Newhall Ranch Alert

The Draft Environmental Impact Report for Landmark Village has been released (You can read it on the County website). The public review period is from November 20, 2006 to January 22, 2006. A public hearing is scheduled for 9 a.m. on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 in the Regional Planning Commission Hearing Room, 320 West Temple Street, Los Angeles CA.

Copies of the Draft EIR are available for review at the following county libraries:

Newhall Co. Library, 22704 West 9th Street, Newhall, CA.

Canyon Country Library, 18601 Soledad Canyon Road, Canyon Country, CA.

Valencia County Library, 22374 West Valencia Blvd, Valencia, CA.

Copies of the Draft EIR are available for public review Monday through Thursday, 7:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. at County of Los Angeles, Department of Regional Planning, Impact Analysis Section, Room 1348, 320 West Temple Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012.

Written comments on the Draft EIR should be submitted to Mr. Daniel Fierros at the above address.

FSCR, the Santa Clara River Alliance, environmental legal council and an array of other environmental groups continue to monitor the progress of this project through the LA Planning process and the State and Federal permitting process. All of these agencies have pending environmental documents expected to be released for public review during the next 3 to 10 months. What can the public expect and how can you help? We want you to have answers.

The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the first tract proposed in the Newhall Ranch, called Landmark Village, has been released. Landmark Village is located west of Interstate 5 along Highway 126. This tract includes an elementary school, retail center and housing. It is sited directly in the floodplain of the river and is adjacent to the Chiquita Canyon Landfill. (and is within the inundation plain of Castaic Dam).

At this time the entire Newhall Ranch project Specific Plan has begun to take on significant changes. The project now includes four large conceptual areas referred to as: Landmark Village, Heritage Village, Mission Village and Potrero Village.

The two other agencies preparing a Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Report (DEIS/DEIR) are the US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). This combined document is expected out later in the year. This document intends to analyze the impacts of Newhall Ranch on the environment; habitat, species, streams, the river, air, water, and much more. All three agencies' reports must adequately inform elected officials who are deciding to approve or disapprove projects on the basis of laws that protect us and our environment.

Project Status

FSCR, the Santa Clara River Alliance, environmental legal council and an array of other environmental groups continue to monitor the progress of this project through the LA Planning process and the State and Federal permitting process. All of these agencies have pending environmental documents expected to be released for public review during the next 3 to 10 months. What can the public expect and how can you help? We want you to have answers.

The LA County planning document expected soonest is a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the first tract proposed in the Newhall Ranch. Currently this is referred to as Landmark Village and is located west of Interstate 5 along Highway 126. This tract includes an elementary school, retail center and housing. It is sited directly in the floodplain of the river and is adjacent to the Chiquita Canyon Landfill. (and is within the inundation plain of Castaic Dam)

At this time the entire Newhall Ranch project Specific Plan has begun to take on significant changes. The project now includes four large conceptual areas referred to as: Landmark Village, Heritage Village, Mission Village and Potrero Village.

The two other agencies preparing a Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Report (DEIS/DEIR )are the US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). This combined document is expected out later in the year. This document intends to analyze the impacts of Newhall Ranch on the environment; habitat, species, streams, the river, air, water, and much more. All three agencies' reports must adequately inform elected officials who are deciding to approve or disapprove projects on the basis of laws that protect us and our environment.

What can you do?

Remember that you can make a difference. This process is far from over and at this time there are no approvals that allow anything to be built. Your letters and comments at public hearings are crucial in this process. FSCR and other groups will alert the public when your participation is important. STAY TUNED! Visit www.fscr.org and please volunteer to help where your can.

The first phase of Newhall Ranch is known as Landmark Village. An Environmental Impact Report is currently in preparation for this phase, which is planned to consist of 1444 homes and up to 1.5 million square feet of non-residential mixed-use space. Comments of Friends of the Santa Clara River relating to this EIR are given at the end of this section. The Army Corps of Engineers and the California Department of Fish and Game are also currently developing a joint Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report which will be used in establishing needed permits relating to wetlands impacts on the property as well as river alterations due to such items as bank protection and construction of bridges. The following sections cover the general concerns which have been expressed by Friends of the Santa Clara River over the years since the project's first public hearings in 1995.

General Comments on the Santa Clara River

The Santa Clara is Southern California's last major "wild river". There are few levees and only one diversion dam. The river channel retains its dynamic nature. For most of its length, it flows through natural and agricultural landscapes, including some of the best remaining riparian woodland in the southland. In contrast, the Los Angeles and Santa Ana Rivers, which rival the Santa Clara in size, were long ago largely converted to concrete channels.

The headwaters of the river originate in the Angeles National Forest , east of Soledad Canyon, which parallels Route 14 leading from Los Angeles to Palmdale. After flowing down Soledad canyon through steep-walled Soledad Canyon, the river reaches a small plain - the Santa Clarita Valley. Here the new city of Santa Clarita forms the only major urban stretch. Then the Santa Clara returns to a narrower valley. Flanked by some of the best remaining riparian woodland in Southern California, it crosses into Ventura County, where it flows over broad sand and gravel deposits past extensive citrus orchards and farmland. To the south lie the Santa Susana Mountains and Oak Ridge, coated with coastal sage scrub, oak woodland and chaparral. Several small towns in this vicinity do not impinge on the natural, dynamic river.

