Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

State Clearinghouse Number Presented to Sacramento LAFCo

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "State Clearinghouse Number Presented to Sacramento LAFCo"— Presentation transcript:

1 Greenbriar Development Project Sacramento, California SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
State Clearinghouse Number Presented to Sacramento LAFCo September 19, 2007

2 Presentation Topics Project Description Consistency with Blueprint
Public Services & Fiscal Analysis EIR Process & Issues

3 Greenbriar Project Team
Project Applicants North Natomas 575 Investors, LLC AKT Development Woodside Homes River West Investments Project Management Phil Serna, Serna Consulting Tina Thomas, RTM&M SOI Applicant - City New Growth Manager, Scot Mende Public Improvements & Finance Manager, Mark Griffin City Team Environmental, Tom Buford EDAW: Gary Jakobs & Amanda Olekzulin Parks, Mary deBeauvieres Dev. Engineering, Samar Hajeer Utilities 3

4 SPHERE OF INFLUENCE City’s SOI established 1981
Modified in ’90s to include adopted North Natomas Community Plan No other significant SOI amendments Greenbriar SOI initiated by City Council Nov 2005

5 Location and Local Context
North Natomas Community Plan Metro Air Park Located at the SWC of the intersection of Highway 99/70 and Elkhorn Boulevard Specifically, the project is south of Elkhorn Boulevard, West of Highway 99, North of Interstate 5, and East of the Metro Air Park County approved 1,913 acre office/industrial development North & West of the existing North Natomas Community Plan Area 5

6 Land Use Map

7 Project Description - Land Use Summary
577 acres Northwest Corner of I-5/SR 70/99 Mixed Uses 2,991 mixed-density residential units Proposed RT rail line and station 38.5 acres commercial development 41.9 acres public/private parks Elementary school site Open space/habitat corridor (58.2 acres) Off-site biology mitigation: Spangler (245.2 ac); Natomas 130 (20.4 ac)

8 GREENBRIAR CONSISTENCY WITH BLUEPRINT

9 Relationship to SACOG Blueprint
Within the SACOG Blueprint area Comparison of growth projected for the Greenbriar site: Blueprint 1,200 employees 4,200 dwelling units Greenbriar proposal 1,016 employees 2,991 dwelling units You may be aware that the Greenbriar project is within the SACOG Blueprint area. 9

10 Blueprint Principles Offer Transportation Alternatives
Offer Housing Variety Encourage Compact Development Provide Mixed Land Uses Conserve Natural Resources Implement Quality Design Although the Greenbriar project is not entirely consistent with the Blueprint growth numbers, the proposal is consistent with several of the Blueprint principles. Specifically the following: • Provide a variety of transportation choices • Offer housing choices and opportunities • Take advantage of compact development • Use existing assets • Mixed land uses • Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, through natural resources conservation • Encourage distinctive, attractive communities with quality design 10

11 Blueprint Principle: Offer Transportation Alternatives
Greenbriar accommodates the future DNA LRT extension and provides a mixed-use station site Project design provides pedestrian friendly elements: off-street pedestrian/bike paths pedestrian paseos alley-loaded residential units Downtown – Natomas – Airport 11

12 Transit Characteristics
There are currently no bus routes provided in the immediate area 1,162 LRT boardings (estimate from DNA EIR) Dedication of 40’ wide ROW for the track area, 60’ x 400’ station area, 0.25 acre substation, and 2 acre park & ride area Developer construction on LRT station - $2.2 million current estimated cost Join North Natomas TMA – shuttle services as an interim mitigation measure (until LRT is operational) 12

13 Transit/Light Rail The Downtown / Natomas / Airport line would continue from the Amtrak station ultimately to the Airport Phase 1 of this extension will be to the Richards Blvd. area Later phases will include the construction of a bridge across the American River, through South Natomas, through the North Natomas Town Center, across the US99/70 freeway (on the Meister Way overcrossing), through Greenbriar, Metro Air Park, and to the airport The Greenbriar project provides one of the missing rights-of-way components and would boost the potential ridership – thereby enhancing the feasibility of the transit project. 13

