City of Santa Clarita
Engineer’s Report
Open Space Preservation District
FISCAL YEAR 2025/2026
Intent Meeting: May 27, 2025
Public Hearing: June 10, 2025
Prepared on: March 20, 2025
27368 Via Industria
Suite 200
Temecula, CA 92590
T 951.587.3500 | 800.755.6864
F 951.587.3510
www.willdan.com
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION DISTRICT
ENGINEER’S REPORT
CERTIFICATE
This Report describes the District including the imp rovements, budgets, parcels and assessments to be l evied for Fiscal Year 2025/2026, as they existed at the time o f the passage of the Resolution of Intention. Refer ence is hereby made to the Los Angeles County Assessor’s ma ps for a detailed description of the lines and dime nsions of parcels within the District. The undersigned respec tfully submits the enclosed Report as directed by t he City Council.
Dated this ______ day of____________, 2025.
Willdan Financial Services
Assessment Engineer
By: ________________________________ By:__________ ___________________ Stacee Reynolds Tyrone Peter
Principal Consultant, District Administration Services PE # C81888
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer’s Report, together with Assessment Roll and Assessment Diagr am thereto attached was filed with me on the _____day of________, 2025.
By:_____________________________
Mary Cusick, City Clerk
City of Santa Clarita
Los Angeles County, California
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer’s Report, together with Assessment Roll and Assessment Diagr am thereto attached was approved and confirmed by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita, Californ ia, on the _____day of________, 2025.
By:_____________________________
Mary Cusick, City Clerk
City of Santa Clarita
Los Angeles County, California
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................................................... 1 A. BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................................................. 1 B. EFFECTS OF PROPOSITION 218 .................................................................................................................. 2 II. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.......................................................................................................................... 2 A. IMPROVEMENTS AUTHORIZED BY THE 1972 ACT .................................................................................... 2 B. DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MAINTAINED AND SERVICED ............................................. 3 III. ESTIMATE OF COST .......................................................................................................................................... 4 IV. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT ........................................................................................................................ 5 A. GENERAL ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 B. REASON FOR THE ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................................... 5 C. SPECIAL BENEFIT ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................................... 5 D. SPECIAL BENEFIT DETERMINATION .......................................................................................................... 6 E. AREA OF BENEFIT ........................................................................................................................................ 7 F. GENERAL BENEFIT ....................................................................................................................................... 8 G. SPECIAL BENEFIT METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................... 8 V. ASSESSMENT ROLL ........................................................................................................................................ 14 VI. ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM ................................................................................................................................. 14
APPENDICES
1) Certificate of Participation (Open Space and Parkland Acquisition Program) 2) Open Space Acquisition Implementation Work Program
Fiscal Year
2025/2026
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
I. OVERVIEW
A. BACKGROUND
Since the City of Santa Clarita’s (“the City”) inco rporation in 1987, the City has made a significant effort to preserve the greenbelts and undeveloped land within and outside the City. This includes implementing t he vision of the first and subsequent City Councils to buffer the Santa Clarita Valley with a greenbelt t o help maintain the character and quality of life for resi dents. During the “The Big Picture” Community Strat egic Planning process in 2004, several open space goals were reaffirmed. Additionally, in 2007 a number of community members spoke to the Council in support of preserving undeveloped land and asked the Council to, once again, pursue the creation of a mechanism to finance the acquisition and preservation of undeveloped land. In April 2007, the City Council adopted a resolution to initiate the formation of the City of Santa Clarita Open Space Preservation District.
On August 13, 2014, LAFCO (Local Agency Formation Com mission) approved Annexation 2013-03 (North Saugus) to the City of Santa Clarita. On October 1 4, 2014 LAFCO approved the boundary change of the City of Santa Clarita to include the North Saugus a rea. Beginning in Fiscal Year 2015/16, parcels in Annexation 2013-03 are subjected to the Open Space Preservation District Assessment.
On April 12, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolut ion No. 16-12, initiating annexation proceedings fo r the West Creek/West Hills annexation with the LAFCO. An nexation Application No. 2016-07 was submitted to LAFCO on April 14, 2016.
On June 28, 2016, the City Council approved and ado pted a Joint Resolution between the City and Los Angeles County approving and accepting the negotiat ed exchange of property tax revenue relating to the pending annexation of areas within the unincorporat ed portion of Los Angeles County. Following the Council's action, the Los Angeles County Board of S upervisors adopted the same Joint Resolution at the ir Board meeting of July 19, 2016. LAFCO approved Anne xation 2016-07 at their August 10, 2016, meeting and further held the protest hearing at their Octob er 12, 2016, meeting. Annexation 2016-07 was compl ete on November 15, 2016 when the annexation was recorded with the State.
