CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday, November 25, 2025
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
Ayala
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.
AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS
Recycling All Star Award
Friends of Hart Park Lifetime Achievement Award
Investment Policy and Excellence in Financial Reporting Awards City of Santa Clarita Technology Services Award Recognition
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. APPEAL OF THE WILEY CANYON MIXED USE PROJECT (MASTER CASE 20-238) - Appeal of the Planning Commission determination to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report and approve the Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project, Master Case 20-238 and its associated entitlements.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council:
1. Conduct the public hearing.
2. Adopt a resolution, denying Appeal 25-002, and affirming the Planning Commission decision to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2202030626) prepared for the project, including adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
3. Adopt a resolution denying Appeal 25-002 and affirming the Planning Commission’s approval of the Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (Master Case 20-238).
2. SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE TO ADOPT THE 2025 CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE - This ordinance adopts the 2025 California Building Standards Code with an effective date of January 1, 2026, as required by state law and also adopts local amendments to the state codes.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council conduct a public hearing and adopt an ordinance entitled: “AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING AND REPLACING TITLES 18 THROUGH 22, TITLE 24, AND CHAPTER 25.01 OF TITLE 25; AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025 CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE, BUILDING, RESIDENTIAL,
ELECTRICAL, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING, ENERGY, EXISTING BUILDING,
HISTORICAL BUILDING, FIRE, WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE, GREEN
BUILDING STANDARDS, AND REFERENCED STANDARDS CODES WITH CERTAIN APPENDICES AND LOCAL AMENDMENTS.”
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 28, 2025 Regular Meeting.
4. CHECK REGISTER NOS. 23 AND 24 - Check Register No. 23 for the Period 10/03/25 through 10/16/25 and 10/23/25. Electronic Funds Transfers for the Period of 10/06/25 through 10/17/25. Check Register No. 24 for the Period 10/17/25 through 10/30/25 and 11/06/25. Electronic Funds Transfers for the Period of 10/20/25 through 10/31/25.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council approve and ratify for payment the demands presented in Check Register Nos. 23 and 24.
5. FIVE-YEAR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE CITY'S RECORDS
RETENTION SCHEDULE - The City of Santa Clarita Records Retention Schedule is brought before the City Council for approval no less than once every five years.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council adopt a resolution approving amendments to the City of Santa Clarita Records Retention Schedule.
6. PURCHASE OF A ZAMBONI FOR THE CUBE ICE AND ENTERTAINMENT CENTER - City Council consideration for a new Zamboni ice-resurfacer for The CUBE.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council:
1. Approve the “piggyback” purchase of a Zamboni from Zamboni Company USA, Inc. using Sourcewell contract #120320-FZC in an amount not to exceed $200,625.
2. Authorize the City Manager or designee to execute all documents, subject to City Attorney approval.
7. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE UPDATED SEWER SYSTEM
MANAGEMENT PLAN (SSMP) - Adopt a resolution approving the updated Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council:
1. Adopt a resolution approving the updated Sewer System Management Plan.
2. Find that the Sewer System Management Plan is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Article 19, Class 1, Section 15301, Existing Facilities.
3. Authorize the City Manager, or designee, to make future minor updates as may be required by the State Water Resources Control Board that do not have a financial impact to the City, to comply with Waste Discharge Requirements.
4. Direct the City Clerk to record the certified original resolution in the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder’s office.
8. TAX-SHARING RESOLUTIONS FOR SANITATION DISTRICT, ANNEXATION NOS. 1134, 1137, AND 1143 - The Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District provides wastewater treatment services within the District's service area. To provide wastewater treatment service to properties located outside the District's service area, the boundary must be expanded through the annexation process. The District has requested the City Council consider adopting resolutions for three annexations.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council:
1. Adopt the Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District's resolutions approving and accepting the negotiated exchange of property tax revenues resulting from Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District Annexation Nos. 1134, 1137, and 1143.
2. Authorize the City Manager or designee to execute all documents, subject to City Attorney approval.
9. SANTA CLARITA VALLEY WATER AGENCY EASEMENT ON CITY
PROPERTY - This item recommends the extension of an existing temporary construction easement on City property for the Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency's Castaic Conduit Bypass Pipeline Project.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council:
1. Approve an extension of the existing temporary construction easement with the Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency on City-owned Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 2811-063- 904, 2811-063-905, 2811-063-906, and 2811-063-907 (Rye Canyon Industrial area).
2. Authorize the City Manager or designee, to execute all documents, subject to City Attorney approval.
10. FRANCHISED WASTE HAULER ANNUAL RATE ADJUSTMENT - The City of Santa Clarita's residential and commercial solid waste services provider is Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc. Per the approved franchise agreement, the waste hauler may submit a request for an annual rate adjustment.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council adopt a resolution approving the annual rate adjustment request for Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc., contingent upon the implementation of Los Angeles County’s proposed residential rate in the unincorporated areas of the Santa Clarita Valley effective January 1, 2026.
11. SPECIALIZED ELEVATOR CONTRACT RATIFICATION - This item considers ratifying payments in the amount of $22,646 to Specialized Elevator for elevator services at City of Santa Clarita facilities.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council ratify payments in the amount of $22,646 to Specialized Elevator for
emergency repair services to city-wide elevators.
12. CITY HALL & VALENCIA LIBRARY WINDOW SEAL & WALL JOINT REPAIR - PROJECT M1044 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS - This item considers increasing the expenditure authority for the existing contract with Angelus Waterproofing and will provide the necessary appropriations to accommodate the unanticipated labor and material costs associated with construction efforts.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Council:
1. Authorize an increased expenditure authority for construction activity with Angelus Waterproofing and Restoration, Inc., in the amount of $93,000 for a revised total contract amount not to exceed $477,777.
2. Appropriate $93,000 from General Fund Capital Projects Fund (Fund 601) to expenditure account M1044601-516101. Increase transfers out from General Fund (fund 100) account 1009500-710601 and increase transfers in to General Fund Capital Projects Fund (Fund 601) account 601-600100 in the amount of $93,000.
3. Authorize the City Manager or designee to execute all documents, subject to City Attorney approval.
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
ADJOURNMENT
FUTURE MEETINGS
The next regular meeting of the City Council will be held December 9, 2025, at 6:00 PM in the Council Chambers, 1st floor of City Hall, 23920 Valencia Blvd., Santa Clarita, CA.
CERTIFICATION
On November 20, 2025, 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: November 25, 2025
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE WILEY CANYON MIXED USE PROJECT
(MASTER CASE 20-238)
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
PRESENTER: Erika Iverson
RECOMMENDED ACTION
City Council:
1. Conduct the public hearing.
2. Adopt a resolution, denying Appeal 25-002, and affirming the Planning Commission decision to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2202030626) prepared for the project, including adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
3. Adopt a resolution denying Appeal 25-002 and affirming the Planning Commission’s approval of the Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (Master Case 20-238).
BACKGROUND
REQUEST
On September 16, 2025, the Planning Commission certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and approved the Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project, Master Case 20-238, consisting of an Architectural Design Review (ADR), Conditional Use Permit (CUP), Development Review (DR), Minor Use Permit (MUP), Oak Tree Permit (OTP), and Tentative Map (TM) to allow for the development of a mixed-use project consisting of a senior-living facility with 120 assisted-living units; 9,000 square feet of commercial floor area; 45 detached single-family units, 8 of which would include an attached Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU); and 179 townhome units (Project).
An appeal of the Planning Commission determination was filed on September 30, 2025. The 1 Packet Pg. 7
appeal letter was signed by 30 members of the public (collectively “the appellant”). A copy of the appeal letter is provided as an attachment to this agenda report for the City Council’s review.
The appeal letter claims that 1) the determination is not in accord with the purposes of the Santa Clarita Municipal Code (SCMC); 2) there was an error or abuse of discretion; 3) the record includes inaccurate information; and 4) the decision is not supported by the record. In summary, the appeal raises the following concerns about the points above:
1. Wiley Canyon Road should be constructed as four lanes, and the environmental impact regulations for protocol site surveys of the Crotch’s Bumble Bee are not being followed;
2. The Final EIR did not provide adequate response to the public comments received on the Draft EIR;
3. The roadway measurements for Wiley Canyon Road are inaccurate; and
4. The City of Santa Clarita (City) did not assess the impacts of traffic intrusion into the local neighborhoods due to the construction of new roundabouts on Wiley Canyon Road; Los Angeles County Fire Department response time; and the Draft EIR did not adequately address air quality.
PLANNING COMMISSION
The Planning Commission has conducted four public hearings on the Project: March 19, 2024, June 18, 2024, August 19, 2025, and September 16, 2025 (copies of the Planning Commission staff reports are available in the City Clerk’s reading file). The Project qualifies as a housing development project in accordance with the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (Government Code section 66300). As such, the Project is subject to and must be evaluated based on compliance with the objective standards of the SCMC for the Mixed-Use Neighborhood (MXN) zone and the City’s Community Character and Design Guidelines (CCDG). Additionally, under state law, the City cannot conduct more than five public hearings (including appeals) to consider the Project.
At the March 19, 2024, hearing, City staff introduced the Project and summarized the Draft EIR.
At that time, the Project request was for a larger, mixed-use project that consisted of a senior- living facility with 130 independent-living units, 61 assisted-living units, and 26 memory-care beds; 8,914 square feet of commercial floor area; and 379 multi-family apartment units. The hearing was continued, and the Planning Commission requested clarification and additional information on several topics from City staff and the applicant, including traffic circulation and access, emergency plans for the senior living facility, parking operations, construction management plan, landscaping along Project boundaries, additional renderings, discussion on the geotechnical analysis, and community outreach.
At the June 18, 2024, hearing, City staff provided an overview of the applicant responses to Planning Commission comments made at the March 2024 hearing. The Planning Commission requested clarification and additional information on many topics from City staff and the applicant, including traffic circulation on Wiley Canyon Road, timing for roadway improvements and right-of-way-acquisition, parking operations, emergency operation plan for the senior living facility, construction phasing plan and construction noise mitigation, interior Project renderings, and community outreach.
1 Packet Pg. 8
Following the June 2024 Planning Commission meeting, the applicant submitted an Alternative Project that reduced the overall density and floor area of the Project for the Planning Commission’s consideration. At the August 19, 2025, Planning Commission hearing, staff presented the Alternative Project. The Planning Commission directed staff to return with a recommendation for the Alternative Project and the Final EIR for the Commission to consider.
At the September 16, 2025, Planning Commission hearing, the Planning Commission, in a 4-0 vote with one abstention, adopted Resolution P25-13, to certify the Final EIR (SCH No. 2022030626) prepared for the Project, and adopted Resolution P25-14, to approve the Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project under Master Case 20-238, for a development consisting of a senior- living facility with 120 assisted-living units; 9,000 square feet of commercial floor area; 45 detached single-family units, 8 of which would include an attached ADU; and 179 townhome units.
PROJECT SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
The Project site has a General Plan land use and zoning designation of MXN and is located within an approximately 38-acre area that is specifically identified in the General Plan as the Calgrove Corridor/Smiser Ranch Special Development Area (Smiser Ranch area). The General Plan limits the total allowable floor area for the Smiser Ranch area to 830,000 square feet of combined residential and commercial development. The Project site is also located within the Planned Development Overlay zone.
The Project is located east of Interstate 5 (I-5) and west of Wiley Canyon Road, between Hawkbryn Avenue and Calgrove Boulevard, in the community of Newhall. Historically, approximately 31 acres, was used as a mule ranch. The northeastern portion of the Project site is separated from the proposed development by Wiley Canyon Road and consists of vacant land on an elevated hillside that will remain vacant. The South Fork Santa Clara River (creek) bisects the Project site at the southern end and continues northerly into a concrete-lined channel along the west side of Wiley Canyon Road. The existing Mulberry Mobile Home Park is located immediately adjacent to the north. Uses to the east, across Wiley Canyon Road are improved with single-family residences. The properties immediately adjacent to the south are improved with commercial uses, including an existing gym and medical office building. The I-5 is immediately adjacent to the west. There are 36 oak trees located on the Project site and its surroundings.
The applicant is seeking approvals for the development of a mixed-use project on the approximately 31-acre site, consisting of a senior-living facility with 120 assisted-living units; 9,000 square feet of commercial floor area; 45 detached single-family units, 8 of which would include an attached ADU; and 179 townhome units.
The development of the proposed Project would require several off-site roadway improvements, including the construction of three new roundabouts at the intersections of 1) Wiley Canyon Road and the Project entrance; 2) Wiley Canyon Road at Canerwell Street; and 3) Wiley Canyon Road at Calgrove Boulevard. The Project would require approximately 44,000 cubic yards of cut, 59,000 cubic yards of fill, over excavation of 515,000 cubic yards, and the import of approximately 85,000 cubic yards of earth to balance the grading for the Project. The Project proposes the removal of four non-heritage oak trees.
1 Packet Pg. 9
As it relates to development standards of the MXN zone and development limitations established for the Smiser Ranch Area of the General Plan, the Project complies with all applicable objective development regulations. The General Plan establishes a limitation on the overall allowable floor area of 830,000 square feet of total residential and commercial combined development in the Smiser Ranch Area. The combined floor area of the Project is 523,890 square feet.
The maximum height allowed in the MXN zone is 50 feet. The assisted-living facility would have a maximum height of four stories, not to exceed 50 feet. The single-family detached condominiums and townhomes would be two stories, with a maximum height of 35 feet.
Parking would exceed the City’s mixed-use development standards by 50 parking stalls, as shown in the table below. Each single-family condominium and each townhome would provide a two-car garage. Each ADU would have one surface parking space. Guest parking would be accommodated along the private street. The parking for the commercial and senior-living facility would be provided in surface parking spaces around the building.
Land Use Parking Ratio Units Required Spaces Provided Spaces Single-Family Condominium 2/Unit 45 90 90
Townhome 2/Unit 179 358 358
ADU 0/Unit 8 0 8
Residential Guest 0.5/Unit 224 112 129
Senior Living Facility 0.5/Bed or Unit 120 60 66
Commercial 1/200 sq. ft. 9,000 sq. ft. 45 64
TOTAL 665 Spaces 715 Spaces
APPEAL
A discussion of the appeal points is provided below.
1. The determination is not in accord with the purposes of the SCMC; namely Wiley Canyon Road was not required to be constructed as four lanes; and the environmental impact regulations for protocol site surveys of the Crotch’s Bumble Bee are not being followed; Wiley Canyon Road Improvements
The Project includes roadway improvements along Wiley Canyon Road that would construct three new roundabout intersections 1) at the Project entrance on Wiley Canyon Road; 2) at Canerwell Street and Wiley Canyon Road; and 3) at Calgrove Boulevard and Wiley Canyon Road. In addition, a Class I trail (two-lane bicycle path and separated, five-foot wide pedestrian path) would be installed along the Project frontage on Wiley Canyon Road from the Project entrance to Calgrove Boulevard.
As discussed in the Planning Commission staff reports and in the staff presentations for the Planning Commission hearings, Wiley Canyon Road is designated by the City’s General Plan 1 Packet Pg. 10
Circulation Element as a Secondary Highway, which is a four-lane road configuration. However, the Project would maintain a two-lane roadway configuration along Wiley Canyon Road.
Due to the significantly lower daily trips generated by the proposed Project (3,500) than had been contemplated by the General Plan (27,000) for this site, there is not a nexus between the Project and build-out of a four-lane roadway. Additionally, based on the projected future traffic volumes, including the Project trips, it is not anticipated that this portion of Wiley Canyon Road will ever reach the need to be four-lanes because these anticipated volumes fall far below the maximum capacity of a two-lane roadway as detailed below.
A traffic analysis was prepared for the Project, and based on the analysis, the proposed Project would generate approximately 3,500 daily trips. The General Plan had assumed a build-out of the Project site that would generate approximately 27,000 daily trips, which had informed the designation of Wiley Canyon Road as a four-lane roadway in the Circulation Element.
The traffic analysis for the Project considers the traffic volumes, inclusive of the current and expected future traffic volumes, plus the traffic volumes for the Project, along this portion of Wiley Canyon Road and Calgrove Boulevard. As discussed in the analysis and as presented at the Planning Commission hearings, the vehicle trips would be between 9,000 and 10,000 vehicle trips per day along this portion of Wiley Canyon Road and Calgrove Boulevard. This is well below the maximum capacity of a two-lane roadway, which has a maximum capacity of 16,000 to 18,000 vehicle trips per day.
The Project would maintain a two-lane roadway configuration on Wiley Canyon Road, but the Project will not change the roadway designation of Secondary Highway in the Circulation Element. Based on the traffic analysis for the Project, it is not expected that four lanes will ever be necessary. Nonetheless, City Traffic and Transportation Planning staff have determined that Wiley Canyon Road could be designed with four vehicle lanes and a sidewalk on either side, if that was ever necessary in the future as a result of new development.
Crotch’s Bumble Bee
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) is the regulatory agency responsible for the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, and native plants. The CDFW submitted a comment letter on the Draft EIR. In the comment letter, CDFW made recommendations for revisions to Mitigation Measure BIO-1 to mitigate impacts to Crotch’s Bumble Bee. The CDFW revisions were accepted and incorporated into the Final EIR.
As was discussed in the staff report and staff presentation at the September 16, 2025, Planning Commission hearing, the revision to Mitigation Measure BIO-1 simply refined the mitigation measure, addressing impacts to Crotch’s Bumble Bee, which was already included in the Draft EIR. It did not introduce a new mitigation measure nor identify a new significant impact.
2. There was an error or abuse of discretion; namely, the Final EIR did not adequately address the public comments submitted;
As was discussed in the staff report and in the staff presentation at the September 16, 2025, Planning Commission hearing, a Final EIR was prepared for the Project in conformance with 1 Packet Pg. 11
CEQA. Specifically, in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines Section 15132, the Final EIR for the Project includes the 60 comment letters that were received during the public review period from public agencies, organizations, and members of the public. Each comment letter was reviewed and bracketed to assign each individual comment a unique identifier for the use of providing a response. These bracketed comment letters are provided in Attachment 1 of the Final EIR. Written responses to every bracketed comment are provided in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR.
In addition, a summary of the response to comments was discussed in the staff report and staff presentation at the September 16, 2025, Planning Commission hearing.
3. The record includes inaccurate information; namely the roadway measurements for Wiley Canyon Road are inaccurate;
As discussed above, there is no nexus between the expected future traffic volumes, inclusive of the Project, that warrants the need for a build-out to four lanes. Accordingly, the proposed roadway improvements shown on the Tentative Map maintain a two-lane roadway configuration with roundabout intersections at the Project entrance, at Wiley Canyon Road and Canerwell Street, and at Wiley Canyon Road and Calgrove Boulevard. The Tentative Map includes dimensioned roadway sections, which demonstrate how the proposed improvements would be constructed.
The roadway improvements and traffic analysis were discussed at length in the Planning Commission hearings. While the expected future traffic volumes do not indicate a need for a four-lane roadway, the City’s Traffic and Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the right- of-way width of Wiley Canyon Road and determined that, in the unlikely event four-lanes ever became necessary with future development, at its narrowest point, Wiley Canyon Road could be designed with four vehicle lanes and a sidewalk on either side of the roadway.
4. The decision is not supported by the record; namely the City did not address traffic intrusion into local neighborhoods due to construction of new roundabouts on Wiley Canyon Road; Los Angeles County Fire Department response time; the Draft EIR did not adequately address air quality;
Traffic Intrusion
As indicated in the appellant letter, the Conditions of Approval for the Project include Condition Number TE20, which reads as follows:
Before the City Engineer issues a grading permit, the permittee must conduct vehicle counts on Canerwell Street, Ebelden Avenue, Fambrough Street, and Kalmar Avenue (Oak Ridge Estates neighborhood) and submit the counts to the City Engineer. Within one year of full occupancy of the Project, if requested by the City Engineer, the permittee must conduct new vehicle counts in Oak Ridge Estates neighborhood. If the new vehicle counts demonstrate a significant diversion of vehicles, as determined by the City Engineer, into the Oak Ridge Estates neighborhood, the permittee will be required to implement appropriate traffic calming measures that must be approved by the City Engineer to discourage such diversion.
This Condition of Approval was included in direct response to public comments regarding 1 Packet Pg. 12
concern that the proposed construction of the roundabout intersections would result in vehicles using the neighborhood streets as an alternate route to avoid Wiley Canyon Road. It is important to note that this is not a deferred mitigation measure as suggested by the appellant. There is no indication in the traffic analysis that vehicles would cut through the neighborhood streets in an effort to avoid using Wiley Canyon Road. Nonetheless, the Condition of Approval provides a mechanism for the City Engineer to evaluate and implement traffic calming measures after the Project is completed, if that is ever determined to be needed.
Los Angeles County Fire
The conclusions made in the Draft EIR regarding Fire Department response come directly from coordination with the County of Los Angeles Fire Department (LACFD), the regulatory authority for fire protection services at the Project site. The City, as part of the EIR preparation, received a letter from LACFD indicating the available fire stations in the vicinity to provide service to the Project site, indicating that the development of the proposed Project would not create a capacity or service level problem, and would not require the need for new or upgraded facilities. In addition, the letter from LACFD states that developer fees and property tax revenue generated by new developments help ensure adequate service levels with new development.
Air Quality Analysis
An air quality analysis was prepared for the Project and evaluated based on the guidance of the local and state regulatory agencies, as outlined below.
Per the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook, characterization of existing ambient air quality in an EIR should include the most recent available data on background concentrations of criteria pollutants, as well as the number of days in which ambient levels exceed the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). This data must be obtained from the nearest SCAQMD air monitoring station within the Source Receptor Area (SRA) of the project, which is SRA 13. However, as SRA 13 did not provide data for all pollutants, available data from the nearest monitoring stations to SRA 13 were included, which include SRA 6 (the West San Fernando Valley Monitoring Station) and SRA 1 (the Central Los Angeles County Monitoring Station). Consistent with this guidance, the Draft EIR appropriately establishes existing background concentrations for the Project, as presented on page 4.2-4 of the Draft EIR.
