Public to weigh in on 2 Newhall Ranch subdivisions

Proposed site of Newhall Ranch development, looking southeast on state Route 126 in Castaic. Dan Watson/The Signal.

Santa Clarita Valley residents concerned about 21,000 homes being built as part of Newhall Ranch are getting a chance next week to express themselves on two of the development’s subdivisions –  Landmark Village and Mission Village.

Los Angeles County planners have scheduled a 3-hour public meeting set for Jan. 12 and beginning at 6 p.m. to hear comments from the public about the issues they address in their revised report on the environmental impact of the Landmark Village Project.

The meeting is to take place at Rancho Pico Junior High School, 26250 W. Valencia Boulevard, Westridge.

Mission Village and Landmark Village are the first two villages within the approved Newhall Ranch Specific Plan, which were originally approved by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors in 2012.

The Landmark Village community will be developed on 293 acres within Newhall Ranch and contain up to 1,444 residential units, approximately 1 million square feet of mixed-use commercial space as well as an elementary school and park.

Mission Village will be developed on 1,262 acres and contain up to 4,055 residential units and 1.5 million square feet of mixed-use commercial space, along with an elementary school, fire station and public library, among other uses.

Officials with the Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning want the public’s input on changes they made to the county-approved development.

Newhall Ranch suffered a setback in November 2015 when the California Supreme Court tossed out the developer’s report concluding 21,000 planned homes in the Newhall Ranch project would not adversely affect the environment.

The court ruled that Newhall Land Development Inc. – now FivePoint – failed to provide evidence in its Environmental Impact Report to prove its project was consistent with meeting state guidelines to control harmful greenhouse gas.

It also concluded that measures calling for capture and relocation of the unarmored threespine stickleback — a species of fish protected by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife — amounted to illegal movement, or “take,” of the endangered indigenous fish.

On Thursday, Jan. 12, the public is invited to comment on the county’s environmental impact report which planners hope responds to the directives laid out by the California Supreme Court – specifically, on the issues of greenhouse gas and the endangered fish.

[email protected]


on Twitter @jamesarthurholt

Related To This Story

Latest NEWS