On April 24, 2018, the City Council adopted Resolut ion No. 18-14, which initiated annexation proceedin gs for the Plum Canyon annexation with the Local Agenc y Formation Commission (LAFCO). Annexation Application No. 2018-04 was submitted to LAFCO on June 27, 2018.
On July 10, 2018, the City Council adopted a joint resolution between the City of Santa Clarita (City) and County of Los Angeles, approving and accepting the negotiated exchange of property tax revenue relatin g to the pending annexation of areas within the uninc orporated portion of Los Angeles County. Following the Council's action, the Los Angeles County Board of S upervisors adopted the same joint resolution at the ir board meeting on September 18, 2018. LAFCO approved Annexation 2018-04 at their October 10, 2018, meeting and further held the protest hearing at their November 14, 2018, meeting. Annexation 2018-04 was complete on November 15, 2018, when the annexation was recorded with the state.
On November 12, 2019, the City Council adopted Reso lution No. 19-57, which initiated annexation proceedings for the Tesoro del Valle annexation with the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) Annexation Application No. 2020-01 was submitted to LAFCO on January 28, 2020. The Tesoro del Valle annexation was completed on November 14, 2022.
Fiscal Year
2025/2026
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
B. EFFECTS OF PROPOSITION 218
On November 5, 1996, the electorate approved Propos ition 218, Right to Vote on Taxes Act, which added Articles XIIIC and XIIID to the California Constitu tion. The Article XIIID affects all assessments upon real property for a special benefit conferred on the pro perty. Assessments imposed under the Landscaping an d Lighting Act of 1972 are these types of benefit assessments.
The provisions of Proposition 218 can be summarized in four general areas:
1. Strengthens the general and special tax provisions of Propositions 13 and 62;
2. Extends the initiative process to all local taxes, assessments, fees and charges;
3. Adds substantive and procedural requirements to assessments; and
4. Adds substantive and procedural requirements to property-related fees and charges.
II. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
A. IMPROVEMENTS AUTHORIZED BY THE 1972 ACT
As applicable or may be applicable to this District , the 1972 Act defines improvements to mean one or any combination of the following:
The installation or planting of landscaping.
The installation or construction of statuary, founta ins, and other ornamental structures and facilities.
The installation or construction of public lighting facilities, including, but not limited to, traffic signals.
The installation or construction of any facilities w hich are appurtenant to any of the foregoing or which are necessary or convenient for the maintenan ce or servicing thereof, including, but not limited to, grading, clearing, removal of debris, t he installation or construction of curbs, gutters, walls, sidewalks, or paving, or water, irrigation, drainage, or electrical facilities. The installation of park or recreational improvements, including, but not limited to, all the following:
Land preparation, such as grading, leveling, cuttin g and filling, sod, landscaping, irrigation systems, sidewalks, and drainage.
Lights, playground equipment, play courts, and public restrooms. The maintenance or servicing, or both, of any of the foregoing. The acquisition of land for park, recreational, or open-space purposes. The acquisition of any existing improvement otherwise authorized pursuant to this section. Incidental expenses associated with the improvements include, but are not limited to:
The cost of preparation of the report, including pla ns, specifications, estimates, diagram, and assessment;
The costs of printing, advertising, and the publishing, posting and mailing of notices; Compensation payable to the County for collection of assessments; Compensation of any engineer or attorney employed to render services;
Fiscal Year
2025/2026
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
Any other expenses incidental to the construction, installation, or maintenance and servicing of the improvements;
Any expenses incidental to the issuance of bonds or notes pursuant to Section 22662.5. Costs associated with any elections held for the ap proval of a new or increased assessment.
The 1972 Act defines "maintain" or "maintenance" to mean furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation, and servicing of any improvement, including:
Repair, removal, or replacement of all or any part of any improvement. Providing for the life, growth, health, and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, or treating for disease or injury. The removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris, and other solid waste. The cleaning, sandblasting, and painting of walls an d other improvements to remove or cover graffiti.
B. DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MAINTAINED AND SERVICED
The Open Space Preservation District expands the City’s existing Open Space, Park and Parkland Program.
This program preserves, improves, finances, services and maintains facilities as described below.
It is the City Council’s intent to utilize the addi tional funding from the Open Space Preservation Dis trict to expand the existing Open Space, Park, and Parkland Program to accelerate vacant land acquisition in an d around the City in accordance with the guidelines o utlined in the Open Space Acquisition Implementatio n Work Program, which is included herein and is provided in the Appendix.