It should also be noted that the existing ambient air quality does not change the impact findings of the Draft EIR. The effects of the existing environment on the Project are not considered environmental impacts pursuant to CEQA (California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (2015) (Case No. S213478)), which states in summary that “agencies subject to CEQA generally are not required to analyze the impact of existing environmental conditions on a project’s future users or residents. But when a proposed project risks exacerbating those environmental hazards or conditions that already exist, an agency must analyze the potential impact of such hazards on future residents or users. In those specific instances, it is the project’s impact on the environment - and not the environment’s impact on the project - that compels an evaluation of how future residents or users could be affected by exacerbated conditions.” Thus, the EIR is not required to anticipate the potential impact of off- 1 Packet Pg. 13
site ambient air quality on the Project. Nevertheless, as detailed above, the EIR adequately provided contextual data for ambient air quality. Overall, as discussed in detail in Section 4.2, Air Quality, of the Draft EIR, all air quality impacts were determined to be less than significant or less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Furthermore, the SCAQMD’s CEQA mass daily thresholds for criteria air pollutants are designed to evaluate the incremental increase in emissions resulting from a proposed project.
These thresholds are informed, in part, by the current attainment status of the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) for each pollutant and the levels that the SCAB can accommodate without affecting the attainment date for the NAAQS or CAAQS. Therefore, the SCAQMD mass daily emissions inherently account for existing ambient air quality conditions within the SCAB. The Project’s air pollutant emissions inventory for both construction and operational phases was evaluated against these thresholds. Accordingly, the analysis of potential impacts related to criteria air pollutant emissions has been conducted in accordance with SCAQMD guidance and significance criteria.
PUBLIC NOTICING
All notices required by law were completed, which consisted of a legal advertisement in The Signal newspaper on November 4, 2025, and notification of public hearing by mail to all property owners and occupants within a 1,000-foot radius of the Project site. Two signs were also posted at the Project site on November 11, 2025. In addition, notices were sent to all signatories on the appeal letter. Following the publication of the public hearing notice, and as of the writing of this staff report, staff has received one letter from the applicant in response to the appeal letter which is provided as an attachment.
CONCLUSION
The Project is a housing development project in accordance with the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (Government Code section 66300). Accordingly, the Project was reviewed and evaluated based on conformance with the City’s objective development standards as discussed above, and as discussed at each Planning Commission hearing. As a housing project, the Project cannot be denied if it complies with the City’s objective design standards. The Project complies with objective standards of the SCMC for the MXN zone; therefore, the Planning Commission voted to approve the Project.
City staff has prepared the necessary resolutions for consideration, and recommends the City Council adopt resolutions to deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission determinations to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2022030626) prepared for the Project, and to approve the Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project under Master Case 20-238 (ADR 20-023, CUP 20-005, DR 20-017, MUP 20-013, OTP 425-004, and TM 83295) for development consisting of a senior-living facility with 120 assisted-living units; 9,000 square feet of commercial floor area; 45 detached single-family units, 8 of which would include an attached ADU; and 179 townhome units; subject to the Conditions of Approval.
1 Packet Pg. 14
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
Other action as determined by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no impact to the General Fund.
ATTACHMENTS
Public Hearing Notice
CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR
Project Resolution and Exhibit
Appeal Letter
Site Plan
Applicant Response to Appeal Comments
2024-03-19 Planning Commission (available in the City Clerk's Reading File) 2024-06-18 Planning Commission (available in the City Clerk's Reading File) 2025-08-19 Planning Commission (available in the City Clerk's Reading File) 2025-09-16 Planning Commission (available in the City Clerk's Reading File) 1 Packet Pg. 15
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPEALS OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FOR MASTER CASE 20-238
APPLICATION: Appeal 25- 002 regarding Master Case 20- 238: Tentative Map 83295, Architectural Design Review 20 -023, Conditional Use Permit 20-005, Development Review 20- 017, Minor Use Permit 20- 013, Oak Tree Permit (Class 4), and Environmental Impact Report 20-002
PROJECT APPLICANT: Wiley Canyon, LLC
PROJECT LOCATION: East of Interstate 5 and west of Wiley Canyon Road, between Hawkbryn Avenue and Calgrove Boulevard. Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 2825-012- 007, 2825-007-010, 2825-012-011, 2825-012-901, and 2825-012-902
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
On September 16, 2025, a public hearing was conducted for the proposed project, and the Planning Commission certif ied the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and approved Master Case 20 -238. Master Case 20 -238 granted an Architectural Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, Development Review, Minor Use Permit, Oak Tree Permit, and Tentative Map to allow for development of a m ixed-use project consisting of a senior -living facility with 120 assisted -living units; 9,000 square feet of commercial floor area; 45 detached single- family units, eight of which would include an attached Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU); and 179 t ownhome units . The project would include off -site improvements, which consists of a new roundabout at the Project entrance on Wiley Canyon Road, and at the intersections at Wiley Canyon Road with Canerwell Street, and Wiley Canyon Road with Calgrov e Boulevard, as we ll as construction of Class I, II, and III bicycle lanes along Wiley Canyon Road from north of Lyons Avenue to Calgrove Boulevard, and along Calgrove Boulevard to The Old Road. In addition, off-site improvements are necessary for the buildout of the projec t, including a new water line proposed within Old Wiley Canyon Road, a new storage tank and a new pump within an existing pump station. The Project would require grading for up to 44,000 cubic yards of cut and 59,000 cubic yards of fill, and the import of approximately 85,000 cubic yards of fill. The Project includes removing four non- heritage oak trees and the encroachment of 19 oak trees.
A timely appeal of the Planning Commission decision was filed on September 3 0, 2025. In accordance with the Santa Cla rita Municipal Code, t he City Council will conduct a public hea ring on this matter on the following date:
DATE: Tuesday, November 25, 2025
TIME: At or after 6:00 p.m.
LOCATION: City Hall, Council Chambers
23920 Valencia Blvd., First Floor
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
In accordance with California law, a decision must be rendered at this public hearing; no continuances are permitted. The City Council agenda can be found at www.santaclarita.gov/agendas on or before November 21, 2025.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: A Final EIR was prepared to identify the project's potential environmental impacts. The Final EIR for the Wiley Canyon project is available for review by appointment in the City Clerk’s Office at the following location:
City of Santa Clarita City Hall, City Clerk’s Office
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 120
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
1.a
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: Public Hearing Notice (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
The Final EIR for the Wiley Canyon Project is also available for public review on the City of Santa Clarita website at: https://santaclarita.gov/planning/environmental-impact-reports-under-review/
If you wish to challenge the action taken on this matter in court, you may be limited t o raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearings described in this notice, or written correspondence delivered to the City of Santa Clarita at, or before, the public hearings.
For further information regarding this proposal, you may contact the project planner at the City of Santa Clarita, Permit Center, 23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 140, Santa Clarita, CA 91355. Telephone: (661) 255- 4330. Website: www.santaclarita.gov/planning. Send written correspondence to: 23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 302, Santa Clarita, CA 91355. Project Planner: Erika Iverson, [email protected].
Mary Cusick, MMC
City Clerk
Published: The Signal, November 4, 2025
N
Project
i
1.a
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: Public Hearing Notice (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
1.a
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: Public Hearing Notice (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
RESOLUTION NO. 25-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING APPEAL 25-002 AND AFFIRMING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION DECISION TO CERTIFY THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH No. 2022030626) FOR MASTER CASE 20-238 (ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW 20-023, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 20-005, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 20-017, MINOR USE PERMIT 20-013, OAK TREE PERMIT 425-004, AND TENTATIVE MAP 83295) INCLUDING REQUIRED FINDINGS OF FACT, AND ADOPTION OF THE
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS FOR MASTER CASE 20-238.
The City Council makes the following findings of fact and conclusions:
A. On October 28, 2020, an application for Master Case 20-238 was filed, consisting of Architectural Design Review (ADR) 20-023, Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 20-005, Development Review (DR) 20-017, Minor Use Permit (MUP) 20-013, Oak Tree Permit (OTP) 425-004, and Tentative Map (TM) 83295. The properties affected by the application are Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APN) 2825-012-007, 2825-007-010, 2825-012-011, 2825- 012-901, and 2825-012-902;
B. The approximately 31-acre Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (Project) site is located at 24924 Hawbryn Avenue, and has a General Plan land use and zoning designation of Mixed Use Neighborhood (MXN). The Project site is also located within the area designated by the General Plan as the Calgrove Corridor/Smiser Ranch Special Development Area (Smiser Ranch Area), and located within the Planned Development Overlay (PD) zone; C. The Project includes the proposed development of 45 two-story detached, single-family condominium units, eight of which would include an attached Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU); 179 two-story townhome units; a four-story, 120-unit assisted-living facility; and 9,000 square feet of commercial floor area, including the merger and subdivision into seven lots;
D. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; Public Resources Code § 21000, et seq.), including the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regs. § 15000, et seq.), the City of Santa Clarita (City) is the lead agency;
E. The City determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared for the Project;
F. A Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Project EIR was circulated to affected agencies, pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, for 30 days, beginning on March 24, 2022, and ending on April 25, 2022. Agencies that received the NOP include, but are not limited to, the County of Los Angeles, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, California
1.b
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Department of Fish and Wildlife, South Coast Air Quality Management District, law enforcement agencies, school districts, water agencies, and utility companies serving the Santa Clarita Valley in accordance with CEQA’s consultation requirements. Comments from public agencies, organizations, and members of the public were received in response to the NOP for the Project;
G. A scoping meeting was held at City Hall on April 14, 2022, to obtain information from the public as to issues that should be addressed in the EIR. Notice of the scoping meeting was published in The Signal newspaper on March 24, 2022. Approximately 58 people attended the scoping meeting. The topics of concern that were raised at the meeting included changes to the existing visual characteristics, displacement of wildlife, wildland fire and emergency evacuation, increase in traffic, water quality and water supply, drainage and flooding, and increase in density;
H. The City hosted a community meeting in an open house format on June 30, 2022, providing the opportunity for the public to view the Project proposal and engage with City staff. There were approximately 40 people in attendance;
I. A site tour of the Project site with the Planning Commission was held February 21, 2023, to provide the Planning Commission with context for the site setting and surroundings; J. The City prepared a Draft EIR, for the Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project, that addressed all issues raised in comments received on the NOP. The Draft EIR was circulated for review and comment by affected governmental agencies and the public, in compliance with CEQA.
Specifically, the Notice of Availability/Notice of Completion for the Draft EIR was advertised on March 1, 2024, for a 45-day public review period that ended on April 15, 2024, at 5:00 p.m. in accordance with CEQA. The City received written comments throughout the comment period as well as oral testimony at the March 19, 2024, June 18, 2024, August 19, 2025, and September 16, 2025, Planning Commission meetings for the Project; K. The Planning Commission public hearings for the Project were duly noticed in accordance with the noticing requirements for each of the Entitlements. The Project was advertised in The Signal newspaper, through on-site posting 14 days before the hearing, and by direct first- class mailing to property owners and occupants within 1,000 feet of the Project site; L. On March 19, 2024, a duly noticed public hearing was held before the Planning Commission at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita. The Planning Commission opened the public hearing for the Project and received a presentation from City staff on the Project setting, requested Entitlements, Project description, and the Draft EIR sections. The Planning Commission provided direction to bring the Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project back to the Planning Commission with additional information regarding traffic circulation and access, a parking plan, residential amenities, landscape buffers, emergency evacuation operations for the senior facility, construction management plans, and discussion of the geotechnical analysis. The Planning Commission continued the item to the June 18, 2024, Planning Commission meeting;
1.b
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
M. On June 18, 2024, the Planning Commission received a presentation regarding the follow-up items from the March 19, 2024, meeting, along with a presentation from the applicant, and public testimony. Additional time was needed to respond to all comments received on the Draft EIR and the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission provided direction to bring the Project back to the Planning Commission with additional information regarding traffic simulations, timing for right-of-way acquisition, parking operations plan, construction phasing, and construction noise mitigation plans, additional renderings, and additional community outreach. The Planning Commission then continued the item; N. On August 19, 2025, a duly noticed continued public hearing was held before the Planning Commission at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita. The Planning Commission received a staff presentation on the follow-up items from the March 19, 2024, and June 18, 2024, meetings, along with a presentation of a reduced Project alternative proposed by the applicant. Following public testimony, the Planning Commission directed that the Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project return to the Planning Commission at the September 16, 2025, meeting with a draft resolution and Conditions of Approval for the reduced Project alternative for consideration; O. On September 16, 2025, the Planning Commission received a presentation on the follow-up items from the March 19, 2024, June 18, 2024, and August 19, 2025, meetings, along with the applicant’s presentation and public testimony. The Planning Commission considered the staff report, Draft Final EIR, Resolutions, and Conditions of Approval; P. The Draft EIR was presented to the Planning Commission on March 19, 2024. On September 16, 2025, the Planning Commission considered the Draft Final EIR prepared for the Project, as well as information provided in staff reports, presented to the Planning Commission by experts, and presented in public testimony, including letters submitted to the Planning Commission. At the close of the public hearing, the Planning Commission, in a 4-0 vote, with one abstention, certified the Final EIR for the Project. The Final EIR for the Project was prepared in compliance with CEQA;
Q. On September 30, 2025, an appeal (Appeal 25-002) to the City Council of the Planning Commission’s decision was filed;
R. On November 25, 2025, a duly noticed public hearing regarding the appeal was held before the City Council at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita; and
S. 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.b
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
SECTION 2. CEQA REQUIREMENTS. Based on the foregoing facts and findings for Master Case 20-238, the City Council determines as follows:
A. CEQA provides that “public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects[.]” (Pub. Resources Code, § 21002). The procedures required by CEQA “are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects” (Id.);
B. CEQA’s mandates and principles are implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies adopt findings before approving projects for which EIRs are required. For each significant environmental effect identified in an EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency must issue a written finding reaching one or more of three permissible conclusions:
(1) “[c]hanges or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR,” (2) “[s]uch changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency,” or (3) “[s]pecific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.” (CEQA Guidelines §15091.) CEQA defines “feasible” to mean capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, legal and technological factors. (CEQA §21061.1; CEQA Guidelines §15364.);
C. The concept of “feasibility” also encompasses the question of whether a particular alternative promotes the underlying goals and objectives of a project. “Feasibility” under CEQA, then, encompasses “desirability” to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and technological factors; D. CEQA requires that the lead agency exercise its independent judgment in reviewing the adequacy of an EIR and that the decision of a lead agency in certifying a Final EIR and approving a project not be predetermined. The City Council has conducted its own review and analysis, and is exercising its independent judgment when acting as herein provided; E. CEQA requires decision-makers to adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for those mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR that would mitigate or avoid each significant impact identified in the EIR and to incorporate the MMRP, including all mitigation measures, as a condition of Project approval;
1.b
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
F. CEQA requires that the responses to comments in the Final EIR demonstrate good faith and a well-reasoned analysis, and not be overly conclusory. In response to several of the comments received, portions of the Draft EIR have been revised. Although new material has been added to the Draft EIR through preparation of the Final EIR, this new material provides clarification to points and information already included in the Draft EIR and is not considered to be significant new information or a substantial change to the Draft EIR or to the Project that would necessitate recirculation; and
G. CEQA Guidelines § 15003 notes that the purpose of an EIR is to inform other governmental agencies and the public generally of the environmental impacts of a proposed project. CEQA does not require technical perfection or exhaustive treatment of issues in an EIR, but rather adequacy, completeness, and a good-faith effort at full disclosure.
SECTION 3. CEQA FINDINGS. The City Council finds that the Draft Final EIR for Master Case 20-238 (ADR 20-023; CUP 20-005; DR 20-017; MUP 20-013; OTP (Class 4) 425-004; and TM 83295) identifies and discloses Project-specific impacts and cumulative Project impacts.
Environmental impacts identified in the Draft Final EIR, findings, and facts in support of findings are incorporated as CEQA Facts and Findings referred to as Exhibit A, which is incorporated by reference, and identified as follows:
A. The Draft Final EIR identifies significant but mitigated impacts, as set forth in Section 5.3 of Exhibit A. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will avoid or reduce these potential impacts to a less-than-significant level.
B. The Draft Final EIR also identifies less-than-significant impacts, as set forth in Section 5.2 of Exhibit A.
C. The Draft Final EIR also identifies significant and unavoidable, but mitigated to the extent feasible, as set forth in Section 5.4 of Exhibit A.
D. The less-than-significant impacts set forth in Section 5.2 of Exhibit A will not contribute to cumulative impacts.
E. The MMRP, attached as Exhibit B, which is incorporated by reference, is required to mitigate Project impacts.
SECTION 4. CONSIDERATION OF A REASONABLE RANGE OF ALTERNATIVES.
Based upon the above recitals and the entire record, including the Project Draft Final EIR, oral and written testimony and other evidence received at the public hearings held on the Project and the Draft Final EIR and otherwise, upon studies and investigation made by the City Council, and upon reports and other transmittals from City staff to the City Council, the City Council further finds that the Draft Final EIR analyzes a reasonable range of Project alternatives that would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the Project, would lessen any of the significant impacts of the Project, and adequately evaluates the comparative merits of each alternative.
1.b
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
A. The objectives of the Project are specified in the Draft Final EIR and Section 2.2 of Exhibit A. These objectives are used as the basis for comparing the Project alternatives and determining the extent that the objectives would be achieved relative to the proposed Project.
B. Alternative 1 – No Project/No Development Alternative. This alternative is required by the CEQA Guidelines and compares the impacts that might occur if the site is left in its present condition with those that would be generated by the proposed Project. Under this alternative, no development or redevelopment would occur beyond what exists today; therefore, all impacts would remain at current levels.
This alternative would have the least impact compared to the Project; however, it would not attain any of the Project Objectives as summarized in Section 2.2 of the CEQA Facts and Findings (Exhibit A). Therefore, this alternative is infeasible.
C. Alternative 2 – Affordable Housing Alternative. This alternative includes the development of 837 apartment units, including 201 units designated for lower-income households. The maximum height would be 65 feet, with a proposed floor area ratio of 0.63. This alternative would not develop the recreation area located to the south of the creek. The infrastructure improvements, including the drainage basins and off-site street improvements, would remain the same as the Project.
This alternative would generally have similar impacts as the proposed Project. Impacts to Greenhouse Gas (GHG), Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, and Utilities would be slightly higher, but this alternative would necessitate the same mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. This alternative would have the same temporary, significant, unavoidable impact on construction noise. This alternative generally meets the Project Objectives, though it does not provide a senior-living component or commercial component, and does not develop the same recreational space as the Project.
D. Alternative 3 – Private Recreation Facility Alternative. This alternative includes the development of a private recreational facility, including a 10,000-square-foot clubhouse/restaurant. The facility would consist of eight tennis courts, seven pickleball courts, a soccer field, a football field, a baseball field, and an outdoor basketball court. All fields would include overhead lighting. The infrastructure improvements, including the drainage basins and off-site street improvements, would remain the same as the Project.
This alternative would have greater impacts in the areas of Aesthetics, due to overhead field lighting. Impacts in the areas of Air Quality, Energy, GHG, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, and Utilities would be less than the Project. Impacts in all other areas would be similar to the Project, including the same temporary significant unavoidable impact for construction noise. This alternative would not meet the primary Project Objectives to provide a mixed-use development with housing, senior-living, and commercial uses.
1.b
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
E. Alternative 4 – Construction Noise Setback Alternative. This alternative includes the development of a 139-bed assisted-living facility, 47 detached condos, and 237 apartment units. The assisted-living facility would be three stories in height, and the multifamily units would range from two to four stories. Under this alternative, a 200-foot open space/landscaped buffer between the mobile home park to the north and the Project site would be provided. A similar recreation space to the Project at the southern portion of the Project site would be provided.
This alternative would have similar or slightly lower impacts as the proposed Project.
Impacts to Air Quality, Energy, GHG, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, and Utilities would be slightly lower, but expected to require the same mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. This alternative would eliminate the temporary, significant, unavoidable impact of construction noise. This alternative generally meets the Project Objectives; however, it does not provide the commercial component.
F. Alternative 5 – Mixed Use Project Alternative. This alternative includes the development of 232 townhome and/or detached condominium units, two stories in height. In addition, this alternative would include a senior/assisted-living facility with 120 units, four stories in height. The commercial component under this alternative would be 9,000 square feet. A similar recreation space to the Project at the southern portion of the Project site would be provided.
This alternative would have similar or slightly lower impacts than the proposed Project.
Impacts to Air Quality, Energy, GHG, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, and Utilities would be slightly lower, but expected to require the same mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. This alternative would have the same temporary significant unavoidable impact for construction noise. This alternative meets the Project Objectives.
SECTION 5. FINDINGS FOR CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL EIR. Based upon the above recitals and the entire record including, without limitation, the Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project Draft Final EIR, oral and written testimony and other evidence received at the public hearings held on the Project and the Draft Final EIR, upon studies and investigation made by the City Council, and upon reports and other transmittals from City staff to the City Council, the City Council finds:
A. That the Draft Final EIR for the Project is adequate, complete, was prepared in accordance with CEQA, and should be certified on that basis;
B. That the City Council independently reviewed and considered the Draft Final EIR in reaching its conclusions;
C. That the Draft Final EIR was presented and reviewed prior to taking final action to recommend certification of the Final EIR and approval of the Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project;
1.b
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
D. That, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, the Draft Final EIR includes a description of each potentially significant impact and rationale for finding that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect, as detailed in Exhibit A attached hereto. The analyses included in the Draft Final EIR to support each conclusion and recommendation therein is hereby incorporated into these findings; E. That, in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081, modifications occurred to the Project to reduce significant effects;
F. That, in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, changes and alterations have been required and incorporated into the Project that avoid or substantially lessen its significant environmental effects because feasible mitigation measures, including those in the MMRP, are made Conditions of Approval for the Project;
G. That the Draft Final EIR reflects the decision-maker’s independent judgment and analysis; H. That an MMRP has been prepared and is recommended for adoption to enforce the mitigation measures required by the Draft Final EIR and Project approvals; and I. The documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings on which this decision is based are under the custody of the Director of Community Development and are located at the City of Santa Clarita, Community Development Department, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302, Santa Clarita, California 91355.
