /36 /31/51/34
/41 /38 /i255 /20 /24
/44/38/40 /41 /21 /53 /i255 /33 /27 /28 /34 /23 /28 /i255 /35 /32 /37/38/21/39/36/32/35/32
/29 /36 /48
/51/i255
/33 /27 /28 /34 /23 /28 /i255 /35 /32
/37 /21 /53 /23 /24 /23 /i255 /20 /21 /36 /i255 /43 /27 /36 /36 /21 /i255 /20 /24 /45/24/27/28/59/36/40/28/29/30/52/27/59/21/56/48/50/38/21/53/35/32 /35 /27 /40 /36 /24 /23 /27 /32 /i255 /47 /42
/58 /23 /36 /32 /21 /28 /i255 /37 /24 /40 /27 /28 /50 /36 /21 /i255 /35 /32 /33 /38 /40 /60 /48 /40 /41 /23 /i255 /33 /27 /28 /34 /23 /28 /i255 /35 /23 /27 /32 /56/40/36/36/22/24/21/53/41/29/27/24/59/30/27/34
/31/27/28/45/24/27/28/22 /40/53/60/48/40/41/23/33/27/28/34/23/28/35/23/27/32 /56/27/53/36/21/34/33/27/28/34/23/28/35/23/27/32
/43/27/53/60/48/21/61/33/27/28/34/23/28/35/23/27/32
/46/23/48/60/48/21/41/33/27/28/34/23/28/35/23/27 /32
/52/40/41/41/36/21/37/48/62/48/28/50/27/33/27/28/34/23/28/35/23/27/32 /63 /64 /65
/63 /66
/67
/68 /69 /70 /71 /69 /i255 /73 /74 /69 /75 /76 /71 /69
/77 /78 /79 /80 /81 /79 /78 /i255 /81 /83 /80 /84 /i255 /85 /86/87/i255/88 /79 /89 /90 /91 /i255 /92 /93 /81 /94 /i255 /95 /80 /96 /79 /89 /93 /84 /79 /95 /79 /81 /91 /79 /79 /84 /i255 /85 /86/87/i255/88 /79 /89 /90 /91 /i255 /92 /93 /81 /94 /i255 /95 /80 /96 /79 /89 /93 /84 /79 /i255 /80 /84 /97 /i255 /92 /93 /81 /94 /i255 /95 /80 /96 /79 /89 /93 /84 /79 /i255 /99 /88 /90 /100 /79 /i255 /73 /76 /71 /101 /i255 /102 /103 /104 /105 /106 /107 /108 /105 /109 /110 /111 /111 /i255 /71 /112 /69 /70 /i255 /113 /114 /i255 /115 /110 /111 /76 /116 /110 /70 /71 /111 /117 /118 /119 /120 /121 /122 /i255 /124
/125 /69 /76 /74 /101 /i255 /126 /127/128/110/129 /130 /69 /111 /110 /116 /i255 /131/132/133/i255 /134 /110 /75 /i255 /73 /69 /134 /76 /71 /69 /73 /127/128/134/69 /75 /110 /116 /i255 /71 /127 /i255 /73 /76 /71 /101 /i255 /135 /136 /110 /75 /69 /137 /110 /i255 /138 /139 /114 /139 /114 /140 The VMT metrics illustrated in Figure 5 can
be used to screen residential projects in low
VMT areas. Specifically, if a residential
project is proposed in a TAZ that has VMT at
least 15 percent lower than the citywide
average, the project would also be expected
to generate VMT at least 15 percent lower
than the citywide average.

Project Site (within a low VMT area of greater than 15% below City baseline)

1.h
Packet Pg. 120
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)

Attachment B
Noise Study

1.h
Packet Pg. 121
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

CARLSBAD
CLOVIS
IRVINE
LOS ANGELES
PALM SPRINGS
POINT RICHMOND

RIVERSIDE

ROSEVILLE
SAN LUIS OBISPO
3210 El Camino Real, Suite 100, Irvine, California  92602     949.553.0666     www.lsa.net

MEMORANDUM
DATE:  August 9, 2023
TO:  Robert Neman, Harvard 826 Property, LLC
FROM:  Jason Lui, Associate/Senior Noise Specialist
SUBJECT:  Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis Memorandum for the proposed Promenade Flats Project at 26135 Bouquet Canyon Road in Santa Clarita, California

INTRODUCTION
This noise and vibration impact analysis has been prepared to evaluate the potential noise and vibration impacts associated with the proposed Promenade Flats Project in Santa Clarita, California (project). This report is intended to satisfy the City of Santa Clarita (City) requirement and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a project‐specific noise and vibration impact analysis by exam
ining the impacts of the proposed uses on the project site and determining whether reduction measures would be required to reduce noise and vibration impacts.

PROJECT LOCATION
The project site is located along the west side of Bouquet Canyon Road, north of Magic Mountain Parkway and south of Cinema Drive at 26135 Bouquet Canyon Road (Assessor’s Parcel Number 2811‐003‐018) in the community of Valencia. The project site has a Mixed Use Corridor (MXC) zoning designation. Figure 1, below, shows the project location.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project would remove a portion of the existing parking lot to accommodate a new four‐story, mixed‐use building on 1.2 acres. The proposed project would include a total of 15,741.50 square feet (ft) of commercial use consisting of a 7,266.10 sf first‐floor retail space, a 3,027.40 sf rooftop yoga studio, and the exi
sting 5,448 sf International House of Pancakes (IHOP) restaurant. In addition to the new commercial uses, the proposed building would include four live/work units and 26 one‐bedroom units on floors two through four. Additionally, a new 14,359 sf (0.33 acre) parking lot would be constructed on an adjacent vacant parcel to offset the parkin g that would be removed as part of the project. Construction of the proposed project would start in August 2022 and would be completed in approximately 16 months. Figure 2 shows the site plan. Figures 3 through 5 show the floor plans of the proposed mixed‐ use building.

1.h
Packet Pg. 122
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) SOURCE: ArcGIS Online Topographic Map (2020)
Ven tu ra
County
Los
Angeles
County
27 170
126
14 118
405
210
5 I:\HAV2001\G\Project_LocaƟon.ai (10/6/2023)
FIGURE 1
Promenade Flats
Project LocaƟon
Project Vicinity
FEET
LEGEND
Project Site
0 500 1000
Project Location

1.h
Packet Pg. 123
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

NOT PART

OF THE PROJECT
SOURCE: CHARC Design
FEET
60300
FIGURE 2
I:\HAV2001\G\Site_Plan.ai (10/6/2023)
Promenade Flats
Site Plan
LEGEND
Project Site

1.h
Packet Pg. 124
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use I:\HAV2001\G\Site_Plan_1st-2nd_Floor.ai (10/6/2023)
FIGURE 3
First and Second Floor Plan
Promenade Flats
UP
A
1 B C D E F G H I J K
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT

EXIT EXIT
EXIT
ENTR
ENTR
ENTR
ENTR
ENTR
ENTR
ENTR
ENTR
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
4 4
4 4
4 4
4 4
4 3
A
1 B C D E F G H I J K
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
7 8
8 8
9 10
11 CMSD
SD
G
7 8
8 11
SD
9 CMSD
G
8 8
8 9
10 11
CMSD
SD
G
7 8
8 8
11 SD
9 CMSD
7 8
8 8
9 10
11 CMSD
G
7 8
8 8
11 SD
9 CMSD
7 8
8 8
9 10
11 CMSD
SD
7 8
8 11
SD
9 CMSD
SD
7 8
8 8
9 G
EXIT
4 CMSD
CMSD
SD
G
7 8
8 9
G
8 SD
G

IN FRONTOF LIFT
EXIT
4 CMSD
G
G
G
G
10 10
10 1
1ST FLOOR
2 2ND FLOOR

PROJECT
NORTH

PROJECT
NORTH
SOURCE: CHARC Design
FEET
50250

1.h
Packet Pg. 125
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use I:\HAV2001\G\Site_Plan_3rd-4th_Floor.ai (10/6/2023)
FIGURE 4
Third and Fourth Floor Plan
Promenade Flats
SOURCE: CHARC Design
FEET
50250
UP
A
1 B C D E F G H I J K
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
7 8
8 8
9 10
11 CMSD
SD
G
7 8
8 11
SD
9 CMSD
G
8 8
8 9
10 11
CMSD
SD
G
7 8
8 8
11 SD
9 CMSD
7 8
8 8
9 10
11 CMSD
G
7 8
8 8
11 SD
9 CMSD
7 8
8 8
9 10
11 CMSD
SD
7 8
8 11
SD
9 CMSD
SD
7 8
8 8
9 G
EXIT
4 CMSD
CMSD
SD
G
7 8
8 9
G
8 SD
2 - HRS SHAFT
5'x5' CLRIN FRONTOF LIFT
G
2 - HRS SHAFT
5'x5' CLRIN FRONTOF LIFTIN FRONTOF LIFT
EXIT
4 CMSD
G
G
G
G
10 10
10 A
1 B C D E F G H I J K
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
7 8
8 8
9 10
11 CMSD
SD
G
7 8
8 11
SD
9 CMSD
G
8 8
8 9
10 11
CMSD
SD
G
7 8
8 8
11 SD
9 CMSD
7 8
8 8
9 10
11 CMSD
G
7 8
8 8
11 SD
9 CMSD
7 8
8 8
9 10
11 CMSD
SD
7 8
8 11
SD
9 CMSD
SD
7 8
8 8
9 G
EXIT
4 CMSD
CMSD
SD
G
7 8
8 9
G
8 SD
G
EXIT
4 CMSD
G
G
G
G
10 10
10 1
3RD FLOOR
2 4TH FLOOR

PROJECT
NORTH

PROJECT
NORTH

1.h
Packet Pg. 126
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use I:\HAV2001\G\Site_Plan_5th_Floor.ai (10/6/2023)
FIGURE 5
FiŌh Floor Plan
Promenade Flats
A
1 B C D E F G H I J K
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
7 EXIT
4 CMSD
EXIT
4 CMSD
1 5TH FLOOR

PROJECT
NORTH
SOURCE: CHARC Design
FEET
50250

1.h
Packet Pg. 127
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 7 CHARACTERISTICS OF SOUND
Sound is increasing to such disagreeable levels in the environment that it can threaten quality of life.