The improvements are the acquisition, preservation, improvement, financing, servicing and maintenance o f parks, parkland and open space lands and appurtenan t equipment and facilities, including but not limit ed to, personnel, electrical energy, utilities such as wat er, materials, contracting services, debt service c osts, and other items necessary for the satisfactory provision of these facilities and services.
Facilities include but are not limited to:
Open Space Lands
The Santa Clara River Watershed
Trail Systems
Wildlife Corridors
Park and Recreation Facilities and Equipment
Maintenance means the furnishing of services and ma terials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation, preservation and servicing, including re pair, removal or replacement of all or part of any of the park, parklands and open space lands or appurtenant equipment or facilities; providing for the life, g rowth, health and beauty of the landscaping, including cul tivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizi ng and treating for disease or injury; the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste; brush clearing; and the cleaning, sandblasting, and painting of walls and other improvements to remove or cover graffiti.
Servicing means the furnishing of water for the irr igation and the furnishing of electric current or e nergy, gas or other illuminating agent for the operation of th e park, parklands and open space lands or appurtena nt equipment or facilities.
Fiscal Year
2025/2026
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
The City financed a portion of the facilities through the issuance of bonded indebtedness.
The plans and specifications for the improvements, s howing the general nature, location and the extent of the facilities, are on file in the City Parks, Recr eation and Community Services Department and are he rein made a part of this report.
III. ESTIMATE OF COST
The City's budget for the Open Space, Park, and Park land Program, shown below, details the estimated co sts for Fiscal Year 2025/2026 as available at the time of pr eparation of this report. The 1972 Act provides tha t the total cost of the construction, acquisition, preservation, imp rovement, servicing and maintenance, together with incidental expenses, may be financed from the assessment proce eds. The incidental expenses may include engineering fees, legal fees, printing, mailing, postage, publishing, and all other related costs identified with the district proceedings.
Open Space, Park and Parkland Program Estimate of C osts:
Open Space, Park, and Parkland Program $9, 884,556 Expansion of the Program through the Preservation District 3, 425,09 8 Less General Benefit Contribution (69.6 0%) (9,263,520 ) Assessment shall not exceed Special Benefit Quantif ication of (30.4 0%): $4,046,134
Budget for Expansion of the Program through the Ope n Space Preservation District
Resources:
Beginning Land Acquisition Reser ve (Beginning Fund Balance FY 24/25) $8,200,130 Other Revenue (interest, etc. ) 372,685
Total Resources: $8,572,815
Uses:
Administration $1, 20 0,306
Bond Debt Service 844,806
Capital Projects 0
Operating Reserve Per Section 22569(a) 1,022,556
Ending Land Acquisition Reserve (Ending Fund Balance FY 24/25) 8,930,246 Total Uses: $11, 997,913
Total Preservation District Expansion Budget: $3,425,09 8 Total Assessable Benefit Units 81, 549.95
Maximum Assessment per Benefit Unit $42.00
Applied Rate per Benefit Unit $42.00
Note:
(1) Detailed estimated cost of components of the Program are available in the Neighborhood Services Department and are incorporated herein by this reference.
(2) Under the Preservation District, the total esti mated cost of the Improvements to be funded by the Preservation District is greater than the amount th at can be conveniently raised from a single annual assessment . The City is authorized to determine such costs of one or more Improvements, including related debt service, to be collected in installments over a per iod not to exceed thirty (30) fiscal years from its initial funding, as provided in the annual Enginee r’s Report. On December 12, 2007, the City executed and delivered $15,525,000 Certificates of Participation (Open Space and Parkland Acquisition Program) 2007 Series (t he “Certificates”) to fund such Improvements and the a ssessments from the Preservation District were pled ged to make debt service payments on the Certificat es.
The debt service schedule is attached hereto as Appendix 1.
The 1972 Act requires that a special fund be set-up for the revenues and expenditures of the District. Funds raised by assessment shall be used only for the purpose as stated herein. The City may advance funds or incur bonded indebtedness, if needed, to ensure adequate cash fl ow or timing of the provision of the facilities, an d will be
Fiscal Year
2025/2026
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
reimbursed for any such advances or payment of annu al bond debt service upon receipt of assessments. A ny surplus or deficit remaining on July 1 must be carried over to the next fiscal year.
IV. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT
A. GENERAL
Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways C ode, the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, perm its the establishment of Assessment Districts by cities for the purpose of providing certain public improv ements which include the construction, maintenance and ser vicing of park and recreation improvements and the acquisition of land for park, recreation or open space purposes.
Section 22573, Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 requires that assessments be levied according to benefit rather than according to assessed value. This section states:
"The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in prop ortion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements.”