SECTION 6: STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS. Based upon the above recitals and the entire record, including the Final EIR, oral and written testimony and other evidence received at the public hearings held on the Project and the Final EIR and otherwise, upon studies and investigation made by the City Council, and upon reports and other transmittals from City staff to the City Council, the City Council further finds that there is substantial evidence that supports the conclusion that the Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project will result in community benefits including specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits that outweigh the one significant effect of the Project on the environment that cannot be mitigated to a level less than significant.
A. One significant unavoidable impact relates to construction noise, as further described in attached Exhibit A, which is incorporated by reference; and B. The benefits of the Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project outweigh its one significant unavoidable impact that cannot be mitigated to a level below significant. These benefits are listed in Section 7.3 of Exhibit A.
SECTION 7: APPROVALS. The City Council reviewed and considered the Draft Final EIR (SCH No. 2022030626) and determined that it is adequate and in compliance with CEQA.
Accordingly, the City Council certifies the Final EIR and associated documents, and adopts the attached MMRP as if fully set forth.
1.b
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
SECTION 8: 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 9: 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 10: 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 11: EFFECTIVE DATE. This resolution becomes effective immediately upon adoption and memorializes the City Council’s final decision made on November 25, 2025.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 25th day of November, 2025.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
Date:_________________________
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. 25-__ was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 25th day of November, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
CITY CLERK
1.b
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
EXHIBIT A
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND FINDINGS
REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
FOR THE
WILEY CANYON PROJECT
SCH NO. 2022030626
Lead Agency:
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
November 25, 2025
1.b
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 STATEMENT OF FACTS AND FINDINGS ................................ ................................ ...... 2
2.0 PROJECT SUMMARY ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 4
2.1 Description of Project Proposed for Approval .............................................................. 4
2.2 Statement of Objectives ................................................................................................ 6
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW/PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ................................ ................. 8
4.0 INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT AND FINDING ................................ ................................ 10
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND FINDINGS ................................ ............................. 12
5.1 Effects Determined to Have No Impact in the EIR ..................................................... 12
5.2 Effects Determined to Be Less Than Significant Without Mitigation in the EIR ......... 13
5.3 Effects Determined to Be Mitigated to Less-Than-Significant Levels in the EIR ....... 18
5.4 Effects Determined to Be Significant and Unavoidable But Mitigated to the Extent Feasible ....................................................................................................................... 33
5.5 Alternatives to the Proposed Project .......................................................................... 34
6.0 CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL EIR ................................ ................................ ........... 48
6.1 Findings ....................................................................................................................... 48
6.2 Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 48
7.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ................................ ................... 50
7.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 50
7.2 Significant Unavoidable Impacts ................................................................................ 50
7.3 Overriding Considerations .......................................................................................... 51
8.0 STATEMENT OF LOCATION AND CUSTODIAN OF DOCUMENTS ............................ 55
1.b
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 1
This page intentionally left blank.
1.b
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 2
1.0 STATEMENT OF FACTS AND FINDINGS
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that a Lead Agency make specific findings before approving a project that would significantly impact on the environment. In this Statement of Facts and Findings, the City identifies the significant impacts of the Project, presents facts supporting the conclusions reached in the analysis, makes one or more of three potential findings for each impact, and explains the reasoning behind the agency’s findings.
This Statement of Facts and Findings was prepared in accordance with CEQA, specifically Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091. CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a) provides that:
No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding.
The three findings available for the Statement of Facts and Findings pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 are as follows:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.
The City of Santa Clarita (City), the CEQA Lead Agency, finds and declares that the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was completed in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. The City’s City Council finds and certifies that the EIR was reviewed, and information contained in the EIR was considered before approving the Wiley Canyon Project (“project”).
Based upon its review of the EIR, the City Council finds that the EIR is an adequate assessment of the potentially significant environmental impacts of the project, represents the independent judgment and analysis of the City, and sets forth an adequate range of alternatives to this project.
The EIR for the project is comprised of the following elements:
• Wiley Canyon Project Draft EIR and Technical Appendices (March 2024) • Wiley Canyon Project Final EIR and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (September 2025)
1.b
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 3
This page intentionally left blank.
1.b
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 4
2.0 PROJECT SUMMARY
2.1 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT PROPOSED FOR APPROVAL
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
The project site consists of approximately 31.8 acres of vacant land located at 24924 Hawkbryn Avenue in the southwestern portion of Santa Clarita bordered by Interstate 5 (I-5) to the west, Wiley Canyon Road to the east, Hawkbryn Avenue to the north and Calgrove Boulevard to the south, within the Newhall area of the City of Santa Clarita (City) . The proje ct site is located approximately 28 miles northwest of downtown Los Angeles and is locally accessible via Wiley Canyon Road and Hawkbryn Avenue. Regionally, the project site is accessible from the I -5 freeway via Calgrove Boulevard, south of the site, or v ia Lyons Avenue approximately 0.6 miles north of the site. The project site is located entirely within the City’s jurisdictional boundaries, and unincorporated Los Angeles County is located immediately west of the I-5 freeway.
The project applicant proposes to redevelop existing vacant land with a new mixed -use development consisting of the following components: a 277,108 square-foot senior living facility, 8,914 square feet of commercial space, 379 multifamily residential apartments, a publicly accessible outdoor recreational field space , and off -site circulation improvements (e.g., new roundabouts, traffic signals, Class I and II bike lanes on Wiley Canyon Road and Calgrove Boulevard, and pedestrian trails).
A 277,108 -square-foot senior living facility is proposed with 130 independent living units, 61 assisted living units, and 26 memory care beds. This facility would be located on a 7.27-acre area in the northernly portion of the project site. Within the proposed senior living facility would be an 8,914-square-foot commercial space on the first floor by the facility’s entrance.
A total of 379 multifamily residential units are proposed to be south of the senior living facility. A total of five 3 -story buildings comprised of 152 units would be constructed on a 4.47-acre area.
Amenities on site would include a leasing center, clubhouse with fitness center, and a pool area, totaling 5,886 square feet. The proposed residences would range from 1-, 2-, and 3-bedrooms as well as loft style apartments. In addition, a total of eight buildings with 227 units would be developed within an 8.17-acre area and consist of four 4-story buildings and four 2-story buildings.
The proposed residences would include studios, and 1-, 2-, and 3-bedroom apartments as well as a 2,400 square-foot clubhouse and pool area.
The project also proposes active and passive on-site recreational facilities. A 50,600-square-foot passive recreational grass pad would be located on the southern portion of the project site. A 16- foot-wide pedestrian trail/maintenance road would be run approximately 7,040 linear feet (1.3 miles) throughout the project site and along Wiley Canyon Road. Additionally, Lot 6, which is 128,659 square feet (2.9 acres) in size and located to the east of Wiley Canyon Road would remain undeveloped under the proposed project. Within the senior living f acility, a memory care garden with a central fountain, table and bench seating, faux turf, and enhanced concrete pavers are proposed. The senior living facility would also include a pool and spa, chaise lounge seating, and outdoor dining areas as well as a barbeque area with a shade structure, counter space, and pedestrian pathways and paving. The project site would be redeveloped to include landscaping throughout and would be used to screen certain facilities on site, such as transformers and
1.b
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 5
maintenance b uildings. In addition, the project would utilize landscaping for fuel modification zones.
Implementation of the proposed project would require infrastructure improvements including curb and gutter, storm drain, and water and sewer connections to existing f acilities within the local vicinity. The project proposes to connect to an existing 12-inch sewer line and a 12-inch dip water line located to the east of the project site along the right-of-way for Wiley Canyon Road. Existing power poles and overhead elec tric lines would be removed along the western boundary of the site adjacent to the I -5 freeway, with the exception of select power poles and overhead lines at the southern end of the site adjacent to the proposed drainage basin, and updated, underground electrical lines would be installed. Electrical transformer units would be installed intermittently around the perimeter of the project site. A 30,011-square-foot (0.69-acre) drainage basin would be located immediately south of the multifamily apartment buildings, and two smaller water quality basins would be located at the northwestern end of the project site and the eastern portion of the site adjacent to the multifamily residences. Additionally, between the drainage basin discussed above, and the South For k of the Santa Clara River, the project proposes a soil cement bank protection, adjacent to the asphalt trail and maintenance road, for protection during a 25 -year storm event.
The majority of the off-site infrastructure improvements would be street improvements along Wiley Canyon Road and its intersecting streets, including Fourl Road, Canerwell Street, Valley Oak Court, and Calgrove Boulevard. Street improvements would include three new roundabouts, new curbs and gutters, a storm drain box culvert extension, new bus bays, bicycle paths (e.g., Classes I and II) and ramps, walking trails and sidewalks, as well as changes to existing directional signage and utilities (i.e., new power poles). The intersection of Calgrove Boulevard and I-5 located at the southwest corner of the project site would also be signalized.
AGREEMENTS, PERMITS, AND APPROVALS
This EIR is intended to inform and provide clearance under CEQA for all governmental approval actions necessary to authorize the project to proceed. These approvals include those listed below.
City of Santa Clarita
• Tentative Map to subdivide the project site into seven lots. • Grading Permit for up to 44,000 cubic yards of cut and 59,000 cubic yards of fill, and the import of approximately 85,000 cubic yards of fill.
• Conditional Use Permit for new development within the Planned Development Overlay and to permit the assisted living facility in MXN zone. • Minor Use Permit for commercial floor area ratio that does not meet the minimum required in the zone, and the import of approximately 85,000 cubic yards of fill. • Development and Architectural Design Review for the development of the proposed project.
• Oak Tree Permit for removal of, encroachment upon, and/or impact to existing oak trees. • Certification of the EIR prepared for the project.
1.b
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 6
• Approval by the City Council that the EIR was prepared in accordance with CEQA and other applicable codes and guidelines.
• Approval by the City Council of the project or an alternative to the project.
Other Agencies
To allow for construction for certain improvements, the following permits would be required:
• Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (if jurisdictional aquatic resources are impacted)
• Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (if jurisdictional aquatic resources are impacted) • Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) pursuant to California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 (if jurisdictional aquatic resources are impacted)
• Domestic Water Supply Permit Amendment with the Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency from the State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water. • Encroachment Permit from the California Department of Transportation. • Transportation Permit from the California Department of Transportation for the use of heavy construction equipment and/or materials that require the use of oversized transport vehicles on State highways.
2.2 STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES
The primary objectives of the project include the following:
• Create a new mixed -use community that allows for residential, retail/commercial, and senior housing while preserving and enhancing natural resources. • Provide a sensitive and protective interface with the adjacent Wiley Canyon Creek by utilizing appropriate setback, grading, landscape, buried bank stabilization and water quality treatments.
• Provide development and transitional land use patterns th at are compatible with surrounding communities and land uses and are consistent with the City’s General Plan. • Arrange land uses and add amenities to reduce vehicle miles traveled and to encourage the use of transit.
• Design neighborhoods to locate resident ial and non -residential land uses in close proximity to each other and major road corridors, transit and trails. • Provide public spaces, including plazas, private and public recreational areas and trails. • Implement waste reduction, drought -tolerant landscap ing, and use of water efficiency measures.
1.b
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 7
• Provide a meandering trail with public access along Wiley Canyon Road and within the project site along Wiley Canyon Creek.
• Provide a landscape design emphasizing a pleasant neighborhood character and inviting streetscapes.
• Enhance and augment the City’s housing market by providing a variety of housing product to meet the needs of future residents.
• Maintain and enhance the use of Wiley Canyon Creek with native revegetation as a to serve as a natural channel to be utilized by wildlife.
• Incorporate new oak trees into the project design, including public spaces. • Incorporate vehicle and pedestrian circulation improvements on Wiley Canyon Road and Calgrove Boulevard through the widening of the roadways where needed, as well as the addition of appropriate traffic controls at various intersections. • Provide a Class I trail and sidewalks along the roadways. • Provide publicly accessible passive and active recreational opportunities for prospective residents and existing residents in proximity to the project site. • Include amenities to specifically support senior residents requiring senior services including memory care, supporting amenities for basic -needs nursing care, and housekeeping service.
• Include recreational amenities to improve quality of life of prospective on -site residents and existing off -site residents and encourage senior living tenants to socialize and maintain active lifestyles.
1.b
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 8
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW/PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The City conducted an extensive review of this project, which included a Draft EIR and this Final EIR, including technical reports, along with a public review and comment period. The following is a summary of the City’s environmental review of this project:
• Pursuant to the provision of CEQA Guidelines Section 15082, the City circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to public agencies, organizations, and members of the public who had requested such notice for a 30 -day period. The NOP was submitted to the State Clearinghouse and filed with the Los Angeles County Clerk on March 24, 2022, with the 30- day review period ending on April 25, 2022.
• The NOP public review period ran for 30 days. The City received comment letters from State, regional, and local public agencies, as well as comment letters and comment cards from local organizations and individuals; these comment letters were included in Appendix A of the Draft EIR.
• A scoping meeting was held at Santa Clarita City Hall, Century Conference Room on April 14, 2022, to obtain information from the public as to issues that should be addressed in the EIR.
Notice of the scoping meeting was published in The Signal newspaper , in addition to approximately 51 agencies, interested parties, and individuals who requested to be notified of the project. Approximately 58 persons from or members of the public attended the scoping meeting.
• The Draft EIR was distributed for public review, and a Notice of Availability (NOA) and Notice of Completion (NOC) were filed with the State Clearinghouse on February 21 , 202 4, to commence a 45-day review period, beginning on March 1, 2024, and ending on April 15, 2024.
The NOA was filed with the Los Angeles County Clerk on February 21, 2024. The NOA was also mailed to approximately 57 agencies, interested parties, and individuals who requested to be notified of the project, and was published in The Signal. • The project and the Draft EIR were presented at four Planning Commission meetings held on March 19 , 202 4, June 18, 2025 , August 19, 2025, and September 16, 2025 to solicit comments from the public and the Planning Commission on the Draft EIR . Notice of the Planning Commission meeting in March 2024 was published in The Signal newspaper. Notice of the Planning Commission in August 2025 was also published in the Signal newspaper. • The City received a total of 60 comment letters on the Draft EIR from public agencies and the public, as well as numerous letters from organizations and members of the public regarding the merits of the project or questions regarding the project. The City prepared responses to all written comments. The comments and responses are contained in Section 2.0, Responses to Comments, of the Final EIR.
• In accordance with CEQA, the City provide d written responses to the public agenci es that commented on the Draft EIR at least 10 days before certification of the EIR.
1.b
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 9
This page intentionally left blank.
1.b
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 10
4.0 INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT AND FINDING
The City solicited proposals from independent consultants to prepare the Wiley Canyon Project EIR. Subsequently, the City selected and retained Dudek to prepare the Wiley Canyon Project EIR. Dudek prepared the EIR under the supervision and direction of the City of Santa Clarita staff.
All findings set forth herein are based on substantial evidence in the record as indicated with respect to each specific finding.
FINDING:
The EIR for the project reflects the City’s independent judgment. The City exercised independent judgment in accordance with PRC Section 21082.1(c)(3) in retaining its own environmental consultant and directing the consultant in the preparation of the EIR. The City independentl y reviewed and analyzed the EIR and accompanying studies and finds that the report reflects the independent judgment of the City.
The City Council considered all the evidence presented in its consideration of the project and the EIR including, without limitation, the Final EIR and its supporting studies, written and oral evidence presented at hearings on the project, and written evidence submitted to the City by individuals, organizations, regulatory agencies, and other entities. On the basis of such evidence, the City Council finds that, with respect to each environmental impact identified in the review process, the impact (1) is less than significant and would not require mitigation; (2) is potentially significant but would be avoided or reduced to a less -than-significant level by implementation of identified mitigation measures; or (3) would be significant and not fully mitigated but would be, to the extent feasible, lessened by implementation of identified mitigation measures.
The Final EIR identifies certain significant adverse environmental effects of the project which cannot be avoided or substantially les sened. Before approving this project, the City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations which finds, based on specific reasons and substantial evidence in the record (as specified in Section 7.0), that certain identified economic, social, or other benefits of the project outweigh such unavoidable adverse environmental effects.
1.b
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 11
This page intentionally left blank.
1.b
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 12
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND FINDINGS
5.1 EFFECTS DETERMINED TO HAVE NO IMPACT IN THE EIR
The Wiley Canyon Project EIR found that the project would have no impact on a number of environmental topic areas, as listed below. A detailed analysis of these topic areas is provided in Section 4.1, 4.3, 4.6, 4.8, 4.12, and Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR.
FINDING:
The EIR for the project reflects the City’s independent judgment. The City has exercised independent judgment in accordance with PRC Section 21082.1(c)(3) in retaining its own environmental consultant and directing the consultant in the preparation of the EIR. The City has independently reviewed and analyzed the EIR and accompanying studies and finds that the report reflects the independent judgment of the City.
Aesthetics
e) Would the project result in changes to the topography of a Primary or Secondary Ridgeline?
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
a) Would the project c onvert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?
d) Would the project result in the loss of forestland o r conversion of forestland to non - forest use?
e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forestland to non-forest use?
Biological Resources
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plans, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
j) Would the project result in a disturbance to any Significant Ecological Area (SEA) as identified by the City of Santa Clarita?
Geology and Soils
1.b
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 13
a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential adverse effects , including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Faults
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
e) Would the project be located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, and would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Population and Housing
b) Would the project d isplace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere (especially affordable housing)?
5.2 EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
WITHOUT MITIGATION IN THE EIR
The Wiley Canyon Project EIR found that the project would have a less -than-significant impact on a number of environmental topic areas, as listed below. A detailed analysis of these topic areas is provided in Sections 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.9, 4.10, 4.11, 4.12, 4.13, 4.14, 4.15, 4.16,
4.18, and 4.19 of the Draft EIR prepared for the project.
FINDING:
The City of Santa Clarita City Council, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the Draft EIR and Technical Appendices, Final EIR, and administrative record, finds that based on substantial evidence in the record, impacts related to the following topics, to the extent they result from the project, would be less than significant.
Aesthetics
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, primary/secondary ridgelines, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
d) Would the project c reate a new source of substantial light or glare which wou ld adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
1.b
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 14
Cumulative Aesthetics Impacts
Air Quality
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Cumulative Air Quality Impacts
Biological Resources
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? g) Would the project result in the removal of any heritage oak trees, as defined in Unified Development Code §17.17.090, removal of more than five (5) oak trees from a project on a site that has an existing single-family residence, or the removal of more than three (3) oak trees, proposed as part of any other project?
Cumulative Biological Resources Impacts
Energy
a) Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
c) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable energy impact? Cumulative Energy Impacts
Geology and Soils
a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential adverse effects , including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
ii) Seismic Ground Shaking
iii) Seismic-Ground Failure (Liquefaction)
iv) Landslides
b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on - or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
1.b
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 15
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? g) Would the project result in the movement or grading of earth exceeding 100,000 cubic yards?
Cumulative Geology and Soils Impacts
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emission, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Cumulative Greenhous Gas Emissions Impacts
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving explosion or the release of hazardous materials into the en vironment (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals, fuels, or radiation)?
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Cumulative Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts
Hydrology and Water Quality
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management in the basin?
c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site;
1.b
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 16
ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Cumulative Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts
Land Use and Planning
a) Would the project d isrupt or physically divide an established community (including a low-income or minority community)?
Cumulative Land Use and Planning Impacts
Mineral Resources
a) Would the project r esult in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Cumulative Mineral Resources Impacts
Noise
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Population and Housing
a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Cumulative Population and Housing Impacts
Public Services
a) Would the project result in s ubstantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically a ltered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i) Fire protection?
ii) Police protection?
iii) Schools?
1.b
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 17
iv) Parks?
v) Other public facilities?
Cumulative Public Services Impacts
Recreation
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Cumulative Recreation Impacts
Transportation
a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Cumulative Transportation Impacts
Utilities and Service Systems
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the Project that it has adequate capacity to serve the Project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction?
e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Cumulative Utilities and Service Systems Impacts
Wildfire
1.b
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 18
a) Would the project s ubstantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
d) Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
Cumulative Wildfire Impacts
5.3 EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGATED TO LESS -THAN-
SIGNIFICANT LEVELS IN THE EIR
The Wiley Canyon EIR found that the project would have a less -than-significant impact with mitigation incorporated on a number of environmental topic areas, as listed below. A detailed analysis of these topic areas is provided in Sections 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.6, 4.8, 4.9, 4.10, 4.12, 4.15,
4.17, and 4.19 of the Draft EIR.
FINDING:
The City of Santa Clarita City Council having reviewed and considered the information contained in the Draft EIR and Technical Appendices, Final EIR, and administrative record, finds, pursuant to PRC Section 21081 (a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which would avoid or substantially lessen to below a level of significance potentially significant environmental effects identified in the Draft EIR. The potentially significant adverse environmental impacts that can be mitigated are listed below. The City of Santa Clarita City Council finds that based on substantial evidence in the record, the impacts discussed below, to the extent they result from the project, would be less than significant after implementation of mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR.
AIR QUALITY
The project’s impacts related to air quality that can be mitigated or are ot herwise less than significant are discussed in Section 4. 2, Air Quality, of the Draft EIR. Identified impa cts include potential substantial adverse effects related to a cumulatively considerable new increase of any criteria pollutant ; exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations ; and exceeding the most recent air quality thresholds as determined by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, as published in its “Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook.” Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
Construction of the project would result in emissions that exceed the NO X regional threshold.
However, i mplementation of Mitigation Measure (MM)
MM-AQ-1, which establishes construction equipment emissions standards , would reduce construction emission impacts below the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) standards to a less-than-significant level. In addition, MM-AQ-1 would reduce health
1.b
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 19
risk impacts relating to exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and relating to exceeding the most recent air quality thresholds to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measures
MM-AQ-1: Construction Equipment Features. The project must utilize off -road diesel - powered construction equipment that meets or exceeds the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Tier 4 Final off- road emissions standards or equivalent for equipment rated at 50 horsepower (hp) or greater during project construction. Such equipment must be outfitted with Best Available Control Technology (BACT), which means a CARB-certified Level 3 diesel particulate filter (DPF) or equivalent.