Noise is usually defined as unwanted sound. Noise consists of any sound that may produce physiological or psychological damage and/or interfere with communication, work, rest, recreation, and sleep.

To the human ear, sound has two significant characteristics: pi tch and loudness. Pitch is generally an annoyance, while loudness can affect the ability to hear. Pitch is the number of complete vibrations, or cycles per second, of a wave resulting in the tone’s range from high to low. Loudness is the strength of a sound that describes a noisy or quiet environment and is measur ed by the amplitude of the sound wave. Loudness is determined by the intensity of the sound waves combined with the reception characteristics of the human ear. Sound intensity refers to how hard the sound wave strikes an object, which in turn produces the sound’s effect. This characteristic of sound can be precisely measured with instruments. The analysis of a project defines the noise environment of the project area in terms of sound intensity and its effect on adjacent sensitive land uses.

Measurement of Sound
Sound intensity is measured through the A‐weighted scale to correct for the relative frequency response of the human ear. That is, an A‐weighted noise level de‐emphasizes low and very high frequencies of sound similar to the human ear’s de‐emphasis of these frequencies. Decibels, unlike the linear scale (e.g., inches or pounds), are measure d on a logarithmic scale, which is a scale based on powers of 10.

For example, 10 decibels (dB) is 10 times more intense than 0 dB, 20 dB is 100 times more intense than 0 dB, and 30 dB is 1,000 times more intense than 0 dB. Thirt y decibels (30 dB) represents 1,000 times as much acoustic energy as 0 dB. The decibel scale increases as the square of the change, representing the sound pressure energy. A sound as soft as human breathing is about 10 times greater than 0 dB. The decibel system of measuring so und gives a rough connection between the physical intensity of sound and its perceived loudness to the human ear. A 10 dB increase in sound level is perceived by the human ear as only a doubling of the loudness of the sound. Ambient sounds generally range from 30 dB (very quiet) to 100 dB (very loud).

Sound leve
ls are generated from a source, and their decibel level decreases as the distance from that source increases. Sound dissipates exponentially with distance from the noise source. For a single point source, sound levels decrease approximately 6 dB for each doubling of distance from the source. This drop‐
off rate is appropriate for noise generated by stationary equipment. If noise is produced by a line source (e.g., highway traffic or railroad operations), the sound decreases 3 dB for each doubling of distance in a hard‐site environment; however, line source noise in a relatively flat environment with absorptive vegetation decr
eases 4.5 dB for each doubling of distance.

There are many ways to rate noise for various time periods, but an appropriate rating of ambient noise affecting humans also accounts for the annoying effects of sound. The equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) is the total sound energy of time‐varying noise over a sample period. However, the predominant rating scales for human communities in the State of California are Leq and the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) or the day‐night average noise level (Ldn) based on A‐weighted decibels (dBA). CNEL is the time‐varying noise over a 24‐hour period, with a 5 dBA

1.h
Packet Pg. 128
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 8 weighting factor applied to the hourly Leq for noises occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. (defined as relaxation hours), and a 10 dBA weighting factor applied to noises occurring from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (defined as sleeping hours). Ldn is similar to the CNEL scale but without the adjustment for events occurring during relaxation hours. CNEL and Ldn are within 1 dBA of each other and are normally interchangeable. The City uses the CNEL noise scale for long‐term noise impact assessment.

Other noise rating scales of importance during assessment of the annoyance factor include the maximum noise level (Lmax), which is the highest exponential time‐averaged sound level that occurs during a stated time period. The noise environments discussed in this analysis for short‐term noise impacts are specified in terms of maximum levels denoted by Lmax, which reflects peak operating conditions and addresses the annoying aspects of intermittent noise. It is often used together with another noise scale, or noise standards in terms of percentile noise levels, in noise ordinances for enforcement purposes. For example, the L10 noise level represents the noise level exceeded 10 percent of the time during a stated period. The L50 noise level represents the median noise level.

Half the time the noise level exceeds this level, and half the time it is less than this level. The L90 noise level represents the noise level exceeded 90 percent of the time and is considered the background noise level during a monitoring period. For a relatively constant noise source, Leq and L50 are approximately the same.

Noise impacts can be described in three categories. The first category includes audible impacts, which refers to increases in noise levels noticeable to humans. Audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3 dB or greater because this level has been found to be barely perceptibl
e in exterior environments. The second category, potentially audible, refers to a change in the noise level between 1 dB and 3 dB. This range of noise levels has been found to be noticeable only in laboratory environments. The last category includes changes in noise levels of less than 1 dB, which are in
audible to the human ear. Only audible changes in existing ambient or background noise levels are considered potentially significant.

Physiological Effects of Noise
Physical damage to human hearing begins at prolonged exposure to noise levels higher than 85 dBA.

Exposure to high noise levels affects the entire system, with prolonged noise exposure in excess of 75 dBA increasing body tensions, thereby affecting blood pressure and functions of the heart and the nervous system. In comparison, extended period s of noise exposure above 90 dBA would result in permanent cell damage. When the noise level reaches 120 dBA, a tickling sensation occurs in the human ear, even with short‐term exposure. This level of noise is called the threshold of feeling. As the sound reaches 140 dBA, the tickling sensation  is replaced by the feeling of pain in the ear (the threshold of pain). A sound level of 160–165 dBA will result in dizziness or loss of equilibrium. The ambient or background noise problem is widespread and generally more concentrated in urban areas than in outlying, less developed area. Table A  lists definitions of acoustical terms, and Table B shows common sound levels and their sources.

1.h
Packet Pg. 129
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 9 Table A: Definitions of Acoustical Terms
Term  Definitions
Decibel, dB  A unit of sound level that denotes the ratio between two quantities that are proportional to power; the number of decibels is 10 times the logarithm (to the base 10) of this ratio.

Frequency, Hz  Of a function periodic in time, the number of times that the quantity repeats itself in one second (i.e., the number of cycles per second).

A‐Weighted Sound
Level, dBA
The sound level obtained by use of A‐weighting. The A‐weighting filter de‐emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise. (All  sound levels in this report are A‐ weighted, unless reported otherwise.)
L01, L10, L50, L90  The fast A‐weighted noise levels that are equaled or exceeded by a fluctuating sound level 1%, 10%, 50%, and 90% of a stated time period, respectively.

Equivalent Continuous
Noise Level, Leq
The level of a steady sound that, in a stated time period and at a stated location, has the same A‐ weighted sound energy as the time varying sound.

Community Noise
Equivalent Level, CNEL
The 24‐hour A‐weighted average sound level from midnight to midnight, obtained after the addition of 5 dBA to sound levels occurring in the evening from 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM and after the addition of 10 dBA to sound levels occurring in the night between 10:0 0 PM and 7:00 AM.

Day/Night Noise Level,
Ldn
The 24‐hour A‐weighted average sound level from midnight to midnight, obtained after the addition of 10 dBA to sound levels occurring in the night between 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM.

Lmax, Lmin  The maximum and minimum A‐weighted sound levels measured on a sound level meter, during a designated time interval, using fast time averaging.

Ambient Noise Level  The all‐encompassing noise associated with a given environment at a specified time, usually a composite of sound from many sources from many directions, near and far; no particular sound is dominant.

Intrusive  The noise that intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude, duration, frequency, and time of occurrence and tonal or informational content, as well as the prevailing ambient noise level.

Source: Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control (Harris 1991).

Table B: Common Sound Levels and Their Noise Sources
Noise Source  A‐Weighted Sound
Level in Decibels  Noise Environments  Subjective Evaluations Near Jet Engine  140  Deafening  128 times as loud
Civil Defense Siren  130  Threshold of Pain  64 times as loud Hard Rock Band  120  Threshold of Feeling  32 times as loud Accelerating Motorcycle at a Few Feet Away  110  Very Loud  16 times as loud Pile Driver; Noisy Urban Street/Heavy City Traffic  100  Very Loud  8 times as loud Ambulance Siren; Food Blender  95  Very Loud  —
Garbage Disposal  90  Very Loud  4 times as loud
Freight Cars; Living Room Music  85  Loud  —
Pneumatic Drill; Vacuum Cleaner  80  Loud  2 times as loud Busy Restaurant  75  Moderately Loud  —
Near Freeway Auto Traffic  70  Moderately Loud  Reference level Average Office  60  Quiet  One‐half as loud
Suburban Street  55  Quiet  —
Light Traffic; Soft Radio Music in Apartment  50  Quiet  One‐quarter as loud Large Transformer  45  Quiet  —
Average Residence without Stereo Playing  40  Faint  One‐eighth as loud Soft Whisper  30  Faint  —
Rustling Leaves  20  Very Faint  —
Human Breathing  10  Very Faint  Threshold of Hearing
—   0  Very Faint  —
Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2015).

FUNDAMENTALS OF VIBRATION
Vibration refers to ground‐borne noise and perceptible motion. Ground‐borne vibration is almost exclusively a concern inside buildings and is rarely perceived as a problem outdoors. Outdoors, the

1.h
Packet Pg. 130
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 10 motion may be discernible, but without the effects associated with the shaking of a building, there is less adverse reaction. Vibration energy propagates from a source through intervening soil and rock layers to the foundations of nearby buildings. The vibration then propagates from the foundation throughout the remainder of the structure. Building vibration ma y be perceived by occupants as the motion of building surfaces, the rattling of items on shelves or hanging on walls, or a low‐frequency rumbling noise. The rumbling noise is caused by the vibration of walls, floors, and ceilings that radiate sound waves. Annoyance from vibration often occurs when the vibration excee ds the threshold of perception by 10 vibration velocity decibels (VdB) or less. This is an order of magnitude below the damage threshold for normal buildings.