The Act permits the designation of zones of benefit within any individual assessment district if "by re ason of variations in the nature, location, and extent of t he improvements, the various areas will receive dif ferent degrees of benefit from the improvements." (Sec. 22 574). Thus, the 1972 Act requires the levy of a true "assessment" rather than a "special tax."
In addition, Proposition 218, the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act" which was approved on the November 1996 Statewide ballot and added Article XIIID to the Cal ifornia Constitution, requires that a parcel's asse ssment may not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportio nal special benefit conferred on that parcel. XIIID provides that only special benefits are assessable and the City must separate the general benefits fro m the special benefits. XIIID also requires that publicly owned properties that benefit from the improvement s be assessed.
B. REASON FOR THE ASSESSMENT
The District funds a portion of the City’s Open Spac e, Park, and Parkland Program (the “Program”) as previously defined herein in Section II of this Report.
This Program covers park and recreation facilities, open space lands, the Santa Clara River watershed, trail systems and wildlife corridors throughout the City of Santa Clarita, and open space preservation aroun d the perimeter of the City.
C. SPECIAL BENEFIT ANALYSIS
Parcels within the District are assessed for those improvements that provide a special benefit to the properties. Article XIIID of the California Constitution defines special benefit as:
"A particular and distinct benefit over and above g eneral benefits conferred on real property located in the district or to the public at large. General enh ancement of property value does not constitute ‘spe cial benefit’."
Fiscal Year
2025/2026
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
D. SPECIAL BENEFIT DETERMINATION
In determining the proportionate special benefit de rived by each identified parcel, the proximity of t he parcel to the public improvements detailed in Part A above , and the capital, maintenance and operating costs of said public improvements, was considered and analyz ed. Due to the close proximity of the parcels to th e improvements detailed in Part A above, it has been demonstrated and determined the parcels are uniquel y benefited by, and receive a direct advantage from, and are conferred a particular and distinct special benefit over and above general benefits by, said public improvements.
The overall quality of life and desirability of an a rea is enhanced when parks, open space and recreati onal facilities are in place, improved, operable, safe, clean and maintained. Property desirability in an a rea also increases when there is an increase in the number of parks, open space and recreation facilities.
Studies in a number of communities have indicated t hat recreation areas and facilities, if well mainta ined and wisely administered, have caused a marked increase in the property values of parcels in the community.
Consequently, such recreation and park facilities h ave proved to be a potent factor in maintaining a s ound economic condition and a high standard of livabilit y in the community. These studies confirm the opini on long held by planning authorities as to the economi c value of parks and recreational facilities in a community.
"The recreation value is realized as a rise in the v alue of land and other property in or near the recreation area, and is of both private interest to the landowner and others, holding an economic stak e in the area, and of public interest to the taxpayer s, who have a stake...." (National Recreation and P ark Association, June 1985)
“Recreation and park amenities are central componen ts in establishing the quality of life in a community. ... [businesses’] main resource is their employees for whom quality of life is an important issue... The availability and attractiveness of loca l parks and programs influences some companies’ relocation decisions. ... the presence of a park en courages real estate development around it....” (California Parks & Recreation, Winter 1997)
The special benefit of parks and other recreational facilities conferred to residential and non-residen tial properties has been summarized by a number of studi es. The United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service, in a publication dated June 1984, concluded that:
"Parks and recreation stimulate business and generate tax revenues." "Parks and recreation help conserve land, energy, and resources." "An investment in parks and recreation helps reduce pollution and noise, and makes for a more pleasing community...”
"Public recreation benefits all employers by provid ing continuing opportunities to maintain a level of fitness throughout one's working life, and through helping individuals cope with the stress of a fast- paced and demanding life."
Collaborative Economics, a Silicon Valley think-tan k, has found strong connections between the physica l design and attractive maintenance of community faci lities and the new knowledge-driven, service-orient ed economy ( Linking the New Economy to Livable Communities , Collaborative Economics 1998). Businesses are increasingly valuing “quality of life” as a way to recruit and retain skilled workers ( Profiles of Business Leadership on Smart Growth , National Association of Local Government Environm ental Professionals, 1999).
Non-residential property (either vacant or develope d) located within a community that actively promote s the design and maintenance of park and recreation facil ities, is conferred a distinct and special benefit because
Fiscal Year
2025/2026
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
these features attract businesses, ensuring the hig hest and best use of the property. Area desirabilit y helps to assure that vacant property is actually marketab le to willing buyers and helps assure that the prop erty owner can actually capture the full market value for property.