An exemption from this requirement may be granted by the Director of Community Development, or designee, if (1) the City documents equipment with Tier 4 Final engines are not reasonably available, and (2) the required corresponding reductions in criteria air pollutant emissions can be achieved for the project from other combinations of construction equipment. Before an exemption may be granted, the permittee must (1) demonstrate that at least three construction fleet owners/operators in Los Angeles region were contacted and that those owners/operators confirmed Tier 4 Final equipment could not be located within Los Angeles County during the desired construction schedule, and (2) the permittee must provide evidence to the Director that the proposed replacement equipment was evaluated using California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) or other industry standard emission estimation method, and documentation was provided to confirm that necessary project-generated emissions reductions are achieved.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The project’s impacts to biological resources that can be mitigated or are otherwise less than significant are discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR. Identified impacts include potential substantial adverse effects related to candidate, sensitive, or special -status species; riparian habitat or other sensitive natural commu nities; State- or federally-protected wetlands; movement of native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory corridors, or impedes the use of native wildlife nursery sites; disturbance or encroachment of any river, river tributary, riparian habitat, strea m or similar waterway identified on a United States Geological Survey map as a “blue -line” watercourse, or any waterway otherwise identified as a significant resource by the City; and disturbance of any habitat known or suspected to contain a plant or animal species listed as endangered on such Federal and/or State lists.
Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
As potentially suitable habitat for special -status wildlife species exists on the project site, implementation of the project would potentially impact existing habitat. Mitigation Measures
1.b
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 20
MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-3, which involve focused, protocol, and pre-construction surveys for Crotch bumble bee nests, least Bell’s vireo, and Cooper’s hawk and avoidance measures, would reduce the potential to impact candidate, sensitive, or special -status species, includi ng Crotch bumble bee, least Bell’s vireo, and Cooper’s hawk to a less-than-significant level.
The project site supports three sensitive plant communities considered high priority by CDFW , Fremont cottonwood/mulefat forest, Fremont cottonwood forest, and th e California sycamore woodland. To reduce potentially significant impacts to these sensitive habitats, implementation of Mitigation Measure MM -BIO-4 requires on -site or off -site restoration or enhancement of sensitive plant communities at a ratio of no less than 1:1 to mitigate for impacts to sensitive plant communities. With implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-4, impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
The project site includes 1.081-acres (3,209 linear feet) of federally and state protected waters (e.g., wetlands or drainages). The project would impact 0.19 acre of waters of the U.S. and about
1.1 acre of CDFW jurisdiction. The proposed impact is approximately 1,400 linear feet in length, with approximately 400 feet of the 1,400 linear feet being within the existing concrete drainage channel at the northeast end of the project site. Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-5 requires on-site or off -site restoration or enhancement of United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)/Regional Water Quality Control Board ( RWQCB) and CDFW jurisdictional waterways and aquatic resources at a ratio of at least 2:1 for permanent impacts and the restoration of impacted areas to pre-project conditions for temporary impacts. Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-5 would reduce permanent impacts to protected waters to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-BIO-5 would reduce potential impacts to State- or federally-protected wetlands to less-than-significant levels.
The project site and adjacent areas support potential nesting habitat for migratory and residential birds covered under the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code. Project activities may result in direct and/or indirect loss of an active nest. Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-3 would require that pre-construction surveys for active nests be conducted during the breeding season for Cooper’s hawk. If active nests are found during the surveys, buffers around the nests would be established and work within these buffers would be postponed or halted until the nest is vacated. With implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-3, impacts to wildlife nurseries would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
The Study Area contains 1.081 -acres (3,209 linear feet) of federally and state protected water, including two aquatic features considered to be waters of the U.S., waters of the State, and features subject or Fish and Game Code Section 1600, et seq., which may be impacted by the proposed project. The project would impact 0.19-acre of waters of the U.S. and about 1.1 -acres of CDFW jurisdiction. The proposed impact would be approximately 1,400 linear feet in length, with approximately 400 feet of the 1,400 being within the existing concrete drainage channel at the northeast end of the project site. Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-5, which requires on-site or off -site restoration or enhancement of USACE/RWQCB and CDFW jurisdictional waterways and aquatic resources at a ratio of at least 2:1 for permanent impacts and the restoration of impacted areas to pre -project conditions for temporary impacts , would reduce potentially significant impacts to a level of less-than-significant.
The project design is anticipated to impact 0.78 acre of marginally suitable habitat for least Bell’s vireo. In addition, Cooper’s hawk could potentially occur as nesting occurs in the woodlands and
1.b
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 21
forests in adjacent to the project site. Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-3, which involve focused, protocol, and pre -construction surveys and avoidance measures, would reduce any potential impacts to special-status wildlife to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measures
MM-BIO-1: Crotch Bumble Bee. Surveys for Crotch bumble bee must be conducted within one year of Project ground-disturbing. Surveys must include 1) a habitat assessment and 2) focused surveys, both of which shall adhere to the “Survey Considerations for California Endangered Species Act (CESA) Candidate Bumble Bee Species,” released by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) on June 6, 2023, or the most current at the time of construction.
The habitat assessment must include historical and current species occurrences; document potential habitat onsite including foraging, nesting, and/or overwintering resources; and identify which plant species are present.
Focused surveys must be performed by a qualified entomologist with appropriate handling permits and familiarity with identification, behavior, and life history of the species. Surveys must include at least three survey passes that are not on sequential days or in the same week, preferably spaced two to four weeks apart.
The timing of these surveys must coincide with the Colony Active Period (April 1 through August 31 for Crotch bumble bee). Surveys must occur between one hour after sunrise and two hours before sunset. Surveys may not be conducted during wet conditions (e.g., foggy, raining, or drizzling). Optimal surveys are when there are sunny to partly sunny skies that are greater than 60° Fahrenheit. Surveys may not be conducted when it is windy (i.e., sustained winds greater than 8 mph). The qualified entomologist must seek out nest/hive resources suitable for bumble bee use. Ensuring that all nest resources receive 100% visual coverage, the qualified entomologist must watch the nest resources for up to five minutes, looking for exiting or entering worker bumble bees. Worker bees should arrive and exit an active nest site with frequency, such that their presence would be apparent after five minutes of observation. If a bumble bee worker is detected, then a representative individual must be identified to species to determine if it is Crotch bumble bee or one of the common, unregulated species. It is up to the discretion of the biologist regarding the actual survey views hed limits from the chosen vantage point which would provide 100% visual coverage; this could include a 30 - to 50-foot-wide area. If a nest is suspected, the surveyor may block the entrance of the possible nest with a sterile vial or jar until nest activity is confirmed (not longer than 30 minutes).
Identification must include the qualified entomologist netting/capturing the representative bumble bee in appropriate insect nets, per the protocol in U.S.
National Protocol Framework for the Inventory and Monitoring of Bees (Droege, Engler, Sellers, and O’Brien (2016)).
If C rotch bumble bee nests are not detected, no further mitigation is required.
However, if construction in a given phase area does not start within a year of the last survey, surveys must be repeated for that phase area. Additionally, if construction
1.b
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 22
stops for 14 days or longer, surveys would be repeated if construction resumes in the nesting season. Outside of the nesting season, it is assumed that no live individuals would be present within the nest as the daughter queens (gynes) usually leave by September, and all other individuals disperse to outside of the construction footprint to surrounding open space areas.
Following the habitat assessment and focused surveys, a written survey report must be submitted to the Director and CDFW before Project activities. The report will include survey methods, weather conditions, a description and map of the survey area, and survey results, including a list of insect species observed and a figure showing the locations of any Crotch bumble bee nest sites or individuals observed.
The survey report must include the qualifications/resumes of the entomologist(s) for identification of photo vouchers, detailed habitat assessment, and photo vouchers.
If Crotch bumble bee s are observed, the qualified entomologist must provide the location of all nests within and adjacent to the Project site. The survey report must also include the physical (e.g., soil, moisture, slope) and biological (e.g., plant composition) conditions where each nest/colony is found. This includes native plant composition (e.g., density, cover, and abundance) within affected habitat (e.g., species list separated by vegetation class; density, cover, and abundance of each species). The qualified entomologist must also draft an Avoidance Plan with specific avoidance measures that will be implemented before and during Project activities.
The Avoidance Plan must be submitted to CDFW before Project activities for review.
Upon CDFW approval of an Avoidance Plan , the qualified entomologist must demarcate an appropriate buffer zone around all identified nest(s).
If complete avoidance of Crotch’s bumble bee is not feasible, the permittee continue consultation with CDFW to determine if take authorization from CDFW is required.
Any measures determined to be necessary through the Incidental Take Permit process to offset impacts to Crotch bumble bee supersede measures provided in this CEQA document.
In the event an Incidental Take Permit is needed, the Project proponent must provide compensatory mitigation at a minimum 1 :1 nesting habitat replacement of equal or better functions and values to those impacted by the project, or as otherwise determined through the Incidental Take Permit process. Mitigation must be accomplished either through off-site conservation and the permittee must provide an endowment determined through the Incidental Take Permit process.
MM-BIO-2: Least Bell’s Vireo. Before starting construction, a qualified biologist must conduct eight focused surveys within suitable least Bell’s vireo habitat between April 10 and July 31, and be spaced a minimum of 10 days apart, in accordance with the 2001 United State Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Least B ell’s Vireo Survey Guidelines. The eight focused protocol surveys must be completed, and the results of the surveys be submitted in a draft report to the Director for review within 21 days of the completion of surveys. A final report must be prepared and s ubmitted to the Director and USFWS within 45 days following the completion of the surveys. If least Bell’s vireo is determined to be absent, no further action is required.
1.b
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 23
If least Bell’s vireo is determined to be present based on the results of the proto col surveys, no construction may begin before consulting with California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and USFWS for compliance with both the federal and State endangered species acts. Compensatory mitigation for impacts to 0.78 acre of marginally suitable least Bell’s vireo habitat must be achieved in conjunction with Mitigation Measure BIO-4 for impacts to a jurisdictional drainage with mitigation ratio of at least 2:1.
MM-BIO-3: Nesting Birds. Before construction that would require removal of po tential habitat for raptor and songbird nests between January 15 and September 1, the Project applicant must have a qualified biologist that is approved by the City conduct surveys for any and all active avian nests. Pre -construction nesting bird surveys m ust be conducted weekly, within 30 days before initiation of ground -disturbing activities to determine the presence of active nests. The surveys should continue on a weekly basis with the last survey being conducted not more than three days before the start of clearance/construction work. Surveys should include examination of trees, shrubs, and the ground, within grasslands, for nesting birds, as several bird species known to the area are shrub or ground nesters, including mourning doves. If ground- disturbing activities are delayed, additional preconstruction surveys may be recommended by the City so that not more than three days elapse between the survey and ground-disturbing activities.
If active nests are located during pre-construction surveys, clearing and construction activities within 300 feet of the nest (500 feet for raptors) must be postponed or halted until the nest is vacated and juveniles have fledged, as determined by the biologist, and there is no evidence of a second attempt at nesting. Limits of construction to avoid an active nest must be established in the field with flagging, fencing, or other appropriate barriers and construction personnel should be instructed on the sensitivity of nest areas. The nest buffers may be reduced by the monitoring biologist when there is a biologist present to observe the nest for changes in behavior. The biologist must serve as a construction monitor during those periods when construction activities will occur near active nest areas to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on these nests will occur. The results of the survey, and any avoidance measures taken, shall be submitted to the City within 30 days of completion of the pre-construction surveys and/or construction monitoring to document compliance with applicable state and federal laws pertaining to the protection of native birds.
MM-BIO-4: Sensitive Plant Communities. Before the Building Official issues a grading permit, impacts to sensitive plant communities (e.g., Fremont cottonwood/mulefat forest, Fremont cottonwood forest, and California sycamore woodland) must be mitigated through enhancement or restoration of rem aining on -site sensitive plant communities at a ratio of 1:1 or the creation of new sensitive plant communities within the newly created channel area. A habitat mitigation and monitoring plan must be prepared by a City -approved biologist or restoration eco logist and approved by the City before the Public Works Director, or designee, issues a grading permit. The mitigation and monitoring plan must focus on the removal of nonnative elements within disturbed habitat areas of the project site or depict creation areas, planting/restoration methods and success criteria. In addition, this plan must provide
1.b
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 24
details as to its implementation, maintenance, and future monitoring including the following components:
• Description of existing sensitive plant communities on the Project site; • Summary of permanent impacts to the sensitive community based on approved Project design;
• Proposed mitigation location areas, with description of existing conditions before mitigation implementation;
• Detailed description of restoration or enhancement goals; • Description of implementation schedule, site preparation, erosion control measures, planting plans, and plant materials;
• Provisions for mitigation site maintenance and control on non -native invasive plants; and
• Monitoring plan, including performance standards, adaptive management measures, and
• Monitoring reporting to the City of Santa Clarita
Alternatively, mitigation for sensitive plant community impacts may be achieved through off -site restoration or enhancement at a ratio no less than 1:1 and may include the purchase of mitigation credits at an agency- approved off-site mitigation bank or an in lieu fee program within Los Angeles County acceptable to the City.
MM-BIO-5: Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources. Before the Public Works Director, or designee, issues any grading permit for permanent or temporary impacts in the areas designated as jurisdictional features, the applicant must obtain a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), a Clean Water Act Section 401 permit from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and Streambed Alteration Agreement permit under Fish and Game Code Section 1602 from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). The following shall be incorporate d into the permitting, subject to approval by the regulatory agencies:
• On- or off-site restoration or enhancement of USACE/RWQCB jurisdictional “waters of the U.S. /“waters of the State” and wetlands at a ratio no less than 2:1 for permanent impacts, and for temporary impacts, restore impact area to pre-project conditions (i.e., revegetate with native species, where appropriate).
Off-site restoration or enhancement at a ratio no less than 2:1 may include the purchase of mitigation credits at an agency -approved off-site mitigation bank or in lieu fee program within Los Angeles County or within the same watershed acceptable to the City, where the location has comparable e cological parameters such as habitat types and species mix;
• On- or off-site restoration or enhancement of CDFW jurisdictional streambed and associated riparian habitat at a ratio no less than 2:1 for permanent impacts, and for temporary impacts, restore i mpact area to pre -project conditions (i.e., revegetate with native species, where appropriate). Off -site
1.b
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 25
restoration or enhancement at a ratio no less than 2:1 may include the purchase of mitigation credits at an agency -approved off-site mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program within Los Angeles County or within the same watershed acceptable to the City, here the location has comparable ecological parameters such as habitat types and species mix.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
The project’s impacts to cultural resources that can be mitigated or are otherwise less than significant are discussed in Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, of the Draft EIR. Identified impacts include potential substantial adverse effects related to historical and archaeological resources, and potential disturbance of human remains.
Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
No historical resources or unique archaeological resources as defined by CEQA were identified within the project site as a result of either the California Historical Research Information System (CHRIS) records search or as a result of the cul tural resources survey. The existing structures within the project site do not meet the age thresholds for consideration as historical resources under CEQA. However, the geoarchaeological review revealed that there is a potential for the project site to contain subsurface archaeological deposits. As a result, the project has a potential to impact and thus cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a yet unknown historical resources and inadvertent discovery of intact archaeological resources. Therefore, the project incorporated Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-4. MM-CUL-1 requires the retention of a qualified archaeologist to carry out all mitigation measures related to archeological resources. MM-CUL-2 requires that all project construction personnel participate in a cultural resources sensitivity training given by the qualified archaeologist . MM-CUL-3 involves requires archaeological and Native American monitoring for ground disturbing activities within areas of the project site mapped as containing Holocene-age undifferentiated alluvium. MM-CUL- 4 includes the protocols and procedures for the inadvertent discovery of archaeological resources.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-4 would reduce potential impacts to historical and archaeological resources to a less-than-significant level.
No prehistoric or historic -period burials, including those inte rred outside of formal cemeteries, were identified within the project site as a result of the CHRIS records search, NAHC SLF search and informal tribal outreach, or pedestrian survey. Therefore, the likelihood of encountering human remains within the subsu rface of the project site is low. However, the possibility of encountering human remains within the project site exists such that potentially significant impacts could occur. The discovery of human remains would require handling in accordance with PRC 5097.98, which states that in the event that human remains are discovered during construction, construction activity shall be halted, and the area shall be protected until consultation and treatment can occur as prescribed by law . In addition, implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-5, which includes the protocols and procedures for the inadvertent discovery of human remains, would reduce potentially significant impacts to a level of less-than-significant.
1.b
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 26
Mitigation Measures
MM-CUL-1: Retention of a Q ualified Archaeologist. Before the Public Works Director, or designee, issues grading permit and before starting any ground -disturbing activity, the applicant must retain a qualified archaeologist, defined as one meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archeology (U.S.
Department of Interior 1983) to carry out all mitigation measures related to archeological resources.
MM-CUL-2: Cultural Resources Sensitivity Training. Before starting ground -disturbing activities, the qualified archaeologist must conduct cultural resources sensitivity training for all construction personnel. Construction personnel will be informed of the types of archaeological resources that may be enc ountered, and of the proper procedures to be enacted in the event of an inadvertent discovery of archaeological resources or human remains. The applicant must ensure that construction personnel attend the training and retain documentation demonstrating attendance.
MM-CUL-3: Archaeological and Native American Monitoring. An archaeological monitor (working under the direct supervision of the qualified archaeologist) and a Native American monitor must be present during all ground-disturbing activities within areas of the Project mapped as containing Holocene -age undifferentiated alluvium. The qualified archaeologist, in coordination with the City’s Project Manager, may reduce or discontinue monitoring if it is determined that the possibility of encountering buried archaeological deposits is low based on observations of soil stratigraphy or other factors. Archaeological monitoring must be conducted by an archaeologist familiar with the types of archaeological resources that could be encountered within the Project area. The Native American monitor must be selected from the Native American groups identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) as having affiliation with the Project area. The archaeological monitor and Native American monitor are empower ed to halt or redirect ground -disturbing activities away from the vicinity of a discovery until the qualified archaeologist has evaluated the discovery and determined appropriate treatment. The archaeological monitor must keep daily logs detailing the type s of activities and soils observed, and any discoveries. After monitoring is completed, the qualified archaeologist must prepare a monitoring report that details the results of monitoring. The report must be submitted to the City and any Native American groups who request a copy. A copy of the final report must be filed at the SCCIC.
MM-CUL-4: Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological Resources. Should unanticipated discovery of archaeological materials occur, the contractor must immediately cease all work activities in the area (within approximately 100 feet) of the discovery until it can be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist. Prehistoric archaeological materials might include obsidian and chert flaked -stone tools (e.g., projectile points, knives, scrapers) or tool-making debris; culturally darkened soil (“midden”) containing heat- affected rocks, artifacts, or shellfish remains; stone milling equipment (e.g., mortars, pestles, handstones, or milling slabs); and battered stone tools, such as hammerstones and pitted stones. Historic -period materials might include stone or concrete footings and walls; filled wells or privies; and deposits of metal, glass,
1.b
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 27
and/or ceramic refuse. Construction may not resume until the qualified archaeologist has conferred with the City’s Project Manager on the significance of the resource.
If it is determined by the qualified archaeological monitor that the discovered archaeological resource constitutes a historical resource or unique archaeological resource under CEQA, avoidance and preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigation. Preservation in place maintains the important relationship between artifacts and their archaeological context and also serves to avoid conflict with traditional and religious values of groups who may ascribe meaning to the resource.
Preservation in place may be accomplished by, but is not limited to, avoidance, incorporating the resource into open space, capping, or deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement. In the event that pre servation in place is demonstrated to be infeasible and data recovery through excavation is the only feasible mitigation available, an Archaeological Resources Data Recovery and Treatment Plan shall be prepared and implemented by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the City that provides for the adequate recovery of the scientifically consequential information contained in the archaeological resource. The qualified archaeologist and City’s Project Manager must consult with appropriate Native American representatives in determining treatment for prehistoric or Native American resources to ensure cultural values ascribed to the resource, beyond those that are scientifically important, are considered.
MM-CUL-5: Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains. If human remains are encountered, the contractor must halt work in the vicinity (within 100 feet) of the discovery and contact the Los Angeles County Coroner in accordance with Public Resources Code (PRC) section 5097.98 and Health and Safety Code section 7050.5. The City’s Project Manager must also be notified. If the County Coroner determines the remains are Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission NAHC must be notified in accordance with Health and Safety Code section 7050.5(c) a nd PRC Section 5097.98. The NAHC will designate a most likely descendent (MLD) for the remains per PRC section 5097.98. Until the landowner has conferred with the MLD, the contractor must ensure that the immediate vicinity where the discovery occurred is not disturbed by further activity, is adequately protected according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, and that further activities take into account the possibility of multiple burials.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The project’s impacts related to geology and soils that can be mitigated or are otherwise less than significant are discussed in Section 4. 6, Geology and Soils, of the Draft EIR. Identified impacts include potential adverse effects to paleontological resources.
Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
1.b
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 28
Although the potential to encounter fossil resources from recent alluvial deposits is relatively low, these sediments are underlain by older alluvial deposits that have increased paleontological sensitivity at depth. These older alluvial deposits and the Plio-Pleistocene Saugus Formation have a high potential for containing fossil resources due to their older age and from previously recorded fossil localities from the same and/or similar sediments found outside of the proposed project area.
Mitigation Measures MM-GEO-1 through MM-GEO-4, which require the retention of a qualified paleontologist before the initiation of grading activities , sensitivity and awareness training, monitoring, and procedures to follow in the event of inadvertent discovery, would reduce the potential to damage such resources to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measures
MM-GEO-1: Retain Qualified Paleontologist. Before starting construction activities, the developer must retain a Qualified Paleontologist that meets the standards of the Society for Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) (2010) to carry out all mitigation measures related to paleontological resources.
MM-GEO-2: Paleontological Resources Sensitivity Training. Before any person commences ground-disturbing activities, the Qualified Paleontologist must conduct pre - construction worker paleontological resources sensitivity training. The training must include information on what types of paleontological resources could be encountered during excavations, what to do in case an unanticipated discovery is made by a worker, and laws protecting paleontological resources. All construction personnel must be informed of the possibility of encountering fossils and instructed to immediately inform the construction foreman or supervisor if any bones or other potential fossils are unexpectedly unearthed in an area where a paleontological monitor is not present. The developer must ensure that construction personnel are made available for and attend the training and retain documentation demonstrating attendance.