Typical sources of ground‐borne vibration are construction activities (e.g., blasting, pile driving, and operating heavy‐duty earthmoving equipment), steel‐wheeled trai ns, and occasional traffic on rough roads. Ground‐borne vibration and noise from these sources are usually localized to areas within approximately 100 feet (ft) from the vibration source, although there are examples of ground‐borne vibration causing interference out to distances greater than 200 ft (FTA 2018). When roadways are smooth, vibration from traffic, even heavy trucks, is rarely perceptible. It is assumed for mo st
projects that the roadway surface will be smooth enough that ground‐borne vibration from street traffic will not exceed the impact criteria; however, both construction of a project and freight train operations on railroad tracks could res ult in ground‐borne vibration that may be perceptible and annoying.

Ground‐borne noise is not likely to be a problem because noise arriving via the normal airborne path will usually be greater than ground‐borne noise. Ground‐borne vibration has the potential to disturb people and damage buildings. Although it is very rare for train‐ induced ground‐borne vibration to cause cosmetic building damage, it is not uncommon for heavy‐duty construction processes (e.g., blasting and pile driving) to cause vibration of sufficient amplitudes to damage nearby buildings (FTA 2018). Ground‐borne vibration is usually measured in terms of vibration velocity, either th e root‐ mean‐square (RMS) velocity or peak particle velocity (PPV). The RMS velocity is best for characterizing human response to building vibration, and PPV is used to characterize potential for damage. Decibel notation acts to compress the range of numbers required to describe vibration.

Vibration velocity level in decibels is defin ed as the following:

Lv = 20 log10 [V/Vref]
where Lv is the VdB, V is the RMS velocity amplitude, and Vref is the reference velocity amplitude, or 1 x 10‐6 inches/second (in/sec) used in the United States.

REGULATORY SETTING
Federal Regulations
Federal Transit Administration
Noise. The construction noise criteria included in the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (2018) was used to evaluated potential construction noise impacts because Section 11.44.080 of the City’s Municipal Code does not have daytime construction noise level limits for activities that occur within the specified hour s. Table C shows the FTA’s Detailed Assessment Daytime Construction Noise Criteria based on the composite noise levels for each construction phase.

1.h
Packet Pg. 131
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 11 Table C: Detailed Assessment Daytime
Construction Noise Criteria
Land Use  Daytime 1‐hour Leq (dBA)
Residential  80
Commercial   85
Industrial  90
Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018). dBA = A‐weighted decibels
Leq = equivalent continuous sound level

Vibration. Vibration standards included in the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (2018) are used in this analysis for ground‐borne vibration impacts on human annoyance. Table D provides the criteria for assessing the potential for interference or annoyance from vibration levels in a building.

Table D: Interpretation of Vibration Criteria for Detailed Analysis Land Use  Maximum Lv (VdB)1  Description of Use
Workshop  90  Vibration that is distinctly felt. Appropriate for workshops and similar areas not as sensitive to vibration.

Office  84  Vibration that can be felt. Appropriate for office and similar areas not as sensitive to vibration.

Residential Day  78  Vibration that is barely felt. Adequate for computer equipment and low‐power optical microscopes (up to 20X).

Residential Night and
Operating Rooms  72
Vibration is not felt, but ground‐borne noise may be audible inside quiet rooms.

Suitable for medium‐power optical microscopes (100X) and other equipment of low sensitivity.

Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018). 1   As measured in 1/3‐octave bands of frequency over the frequency range of 8 to 80 Hz.

FTA = Federal Transit Administration
Hz = hertz
LV = velocity in decibels
VdB = vibration velocity decibels

The criteria for environmental impact from ground‐borne vibration and noise are based on the maximum levels for a single event. Table E lists the potential vibration building damage criteria associated with construction activities, as suggested in the Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018). FTA guidelines show that a vibration level of up to 102 VdB (equivalent to 0.5 in/sec in PPV [FTA 2
018]) is considered safe for buildings consisting of reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster), and would not result in any construction vibration damage.

For non‐engineered timber and masonry buildings, the construction building vibration damage criterion is 94 VdB (0.2 in/sec in PPV).

Table E: Construction Vibration Damage Criteria
Building Category  PPV (in/sec)  Approximate LV (VdB)1
Reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster)  0.50  102 Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster)  0.30  98
Non‐engineered timber and masonry buildings  0.20  94
Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage  0.12  90 Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018). 1  RMS vibration velocity in decibels (VdB) is 1 µin/sec. µin/sec = microinches per second
FTA = Federal Transit Administration
in/sec = inches per second
LV = velocity in decibels
PPV = peak particle velocity
RMS = root‐mean‐square
VdB = vibration velocity decibels

1.h
Packet Pg. 132
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 12 Local Regulations
City of Santa Clarita
Noise Element. The City’s General Plan Noise Element lists the objectives and policies required to meet the City’s noise‐related goals. The following lists the applicable goals, objectives, and policies, for the proposed project.
 Goal N1: A healthy and safe noise environment for Santa Clarita Valley residents, employees, and visitors.
○ Objective N1.1: Protect the health and safety of the residents of the Santa Clarita Valley by the elimination, mitigation, and prevention of significant existing and future noise levels. ■ Policy N1.1.1. Use the Noise and Land Use Compatibility Guidelines contained in Table F (Exhibit N‐8 in the Noise Element of the General Plan), which are consistent with State guidelines, as a policy basis for decisions on land use and development proposals related to noise.
■ Policy N1.1.4. Control noise sources adjacent to residential, recreational, and community facilities, and those land uses classified as noise sensitive.  Goal N2: Protect residents and sensitive receptors from traffic‐generated noise. ○ Objective N2.1: Prevent and mitigate adverse effects of noise generated from traffic on arterial streets and highways through implementing noise reduction standards and programs.
■ Policy N2.1.1. Encourage owners of existing noise‐sensitive uses, and require owners of proposed noise sensitive land uses, to construct sound barriers to protect users from significant noise levels, where feasible and appropriate. ■ Policy N2.1.2. Encourage the use of noise absorbing barriers, where appropriate.  Goal N3: Protect residential neighborhoods from excessive noise. ○ Objective N3.1: Prevent and mitigate significant noise levels in residential neighborhoods. ■ Policy N3.1.1. Require that developers of new single‐family and multi‐family residential neighborhoods in areas where the ambient noise levels exceed 60 dBA CNEL provide mitigation measures for the new residences to reduce interior noise levels to 45 dBA CNEL, based on future traffic and railroad noise levels. ■ Policy N3.1.2. Require that developers of new single‐family and multi‐family residential neighborhoods in areas where the projected noise levels exceed 65 dBA CNEL provide mitigation measures (which may include noise barriers, setbacks, and site design) for new residences to reduce outdoor noise levels to 65 dBA CNEL, based on future traffic conditions. This requir
ement would apply to rear yards areas for single‐family developments, and to private open space and common recreational and open space areas for multi‐family developments.

1.h
Packet Pg. 133
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 13 Table F: City of Santa Clarita Noise and Land Use Compatibility Guidelines Land Use Category  Community Noise Exposure, Ldn or CNEL, dB 55  60  65  70  75  80  85
Residential – Low Density
Single Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes

Residential
Multi‐Family

Transient Lodging
Motels, Hotels

Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals,
Nursing Homes

Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters

Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports

Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks

Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water
Recreation, Cemeteries

Office Buildings, Business Commercial and
Professional

Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities,
Agriculture

Normally
Acceptable
Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements.

Conditionally
Acceptable
New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.

Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice.

Normally
Unacceptable
New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Sound walls, window upgrades, and site design modifications may be needed in order to achieve City standards.

Clearly
Unacceptable
New construction or development should generally not be undertaken.

Source: City of Santa Clarita General Plan Noise Element (2011b).

1.h
Packet Pg. 134
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 14 ■ Policy N3.1.3. Through enforcement of the applicable Noise Ordinance, protect residential neighborhoods from noise generated by machinery or activities that produce significant discernable noise exceeding recommended levels for residential uses. ■ Policy N3.1.4. Require that those responsible for construction activities develop techniques to mitigate or minimize the noise impacts on residences, and adopt standards that regulate noise from construction activities that occur in or near residential neighborhoods.
■ Policy N3.1.9. Implement a buyer and renter notification program for new residential developments where appropriate, to educate and inform potential buyers and renters of the sources of noise in the area and/or new sources of noise that may occur in the future. As determined by the reviewing authority, notification may be appropriate in the following areas:
a. Within one mile of Six Flags Magic Mountain theme park, potential buyers and renters should receive notice that noise may occasionally be generated from this facility and that the frequency and loudness of noise events may change over time. b. Within 1,000 feet of the railroad, potential buyers and renters should receive notice that noise may occasionally be generated from this facility and that the frequency and loudness of noise events may change over time.
c. Within 200 feet of commercial uses in mixed‐use developments, potential buyers and renters should receive notice that the commercial uses within the mixed‐use developments may generate noise in excess of levels typically found in residential areas, that the commercial uses may change over time, and the associated noise levels and frequency of noise events ma y change along with the use. d. Within 1,000 feet of the Saugus Speedway, in the event speedway operations are resumed in the future.

Municipal Code. Section 11.44.040 of the City’s Municipal Code has established daytime and nighttime exterior noise limits in regions designated as residential, and commercial and manufacturing, as shown in Table G.

Table G: City of Santa Clarita Maximum Exterior Noise Limits Region  Time Period  Noise Level
(dBA)
L25
(15 minutes)1
L8
(5 minutes)2
L2
(1 minute)3
Residential Zone  Daytime  7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.  65  70  75  85 Nighttime  9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.  55  60  65  75
Commercial and
Manufacturing
Daytime  7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.  80  85  90  100
Nighttime  9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.  70  75  80  90
Source: City of Santa Clarita, Municipal Code. (2022).