Residential property (both vacant and developed) be nefits from the “area desirability” because workers are attracted to community, and will purchase homes, wh ich again assures the highest and best use of the property. As described above, when an area is desir able, property is more marketable and owners are better positioned to capture the benefits full market value.
The entire community, and parcels within the communi ty, are conferred a special benefit when parks and recreational facilities are included as part of the overall community design standard and are maintained.
The Supreme Court of California, in Knox v. City of Orland, acknowledged that parks confer special benefit.
In this opinion, the Supreme Court of California st ated, “in California, there is a lengthy history of legislative and judicial recognition that parks constitute proper subjects for special assessment.”
Homebuyers over age 55, considering a move, were su rveyed about the amenities that “would seriously influence them in selecting a new community” in Boomers on the Horizon: Housing Preferences of the 55+ Market , National Association of Home Builders, 2002. The following results were found:
Amenity Group
% Seeking
Amenity
Rank on
List
Walking and jogging trails
Walking and jogging trails
55+
55+ >$75k per year
52 65 1
Outdoor spaces
Outdoor spaces (park)
55+
55+, moving to suburbs
51 55 2
Open Spaces 55+ 46 4
Finally, the ERE Yarmouth and Real Estate Research C orporation has found that “smart communities” (those that actively plan and maintain parks, open space, streetscaping and pedestrian friendly featur es) will experience the fastest rise in real estate val ues ( Defining New Limits, Emerging Trends in Real Estate , ERE Yarmouth and Real Estate Research Corporation, 1988).
In addition, all of the aforementioned above illust rates that parks, open space and recreational facil ities contribute to a specific increase in property desir ability which confers a particular and distinct spe cial benefit upon the real property located within the district.
E. AREA OF BENEFIT
Proposition 218 states, “No assessment shall be imp osed on any parcel which exceeds the reasonable cos t of the proportional special benefit conferred on th at parcel. Only special benefits are assessable, an d an agency must separate the general benefits from the special benefits conferred on a parcel.”
Based on the above, the area of benefit for the fac ilities and services funded by the District are def ined below:
Fiscal Year
2025/2026
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
The National Recreation and Park Association standar ds are used to define the service area of the City’ s existing parklands and open space areas. These stand ards state that a community park, which serves the needs of several neighborhoods, has a service radiu s of up to 3 miles. Properties within this 3-mile s ervice radius are considered to receive special benefit from the facility.
To define the service area of the District, a 3-mile radius was drawn around all of the City’s existing parklands and open space areas. This is shown on the Assessment Diagram at the back of this Report.
Parcels within the District service area are consid ered to receive special benefit from the District. The total area served by the Program, as defined above, is 14 9,340.58 acres. Of that area, 103,984.51 acres, or approximately 69.60 percent, is outside the city bo undaries. The benefits conferred on these non-city parcels within the service areas are considered the “general benefits” associated with the District.
Therefore, only 30.40 percent of the District budget is assessed to City properties as the quantificati on of special benefits received, and 69.60 percent of the budget will be provided from other sources (e.g.: general fund, Proposition A funds, etc.).
F. GENERAL BENEFIT
Section 4 of Article XIIID requires that the genera l benefits imparted by the Open Space, Park and Par kland Program be separated from the special benefits and that only the special benefit portion of the costs of the project be assessed against those parcels which are identified as receiving special benefits.
As stated above, only 30.40 percent of the District budget is assessed to properties within the City boundaries as the quantification of special benefit s received, and 69.60 percent of the budget is defi ned as the “general benefits”.
This quantification of general benefit is considered a conservative estimate as much of the area outsid e the City boundaries is currently sparsely developed whe n compared with the development intensity within th e City.
All properties within the City of Santa Clarita are within the service area of the City’s existing par klands and open space areas. Therefore, these properties receiv e special benefit from the existing facilities. The existing facilities are distributed throughout all areas of the City. Due to the uniform distribution of the existing parklands and open space areas in the City , it is considered a reasonable approximation of th e ultimate service area of the parklands and open space to be obtained, developed and preserved through the Program.
Any future acquisition of undeveloped lands will be within the City of Santa Clarita city limits or wi thin the service area of the City’s existing parklands and open space areas. Due to this account and the fact that any undeveloped lands outside the City boundaries will remain essentially in their natural state, these ad ditional areas are not considered to increase the benefit boundaries of the District.
Additional general benefits to the public at large are considered incidental and non-quantifiable and are more than adequately funded by the City’s additional contribution.