The biological resources of the Santa Clara River are impressive. The riparian forest next to the river is home for a host of bird species, including the endangered least Bell's vireo. The unarmored threespine stickleback, a small endangered fish, inhabits the river's upper reaches. The river estuary supports the western snowy plover, least tern and tidewater goby, all federally listed as endangered. Overall, 14 resident bird species along the are listed as endangered or of special concern; and 6 plant species are endangered or candidates for listing.

Spreading Urbanization

By far the largest long-term threat to the health of the river ecosystem is urban development. Ventura County has policies restricting development to within existing city boundaries. In Los Angeles County, however, urban sprawl has, up to now, been accepted. Numerous development projects are either in the approval process or partly built near the already fast growing city of Santa Clarita, involving a total of about 60,000 housing units.

The proposed "new city" of Newhall Ranch, encompassing nearly 12,000 acres straddling the river from I-5 to the Ventura County line, would add 21,000 units in a community of almost 70,000 people to the existing urban area. This "new city" would border the best remaining Santa Clara River woodlands, with inadequate provisions for buffer zones around the river. Degradation of the woodlands would inevitably follow due to increased human use, including off-road vehicles, and predation by domestic animals. Newhall Ranch would also have significant adverse impacts on the quality of life of all current residents of the Santa Clarita Valley, including loss of open space, degraded air quality, increased traffic congestion, and increased storm-water runoff. The Santa Clara River valley west of I-5 would be transformed from its current rural/natural setting of open landscapes to an urban zone.

Furthermore, the project would impact two of L.A. County's Significant Ecological Areas (SEAs) encompassing the Santa Clara River and the Santa Susana Mountains. Village centers and residential subdivisions would line the river corridor. They would sever the natural transition zone from riparian to surrounding upland and produce numerous degrading "edge effects" on the river's woodlands. The narrow river corridor and its woodlands need much more buffering from urban encroachment than is provided in Newhall's Plan..

Newhall Ranch, although proposed as a "master planned" community, involves basically the same type of auto-dependent sprawl which has caused much of California's open space to disappear. A growing array of architects, planners and urban experts point out that, for 50 years, we have planned for automobiles, not people. We produce sprawling communities, with separated residential, shopping and office areas joined by feeder roads and divided highways. This pattern demands auto dependence, traffic congestion and a loss vibrant and friendly human communities. The Newhall Ranch brochure touts "village centers" which promote walking and cycling. But a layout by landuse type shows an auto-dependent community taking up more space than necessary.

Agriculture

According to the American Farmland Trust, the California coast is the third most threatened agricultural region in the nation. The long-term protection of these rich farmlands is of great importance to society. Newhall Ranch would wipe out nearly 1500 acres of agricultural land.

Air Quality

Air pollution is already a major problem in the Santa Clarita area, which has some of the worst air quality for ozone in the Los Angeles area. The valley is a natural air pollutant trap. Ozone derives primarily from emissions of nitrous oxides (NOx). Newhall Ranch NOx emissions of about 3,000 pounds per day would be additive to existing pollution plus that of 40,000 other units under development. Claims that federal and state air quality standards will one day be met while large-scale development proceeds in the valley defy common sense.

Water

Water is generally not available for the projected growth in the Santa Clarita region. Newhall Ranch will get its water from the alluvial aquifer under the Santa Clara River, which is already in an overpumped condition. Supplies of state water, which are not reliable in drought years, continue to be relied on for most development near Santa Clarita. Since state water supplies will fall far short of entitlements in drought years, severe overpumping of both the alluvial aquifer and the Saugus deep-water aquifer under the river are likely to occur.

On the Need for Buffer Zones

The Santa Clara is the last major natural river remaining in Southern California, a region has already lost all but 3-5% of its pre-settlement riparian woodlands. Here is a statement from the Newhall Ranch Environmental Impact Report: "The Santa Clara River is a regionally significant biological resource. Its value is derived from the inherent value of the riparian habitats and associated species, from its function as a regional wildlife corridor, and because it is a natural river for most of its course". Yet Newhall Ranch is set to cause major degradation to the River's biological resources.