Note: A correction to the noise limits of minus 5 dB for repetitive impulsive noise, steady whine, screech, or hum. 1  Noise occurring more than 5 minutes but less than 15 minutes per hour. 2  Noise occurring more than 1 minute but less than 5 minutes per hour. 3  Noise occurring less than 1 minute per hour.
dBA = A‐weighted decibels

1.h
Packet Pg. 135
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 15 Section 11.44.080 of the City’s Municipal Code prohibits any noise level from the use or operation of any machinery, equipment, pump, fan, air conditioning apparatus, refrigerating equipment, motor vehicle, or other mechanical or electrical device, or in repairing or rebuilding any motor vehicle, which exceeds the noise limits as set forth in Section 11.44.040  at any property line.

Section 11.44.080 of the City’s Municipal Code prohibits construction work that requires a building permit from the City on sites within 300 ft of a residentially zoned property except between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. No work shall
be performed on New Year’s Day, Independence Day,
Thanksgiving, Christmas, Memorial Day, and Labor Day.

EXISTING SETTING
Land Uses in the Project Vicinity
Land uses surrounding the proposed building include residences to the west and commercial uses to the north, east, and south. Land uses surrounding the new parking lot include residences to the north and southeast and commercial uses to the east, south, and west. Bouquet Canyon Road and the Metrolink rail are located east of the project.

Overview of the Existing Noise Environment
Transportation facilities make up the primary existing noise sources in the project area. Traffic on Bouquet Canyon Road and other roadways in the vicinity are a steady source of ambient noise. The Metrolink rail line to the east is a source of intermittent noise. Other sources of noise in the project area include commer
cial activity.

Ambient Noise Measurements
Short‐Term Noise Measurements
Short‐term (15‐minute) noise level measurements were conducted on January 25 and 26, 2021, using a Larson Davis Model 831 Type 1 sound level meter. Table H shows the results of the short‐ term noise level measurements along with a description of the measurement locations and noise sources that occurred durin
g the measurement. As shown in Table H, the measured average noise levels in the project vicinity range from 51.8 to 69.1 dBA Leq, and the instantaneous maximum noise levels range from 66.4 to 84.0 dBA Lmax. Figure 6 shows the short‐term monitoring locations.

Long‐Term Noise Measurements
Two long‐term (24‐hour) noise level measurements were conducted from January 25 to January 26, 2021, using a Larson Davis Spark 706RC Dosimeter. Tables I and J show the hourly Leq, Lmax, and Lmin results from the long‐term noise level measurements, and Table K summarizes the long‐term noise level measurements. As shown in Table K, the noise levels on the project site range from 46.1 to

61.9 dBA Leq and calculated CNEL levels range from 60.4 to 62.0 dBA. Figure 6 shows the long‐term monitoring locations.

1.h
Packet Pg. 136
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 16 Table H: Short‐Term Ambient Noise Level Measurements Monitor
No.  Location  Date  Start Time  Noise Level (dBA)  Noise Source(s) Leq  Lmax  Lmin ST‐1
26135 Bouquet Canyon Road. On the dirt
landscaping path in front of the IHOP
restaurant. Approximately 35 ft from the
edge of Bouquet Canyon Road.
1/26/21  4:25 PM  69.1  84.0  52.0
Traffic on Bouquet
Canyon Road.

ST‐2
26135 Bouquet Canyon Road. On the
north end of the parking lot.

Approximately 15 ft south from the wall.
1/25/21  3:18 PM  51.8  66.4  46.2
Traffic on Bouquet
Canyon Road and birds.

ST‐3
Vacant lot south of the Las Flores
Apartments. Approximately 28 ft south of
the wall and 18 ft west of the parking lot
edge.
1/26/21  4:55 PM  52.3  71.4  44.6
Traffic on Bouquet
Canyon Road and birds.

Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2021).
dBA = A‐weighted decibels
ft = foot/feet
Leq = equivalent continuous sound level
Lmax = maximum measured sound level
Lmin = minimum measured sound level

1.h
Packet Pg. 137
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) SOURCE: Google Earth (2021)
FEET
2001000
FIGURE 6
Noise Monitoring Locations
Promenade Flats
I:\HAV2001\G\Noise_Monitor_Locs.ai (10/6/2023)
- Project Site Boundary
- Short-term Noise Monitoring Location
- Long-term Noise Monitoring Location
LEGEND
LT-1LT-1LT-1
ST-1ST-1ST-1
ST-2ST-2ST-2
ST-3ST-3ST-3
ST-1ST-1ST-1LT-2LT-2LT-2 LT-1LT-1LT-1

1.h
Packet Pg. 138
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 18 Table I: Long‐Term (24‐Hour) Noise Level Measurement Results at LT‐1 Start Time  Date  Noise Level (dBA)
Leq  Lmax  Lmin
1  4:00 PM  1/25/21  58.2  90.8  47.4
2  5:00 PM  1/25/21  59.1  85.0  47.6
3  6:00 PM  1/25/21  56.7  78.1  46.6
4  7:00 PM  1/25/21  58.0  86.2  45.7
5  8:00 PM  1/25/21  54.9  74.7  43.6
6  9:00 PM  1/25/21  52.8  72.4  41.9
7  10:00 PM  1/25/21  52.2  80.1  42.0
8  11:00 PM  1/25/21  49.3  67.8  41.0
9  12:00 AM  1/26/21  48.7  67.5  41.6
10  1:00 AM  1/26/21  47.9  64.6  40.9
11  2:00 AM  1/26/21  48.1  65.8  41.0
12  3:00 AM  1/26/21  49.6  67.3  42.0
13  4:00 AM  1/26/21  55.8  88.0  42.3
14  5:00 AM  1/26/21  58.7  88.2  46.5
15  6:00 AM  1/26/21  59.3  86.3  47.8
16  7:00 AM  1/26/21  59.7  76.8  52.1
17  8:00 AM  1/26/21  59.1  86.1  50.8
18  9:00 AM  1/26/21  58.9  86.7  52.2
19  10:00 AM  1/26/21  58.7  86.7  50.8
20  11:00 AM  1/26/21  59.1  79.0  50.0
21  12:00 PM  1/26/21  57.0  79.0  46.2
22  1:00 PM  1/26/21  58.4  85.9  46.5
23  2:00 PM  1/26/21  59.6  85.0  49.1
24  300 PM  1/26/21  59.3  86.6  48.8
Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2021).
dBA = A‐weighted decibel
Leq = equivalent continuous sound level
Lmax = maximum measured sound level
Lmin = minimum measured sound level

1.h
Packet Pg. 139
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 19 Table J: Long‐Term (24‐Hour) Noise Level Measurement Results at LT‐2 Start Time  Date  Noise Level (dBA)
Leq  Lmax  Lmin
1  4:00 PM  1/25/21  58.2  90.8  47.4
2  5:00 PM  1/25/21  59.1  85.0  47.6
3  6:00 PM  1/25/21  56.7  78.1  46.6
4  7:00 PM  1/25/21  58.0  86.2  45.7
5  8:00 PM  1/25/21  54.9  74.7  43.6
6  9:00 PM  1/25/21  52.8  72.4  41.9
7  10:00 PM  1/25/21  52.2  80.1  42.0
8  11:00 PM  1/25/21  49.3  67.8  41.0
9  12:00 AM  1/26/21  48.7  67.5  41.6
10  1:00 AM  1/26/21  47.9  64.6  40.9
11  2:00 AM  1/26/21  48.1  65.8  41.0
12  3:00 AM  1/26/21  49.6  67.3  42.0
13  4:00 AM  1/26/21  55.8  88.0  42.3
14  5:00 AM  1/26/21  58.7  88.2  46.5
15  6:00 AM  1/26/21  59.3  86.3  47.8
16  7:00 AM  1/26/21  59.7  76.8  52.1
17  8:00 AM  1/26/21  59.1  86.1  50.8
18  9:00 AM  1/26/21  58.9  86.7  52.2
19  10:00 AM  1/26/21  58.7  86.7  50.8
20  11:00 AM  1/26/21  59.1  79.0  50.0
21  12:00 PM  1/26/21  57.0  79.0  46.2
22  1:00 PM  1/26/21  58.4  85.9  46.5
23  2:00 PM  1/26/21  59.6  85.0  49.1
24  300 PM  1/26/21  59.3  86.6  48.8
Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2021).
dBA = A‐weighted decibel
Leq = equivalent continuous sound level
Lmax = maximum measured sound level
Lmin = minimum measured sound level

1.h
Packet Pg. 140
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 20 Table K: Long‐Term Ambient Noise Level Measurements
Monitor
No.  Location  Start
Date
Start
Time
Duration
(hours)
Noise Level (dBA)  Noise Sources Leq  CNEL
LT‐1
26135 Bouquet Canyon
Road. On the west side of
the parking lot.
1/25/21  4:00 PM  24  47.9–59.7  62.0
Traffic on Bouquet Canyon
Road, Metrolink train, and
commercial activity.

LT‐2
26135 Bouquet Canyon
Road. On the east side of
the parking lot.
1/25/21  4:00 PM  24  46.1–61.9  60.4
Traffic on Bouquet Canyon
Road, Metrolink trains, and
commercial activity.

Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2021).

CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA = A‐weighted decibels
Leq = equivalent continuous sound level

Existing Aircraft Noise
The Whiteman, Agua Dulce, and Van Nuys Airports are approximately 12.8 miles southwest, 13.8 miles northeast, and 14 miles south of the project site, respectively. Based on the airport influence area map in the Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan (Los Angeles County ALUC 2004), the project site is well beyond the airport influence areas for any  of these airports.

Existing Traffic Noise
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA‐RD‐77‐ 108) was used to evaluate highway traffic‐related noise conditions along roadway segments in the project vicinity. This model requires various parameters, including traffic volumes, vehicle mix, vehicle speed, and roadway geometry to compute typical equivalent noise levels during daytim e, evening, and nighttime hours. The resultant noise levels are weighted and summed over 24‐hour periods to determine the CNEL values. The standard vehicle mix for Southern California roadways was used for traffic on these roadway segments. The 2008 average daily traffic (ADT) volume of 37,650 on Bouquet Canyon Road was obtained from the City’s Traffic Flow  Map (City of Santa Clarita 2013). The City’s Traffic Flow Map show that the ADT volumes decreased greatly from 2008 to 2013 and were not projected to the existing 2021 year. For the reasons described above, the existing 2021 ADT volumes were assumed to be equivalen t to the 2008 ADT volumes. Table L shows the modeled 24‐hour CNEL levels for the existing conditions. These noise levels represent the worst‐ case scenario, which assumes no shielding is provided between the traffic and the location where the noise contours are drawn. The specific assumptions used in developing thes e noise levels and model printouts are provided in Attachment B.

