With the draft environmental impact report (EIR) released for Newhall Ranch’s first (and smallest) village, SCV is once again discussing the forthcoming community along the 126. On a recent trip to Fillmore, I couldn’t help but gaze at the land that will one day become Newhall Ranch. Where exactly will it go? What will it look like? How far does it extend?
I’m not the only one… On a recent post, SCVTalk reader Stevens posited:
It would be interesting to see the exact locations of the proposed home lots. It’s not too difficult to get the exact locations of the oil wells (in longitude and latitude) from the CA Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources.
Stevens, we aren’t able to glean specific coordinates yet, be we have obtained maps with more specifics on the locations of each proposed village in Newhall Ranch, along with more details related to the land that will be designated as permanent open space.
While I appreciate the interactive maps on the Newhall Ranch informational website, the ‘birds eye’ view can be a bit ambiguous.
Newhall Ranch Interactive Map on NewhallRanch.net
The imagery on this most detailed map is dense; it is best viewed full screen, perhaps even zoomed all the way in for some areas:
Newhall Ranch – Satellite with Village Overlay
Newhall Land has proudly declared (and has based much of the community branding) on the the fact that most of the 12,000 acre property will be designated as permanent open space.
The Preservation Area map highlights 7,841 acres that will remain wild, with the largest chunk designated as “specific management areas” (SMA):
River Corridor SMA: 977
Spineflower Conservation Plan Easement: 140
Newhall Ranch Specific Plan Open Area: 1,002
Newhall Ranch High Country SMA: 4,205
Salt Creek: 1,517
Finally, for purposes of reference – and to get a sense of the specific areas that Newhall Land nee Newhall Land and Farming has developed in their current piece de resistance – here’s a multi-faceted look at Valencia, highlighting much of the development that put SCV’s suburban heart on the map.
Newhall Land – Valencia
1. There is simply not enough water for Newhall Ranch, unless you want to see mandatory rationing of YOUR water to free enough for this new development.
2. Without a Castaic High school there is no place for the students… there is a sleight of hand happening over where the NR HS students will attend.
3. The open space being “preserved” is largely unbuildable anyway is simply being used as a smokescreen to hide the fact that they are taking much of the floodplain and all of the flat land for houses and min-wage stores.
4. Their claims of job creation and that residents will work in the SCV is a lie.
5. The school being proposed is also close to the flodo area, which allows NLF to treat those opposing building there to be painted as anti-children.
This nonsense and misrepresentation is appalling and this development shodl go back to the drawing board.
Nice post! I checked out the Landmark Village EIR, and on the abandoned oil well map, they showed a lot sitting right on top of one.
NickelDime, what’s the source for these maps? Very interested.
Pingback: SCVTalk.com » Blog Archive » February 17, 2010 – Daily Brief
spine:
1) Water: are you referring to all LA basin water or CLWA specific areas? The density and spec planned for this development will mean less water consumption per capita vs. existing homes, in SCV or elsewhere.
2) The development isn’t slated take place for at least a few more years. Even then, Landmark Village is slated to have very few homes — roughly half of what is planned for West Creek/West Hills alone. The timing for CHS *seems* to fall before this will have any sort of scale.
3) I’m not so sure. My understanding is that Tejon Mountain Village to the north is being constructed in hills much more treacherous than the High Country.
4) We’ve discussed this in-depth. We need more good-paying jobs, and at present, it feels like anecdotes. I’d point to the lack of a research institution as the fundamental reason why they’re not here.
5) Interesting take. Wouldn’t there be restrictions on obtaining insurance if the school is directly in a flood zone? Or are there mitigating factors in the design? I’m not an expert by any stretch.
If you believe that, over the long term, our population is expanding, a planned development such as this would be a smarter proposition than onesy-twosy infill that would ultimately mean more consumption per belly button. It’s harder to fight those smaller projects (less visibility, fewer NIMBYists, etc), and there is zero accoutbability to bringing jobs (min wage or not) and much less accountability to the environmental concerns.
If you don’t believe our population is expanding over the course of 10-20 years, then that is a different subject altogether. Perhaps that’s where this topic touches the immigration debate.