"Buffer Zones for Ecological Reserves in California: Replacing Guesswork with Science" is the title of a paper by Drs. Kelly and Rotenberry, two University of California Riverside scientists, in this Southern California Academy of Sciences volume "Interface Between Ecology and Land Development in California". The river's riparian corridor can properly be considered an ecological reserve, as per its designation by Los Angeles County as SEA#23. Here is a key quote from Kelly and Rotenberry's paper (page 87): "Buffer design needs to be regarded as a key component of any integrated management strategy for sensitive species". The Newhall Ranch EIR properly acknowledges that Newhall Ranch is home to a multitude of such species, but buffering ranges from small to non-existent. Moreover, the EIR does not consider the subject of adequate buffers or reference any studies concerning urban edge effects on riparian species. In designing buffers, the UC Riverside scientists consider what are the processes operating at the reserve boundary and to what extent are those external forces likely to penetrate the boundary and result in negative effects? Several potential forces are listed, including: (1) introduction of alien predators (particularly domestic cats and dogs), (2) increased nighttime illumination, (3) trespass, including pedestrian, equestrian, and off-road vehicle, (4) introduction of wildlife competitors, (5) pollution, and (6) disease transmission from domestic animals to wildlife. The paper illustrates the problem with a diagram showing a wildlife reserve in Orange County. This reserve, which is up to a mile wide in places, is discussed by the authors as likely having no interior area immune from certain edge effects such as far-ranging pets, even at a mile in width, four times wider than the river corridor allotted in the Specific Plan. (Note: The Final EIR attempts to disallow the results of this paper, but the edge effects analyzed are nevertheless applicable to riparian zones as well as larger reserves).

Loss of Santa Clara River Floodplain

The Specific Plan as approved will result in a loss of over 140 acres of floodplain. An acre is about one football field in size, the loss of floodplain thus amounts to 140 football fields, a very large loss. The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board has recommended that the Newhall Ranch applicant avoid development in the floodplain. Friends of the Santa Clara River also recommends that floodplain development be avoided. Why? The purpose of floodplains is to store floodwaters - that would seem to be a basic principle of river function, but one often ignored. Usurping the floodplain of a river has serious immediate and long-term repercussions on the hydrology of the river and on channel morphology, both upstream and downstream. Immediate impacts are shown by the need to cover 80% of the northbank and 30% of the southbank with bank stabilization to protect large areas of fill for placement of housing units. Long-term impacts include structural flood control measures of unknown magnitude which could be required in the future due to the cumulative effects of artificial reduction of the existing floodplain.

Opportunities

The degradation of the Santa Clara River and valley as a rural and prime natural area has already begun. It is moving swiftly through the heavy development in the Santa Clarita area. With the Newhall Ranch proposal, the process continues almost to the Ventura County line, building long-term pressure for continued development toward the ocean. Insufficient attention to cumulative impacts has allowed disastrous development along most of Southern California's rivers. We have an opportunity to prevent a similar fate for the Santa Clara. Newhall Ranch should be redesigned to have a much smaller footprint, confined mostly to the existing entitlements in the eastern portion of the property. This alternative would utilize the area next to existing urban uses, provide an adequate river buffer zone, and avoid development in the floodplain. It would fully protect the critical riparian woodland and wildlife corridors, as well as avoiding a sprawling strip of development along Route 126.

Friends' Comments on River Village - Newhall Ranch First Phase

March 1, 2004

Los Angeles County Dept. of Regional Planning
320 West Temple Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Attn: Hsiao-ching Chen

Re: Newhall Ranch River Village NOP

Dear Mr. Chen,

Friends of the Santa Clara River is pleased to submit the following comments regarding the Newhall Ranch River Village Notice of Completion.

Recent surveys by independent biologists along the Santa Clara River have resulted in the discovery of threatened or endangered species where previous Newhall-hired biologists have found none. This surely calls into question the thoroughness and veracity of the Newhall surveys. Therefore, we request that Los Angeles County order surveys of the River Village area by independent biologists, and that the results of such surveys be provided to cognizant agencies and to the general public.

Friends has never been satisfied that there is substantial evidence justifying Los Angeles County's findings that development in Newhall Ranch was located and designed so as not to conflict with critical resources and habitat within Significant Ecological Area (SEA) 23. The Los Angeles County General Plan states unequivocally that development proposals near SEAs must be highly compatible with biotic resources and that sufficient natural cover or open space be retained to buffer critical resources from proposed uses.

There are two scientific references in the open literature which provide information directly relevant to the compatibility of River Village development with biotic resources. The first paper is "Buffer Zones for Ecological Reserves in California: Replacing Guesswork with Science" by two University of California Riverside scientists. This paper looks at the impacts of such factors as domestic cat, equestrian, human and ORV intrusion into an Orange County Reserve. Impacts were evident at the center of the one mile wide reserve. A second reference by Stanford's Department of Biological Studies shows that the placement of urban uses in the vicinity of riparian zones has substantial impacts on riparian bird comunities out to a distance of 1500 feet. Since River Village borders directly on SEA 23, essentially no buffer exists between the project and the river corridor and its sensitive biological areas. The Stanford paper's concluding paragraph contains the following statement: "The single most important step that can be taken to conserve riparian communities in the face of urbanization is to minimize development in and along floodplains by maintaining broad buffers of undeveloped land between developed areas and riparian habitats."

It is beyond question, based on the above scientific studies, that the integrity of the Santa Clara River SEA depends on the establishment of adequate buffer zones around the SEA. The River Village EIR therefore must evaluate impacts to the SEA and propose adequate mitigation. Mitigation, it appears, would almost certainly involve redesign of the tract to allow a much larger buffer area between the SEA border and developed areas.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Sincerely,
Ron Bottorff, Chair