As shown in Table L, traffic noise levels along Bouquet Canyon Road directly adjacent to the project site are moderately high, with the 70, 65, and 60 dBA CNEL noise contours extending 112 ft, 344 ft, and 1,084 ft, respectively, from the roadway centerli
ne.

1.h
Packet Pg. 141
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 21 Table L: Existing Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment  ADT
Centerline
to
70 dBA
CNEL (ft)
Centerline
to
65 dBA
CNEL (ft)
Centerline
to
60 dBA
CNEL (ft)
CNEL (dBA) 50 ft
from Centerline
of Outermost
Lane
Bouquet Canyon Road north of
Magic Mountain Parkway  37,650  112  344  1,084  71.7
Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2021).

Note: Noise modeling performed using “Soft” setting and Southern California traffic percentages.

ADT = average daily traffic
CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA = A‐weighted decibels
ft = foot/feet

IMPACTS
Short‐Term Construction Noise Impacts
Two types of short‐term noise impacts would occur during project construction. The first type would be from construction crew commutes and the transport of construction equipment and materials to the project site and would incrementally raise noise levels on roadways leading to the site. The pieces of construction equipment for construction activities would move on site, would remain for the duration of each construction phase, and would not add to the daily traffic vol ume in the project
vicinity. Although there would be a relatively high single‐event noise exposure potential causing intermittent noise nuisance (passing trucks at 50 ft would generate up to a maximum of 84  dBA), the effect on longer‐term ambient noise levels would be small because the number of daily construction‐related vehicle trips is small compared to existing daily traffic volume on Bouquet Canyon Road. The demolition phase would generate the most trips of all of the construction phases, at a Passenger Car Equivalent
(PCE) of 260 trips per day based on the California Emissions Estimator Model (Version 2022.1). Based on Table L, Bouquet Canyon Road has an estimated existing ADT volume of 37,650 adjacent to the project site. Based on the information above, construction‐related traffic noise would increase by 0.03 dB A. A noise level increase of less than 3 dBA would not be perceptible to the human ear in an outdoor environment. Therefore, no short‐term, construction‐ related impacts associated with worker commutes and transport of construction equipment and material to the project site would occur, and no noise reduction measures would be  required.

The second type of short‐term noise impact is related to noise generated from construction activities. The proposed project anticipates site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating phases of construction. Construction is performed in discrete steps, each of which has its own mix of equi pment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. These various sequential phases change the character of the noise generated on a project site. Therefore, the noise levels vary as construction progresses. Despite the variety in the type and size of construction equipment, similarities in the dominant noise sources and patterns of operation allow construction‐related noise ranges to be categorized by work phase . Table M lists the Lmax
recommended for noise impact assessments for typical construction equipment included in the FHWA’s Highway Construction Noise Handbook (2006), based on a distance of 50 ft between the equipment and a noise receptor.

1.h
Packet Pg. 142
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 22 Table M: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels Equipment Description  Acoustical Usage Factor1 (%)  Maximum Noise Level (Lmax) at 50 ft2 Backhoe  40  80
Compactor (ground)  20  80
Compressor  40  80
Crane  16  85
Dozer  40  85
Dump Truck  40  84
Excavator  40  85
Flatbed Truck  40  84
Forklift  20  85
Front‐End Loader  40  80
Grader  40  85
Impact Pile Driver  20  95
Jackhammer  20  85
Pavement Scarifier  20  85
Paver  50  85
Pickup Truck  40  55
Pneumatic Tools  50  85
Pump  50  77
Rock Drill  20  85
Roller  20  85
Scraper  40  85
Tractor  40  84
Welder  40  73
Source: Highway Construction Noise Handbook, Table 9.1 (FHWA 2006).

Note: The noise levels reported in this table are rounded to the nearest whole number. 1  The usage factor is the percentage of time during a construction noise operation that a piece of construction equipment is operating at full power.
2  Maximum noise levels were developed based on Specification 721.560 from the CA/T program to be consistent with the City of Boston, Massachusetts, Noise Code for the “Big Dig” project.

CA/T = Central Artery/Tunnel
FHWA = Federal Highway Administration
ft = foot/feet
Lmax = maximum instantaneous noise level

Typical noise levels range up to 88 dBA Lmax at 50 ft during the noisiest construction phases. The site preparation and grading phase tends to generate the highest noise levels because the noisiest construction equipment is earthmoving equipment. Earthmoving equipment includes excavating machinery such as backhoes, bulldozers, excavators, and front‐end loaders. Earthmoving and compacting equipment include compactors, scrapers, and graders. Typical operating cycles fo r these types of construction equipment may involve 1 to 2 minutes of full‐power operation followed by 3 to 4 minutes at lower power settings.

Project construction is expected to require the use of a grader, bulldozer, and water truck/pickup truck. Noise associated with the use of construction equipm ent is estimated to be between 55 dBA Lmax and 85 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 ft from the active construction area for the site preparation and grading phase. As shown in Table M, the maximum noise level generated by a grader is assumed to be approximately 85 dBA Lmax at 50 ft from the grader. The dozer would generate approximately 85 dBA Lmax at 50 ft. The maximum noise level generated by a water truck/pickup truck is approximately 55 dBA Lmax at 50 ft. Each doubling of the sound sources with equal strength increases the noise level by 3 dBA. Assuming that each piece of construction equipment operates at some distance from the other equipment, the worst‐ case combined noise level during construction would

1.h
Packet Pg. 143
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 23 be 88 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 ft from the active construction area. Based on a usage factor of 40 percent, the worst‐case combined noise level during construction would be 84 dBA Leq at a distance of 50 ft from the active construction area.

The closest residences are located approximately 175 ft west from the center of the proposed building and approximately 75 ft north from the center of the new parking area, which may be subject to short‐term construction noise reaching 77 dBA Lmax (73 dBA Leq) and 82 dBA Lmax (78 dBA Leq), respectively. Construction noise is temporary and would stop once project construction is completed. The project would be required to comply with the construction hours allowed under the City’s Municipal Code Noise Ordinance, and standard conditions for construction listed below would minimize construction noise. Furthermore, construction related noise levels would be below the FTA noise level standard of 80 dBA Leq for residential uses. Therefore, no noise impacts from construction activities would occur, and no noise reduction measures are required.  The construction contractor shall limit construction activities to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. No construction shall be permitted outside
of these hours or on Sundays and New
Year’s Day, Independence Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas, Memorial Day, and Labor Day.  During all project site excavation and grading, the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers’ standards.
 The construc
tion contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction‐related noise sources and most noise‐sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction.
 The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that the emitted noise is directed away from th
e sensitive receptors nearest the project site.

Short‐Term Construction Vibration Impacts
This construction vibration impact analysis discusses the level of human annoyance using vibration levels in VdB and will assess the potential for building damages using vibration levels in PPV (in/sec) because vibration levels calculated in RMS are best for characterizing human response to building vibration whereas vibration level in PPV is best used to characterize potential fo r damage. As shown previously in Table E, the FTA guidelines indicate that a vibration level up to 102 VdB (equivalent to

0.5 PPV [in/sec]) is considered safe for buildings consisting of reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster) and would not result in any construction vibration damage  (FTA 2018). For a non‐ engineered timber and masonry building, the construction vibration damage criterion is 94 VdB (0.2 PPV [in/sec]). For a fragile building, the construction vibration damage criterion is 90 VdB (0.12 PPV [in/sec]).

1.h
Packet Pg. 144
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 24 Table N shows the reference vibration levels at a distance of 25 ft for each type of standard construction equipment from the FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (2018). Outdoor site preparation and grading for the proposed project are expected to require the use of a small bulldozer (with rubber tire s) and loaded trucks, which would generate ground‐borne vibrations of up to 58 VdB (0.003 PPV [in/sec]) and 86 VdB (0.076 PPV [in/sec]), respectively, when measured at 25 ft.

Table N: Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment Equipment  Reference PPV/LV at 25 ft
PPV (in/sec)  LV (VdB)1
Pile Driver (Impact), Typical  0.644  104
Pile Driver (Sonic), Typical  0.170  93
Vibratory Roller  0.210  94
Large Bulldozer  0.089  87
Caisson Drilling  0.089  87
Loaded Trucks2  0.076  86
Jackhammer  0.035  79
Small Bulldozer2  0.003  58
Sources: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018). 1 RMS vibration velocity in decibels (VdB) is 1 µin/sec. 2 Equipment shown in bold is expected to be used on site. µin/sec = microinch/microinches per second
ft = foot/feet
FTA = Federal Transit Administration
in/sec = inches per second
LV = velocity in decibels
PPV = peak particle velocity
RMS = root‐mean‐square
VdB = vibration velocity decibels

The greatest vibration levels are anticipated to occur during the site preparation and grading phase.

All other phases are expected to result in lower vibration levels. The distance to the nearest buildings for vibration impact analysis is measured between the nearest off‐site buildings and the project boundary (assuming the construction equipment would be used at or near th e project boundary), because vibration impacts normally occur within the buildings. An exception to this would be the location of loaded trucks. Loaded trucks would be limited to certain areas on the project site and would not operate at the project construction boundary.

