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.
Comments (14)