14 Transit / Density Relationship
The pale yellow circle shows the 1/8 mile radius from the LRT station. Within this radius, approximately 226 dwelling units at an average density of nearly 15 DU/NA. The darker circle identifies the ¼ mile radius which includes 1,067 dwelling units, at an average density of approximately 11 DU/NA. 14

15 Blueprint Principle: Offer Housing Variety
Greenbriar offers thirteen different housing types, including: low and medium density detached cluster detached townhomes Proposed affordable housing plan meets City’s Mixed-income Housing Ordinance 5% Low and 10% Very Low for seniors and families. 15

16 Blueprint Principle: Encourage Compact Development
Greenbriar proposal meets and exceeds the average net density for the North Natomas Community Plan: NNCP average net density = 10.5 du/na; Greenbriar average net density = 11.5 du/na Medium and high density housing in the Greenbriar proposal constitute a majority of the residential land uses; 11 to 30 du/na According to the 1994 NNCP: 33,257 dwelling units on 3,161 net acres. 16

17 Blueprint Principles: Provide Mixed Land Uses
The project proposes residential, recreational, institutional and commercial uses within the project site, adjacent to Metro Air Park The project proposes a future light rail station and small mixed-use retail site at the center of the development 17

18 Blueprint Principles: Conserve Natural Resources
Applicant proposes a comprehensive strategy to address needs of special status species, including habitat buffer and numerous off-site habitat mitigation sites Applicant developing habitat conservation plan and has completed an Effects Analysis to ensure future development project does not compromise Natomas Basin HCP The Effects Analysis was included as part of the Draft EIR The Greenbriar Team has been meeting regularly with USFWS & CDFG since March 18

19 Blueprint Principle: Implement Quality Design
As a master-planned project, Greenbriar was able to benefit from the SACOG Blueprint project Project entitlements include PUD Guidelines to specify urban design standards and to guide plan implementation relative to the Blueprint 19

20 PUBLIC SERVICES & UTILITIES
Services would be adequately provided by service agencies SOI and annexation will be consistent with Master Services Element Municipal Services Review prepared Consultation with all public service and utility providers Seeking amendment for SOI for SRCSD and CSD-1

21 Fire Services & Facilities
Citywide Fire Master Plan being prepared – draft Nov ’07 Will address operations funding Greenbriar pays $1.5 million towards new fire station Current practice: <4.5 minutes first response (90%) <8 minutes paramedics (90%) Greenbriar w/o new station would meet the paramedic (ambulance) response time, but would be marginal as far the first response (oxygen on fire truck) A new station at airport, MAP, or Greenbriar is being evaluated for funding and location through the Master Plan process.

22

23 Police Services & Facilities
Citywide Police Master Plan being prepared – draft Nov ’07 Will address operations funding Greenbriar pays $0.8 million towards new police station (at Town Center) Greenbriar pays $1.5 million towards radio communications tower

24 FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
City/County split of property taxes City costs/revenue neutral Citywide services paid from citywide resources – not exclusively Greenbriar Park maintenance 100% funded through Services CFD

25 FINANCE PLAN Pays for all water, sewer, drainage requirements, on-site roadway infrastructure Freeway mainline improvements and LRT station Open Space – including freeway buffer, parks, trails, and contribution toward regional park Police & Fire facilities

26 GREENBRIAR ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Airport Overflight
Flood Hazards / Flood Protection Transportation Agriculture, Open Space, and Habitat

27 Project Description – Primary Entitlements
LAFCO Amend Sphere of Influence for: City, SRCSD and CSD-1 (Tonight’s hearing) Annexation of Project Site to City, SRCSD, and CSD-1 (after City Council actions) City of Sacramento Annexation Related Actions General Plan Amendment Other Approval Actions USFWS-Endangered Species Take Permit Include SOIA for SRCSD. “Alignment” is misspelled.