The following provides the formula for vibration transm ission:

LvdB (D) = LvdB (25 ft) – 30 Log (D/25) and PPVequip = PPVref x (25/D)1.5 Table O lists the projected vibration level from various construction equipment expected to be used on the project site of the proposed building and the parking lot to the nearest buildings in the project vicinity. As shown in Table O, the closest residential buildings are located west of the proposed building and southeast of the proposed park ing lot site and would experience vibration levels of up to 84 VdB (0.058 PPV [in/sec]) and 93 VdB (0.164 PPV [in/sec]), respectively. These vibration levels have the potential to result in community annoyance because vibration levels would exceed the FTA annoyance threshold of 78 VdB for daytime reside nces. However, this vibration level

1.h
Packet Pg. 145
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 25 Table O: Summary of Construction Equipment and Activity Vibration Construction
Area  Land Use  Direction  Equipment/
Activity
Reference Vibration Level at 25 ft  Distance
(ft)
Maximum Vibration Level
VdB  PPV  VdB  PPV
Proposed
Building
Commercial  North  Small Bulldozers  58  0.003  10  70  0.012 Loaded Trucks  86  0.076  301  84  0.058
Commercial  East  Small Bulldozers  58  0.003  10  70  0.012 Loaded Trucks  86  0.076  301  84  0.058
Commercial  South  Small Bulldozers  58  0.003  45  50  0.001 Loaded Trucks  86  0.076  45  78  0.031
Residential  West  Small Bulldozers  58  0.003  30  56  0.002 Loaded Trucks  86  0.076  30  84  0.058
Proposed
Parking Lot
Commercial  North  Small Bulldozers  58  0.003  40  52  0.001 Loaded Trucks  86  0.076  40  80  0.038
Commercial  East  Small Bulldozers  58  0.003  60  47  0.001 Loaded Trucks  86  0.076  60  75  0.020
Residential  Southeast  Small Bulldozers  58  0.003  15  65  0.006 Loaded Trucks  86  0.076  15  93  0.164
Commercial  South  Small Bulldozers  58  0.003  25  58  0.003 Loaded Trucks  86  0.076  25  86  0.076
Commercial  West  Small Bulldozers  58  0.003  10  70  0.012 Loaded Trucks  86  0.076  301  84  0.058
Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2021).

Note: The FTA‐recommended building damage threshold is 0.2 PPV (in/sec) or approximately 94 VdB at the receiving building structure. 1  Loaded trucks would be limited to certain areas on the project site and would not operate at the project construction boundary. ft = foot/feet
in/sec = inches per second
FTA = Federal Transit Administration
PPV = peak particle velocity
VdB = vibration velocity decibels

would not have the potential to result in building damage because vibration levels would not exceed the FTA damage threshold of 94 VdB (0.2 PPV [in/sec]) since the residential buildings would be constructed of non‐engineered timber and masonry.

Also, Table O shows that the closest commercial buildings, which are located north and east of the proposed bui
lding and west of the proposed parking lot site, would experience vibration levels of up to 84 VdB (0.058 PPV [in/sec]). This vibration level would not have the potential to result in community annoyance because the vibration levels would exceed the FTA annoyance threshold of 84 VdB for buildings not as
sensitive to vibration. In addition, this vibration level would not have the potential to result in building damage because vibration levels would not exceed the FTA damage threshold of 94 VdB (0.2 PPV [in/sec]) since the commercial buildings would be constructed of non‐ engineered timber and masonry. Oth er adjacent buildings to the project site are farther away and would experience lower vibration levels. Therefore, no construction vibration impacts would occur, and no vibration reduction measures are required.

Long‐Term Aircraft Noise Impacts
As discussed above, the Whiteman, Agua Dulce, and Van Nuys Airports are approximately 12.8 miles southeast, 13.8 miles northeast, and 14 miles south of the project site, respectively. Based on the airport influence area map for these airports in the Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan (Los Angeles County ALUC 2004), the projec t site is well beyond the airport influence area for noise impacts. Therefore, the project would not expose people working or residing in the project area to excessive noise levels.

1.h
Packet Pg. 146
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 26 Long‐Term Traffic Noise Impacts
The proposed project is estimated to generate an ADT volume of 636 based on the proposed 7,266.10 sf of retail, 3,027.40 sf of rooftop yoga studio (health/fitness club), and 30 multifamily residential units from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021). As discussed above, the existing 2021 ADT volume on Bouquet Can yon Road is assumed to be 37,650. It takes a doubling of traffic to increase traffic noise levels by 3 dBA. The project‐related traffic would increase traffic noise along Bouquet Canyon Road by up to 0.07 dBA. A noise level increase of less than 3 dBA would not be perceptible to the hu man ear in an outdoor environment. Therefore, no traffic noise impacts from project‐related traffic on off‐site sensitive receptors would occur, and no noise reduction measures are required.

Land Use Compatibility
The proposed project’s on‐site uses were assessed based on the City’s exterior noise standard of 65 dBA CNEL contained in the Noise Element of the City’s General Plan and an interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL, which is consistent with the State’s noise insulation standards.

Exterior Noise Levels
As discussed above, exterior noise level s in the project area include traffic on Bouquet Canyon Road, train noise from the Metrolink rail line, and commercial activity. The project site is located well beyond the airport influence area of the closest airports and the contribution of aircraft noise in the project area would be min imal to negligible. The long‐term noise level measurements at LT‐1 and LT‐2 are composite noise levels of all the noise sources in the project area described above, and the calculated CNEL levels at LT‐1 and LT‐2 were 62.0 and 60.4 dBA, respectively.

To assess the future ex terior noise levels on the project site, the composite existing exterior noise level at the ground floor of Receptors R‐1 and R‐2 were calculated based on traffic noise on Bouquet Canyon Road and train noise from the Metrolink rail line to ensure that it is consistent with the measured noise level. Figure 7 shows the model
ed receptor locations. Receptor R‐1 represents the
area east of the proposed building, which is in the approximate location of LT‐1. Receptor R‐2 represents the area west of the proposed building, which is in the approximate location of LT‐2.

Existing traffic noise le
vels on Bouquet Canyon Road are shown in Table L, which has a traffic noise level of 65 dBA CNEL at 344 ft from the roadway centerline. The existing commercial buildings north, east, and south of the project site would provide an estimated traffic noise reduction of 5 dBA and 3 dBA at Rece
ptors R‐1 and R‐2, respectively. The existing train noise was estimated to be 62.4 dBA CNEL at 50 ft based on a reference noise level of 57 dBA Leq at 50 ft with 21 daytime trips, 4 evening trips, and 5 nighttime trips. The existing commercial buildings north, east, and south of the project site would provide an estimated train noise reduction of 6 dBA and 4 dBA at Receptors R‐1 and R‐2, respectively.

Table P shows that the calculated ex isting composite noise levels at Receptors R‐1 and R‐2 are 63 and 61 dBA CNEL, respectively, which are levels considered in agreement with the measured noise levels at LT‐1 and LT‐2. Table C‐1 in Attachment C shows the detailed noise calculations for the existing ground floor nois
e levels at Receptors R‐1 and R‐2.

1.h
Packet Pg. 147
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) SOURCE: Google Earth (2021)
FEET
100500
FIGURE 7
Bouquet Canyon RdBouquet Canyon RdBouquet Canyon Rd
Modeled Receptor Locations
Promenade Flats
I:\HAV2001\G\Modeled_Receptor_Locs.ai (10/6/2023)
Project Site Boundary
Receptor Location
LEGEND
R-1R-1R-1
R-1R-1R-1
R-2R-2R-2

1.h
Packet Pg. 148
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 28 Table P: Exterior and Interior Noise Levels
Receptor No.

Noise Level (dBA CNEL)  Noise Reduction
to Meet 45 dBA
CNEL Interior
Noise Standard
Existing
Ground Floor
Exterior
Existing
Upper Floor
Exterior
Future
Upper Floor
Exterior
Interior
with Windows
and Doors Open1
R‐1  63  68  69.0  57.02  24.0
R‐2  61  64  65.0  53.0  20.0
Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2021).
1   Interior noise levels were calculated using an exterior‐to interior noise reduction of 12 dBA based on the EPA’s Protective Noise Levels (EPA 1978) and standard construction in California (warm climate) with a combination of exterior walls, doors, and windows. 2   Numbers shown in bold exceed the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL.

CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA = A‐weighted decibels
EPA = United States Environmental Protection Agency

The existing and future upper floor exterior noise levels were then calculated at Receptors R‐1 and R‐2 without shielding from the existing commercial buildings to the north, east, and south because the proposed residences would be located on the upper floors (floors 2 through 4) and the existing commercial buildings would not provide any noise re duction. The future traffic volume on Bouquet Canyon Road was estimated to have an average daily traffic (ADT) volume of 45,000 based on an ADT capacity of 9,000 vehicles per lane from the General Plan Circulation Element (City of Santa Clarita 2011a) and an existing five‐lane divided roadway (three lanes in the no rthbound direction and two lanes in the southbound direction) on Bouquet Canyon Road in the project area. The future ADT volume of 45,000 would have a traffic noise level of 65 dBA CNEL at a distance of 411 ft based on the FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA‐RD‐77‐108). This noise leve l represents the worst‐case scenario, which assumes no shielding is provided between the traffic and the location where the noise contours are drawn. The specific assumptions used in developing the noise level and model printout are provided in Attachment B.

Table P shows the existing and future up
per floor exterior noise levels at R‐1 and R‐2. Tables C‐2 and C‐3 in Attachment C shows the detailed noise calculations for the existing and future upper floor noise levels at Receptors R‐1 and R‐2. As shown in Table P, future upper floor exterior noise le vels at Receptors R‐1 and R‐2 are predicted to be 69.0 dBA CNEL and 65.0 dBA CNEL, respectively. The proposed outdoor private living areas (e.g., balconies or common outdoor areas) would have exterior noise levels that exceed the City’s exterior noise standard of 65  dBA CNEL for residential uses in the future as traffic increases. A minimum barrier height of 6 ft surrounding the private balconies of residential dwelling units and the rooftop terrace would provide a minimum noise reduction of 5 dBA and would reduce exterior noise levels to 65 dBA CNEL or below. In addition, the project would com
ply with Policy N3.1.9 in the Noise Element of the General Plan by providing notification to all potential buyers or renters of the residential dwelling units of noise sources in the area, new noise sources that may occur in the future, commerc ial uses that may generate noise in excess of levels for residential uses, that commercial uses may change over time, and that noise levels and frequency of noise events may change along with the change in commercial use because the proposed project would be located within 1,000 ft of the Metrolink rail  line and within 200 ft of commercial uses. Therefore, no exterior noise impacts would occur with implementation of balcony barriers and rooftop terrace barriers and compliance with Policy N3.1.9 in the City’s General Plan Noise Element.