MM-GEO-3: Paleontological Monitoring. The Qualified Paleontologist must supervise a paleontological monitor meeting the SVP standards (2010) and be present during all excavations extending beyond a depth of 5 feet. Monitoring must consist of visually inspecting fresh exposures of rock for larger fossil remains and, where appropriate, collecting wet or dry screened standard sediment samples (up to 4.0 cubic yards) of promising horizons for smaller fossil remains (SVP 2010). Per the SVP standards (2010), once 50 percent of excavations or other ground disturbing activities are complete within geologic units assigned high paleonto logical sensitivity and no fossils are identified, monitoring can be reduced to part -time inspections or ceased entirely if determined adequate by the Qualified Paleontologist in consultation with the City’s Project Manager. Monitoring activities must be d ocumented in a Paleontological Resources Monitoring Report to be prepared by the Qualified Paleontologist at the completion of construction and be provided to the City within six months of Project completion. If fossil resources are identified during monitoring, the report will also be filed with the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County.
MM-GEO-4: Inadvertent Discoveries. If a paleontological resource is discovered during construction, the paleontological monitor is empowered to temporarily divert o r redirect grading and excavation activities in the area of the exposed resource to
1.b
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 29
facilitate evaluation of the discovery. An appropriate buffer area must be established by the Qualified Paleontologist around the find where construction activities shall not be allowed to continue. Work may be allowed to continue outside of the buffer area.
At the Qualified Paleontologist’s discretion and to reduce any construction delay, the grading and excavation contractor must assist in removing rock samples for initial processing and evaluation of the find. All significant fossils must be collected by the paleontological monitor and/or the Qualified Paleontologist. Collected fossils must be prepared to the point of identification and catalogued before they are submitted to their final repository. Any fossils collected must be curated at a public, non -profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, if such an institution agrees to accept the fossils. If no institution accepts the fossil collection, they may be donated to a local school in the area for educational purposes. Accompanying notes, maps, and photographs must also be filed at the repository and/or school.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The project’s impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials that can be mitigated or are otherwise less than significant are discussed in Section 4. 8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the Draft EIR. Identified impacts include potential adverse effects related to the exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.
Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
The project site is located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) in a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) , and therefore the project has the potential to expose people or structures to significant risk involving wildland fires. Implementation of Mitigation Measures MM- FIRE-1 through MM-FIRE-3, which involve additional requirements for construction activities in hazardous fire areas and limiting or ceasing construction work during high-wind weather events; vegetation management requirements implemented at the start of and throughout all phases of construction; and ensure that plant selection for the project would be in accordance with the fuel modification plant selection guidelines of the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) , would reduce impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials, and specifically impacts associated with potential exposure to wildfire risks, to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measures
See MM-FIRE-1 through MM-FIRE-3 under Wildfire of Section 5.3 below.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The project’s impacts related to hydrology and water quality that can be mitigated or are otherwise less than significant are discussed in Section 4.7, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the Draft EIR.
Identified impacts include potential adverse effects relating to impeding or redirecting flood flows and relating to the risk of release of pollutants in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiches zones.
1.b
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 30
Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
Based on the Federal Emergency Management Agency ( FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), the project site is located in an area mapped as either Zone A Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) (without base flood elevation) or Zone AO SFHA (with base flood elevation of 3 feet). Placement of the proposed project would impede and potentially redirect flood flows if not addressed appropriately. Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-HYD-1, which requires that design plans including the site modifications meet FEMA requirements to remove the site from the SFHA, and meet National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) requirements, would reduce potential flooding impacts to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measures
MM-HYD-1: The applicant must submit an application for a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) along with a hydrology a nd hydraulics report prepared by a California licensed engineer. The LOMR must be based on the implementation of all physical measures that affect the hydrologic or hydraulic characteristics of the flooding source for the site that are to be included as part of the project before obtaining a building permit. The hydrologic and hydraulics report must demonstrate how modification of the existing regulatory floodway or the Special Flood Hazard Area for the project site will reduce flooding risks to within FEMA requirements. Once the LOMR is approved by FEMA and revises the Flood Insurance Rates Map or Flood Boundary and Floodway Map for the project site, construction of the proposed project may commence in accordance with applicable law.
LAND USE AND PLANNING
The project’s impacts related to land use and planning that can be mitigated or are otherwise less than significant are discussed in Section 4.10, Land Use and Planning, of the Draft EIR. Identified impacts include potential adverse effects relating to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
Findings
Changes or alterations have be en required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
As shown in Table 4.10 -2, General Plan Land Use Consistency Analysis, within Section 4.10, Land Use and Planning, of the Draft EIR, the project is either consistent or partially consistent with the City’s General Plan’s applicable goals, objectives, and policies with the implementation of MM-AQ-1, MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-5, MM-HYD-1, MM-NOI-1, MM-NOI-2, and MM-FIRE- 1 through MM-FIRE-3, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measures
1.b
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 31
See MM-AQ-1, MM-BIO-1 through MM -BIO-5, MM-HYD-1, MM-NOI-1 through MM -NOI-2, and MM-FIRE-1 through MM-FIRE-3.
RECREATION
The project’s impacts related to recreation that can be mitigated or are otherwise less than significant are discussed in Section 4.15, Recreation, of the Draft EIR. Identified impacts include potential adverse effects relating to recreational facilities or the construction or expansion of recreational facilities.
Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
Construction activities related to the proposed recreational components of the project would involve introducing heavy machinery to the project site for grading, excavation, and development.
Impacts associated with project construction would be temporary and short in duration, as the project is proposed to be constructed over a period of approximately 24 months . As discussed throughout the EIR, impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed project, including the project’s recreational amenities, would result in either no impact or less than significant impacts, either with or without mitigation, for all issues areas wit h the exception of construction noise. For construction noise, construction impacts associated with the recreational components of the project could result in potentially significant impacts such that mitigation would be required. Implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-1, MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-4, MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-5, MM-GEO-1 through MM-GEO-4, MM-NOI-1 and MM-NOI-2, and MM-FIRE-1 through MM-FIRE 3 would reduce potential impacts to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measures
See MM-AQ-1, MM -BIO-1 through MM -BIO-4, MM -CUL-1 through MM -CUL-5, MM -GEO-1 through MM -GEO-4, MM -NOI-1 through MM -NOI-2, and MM -FIRE-1 through MM -FIRE-3 in Section 5.3.
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
The project’s impacts to tribal cultural resources that can be mitigated or are otherwise less than significant are discussed in Section 4. 17, Tribal Cultural Resources, of the Draft EIR. Identified potential impacts include those related to a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or local register, and significant to a California Native American Tribe.
Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
1.b
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 32
No tribal cultural resources (TCRs) were identified within the project site; however, the potential to discover TCRs still exists on the project site. Implementation Mitigation Measures MM-CUL- 1 through MM-CUL-5, which involve retention of a qualified archaeologist; project construction personnel participating in a cultural resources sensitivity training ; archaeological and Native American monitoring for ground disturbing activities within areas of the project site mapped as containing Holocene-age undifferentiated alluvium ; and protocols and procedures for the inadvertent discovery of archaeological resources, would reduce potential impacts to tribal cultural resources to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measures
See MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-5 under Cultural Resources in Section 5.3 above.
WILDFIRE
The project’s impacts related to wildfire that can be mitigated or are otherwise less than significant are discussed in Section 4. 19, Wildfire, of the Draft EIR. Identified impacts include potential adverse effects relating to exacerbating wildfire risks and thereby exposing project occupants to pollutants concentrations from or spread of a wildfire; and installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment.
Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
Project construction would introduce potential ignition sources to the project site, including the use of heavy machinery and the potential for sparks during welding activities or other hot work .
However, implementation of Mitigation Measures MM -FIRE-1 through MM-FIRE-3, which involve additional requirements for construction activities in hazardous fire area s and limiting or ceasing construction work during high -wind weather events ; vegetation management requirements implemented at the start of and throughout all phases of construction; and ensure that plant selection for the project would be in accordance with the fuel modification plant selection guidelines of the LACFD, would reduce potential wildfire impacts to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measures
MM-FIRE-1: Extreme Fire Day Ignition Avoidance. All construction and maintenance activities must temporarily cease during Red Flag Warnings. The contractor’s superintendent must coordinate with personnel to determine which low fire hazard activities may occur. Should the Fire Department declare a Red Flag Warning affecting the Wiley Canyon Project site, the same work activity restrictions occurring during National Weather Service Red Flag Warning periods apply.
MM-FIRE-1: Pre-Construction Requirements . Vegetation management must be conducted before the start of construction and throughout all construction phases. Perimeter fuel modification must be implemented and approved by the Fire Department before bringing combustible materials on site. Existing fla mmable vegetation must be
1.b
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 33
reduced by 50% on vacant lots upon commencement of construction. Caution must be used to avoid causing erosion or ground (including slope) instability or water runoff due to vegetation removal, vegetation management, maintenance, landscaping or irrigation.
Before delivering lumber or combustible materials onto the site, site improvements within the active development area must be in place, including utilities, operable fire hydrants, an approved, temporary roadway surface, and fuel modification zones established. These features must be approved by the Fire Department before combustibles being brought on site.
MM-FIRE-1: LACFD FMZ Plant Selection Guideline Compliant . The Fire Department publishes a list of plants that would not contr ibute to extreme fire behavior are suitable for Fuel Modification Zones. All plants included within fuel modification zones of the proposed project must be from this list and if a minimum distance from structures is stated for the species, such listed species may not be planted closer to any structures associated with the proposed project than the stated minimum distance. No plant that is not listed by the Fire Department on its Fuel Modification Zone Plant Selection Guidelines may be included within a Fuel Modification Zone of the proposed Project without approval by Fire Department.
5.4 EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE SIGNIFICANT AND
UNAVOIDABLE BUT MITIGATED TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE
The Wiley Canyon Project Draft EIR found that the project would have a significant and unavoidable impact related to noise during construction. A detailed analysis of th is topic area is provided in Section 4.12 of the Draft EIR.
FINDING:
The City of Santa Clarita City Council having reviewed and considered the information contained in the Draft EIR and Technical Appendices, Final EIR, and administrative record, finds, pursuant to PRC Section 21081 (a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorpora ted into, the project, which would lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Draft EIR to the extent feasible but not to a less -than-significant level. Therefore, the City of Santa Clarita finds, pursuant to PRC Section 21081(a)(3) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Draft EIR, and, therefore, the project would cause significant unavoidable impacts related to construction noise and cumulative construction noise, as summarized below.
NOISE
As further described in Section 4.12, Noise, of the Draft EIR, identified significant impacts related to noise are associated with the project’s potential to result in temporary construction noise levels that would exceed exterior daytime noise standards at identified sensitive receptors.
Findings
1.b
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 34
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR.
2. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Draft EIR.
Facts in Support of Findings
During the City’s permitted construction hours, project construction would result in noise levels at adjacent sensitive receiver locations exceeding the ambient noise (57.7 to 70 dBA [A-weighted decibels] Leq [Equivalent Continuous Sound Pressure Level ]) plus 5 dBA (62.7 to 77 dBA L eq) significance threshold. Additionally, the senior living facility would be occupied for approximately 18 months while construction continues on the additional residential (and commercial) buildings at the project site. Based on the site plan, the senior living facility would be approximately 50 feet from the construction area of other residential buildings. Once these nearest residential buildings have been constructed, they would function as barriers shielding construction activity in areas beyond these residential buildings nea rest to the senior living facility. Construction noise would reach a maximum of 88.8 dBA Leq at a receiver as close as 50 feet to the construction area thereby resulting in a potentially significant impact. Therefore, mitigation measures are required to protect sensitive receivers. Implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-NOI-1 and MM-NOI- 2 would require construction equipment within 200 feet of the northern and eastern boundary of the project site be limited to small, reduced noise equipment that has a maximum noise generation level of 77 dBA L eq at 50 feet and require noise barriers to be installed during construction with sufficient height to block the line -of-sight between the project construction area and adjacent sensitive receivers , would reduce noise impacts to the extent feasible. As no mitigation measures are feasible to reduce noise impacts to a less than sig nificant level, the impact would be significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measures
MM-NOI-1: Construction equipment within 200 feet of the northern and eastern boundary of the project site is limited to small, reduced noise equipment that has a maximum n oise generation level of 77 dBA Leq at 50 feet. This measure also applies to construction equipment during the later phases of construction for residential buildings within 200 feet of the Senior Living Building after it is occupied.
MM-NOI-2: Construction noise barriers must be installed d uring project construction with sufficient height to block the line-of-sight between the project construction area and adjacent sensitive receivers, including proposed on -site residential uses that are completed and occupied while construction in other par ts of the project site continues.
5.5 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
As set forth in these findings, the implementation of the project would not result in significant impacts that are considered unavoidable , with the exception of impacts related to c onstruction noise and cumulative construction noise . CEQA requires that an EIR include an analysis of a reasonable range of feasible alternatives to a proposed project capable of avoiding or
1.b
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 35
substantially lessening any significant adverse environmental impact associated with the project.
The Draft EIR addressed the environmental effects of alternatives to the project. A description of these alternatives, a comparison of their environmental impacts to the project, and the City’s findings are listed below. These alternatives are compared against the project relative to the identified project impacts, summarized in the sections above, and to the project objectives, as stated in Section 2.2, Statement of Objectives, above.
In making the alternatives findings below, the City of Santa Clarita certifies that it has independently reviewed and considered the information o n alternatives provided in the EIR, including the information provided in the comments on the Draft EIR and the responses thereto.
DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVES SELECTED FOR ANALYSIS IN THE EIR Alternatives that were considered but rejected during the scoping process for detailed evaluation in the EIR are discussed below.
Alternative Site
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)(2), the City considered the potential for alternative locations to the project. As stated in CEQA Guidelines section 15126.6(f)(2)(A), the key question and first step in analyzing alternative sites is whether any of the significant effects of a project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting that project in another location.
Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of a project need to be considered in the EIR.
The project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to construction noise even with the incorporation of mitigation measures MM -NOI-1 and MM-NOI-2, as detailed in Section
4.12, Noise, of this Draft EIR. Similarly, the project would result in cumulatively considerable construction noise impacts. In particular, a significant impact would occur as a result of a temporary exceedance in the ambient noise thresholds during construction, as well as an exceedance in significance thresholds related to the proposed Senior Living residences on site.
There are no significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the proposed project that relate to the location of the project site, and development of the project on another site in the City is not likely to lessen or avoid the environmental impacts that required mitigation. Moreover, the objectives of the proposed project are closely tied to redeveloping the former Smiser Mule Ranch.
Consideration of the potential to development the proposed project on another site within the City was given. The surrounding vicinity is characterized as urban and suburban development, vacant land, which has been previously disturbed by past agricultural activities, and limited commercial uses. Underutilized d eveloped areas would have the potential to be redeveloped to provide additional housing units, however, the project applicant does not control another site within the area of comparable land that is available for development of the project.
Given the site ’s location, site zoning, and site designations for development, it is also not reasonable to assume that the use of another site would result in the project site being vacant and impacts related to the site conditions avoided. Other surrounding areas are also in other jurisdictions outside the control of the City. Development of the proposed project on an alternate site would result in a similar construction scenario, similar quantities of criteria air pollutant emissions during construction, similar level s of construction noise, and similar levels of energy consumption. Additionally, because of the City’s urban nature, mix of land uses, and the presence
1.b
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 36
of a variety of sensitive receptors throughout the City, it is unlikely that an alternate site would be situated far enough from sensitive receptors to substantially lessen the air quality and noise impacts of the proposed project during construction.
Regardless of its location, the proposed project would generally place similar demands on public services, utilities and services systems, and energy resources. With regard to the visibility and appearance of the project, the aesthetic impact on the project is largely related to its height and density, which would not substantially change at an altern ative location. For these reasons, this alternative was eliminated from further consideration.
The following alternatives were selected for evaluation in the Draft EIR:
• Alternative 1: No Project/No Build Alternative
• Alternative 2: Affordable Housing Alternative
• Alternative 3: Private Recreational Facility Alternative • Alternative 4: Construction Noise Setback Alternative Additionally, another alternative was proposed and evaluated as part of the project’s Final EIR. • Alternative 5: Mixed Use Alternative
Table 1 provides a comparison of environmental impacts for each of the alternatives in relation to environmental impacts associated with the project.
Table 1
Summary Comparison of the Impacts of the Alternatives
Impact Topic Project
Alternative 1
No
Project/No
Build
Alternative 2
Affordable
Housing
Zoning
Alternative 3
Private
Recreational
Facility
Alternative 4
Construction
Noise
Setback
Alternative 5
Mixed Use
Aesthetics LTS Less/NI Similar/LTS Greater/LTS Similar/LTS Similar/LTS Air Quality LTSM Less/NI Similar/LTSM Less/LTSM Less/LTSM Less/LTSM Biological Resources LTSM Less/NI Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Cultural Resources LTSM Less/NI Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Energy LTS Less/NI Similar/LTS Less/LTS Less/LTS Less/LTS Geology and Soils LTSM Less/NI Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM GHG Emissions LTS Less/NI Greater/LTS Less/LTS Less/LTS Less/LTS Hazards and
Hazardous Materials
LTSM Less/NI Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Hydrology and Water
Quality
LTSM Less/NI Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Land Use and
Planning
LTSM Less/NI Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Mineral Resources LTS Similar/LTS Similar/LTS Similar/LTS Similar/LTS Similar/LTS Noise SU Less/NI Similar/SU Similar/SU Less/LTSM Similar/SU Population and
Housing
LTS Less/NI Greater/LTS Less/LTS Less/LTS Less/LTS
Public Services LTS Less/NI Greater/LTS Less/LTS Less/LTS Less/LTS
1.b
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 37
Alternative 1: No Project/No Build Alternative
In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, the No Project Alternative for a project on an identifiable property consists of the circumstance under which the project does not proceed. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(B) states that, “in certain instances, the no project alternative means ‘no build’ wherein the existing environmental setting is maintained.” Accordingly, for purposes of this analysis, Alternative 1, the No Project/No Build Alternative, assumes that no development would occur on the project site. The project site would continue to be vacant.
Findings
1. Alternative 1 would eliminate the significant and unavoidable impacts associated with construction noise and cumulative construction noise.
2. Alternative 1 would reduce or eliminate the less-than-significant impacts with mitigation or less-than-significant i mpacts for aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation, tribal cultural resources, utilities and service systems, and wildfire.
3. Alternative 1 would result in similar impacts for mineral resources.
4. Alternative 1 would not meet any of the basic Project objectives and is, therefore, rejected as infeasible.
5. The findings of the project set forth in this document provide support for the project and the elimination of this alternative from further consideration.
Facts in Support of Findings:
Under the Alternative 1, the Wiley Canyon Project would not be implemented, and no development would occur on the project site. The project site would continue to be vacan t.
Because no construction or new operational activities would occur under this alternative, the less- than-significant impacts with mitigation or less-than-significant impacts for aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, noise, population and housing, public Recreation LTSM Less/NI Greater/LTSM Less/LTS Less/LTS Less/LTS Transportation LTS Less/NI Greater/LTS Less/LTS Less/LTS Less/LTS Tribal Cultural
Resources
LTSM Less/NI Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Utilities and Service
Systems
LTS Less/NI Greater/LTS Less/LTS Less/LTS Less/LTS
Wildfire LTSM Less/NI Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Similar/LTSM Notes:
LTS = Less Than Significant Similar = Impact Similar to the Project LTSM = Less Than Significant with Mitigation Greater = Impact Greater than the Project NI = No Impact Less = Impact Less than the Project
PSI = Potentially Significant Impact
SU = Significant and Unavoidable Impact
1.b
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 38
services, recreation, transportation, tribal cultural resources, utilities and service systems , and wildfire would be eliminated.
In addition, the No Project Alternative would not meet any of the project objectives, as identified below in Table 2.
Table 2
Applicability of Project Objectives for Alternative 1
Project Objective
Alternative 1:
No Project
Alternative
Create a new mixed-use community that allows for residential, retail/commercial, and senior housing while preserving and enhancing natural resources.
Does Not Meet
Provide a sensitive and protective interface with the adjacent Wiley Canyon Creek by utilizing appropriate setback, grading, landscape, buried bank stabilization and water quality treatments.
Does Not Meet
Provide development and transitional land use patterns that are compatible with surrounding communities and land uses and are consistent with the City’s General Plan.
Does Not Meet
Arrange land uses and add amenities to reduce vehicle miles traveled and to encourage the use of transit.
Does Not Meet
Design neighborhoods to locate residential and non -residential land uses in clo se proximity to each other and major road corridors, transit and trails.
Does Not Meet
Provide public spaces, including plazas, private and public recreational areas and trails. Does Not Meet Implement waste reduction, drought -tolerant landscaping, and u se of water efficiency measures.
Does Not Meet
Provide a meandering trail with public access along Wiley Canyon Road and within the project site along Wiley Canyon Creek.
Does Not Meet
Provide a landscape design emphasizing a pleasant neighborhood character and inviting streetscapes.
Does Not Meet
Enhance and augment the City’s housing market by providing a variety of housing product to meet the needs of future residents.
Does Not Meet
Maintain and enhance the use of Wiley Canyon Creek with native revegetation as a to serve as a natural channel to be utilized by wildlife.
Does Not Meet
Incorporate new oak trees into the project design, including public spaces. Does Not Meet Incorporate vehicle and pedestrian circulation im provements on Wiley Canyon Road and Calgrove Boulevard through the widening of the roadways where needed, as well as the addition of appropriate traffic controls at various intersections.
Does Not Meet
Provide a Class I trail and sidewalks along the roadways. Does Not Meet Provide publicly accessible passive and active recreational opportunities for prospective residents and existing residents in proximity to the project site.
Does Not Meet
Include amenities to specifically support senior residents requiring senior services including memory care, supporting amenities for basic-needs nursing care, and housekeeping service.
Does Not Meet
Include recreational amenities to improve quality of life of prospective on -site residents and existing off-site residents and encourage senior living tenants to socialize and maintain active lifestyles.