28 EIR Process-Steps Notice of Preparation: June 28/Re-issued July 13, 2005 (30 day review) Draft EIR: Published July 19, 2006 Recirculated DEIR: Published November 14, 2006 Second RDEIR: Published April 10, 2007 Final EIR: Published August 17, 2007 Responds to comments (environmental issues) on DEIR, RDEIR, and Second RDEIR

29 EIR Summary-Context Site: agriculture Surrounding land uses:
Metro AirPark North Natomas Community I-5 and SR 70/99 Agriculture Site near Sacramento International Airport; largely within aircraft overflight zone Within boundaries of Natomas Basin HCP, but not within City Incidental Take Permit area Along proposed DNA Light Rail line

30 EIR Summary-Scope Transportation Air quality Noise Utilities
Public Services Parks/Open Space Aesthetics Public Health/Hazards Geology/Soils Hydrology/Water quality Agriculture Biology Cultural Resources

31 Project Impacts Cumulative impacts: public services - construction of new facilities (fire station, SRWTP) may result in impacts Less-than-significant impacts with mitigation: utilities, public health and hazards, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, biological resources Significant and unavoidable impacts: traffic, air quality, noise, agriculture, open space (partial offset), visual character, safety hazards (ALUC override), short-term flooding (if development occurs prior to 2010 when 100-year flood protection in place),

32 Aircraft Overflight Area
As shown, about 75% of the site is affected by overflight. Several of the parks are included within the overflight zone. The Airport Land Use Commission, following the guidance of the Sacramento International Airport Master Plan, has determined that the parks and light rail station site are not consistent with the CLUP. Note that school site is located outside of the overflight zone. 32

33 ALUC Determination ALUC Determination Regarding Project Consistency with CLUP: The Following Uses are Compatible with the CLUP and do not Require Override: Residential and commercial uses based on the proposed project densities Parks and open space (average of 25 people/acre/day not to exceed 50 people/acre/day) Proposed water features (ALUC defers to airport) Elementary school is outside of overflight zone and therefore not subject to ALUC review Override: Project’s provision for a light rail station in the overflight zone may possibly exceed 50/people/acre/day The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) reviews development proposals for consistency with the Sacramento International Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP). In this review, ALUC typically examines: Public Safety (building height) Noise (aircraft overflight) Waterfowl attractions (from water features) ALUC determined that the Greenbriar project was inconsistent with the CLUP because the light rail station is located within the overflight zone. This will require that the City Council override the ALUC determination. With regard to the water feature (the detention basin / lake), the Airport has accepted the proposed lake management plan that would reduce the impacts to less than significant. 33

34 Airport Noise Impact Summary
General Plan exterior noise standard at residential uses is 60 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL aircraft noise contour associated with project are more than 1,900 feet away from western project boundary Project defined as compatible with overall aircraft noise exposure and impact is less than significant Noise would be less than 60 dBA CNEL even at maximum use conditions with 3rd runway No SENL standards have been established Single event noise may exceed 60 dBA SENL Impacts to residential uses will be less than significant Impacts to schools mitigated to less than significant with design features to reduce interior school noise levels Applicant is proposing to dedicate an overflight easement and record deed notices for purposes of disclosing potential airport noise. The General Plan utilizes the noise measurement of CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level). This is a weighted average noise level over a 24-hour period, with heavier weight assigned to evenings and night overflights. The 60 CNEL contour is at least 1900’ distant from the Greenbriar project – in other words, the noise level at Greenbriar will be less than 60 CNEL, which is within the acceptable limits established by the General Plan. SENL – An additional noise measurement is SENL (Single Event Noise Level). The SENL measures short-duration noise levels. There are no standards for SENL airport noise, although the noise from aircraft overflight can be disruptive to normal conversation. The future elementary school may need to provide acoustic construction standards to reduce interior noise levels. 34

35 Identified Flood Risks
Inadequate freeboard Underseepage Levee encroachments Channel erosion Status of Flood Control Legislation (get from Joe Robinson)