1.h
Packet Pg. 149
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 29 Table P: Exterior and Interior Noise Levels
Receptor No.

Noise Level (dBA CNEL)  Noise Reduction
to Meet 45 dBA
CNEL Interior
Noise Standard
Existing
Ground Floor
Exterior
Existing
Upper Floor
Exterior
Future
Upper Floor
Exterior
Interior
with Windows
and Doors Open1
R‐1  63  68  69  572  24
R‐2  61  64  65  53  20
Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2022).
1   Interior noise levels were calculated using an exterior‐to interior noise reduction of 12 dBA based on the EPA’s Protective Noise Levels (EPA 1978) and standard construction in California (warm climate) with a combination of exterior walls, doors, and windows. 2   Numbers shown in bold exceed the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL.

CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA = A‐weighted decibels
EPA = United States Environmental Protection Agency

Interior Noise Levels
Table P shows the interior noise levels with windows and doors open for Receptors R‐1 and R‐2.

Interior noise levels with windows and doors open were calculated using an exterior‐to‐interior noise reduction of 12 dBA based on the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Protective Noise Levels (EPA
1978) and standard construction in California (warm climate) with a combination of exterior walls, doors, and windows. As shown in Table P, interior noise levels with windows and doors open would range from 53 to 57 dBA CNEL, which would exceed the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. Therefore, mechanical ventilation sy stems such as air conditioning would be required for all residential units so that windows and doors could remain closed for a prolonged period of time. Because the project plans show that air conditioning systems are included as part of the project, no additional measures are required.

Table P also sh
ows that an exterior‐to‐interior noise reduction of 20 to 24 dBA is required to meet the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. To calculate and estimate the noise reduction provided by an exterior wall assembly, the transmission loss at the octave band frequencies for wall material by type
is combined to provide an overall noise reduction. The rating of the wall and window or windows within the assembly will often be referred to as a sound transmission class (STC) rating.

The program INSUL was used to estimate the window ratings to ensure that compliance is ac hieved.

Based on wall details presented in the project plans, the following elements make up the assumed exterior wall assembly:
 7/8‐inch‐thick, three‐coat stucco
 One layer of 0.5‐inch‐thick plywood or oriented strand board (OSB)  One layer of 5/8‐inch‐thick gypsum board
 2‐inch x 6‐inch wood stud wall channels spaced at 16 inches and a minim um R‐19 fiberglass
insulation
 One layer of 5/8‐inch‐thick gypsum board
In addition to the wall construction details, information from the VPI Quality Windows Endurance Series, which is energy and sound rated, was used to determine wi ndow STC ratings. The required window STC ratings and the composite noise level reduction are provided for the sensitive rooms based on the project floor plans. Attachment D provides the results of the INSUL model.

1.h
Packet Pg. 150
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 30 The results of the analysis indicated that for the living room of the corner units facing east towards Bouquet Canyon Road, windows and glass doors with a minimum rating of STC‐31 are required due to the high wall exposure area and high window‐to‐wall ratio. For all other noise‐ sensitive rooms within the project site (i.e., living room and bedrooms), windows and glass doors with a minimum rating of STC‐28 would achieve interior noise levels of 45 dBA CNEL or below.

Long‐Term Off‐Site Stationary Noise Impacts
The project would be potentially exposed to stationary source noise impacts from truck deliveries and unloading activities, parking lot activities, and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment. The following provides a detailed noise analysis and discussion of each stationary noise source.

Truck Delivery and Truck Unloading Activities
The project would include truck delivery and unloading  activities associated with the first floor retail space. Truck delivery and truck unloading activities would occur in the designated parking space near the IHOP restaurant or near the south side of the proposed building. Existing truck delivery and truck unloading activities occur in the project area for the IHOP res taurant and the commercial uses to the south. Noise levels generated by truck deliveries and truck unloading activities from the proposed retail uses would occur at a similar location as the existing commercial uses to the south and would not increase the ambient noise environment in the project area. Therefore, no noi se impacts from truck deliveries and truck unloading activities would occur, and no noise reduction measures are required.

Parking Lot Activity
The proposed project would include a total of 41 new parking spaces located on an adjacent parcel.

Noise generated from parking lot activities would include noise generated by vehicles traveling at slow speeds, engine start‐up noise, car door slams,
car horns, car alarms, and tire squeals. The
existing residences north of the new parking spaces are already exposed to noise levels generated from parking activities associated with their own parking spaces and from the commercial uses to the east. Noise levels gen
erated by parking activities from the new parking spaces would not increase the ambient noise environment in the project area. Therefore, no noise impacts from parking activities would occur, and no noise reduction measures are required.

HVAC Equipment
The proposed project would include a total of 40 rooftop HVAC units for the proposed residential/ retail
building. The HVAC equipment could operate 24 hours per day. Each HVAC unit associated with the retail spaces would generate a sound power level (SWL) that ranges between 76.0 dBA and

79.0 dBA, which would be equivalent to noise levels of 44.4 dBA Leq and 47.4 dBA Leq at a distance of 50 ft. Each HVAC unit associated with residential uses would generate a sound pressure level (SPL) ranging between 60.0 dBA Leq and 63.0 dBA Leq at a distance of 3.3 ft. At a distance of 50 ft, noise levels would range between 36.3 dBA Leq and 39.3 dBA Leq. The composite noise level of all 40 HVAC units would be 56.2 dBA at a distance of 50 ft. The composite HVAC noise calculations are provided in Attachment E.

1.h
Packet Pg. 151
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 31 The 40 rooftop HVAC units would be shielded by the roofline and parapet, which would provide a minimum noise reduction of 8 dBA. Table Q summarizes the noise levels generated by the rooftop HVAC units at the adjacent land uses. As shown in Table Q, noise levels generated by the rooftop HVAC units wou
ld range from 37.6 to 49.1 dBA Leq. These noise levels would not exceed the City’s daytime and nighttime exterior noise standards of 65 dBA and 55 dBA for residential uses, respectively. In addition, these noise levels would not exceed the City’s daytime and nighttime exterior noise standard of 80 dBA and 70 dBA for commercial uses, respectively. Therefore, no noise impacts from on‐site HVAC equipme
nt would occur, and no noise reduction measures are required.

Table Q: HVAC Noise Levels
Land Use  Direction
Reference
Noise
Level1
(dBA Leq)
Reference
Distance
(ft)
HVAC
Equipment
to Property Line
Distance (ft)
Distance
Attenuation
(dBA)
Shielding2
(dBA)
Noise
Level
(dBA Leq)
Commercial  North  56.2  50  85  4.6  8  43.6
Commercial  East  56.2  50  50  0.0  8  48.2
Commercial  South  56.2  50  45 ‐ 0.9  8  49.1
Residential  West  56.2  50  170  10.6  8  37.6
Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2022).
1  The composite noise level of 40 HVAC units. The detailed composite noise level calculations are provided in. Attachment E 2  The roofline and high parapet would provide a minimum noise reduction of 8 dBA. dBA = A‐weighted decibels
ft = foot/feet
HVAC = heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
Leq = equivalent continuous sound level

Long‐Term Ground‐Borne Noise and Vibration
The proposed project would not generate vibration levels. In addition, vibration levels generated from project‐related traffic on the adjacent roadway (Bouquet Canyon Road) are unusual for on‐road vehicles because the rubber tires and suspension systems of on‐road vehicles provide vibration isolation. Therefore, no long‐term vibration impacts from long‐term operations of the project would occur, and no vibration re
duction measures are required.

STANDARD CONDITIONS AND REGULATORY COMPLIANCE
Short‐Term Construction Noise Impacts
The following measures would further minimize construction noise:
 The construction contractor shall limit construction activities to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. No work shall be performed outside of these hours or on Sundays, Ne w Year’s Day, Independence Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas, Memorial Day, and Labor Day.  During all project site excavation and grading, the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers’ standards.
 The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greate st distance between construction‐related noise sources and most noise‐sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction.

1.h
Packet Pg. 152
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

10/9/23 «P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx» 32  The construction contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that the emitted noise is directed away from the sensitive receptors nearest the project site.

Traffic Noise Impacts
The following measure is required to comply with Policy N3.1.9 in the Noise Element of the General Plan:
 Notification shall be provided to all potential buyers or renters of the residential dwelling units of noise sources in the area, new noise sources that may occur in the future, commercial uses that may generate noise in excess of lev
els for residential uses, commercial uses may change
over time, and noise levels and frequency of noise events may change along with the change in commercial use.

REDUCTION MEASURES
Short‐Term Construction Noise Impacts
No noise reduction measures are required.

Short‐Term Construction Vibration Impacts
No vibration reduction measures are required.

Aircraft Noise Impacts
No noise reduction measures are required.

Traffic Noise Impacts
The following on‐site noise reduction measures would be required for the proposed project.  All residential dwelling units and the rooftop terrace shall have a balcony barrier or rooftop terrace barrier with a minimum height of 6 ft.
 The exterior wall assembly shall meet or exceed the assumptions above.  All windows and glass doors in
the living rooms of the corner units on the east side of the project site facing Bouquet Canyon Road shall have a minimum STC rating of 31.  All windows and glass doors in other habitable rooms (i.e., bedrooms and living rooms) shall have a minimum ST C rating of 28.

Long‐Term Stationary Noise Impacts
No noise reduction measures are required.

Long‐Term Vibration Impacts
No vibration reduction measures are required.