G. SPECIAL BENEFIT METHODOLOGY
The District boundaries are coterminous with the City of Santa Clarita. To establish the special benefit to the individual parcels within the District, a Benefit Unit system is utilized. Each parcel of land is assi gned Benefit Units (BU's) in proportion to the estimated special benefit the parcel receives relative to the other parcels
Fiscal Year
2025/2026
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
within the District from the Program. Benefit Units are established by considering both the dwelling u nit equivalency of a property and the benefits provided, as discussed above.
Basic Formula:
(Equivalent Dwelling Units) x (Benefit Factor) = Benefit Units
EQUIVALENT DWELLING UNITS
In order to allocate benefit fairly between the par cels, an Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) methodology is utilized, which equates different types of land use s to a single-family residential parcel, thereby al lowing a uniform method of assessment.
The EDU method uses the single family home as the ba sic unit of apportionment. A single family home equals one Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU). Every other land use is converted to EDU's as described bel ow.
All assessable properties in the District are assig ned dwelling units and land use classifications per the County Assessor's roll. (Inaccuracies in the County data will be reviewed on a case by case basis as t hey are brought to the City’s attention.)
The methodology to calculate the EDU’s for other res idential land uses and for non-residential parcels is as follows:
Every land use is converted to EDU's. Parcels conta ining apartments are converted to EDU's based on th e number of dwelling units on each parcel of land; no n-residential parcels are converted based on the lo t size of each parcel of land.
Table 1 outlines the EDU formula.
Table I: EDU Formula
Land Use Assessed Unit x
EDU
Factor =
Equivalent Dwelling Unit
Rate (EDU)
Residential
Single family home 1 dwelling x 1 = 1.00 EDU/dwelling Single family vacant 1 parcel x 0.25 = 0.25 EDU/parcel Multi-Family (incl. Condo/Apt) 1 dwelling x 0.75 = 0.75 EDU/dwelling Mobile Home Parks 1 space x 0.5 = 0.50 EDU/space
Developed Non-Residential
Commercial, Industrial, 1 acre x 6 = 6.00 EDU/acre
Government, Church 1.00 EDU/parcel min
Vacant
1 acre x 1.5 = 1.50 EDU/acre
0.25 EDU/parcel min
5 acre x 1.5 = 7.50 EDU/parcel max
Residential
Single Family Residences (SFR). A single family home equals 1 EDU.
Fiscal Year
2025/2026
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
Multi-family Residences (Apartments and Condominiums) and Mobile Home Parks. Multifamily residential parcels and Mobile Home Park equivalenc ies are determined by multiplying the number of dwelling units on each parcel by 0.75 and 0.5, resp ectively, due to the relative population density of these types of dwelling units and reduced unit size compa red to the typical density and size of an SFR. Studi es have consistently shown that the average apartment unit impacts infrastructure approximately 75% as much as a single-family residence and the average mobile home unit impacts infrastructure approximately 50% . (Sources: Institute of Transportation Engineers Info rmational Report Trip Generation, Fifth Edition, 1991 ; Metcalf and Eddy, Wastewater Engineering Treatment, Disposal, Reuse, Third Edition, 1991). Trip generation and wastewater usage are a function of p opulation density. Based on this, it is concluded t hat other infrastructure will be similarly impacted at a reduced level. The smaller average unit size of mu ltiple- residential and mobile homes results in a lesser enhancement per unit to property values.
The EDU's assigned to a multi-residential or to a mobile home parcel are calculated based on the number of dwelling units and the appropriate EDU factor. For e xample, the EDU factor for multi-residential (0.75) is multiplied by the number of dwelling units on the p arcel to determine the total EDU's for the multiple residential parcel. Similarly, the total EDU's for a mobile home parcel are calculated by multiplying the EDU factor (0.5) by the number of mobile home units on the parcel.
Developed Non-Residential
Developed non-residential properties are defined as improved commercial, industrial and institutional properties (such as churches). In converting these properties to EDU's, the size of the parcels is com pared to the median size of a single-family residential l ot, which is 0.17 acres. This equals approximately 6 SFR lots per acre of land. Therefore, developed non-resi dential parcels are assigned EDU’s at a rate of 6 E DU’s per acre. The minimum EDU assignment for a developed non-residential parcel is 1.0 EDU per parcel, which is the same as a developed SFR.
The area of non-residential condominium parcels is c alculated based on the individual area of the condo plus an equal share of the common area associated with the condominium project .
Vacant
Vacant property consists of parcels with few or no improved structures. These properties have virtually no impacts on infrastructure to make a comparison to d eveloped property; however, based on the Los Angele s County Assessor’s data, the average land value of a n SFR property is between 45% and 50% of the total value. Splitting the difference between value and i mpacts, vacant property is assigned EDU’s at the ra te of 25 percent of improved property.
