A controversial Newhall mixed-use project has inspired a flurry of deal-making activity at Santa Clarita City Hall, and a city attorney cautiously distanced city staff from those negotiations at Tuesday’s Planning Commission hearing.
Regardless, the commission unanimously approved the staff recommendation to allow for a full-block demolition, including a historical structure near Main Street, to clear the way for a new five-story mixed-use building approximately 52 feet in height, for 78 apartment units and 5,300 square feet of commercial floor area.
It likely didn’t hurt that the project’s developer, whose last project, Newhall Crossings, was described by neighboring businesses as being key to the area’s revitalization, had apparently struck a bargain with a City Council member that the developer said had already been relayed to City Manager Ken Striplin.
In a prepared statement sent Thursday via email by city Communications Manager Carrie Lujan, Striplin said he was not a party to any negotiations with the developer.
That written statement was the only response either Lujan or Striplin would provide in response to multiple requests for phone interviews Wednesday and Thursday.
Neither Lujan nor Striplin were available via phone to explain how a $750,000 “impact fee” suggested by the developer ended up in the project’s planning conditions in the city staff’s report for project recommendations.
The developer told the Planning Commission on Tuesday that the fee was negotiated with an unspecified City Council member, who passed it along to the city manager.
After multiple attempts to reach her by phone Wednesday and Thursday, Santa Clarita Mayor Pro Tem Laurene Weste called Thursday afternoon to shed light on the discussion she had with Tolleson about the impact fee for the historical building.
To make room for the project, the developer needs to get rid of what’s in its way — Mac’s Pool Supply (24316 Main St.), Horseshoe on Main (24300 Main St.) and the historic Masonic Lodge/Courthouse (22505 Market St.) buildings. The last spot in particular was part of the discussion for several reasons.
The project’s principal said it was too expensive to move the building, which was placed on the city’s list of historical locations in November 2012.
The recognition meant the developer would need special permission from the council to move or demolish it. Moving it was infeasible, Tolleson said, adding the building wasn’t part of the original plan, and if he’d known he was going to have to move it, he would have not included it.
So, he worked out a deal with a City Council member, he said — but did not identify which council member it was Tuesday.
“What do you mean the negotiated impact fee?” asked Planning Commissioner Denise Lite, after Jason Tolleson, principal for the project, mentioned that to the commission.
“Um, I talked to a council member about it, who spoke with the city manager, and we worked out something that seemed reasonable,” Tolleson said.
Tolleson said his consultants indicated the building would have to be essentially deconstructed and then reassembled, and there also would have to be a temporary move of power lines. He also acknowledged there had been no actual study on such costs.
The written statement sent by Lujan on Thursday said, “the city manager talks to council members on a variety of issues on a daily basis, including development projects,” and there is no provision against such conversations taking place.
Tolleson declined to respond to a request for comment Wednesday.
Planning Commissioner Tim Burkhart, who recently retired after a long career in major construction projects for Six Flags Magic Mountain, said if Tolleson was offering that much for a mitigation fee, then the commission could be confident it would cost significantly more to move the building.
But the details of the negotiations that led to the $750,000 fee being included in the staff recommendation remained scant Wednesday and Thursday.
During the commission’s deliberations, there was no discussion of where that $750,000 would actually go, with the city’s planning documents for the meeting mentioning just that it would be “to support local historic preservation efforts.”
There also was no discussion of who made the arrangement, and while the $750,000 was specifically mentioned in the city’s planning agenda for the meeting, the acting city attorney said the commission was under no obligation to consider it during Tuesday’s meeting.
“There’s no commitment on behalf of the city or the City Council to actually accept that mitigation fee,” said Karl Berger, a city attorney.
“How that fee was come up with, is between the applicant and who they discussed that with,” he said, adding “certainly the City Council has not weighed in on that.”
Striplin also wrote in his email that any condition for a project must be discussed at a council meeting, reviewed by the council and ultimately either added or not by the council as a whole.
The Santa Clarita Valley Historical Society signed off on a letter noting the structure — whose second floor was built of lumber from the 1920s Hap-A-Lan Hall, which was used as a morgue for San Francisquito Dam victims — no longer had enough of its original content inside to be considered historical, due to a 1968 remodel.
Three of five council members — Jason Gibbs, Marsha McLean and Weste — took calls Wednesday. Gibbs and McLean indicated they had not discussed the project with Tolleson. Mayor Bill Miranda and Councilwoman Patsy Ayala have not responded to calls seeking comment.
McLean acknowledged that Tolleson reached out to share general information about the project, which was common, but they did not discuss it. Gibbs said he had no problem with such conversations as long as nothing discussed ran afoul of the law.
Both said they were not made aware of any negotiations with Tolleson.
The project is one Weste brought up last week during her council member comments, regarding a request that the city look into how city staff can help KHTS, a local radio station, during the project’s construction. KHTS is located next to the construction site.
Weste answered the phone Wednesday afternoon to say she did not have time to talk and then abruptly hung up.
On Thursday morning, she said she was not aware of what happened at Tuesday’s meeting. When asked if she was the person who negotiated with Tolleson, she said that she was busy, had people next to her at the moment, had to go and hung up.
She called back Thursday afternoon to say the city would receive the impact fee, not the SCV Historical Society, and that her role as a Historical Society board member does not present a conflict of interest.
“If it’s for historic preservation, then it would be used for historic preservation of buildings that are already under the city’s purview,” she said.
She said the city has never taken down a historic site before, and that was part of the reason why she spoke to Tolleson.
“So, it’s an impact fee that would go to the city, and the council will hear all discussions and when it gets to the council, then I will disclose that I’ve spoken to the builder,” she added.
Weste is on the board of directors for the SCV Historical Society and is its restoration chair. The city staff report just notes the money would be for “local historic preservation efforts.”
Weste also confirmed a report Thursday that KHTS was no longer seeking any assistance from the city in terms of a temporary move.
Negotiations and plans with the property appear active for now as the project heads toward an inevitable Santa Clarita City Council hearing.