Attachments:  A – References
B – FHWA Traffic Noise Model Printouts
C – Detailed Exterior Noise Calculations
D – INSUL Printouts
E – Composite HVAC Noise Calculations

1.h
Packet Pg. 153
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) N OISE   AND   V IBRATION   I MPACT   A NALYSIS
A UGUST   2023
P ROMENADE   F LATS   P ROJECT
S ANTA   C LARITA ,   C ALIFORNIA

P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx «10/09/23» ATTACHMENT A

REFERENCES
City of Santa Clarita. 2011a. General Plan, Circulation Element. June. Website: https://www.code publishing.com/CA/SantaClarita/html/SantaClaritaGP/4%20‐%20Circulation%20Element.pdf (accessed August 2023).
_____. 2011b. General Plan, Noise Element. June. Website: https://www.codepublishing.com/ CA/SantaClarita/html/SantaClaritaGP/5%20‐%20Noise%20Element.pdf (accessed August 2023).
_____.  2013. City of Santa Clarita Traffic Flow Map. April. Website: https://www.santa‐clarita.com/ home/showpublisheddocument?id=7621 (accessed May 2022). _____. 2023. Municipal Code. Apri l 25.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 1977. Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, FHWA‐RD‐77‐108.
_____. 2006. Highway Construction Noise Handbook. Roadway Construction Noise Model, FHWA‐HEP‐06‐015. DOT‐VNTSC‐FHWA‐06‐02. NTIS No. PB2006‐109012. August.

Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact  Assessment Manual.

FTA Report No. 0123. September. Website: https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/ files/docs/research‐innovation/118131/transit‐noise‐and‐vibration‐impact‐assessment‐ manual‐fta‐report‐no‐0123_0.pdf (accessed August 2023).

Harris, Cyril M., editor. 1991. Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control, Third Edition.

Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). 2021. Trip Generation Manual. 11th ed.

Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). 2004. Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan. December 1.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1978. Protective Noise Levels, Condensed Version of EPA Levels Document. EPA 550/9‐79‐100. November.

1.h
Packet Pg. 154
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) N OISE   AND   V IBRATION   I MPACT   A NALYSIS
A UGUST   2023
P ROMENADE   F LATS   P ROJECT
S ANTA   C LARITA ,   C ALIFORNIA

P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx «10/09/23» ATTACHMENT B

FHWA TRAFFIC NOISE MODEL PRINTOUTS

1.h
Packet Pg. 155
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) TABLE Existing-01

FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS

RUN DATE: 05/28/2021
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Bouquet Canyon Road
NOTES: Santa Clarita Plaza - Existing
______________________________________________________________________

* * ASSUMPTIONS * *

AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 37650 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5

TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES

DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS

75.51 12.57 9.34

M-TRUCKS

1.56 0.09 0.19

H-TRUCKS

0.64 0.02 0.08

ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 28 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD

______________________________________________________________________

* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *

CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 71.73

DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
112.0 343.9 1084.3 3427.5

______________________________________________________________________

1.h
Packet Pg. 156
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) TABLE Future-01

FHWA ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS

RUN DATE: 05/28/2021
ROADWAY SEGMENT: Bouquet Canyon Road
NOTES: Santa Clarita Plaza - Future
______________________________________________________________________

* * ASSUMPTIONS * *

AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 45000 SPEED (MPH): 45 GRADE: .5

TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES

DAY EVENING NIGHT
--- ------- -----
AUTOS

75.51 12.57 9.34

M-TRUCKS

1.56 0.09 0.19

H-TRUCKS

0.64 0.02 0.08

ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 28 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: HARD

______________________________________________________________________

* * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * *

CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 72.50

DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL
70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL
------- ------- ------- -------
132.6 410.7 1295.8 4096.5

______________________________________________________________________

1.h
Packet Pg. 157
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) N OISE   AND   V IBRATION   I MPACT   A NALYSIS
A UGUST   2023
P ROMENADE   F LATS   P ROJECT
S ANTA   C LARITA ,   C ALIFORNIA

P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx «10/09/23» ATTACHMENT C

DETAILED EXTERIOR NOISE CALCULATIONS

1.h
Packet Pg. 158
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Reference
Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)
Reference
Distance (ft)
Roadway
Centerline to
Receptor
Distance (ft)
Shielding
(dBA)
Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)
Reference
Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)
Reference
Distance (ft)
Rail
Centerline to
Receptor
Distance (ft)
Shielding
(dBA)
Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)
R‐1 65 344 222 5 63 64.2 50 311 6 46 63
R‐2 65 344 386 3 61 64.2 50 476 4 46 61
Table C‐1: Existing Ground Floor Exterior Noise Levels (Calibration) Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2021).

CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA = A‐weighted decibels
ft = foot/feet
Receptor No.

Bouquet Canyon Road Metrolink
Composite
Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)

1.h
Packet Pg. 159
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Reference
Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)
Reference
Distance (ft)
Roadway
Centerline to
Receptor
Distance (ft)
Shielding
(dBA)
Noise Level
with
Shielding
(dBA CNEL)
Reference
Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)
Reference
Distance (ft)
Rail
Centerline to
Receptor
Distance (ft)
Shielding
(dBA)
Noise Level
with
Shielding
(dBA CNEL)
R‐1 65 344 222 0 68 64.2 50 311 0 52 68
R‐2 65 344 386 0 64 64.2 50 476 0 50 64
Table C‐2:  Existing Upper Floor Exterior Noise Levels
ft = foot/feet
Receptor No.

Composite
Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)
Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2021).

CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA = A‐weighted decibels
Bouquet Canyon Road Metrolink

1.h
Packet Pg. 160
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Reference
Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)
Reference
Distance (ft)
Roadway
Centerline to
Receptor
Distance (ft)
Shielding
(dBA)
Noise Level
with
Shielding
(dBA CNEL)
Reference
Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)
Reference
Distance (ft)
Rail
Centerline to
Receptor
Distance (ft)
Shielding
(dBA)
Noise Level
with
Shielding
(dBA CNEL)
R‐1 65 411 222 0 69 64.2 50 311 0 52 69
R‐2 65 411 386 0 65 64.2 50 476 0 50 65
Table C‐3: Future Upper Floor Exterior Noise Levels
Note: The Predicted Future Noise Level was calculated by adding the Future Increase in Noise Level (Future Modeled Noise Level minus Existing Modeled Noise Level) to CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA = A‐weighted decibels
ft = foot/feet
Receptor No.

Composite
Noise Level
(dBA CNEL)
Bouquet Canyon Road Metrolink
Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, In c. (2021).

1.h
Packet Pg. 161
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use N OISE   AND   V IBRATION   I MPACT   A NALYSIS
A UGUST   2023
P ROMENADE   F LATS   P ROJECT
S ANTA   C LARITA ,   C ALIFORNIA

P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx «10/09/23» ATTACHMENT D

INSUL MODEL RESULTS PRINTOUTS

1.h
Packet Pg. 162
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.h
Packet Pg. 163
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.h
Packet Pg. 164
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.h
Packet Pg. 165
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project)

1.h
Packet Pg. 166
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) N OISE   AND   V IBRATION   I MPACT   A NALYSIS
A UGUST   2023
P ROMENADE   F LATS   P ROJECT
S ANTA   C LARITA ,   C ALIFORNIA

P:\HAV2001\Noise\Product\Noise Memo_20231009.docx «10/09/23» ATTACHMENT E

COMPOSITE HVAC NOISE CALCULATIONS

1.h
Packet Pg. 167
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) Area
Served Unit Space
Model
No. Capacity
Sound Power
Level (SWL)
Sound Pressure
Level (SPL dBA)
SPL
Reference
Distance (ft)
Noise Level
at 50 ft
(dBA) Energy
1‐1 Tenant #101 36 77 45.4 50 45.4 34673.7
1‐2 Tenant #102 36 77 45.4 50 45.4 34673.7
1‐3 Tenant #103 24 76 44.4 50 44.4 27542.3
1‐4 Tenant #104 36 77 45.4 50 45.4 34673.7
1‐5 Tenant #105 36 77 45.4 50 45.4 34673.7
1‐6 Tenant #106 48 79 47.4 50 47.4 54954.1
1‐7 Tenant #107 36 77 45.4 50 45.4 34673.7
2‐1 Unit #1 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
2‐2 Unit #2 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
2‐3 Unit #3 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
2‐4 Unit #4 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
2‐5 Unit #5  38MBRQ 36 n/a 63 3.28 39.3 8511.4
2‐6 Unit #6 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
2‐7 Unit #7 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
2‐8 Unit #8 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
2‐9 Unit #9 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
2‐10 Unit #10  38MBRQ 36 n/a 63 3.28 39.3 8511.4
3‐1 Unit #11 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
3‐2 Unit #12 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
3‐3 Unit #13 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
3‐4 Unit #14 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
3‐5 Unit #15  38MBRQ 36 n/a 63 3.28 39.3 8511.4
3‐6 Unit #16 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
3‐7 Unit #17 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
3‐8 Unit #18 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
3‐9 Unit #19 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
3‐10 Unit #20  38MBRQ 36 n/a 63 3.28 39.3 8511.4
4‐1 Unit #21 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
4‐2 Unit #22 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
4‐3 Unit
#23 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
4‐4 Unit #24 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
4‐5 Unit #25 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
4‐6 Unit #26 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
4‐7 Unit #27 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
4‐8 Unit #28 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
4‐9 Unit #29 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
4‐10 Unit #30 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
4‐11 Gym  Room 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
4‐12 Rec  Room 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
4‐13 Lobby? 24 n/a 60 3.28 36.3 4265.8
Combined Leq at 50 ft  56.2
HVAC Equipment and Noise Level Calculations
Retail
Residential
25HCE4
38MAQB
38MAQB
38MAQB
38MAQB
38MAQB

1.h
Packet Pg. 168
Attachment: CEQA Notice of Exemption (Continuation of the Appeal of the Promenade Flats Mixed Use Project) November 16, 2023
Santa Clarita Plaza Apartments Project for a Categorical Exemption as a Class 32 In-Fill Development (Envicom Project No. 2021-053-01)