A vacant parcel, designated exclusively for a single-family residential unit by a recorded Tract Map or Parcel Map, will be assigned 0.25 EDUs per lot.
Other vacant parcels, including those properties de signated as agricultural, are assessed based upon t he acreage of the parcel. All of these parcels will be assigned EDU's at the rate of 25% of the developed non- residential properties, or 1.5 EDU’s per acre.
Regarding larger vacant properties, a strict applic ation of the EDU rate per acre will result in an inappropriately large assessment, particularly cons idering the fact that the vacant parcel provides so me of the open space attributes the park system endeavors to provide. As the size of a parcel increases, it begins to provide proportionally larger open space charact eristics. In order to recognize this, the EDU rate for vacant, non-SFR property is applied to the first 5 a cres only. This provides the City with a mechanism t o effectively model the benefits received by vacant, non-SFR property in the more urbanized areas (where
Fiscal Year
2025/2026
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
vacant lot sizes tend to be smaller because of encr oaching development) while also crediting the open space benefits provide by larger, undeveloped parcels.
Therefore, vacant, non-SFR parcels will be assessed 1 .5 EDU’s per acre up to a maximum of 5 acres per parcel. The minimum EDU assignment for a vacant parc el is 0.25 EDU’s per parcel, which is 25% of a developed SFR.
Exempt
Exempted from the assessment are the areas of stree ts, avenues, lanes, roads, drives, courts, alleys, and public easements, rights-of-ways, and parkways. Als o exempted from assessment are utility rights-of-wa y, common areas (such as in condominium complexes), la ndlocked parcels and small parcels vacated by the City as these parcels have little or no value and therefore do not benefit from the improvements.
In addition, parks, greenbelts and open space are e xempt from assessment, as are public schools, golf courses (which are considered as parks in most citi es’ planning documents) and cemeteries, which are a lso considered to provide a type of parkland and open space.
Government-Owned Property
Prop. 218 states, “Parcels within a district that a re owned or used by any [public] agency…shall not b e exempt from the assessment unless the agency can de monstrate…that [the] parcels in fact receive no special benefit.”
Government-owned (public) properties must be assess ed for the benefits they receive. If no benefit is received (for example, parks and schools as discuss ed above) then the government owned parcels can be “exempt” from the assessment. Uses such as City Hal l and maintenance yards are assessed as developed non-residential property.
BENEFIT FACTORS
Proper preservation of parklands and open space wit hin and surrounding the City benefits properties by providing environmental quality and recreational enhancement. The amount of benefit received will vary with the different land use of the property. There are tw o categories from which the total benefit of a parc el is derived, and these benefits are weighted equally with respect to each other:
1. Environmental Quality Benefit. The improvement of the quality of air, visual aesthe tics and attractiveness of the community as a place to live, work and do business. All properties within the District are considered to receive this benefit.
2. Recreation Enhancement Benefit. The availability of useable and safe parkland and re creational facilities. Only residential properties are conside red to receive this benefit as it more directly rel ates to the enhancement of the quality of life in the residential community.
Table 2 outlines the Benefit Factors for the Open space, park and parkland program:
Table II: Open Space & Parkland Benefit Factors
Land Use: Residential Non-Residential
1. Environmental Quality 0.5 0.5
2. Recreation Enhancement 0.5 0
Total Benefit Factor = 1 0.5
Fiscal Year
2025/2026
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
BENEFIT UNITS
As discussed above, the basic formula for calculating Benefit Units for each property is as follows:
Basic Formula:
(Equivalent Dwelling Units) x (Benefit Factor) = Benefit Units
Table 3, below, outlines the Benefit Unit calculations for various properties:
Table III: Benefit Unit Calculation
Land Use
Assessed
Unit x
EDU
Factor x
Benefit
Factor = Benefit Unit (BU) Rate
Residential
Single family home 1 dwelling x 1.0 x 1.0 = 1.00 BU / dwelling Single family vacant 1 parcel x 0.25 x 1.0 = 0.25 BU / parcel Multi-Family (incl. Condo) 1 dwelling x 0.75 x 1.0 = 0.75 BU / dwelling Mobile Home Parks 1 space x 0.5 x 1.0 = 0.50 BU / space Developed Non -Residential
Commercial, Industrial,
Gov, Church 1 acre x 6 x 0.5 = 3.00 BU / acre
1 EDU min x 0.5 = 0.50 BU/ parcel min
Vacant
1 acre x 1.5 x 0.5 = 0.75 BU / acre
0.25 EDU min x 0.5 = 0.125 BU/ parcel min
5 acre x 1.5 x 0.5 = 3.75 BU/ parcel max
Table 4, below, provides a summary of Benefit Units for the City of Santa Clarita.
