A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge heard arguments Wednesday from attorneys representing environmental groups and the county regarding the water supply for the Newhall Ranch housing development, but made no decision.
Friends of the Santa Clara River and the Santa Clarita Organization for Planning the Environment filed a civil lawsuit against the county in August 2017, challenging the adequacy of the water supply secured by developer FivePoint Holdings for the first 6,000 units of subsidiary Newhall Land & Farming’s 21,500-unit mixed-use project.
Those are the Mission and Landmark tracts, located in county territory off Highway 126 west of the city Santa Clarita.
The Newhall Ranch development was first proposed in the 1980s and was subject to numerous state and federal legal challenges by conservation groups. County officials finally approved the Mission Village and Landmark portions of the development in July 2017, as did the 9th Circuit in April 2018. Grading began soon after county approval.
But in the August 2017 suit, the environmental groups challenged the project’s 2010 environmental impact report which determined an adequate water supply was available, saying the EIR was completed prior to a historic six-year drought and should be updated.
Lawyers for the developers countered that the environmental groups were raising the water issue late in the process, and cited previous court rulings that cleared the path for the development to proceed.
After questioning and hearing responses from both sides, Judge Richard L. Fruin ordered transcripts of the testimony for his review and consideration but did not set a date for a follow-up hearing.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Tweet This
Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
RSS
REAL NAMES ONLY: All posters must use their real individual or business name. This applies equally to Twitter account holders who use a nickname.
4 Comments
Everyone in this valley knows we have water problems. From polluted Valencia wells that had to be shut down to protect the community to dead tress and brown lawns. If we couldn’t make it through the last drought without severe cut backs, how are we going to supply Newhall’s 60,000 additional residents with lawns and swimming pools? Not to mention all the other approvals that haven’t been built yet. What are they thinking? Newhall claims all the water belongs to them, but water is a public good. They don’t own it.
I moved to Santa Clarita in the 70’s. There was a battle going on where the water was coming from then.
We’re asking the wrong questions: So Many people are already sick from the landfill/$$$$ manipulating the system. Let’s bring more people in to our pretested community? What and when were the tests done? What are the guidelines? What is considered healthy/acceptable? Are the people setting the guidelines children living there or are they just making $$$$ off the development? Do research people!! See below!!
https://scvnews.com/2017/08/30/civic-groups-challenge-countys-chiquita-canyon-landfill-expansion-ok/
How things like this happen: $12.6 million a day!
The Chiquita Canyon Landfill off the 126 legally agreed to NOT expand or receive trash once it met capacity over 2 decades ago! But they still are?!?
Chiquita Canyon Landfill 2018 1st Qtr financials: In the first quarter revenue was $1.14 billion, up $48.9 million over the prior-year period.
Acquisitions completed since the year-ago period contributed about $38.7 million of revenue in
the quarter and about $10.8 million net of divestures.
Source Link: Waste Connections, Inc. Q1 2018 Earnings Conference Call Transcript
wasteconnections.investorroom.com/…/Q1+2018+WCN+Earnings+Call+Transcript.pd…
May 3, 2018 – lastly, the permitted volume change at our Chiquita Canyon landfill in Q3 of last …. Adjusted net income in Q1 primarily excludes the impact of …
[PDF]
Note: Sources say Chiquita Canyon Landfill omitted documents in order to be granted approval to expand. Said documents have surfaced and been submitted, however…..$12.6 MILLION A DAY!
n April of this year, roughly 20 years after it first gained permission to increase its capacity, the Chiquita Canyon Landfill was approved for expansion once again. The LA County Department of Regional Planning gave the landfill a 30-year extension, even though it had already exceeded the 23 million-ton maximum capacity mandated in 1997. Under the new agreement, the landfill is allowed to operate for three more decades, or until it reaches 60 million tons. It is also permitted to laterally expand its “existing waste footprint from 267 acres to 400 acres,” in addition to boosting its maximum elevation from 1,430 feet to 1,573 feet and doubling its disposal limits from 6,000 tons of waste per day to 12,000 tons per day.
The LA County Department of Regional Planning acknowledged that the most serious concerns about the project were its potential health impacts, including possible increased risks of cancer and respiratory diseases. But ultimately it found that the landfill didn’t produce significant impacts to public health, nor did it adversely affect the welfare of its residents. The department also found that the landfill contributes significantly to helping LA county meet its waste-disposal needs: According to a 2015 county report, 55 percent of the total waste at Chiquita Canyon Landfill comes from the city of Los Angeles; 19 percent comes from other cities in LA county, and 13 percent comes from the city of Santa Clarita. The LA County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the permit during a public hearing attended by anti-landfill activists in June.
“There’s not a lot of attention brought to Val Verde, and I think a lot of it has to do with how its relationship with the landfill is,” says Erica Larsen Dockray, alluding to the fact that the company that operates the landfill also contributes a significant amount of money to the community every year. Santa Clarita Valley International Charter School has recognized Chiquita Canyon Landfill as a donor for the last six years, and over that same period of time, the landfill offered CalArts students annual scholarships based on a judged gallery show in which all of the art must be constructed from trash from the landfill.
Source link: https://la.curbed.com/2017/9/27/16351910/val-verde-landfill-eureka-villa-history-california
Jenny, you’re quoting company financials as a whole and not the landfill’s. Your argument is false. Let’s do some simple math. You said the landfill made 12 million per day, correct? You quoted the landfill can have 12k tons per day, so you’re saying people are paying $1k per ton of trash?! WRONG! Stop spreading false propaganda on things you know nothing about, but latch on a train because its the cool thing to do.