Note: this is a follow up to Jeff’s post on Newhall Ranch, prompted by our on-site tour of the property with Newhall Land representatives.
Are all developments inherently bad? Is it possible to pave nature in a responsible way, perhaps even balance out some of the irresponsible development in SCV?
The concept of Newhall Ranch is a live/work/play community, facilitated by local jobs and smaller homes in what is known in developer parlance as “high density” (synonymous with “multi-family residences”: typically condos, townhomes, zero lot line or patio homes). The project will likely take at least two decades to complete.
Some have been quick to draw comparisons between Newhall Ranch and Valencia; while both are Newhall Land communities, the two share a number of differences.
 |
 |
|
|---|---|---|
| Master Plan | 1960′s | 1990′s |
| Size | 15,000 acres | 12,000 acres |
| Open space | 4,500 acres | 7,800 acres |
| Homes (at build out) | 24,000 | 20,885 |
| Residents | 60,000 | 60,000 |
| Jobs (est) | 60,000 | 60,000 |
| SFR:Multi-family ratio |
65:35 | 40:60 |
| Trails | 30 miles | 50 miles |
| Landscape | Mostly non-native; fescue | Native, drought-tolerant |
The high density plan:
- Lowers the price point for NR homes, which translates to lower commute times
- Makes the project more proftable
- Allows for more open space and more walkable villages
- Mitigates a chunk of the environmental concerns
Since land is a fixed cost, packing more homes in a tighter space results in a higher return for the developer. In recent years Newhall Land has migrated to a higher mix of multi-family units. With the exception of West Hills, all of their recent villages are primarily high density. For example, Entrada, NL’s nascent village adjacent Magic Mountain will feature 1,232 multi-family units vs. 408 SFR, a 3:1 ratio. Newhall Ranch will continue this trend.
High density housing also satisfies a price point that should create a more attractive live/work balance. That stands in sharp contrast to Valencia, whose homes generally have values that demand higher incomes than this valley can support.
A byproduct of nearly all development involves changing what Mother Nature intended (check out SCVTalk’s photo montage for a glimpse of the property today). However, in dedicating a huge chunk of permanent open space, paying specific attention and care to the Santa Clara river, targeting 51% water recycling, planting native/drought tolerant landscape and building primarily high density homes (which make efficient use of space, use less water and are cheaper to heat/cool), Newhall Land deserves credit for environmental sensitivity. NR’s environmental impact report (EIR) is the largest and most extensive in CA history. Clearly, Newhall Land has learned lessons from the usual cast of opposing characters: I can’t think of a development on this scale more sensitive to environmental issues. The average Newhall Rancher will have a smaller carbon footprint than the rest of us Claritans.
However, the environmental mitigations won’t matter if NR fails to attract reasonably paying jobs and an educated work force that desires high density living. Failing that, residents will join the rest of us on 5 freeway for a job beyond the dreaded Newhall Pass. I would be more optimistic if mass transit were an essential component of the project–despite providing right-of-way for Metrolink, there is no guaranteed light rail, something we lamented earlier this year. But if Newhall Land continues its success in attracting more local jobs, perhaps that won’t matter. Without a sustainable source for job growth–a research institution, for example–that success is predicated on a pro-business stance from the City, enterprise-zone status and an unfriendly business environment in Los Angeles.
If we trust Newhall Land and their plan for Newhall Ranch, this will be a great addition to our valley. If it doesn’t quite work (jobs don’t materialize; high density doesn’t resonate), the results could prove to be a serious drag on our transportation and water infrastructure.
Loading ...
JB:
It is fairly obvious that Valencia was put together as about a 1/2 to 2/3′s scale model of Irvine (with a community college and CalArts rather than a UC, for example and the jobs in the (relatively) close SFV rather than in the City itself). Where is Newhall Ranch derivative of?
Valencia was the model for Irvine, not the other way around. Check Ruth Newhall’s history of Newhall Land and Farming book.
Well, if that is the case then the Irvine Company did a demonstrably better job of “executing” on the plan! Also remember that the original meta plan, quickly abandoned, had a population of tens of thousands living in high rises with open space all around.
That was only the “concept” original idea. Did not even last to the county planning presentation.
So Newhall Land gets to “roll the dice” and if it comes up craps we pick up the tab? Awesome???
Plenty of inventory out there now.
Success in local jobs/attracting businesses? How come we have soooo many empty office/industrial buildings built by Newhall Land that are empty?
I also feel like the correlation between lower prices and a faster commute is a bit of a fantasy…people are always going to work over the hill. If things keep going like they have been, I’d say a large percentage of the tens of thousands of NR residents will be working over the hill.
http://i26.tinypic.com/jp7u5h.jpg
Furthermore, in the map above, you can see that the actual area for what’s classified as ‘high density’ makes up a pretty small portion of the map…the rest is medium(like Landmark Village), low/medium, low density, ‘estates,’ and mixed use/commercial.
I wonder where they get the 60,000 jobs from? Does that include the temporary construction workers? Keep in mind that unless annexed soon, Newhall Ranch is County – not City and will not benefit from the City’s overly pro business friendly environs. The real question will be if they can create enough jobs that will pay enough to live there on one salary unless both spouses are able to work locally (I don’t see that happening too much). Otherwise, we can all look forward to another hour in the Newhall Pass next time there is a fire or a spilled load of cardboard.
Agreed. So how is it that we can expect the County to limit residential development under OVOV while the City takes on the bulk of the growth through higher density?
Fun fact: Victor Gruen & Associates were hired to design the ‘city center’ of Valencia or something along those lines. Victor Gruen was apparently a committed socialist.
The father of the modern mall was a socialist?
;-P
Where will the water come from?
1960s Thousand Oaks was the model for 1970s Valencia.
Those job totals include temporary construction jobs. Precious few of them are commensurate with the cost of the houses, so we will make worse the two-way commute.
And they need to back way off from the river!
Oh, they DON’T have the water for it. That’s why we have all this fuss over stte water quantity and quality.
Way too many questions for me to answer in a short blog format.
TO answer your first, they need to back off not only form the banks, but from the historical flow basin for the river.
You see, NLF has been quietly filling in those banks under the guise of farming grading, which requires NO PERMITS OR INSPECTIONS, and then justifies their not harming the river by saying they are only building to the current banks.
It’s a real scam of the permit process, but as they say, it’s perfectly legal. Just like the Bell pay increases, no?