Table IV: Assessable Benefit Unit Summary by Land Use
Land Use
No. of
Parcels
No. of
dwellings No. of Acres No. Of Benefit Units
Residential
Single family home 43,394 43,394 43,394.00
Single family vacant 1,299 1,299 324.75
Multi-family residential 434 12,467 9,350.25
Condominiums 20,159 20,159 15,119.25
Mobile Home Parks 27 2,447 1,223.50
Developed Non-Residential
Commercial / Industrial 2,052 3,486.86 10,539.32
(incl. Government & Church)
Vacant
Vacant 5 acres or less 594 870.43 661.87
Vacant more than 5 acres 266 6,719.46 997.50
Totals: 68,225 79,766 11,076.74 81,610.44
Fiscal Year
2025/2026
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
ASSESSMENT RATE CALCULATION
Table 5 provides the assessment rate calculation for FY 2025/2026.
Table V: Assessment Rate Calculation
Estimated Budget No. of BU's FY 2025/26 Applied
Assessment per BU
FY 2025/26
Maximum*
Assessment per BU
FY 2024/25
Maximum
Assessment per BU
$3, 509,246.35 81, 610.44 $43.00 $43.00 $42.00
* The maximum annual assessment rate will be increased each year by $1.00 per Benefit Unit (table below).
The actual assessments levied in any fiscal year wil l be as approved by the City Council and may not exceed the maximum assessment rate without receiving property owner approval for the increase.
Sample calculations for various land uses are provided in the following Table 6:
Table VI: Sample Calculations
Land Use
No. of Units or
Parcel Size x
EDU
Factor x
Benefit
Factor =
Benefit
Units
FY 24-25
Annual
Asmt.
Residential
Single family home 1 dwelling x 1 x 1 = 1 $43.00
Single family vacant (subdivided) 1 parcel x 0.25 x 1 = 0.25 $10.75 Condominium 1 dwelling x 0.75 x 1 = 0.75 $32.25
Duplex 2 dwellings x 0.75 x 1 = 1.5 $64.50
4-plex 4 dwellings x 0.75 x 1 = 3 $129.00
10 -unit Apartment 10 dwellings x 0.75 x 1 = 7.5 $322.50 Mobile Home Parks 10 spaces x 0.5 x 1 = 5 $215.00
Developed Non -Residential
Commercial, Industrial, Gov, Church 0.25 acres x 6 x 0.5 = 0.75 $32.25 Commercial, Industrial, Gov, Church 0.5 acres x 6 x 0.5 = 1.5 $64.50 Commercial, Industrial, Gov, Church 1 acre x 6 x 0.5 = 3 $129.00 Vacant
Vacant 0.5 acres x 1.5 x 0.5 = 0.38 $16.34
Vacant 1 acres x 1.5 x 0.5 = 0.75 $32.25
Vacant 5 acres x 1.5 x 0.5 = 3.75 $161.25
Vacant * 10 acres = 3.75 $161.25
* Vacant parcels with more than 5 acres are assessed a maximum amount of 3.75 benefit units.
ASSESSMENT DURATION
The Open Space Preservation District is proposed to exist for thirty (30) years beginning with 2007/08 and maturing in Fiscal Year 2036/37.
Fiscal Year
2025/2026
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
V. ASSESSMENT ROLL
The Assessment Roll is a listing of the proposed ass essment for Fiscal Year 2025/2026 apportioned to eac h lot or parcel, as shown on the last equalized roll of the Assessor of the County of Los Angeles. The Prelimina ry Assessment Roll is provided as part of this report and is incorporated herein.
The description of each lot or parcel is part of the records of the Assessor of the County of Los Angel es and these records are, by reference, made part of this Report.
VI. ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM
The Assessment Diagram for the District is provided on the following page. The lines and dimensions of e ach lot or parcel within the District are those lines and dime nsions shown on the maps of the Assessor of the Cou nty of Los Angeles, for the year when this Report was prepared, and are incorporated by reference herein and made part of this Report.
Fiscal Year
2024/2025
City of Santa Clarita
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
APPENDIX 1
Appendix 1
Certificates of Participation
Open Space and Parkland Acquisition Program 2007 Series Debt Service Schedule
Fiscal Year
2024/2025
City of Santa Clarita
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
APPENDIX 1
Fiscal Year
2024/2025
City of Santa Clarita
Open Space Preservation District
Engineer’s Report
APPENDIX 2
Appendix 2
Open Space Acquisition
Implementation Work Program