Does Not Meet
1.b
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 39
Alternative 2: Affordable Housing Alternative
Alternative 2, the Affordable Housing Alternative, would allow the development of the project site with 837 apartment units , including 201 units designated for low - and very -low-income households. The maximum height of the proposed buildings would be 65 feet under this alternative. The proposed floor-area-ratio for this alternative is 0.63. Under Alternative 2, a total of 1,026 parking spaces would be provided, in compliance with State Density Bonus requirements. In comparison to the proposed project, th e recreational areas located on the southern portion of the project site would not be developed under this alternative. Infrastructure improvements, including the northern water quality basin and the southern drainage basin on site, are proposed under this alternative. In addition, off-site street improvements along Wiley Canyon Road and its intersecting streets, including Fourl Road, Canerwell Street, Valley Oak Court, and Calgrove Boulevard would remain.
Findings
1. Alternative 2 would result in similar significant and unavoidable impacts after mitigation associated with construction noise and cumulative construction noise.
2. Alternative 2 would result in greater impacts associated with recreation which would be less- than-significant with mitigation incorporated.
3. Alternative 2 would result in greater less-than-significant impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions, population and housing, public services, transportation, and utilities and service systems.
4. Alternative 2 would result in similar impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, tribal cultural resources, and wildfire.
5. The findings of the project set forth in this document provide support for the project and the elimination of this alternative from further consideration.
Facts in Support of Findings:
In comparison to the project, Alternative 2 would result in similar impacts relative to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning , mineral res ources, noise, tribal cultural resources, and wildfire . However, this alternative would result in potentially greater impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation, and utilities and service systems for the following reasons:
• Under Alternative 2, an increase in GHG emissions is anticipated due to an increase of 312 vehicle trips as a result of the proposed land use. Given this, Alternative 2 is anticipated to result in GHG impacts slightly greater than the proposed project. • Under Alternative 2, 837 multifamily residential units are proposed on the project site.
Utilizing the City’s average persons per household of 3.08 (as identified in Section 4.13 of this EIR), this alternative is anticipat ed to result in approximately 2,578 residents. 1 The
1 837*3.08 = 2577.95 or 2,578 (rounded to the nearest whole person)
1.b
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 40
population projections under Alternative 2, therefore, would be greater than the 1,371 residents anticipated under the proposed project.
• Under Alternative 2, an increase in population is anticipated when compared to the proposed project (see the discussion above regarding population and housing). Given this, the alternative is anticipated to result in an increased demand for police, fire, schools, parks, and other public services (libraries), as well as recreational facilities. • Under Alternative 2, an increase of approximately 312 average daily vehicle trips is anticipated during operations when compared to the project . Given this, Alternative 2 is anticipated to result in transportation impacts slightly greater than the proposed project. • Under Alternative 2, future development would have the same development footprint as the proposed project. Connections to utilities and service systems to the project site would remain. However, due to the potential increase in population generated as a result of 837 multifamily residential units, an increase in demand for potable water, electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications is anticipated. Similarly, an increase in the generation of solid waste and wastewater is expected.
In addition, Alternative 2 would not meet some of the project objectives, as identified below in Table 3.
Table 3
Applicability of Project Objectives for Alternative 2
Project Objective
Alternative 2:
Affordable
Housing
Alternative
Create a new mixed -use community that allows for residential, retail/commercial, and senior housing while preserving and enhancing natural resources.
Partially Meets
Provide a sensitive and protective interface with the adjacent Wiley Canyon Creek by utilizing appropriate setback, grading, landscape, buried bank stabilization and water quality treatments.
Meets
Provide development and transitional land use patterns that are compatible with surrounding communities and land uses and are consistent with the City’s General Plan.
Meets
Arrange land uses and add amenities to reduce vehicle miles traveled and to encourage the use of transit.
Partially Meets
Design neighborhoods to locate residential and non -residential land uses in close proximity to each other and major road corridors, transit and trails.
Meets
Provide public spaces, including plazas, private and public recreational areas and trails. Partially Meets Implement waste reduction, drought -tolerant landscaping, an d use of water efficiency measures.
Meets
Provide a meandering trail with public access along Wiley Canyon Road and within the project site along Wiley Canyon Creek.
Meets
Provide a landscape design emphasizing a pleasant neighborhood character and inviting streetscapes.
Meets
Enhance and augment the City’s housing market by providing a variety of housing product to meet the needs of future residents.
Meets
1.b
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 41
Alternative 3: Private Recreational Facility Alternative This alternative includes the development of a private recreational facility , which would include various recreational uses along with a 10,000 square foot clubhouse/restaurant. Development under this alternative would consist of eight tennis courts, seven pickleball courts, a soccer field, a football field, baseball field and outd oor basketball court. All courts and fields would include overhead lighting. Under Alternative 3, parking would be included to support the recreational facility. In addition, on -site infrastructure improvements along the creek off -site street improvements would be included.
Findings
1. Alternative 3 would not eliminate the project’s significant and unavoidable impacts associated with construction noise and cumulative construction noise.
2. Alternative 3 would result in greater impacts related to aesthetics which would be less-than- significant with mitigation incorporated.
3. Alternative 3 would reduce, but not eliminate, the less -than-significant impacts with mitigation incorporated for air quality and would reduce less-than-significant impacts related to energy, greenhouse gas emissions, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation, and utilities and service systems.
4. Alternative 3 would result in similar impacts related to biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, tribal cultural resources, and wildfire.
5. The findings of the project set forth in this document provide support for the project and the elimination of this alternative from further consideration.
Facts in Support of Findings:
In comparison to the project, Alternative 3 would result in similar impacts relative to biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and Maintain and enhance the use of Wiley Canyon Creek with native revegetation as a to serve as a natural channel to be utilized by wildlife.
Meets
Incorporate new oak trees into the project design, including public spaces. Meets Incorporate vehicle and pedestrian circulation improvements on Wiley Canyon Road and Calgrove Boulevard through the widening of the roadways where needed, as well as the addition of appropriate traffic controls at various intersections.
Meets
Provide a Class I trail and sidewalks along the roadways. Meets Provide publicly accessible passive and active recreational opportunities for prospective residents and existing residents in proximity to the project site.
Partially Meets
Include amenities to specifically support senior residents requiring senior services including memory care, supporting amenities for basic-needs nursing care, and housekeeping service.
Does Not Meet
Include recreational amenities to improve quality of life of prospective on -site residents and existing off-site residents and encourage senior living tenants to socialize and maintain active lifestyles.
Partially Meets
1.b
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 42
water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, tribal cultural resources, and wildfire.
Alternative 3 would have reduced impacts relative to air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation, and utilities and service systems due to the reduced scale of the proposed development compared to the project.
Alternative 3 would still re quire mitigation measures associated with air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, tribal cultural resources, and wildfire. However, this alternative would result in potentially greater impacts related to aesthetics for the following reasons:
• Under Alternative 3, the recreational facility would require overhead lighting . I mpacts related to lighting and glare would be greater than the proposed project.
In addition, Alternative 3 would not meet some project objectives, as identified below in Table 4.
Table 4
Applicability of Project Objectives for Alternative 3
Project Objective
Alternative 3:
Private
Recreational
Facility
Alternative
Create a new mixed -use community that allows for residential, retail/commercial, and senior housing while preserving and enhancing natural resources.
Does Not Meet
Provide a sensitive and protective interface with the adjacent Wiley Canyon Creek by utilizing appropriate setback, grading, landscape, buried bank stabilization and water quality treatments.
Meets
Provide development and transitional land use patterns that are compatible with surrounding communities and land uses and are consistent with the City’s General Plan.
Meets
Arrange land uses and add amenities to reduce vehicle miles traveled and to encourage the use of transit.
Partially Meets
Design neighborhoods to locate residential and non -residential land uses in close proximity to each other and major road corridors, transit and trails.
Meets
Provide public spaces, including plazas, private and public recreational areas and trails. Partially Meets Implement waste reduction, drought -tolerant landscaping, and use of water efficiency measures.
Meets
Provide a meandering trail with public access along Wiley Canyon Road and within the project site along Wiley Canyon Creek.
Meets
Provide a landscape design emphasizing a pleasant neighborhood character and inviting streetscapes.
Meets
Enhance and augment the City’s housing market by providing a variety of housing product to meet the needs of future residents.
Does Not Meet
Maintain and enhance the use of Wiley Canyon Creek with native revegetation as a to serve as a natural channel to be utilized by wildlife.
Meets
Incorporate new oak trees into the project design, including public spaces. Meets
1.b
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 43
Alternative 4: Construction Noise Setback Alternative
This alternative includes development of the site with a 139 -bed assisted living facility, 47 detached condos, and 237 apartment units. The proposed senior living facility would be 3-stories in height and the multifamily apartments would range from 2- and 4-stories. Under Alternative 4, a 200-foot open space/landscaped buffer is proposed between the mobile home park to the north and the project site. This alternative would include development of a recreational building and pool located in the center of the project site surrounded by the proposed apartment buildings. In addition, recreational/ open space uses are proposed on the southern portion of the site.
Infrastructure improvements, including the northern water quality basin and the southern drainage basin on site, are proposed under t his alternative as well as off -site street improvements along Wiley Canyon Road and its intersecting streets.
Findings
1. Alternative 4 would eliminate the project’s significant and unavoidable impacts associated with construction noise and cumulative construction noise to a level of less-than-significant with mitigation incorporated.
2. Alternative 4 would reduce, but not eliminate, the less -than-significant impacts with mitigation incorporated for air quality and would reduce less-than-significant impacts for energy, greenhouse gas emissions, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation, and utilities and service systems.
3. Alternative 4 would result in similar impacts for aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, tribal cultural resources, and wildfire.
4. The findings of the project set forth in this document provide support for the project and the elimination of this alternative from further consideration.
Facts in Support of Findings:
In comparison to the project, Alternative 4 would result in simil ar impacts relative to aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, tribal cultural resources, and wildfire. Alternative 4 would have reduced impacts relative to air quality, energy, Incorporate vehicle and pedestrian circulation improvements on Wiley Canyon Road and Calgrove Boulevard through the widening of the roadways where needed, as well as the addition of appropriate traffic controls at various intersections.
Meets
Provide a Class I trail and sidewalks along the roadways. Meets Provide publicly accessible passive and active recreational opportunities for prospective residents and existing residents in proximity to the project site.
Partially Meets
Include amenities to specifically support senior residents requiring senior services including memory care, supporting amenities for basic-needs nursing care, and housekeeping service.
Does Not Meet
Include recreational amenities to improve quality of life of prospective on -site residents and existing off-site residents and encourage senior living tena nts to socialize and maintain active lifestyles.
Partially Meets
1.b
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 44
greenhouse gas emissions, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation, and utilities and service systems due to the reduced scale of the proposed development compared to the project. Alternative 4 would still require mitigation measures associated with air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, tribal cultural resources, and wildfire.
In addition, Alternative 4 would not fully meet all project objectives, as shown below in Table 5.
Table 5
Applicability of Project Objectives for Alternative 4
Project Objective
Alternative 4:
Construction
Noise Setback
Alternative
Create a new mixed -use community that allows for residential, retail/commercial, and senior housing while preserving and enhancing natural resources.
Partially Meets
Provide a sensitive and protective interface with the adjacent Wiley Canyon Creek by utilizing appropriate setback, grading, landscape, buried bank stabilization and water quality treatments.
Meets
Provide development and transitional land use patterns that are compatible with surrounding communities and land uses and are consistent with the City’s General Plan.
Meets
Arrange land uses and add amenities to reduce vehicle miles traveled and to encourage the use of transit.
Meets
Design neighborhoods to locate residential and non-residential land uses in close proximity to each other and major road corridors, transit and trails.
Meets
Provide public spaces, including plazas, private and public recreational areas and trails. Meets Implement waste reduction, drought -tolerant la ndscaping, and use of water efficiency measures.
Meets
Provide a meandering trail with public access along Wiley Canyon Road and within the project site along Wiley Canyon Creek.
Meets
Provide a landscape design emphasizing a pleasant neighborhood charac ter and inviting streetscapes.
Meets
Enhance and augment the City’s housing market by providing a variety of housing product to meet the needs of future residents.
Meets
Maintain and enhance the use of Wiley Canyon Creek with native revegetation as a to serve as a natural channel to be utilized by wildlife.
Meets
Incorporate new oak trees into the project design, including public spaces. Meets Incorporate vehicle and pedestrian circulation improvements on Wiley Canyon Road and Calgrove Boulevard through the widening of the roadways where needed, as well as the addition of appropriate traffic controls at various intersections.
Meets
Provide a Class I trail and sidewalks along the roadways. Meets Provide publicly accessible passive and active recreational opportunities for prospective residents and existing residents in proximity to the project site.
Meets
Include amenities to specifically support senior residents requiring senior services including memory care, supporting amenities for basic-needs nursing care, and housekeeping service.
Meets
1.b
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 45
Alternative 5: Mixed Use Alternative
Alternative 5 removes the for-rent residential component of the proposed project (379 units and up to four stories) and replaces it with 232 townhome and/or detached condominium re sidential units. The townhome/condominium units would be two -story in height. Under Alternative 5, the size of the senior facility/assisted living facility would reduce to 140,000 square feet (120 assisted living units) when compared to the proposed projec t. The commercial component under this alternative would remain at 9,000 square feet. The residential area would be 16.5 acres, and the assisted living/commercial area would be 3.5 acres. A total of 601 parking spaces would be provided for residential uses , 64 spaces for commercial use, and 66 spaces for senior living parking. The open space proposed on site would total 120,330 square feet, including 15,000 square feet for recreational amenities (e.g., pool, tot -lot, restroom), an 80,045-square-foot park, 16,850 square feet for the small lot single -family development private yards, and 8,435 square feet for townhome private yards. Under this alternative, the proposed grading activities, bank protection along Wiley Canyon Creek, and off-site infrastructure would all remain the same as the proposed project.
Findings
1. Alternative 5 would not eliminate the project’s significant and unavoidable impacts associated with construction noise and cumulative construction noise.
2. Alternative 5 would reduce, but not eliminate, the less -than-significant impacts with mitigation incorporated for air quality and would reduce less -than-significant impacts for energy, greenhouse gas emissions, population and housing, public services, recr eation, transportation, and utilities and service systems.
3. Alternative 5 would result in similar impacts for aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, tribal cultural resources, and wildfire.
Facts in Support of Findings:
In comparison to the project, Alternative 5 would result in similar impacts relative to aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geolog y and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, tribal cultural resources, and wildfire. Alternative 5 would have reduced impacts relative to air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation, and utilities and service systems due to the reduced scale of the proposed development compared to the project. Alternative 5 would still require mitigation measures associated with air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, tribal cultural resources, and wildfire.
Alternative 5 would meet all project objectives, as shown below in Table 6.
Include recreational amenities to improve quality of life of prospective on -site residents and existing off-site residents and encourage senior living tenants to socialize and maintain active lifestyles.
Meets
1.b
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 46
Table 6
Applicability of Project Objectives for Alternative 5
Project Objective
Alternative 5:
Mixed Use
Alternative
Create a new mixed -use community that allows for residential, retail/commercial, and senior housing while preserving and enhancing natural resources.
Meets
Provide a sensitive and protective interface with the adjacent Wiley Canyon Creek by utilizing appropriate setback, grading, landscape, buried bank stabilization and water quality treatments.
Meets
Provide development and transitional land use patterns that are compatible with surrounding communities and land uses and are consistent with the City’s General Plan.
Meets
Arrange land uses and add amenities to reduce vehicle miles traveled and to encourage the use of transit.
Meets
Design neighborhoods to locate residential and non -residential land uses in close proximity to each other and major road corridors, transit and trails.
Meets
Provide public spaces, including plazas, private and public recreational areas and trails. Meets Implement waste reduction, drought -tolerant landscaping, and use of water efficiency measures.
Meets
Provide a meandering trail with public access along Wiley Canyon R oad and within the project site along Wiley Canyon Creek.
Meets
Provide a landscape design emphasizing a pleasant neighborhood character and inviting streetscapes.
Meets
Enhance and augment the City’s housing market by providing a variety of housing product to meet the needs of future residents.
Meets
Maintain and enhance the use of Wiley Canyon Creek with native revegetation as a to serve as a natural channel to be utilized by wildlife.
Meets
Incorporate new oak trees into the project design, including public spaces. Meets Incorporate vehicle and pedestrian circulation improvements on Wiley Canyon Road and Calgrove Boulevard through the widening of the roadways where needed, as well as the addition of appropriate traffic controls at various intersections.
Meets
Provide a Class I trail and sidewalks along the roadways. Meets Provide publicly accessible passive and active recreational opportunities for prospective residents and existing residents in proximity to the project site.
Meets
Include amenities to specifically support senior residents requiring senior services including memory care, supporting amenities for basic-needs nursing care, and housekeeping service.
Meets
Include recreational amenities to improve quality of life of pro spective on -site residents and existing off-site residents and encourage senior living tenants to socialize and maintain active lifestyles.
Meets
1.b
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 47
6.0 CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL EIR
The City Council finds that no new significant information as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 was received by the City Council after circulation of the Draft EIR that would require recirculation of the Draft EIR.
The City Council certifies the Final EIR based on the following findings and conclusions.
6.1 FINDINGS
The project would have the potential for creating significant adverse impacts. These significant adverse environmental impacts are identified in the Draft EIR and require mitigation as set forth in the Findings. Significant adverse impacts which cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance after mitigation include noise impacts during project construction.
6.2 CONCLUSIONS
1. All significant environmental impacts from the implementation of the project are identified in the Draft EIR and, with implementation of t he mitigation measures identified, will be mitigated to less -than-significant level s, with the exception of construction noise and cumulative construction noise.
2. Alternatives to the project, which could potentially achieve the basic objectives of the project, have been considered. The project and Alternatives 1 through 4 have been rejected in favor of Alternative 5.
3. Environmental, economic, social, and other considerations and benefits derived from the development of the proposed project, as further discussed in Section 7.0, override and make infeasible any alternatives to the project or further mitigation measures beyond those incorporated into the project.
1.b
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 48
This page intentionally left blank.
1.b
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 49
7.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
7.1 INTRODUCTION
The City of Santa Clarita is the Lead Agency under CEQA for preparation, review, and certification of the Final EIR for the Wiley Canyon Project. As the Lead Agency, the City is also responsible for determining the potential environmental impacts of the pr oposed action and which of those impacts are significant, and which can be mitigated through imposition of mitigation measures to avoid or minimize those impacts to a level of less than significant. CEQA then requires the Lead Agency to balance the benefits of a proposed action against its significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts in determining whether or not to approve the project. In making this determination, the City is guided by CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, which provides as follows:
a) CEQA requires the decision -making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered “acceptable.”
b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the Final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the Final EIR and/or other info rmation in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091.
In addition, PRC Section 21081(b) requires that where a public agency finds that speci fic economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in an EIR and thereby leave significant unavoidable effects, the public agency must also find that overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects of Alternative 5.
Pursuant to PRC Section 21081(b) and the CE QA Guidelines Section 15093, the City has balanced the benefits of the Alternative 5 against the one unavoidable adverse impact associated with the Alternative 5 and has adopted all feasible mitigation measures with respect to this impact.
The City Council, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the Wiley Canyon Draft EIR, the Final EIR, including responses to comments, and the public record in its entirety, hereby adopt s this Statement of Overriding Considerations, which balances the benefits of Alternative 5 against the one unavoidable adverse impact in reaching a decision on this project.
7.2 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
1.b
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 50
Although all potential project impacts have been substantially avoided or mitigated as described in the preceding findings, there is no complete mitigation for project impact related to construction noise and cumulative construction noise . Details of this significant unavoidable adverse impact were discussed in the EIR and are summarized or were otherwise provided in the Statement of Facts and Findings (above).
7.3 OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The City Council finds that each of the specific economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, and other considerations, and the benefits of the project separately and independently outweigh the remaining significant, adverse impact related to noise impacts associated with construction and is an overriding consideration independently warranting approval of the project. The remaining significant adverse impact identified in Section 7.2, above, is acceptable in light of each of these overriding considerations, and the substantial evidence that supports the enumerated benefits of Alternative 5 can be found in the Statement of Facts and Findings herein, the Final EIR, Alternative 5 itself, and the record of all proceedings in connection with the approval of Alternative 5. In the event that any court decision or regulatory action results in a determination that there are additional remaining significant impacts resulting from the City’s approval of the project that cannot be avoided even with the incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures into the project, the Statement of Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations herein shall be deemed to apply to such additional remaining significant impacts.
After examining the proposed project in light of its alternatives, the City determined that adoption and implementation of one of the alternatives (Alternative 5) is the most desirable, feasible, and appropriate action.
The City finds and determines that (1) all significant environmental effects of Alternative 5 are substantially lessened where feasible; (2) Alternative 5 will result in certain significant adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided or reduced to a less-than-significant level even with incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures; a nd (3) there are no other feasible mitigation measures or feasible project alternatives that will further mitigate, avoid, or reduce the remaining significant environmental effects to a less-than-significant level.
The City finds that the adoption and implementation of Alternative 5 will have the economic, social, legal, and other considerable benefits listed below. The City finds that each of the separate benefits listed below is determined to be unto itself an overriding consideration, independent of other benefits, that warrants approval of Alternative 5 and outweighs and overrides the significant unavoidable impacts related to construction noise and cumulative construction noise described in Section 5.4, and thereby justifies approval of Alternative 5.
The specific economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, and other considerations, and the benefits of Alternative 5 that outweigh the significant unavoidable impact of the project are:
1. Alternative 5 would c reate a new mixed -use community that al lows for residential, retail/commercial, and senior housing while preserving and enhancing natural resources.
2. Alternative 5 would provide a sensitive and protective interface with the adjacent Wiley Canyon Creek by utilizing appropriate setback, grading, l andscape, buried bank stabilization and water quality treatments.
1.b
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 51
3. Alternative 5 would provide development and transitional land use patterns that are compatible with surrounding communities and land uses and are consistent with the City’s General Plan.
4. Alternative 5 would arrange land uses and add amenities to reduce vehicle miles traveled and to encourage the use of transit.