36 Flood Protection Currently X Zone
USCOE 07/26/06 letter – identifies that levees are no longer certifiable City letter to FEMA requesting A99 March 2008 FIRM re-designation SAFCA anticipates 100-year protection by 2010 SAFCA anticipates 200-year protection by 2012 Defer construction to meet FEMA & any local land use regulations Anticipate requesting building permit in 2010 36

37 Flood Legislation SB5: Prohibits development for areas that don’t have by year 2015 100-year flood protection A plan for 200-year flood protection AB70: Imposes liabilities on cities who are "unreasonable" in approving projects Applies only to development applications submitted after 12/31/07

38 Flooding in Natomas Basin
DEIR identified less-than-significant impacts (published July 19, 2006) USACE issued a letter stating it can no longer support certification of the levees (July 20, 2006) Recirculated DEIR prepared identifying a significant and unavoidable short- term flooding impact

39 Flooding Impacts in Natomas Basin
FEMA currently determining which flood zone designation will apply to Natomas Basin Mitigation: Require project applicants to comply with development requirements of appropriate flood zone designation and contribute to funding for necessary levee improvements Significant and unavoidable flooding impact remains for an interim period if damageable structures are constructed prior to when all levee improvements for 100-year flood protection are completed Post-2010: Less than Significant Flooding Impact

40 Transportation Project would contribute to significant cumulative impacts on area freeways Project includes dedication of light rail corridor and construction of transit station for Sacramento Regional Transit’s DNA line. The transit station is currently estimated at $2.4 million. RT will also be provided with the right-of-way over the project site at no cost. Mitigation requires contribution to City’s Traffic Congestion Relief Fund to fund projects that would reduce freeway mainline congestion Mitigation Measure: (including DNA line)

41 Parks, Open Space, and Agriculture
Provides adequate park land (48.2 acres) to meet Quimby Act requirements Provides publicly accessible detention basin and freeway buffer – creditable as Natomas Joint Vision Open Space Results in loss of open space resources (546 acres) most of which are Important Farmland (518 acres)

42 Greenbriar in context w/ Natomas Basin

43 Effects on NBHCP NBHCP covers numerous species
Giant garter snake (federal and state threatened) Swainson’s hawk (state threatened) Authorizes development on 17,500 acres Requires mitigation: conservation/ enhancement on 8,750 acres (0.5:1) Extensive analysis Effects of Greenbriar on NBHCP conservation strategy Consistency of Greenbriar with NBHCP Goals and Objectives Effects on endangered and threatened species

44 NBHCP Conclusions in EIR
Project would develop 546 acres 30.6 acres would be preserved and enhanced on-site along Lone Tree Canal 265.8 acres would be preserved and enhanced at off-site reserves 48.2 acres is on-site open space Additional 15.9-acre buffer proposed for preservation at West Lakeside

45

46 NBHCP Conclusions in EIR
An additional 49 acres of land is required to be preserved and managed for Swainson’s hawk (Mitigation ) TOTAL preserved and enhanced = 345 acres plus additional 15.9 acres for West Lakeside buffer With mitigation, the project would not reduce the effectiveness of NBHCP’s conservation strategy nor reduce the likelihood of attaining the goals and objectives of the NBHCP resulting in less-than- significant impacts LAFCo, City, and project applicant’s are in consultation with USFWS and CDFG. Applicant is preparing a separate project HCP and USFWS will prepare EIS.

47

48 Repeal Resolution On July 24, 2001, the City Council approved a Resolution to temporarily establish restrictions on the approval of entitlements on 3 properties located outside of the City of Sacramento. The three affected areas: Camino Norte West Lakeside Greenbriar Farms The Resolution will need to be repealed in order to allow the first-stage legislative entitlements to be approved for the Greenbriar project. This action was taken to implement the Settlement Agreement between the City & plaintiffs challenging the 1997 HCP. Once the 2003 HCP was adopted, the Settlement Agreement was no longer in force. The action was contemplated to be set aside when the City’s Sphere of Influence Study was completed The Sphere of Influence Study subsequently morphed into the Natomas Joint Vision process.


Download ppt "State Clearinghouse Number Presented to Sacramento LAFCo"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google