5. Alternative 5 would provide designs and neighborhoods to locate residential and non - residential land uses in close proximity to each other and major road corridors, transit and trails.
6. Alternative 5 would provide public spaces, including plazas, private and public recreational areas and trails.
7. Alternative 5 would implement waste reduction, drought-tolerant landscaping, and use of water efficiency measures.
8. Alternative 5 would provide a meandering trail with public access along Wiley Canyon Road and within the project site along Wiley Canyon Creek.
9. Alternative 5 would provide a landscape design emphasizing a pleasant neighborhood character and inviting streetscapes.
10. Alternative 5 would enhance and augment the City’s housing market by providing a variety of housing product to meet the needs of future residents.
11. Alternative 5 would m aintain and enhance the use of Wiley Canyon Creek with native revegetation as a to serve as a natural channel to be utilized by wildlife.
12. Alternative 5 would incorporate new oak trees into the project design, including public spaces.
13. Alternative 5 would incorporate vehicle and pedestrian circulation improvements on Wiley Canyon Road and Calgrove Boulevard through the widening of the roadways where needed, as well as the addition of appropriate traffic controls at various intersections.
14. Alternative 5 would provide a Class I trail and sidewalks along the roadways.
15. Alternative 5 would provide publicly accessible passive and active recreational opportunities for prospective residents and existing residents in proximity to th e project site.
16. Alternative 5 would i nclude amenities to specifically support senior residents requiring senior services including memory care, supporting amenities for basic-needs nursing care, and housekeeping service.
17. Alternative 5 would include recreational amenities to improve quality of life of prospective on-site residents and existing off -site residents and encourage senior living tenants to socialize and maintain active lifestyles.
Therefore, the City Council, having reviewed and considered all of the information contained in the Draft EIR, Final EIR, and the public record, adopt s the Statement of Overriding
1.b
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 52
Considerations, which balances the benefits of Alternative 5 against the unavoidable adverse impact related to operational air quality in reaching a decision on this project.
1.b
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 53
This page intentionally left blank.
1.b
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 54
8.0 STATEMENT OF LOCATION AND CUSTODIAN OF
DOCUMENTS
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(e), the City of Santa Clarita, as the Lead Agency, specifies that copy of the FEIR and all supporting documents are available at the City Clerk’s Office, located in the City Hall Building at 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 120, Santa Clarita, California, 91355.
1.b
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238)) City Council Recommended Statement of Facts and Findings for the Wiley Canyon Project Final Environmental Impact Report
November 2025 55
This page intentionally left blank.
1.b
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
MASTER CASE 20-238
EXHIBIT B
Final EIR; and
Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program for the Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project SCH No. 2022030626
Incorporated by Reference
Document can be found at
https://santaclarita.gov/planning/environmental-impact-reports-under-review/wiley-canyon- mixed-use-project/
1.b
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: CEQA Resolution and Exhibits- Draft and Final EIR (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
RESOLUTION NO. 25-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING APPEAL 25-002 AND AFFIRMING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO APPROVE MASTER CASE 20-238, CONSISTING OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW 20-023, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 20-005, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 20-017, MINOR USE PERMIT 20-013, OAK TREE PERMIT 425- 004, AND TENTATIVE MAP 83295, FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 24924 HAWKBRYN AVENUE (ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBERS: 2825-012-007, 2825-007-010, 2825-012-011, 2825-012-901, AND 2825-012-902),
IN THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, SUBJECT TO THE ATTACHED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (EXHIBIT A).
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS FOR MASTER CASE 20-238.
The City Council makes the following findings of fact and conclusions:
A. On October 28, 2020, an application for Master Case 20-238 was filed, consisting of Architectural Design Review (ADR) 20-023, Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 20-005, Development Review (DR) 20-017, Minor Use Permit (MUP) 20-013, Oak Tree Permit (OTP) 425-004, and Tentative Map (TM) 83295. The properties affected by the application are Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APN) 2825-012-007, 2825-007-010, 2825-012-011, 2825- 012-901, and 2825-012-902;
B. The approximately 31-acre Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (Project) site is located at 24924 Hawbryn Avenue, and has a General Plan land use and zoning designation of Mixed Use Neighborhood (MXN). The Project site is also located within the area designated by the General Plan as the Calgrove Corridor/Smiser Ranch Special Development Area (Smiser Ranch Area), and located within the Planned Development Overlay (PD) zone; C. The project includes the proposed development of 45 two-story detached, single-family condominium units, eight of which would include an attached Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU); 179 two-story townhome units; a four-story, 120-unit assisted-living facility; and 9,000 square feet of commercial floor area, including the merger and subdivision into seven lots;
D. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”; Public Resources Code § 21000, et seq.), including the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regs. § 15000, et seq.) the City of Santa Clarita (City) is the lead agency for the Project. The findings, conclusions, and actions set forth in Resolution No. 25-_ are incorporated by reference; and
E. This resolution and its findings are made based upon City Council’s de novo review of the entire administrative record, including, without limitation, testimony and evidence presented to the City Council at its public hearings, including the staff report.
1.c
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
SECTION 2. GENERAL FINDINGS FOR MASTER CASE 20-238. Based on the foregoing facts and findings for Master Case 20-238, the City Council determines as follows:
A. That the proposal is consistent with the General Plan;
The Project site is designated as Mixed-Use Neighborhood (MXN) under the Santa Clarita General Plan (Land Use Element), which is intended for mixed-use development “in order to create neighborhoods that integrate residential uses with complementary commercial services, including retail and office uses.” In addition, the Project site is located within an approximately 38-acre area that is specifically identified in the General Plan as the Calgrove Corridor/Smiser Ranch Special Development Area (Smiser Ranch area). The General Plan establishes a limitation on the overall allowable floor area of 830,000 square feet of total residential and commercial combined development (excluding parking facilities) in the Smiser Ranch area.
The proposed Project would develop an underutilized site with a mixed-use development, inclusive of new residential units, assisted-living units, and commercial floor area for neighborhood-serving commercial uses. The proposed development is within the allowable floor area established by the General Plan for the Smiser Ranch area.
The Project would construct roadway improvements along its frontage on Wiley Canyon Road to include three new roundabouts and installation of a Class I Trail from the Project entrance to Calgove Boulevard. While Wiley Canyon Road would maintain a two-lane roadway configuration, the Project would not change the General Plan roadway designation, and would not preclude Wiley Canyon Road from being built out to four lanes if that ever became necessary in the future.
In addition, the proposed Project would be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan, including, without limitation.
The proposed Project is consistent with the following Land Use goals, and their associated objectives and policies: Goal LUE 1; Objective LU 1.2; Policy LU 1.2.1; Goal LU 2; Objective LU 2.1; Objective LU 2.3; Goal LU 3; Objective LU 3.1; and Policy LU 3.1.2. The development proposal is consistent with the intent and goals of the General Plan. The Project would provide new housing opportunities in a variety of housing types, and new commercial floor area to provide neighborhood serving commercial retail and office uses, helping to meet the housing and business needs of both current and future residents.
B. The proposal is allowed within the applicable underlying zone and complies with all other applicable provisions of the Santa Clarita Municipal Code (SCMC);
The proposed Project is a mixed-use development, located in the MXN zone, which is intended for mixed-use development. Multifamily and single-family residential units are permitted by right in the MXN zone. The assisted-living facility is permitted with the approval of a CUP. In addition, commercial development is permitted in the MXN zone, subject to the objective development standards in SCMC Chapters 17.51 and 17.55. Any
1.c
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
future commercial uses will be subject to the requirements of SCMC Section 17.35.020(B), the permitted use chart for the MXN zone.
The MXN zone establishes minimum and maximum density for residential units, and establishes minimum and maximum floor area ratios (FAR) for commercial uses. The FAR for commercial uses is 0.2, and the maximum FAR is 0.5. Based on the 31-acre Project site, the commercial uses should provide between 270,072 and 675,180 square feet of floor area.
The required residential density is a minimum of six units per acre and a maximum of 18 units per acre. Based on the Project site area, the Project should provide between 186 to 558 units.
The Project includes 232 residential units, meeting the minimum and maximum residential density of the MXN zone. The Project request includes an MUP to provide a commercial FAR that is less than that required by the MXN zone. The applicant proposes a 149,000 square feet of commercial floor area, inclusive of the assisted-living and commercial floor area.
The proposed Project is within the allowable building height of 50 feet in the MXN zone. In general, the residential units are two stories, with a maximum height of 35 feet. The assisted living facility is four stories with a maximum height of 50 feet. The architecture was reviewed for conformance with the Community Character and Design Guidelines (CCDG) for the community of Newhall.
The Project complies with the objective development standards for the MXN zone, and with approval of the CUP and 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; and
The permittee is required to comply with all applicable laws, including, without limitation, the California Building Standards Code and Fire Code. Sufficient access for firefighting purposes is provided and verified by the Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County (LACFD), and the permittee must comply with all LACFD requirements. As described above, the Project complies with the zoning regulations for the MXN zone and would not create a hazard to the public health, safety, and welfare. The Project complies with all applicable laws. There is no evidence demonstrating that the Project, if constructed, would endanger public health and safety.
D. The proposal is physically suitable for the site. The factors related to the proposal’s physical suitability for the site shall include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. The design, location, shape, size, and operating characteristics are suitable for the proposed use;
1.c
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
The Project complies with the City’s objective standards for mixed-use development, including, without limitation, setbacks, building height, drive aisle width, outdoor space, and landscaping, and sufficient parking is provided for both the commercial and residential components as required by the SCMC. As described in the above findings, with approval of the CUP and MUP, the Project would be consistent with the underlying zoning requirements.
2. 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 would include several off-site roadway improvements along Wiley Canyon Road. Wiley Canyon Road is currently a two-lane roadway along the Project frontage to Calgrove Boulevard. The are no signalized intersections along this stretch of Wiley Canyon Road. The roadway improvements for the Project include the installation of three new roundabout intersections: 1) at the Project entrance on Wiley Canyon Road; 2) at Canerwell and Wiley Canyon Road; and 3) at Calgrove Boulevard and Wiley Canyon Road. In addition, a Class I trail (two-lane bicycle path and separated, five-foot wide pedestrian path) would be installed along the Project frontage on Wiley Canyon Road from the Project entrance to Calgrove Boulevard. As discussed throughout the public hearing process, the Project trips do not necessitate the build-out of four lanes; however, the Wiley Canyon Road right-of-way could accommodate four lanes if needed in the future.
The Project would also improve bicycle trail connections in the vicinity of the Project along Wiley Canyon Road from Lyons Avenue to Calgrove Boulevard. A Class III bicycle lane (signage to indicate a shared bicycle lane in the traffic lane) would be installed on Wiley Canyon Road from Lyons Avenue to Wabuska Street. This would transition to a Class II bicycle lane (striped bicycle lane in the traffic lane right-of-way) at Wabuska Street to the Project entrance. A Class II trail would be installed on Calgrove Boulevard from Wiley Canyon Road to The Old Road. Ultimately, these improvements would make bicycle path connections from existing bicycle trails on the north side of Lyons Avenue to The Old Road. This would provide for a future trail connection to the Towsley Canyon Open Space, on the south side of the intersection of Calgrove Boulevard and The Old Road.
3. Public protection services (e.g., Fire protection and Sheriff protection) are readily available; and
The Project site is located in an established, urban environment that is serviced by existing public protection services provided by both the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD) and LACFD, and will not require any significant additional resources or services from those organizations as a result of its operation. The proposal must comply with all applicable requirements of the LACFD and LASD. In addition, the developer will be required to pay applicable fees to the law enforcement and fire protection agencies to assist in offsetting any impacts to the services necessary to
1.c
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
properly service the Project.
4. The provision of utilities (e.g., potable water, schools, solid waste collection and disposal, storm drainage, wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal) is adequate to serve the site.
The Project is in a portion of the City that is surrounded by developed communities with access to the necessary utilities to service the Project site. Additionally, the Conditions of Approval require necessary utility connections to support the Project.
SECTION 3: ADDITIONAL FINDINGS FOR THE OAK TREE PERMIT. Based on foregoing facts and findings for OTP 425-004, the City Council finds as follows:
A. It is necessary to remove, relocate, prune, cut or encroach into the protected zone of an oak tree to enable reasonable use of the subject property which is otherwise prevented by the presence of the tree and no reasonable alternative can be accomodated due to the unique physical development constraints on the property.
A total of 36 oak trees are located on the Project site and/or adjacent to planned roadway improvements associated with the Project. The Project would remove four non-heritage oak trees that are located on the Project site. In addition, there are encroachment impacts identified for 19 oak trees, including encroachment into the dripline of two heritage oak trees.
Removing oak trees requires mitigation in accordance with the City’s Oak Tree regulations.
The Conditions of Approval require the permittee to prepare a mitigation plan that is equal to the full appraisal value of the oak trees proposed to be removed. The mitigation plan could include on-site planting of oak trees, payment of a fee to the City’s oak tree fund, or donation of land for planting of oak trees.
SECTION 4: FINDINGS FOR TENTATIVE MAP 83295. Pursuant to SCMC § 16.25.110, the City Council finds that there is no basis for denying TM 83295 under Government Code § 66474 and further finds, determines, and declares that:
A. The proposed Tentative Map is consistent with the General Plan as required in Government Code § 65451. 1. As set forth in Section 3, this Project meets the goals and objectives of the General Plan.
B. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development; C. The design of the Project and the proposed improvements are unlikely to cause substantial damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed type of improvements are unlikely to cause serious public health problems. There is no evidence demonstrating that the approval of a tentative map is likely to cause any serious public health problems; and E. The design of the Project or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements
1.c
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed Project. The on-site roadways necessary for the Project will be installed and accessible for the future residents, law enforcement, and emergency services.
SECTION 5: APPROVALS. The City Council hereby denies Appeal 25-002 and affirms the Planning Commission’s decision to approve Master Case 20-238 consisting of ADR 20- 023, CUP 20-005, DR 20-017, MUP 20-013, OTP 425-004, and TM 83295, for the construction of a mixed-use development consisting of 232 residential units, inclusive of eight ADUs; a 120-unit assisted-living facility; and 9,000 square feet of commercial, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval (Exhibit A).
SECTION 6: 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 7: 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 8: 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 9: EFFECTIVE DATE. This resolution becomes effective immediately upon adoption and memorializes the City Council’s final decision made on November 25, 2025.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 25th day of November, 2025.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
______________________________
CITY CLERK
DATE:__________________________
1.c
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
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. 25-__ was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 25th day of November, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
CITY CLERK
1.c
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
EXHIBIT A
DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MASTER CASE 20-238
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW 20-023, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 20-005, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 20-017, MINOR USE PERMIT 20-013, OAK TREE PERMIT 425- 004, AND TENTATIVE MAP 83295
In addition to all applicable provisions of the Santa Clarita Municipal Code (SCMC), Wiley Canyon, LLC (permittee) agrees to comply with the following provisions as conditions for the City of Santa Clarita’s (City) approval of Master Case 20-238 (MC20-238).
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 SCMC.
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 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, 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.
1.c
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
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 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 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 by the Planning Commission.
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.
GC14. This decision is not effective until the 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 cease until all
1.c
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
requirements of this approval are complied with. Development entitlements may be withheld until violations of the SCMC are abated.
GC16. The Building Official 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 DIVISION
PL1. The permittee is granted approval for the subdivision and construction of the Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (Project), with up to 232 two-story residential units, inclusive of a maximum of eight attached Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs); a 120-unit, four- story assisted-living facility; and up to 9,000 square feet of commercial floor area. The construction of the Project must be consistent with the approved plans on file with the Planning Division under MC20-238. Any modification to the approved plans is subject to further review and approval of the Director.
PL2. Attached ADUs are not permitted to be sold separately from the primary residential unit, unless otherwise permitted under state law.
PL3. The final map submitted to the City Engineer for approval and subsequent recordation must substantially comply with Alternative 5, as approved by the Planning Commission.
PL4. Before the City Engineer issues a precise grading permit, the permittee must submit an Architectural Design Review (ADR) and a Development Review (DR) for review and approval by the Director. An ADR and a DR are required for each development phase of the Project. The ADR and DR can be submitted for the entire Project or by individual planning phase.
PL5. Parking must be provided in accordance with the parking plan shown on Alternative 5, on file with the Director under MC20-238.
PL6. All walls and fencing must be shown on the development plans. A minimum six-foot-tall block wall must be installed along the northerly property line. A minimum 10-foot combination of berm and block wall must be installed along the west property line in any area that is not separated from the Interstate-5 freeway by the Metro sound wall.
PL7. Before the Building Official issues a Certificate of Occupancy for the assisted-living facility, the permittee must provide the Director with a copy of the Emergency and Disaster Plan approved by the California Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), or other state agency as may be referred to by DHHS.
PL8. All construction-related staging, construction equipment, and construction worker parking must be provided on the Project site. No off-site construction parking or staging
1.c
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
is permitted.
PL9. Heavy earthwork construction is limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays unless otherwise approved by the Director of Community Development upon written formal notification.
PL10. No signage is approved by this permit. All future signage requires a sign permit application in accordance with the SCMC.
PL11. The permittee must comply with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) as identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the Project, which is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth.
Landscaping Conditions
LR1. Before the City Engineer issues a grading permit, the permittee must provide final landscape, lighting and irrigation plans (Landscape Document Package) for Director 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 and the SCMC.
LR2. Before the Building Official issues a final Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee must install all proposed irrigation and landscaping, including irrigation controllers, staking, mulching, etc., to the satisfaction of the Director. The Director may impose inspection fees for more than one landscape installation inspection.
LR3. Before the Building Official issues a final Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee must submit to the Director a letter from the Project landscape architect certifying that all landscape materials and irrigation were installed and function according to the approved landscape plans.
ENGINEERING SERVICES DIVISION
General Requirements
EN1. Before the Building Official issues first Certificate of Occupancy, all new and existing power lines and overhead cables less than 34 KV within or fronting the Project site must be installed underground.
EN2. Before the City Engineer, or designee, issues grading permit or approves Final Map, whichever occurs first, the permittee must cooperate, at permittee’s expense, with the City to acquire Los Angeles County properties (Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN): 2825- 001-904, portion of APN: 2825-013-913, and portion of APN: 2825-013-914) for the proposed improvements shown on their properties per Tentative Map (TM) 83295.
1.c
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
EN3. Before the City Engineer, or designee approves grading plan, the permittee must obtain a notarized Letter of Permission for access and grading outside the property lines/tract boundary from all affected adjacent property owner(s), including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).
EN4. Before Street Plan approval, the permittee must obtain a notarized Letter of Permission from the affected property owner(s) for the proposed driveway closure with the installation of a roundabout at the intersection of Wiley Canyon Road and Canerwell Street.
EN5. Before the City Engineer issues grading permit, the permittee must acquire the necessary right of way from each property owner for the construction of proposed roundabouts at the intersection of Wiley Canyon Road/Calgrove Boulevard and Wiley Canyon Road/Canerwell Street, and the proposed Class I Trail from the north side of the Project to Rivendale Park. The permittee must acknowledge and agree with the requirements of EN9.
Subdivision Requirements
EN6. Before the Building Official issues first building permit, a Tract Map prepared by or under the direction of a person licensed to practice land surveying in the State of California must be filed in the Office of the County Recorder, in compliance with applicable City, County, and State Subdivision Map Act.
EN7. This tentative map approval is subject to the permittee's acceptance of the following conditions for acquisition of easements/right-of-way:
A. The permittee must secure, at the permittee's expense, sufficient title, or interest in land to permit construction of any required off-site improvements.
B. If the permittee is unable to acquire sufficient title or interest to permit construction of the required off-site improvements, the permittee must notify the City of this inability not less than six months prior to approval of the Tract Map. In such case, the City may thereafter acquire sufficient interest in the land, which will permit construction of the off-site improvements by the permittee.
C. The permittee must pay all of the City's costs of acquiring said off-site property interests pursuant to Government Code Section 66462.5. Permittee must pay such costs irrespective of whether the Tract Map is recorded or whether a reversion occurs. The cost of acquisition may include, but is not limited to, acquisition prices, damages, engineering services, expert fees, title examination, appraisal costs, acquisition services, relocation assistance services and payments, legal services and fees, mapping services, document preparation, expenses, and/or damages as provided under Code of Civil Procedures Sections 1268.510-.620 and overhead.
D. The permittee agrees that the City will have satisfied the 120-day limitation of Government Code Section 66462.5 and the foregoing conditions relating thereto when it files its eminent domain action in superior court within said time.
E. At the time the permittee notifies the City as provided in “B” hereinabove, the permittee must simultaneously submit to the City in a form acceptable to the City all appropriate appraisals, engineering specifications, legal land descriptions, plans, pleadings, and other
1.c
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
documents deemed necessary by the City to commence its acquisition proceedings. Said documents must be submitted to the City for preliminary review and comment at least 30 days prior to the permittee's notice described hereinabove at “B” F. The permittee agrees to deposit with the City, within five days of request by the City, such sums of money as the City estimates to be required for the costs of acquisition. The City may require additional deposits from time-to-time.
G. The permittee must not sell any lot/parcel/unit shown on the Tract/Parcel Map until the City has acquired said sufficient land interest.
H. If the superior court thereafter rules in a final judgment that the City may not acquire said sufficient land interest, the permittee agrees that the City may initiate proceedings for reversion to acreage.
I. The permittee must execute any agreements mutually agreeable prior to approval of the Tract Map as may be necessary to assure compliance with the foregoing conditions.
J. Failure by the permittee to notify the City as required by “B” hereinabove, or simultaneously submit the required and approved documents specified in “E” hereinabove, or make the deposits specified in “F” hereinabove, must constitute permittee's waiver of the requirements otherwise imposed upon the City to acquire necessary interests in land pursuant to Section 66462.5. In such event, subdivider must meet all conditions for installing or constructing off-site improvements notwithstanding Section 66462.5.
EN8. Before the Tentative Map being recorded with the County Recorder, the permittee must not grant or record easements within areas proposed to be granted, dedicated, or offered for dedication for public streets or highways, access rights, building restriction rights, or other easements; unless subordinated to the proposed grant or dedication. If easements are granted after the date of tentative map approval, subordination must be executed by the easement holder prior to the filing of the Tentative Map.
EN9. Before Tract Map approval, the permittee must label driveways as "Private Driveway and Fire Lane" on the map, as directed by the City Engineer.
EN10. Before Tract Map approval, the permittee must dedicate any necessary easements or rights-of-ways for public improvements (such as sewer, storm drain, sidewalk and roadway), to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
EN11. Before Tract Map approval, the permittee must remove existing structures.
EN12. Before Tract Map approval, the permittee must vacate and/or relocate easements running through proposed structures or other improvements, as directed by the City Engineer.
EN13. At map check submittal, the permittee must provide a preliminary subdivision report. A final subdivision guarantee is required prior to Tract Map approval.
EN14. Before Tract Map approval, the permittee must provide a Will Serve Letter stating that Community Antenna Television service (CATV) will be provided to this project.
EN15. Before Tract Map approval, the permittee must provide a Will Serve Letter from all necessary utilities, stating that service will be provided to this property.
1.c
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
EN16. Before Tract Map approval, the permittee must dedicate to the City the right to prohibit the erection of building(s) and other structures within open space lots.
EN17. Before Tract Map approval, the permittee must adjust, relocate, and/or eliminate lot lines, lots, streets, easements, grading, geotechnical protective devices, and/or physical improvements to comply with ordinances, policies, and standards in effect at the date the City determined the application to be complete, all, as directed by the City Engineer.
EN18. Before Tract Map approval, the permittee must show on the map all Los Angeles County Flood Control District Easements. A permit will be required for any construction affecting the right-of-way or facilities.
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions Requirements
EN19. Before a Final Map is approved, the permittee must obtain approval from the City Engineer and the City Attorney for Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for this development. The permittee must reimburse the City for the City Attorney’s review and approval fee. The CC&Rs must include a disclosure to comply with the Geologist's recommendations in the Geology Report concerning restrictions on watering, irrigation, and recommend plant types. The CC&Rs must grant the City the authority to review and approve/disapprove amendments (including dissolution) of the CC&Rs/association. The CC&Rs must grant the City the right (though not the obligation) to enforce the CC&Rs (at a minimum those provisions related to City-required items).
EN20. Before the Building Official issues first building permit, the permittee must record the approved CC&Rs with the Los Angeles County Recorder’s office.
EN21. Before the Building Official issues first Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee must establish a Property Owners’ Association (POA), or similar entity, to ensure the continued maintenance of all shared/common lots and drainage devices are not transferable to the County Flood Control District.
EN22. Before the Building Official issues first Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee must transfer ownership of open space lots to the POA. The grant deed must be submitted to Engineering Services for review and approval by the City Engineer before a Final Map is approved.
Access Requirements
EN23. Before the Building Official issues building permits, the permittee must record a covenant for easement of all shared driveways and drive aisles, and common landscaping/slope maintenance areas, as directed by the City Engineer. This condition may be satisfied by incorporating the appropriate provisions into the CC&Rs.
Condominium/Lease Requirements (for residential only)
EN24. Before final map approval, the permittee must submit a notarized affidavit to the City Engineer, signed by all owners of record at the time of filing of the map with the City, stating that any proposed condominium building have not been constructed or that all buildings have not been occupied or rented and that said building will not be occupied or rented until after the recording of the map with the Los Angeles County (County) Recorder.
1.c
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
Grading and Geology Requirements
EN25. Before the City Engineer, or designee, issues a grading permit, the permittee must submit a grading plan consistent with the approved Plan, 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 all submitted recommendations, including seismic hazards associated with landslide and liquefaction.
EN26. Before the Building Official issues building permit, 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.
EN27. The Preliminary Grading Plan shows an import of 85,000 Cubic Yards of dirt to 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 is between 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.
3. Provide non-stop street sweeping service on all City streets along the haul route during all hours of work to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
4. Provide traffic control and flagging personnel along the haul route to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
C. Before the City Engineer, or designee, issues a grading permit, the permittee must pay a Haul Route Pavement Repair Security Cash Deposit (Deposit) of $100,000, which may be increased or decreased based upon an estimated cost to complete the repairs of streets damaged during the dirt hauling operation. The limits and scope of the repairs must be determined by the City Engineer. 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 permittee. If the Deposit is insufficient to complete the repairs, the City will seek additional funds from the permittee.
D. Before the Building Official issues building permits, 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.
EN28. Before the City Engineer, or designee issues a grading permit, the permittee must obtain a notarized Letter of Permission for grading and/or improvements over all easements, including the California Department of Transportation.
1.c
Packet Pg. 100
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
Drainage Requirements
EN29. Before the City Engineer, or designee issues a grading permit, the permittee must obtain approval and connection permit from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, Land Development Division/Construction Division as appropriate to connect on- site drainage system to the County-maintained drainage channel.
EN30. Before the soil-cement bank protection and retaining wall plans approval, the permittee must obtain approval from Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) for the proposed improvement on their property.
EN31. Before the City Engineer issues the first building permit, the permittee must form a maintenance district, such as DBAA, to fund the ongoing maintenance of natural channel (Lot 5) and other associated improvements that are not transferable to the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) but required to be maintained by the City.
EN32. Before the storm drain plan approval, all existing and proposed storm drain inlets/catch basins within or adjacent to the property along with all new storm drain inlets/catch basins constructed as part of the Project must be provided with filter inserts and/or screen covers, as directed by the City Engineer.
EN33. Specific drainage requirements for the site will be established at building permit application. Before Building Official issues a building permit, the permittee must submit a precise grading plan.
FEMA Flood Zone Requirements
EN34. The Project is located in FEMA Flood Zone (A, AO) in accordance with the Federal Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs).
A. For the proposed improvements within the Floodway, the permittee is required to comply with FEMA requirements to revise the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRMs).
Before the Building Official issues Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee must complete a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR).
B. For the proposed improvements within the Flood fringe, the permittee must comply with FEMA requirements to revise the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRMs). Prior to issuance of grading permit, the permittee must complete a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and prior to first building final, the permittee must complete a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR).
Water Quality Requirements
EN35. 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. Before the City Engineer, or designee issues a grading permit, 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 shall reference the corresponding Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) number issued by the state upon receipt of the NOI.
1.c
Packet Pg. 101
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
EN36. This Project is a development planning priority Project under the City’s NPDES Municipal Stormwater Permit as a development with equal to one acre or greater of disturbed area that adds more than 10,000 square feet of impervious surface area. Before the City Engineer, or designee issues a 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 infiltration 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.
EN37. Before the final map recordation, the permittee must establish a POA to maintain all SUSMP devices/systems identified on the latest approved Drainage Concept/Storm drain plan. SUSMP devices/systems shall include, but are not limited to, catch basin inserts, debris excluders, biotreatment basins, vortex separation type systems, and other devices/systems for stormwater quality. The permittee must be responsible for the maintenance of all SUSMP devices/systems until the POA has been established.
Street Light Requirements
EN38. Before street plan approval, the permittee must submit a Street Light Plan to the City Engineer, or designee, for review and approval. Street-lighting systems must be designed as City-owned and maintained on the LS-3 rate schedule, using LED fixtures approved by the City’s Streetlight Maintenance District Division.
EN39. Before the Building Official issues a final Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee must install street lights per the approved plans, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Street Improvement Requirements
EN40. Before any construction (including, without limitation, drive approaches, sidewalks, sewer laterals, curb and gutter, etc.), trenching or grading within public street right-of- way, the permittee must submit a street improvement plan consistent with the approved Plan, Oak Tree Report, and Conditions of Approval; and obtain encroachment permits from the City Engineer, or designee.
EN41. The property boundaries of the site abut the Caltrans jurisdiction. Encroachments into Caltrans jurisdiction must be permitted by Caltrans before the Director considers issuing any permit(s).
EN42. Before street plan approval, the permittee must submit a street tree location plan to the City’s Urban Forestry Division for review and approval by the Director. The location of the street trees shall not conflict with sewer or storm drain infrastructure. The plan must include proposed sewer lateral locations and storm drain infrastructure for reference.
EN43. Before final map approval or grading permit, whichever occurs first, the permittee must dedicate to the City the right-of-way required for off-site street improvements (roundabout at Calgrove & Wiley Canyon Road, at Canerwell Street & Wiley Canyon Road, and other locations shown on the TM 83295)
EN44. Before final map approval, 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.
1.c
Packet Pg. 102
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
EN45. Before Building Official issues first Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee must construct the following street improvements within the Project site, on Wiley Canyon Road from Wabuska Street to Calgrove Blvd, and on Calgrove Boulevard from Wiley Canyon Road to Old Road, as directed by the City Engineer:
Street Name Inverted
Shoulder
Curb &
Gutter
Base &
Paving
Street
Lights
Street
Trees
Sidewalk
(5’min)
Landscaped
Median
Wiley Canyon Road (including
roundabouts) x x x x x x
Calgrove Boulevard * x x x x x
Private driveways/Fire Lanes x x
Hawkbryn Avenue x x
* Improvements include trail connection to Rivendale Park, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
EN46. Before the Building Official issues first Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee must construct wheelchair ramps at the roundabouts and various intersections along Wiley Canyon Road between the roundabouts, as directed by the City Engineer.
EN47. Before final map approval, the permittee must pay an in-lieu fee for landscaping and irrigation of the medians on Wiley Canyon Road and Calgrove Boulevard per plans, at the discretion of the City Engineer. The in-lieu fee must be based on a cost estimate calculated by the permittee and approved by the City Engineer.
EN48. Before the Building Official issues Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee must repair any broken or damaged curb, gutter, and sidewalk and refurbish the half section of pavement on streets abutting the Project, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A revised street plan and encroachment permit is required.
Sewer Improvement Requirements
EN49. Before final map approval, the permittee must dedicate all necessary sewer easements.
The sewer plans must be reviewed and approved by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (Sewer Maintenance Division), Los Angeles County Sanitation District, and the City Engineer.
EN50. Before Building Official issues a building permit, the permittee must annex the property into the County Sanitation District. The permittee must provide the City’s Building & Safety Division with written confirmation from the Sanitation District that the property has been annexed.
EN51. The on-site sewer must be a publicly maintained sewer. The public sewer plan must be reviewed and approved by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (Sewer Maintenance Division), Los Angeles County Sanitation District, and the City Engineer; and all necessary easement for maintenance of the sewer must be dedicated to the City of Santa Clarita.
EN52. Before the Building Official issues building permits, the on-site sewer main with building laterals must be connected to existing public sewer in Wiley Canyon Road (per PC 7599).
Before the Building Official issues building permits, the permittee must coordinate with
1.c
Packet Pg. 103
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
the Building Official, or designee, regarding payment of additional annexation fees, if required, to annex the property into the Los Angeles County Sanitation District.
EN53. Before the Building Official issues Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee must construct all sewer upgrades per the approved sewer area study, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Bonds, Fees and Miscellaneous Requirements
EN54. Before City Engineer, or designee issue encroachment permits for public improvements (Street, Sanitary Sewer, Storm Drain, and Street Lights), the permittee, by agreement with the City Engineer, must guarantee installation of the improvements through faithful performance bonds, letters of credit or any other acceptable means. Certificate of Occupancy/Occupancies must be withheld if the improvements are not completed.
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
TE1. Before final map approval, the permittee must acquire and dedicate to the City the right- of-way required for all street improvements as identified in the traffic study, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
TE2. Before the Building Official issues the first Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee must construct all street improvements as identified in the traffic study required to adequately serve this development.
TE3. Project access along Wiley Canyon Road must be designed and constructed as a roundabout. The roundabout must be designed according to appropriate design standards including radius, deflection, and design speed. The City Engineer may require permittee to pay for the submitted design being peer reviewed by a third-party consultant. This must be shown on all applicable plans before the Building Official issuing the first building permit.
TE4. The Project must construct a roundabout at the intersection of Wiley Canyon Road and Calgrove Boulevard. The roundabout must be designed according to appropriate design standards, including radius, deflection, and design speed. The City Engineer may require permittee to pay for the submitted design being peer reviewed by a third-party consultant.
This must be shown on all applicable plans before the Building Official issuing the first building permit.
TE5. The Project must construct a roundabout at the intersection of Wiley Canyon Road and Canerwell Street and close/relocate the existing driveway on the west side of the intersection. The roundabout must be designed according to appropriate design standards, including radius, deflection, and design speed. The City Engineer may require permittee to pay for the submitted design being peer reviewed by a third-party consultant. This must be shown on all applicable plans before the Building Official issuing the first building permit.
TE6. The permittee must install a median at the intersection of Wiley Canyon Road and Fourl Road to prohibit westbound left-turns exiting Fourl Road. This must be shown on all applicable plans before the Building Official issues the first building permit.
1.c
Packet Pg. 104
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
TE7. Before the Building Official issues the first Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee must provide a Class I trail on the west side of Wiley Canyon Road between Calgrove Boulevard and the terminus of Old Wiley Canyon Road. The trail must be 11 feet wide at a minimum and include an adjacent walking path of at least 5 feet wide. On the east side of Wiley Canyon Road, the permittee must install Class II bicycle lanes between the same aforementioned limits.
TE8. Before the Building Official issues the first Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee must extend existing Class II bicycle lanes along both sides of Calgrove Boulevard from Wiley Canyon Road to the intersection of The Old Road and Calgrove Boulevard. Crosswalks must be provided on both the western and southern legs of the intersection. All necessary intersection improvements to ensure ADA compliance will be the responsibility of the permittee.
TE9. Before the Building Official issues the first Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee must install Class II bike lanes on both sides of Wiley Canyon Road from the northern terminus of the Class I trail to Wabuska Street.
TE10. Before the Building Official issues the first Certificate of Occupancy, the permittee must design and install bicycle facilities on Wiley Canyon Road between Wabuska Street and 200-feet north of Lyons Avenue, subject to approval by the City Engineer.
TE11. The permittee must install new conduit for the installation or future installation of fiberoptic cable due to street improvements associated with the Project. This must be shown on all applicable plans and installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This interconnect conduit and cable is required along new frontage improvements. All improvement plans for the above interconnect must be approved by the City Engineer.
The interconnect conduit and cable must be installed at the time of the respective traffic signal and/or frontage improvements.
TE12. Sidewalks must be provided on all internal roadways that are not alley-type driveways.
This must be shown on all appropriate cross sections.
TE13. Before the Building Official issues the first building occupancy permit, the permittee must obtain approval from the LACFD for any private driveway sections.
TE14. Before the Building Official issues the first building occupancy permit for each phase, the permittee must post “No Parking– Fire Lane” signs along all driveways with a curb-to- curb width of less than 34 feet. This must be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit.
TE15. All dead-end driveways must extend five feet beyond the last parking stall or garage to provide back-up area. This must be shown on all applicable plans before the Building Official issuing the first building permit.
TE16. Provide access gates for vehicles and bikes/pedestrians at the northerly terminus of the trail (roundabout). Provide vehicle terminus and turnaround at the southerly terminus of the trail. The trail must be designed to meet ADA requirements. Fencing material and design to be decorative, not galvanized chain link. This must be shown on all applicable plans before the Building Official issues the first building permit.
1.c
Packet Pg. 105
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
TE17. The permittee must provide a connection from the southerly end of the trail to Wiley Canyon Road. This must be shown on all applicable plans before the Building Official issues the first building permit.
TE18. The permittee must provide a trail around the westerly perimeter of the site as a continuation of the on-site trail/maintenance road. This must be shown on all applicable plans before the Building Official issues the first building permit.
TE19. The permittee must provide a trail connection to Rivendale Park and Open Space. This must be shown on all applicable plans before the Building Official issues the first building permit.
TE20. Before the City Engineer issues a grading permit, the permittee must conduct vehicle counts on Canerwell Street, Ebelden Avenue, Fambrough Street, and Kalmar Avenue (Oak Ridge Estates neighborhood) and submit the counts to the City Engineer. Within one year of full occupancy of the project, if requested by the City Engineer, the permittee must conduct new vehicle counts in Oak Ridge Estates neighborhood. If the new vehicle counts demonstrate a significant diversion of vehicles, as determined by the City Engineer, into the Oak Ridge Estates neighborhood, the permittee will be required to implement appropriate traffic calming measures that must be approved by the City Engineer to discourage such diversion.
TE21. Before the Building Official issues 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 Via Princessa B&T District. The current rate for this District is $23,170. The B&T rate is subject to change and is based on the rate at the time of payment.
Standard B&T Fee Calculation:
Townhomes = number of units (232) x the district rate ($23,170) x 0.8 = $4,300,352
Commercial = gross acreage (3.5) x the district rate ($23,170) x 5 = $405,475
SPECIAL DISTRICTS
Urban Forestry
UF1. The Conditions of Approval herein are based on the arborist report dated February 2024.
Oak tree removals are limited to trees numbers 450, 452, 455, and 456, as described and proposed in the arborist report.
UF2. Permittee must mitigate for the loss of trees 450, 452, 455, and 456. The mitigation value is the International Society of Arboriculture appraised value:
a. Oak tree number 450 (Quercus agrifolia) – ISA appraised value $26,000 b. Oak tree number 452 (Quercus agrifolia) – ISA appraised value $15,600 c. Oak tree number 455 (Quercus agrifolia) – ISA appraised value $170,200
1.c
Packet Pg. 106
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
d. Oak tree number 456 (Quercus agrifolia) – ISA appraised value $91,600 UF3. Before the City Engineer issues a grading permit, permittee must submit a comprehensive oak tree mitigation plan to Urban Forestry for review and approval by the Director. The oak tree mitigation plan shall include, without limitation: a map identifying the proposed location of replacement mitigation oak trees and the quantities. The mitigation plan must equal no less than $303,400.
UF4. Before the City Engineer issues a grading permit, permittee must submit International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) tree appraisal values for all oak trees in the arborist report identified to be encroached on: tree numbers 451, 453, 454, 457, 459, QA4, QA5, QA6, QA8, QA9, QA10, QA11, QL12, QL13, QL15, QL16, QL17, QL18, and 463.
UF5. Before the City Engineer issues a grading permit, and before removal or encroachment of any oak trees, permittee must secure a Bond equal to 1) the full appraised value for all the oak trees proposed for removal, and 2) the full appraised value of all oak trees proposed for encroachment.
The Bond shall be exonerated 24 months after the conclusion of all phases of construction if all conditions of the oak tree permit have been met to the satisfaction of the Director of Administrative Services or their designee.
UF6. Before the City Engineer issues a grading permit, permittee must submit a maintenance and care program to Urban Forestry, prepared by the Project’s oak tree consultant. The program shall be initiated to ensure the continued health and care of oak trees being preserved, throughout all phases of construction.
UF7. Two years after the conclusion of all phases of grading and construction activities, the permittee must submit and affidavit by a qualified oak tree consultant to the Director.
Such affidavit shall certify compliance with the conditions of the oak tree permit and the health of all replacement mitigation oak trees.
UF8. Permittee must adhere to all oak tree preservation and protection recommendations prescribed in the arborist report. In addition, permittee must adhere to the City’s Oak Tree Preservation Guidelines, for the protection of all oak trees being preserved.
Street Light Maintenance District
SD1. The permittee must annex all parcels into the Santa Clarita Landscaping and Lighting District, Streetlighting Zone B. The annexation fee will be based on the current maximum assessment rate per Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU) for each parcel. There is a one-time annexation fee of $500.00 plus $100.00 per EBU. A minimum of 120 days is required to process the annexation, which must be completed before final map approval, grading, or the issuance of a building permit, whichever occurs first.
SD2. Existing streetlights must be protected, preserved, and remain in operation during any modification. Any existing streetlight proposed for removal and/or relocation must be approved by Special Districts, Streetlight Maintenance Districts (SMD).
SD3. Within the public right-of-way fronting the Project site or as required by Engineering, the permittee must replace existing streetlights with the City’s standard streetlight pole.
Before street plan approval, the permittee must obtain approval from SMD on the Light
1.c
Packet Pg. 107
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval
Emitting Diode (LED) fixtures to be installed on public streets and whether the new streetlights will be metered (LS-3 rate) or unmetered.
SD4. All new streetlights installed on public streets, per the approved plans, will be owned by the City. A Geographic Information Systems file mapping the underground facilities is required before streetlight acceptance by the City.
Landscape Maintenance District
SD5. This parcel is located within Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) Areawide Zone 2008-1, which was established to fund the construction and maintenance of landscaped medians on major thoroughfares throughout the City of Santa Clarita. Before the Building Official issues a certificate of occupancy, the applicant must financially contribute to the Areawide Zone in a manner reflective of this LMD zone’s assessment methodology.
SD6. All medians and turnabouts must be landscaped to the satisfaction of the Director.
SD7. Landscape must include, without limitation, installation of concrete pavers, irrigation, trees, shrubs, groundcover, and mulch.
SD8. All landscape proposed within the medians and turnabouts must be installed according to the LMD “Design Standards, Notes, Details & Specifications for Median Landscaping in Santa Clarita.”
SD9. No on-site landscaping will be maintained by the LMD.
SD10. The permittee must be required to install a separate water meter, electric meter, and pedestal specifically for medians and parkways. Upon successful completion of all required landscape establishment and maintenance period, both meters will be turned over to the City.
SD11. The applicant is required to install an approved irrigation controller to be used for all landscape located within both the medians and parkways. Applicant shall contact Special Districts for the approved controller and model number. Typically, the controller is a 48 station WeatherTrak® Pro 3.
SD12. Upon completion of the Project and after the final walk for acceptance, the permittee must submit a completed turnover sheet with all the required information and materials to the Director.
Street Trees
SD13. Before the City Engineer issues a grading permit, the permittee is required to submit a site plan which indicates existing parkway tree location and includes a Tree Preservation and Protection Plan to the City’s Urban Forestry Division for review and approval by the Director.
SD14. Prior to street tree plan approval and issuance of the building permit, the permittee is required to submit a street tree location plan for proposed parkway tree installations to the City’s Urban Forestry Division for review and approval. Location of tree wells and parkway trees must be shown to scale on all required sets of site plans including grading
1.c
Packet Pg. 108
Attachment: Project Resolution and Exhibit (Appeal of Wiley Canyon Mixed Use Project (MC20-238))
Master Case 20-238,
Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval