HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1998 1007 CC REG ITEM 09AAGENDA REPORT
CITY OF MOORPARK
TO: Honorable City Council
FROM: Nelson Miller, Director of Community
Prepared by: John Libiez, Principal P
,// A - 3 Cam)
ITEM q . ko
CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
City Council Meeting
of 1 0 - G'f
A TION: - " 0+e d ReSo .
infirn�Ajred Ord .IVo.d47
r c!i n
DATE: September 25, 1998 (For City Council Meeting of October 7, 1998)
SUBJECT: CONSIDER GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 97 -1, TO
AMEND THE LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENTS;
ZONE CHANGE NO. 97 -5, TO AMEND TITLE 17 OF THE
MUNICIPAL CODE, THROUGH TEXT AND MAP CHANGES TO
ESTABLISH ZONING DISTRICTS AND CONTROL
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; AND THE MOORPARK
DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 95 -1, WHICH INCLUDES
LAND USE AND ZONING MAPS, A STREETSCAPE
BEAUTIFICATION PROGRAM, PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC
CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS, DESIGN GUIDELINES,
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, AND IMPLEMENTATION
PROGRAMS TO GUIDE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.
(CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 19,1998.)
DISCUSSION:
The City Council initiated public hearings on the Downtown Specific Plan on November
5, 1997, closing the hearing on April 15, 1998. Between May 20 and August 19, 1998,
Council considered and provided direction to Staff and RRM, the consultant for the plan,
on a variety of issues including permitted uses, zoning, development standards,
architectural styles, traffic circulation improvements, streetscape beautification and
implementation programs, related to the downtown specific plan,. On August 19, 1998,
based upon recommendations received from the Planning Commission in Resolution PC-
97 -345 and Council considerations and public testimony during the public review period,
City Council directed staff to complete the required changes to the downtown plan and
return the plan and appropriate resolutions /ordinances to Council for consideration and
adoption.
The Downtown Specific Plan has had significant changes to reflect the changes directed
by City Council. A significant number of graphics, diagrams and pictures necessary to
depict the plan requirements had to be replaced to reflect architectural styles, design
features and development standards and map changes altered through the hearing and
discussion sessions, especially the deletion of Spanish architectural styles. The final draft
plan, which accompanies this staff report, incorporates all City Council actions.
C:M\dwntwnspstfipt 10798
Downtown Specific Plan
October 7, 1998
Page 2
The Specific Plan and accompanying maps and exhibits are being circulated under
separate cover.
City Council is being asked to consider the Mitigation Monitoring Program, Mitigated
Negative Declaration including responses to comments, General Plan Amendment 97 -1,
Specific Plan 95 -1, and Zone Change 97 -5, necessary to effect the Downtown Specific
Plan.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Consider Resolution 98 for adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring Program,
adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration including responses to comments,
adoption of General Plan Amendment 97 -1, and adoption of Specific Plan 95 -1;
2. Consider introduction for first reading of Ordinance No. to amend the
Municipal Code, Title 17, Zoning, to designate properties within the downtown
plan area as Specific Plan - Downtown (SP -D) Zone; to establish a new zoning
category known as "Old Town Commercial" (C -OT); and, amend the zoning map
to reflect downtown specific plan zoning.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution No. 98- , adopting a Mitigation Monitoring Program,
Mitigated Negative Declaration including responses to comments, General Plan
Amendment 97 -1, and the Downtown Specific Plan (Specific Plan 95 -1).
2. Draft Ordinance No. , adopting zoning regulations, zoning designations and
standards related to the Downtown Specific Plan.
C:M\dwntwnspstfipt 10798
00040
RESOLUTION NO: 98-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM,
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
97 -1, AND SPECIFIC PLAN 95- 1/DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed Public Hearing on November 5, 1997, continued
Public Hearings on January 28, 1998, February 5, 1998, March 11, 1998, April 15, 1998;
and, in public meetings on May 20, 1998, June 17, 1998, July 1, 1998, August 19, 1998,
and October 7, 1998, the City Council of the City of Moorpark considered the application
of the City of Moorpark for the Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan 95 -1, General Plan
Amendment 97 -1, Zone Change 97 -5, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH -
97071033) concerning potential environmental consequences of the specific plan, and a
Mitigation Monitoring Program; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Moorpark did adopt
Resolution No. PC 97 -345 recommending that the City Council adopt General Plan
Amendment 97 -1, Zone Change 97 -5, Specific Plan 95 -1, a Mitigation Monitoring
Program for the project, and Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH- 97071033); and
WHEREAS, the City Council during its considerations on the project received
public testimony from all those who wished to testify;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK,
DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Based upon the information contained within the Planning Commission
Resolution PC -97 -345, the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring
Program, Specific Plan 95 -1, staff reports, Downtown Citizens Advisory Committee
Reports, staff and public testimony, the City Council makes the following findings:
Environmental Findings:
1. The Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH - 97071033) prepared for the Downtown
Specific Plan Project reflects the independent judgement of the City of Moorpark,
as lead agency.
2. The Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Downtown Specific Plan project has
been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) and the City's Rules to implement CEQA.
3. The Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project complies with CEQA and was
accepted and reviewed by the City Council and the information contained therein
was considered prior to its decision on the project.
4. The Mitigation Monitoring Program provides reasonable control throughout the
life of the downtown plan to ensure that impacts shall be mitigated.
C:M\dwntwnspreso
oQ000a.
General Plan Findings:
1. The approval of General Plan Amendment 97 -1 is consistent with the goals and
policies of the Circulation Element and Land Use Element of the Moorpark
General Plan in that:
a. It provides for the expansion and development of the city -wide bikeway,
pedestrian and recreational circulation network; and,
b. Promotes non - polluting forms of transportation; and,
C. Promotes the rehabilitation of the central business district through
application of design and improvement standards which will improve the
use and presentation of district developments.
Specific Plan Findings:
1. The proposed specific plan is consistent with the requirements of California
Government Code Section 65450 et seq.; and,
2. The proposed specific plan, with the imposition of mitigation measures, is
consistent with the City of Moorpark General Plan as amended through GPA 97 -1
and the goals and policies of the Land Use Element dated 1992 with regard to the
improvement of the downtown core, strengthening the visual character of the
downtown commercial core, and preparation of a comprehensive plan for the
downtown core.
Section 2. The City Council has reviewed and considered and hereby adopts the
Mitigation Monitoring Program attached hereto as Attachment 1.
Section 3. The City Council has reviewed and considered and hereby adopts the
Mitigated Negative Declaration attached hereto as Attachment 2.
Section 4. The City Council has reviewed the text and exhibits comprising the
Downtown Specific Plan (Specific Plan 95 -1) and hereby adopts and approves said plan
attached hereto as Attachment 3.
Section 5. The City Council hereby approves General Plan Amendment 97 -1 to
revise Section 5.2, Specific Plan Designation, to include a description of the downtown
specific plan; revise Exhibit 3, Bikeway Element, to reflect the planned bikeway linkages
contained within the specific plan; both attached hereto as Attachments 4 and 5.
Section 6. If any Chapter, section, sentence, clause or portion of the Specific Plan as
contained in the attachments hereto is for any reason held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity
of the remaining portion thereof.
C: Wdwntwnspreso
GOG0a4
Section 7. The City Council hereby designates the Offices of the City Clerk and the
Community Development Department as the custodians of the records constituting the
record of proceedings upon which its decision is based. The original resolution along
with one copy of the attachments referenced herein shall be maintained within the Office
of the City Clerk. The Community Development Department shall be designated the
repository and archive for all historical and active materials related to this project.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF OCTOBER, 1998
Patrick Hunter, Mayor
ATTEST:
Deborah S. Traffenstedt
City Clerk
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Mitigation Monitoring Program
2. Mitigated Negative Declaration
3. Downtown Specific Plan (Specific Plan 95 -1)
4. General Plan Text Amendment, Section 5.2, Land Use Element
5. General Plan Amendment, Figure 3, Bikeways, Circulation Element
C: Wdwntwnspreso (300005
TO BE PROVIDED UNDER SEPARATE
COVER
ATTACHMENT 1
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
C:M\dwntwnspreso
(;QcooE;
TO BE PROVIDED UNDER SEPARATE
COVER
ATTACHMENT,2
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
C:1Vndwntwnspreso
TO BE PROVIDED UNDER SEPARATE
COVER
ATTACHMENT 3
DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN (SP -95 -1)
C:1Vndwntwnspreso couous
ATTACHMENT 4
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA -97 -1)
LAND USE ELEMENT, SECTION S. 2, TEXTUAL
C:M\dwntwnspreso
600005
TEXT AMENDMENT TO 1992 LAND USE ELEMENT
5.2 SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION - SP
Planning Area Within The City
Downtown Specific Plan (SP -D) [added]
The Downtown Specific Plan concentrates on long range planning for the primary
downtown core which focuses along Moorpark Avenue, High Street and a portion
of Spring Road.
The intent of the Downtown plan is to create a viable central business core. The
plan seeks to accomplish this goal by establishing a variety of uses that address
community needs. The plan seeks to develop anchor -type uses of medium chain
retailers, mixes of restaurants, retail and specialty markets, visitor service uses,
convenience uses, civic /community uses such as post office, library, and, office
uses, entertainment, and service businesses, compatible with adjacent civic center,
industrial and residential uses. The object is to increase the attraction level of the
core area and create jobs for community residents.
The plan contains design standards, landscape standards and public improvement
criteria to create a harmonious downtown environment. Architectural styles
encouraged for the downtown plan area re- enforce the ambiance of rural country
charm which has been favored for the development of the core area, historically.
Property maintenance standards, landscape and streetscape standards and core
area monument signage provide a sense of place and enhance the quality of the
downtown experience.
Site specific land use designations are contained within the Downtown Specific
Plan. These uses provide a mix intended to create a special place and destination
center within the downtown area.
The specific plan provides a menu of development opportunities, improvements
and relationships structured to provide economic growth and stability within the
community core area. The plan addresses a variety of programs and potential
funding sources to help to implement the plan and accomplish goals and policies
contained in this element related to commercial development, economic
development and employment.
C:M\dwntwnspreso
tO 02.0
ATTACHMENT 5
GENERAL PLANAMENDMENT (GPA -97 -1)
CIRCULATION ELEMENT, FIGURE 3, BIKEWAYS
C:Wwntwnspreso
•
60601..
TO FILLMORE
BROADWAY
2
1 4 .�■
1 9 I ■
-', HARLES
�` S �■■■� S P
! �� ...,c %TER ���f■
�•.�.r / UI NEW
I` LOS 1 ANGELES
• '�imtro 11,�.�,
*0o ♦ �� �R�� °_ `OCHBs
1 N *ouN•rnt�j� �� �■ ■ ■
4f OEM
L�4DOW "Wool,
4f.�.�.�.�.1
TO REGIONAL PARK 41F Q00 j
Q
I•�• Z�� ��� ■tom.
`' %*CAMPUS PARK �� ��� �,�•
R ET c[z_itQ _40S VALLEY FREEIies.
1
1
■�■
TIERRA •�
""■ ■ M 0# LEGEND
IIIIIltll11101 CLASS I BIKEWAY (BIKE PATH) - A facility designed for
exclusive use by bicycles and physically separated from
vehicular traffic by a barrier, grade separation or open space.
Cross -flows by vehicles and pedestrians allowed but minimized.
■E■■■ CLASS 11 BiKFWAY (RIKF.. IANP.) - A paved area of it
roadway designated for preferential use of bicycles. Pavement
markings and signage indicate the presence of a bike lane on
the roadway.
k"__2q CLASS III BIKEWAY (BIKE ROUTE) - A conventional street
where bike routes are indicated by sign only. there are no
special pnvetuni walkways and hie'ycle traffic shares the
roadway with motorized trollies Only (litss III lincilities which
connect the Moorpark sphere with the regional bikeway system
are identified in the bikeway network. Roadways which are
not designated with a Class 11 bikeway, but which serve as
connections between Class 11 facilities or the regional bikeway
system should be considered as Class III bikeways.
••.•.•. CITY LIMIT BOUNDARY
ORDINANCE NO.:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK,
CALIFORNIA AMENDING TITLE 17, ZONING, OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
BY ADDING SECTION 17.12.010 TO CREATE A NEW ZONING
DESIGNATION ENTITLED "OLD TOWN COMMERCIAL" (C -OT); ADDING
SECTION 17.16.050 DEFINING THE "OLD TOWN COMMERCIAL ZONE;
AMENDING SECTION 17.20.060 BY REVISING TABLE 17.20.060 TO
REFLECT C -OT; DESIGNATING PROPERTIES WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN
SPECIFIC PLAN AREA AS SP -D (DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN) BY
AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK TO
REFLECT THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING (SP -D);
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed Public Hearing on November 5, 1997, continued
Public Hearings on January 28, 1998, February 5, 1998, March 11, 1998, April 15, 1998;
and, in public meetings on May 20, 1998, June 17, 1998, July 1, 1998 ,August 19, 1998,
and October 7, 1998, the City Council of the City of Moorpark considered the application
of the City of Moorpark for the Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan 95 -1, General Plan
Amendment 97 -1, Zone Change 97 -5, a Mitigated Negative Declaration concerning
potential environmental consequences of the specific plan (SCH- 97071033) and a
Mitigation Monitoring Program.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Moorpark did adopt
Resolution No. PC 97 -345 recommending that the City Council adopt General Plan
Amendment 97 -1, Zone Change 97 -5, Specific Plan 95 -1, a Mitigation Monitoring
Program for the project, and Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH- 97071033).
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Title 17, Zoning, of the Municipal Code of the City of Moorpark is
amended as follows:
A. The official zoning map of the City of Moorpark, as referenced in Section
17.04.020, is amended by adding thereto the designation Downtown Specific Plan
Overlay (SP -D) and applying said designation to the properties within the
Downtown Specific Plan area as shown upon Exhibit A, attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference;
B. Section 17.12.010 is amended by adding the zoning designations as follows:
"Q. Old Town Commercial (C -OT) zone."
"R. Specific Plan — Downtown Overlay (SP -D) zone"
C:M\dwtwnspord nn��`M
bW Vi `#.
C. Section 17.16.050 is amended by adding the definition for the Old Town
Commercial District as follows:
"E. Old Town Commercial (C -OT) Zone. The purpose of this zone is to
provide development standards and uses within the Downtown Specific
Plan area, approved in Specific Plan 95 -1, in order to ensure compatibility
and coordination of uses within the downtown planning area."
D. Section 17.16.080 is amended by adding:
"A. Specific Plan — Downtown (SP -D) Overlay Zone. The purpose of
this overlay zone is to provide special design standards for the downtown
core area."
E. Amending Table 17.20.060 within Section 17.20.060 by adding thereto the
designation C -OT as an additional column and identifying the uses and approval
methodology for such uses as shown on Exhibit B attached hereto and
incorporated by reference.
F. Adding thereto Chapter 17.72, Downtown Specific Plan Overlay, as shown upon
Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated by reference.
Section 2. Whenever a conflict shall occur between provisions of the Specific Plan
and the Zoning Code as to the meaning of terms, uses permitted, standards applicable, or
Administration thereof, the Specific Plan shall prevail.
Section 3. If any section, sub - section, sentence, clause, phrase, part or portion of this
Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of
competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have adopted this
ordinance and each section, sub - section, sentence, clause, phrase, part or portion thereof,
irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, sub - sections, sentences, clauses,
phrases, parts or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Section 4. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its passage
and adoption.
Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance;
shall enter the same in the book of original ordinances of said city; shall make a minute
of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council
at which same is passed and adopted; and shall within fifteen (15) days after the passage
and adoption thereof, cause the same to be published once in the Moorpark News - Mirror,
a weekly newspaper of general circulation, as defined in Section 6008 of the Government
Code, for the City of Moorpark, and which is hereby designated for that purpose.
C:M\dwtwnspord
v14
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF OCTOBER, 1998
Patrick Hunter, Mayor
ATTEST:
Deborah S. Traffenstedt
City Clerk
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A: Zoning Map Designation " Downtown Specific Plan Overlay" (SP -D)
Exhibit B: Zoning Use Table Amendments Table 17.20.060
Exhibit C: Zoning Code Textual Amendment, Chapter 17.72, Downtown Specific
Plan Overlay
C:M\dwtwnspord WGUIS
C:Mldwtwnspord
EXHIBIT A
ZONING MAP CHANGE
fjowl5
NFW I.n1 ANGLIUS AV6NU[
LEGEND
DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY
ZONING: SPECIFIC PLAN - DOWNTOWN (SP -D)
See Specific Plan for Parcel Specific Zoning
EXHIBIT A
r Xnr4n11 "7
EXHIBIT B
ZONING TABLE AMENDMENT
C:M\dwtwnspord
.0OGViS
%iZoozlaaz!¢ Dcu..ceda"t S',4ccc;�ic pear
Table 4
PA141111ITTED IIISE LIST FOR OLD TMI'A • • ZONE
SYMBOL KEY
A Temporary use permit
Permitted by zone clearance
Planning Commission- approved planned development permit
City Council - approved planned development permit
Planning Commission - approved conditional use permit
City Council - Conditional Use Permit
Administrative Permit
USE LIST
C-OT
old To wn
Commercial
Alcoholic beverage sales
Beer and wine sales in restaurants
All other alcohol sales
Amusement and recreational facilities (see definitions in Chapter 17.08)
Art galleries, museums, and botanical gardens
Automobile repair, including component repair
Automobile service stations
Banks and related financial offices and institutions
Barber, hairstylists, manicurists
Tanning centers
Bars, tavems, and nightclubs
Care facilities: For 9 or more persons (Day)
Churches, synagogues, and other buildings used for religious worship
00
Club projects, temporary outdoor
Clubhouses
With alcoholic beverages
Communications facilities
Radio and television broadcasting studios
Crop production
Dog and cat grooming
Dressmaking and tailor shops
Dwelling for superindendent or owner
Dwelling, caretaker
Education and training (see schools)
Festivals and similar special events, temporary outdoor
Government buildings, excluding correctional institutions
Fire stations
Libraries and information center
Zawd ?(ac "d '2 —
28 - 0
60GOVi
/Gaa2�(ta2l¢ [iau/�ctau�sc 5,&ccc6lc
Table 4 (continued)
Grading not in conjunction with a de\,elopment project
Less than 5,000 cubic yards
More than 5,000 cubic yards
Health club/gymnasium (see definitions)
0
Health seruces such as professional offices and outpatient clinics
Hotels, motels and bed- and - breakfast inns
0
Kennels (animal hospitals, boarding and grooming - small animals)
Laundry seruce (laundromats)
Laundry seruce (light)
•
Manufacturing associated with crafts ad artisans ( incl. assembly, exhibits, demonstration)
Manufacturing and repair of photograhic and optical goods
Martial arts and dance studios
•
Motion picture and N production, and related actiuties and structures
Temporary (maximum 47 days in any 180 -day period)
Offices: business, professional, and administrati\,e, except health and wterinary
Optical Goods
Organizations (professional, religious, political, labor, trade, youth, etc.)
Parks —public
ILI
Parking lots
Public utility facilities
Offices only
.
Pharmacy, accessory retail, for prescription phamiaceuticals only
Photocopy /quick printers
•
Photofinishing (1 -hour photo)
•
Produce stands, retail
Repair of personal goods such as jewelry, shoes, and saddlery
Restaurants, cafes, and cafeterias
Restaurants and cafes outside eating area
Retail trade (see definitions in Chapter 17.08) includes retail only nurseries and
excludes lumber and building materials sales yards, pawnshops, and liquor stores
Outdoor sales area
Outdoor sales area temporary
Z"d ?lac "d g —
29 OUGUZU
TO BE PROVIDED UNDER SEPARATE
EXHIBIT C
CHAPTER 17.72 MOORPARK ZONING CODE TEXT
C:M\dwtwnspord •
7ia • 3(q)
ITEM -19 A •
TITLE 17.72
DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN OVERLAY ZONE (SP -D)
Sections:
17.72.010
17.72.020
17.72.030
17.72.040
17.72.050
17.72.060
17.72.070
17.72.080
17.72.090
17.72.100
17.72.110
17,72.120
17.72.130
17.72.140
17.72.150
Purpose
Terms and Definitions
General Provisions
Review Procedures
Design and Landscape Guidelines
Single - family Residential (R -1)
Two - family Residential (R -2)
Residential Planned Development (R -PD)
Office (C -O)
Old Town Commercial (C -OT)
Neighborhood Commercial (C -1)
Commercial Planned Development (C -PD)
Institutional (I)
Industrial Park/Light Industry (M -1)
Lot Consolidation Incentive Program
17.72.010 Purpose
The development standards and design guidelines for Downtown Moorpark are intended
to reinforce building character and establish design criteria for all new buildings,
renovated buildings, and remodels.
17.72.020 Terms and Definitions
Words and terms used within the Downtown Specific Plan and overlay zone shall have
the same meaning and definition as given within the Moorpark Municipal Code,
including Chapter 17, Zoning Ordinance and the City General Plan.
17.72.030 General Provisions
The provisions of the Downtown Specific Plan Overlay Zone apply to properties in the
Downtown Specific Plan area and supplement the other regulations of the Zoning
Ordinance. The Specific Plan development standards and design guidelines are
consistent with, and further, the City Zoning Ordinance. In such cases where the Specific
Plan development standards and zoning code standards conflict, the Specific Plan
development standards shall apply.
17.72.040 Review Procedures
Design review procedures identified within the Downtown Specific Plan shall apply to
any private or quasi - public parcel or building within the specific plan area. Design review
is generally required for all new construction, exterior modifications, and substantial
remodels to existing buildings, single and multifamily residences, parking lots and
exterior pedestrian areas. Design Review occurs in conjunction with the respective
entitlement process which is governed by Chapter 17.44 of the City's Zoning Ordinance.
In addition to the City's Zoning Ordinance, projects must comply with the standards
EXHIBIT C
provided in the Specific Plan. Projects shall comply with the standards set forth in this
district, the specific plan and the existing zoning designation.
17.72.050 Design and Landscape Guidelines.
The Design Guidelines contained within the Downtown Specific Plan are intended to
reinforce building character, and establish design criteria for all new buildings, renovated
buildings, and remodels. The guidelines should be used in conjunction with the
Downtown Vision Plan (Section 1.1 of the Downtown Specific Plan), and are intended to
provide property owners, merchants, and their designers with the basic design criteria.
A. Goals of the Development Standards and Design Guidelines
The goals of these development standards and design guidelines are as follows:
1. Establish a hierarchy of building types in the downtown area utilizing a
landmark building designation to identify special and important places.
2. Provide basic design recommendations for all buildings in the downtown
promoting design creativity, and variation while insuring consistency in
building scale, proportion, and pedestrian orientation.
3. Establish clear and usable standards, guidelines and criteria.
4. Protect and enhance historical architectural buildings and utilize historical
building forms and styles to create future buildings.
B. The Design Guidelines and Landscape Guidelines should be considered in
conjunction with the Development Standards.
17.72.060 Single Family Residential (R -1)
1. Land Use and Permitted Uses
The Single Family Residential designation is intended to accommodate single family home
development on "varying sized parcels, while preserving hillside landforms and historic weave
of the neighborhood character. This land designation allows for second dwelling units when
an Administrative Permit has been secured in accordance with Zoning Code Chapter 17.28(G).
Secondary dwellings are not encouraged on small to medium sized lots. Land uses shall be
permitted as designated in Table 17.20.050 of the Zoning Code.
2. Density
Existing land use patterns in the Single Density Residential areas of the plan are character-
ized by both developed and undeveloped parcels that range from 6,000 square feet to greater
than 1 acre in size. A number of parcels north of Everett Street and along Valley Road are
located in hillside areas with slopes in excess of 20 percent, making them subject to Hillside
Management development requirements. The maximum density for the Single Family Resi-
dential area is 4 to 6 units per acre.
3. Building Setbacks - Single Family Residential - R -1
Building setbacks in the Single Family Residential zone shall conform to the following stan-
dards, with setback intrusions permitted only as described in Section 17.24.060.A of Title 17
of the Moorpark Zoning Code, including setback requirements for detached accessory struc-
tures. Section 17.24.070 shall determine the extent of any other miscellaneous setback re.
quirements.
YARR
SMACKS
Front
From main house
Min. 20 feet
From front porch
Min. 14 feet
Interior lot
Min. 5 feet
Corner lot street side
Min. 10 feet
Rear
Min. 15 feet
4. Height
For the primary structure, the maximum height is 25 feet; measured from finish grade to
the highest point of a flat or mansard roof, or in the case of pitched or hip roof, to the
"averaged midpoint" which is the average of the highest point on the roof with the top of
the finished wall height.
The maximum height for an accessory structure is 15 feet. The maximum height of a patio
cover or second story deck (excluding rail height) shall be 12 feet. Exceptions to building
height may only be permitted in accordance with Section 17.24.080 of Title 17 of the Moorpark
Municipal Code.
5. Second Dwellings and Building Additions
Second dwellings are permitted on lots that are 10,890 square feet (1/4 acre) or larger in size.
For lots 10,890 square feet (1/4 acre) to 21,780 square feet (1/2 acre) - a second dwelling unit
shall not exceed 800 square feet. These units may be located over garages. All secondary
structures and building additions /expansions should complement the existing structure in
form, massing, building materials, and architectural character.
The maximum size of the second dwelling shall be limited to the following lot size limita-
tions:
1/4 acre - 1/2 acre 800 sq. ft.
(10,890 - 21,780 sq. ft.)
'Per City of Moorpark Zoning Code.
• The Planning Commission may authorize exceptions to the standards by use permit
upon finding that 1) The purpose of this section is served 2) Strict compliance with
the size limitations would (a) require significant structural modifications that would
not otherwise be required, or (b) adversely affect an historic or architecturally signifi-
cant building.
• Either the primary unit or the second unit must be owner - occupied.
• Accessory buildings shall not be located in front setback areas between the main
structure and the public street.
• The style material and color of accessory buildings visible from public streets shall be
the same or substantially consistent with the main structure.
• In the case of carport design:
- Materials and colors shall be the same as the main building
Where carports back up to public streets or alleys, provide rear carport walls to
screen cars
Include facias in carport roof design to screen support beams and trusses
Roof design should be compatible with the main structure
6. Maintenance and Renovation:
Quality maintenance of existing buildings and parcels, combined with gradual progression in
meeting design goals for this land use designation are encouraged. To this end, the mainte-
nance guidelines and incentives outlined in section 2.3.1 to 2.3.2 apply to the Single Family
Residential designation.
B. The Design Guidelines and Landscape Guidelines contained in the Downtown
Specific Plan for this designation should be considered in conjunction with the
Vision Statement contained in Section 1.1 of the Downtown Specific Plan and the
site development standards contained in this chapter.
17.72.070 Two-family Residential (R -2)
A. Site Development Standards
1. Land Use and Permitted Uses
The Two-Family Residential designation is intended to accommodate duplex and secondary
dwelling units in addition to Single Family Residential development. This land designation
allows for second dwelling units in accordance with Chapter 17.20 of the Zoning Code. Land
Uses shall be permitted as designated in Table 17.20.050 of the Zoning Code.
2. Density
Existing land use patterns in the Two-Family Residential areas of the plan are characterized
by mostly developed parcels that range from 6,000 to 8,000 square feet in size. These parcels
face onto Flory Avenue and have alley access along their western boundary, adjacent to the
Office Zone. The maximum density for the Two-Family Residential area is four to six units
to the acre. The minimum site area per dwelling unit is 3,500 square feet.
3. Building Setbacks - Two - Family (R -2)
Setbacks for the Two-Family Residential designation shall comply with the setbacks for the
Single - Family Residential designation contained in Section 2EZEtl l'7 • -7 z •o(op A .3
4. Height
Height requirements for the Two-Family Residential designation shall comply with the height
requirements for the Single- Family Residential designation contained in Section 1-4:4, .
i-r.-rz- olooA4
5. Second Dwellings and Building Additions
Second dwellings and building additions for the Two-Family Residential designation shall
comply with the second dwellings and building additions for the Single- Family Residential
designation contained in Section 2.2.1.
6. Maintenance and Renovation
Maintenance and renovation for the Two-Family Residential designation shall comply with
the maintenance and renovation for the Single- Family Residential designation contained in
Section 2.2.1.
Quality maintenance of existing buildings and parcels, combined with gradual
progression in meeting design goals for this land use designation are encouraged.
To this end, the maintenance guidelines and incentives outlined in Section 2.3.1 to
2.3.2 of the Downtown Specific Plan are encouraged.
B. The Design Guidelines and Landscape Guidelines contained in the Downtown
Specific Plan for this designation should be considered in conjunction with the
Vision Statement contained in Section 1.1 of the Downtown Specific Plan and the
site development standards contained in this chapter.
17.72.080 Residential Planned Development (R -PD)
The Residential Planned Development category is intended to provide small lot single -fam-
ily and attached housing - townhouses / condominiums / apartments. These units should be
well articulated as individual or collective units, and act as a transition between Single Family
Residential and the Old Town Commercial. Buildings shall be generally oriented toward
the street with parking courts located behind.
1. Land Use and Permitted Uses
The Residential Planned Development designation is intended to allow for a wide range of
residential development products as a primary use, with limited office as a secondary use.
The range of residential density that is covered by this Specific Plan designation is inclusive of
both the High Density (7 units to the acre) and Very High Density (14 units to the acre)
General Plan land use designations. A 15 unit density allocation applies only to the devel-
oped property east of Spring Road between High Street and Charles Street. Permitted uses
in the R -PD zone are designated in Table 17.020.050 of the City Zoning Code.
2. Density
The majority of the existing land use pattern in the Residential Planned Development areas
of the plan are characterized by lots that are in the 7,000 to 8,000 square foot range. There
are some lots which are 16,000 square feet or greater in size that occur where smaller lots
have been combined, or a single cohesive development has occurred (as with the senior
housing project at Magnolia and Charles Streets).
The density maximums within the Residential Planned Development area have been de-
signed to encourage lot consolidation and redevelopment of underdeveloped or declining
properties. The maximum permissible density for the Residential Planned Development
area ranges from 7 to 14 units to the acre and up to 20 units /acre should low /very low or
senior housing be built. (Refer to Section ME9 for explanation and density standards con.
tained within the Lot Consolidation Incentiv and the Building Renovation Programs).
t'T• -7 2 !!oO
The Specific Plan RPD District allows a second dwelling on residential zoned lots as permit-
ted by the City Zoning Code Chapter 17.28.020 G.C.
3. Building Setbacks— Residential Planned Development (R -PD)
YARD :
SETBACKS
(from property line)
Front
Main House
Min 20'
Front Porch
Min 14'
Side
Interior Lot
Min 10'
Corner lot street side
Min 20'
Rear
As determined
on project by
project basis
* Shall be adequate to provide buffering from incompatible adjacent land uses.
4. Height
The maximum height is 35 feet; measured from finish grade to the highest point of a flat or
mansard roof, or in the case of pitched or hip roof, to the "averaged midpoint" which is the
average of the highest point on the roof with the top of the finished wall height. There is a
three story maximum on main structures.
5. Accessory Structures and Building Additions
Generally, secondary structures and building additions /expansions should compliment the
existing structure in form, massing, building materials, and architectural character. How-
ever, if the existing structure is already not in keeping with the design characteristics estab-
lished by this section, compatible materials and architecture may create an even larger design
compatibility gap. The programs and standards contained in section . are designed to
encourage and guide building additions and renovations towards agre iT ent with the design
characteristics established within the Specific Plan. 1"1 •-7 z. 16 C
6. Building Maintenance and Renovation
Quality maintenance of existing buildings and parcels, combined with gradual
progression in meeting design goals for this land use designation are encouraged.
To this end, the maintenance guidelines and incentives outlined in Section 2.3.1 to
2.3.2 of the Downtown Specific Plan are encouraged.
B. The Design Guidelines and Landscape Guidelines contained in the Downtown
Specific Plan for this designation should be considered in conjunction with the
Vision Statement contained in Section 1.1 of the Downtown Specific Plan and the
site development standards contained in this chapter.
17.72.090 Office (GO)
1. Land Use and Permitted Uses
Existing land uses in this district are a mixture of office complexes, some retail uses and small
single and two- family bungalow style residences. There are a number of existing auto retail/
service uses along Moorpark Avenue which are existing legal nonconforming uses. These
uses may continue as nonconforming uses in accordance with Section 2.3.2 of this Specific
Plan. This district is intended to provide opportunity for conversion of existing residences to
small professional and commercial offices, while preserving residential scale, and respecting
the existing historic character of the neighborhood. Innovative re -use of existing structures
is encouraged. All new office construction and remodels should be done so as not to detract
from the existing character of the neighborhood, particularly with regard to historic charac-
teristics. Public Institutional uses are intended to be allowable with an Administrative Permit
within the Office
zone. Additionally,
parks are permit-
ted in the Office
zone, which would
enable park devel.
opment such as the
concept discussed
in Section 3.3.6 of
this Plan. Land
uses in the C -0
zone shall be per-
mitted as desig-
nated in Table
17.020.050 and
17.020.060 of the
City Zoning Code.
2. Building Setbacks
The following table indicates the minimum building setbacks in the Office (C-0) zone. The
front and side setbacks are consistent with the R -RD zone provisions in the Moorpark Zon-
ing Code. (Refer to the City Zoning Code for more detailed descriptions and exceptions).
YARD
SETBACKS
Front
From Arterial Streets
Minimum 20 feet
(Spring Road, Los Angeles Avenue)
Average 24 feet
Local and Collector Streets
(First, Second, Third, Charles, Walnut, Bard,
Magnolia Streets, and Moorpark Avenue)
Minimum 20 feet
Side
Interior yard
Minimum 5 feet
Rear — Adjacent to Residential Zone
From property line
Minimum 15 feet
From alley
Minimum 5 feet
Rear--Adjacent to Commercial Zones
From property line or alley
As determined by
permit
3. Height
The maximum height for an office structure shall be 35 feet, and no more than three stories
high. The maximum height of accessory structures such as garages shall be 15 feet with the
exception that the maximum height of a patio cover shall be 12 feet.
4. Building Maintenance and Renovation
Quality maintenance of existing buildings and parcels, combined with gradual
progression in meeting design goals for this land use designation are encouraged.
To this end, the maintenance guidelines and incentives outlined in Section 2.3.1 to
2.3.2 of the Downtown Specific Plan are encouraged.
B. The Design Guidelines and Landscape Guidelines contained in the Downtown
Specific Plan for this designation should be considered in conjunction with the
Vision Statement contained in Section 1.1 of the Downtown Specific Plan and the
site development standards contained in this chapter.
17.72.100 Old Town Commercial (C -OT)
A. Site Development Standards
1. Land Use and Permitted Uses
This area is characterized by commercial buildings
which are rooted in the framework of Moorpark's
agricultural business and rural heritage. This dis.
trict is intended to attract a wide range of specialty
retail, service and entertainment uses that will en-
courage public gathering and pedestrian activity.
The introduction of outdoor paseos and courtyards
as part of the street experience is encouraged.
Refer to Table 4 in Section 2.1 for the permitted
uses within the Old Town Commercial zone.
{I 3
2. Building Setbacks - Old Town Commercial Zone - (GOT)
Buildings should be located along the street right -of way inside property lines. This will
create a strong edge for storefronts and public sidewalks. Setbacks from street right -of -ways
are permitted only when providing areas for benches, planters, or pedestrian plazas.
The following are the setback requirements that apply to new and renovated structures in
the GOT zone. These requirements vary from other commercial zone landscaping and
setback requirements.
BUILDING
SETBACKS
F=
None
sidt
Parking Lots
None
Parking Lots
From right -of -way to parking lot
Minimum 6 feet
Notwithstanding the setbacks noted above, new development shall be consistent with Table
17.24.020.B of the City's Zoning Code, which requires a 30 -foot landscape setback from
arterials and a 20 -foot landscape setback from two-lane local and rural collector roads.
3. Height
The maximum building height is 35 feet; measured from finish grade to the highest point of
a flat or mansard roof, or in the case of pitched or hip roof, to the "average and midpoint ",
which is the average of the highest point on the roof with the top of the finished wall height.
• Architectural elements such as towers, chimneys, parapet walls, and flagpoles may
have a maximum height of forty (40) feet.
• Corner buildings should be a minimum of two (2) stories high.
4. Building Maintenance and Renovation
Quality maintenance of existing buildings and parcels, combined with gradual
progression in meeting design goals for this land use designation are encouraged.
To this end, the maintenance guidelines and incentives outlined in Section 2.3.1 to
2.3.2 of the Downtown Specific Plan are encouraged.
The Design Guidelines and Landscape Guidelines contained in the Downtown
Specific Plan for this designation should be considered in conjunction with the
Vision Statement contained in Section 1.1 of the Downtown Specific Plan and the
site development standards contained in this chapter.
5. Mixed Use Development
A mixed commercial - residential use project is a project in which commercial uses will occupy
the entire street level of a building or group of buildings, and residential uses will occupy
portions or all of the upper floors of that same building(s). The intent of allowing for mixed -
use projects in the Old Town Commercial District is to provide continuous frontage of retail
shops and commercial business establishments at the street level, while providing opportuni-
ties for downtown residential living. The following requirements shall apply to these mixed -
use projects:
a. The primary use shall be commercial and the residential use shall be secondary to the
commercial use of the property.
b. The street level of the commercial structure shall be utilized for commercial uses and
not for parking.
c. The entire ground floor or street level, with the exception of circulation access, shall
be used exclusively for retail and other commercial uses and no dwelling shall be
permitted to be located in whole or in part on the ground floor or street level.
d. All parking spaces required by the residential use shall be required to be provided on.
site. Parking spaces to serve the residential units shall be specifically designated and
shall be reserved for the exclusive use of the residents, but not to dominate a street
level storefront.
e. Where a project consists of more than ten (10) units, the project shall be clustered in
two or more buildings to reduce building mass and create architectural interest.
f. Wall planes for buildings shall have design articulation consistent with the design
standards set for all buildings in the Old Town Commercial district.
g. Direct access for parking areas and driveways is discouraged along High Street. Access
for parking and driveways shall be taken from adjoining alleys or alternative streets
when available. If a parking area or driveway cannot be designed to avoid access from
High Street the driveway and parking area shall not occupy more than 40% of the lot
frontage, leaving the majority of the lot width for commercial store front develop-
ment.
h. Driveway access to parking shall be taken as close to a side lot line as is feasible, rather
than from the middle of the lot frontage.
i. Additions to existing buildings shall be designed to be integrated with the existing
building. The new addition should match the original in terms of scales, architectural
details, window and door styles and openings, roofline, materials, color and other
aspects of design.
j. Where a large addition is developed the entire building should be renovated to achieve
a single, coordinated appearance.
B. The Design Guidelines and Landscape Guidelines contained in the Downtown
Specific Plan for this designation should be considered in conjunction with the
Vision Statement contained in Section 1.1 of the Downtown Specific Plan and the
site development standards contained in this chapter.
17.72.110 Neighborhood Commercial (C -1)
1 . Land Use and Permitted Uses
These development standards and design guidelines apply to the Neighborhood Commer-
cial zone designated in Figures 5 & 6. This zone is located on the west and east side of
Moorpark Avenue, between First and Third Streets. This zone is adjacent to an Office zone,
Old Town Commercial, and General Commercial zoning. Due to its proximity to this wide
variety of land uses, these design standards and subsequent guidelines strive to blend the
building character of the Neighborhood Commercial zone with the surrounding established
neighborhoods.
This area is characterized by small scale shopping facilities which are intended to provide a
range of goods and services that cater to the convenience needs of residents in the immedi-
ate neighborhood vicinity. The scale of development and the commercial uses permitted in
this district are not intended to be oriented to a community or regional need. Refer to Table
17.20.060 of the City's Zoning Code which contains the permitted uses within the G1 zone.
2. Building Setbacks
The following table indicates the minimum setbacks in the Neighborhood Commercial zone.
The front setback is consistent with the Commercial zone landscaping provisions in the
Moorpark Zoning Code: the side setback requirements are consistent with the R -1 zone
provisions but differ from the commercial zone landscaping provisions in the Moorpark
Zoning Code; while the rear setback is unique to the Downtown Specific Plan. (Refer to the
City Zoning Code for more detailed descriptions and exceptions).
BUILDING
SETBACK
Front
Minimum 20 feet
Side
Corner lot
Minimum 5 feet
Side
Interior lot adjacent to Residential zone
Minimum 5 feet
Interior lot
As specified by permit
Rear - Adjacent to Residential Zones
From property line
Minimum 15 feet
From alley
Minimum 3 feet
Rear - Adjacent to Commercial Zones
From property line or alley
As determined by
permit
3. Height
The maximum height for a Neighborhood Commercial structure shall be 35 feet and no
more than three stories high.
4. Building Maintenance and Renovation
Quality maintenance of existing buildings and parcels, combined with gradual
progression in meeting design goals for this land use designation are encouraged.
To this end, the maintenance guidelines and incentives outlined in Section 2.3.1 to
2.3.2 of the Downtown Specific Plan are encouraged.
B. The Design Guidelines and Landscape Guidelines contained in the Downtown
Specific Plan for this designation should be considered in conjunction with the
Vision Statement contained in Section 1.1 of the Downtown Specific Plan and the
site development standards contained in this chapter.
17,72.120 Commercial Planned Development (C -PD)
I. Land Use and Permitted Uses
Existing uses in these areas are the Metrolink rail station, a gas station and various small
developed commercial buildings. This district will continue to accommodate this mix of land
uses. Permitted uses in the CPD zone can be referenced in the City Zoning Code Table
17.020.060.
2. Building Setbacks
The following table indicates the minimum setbacks in the Commercial Planned Develop-
ment zone. The front and side setbacks are consistent with the R -1 zone provisions in the
Moorpark Zoning Code, while the rear is unique to the Downtown Specific Plan. (Refer to
the City Zoning Code for more detailed descriptions and exceptions).
.#
To be consistent
with Table 17.24.020.B
of Title 17 of
Municipal Code
I&
Corner lot Minimum 5 feet
side
Interior lot adjacent to Residential zone Minimum 5 feet
Interior lot As specified by permit
Rear - A 'acent to Residential Zones
From property line Minimum 15 feet
From alley Minimum 2 feet
Rear - Adjacent to Commercial Zones
From property line or alley As determined by
3. Height
The maximum height for a Commercial Planned Development structure shall be 35 feet
and no more than three stories high.
B. The Design Guidelines and Landscape Guidelines contained in the Downtown
Specific Plan for this designation should be considered in conjunction with the
Vision Statement contained in Section 1.1 of the Downtown Specific Plan and the
site development standards contained in this chapter.
17.72.130 Institutional (1)
MUM •.,,-, 6.1 ,..
I. Land Use and Permitted Uses
This area provides for the uses in the existing Civic Center, as well as other public facilities
which include: government buildings, libraries, fire stations, non - profit status organizations,
and community service oriented uses. Permitted uses in the I zone can be referenced in the
City Zoning Code Table 17.020.050 and 17.020.060.
2. Building Setbacks
The following table indicates the minimum setbacks in the Institutional zone. The front
and side setbacks are consistent with the R -1 zone provisions in the Moorpark Zoning Code,
while the rear is unique to the Downtown Specific Plan. (Refer to the City Zoning Code for
more detailed descriptions and exceptions).
Front
Minimum 20 feet from
Moorpark Avenue. As
determined by permit.
Corner lot Minimum 5 feet
aidt
Interior lot adjacent to Residential zone Minimum 5 feet
Interior lot As specified by permit
Rear - Adjacent to Residential Zones
From property line Minimum 15 feet
Rear - Adjacent to Commercial Zones
From property line or alley As determined by
Permit
BUILDING
SETBACK
Front
Consistent with Table
17.24.020.B of Title 17'
Side
Corner lot
Minimum 5 feet
Side
Interior lot adjacent to Residential zone
Minimum 5 feet
Interior lot
As specified by permit
Rear - Adjacent to Residential Zones
From property line
Minimum 15 feet
From alley
Minimum 2 feet
Rear - Adjacent to Commercial Zones
From property line or
alley. As determined by
permit
Requires 30 -foot landscaped setback from arterials and a 20 -foot landscaped setback
from two-lane local and rural collectors.
3. Height
The maximum height for an Industrial Park structure shall be 35 feet and no more than
three stories high.
4. Building Maintenance and Renovation
Quality maintenance of existing buildings and parcels, combined with gradual
progression in meeting design goals for this land use designation are encouraged.
To this end, the maintenance guidelines and incentives outlined in Section 2.3.1 to
2.3.2 of the Downtown Specific Plan are encouraged.
B. The Design Guidelines and Landscape Guidelines contained in the Downtown
Specific Plan for this designation should be considered in conjunction with the
Vision Statement contained in Section 1.1 of the Downtown Specific Plan and the
site development standards contained in this chapter.
3. Height
The maximum height for an Institutional structure shall be 35 feet and no more than three
stories high.
4. Building Maintenance and Renovation
Quality maintenance of existing buildings and parcels, combined with gradual
progression in meeting design goals for this land use designation are encouraged.
To this end, the maintenance guidelines and incentives outlined in Section 2.3.1 to
2.3.2 of the Downtown Specific Plan are encouraged.
B. The Design Guidelines and Landscape Guidelines contained in the Downtown
Specific Plan for this designation should be considered in conjunction with the
Vision Statement contained in Section 1.1 of the Downtown Specific Plan and the
site development standards contained in this chapter.
17.72.140 Industrial Park/Light Industry (M -1)
1. Land Use
The existing development in this zone, where it is adjacent to the railroad right -of -way is
characterized by a number of small industrial uses housed in a long narrow metal warehouse.
Due to the narrow lot dimension and its proximity between existing residential single family
homes and the railroad tracks, the lot has limited alternative use potential. Ultimately,
improved access could be provided through a connection to the westerly Metrolink parking
lot. In addition to the core planning area, light industrial uses are planned for in the area
east of Spring Road, between Los Angeles Avenue and the railroad tracks. This area is
characterized by an existing mixed light industrial complex fronting High Street east of Chuey's
restaurant. This district is intended to accommodate small scale, low traffic demand, clean
industrial service oriented uses which are compatible with adjoining commercial and resi-
dential areas. Permitted uses in the (M -1) zone as listed in the Moorpark Zoning Code
2. Building Setbacks
The following table indicates the minimum setbacks in the M -1 zone. The front and side
setbacks are consistent with the R -1 zone provisions in the Moorpark Zoning Ordinance,
while the rear is unique to the Downtown Specific Plan. (Refer to the City Zoning Ordi-
nance for more detailed descriptions and exceptions).
17.72.150 Lot Consolidation Incentive Program
In the High to Very High Density Residential areas of the Specific Plan, the density maxi-
mums have been designed to encourage lot consolidation and redevelopment of underdevel-
oped or declining property. The maximum permissible density for the High to Very High
Density Residential area ranges from 7 to 14 units to the acre.
Where a range for density is indicated (as in RPD 7 -14U) the 14 unit density maximum is
only obtainable when certain performance standards are met. The performance standards
are tied to desired land use patterns and character for the High Density Residential neigh-
borhoods. The density bonus is intended as an incentive to attain that desired neighbor-
hood characteristic. The potential resulting number of units per lot, in relation to lot size, is
illustrated on Table 6 (Density Threshold Comparison by Lot Size). Table 7 outlines the
performance standards that are required to achieve the desired maximum permitted den-
sity. The lot consolidation program is intended to encourage lot consolidation of multiple
parcels and does not promote small duplexes or inappropriately scaled two -story residences.
Hence, the performance criteria rewards additional density for the successful consolidation
of lots equal to 21,780 square feet at minimum. At such time as renovation occurs, the base
zoning of the parcel should be modified to reflect the appropriate earned increase in density
(e.g. RPD 7U to RPD 14U). The Department of Community Development will administer
this base density tracking. Further, Table 7 requires certain findings be made by the Plan-
ning Commission in order to permit the density increase. These findings are described on
the following page
Table 6
Table 7
DENSrfY
DESKiUMO
MAXMUM
DENW"-
PERFORMANCE CRITERIA `
RPD -7U
7 /acre
fvtustmeetdevelopment specifications of the Zoning Code
and Specific Plan
RPD -7 to 14 U '
7 /acre
Must meet development specifications of the Zoning Code
and Specific Plan
12/acre
21,000 square foot net minimum parcel sine
14 /acre
28,000 sqare foot, or greater, net minimum parcel size
RPD -14U
Must meet development specifications of the Zoning Code
and Specific Plan
Density Bonus
up to 18 /acre
Consistent with Chapter 17.64 of the Zoning Code, a 25%
densitybonus maybe added to the permitted base density
when a project qualifies on criteria associated with
lowherylow income or senior housing.
• Densitybeyond 7 dwelling units to the acre is permitted onlywhen one or more of the
performance standards associated with each densitycap has been met through project
design, and the Planning Commission makes the findings on the following page before approving
a project.
Findings for Increased Density up to 14 units to the acre:
1. The project is consistent with the spirit and intent of the City's General Plan and
Specific Plan goals and policies for the downtown.
2. The project is consistent with the combined development standards of the City's
Zoning Code and the Downtown Specific Plan.
3. The project has incorporated design measures which render the project compatible
with existing and planned surrounding land use and development.
4. The project would not be obnoxious or harmful, or impair the utility of the neighbor-
ing property or uses.
5. The project would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, conve-
nience or welfare.
6. The density increase beyond 7 units to the acre is supported by the project through
incorporating one or more of the design characteristics listed below which will result
in greater community benefit as circumscribed in the Downtown Specific Plan.
a. The project has a minimum lot size of 21,780 square feet or greater.
b. The project will significantly remodel /renovate an existing residential structure
that currently does not meet design standards established by the Specific Plan,
and will in turn incorporate physical building and site improvements that are
consistent with the design standards for the High to Very High Residential land
use designation within the Specific Plan.
7. The project has demonstrated the use of innovative site planning and has designed
the multiple units to be compatible with each other, the surrounding single family
residential neighborhood, and maintain an overall cohesive appearance.
Mitigation and Monitoring Program
ATTACHMENT 1
Mitigation and Monitoring Program
Pursuant to the requirement of A133180, the City of Moorpark Department of Community Development is obligated by statute to establish a program to monitor
project compliance with those mitigation measures adopted as conditions of project approval for the purpose of mitigating potentially significant environmental
effects. Monitoring program requirements and responsible party are identified in the following table and will be implemented as written.
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND SUMMARY OF POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
WHICH WITH MITIGATION MEASURES, REDUCE TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS
I RESOURCE IMPACT DESCRIPTION RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES RESIDUAL MONITORING PROGRAM I
PROJECT CONDITIONS EFFECT
Land Use Rezoning certain properties
Compatibility within the Plan area could
potentially create
incompatibilities between
adjacent uses both during
construction and long -term.
LU -1 -- High to Very High Density Residential construction:
The development standards and design guidelines contained
in Section 2.3.2 (for High to Very High Density Residential)
should be implemented relating to: A) Building Form and
Massing, B) Unit Articulation, C) Roof Form, D) Materials, E)
Windows, F) Front Doors and Garage Doors, G) Front
Porches, H) Garbage / Recycling Areas, 1) Mechanical
Equipment, J) Accessory Structures, K) Energy Efficiency, L)
Wall Articulation; and the Landscape Guidelines contained in
Section 2.2.3 relating to A) Planting, and B) Fences and
Walls.
Less than As properties develop in the Plan area, the Department of
significant. Community Development shall regulate and encourage
(review and approve) renovation and new construction plans
and permits to comply with the stated development
standards and design guidelines as prescribed by this
section of the Specific Plan. The Community Development
Department staff will be responsible for ensuring
compliance with the provisions of the Specific Plan.
LU -2 — Medium Density Residential construction: The Less than (See Monitoring Program for LU -1)
development standards and design guidelines contained in significant.
Section 2.2.3 (Medium Density Residential) should be
implemented for construction and landscaping design
mitigation between adjacent uses.
LU -3 — Office construction: The development standards and Less than (See Monitoring Program for LU -1)
design guidelines contained in Section 2.4.2 and Landscape significant.
Guidelines contained in Section 2.4.3 (Office) should be
implemented for construction and landscaping design
mitigation between adjacent uses.
LU-4 -- Old Town Commercial construction: The Less than (See Monitoring Program for LU -1)
development standards and design guidelines contained in significant.
Section 2.5.2 and Landscape Standards contained in Section
2.5.3 (Old Town Commercial) should be implemented for
construction and landscaping design mitigation between
adjacent uses.
LU -5 — Office Conversion - Charles Street: No conversion of Less than (See Monitoring Program for LU -1)
residential structures shall occur without first obtaining a significant.
Conditional Use Permit and demonstrating that neighborhood
compatibility issues have been resolved through project
design and /or operating conditions.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program — Page 1
. MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND SUMMARY OF POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
WHICH WITH MITIGATION MEASURES REDUCE TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS
RESOURCE IMPACT DESCRIPTION RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES RESIDUAL MONITORING PROGRAM
PROJECT CONDITIONS EFFECT
Conflict with Plan implementation could
AA =1 — Prior to project implementation, the City of Moorpark
Less than
Upon adoption of the Specific Plan and applicable
Agency Plans potentially result in conflicts
shall enter into a contract with the Ventura County
significant.
environmental documents, the City Redevelopment Agency
and Policies with adopted agencies
Transportation Commission (VCTC) to utilize portions of their
shall pursue obtaining formal approval from the VCTC (and if
environmental plans or policies.
right -of -way for landscaping and parking purposes.
necessary, Union Pacific Railroad) to use a portion of the
Compliance with all safety standards as required by the
railroad spur ROW for parking and landscaping. The City
VCTC shall be demonstrated at that time.
Redevelopment Agency Executive Director shall be
responsible for negotiations with the VCTC and seeking
written concurrence for the City's use of this ROW.
Incompatible Creation of a mixed -use zone
ILU-1 -- The site development standards, design guidelines,
Less than
(See Monitoring Program for LU -1)
Land Uses and applying special site
and landscape guidelines contained in each of the land use
significant.
development standards to the
areas described within the Specific Plan shall be applied at
prescribed land uses in the
the time that new development occurs.
Specific Plan could potentially
result in land use
incompatibilities.
ILU -2 -- An Administrative Use Permit shall be required for
Less than
The City Director of Community Development shall be
the construction of nonresidential structures or the
significant.
responsible for review, approval and landowner compliance
conversion of residential structures to nonresidential uses in
with the findings and conditions of individual Administrative
the mixed -use zone (C -OT). To approve such a use permit,
Use Permit(s) issued within the Old Town Commercial
the Director must make each of the following findings:
mixed -use zone. The Director or Department staff shall be
• The location, orientation, height, and mass of new
responsible for routing plans to Department personnel for
structures will not significantly affect privacy in nearby
comments, which shall then be incorporated into the project
residential areas.
design.
• The project's location or access arrangements will not
significantly direct traffic to use local streets in nearby
residential areas.
• The project shall include landscaping and yards that
adequately separate parking and pedestrian circulation
areas from sites in nearby residential areas.
Geology Earthwork, grading, building
G-1 -- All new development within the plan area, including
Less than
The Department of Community Development staff will be
renovation and new
both grading and building construction, shall be subject to the
significant.
responsible for ensuring that individual applicants meet
construction could potentially
City's Hillside Management Standards (Chapter 17.38 of the
and/or exceed the grading and building requirements of the
disturb established plant
Zoning Code) and UBC standards as adopted by Title 15 of
Municipal Code, emphasizing design to reduce project
communities, sensitive
the Moorpark Municipal Code.
grading to areas with the least impact on the site's natural
hillsides, and dramatically alter
conditions. The Public Works and Building Department staff
the site.
shall be the responsible parties for overseeing final design
and construction grading activities as a part of
building /construction permit issuance.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program — Page 2
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program — Page 3
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND SUMMARY OF POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT
IMPACTS
WHICH WITH MITIGATION MEASURES REDUCE TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS
RESOURCE IMPACT DESCRIPTION
RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES
RESIDUAL
MONITORING PROGRAM
PROJECT CONDITIONS
EFFECT
Drainage Earthwork and new
DD =1 -- All Prior to individual projects receiving construction
Less than
The Department of Community Development and
construction could potentially
entitlement (zoning clearances or building permits) each will
significant
Engineering staff will be responsible for ensuring that
increase storm drainage flows
be reviewed to determine project specific drainage
individual applicants meet and /or exceed State and
through the introduction of
improvements and any necessary fair share payment
Municipal Code requirements as they apply to deterring off
additional impervious surfaces.
towards cumulative drainage improvements that may be
site storm water runoff. Said review for impacts shall be
warranted for that project.
conducted in conjunction with any applicable zoning
clearances, environmental review and /or building permits.
Drainage Earthwork and new
construction could potentially
D New development shall comply with the requirements
of the Ventura Countywide Stormwater Quality Management
Less than
significant
The Department of Community Development and
Engineering staff will be responsible for ensuring that
increase storm water discharge
Program, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
individual applications are appropriately routed to
into surface waters and affect
(NPDES) Permit No. CAS063339, and any other NPDES
responsible permitting agencies in accordance with standard
water quality.
permit subsequently issued by the State of California.
interagency coordination practices as they apply to NPDES
permitting requirements
Air Quality Plan implementation could
AQ-1 -- The design measures contained in Chapter 3.0
Less than
The construction of public streetscape improvements, as set
violate an air quality standard
(Circulation and Streetscape Beautification) of the Specific
significant.
forth in the Plan, shall be overseen by the Department of
or contribute to an existing or
Plan shall be implemented.
Public Works. The Department staff will be responsible for
projected air quality violation.
ensuring that the project contractor, prior to contract
execution, can demonstrate the ability to employ emission
reduction measures on needed construction equipment. The
Department of Community Development will be responsible
for private property owner compliance with the development
standards and design guidelines of the Specific Plan.
AO-2 -- The design measures contained in Section 3.0
Less than
(See Monitoring Program for LU -1)
(Circulation and Streetscape Beautification) should be fully
significant.
implemented to maximize reduction of long -term air quality
impacts associated with normal build out of the Downtown
Specific Plan area.
Traffic Land use rezonings could
TT =1 -- The development standards and design features
Less than
The Redevelopment Agency shall be the lead City
result in increased vehicle trips,
contained in Chapter 3.0 (Circulation and Streetscape
significant.
Department responsible for continued progress toward
congestion and create
Beautification) shall be implemented to best aid in the
implementing (securing funding, overseeing design and
intersection levels of service
reduction of long -term projected traffic congestion issues
construction, etc.) the public streetscape design
that are not within the City's
within the downtown area.
improvements that should increase traffic flow and improve
performance objectives.
turning movements. Assistance from other City departments
(Public Works, Community Development, Building, etc.) shall
be solicited as needed. The Department of Community
Development should assertively pursue intersection
upgrades to key intersections to meet regional transportation
needs.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program — Page 3
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND SUMMARY OF POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
WHICH WITH MITIGATION MEASURES, REDUCE TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS
RESOURCE IMPACT DESCRIPTION
RECOMMENDED MITIGATION-MEASURES
RESIDUAL
MONITORING PROGRAM
local trash/recyclables hauling company for materials
. PROJECT CONDITIONS
EFFECT
to increase solid waste
Solid Waste New development within the
SWA — To the extent feasible, new construction and
Less than
The Department of Community Development and
downtown are has the potential
demolition projects shall be required to recycle their
significant
Engineering staff will be responsible for ensuring that
to increase solid waste
construction and demolition waste. Wood waste, if
construction materials. Said review for impacts and
individual applicants meet and /or exceed State and
generation and have
separated on -site, should be recycled by mulching and
recycling opportunities shall be conducted in conjunction
Municipal Code requirements as they apply to recycling of
cumulative solid waste disposal
chipping for use in landscaping, weed control, water
with any applicable zoning clearances, environmental review
construction materials. Said review for impacts and
impacts.
conservation, etc. Metals can be recycled through local
and/or building permits.
recycling opportunities shall be conducted in conjunction
_Q-1 — The California Pepper trees along High Street (County
hauling companies. Concrete, should be recycled into
The Department of Community Development and
with any applicable zoning clearances, environmental review
Landmark No. 72) shall be preserved, unless authorized for
aggregate for road beds, walkways, etc.. It the applicant
Engineering staff will be responsible for ensuring that the
and /or building permits.
removal in accordance with County and City
requires technical assistance they should contact the
trees are shown for retention and protection in conjunction
be preserved as a community
cultural /historical preservation standards.
Moorpark Solid Waste Department or Ventura County Solid
with public works and street improvement construction
resource.
Waste Management Department for solid waste reduction
drawings for the implementation of the Specific Plan.
information.
Solid Waste New development within the
SW-2 — To the extent feasible, projects shall recycle or
Less than
The Department of Community Development and
downtown are has the potential
reduce green waste collected from the project through
significant
Engineering staff will be responsible for ensuring that
to increase solid waste
xeriscaping, grasscycling, mulching or small -scale
individual applicants meet and/or exceed State and
generation and have
composting activities.
Municipal Code requirements as they apply to recycling of
cumulative solid waste disposal
construction materials. Said review for impacts and
impacts.
recycling opportunities shall be conducted in conjunction
with any applicable zoning clearances, environmental review
and/or building permits.
Solid Waste New development within the
SW -3 — To the extent feasible, projects shall arrange with a
Less than
The Department of Community Development and
downtown are has the potential
local trash/recyclables hauling company for materials
significant
Engineering staff will be responsible for ensuring that
to increase solid waste
collection or the applicant may arrange for self - hauling to an
individual applicants meet and /or exceed State and
generation and have
authorized facility which accepts recyclable materials.
Municipal Code requirements as they apply to recycling of
cumulative solid waste disposal
construction materials. Said review for impacts and
impacts.
recycling opportunities shall be conducted in conjunction
with any applicable zoning clearances, environmental review
and/or building permits.
Cultural The California Pepper Trees
_Q-1 — The California Pepper trees along High Street (County
Less than
The Department of Community Development and
along High Street are County
Landmark No. 72) shall be preserved, unless authorized for
significant
Engineering staff will be responsible for ensuring that the
Landmark No. 72 and should
removal in accordance with County and City
trees are shown for retention and protection in conjunction
be preserved as a community
cultural /historical preservation standards.
with public works and street improvement construction
resource.
drawings for the implementation of the Specific Plan.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program — Page 4
FINAL
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CITY OF MOORPARK
Downtown Specific Plan
Prepared for:
City of Moorpark
October 1998
Contents
Mitigated Negative Declaration
Response to Comments
Errata Summary Sheet — Corrections /Amendments to Project Documents
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Initial Study
Appendices
List of Figures
FIGURE 1:
Vicinity Map
FIGURE 2:
Specific Plan Area Boundaries (Primary)
FIGURE 3:
Secondary Planning Area Boundaries
FIGURE 4:
Specific Plan General Plan Amendment Sub Areas
FIGURE 5:
Specific Plan Zoning Map Amendment Sub Areas
FIGURE 6:
Secondary Planning Area General Plan and Zoning Designations
FIGURE 7:
Charles Street Office Overlay District
FIGURE 8:
Metrolink Station Parking and Landscaping Design
List of Tables
TABLE 1:
Projected Increase in Dwelling Units
TABLE 2:
Trip Generation Changes by Sub Area
List of Appendices
Appendix A: October 30, 1996 memorandum from VCTC Staff to LeeAnne Hagmaier
Appendix B: Distribution List
Appendix C: State Clearinghouse letter dated August 12, 1997
Appendix D: Notice of Determination
CITY OF MOORPARK
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
799 MOORPARK AVENUE
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA 93021
Mitigated Negative Declaration
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
1. Entitlement: Downtown Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 95 -1, General
Plan Amendment No. 97 -1, and Zone Change No. 97 -5.
2. Applicant: City of Moorpark
3. Proposal: Specific Plan for the City of Moorpark's Downtown Area.
4. Location: The downtown plan area is located in the center of the City
with High Street at its core. The plan area includes other
parts of the Old Town Moorpark, including the residential
neighborhood north of High Street, the railroad right -of-
way south of High Street, and the strip of land south along
Moorpark Avenue to Los Angeles Avenue. Main street
corridors covered within the Plan are the High Street
corridor, Spring Road, and the Moorpark Avenue corridor.
The planning extends to the east of Spring Road, between
Flinn Avenue and Los Angeles Avenue, bisected by the rail
road right -of -way. (See Figures 2 and 3 for planning area
boundaries).
5. Primary Landowners: Various private ownerships and public land owned by the
City of Moorpark, the Moorpark Unified School District,
and the Ventura County Transportation Commission.
6. Agencies with
Review Authori ty: State Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District
Ventura County Transportation Commission
City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency
7. Project Objective: The project is the adoption of a Specific Plan which would
reinforce revitalization efforts of the downtown area. The
Specific Plan contains a master land use and zoning plan, a
streetscape beautification program, pedestrian and traffic
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Mitigated Negative Declaration
circulation improvements, and specific design guidelines
and development standards which will guide future
development within the plan area.
8. Project Land Uses: Mixed general commercial, office, light industrial, single
family and multiple family residential, public /institutional
uses.
9. Existing Land Use
Designations: The existing designations within the Specific Plan
boundary include Neighborhood Commercial (C -1),
General Commercial (C -2), Light Industrial (I -1), Medium
Density Residential (M), High Density Residential (H),
Very High Density Residential (VH), and Public (P).
10. Existing Zoning Existing Zoning Districts within the Specific Plan area
include R -1, RPD, C -1, C -2, CPD, M -1, and M -2 Zones.
11. Permits and
Approvals: Adoption of the Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan, and
Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, General
Plan Amendment modifying land use designations, Zoning
Map Amendment modifying zoning district boundaries,
Zoning Chapter Text Amendment establishing Old Town
Commercial zoning standards, expansion of uses permitted
in the C -1 zone, and special development standards.
12. Jurisdiction: City of Moorpark.
13. Utilities and Services:
Electric: Southern California Edison Company
3589 Foothill Drive
Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
Telephone: Pacific Bell
2130 Ward Avenue, Room 124
Simi Valley, CA 93065
Natural Gas: Southern California Gas Company
North Coastal Division
977 Chambers Lane
Simi Valley, CA 93065
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Mitigated Negative Declaration 2
14.
I.
Water /Sewer: Ventura County Water Works District 1
7150 Walnut Canyon Road
Moorpark, CA 93021
Water: Calleguas Municipal Water District
2100 Olsen Road
Thousand Oaks, CA 91362
Oil: Shell Pipeline Corporation
PO Box 4848
Anaheim, CA 92803
Cable: TCI
2323 Teller Road
Newbury Park, CA 91320
Specific Plan
Consultant: RRM Design Group
3701 South Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS:
An initial study was conducted by the Community Development Department to evaluate
the potential effects of this project upon the environment. Based upon the findings
contained in the attached initial study, it has been determined that although the proposed
project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant
effect, in this case, because the mitigation measures described in the Mitigation
Monitoring Program have been added to the project.
II. PUBLIC REVIEW:
1. Public Notice: Publication of a notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the
area.
2. Document Posting Period: July 11, 1997 to August 11, 1997
Prepared by:
Meg Williamson
Principal Planner, RRM Design Group
Date:
Nelson E. Miller, AICP
Director of Community Development
Date:
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Mitigated Negative Declaration 3
Response to Comments
Responses to Comments
Mitigated Negative Declaration for
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan
SCH # 97071033
INTRODUCTION
This document serves as the Response to Comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration
prepared for the City of Moorpark's Downtown Specific Plan. This document contains all
information available in the public record related to the Mitigated Negative Declaration as of
Monday, August 11, 1997 and responds to comments in accordance with Section 15074 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
This Response to Comments document contains five sections. In addition to this Introduction,
these sections are Public Participation and Review, Summary of Comments received, Response
to Comments, and Summary of Errata to the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
The Public Participation section outlines the methods the City of Moorpark has used to provide
public review and solicit input on the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Summary of
Comments section contains those written comments received from agencies, groups,
organizations, and individuals as of Monday, August 11, 1997. The Response to Comments
section contains individual responses to each comment. The Errata to the Mitigated Negative
Declaration is provided to show corrections of errors and inconsistencies in the Draft Mitigated
Negative Declaration and/or the Mitigation Monitoring Program.
It is the intent of the City of Moorpark to include this document in the official public record
related to the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Based on the information contained in the public
record the decision - makers will be provided with an accurate and complete record of all
information related to the environmental consequences of the project.
H. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND REVIEW
The City of Moorpark notified all responsible and interested agencies and interested groups,
organizations, and individuals that a Mitigated Negative Declaration had been prepared for the
proposed project. The City also used several methods to solicit input during the review period
for the preparation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The following is a list of actions
taken during the preparation, distribution, and review of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
An official thirty- (30) day public review period for the Mitigated Negative Declaration was
established by the City in accordance with Section 15073 of the State's Guidelines to Implement
CEQA. The public review period began on Friday, July 11, 1997 and ended on Monday, August
11, 1997. Public comment letters were accepted by the City of Moorpark through Monday,
August 11, 1997.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 1
2. Notice of intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration was published in the Moorpark Star
on July 3, 1997. Upon request, copies of the document were distributed to agencies, groups,
organizations, and individuals.
3. On August 11, 1997, during the public comment period, a public hearing was held by the City
Planning Commission to facilitate the receipt of comments and to provide information to the
public on the proposed project. The public hearing was subsequently continued to August 28,
1997, September 8, 1997, and September 16, 1997 Planning Commission meetings.
4. A copy of the distribution list is attached (within the Appendices to Final Mitigated Negative
Declaration).
5. A copy of the August 11, 1997 letter from the Governor's Office of Planning and Research is
attached (within the Appendices to Final Mitigated Negative Declaration). That letter cites the
relevant noticing dates for the environmental document and acknowledges compliance with the
State Clearinghouse review requirements.
III. SUMMARY OF COMMENTS
Seven comment letters were received during the comment period and each comment raised in
those letters is responded to in the Section IV discussion. The written comments received are
summarized below.
Stephen Buswell, State Department of Transportation, District 7
July 21, 1997
2. Alex Sheydayi, County of Ventura Flood Control Department
July 24, 1997
3. Lori Rutter, Member Ad Hoc Citizens Advisory Committee for Draft
Downtown Specific Plan
July 31, 1997
4. Kim Hocking, Cultural Heritage Program Staff
August 4, 1997
5. Robert Brownie, County of Ventura Transportation Department
August 6, 1997
6. Sharon Reifer, Ventura County Solid Waste Management Department
August 8, 1997
7. Thomas Berg, County of Ventura Resource Management Agency
August 11, 1997
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 2
W. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
The Mitigated Negative Declaration was distributed to responsible agencies, interested groups,
organizations, and individuals. The report was made available for public review and comment
for a period of thirty days, in accordance with CEQA. The public review period for the
Mitigated Negative Declaration established by the City commenced on July 11, 1997.
Copies of all documents received as of August 11, 1997 are contained within this section of
discussion. Responses are presented for each comment raised and are correspondingly numbered
to each comment letter. Where a response to a comment resulted in modified text within the
body of the Mitigated Negative Declaration document or Downtown Specific Plan, the new text
and/or modified and additional mitigation measures are summarized in Section V — Errata to
Mitigated Negative Declaration.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 3
STAfE OF CALIFORNIA— BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY
PETE w(ISOti Gow
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OIStRICT 7. 120 SO SPRING ST.
LOS ANGELES. CA 90012.3606 ,
TOO (2131 897-6610
July 21. 1997 COMMENT NO. 1
DEBORAH TRAFFENSTEDT
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Re: IGR/CEQA #970725/NP
Mitigated Negative Declaration
Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan
City of htooraark
Ven. 118 - 17.49/023 -11.43
Dear Ms. Trai%nstedt:
C(I rn
11�
J
��Ta�,1,tT fit
c
2_1
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the above -named Specific Plan. The project land
uses are mixed general commercial, offices, light industrial, single family and multi - family residential,
and public /institutional buildings.
We have the following comments to text on pages listed below:
1) Page 145, Section 3.7, Fig. 13 - Caltrans Policy does not provide fdr decorative textured cross- A
walks bulbouts, and gateway signs on State highways.
2) Page 131 & 140 - Hwy. 23 was built to accommodate truck traffic. We cannot prohibit trucks B
on this roadway.
3) Page 135 - We have concerns about placing a raised median island on Hwy. 23 as it is a fixed C
object that can be hit by motorists. We would prefer a two -way left turn lane.
4) Page 139 - Lane widths should not be less than 12' on Hwy. 23. 1 D
If you have any questions regarding this response, please contact the undersigned at (213) 897 -4429 and
refer to our IGR/CEQA #970725/NP.
Sincerely,
Or+euhKA 311FI R By
STEPHEN J. BUSWELL
Program Manager
IGR/CEQA
cc: ✓ Chris Belsky
State Clearinghouse
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 4
Response No. 1
Stephen Buswell
State Department of Transportation
July 21, 1997
lA The referenced gateway signs are not intended to conflict with CalTrans right of
way policies or use. Any and all placement of physical improvements would need
to be coordinated through CalTrans as a responsible agency and encroachment
permits obtained as appropriate. The use of gateway improvements and signing
may need to be coordinated with private property owners in order to avoid
conflict with CalTrans policies. A clarifying statement has been added to section
3.7 of the Downtown Specific Plan to address this comment.
1B The stated goal within the Downtown Specific Plan to reroute truck traffic from
Highway 23 is consistent with the City's adopted General Plan Circulation
Element goals. The intent of the City's General Plan goal is to maintain
appropriate State routes and circulation needs, while minimizing heavy traffic
through the downtown core. The comment is acknowledged, but appears to be
internally consistent with City policies. Any future implementation of this truck
re- routing would need to be fully coordinated with CalTrans District 7, as they are
the responsible agency for the Highway 23 right of way.
IC The Planning Commission, as a result of their discussion at their public hearings,
modified the Downtown Specific Plan street sections to remove the raised median
planters. This modification addresses the CalTrans comment 1C regarding raised
medians, likely eliminating it as a concern.
1D This comment is acknowledged, and relevant text and/or cross sections have been
modified within the Downtown Specific Plan to clarify the medians within
Moorpark Avenue are a long term goal which would be pursued in the event that
a bypass route to highway 23 were ever constructed. In the short term, the 12 foot
travel lane width requirement can be accommodated since medians would not be
installed while Moorpark Avenue were designated as a State Highway.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 5
PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY
county of ventura
Representing Ex- officio:
lentura County Flood Control District
,Jentura County Waterworks Districts
No. 1 , 16. 17, and 19
-ake Sherwood Community Services District
^ox Canyon Groundwater Management Agency
July 24, 1997
City of Moorpark
ATTN.- Deborah S. Traffenstedt
799 Moorpark
Moorpark, CA 93021
COMMENT NO.2
RE: Comments to the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Draft Moorpark Specific Plan
Dear Ms. Traffenstedt:
Director
Arthur E. Gou e'
Deputy Directors
William B Sr t'
T•a ^scar•v
John C. Crowiey
Hater aeso -rces 3
Robert E Quinn
- -g,ree g se,.. -=
Paul W. Ruffin
Cervai Se,, _-
Alex Shheyday-
-ac
The Ventura County Flood Control District has reviewed the above referenced documents and offers
the following comments:
1. Negative Declaration, Page 25, Water, item c: Please add that new deYelopment would be
required to comply with the requirements of the Ventura Countywide Stormwater Quality Management A
Program, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) Permit No. CAS063339, and any
other NPDES permit issued by the State of California.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have further questions, please contact Kathy
Kefauver at (805) 654 -3942.
Very t yours,
x Sheydayi
Deputy Director of Public Works
Flood Control Department
cc: Kim Hocking, RMA
DIAN -rNSP.DOC
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan
A,
'1 �vN
JUL
L V
Response to Comments — Page 6
OQ 800 South Victoria Avenue. Ventura. CA 93009 -1600
Response No. 2
Alex Sheydayi
County of Ventura Flood Control Department
July 24, 1997
2A This comment is acknowledged and a mitigation measure has been added to the
Mitigation Monitoring Program which will require compliance with NPDES
Permit No. CAS063339.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 7
July 3 1, 1997
COMMENT NO.3
To: Deborah S. Traffenstedt. Senior Planner
Nelson Miller. Director of Community Development
Moorpark Planning Commission
Moorpark City Council
Fr: Lori Rutter
Member. Ad Hoc Citizens Advisory Committee for
Draft Downtown Specific Plan
Re: Comments on Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
Initial Study and Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan
I will keep my comments brief and referenced only to those matters where I have strong
disagreement or concern.
I. Land Use and Planning (p. 13)
I feel that the medium scale local- serving household uses, such as home furnishings, appliances.,
and hardware are either already adequately available (K -Mart is only a block or more away) or A
better served by a consistent C -OT zoning in this area. I feel that C -1 zoning is incompatible
with a busy thoroughfare and with the C -O zoning located across the street.
Area 14 (p. 14) - I do not wish to see CPD allowed uses on this site, such as car repair, car B
washes or gas stations. C -OT should be applied consistently here to keep only compatible uses
within the DSP area.
Secondary Planning Area (p. 15) - If you agree that residential density is desirable in the DSP
area, and that existing residential zones along Charles and Everetts Streets may not develop as
planned for, I would suggest that this area is very well suited to high density residential C
development given its proximity to the complexes adjacent to the south (WoodCreek "). I think
it's-ideal for senior housing or condominiums, and should be well - screened and landscaped as a
buffer from busy Spring Street and the railroad tracks.
Charles Street Office Overlay District (p. 16) - If I understand this proposal correctly, the
underlying RPD 7 -14DU zone would prevail and the overlay district would permit conditional
office uses. Would the owner of a future condominium on one of these sites also be permitted to D
apply for office use? I would rather see the City put their efforts into rehabilitating these Charles
Street residences, perhaps converting them into C -OT business uses, than creating office space
within an essentially residential area. If the inventory of offices is so low, then why not zone the
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 8
previous Secondary Planning Area (see above) for offices instead of C -OT''
II. Population and Housing (p. 21)
Does the proposal displace existing residents or housing. especially affordable housing''
No impact "? While the DSP may create a potential for additional housing density to occur. this E
is not sufficient mitigation for those who will most certainly be displaced,. Anticipation of a net
increase in the number of dwelllinc' units also does not mitigate their certain displacement. I
think the City should look more carefully at the needs of existing residents who will certainly
need affordable replacement housing!
III. Geologic Problems (p. 24)
I disagree that no unique geologic /physical features exist beyond the hillside area at the northern
portion- -there is a lovely canyon at Charles and Spring Streets where the Department of Fish and F
Game have found endangered anatcatchers. Is this property not within the DSP area? I believe
that it was initially when the Citizens Ad Hoc Committee reviewed it.
IV. Water (p. 25)
To say that there would be no increase in surface runoff, and that median planters may increase
the amount of pervious surface and improve runoff impacts is a ridiculous,Statement. What
about the extensive paving for the dozen or so new rear parking lots? This is not less than
significant. If you've ever seen the watering patterns for medians along Tierra Rejada, you G
would know that the runoff is significant and wasteful. All the more reason to consider my
suggestion not to pave the parking areas at the rear, but rather to finish the surface with crushed
rock or gravel (photo example supplied to the Council).
V. Air Quality (p. 27)
The City's own Circulation Element of the General Plan requires the implementation of alternate
systems of travel and specifically describes an equestrian trail network in conjunction with new
development in the northern area of town. I believe that the DSP should have included design H
elements for equestrian- oriented transportation via the property near Charles and Spring Streets.
Would the proposal expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
Less than significant impact' ?? Children are highly susceptible "receptors" to pollutants. To say
that the DSP design policies will mitigate the obvious effects of "normal growth- induced air
quality impacts" is unsubstantiated at best. You only have to look at reports of increased death I
rates due to respiratory causes to find these mitigation factors are wholly inadequate. Not to
k-uy or Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 9
mention that our Hillside Management Standards allow for the stripping bare or every inch of
native habitat. otherwise known as "gradina ". Air quality is not measured nor limited to the
DSP - -our air quality is impacted every time we approve a Carlsberg project, or a lvIessenQer
project. or SDI. etc.
VI. Transportation /Circulation (p. 29)
Will the proposal result in increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
The obvious flaw in these analyses is that projects approved and/or under construction will have ! `j
unintended impacts. Should we not consider the TMC's 1200 truck trips down SR 23 each day?
How congested will Moorpark Avenue be when the majority of parents arrive to drop off and
pick up their students at Casey Road School'? The Circulation and Streetscape Beautification K
Design measures are not reasonable responses. Reasonable people know this.
It was not the desire or recommendation of the Citizens Ad Hoc Downtown Advisory Committee
to have medians on High Street. Decorative paved crosswalks without pedestrian- activated
signals may be inducing a false sense of security (per Senior Deputy Tumbleson and Mary L
Lindley). Is there actual proof that sidewalk bulbouts actually improve pedestrian safety'? I
believe it's just the latest in street design that serves a very limited purpose and unnecessarilyAo
the cost of the downtown improvements.
The CAHDAC also did not endorse the DSP's proposal to close Magnolia Street and create a
promenade. It serves no important purpose and reduces cross traffic and circulation from three
streets to two, on an otherwise long thoroughfare with no southerly circulation.
The draft Downtown Specific Plan neglected to provide for the installation of any equestrian
access. This is an oversight that needs correction. Moorpark has many equestrian- oriented N
businesses and residents. access to a substantial County park on its northern border, and
professes to cherish its country roots.
VII. Biological Resources (p. 38)
Would the proposal result in impacts to endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats''
No impact! No known significant biological habitats. I wonder if the Department of Fish and
Game, which found the anatcatcher on the Morrison property, would agree that this bird's habitat
does not include any part of the DSP area?
X. Noise (p. 41)
Would the proposal result in increases in existing noise levels'?
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments —Page 10
Levels of 70 dBA are comparable to a vacuum cleaner operating four Meet away -- hardly possible
to have a conversation between two people standing 1 -20 feet apart! Trees. shrubberv, and P
landscaped medians are not efficient noise absorbers according to Gary Roller with the CHP.
And he also states that vehicular traffic noise levels can only be effectively measured at constant
rates of speed above 50 mph.
I believe that large delivery trucks will be the main source of increased noise pollution. I thi
the City needs to look very carefully at businesses which will generate substantial truck trips
the Hiah Street area and put very clear guidelines into place to mitigate their impact upon ne
residential uses. For example, in Sonoma, there is a truck delivery "zone" marked off in the
middle of the streets surrounding their plaza retail center (refer to photos provided by the
Citizens Committee). This would keep trucks out of public parking lots and away from
residences north and south of High Street.
XI. Public Services (p. 43)
Would the proposal result in a need for new or altered police protection'?
k
into
rby
`'Less than Significant Impact" response addresses only the current perception of policing and
ignores the obvious impact of increased business activity in the area. Retail areas are always
targets for crime, loitering. etc. In fact the Citizens Committee recommended relocating the
Police Resource Center back to the DSP area precisely because this area has been vulnerable in
the past and will certainly generate more of these same issues. Also, the DSP will add more
residential density to the area whichgdemand�reater police services.
ALAL AM
Would the proposal result in a need for new or altered schools?
Unfortunately, it is well- documented that impact fees paid for by new construction projects are
inadequate in the long term. It is essential that public service impacts generated by the DSP be
adequately accounted for long term. Communities can ill afford to deal with these fiscal issues
after the fact, and the trend of approving more and more massive projects to cover the City's
fiscal obligations (often leftover from some other ill- conceived project) will obviously ruin the
desirability of Moorpark.
Would this proposal result in new or altered maintenance of public facilities'?
Again, this analysis is ludicrous given the Mayor's announcement just this week that the City
will ask voters this Fall to approve Measure P, asking for additional park maintenance funding.
The Citizens Committee vetoed the medians plan for High Street in the DSP. I would think the
City of Moorpark should only consider additional plazas and/or pocket green areas that retain
their natural character (not manicured, sprinkled, etc.), thereby reducing maintenance costs by 10
X.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments —Page 11
R
S
T
XVI. Mandatory Findings of Significance (p.49)
Why is there no response to question "a".' Does the Department of Fish and Game's findings re: U
the anatcatcher affect the DSP proposal in any way" I think a yes or no answer should be
indicated.
XVIII. Reference List
Is the EIR for Moorpark Land Use and Circulation Element Update also dated 1991 '? I vas
under the impression from the recently completed General Plan Annual Report that these updates v
actually pre -date 1991.
With what specific authority, title, or knowledge does Senior Deputy Tumbleson speak to the
issues in the NI D? I think it is important to substantiate between his opinions and his expertise.
I feel that in many instances his comments are more opinion than expertise, and I have disagreed w
with him wholeheartedly on several issues in the past, unrelated to the DSP. In fact, the DSP
makes recommendations that I know he would personally take issue with (e.g. pedestrian "safe
crosses ").
Determination: I seem to find no clear choice as to whether an EIR will be prepared for the DSP. X
Five options are stated, and none indicated? Is this an oversight?
Additional remarks: The notice states that verbal or written comments must be received by 5:00
p.m. on August 11. yet the hearing doesn't take place until 7:00 p.m. This would seem to Y
preclude consideration of any public comments made verbally at the meeting -- true?
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 12
Response No. 3
Lori Rutter
Member, Ad Hoc Citizen's Advisory Committee for Draft Downtown Specific Plan
July 31, 1997
3A Comment is noted. C 1 zoning supports uses needed by the nearby residential
neighborhoods within the downtown core.
3B Comment is noted. Use of CPD zoning provides greater flexibility within the
plan area to design and implement developments compatible to the railroad which
abuts the site.
3C Comment is noted. The City's zoning standards for landscaping set backs will
require up to a 30 foot landscape buffer adjacent to Spring Street. Also, the final
Downtown Specific Plan designates parcels between Los Angeles Avenue and the
railroad track for light industrial uses.
3D The Planning Commission has recommended the elimination of the Charles Street
Office Overlay designation, keeping this area under its current designation for
residential use.
3E The greatest potential influence on conversion and/or displacement of residential
uses was the establishment of the Charles Street Office Overlay district. This
overlay would have conditionally permitted conversion of existing residences to
commercial office uses, thereby potentially displacing residents in those areas.
However, the inventory of housing was also expected to increase within the
Downtown Specific Plan area as a result of increased residential density through
land use and zoning modifications. The elimination of the Charles Street Office
Overlay district reduces the potential conversion of existing residences within the
Downtown Specific Plan area further than previously anticipated. This impact is
still considered to not be significant (no impact).
3F The comment refers to the existence of a canyon at Charles and Spring Street as it
relates to habitat area for a special status wildlife species (the gnatcatcher). This
area is a portion of Specific Plan No. 2, a residential specific plan. The
gnatcatcher issue will be studied as a portion of the Specific Plan No. 2 EIR. The
environmental checklist question "III -i" specifically relates to the geologic
formation of an area and whether there are unique features related to rock, mineral
and solid matter as it relates to the science of geology. The comment is noted.
However, the analysis contained in the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative
Declaration relating to this item appears sound and adequate in the context of
geologic impact.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 13
3G The analysis contained within the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative
Declaration compares the potential increase in impact resulting from design
treatments and material recommendations contained in the Downtown Specific
Plan as compared to normal build -out already anticipated within the downtown
area. As such, the conclusion that the decorative materials and treatments
recommended in the plan do not intensify anticipated drainage impacts for this
area would remain accurate. Mitigation Measure D -1 in the Mitigation
Monitoring Program requires each new project to obtain necessary permits from
the City in conjunction with development, at which time fair share payment
towards cumulative drainage impacts and/or project specific mitigations can be
implemented. This approach is consistent with City policy and the Downtown
Drainage Master Plan. The comment relating to impacts of drainage along Tierra
Rejada are noted, but not considered relevant to increased drainage as a result of
Specific Plan build -out.
3H The City's General Plan Circulation Element contains policies to encourage
equestrian facilities and trail connections where feasible in new development
(Goal 6 — Policies 6.1 through 6.3). Section 7.0 of the Circulation Element
contains the City's equestrian facility plan. Figure 4 of the Circulation Element,
shows the planned equestrian network for the City and does not contain planned
trails in close proximity to be logically accessed via the downtown. The closest
planned trail connection is from the north where a loop trail connects down from a
point south of C- Street, but does not appear to connect down to Charles or Spring
Streets as the comment suggests. The Downtown Specific Plan is consistent with
the cited equestrian sections and policies of the City's Circulation Element.
3I The discussion contained within the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
document is intended to analyze the incremental difference anticipated in air
quality impacts as a result of build out of the Downtown Specific Plan
improvements and land uses as opposed to existing planned for improvements and
land use patterns. The analysis acknowledges that there will already be impacts to
air quality (both short term and long term) as a result of normal urban in -fill
development within the downtown, even without implementing the Downtown
Specific Plan.
Commenter states that it is incorrect to say that the Downtown Specific Plan
design policies will mitigate the obvious effects of normal growth- induced
impacts to air quality. It should be clarified that the environmental analysis first
establishes that net air quality impacts are expected to be less than significant for
the Downtown Specific Plan. Therefore there is no expectation that the
Downtown Specific Plan mitigate air quality impacts which could occur should
the downtown develop without the Downtown Specific Plan in place. In the
context of net increases, the Downtown Specific Plan is not anticipated to
increase the existing cumulative impacts of urban growth within the City.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 14
3J Part of the commenter's comments deal with the extensive truck traffic on Walnut
Canyon/Moorpark Avenue. Should Specific Plan No. 2 (SP -2) be approved,
circulation of trucks would move from Walnut Canyon/Moorpark Avenue to
Spring Road. Route 23 would be realigned to fall upon the Spring Road
extension. This removes the conflict from the Casey Road School, Civic Center
area. It provides more direct routing for the trucks with fewer stops which aids to
reduce air impacts or noise generated by exhaust brake use. Long range planning
would have the 118 bypass completed from Princeton to Gabbert/Los Angeles.
Route 23 (Spring) would connect in SP -2 with the eventual removal of truck
traffic from Spring, Moorpark, Walnut Canyon Roads, except for strictly local
service.
In addition to the aforementioned long range planning and circulation potentials
within the downtown area, the existing patterns of development within the City
have been established through the General Plan process which, as required by
law, has undergone its own level of environmental scrutiny prior to its adoption.
The approach of the environmental analysis for the Downtown Specific Plan is to
quantify the incremental differences between trip generation rates established
within the existing General Plan build -out and the build -out anticipated with
implementation of the Downtown Specific Plan (net difference). This approach is
not considered flawed since the City's General Plan and Circulation Element were
reviewed and appropriately analyzed in previous environmental documents.
3K The comment relates to anticipated congestion associated with school generated
traffic. The recommended design elements for Moorpark Avenue contained
within the Downtown Specific Plan are not congestion inducing, but rather have
the ability to potentially improve traffic flow. Methods to improve traffic flows
include: consolidation of pedestrian crossings, better demarcation of turning and
stacking lanes, and reduction in the number of vehicular access points turning
onto Moorpark Avenue. There is no reduction in the number of travel lanes or
their widths. The recommendations for Moorpark Avenue improvements are
consistent with the City's Circulation Element.
3L Comment is noted. The Planning Commission has recommended that the raised
medians on High Street be removed from the Downtown Specific Plan.
The use of pedestrian bulb -outs at intersections can better delineate crossings for
pedestrians, potentially reducing mid- street crossing. There is no known
information that would indicate the bulb -outs are unsafe for pedestrians.
Additionally, it is acknowledged as the comment implies, that the design feature
does also have non - safety- related benefits, such as aesthetic opportunities.
3M Comment is noted.
3N Comment noted. The Downtown Specific Plan is consistent with the City's
Circulation Element and Equestrian Facility Plan.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan
Response to Comments —Page 15
30 This document was circulated to the State Department of Fish and Game through
the State Clearinghouse to provide opportunity to respond on the adequacy of the
document. No response was received from Fish and Game to indicate inadequacy
in the Downtown Specific Plan environmental analysis. It is doubtful that the
Downtown Specific Plan area contains proper habitat for the gnatcatcher.
It also should be noted that the Downtown Specific Plan document in and of itself
does not dictate that certain properties will be developed and to what extent or
level of intensity. Each property must be reviewed individually at the time new
development is proposed. It is through that development application process that
the City as the Lead Agency will conduct appropriate environmental analysis to
determine what levels of property - specific impacts there may be with a project.
3P Analysis contained in the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
document refers back to previous environmental analysis and policies contained
within the City's General Plan Noise Element. The environmental analysis for
the Downtown Specific Plan does not judge the appropriateness of what is
considered acceptable within the City's' noise element, rather, the environmental
document analyzes what changes might be expected as a result of the
implementation of the Downtown Specific Plan and whether those changes would
be considered significant. Based on the continued pattern of mixed uses within
the downtown area, as already anticipated within the City's General Plan, the
increase in noise levels was not found to be significant and therefore mitigation
measures not recommended. The comment on the adequacy of planting materials
as noise buffers is noted.
3Q Comment is noted. Commercial and service businesses rely on trucks for
delivery of goods. High Street is not a portion of the City - recognized truck route
system; therefore heavy duty hauling is not expected to occur on a regular basis.
3R The discussion on police services within the Initial Study and Negative
Declaration was based on discussions with police staff on both existing and
projected uses within the downtown project area. The projected increase in
business activity was not anticipated to create a negative impact to police services
(source: Ed Tumbleson verbal discussions). Additionally, the Downtown
Specific Plan would not preclude the relocation of the Police Resource Center
elsewhere within the Downtown Specific Plan area.
3S Comment is noted. The Plan contemplates slight increases in density in a portion
of the total area. Most of this density relates to a senior housing area in which
few, if any, children will be generated to create impacts.
3T Comment is noted. No parks are incorporated to the Downtown Specific Plan.
Financing of the public maintenance of landscape in the Central Business District
(CDB) area may be accomplished by a CDB Association.
catty of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 16
3U The comment challenges the "less than significant" conclusion for Initial Study
Checklist item XVI(a) — Mandatory Findings of Significance. The following
responses are offered for Section XVI:
(a) The project area is generally urban in character with areas of in -fill that
will need to be analyzed individually as development is proposed for
specific properties. While the project area may have isolated areas which
may contain wildlife and/or biological resources, the Specific Plan
framework in and of itself would not have the ability to degrade the
quality of the environment as it relates to biological and wildlife habitat.
(b) The project is consistent with the City of Moorpark's General Plan
policies and Zoning Code, and has the potential to implement some of
those stated General Plan policies. The project would not achieve short-
term goals at the disadvantage of long term goals.
(c) While it may be argued that impacts will occur with any new or changed
individual projects, the level of significance is expected to be less than
significant, or nil, beyond those anticipated from in -fill build -out under
current zoning standards. Therefore, the Downtown Specific Plan project,
when viewed in the context of its potential to generate net increases in
environmental impacts over those impacts already identified and
anticipated in conjunction with current General Plan build -out, is not
considered to have cumulatively significant impacts.
(d) While the project has the potential to create impacts relating to aesthetics,
noise, light, glare, etc... as a result of normal in -fill and build -out
development, the Downtown Specific Plan incorporates appropriate
mitigation measures in its general framework to lessen these impacts to
acceptable levels. The Downtown Specific Plan is a framework for future
development. At the time that individual properties apply for
development entitlements, there will be adequate opportunity to address
and mitigate site - specific environmental and human effects anticipated to
be potentially generated by this project.
3V The Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) prepared for the City's General
Plan Update was completed in 1992. The General Plan Land Use and Circulation
Elements were adopted by the City Council on May 13, 1992.
3W Comment is noted. The comment goes to the heart of the CEQA. The purpose
of any CEQA document, Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration or
EIR is to provide information related to the project from a variety of sources,
textual and personal. Well informed, trained professionals in all disciplines are
often used to provide data, information and evaluation of their area of expertise
whether it be biology, geology or police science. Since most Senior Deputies
have more than one community experience on which to form judgments, such
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 17
expertise/ opinion is reasonable to consider in preparing an Initial
Study/Environmental document.
3X The Initial Study prepared for the Downtown Specific Plan resulted in a
recommendation that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) would be the
appropriate environmental document for the project. The MND was subsequently
circulated for 30 days and notices of intent to adopt the MND were published in
accordance with CEQA requirements (see the introductory sections of this
response to comments document). This is a lead agency decision under CEQA.
3Y At the public hearing held on August 11, 1997 the Planning Commission
considered verbal comments on the Downtown Specific Plan as well as its
environmental document. The Commission also continued the public hearing to
subsequent meeting dates (listed earlier in this response document) allowing for
additional public input opportunities. The purpose of the hearing, as advertised,
was and is to receive comment relevant to all aspects of the project.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 18
COMMENT NO.4
August 4, 1997
TO: EIR Review Coordinator
FROM: Kim Hocking, Cultural Heritage Program Staff
SUBJECT. Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan ND, (97 -48)
Please note that the Pepper Trees along High Street are County Landmark No. 72. This is not A
noted In Section XIV, Cultural Resources. The trees are mentioned appropriately In Sec. VII,
Biological Resources, however.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan . Response to Comments — Page 19
Response No. 4
Kim Hocking
Cultural Heritage Program Staff
August 4, 1997
4A Comment is acknowledged. Mitigation Measure CR -1 has been added to the
Mitigation Monitoring Program to reflect the Pepper Trees along High Street as
County Landmark No. 72 and assure their protection as a cultural resource.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 20
PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
Traffic and Planning & Administration
MEMORANDUM
August 6, 1997
COMMENT NO.5
TO: Resource Management Agency, Planning Division
Attention: Kim Hocking
FROM: Robert B. Brownie, Principal Engineer �Q
SUBJECT: Review of Document 97-48
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Moorpark Downtown Drag Specific Plan
Within the City of MOORPARK
=_ -. - -
iQ. % !� : �. `I -- -
Aij J
The Transportation Department has reviewed the subject Initial Study and Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the Moorpark Downtown Draft Specific Plan. We offer the following comments:
1) We concur with the comments in the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for
those areas under the purview of the Transportation Department with the exception of
Section 3.4.5. Truck traffic should not be diverted to the County portion of Grimes Canyon A
Road. Grimes Canyon Road is a rural road. It is not recommended that significant volumes
of commercial or residential traffic be diverted to Grimes Canyon Road unless the City of
Moorpark is willing to participate in the cost of upgrading the road to current road standards.
Additionally, we again recommend that the City of Moorpark consider participation in a
reciprocal traffic agreement with the County.
2) The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration show that this project will not have a
significant adverse project impact on the County's Regional Road Network However, the B
cumulative impacts of this and other projects in the City have not been addressed and our
previous comments regarding a reciprocal traffic agreement are still valid.
3)* Our review of this project is limited to the impacts this project may have on the County's C
Regional Road Network.
Please call me at extension 2080 with questions.
c: Richard Herrera
Duane Flaten
Carole Trigg
RBHIRH/DU:sa
974E.mam
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 21
Response No. 5
Robert Brownie, Principal Engineer
County of Ventura Transportation Department
August 6, 1997
5A The Downtown Specific Plan section 3.4.5 states that "every measure should be
taken to relocate truck traffic from Moorpark Avenue." The section also suggests
potential alternative road routes that could be used for trucks. However, this
language is a guiding framework for future circulation patterns for the City to
pursue, and does not lock in a particular circulation approach. Diversion of truck
traffic through signing and other physical means would involve coordination with
appropriate responsible agencies affected by such a proposal.
5B Comment is noted. Implementation of the Downtown Specific Plan is not
expected to have resulting impacts on County streets, beyond those currently
experienced.
5C Comment is noted.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 22
COMMENT NO.6
county of vEntura �,
.h
Solid Waste Management Department <aoD
800 S. Victoria Avenue. Ventura, CA 93009 -1650 (805) 654 -2889 FAX (805) 648 -9233
KAY MART I r
Director
DATE: August 8, 1997 s'
TO: Deborah Traffenstedt, Scnior Planner, City of Moorpark _
FROM: �a on K. Reifer, Ventura County Solid Waste Management Department
SUBJECT: Review of Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration - Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan
Thank you for the opportunity to review the draft mitigated negative declaration prepared for the
Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan. The Solid Waste Management Department offers the
following comments for your review and consideration.
The draft Negative Declaration does not adequately provide information related to the amount of
waste generated from the proposed project, nor identify cumulative solid waste disposal impacts.
This information is relevant in judging the overall impact to regional landfills and compliance with
the provisions of the County's Source Reduction Recycling Element (SRRE) (pursuant to the
mandates of AB939, California Statutes of 1989). Taken from total building footage listed in
table 11 and 12 on page 149 of the specific plan, SWMD assumes the following square footage's
in order to calculate overall diversion tonnage.
89 Dwelling Units 3.304 persons/DU - Residential
High Street 209.000 - Commercial
Moorpark Avenue 100,700 - Commercial
24,150 - Office
8,000 - Institutional
Our solid waste project impact calculations (see attached) indicate that 1,544 tons per year will be
generated by the development of the proposed Downtown Specific Plan. In addition to conditins
provided on page 155 of the specific plan, it is recommended that the City of Moorpark also
incorporate the following conditions:
Require recycling to the extent feasible, construction and demolition waste. Wood waste, if
separated on -site, should be recycled by mulching and chipping for use in landscaping, weed
control, water conservation, etc. Metals can be recycled through local hauling companies.
Concrete, shall be recycled into aggregate for road beds, walkways, etc. If the applicant
requires technical assistance they should contact the Moorpark Solid Waste Department or
Ventura County Solid Waste Managment Department for solid waste reduction information.
0
2. Recycling or reducing green waste collected from the proposed project through xeriscaping,' C
arasscycling, mulching or small-scale composting activities.
3. Arranging with a local trash/recyclables hauling company for materials collection or the D
applicant may arrange for self- hauling to an authorized facility which accepts recyclable
materials.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this environmental document. Please call me at (805)
648 -9225 if you should have any questions.
c: Carole Trigg, PWA
Jill Myers, City of Moorpark
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 24
Response No. 6
Sharon Reifer
Ventura County Solid Waste Management Department
August 8, 1997
6A This comment on the lack of information related to the generation of solid waste from the
Specific Plan area is noted. The data provided by the County Solid Waste Management
Department is hereby incorporated into the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration. That
calculation indicates 1,544 tons per year to be generated by the potential additional
residential, commercial and industrial build -out within the Specific Plan area.
6B This recommended mitigation measure to require recycling to the extent feasible has been
incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Downtown Specific Plan
(SW -1). The City continues to be actively supportive and engaged in recycling
programs.
6C This recommended mitigation measure to reduce greenwaste through utilizing special
planting, mulching and recycling techniques to the extent feasible has been incorporated
into the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Downtown Specific Plan (SW -2).
6D This recommended mitigation measure to require the arrangement for hauling of trash
and recyclables to a local facility to the extent feasible has been incorporated into the
Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Downtown Specific Plan (SW -3).
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 25
COMMENT NO.7
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY
county of ventura rHOMASSERG
Agency Director
Monday, August 11, 1997
Deborah Traffenstedt
Moorpark
FAX 529 -8270
Subject: Downtown Specific Plan
Dear Ms. Traffenstedt:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject documents. These notices were A
circulated for review. The responses are attached. Please forward your reply to our
comments as appropriate.
Please call Kim Hocking if you have questions and he will direct you to the appropriate
person, 805- 654 -2414.
Yours truly,
Thomas Berg, Director
Reference No. 97 -48
cc: Trigg, PWA - L#1600
Attachment
Govemment C4W, lP* of AdpnisW=, L01 700
800 S. VKWda Ave., v eluo. t-,%bbCQ (OM 65442661 FAX 6489212
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 26
Response No. 7
Thomas Berg
County of Ventura Resource Management Agency
August 11, 1997
7A Comments received from the County of Ventura have been addressed within this
response document. Copies of responses will be forwarded as required by CEQA.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 27
V. ERRATA TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION / RELATED DOCUMENTS
The following changes to the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Initial Study Checklist, Mitigation
Monitoring Program and the Project Document (Downtown Specific Plan itself) are as noted
below. The changes to the above noted documents as they relate to issues contained within this
errata sheet do not affect the overall conclusions of the environmental document. The changes
are identified within the individual responses to comments, and are also summarized below.
Document
Summary of Correction
Reference
Mitigated Negative
As a point of clarification, the MND and Initial Study contain
Declaration and
references and analysis relating to "the Secondary Planning Area."
Initial Study
The Secondary Planning Area was generally the area to the east of
Spring Road on the south side of Los Angeles Avenue, and parcels
immediately east of Spring Road and south of the railroad tracks.
This area has since been fully incorporated into the boundary map
exhibits of the Downtown Specific Plan and the original text
references to the Secondary Planning Area within the Final
Downtown Specific Plan document have been eliminated. The
merging of the Secondary Planning Area with the main downtown
planning area boundary does not affect the content and integrity of
the Initial Study and MND document.
Specific Plan
Section 3.7 of the Downtown Specific Plan now contains
Document
additional text which references the need to coordinate all physical
improvements with Caltrans and private property owners, as
necessary.
Specific Plan
Chapter 3 (Circulation and Streetscape Beautification) has been
Document
modified to eliminate textual references to medians on High Street
and all High Street graphics and cross sections were modified to
eliminate the raised, planted medians. The raised medians in
Moorpark Avenue are shown as a long term goal with textual
notations that they would not be pursued until such time that a
bypass route to Highway 23 is established in coordination with
Caltrans.
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure D -2 has been added to the Mitigation
Monitoring Program
Monitoring Program to required new development to comply with
the County's NPDES Permit No. CAS063339.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Response to Comments — Page 28
Document
Summary of Correction
Reference
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure CR -1 has been added to the Mitigation
Monitoring Program
Monitoring Program to reflect the Pepper Trees along High Street
as County Landmark No. 72, requiring their protection.
Mitigation
Mitigation Measures SW -1, SW -2, and SW -3 have been added to
Monitoring Program
the Mitigation Monitoring Program to require recycling to the
extent feasible in conjunction with new construction and
demolition projects, as well as on -going business operations.
Response to Comments — Page 29
Miti ation and MonitorinLy Pro ram
Mitigation and Monitoring Program
Pursuant to the requirement of AB3180, the City of Moorpark Department of Community Development is obligated by statute to establish a program to monitor
project compliance with those mitigation measures adopted as conditions of project approval for the purpose of mitigating potentially significant environmental
effects. Monitoring program requirements and responsible party are identified in the following table and will be implemented as written.
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND SUMMARY OF POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
WHICH WITH MITIGATION MEASURES, REDUCE TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS
RESOURCE IMPACT DESCRIPTION
RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES
RESIDUAL
MONITORING PROGRAM
PROJECT CONDITIONS
EFFECT
Land Use Rezoning certain properties
LU-1 -- High to Very High Density Residential construction:
Less than
As properties develop in the Plan area, the Department of
Compatibility within the Plan area could
The development standards and design guidelines contained
significant.
Community Development shall regulate and encourage
potentially create
in Section 2.3.2 (for High to Very High Density Residential)
(review and approve) renovation and new construction plans
incompatibilities between
should be implemented relating to: A) Building Form and
and permits to comply with the stated development
adjacent uses both during
Massing, B) Unit Articulation, C) Roof Form, D) Materials, E)
standards and design guidelines as prescribed by this
construction and long -term.
Windows, F) Front Doors and Garage Doors, G) Front
section of the Specific Plan. The Community Development
Porches, H) Garbage / Recycling Areas, 1) Mechanical
Department staff will be responsible for ensuring
Equipment, J) Accessory Structures, K) Energy Efficiency, L)
compliance with the provisions of the Specific Plan.
Wall Articulation; and the Landscape Guidelines contained in
Section 2.2.3 relating to A) Planting, and B) Fences and
Walls.
L U-2 — Medium Density Residential construction: The
Less than
(See Monitoring Program for LU -1)
development standards and design guidelines contained in
significant.
Section 2.2.3 (Medium Density Residential) should be
implemented for construction and landscaping design
mitigation between adjacent uses.
LI , � — Office construction: The development standards and
Less than
(See Monitoring Program for LU -1)
design guidelines contained in Section 2.4.2 and Landscape
significant.
Guidelines contained in Section 2.4.3 (Office) should be
implemented for construction and landscaping design
mitigation between adjacent uses.
LU-4 -- Old Town Commercial construction: The
Less than
(See Monitoring Program for LU -1)
development standards and design guidelines contained in
significant.
Section 2.5.2 and Landscape Standards contained in Section
2.5.3 (Old Town Commercial) should be implemented for
construction and landscaping design mitigation between
adjacent uses.
LU-5 — Office Conversion - Charles Street: No conversion of
Less than
(See Monitoring Program for LU -1)
residential structures shall occur without first obtaining a
significant.
Conditional Use Permit and demonstrating that neighborhood
compatibility issues have been resolved through project
design and/or operating conditions.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program — Page 1
M MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND SUMMARY OF POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
WHICH WITH MITIGATION MEASURES REDUCE TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS
RESOURCE IMPACT DESCRIPTION RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES RESIDUAL MONITORING PROGRAM
Conflict with Plan implementation could &I — Prior to project implementation, the City of Moorpark Less than Upon adoption of the Specific Plan and applicable
Agency Plans potentially result in conflicts shall enter into a contract with the Ventura County significant. environmental documents, the City Redevelopment Agency
and Policies with adopted agencies Transportation Commission (VCTC) to utilize portions of their shall pursue obtaining formal approval from the VCTC (and if
environmental plans or policies. right -of -way for landscaping and parking purposes. necessary, Union Pacific Railroad) to use a portion of the
Compliance with all safety standards as required by the railroad spur ROW for parking and landscaping. The City
VCTC shall be demonstrated at that time. Redevelopment Agency Executive Director shall be
responsible for negotiations with the VCTC and seeking
written concurrence for the City's use of this ROW.
Incompatible Creation of a mixed -use zone
Land Uses and applying special site
development standards to the
prescribed land uses in the
Specific Plan could potentially
result in land use
incompatibilities.
Geoloav Earthwork, grading, building
renovation and new
construction could potentially
disturb established plant
communities, sensitive
hillsides, and dramatically alter
the site.
ILU_1 -- The site development standards, design guidelines, Less than (See Monitoring Program for LU -1)
and landscape guidelines contained in each of the land use significant.
areas described within the Specific Plan shall be applied at
the time that new development occurs.
ILU_2 -- An Administrative Use Permit shall be required for
the construction of nonresidential structures or the
conversion of residential structures to nonresidential uses in
the mixed -use zone (C -OT). To approve such a use permit,
the Director must make each of the following findings:
• The location, orientation, height, and mass of new
structures will not significantly affect privacy in nearby
residential areas.
• The project's location or access arrangements will not
significantly direct traffic to use local streets in nearby
residential areas.
• The project shall include landscaping and yards that
adequately separate parking and pedestrian circulation
areas from sites in nearby residential areas.
Less than The City Director of Community Development shall be
significant. responsible for review, approval and landowner compliance
with the findings and conditions of individual Administrative
Use Permit(s) issued within the Old Town Commercial
mixed -use zone. The Director or Department staff shall be
responsible for routing plans to Department personnel for
comments, which shall then be incorporated into the project
design.
G-1 -- All new development within the plan area, including Less than
both grading and building construction, shall be subject to the significant.
City's Hillside Management Standards (Chapter 17.38 of the
Zoning Code) and UBC standards as adopted by Title 15 of
the Moorpark Municipal Code.
The Department of Community Development staff will be
responsible for ensuring that individual applicants meet
and/or exceed the grading and building requirements of the
Municipal Code, emphasizing design to reduce project
grading to areas with the least impact on the site's natural
conditions. The Public Works and Building Department staff
shall be the responsible parties for overseeing final design
and construction grading activities as a part of
building/construction permit issuance.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program — Page 2
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program — Page 3
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND SUMMARY OF POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
WHICH WITH MITIGATION MEASURES REDUCE TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS
RESOURCE IMPACT DESCRIPTION
RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES
RESIDUAL
MONITORING PROGRAM
PROJECT CONDITIONS
EFFECT
Drainacie Earthwork and new
j- -- All Prior to individual projects receiving construction
Less than
The Department of Community Development and
construction could potentially
entitlement (zoning clearances or building permits) each will
significant
Engineering staff will be responsible for ensuring that
increase storm drainage flows
be reviewed to determine project specific drainage
individual applicants meet and/or exceed State and
through the introduction of
improvements and any necessary fair share payment
Municipal Code requirements as they apply to deterring off
additional impervious surfaces.
towards cumulative drainage improvements that may be
site storm water runoff. Said review for impacts shall be
warranted for that project.
conducted in conjunction with any applicable zoning
clearances, environmental review and/or building permits.
Drainage Earthwork and new
construction could potentially
- New development shall comply with the requirements
of the Ventura Countywide Stormwater Quality Management
Less than
significant
The Department of Community Development and
Engineering staff will be responsible for ensuring that
increase storm water discharge
Program, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
individual applications are appropriately routed to
into surface waters and affect
( NPDES) Permit No. CAS063339, and any other NPDES
responsible permitting agencies in accordance with standard
water quality.
permit subsequently issued by the State of California.
interagency coordination practices as they apply to NPDES
permitting requirements
Air Quali Plan implementation could
AQ-1 -- The design measures contained in Chapter 3.0
Less than
The construction of public streetscape improvements, as set
violate an air quality standard
(Circulation and Streetscape Beautification) of the Specific
significant.
forth in the Plan, shall be overseen by the Department of
or contribute to an existing or
Plan shall be implemented.
Public Works. The Department staff will be responsible for
projected air quality violation.
ensuring that the project contractor, prior to contract
execution, can demonstrate the ability to employ emission
reduction measures on needed construction equipment. The
Department of Community Development will be responsible
for private property owner compliance with the development
standards and design guidelines of the Specific Plan.
The design measures contained in Section 3.0
Less than
(See Monitoring Program for LU -1)
(Circulation and Streetscape Beautification) should be fully
significant.
implemented to maximize reduction of long -term air quality
impacts associated with normal build out of the Downtown
Specific Plan area.
Traffic Land use rezonings could
J-1 -- The development standards and design features
Less than
The Redevelopment Agency shall be the lead City
result in increased vehicle trips,
contained in Chapter 3.0 (Circulation and Streetscape
significant.
Department responsible for continued progress toward
congestion and create
Beautification) shall be implemented to best aid in the
implementing (securing funding, overseeing design and
intersection levels of service
reduction of long -term projected traffic congestion issues
construction, etc.) the public streetscape design
that are not within the City's
within the downtown area.
improvements that should increase traffic flow and improve
performance objectives.
turning movements. Assistance from other City departments
(Public Works, Community Development, Building, etc.) shall
be solicited as needed. The Department of Community
Development should assertively pursue intersection
upgrades to key intersections to meet regional transportation
needs.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program — Page 3
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND SUMMARY OF POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
WHICH WITH MITIGATION MEASURES, REDUCE TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS
RESOURCE IMPACT DESCRIPTION
RECOMMENDED MITIGATION-MEASURES
RESIDUAL
MONITORING PROGRAM
local trash/recyclables hauling company for materials
. PROJECT CONDITIONS
EFFECT
to increase solid waste
Solid Waste New development within the
SW-1 — To the extent feasible, new construction and
Less than
The Department of Community Development and
downtown are has the potential
demolition projects shall be required to recycle their
significant
Engineering staff will be responsible for ensuring that
to increase solid waste
construction and demolition waste. Wood waste, if
construction materials. Said review for impacts and
individual applicants meet and/or exceed State and
generation and have
separated on -site, should be recycled by mulching and
recycling opportunities shall be conducted in conjunction
Municipal Code requirements as they apply to recycling of
cumulative solid waste disposal
chipping for use in landscaping, weed control, water
with any applicable zoning clearances, environmental review
construction materials. Said review for impacts and
impacts.
conservation, etc. Metals can be recycled through local
and/or building permits.
recycling opportunities shall be conducted in conjunction
P-1 — The California Pepper trees along High Street (County
hauling companies. Concrete, should be recycled into
The Department of Community Development and
with any applicable zoning clearances, environmental review
Landmark No. 72) shall be preserved, unless authorized for
aggregate for road beds, walkways, etc.. It the applicant
Engineering staff will be responsible for ensuring that the
and/or building permits.
removal in accordance with County and City
requires technical assistance they should contact the
trees are shown for retention and protection in conjunction
be preserved as a community
cultural/historical preservation standards:
Moorpark Solid Waste Department or Ventura County Solid
with public works and street improvement construction
resource.
Waste Management Department for solid waste reduction
drawings for the implementation of the Specific Plan.
information.
Solid Waste New development within the
SW_2 — To the extent feasible, projects shall recycle or
Less than
The Department of Community Development and
downtown are has the potential
reduce green waste collected from the project through
significant
Engineering staff will be responsible for ensuring that
to increase solid waste
xeriscaping, grasscycling, mulching or small -scale
individual applicants meet and/or exceed State and
generation and have
composting activities.
Municipal Code requirements as they apply to recycling of
cumulative solid waste disposal
construction materials. Said review for impacts and
impacts.
recycling opportunities shall be conducted in conjunction
with any applicable zoning clearances, environmental review
and/or building permits.
Solid Waste New development within the
SW -3 — To the extent feasible, projects shall arrange with a
Less than
The Department of Community Development and
downtown are has the potential
local trash/recyclables hauling company for materials
significant
Engineering staff will be responsible for ensuring that
to increase solid waste
collection or the applicant may arrange for self - hauling to an
individual applicants meet and/or exceed State and
generation and have
authorized facility which accepts recyclable materials.
Municipal Code requirements as they apply to recycling of
cumulative solid waste disposal
construction materials. Said review for impacts and
impacts.
recycling opportunities shall be conducted in conjunction
with any applicable zoning clearances, environmental review
and/or building permits.
Cultural The California Pepper Trees
P-1 — The California Pepper trees along High Street (County
Less than
The Department of Community Development and
along High Street are County
Landmark No. 72) shall be preserved, unless authorized for
significant
Engineering staff will be responsible for ensuring that the
Landmark No. 72 and should
removal in accordance with County and City
trees are shown for retention and protection in conjunction
be preserved as a community
cultural/historical preservation standards:
with public works and street improvement construction
resource.
drawings for the implementation of the Specific Plan.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring Program — Page 4
Initial Study
An Initial Study/Environmental Concerns Checklist is the preliminary analysis that is
prepared by a Lead Agency to determine whether to prepare a Negative Declaration, EIR
or some other form of environmental document. In the case of the proposed project,
based on the data contained in the following Initial Study, the City of Moorpark has
determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration is the appropriate environmental
document for evaluating the impacts of the Downtown Specific Plan. As required by
CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, the Initial Study/Environmental Concerns Checklist
has been annotated to provide documentation of the factual basis for this finding.
Project Title: Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan
Date of Initial Study: July 2, 1997
Name of Applicant: City of Moorpark
Location of Project: The downtown plan area is located in the center of the City
limits and contains High Street at its core. The plan area
also includes other parts of the Old Town Moorpark,
including the residential neighborhood north of High Street,
the railroad right -of -way south of High Street, and the strip
of land south along Moorpark Avenue to Los Angeles
Avenue. The two main stteet corridors covered within the
Plan are the High Street corridor, and the Moorpark
Avenue corridor. A secondary planning area is located to
the east of Spring Road, between Flinn Avenue and Los
Angeles Avenue, bisected by the rail road right -of -way.
(See Figures 2 and 3 for planning area boundaries).
General Plan Designation: The existing designations within the Specific Plan
boundary include General Commercial, Neighborhood
Commercial, Commercial/Industrial Mix, Light Industrial,
Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential,
Office and Institutional.
Zoning: Existing Zoning Districts within the Specific Plan area
include C -1, C -2, CPD, R -1, R -2, RPD, C -O, M -1, and M -2
Zones.
Description of Project: A complete description of the Proposed Project is provided
in the Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan. This document
is hereby incorporated by reference. Portions of the
Specific Plan are subject to CEQA review and portions are
exempt, as described below.
Initial Study 1
Vicinity Map
To
Los Angeles
Fiaure 1
A. The Specific Plan Elements Exempt From Further CEOA Review:
The Specific Plan, shown in the exhibit provided in the Appendices, was developed
through a community participation effort that included resident and merchant surveys,
field observations, individual owner /group meetings /conversations, a market analysis,
and evaluation and incorporation of earlier studies (e.g. 1989 Downtown Study). In
addition to these efforts, a steering committee was formed and provided input, as well as
Planning Commission and City Council Study Sessions. This participation was designed
to ensure that the Specific Plan's ideas and visions for Moorpark's Downtown were
derived from the community and its residents. The intention was that the design
guidelines and policies would represent, as close as possible, consensus of opinion about
how Moorpark residents feel the Downtown should develop.
The Specific Plan contains the following components which are exempt from
consideration under CEQA (Section 15301 of the State's Guidelines to Implement
Initial Study
2
CEQA — existing facilities) because (1) these elements of the plan are explicitly designed
to guide the aesthetics of future development already anticipated within the City's
General Plan, (2) they will assure that the historic continuity is preserved, and (3) based
on the findings in the Initial Study, the effects of these elements of the Plan would be
beneficial rather than adverse:
Sections 2.0 through 3.8 —
• Site Development Standards
• Streetscape Beautification
• General Landscape Guidelines
• Building Renovation Guidelines
• New Development Design Guidelines
• Public Plazas
• Gateways and Signage
Section 5 (Implementation Measures) is also CEQA exempt because it would not be
defined as a project per Section 15378 of the State's Guidelines to Implement CEQA.
However, by its very nature, the Implementation Plan will assist in implementation of
CEQA mitigation requirements. The Implementation Section of the final adopted
Specific Plan will ultimately incorporate the mitigation measures proposed within the
Mitigated Negative Declaration document.
NOTE: It is important to stress that while there may not be unanimity of opinion about all
elements of the design program set forth by the consultants, controversy about these
issues are not CEQA concerns. Further, questions of economics related to property
values, implementation programs, and economic effects are similarly not within the
domain of CEQA review.
B. Elements of the Specific Plan Not Exempt from CEOA Review:
Portions of the project that are not CEQA exempt are those portions of the Specific Plan
with some potential to generate physical impacts on the natural or man-made
environment. These potential sources of impact include:
1. Land use designations and zoning district modifications
2. Circulation/streetscape improvements within right -of -way
(medians/bike paths)
3. Air quality changes resulting from project build -out
Each of these potential sources of impact are discussed in the Impact Analysis Section of
this document.
Initial Study
3
Description
of Project Site: The Downtown Specific Plan Area (primary) contains a mix of retail
and service commercial uses, offices, single and multi - family
residences, public institutional buildings and light industrial uses.
Moorpark Avenue is the main thoroughfare running north/south
through the project area, and High Street is the main street connection
running east/west between Moorpark Avenue and Spring Road. The
railroad tracks and right -of -way for the Metrolink rail system run
parallel to High Street, through the project core. A Secondary Planning
Area is located to the east of Spring Road, between Flinn Avenue and
Los Angeles Avenue, bisected by the rail road right -of -way. The
entire Specific Plan area is located within the City of Moorpark's
Redevelopment Area.
7` . -------
N
D 1
!1 t n
Applicable Properties -
Design Guidelines /Standards
_
Figure 2.
Specific Plan Study Area
Initial Study
4
Planned extension of rin
�.._ .._.,_., .........,,....� Spg Road
,
to the north
(See Figure 10)
i'
9 reef
-� f `, +-1 I
1rQ Cr'
1 r"..r -7C,4r
p M 1
1,
�I� S3r
L;
rb
J
I �,IR
Log Angeles Avenue
o �a;
Industrial t Industrial
Park
i 1
Park
F11M C
Multi- Family Residential
Legend
ar...r Specific Plan Boundary ?;;.. Secondary Planning Area
Figure 3.
Moorpark Secondary Planning Area
Note: In the Final Downtown Specific Plan the Secondary Planning Area
was merged into the primary Downtown Specific Planning area boundary
and this figure /exhibit was eliminated from that document.
Initial Study 5
I
TO
Highway 118
_
rr
c
/
,1
��'� .: ''
AEI.
}'.; �'�� •_ ',
-1�ui
_.� -
Hi -h St
_. _..__. .. rs - -��E S:�, �nIA:4�.•. -.. :.a
9 reef
-� f `, +-1 I
1rQ Cr'
1 r"..r -7C,4r
p M 1
1,
�I� S3r
L;
rb
J
I �,IR
Log Angeles Avenue
o �a;
Industrial t Industrial
Park
i 1
Park
F11M C
Multi- Family Residential
Legend
ar...r Specific Plan Boundary ?;;.. Secondary Planning Area
Figure 3.
Moorpark Secondary Planning Area
Note: In the Final Downtown Specific Plan the Secondary Planning Area
was merged into the primary Downtown Specific Planning area boundary
and this figure /exhibit was eliminated from that document.
Initial Study 5
Legend
ar...r Specific Plan Boundary ?;;.. Secondary Planning Area
Figure 3.
Moorpark Secondary Planning Area
Note: In the Final Downtown Specific Plan the Secondary Planning Area
was merged into the primary Downtown Specific Planning area boundary
and this figure /exhibit was eliminated from that document.
Initial Study 5
Surrounding Land Uses: Adjacent at the southeast quadrant of the Plan area is a
combination of single family and low density multiple
family residential parcels /development, as well as the
adjacent Flory Elementary School and the School District
Administrative Offices. At the southwest quadrant of the
Plan area, the adjacent uses are single family residences
and mixed commercial buildings in the Moorpark Towne
Center. Adjacent uses in the northwest portion of the Plan
area include school facilities/land, and developed and
underdeveloped residential parcels. Northeast of the Plan
area, the adjacent uses include single family residential, and
medium density single family land uses and development.
Adjacent to the secondary planning at its northwest
boundary is a gas station, auto service use and Chuey's
restaurant. Low density residential uses are to the north
and scattered rural structures and dry riverbed to the
northeast. To the southeast of the secondary planning area
is mixed industrial office, manufacturing and the Caltrans
storage yard. There are low density single family homes
and mixed service industrial users to the west, across
Spring Road. .
Other Responsible or
Trustee Agencies: Ventura County Air Pollution Control District
State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC)
City of Moorpark Redevelopment Agency (City Council)
GENERAL PLAN AND MUNICIPAL CODE CONSISTENCY:
Moorpark General Plan: The proposed Specific Plan is consistent with policies
within the General Plan related to downtown revitalization, visual character,
historic /small town preservation and corridor beautification. The Specific Plan
will modify land use designations as shown in the attached Figure 4. However,
many of these proposed changes are consistent with existing General Plan policies
and programs relating to Commercial Development, Economic Development and
Employment. (See Pages 20 -23 of the Specific Plan).
Moorpark Municipal Code: The Specific Plan sets forth development standards
and design guidelines which are, for the most part, consistent with the City
Zoning Code for existing districts. The Specific Plan will be modifying zoning
district boundaries as shown in the attached Figure 5. In addition to modifying
the Zoning Map district boundaries, the Specific Plan will be modifying the
Zoning Chapter Text to create the Old Town Commercial (C -OT) zone. This
district is intended to be a hybrid of the C -1 and C -2 districts, allowing for a range
of commercial uses already permitted in both zones, but allowing those which
Initial Study 6
more closely reflect the desired uses for downtown as represented in citizen
surveys and market analysis. Further, the Specific Plan proposes an expanded list
of allowable uses in the C -1 zone to accommodate uses identified for capture by
the Market Analysis.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors listed below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages:
Land Use and Planning
Transportation / Circulation
Air Quality
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (CHECKLIST):
The purpose of the checklist is to assist in determining potential environmental impacts
associated with project development. Questions are grouped into major environmental
issue categories. All answers take into account the whole action involved, including
offsite as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project - specific, impacts. The basic
response to each question is selected from four possibilities:
• Potentially Significant Impact - This response is appropriate if there is substantial
evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more Potentially Significant
Impact entries in the checklist, an EIR is required.
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated - This response applies
where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from
Potentially Significant Impact to a Less Than Significant Impact. If this response
is used, the mitigation measures must be described along with an explanation how
they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.
• Less Than Significant Impact — If the project will create an impact, but the impact is
so small that it is not considered to be significant, this response is used.
No impact — This response is used if the project will not have any effect related to the
question.
The following Sections I through XVI contain a listing of each potential impact area, a
discussion of the associated potential environmental effect, mitigation measures if
applicable, and a finding of the resulting level of environmental impact.
Initial Study 7
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a. Conflict with general plan designation or Zoning?
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated.
Response: The Specific Plan involves extensive revisiting of both the General
Plan Land Use and Zoning Designations within the Plan boundary. The proposed
plan modifications are described below and are cross referenced to the sub areas
illustrated in Figures 4 and 5. In addition to modifying the land use and zoning
designations, the Specific Plan will create a new land use /zoning district called
Old Town Commercial (C -OT). The potential impacts of the aforementioned
modifications and the associated necessary mitigation measures are described
below.
_,.•r, �.� �.. _..� „�..�,. �.._.._.._..
�L
LL
i
1 6 2 t 4` .1 r__( .
i
1 l0 7a 1 1
7
7 - 7 7
14
7 4
i
4
8 1
4
i
- -�•.I 4
nl.
7 $!
7 'f
14
I
717-77,
v
f
Legend
l Medium Density Residential to High -Very High
il
Density Residential
2 Medium Density Residential to Oti;ce
r✓ i
3 Very High Density Residential to High_ Very High
-
Density Residential
4 Neighborhood
Commercial to Office
t
i
j
S Neighborhood Commercial to General Commercial
6 General Commercial to Office
I_.:___, J}
7 General Commercial to Old Town Commercial
7a Medium Density Residential to Old Town
_
-�'
J y 142-
Commercial
8 General Commercial to Neighborhood Commercial
l0 General Commercial to Public
14 Light Industrial to Old Town Commercial
Flory
15 Light Industrial to General Commercial
School (
17 General Commercial to Parks
Specific Plan Boundary
Utq�l �� �tv�nw
_ Figure 4
Land Use Map Amendments
Initial Study g
NOTE: The City of Moorpark's General Plan Land Use and Zoning Maps are not
consistent in all cases. These base map differences result in inconsistent sub area
designations between Figures 4 and 5. (For example, sub area 7 on Figure 4 is
broken down into even smaller sub areas 11, 13 and 15 on Figure 5). The
following discussions are inclusive of both Figure 4 and 5 map exhibits, and their
referenced amendments. In the event that certain sub areas are not cross
referenced, Figure 5 (Zoning Map Amendments) is assumed as the appropriate
base reference.
rot
(7-14W -
�,
6 2 q 1 (7U)
1 (7U) 1 (7U)
7
� 9 7
7
7 7 0 i
a:
L.•�
High Street
13 11 IS 1'1 13
3
Is 13 14 _
7 10 � � ti..,.�_r„�.�•�tF-+;- C.
y !�
C
} �4FfL�r�jtG�r�G?�;[
_ 4 _ a,.•J iti.7tr'.�fr'LY_r�
o
o
Lly
r� 4r
fl
.€ Legend
�- 1 R -I and RPD -7U to RPD- 7U -14U
2 R -1 to C -O
3 R -2 to RPD -7U
EP
4 C -1 to C -O
5 C -1 to CPD
r' 1 6 C -2 to C -O
-�..r 4 T 7 C -2 to C -OT
! �! r —� 8 C -2 to C1
- U ! 9 C -2 to I
2 C� to CPD to C -O
i L 11 CPD to C -OT
! J 12 CPD to I
13 M -1 to C -OT
✓� ' School 14 M -I to CPD
5 ( 15 M -2 to C -OT
rUN..eee..Neel S ifiC Plan Boundary
Los Angeles Avenue
Fire 5
Zoning Map Amendments
Initial Study q
Area 1 (R -1 to RPD): This sub area covers approximately 13 acres within the
Specific Plan area and is spread out over a number of separate blocks. These are
parcels which currently have a Medium Density Residential designation of 4
dwelling units /acre and are proposed to be modified to a High to Very High
Density Residential designation allowing a range of 7 -14 dwelling units /acre.
The two density categories are RPD -7U (allowing only up to 7 du/acre) and RPD -
7 -14U (allowing a range between 7 -14 du/acre, with up to 14 du/acre only
permitted when specific development criteria are met, such as lot consolidation or
where there is redevelopment of existing structures).
There is an approximate 2 acre site, located east of Spring Road between Charles
and High Streets, which is already developed with multiple family apartments.
This site will receive the High to Very High Density Residential land use
designation, but its existing zoning of RPD -15U will not change. This parcel is
the only residential parcel in the Plan area with the RPD -15U zoning designation.
This designation is a result of the existing developed apartment complex and
density established for the site. There is no change in density for this site.
As shown in the chart below, if the underdeveloped parcels in these proposed
RPD areas were to all develop at their maximum permissible density, the potential
net dwelling unit increase (based on gross land square footage ) could be 89 units.
Because of the fractured ownership of these parcels, and the presence of existing
units on these lots, it is not likely that this maximum unit increase would be
realized. A more realistic projection would be between 65 -75 units ( +/- 80 %).
Table 1 — Tr. YT—!A
Density Change
Gross Land
Current
&A& ar n chill V 11111
Proposed
Dwelling Unit
Area
Permitted
Permitted
Increase
Dwelling Units
Dwelling Units
RPD7 to
90,000 s.f.
14 du
29 du
15 du
RPD 14
R -1 to RPD7
229,996 s.f.
21 du
37 du
16 du
R -1 to
250,862 s.f.
23 du
81 du
58 du
RPD7 -14
TOTAL
POTENTIAL
89 DU
INCREASE
The City's Housing and Land Use Element policies, referenced on page 22 of the
Specific Plan, support increased residential density and mixed housing product
types near commercial service uses, provided that the necessary service
infrastructure will be available to serve those dwellings. Based on information
contained in the Utility Services section of this checklist, there would be adequate
public services to service the build -out of proposed land uses within the Specific
Plan area.
Initial Study to
In addition to the ability to service these potential units, higher density residential
areas have historically located in the vicinity of downtown commercial services,
thus may be considered an appropriate use mix. This is tied to the ability for
residents to walk to services, especially in the case of elderly housing. If the
design standards set forth in the Specific Plan are implemented at the time of
future proposed development, issues of land use compatibility are expected to be
less than significant.
NOTE: The following sub areas are proposed changes to the existing land use
designation and/or base zoning. Modification to those base designations /zones
will require City Council approval of a General Plan Amendment and Rezone.
Area 2 (R -1 to C -O): This sub area includes three parcels on the northwest
corner of Walnut and Charles Streets. These properties are adjacent to parcels
which front on Moorpark Avenue which are presently commercially designated
and developed with housing, retail and office professional uses. The new Office
designation will provide for a natural transition between public institutional and
commercial designated properties to the west, and the medium density residential
uses in the Charles Street neighborhood to the east. Additionally, a new
designation of Old Town Commercial is proposed across Charles Street directly
to the south. This Office designation will promote gradual use changes that are
generally more compatible with residential uses than commercial uses. Based on
the character of the existing development on these parcels, the design standards
being proposed within the Specific Plan for the Office district, and the
relationship to Old Town Commercial zoned property to the south, no adverse
land use impacts are anticipated with this land use /zoning modification.
Area 3 (R -2 to RPD -7u) Those parcels east of Moorpark Avenue, between the
alley and Flory Avenue, and between 3`d Street and Los Angeles Avenue are
proposed to be modified from Very High Density Residential/R -2 to High to Very
High Density Residential/RPD7, allowing for up to 7 units /acre. These parcels
are already developed with two - family residential units on single parcels.
Therefore, the proposed land use and zoning modification is intended to eliminate
the only R -2 designation in the Specific Plan area and bring the land use
designation and density into conformation with other uses in the Specific Plan.
Since the density does not increase with this modification, no impact is
anticipated from this proposed modification.
Area 4 (R- 1 /C- 1 /C -2 /CPD to C -O)• There is currently a mix of residential, retail
and commercial service uses in this sub area. Under the current land use /zoning
designations, these parcels will potentially continue to develop in a broad
scattering of mixed commercial uses. The parcels have their frontage on
Moorpark Avenue (a well traveled commercial highway), but are also adjacent to
single and multiple family residential development across the alley at their eastern
boundary. The change of these parcels to an Office designation has the potential
to: a) result in a more compatible land use transition to the residential uses to the
initial Jtuay
11
east (based on the typical architectural scale and design for office uses and their
complementary hours of operation), b) encourage the redevelopment and
revitalization of the existing residences, and, c) provide a more cohesive pattern
of commercial development along this business corridor. As existing buildings
are reused/converted to offices, opportunity will occur for the new parking to be
accessed via the alleys, thereby minimizing driveways and creating an incentive
for driveway consolidation along Moorpark Avenue, consistent with Policy 2.5 of
the Circulation Element. No negative impacts are anticipated, and the
modification may have some positive impacts as noted.
Area 5 (C -1 to CPD): This area involves a change from C -1 (Neighborhood
Commercial) to CPD (Commercial Planned Development). There is an existing
small commercial development on this site. This land use change effectively
brings the property into conformance with the westerly CPD zoned and developed
site fronting Los Angeles Avenue. As such, the development pattern is not
expected to change as a result of the land use modification. No negative impacts
are anticipated.
Area 6 C -2 to C-0): Parcels fronting on the east side of Moorpark Avenue
between Everett and Charles Streets would change from a C -2 designation to an
Office designation. The Office land use designation will be adjacent to
institutional and civic uses to the west, high density residential to the north, low
density residential to the east and Old Town Commercial mixed use to the south.
The City's Fire Station No. 42 is located in between parcels in this sub area and
will retain its current I (Institutional) land use designation (the fire station site will
also be changed to I zoning and is discussed in Area 9 analysis). The C -O district
permits public /institutional uses via an Administrative Use Permit, potentially
allowing for other institutional uses in this or other C -O areas. The Fire Station
would not be considered incompatible with future office uses. The Office land
use and zoning designation will complement the civic and commercial uses while
providing for an appropriate buffer to the mixed residential uses. No negative
impacts are anticipated.
Area 7 (C -2 to C -OT): This area involves a change from C -2 (General
Commercial) to C -OT (Old Town Commercial). The C -2 district currently allows
for a broader range of land uses than the newly established C -OT category. The
main differences will be that gas stations, auto related services and other heavy
service commercial uses, would no longer be permitted. The main purpose and
intent of the C -OT district is to allow for a compatible mix of retail, service,
office, eating establishments, and entertainment in the downtown core. These
types of uses were identified as desirable targets by the Downtown Marketing
Analysis. Because the proposed land uses are similar in nature to those within the
existing C -2 zone, no negative land use impacts are anticipated.
Initial Study 12
Area 8 (C -2 to C -1): This area involves a change from C -2 (General Commercial)
to C -1 (Neighborhood Commercial). The main goal of this land use change is to
provide sufficient land inventory and promote medium scale neighborhood
serving uses adjacent to the downtown. This change limits some of the permitted
uses for this area. Uses no longer permitted by right in the C -1 district would be
bars, hotels and automobile repair work. Uses encouraged would be home
furnishings, appliances, hardware and other local serving household uses. The
City's land use inventory would still contain vacant and or under - utilized C -2 and
C -OT properties which could accommodate the more broad types of uses of those
zones, respectively. No negative land use impacts are anticipated.
Area 9 (C -2 to I): This area involves a change from C -2 (General Commercial)
to I (Institutional). These two areas contain a mix of public /civic and commercial
buildings, including the Fire Station No. 42. These properties are current owned
by the City of Moorpark. The City Hall, Library and Senior Center are located
directly to the north of the parcel on the west side of Moorpark Avenue. This
change is more consistent with the existing development character of the property
and promotes retaining civic uses in the downtown. The modification of the Fire
Station parcel to I will make the zoning consistent with the existing Institutional
land use designation. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated with this change of
use.
Area 10 (CPD to C -O): This area involves a change from CPD (Commercial
Planned Development) to C -O (Office Commercial). The CPD district permits a
wide range of land uses that would no longer be permitted if the zone were,
modified to C -O. The C -O district would mainly permit banks, business and
medical offices, along with some conditionally permitted uses such as churches
and daycare. The site is currently developed with an office use. Additionally,
this site is adjacent to single family residential uses to the east, where heavier
commercial uses would be less compatible than office. Therefore this
modification will bring the site into conformance with its base zone, and may
have future positive effects in terms of land use compatibility to the adjoining
residential neighborhood. No negative impacts are anticipated.
Area 11 (CPD to C -OT): This area involves a change from CPD (Commercial
Planned Development) to C -OT (Old Town Commercial). The CPD district
permits a wide range of land uses that are not all permitted within the C -OT
district (including gas stations, car washes and auto service repair). This area is
adjacent to properties which currently have M -1 and M -2 zoning but which are
also proposed to be modified to C -OT zoning. With both the south and north side
of High Street receiving Old Town Commercial zoning, the resulting land use
pattern will function like a "spine" for the envisioned revitalized character of the
downtown. Based on the similarities in the intensity of land uses permitted in
both the CPD and C -OT districts, no negative impacts to land use compatibility
are anticipated.
Initial Study
13
Area 12 (CPD to I): This area is proposed to be modified from CPD (Commercial
Planned Development ) to I (Institutional). This area, owned by the City, contains
a mix of existing public and civic buildings (City Hall, Library, Senior Center and
Public Park) which have established a defined public /institutional pattern for this
area. The existing General Plan land use designation is Public Institutional.
Based on this existing development and land use pattern and the existing General
Plan land use designation for public use, the Institutional designation is
appropriate for this sub area. No impact is anticipated with the modification.
Area 13 (M -1 to C -OT): This area involves a change from M -1 (Industrial Park)
to C -OT (Old Town Commercial). This parcel is also owned by the City. The
uses permitted within the proposed C -OT district will permit a wide range of
commercial retail and service uses than the industrial type uses that could
currently be established in this area. As is mentioned in the discussion of sub area
12, this property is an integral part of the downtown "spine" of Old Town
Commercial uses. As a currently undeveloped site, the potential development of
this area is essential to establishing a "gateway" into the Old Town Commercial
district. The modification to C -OT will increase the compatibility of this area in
the context of the future downtown vision for commercial revitalization. No
negative impacts are anticipated.
Area 14 M -1 to CPD): This area is proposed to be modified from M -1 (Industrial
Park) to CPD (Commercial Planned Development). The Ventura County
Transportation Commission's Metrolink Station and a large parking lot are
developed on this site. No change is anticipated in the current development
pattern as a result of the land use and zoning modification. The resulting zoning
will likely be more compatible with the anticipated pattern of future build out for
this site (parking and landscaping expansion) and the retail commercial uses in the
adjacent Old Town Commercial district. No impact is anticipated from this land
use change.
Area 15 (M -2 to C -OT): This area involves a change from M -2 (Limited
Industrial) to C -OT (Old Town Commerical). As is discussed in relation to sub
areas 12 and 14 above, the C -OT district is proposed to be applied to both the
north and south sides of High Street within the Specific Plan Area. This new Old
Town Commercial designation will be the "spine" for future downtown
commercial revitalization efforts. The modification of this area from industrially
oriented uses to retail and specialty commercial oriented uses will be consistent
with the projected land use pattern for the area. No negative impact is anticipated.
Area 17 (Light Industrial and General Commercial to a Parks Land Use
Designation): The City does not currently have a Parks zoning designation, but
permits parks within all districts. The Parks land use designation is proposed
along High Street consistent with the public plaza and green space vision design
proposed by the Specific Plan. The plaza area supports pedestrian oriented uses
within the downtown and provides a logical link to the Metrolink station, as well
Initial Study 14
as other surrounding businesses. No impacts are anticipated as a result of
establishing this Parks land use designation for this sub area.
Secondary Planning Area: This area involves a change from existing M -1
(Industrial Park) and M -2 (Limited Industrial) to C -OT (Old Town Commercial).
(See Figure 6, below). Similar to the discussion of sub areas 14 and 16 (above)
this area plays a part in the future pattern of the downtown core revitalization
efforts as a "gateway" to the downtown as one of the few large vacant properties
nearby the downtown. The land use modification to Old Town Commercial will
provide opportunity for uses to develop on this site which complement the
downtown core uses, while still remaining compatible with the developed
industrial park properties to the east, and developed commercial properties to the
north. The site is ample in size to incorporate landscaping and visual buffers
along Spring Road and result in future development which is compatible with
single family residential uses adjacent to the west. No negative land use impacts
are anticipated in conjunction with this proposed land use modification.
Planned extension of
— — — — —• •"' .�. Spring Road
t to the north
4
(See Figure 10)
..._ ..L - To
�' J .P •7 Highway 118
r /
:.+
1 Y,
1`' r
r —
rNigh Street -__ —_ •....... �t•�4l�R� ",
Industrial
t; Park
r?
C
i
�i
[AS Mg11.. Av.xtu•
initial atuay
Old Town Commercial
Industrial Industrial
Perk Park
H111
Mind- FanNly Residential
Legend
�••� Specific Plan Boundary
w
Industrial Park (M.1)
Old Town Commercial (OTC)
Figure 6.
Moorpark Secondary Planning Area Zoning
15
Charles Street Office Overlay District• This area is proposed to retain its primary
residential land use and zoning designation of High Density Multiple Family and
RPD (see Figure 7, below). The Office Overlay designation would allow for
property owners to apply for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to convert a
residential use to an office use. A CUP would be subject to Planning Commission
consideration through public hearings involving notification to surrounding land
owners. Consideration of the land use impacts of individual proposals would be
reviewed on a site specific basis at the time that CUP applications were filed.
Each applicant would have to demonstrate that land use compatibility issues were
adequately mitigated in order for the Planning Commission to make findings for
approval of the CUP. Based on the need for individual properties in this district
to obtain a CUP prior to conversion from residential to office use, and because at
such time that a CUP is considered separate land use compatibility findings will
need to be considered and made if a CUP is to be approved, no impact is
anticipated at this time.
(Source: 3,4)
Legend
_"' Specific Plan Boundary
Office Professional Overlay District,
allowing limited office uses
on onto R -PD Base Zone)
subject to Conditiorul Use Permit
(sec section 2.4.4 for requirements)
_� Lo• Anp�lu Av�nu�
Figure 7.
Charles Street Professional Office Overlay District
Initial Study 16
Land Use Compatibility Mitigation Measures:
LU -1 High to Very High Residential construction: The Design Guidelines contained in
Section 2.3.2 (for High to Very High Density Residential) should be implemented
relating to: A) Building Form and Massing, B) Unit Articulation, C) Roof Form,
D) Materials, E) Windows, F) Front Doors and Garage Doors, G) Front Porches,
H) Garbage / Recycling Areas, 1) Mechanical Equipment, J) Accessory
Structures, K) Energy Efficiency, L) Wall Articulation; and the Landscape
Guidelines contained in Section 2.2.3 relating to A) Planting, and B) Fences and
walls.
LU -2 Medium Density Residential construction: The Design Guidelines contained in
Section 2.2.2 and Landscape Guidelines contained in Section 2.2.3 (Medium
Density Residential) should be implemented for construction and landscaping
design mitigation between adjacent uses.
LU -3 Office construction: The Design Guidelines contained in Section 2.4.2 and
Landscape Guidelines contained in Section 2.4.3 (Office) should be implemented
for construction and landscaping design mitigation between adjacent uses.
LU -4 Old Town Commercial construction: The Design Guidelines contained in Section
2.5.2 and Landscape Guidelines contained in Section 2.5.3 (Old Town
Commercial) should be implemented for construction and landscaping design
mitigation between adjacent uses.
LU -5 Office Conversion — Charles Street: No conversion of residential structures shall
occur without first obtaining a Conditional Use Permit and demonstrating that
neighborhood compatibility issues have been resolved through project design
and/or operating conditions.
b. Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by
agencies with jurisdiction over the project?
Less than significant impact.
Response: The Metrolink rail system and station is a critical link in commuter
operations for the region. The Ventura County Transportation Commission
(VCTC) has jurisdiction over portions of the rail right -of -way which bisects the
project area. The Specific Plan proposes a Vision Plan for development on City -
owned property adjacent to the Metrolink station. This proposed site
development would include parking and landscaping adjacent to the spur line
which is within the VCTC owned portion of the rail right -of -way (See Figure 6).
The VCTC staff has verified that their safety design needs would require 8 -1 /2
feet of clear area from the center line of the spur line. The proposed Vision Plan
would provide for this required set back through 10 feet of landscape area. While
Initial Study 17
the Vision Design is acceptable in the context of VCTC planning standards, it
would be necessary for the City of Moorpark to enter into a contractual agreement
with the VCTC, prior to project construction, which would cover maintenance
and liability issues for this design. As currently designed, and with the
requirement for a contractual agreement between the City and VCTC prior to
project implementation, the impact of the project on the Metrolink rail system and
VCTC standards would be less than significant. (Source: 23)
State Highway 118 (Los Angeles Avenue) and State Highway 23 (Moorpark
Avenue) are within the State Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
jurisdiction. The proposed median and bikeway improvements will maintain the
existing two lane traffic flow on Moorpark Avenue and allow for continued
vehicle stacking and left turn movements (as shown in figure 13 of the Specific
Plan). Also, the Specific Plan site development policies call for consolidation of
driveways along Moorpark Avenue, which may result in potentially beneficial
impacts by enhancing traffic flow. Further, the City's General Plan discusses the
potential relocation of this State Route, which is dependent upon future growth
and development approvals in the northeastern portions of the City. This
relocation would have a beneficial effect on the long term aesthetics of the
downtown. No design modifications are proposed for Los Angeles Avenue. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the plan design and policies.
(Source: 3)
See Figure 8 on Page 19 for Metrolink Station Parking and Landscaping Design.
Initial Study
18
O
7C'
►r .
O
b
CIQ
a
ri
a
b
d
c�
as
Agency Mitigation Measures:
A -1 Prior to project implementation, the City of Moorpark shall enter into a contract
with the Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC) to utilize portions
of their right of way for landscaping and parking purposes. Compliance with all
safety standards as required by the VCTC shall be demonstrated at that time.
Initial Study 19
Be incompatible with existing or planned land use in the vicinity?
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated.
Response: As described in the response to I(a) above, the Specific Plan will
modify land use and zoning designations within the Plan's boundary. Some of
these land use modifications will eliminate spot zones and bring zoning into
compliance where existing developed uses/buildings are incompatible with their
current zoning designations (e.g. Area 3 shown on Figures 4 and 5). The Specific
Plan attempts to place land uses so as to create intrinsic design and use
compatibility. Examples of this would be the placement of an Office designation
as a transition between civic /commercial uses and residential uses, illustrated by
sub areas 2 and 6. The Specific Plan also contains design policies which will
guide the physical design of future uses and minimize compatibility issues to a
point of insignificance.
The Specific Plan will introduce the ability to have mixed land uses (residential as
a supplementary use to commercial) in the downtown area. The Specific Plan
limits such mixed use to second story units only (no side by side). These second
story units will function as either caretaker's units (accessory to the adjoining
commercial use) or as regular rental units. Based on the pattern of C -OT zoning
within the Specific Plan area, the likely concentration of future second story
dwelling units would be mainly along the High Street corridor. The second story
limitation avoids a hodge -podge pattern of residential and commercial uses at
street level, keeping building design/streetscape generally uniform and promoting
open, active storefronts along the street scene. The Plan also calls for any second
story residential use to obtain an Administrative Permit through the City of
Moorpark's Planning Director. Through the Administrative Permit process, the
director will determine conditions of approval that may be necessary, on a case by
case basis, to avoid land use compatibility conflicts. See also the response to
question VI(a) - Traffic Generation for further discussion. (Source: 3,4)
Incompatible Land Use Mitigation Measures:
ILU -1 The Site Planning, Design Guidelines and Landscape Standards contained in each
of the land use areas described within the Specific shall be applied at the time that
new development occurs.
ILU -2 An Administrative Use Permit shall be required for the construction of
nonresidential structures or the conversion of residential structures to non-
residential uses in the mixed -use zone (C -OT). To approve such a use permit, the
Director must make each of the following findings:
• The location, orientation, height, and mass of new structures will not
significantly affect privacy in nearby residential areas.
Initial Study
20
• The project's location or access arrangements will not significantly direct
traffic to use local streets in nearby residential areas,
The project shall include landscaping and yards that adequately separate
parking and pedestrian circulation areas from sites in nearby residential
areas.
d. Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils or
farmlands), convert agricultural land to nonagricultural use, andlor result
in an inadequate buffer between incompatible uses?
No impact.
Response: There are no agriculturally zoned parcels within the Specific Plan
boundary. There is an existing agricultural business (Eggs West) operating an
egg manufacturing and distribution business on High Street, adjacent to the rail
road. This agricultural business site operates under a month to month lease
agreement with the City, who owns the property. The site is proposed to receive
the Old Town Commercial land use and zoning designation. This new
designation will maintain the agricultural business as a permitted use, but
encourage the redevelopment of this site. Uses surrounding the business are
generally developed at this time. There are no anticipated problems with
incompatibility resulting from the Specific Plan land use modifications. (Source:
3,4)
e. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community
(including a low - income or minority community)?
No Impact.
Response: No displacement of residential dwellings/land uses would occur as a
result of this plan. The land use and zoning designations proposed would bring a
more balanced mix between residential and commercial uses, introducing more
uniformity to the downtown area and planning for a greater mix of uses that can
work together and complement each other. (Source 3,4)
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a. Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections?
No impact.
Response: As described in the response to I(a), the Specific Plan will modify the
land use and zoning designations for certain residential areas. While estimates
based on gross land acreage would allow for a net dwelling unit increase of 89
Initial Study
21
units , the resulting actual net change will likely be smaller (based on existing lot
line patterns and actual physical placement of existing buildings on lots). This
potential 89 unit increase would not be considered a significant impact in relation
to the 3,524 to 4,904 units projected to be developed in Specific Plan areas 1, 2, 8,
9 and 10 within the City (Pages 39 and 40 of the 1992 Land Use Element). The
resulting dwelling units could be considered a beneficial effect, consistent with
Goals and Policies of the Housing Element calling for preservation of existing
neighborhoods, rehabilitation of existing housing, providing for housing
opportunities for a greater segment of the community, and provision of housing
supply for low and moderate income housing needs. Further, the City's newly
created Housing Rehabilitation Program has participation from over 40 properties,
most of which are located in the residential neighborhoods in the Specific Plan
area. This indicates the likelihood that the downtown housing supply is
undergoing revitalization and that the downtown fulfills the City's requirement to
provide a balance of housing types. (Source: 3, 4, 24)
b. Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g.
through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major,
infrastructure ?
No impact.
Response: Areas proposed for changes in residential density are located adjacent
to existing sewer, water, street and storm drain infrastructure. All public services
are available within the Specific Plan area. (Source: 12, 15, 16, 22)
C. Displace existing residents or housing, especially affordable housing?
No impact.
Response: Some residential units may be converted to offices or residences
demolished and office buildings constructed as a result of expanding the Office
zoning within the Specific Plan area. However, the Specific Plan would also
create the potential for additional housing density to occur in the plan area.
Therefore, overall, a net increase is anticipated in the number of dwelling units
with a resulting potential beneficial effect on future development and availability
of affordable housing. (Source: 3)
III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to
potential impacts involving:
a. Fault rupture?
Less than significant.
Initial Study 22
Response: The General Plan Safety Element identifies that the nearest fault to
the downtown Specific Plan area is the Simi -Santa Rosa fault. This fault is
expected to produce a maximum credible earthquake magnitude of 6.9 (data from
AP Engineers Geotechnical Analysis and Report dated January 17, 1997). The
downtown area is located in Uniform Building Code (UBC) Seismic Zone 4. The
Specific Plan in and of itself will not have the ability to pose a seismic risk.
However, as individual projects build out within the Plan Area, they will be
subject to all Local, State and Federal regulations relating to building safety to
assure that any potential geologic impacts are mitigated. Few, if any,
unreinforced masonry buildings exist in the downtown. Thus an aggressive
seismic retrofit program is not necessary within the Specific Plan area. With
local health and safety ordinances in place, the potential for geologic impact is
less than significant. (Source: 3, 10)
b. Seismic ground shaking?
Less than significant.
Response: Refer to the response to question III (a) above.
C. Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
Less than Significant.
Response: Refer to the response to question III (a) above.
d. Seiche, tsunamic, or volcanic hazard?
Less than Significant.
Response: None of these potential hazards have been identified in the City of
Moorpark General Plan Safety Element. It is not anticipated that these hazards
exist in the Specific Plan boundary. (Source: 3, 10)
e. Landslides or mudflows?
Less than significant.
Response: No major landform modifications are anticipated as part of future
implementation of the Specific Plan. However, as development occurs in the
hillside areas at the northern portion of the plan area, new grading and
construction will be subject to the City's Hillside Management Standards
(Chapter 17.38) and UBC standards as adopted by Title 15 of the Moorpark
Municipal Code. At time of development, individual projects will be reviewed
based on the City's adopted hillside management development and grading
Initial Study
23
criteria. Mitigation measures will be implemented at time of development, as
appropriate, rendering this impact less than significant. (Source: 3, 10)
f. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading, and/or fill?
Less than significant.
Response: Refer to the response to question III (e) above.
g. Subsidence of the land?
Less than Significant.
Response: Refer to the response to question III (e) above.
h. Expansive soils?
Less than Significant.
Response: The City of Moorpark has adopted Uniform Building Code (UBC)
standards (Title 15 of the Municipal Code). At the time of individual parcel
development, it will be necessary for each project to meet all health and safety
requirements as mandated by those codes. Implementing required mitigation at
the time of development would reduce construction impacts to being less than
significant in their impact. (Source: 3, 10)
i. Unique geologic or physical features?
Less than Significant.
Response: No unique geologic or physical features are identified beyond the
hillside area at the northern portion of the plan area. Refer to the response to
question III (a) and III (h) above.
Geologic Mitigation Measures:
G -1 All new development within the plan area, including both grading and building
construction, shall be subject to the City's Hillside Management Standards
(Chapter 17.38 of the Zoning Code) and UBC standards as adopted by Title 15 of
the Moorpark Municipal Code.
Initial Study
24
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of
surface runoff?
Less than Significant.
Response: The City of Moorpark adopted a Master Storm Drainage Plan for its
downtown area in the 1980s. A Draft Gabbert and Walnut Canyon Channels
Flood Control Deficiency Study has also recently been completed. This study
describes required flood control improvements west of Walnut Canyon road and
Moorpark Avenue. The City continues to implement public projects identified
within the Downtown Drainage Master Plan, such as storm drain improvements
on Moorpark Avenue and Spring Road. Individual projects will be reviewed at
the time of entitlement and building permit process to determine project specific
drainage improvements and fair share payment for cumulative improvements.
The proposed Street Beautification Section of the Specific Plan proposes to utilize
alternative streetscape materials which are decorative in nature, but which would
have the same degree of impervious qualities as existing non - decorative materials.
Therefore, there would be no increase in surface runoff as a result of using
decorative streetscape materials as proposed in the Specific Plan. The addition of
median planters may in fact increase the amount of pervious surface and therefore
decrease (improve) runoff impacts. Detailed engineering and construction
documents would be necessary as part of project implementation. These plans
would be necessary to document that surface flow will be properly directed to an
appropriate drainage system. No significant impacts to drainage patterns or
surface runoff are anticipated. (Source: 16, 24)
b. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding?
Less than Significant.
Response: The Specific Plan in and of itself will not have the ability to pose a
flooding risk. However, as individual projects build out within the Plan Area,
they will be reviewed on a case by case basis in the context of all Local, State and
Federal regulations relating to drainage and flooding. With local health and
safety ordinances in place, the potential for flooding related hazard is not
anticipated as being significant. (Source 12)
C. Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality
(e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)?
No impact.
Initial Study
25
Response: The Specific Plan design standards do not conflict with adopted City
Master Plans. Therefore, implementation/build out occurring under the Specific
Plan is not anticipated to exceed planned for storm water quantities or quality that
are being properly discharged into approved drainage systems. (Source: 12)
d. Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body?
No Impact.
Response: The closest surface water flow is within the Arroyo Simi Channel to
the east and south east of the Specific Plan Area. No signficiant change in the
amount of surface water to this channel is anticipated as previously discussed in
responses to questions IV (a). (Source: 12)
e. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements?
No impact.
Response: Refer to the response to question IV (d) above. No change or impact
is anticipated.
f. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions
or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or
excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability?
Less than Significant.
Response: Changes in land uses are not being proposed which would
significantly affect water quantity demands. The Ventura County Water Works
District 1 and Calleguas Municipal Water district have the ability to service the
downtown area at its projected build out. No change in ground water quantities is
anticipated. (Source: 12)
g. Altered direction or rate of flow of ground water?
No Impact.
Response: The Specific Plan project will not modify ground water by drilling
wells or diverting underground resources. (Source: 12)
h. Impacts to groundwater quality?
No Impact.
Initial Study
F
Response: Any future proposed development of individual parcels /projects
within the Specific Plan area will have to go through a site specific entitlement
process and comply with all applicable health and safety standards as required by
the City of Moorpark, State Uniform codes and Environmental Protection
standards. No impact to groundwater quality is anticipated. (Source: 12)
Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available
for public water supplies?
Less than Significant.
Response: Refer to the response to question IV (f) above. No significant impact
is anticipated.
Location of project within a 100 -year flood hazard area as identified on
the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map
for the City of Moorpark?
No Impact.
Response: No portions of the Specific Plan area are located within the 100 year
flood hazard area as identified by FEMA maps. Portions of the project area
(primarily along Moorpark Avenue and a portion of Everett, Charles and High
Streets adjacent to Moorpark Avenue) are located in the 500 year flood hazard
,area. No flooding impact is anticipated with this project. (Source: 2)
Drainage Impact Mitigation Measures:
D -1 Prior to individual projects receiving construction entitlement (zoning clearances
or building permits) each will be reviewed to determine project specific drainage
improvements and any necessary fair share payment towards cumulative drainage
improvements that may be warranted for that project.
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a. Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected
air quality violation?
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated.
Response: There are no known air quality violations within the Specific Plan
area boundary. Under the current build -out scenario for the downtown (no
Specific Plan), there will be incremental changes in existing air quality. These
changes range from short term construction impacts to long term impacts
associated with traffic. Implementation of the Specific Plan will not result in a
net increase to traffic or air quality impacts (refer to the response to question V(e)
Initial Study 27
on traffic). Nevertheless, mitigation measures are recommended since any build -
out of the downtown has the potential to compound air quality problems, and the
Specific Plan provides an opportunity to realize positive benefits through its
design.
Design elements of the Specific Plan which could be expected to improve long
term air quality impacts for the area are: requirements for street planting,
landscaping (on public and private property), pedestrian oriented public
improvements, installation of bike path connections and enhancement of facilities
supporting alternative transportation methods. With the implementation of the
design measures contained in Chapter 3.0 (Circulation and Streetscape
Beautification) of the Specific Plan, impacts to air quality are anticipated to be
less than significant for anticipated build out of the downtown area. (Source: 7, 8)
Air ()uality Mitigation Measures:
AQ -1 The design measures contained in Chapter 3.0 (Circulation and Streetscape
Beautification) of the Specific Plan shall be implemented.
b. Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: There are two churches, a senior center and various civic buildings
located within the Specific Plan area. An elementary school site is located
directly adjacent to the plan boundary on the southeast side and a new elementary
school is planned on the northwest side. These are uses which will be subject to
the effect of normal growth induced air quality impacts. The Specific Plan land
use plan and design policies have the potential to induce beneficial impacts
through improved pedestrian linkages, street tree planting and beautification, bike
path connection improvements, and installation of support improvements for
alternative forms of transit (such as enhancement of the Metrolink station
accessibility /parking). These design features all have the potential to create
beneficial impacts to air quality. ( Sourc3: 7, 8 )
C. Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in
climate?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: By reason of the scale of the project area and the class and nature of
the uses permitted within the plan boundary, adoption and implementation of the
plan will not alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in
climate. There may be the potential of the project to have beneficial air quality
impacts as described in the response to question V (b) above. (Source: 7, 8)
Initial Study 28
d. Create objectionable odors?
No Impact.
Response: Objectionable odors are generally associated with major industrial
and agricultural uses. Based on the class of uses that will generally be permitted
within the plan boundary, no significant odor generation is expected to occur as
result of this project. (Source: 7, 8)
e. Result in a significant adverse air quality impact (based on the estimate
date of project completion), as identified in the Venture County Air
Pollution Control District's Guidelines for the Preparation of Air Quality
Impact Analyses?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: Based on the results contained in the response to question VI(a),
implementation of the Specific Plan is not anticipated to incrementally increase
trip generation/traffic within the downtown area beyond what has already been
planned for and anticipated in the City's General Plan. These findings, along with
the discussion and design feature mitigation contained in the response to question
V(a) would result in a less than significant impact. (Source: 7)
f. Result in a significant cumulative adverse air quality impact based on
inconsistency with the Ventura Coun Air Quality Management Plan?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: Refer to the response to question V(a) above. As individual projects
build out within the Specific Plan area, they will generate only short-term
construction related air emissions. No air emissions, beyond currently anticipated
and projected levels, are anticipated with implementation of the Specific Plan.
(Source: 8)
Air Quality Mitigation Measures:
AQ -2 The design features contained in Chapter 3.0 (Circulation and Streetscape
Beautification) should be fully implemented to maximize reduction of long term
air quality impacts associated with normal build out of the Downtown Specific
Plan area.
VI. TRANSPORTATION /CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in:
a. Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated.
Initial Study
29
Response: The proposed land use and zoning designation changes discussed in
section I(a) will affect traffic vehicle trip generation rates within the Specific Plan
Area. The calculated changes in trip generation are the incremental differences
between trip generation rates already anticipated with implementation of the
City's Land Use and Circulation Elements (without implementation of the
Downtown Specific Plan), and the proposed modified land use and zoning
designations depicted within the sub areas of the Specific Plan. The analysis
provided at this time is a more broad based land use and traffic generation
analysis. As individual properties within the Specific Plan area develop in the
future, those projects will need to be reviewed on a case by case basis to
determine their specific level of traffic impact and need for mitigation.
In some of the Specific Plan sub areas (depicted in Figure 5 - Zoning Map
Amendments) trip generation rates decrease, in others they increase. Table 2
summarizes the calculated Trip Generation changes by the Figure 5 sub areas.
The following discussion of traffic generation by sub area describes the
assumptions and methodology applied in calculating the trip generation changes
which have led to the conclusions of this section.
Sub Area 1: This area involves a range of change from medium density
residential (4 units to the acre) to high density residential (ranging from 7 -14 units
to the acre). One portion of this area is already designated as High Density
Residential, but the zoning is increasing from RPD -7U to RPD -14U. A total of
89 additional potential units is anticipated for this sub area. (A break down of the
additional potential units within sub area 1 is illustrated in Table 1 contained in
the response to question I(a), earlier in this document). Of these 89 additional
units, 69 units which are expected to be detached unit construction were
multiplied by the Residential — Medium Low trip generation rate established by
the City's Traffic Model (9.55 ADT /du). The remaining 20 units which are
expected to be attached apartment construction were multiplied by the Apartment
trip generation rate established by the City's Traffic Model (6.47 ADT /du).
These calculations would result in 788 increased residential average daily trips
(ADT).
Sub Area 2: This area involves a change from R -1 (Residential Single Family) to
C -O (Office). A resulting increase of 160 ADT could be realized based on
calculating the difference between the existing permitted residential density's
ADT and resulting office square footage's ADT (assuming a .25 Floor Area Ratio
for potential office square footage).
Sub Area 3: This area involves a change from R -2 to RPD (multiple family)
residential designation. Because this area is already developed with two- family
residential units, no change is anticipated to traffic generation.
Initial Study
30
Sub Area 4: This area involves a change from C -1 (Neighborhood Commercial)
to C -O (Commercial Office). The existing C -1 district allows for a much broader
range of land uses (including service stations and retail) than would be permitted
in C -O. A resulting decrease of 5,299 ADT is anticipated based on the following
two (2) assumptions: 1) 80 % of the building area within this district would not be
built/used as retail, but would instead be office square footage (saving 30 ADT
per 1,000 square feet of building); and, 2) two potential combined service
station/convenience store sites, of 2,500 square feet each, would instead be built
out as office area. NOTE: Sub Area 11 is included in these calculations.
Sub Area 5: This area involves a change from C -1 to CPD where there is already
an existing commercial development that is not anticipated to change. No change
is anticipated to traffic generation.
Sub Area 6: This area involves a change from C -2 (General Commercial) to C -O
(Commercial Office). The existing C -2 district allows for a much broader range of
land uses (including restaurants, service stations, retail and car washes) than
would be permitted in C -O. A resulting decrease of 250 ADT is anticipated
based on the assumption that 5,000 square feet of potential future restaurant
would instead be realized as office square footage (saving 80 ADT per 1,000
square feet of building).
Sub Area 7: This area involves a change from C -2 (General Commercial) to C-
OT (Old Town Commercial). The existing C -2 district allows for a broader range
of land uses than C -OT (including gas stations, auto repair and car washes). A
resulting decrease of 2,250 ADT is anticipated based on the assumption that two
combination convenience /service stations sites, of 1,500 square feet each, that
might potentially be permitted/constructed in this sub area would instead be
built/used as retail square footage.
Sub Area 8: This area involves a change from C -2 (General Commercial) to C -1
(Neighborhood Commercial). The existing C -2 district allows for a broader range
of land uses than C -1 (including bars, hotels and car washes). ). A resulting
decrease of 500 ADT is anticipated based on the assumption that 5,000 square
feet of potential tavern/nightclub area would instead be built/used as retail (a
difference of 100 ADT per 1,000 square feet of building area).
Sub Area 9: This area involves a change from C -2 (General Commercial) to I
(Institutional). This area contains a mix of public buildings that have established
the build out pattern for the area. No change is anticipated in trip generation.
Sub Area 10: This area involves a change from CPD (Commercial Planned
Development) to C -O (Commercial Office). This area was included in the
analysis for Sub Area 4.
Initial Study 31
Sub Area 11: This area involves a change from CPD (Commercial Planned
Development) to C -OT (Old Town Commercial). The CPD district permits a
wide range of land uses that are not all permitted within the C -OT district
(including gas stations, car washes, and auto repair). A resulting decrease of 750
ADT is anticipated for this area based on the assumption that 3,000 square feet of
building area that could potentially be built/used as car wash, would instead be
utilized as retail (saving 250 ADT per 1,000 square feet of building area).
Sub Area 12: This area involves a change from CPD (Commercial Planned
Development) to I (Institutional). This area contains a mix of public /civic
buildings that have established the build out pattern for the sub area (City Hall,
Library and Senior Center). No change is anticipated in trip generation.
Sub Area 13: This area involves a change from M -1 (Industrial Park) to C -OT
(Old Town Commercial). The -uses permitted within the proposed C -OT district
would permit uses that are higher traffic generators than within the M -1 zone. An
increase of 1,323 ADT is anticipated based on assumed build out scenarios for
each district as described below.
Existing ADT under M -1 zoning: A Floor Area Ration (FAR) of .38 was
applied to the gross square footage total of the sub area. Of that resulting 55,556
square feet of potential building area, a general mix of manufacturing,
warehousing and office was assumed. Based on a base ADT of 10 for general
manufacturing, a Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE) of 1.6 was applied to 80
percent of those 10 trips, to arrive at an ADT of 15. The PCE is a multiplier used
to compensate for the increased impact that a truck would have than a standard
passenger vehicle. This formula resulted in an estimated 833 existing ADT.
Projected ADT under C -OT zoning: A Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of .25 was
applied to the gross square footage of the total sub area. Of that resulting 36,550
square feet of potential building area, the following percentage of projected land
use build -out and usage was assumed: 50% Retail, 20% Office and 30%
Food/Restaurant related. This formula resulted in an estimated 2,156 ADT.
The existing and projected build -out scenarios noted above were compared as a
means of arriving at the net ADT increase figure of 1,323. NOTE: A potential
benefit of the use change for this area would be the anticipated reduction in truck
traffic on High Street.
Sub Area 14: This area involves a change from M -1 (Industrial Park) to CPD
(Commercial Planned Development). This is the location of the existing
Metrolink Station owned and operated by the Ventura County Transportation
Commission. No change in the development pattern for this area is expected as a
result of the land use modification. Therefore, no increase in traffic trip
generation is anticipated.
Initial Study
32
Sub Area 15: This area involves a change from M -2 (Limited Industrial) to C -OT
(Old Town Commercial). As discussed in sub area 14 above, the C -OT district
will permit uses that are greater traffic generators than those permitted in M -2.
Applying the same formula as was used for sub area 14 of this discussion, an
increase of 569 ADT is anticipated for this sub area.
Office Overlay: This overlay district would conditionally permit the conversion
of residential buildings for office use. Such conversion would be subject to
obtaining a Conditional Use Permit which is a discretionary permit considered by
the Planning Commission on a site specific basis. The number of potential
applications for conversion are undeterminable at this time. However, at such
time that an application is filed for office conversion, traffic generation and
impact to the neighborhood will be analyzed and appropriate mitigation measures
incorporated into the project before findings area made for an approval. No
change is anticipated at this time.
Secondary Planning Area: This area involves a change of existing M -2 (Limited
Industrial) to C -OT (Old Town Commercial). Applying the same scenario as
described in the discussion for areas 14 and 16 above, there is the potential for an
increase of 4,434 ADT for this sub area.
Second Story Dwelling Units: As illustrated in Table 10 of the Specific Plan,
209,000 square feet of single floor Old Town Commercial building area is
anticipated as potentially developable along the High Street corridor. Assuming
that the 209,000 square feet of maximum build out is realized for bottom story
commercial space, and that 80 percent of that commercial space then develops
with second story dwelling units (at an estimated density of 1 dwelling unit for
every 1,000 square feet of gross second story floor area) there is a potential for an
increase of 1,081 ADT as a result of second story dwelling units. NOTE: This
scenario includes both existing and new build -out square footage projections for
bottom story commercial within the C -OT district. The scenario assumes 80
percent of that total area will be two story, with the second story utilized for
dwellings
Initial Study 33
Table 2
Trip Generation Changes by Sub Area
-Planning Sub Area
Land Use Change
ADT Increase
ADT Decrease
R -1 to RPD
.
1
788
2
R -1 to C -O
160
3
R -2 to RPD
-
_
4
C -1 to C -O
5,299
5
C -1 to CPD
-
-
6
C -2 to C -O
250
7
C -2 to C -OT
2,250
8
C -2 to C -1
-
500
9
C -2 to I
-
-
10
CPD to C -O
See Area 4
' 11
CPD to C -OT
750
12
CPD to I
-
-
13
M -1 to C -OT
1,323
14
M -1 to CPD
-
_
15
M -2 to C -OT
569
Secondary Area
M -1/M -2 to C -OT
4,434
Second Story
Dwelling Units
C -OT Provisions
1,081
SUB TOTAL
8,355
9,049
Initial Study
34
Conclusion: As is summarized in Table 2, it is anticipated that the total
incremental trip generation changes for all sub areas combined will be a
decrease of 694 trips. While some sub areas may experience increased traffic,
other sub areas are anticipated to decrease. The net effect on vehicular trip
generation from the proposed land use changes within the Specific Plan appear to
be negligible, if not beneficial. However, future traffic within the downtown area,
based on current build -out scenarios (without implementation of the Specific
Plan) is anticipated to result in congestion and related traffic and air quality
effects. As discussed in the response to question VI(b) below, it is recommended
that the Circulation and Streetscape Beautification Design measures contained in
Chapter 3 of the Specific Plan be implemented since those measures will have the
potential to create a positive impact to traffic generation and traffic pattern
changes. (Source: 1, 2, 3, 5, 9, 11)
b. An intersection level of-service less than the City's system performance
objective?
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated.
Response: As discussed in the conclusion to the response to question VI(a)
implementation of the Specific Plan is not anticipated to incrementally increase
traffic generation within the downtown area to a point of significance.
Additionally, design measures are proposed within the Circulation chapter of the
Specific Plan which are expected to improve the flow of traffic along Moorpark
Avenue and High Streets. Therefore, a short term impact to intersection level of
service is not anticipated with implementation of this project.
However, based on the City's Traffic Model, certain street systems within or near
the downtown area (Moorpark Avenue at Los Angeles Avenue and Spring Road
at Los Angeles Avenue) are already projected to perform at level of service D &
E (respectively) during peak hour trips in the year 2005. Implementation of the
design measures contained within Chapter 3 (Circulation and Street
Beautification) of the Specific Plan will have a potential positive impact on
improving projected intersection levels of service in the long term. Examples of
these positive effects would be improvement to traffic flow efficiency resulting
from: a) better demarcation and signing of certain intersections, b) consolidated
pedestrian crossings to minimize breaks in traffic flow, c) re- striping of streets
and better demarcation of turning and stacking lanes without reduction in travel
lanes widths or numbers of travel lanes, and d) consolidation of vehicular access
points on Moorpark Avenue.
While the trip generation calculations would indicate that the project would not
have a significant impact on traffic generation or create additional congestion, it is
nevertheless important to incorporate design measures that best aid in the
reduction of existing and future projected downtown traffic flows. Therefore, it is
recommended that the design features contained in Chapter 3.0 (Circulation and
Initial Study 35
Streetscape Beautification) be fully implemented to improve traffic flows to the
greatest degree possible. (Source: 1, 3, 4, 5, 9, 11)
Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous
intersection) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: The design standards and vision plan contained in the Specific Plan
will create potentially beneficial impacts to public street/circulation design. The
Specific Plan calls for installation of decorative paved crosswalks that will better
delineate pedestrian crossings. Raised landscaping medians are proposed within
Moorpark Avenue and High Street which will contribute towards traffic calming
without interrupting normal traffic flow. The Specific Plan calls for the
intersections at Moorpark Avenue and High Street, Walnut and High Streets, and
Bard and High Streets, to be designed with "safe crosses." These safe crosses are
places where the corner radius of the sidewalk is exaggerated in size (bulbed out)
to reduce the distance in pedestrian crossing. These safe crosses are designed so
as not to inhibit traffic turning movement or flow, while improving pedestrian
safety. No adverse impact to traffic is anticipated based on the public
improvements proposed as part of the Specific Plan standards. (Source: 1, 3, 4, 5)
d. Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: The Specific Plan proposes to close Magnolia Street to through
vehicular traffic and convert this area to a pedestrian plaza. Magnolia Street is
one of five north/south connecting streets between Charles Street and High Street
within the Specific Plan boundary. The existing linear distance between the
Spring Road and Magnolia Street intersections is 920 feet (from right of way
centerlines). If the closure occurs, the intersection distance would be increased by
460 feet, making Bard Street the closest intersection north of Spring Road. There
is only one commercial business which takes its direct access from Magnolia
Street (a small restaurant). Pedestrian access is accommodated within the plaza
design for this commercial use, with parking available on street. Vehicular
access, including emergency vehicle access remains uninhibited along High and
Charles Streets. The closure of Magnolia for this length between High and
Charles Street is not anticipated to be a significant impact. (Source: 1, 3)
e. Insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: Section 3.8 of the Specific Plan is dedicated to the analysis of parking
adequacy within the downtown area. In this analysis, the inventory of existing
Initial Study
36
available parking was compared to the existing and potential build -out within
commercial areas. The study concluded that existing parking ratios for off street
parking were adequate to meeting existing needs, but that future commercial uses
would need to off -set their individual parking impacts as currently called for in
the Moorpark Zoning Code. As a proactive measure to future parking needs, the
Specific Plan includes a Parking Management Plan which focuses on
development of additional public parking in the future and other alternatives to
project- specific off - street parking. Based in the findings of the Specific Plan
parking study and the off - street parking requirements contained in the Moorpark
Zoning Code, impacts to existing and future parking capacity are considered less
than significant. (Source: 4)
f. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclist?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: As discussed in the response to question VI (c.), the Specific Plan will
likely result in beneficial impacts to pedestrian and bicycle travel. The specific
Plan includes provisions for the installation of decorative cross walks, safe
crossing design at major intersections, class II bike path connections consistent
with the Moorpark Circulation Element, landscape parkways to separate and
protect pedestrians from vehicular traffic, and pedestrian scale park plazas with
walking connnections. These measures are expected to enhance pedestrian and
cyclist travel without any negative impact. (Source: 1, 3, 4,)
g. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g.
bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: The City's Circulation Element contains policies 4.2, 5.2 and 5.6
which all encourage improvements which support alternative forms of transit
(bus, train, bicycle and pedestrian). The Specific Plan is consistent with these
policies in that the vision plans call for the installation of 5 new bike racks and 36
new public benches adjacent to High Street, within the Magnolia Court plaza and
the High Street plaza. A vision design is also provided for enhanced parking and
landscaping adjacent to the Metrolink Station, expanding benefit to regional
transit connections. A bus turnout is designed in front of the High Street plaza.
No conflicts are anticipated with the City of Moorpark adopted policies and
therefore the impact of the Specific Plan is less than significant. (Source: 1, 3, 4)
h. Rail traffic impacts?
Less than Significant Impact.
Initial Study
37
Response: Regional and intra -State rail service are currently provided in the
City of Moorpark through the Amtrak and Metrolink rail lines. The Union Pacific
Rail Road main line, and the VCTC owned spur line, run east/west through the
Specific Plan area and the downtown. The vision plan/proposed improvements of
the Specific Plan have been coordinated with the VCTC safety /design standards
(refer to the response to question I (b) regarding the parking and landscape design
adjacent to the spur line). Therefore, the Specific Plan is not anticipated to have a
negative impact on these rail facilities. (Source: 1, 3)
Traffic Mitigation Measure:
T -1 The design features contained in Chapter 3.0 (Circulation and Streetscape
Beautification) shall be implemented to best aid in the reduction of long term
projected traffic congestion issues within the downtown area.
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to:
a. Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but
not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)?
No Impact.
Response: The Specific Plan boundary encompasses the "heart" of the City of
Moorpark. The downtown is an urban setting with no known significant
biological habitats. Infill projects will be part of the future development pattern
of the Specific Plan area, however, no impact to biological resources are
anticipated. (Source: 1, 3)
b. Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak woodland, riparian
woodland, coastal sage scrub, etc.)?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: Refer to VII(a), above. The mature California Pepper trees located
along High Street are considered to be part of the City of Moorpark's community
heritage. The Specific Plan has incorporated all existing mature Pepper trees into
the streetscape vision designs and the plan calls for additional Pepper trees to be
planted to enhance the existing tree inventory. Impacts to these heritage trees will
be less than significant and potentially beneficial. (Source: 1, 3)
C. Wetland habitat (e.g. riparian woodland or vernal pool)?
No Impact.
Response: There are no known wetland habitats effected by this project. (Source:
1,3)
Initial Study
38
d. Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
No Impact.
Response: There is no identified wildlife or migration corridors in the plan area
that would be impacted by this project. (Source: 1, 3)
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a. Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: As projects build out within the Specific Plan area their construction
will utilize energy resources. However, energy usage is not anticipated to exceed
that which would be otherwise used in build out of the project area if the Specific
Plan were not implemented. All new construction will comply with energy
saving plans and policies which are in effect. Therefore, the impact is considered
less than significant. (Source: 3)
b. Use non - renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: Projects being constructed within the Downtown Specific Plan are
anticipated to be typical in their consumption of energy and resources to other
commercial, office and residential projects being built out within the City. No
significant impacts related to the use of non - renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner are anticipated. (Source: 3)
C. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would
be of future value to the region and the residents of the State?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: No significant mineral resource is known to occur within the project
boundaries. (Source: 3)
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a. A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)?
Less than Significant Impact.
Initial Study
39
Response: The Specific Plan in and of itself does not have the ability to impose
risks related to release of hazardous substances or explosion. At the time that
projects develop within the Specific Plan area, they will comply with all
applicable local, State and Federal requirements regulating such substances.
(Source: 3)
b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: Temporary closure of streets within the Downtown area (specifically
Moorpark Avenue and High Street) will occur when the Street Beautification
designs are implemented. Standard traffic control measures will be implemented
during construction to minimize interference with normal traffic flows. Because
of the grid pattern of streets within the Downtown area, at no time is it anticipated
that any parcel/building would be rendered inaccessible. Therefore, partial street
closures are considered an insignificant effect. (Source: 3)
C. The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: At the time that projects build out within the Downtown area, such
development will involve activities normally used for commercial and residential
construction. No significant impacts are anticipated. (Source: 3)
d. Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: No known health hazards have been identified within the project
boundaries. (Source: 3)
e. Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass or trees?
No Impact.
Response: The Specific Plan area is a combination of urban infill and hillside
terrain. The hillside terrain area is proposed for residential land uses, consistent
with current designations. Properties with large, undeveloped yards and/or
vacant areas with brush and weeds, will be required to comply with weed
abatement practices to maintain fire protection standards. No increase to fire
hazard areas is anticipated in conjunction with implementation of the Specific
Plan. All normal fire protection measures will be applied to build out of this area.
(Source: 3, 4)
Initial Study
40
f. Project located within or adjacent to a high fire hazard area as defined by
the Ventura County Fire Protection District?
No Impact.
Response: Discussions with staff at the Ventura County Fire Protection
District confirmed that the Downtown Specific Plan area is not situated within a
designated High Fire Hazard Zone. (Source: 14)
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: The Specific Plan area consists of properties which are developed
with a mix of residential, commercial and light industrial urban land uses. While
the majority of the parcels are already developed, there are a number of
intermittent vacant or underdeveloped parcels. Implementation of the Specific
Plan and its policies will entail in -fill development within this existing mixed
urban setting.
The existing noise levels vary between the residential and commercial sub areas
of the Specific Plan. The Existing Traffic Noise Contours contained in the City of
Moorpark's General Plan Noise Element (Exhibit 10), range from 60 to 70 dBA
in the vicinity of High Street, Moorpark Avenue and the railroad right of way.
The 60 dBA level areas are generally located in the residential areas north of
Charles Street, and east of Moorpark Avenue adjacent to Flory Avenue. The 70
dBA level area runs parallel to the rail road tracks, adjacent to commercial and
light industrial uses. Those parcels adjacent to High Street and Moorpark Avenue
are in the 65 dBa noise level contour.
To put this dBA range for the downtown area into perspective, it is necessary to
understand that the term dBA is an increment of measure for the loudness of
sound. The Decibel (dB) measurement is based on a logarithmic scale, similar to
the Richter scale for measure of earthquakes. The A- weighted decibel scale
(dBA) is a measuring increment which is designed to approximate the sensitivity
of the human ear. The 60 to 70 dBA range could be characterized as sound
ranging from just- above - Quiet, to Moderately Loud. With background noise at
the 60 to 70 dBA range, conversation would still be possible between persons
even at ranges of 15 to 20 feet apart (from Exhibit 2 of the Moorpark General
Plan Noise Element).
While the Specific Plan proposes to modify certain land use and zoning
designations within the Specific Plan area boundary, the mix of uses remains the
Initial Study
41
same. Additionally, these land uses will generally be in the same proximity to
one another as they currently are, but with potentially improved transitions
between uses. For example, at the northwest corner of Charles and Walnut
Streets where residential and commercial zoning were previously adjacent, the
Specific Plan proposes to introduce office zoning as a buffer between the two. As
such, it is not anticipated that modification to land use categories will result in an
increase in noise levels in the area, but in some cases may have some beneficial
results.
The Specific Plan proposes improvements to the downtown circulation system
which will contribute towards traffic calming, which in turn may result in
reductions in ambient noise. Examples of circulation improvements which will
help to attenuate sound are: raised landscaped medians in Moorpark Avenue and
High Street to slow and control the flow of vehicular traffic, trees and shrubbery
within medians and parkways to aid in noise absorption, bikepath and enhanced
pedestrian connections to encourage alternative modes of transportation, closure
of Magnolia Street and improvement of pedestrian plazas to encourage pedestrian
rather than vehicular travel. Because vehicle traffic is a main noise generating
source within the downtown area, it is anticipated that implementation of the
Specific Plan may have some positive impacts to noise levels in the downtown.
(Source: 6)
b. Exposure of people to conditionally acceptable or unacceptable noise
levels based on the City's Noise Element?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: The Noise Element of the General Plan provides guidelines and
standards intended to measure whether particular land uses are acceptable within
the community and/or adjacent to other uses. The interpretation of compatibility
is a function of several factors: the sensitivity of a particular land use to noise
(e.g., residential uses are more sensitive to noise than are offices), the level of
noise a particular land use is expected to generate if placed next to a sensitive
receptor (e.g. an outdoor commercial use next to a convalescent facility), the dBA
level and duration of the noise, and the placement of a sensitive use adjacent to
known high noise generator (residences next to a highway).
While the Specific Plan proposes to modify certain land use designations within
the Plan boundary, there will remain a mix of residential and commercial activity,
in close proximity, as is currently experienced. As discussed in the response to X
(a) above, there are standards within the Specific Plan relating to street
improvements and pedestrian enhancement which may have positive effects on
existing levels of noise in the downtown area. Additionally, all new development
would be required to comply with Local, State and all applicable noise standards
relating to their construction. For example, Uniform Building Code standards
would require residential construction techniques to reduce the ambient noise
Initial Study
42
level on the interior of the building to acceptable noise levels of 45 dBA. No
unacceptable incremental change in exposure of people to noise as a result of
implementation of the Specific Plan is anticipated. (Source: 6)
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a
need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: Fire protection response to the downtown area is provided primarily
from Station No. 42 located on Moorpark Avenue across from the City Hall and
Library. During construction of street improvements, standard traffic control
measures will be adhered to. No disruption of service from this station would
occur as a result of implementation of the Specific Plan. Existing water flows and
pressure within the downtown are adequate to meet current fire protection needs.
New development would install supplemental fire protection infrastructure,
specific to a project's needs, at the time of development. Therefore, a less than
significant impact to fire protection services is anticipated. (Source: 3, 14)
b. Police protection?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: Discussion with Police personnel indicate that there has been a
perception of policing problems within the downtown area. The perception of
crime in the downtown is likely greater than the incidents themselves based on
event logs of downtown police response activity. The Specific Plan proposes
standards and policies which are designed to enhance the character of the
downtown, build its image and encourage additional investment and activity.
General property maintenance, enhanced pedestrian areas and introduction of
landscaping all contribute to a friendlier downtown, and potentially a reduction in
the perception of police problems in that area. It is anticipated that
implementation of the Specific Plan may have some beneficial effects on police
services. (Source: 3, 13)
C. Schools?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: The Specific Plan proposes to potentially increase residential densities
in the vicinity of Charles Street. Residents of these potential additional units will
be serviced by the Moorpark Unified School District. Each unit, at its time of
construction, will be required to pay residential impact fees to offset potential
impacts to public schools. This fee is collected in conjunction with the building
Initial Study
43
permit and is utilized by the school district for facilities planning and expansion.
All new commercial development within the plan area will also pay school impact
fees on a per square foot basis. With such mitigation already in place, a less than
significant impact to public school facilities is anticipated. (Source: 21)
d. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and parks?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: The City of Moorpark is presently responsible for maintenance of the
public streets and parkways. If the Specific Plan is implemented, design features
such as medians, landscaping, decorative paving and street furniture, will be
additionally placed in the public right of way. These new features will result in
additional maintenance responsibility for the City in areas such as landscape
watering, weeding, pruning, and general clean up. These additional maintenance
costs will need to be accounted for when these public improvements are funded.
Whereas on -going maintenance is an available resource once funded, impacts to
maintenance are not considered a significant impact.
In addition to public right of way improvements, the Specific Plan provides site
planning for private plazas and pocket green areas. The majority of these
improvements are located on private property and will be the responsibility of
private lot owners to develop and maintain in conjunction with related site
improvements. Development of these private areas are not anticipated to generate
significant impacts to public maintenance needs. (Source: 3)
e. Other governmental services?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: Many civic /public services are already located within the downtown
area (Post Office, City Hall, County Library, Senior Center and Metrolink
Station). These services will likely be enhanced through better street and
pedestrian connections, making them better accessible to the public. (Source: 3)
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need
for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: Southern California Gas Company provides service to the Moorpark
area. Numerous underground gas lines exist within the downtown area to serve
its customer base. At such time that new construction within the Specific Plan
area takes place, it will be necessary to coordinate construction trenching and site
Initial Study
44
work with Southern California Gas to avoid any breakage or impact to the
existing gas system network. The project is not anticipated to interfere with gas
services or create an unmet demand. (Source: 1)
b. Communications systems?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: The Pacific Bell Company provides service to the Moorpark
downtown area. The project is not anticipated to interfere with
phone /communication services. (Source: 1)
C. Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: The City of Moorpark obtains its domestic water from both State
water and local ground water sources. The Calleguas Municipal Water District is
the purveyor of State Water for the Ventura County Water Works District 1.
Water Works District 1 manages and provides water service to the City of
Moorpark. Distribution lines exist within the downtown area to serve the public
service need. At such time that new construction within the Specific Plan area
takes place, it will be necessary to coordinate construction trenching and site work
to avoid any breakage or impact to existing service lines or private laterals.
Discussions with District 1 staff would indicate that implementation of the
'Specific Plan will not have a significant impact on their ability to meet water
service needs to the area, consistent with the 1992 Water System Master Plan.
(Source: 16)
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: Ventura County Water Works District 1 provides waste water
treatment for the City of Moorpark. Sewer service lines are located within the
downtown and will need to be avoided during construction as described above in
the response to XH(c). Discussions with District 1 staff would indicate that
implementation of the Specific Plan will not have a significant impact on their
ability to meet waste water treatment needs to the area, consistent with the 1996
Sewer Master Plan. (Source: 16)
e. Storm water drainage?
Less than Significant Impact.
Initial Study
45
Response: The Specific Plan in and of itself does not have the ability to increase
storm water runoff and create the need for new storm water systems. As
individual projects develop within the Specific Plan area, each will need to
demonstrate that it is designed in compliance with all applicable local, State and
Federal requirements governing storm water runoff. No impact is anticipated.
(Source: 12, 15)
f. Solid waste disposal?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: As discussed in the Land Use section of this checklist, there is the
potential for up to 114 additional residential units to be developed in the
downtown area. These units would be developed along Everett Street, Charles
Street, Spring Road and Flory Avenue, which are routes currently served by two
refuse haulers (GI Industries and Moorpark Rubbish Disposal). No new pick -up
routes would need to be created to service these potential additional dwelling
units. Refuse would be hauled to the Simi Valley land fill which is maintained by
Waste Management Inc. The City presently has waste reduction codes and
policies in place which all future projects would need to comply with at time of
development entitlement. There is adequate capacity within the Simi Valley land
fill with permits valid through 2010. There is no significant impacts to solid waste
anticipated with this project. (Source: 17)
g. Local or regional water supplies?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: Please refer to the response to question IV(f). No impact is
anticipated. (Source 16)
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
No Impact.
Response: There are no designated scenic highways within the Specific Plan
Area. No negative impacts are anticipated in conjunction with the Specific Plan
project. The project would have potentially beneficial impacts to major
circulation corridors (Moorpark Avenue and High Street) if streetscape
beautification plans are implemented. (Source: 3, 4)
b. Result in the loss, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or
physical features?
Initial Study
46
No Impact.
Response: No known unique geologic or physical features have been identified
within the plan boundary. (Source: 1, 3)
C. Result in hillside grading that is inconsistent with the purpose and intent
of the City's Hillside Management regulations contained in Chapter
17.38 of the Zoning Code?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: There are portions of the Medium Density Residential areas which are
located on slopes in excess of 10 percent. The Specific Plan in and of itself will
not disturb these hillside areas that are within the plan boundary. Future projects
will be subject to development review by the City of Moorpark and will be
required at that time to comply with all Hillside Management regulations. With
the application of these standards in place, no impacts are anticipated. (Source: 4)
d. Create an aesthetically offensive site open to public view?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: Completion of the plan will result in potentially beneficial impacts, in
as much as the purpose and intent of the Specific Plan is to revitalize and beautify
Moorpark's downtown area, and preserve its historical character. (Source:. 3, 4)
e. Result in the loss of a distinctive historic or landmark tree or stand of
mature trees?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: The California Pepper trees located along High Street are a distinctive
part of Moorpark's heritage. These mature trees have been incorporated into the
Specific Plan's roadway improvement standards. A beneficial impact is
anticipated if the Specific Plan is implemented. (Source: 1, 3, 4)
f. Create light or glare?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: As in -fill projects or remodels of existing buildings occur within the
Specific Plan area, such new development will likely involve the placement of
exterior security and/or decorative lighting. Exterior building lighting has the
potential to create off -site glare to neighboring properties and/or public streets.
The Specific Plan contains design guidelines which restrict placement of exterior
lighting which is not shielded. With such a standard in place, impacts from light
Initial Study 47
or glare are not anticipated in conjunction with implementation of the Specific
Plan. (Source: 3, 4)
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a. Disturb paleontological resources?
No Impact.
Response: There are no known paleontological resources in the plan area. No
impact is anticipated. (Source: 1, 3, 4)
b. Disturb archaeological resources?
No Impact.
Response: There are no known archaeological resources in the plan area. No
impact is anticipated. (Source: 1, 3, 4)
C. Affect historical resources?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: There are numerous landmark buildings within the downtown area.
Examples include the Birkenshaw House, the Old Epworth Church and the
Railroad Depot. The Specific Plan design guidelines and policies are designed to
preserve and enhance the historical characteristics inherent within the downtown
area. Preservation guidelines apply within the Specific Plan to both residential
and commercial projects. The Specific Plan also establishes a Landmark Building
Designation system so as to better identify historically important buildings, and to
generate a greater degree of pride in those structures. Impacts from the Specific
Plan are expected to be positive for these important historical resources. (source:
1, 3, 4)
d. Have the potential to cause a physical or aesthetic change which would
affect unique ethnic cultural values?
No Impact.
Response: No negative impacts area anticipated. Refer to the response to
question XIV (c.) above. (Source: 3, 4)
e. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area?
No Impact.
Initial Study 48
Response: There are currently two freestanding churches within the plan area.
No impact is anticipated to these uses as a result of implementation of the Specific
Plan. (Source: 3, 4)
XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a. Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other
recreational facilities?
Less than Significant Impact..
Response: The Specific Plan, if implemented, would introduce new plaza and
public space areas, as well as better pedestrian and bicycle linkages between these
public use areas. If revitalization of the downtown is successful, this to a degree
will meet a recreational need, by making a visit to the downtown a conscious
decision for Moorpark residents and tourists alike. (Source: 3, 18)
b. Affect existing recreational opportunities?
Less than Significant Impact.
Response: No impact is anticipated to existing recreational uses as a result of
implementation of the Specific Plan. There could be positive impacts as a result
of the construction of new plaza areas, street furniture and improved pedestrian
and bicycle linkages within and outside of the plan area. (Source: 3, 18)
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
Less than Significant
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short -term, to the
disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals?
Less than Significant
C. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable? Means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in
Initial Study 49
connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)
Less than Significant
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less than Significant
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the
tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been
adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section
15603(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following:
a. Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are
available for review.
Response: (1) EIR for Moorpark Land Use and Circulation Element Update and
Sphere of Influence Expansion Study (1992). Available from the City of
Moorpark. (2) Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Spring Road Bridge
Replacement (1997). Available from the City of Moorpark.
b. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above
checklist were within the scope of an¢ adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such
effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis.
Response: Effects on Geology, Biological Resources. No mitigation measures
were used from these documents since impacts were either determined to be
insignificant or project specific mitigation resulted from this initial study.
C. Mitigation measures. For effects that are Less than Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated, describe the mitigation measures which were
incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which
they address site- specific conditions for the project.
Response: Not applicable to this project.
Initial Study 50
XVIII. REFERENCE LIST:
The references used in responding to this questionnaire include the following:
Standard References
I. EIR for Moomark Land Use and Circulation Element Update and Sphere of Influence
Expansion Study (1991).
2. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community
Panel Number 060712 - 00054, September 29, 1986 and revision dated August 24,
1990.
3. General Plan of the City of Moorpark.
4. Moorpark Municipal Code, including Title 15 (Building Codes) & Title 17 (Zoning
and Hillside Ordinance).
5. Moorpark Traffic Analysis Model Model Description and Validation June 1994.
6. Technical Appendices for the General Plan Noise Element November 1994.
7. Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, Guidelines for the Preparation of Air
Quality Impact Analyses, 1989.
8. Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, Ventura County Air Quality
Management Plan, 1995.
9. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 1991.
Project Specific References
10. Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Spring Road Bridge Replacment (1997) —
Appendix A — Geotechnical Studies.
11. EIR prepared for Draft Specific Plan No 2, March 1997.
12. Citywide Master Plan of Drainage, 1995.
13. Ed Tumbleson - Moorpark Police Department (Ventura County Sheriff's
Department), verbal discussions, 1997.
14. Sandy Wells - Ventura County Fire Protection District, verbal discussion, 1997.
Initial Study
51
15. Dirk Lovett - City of Moorpark Engineering, Building/Safety verbal discussions,
1997.
16. Satya Karra — Ventura County Water Works District 1, phone discussions, 1997.
17. Jill Reuben - Meyers, City of Moorpark Solid Waste Coordinator, verbal discussions,
1997.
18. Stephanie Shaw, City of Moorpark Community Services Department, verbal
discussions, 1997.
19. Laurie Dunning, Moorpark Library staff, verbal discussions, 1997.
20. Carol Ghens, City of Moorpark Senior Center staff, phone discussion, 1997.
21. Moorpark Unified School District staff, phone discussions, 1997.
22. Ken Gilbert, City of Moorpark Public Works Director, phone discussion, 1997.
23. Christopher Stephens, Ventura County Transportation Commission staff, phone
discussion, 1997 and letter dated October 30, 1996.
24. Housing Element of the General Plan, October 1989.
25. Draft Gabbert and Walnut Canyon Channels Flood Control Deficiency Study, March
1997.
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
• I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
• I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the
mitigation measures described herein and contained in the Mitigation
Monitoring Program have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
• I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment,
and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
• I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment,
but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document
Initial Study 52
pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is
a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have significant effect on the
environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to
that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project.
Date Meg Williamson, Principal Planner
RRM Design Group
Date
Ms. Deborah Traffenstedt
Senior Planner
Initial Study 53
Appendix A - VCTC Memo
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Appendices
,= .
S -06 -1997 2 :21Pr1
F/M
FROr'1 vCTC 80S 642 481601
0°6M
AW
".October 30, 1996
TO: LeeAnne Hagmaier.
Nelson Miller
FROM: Chris Stephens 7
SUBJECT: Downtown Moorpark Plans
P_ I
VENTURA coukTy.
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
950 Counry Square pnvv Swim 2C?
vGntur2�_ CA 93OC3
1805) 6S4 -2338
18051642-159:
FAX 16051 642-495:
r
With this memo I wanted to put in vMting the phone message I left LepAnne two weeks. ago.
The VCTC owns the property nort.� of and running parallel to the railroad tracks beginning 10
feet from the centerline and ending 50 feet from the track centerline. Aso, the siding/spur which
runs along the north side of the tracks (south edge of project area on LeeAnne's maps) is active
and therefore no structures, fences, etc. can be constructed within 8.5 feet of the outside rail. As
far as we are concerned, this represF.nts the only significant restriction on our property and any
plans by the City which are consistent with this would likely be viewed positively by VCTC staff
and recommended to the Commission.
I hope this is helpful, and I apology; it took so long to forward this information in writing. If
you have any further Questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Post -it` Fax Note 7671
Date
+1 oar b.
To
From
Co-/Dept.
Co.
Fax I (J -.- 0
Fax M
Appendix B - MND Distribution List
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Appendices
Distribution List
Resource Management Agency
County of Ventura
Attn: Kim Hocking (5 copies)
800 South Victoria Avenue
Ventura, CA 93009
Public Works Agency
Waterowks District No. 1
Attn: Reddy Pakala
7150 Walnut Canyon
Moorpark, CA 93020
City of Simi Valley
Attn: Michael Kuhn
Environmental Services
2929 Tapo Canyon Road
Simi Valley, CA 93065
City of Thousand Oaks
Attn: John Prescott
2150 West Hillcrest Drive
Thousand Oaks, CA 91361
Ventura County Fire Protection District
Attn: Shonna Perry/Wayne Maynard
165 Durley Avenue
Camarillo, CA 93010 -8586
Eat Valley Sheriff Station
Attn: Senior Deputy/Ed Tumbleson
2101 Olsen Road
Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
Calleguas Muni Water District
Attn: Don Kendall/George Mulligan
2100 Olsen Road
Thousand Oaks, CA 91360 -6800
Moorpark Unified School District
Attn: Tom Duffy
30 Flory Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Pacific Bell
Attn: Cheri Robb
2250 Ward Avenue
Simi Valley, CA 93065
Southern California Edison
Attn: Willie Claytor
3589 Foothill Drive
Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
CALTRANS
District 7
Attn: Wilford Melton
120 South Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012 -3606
State Office of Planning and Research
Attn: Mr. Chris Belsky (10 copies)
1400 Tenth Street, Room 121
Sacramento, CA 95814
Shell Pipe Line Corporation
Attn: Sheila McWilliams
20945 S. Wilmington Avenue
Carson, CA 90810
Ventura County Cultural Heritage Board
Appendix C — State Clearinghouse Letter
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Appendices
STA', E CF %ALL' "GRNIA
PETE W" SON.
Governor's Office of Planning and Research
1400 Tenth Street
Sacramento, CA 95$14
August 12, 1997
DEBORAH TREFFENSTEDT
CITY OF MOORPARK
799 MOORPARK AVE
MOORPARK, CA 93021
Subject: CITY OF MOORPARK DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN SCH #: 97071033
Dear DEBORAH TREFFENSTEDT:
The State Clearinghouse has submitted the above named proposed Negative
Declaration to selected state agencies for review. The review period is now
closed and the comments from the responding agency(ies) is(are) enclosed. On
the enclosed Notice of Completion form you will note that the Clearinghouse
has checked the agencies that have commented. Please review the Notice of
Completion to ensure that your comment package is complete. If the comment
package is not in order, please notify the State Clearinghouse immediately.
Remember to refer to the project's eight -digit State Clearinghouse number so
that we may respond promptly.
Please note that Section 21104 of the California Public Resources Code
required that:
"a responsible agency or other public agency shall only make
substantive comments regarding those activities involved in a
project which are within an area of expertise of the agency or which
are required to be carried out or approved by the agency.,,
Commenting agencies are also required by this section to support their
comments with specific documentation.
These comments are forwarded for your use in preparing your final EIR. Should
you need more information or clarification, we recommend that you contact the
commenting agency at your earliest convenience.
This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse
review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act. Please contact at (916) 445 -0613 if you
have any questions regarding the environmental review process.
Sincerely,
ANT
ERO A. RIVASPLATA
Chief, State Clearinghouse
Enclosures
CC: Resources Agency
C rf t' OF .NIOOItr :kRK
�CtrICE OF COMPLETION;
,I \tail to: State Clearinghouse. 1400 Tenth Street. Sacramento. CA 95814 (916) 445 -0613 —7
Project Title: y�f�l ra k Diwmown Spmtfic Plan
_
Ccad 4gencyLCIry ,_f Moorpark Contact Person:
Deber"Tratferutedt
S ree: Address. Moorua :k. CA 93C21
Phone: 405529 6864- eft
C;rr, n „- Sate California
Zip Code: _ 93021 CCurry t eatura !
!i Prol;ct Location
County: \'cnrura Ciry/Nearest Community
Moomark
Cass Street Includes es High Shtt !,Jwornark Ave.. Spyg Rd
Zip Code: 93021 Total ACres:
%'Sessor i Parcel No `.Incur Section:
—
TWP Range. Ease:
w,thm 2 Soler State Hwy# 23 and IIS Waterways:
Axpers: N i A Railways: Southern Pacific
Schools: Flory Elementary
Documentarian Type
C
(,
OP C] Supplement/Subsequent
OI Joint Document
❑ Early Cons ❑ EIR (Prior to SCH. No
❑ EA ❑ Final Document
Z Nell Dec ❑ Other
❑ Draft EIS ❑ Other
r] Drat EIR
Locationn, Action Type
❑ General P1.n Update ® Specific Plan
❑
Rezone Annexation
�] H
General Plan Amendment Muter Plan
Prezone Redevelopment
❑ General Plan Element ❑ Planned Unit Develop.
❑ Use Permit ❑ Other
❑ community Plan ❑ Site Plan
Cl tend Division
(Subdivision, Parcel
Map, Tract Map, etc.)
Development Type
❑ Residential: 1JNTTS Acres_
❑ Water Facilities: TYPE: MCD
❑ Office: Sq. Ft. Acres_ Employees
Transportation: TYPE:
❑ Commercial: Sq. Ft._ Acres_ Employees_
Mining: MINERAL:
[] Industrial: Sq. Ft._ Acres_ Employees_
Power. TYPE:
❑ Educational
❑ WastewaterTreamwt: TYPE:
C] Recreational
❑ Husedous Waste: TYPE:
® Other: Downtown Soaific Plan
Project Issues Discussed in Document
AesrhedcNisual Flood Plain/Flooding
❑ SchoolwUniversit:n ❑ Water Quality
❑ Agricultural Land Form Lsod/Ate Huard
®
Septic System ❑ Water Supply/Groundwater
Air Quality GeoloVdSastaie
Sewer Capacity . ❑ Wedaod/Ripanan
ArchwolcgicaU ❑ Minerals
Soil ErosionlCompaction/ ❑ Wildlife
Historical
Grading
❑ Casul Zone ® Noise
® Solid Waste ❑ Growth inducing
® Drainage/Absorption
Present Land UserZoning/General P1ast Use:
Mixed CommercialfResidendal /Officeftblie and Industrial
State Clearinghouse Contact: Mr. C'hns Brlsky
State Review Began
Dept. Review to Agency
Agencv Rev to SCH
SCH COMPLIANCE
(916) 445-0613
k
Please note SCH Number on all Comments
I'lease forward late comments directly to the
I cad Agency
VI \ID APCD./1Reiources: 7 /tZl
Project Sent to the following State Agencies
X Resources
Boating
Coastal Comm
_ Coastal Consv
•_ Colorado Rvr lid
C_ Conservation r
X Fish & Game q __
_ Delta Protection
Forestry
�CParks & Rec.'OHP
Reclamation
_ BCDC
_ DWR
OES
Bus Transp Hous
_ Aeronautics
Cill'
X _ Caltri,ns I'
Trans Planning
_X llou,uag ti Del _•1
Health & Welfare
Drinkm^ H20
Medical Waste
State /Consumer Sscs
_ General Services
Ca1!F.I'A
ARB
_ C1 Waste \I_nu ltd
SWRCR Crrantc
_SWRCB: Drl[a
SW'RCB: WtrQtmht%
_ S\k RCB Wtr Riehb
X Re . WQClt a _
_ D'rSC CTC
YlhlAdif Corrections
__._ Cl11TCCtllnl\
Independent ( onnm
- --- Lnerg> Comm
NAI IC
PUC
Saniti \111 \1111.
X Matc Lauds l onim
-- lalute Rel P!.:n
Other
0
Appendix D - Notice of Determination
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan Appendices
Notice of Determination
To: X Office of Planning and Research From: City of Moorpark
1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Department of Community Development
Sacramento, CA 95814 799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
To: X County Clerk
County of Ventura
800 South Victoria Avenue
Ventura, CA 93009
Subject: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code.
City of Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan
Project Title
97071033 City of Moorpark 805/529 -6864
State Clearinghouse Lead Agency Area Code/Telephone #
Downtown Moorpark with High Street as its core, south along Moorpark Avenue to Los Angeles Avenue, in Ventura County
Project Location
Project Description:
The proposed project is a Specific Plan which will form the planning framework for a mix of residential /commercial/industrial uses
within the City's downtown core, along with design standards and vision plans for streetscape improvements. The plan includes
general plan land use and zoning map revisions for portions of the project area.
This is to advise that the City of Moorpark has approved the above described project on October 7, 1998. The City of Moorpark is
the 0 Lead Agency ❑ Responsible Agency and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project:
1. The project [ ❑will ®will not ] have a significant effect on the environment.
2. ❑ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
3. 0 A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
4. Mitigation measures [ 0 were ❑ were not ] made a condition of the approval of the project.
5. A statement of Overriding Considerations ( ❑ were 0 were not ] adopted for this project.
6. Findings 10 were ❑ were not ] adopted for this project.
This is to certify that the final Mitigated Negative Declaration with comments and responses and record or project approval is
available to the General Public at:
City of Moorpark Department of Community Development, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, CA 93021
Director of Community Development City of Moorpark
Nelson E. Miller, AICP Title Date
Date received for filing at OPR:
9"4^^
F
o o r p a r
ID 0 7V N70 W-7-
S#Iap ;De"
P ��"
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
(805) 529.6864
?W 414ce 57eaaideaeet �4Kal�aia
p .le41,
Applied Development Economics
2029 University Avenue
Berkley, CA 94794
S ,Aecijc Pe"
Aoawwll�_'
III
RRM DESIGN GROUP
Architecture • Planning • Engineering Surveying • Interiors • Landscape Architecture
3701 South Higuera Street • San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 • Phone: (805)543 -1794 • Fax: (805)5434609
Vic Montogomery, Architect Col 1090 - Jerry Michael, RCE 36895, LS 6276 • Jeff Ferber, Landscape Architect 2844
?&*aks,*4zk Doa•aeaevee S ,&cceJec PlaK
CITY OF MOORPARK DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
October 1, 1998
Prepared for
City of Moorpark
Community Development Department
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Adopted by:
City Council, October 7, 1998
nowt,oazk V aeaaesewa Pear
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
City Council:
Patrick Hunter, Mayor
Debbie Rogers- Teasley, Mayor Pro Tem
Christopher Evans
Bernardo Perez
John Wozniak
Planning Commission:
Gary Lowenberg, Chair
Keith Millhouse, Vice Chair
Ernesto Acosta
Barton Miller
Paul Norcross
29—ff -
Steven Kueny, City Manager
Nelson Miller, Director of Community Development
Debbie Traffenstedt, Senior Planner
John Libiez, Principal Planner
I /(.06Z#4 ,4 Dd(pK Z6G4K S ,*66CjC6 VCaw
Table of Contents
Page Number
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................ ............................... 1
1.1
VISION
3
1.2
Plan Location and Setting
4
1.3
Organization of the Specific Plan
6
1.4
Public Participation Process and Market Analysis
7
2.2.1 Single Family Residential — (R -1)
1.4.1 Aerial Photographs and Base Mapping
7
35
1.4.2 Attendance at Moorpark's "Country Days"
7
C. Landscape Guidelines ............................. ...............................
1.4.3 Market Analysis
7
49
1.4.4 Resident Survey
12
B. Design Guidelines .................................. ...............................
1.4.5 Steering Committee /Planning Commission /City Council Meetings
12
50
1.4.6 Downtown Merchant Survey
15
1.4.7 Mixed Use Analysis
15
1.4.8 Planning Area Boundary Expansion
15
1.5
Relationship to City Plans and Programs
19
1.5.1 General Plan Consistency
19
1.5.2 Consistency with City Zoning Code
22
1.6
Review Procedures
23
2.0 Land Use and Zoning .................... ...............................
25
2.1 Existing Land Use and Zoning
25
2. 1.1 Planned Land Use and Zoning
25
2.1.2 Development Standards, Design Guidelines, Landmark Structures
32
2.2 Development Standards and Guidelines for
Specific Plan Zones
35
2.2.1 Single Family Residential — (R -1)
35
A. Site Development Standards ..................... ...............................
35
B. Design Guidelines .................................. ...............................
38
C. Landscape Guidelines ............................. ...............................
45
2.2.2 Two - Family Residential (R -2)
49
A. Site Development Standards ..................... ...............................
49
B. Design Guidelines .................................. ...............................
50
C. Landscape Guidelines ............................. ...............................
50
?&*dtTAazk Daus.etauRU S,*eeeJee PIaw
Table of Contents (continued)
Page Number
2.2.3
Residential Planned Development (R -PD)
51
A.
Site Development Standards ..................... ...............................
51
B.
Design Guidelines .................................. ...............................
53
C.
Landscape Guidelines ............................. ...............................
61
2.2.4
Office — (C -0)
63
A.
Site Development Standards ..................... ...............................
63
B.
Design Guidelines .................................. ...............................
65
C.
Landscape Guidelines ............................. ...............................
69
2.2.5
Old Town Commercial (C -OT)
70
A.
Site Development Standards
70
..................... ...............................
B.
Design Guidelines .................................. ...............................
73
C.
Landscape Guidelines ............................. ...............................
86
2.2.6 Neighborhood Commercial (C -1)
87
A.
Site Development Standards ...................... ...............................
87
B.
Design Guidelines .................................. ...............................
89
C.
Landscape Guidelines ............................. ...............................
91
2.2.7
Commercial Planned Development (CPD)
93
A.
Site Development Standards
93
..................... ...............................
B.
Design Guidelines .................................. ...............................
94
C.
Landscape Guidelines ............................. ...............................
94
2.2.8 Institutional (n
95
A.
Site Development Standards ..................... ...............................
95
B.
Design Guidelines .................................. ...............................
96
C.
Landscape Guidelines ........................... ...............................
102
2.2.9 Industrial Park /Light Industrial (M -1)
104
A.
Site Development Standards
104
................... ...............................
B.
Design Guidelines ................................ ...............................
106
C.
Landscape Guidelines ........................... ...............................
111
2.3 Private Property Maintenance, Expansion, and Renovation
112
2.3.1 Private Property Maintenance Guidelines
112
nOO"r'iaak V oeuKtoeo v S'Oec4e' 'VCso
Table of Contents (continued)
Page Number
2.3.2 Legal Non - Conforming Uses, Expansions, and Renovations
2.3.3 Building Expansion and Renovation
3.0 Circulation and Streetscape Beautification .....................
3.1 Intent
3.1.1 Existing Conditions
3.2 Circulation System Hierarchy
3.2.1 Signalization
3.3 Streetscape Beautification
3.3.1 General Goals
3.3.2 Building Renovation and New Development Goals
3.3.3 Land Use Goals
3.3.4 Circulation and Parking Goals
3.3.5 Activities, Events and Promotions Goals
3.3.6 Public Pathways and Plazas
3.3.7 Street Trees
3.3.8 Medians
3.3.9 Lighting
3.3.10 Street Furnishings
3.3.11 Landscaping
3.4 Roadway Improvements
3.4.1 Traffic Calming
3.4.2 Programmed Roadway Improvements
3.4.3 Re- striping of High Street
3.4.4 Closure of Magnolia Street
3.4.5 Relocation of Track Traffic
3.5 Pedestrian /Bicycle Circulation
3.5.1 Bicycle Rack and Bench /Rest Stops
3.5.2 Pedestrian Walkways
113
114
120
120
120
122
122
124
124
125
130
130
131
132
134
134
134
135
136
137
137
137
139
139
139
140
141
142
%iLaa2�iazk Dau..ctau..e S�eec�ie pCaK
Table of Contents (continued)
Page Number
3.6 Public Transit
143
3.6.1 Bus Transit
143
3.6.2 Rail Service
143
3.7 Gateways and Signage
144
3.7.1 Designated Gateway Locations
144
3.7.2 Signage
145
3.8 Parking
146
3.8.1 Existing Parking Conditions
146
3.8.2 Parking Recommendations and Design Guidelines
149
3.8.3 Parking Management Plan
150
4.0 Public Utilities, Infrastructure, Services and Safety .......... 152
4.1
Water Service
152
4.2
Sewer Service
153
4.3
Drainage
153
4.4
Solid Waste and Recycling
154
4.5
Fire, Police Protection and Enforcement
155
4.5.1 Fire
155
4.5.2 Police
155
4.6
Public Utilities
156
4.7
Other Public Services
156
4.7.1 City Hall
156
4.7.2 Library
157
4.7.3 Senior Center
157
4.7.4 Post Office
157
4.7.5 Chamber of Commerce
157
4.7.6 Satellite Utility Company Offices
158
4.7.7 Medical Facilities
158
4.7.8 School Facilities
158
4.7.9 Parks
159
%flooz,�iaak Dauf.ctou..c
Table of Contents (continued)
plaK
Page Number
5.0 Implementation and Administration of the Specific Plan.... 160
5.1
Discussion of Potential Funding Sources
161
5.1.1 Local Funding Sources
161
5.1.2 State Funding Sources
164
5.1.3 Federal Funding Sources
165
5.2
Recommended Implementation Programs
167
5.2.1. Economic Development Recommended Programs
167
5.2.2 Promotions and Special Events Recommended Programs
171
5.3
Public Streetscape Improvements
173
5.4
Specific Plan Administration, Adoption and Amendments
180
5.4.1 Specific Plan Administration
180
5.4.2. Specific Plan Adoption
180
5.4.3 Specific Plan Amendments
180
Appendix (under seperate cover)
Market Analysis
Resident Survey
Merchant Survey
Summary of 1989 Downtown Study
VCTC Correspondence
%1Laaz,�iazk V aeomeauoa SAeesjee pla v
List of Tables
Page Number
Table 1.
Summary of Moorpark Retail Supply and Demand
10
Table 2.
Resident Survey Summary
13
Table 3.
Mixed -Use Observations
16
Table 4.
Permitted Use List for Old Town Commercial (C -OT) Zone
28
Table 5.
Downtown Specific Plan Suggested Plant Palatte
47
Table 6.
Density Threshold Comparison by Lot Size
115
Table 7.
Density Designations
116
Table 8.
Substantial Building Renovation Program
118
Table 9.
Existing Roads within Downtown Moorpark
121
Table 10.
High Street Parking Inventory
148
Table 11.
Moorpark Avenue Parking Inventory
148
Table 12.
Preliminary Statement of Probable Cost
174
%11062,44,4 Dora.ctou..s Spacc�(ic PCaK
List of Figures
Page Number
Figure 1.
Vicinity Map
4
Figure 2.
Specific Plan Study Area
5
Figure 3.
Existing Conditions
8
Figure 4.
Opportunities and Constraints
14
Figure 5.
Specific Plan Land Use Map
30
Figure 6.
Specific Plan Zoning Map
31
Figure 7.
Street System Hierarchy
123
Figure 8.
Vision Plan
126
Figure 9.
Vision Plan
127
Figure 10.
Vision Plan
128
Figure 11.
Vision Plan
129
Figure 12.
Public Pathways and Plazas
133
Figure 13.
Moorpark Avenue Street Section
138
Figure 14.
High Street Street Section
138
Figure 15.
Bicycle Lane Classifications
140
Figure 16.
Parking Blocks
147
71ia 4&04n4 2)W —&a-a ;v&,.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
For many years, downtown Moorpark served as an agricultural hub and commercial center
for the surrounding Ventura and Los Angeles County communities. Founded in the late
1800's and early 1900's, the early colonization of Moorpark stemmed from the small commu-
nities of Epworth and Fremontville. A number of small buildings arose shortly after the turn
of the century in which one could find civic uses, schools, dining, and fraternal meeting halls.
The railroad provided excellent transportation to larger cities in both Los Angeles and Ventura
County. An active agricultural based downtown district thrived.
Today, in the mid- 1990's, the downtown's role as a commercial district has declined. Despite
the historic agricultural value and character, many of the original old buildings have been
demolished as part of the suburbanizaiton of Los Angeles and the evolution of Moorpark
into a bedroom community for the greater Los Angeles area. Very few unreinforced masonry
buildings exist in the downtown. Most retailing takes place in the newer, modern shopping
centers in both Simi Valley and on Los Angeles Avenue in Moorpark, as opposed to the
downtown High Street core. Unfortunately the downtown is not viewed as a place one gener-
ally goes for entertainment, public gathering, strolling or socializing. This is due mostly from
the absence of businesses serving these types of needs. Instead, most of the downtown busi-
nesses are small scale, commercial service -type uses as well as some agricultural support whole-
salers and retailers.
The potential for revitalization of the downtown is strong. The regional retailing and indus-
trial activity throughout the City and the greater Simi Valley has dispersed and changed the
City over recent years. The retention and possible resurgence of the High Street corridor's
unique and historic role as a civic and community focus, can be preserved and strengthened
provided firm direction and programs are implemented toward that goal. The High Street
corridor's compact size, historical character
and proximity to civic facilities such as City
Hall, the senior center, and multiple schools
suggest a place in which people could enjoy t«:
visiting, walking and entertaining. Further -
more, the downtown, especially the High
Street corridor, has quite a few interesting and
potentially attractive places, such as the Melo-
drama, the train depot, the original Epworth
Church and the landmark Birkenshaw House
on Moorpark Avenue. These key landmarks
afford glimpses back to Moorpark's heritage.
UL1RCTL3ftsw noose
— �staodaetles
1
Dou•«teu..c S,aa�c P�
The physical terrain of the downtown core reinforces the small town, quaint character that is
desired. The very large pepper trees, originally planted in 1904, establish the rural character
of the area. The downtown is framed by a mountain backdrop to the north which provides a
gradual transition from the downtown commercial uses to the more residential suburban
neighborhoods extending northwest and eastward.
The downtown remains the site of one of the most popular and long- standing community
events in Moorpark, "Country Days ", as well as the annual car show. These events recall
Moorpark's rural past. The railroad may once again be a boon to downtown activity as
Metrolink ridership and hours of operation expand. The City's purchase of the railroad
property adjacent to the lines provides exciting, long term possibilities for downtown revital-
ization and development of public spaces.
In recent years Moorpark has been subjected to suburbanization of its borders, which has
caused a decentralization from the downtown High Street corridor. Convenience shopping
and market demands that promote big and medium box retailers have shifted many of the
commercial businesses toward the nearby, modern strip shopping centers on Los Angeles
Avenue. Consequently, the "sense of place" and concentrations of uses in the old downtown
has been partially lost. Historically, many of the large residential development areas in the
city, such as Peach Hill and Mountain Meadows are not located in close proximity to Old
Town Moorpark. With a number of specific plans for master planned communities being
processed around the northern periphery of the City, there is now the potential opportunity
to draw on a large customer base in closer proximity to Old Town Moorpark.
The City and its Redevelopment Agency are dedicated to the improvement of downtown
revitalization. This is evidenced by the fact that in 1989 the City commissioned a consultant
study to identify and address the issues of revitalization of the downtown. Since the comple-
tion of the 1989 Downtown Study, City leaders and officials have implemented many compo-
nents of that plan. As a part of this latest effort, the recommendations in the 1989 study were
reviewed and summarized to determine whether individual programs have been implemented,
are in the progress of being implemented, or have not yet been acted upon. This summary
review is available in the Appendix to this Specific Plan.
— 9ataoducttoK
2
?WOOV4 44 VO&Wr aW s pe,.
1.1 VISION
As the next logical step toward implementing some of the stated goals of the 1989 Downtown
Study, this Specific Plan furthers the vision for the overall revitalization of the downtown and
implements design standards, guidelines, and a strategy for business attraction and develop-
ment of the City owned parcels in the downtown. Most importantly, as a part of this Specific
Plan effort it has been determined that the community as a whole recognizes the potential in
revitalizing "Old Town Moorpark ", making it an attractive and thriving place for the enjoy-
ment and benefit of everyone. Based upon numerous interviews with City residents and
businesses, a downtown merchant survey, a public opinion survey sent to 800 residences and
businesses, parking counts, an up-to -date land use survey, and other field studies, the follow-
ing vision statement summarizes the special qualities of Old Town Moorpark.
"The vision for Old Town Moorpark is that of rural small town America. The High Street
area is particularly important because it retains the country charm and agrarian qualities
that are the roots of Moorpark's history. Important features include a family town with
friendly people who care for each other. It is a pedestrian - oriented area where people walk,
shop, and feel safe on the street at night. It is a unique mix of offices and businesses, and
the cultural and civic hub to the City. Both High Street and Moorpark Avenue are sur-
rounded by mixed housing types that are homes to people of multiple classes and cultures
Identifiably different than other commercial areas of the City, the goal is to nothave corpo•
rate business uses overwhelm the area at the expense of the small town character. In recog
nizing the value and irreplacability of the downtown's cultural heritage and social and
economic well being, high quality, new development reflecting the small town charm is
essential. Revitalization and image building of Old Town Moorpark will contribute to a
memorable City identity, welcoming residents and visitors to downtown Moorpark. "
— �stao�acelloK
3
1.2 Plan Location and Setting
SAiuY1a Dla r
The City of Moorpark benefits from an impressive physical setting. It is surrounded by open
space, predominantly farmland and rolling hills. A scenic approach to the City is provided by
Highway 23 which enters Moorpark from the foothills to the east and south. From Fillmore,
Highway 23 is a winding, two -lane rural road that passes through rolling terrain. The geo-
graphic setting of the Specific Plan Area is shown in Figure 1. The Downtown Specific Plan
Area is located in the center of the City limits and contains High Street at its core. Bound-
aries of the Specific Plan Area are shown in Figure 2. Also included in the Specific Plan Area
are other parts of Old Town Moorpark, including the residential neighborhood north of
High Street, the railroad right -of -way below High Street, and the strip of land south along
Moorpark Avenue to Los Angeles Avenue. Two distinct areas of the downtown exist. One is
the High Street corridor, and the second is the Moorpark Avenue corridor. The Plan Area
also includes properties east of Spring Road, both north and south of the railroad tracks
fronting both High Street and Moorpark Avenue.
HWY lie
® cmC CENTER
® TOWN CENTER
'.'
U
North
�-- °OROTH1 VE' I Not to Scale
Source: City of Moorpark General Plan, May, 1992
Figure 1
1 artodr drocom
4
L-nI
a
N
Specific Plan Study Area
FNc Avenue
1
11
A enw
••�••� Not to Scale
11110ee111111 Specific Plan Boundary
Applicable Properties -
Design Guidelines /Standards
I
t
..
!.OMAN
= t T7T r rr J1
�.R�.R"RR '!J C J.i1�1j .i4t�f `'il lL...Jpl._.�.r rl� jV It
� I'
- i it {
i c3 t tt t �t
�r..
J t 1 a ...1 I
_ r,j''��
`r'� { 1ET `!'( .. �r.
,
Z�f
!
t
I ,
' r G•,r t
t
I
rt
t
,
�
i
lJ
f
'
U{
i.J
1
1
r
1
<
_..•.�.a
r
7
i1
(.iI
G
1
r'
i ..! f
r
_0 ice: :J ' ....
r
1
tt E,,IrI_�r
f i1
Lu'
Hl�h Street .. ............ .,...
..
,�.,:
...
i f .-
.......Jt111RRRlRg1lRRRRR. RRIRII.lR1ARR.•IRIR.. I..... IRRRI.
Specific Plan Study Area
FNc Avenue
1
11
A enw
••�••� Not to Scale
11110ee111111 Specific Plan Boundary
Applicable Properties -
Design Guidelines /Standards
I
t
..
!.OMAN
= t T7T r rr J1
�.R�.R"RR '!J C J.i1�1j .i4t�f `'il lL...Jpl._.�.r rl� jV It
� I'
- i it {
i c3 t tt t �t
�r..
J t 1 a ...1 I
_ r,j''��
`r'� { 1ET `!'( .. �r.
,
Z�f
!
t
I ,
' r G•,r t
r t tl r..I a , r..'i i.
It
Specific Plan Study Area
FNc Avenue
1
11
A enw
••�••� Not to Scale
11110ee111111 Specific Plan Boundary
Applicable Properties -
Design Guidelines /Standards
..
= t T7T r rr J1
�.R�.R"RR '!J C J.i1�1j .i4t�f `'il lL...Jpl._.�.r rl� jV It
t
- i it {
i c3 t tt t �t
�r..
J t 1 a ...1 I
_ r,j''��
`r'� { 1ET `!'( .. �r.
,
.......... , t
I ,
' r G•,r t
r t tl r..I a , r..'i i.
It
�
lJ
-; ca
i.J
Specific Plan Study Area
FNc Avenue
1
11
A enw
••�••� Not to Scale
11110ee111111 Specific Plan Boundary
Applicable Properties -
Design Guidelines /Standards
'%1%o aak Dou-aou a SA4Au� Pls.
1.3 Organization of the Specific Plan
This Specific Plan is composed of five comprehensive sections.
Section 1.0 - is the Introduction which describes the purpose of the plan, the vision for
downtown, its contents, and the methodology through which it was prepared. Further, re-
view procedures for processing individual project requests in the Specific Plan Area as out-
lined.
Section 2.0 - discusses land uses, zoning characteristics, including the existing conditions in
downtown, and the proposed amendments as a part of this Specific Plan. Likely the most
substantive section of the Specific Plan, this section is broken down into separate subsections
describing the various permitted land uses, site development standards and design guidelines
for the land use categories including Single Family, TwaFamily Residential, Residential Planned
Development, Office, Old Town Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial, General Com-
mercial, Public Institutional, and Light Industrial. Site development standards, design guide-
lines, landscape guidelines and private property maintenance, renovation and expansion pro-
grams are comprehensively described in this section.
Section 3.0 - addresses existing circulation conditions and alternative forms of circulation for
the downtown. This section addresses circulation system hierarchy, public streetscape beauti.
fication and roadway improvements based on the Vision Plan for the High Street and Moorpark
Avenue corridors, public transit, pedestrian/bicycle circulation and gateways, and parking.
Section 4.0 - summarizes the public utilities, infrastructure and services that are present and
planned for in the downtown. Specific services that are addressed include water, sewer, drain-
age, public facilities and services, fire /police protection and enforcement.
,Section 5.0 - addresses implementation of the Plan. Included in this section is a discussion
of organizing and promoting special events and other civic activities in the downtown, as well
as the discussion of possible strategies for attracting and retaining businesses in the down.
town. Moreover, this section provides recommended improvement projects, funding possi-
bilities, programs for implementation of those projects and identifies costs for public im-
provements envisioned in this Plan. This section also discusses issues of downtown manage.
ment, enforcement and image building.
— %KtaodRCCtie.c
6
2V4*T#4,4 Dow.doaw 'Ve.
1.4 Public Participation Process and Market Analysis
1.4.1
1.4.2
1.4.3
The Downtown Moorpark Specific Plan has evolved over a three year process and involved
public outreach through a series of methods. Project consultants worked with the commu-
nity and City leaders through a series of activities to solicit interaction input so that the goals
of the downtown are indeed representative of the merchants, landowners, and public that
regularly use the downtown. Preferences were openly discussed with the City's consultants,
resulting in specific issues that needed to be addressed in the Specific Plan. Below is a sum-
mary of the public participation process, as well as the market analysis and technical support
that was pursued to create the Downtown Specific Plan.
Aerial Photographs and Base Mapping
In order to clearly articulate the vision for the downtown, the City's aerials were combined
with assessor's parcel maps and available legal instruments of record into a base map encom-
passing all the parcels in downtown. This information is a valuable tool to the City since this
is the first occasion a comprehensive map of existing parcels and uses has been created. Exist-
ing downtown conditions are illustrated in Figure 3.
Attendance at Moorpark's "Country Days"
In order to understand how the downtown functions during a
City festival, project consultants attended the "Country Days"
celebration in the Fall of 1995. Field notes and observations
were made about parking, circulation, traffic, public spaces, and
general interest in retail opportunities for the downtown. A num-
ber of interested people who care about the downtown's revital.
ization, most of which were from the Moorpark community, talked
with consultants and offered input and interest in the outcome
of the study. This was a helpful tool for consultants to target
planned improvements for the downtown.
Market Analysis
Si5n -in Sheet
tx
... U"MR „ ..:O.............
�.._ .......
As part of the Specific Plan effort, a basic retail supply and demand analysis was prepared by
Applied Development Economics (ADE), professsional marketing consultants. ADE's re-
port was generated with information provided by the City Redevelopment Agency that in-
cluded professional marketing consultant's estimates of Moorpark residents' spending on
specific products and at specific store types. The purpose of this study was to estimate the
amount of spending leakage leaving the City of Moorpark in order to properly plan for and
capture some of that leakage into new market development opportunities in the downtown.
The analysis included a discussion of sales leakage, local development potential, and regional
transit that may affect the opportunities for business growth downtown. While this market
/Kt26C�KC�6K
7
� e
ao
�/ o
a -
�d
� Ewen Srreer
O MID 0 13
�-.R uo�❑ ❑C� °aa�aC �a0d o0 El
ff= [moo nn 0 1 F no on f
?&OOT 444 V w0ae4 we -TA. ;, Peas
E►nNk
K�4.t al.ri,�
wow
1
o
�
C
d
Q Q ❑
u110 o odau ''a.
I
on 11 LLJ- gpgpg5P° o0 odELjdclg7P
f13
0 CO cflEj ill
r*
o o ru�
0 u00 ❑Q❑ E 1 o owl
■ o 13
1 Lill U on
Inre S..m
..u::.:.-. Ll --
E
D:1
0 R
O
L MHO
i�
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
Figure 3
%Kr36dQmu"
Amm-
8
D�
•*AW MKW
Q
ft-ft" ► E w m--ry
sm-6owwo
oow
.,oErreyE. w
i�
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
Figure 3
%Kr36dQmu"
Amm-
8
21y4avo" Dou ,r44WV s �Ve..
analysis serves the needs of the Specific Plan, it is preliminary in nature. As revitalization
opportunities are identified, more detailed market analysis and financial feasibility studies
may be needed to address market fluctuations and fiscal feasibility/impacts related to specific
development proposals.
The market analysis addressed several key areas:
• Public /private efforts that have been unsuccessful due to a lack of agreement on how
to best improve the downtown.
• Downtown revitalization opportunities including expanding the regional tourism in-
dustry, taking advantage of the Metrolink station activity, reinforcing the distinct physical
character of "Old Town ", and capturing some of the consumer spending capacity that's
leaking to other areas of Ventura and Los Angeles Counties.
• Downtown revitalization barriers that may prevent capitalizing on the market opportu-
nities such as, the separate and distinct geographic areas of the City, location of down-
town away from commuting traffic patterns, the fact that Moorpark residents have
become accustomed to shopping out of town, strong regional competition, and over-
coming the downtown's negative image. The study addressed and summarized in
table format, the City's retail supply and demand including household spending, tax-
able sales, actual sales and leakages. The study determined that over 50% of retail
spending which constitutes almost $2 hundred million dollars, leaks outside of the
City of Moorpark. Most significant leakage overwhelmingly occurs in auto sales, but
substantial leakages also occur in apparel, department stores, general merchandise,
home furnishings and household appliances, and eating and drinking establishments.
The outcome of the market analysis recognized that there is retail leakage among nearly
every category of business in Moorpark, and defined specific uses that would be most
appropriate for the High Street corridor and the Moorpark Avenue corridor, which are
listed in Table 1.
• Other general recommendations involved City leadership in improving communica-
tions and establishing a working relationship among the downtown merchants, recre-
ating a Farmers Market or a crafts market for the downtown area, and exploring the
possibility for hiring an Economic Development Director whose primary purpose is to
attract new retailers into the City with a special emphasis on the downtown district.
The market analysis report and more detailed recommendations can be referenced in the
Appendix to this Specific Plan.
7Ktsadaaeuac
9
W4 z#azk Vo". r-e.K s,�cy�ic alas
Table 1
SUMMARY OF MOORPARK RETAIL SUPPLY AND I)EMANQ
Household
Taxable
Actual
Retail
Spending
Sales
Sales
Leakages
TOTAL
$192,005,572
$60,474,400
$90,636,656
$101,368,916
Apparel Group
$13,356,196
$604,900
$604,900
$12,751,296
• Women's and Misc. apparel
$5,065,489
$604,900
$604,900
$4,460,589
• Men's and boy's clothing
$1,322,890
$0
$0
$1,322,890
• Children's clothing
$523,795
$0
$0
$523,795
• Family clothing
$4,313,823
$0
$0
$4,313,823
• Shoe sales
$2,130,199
$0
$0
$2,130,199
General Merchandise
$36,075,246
$12,012,600
$15,241,072
$20,834,174
• Variety stores
$871,018
$0
$0
$871,018
• Department stores
$11,042,197
$0
$0
$11,042,197
• Discount, mass merchandising
$12,037,142
$9,824,000
$10,635,775
$1,401,367
• Drug and proprietary stores
$4,904,113
$2,188,600
$4,605,296
$298,817
• Warehouse clubs
$3,078,967
$0
$0
$3,078,967
• Other general merchandise
$4,141,809
$0
$0
$4,141,809
Specialty Retail
$11,702,592
$6,547,300
$6,569,783
$5,132,809
• Gift, novelty and souvenir
$711,865
$0
$0
$711,865
• Sporting goods
$2,316,704
$0
$0
$2,316,704
• Florists
$678,867
$0
$0
$678,867
• Photographic equipment
$188,726
$0
$0
$188,726
• Record and prerecorded tape stor
$793,515
$0
$0
$793,515
• Musical instrument stores
$303,278
$0
$0
$303,278
• Book and stationary stores
$764,139
$2,928,100
$2,940,329
$2,176,190
• Jewelry stores
$1,357,285
$0
$0
$1,357,285
• Computer and software stores
$865,657
$2,619,200
$2,619,200
$1,753,543
• Other specialty retail
$3,722,556
$1,000,000
$1,010,254
$2,712,302
Toys
$1,040,568
Luggage and leather
$63,446
Optical goods
$774,500
Candy and confectionary
$124,619
Tobacco stores
$60,698
Misc. retail
$1,658,725
— %Kt4be�KCS60K
10
Table 1 (continued)
SUMMARY Of MOiORPARK RETAIL SUPPLY AND DENtANQ
Household
Taxable
Acts
Retait
Spending
Sales
5a1es
Leakages
Grocery group
$36,696,691
$11,043,500
$37,579,547
$882,856
• Supermarkets and convenience food
$33,572,079
$10,401,200
$36,914,911
$3,342,832
• Specialty food stores
$1,667,101
$0
$0
$1,667,101
Delicatessens
$182,315
Meat and fish markets
$523,093
Fruit and vegetable markets
$190,514
Retail bakeries
$561,435
Misc. food stores
$209,744
• Liquor stores
$1,457,511
$642,300
$664,636
$792,875
Eating and Drinking Group
$20,541,616
$13,172,300
$13,172,300
$7,369,316
• Restaurants /caftedas /specialty
$11,156,736
• Fast food
$8,312,893
• Drinking places
$1,071,987
Home and Garden Group
$15,158,406
$1,506,600
$1,513,102
$13,645,304
• Furniture and home furnishings
$7,566,967
$0
$0
$7,566,967
• Household appliances and electronicss
$5,080,870
$0
$0
$5,080,870
• Used merchandise
$625,220
$0
$0
$625,220
• Nurseries, lawn and garden supply st
$737,904
$1,506,600
$1,513,102
$775,198
• Fuel and ice dealers
$1,147,445
$0
$0
$1,147,445
Building Materials Group
$3,150,420
$621,200
$622,635
$2,527,765
• Lumber and other building materials
$2,325,313
$0
$0
$2,325,313
• Hardware stores
$603,872
$621,200
$622,635
$18,783
• Paint and wallpaper
$221,235
$0
$0
$221,235
Automotive Group
$49,966,053
$13,392,300
$13,392,300
$36,573,753
• Automobile dealers
$34,383,502
$0
$0
$34,383,502
• RV, mobile home, and boat dealers
$1,747,264
$0
$0
$1,747,264
• Auto parts, tires, accessories
$1,397,942
$1,061,000
$1,061,000
$336,942
• Gasoline service stations
$12,437,345
$12,331,300
$12,331,300
$106,045
— 7.ctaaduetlee
11
nr6&o444 DoK s pea,
1.4.4 Resident Survey
Upon evaluating the market conditions and leakage that appears prevalent in Moorpark, it
was determined that a resident survey should be conducted. A total of 800 resident surveys
were distributed to a random sampling of homeowners in the following areas: Campus Park,
Peach Hill, Mountain Meadows, downtown, Varsity Park, and Steeple Hill. Survey questions
were specifically targeted at issues of downtown image and architectural character, use of the
Metrolink station and retail and business opportunities for the downtown versus Los Angeles
Avenue commercial areas. A total of 234 respondents participated in the survey which is
described in Table 2.
1.4.5 Steering Committee /Planning Commission /City Council Meetings
In December of 1995, a study session was held at the Planning Commission and City Coun-
cil to discuss the preliminary ideas being generated for the downtown, and the results of the
market analysis. At this meeting, existing conditions and observations based on field study
and a windshield tour of the downtown were presented, as shown in Figure 3. Opportunities
and constraints as assessed from a physical site planning perspective, as well as market and
land use opportunities, were mapped and presented for discussion and direction. The oppor-
tunities and constraints exhibit is shown in Figure 4.
An exercise titled "rating of preliminary ideas for downtown" was pursued which raised mul-
tiple ideas for both the High Street and Moorpark Avenue corridors relating to market attrac.
tion, character/beautification, land use, and circulation /parking and traffic flow. The City
Council, Planning Commission, and public were asked to prioritize these ideas from high to
low. Specific discussions regarding reuse of the High Street, City-owned property were pre-
sented and direction received that the best alternative was to pursue developer interest and
lease incentives to attract private developers to the property. A number of downtown mer.
chants present at the meeting expressed interest in participating in the exercise, "rating of
preliminary ideas for downtown."
Subsequent to this meeting, draft plans were prepared and reviewed with the Planning Com-
mission and City Council. Feedback on issues of land use design, expansion of the Planning
Area to the east, and implementation ideas were offered and incorporated into the final Plan.
In addition to these public meetings during the writing of this Plan, the City Council ap-
pointed a Downtown Steering Committee to develop recommendations incorporated into
the Plan. Multiple meetings of this committee were conducted, and recommendations were
incorporated into the Specific Plan.
latted«auda
12
7l� Doawroaw s P&.
Table 2
Moorpark Downtown Survey Summary
Resident Survey
May, 1996
Respondents: 234 total 25% Campus Park 15% Peach Hill
39% Mtn. Meadows 19% Downtown 1% Varsity Park 1% Steeple Hill
An overwhelming number of respondents use the Metrolink Station less than 1 day /month. Only 7% responded that
they use the station at all. Ridership is up, therefore commuters may be drawn from outside Moorpark or outside our
study area.
The most common purchases made on High St. are food and hardware. Food (ice cream, diner /cafe, restaurants, etc.)
was the primary reason people come to High St. Second was to visit Whitaker's Hardware, which draws a respectable
22 %. Animal care and the Melodrama were other regularly attended uses. Los Angeles Avenue however, draws a
healthy cross - section of purchases. While food definitely ranked the most purchased item (89 %), such uses as video,
gas, drug store cleaners and K -Mart (specifically), are commonly visited. Specialty items seem to be purchased more
often on High St. (antiques, art, theater, flowers).
The most liked commercial establishments are Wood Ranch BBQ, K -Mart, Hughes Market, Chuy's, the Cactus Patch,
Monica's General Store, Video Thyme and fast food. People are interested in convenience, good quality service /food
and variety.
An even number of people attended Country Days as did not attend. More importantly, 50 % -75% of the respondents
stated that they would attend new activities in the downtown such as a Farmer's Market, art fairs, the theater and
parades. Many respondents currently attend the Melodrama.
The survey showed that people want to dine and shop for specialty goods in the High St. area. Most people responded
that they currently do not shop or dine downtown, but they do shop and dine on Los Angeles Avenue. Given the few
cafe's /restaurants and retail establishments on High St./Moorpark Ave., about 30 % -50% said that they presently use the
High St. /Moorpark area, which tells us that the demand exists for such uses. With respect to grocery shopping, most
people buy their groceries in Moorpark, and only 30% go outside to shop.
Another interesting response was those uses that people said would cause them to visit downtown more often. Over-
whelmingly, people want to see a variety of uses (food and specialty shop diversity), and "name" restaurants (Marie
Callendars, Chili's, Hudson's, etc.). Of concern was that many people raised issue with the lack of enforcement and
that the area does not feel safe, particularly at night. People are concerned about the town's image, and feel as though
loitering (Tipsy Fox and other markets) don't bode well at the City's entrances. Some people suggested that both
upscale Spanish and English business's could be appealing and a draw to downtown. Other's liked the idea of main-
taining the history and integrating it through design and architecture. Increasing tourism was mentioned often.
88% of the respondents want to maintain and promote the rural, country charm in downtown. 35% preferred the
Victorian charter of the buildings and street. Support was also voiced for maintaining the cultural diversity and integrat-
ing civic uses when possible. When asked about what people like the most, the small town atmosphere, quaint architec-
ture, landscaping, lighting and new improvements, the Metrolink Station and boutique /pedestrian uses prevailed. When
asked what they like the least, people stated the lack of different businesses /restaurants and specialty shops, lighting,
clean sidewalks, parking, too much loitering and lack of town pride.
VxAddacada ANN_
13
=
cz) C2 Waft a
C3 C
} ���.E NWGRBo9Hc= -
�! Il�F, 0 E7 r,r,nn nn _, ,_ sue � •��
►_a ■ 7 i
w
gG�E7pgClg[�p E�]6DE�Ep z] ! .`
ms
jdbd�MdCfl'L Ef LLIET�3dT�- R
U U. UUu u�u
°
r�
3 ® O ❑dD p i
•NMI � { � N�y�yM7r `��
I ♦ ❑ r 1%R� LL,OOfDyj�, MM
o c
Ej
•Nllt( w
ihHh
CI MLn -MMLY
M..R
On 130
D �® [3
8 a°
�. o a
OPPORTUNITIES
�° ° ° and
°0 .o d CONSTRAINTS
i
•ate ••�.- Figure 4
— �Ktao�tigcctlo�c
14
ftWZAa a VwlRKt4LpK Sftei(ic PV&.•
1.4.6 Downtown Merchant Survey
As a follow -up to the December Planning Commission /City Council Study Session, the pre-
liminary ideas discussed were distributed in survey form to merchants near downtown High
Street. Respondents often wrote in comments, personalizing the surveys. The results of the
survey can be referenced in the Appendix to this Specific Plan.
1.4.7 Mixed Use Analysis
At the outset of the Specific Plan effort, the City expressed interest in studying the issue of
mixed use (commercial and residential) in the downtown and whether it would be appropri-
ate to help stimulate flexible downtown zoning and provide more opportunity for retail cap.
ture. The planning consultants surveyed City/State -wide programs to determine how mixed
use projects in downtowns succeed and fail and whether the nuisances with mixed use far
outweigh the benefits to permitting retail commercial office and residential uses in close
proximity to one another. The summary in Table 3 describes the common opportunities and
challenges that were identified in mixed use communities. The result of this analysis is that
mixed use is appropriate in the Old Town Commercial Zone along the High Street corridor;
specifically increasing residential and office activities in downtown can foster a healthy, di-
verse environment. Moreover, mixed use in the downtown should include commercial and
residential uses in the same building, as first story commercial and second story residential.
Commercial and residential uses, however, should not be permitted in the High Street corri.
dor when housed in adjacent buildings.
1.4.8 Planning Area Boundary Expansion
Purpose and Intent
The Downtown Specific Plan concentrates on long range planning for the primary down-
town core, focusing on the High Street and Moorpark Avenue corridors, and the surround-
ing residential districts. In developing this Specific Plan, it became apparent that some key
properties adjacent to the High Street core should be evaluated for their relationship and
potential impact to the downtown. Thus, the Planning Area was expanded to address the
future use of adjacent key properties that could have a direct or indirect impact of the vitality
of the downtown. These parcels include properties east and southeast of Spring Road, along
the Metrolink railroad tracks. Comprised of a number of vacant and partially developed
properties, these parcels, their existing conditions, relevant land uses and their relation to the
downtown are discussed below. The City has included these parcels in the Specific Plan
because:
• It is the intent of the Plan to encourage land uses in and adjacent to the downtown
core which are compatible and complementary with the planned downtown land uses.
�Ktae�uet[es ANN-
15
Table 3
MOORPARK DOWNTOWN
MIXED -USE OBSERVATIONS
Opportunities with Mixed -Use
Daawrwow s,� ;Ve.
1. Provides affordable housing.
2. Creates safer downtown.
3. Creates safer nightlife, as well as morning and midday activity (no dead zones). (Can create "24 -hour life ", if desired.)
4. Reduces vehicle trips by providing services, jobs, and housing in close proximity to each other.
5. Promotes a compact City urban form.
6. Can work with peak use times through shared parking, reducing the overall number of needed parking spaces.
7. Allows for land use flexibility to respond to changing market demands.
8. Tends to have more flexible and stronger design character. (Mixed -use architecture is often designed with more sensitiv-
ity to the pedestrian due to the incorporation of residential uses.)
9. Adds life to the upper story of buildings.
10. Can be a more efficient use of land.
11. A tool for the redevelopment / revitalization of depressed areas.
12. Creates a lively urban environment.
Lending capabilities (economic viability of the commercial and residential components).
Noise and nuisance issues between various uses.
Parking — can create competition between residential and business spaces.
Lack of yard, garage, and storage space for residences.
Must be located in high exposure area for commercial uses.
More complex property management
Potential "fear of something new" — the public tends to over regulate and over condition new mixed -use zones which
deteriorates the marketability of the project — the community may fear the unknown and not support it.
Integration and compatibility with adjacent uses (noise, trash and hours of operation)
Potential for overall increase in traffic, noise, and impact on air quality, utilities, schools, and parks.
The challenges with mixed -use developments involving issues of compatibility, traffic, other environmental concerns and con-
sistency with the General Plan could be addressed either on a case -by -case basis during the individual project review process
(i.e., a Special Use Permit), or during the preparation of a City- initiated Zone Change and General Plan Amendment, depending
on the vehicle used to implement the mixed -use concept.
To address parcel specific uses, in many areas mixing office and residential uses near existing residential neighborhoods, cities
employ the following procedure:
An administrative use permit is required for the construction of nonresidential structures or the conversion of resi-
dential structures to nonresidential uses in a mixed -use zone. In order to approve a use permit, the director would
make each of the following findings:
A. That the location, orientation, height, and mass of new structures will not significantly affect privacy in nearby
residential areas.
B. That the project's location or access arrangements will not significantly direct traffic to use local streets in nearby
residential areas.
C. That the project includes landscaping and yards that adequately separate parking and pedestrian circulation areas
from sites in nearby residential areas.
isizoaaccuas
16
'%1loo�aak Doa..ctouR.a s ��
• This Plan sets forth the preferred image, uses, transit/circulation routes, architectural
character, parking and public spaces in the downtown. The close proximity of the only
large vacant parcel to the primary transit /pedestrian /vehicular corridor in the down-
town presents an opportunity to capitalize on the highest and best use to spur down-
town revitalization.
• The planning and further development of these properties may reduce or benefit the
quality of life for residents, merchants and visitors to the downtown, depending upon
the type, size, quantity and quality of the development.
A. Existing Conditions and Land Use
Parcels in the expanded Planning Area front either old Los Angeles Avenue or Spring Road.
All parcels share frontage along the Union Pacific Railroad right -of -way. Most of the parcels
are vacant, and immediately to the east are small lot industrial park uses. To the south are
multi - family attached condominiums. Some parcels front old Los Angeles Avenue and are
developed as a gravel operation and a very small vacant parcel. To the west, closer to the
downtown, exist four small lots that contain Chuey's fast food restaurant, an automobile
repair /service shop and a gas station at the corner of High Street and Spring Road. Of
particular importance is the fact that the City has designated Spring Road as the future con-
nection to possible growth areas north of the City limits. This will result in road widening to
accommodate future increased traffic levels.
B. Planning Issues
A number of issues are raised in designating the highest and best use for these important
properties. These issues are discussed below:
High Street/Los Angeles Avenue Parcels:
These parcels contain operating industrial uses fronting onto a heavily traveled route con-
necting the downtown and civic center to Highway 118. The physical characteristics of the
street are somewhat different (than between High Street and Moorpark Avenue). When
traveling east past Chuey's restaurant, the road winds and a substantial grade change exists on
the north side of the street.
The residential neighborhood on the north side of the street overlooks these sites and is most
impacted by these uses. Particular issues of noise, light nuisance, glare and visual impacts are
a concern. The scale of the pedestrian space is less intimate than on High Street to the west,
and does not promote a walking atmosphere. This is partially due to the absence of buildings
fronting the north side of the street. Further, vehicle speeds tend to increase as drivers accel-
erate from the signalized intersection at Spring Road and High Street moving east. Points of
access are limited as the number and size of the uses are larger than that in the High Street
core. A landscape buffer has been planted along the southern side of the street to screen the
gravel operation. With the presence of the railroad tracks defining the edge of these parcels,
the conditions dictate an environment conducive to industrial use versus commercial, resi-
dential or other downtown -type uses.
1- estswaaetle«
17
?&40TA44 2)@&Wt*eOW j= ..
Spring Road Vacant Parcels:
These vacant parcels are surrounded by a mix of uses including industrial park, multi- family
residential, single- family residential and commercial service /retail. Spring Road itself is a
primary connection between the Los Angeles Avenue "downtown" corridor to the High Street
"old town" corridor. The intersection of these two roads is an important gateway into the
"old town" High Street core. The character of uses along Spring Road to this intersection is
different than along the Los Angeles /High Street extension to the east (described above).
The pedestrian scale of the street is reduced because of the single and multi- family neighbor-
hoods coupled with the retail and service commercial uses at the corners of High Street and
Spring Road. Sidewalks, landscaping and "people" are more common in this area. These
parcels front the railroad right -of -way and tend to have a stronger connection to the "old
town" core, especially since the Metrolink station is a central focal point along High Street.
While these parcels were originally planned as a part of the Spring Road industrial park, their
location fronting Spring Road promotes the opportunity to reinforce the gateway to down-
town High Street. Future use of these parcels could involve integrating the adjacent indus-
trial park offices with the residential and commercial neighborhoods to the west, focusing on
the railroad as a linking corridor.
— 9stsodacelleK
18
wloo1#444 Doaw&v,.v SA.Ai:! P&"
1.5 Relationship to City Plans and Programs
1.5.1 General Plan Consistency
This Specific Plan is authorized by Article 8 of the California Government Code, Section
65450 et. set.. This document meets the requirements as specified in Section 65451 of that
Code. The Specific Plan is consistent with and furthers the objectives of the City of Moorpark
General Plan. It provides detailed criteria for development of specific sites and public
streetscape improvements. This Specific Plan has been prepared to reinforce all elements of
the General Plan, and more specifically the Land Use and Circulation Element adopted by
the City Council on May 13, 1992 and the Housing Element adopted in October 1989. The
following General Plan Land Use, Housing, and Circulation Element policies have guided
the Downtown Specific Plan effort.
Commercial Development --Land Use Element
Goal 8: Provide for new commercial development which is compatible with surround.
ing land uses.
Policy 8.1: New commercial uses shall be compatible in scale and character with all adja-
cent commercial uses.
Policy 8.2: Commercial development shall incorporate design features such as walls, land-
scaping and setbacks, and include height and lighting restrictions so as to
minimize adverse impacts on adjacent uses and enhance the visual character-
istics of the area.
Policy 8.3: Automobile and truck access to commercial properties shall be located so as
to minimize impacts to adjacent uses.
Policy 8.4: Commercial uses shall be well maintained to enhance the visual characteris.
tics of the area.
Goal 9: Promote the revitalization of the downtown commercial core (Moorpark Av-
enue area, Walnut Street, Bard Street, Magnolia Avenue, and High Street).
Policy 9.1: The visual character of the downtown commercial core shall be strengthened
in order to attract a variety of commercial uses and to promote the economic
viability of downtown Moorpark.
Policy 9.2: The low -rise scale of the downtown commercial core should be maintained.
Policy 9.3: The establishment of a community meeting/marketplace in the downtown
core shall be promoted.
— 9staodaet6oK
19
?&4&9A44 V O&W VA-M S,�c ;V&.
Policy 9.4: A comprehensive plan for the downtown commercial core shall promote new
commercial infill areas, park or recreational opportunities, public parking,
and a potential multimodal transportation center.
Policy 9.5: The civic center shall remain in the downtown area to encourage the revital-
ization of downtown.
Policy 9.6: Public spaces and services shall be maintained to create an aesthetically and
functionally welcoming environment.
Policy 9.7: An integrated architectural theme should be used in the redevelopment of
existing or development of new commercial buildings.
Economic Development and Employment —Land Use Element
Policy 13.3: The City shall encourage the coordinated revitalization of obsolete or declin-
ing commercial areas, particularly focusing on the downtown area.
Policy 13.4: The City shall work with the business community in a cooperative manner to
encourage desired businesses to locate and to remain in the City.
Policy 13.5: The City shall work with the business and development community to en-
courage an increase in sales tax capture.
Policy 13.6: The City shall establish and implement a business attraction, promotion, and
retention plan.
Community Appearance —Land Use Element
Policy 17.1: New development shall be compatible with the scale and visual character of
the surrounding neighborhood.
Policy 17.2: Identifiable entryways for the overall community, and unique or principal
business /commercial districts of the City (i.e., City core and transportation
corridors) should be encouraged.
Policy 17.4: Design concepts should be established for the overall community and for spe-
cial treatment areas, such as the downtown district, which may include guide-
lines for architecture, landscape architecture, signage, streetscape, and infra-
structure.
Policy 17.5: New development should incorporate a variety of landscape architecture themes
and techniques to help organize and delineate land uses and to enhance the
overall visual quality of the City.
— 9.ctzoadaetio.c —
20
Policy 17.10: A design program which includes specific standards and detailed design mea-
sures shall be established for the downtown area.
Policy 18.1: All downtown area revitalization efforts shall preserve, as appropriate, a his-
toric theme reflective of the community's origins.
Policy 18.3: The creation of both residential and commercial historic districts, and the
upgrading of historic structures should be encouraged.
Policy 18.4: Development in the downtown area should incorporate the careful use of
compatible or similar construction materials and architectural style, so as not
to detract from the integrity of historical features.
Residential Development —Land Use Element
Goal 5: Develop new residential housing which is compatible with the character of
existing individual neighborhoods and minimizes land use incompatibility.
Policy 5.1: Multiple- family dwellings shall be developed in close proximity to employ-
ment opportunities, shopping areas, public parks, and transit lines, with care-
ful consideration of the proximity to and compatibility with single- family neigh-
borhoods.
Policy 5.2: Infill development in existing residential neighborhoods shall be compatible
with the scale and character of the surrounding neighborhood.
Housing Element
Goal 2: To preserve desirable neighborhoods through conservation, rehabilitation,
and renewal of housing.
Goal 5: To provide housing opportunities for all segments of the population and for a
variety of economic levels in proximity to jobs, schools, and shopping facili-
ties.
Goal 7: To promote upgrading and maintenance of existing housing.
Transit System — Circulation Element
Policy 4.2: Proposed developments shall include transit facilities, such as bus benches,
shelters, pads or turn -outs, where appropriate, in their improvement plans, or
as needed in proximity to their development.
21
7&40TA4,a Do&-erd wa S�icC�ca Pla
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities — Circulation Element
Policy 5.2: Plans for bicycle and pedestrian facilities shall give priority to providing conti-
nuity and closing gaps in the bikeway and sidewalk network.
Policy 5.6: Bicycle racks shall be required, and storage facilities shall be encouraged at
new or modified public, commercial, and industrial building sites.
The Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan is intended to be consistent with and help imple-
ment the Moorpark General Plan which encourages the preservation and enhancement of
the downtown while maintaining the City's small town character. Existing General Plan
Land Use designations within the Specific Plan can be referenced in the City General Plan
and Zoning Code.
1.5.2 Consistency with City Zoning Code
The City of Moorpark Municipal Code, Title 17 - Zoning, provides site specific development
and use regulations that govern the size, shape, and intensity of development in the down-
town and the uses to which new development may be committed. The provisions of the City
Zoning Code apply to the properties in the Specific Plan Area and supplement the regula-
tions stated in the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan development standards and design guide-
lines are consistent with, and further, the City Zoning Code. In such cases where the Specific
Plan development standards and zoning code standards conflict, the Specific Plan develop-
ment standards shall apply.
This Specific Plan involved extensive revisiting of land uses and zoning within the Specific
Plan boundary. The new Specific Plan land use and zoning maps can be referenced in Fig-
ures 5 and 6 in Section 2.0. The most significant changes in land use and zoning involve the
creation of the Old Town Commercial Zone which is a mixed use zone with a special list of
allowable uses along the High Street corridor.
In many cases the Specific Plan supplements the City Zoning Code. In such cases the City
Zoning Code is referenced for detailed standards. This is particularly true for sign require-
ments. Since the City's Zoning Code involves comprehensive sign standards, sign guidelines
and standards are not emphasized in this plan.
*24rudacu" Abu-
22
%iA&L i 4 vwwordaw SA",Oe Pe.
1.6 Review Procedures
This section of the Specific Plan describes the City's design review process. As with any
development or renovation proposal in the City, an applicant must follow a process in order
to complete site and building improvements. These procedures apply to any privately or
quasi- publicly held parcel or building within the Specific Plan area. For definition, the appli-
cable study area that is subject to these review procedures and subsequent requirements of
this Specific Plan is shown in Figure 2.
The City's design review process is handled by the Department of Community Development.
Anyone considering a development project, a remodel, expansion or change of use within the
boundaries of the Specific Plan area should first schedule an appointment with a member of
the Community Development Department to discuss the Specific Plan land uses, zoning,
and design guidelines and standards. The staff member can help explain the City's develop-
ment procedures, assessing whether or not the project needs an administrative, planned de-
velopment or conditional use permit. The staff member can also provide an approximate
timeline for processing the project /application and the required permits or approvals. Appli-
cation forms and a complete list of application submittal requirements can be obtained from
the staff planner or from the Community Development Department. Since the downtown is
designated a redevelopment area, the applicant may also benefit from meeting with a staff
member from the Redevelopment Agency.
Design review is generally required for all new construction, exterior modifications and sub-
stantial remodels to existing buildings or single and multifamily residences, parking lots and
exterior pedestrian areas. Design review occurs in conjunction with the respective entitle-
ment process which is governed by Chapter 17.44 of the City's Zoning Code. In addition to
the City's Zoning Code, projects must comply with the standards provided in this Specific
Plan. The specific provisions of this code should be discussed with Community Develop-
ment staff prior to submission of an application.
The City's design review process begins with submittal of an application to the Department
of Community Development. Community Development staff will review the submitted ap-
plication to make sure it is complete, and prepare a written report assessing the overall design,
its consistency with applicable city development codes and standards, and its consistency with
the guidelines and standards of this Specific Plan. Depending upon the type of application
(administrative use, planned development or conditional use permit) the project will be con-
sidered for approval in a public hearing by either the Director of Community Development,
the Planning Commission or City Council. Regardless of the approval body, such factors will
be considered in the review of any application, such as how the project relates to the natural
features of the site, surrounding development and the desired architectural character of the
immediate neighborhood as prescribed in this Specific Plan. The review authority will also
evaluate the effect the project will have on the visual character of the community, the quality
of the experience for those who will use the development, and the quality of life in downtown
9ataedacu"
23
?&4OT aaak Dou.«tocwc Sp a P&..
Moorpark. For example, if the project involves renovation of a landmark building as desig-
nated by this Specific Plan, special design criteria may be required to preserve and enhance
the building's historic architectural value.
For the purposes of clarity, new development is defined as any building application for a
structure(s) on a parcel which is vacant or partially developed. Site and building renovations
and expansions are those improvements made to existing structures, parking and landscape
areas.
— 9Ktaalrceue.� —
24
n**%Aazk Daufntau•k S,4cceJee ,VCcs
2.0 Land Use and Zoning
2.1 Existing Land Use and Zoning
The existing land use and zoning maps for the Downtown Specific Plan can be referenced in
the City General Plan and Zoning Code. Existing conditions for the planning area are shown
in Figure 3 of this Specific Plan. Existing land uses and conditions for the expanded planning
area (not addressed in Figure 3), are discussed in Section 1.4.8 of this Specific Plan. The
relationship between the City General Plan Land Use Element and this Specific Plan is
discussed in Section 1.5.1 of this Specific Plan.
2.1.1 Planned Land Use and Zoning
As discussed in Section 1.5, Relationship to City Plans and Programs, the City's General Plan
sets forth a number of policies that encourage revitalization of the downtown with respect to
land uses, parking, and business attraction. In order to further this goal, this Specific Plan
sets forth different land use designations and zoning districts within the Downtown Specific
Plan area. These designations reflect the existing downtown conditions and General Plan
policies to intensify land use, as well as plan for a mix of commercial neighborhood, commer-
cial retail, general commercial, office, single and multi - family residential, public institutional,
and industrial zoning districts.
A. Special Commercial and Industrial Zones
• Old Town Commercial (GOT)
Probably the most significant change that is occurring as a part of this Specific Plan is the
creation of the Old Town Commercial zone. The purpose of creating this zone is to allow for
an expanded list of allowable uses, combining uses currently allowed within the City's G1
and G2 commercial zoning categories in order to focus and encourage preferred uses to the
downtown. Formally, to establish the C-OT zoning district, Title 17, Zoning of the Munici-
pal Code of the City of Moorpark, has been amended as follows:
1. The official zoning map of the City of Moorpark, as referenced in Section 17.04.020,
is amended by adding thereto the designation Downtown Specific Plan (SP -D) and
applying said designation to the properties within the Downtown Specific Plan area
as shown in Figure 6 of this Specific Plan;
2. Section 17.12.010 is amended by adding the zoning designation "C-OT" Old Town
Commercial to the zoning list as follows: "Q Old Town Commercial (C-OT) zone ".
L'a«d Zfec a«d �oafirg —
25
Waa2fLQ24 Ddeove*a..v .S )O66G6c6 �ZYtw
3. Section 17.16.050 is amended by adding the definition for the Old Town Commer-
cial District as follows: E. Old Town Commercial (GOT) Zone. The purpose of
this zone is to provide development standards and uses within the Downtown Spe-
cific Plan area approved in Specific Plan 95 -1, in order to ensure compatibility and
coordination of uses within the planning area.
4. Amending Table 17.20.060 within Section 17.20.060 by adding thereto the designa-
tion GOT as an additional column and identifying the uses and approval methodol-
ogy for such uses as shown on Table 4.
• Commercial Planned Development (CPD)
In addition to creation of the GOT zone, a few parcels are designated C-PD in the Plan area.
For the GPD zoned vacant undeveloped properties east of Spring Road, preferred uses are
those that will act as an extension to the High Street downtown corridor. Ideal uses are those
that bring people to the site to shop, dine or recreate. Preferred uses include anchor -type
medium chain retailers (i.e. Petsmart, Circuit City, Good Guys, IKEA), a mix of restaurants,
retail uses and specialty markets, visitor - serving uses (small inn, hotel and support facilities,
and some neighborhood convenience uses (specialty furniture and appliances, housewares,
small department store, health club, etc.). In addition to these commercial uses, civic uses
such as a post office, library, or required offices are also encouraged.
• Industrial Park (M -1)
The intent of the M -1 District is to attract clean, high -tech industrial employment uses.
These uses will bring base -level jobs and people to the downtown, thereby increasing daytime
activity. Preferred Light Industrial uses are railroad dependent or support businesses, clean
industry (software, semi - conductor etc.), research and development and various commercial
and industrial offices.
B. Legal, Non - Conforming Uses
In some cases, zone changes made as a part of the Specific Plan will result in creating legal
non - conforming uses. It is the intent of the City at the time of writing this Specific Plan to
allow existing uses to remain. Thus, in such cases, where legal non - conforming uses are
created, this Specific Plan allows minor expansions for these legal, nonconforming uses
based on compliance with strictly written criteria (see Section 2.3.2).
C. Vision Plans
According to the City General Plan, there currently exists approximately 194 acres of Gen-
eral Commercial zoning in the City and nine acres of Neighborhood Commercial zoning.
In order to estimate what the potential build -out would be in terms of square footage for the
Downtown Specific Plan area, approximate calculations were performed based on City of
Moorpark Zoning Code building coverage requirements. In order to properly design and
project build -out of the vacant parcels and underdeveloped parcels in the downtown, physi-
cal "vision" plans were prepared for the High Street and Moorpark Avenue corridor. Illus-
z4a ?.lac aad �eKGrg —
lWokas,owni V aus.ctaaan S/ecg4e Caw
trated in Figures 8 through 11, these Vision Plans characterize build -out of the downtown
with respect to public streetscape, beautification, parking, massing, and pedestrian circula-
tion and plazas. These Vision Plans also suggest a possible scenario for private property
development in these focus areas. These plans are intended to help guide future develop-
ment, but in no way are intended as mandatory configurations for implementation. (Sec-
tion 3.3 fully describes these plans and their elements).
D. Potential Commercial Build -out
Presently, the City of Moorpark Zoning Code allows building coverage up to 50 %. Based
upon preliminary site planning and parking coverage, proposed build -out of the Vision Plan
shows the average building coverage at approximately 37 %. Presently, for the commercial
areas in the downtown building coverage totals approximately 15 -20 %, demonstrating that
the area is significantly underdeveloped. The total land square footage within the commer-
cial areas of the downtown include approximately 564,700 and 676,500 square feet for the
Moorpark Avenue and High Street areas. Presently, the existing commercial and light indus-
trial zoning includes C-1, C-2, CPD, M -1 and M -2 zones. The total existing commercial
building square footage within those zones is 102,600 square feet and 54,300 square feet.
Assuming proposed build -out per the Vision Plan, new commercial building square footage
would almost triple from 156,900 to 441,850 square feet. This assumes building footprint
only and does not consider the allowance for two and three -story development. Given this
build -out scenario, assuming the downtown commercial areas could accommodate two and
three story development, there is a maximum potential commercial build -out capacity in the
downtown of approximately five to ten acres. Further, given the City's existing Zoning Code
incentive that allows a 50% reduction in parking to encourage downtown uses, it is likely
that up to ten acres of commercial development could be realized along the Moorpark Av-
enue and High Street corridors.
E. Organization of Specific Plan Development Standards and Design Guidelines
Sections 2.2.1 through 2.2.8 of this Specific Plan address the land use and zoning categories
designated in the Specific Plan. These sections are categorized into specific site development
standards and more general design guidelines. Each category is discussed with respect to site
planning standards, permitted density, design guidelines, and landscape standards that will
guide new development or expansions of existing development within the downtown. Fol-
lowing the development standards and design guidelines for each zone (Sections 2.2.1. 2.2.8)
is a discussion of private property maintenance, renovation and expansion (Section 2.3).
This section is intended to supplement the various land use standards and guidelines, as well
as specify a program for lot consolidation and building renovation in the Plan area.
rand ?lac aad go"" -
27
%%laazhazk Dacu.rtau•.c S,�ccc6CC �CaK
Table 4
A Temporary use permit
Permitted by zone clearance
Planning Commission- approved planned development permit
1 Qty Council- approved planned development permit
0 Planning Commission- approved conditional use permit
City Council - Conditional Use Permit
Administrative Permit
.;
■
G{7T
Old To%m
USE #rSTorme�ciar
Alcoholic beverage sales
Beer and wine sales in restaurants
All other alcohol sales
Amusement and recreational facilities (see definitions in Chapter 17.08)
Art galleries, museums, and botanical gardens
Automobile repair, including component repair
Automobile service stations
Banks and related financial offices and institutions
Barber, hairstylists, manicurists
Tanning centers
Bars, taverns, and nightclubs
Care facilities: For 9 or more persons (Day)
Churches, synagogues, and other buildings used for religious worship
Club projects, temporary outdoor
Clubhouses
With alcoholic beverages
Communications facilities
Radio and television broadcasting studios
Crop production
Doa and cat aroomim
n
Dressmaking and tailor shops
Dwelling for superindendent or owner
Dwelling, caretaker
Education and training (see schools)
Festivals and similar special events, temporary outdoor
Government buildings, excluding correctional institutions
Fire stations
Libraries and information center
■
Z4, d 14e "d 5ft-i"
28
nooa, wt.6 j%oucKteu•K SAeec�(Ce PCss
Table 4 (continued)
Grading not in conjunction with a development project
Less than 5,000 cubic yards
More than 5,000 cubic yards
Health club/gymnasium (see definitions)
0
Health services such as professional offices and outpatient clinics
Hotels, motels and bed- and - breakfast inns
Kennels (animal hospitals, boarding and grooming - small animals)
Laundry service (laundromats)
Laundry service (light)
Manufacturing associated with crafts ad artisans ( incl. assembly, exhibits, demonstration)
Manufacturing and repair of photograhic and optical goods
Martial arts and dance studios
0
Motion picture and N production, and related activities and structures
Temporary (maximum 47 days in any 180 -day period)
A
Offices: business, professional, and administrative, except health and veterinary
0
Optical Goods
Organizations (professional, religious, political, labor, trade, youth, etc.)
Parks--public
Parking lots
Public utility facilities
Offices only
Pharmacy, accessory retail, for prescription pharmaceuticals only
Photocopy /quick printers
Photofinishing (1 -hour photo)
Produce stands, retail
A
Repair of personal goods such as jewelry, shoes, and saddlery
Restaurants, cafes, and cafeterias
Restaurants and cafes outside eating area
Retail trade (see definitions in Chapter 17.08) includes retail only nurseries and
excludes lumber and building materials sales yards, pawnshops, and liquor stores
Outdoor sales area
Outdoor sales area temporary
A
.44.d ?foe 4,d g —
29
(1:13, 11
2z
...........
. .... .......
............ I I ", /-....
Angeles Avenue
..............
Specific Plan Land Use Map
Not to Scale
Legend
El Medium Density Residential (4-6 du)
EM High to Very High Density Residential (7-14 du)
19 Very High Density Residential (15-20 du)
Office
Old Town Commercial
Neighborhood Commercial
El General Commercial
1:1 Light Industrial
ElPublic Institutional
Parks
Specific Plan Boundary
. . .. ..
.............
LT
Filch A-
[A.E.— ;—;i j �f I i
tP
4
Jl;;,�A t le .1 i
I el
.. ... .. . ............. ..
Rk-
. . ..................
rA
Angeles Avenue
..............
Specific Plan Land Use Map
Not to Scale
Legend
El Medium Density Residential (4-6 du)
EM High to Very High Density Residential (7-14 du)
19 Very High Density Residential (15-20 du)
Office
Old Town Commercial
Neighborhood Commercial
El General Commercial
1:1 Light Industrial
ElPublic Institutional
Parks
Specific Plan Boundary
11--ii
RPD -20u
1.
1 #'
J,.
1 = rtllrwr.wwgnau rrw.r�c j (t 'tl : t
1
..t ..."_. _..... il 1�� .J t.tl 71 YrYj �f (1
t...7i
T �I
� ., :.t� � JEr:ll 3rr�•,><.-�I 17 I � F �I lt,t � I t- I
L. �l} Fl"" .. _..
7 1
,,�
Mulll roily ReeM
1 L= i
1
Density t ♦ " 1 . f '
bonus t l
allowed lot
co sol ationand r e pl ac ementstructures, an d
"- .► - ' F� � up to 20 du allowed upon meeting criteria for
- 1: a [N•,2 low /very low income or senior housing.
♦ t
Los Angeles Avenue ..
R ,
FT
Specific Plan Zoning Map
Md..tnal
Park
Not to Scale
Leaend
E] (R - 1) Single Family Residential
(R - 2) Two - Family Residential
B(RPD) Residential Planned Development,
7- 14units/acre •
® (C - 0) Office
® (C - 1) Neighborhood Commercial
(C - OT) Old Town Commercial
(C -2) General Commercial
E] (CPD) Commercial Planned Development
(1) Institutional
(M - 1) Industrial Park
.... Specific Plan Boundary
I /{.daZfGQZ� �6Cp Ktd(µK .S)OeceJee 'Pe11K
2.1.2 Development Standards, Design Guidelines, Landmark Structures
The following development standards and design guidelines for downtown Moorpark are
intended to reinforce building character and establish design criteria for all new buildings,
renovated buildings, and remodels. The standards and guidelines should be used in conjunc-
tion with the Downtown Vision Plan (see Figures 8 - 11), and are intended to provide prop-
erty owners, merchants, and their designers with basic design criteria. These guidelines and
standards are intended to apply to any and all renovations regardless of the level and inten-
sity.
A. Goals of the Development Standards and Design Guidelines
The goals of these development standards and design guidelines are as follows:
1. Establish a hierarchy of building types in the downtown area utilizing a landmark
building designation to identify special and important places.
2. Provide basic design recommendations for all buildings in the downtown promoting
design creativity, and variation while insuring consistency in building scale, propor-
tion, and pedestrian orientation.
3. Establish clear and usable standards, guidelines and criteria.
4. Protect and enhance historical architectural buildings and utilize historical building
forms and styles to create future buildings.
B. Description of the Applicable Study Area
The applicable area for these development standards and design guidelines corresponds to
the Downtown Specific Plan boundary. Generally these standards and guidelines apply to all
commercial and non - commercial buildings found within the downtown.
C. Architectural History
Moorpark began as a small agricultural community prior to the turn of the century. It was
subdivided into a number of larger ranchettes consisting of fruit orchards and pasture land.
The arrival of the railroad provided Moorpark with an economic boost as it became a central
point for shipping and dispersion of agricultural products and supplies.
The first buildings were residential structures that supported farming. Commercial build-
ings in the downtown core began to appear slowly and sporadically in the early 1900's. These
buildings were typically single story and were predominantly constructed of wood and to a
lesser degree, unreinforced masonry. There were a number of landmark buildings con-
structed including the Epworth Church (Wesley Chapel), the Cornett Home on Charles
Street, the Moorpark Depot and the Birkenshaw Home on Moorpark Avenue, all of which
occupied prominent downtown locations and have a distinctive level of architectural orna-
mentation.
?foe 4.d go" —
32
%i ,%s,t)iazk ?Doea. roa.s SAeeg6ee PlsK
Historical photographs and histories of downtown Moorpark show that there was not a clear
and overriding design theme to the old town, but rather a blend of Early American commer-
cial architectural styles. As more and more buildings were constructed and infilled in the
downtown, their styles took on the design themes of the day. Thus today, a variety of archi-
tectural styles and character adds to the area's richness and vitality. The guiding architec-
tural styles downtown include Victorian, Early American, and Early California Bungalow.
The standards and guidelines in this Specific Plan, therefore, do not impose strict stylistic
regulations, but rather provide basic guidelines of themes such as massing, height, setback,
scale, proportion, pedestrian orientation in the storefronts while allowing design individual-
ity in each building.
D. Landmark Building Designation
The purpose of establishing a landmark building designation is to begin to identify and thus,
beautify important and key locations downtown. Landmark sites have provided in the past,
and will continue to provide, a sense of place and identity for downtown Moorpark. Land.
marks will become community gathering places and icons.
The process of developing a "place marking" system is critical to establishing a sense of pride
and ownership in downtown Moorpark. Landmark buildings include both private buildings
such as the Birkenshaw House, the Old Epworth Church and public buildings such as the
Railroad Depot. All buildings, regardless
of their landmark status that are, located
at intersections in the core area need to be
given special attention. The following de.
sign criteria are intended to supplement the
City's Municipal Code, Title 15, Building
and Construction, Chapter 15.36 Historic
Preservation, and will insure that existing ^ "E
landmark buildings maintain their special
status and beauty, and that new landmark
buildings will be regally constructed and
denote special places in the downtown.
Historic Epworth Church
New Landmark Building Design Guidelines
• The use of tower -like design and landmark buildings is encouraged. This will en.
hance and emphasize the important qualities of the site and structure.
• Landmark buildings should be a minimum of two stories and preferably three stories
(at least through punctuated architectural elements) to further emphasize the impor-
tance of key intersections.
• Exterior staircases are encouraged and should be compatible with the architectural
character.
Z4.rd Zfee aad �eai.rg —
33
*W4 42'L 4Z 14 ) at a4ot toG4K _T*eec�Ge ;27C4K
• New structures proposed for landmark building sites should respond to pedestrian
circulation by providing areas for corner arcades.
• Corner landmark buildings can emphasize their importance with architectural de-
tails, building height, towers, arcades, etc.
• Existing or new public landmark buildings such as the Railroad Depot should include
such features as grand entrances, tower elements, high ceilings and trusses, vertical,
multi - paneled and recessed windows, ample landscaping and fountains, and /or pub-
lic greens or courtyards.
• Integrating pedestrian plazas and courtyards on landmark sites is recommended as is
stately entrances with planters, wood beams, and large doors that emphasize the
importance of these buildings.
zd-d ?lee aad 4 —
34
'%itoaz�sazk Daev.cteu..c S�eec6le Elsa
2.2 Development Standards and Guidelines for Specific Plan Zones
2.2.1 Single Family Residential — (R -1)
A. Site Development Standards
1. Land Use and Permitted Uses
The Single Family Residential designation is intended to accommodate single family home
development on - varying sized parcels, while preserving hillside landforms and historic weave
of the neighborhood character. This land designation allows for second dwelling units when
an Administrative Permit has been secured in accordance with Zoning Code Chapter 17.28(0).
Secondary dwellings are not encouraged on small to medium sized lots. Land uses shall be
permitted as designated in Table 17.20.050 of the Zoning Code.
2. Density
Existing land use patterns in the Single Density Residential areas of the plan are character-
ized by both developed and undeveloped parcels that range from 6,000 square feet to greater
than 1 acre in size. A number of parcels north of Everett Street and along Valley Road are
located in hillside areas with slopes in excess of 20 percent, making them subject to Hillside
Management development requirements. The maximum density for the Single Family Resi-
dential area is 4 to 6 units per acre.
3. Building Setbacks - Single Family Residential - R -1
Building setbacks in the Single Family Residential zone shall conform to the following stan-
dards, with setback intrusions permitted only as described in Section 17.24.060.A of Title 17
of the Moorpark Zoning Code, including setback requirements for detached accessory struc.
tures. Section 17.24.070 shall determine the extent of any other miscellaneous setback re-
quirements.
Front
From main house Min. 20 feet
From front porch Min. 14 feet
Side
Interior lot Min. 5 feet
Corner lot street side Min. 10 feet
Rear
— St«gLc �a«rtG� �eatdurual —
35
Min. 15 feet
Wawt,&,t,4 V *eOO eGGaK ,Sj6ee4 a pe'4K
4. Height
For the primary structure, the maximum height is 25 feet; measured from finish grade to
the highest point of a flat or mansard roof, or in the case of pitched or hip roof, to the
"averaged midpoint" which is the average of the highest point on the roof with the top of
the finished wall height.
The maximum height for an accessory structure is 15 feet. The maximum height of a patio
cover or second story deck (excluding rail height) shall be 12 feet. Exceptions to building
height may only be permitted in accordance with Section 17.24.080 of Title 17 of the Moorpark
Municipal Code.
5. Second Dwellings and Building Additions
Second dwellings are permitted on lots that are 10,890 square feet (1/4 acre) or larger in size.
For lots 10,890 square feet (1/4 acre) to 21,780 square feet (1/2 acre) - a second dwelling unit
shall not exceed 800 square feet. These units may be located over garages. All secondary
structures and building additions /expansions should complement the existing structure in
form, massing, building materials, and architectural character.
The maximum size of the second dwelling shall be limited to the following lot size limita-
tions:
U.
1/4 acre - 1/2 acre 800 sq. ft.*
(10,890 - 21,780 sq. ft.)
'Per City of Moorpark Zoning Code.
• The Planning Commission may authorize exceptions to the standards by use permit
upon finding that 1) The purpose of this section is served 2) Strict compliance with
the size limitations would (a) require significant structural modifications that would
not otherwise be required, or (b) adversely affect an historic or architecturally signifi-
cant building.
• Either the primary unit or the second unit must be owner - occupied.
• Accessory buildings shall not be located in front setback areas between the main
structure and the public street.
• The style material and color of accessory buildings visible from public streets shall be
the same or substantially consistent with the main structure.
• In the case of carport design:
- Materials and colors shall be the same as the main building
— Burgle
57",a4 Rea6d"ew-
36
'lKoaz�tia2k Daeo'seatv.c S)*eec64'e Pls,r
- Where carports back up to public streets or alleys, provide rear carport walls to
screen cars
- Include facias in carport roof design to screen support beams and trusses
- Roof design should be compatible with the main structure
6. Maintenance and Renovation:
Quality maintenance of existing buildings and parcels, combined with gradual progression in
meeting design goals for this land use designation are encouraged. To this end, the mainte-
nance guidelines and incentives outlined in section 2.3.1 to 2.3.2 apply to the Single Family
Residential designation.
— S.C.9& 7"'a4 Rea ee«ual-
37
%iLodahazk Dou.atou..a ;Ve""
t .
General Character — 1900's California Bungalow and Early American
These Moorpark design guidelines shall apply to all Single Family Residential areas in the
Specific Plan area. Downtown residential architecture consists primarily of early 1900's Cali-
fornia bungalow style, integrated with Early American style structures. These guidelines
apply to new construction as well as replacement and expansion of existing structures to
preserve and strengthen historic neighborhood character. Modern interpretations of these
styles are also acceptable if they maintain integrated massing and blend with the surrounding
neighborhood.
Examples of the 1900's California Bungalow style
1. Building Form and Massing
All housing constructed within the Single Family Residential areas of the Specific Plan must
be consistent with the Moorpark General Plan.
• The buildings and building additions should be carefully massed and articulated to
blend with the existing historic neighborhood. Building additions and expansions
should be of similar form and proportionally massed with the existing structure.
• The building mass should be softened with architectural features such as garden walls,
porches, balconies, and trellises.
• The building form should clearly define entries using roof forms, stoops (elevated
porch), and porches.
• The building form should de-emphasize garages and garage doors by locating them
behind the main building.
— Sucgle 574 -ily �iaide.ctial-
38
'4 D41 seroeaK _T)d*LCL�([C ;VCaK
EXPOSED RAFTER TAILS
I EXPOSED ROOF BEAMS
TRIANGULAR KNEE BRACE
EXPOSED RAFTER TAILS
Exposed structural elements reinforce early American building styles
2. Roof Form
Roof forms and details must be consistent with the Early American and California Bunga-
low style architecture of the surrounding neighborhood. Dormers, eaves, exposed rafter
tails, exposed roof beams, detailed corbels, and triangular knee braces are common elements
of this style. Appropriate roof forms include gable, shed, and hip roofs with a low pitch (3:12
- 4:12).
• Mansard roof forms should only be used when and if the building emulates a tradi.
tional style that employs mansard roofs (e.g. Victorian, Beaux Arts, etc.).
The following guidelines should apply to
buildings with such roof form;
dormer windows and other archi-
tectural features should occupy a
minimum of twenty-five percent
(25 %) of the roof length.
buildings should be three (3) stories
in height.
roof design should enclose no more
and no less than one (1) floor of
habitable space.
SHED DORMER
Encouraged roof forms
Good single-family bungalow example
C'16'90 r�'.'
HIP DORMER
— SdKglc '�a.�Kilq� RcaidGKtf.QL-
39
.44
GABLE DORMER
illaaz�&a.zk ?Dau.aeaca.e .S &eCeJ a Plan
3. Materials
Building materials should reflect quality, durability and consistency, when possible, with the
materials used throughout the surrounding neighborhood. Appropriate building materials
include horizontal and vertical wood siding, stucco of varying surfaces and brick and stone
occasionally used as accents, particularly along the building base.
Appropriate roofing materials include architectural grade asphalt shingles, concrete
tile or slate, or integrally colored concrete roof tiles. Shake roofs are not permitted
due to their high fire hazard nature.
All stucco wall materials should be smooth, unsanded surfaces to prevent collection of
dirt, surface pollutants, and surface paint deterioration. Textured stucco is not en-
couraged unless it is hand troweled or float finished.
• Vivid stripes, arches, tile inlay, or similar architectural accents should be used to rein-
force traditional style.
4. Windows
Window proportions and detailing should reflect the architectural style of the early 1900's by
incorporating key elements such as recessed windows, wood framing, detailed or ornamental
molding around openings, multi -paned windows and window flower boxes.
All windows within a building should be related in operating type, proportion and
trim. Unifying elements such as common sill or header lines are preferred.
Window placement should consider privacy of adjacent
residences.
ii Recessed arch opening
with operable window
Built up plaster
detailing
Multi -paned window
3' wide sash
t 7 7
. ' /A' a
3d window
1' muntins
Operable wood shutters
painted with accent color
�6
— Sisq�c ?a.«<tlsc ,�caiadcKedal-
40
RECESSED WINDOW
SECTIONS
Window
ii
Now
Window recessed 6"
Shutters
7Kaaa actxk Dau.ataeaa SAeec64'e slam
• Vertical rather than horizontal windows are consistent with the desired bungalow and
Victorian style architecture and are encouraged.
Painted wood window accents reflects the Victorian and bungalow style architecture
and is encouraged. Built -up sills and trim should be used to create surface relief and
texture.
vuvu wiruauw ULLCTL s
Mm
• Glass should be inset a minimum of three (3) inches from the exterior wall surface to
add relief, especially in stucco buildings.
• Silver or gold metal window frames with large, glazed glass panes and dark tinted or
reflective glass are discouraged.
5. Front Doors and Garage Doors
Front doors as well as garage doors are a critical, visual element and should be carefully
selected and detailed.
• Front doors should be wood with decora-
tive panels and /or multi -paned windows.
• Metal garage doors are discouraged un-
less panel detailing is used.
• Garage doors should be recessed into the
garage wall and multi - paneled to provide
relief. Decorative panels and /or windows
are encouraged.
41
ivice )ronr enM example
%itooafiazk Doa..ieouf.c S'AeaciCe ;V<4"
jo
Ogg
Recessed garage doors with decorative windows
6. Front Porches
Front porches are a key architectural element which help define the home entry, unify the
neighborhood street scene and encourage physical activity near the street.
• Elevated porches with gable overhangs are traditional elements of the bungalow ar-
chitectural style and are encouraged.
• Victorian and bungalow style porches should include overhangs, heavy wood trellis
structures or traditional lattice or picket surround courtyards whenever possible.
Good examples of bungalow porches
7. Garbage / Recycling Areas
Storage areas for garbage and recycling bins shall be provided. Storage areas should be
shielded from street view using landscaping or fencing on all sides.
8. Mechanical Equipment
Mechanical equipment, satellite dishes, and utility meters should be screened from view
using landscaping, decorative fencing or roof parapets. Whenever possible, roof - mounted
equipment should not be permitted unless it is screened from view.
— Se A 574-a# Reaed"Ual-
42
%Jloaz,¢azk Dou�Ktau•K S,�eec�Ce ,�la�r
9. Accessory Structures
Trellises, pergolas, gazebos and other outdoor structures are encouraged provided they meet
Title 17 codes with respect to height, placement and construction. Materials and colors
should match or complement those of the main residence.
Simple wood treltis with landscaped posts creates
10. Energy Efficiency
Structures should be designed to incorporate passive and active solar features, when possible.
11. Wall Articulation
All building walls should have staggered planes to create interest. Avoid large blank wall
surfaces.
• Long facades or multi -unit buildings should
be divided into shorter modules a maxi-
mum of forty (40) feet in width, preferably
less to reflect the volumes of individual
units within the building. These modules
may be created in a series of ways includ.
ing changes in the roof line and window
groupings, recessing or projecting wall sur-
faces, and /or placement of entry porches,
balconies, bay windows, etc.
— St..rgle 74464 �GdGe�GKtGaI-
43
}:tiff {`2` }•r
.ti
Varied Building Articulation
i1Zao2�tiazk V aeo'veaeaa S,deC4C'e pee v
• Architectural elements that add scale or interrupt the wall facade are encouraged,
such as trellises, bay windows, courtyards, and porches.
Turrets, "eyebrows." and other
special features are common
with Victorian architecture
A variety of elements adds interest to the wall plane
— sca9ze 54-4 4 Re"duet4da.
44
ilLaaz�tiaak D6G4KtOC4K SAeee�(Le P44'r
C. Landscape Guidelines
New planting within the Single Family Residential zone should be consistent with the Sug.
gested Plant Palette shown in Table 5 of this Specific Plan Section.
1. Planting
Water is a limited resource in California and drought remains a recurrent environmental
concern which should be addressed within the overall landscape design. Landscaping mate-
rials should be selected with consideration for water requirements over the lifetime of the
plants. The use of plants with low water requirements, particularly plants that are consid-
ered drought - tolerant, and the use of efficient irrigation systems is strongly recommended.
• Eighty percent of the selected plant material should be drought tolerant.
• All planting area watering systems should be properly designed to conserve water and
minimize the amount of runoff.
• Conservation techniques such as the use of drip irrigation should be explored and,
given the soil constraints, may be the most effective means of irrigating the residential
landscape. Urban runoff from buildings, for example air conditioning units, may be
reclaimed and used for landscape irrigation purposes.
• Plants should be arranged in groups and spaced to allow them to develop in masses.
Avoid spacing plants so far apart that individual shaping is a temptation, unless they
are designated as a single specimen plant.
• Formal perennial planting may be appropriate at entries or along walkways.
• Trees should be used to create an intimate scale, enclose spaces, frame views, but their
placement should respect views from downtown to the surrounding hillsides. The use
of Pepper trees is encouraged.
• Landscape structures (decks, trellises, arbors, gazebos, etc.) should be used to provide
entry accents, shade or enhance the building structure. Colors applied to the struc-
ture must be complimentary to the building. Plastic and metal structures are not
permitted.
— Suegle 574," 4 JReald""I —
45
,4 Voaa.ctoeaa S�eec6le Als's
2. Fences and Walls
Fence design shall be used to reinforce the architectural theme of the house.
• Low, painted picket fences or solid stone or brick walls are encouraged around front
yards promoting an open neighborhood atmosphere.
• Tile detailing is encouraged in such cases where column pilasters may be used.
• Fences within the front yard setback areas are re-
quired to be a maximum of three feet high. Taller
fences may be used in side yards (to the rear of the
front setback) and rear yards. These should be a
maximum of six feet high. (Refer to the City Zon-
ing Code for more detailed fence regulations).
wooa fence wan pt=Eer columns frame ton gale
--s-94 54-4 ,�caddc.ctlal —
46
iitaaa,{iazk Daeaaeaeoa S'Aecejee 'Ve4a
Table 5
DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN SUGGESTED PLANT PALETTE
BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME
GROUNOCOVERS: B
Baccharis pulilaris 'Twin Peaks' C
Coyote Brush
Cerastium tomentosum S
Snow in Summer
Festuca ovina 'Glauca' B
Blue Fescue
Gazania ssp. N
NCN
Hedera helix E
English Ivy
Hypericum calycinum S
St. Johnswort
Juniperus conferta S
Shore Juniper
Lantana montevidensis N
NCN
Lihope spicata C
Creeping Lily Tun`
Lonicera japonica J
Japanese Honeysuckle
Pelargonium peltatum 'Balcan' i
ivy Geranium
Rosmarinus officinalis R
Rosemary
Trachelospermum jasminoides S
Star Jasmine
Verbena peruviana N
NCN
VINES: R
Rose ssp. O
Old- Fashioned Climbing Rose
Distictis buccinatoria B
Blood -red Trumpet Vine
Ficus pumila C
Creeping Fig
Hardenbergia violacea H
Happy Wanderer
Jasminum polyanthum P
Pink Jasmine
Mandevilla "Alice du Pont' N
NCN
Passiflora alatocaerulea P
Passion Vine
SHRUBS A
Agapanthus ssp. L
Lily of the Nile
and C
Cistus ssp. R
Rockrose
PERENNIALS: C
Comus sericea R
Redtwig Dogwood
Dietes vegeta F
Fortnight Lily
Diosma pulchrum B
Breath of Heaven
Echium fastuosum P
Pride of Madiera
Erigeron karvinskianus S
Santa Barbara Daisy
Euryops pentinatus 'Viridis' E
Euryops Daisy
ilex ssp. H
Holly
Hemerocallis hybrids D
Daylily
Hibiscus rosa- sinensis H
Hibiscus
Hydrangea macrophylla G
Garden Hydrangea
Lantana ssp. N
NCN
Lavandula L
Lavender
Ligustrum ssp. P
Privet
Lycianthes rantonnei P
Paraguay Nightshade
Pittosporum tobira N
NCN
Plumbago auriculata C
Cape Plumbago
;74m a# Realdea"e"
47
Trees:
Raphiolepis indica
Rose ssp.
Salvia ssp.
Syringa vulgans
Tulbaghia violacea
Albizia julibrissin
Citrus
Ficus micrucarpa `Green Gem'
Jacaranda mimosifolia
Lagerstroemia indica
Prunus ssp.
Schinus molle
'yilooz�tia2k Dou..ctou�.c SAacc�Cc plaw
Indian Hawthorne
Rose
Sage
Lilac
Society Garlic
Silk Tree
Citrus
Laurel Fig
Jacaranda
Crape Myrtle
Flowering Plum and Cherry
Califomia Pepper
Note: Additional plant species may be substituted for the species listed above, if such species are found
to be consistent with the architectural themes encouraged in the Downtown Specific Plan, and will not
result in damage to infrastructure or become a maintenance problem for the public streets and side-
walk areas.
— SEKg�c 7a«V4 Rdadaetdal-
48
iitaaz,�iazk Daea.traeua STEae66Ce 'VlaK
2.2.2 Two - Family Residential (R -2)
1. Land Use and Permitted Uses
The Two - Family Residential designation is intended to accommodate duplex and secondary
dwelling units in addition to Single Family Residential development. This land designation
allows for second dwelling units in accordance with Chapter 17.20 of the Zoning Code. Land
Uses shall be permitted as designated in Table 17.20.050 of the Zoning Code.
2. Density
Existing land use patterns in the Two - Family Residential areas of the plan are characterized
by mostly developed parcels that range from 6,000 to 8,000 square feet in size. These parcels
face onto Flory Avenue and have alley access along their western boundary, adjacent to the
Office Zone. The maximum density for the Two - Family Residential area is four to six units
to the acre. The minimum site area per dwelling unit is 3,500 square feet.
3. Building Setbacks - Two - Family (R -2)
Setbacks for the Two - Family Residential designation shall comply with the setbacks for the
Single- Family Residential designation contained in Section 2.2.1.
4. Height
Height requirements for the Two - Family Residential designation shall comply with the height
requirements for the Single - Family Residential designation contained in Section 2.2.1.
5. Second Dwellings and Building Additions
Second dwellings and building additions for the Two-Family Residential designation shall
comply with the second dwellings and building additions for the Single - Family Residential
designation contained in Section 2.2.1.
6. Maintenance and Renovation
Maintenance and renovation for the Two - Family Residential designation shall comply with
the maintenance and renovation for the Single- Family Residential designation contained in
Section 2.2.1.
— ?eao -74W4 �catdcsllal —
49
&- �1_ M
Design Guidelines for the Two - Family Residential designation shall be the same as the guide-
lines for the Single- Family Residential designation as contained in Section 2.2.1.
AN—Iff ,_. . ,-
Landscape Guidelines for the Two - Family Residential designation shall be the same as the
guidelines for the Single - Family Residential designation as contained in Section 2.2.1.
— %are- ?awkLGy �catdcKtlal —
50
'W000t#aak V oas.etaas.t SAeee6Ce ;VCao
2.2.3 Residential Planned Development — (R -PD)
The Residential Planned Development category is intended to provide small lot single -fam-
ily and attached housing - townhouses / condominiums / apartments. These units should be
well articulated as individual or collective units, and act as a transition between Single Family
Residential and the Old Town Commercial. Buildings shall be generally oriented toward
the street with parking courts located behind.
1. Land Use and Permitted Uses
The Residential Planned Development designation is intended to allow for a wide range of
residential development products as a primary use, with limited office as a secondary use.
The range of residential density that is covered by this Specific Plan designation is inclusive of
both the High Density (7 units to the acre) and Very High Density (14 units to the acre)
General Plan land use designations. A 15 unit density allocation applies only to the devel-
oped property east of Spring Road between High Street and Charles Street. Permitted uses
in the R-PD zone are designated in Table 17.020.050 of the City Zoning Code.
2. Density
The majority of the existing land use pattern in the Residential Planned Development areas
of the plan are characterized by lots that are in the 7,000 to 8,000 square foot range. There
are some lots which are 16,000 square feet or greater in size that occur where smaller lots
have been combined, or a single cohesive development has occurred (as with the senior
housing project at Magnolia and Charles Streets).
The density maximums within the Residential Planned Development area have been de-
signed to encourage lot consolidation and redevelopment of underdeveloped or declining
properties. The maximum permissible density for the Residential Planned Development
area ranges from 7 to 14 units to the acre and up to 20 units /acre should low /very low or
senior housing be built. (Refer to Section 2.3.3 for explanation and density standards con-
tained within the Lot Consolidation Incentive and the Building Renovation Programs).
The Specific Plan RPD District allows a second dwelling on residential zoned lots as permit.
ted by the City Zoning Code Chapter 17.28.020 G.C.
Reaed"rul ;V& aced Degeo we et .
51
'JiLoa- stiazk V aemararaa S'eaujee pla.
3. Building Setbacks— Residential Planned Development (R -PD)
YARD
SETBACKS...
(from propeny line}
Front
Main House
Min 20'
Front Porch
Min 14'
Side
Interior Lot
Min 10'
Corner lot street side
Min 20'
Rear
As determined
on project by
project basis
Shall be adequate to provide buffering from incompatible adjacent land uses.
4. Height
The maximum height is 35 feet; measured from finish grade to the highest point of a flat or
mansard roof, or in the case of pitched or hip roof, to the "averaged midpoint" which is the
average of the highest point on the roof with the top of the finished wall height. There is a
three story maximum on main structures.
5. Accessory Structures and Building Additions
Generally, secondary structures and building additions /expansions should compliment the
existing structure in form, massing, building materials, and architectural character. How-
ever, if the existing structure is already not in keeping with the design characteristics estab-
lished by this section, compatible materials and architecture may create an even larger design
compatibility gap. The programs and standards contained in section 2.3.3 are designed to
encourage and guide building additions and renovations towards agreement with the design
characteristics established within the Specific Plan.
6. Building Maintenance and Renovation
Quality maintenance of existing buildings and parcels, combined with gradual progression in
meeting design goals for this land use designation are encouraged. To this end, the mainte-
nance guidelines and incentives outlined in section 2.3.1 to 2.3.3 apply to the Residential
Planned Development designation.
— ,�c4tdcKtlal pl"Oed Deae&Ameat —
52
'%itaa¢�fiazk Dauemed4om SOeee�Ce plan
-4 1 .
In addition to the Single Family Residential guidelines, the following design guidelines apply
to the Residential Planned Development areas. All housing constructed within the Residen-
tial Planned Development areas of the Specific Plan must be consistent with the Moorpark
General Plan.
General Character - 1900's California Bungalow and Early American
Downtown neighborhood architecture primarily consists of early 1900's California bunga-
low style, integrated with Western - Victorian and Early American style structures. These
guidelines and standards apply to new construction as well as replacement and expansion of
existing structures to preserve and strengthen historic neighborhood character. Modern
interpretations of these styles are also acceptable if they maintain articulated massing and
blend with the surrounding neighborhood.
1. Building Form and Massing
Building form and massing is particularly important for these higher density buildings. The
following guidelines will emphasize varied building forms and enable renovations or new
construction to blend with the surrounding small lot single family development.,
• Avoid designing buildings longer than 120 feet.
• Buildings and building additions shall be carefully massed and articulated to blend
with the existing historic Charles Street neighborhood. Building additions and ex-
pansions should be of similar form and proportionally massed with the existing struc-
ture.
• Building mass should soften the structure's
appearance with architectural features such
as garden walls, porches, balconies, and
trellises.
• The building form should clearly define
entries using roof forms, stoops (elevated
porch), and porches.
• Building form should de- emphasize garages
and garage doors by locating them behind
the main building. Where garages are sepa-
rated from the primary structure, breeze-
ways or an overhead trellis are encouraged
to connect structures.
Ria�deMt6al ;VlaMMed DePO&AM eNt —
53
Lxample of dearlydefined entry
?&,,a
t:k DacaKtacraK S�ccc6lc PCaK
2. Unit Articulation
Unit articulation will help diminish the massive look of large structures, and blend with the
surrounding neighborhood. These guidelines are especially pertinent to those parcels along
Charles Street that may be affected by the lot consolidation (aka. Spring Road) density incen-
tives.
• Buildings backing up to public streets should carefully articulate the back of buildings.
• Variety in roof levels and wall planes should be used to articulate buildings and reduce
the building mass.
• Long facades of multi - family buildings should be divided into shorter modules a maxi-
mum of 30 feet in width, to reflect the volumes of individual units within the build-
ing. This can be done with varied setbacks, vertical molding, texture change on the
facade, porches, and balconies.
No roof mounted air condsioners or arnentia
Roof and wall planes varied and
well articulated to diminish the
bulk and scab of the bW -
Public Street
\� Each una Identifiable
in building form
!
i
j Private yard areas
\ t
�,
- --
Patio
Driveway
Back Balcony
/
All
l BUILDING FORM
garages to
Front Balcony
(exams)
bad onto the court
/
Parking court boated
BUILDING FORM
behind buildings oR of alley
(example)
Front Porch
Local SbealJ
BUILDING LOCATION
Public attest
BUILDING LOCATION
Alley
_.
Be"
Garages
Parking Court
High Density Residential
n
Yard
Front Porch
Bustling oriented
Patio
toward street
_ _ —�
Local Street
_
Public street
— ,�csiductlal Plasatcd V eve& o*e*e —
54
iiLaaafiiaak Daa-meaeoot SAeec�Cc Vea-
3. Roof Form
Since high density buildings tend to be larger structures, it is important to articulate the roof
forms to help blend these buildings with the surrounding smaller residential buildings.
Breakup roof form with elements such as dormers, eaves, exposed rafter tails, exposed
roof beams, and triangular knee braces.
Projection
Building Articulation
- / / ///
Ar
AV
Recess
Overhang
• Appropriate roof forms include gable, shed, and hip roofs with a low pitch (3:12 -
4:12).
• Mansard roof forms should can y be used when and if the building emulates a tradi-
tional style that employs mansard roofs (e.g., Victorian, Beaux Arts, etc.).
The following guideline should apply to buildings with mansard roof forms.
Dormer windows and other architectural features should occupy a minimum of twenty-
five percent (25 %) of the roof length.
• Buildings should be three (3) stories in height.
• Roof design should enclose no more and no less than one (1) floor of habitable space.
4. Materials
Building materials should reflect quality, durability and consistency, when possible, with the
materials used throughout the surrounding neighborhood.
• Appropriate building materials include horizontal and vertical wood siding, stucco of
varying surfaces and brick and stone occasionally used as accents, particularly along
the building base.
,Ri44de00U4e PUNNOd V emee4, m"t .
55
%Koazfiazk V ousataa.a PCaK
• Appropriate roofing materials include architectural grade asphalt shingles, standing
seam metal roofing, concrete tile or slate, or clay or integrally colored concrete roof
tiles. Shake roofs are not permitted due to their high fire hazard nature.
• All stucco wall materials should be smooth, unsanded surfaces to prevent collection of
dirt, surface pollutants, and surface paint deterioration. Textured stucco is not en-
couraged unless the application is float finished.
• Vivid stripes, arches, tile inlay, or similar architectural accents should be used to rein-
force traditional style.
the surrounding neighborhood
5. Windows
Window proportions and detailing on new structures and renovations should reflect the
architectural style of the early 1900's by incorporating key elements such as recessed win-
dows, wood framing, detailed or ornamental molding around openings, multi -paned win-
dows and window flower boxes. On space building additions, windows should complement
windows in the existing structure.
• All windows within a building
should be related in operating
type, proportion and trim.
Unifying elements such as com-
mon sill or header lines are
preferred.
• Window placement should con-
sider privacy of adjacent resi-
dences.
1111 . �■■ � I:■ ��� iee fir. rr. _ Ipurlrl
��■ �>r■ Ilr� ■� ■ ■■ .:■
..� ■: �.■ ■e■ was
MMM
Appropriate Window Orientation
— ,Rcatdeveeal P&**ed Dcacles xc,ct —
56
%Kooz,*wth Doa•KtouF.c S,eeec�(le ;VCsw
• Glass should be inset a minimum of three (3) inches from the exterior wall surface to
add relief, especially in stucco buildings.
• Silver or gold metal window frames with large, glazed glass panes and dark tinted or
reflective glass are discouraged.
6. Front Doors and Garage Doors
Front doors as well as garage doors are a critical, visual element and should be carefully
selected and detailed.
• Front doors should be wood with decorative panels and /or multi -paned windows.
• Metal garage doors are discouraged unless panel detailing is used.
• Garage doors should be recessed into the garage wall and multi - paneled to provide
relief. Decorative panels and /or windows are encouraged.
7. Front Porches
Front porches are a key archi-
tectural element which help
define the home entry, unify
the neighborhood street scene
and encourage physical activity
near the street.
Elevated porches with
gable overhangs are tra-
ditional elements of the
bungalow architectural
style and will help the
larger structures blend with the surrounding neighborhood.
• Early American and Victoran style porches should include plentiful overhangs, wood
post structures with traditional bracketed and tapered porch columns whenever pos-
sible.
— �catduetial PUmmed Deae&jtmeat m
57
�III�
with decorative fluting
ri
ri
iii
� =--
masonry base
%itaa2,lzazk 9ae4Ktae0K S,eeeq'-e plan
1a.1 Minimum 6 feet of clear
sitting area
1a.2 Porch slab /floor should at a minimum, extend 6
inches above the grade adjacent to the porch. (The
porch floor should generally be 12 inches above the
lowest point of the street curb.)
W �/
0
Paired or muftide post:
with base
,�isiducttai! pegyesed Deo�ela,��xe et —
58
1a.3 Detailed columns
and railings
(see examples below)
T rornA rrJ.- with
tapered base
7Xxdkz )&4ti46 DOasKt6taK Pls"
8. Garbage/ Recycling Areas
Storage areas for garbage and recycling bins shall be provided. Storage areas shall be shielded
from street view using landscaping or fencing on all sides.
9. Mechanical Equipment
Mechanical equipment, satellite dishes, and utility meters shall be screened from view using
landscaping, decorative fencing or roof parapets. Whenever possible, roof - mounted equip-
ment shall not be permitted unless it is screened from view.
10. Accessory Structures
Trellises, pergolas, gazebos and other outdoor structures are encouraged provided they meet
Title 17 codes with respect to height, placement and construction. Materials and colors shall
match or complement those of the main structure.
Simple wood trellis with landscaped posts creates attractive building detail
11. Energy Efficiency
Structures should be designed to incorporate passive and active solar features, when possible.
12. Wall Articulation
All building walls should have staggered planes to create interest. Avoid large blank wall
surfaces.
Long facades or multi -unit buildings should
be divided into shorter modules a maxi-
mum of forty (40) feet in width, preferably
less to reflect the volumes of individual
units within the building. These modules
may be created in a series of ways includ-
ing changes in the roof line and window
groupings, recessing or projecting wall sur-
faces, and /or placement of entry porches,
balconies, bay windows, etc.
— �catdcattal Pla.sKCd DcadoANOUat —
59
rv.
'�, ~L•r111C1
Lry
Varied Building Articulation
'Wdazhazk yaeosetoa<K �Vla,v
• Architectural elements that add scale or interrupt the wall facade are encouraged,
such-as trellises, bay windows, courtyards, and porches.
Porches, dormers, patios, and varied building forms allow multi family buildings to
blend with the surrounding neighborhood
— Reatdeateed Pe4xaed Dc�ela� e«t —
60
Turreo, "eyebrows.' and other
special features are common
with Victorian architecture
'illooz�ia2k D6te�Kt4usK S,eeu6fe plaK
New planting within the Residential Planned Development zone should be consistent with
the Suggested Plant Palette (Table 5) located in Section 2.2.1 C of this Specific Plan.
1. Planting
Water is a limited resource in California and drought remains a recurrent environmental
concern that should be addressed within the overall landscape design. Landscaping materi-
als should be selected with consideration for water requirements over the lifetime of the
plants. The use of plants with low water requirements, particularly plants that are consid-
ered drought- tolerant, and the use of efficient irrigation systems is strongly recommended.
• Eighty percent of the selected plant material must be drought tolerant.
• All planting area watering systems should be properly designed to conserve water and
minimize the amount of runoff.
• Conservation techniques such as the use of drip irrigation should be explored and,
given the soil constraints, may be the most effective means of irrigating the residential
landscape. Urban runoff from buildings, for example air conditioning units, may be
reclaimed and used for landscape irrigation purposes.
• Plants should be arranged in groups and spaced to allow them to develop in masses.
Avoid spacing plants so far apart that individual shaping is a temptation, unless they
are designated as a single specimen plant.
• Formal perennial planting may be appropriate at entries or along walkways.
• Trees should be used to create an intimate scale, enclose spaces, frame views, but their
placement should respect views from downtown to the surrounding hillsides. The use
of Pepper trees is encouraged.
• Landscape structures (decks, trellises, arbors, gazebos, etc.) should be used to provide
entry accents, shade or enhance the building structure. Colors applied to the struc-
ture must be complimentary to the building. Plastic and metal structures are discour-
aged.
— �catducttal ;DlaKKCd VOVe&;BNOCat —
61
'%itoa<z�tiazk V diewmeaeo e S,Eccc6CC pet,
Z. Fences and Walls
Fence design should be used to reinforce the architectural theme of the building.
Low, painted picket fences or solid stone or stucco-face walls are encouraged around
front yards promoting an open neighborhood atmosphere.
Iron grillework and tile detailing is encouraged on stone or stucco space walls or on
corner pilasters.
Fences within the front yard setback areas may be a maximum of three feet high.
Taller fences or walls may be used in side yards (to the rear of the front setback) and
rear yards. These may be a maximum of six feet high. (Refer to the City Zoning Code
for more detailed fence regulations).
a.1 TO" maximum height
a.2 Varied styles encouraged
a.3 Minimum 50% transparency
Not Permitted In Front Yards: Solid fences or walls, chain fink fences,
and wire fences
b.1
Two sided wood fence with cap and base
b.2
Varied styles encouraged
b.3
Not permitted outside of building setback
adjoining street
b.A
Construction details may vary
b.S
Semi - transparent panel encouraged along
alleyways, lops of slopes, and hillsides
This type of fencing should be visually open and may consist of
wrought iron or other appropriate materials
Type D classification includes split face masonry retaining walls
— �eaidestial 'Plowed Devela;eureae —
62
2.2.4 Office — (C -0)
•.10-t _I_.. .
IW&aor saak [/a[4Kt6USK SAccc�(Cc Pea-
1. Land Use and Permitted Uses
Existing land uses in this district are a mixture of office complexes, some retail uses and small
single and two- family bungalow style residences. There are a number of existing auto retail/
service uses along Moorpark Avenue which are existing legal non - conforming uses. These
uses may continue as nonconforming uses in accordance with Section 2.3.2 of this Specific
Plan. This district is intended to provide opportunity for conversion of existing residences to
small professional and commercial offices, while preserving residential scale, and respecting
the existing historic character of the neighborhood. Innovative re -use of existing structures
is encouraged. All new office construction and remodels should be done so as not to detract
from the existing character of the neighborhood, particularly with regard to historic charac.
teristics. Public Institutional uses are intended to be allowable with an Administrative Permit
within the Office
zone. Additionally,
parks are permit-
ted in the Office
zone, which would
enable park devel-
opment such as the
concept discussed
in Section 3.3.6 of
this Plan. Land
uses in the C -0
zone shall be per-
mitted as desig-
nated in Table
17.020.050 and
17.020.060 of the
City Zoning Code.
2. Building Setbacks
The following table indicates the minimum building setbacks in the Office (CO) zone. The
front and side setbacks are consistent with the R -P D zone provisions in the Moorpark Zon-
ing Code. (Refer to the City Zoning Code for more detailed descriptions and exceptions).
0444 —
63
/ /LOO Z�(LQZ� VaevoetOCYIl S,E66cjC6 rlaw
.YARD
SETBACKS
Front
From Arterial Streets
Minimum 20 feet
(Spring Road, Los Angeles Avenue)
Average 24 feet
Local and Collector Streets
(First, Second, Third, Charles, Walnut, Bard,
Magnolia Streets, and Moorpark Avenue)
Minimum 20 feet
Side
Interior yard
Minimum 5 feet
Rear — Adjacent to Residential Zones
From property line
Minimum 15 feet
From alley
Minimum 5 feet
Rear - Adjacent to Commercial Zones
From property line or alley
As determined by
permit
3. Height
The maximum height for an office structure shall be 35 feet, and no more than three stories
high. The maximum height of accessory structures such as garages shall be 15 feet with the
exception that the maximum height of a patio cover shall be 12 feet.
4. Building Maintenance and Renovation
Quality maintenance of existing buildings and parcels, combined with progress in meeting
design goals for this land use designation are encouraged. To this end, the maintenance
guidelines and incentives outlined in section 2.3.1 to 2.3.3 apply to the Office designation.
—
64
�1 . -
1. Architectural Character
1900's Bungalow and Early Anwrican/Western- Victorian
In addition the design standards in the Single Family Residential section of this Specific Plan,
the following design guidelines apply to the Office (CO) zone as designated in Figure 6, the
Specific Plan Zoning Map.
Office land uses are located in a residential neighborhood with primarily single family homes
built in the early 1900's. The neighborhood has a historic character with many California
bungalow style buildings as well as a few California / Spanish Mission style homes. Renova.
tions of existing structures, as well as new structures, should follow the design standards set in
the Single Family Residential section of the Specific. Plan, which provide design elements
characteristic of this architectural style. Building forms, massing, and design elements shall
be incorporated to preserve and blend with the existing historic neighborhood character.
2. Building Form and Massing
The building form is an important design element particularly for the Office zone where
there is a transition from larger commercial structures (with little to no setbacks) to smaller
single family homes. The structures in the Office zone shall create this transition by massing
the buildings in a way which blends with the form and massing of the smaller single- family
homes.
The size and mass of a larger building should be softened to blend with the surrounding
neighborhoods. A variety in roof levels and wall planes should be used to reduce the mass
and bulk of the structure.
Strong vertical element combined
with "theme" openings
Smaller roof areas and overhangs break up the building mass
094e —
65
3. Site Planning
• Building faces should front pub-
lic streets. Parking areas should
be located to the rear of build-
ings whenever possible. Parking
areas off of private drives or al-
leys along the rear property line
are encouraged.
• Parking lots located near public
streets should be screened from
view with substantial landscap-
ing, berms, hedges, or low walls.
'llLoozlia2k V oeAaeaa- a ;Vla'
French doors as storefront entries
Coping
x
j
i ase
Ze
LOW WALL
4. Entries
• Entrances to individual office units should be easily
visible from public areas. Avoid long balconies and
corridors for access to units.
Q#4e
66
Pier
Simple overhang and well-detailed, in-
scale monument sign
• Stairs, stoops, and porches are recom-
mended to emphasize the entries and
create attractive semi - public spaces.
Raised porches will help blend new
buildings with the existing bungalow
style architecture of the neighbor-
hood.
• Stairway location and form should
complement building form. Prefabri-
cated metal stairs are discouraged.
�Koaafiazk Dau•.ctouf.c SAeeejee Pesos
Ornamental iron work and detailed steps enhance entry
Hood examples or bungalow -style arcnttecture
5. Accessory Buildings
• Laundry facilities, recreational buildings, garages, and sales offices should be architec-
tural compatible with the main building.
6. Garbage and Recycling Areas
• Areas for garbage and recycling shall be provided and should be in convenient loca-
tions. Permanent enclosures should be constructed to shield views from both sides
and above. Materials and detailing should be consistent with the overall project.
• Refuse collection enclosures should be six feet in height and be constructed of du-
rable, low maintenance and noncombustible materials.
0#&,e
67
iltaaz,�azk DaerR.etacu.e S�aec�Ce pCaK
7. Lighting
• Parking lot and walkway lighting should pro-
vide appropriate levels of light for security and
safety.
• Lighting fixtures should be compatible with
the architectural character of the project.
• Lighting fixtures in the parking lot and on
the building shall be shielded and the light
shall be directed downward to avoid light and
glare impacts on neighboring properties.
• Building and parking lot lighting should be
consistent with the Early American or West-
ern- Victorian Style architecture, and comple-
ment the built environment.
• Spot lighting should be designed or selected to be architecturally compatible with the
main structure.
• Height of a light pole should be an appropriate scale for the building or complex and
site. Height of light poles should not exceed the main building height.
68
illaati�iazk Daea.ctau..c sAeegee 2ya.r
• . � • �.._
New planting within this zone should be consistent with the Suggested Plant Palette shown
in Table 5 of Section 2.2.1 of this Specific Plan.
In addition to the standards in the Single Family Residential section of the Specific Plan and
requirements of the Moorpark Zoning Code, the following landscape guidelines apply to the
Office (C-O) zone.
1. Planting
• Trees and planting should be used to soften the mass of larger buildings, shade park-
ing lots, and accent important areas such as entries, plazas, and courtyards.
• The site area devoted to landscaping should be greater than 10% of the overall lot
area.
• The use of large specimen trees (24" box material, minimum) as specified in the
suggested plant palette is encouraged. Shrubs should be a minimum five - gallon, ex-
cept where standard nursery and installation practices use one gallon
• Top dressings should be a minimum 2" layer composted organic material to aid in
weed control and conservation.
2. Fences and Walls
• Attractive fences or walls should be used to screen
service areas, parking, mechanical equipment, and
trash containers; planters should buffer fences and
expansive walls.
3. Signage
• Refer to City Zoning Code, Chapter 17.40, for
detailed sign regulations.
Projection sign with wrought iron
detailing and stylized lettering
encouraged
0#44 —
69
%&dtdot iazk Daa.fe Cot roK S,4eeeJ a PCav
2.2.5 Old Town Commercial (C -OT)
MM-WIM .,IT.M .�., ,
1. Land Use and Permitted Uses
This area is characterized by commercial buildings
which are rooted in the framework of Moorpark's
agricultural business and rural heritage. This dis-
trict is intended to attract a wide range of specialty
retail, service and entertainment uses that will en-
courage public gathering and pedestrian activity.
The introduction of outdoor paseos and courtyards
as part of the street experience is encouraged.
Refer to Table 4 in Section 2.1 for the permitted
uses within the Old Town Commercial zone.
2. Building Setbacks - Old Town Commercial Zone - (C-OT)
Buildings should be located along the street right -of -way inside property lines. This will
create a strong edge for storefronts and public sidewalks. Setbacks from street right-of-ways
are permitted only when providing areas for benches, planters, or pedestrian plazas.
The following are the setback requirements that apply to new and renovated structures in
the GOT zone. These requirements vary from other commercial zone landscaping and
setback requirements.
Notwithstanding the setbacks noted above, new development shall be consistent with Table
17.24.020.B of the City's Zoning Code, which requires a 30 -foot landscape setback from
arterials and a 20 400t landscape setback from two -lane local and rural collector roads.
Old ?0" 6oNe .VSe4d —
70
iiLoaz iazk Dora.ataaaK S,&ecc�(lc XYdir
3. Height
The maximum building height is 35 feet; measured from finish grade to the highest point of
a flat or mansard roof, or in the case of pitched or hip roof, to the "average and midpoint ",
which is the average of the highest point on the roof with the top of the finished wall height.
• Architectural elements such as towers, chimneys, parapet walls, and flagpoles may
have a maximum height of forty (40) feet.
• Corner buildings should be a minimum of two (2) stories high.
4. Building Maintenance and Renovation
Quality maintenance of existing buildings and parcels combined with progress in meeting
design goals for this land use designation are encouraged. To this end, the maintenance
guidelines and incentives outlined in Section 2.3.1 to 2.3.3 of this Specific Plan apply to the
Old Town Commercial designation.
5. Mixed Use Development
A mixed commercial- residential use project is a project in which commercial uses will occupy
the entire street level of a building or group of buildings, and residential uses will occupy
portions or all of the upper floors of that same building(s). The intent of allowing for mixed.
use projects in the Old Town Commercial District is to provide continuous frontage of retail
shops and commercial business establishments at the street level, while providing opportuni-
ties for downtown residential living. The following requirements shall apply to these mixed.
use projects:
a. The primary use shall be commercial and the residential use shall be secondary to the
commercial use of the property.
b. The street level of the commercial structure shall be utilized for commercial uses and
not for parking.
c. The entire ground floor or street level, with the exception of circulation access, shall
be used exclusively for retail and other commercial uses and no dwelling shall be
permitted to be located in whole or in part on the ground floor or street level.
d. All parking spaces required by the residential use shall be required to be provided on-
site. Parking spaces to serve the residential units shall be specifically designated and
shall be reserved for the exclusive use of the residents, but not to dominate a street
level storefront.
e. Where a project consists of more than ten (10) units, the project shall be clustered in
two or more buildings to reduce building mass and create architectural interest.
Old %awo &mwautal
71
?&aaz wt,6 V aepoteau..c S�eec�Ce PCas
f. Wall planes for buildings shall have design articulation consistent with the design
standards set for all buildings in the Old Town Commercial district.
g. Direct access for parking areas and driveways is discouraged along High Street. Access
for parking and driveways shall be taken from adjoining alleys or alternative streets
when available. If a parking area or driveway cannot be designed to avoid access from
High Street the driveway and parking area shall not occupy more than 40% of the lot
frontage, leaving the majority of the lot width for commercial store front develop-
ment.
h. Driveway access to parking shall be taken as close to a side lot line as is feasible, rather
than from the middle of the lot frontage.
i. Additions to existing buildings shall be designed to be integrated with the existing
building. The new addition should match the original in terms of scales, architectural
details, window and door styles and openings, roofline, materials, color and other
aspects of design.
j. Where a large addition is developed the entire building should be renovated to achieve
a single, coordinated appearance.
Old %ate 6mewse
72
i
&00'r#4&s,6 Doa me0a"t .Sjdeegee 9Y".
i 1' 1.
1. Architectural Character
High Street was the original "main street" of Moorpark. The architectural styles of many
existing buildings were established in the late 1800's and early 1900's. The historic styles
consist of a Western - Victorian combination, Agrarian, and classic 1920's Commercial Style
architecture. These historic architectural styles, as well as any contemporary interpretation
of these styles should be used in the Old Town Commercial zone today. Though Spanish
Mission and adobe architectural styles were not historically used along High Street, they are
common styles of this region. The two primary styles below are encouraged as the architec-
ture of preference in the Old Town Commercial Zone.
Western Victorian Style
This style is characterized by a combination of elon-
gated vertical windows, ornate wood detailing, ar-
cades or porches (often with a balcony above) and
light pastel colored facade of Victorian architec-
ture, with Western architectural elements such as
flat roofs with simple parapets, wood shingle roof.
ing over arcades, awnings, natural wood colors used
on facades and vertical wood siding.
t_xunng downtown o jpce budding -
excellent character example
Old 70'. 6ew.WZ&etl
73
' oo't6azk V ataatawor PCaK
Early American Commercial Style
Throughout America, a significant number of commercial structures were built in the 1920's
and 30's which adapted the more ornate styles of classical, Greek Revival, and Chicagoan
architecture to a more simplified,
plain commercial style. Such archi-
tectural treatments were done to
emulate these ornate styles in a less
expensive way. This architectural so-
lution was especially popular in
smaller towns throughout California
where property owners were not
wealthy enough to construct highly
ornate buildings, more typically built Early American Commercial Architecture
in larger urban areas. These more
modest structures exhibit only some of the characteristics known to the more ornate archi-
tectural styles, such as parapets with caps and phinneals, multi -paned windows, canvas aw-
nings, and wainscot base treatments. This architectural style allows for a healthy mix of
building details and can be blended with more traditional eastern elements such as brick and
mortar buildings or wraps and ornate cornice or frieze details.
Varied parapets, balconies and wood
detailing sets character
Old 70" eo«rkouiul
74
Simple wood structure reflects western elements
2. Building Form and Massing
• Building form and massing
should promote continuity
of the street scene. The size
of new structures should be
compatible with adjacent
buildings and neighbor-
hoods.
• To create a less massive build-
ing, the building mass
should vary in modules of
50 feet or less. Buildings
with frontage of longer than
50 feet should have vertical architectural features such as columns or pilasters every
25 to 30 feet.
�ltaea�iazk Dacv.ctacv.c Saccc6ec PCaK
• The use of tower -like elements on cor-
ner buildings and key entries is strongly
encouraged.
• To provide convenient pedestrian circu-
lation and architectural interest, corner
buildings should incorporate features
such as angled corners and walk- through
arcades, interesting signage and store-
fronts.
F
CXMtNMTLnMIIr
CMCoRNM
Old ?MW &WWOtce4t
75
THIS NOT THIS
Corner Treatments
d-
CORN= DISMAY WINDOW
?&*dot;ta4216 DousKtoaYK S,occc�CC PC4r
• Special architectural features such as towers, turrets, and loggias should be used to
accent buildings at street corners, at the terminus of a street, alley, or pedestrian
way, and at other highly visible locations.
• Two to three -story buildings should be located around prominent intersections and
public plazas.
• "Four -sided architecture' - exterior facade detailing and architectural
treatment on all sides of buildings readily visible to the public
should be used.
• "Corporate architecture" and generic designs are discouraged. Each project should be
designed to address the downtown goal to create a pedestrian atmosphere with quality
architecture rich in detail.
3. Service Areas
Service areas including trash and recycling containers, mechanical equipment, and
satellite dishes should be located behind buildings and enclosed or screened by land-
scaping or fencing.
Mechanical equipment on the ground or
on the rooftop should be screened as much
as possible.
Parapet walls should be used to screen
mechanical equipment on rooftops. Place.
ment, material, and color of roof screens
should not negatively impact the building
architecture or roofline.
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT
PARAPET WALL
USED FOR SCREENING
Screening
• Loading areas and service bays should be located at the rear of buildings, when pos-
sible, screening them from public view.
4. Roof Forms
Inspired by the architectural styles of the early 1900's,
new or renovated roof forms should be compatible with
existing roof forms in downtown Moorpark; predomi-
nantly flat roofs with parapets and a few pitched, gable
roofs. Continuous or false mansard roofs are discour-
aged.
Old 7oaw eo—mew —
76
CORNER DETAILS
CAP DETAILS
Parapet caps and corner details
�aaafiiazk Daca.ctaay.c S,�ccc�Cc pla.r
• Parapet wall designs should be used on flat roofs to conceal roof - mounted mechanical
equipment (such as air - conditioners) and to add architectural variety. Parapets should
have sufficient articulation of detail such as corner treatments, continuous banding,
details, or varying pitch.
• Parapet walls, whether
simple or ornate, should
always include a cap and
corner detail to enhance
a building's identity.
Parapets should look inte-
grated into the building.
If the back side of the
parapet is visible, it should
be appropriately detailed.
When parapet roofs are
used on long structures
with multiple tenants, the
building should be designed with two or more facades and parapet roof forms.
Shed roof lean -to structure allows for continuous building facade and decorates
a simple parapet roof in a western motif
• Decorative chimney caps or bell tower turrets are encouraged.
• Varied roof forms within a building such as tower elements, gabled roofs, extended
eaves with rafters or corbels, can also be used to add interest and to create an authen-
tic Early American style building.
• Where gabled or pitched roofs are used careful integration with the primary building
and adjacent buildings should be considered in design. Slopes of pitched roofs should
not exceed 3:12 and 6:12.
Routered wood detailing nicely articulates roof frame and
structural supports
Old 70OW (,oM"Me d
77
create historic character
noov, wt,g Dsu.atoeo e PCs,,
Pronounced shadows are created by
deep roof overhangs, adding depth and
visual interest
5. Windows and Doors
Entrances to commercial buildings should be prominently located. Windows and doors
should be carefully detailed. Quality framing, molding, detailing, and window box treat-
ments should be used as accents where possible.
• Recessed windows and doors create interesting shadows and are common of Early
American style architecture. Windows should be recessed from the exterior wall plane
a minimum of three (3) inches. Doors should be recessed from the exterior wall plane
a minimum of six (6) inches.
i ransom w inaows
• Transom windows located above storefront windows can provide horizontal consis-
tency and add interior light throughout the downtown.
• Consistency between window styles and doorframes should be maintained through-
out the structure to unify building facades.
Old 704. &.K. .tad —
78
i /(.OA2�LQ.2k DdG4Ktdl0K ,S,dCCt�cC �Ve".
• To minimize the expansive nature of glazed windows which can detract from the
desired historical character in Old Town, the use of multi -paned windows and mul-
lions is recommended in window and door designs.
• Entrances and doors should be carefully located and detailed providing a clear sense of
entry. Clearly detailed and marked doorways will relate the building to the street and
help orient pedestrians.
Canopies frame welldetailed doors
can frame an
entrance and set scale
• Customized paving materials and accents between the private sidewalk and the build-
ing facade is encouraged. Unique patterns and materials will personalize businesses
and act as a form of signage, helping pedestrians identify specific businesses.
• Storefront windows which open up to the sidewalk create an inviting atmosphere and
are encouraged.
Old 7o" &MMO tad —
79
'%%�a42fiitL2k Do 4osCaeoK S,*eec6Ce Plan
• 50 - 80% of the ground floor retail areas should be transparent storefront windows.
Second level and third level windows should not exceed 50% of the total exterior wall
surface.
• To be consistent with the desired early 1900's American, Victorian and Western
architecture, windows should be vertically rather than horizontally oriented, unless
they are accenting vertically dominated storefront windows.
-IzJ i
�X i sir, ii
t - S■
� Jill
MI.
opening
Ornamental windows, doors and shutters
in a vertical alignment
6. Arcades, Porches, and Covered Walkways
• Arcades, covered walkways and porches add pedestrian scale to building design and to
the street. They are encouraged, adding a practical and attractive architectural ele-
ment and providing winter weather protection and shade during hot summer months.
• Proportion and human scale are important in the design of arches, columns, and
arcades. Arcades should have sufficient wall thickness emphasizing a sense of strength,
balance, and traditional masonry proportions.
The ratio between the top of the arch and the mass it is supporting should be carefully
designed so that sufficient wall surface is present between the key of the arch and the
next architectural element above.
• Columns supporting the arches should be proportionate to the size of the arch. Nei-
ther spindly and undersized columns, nor squat, overly massive columns are appropri-
ate.
Old 70ars eWMVZC'al
80
aoa�tia�k ?iata•ctora.c PIsK
7. Architectural Details
• Architectural details can be used to enhance a new
or existing structure adding color, shadows, and
interesting architectural forms. Often the archi-
tectural style of the building is depicted through
the simple details.
• Storefront windows should incorporate a base
rather than extending the glass to the ground. This
protects storefront glass from skateboards, bikes,
etc. and provides a location for low seat walls, land-
scaping, or other architectural features. Built- up
stucco, brick, or wood base is encouraged
• Framing and relieved detailing around windows,
doors, parapet caps, and building bases are recom-
mended. Window boxes, balconies, and balcony
type features or other design details which can
enhance two -story structures are encouraged.
• Porch, balcony and overhang treatments to the
building facade reinforce a structure's Western Vic-
torian look while providing pedestrian protection
from sun and rain.
• To create a more comfortable space for pedestri-
ans, the use of awnings and canopies are encour-
aged. Canopies protect people and furniture from
inclement weather and reduce the perceived
height of the building facade to human scale.
Awnings also provide a clearly definable place to
introduce color and signage.
veep overhang allows ample room for
pedestrians
Wood shed roof evokes western theme and
promotes outdoor activity in a shaded
environment
reaesrnan Sneer Scene
Covered Sidewalk
Old %acre a ~usual
81
%ylaaz,�saak Daus.ctau�.c S,accc�tc PlaK
• Building ornamentation on Western - Victorian structures should include detailing
such as routered posts, railings, balustrades, and decorative bulkheads.
• Exterior walls, especially at ground level, should include elements to build depth and
character to the wall plane. Use of reveal patterns, material changes, balconies, over-
hangs, building pop -outs, and recessed entries is preferred.
• Tile accents and relief bands are simple
ways to add interest and character to a
building facade.
• When possible, wrought iron grillework
and ornamental fixtures should be used
as building accents, lighting or signage.
8. Low Walls
Garden Walls
• Low walls are an important unifying element providing continuity to the street edge
and buffering parking and service areas. Low walls and hedges along the High Street
vacant lot frontages can "bridge" large void spaces and provide unity in the street
scene.
• Walls should have a minimum height of 2.5 feet and maximum 4 feet height. The
finish material and design should be compatible with the architectural character of
adjacent buildings.
• Community art display panels may be incorporated into wall design to enhance public
pride.
• For a clean, finished appearance, and to ensure durability and safety in design, low
walls should incorporate a wall cap and pilasters anchoring entry points.
• Defining breaks in low walls should be incorporated to allow for pedestrian circula-
tion.
9. Building Materials
Building materials and finishes should be selected to reinforce the guiding architectural im-
age (Western - Victorian or Early American) and should be consistent with the desired archi-
tectural character of the individual and immediately adjacent buildings. The following mate.
rials are suggestions for renovation and new construction to Old Town street facades and
exposed structure sides. Backs of buildings should use similar materials; however, less expen.
sive and more utilitarian substitution materials are acceptable provided they are compatible
with the overall design.
Old %AMC eoMMMiaC
82
%%taa2�iazk Dau..etaeo e Speec6Ce ;ve,.
• Materials and finishes should be selected for ease of maintenance and durability. The
following materials are encouraged:
Roofs (see Roof Section for graphic examples)
• Exposed wood structural lumbers such as rafter tails, roof beams, and ornamental cor-
bels
• Copper accents, gutters, downspouts, and scuppers
• Concrete or routered wood corbels
• Dimensional asphalt shingles
• Standing seam metal roof
• Fire retardant wood shingles
• Horizontal and vertical wood parapets with routered cap and detailed frames
Building Walls
• Horizontal lap siding, board and batten siding, and barn siding are the most appropri-
ate material to be used on a main surface of the building
• Stone and brick are also acceptable materials (float- finished surfaces are preferred)
• Colored or stained concrete block can be used to simulate brick or adobe
• Stone or brick wainscoting may be used
• Ornamental tiles, wood, brick, and glass block can be used as trim or accents around
the base of the building.
• Heavy timber construction should be used in trellises, roof overhangs, balconies and
other architectural elements.
Low Walls and Fences
• Finished solid wood fence, generally with picket or unusual top - member detail
• Masonry wall with cap detail
• Brick or stone wall
• Wrought iron fence
• Brick or stone masonry wall with wrought iron widow's walk or similar riser
DO NOT USE THE FOLLOWING MATERIALS:
Roofs that use:
• Flat or corrugated metal, aluminum or fiberglass roofing material
• Brightly colored glazed roofing tiles
• Flat asphalt shingles
• Crushed rock
• Spray-finished stucco unless it is not dominant on the building
Old 7mw e4w~=at —
83
illaazhaak Tia&- ovedasK Plaa
Building Walls that are:
• Reflective or dark glass
• Poor quality synthetic materials resembling brick or masonry
• Corrugated fiberglass
• Coarsely finished or unfinished plywood
• Metal siding
• Unfinished concrete block and split -face block
• Shingles or untreated redwood shingles
-T-111 Siding
• Slump stone block
Low Walls and Fences that are:
• Rolled wire, fencing, i.e. chicken wire, pig fencing, etc.
• Chain -link (especially uncoated, uncolored)
• Unfinished materials such as concrete block or plywood
• Vinyl or sheet metal siding
10. Color
Color is an important aspect of the overall building design and street scene creating varia-
tion while maintaining an overall consistency in the downtown area. Maintaining a bal-
anced color palette using the correct proportions between lighter "base colors" and brighter
"accent colors" on individual buildings is essential to reinforce character and compatibility
between structures.
Base Color
Buildings with large expanses of blank walls should have lighter, subtle base color. The base
color on smaller buildings or those with more elaborate details can use slightly stronger
tones. Good base color examples include:
• Light gray
• Cream / ecru
• White (non - glaring)
• Pale Flesh
• Pale Yellow
• Light Beige
• Pastel Tones
Old 7". ee. ~te4d —
84
BASE COLOR ON FACADE
ACCENT COLOR ON AWNINGS
ACCENT COLOR ON
WINDOW FRAMES i DOORS
ACCENT COLOR ON
BUILDING BASE
iKoaz�tiaak V oevoceamot S,&eec6CC PCaK
Accent Color
Brighter accent colors should be carefully and minimally used to accent windows, doors, signs
and awnings. Special materials such as glazed tile can also be used to introduce accent colors
on building facades. Good accent color examples include:
• Forest Green • Brick Red
• Deep Blue Green • Deep Blue
• Dark Browns • Rich Magenta
11. Lighting
• Lighting can be used to enhance architectural details, create shadows, provide security
to a building and indicate whether a business is open or closed. Lights should be
subtle, directional, and not overpowering or glaring. Lighting sources should be inte-
grated into the architectural design. Examples of well - integrated lights include soffit
lighting and accent light fixtures, which can be a design element unto themselves.
• Accent lighting should be used to accent landscaping (up- lights or focused directional
lights) or building details such as tower elements and cupolas.
• Light fixtures that illuminate large areas (over 200'
copy area) should be avoided.
• Lighting used to illuminate store signs should be
subtle and non - glaring. Bulbs should not be ex-
posed and should focus light directly onto the sign
or building.
• Pedestrian level lights add interesting architectural
detail as well as provide security and lighting for
pedestrians at night. These lights should be in-
corporated into building and parking lot designs
and be well detailed.
Lights used nearby or adjacent to High Street should not conflict with
the Early American lampposts that are located along the street.
Recommended lamp types for lighting signs and buildings should be
warmer incandescent halogen, metal halide, or "daylight" fluorescent
bulbs. Cold (blue- tinted) lamp types are not appropriate. Precise in-
tensity and types of light should be recommended by a qualified lighting
design professional. Metal- halite bulbs may only be used as building
accents or to illuminate key building features.
Old %coo &Wwa ad —
85
9itaazhazk �su..ctous.e S�eec6c'e Pla.r
New planting within the Old Town Commercial zone should be consistent with the Sug-
gested Plant Palette shown in Table 5 of Section 2.2.1 of the Specific Plan.
1. Planting
• Landscaping should be used to soften the impact of large blank building walls, as well
as parking lots. Shrubs and planters can help screen views to parking lots from the
street. Trees can break up large expanses of pavement while providing shade for cars
and pedestrians.
• Colorful annual or seasonal accent planting (via pots, planter boxes and hanging pots)
should be used to accent entries and add color and interest to buildings, or special
locations.
• Decorative vines should be considered for use along fences, garden walls, property
boundaries and perimeter walls, and on blank building elevations.
• Freestanding earth berms and /or earth berms near structures are not permitted
unless it is proven that such landscaping techniques will not detract from the overall
Early American, natural planting theme.
• Evergreen trees and shrubs should be used whenever a landscape screen or buffer is
required.
2. Fences and Walls
• Fences and walls are an important unifying element providing continuity to the street
edge and buffering parking and service areas.
• Walls should have a minimum height of 2.5 feet and a maximum height of four feet.
The finish materials and design should be compatible with the architectural character
of adjacent buildings.
• For a clean, finished look, durability, and safety, walls should incorporate a wall cap
and pilasters at entry points.
• Wrought /cast iron fences are encouraged and should include detailed grillework
whenever possible
Olrl %ate eo«rMozuae —
86
,Ka01,04,4 Vau•eetou..e S�eec�ie PC¢K
2.2.6 Neighborhood Commercial (C -1)
•.NT -_ .M-M WM
1 . Land Use and Permitted Uses
These development standards and design guidelines apply to the Neighborhood Commer-
cial zone designated in Figures 5 & 6. This zone is located on the west and east side of
Moorpark Avenue, between First and Third Streets. This zone is adjacent to an Office zone,
Old Town Commercial, and General Commercial zoning. Due to its proximity to this wide
variety of land uses, these design standards and subsequent guidelines strive to blend the
building character of the Neighborhood Commercial zone with the surrounding established
neighborhoods.
This area is characterized by small scale shopping facilities which are intended to provide a
range of goods and services that cater to the convenience needs of residents in the immedi-
ate neighborhood vicinity. The scale of development and the commercial uses permitted in
this district are not intended to be oriented to a community or regional need. Refer to Table
17.20.060 of the City's Zoning Code which contains the permitted uses within the C-1 zone.
2. Building Setbacks
The following table indicates the minimum setbacks in the Neighborhood Commercial zone.
The front setback is consistent with the Commercial zone landscaping provisions in the
Moorpark Zoning Code: the side setback requirements are consistent with the R -1 zone
provisions but differ from the commercial zone landscaping provisions in the Moorpark
Zoning Code; while the rear setback is unique to the Downtown Specific Plan. (Refer to the
City Zoning Code for more detailed descriptions and exceptions).
V*" "d «aiscial —
87
'islaozlaa2k DataKtotuK S,Aec4ee Alaw
BUILDING
SETBACK
Front
Minimum 20 feet
Side
Corner lot
Minimum 5 feet
Side
Interior lot adjacent to Residential zone
Minimum 5 feet
Interior lot
As specified by permit
Rear - Adjacent to Residential Zones
From property line
Minimum 15 feet
From alley
Minimum 3 feet
Rear - Adjacent to Commercial Zones
From property line or alley
As determined by
permit
3. Height
The maximum height for a Neighborhood Commercial structure shall be 35 feet and no
more than three stories high.
4. Building Maintenance and Renovation
Quality maintenance of existing buildings and parcels, combined with progress in meeting
design goals for this land use designation are encouraged. To this end, the maintenance
guidelines and incentives outlined in sections 2.3.1 to 2.3.3 apply to the Neighborhood Com-
mercial designation.
88
illaati�iazk vda"Ceaa.'e S'&e'q' -' 'VCa.
W
1. General Character
This zone is located on the west and east side of Moorpark Avenue between First and Third
Avenues, consisting primarily of early 1900's residential bungalows. This zone acts as a tran-
sition and entry to the Western - Victorian, Agrarian, and Early American architecture of the
Old Town Commercial zone to the north. Because this zone abuts State Highway 23
(Moorpark Avenue), it is essential that new and refurbished uses provide a transition be-
tween the residential uses to the west and east, and the well - traveled road. These guidelines
are intended to reinforce a pedestrian- friendly atmosphere, encouraging residents to walk
from the surrounding neighborhoods for shopping.
Separated by the railroad tracks, but in proximity to the High Street area, this zone serves as
a key corridor to downtown and the architectural character should be compatible with the
Old Town Commercial zone. Thus, for a description of the desired architectural character
in the Neighborhood Commercial zone, refer to the Old Town Commercial zone (Section
2.2.5). The standards and guidelines described in Section 2.2.5 will complement the existing
bungalow architecture across Moorpark Avenue, as well as the other surrounding architec-
ture, thereby creating a cohesive neighborhood.
2. Building Form and Massing
• Building form is an important design element for the Neighborhood Commercial
zone, specifically to ensure compatibility with the adjacent smaller, single family homes.
• The size and mass of a larger building should be softened to blend with the surround-
ing neighborhoods. A variety in roof levels and wall planes should be used to reduce
the mass and bulk of the structure.
• When possible, mass the height of new or replacement structures away from residen-
tial neighborhoods for privacy protection.
• Consistency of the form and massing of buildings will help establish continuity along
Moorpark Avenue. The size of new structures should be compatible with adjacent
buildings.
y444s4md eo•r.�oseial —
89
%itaaalaazk V aeomro a.e pZy"
• Building facades should parallel Moorpark Avenue rather than set at an angle.
• When possible, buildings should
front onto the sidewalk with zero
setback to the street.
• Two and three -story structures
should be designed to avoid windows
and balconies overhanging into or
adjacent to the nearby residential
area.
Awning brings large building wau to peaestnan scale
• Buildings at back of sidewalk
• Higher buildings on comers with
apartments above commercial
THIS
?ZciO4CAeed oicial —
90
• Do not place buildings at odd
angles off of street right -of -way
NOTTHIS
Place buildings to the back of sidewalk
iitooa,�caak Dou•.ctous« Peas
New planting within the Neighborhood Commercial zone should be consistent with the
Suggested Plant Palette located in Table 5 of Section 2.2.1 of this Specific Plan.
1. Planting
• Landscaping should be used to soften the impact of large blank building walls, as well
as parking lots. Shrubs and planters can help screen views to parking lots from the
street. Trees can break up large expanses of pavement while providing shade for cars
and pedestrians.
• Both deciduous and evergreen trees should be used to provide a variety of texture,
color and form.
• Colorful annual or seasonal accent planting (via pots, planter boxes and hanging pots)
should be used to accent entries and add color and interest to buildings, or special
locations.
• Decorative vines should be considered for use along fences, garden walls, property
boundaries and perimeter walls, and on blank building elevations.
• Freestanding earth berms and /or earth berms near structures are not permitted
unless it is proven that such landscaping techniques will not detract from the overall
Early American, natural planting theme.
• Vines, espaliers and potted plants are excellent ways to texture walls, columns and
posts, and shall be used wherever possible.
• Evergreen trees and shrubs should be used whenever a landscape screen or buffer is
required.
• Nicely detailed gates and iron work can reflect the character of a business or project.
Designs should incorporate artistic details in the landscape.
• Relatively short -lived and high maintenance plants shall be limited to areas receiving
regular, skilled maintenance.
?Za4A4,4oa4l ac�elal
91
2. Fences and Walls
• Garden walls and low fences
are an important unifying ele-
ment providing continuity to
the street edge and buffering
parking and service areas.
• Walls and fences should have a
minimum height of 2.5 feet
and a maximum height of four
feet. The finish materials and
design should be compatible
with the architectural character
of adjacent buildings.
iitea2;ha2� dLa"'eadom S,Eeeejee �Vla,r
Wood fence with rouered post and lattice gate
• For a clean, finished look, durability, and safety, walls should incorporate a wall cap
and pilasters at entry points.
Vdf46eaood eo•r.�atetal —
92
iilaaz�tiaak Dau..eeau.a S,4eeg6ee ZYtw
2.2.7 Commercial Planned Development (CPD)
A Site Development Standards
1. Land Use and Permitted Uses
Existing uses in these areas are the Metrolink rail station, a gas station and various small
developed commercial buildings. This district will continue to accommodate this mix of land
uses. Permitted uses in the CPD zone can be referenced in the City Zoning Code Table
17.020.060.
2. Building Setbacks
The following table indicates the minimum setbacks in the Commercial Planned Develop-
ment zone. The front and side setbacks are consistent with the R -1 zone provisions in the
Moorpark Zoning Code, while the rear is unique to the Downtown Specific Plan. (Refer to
the City Zoning Code for more detailed descriptions and exceptions).
Front
To be consistent
with Table 17.24.020.B
of Title 17 of
Municipal Code
Side
Corner lot Minimum 5 feet
Side
Interior lot adjacent to Residential zone Minimum 5 feet
Interior lot As specified by permit
Rear - Adjacent to Residential Zones
From property line Minimum 15 feet
From alley Minimum 2 feet
Rear - Adjacent to Commercial Zones
From property line or alley As determined by
permit
3. Height
The maximum height for a Commercial Planned Development structure shall be 35 feet
and no more than three stories high.
.KOieial P4".wd D�aale�r.KC.rt —
93
'%llaat�iazk Dous.ctaaa.c
;ClaK
1. General Character
The Commercial Planned Development zone applies to the northeast corner of Moorpark
Avenue and Los Angeles Avenue, the Metrolink parking lot south of the railroad tracks, and
the southeast corner of Spring Road and High Street which has a number of existing com-
mercial buildings. To support the general character of the different residential and commer-
cial building forms and architecture to which these areas are adjacent, the Commercial Planned
Development zone shall encourage building forms and massing which relate to the Early
American and Western - Victorian style architecture. Since much of the property in this zone
is comprised of new structures, the design guidelines would mostly apply to any future reno-
vations or reconstruction.
For the Commercial Planned Development design guidelines, refer to the Institutional de-
sign guidelines in Section 2.2.8 of this Specific Plan.
New planting within the Commercial Planned Development zone should be consistent with
the Suggested Plant Palette located in Table 5 of Section 2.2.1 of this Specific Plan.
For landscape guidelines in the CPD zone, refer to the Institutional landscape guidelines
Section 2.2.8 of this Specific Plan.
—
94
91Looz,{taak V oueatoue.e S ,&eee6Ce PCsm
2.2.8 Institutional (n
1. Land Use and Permitted Uses
This area provides for the uses in the existing Civic Center, as well as other public facilities
which include: government buildings, libraries, fire stations, non - profit status organizations,
and community service oriented uses. Permitted uses in the I zone can be referenced in the
City Zoning Code Table 17.020.050 and 17.020.060.
2. Building Setbacks
The following table indicates the minimum setbacks in the Institutional zone. The front
and side setbacks are consistent with the R -1 zone provisions in the Moorpark Zoning Code,
while the rear is unique to the Downtown Specific Plan. (Refer to the City Zoning Code for
more detailed descriptions and exceptions).
Front
Minimum 20 feet from
Moorpark Avenue. As
determined by permit.
Side
Corner lot Minimum 5 feet
Side
Interior lot adjacent to Residential zone Minimum 5 feet
Interior lot As specified by permit
Rear - Adjacent to Residential Zones
From property line Minimum 15 feet
Rear - Adjacent to Commercial Zones
From property line or alley As determined by
Permit
9uautat[eKal
95
'fJdosalaa2k Dolt.Kteu►K S�aec�tc PCsK
3. Height
The maximum height for an Institutional structure shall be 35 feet and no more than three
stories high.
4. Building Maintenance and Renovation
The public facilities in this district would continue to be maintained by the City and County.
Future expansions should be consistent with the design guidelines established within this
section. The location of other public uses within the downtown is encouraged and building
maintenance will be provided by individual public agencies and owners.
1. Architectural Character
The Institutional zone is located adjacent to early 1900's Bungalow architecture of the resi-
dential and office neighborhoods and the Western - Victorian, Agrarian, and Early American
Commercial architecture of the Old Town Commercial zone. The existing structures have a
California- Spanish influence. The following standards will help create a gradual evolution
of this style of architecture into the Early American, Western - Victorian, and Bungalow archi.
tecture of the surrounding neighborhoods' character within the Institutional zone.
For a detailed description of the architectural blend of styles in this zone, please refer to
Sections 2.2.4 Office and 2.2.5 old Town Commercial.
2. Roof Forms
One of the most important factors in determining a building's overall character is the roof
design. This includes the shape, form, slope, material, texture and color of roofs. To ensure
consistent architectural quality throughout Moorpark, the roof masses should be propor-
tionate with the design and scale of the building.
• Varied roof forms within a building
such as tower elements, gabled roofs,
extended eaves, with rafters or cor-
bels can also be used to add interest.
• Flat roofs with articulated parapets
are encouraged.
• Continuous mansard roofs are dis-
couraged unless detailed mansard
roof cover treatments are incorpo-
rated for visual interest.
— 9Kat[tutleKal
96
ROOFS 7 PARAPET
.. U LOW PITCHED
GABLE ROOF
P ,r
MANSARD ROOF
ilLaoz�iazk V'Seporda -0c S &eeq'.e pCa.
• Deep roof overhangs are encouraged, especially when used in balconies, colonnades,
canopies, verandas or where they are specifically used to enhance passive solar design.
3. Windows and Doors
• Entrances to institutional buildings should be prominently located. Windows and
doors should be carefully detailed. Quality framing, large or deep moldings, detailing,
and window box treatment should be used where possible as accents.
• Recessed windows and doors produce interesting shadows. Windows should be re-
cessed from the exterior wall plane a minimum of 6 inches.
• Consistency with windows and door frames should be maintained throughout the
structure. This will help unify the building facade.
• The use of multi -paned windows and mullions are recommended in window and door
designs to minimize the expanses of glazing which detract from the desired historical
character.
• Buildings and doors should be carefully located and detailed providing a clear sense of
entry. This will relate the building to the street and help orient pedestrians.
9,wtiluti wal
97
7iLaoz�ia2k [/6f.4KtdL4K S�ccc��e PCaK
• Windows should be vertically rather than horizontally oriented. Specially designed
horizontal accents are permitted when design reinforces symmetrical facade composi.
tion.
4. Balconies
• Balconies and covered walkways add pedestrian scale to the building design and to the
street. They are a practical and attractive architectural element providing winter
weather protection and shade during hot summer months.
• Proportion and human scale are important in the design of arches, columns, and
balconies. Balconies should have sufficient post detailing and posts should emphasize
a sense of strength, balance, and traditional base proportions.
• The ratio between the top of the post, the base and the canopy it is supporting should
be carefully designed so that sufficient wall surface is present to the next architectural
element above.
• Spindly and undersized posts, and squat, overly massive posts are not appropriate.
5. Architectural Details
• Architectural details can be used to enhance a
new or existing structure adding color, shadows,
and interesting architectural forms. Often the ar-
chitectural style of the building is depicted through
the simple details.
• Framing and relieved detailing around windows,
doors, parapet caps, and building bases are recom-
mended. Window boxes, balconies, and balcony
type features or other design details which can
enhance two -story structures.
To create a more comfortable space for pedestri-
ans, the use of awnings and canopies are encour-
aged. Canopies protect people and furniture from breaks monotony
inclement weather while bringing the building
facade to human scale. Awnings also provide a place to introduce color and signage.
Clear coat, vinyl, or plastic awnings that are backlit with signage are discouraged.
98
'NOWt iazk Caw
• Tile accents and brick or detailed wood relief bands are simple ways to add interest
and -character to a building facade.
reaestnan scale street scene
Columns and archways cast deep
shadows
6. Low Walls
• Low walls are an important unifying element providing continuity to the street edge
and buffering parking and service areas.
• Walls should have a minimum height of 2.5 feet and maximum 4 feet. The finish
material and design should be compatible with the architectural character of adjacent
buildings.
• Community art display panels may be incorporated into wall design to enhance com-
munity feeling.
• For a clean, finished look, durability, and safety, walls should incorporate a wall cap
and pilasters at entry points.
• Breaks in walls should be incorporated to allow for pedestrian circulation.
7. Building Materials
Building materials and finishes should be selected to reinforce the overall design intent of
the project and to be consistent with the desired architectural character of the building. The
following are suggestions for the street facades and exposed sides. Backs of buildings should
use similar materials, however, may be less expensive and more utilitarian.
9 «atit�dtewat
99
azk c )a"&-Vtauaa Stecc;�CC PCaa
Materials and finished should be selected for ease of maintenance and durability. The fol-
lowing materials are encouraged:
Roofs
• Exposed wood structural members such as rafter tails, roof beams, and corbels
• Copper accents, gutters, downspouts, and scuppers
• Concrete or stone or wood corbels
• Unglazed concrete or clay roofing tiles (slate - like /flat)
Building Walls
• Wood siding (horizontal or vertical)
• Stucco and brick/stone
• Stone or brick wainscoting
• Ornamental tiles, wood, bricks, and glass block can be used as trim or accents around
the base of the building.
Low Walls and Fences
• Finished solid wood fence
• Stuccoed brick/stone wall with cap detail
• Wrought iron fence
• Masonry wall with wrought iron on top
• • \ • M�_I_ _ •
0"e[03 I _V_W�_ _
Roofs which use:
• Brightly colored glazed roofing tiles
• Wood shingles and shakes
• Metal roofing
Building Walls that are:
• Solid brick
• Wood or simulated shingles or shakes
• Reflective or dark glass
• Synthetic materials made of poor quality and resemblance to brick or masonry
• Corrugated fiberglass
• Coarsely finished or unfinished plywood
• Metal siding
• Unfinished concrete block and split -face block
•T-111 Siding
• Slump stone block
944NA O"I
100
'Iileoa�tiazk Dou�.ctau<.c S�eec�Cc PCaK
Low Walls and Fences that are:
• Rolled wire, fencing, i.e. chicken wire, pig fencing, etc.
• Chain link
• Unfinished materials such as concrete block or plywood
• Vinyl or sheet metal siding
8. Color
Color is an important aspect of the overall building design creating variation while maintain-
ing an overall consistency within the Civic Center area. It is very important to keep a
balanced color palette using the correct proportions between the lighter "base colors" and
the brighter "accent colors" on each building.
Base Color
Buildings with large expanses of blank walls should have lighter, subtle base color. The base
color on smaller buildings or those with more elaborate details can use slightly stronger
tones. Base color examples:
• Light gray
• Cream
• White
• Pale Flesh
• Pale Yellow
• Light Beige
Accent Color
Brighter accent color should be used minimally to accent windows, doors, and awnings.
Special materials such as glazed tile can also be used to introduce accent colors on building
facades. Accent color examples:
• Forest Green
• Deep Blue Green
• Brick Red
• Deep Blue
• Dark Browns
101
%ida0a#4TA6 2)0*409 taat*9 Peas
9. Lighting
Lighting can be used to enhance architectural details creating shadows as well as provide
security to a building.
Lights should be subtle, directional, and not over-
powering or glaring. Lighting sources should be in-
tegrated into the architectural design. Examples of
well- integrated lights include soffit lighting and ac-
cent light fixtures which are a design element unto
themselves.
• Accent lighting should be used to accent landscap-
ing or building details such as tower elements and
ornamental windows. It should be low -key to reduce
sky glow and /or glare.
• Light fixtures that illuminate large areas should be atte lighting strengthens image
avoided. Lighting used to illuminate store signs should be subtle and non - glaring.
Bulbs should not be exposed and should focus light directly onto the sign or building.
• Pedestrian lights add interesting architectural detail as well as provide security and
lighting for pedestrians at night. These lights should be incorporated into the build-
ing and parking lot designs and be well detailed.
• Recommended lamp types for lighting signs and buildings should be warmer incan-
descent halogen, metal halide, or "daylight" fluorescent bulbs. Cold (blue- tinted) lamp
types are not appropriate. Precise intensity and types of light should be recommended
by a qualified design professional.
New planting within this zone should be consistent with the suggested plant palette located
in Table 5 Section 2.2.1 of this Specific Plan.
In addition to the standards in the Single- Family Residential section of the Specific Plan and
requirements of the Moorpark Zoning Code, the following landscape guidelines shall apply
to the Institutional zone.
1. Planting
• Trees and planting should be used to soften the mass of larger buildings, shade park-
ing lots, and accent important areas such as entries, plazas, and courtyards.
• The site area devoted to landscaping should be greater than 10% of the overall lot
area
1""Wamd —
102
iiLooti�tcazk D6G4Kt4cffK S�ccc�Cc PCsK
• The use of large specimen trees (24" box material, minimum) as specified in the
suggested plant palette is encouraged. Shrubs shall be a minimum five - gallon, except
where standard nursery and installation practices use one gallon.
• Top dressings should be a minimum 2" layer composted organic material to aid in
weed control and conservation.
2. Fences and Walls
• Attractive fences or walls should be used to screen service areas, parking, mechanical
equipment, and trash containers; planters should buffer fences and expansive walls.
3. Signage
• Refer to City Zoning Code, Chapter 17.40, for detailed sign regulations.
944 44r wad
103
'iiCaaa,�iazk Daea- eauoa S,aea'C6C'c �VCsK
2.2.9 Industrial Park /Light Industrial (M -1)
1. Land Use
The existing development in this zone, where it is adjacent to the railroad right -of -way is
characterized by a number of small industrial uses housed in a long narrow metal warehouse.
Due to the narrow lot dimension and its proximity between existing residential single family
homes and the railroad tracks, the lot has limited alternative use potential. Ultimately,
improved access could be provided through a connection to the westerly Metrolink parking
lot. In addition to the core planning area, light industrial uses are planned for in the area
east of Spring Road, between Los Angeles Avenue and the railroad tracks. This area is
characterized by an existing mixed light industrial complex fronting High Street east of Chuey's
restaurant. This district is intended to accommodate small scale, low traffic demand, clean
industrial service oriented uses which are compatible with adjoining commercial and resi-
dential areas. Permitted uses in the (M -1) zone as listed in the Moorpark Zoning Code
2. Building Setbacks
The following table indicates the minimum setbacks in the M -1 zone. The front and side
setbacks are consistent with the R -1 zone provisions in the Moorpark Zoning Ordinance,
while the rear is unique to the Downtown Specific Plan. (Refer to the City Zoning Ordi-
nance for more detailed descriptions and exceptions).
104
Front
7ilaaz�iazk V aeomeaa m S,*ccc6ec PtaK
Consistent with Table
17.24.020.B of Title 17"
Side
Corner lot Minimum 5 feet
Side
Interior lot adjacent to Residential zone Minimum 5 feet
Interior lot As specified by permit
Rear - Adjacent to Residential Zones
From property line Minimum 15 feet
From alley Minimum 2 feet
Rear - Adjacent to Commercial Zones
From property line or
alley. As determined by
permit
Requires 30 -foot landscaped setback from arterials and a 20 -foot landscaped setback
from two -lane local and rural collectors.
3. Height
The maximum height for an Industrial Park structure shall be 35 feet and no more than
three stories high.
4. Building Maintenance and Renovation
Quality maintenance of existing buildings and parcels, combined with progress in meeting
design goals for this land use designation are encouraged. To this end, the maintenance
guidelines and incentives as well as the building restoration guidelines outlined in sections
2.3.1 to 2.3.3 apply to the Industrial Park designation.
t'tg�ri 9.lria*Z4e —
105
'%itaoz)aazk V OL&Aat6l4a S,�ccc6�c pla'r
- 41 a ' M"
The Industrial Park zones are located along the railroad tracks between two different archi-
tectural styles; the Western - Victorian, Early American Commercial, and Agrarian styles of
the Old Town Commercial zone and the Bungalow architecture of the Single Family Resi-
dential zone. Due to both the types of uses in this zone and to its proximity to the railroad,
the architectural character should have an agrarian image. This character is appropriate and
compatible with the adjacent neighborhoods and allows for functional design space for
Industrial uses.
General Architectural Character
Agrarian Style This architecture evolved from the agricultural influence in rural towns.
The building forms are simple, reflecting barn elements such as pitched roofs, clerestories,
dormers, cupolas, and wood / metal siding. This architectural style is appropriate with larger
structures such as the existing railroad station building on High Street. This architectural
style can be integrated into buildings downtown through the use of vertical, farm -like ele-
ments. The existing silos near the train station and on Poindexter Avenue create visible
landmarks to outlying areas in the city.
1. Roof Forms
• Varied roof forms accenting a build-
ing such as tower elements, dormers,
cupolas, gabled roofs, clerestories,
extended eaves with rafters can be
used to add interest to large agrarian
structures.
• Weather vanes are indications of
farmland structures and provide ver-
tical landmarks to downtown.
• Single pitch, basic roof structures
are also appropriate to the agrar-
ian style.
Agrarian Architecture
uooa exampw of agranan nuiLarng lone
— .L�igkt 9.cduadetal
106
'7&*O'Z,6aa4 SAccc6c'e ,VCsa
2. Windows and Doors
• Consistency between windows and door frames should be maintained throughout the
structure to unify the building.
The use of either very large repeated or very small multi -paned windows and mullions
are recommended in window and door designs to minimize the expanses of glazing
which detract from the desired agrarian character.
Repeated window patterns reinforce character
• To create a more comfortable space for pedestrians, the use of awnings and canopies
are encouraged. Canopies protect people and furniture from inclement weather while
bringing the building facade to human scale. Awnings also provide a place to intro•
duce color and signage.
3. Low Walls
• Low walls are an important unifying element providing continuity to the street edge
and buffering parking and service areas.
• Walls should have a minimum height of 2.5 feet and maximum 4 feet. The finish
material and design should be compatible with the architectural character of adjacent
buildings.
• For a clean, finished look, durability, and safety, walls should incorporate the wall cap
and pilasters at entry points.
• Breaks in walls should be incorporated to allow for pedestrian circulation.
rim �wtual —
107
4. Building Materials
Building materials and finishes should be
selected to reinforce the overall design in-
tent and to be consistent with the desired
architectural character of the building.
Below are suggestions for the street facades
and exposed sides of buildings. Backs of
buildings should use similar materials, how-
ever, may be less expensive and more utili-
tarian. Buildings in this zone will be pri-
marily utilitarian in function thus can use
less expensive materials, provided the build-
ing design and material selection meet the
intent of these guidelines.
%ilaoa�tiazk Dau«- ctou..c S 'Aacc�(tc pCa'w
Vertical board and baton siding is appropriate
• Materials and finishes should be selected for ease of maintenance and durability. The
following materials are encouraged:
Roofs (see Roof Section for graphic examples)
• Dimensional asphalt shingles
• Standing seam metal roof
• Treated Wood shingles roofs
• Aluminum, galvanized or corrugated tin accents, gutters, downspouts, and scuppers
Building Walls
• Horizontal lap siding, board and batten siding, and barn siding are the most appropri-
ate material to be used on a main surface of the building.
• Metal siding
• Stucco, adobe, and brick are also acceptable materials
• Colored concrete block used to simulate brick
• Stone or brick wainscoting may be used on buildings
• Heavy timber construction used in trellises, roof overhangs, balconies, and other archi-
tectural elements
Low Walls and Fences
• Finished solid wood fence
• Masonry wall with cap detail
• Brick wall
• Wrought iron fence
• Brick or stone masonry wall with wrought iron accent
I d-wari %t
108
illaaa�aak Daea traua.c ;VCaK
DO NOT USE THE FOLLOWING MATERIALS:
Roofs that use:
• Brightly colored glazed roofing tiles
• Slate or concrete tile
Building Walls that are:
• Reflective or dark glass
• Synthetic materials made of poor quality and resemblance to brick or masonry
• Corrugated fiberglass
• Coarsely finished or unfinished plywood
• Unfinished concrete block and split -face block
• Shingles
-T-111 Siding
• Slump stone block
Low Walls and Fences
• Rolled wire, fencing, i.e. chicken wire, pig fencing, etc.
• Chain -link
• Unfinished materials such as concrete block or plywood
• Vinyl or sheet metal siding
5. Color
Color is an important aspect of the overall building design and street scene creating varia-
tion while maintaining an overall consistency with the surrounding neighborhood. It is very
important to keep a balanced color palette using the correct proportions between the lighter
"base colors" and the brighter "accent colors" on each building.
Base Color
Buildings with large expanses of blank walls should have lighter, subtle base color. The base
color on smaller buildings or those with more elaborate details can use slightly stronger
tones. Whenever possible, color should include natural, earth tones or subtle, gray blue
colors.
Accent Color
Brighter accent color should be used minimally to accent windows, doors, and awnings.
zi* I daatrial
109
6. Lighting
Lighting can be used to enhance architec-
tural details creating shadows as well as
provide security to a building and indicate
whether a business is open. Lights should
be subtle, directional, and not overpower-
ing or glaring. Lighting sources should be
integrated into the architectural design.
Examples of well integrated lights include
soffit lighting and accent light fixtures
which are a design element unto them-
selves.
illaaz,siazk Daeoveau.a S,6eec6te ,alas
Wall mounted and free-standing lighting should complement the
building
• Accent lighting should be used to
accent landscaping or building details such as tower elements and cupolas.
• Light fixtures that illuminate large areas should be avoided. Lighting used to illumi.
nate store signs should be subtle and non - glaring. Bulbs should not be exposed and
should focus light directly onto the sign or building.
• Pedestrian lights add interesting architectural detail as well as provide security and
lighting for pedestrians at night. These lights should be incorporated into the build-
ing and parking lot designs and be well detailed.
• Recommended lamp types for lighting signs and buildings should be warmer incan-
descent halogen, metal halide, or "daylight" fluorescent bulbs. Cold (blue - tinted) lamp
types are not appropriate. Precise intensity and types of light should be recommended
by a qualified design professional.
— .C'[gkt 9�elaraertal
110
%iloazfiazk Dd4kKtdL4K S&acge'e Peas
New planting within the Industrial Park zone should be consistent with the Suggested Plant
Palette located in Table 5 of Section 2.2.1 of this Specific Plan.
• Landscaping should be used to soften the impact of large
blank building walls, as well as parking lots.
• Shrubs and planters can help screen the views of the park.
ing lot from the street.
• Trees can break up the expanses of pavement while pro-
viding shade for cars and pedestrians.
• Colorful accent planting should be used to accent entries
and add color and interest to buildings.
Berming with edge treatments can be an appropriate image
—
111
Landscaping can sotften parking
lots
nooz, azig ci6RfaKt664K S)gece G Caw
2.3 Private Property Maintenance, Expansion, and Renovation
2.3.1 Private Property Maintenance Guidelines
Quality maintenance of all buildings, public sidewalks, and spaces is critical to present a
clean, well -kept appearance in the downtown. Cleaning up trash, debris, removal of graffiti,
repair of cracks, and general cleaning of building facades will go a long way to help beautify
downtown Moorpark.
Property owners of buildings which do not currently meet design guideline criteria should be
encouraged to beautify by making simple cosmetic changes such as repainting, adding new
signage and lighting, installing awnings, and removal of unsafe and unsightly building fea-
tures. This type of work is recommended as a first tier facade improvement program. (Refer
to the Implementation Section for suggested facade improvement program ideas.)
Sections 2.3.1 and 2.3.3 contain development standards and /or guidelines related to site
upkeep, land use and renovation. These standards and guidelines are intended to supple-
ment the City's existing Municipal Code Title 8, Health and Safety, Chapter 17.08.48 Prop-
erty Maintenance. However, listed below are some voluntary building and site maintenance
measures encouraged for all districts.
• Painted and stained surfaces should be cleaned regularly and maintained.
• Metal windows and doors should be treated for rust protection or finished in a perma-
nent, opaque color.
• Business owners should sweep up trash and debris daily around their buildings.
• Storefront repairs such as old cracked window mullions, cracks in stucco, chipped
paint, broken windows, damaged signs, etc. should be repaired
• Owners of vacant lots should cut weeds and eliminate trash on a regular basis.
• Vacant lots and areas visible from streets should not be used for storage and should be
properly screened with low walls and landscaping.
• Quality maintenance of all buildings, public sidewalks, and spaces is critical to present
a clean, well -kept appearance in the downtown. Cleaning up trash, debris, removal of
graffiti, repair of cracks, and general cleaning of building facades will go a long way to
help beautify downtown Moorpark.
• Property owners of buildings which do not currently meet these design guidelines
criteria should be encouraged to beautify by making simple cosmetic changes such a
7ll4i+ &W41 U. EZ#4444W axed RCOOMU W —
112
'%Kaaa ,64106 Daug.ctau•.o _TAeCqC-c ;Veaw
repainting, adding new signage and lighting, installing awnings, and removing of un-
safe and unsightly building features. This type of work is recommended as a first tier
facade improvement program.
2.3.2 Legal Non - Conforming Uses, Expansions, and Renovations
The Specific Plan modifies several land use and zoning districts which will result in the cre-
ation of some legal non - conforming uses. Additionally, there could be some cases where
there are existing non - conforming uses, such as the tire shop and auto repair businesses
located on the east side of Moorpark Avenue where Office zoning is proposed. While new
auto service related uses would not be allowed to be established under the Office designa.
tion, it is not the intent of this document to disallow any existing legally established busi.
nesses.
Chapter 17.52 of the City's Zoning Code (Non - conforming Uses) would allow for the contin-
ued operation of uses such as the tire store and auto service use in the Office zone, but would
not allow for any expansion of these uses. In order to permit limited expansions to these
uses, the Specific Plan establishes a set of supplemental findings for non - conforming uses in
the Plan area. If these criteria are met, an Administrative Permit could be granted for
moderate expansions of non - conforming buildings and uses.
For the purposes of the following findings, moderate expansions are defined as floor area or
use area increases of less than 50 percent of the total existing floor /use area. Land use
intensification is defined as additional activity or services offered by a business which increase
the degree of non - conformity from the zone in which the use is located.
The Community Development Director may allow processing of a Director - approved Con-
ditional Use Permit for expansion of building/service area or intensification of land use for
legally established non - conforming businesses within the Specific Plan area. The Director
may then approve the CUP provided the following findings can be made:
1. The property and its associated improvements have been historically maintained in a
clean and well -kept manner, and /or the nature of the proposed expansion will result
in related site and building improvements which will improve the overall appearance
and compatible operation of the use with surrounding land uses.
2. The proposed expansion has incorporated physical design measures (such as fencing
and landscaping, shielding of future or existing exterior lighting), or has proposed
operational measures (limits on hours of operation, limits on use of outdoor areas
adjacent to sensitive land uses) which can offset potential land use compatibility issues.
711ai«tcKa«ec. $z#4444" 44d Rureaatte.c —
113
'WOOT, 414 .✓ ou .VeOeV.c S,�ecc6Cc Pla,,
3. The location, orientation, height, and mass of expansion areas will not significantly
affect privacy for nearby residences or inhibit business operations of surrounding com-
mercial uses.
4. The location, orientation, height, and mass of expansion areas will conform with the
design guidelines established for the land use district in which the use is located.
5. The expansion of the building or use will not be detrimental to surrounding land uses,
the goals and policies of the Downtown Specific Plan, or public health, safety and
welfare.
The Community Development Director may establish physical design and operational con-
ditions on the non - conforming building/use expansion as necessary to assure compliance
with the above noted findings. All other standards within Chapter 17.52 (Non Conforming
Uses) will apply.
2.3.3 Building Expansion and Renovation
A key goal of this Specific Plan is to create a framework in which the downtown area can
flourish and realize its greatest potential. This process is broadly referred to as "revitaliza-
tion." To achieve that end, it takes a combination of events to occur and work together.
Land uses must complement each other, and the physical environment must project 'a sense
of safety, and community pride.
General property clean up and maintenance, as described in Section 2.3.1, go a long way
towards generating a positive community image. However, when there are tangible forms of
benefit to property owners for physical building and site upgrades, there is a greater likeli.
hood that revitalization efforts will occur.
As one or more properties make an effort in the direction of upgrade and clean up, other
properties often begin to follow. A natural synergy occurs which draws others towards that
same result. To help initiate that process, a number of specific incentive programs and
standards for renovations and expansions are outlined in this section.
A. Building Expansion and Renovation with Administrative Permit
The City's Zoning Code requires new dwelling units in the RPD zone to process a Planned
Development application and secure a permit from the Planning Commission. However,
building expansions, secondary dwellings and /or renovations are allowed through an Ad-
ministrative Permit processed through the Community Development Department.
This Administrative Permit will be processed in accordance with Section 17.44.030 of the
City Zoning Code to streamline the renovation process.
— M44dcKa , S "d Rureoau" —
114
iitaoz�tiazk Daeu.ctacu.c S�ccc��c pCaK
B. Lot Consolidation Incentive Program
In the High to Very High Density Residential areas of the Specific Plan, the density maxi-
mums have been designed to encourage lot consolidation and redevelopment of underdevel-
oped or declining property. The maximum permissible density for the High to Very High
Density Residential area ranges from 7 to 14 units to the acre.
Where a range for density is indicated (as in RPD 7 -14U) the 14 unit density maximum is
only obtainable when certain performance standards are met. The performance standards
are tied to desired land use patterns and character for the High Density Residential neigh-
borhoods. The density bonus is intended as an incentive to attain that desired neighbor-
hood characteristic. The potential resulting number of units per lot, in relation to lot size, is
illustrated on Table 6 (Density Threshold Comparison by Lot Size). Table 7 outlines the
performance standards that are required to achieve the desired maximum permitted den-
sity. The lot consolidation program is intended to encourage lot consolidation of multiple
parcels and does not promote small duplexes or inappropriately scaled two -story residences.
Hence, the performance criteria rewards additional density for the successful consolidation
of lots equal to 21,780 square feet at minimum. At such time as renovation occurs, the base
zoning of the parcel should be modified to reflect the appropriate earned increase in density
(e.g. RPD 7U to RPD 14U). The Department of Community Development will administer
this base density tracking. Further, Table 7 requires certain findings be made by the Plan-
ning Commission in order to permit the density increase. These findings are described on
the following page
Table 6
— �A!aw�ctuca.ccc.
5Z#44& 4X "d Re wvatiac —
115
nooz i4zk Dou•Ktoa -* �Ca,.
Table 7
DENSITY
DESIGNATIO
MAXIMUM
DENSITY
PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
RPD-7U
7 /acre
Must meet development specifications of the Zoning Code
and Specific Plan
RPD -7 to 14 U '
7 /acre
Must meet development specifications of the Zoning Code
and Specific Plan
12/acre
21,000 square toot net minimum parcel size
14 /acre
28,000 sqare foot, or greater, net minimum parcel size
RPD -14U
Must meet development specifications of the Zoning Code
and Specific Plan
Density Bonus
up to 18 /acre
Consistent with Chapter 17.64 of the Zoning Code, a 25%
densitybonus maybe added to the permitted base density
when a project qualifies on criteria associated with
low/very low income or senior housing.
• Densitybeyond 7 dwelling units to the acre is permitted onlywhen one or more of the
performance standards associated with each densitycap has been met through project
design, and the Planning Commission makes the findings on the following page before approving
a project.
Findings for Increased Density up to 14 units to the acre:
1. The project is consistent with the spirit and intent of the City's General Plan and
Specific Plan goals and policies for the downtown.
2. The project is consistent with the combined development standards of the City's
Zoning Code and the Downtown Specific Plan.
3. The project has incorporated design measures which render the project compatible
with existing and planned surrounding land use and development.
4. The project would not be obnoxious or harmful, or impair the utility of the neighbor-
ing property or uses.
5. The project would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, conve-
nience or welfare.
— w4 .taea«ce, £z/LcaKe " "d �e«oaatio�c —
116
'illaazfiazk Daeo erd a.n .5�*aec6le ;VCa.
6. The density increase beyond 7 units to the acre is supported by the project through
incorporating one or more of the design characteristics listed below which will result
in greater community benefit as circumscribed in the Downtown Specific Plan.
a. The project has a minimum lot size of 21,780 square feet or greater.
b. The project will significantly remodel /renovate an existing residential structure
that currently does not meet design standards established by the Specific Plan,
and will in turn incorporate physical building and site improvements that are
consistent with the design standards for the High to Very High Residential land
use designation within the Specific Plan.
7. The project has demonstrated the use of innovative site planning and has designed
the multiple units to be compatible with each other, the surrounding single family
residential neighborhood, and maintain an overall cohesive appearance.
C. Substantial Building Renovation Program
In addition to the development standards and design guidelines outlined in this Specific
Plan, a goal is to promote landowner participation in building renovation and maintenance.
Table 8 identifies common design features typical to residential building renovation. When
property owners decide to substantially renovate an existing structure, certain design features
are required (R) and others encouraged (E). A substantial renovation is defined by an in-
crease in the structure's building floor area equal to or above 25% of the original floor area
of the structure.
— V44*&N41 e. £z#4,Wac aad ,�urevatlac —
117
iff**,z wt,6 %)dea-ceou.,e Saeec6le Pees
Table 8
Substantial Building Renovation Program
A project that includes a substantial renovation ( =/+ 25 %) must meet the following: a) all required ( "R ") design
features are provided, and b) non - optional design features are incorporated when possible into a development
application and subsequently approved by the decision authority.
Design Feature
Required
Encouraged
General site cleanup of all visible areas
R
E
Removal of unsightly features (non structural)
R
E
Removal of unsafe/unsightly features (structural)
R
E
Exterior Painting and Repairs (non structural)
R
E
Addition of Trellis/Arbor
E
Addition of Front Porch
E
Roof Form Modification
E
Appropriate Siding Materials
E
Window Trim
E
WindowAdditions
E
Window Replacements
E
Front Door replacement
E
Screening of Mechanical Equipment
E
New landscaping
R
E
Repair /installation of side/rear yard fencing
E
Decorative frontyard low wall, fence or landscape hedge
E
Addition of covered parking
E
Garage door replacement
E
Building articulation (columns, grillwork, tile inset, cornice, rafters etc.)
E
NOTES:
1. All building and site modifications must be done in compliance with the Design Guidelines contained in Section
2.2.4 — Residential Planned Development.
2. "R" indicates the design feature is required and not optional.
— 7JLatKteKaKee. $44�a" aKd �ueeoralles —
118
?&OO2,6414 V &- W4t4L4K SAeec6le Vea-
D. Building /Zoning Clearance Performance Standards
(Applies to all ministerial actions)
As described in Section 2.3.1 (Maintenance) quality maintenance of all buildings, yard area
and landscaping, is critical to present a clean„ well -kept appearance in the downtown resi-
dential areas Cleaning up trash, maintaining landscaping, mending fences, removing ex-
posed storage, and other cosmetic efforts will go along way to help beautify downtown
Moorpark.
To this end, any ministerial permit (e.g. building permit, home occupation permit) issued by
the Community Development Department, within the Single Family and Residential Planned
Development districts, will require at minimum site maintenance criteria below in addition
to the City's Municipal Code, Title 8 Health and Safety, Chapter 17.08.48 property Mainte-
nance, to be met as conditions of building/zoning approvals:
a. General site cleanup of all visible areas
b. Removal of unsightly features visible from public view.
The Community Development Director may waive all or a portion of these required main-
tenance improvements based on special circumstances or hardship.
— V4Z. uraaca. 5* "a" "d �uwvatioa —
119
?&O*T#44k Doaw SAa,��
3.0 Circulation and Streetscape Beautification
3.1 Intent
A primary purpose of the General Plan Circulation Element is to reinforce the 1992 Gen-
eral Plan Circulation Element goal which states "to designate a safe and efficient circulation
system which promotes the movement of people and goods in and around the City". Fur-
ther, the Circulation Element identifies goals, policies, and implementation measures that
will ensure that all components of the system will meet future transportation needs of the
City. A number of widespread policies related to vehicular circulation, traffic management
and control, roadway standards, transportation demand management, bicycle and pedes-
trian facilities, and roadway facility designations are addressed in the City's Circulation Ele-
ment. No specific policies, however, reference improvements to the downtown.
This Specific Plan addresses existing and future circulation issues and establishes improve-
ment policies for the Moorpark Downtown Specific Plan area. The study components in-
clude roadways and intersections, connection to the railroad, public transit, and pedestrian
and bicycle routes. The goal of the study is to improve the existing circulation system and
accommodate the current and projected circulation of vehicular traffic, as well as pedestrian,
bicycle and public transit.
3.1.1 Existing Conditions
The key automobile circulation routes in the plan area are High Street, Spring Road, Los
Angeles Avenue, and Moorpark Avenue. Large trucks have been restricted from High Street
and must use State Highway 118 and Highway 23 (Los Angeles Avenue, and Moorpark Av-
enue) although vehicular traffic is quite heavy through the High Street corridor. Presently
along High Street pedestrians have a well defined path.
Sidewalks adjacent to commercial uses on the north side of High Street are 15 feet wide; a
good width for a pedestrian- oriented downtown. Recent improvements to the pedestrian
sidewalks along the south side of High Street have occurred which close the gaps that origi-
nally existed in this area. Sidewalks on Spring Road and Moorpark Avenue, however, are
less defined, end abruptly at the railroad right -of -way, and are not regularly used.
East/west connections for pedestrians that run parallel to Moorpark Avenue are the inter-
nal streets in the residential sections of the plan area. Landscaping along High Street and
Charles Street is well defined and mature, while along Moorpark Avenue very little land-
scaping exists and is frequently interrupted by the diversity of the land uses, noncontiguous
building setbacks, and clutter from telephone lines and signage poles. The Specific Plan
study area contains the following main roads:
eGrutlatiac aad �uuu7�tcatiae
120
Table 9
Existing Roads within Downtown Moorpark
Doawrwo a s' ` Ae..
1/W Road Width
Highway 118 - Los Angeles Ave.
six -lane arterial
Flory Avenue
two -lane residential street
Highway 23- Moorpark Ave.
two -lane local collector
60'
42'
Spring Road
four -lane arterial
Magnolia Street
two-lane residential street 60' 36'
High Street
two-lane local collector
80'
44' -62'
(typ. 47')
Charles Street
two -lane local collector
60'
36'
Everett Street
two -lane residential street
50'
34'
Second Street
two -lane residential street
Flory Avenue
two -lane residential street
Millard Street
two -lane residential street
Walnut Street
two -lane residential street 80' 56'
Bard Street
twalane residential street 80' 36'
Magnolia Street
two-lane residential street 60' 36'
— eiscrolatlos aaei �iuurte�ieatlea —
121
%?f- oe�c�ia�k Douatou..c s,a �
3.2 Circulation System Hierarchy
Specific Plan area roads, their main intersections, and their hierarchy are shown in Figure 7.
The level of service for each of the individual roadways represents the optimum average
daily trips that the General Plan is ultimately targeting for each roadway. In addition, heavy
truck traffic is experienced on Highway 23 traveling to and from the City of Fillmore to the
northeast.
3.2.1 Signalization
Within the Specific Plan area, existing signals are located at the intersections of Spring Road
and High Street, High Street and Moorpark Avenue, Poindexter and Moorpark Avenue,
and Los Angeles Avenue and Moorpark Avenue. While these signals are projected to per-
form at level of service D or E during peak hour trips in the year 2005, (based on the City's
Traffic Modeling), it is anticipated that traffic flow will be significantly enhanced by the
Specific Plan circulation design measures outlined in Chapter 3.0. Examples of design mea-
sures which will improve traffic flow, and therefore signal efficiency are: better signage at key
intersections, consolidated pedestrian crossings, restriping of streets to better delineate turn.
ing and stacking areas, and consolidation of vehicular access points along Moorpark Avenue.
These traffic flow improvements would be accomplished with no reduction in the number
or width of travel lanes.
Beyond the circulation design measures contained in this Circulation and Streetscape Beau-
tification section (Section 3.4 specifically), there remain problems of regular vehicle trips and
congestion near City Hall on Moorpark Avenue. It is therefore suggested that an analysis be
done to verify whether a stop sign or pedestrian activated stop light could be warranted at
this location to better connect the downtown to the civic center.
44d —
122
7&00't#� Vdagraaw Ae.
I
15 U
C' L.0"
-r7 Possible Extension
J
of Spring Road
.. .. .. .....
7
�7,
w
Possibe Extension�
of High Street 40
Ll
. . . . . ......
LA_
" JLi :
'1ib1 j
7"Mi
_wQ
M-.1D
:i ..... . .... . ..................
■
',MAI
Ej
- PI:
fl! :11
31
Legend
........ .. .... ... .17
'-". . ..... ..... . ............... . ......
F
�j
C
rJ] L_l
L
!i7lj
G
I
............ . ........ .. ........
- — --- --- ------ - --- ...... . ...
7
. .. ..... ......
L2,J
........... . .. .
L
Rim
Rural Collector (2 to 4 lanes)
Not to Scale
•
Local Collector (2 lanes)
......... ..
Legend
Six Lane Arterial
Four Lane Arterial
Rural Collector (2 to 4 lanes)
Not to Scale
•
Local Collector (2 lanes)
Local Street
F71!
ice:.
nun.un
Alley
. . . ...............................
At-grade Railroad Crossing
N- 15.
Pedestrian Railroad Crossing
Specific Plan Boundary
Street System Hierarchy
"d Figure 7
123 •
'%llooz�tia2k Deu�.ctaca.c S�eec6lc Plan
3.3 Streetscape Beautification
As we continue to design our cities and towns, it is important to understand, recognize, and
incorporate by policy true design of good streets. Streets are truly the public's domain, places
where everyone goes and where the image of a place is shaped: places where the vitality of a
town or an area is measured largely by the composition and life on its streets. Streets provide
an intrinsic opportunity to shape and add character to our communities. By embracing the
street as an important public place, we create an environment rather than simply a means to
get from point A to point B.
In downtown Moorpark two primary streets play a major role in creating the ambiance and
character of the area; High Street and Moorpark Avenue. In order to properly establish a
long -term vision, revitalization of the downtown "streetscape" is necessary to establish a blue.
print for renovation and new growth. By painting a picture for these two key downtown
streets, the City can target a vision for realizing the community's desires for beautifying these
important public travelways in the downtown. The extension of these central streets to
Spring Road and Los Angeles Avenue should also be considered for transitional beautifica.
tion enhancements as entry ways into the downtown core.
This Vision Plan is not intended to be implemented immediately. It will take time, money,
effort, and partnerships between public and private interests in order to realize its elements.
Figures 8 through 11 illustrate the vision for Downtown Moorpark. To begin with the end
in mind, this graphic statement enables the City of Moorpark and its residents to chart the
future path toward renovation of the downtown. The overriding goals of the Vision Plan
are:
3.3.1 General Goals
• To retain, expand and attract selected business opportunities in the downtown and
provide amenities to attract shoppers and visitors.
• Create designated public plazas and open spaces that serve as focal points and land-
marks for community events.
• To guide and provide effective standards for the location, amount, type and quality of
new development in downtown.
• To support these goals, the policies below should direct future efforts to renovate
downtown Moorpark. The downtown should be a special place recognized by the
community as a public and cultural center, civic hub, an identifiably different place
including civic events, dining, entertainment, and shopping.
L''urcrdatioK and i�ux.�a't�iealla.o —
124
7&OdII&#aI4 Dacu.ctauf.c S,4e,gec Pea,
• City and Redevelopment Agency investment and public improvement should focus
on the downtown core, giving it the highest priority.
Entry statements should be developed along key corridors to the downtown, primarily
along Moorpark Avenue near the Birkenshaw House, the intersection of Moorpark
Avenue and High Street, and Moorpark Avenue and Spring Road. The entry monu-
ments should include directional and informational signage with a common theme
and image to help define what is special about downtown.
Property owners should be encouraged to help maintain and improve the appearance
of the downtown by upgrading and renovating building facades, screening unsightly
mechanical equipment, improving the appearance of their storefront sidewalks, clean-
ing up vacant lots, participating in an active merchants association, developing a down-
town icon or logo, and a cooperative plan for enforcement and safety in the down-
town.
• The downtown must be perceived as a safe place to visit. Theme lighting should be
used to supplement the City's recent construction of historic globe lights to make
downtown more interesting and inviting, as well as secure.
• Streetscape improvements should be used to strengthen the lengths between the civic
center, the railroad depot, the Metrolink parking lot, the senior center, the senior
housing complex, and the Flory Avenue Elementary School.
• The City should continue to develop outdoor public spaces such as the small gazebo
near the railroad depot, and possibly closing Magnolia Street to through traffic to
create a public plaza.
• Businesses should be encouraged to provide outdoor seating, especially for food ser-
vice establishments, and the City should allow encroachments on the sidewalks to
accommodate such activities.
3.3.2 Building Renovation and New Development Goals .
New development and expansions of existing buildings downtown should be consis-
tent with the design standards and guidelines described in the downtown Specific
Plan. Infill projects are encouraged to help create the intensity of development tradi.
tionally associated with historic downtowns.
• New buildings and remodels of existing buildings should reflect the traditional mate-
rials and design per the design standards in the Specific Plan.
Historical buildings should be preserved, and to the extent possible restored to high-
light their traditional materials and architecture.
G'i�e•rlatleK acrd �iaati�ieatio,c —
125
, {� V 9I ��'� � w• v �� ��`�
-!1r
..,'� _ .r v yr' .� :. rr
II
�I
i
fir.
r•
mi
IC
� � ll• � — col or , ��
j FIX
��
'
q 1' ,� ea►e s99s
�
POW
IaiA�A7A�ATA� r •w.w �i a�.......� - .'
ww:.w' l�a
Tq
In J. ar .a I_\ P. 1".q. JN Ja I
AM
Ell
............
W Lb
HIGH STREET
IL -M
7-
G
IN DC R I 0 I u ►N
roorpark
I P MOORPARK
AVENUE
ONSHEETA
i
tl .ar
R R M
' D C f i C N
C R O U P
18
mmi
u
s�
ro rpar � .1 7
Figure 10
I
NO"lill" i
I
Ij --
I
��! — — •a � (I I i I
I III - _ b 41 I I • -- -- (� i ... ... ..... II
C f O U F e-•— I� I Q , I I
MOORPARK r p a r k
I�
AVENUE
SHEET d — — Figure 11
IL
- - = -- _ -- - - -- - -- - - --
- - -- 129
%ilaot19,6 se STeec6le �Cas
3.3.3 Land Use Goals
• The City should seek to obtain a developer to establish a "Ghirardelli Square" type
retail center along High Street near the railroad depot.
• The neighborhoods surrounding the downtown are important to the continued suc-
cess and diversity of the downtown. These neighborhoods should be preserved and
physically enhanced to encourage continued investment.
• Coordination with the VCTC, Union Pacific, and Metrolink must occur to ensure
that the large vacant and underdeveloped sites along the tracks maintain uses that are
compatible with and integrated into the downtown.
• Evening activities should be encouraged in the downtown, especially those that sup-
port one another such as dining, strolling, art galleries, crafts, etc.
• Civic uses should be maintained in downtown providing the daytime anchor and hub
of activity to the heart of the City. Relocation of the Post Office and Chamber of
Commerce to the downtown should be pursued.
3.3.4 Circulation and Parking Goals
• Truck traffic should be rerouted from State Route 23 as planned for in the City
General Plan (in coordination with CalTrans).
• Enhance pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile circulation facilities to be pursued in and
around the downtown.
• Directional signage and landscaping of parking lots will help frame and focus traffic to
key parking areas and should be pursued.
• Other facility improvements that encourage pedestrian traffic downtown should be
encouraged such as building awnings, gazebos, informational kiosks or directional
signs, public restrooms, clearly defined crosswalks and pedestrian ways.
• On- street parking should be preserved and off - street parking must be located in places
that are easy to recognize and access, but are well screened from pedestrian sidewalks.
• Relocation of internal parking lots to the northeast side of the High Street commer-
cial core will allow for a strong commercial building edge along High Street, and
screen parking from view.
��reulaties aad �iautl�icatlars —
130
%ileoz�eazk Dau<.ctaaaa S�acc6CC PI.cK
3.3.5 Activities, Events and Promotions Goals
• The downtown should seek to establish its own identity through the creation of a logo
theme and developing a program of frequent activities tied to that theme. Resur-
gence of the Downtown Merchants Association or possibly creation of a BIA/BID
should be pursued, once the concentration of commercial uses increases.
• The City, RDA, and Downtown Merchants As-
sociation should sponsor and encourage festivals,
events, and other activities in the downtown.
• Citywide and regional promotions of the down-
town as a district of the City should be encour-
aged.
• The City should consider working with CalTrans
to pursue historic or downtown signage on High-
way 23 and Highway 118 to increase regional
attraction and tourism.
The downtown Vision Plan, as illustrated in Figures 8
through 11 addresses a number of beautification ele- }
is k
ments for areas within the public right -of- -way. Some
Commwtion
of a public kiosk along High Street
of the envisioned public improvements will require could display announcements to civic functions
private property owner participation and /or coopera- and a citywide directory
tion. Others can be simply implemented by the City as
funding is secured. Individual property owner concepts are simply that. They are concepts
intended to help guide individual property owners with the future development of their
property, but in no way are intended as mandatory plans to be implemented.
Other elements of the streetscape beautification plan are described on the following pages.
4.d
131
3.3.6 Public Pathways and Plazas
As shown in Figure 12, the Vision Plan
for downtown Moorpark is integrated
with a number of public pathways con-
necting to key plazas and public gath-
ering spaces. Existing plazas are pro-
posed to be expanded in front of the
railroad depot and at the Metrolink
station. Reuse of the existing gazebo
in the railroad depot plaza is encour-
aged, or if possible, reconstruction of
a larger bandstand structure could pra
vide a functional alternative for pub.
lic performances.
k S�*eeejec plao
Bandstand promotes entertainment and evokes turn of the century
character
Pedestrian and bicycle connections should be readily provided through on- street sidewalks,
paseos, or coves through new buildings to key landmarks such as the historic church at the
corner of Walnut and Charles Streets, the civic center, the Birkenshaw House, and the
railroad depot. Conversion of the public building at the corner of High Street and Moorpark
Avenue which now houses the Building and Safety Departments of the City into a visitor's
information center and /or Chamber of Commerce could be a good use of a public facility, at
a critical intersection.
Public Plazas /Parks
Small public pocket parks and greens are designated immediately adjacent to High Street
and the railroad depot, the small play area in front of the civic center and in two new
locations.
The first new public green location is directly across from the Birkenshaw House between
the alley and Moorpark Avenue. Designated as GO, Office, parks are an allowable use per
the City's existing Zoning Code. Developing these few parcels into a park or public facility
would require City purchase of the lots, demolition of existing structures, and improvement
of a public park. Possible reuse of these structures for a community center, teen center, civic
facility or public use facility could also be considered. This location for a small park provides
a visual relief from the urban -style uses as one travels up Moorpark Avenue toward the
downtown core. Its logical location directly across from the Birkenshaw House would estab-
lish a landscape break to the traveler along the street, and orchard -like tree planting along
Moorpark Avenue would reinforce the farm -like heritage of early Moorpark through a subtle
landscaping palette. The location of this park adjacent to the Methodist church and daycare
facilities and across from the Flory School reinforces the public facilities component and ties
the historic Birkenshaw House to the public facilities.
132
09d
a.
f67
L1
Al
as mmitim a. mmmis a a II MINOR@
I missm a a ME)l fl
M%M
Greens/Parks
Landscape Greenway
Bike Lane-Class 11
RE] I
•
..... .........
. ..................................
PF
Public/Quasi-public Facilities
01111111141111111
.111 MEN!@ mass
..............
0 J
LT.
L._
IPF
77-
R
i
M.".
....................
I t a I at a I I
.... ......
sit t.
J
a.
f67
L1
Al
i,
iE ......... . .
Greens/Parks
Landscape Greenway
Bike Lane-Class 11
RE] I
•
..... .........
. ..................................
PF
Public/Quasi-public Facilities
01111111141111111
Specific Plan Boundary
0 J
Los Angeles Avenue
, Mimix
'am gas
2911.065MAM slaw
Public Pathways And Plazas
Not to Scale
Legend
Public Buildings/Landmarks
Public Plazas and Squares
Greens/Parks
Landscape Greenway
Bike Lane-Class 11
Bike Lane-Class Ill
•
Pedestrian/Shopping Streets
PF
Public/Quasi-public Facilities
01111111141111111
Specific Plan Boundary
aaz�iaak V aeoatoaFa SAccge, ;ve,.
The second possible location for a public pocket park or green is at the intersection of Spring
Road and Charles Street. With the future realignment of Spring Road to the Specific Plan
areas to the north, this corner parcel will be significantly affected by the need to expand the
right -of -way. Therefore, conversion of this parcel into a small pocket park is a logical transi-
tion, will provide a nice landscape buffer along Spring Road, and a much needed small play
area for the Charles Street neighborhood.
3.3.7 Street Trees
Street trees should be planted a minimum of 50 feet on center to act as traffic calming
devices and to mitigate traffic noise. Trees should not be planted any closer than ten feet
from any driveway. Tree installation shall include 15- gallon size species and they should be
staked per City standards. The general tree character shall be compatible with the mature
California Peppers on High Street, providing a large canopy of shade for pedestrians as well
as substantial greenery to establish rural character. The following species shall be planted
unless otherwise specified by the City or CalTrans on Moorpark Avenue.
Street
Botanical Name
High Street Schinus molle
Moorpark Avenue Prunus blireiana
Pistacia chinensis
Magnolia Court Magnolia grandiflora'Majestic Beauty'
Walnut Street
Bard Street
3.3.8 Medians
Pistacia chinensis
Pyrus calleryana 'Bradford'
Common Name
California Pepper
Flowering Plum
Chinese Pistache
Southern Magnolia
(medium size)
Chinese Pistache
Bradford Pear
New raised and planted medians shall be considered a long -term objective on Moorpark
Avenue and in the event a State Route 23 bypass is constructed and the City assumes respon-
sibility for Moorpark Avenue. These medians will control vehicle- turning movements and
serve to calm traffic and reduce noise. The medians will also provide a place for directional
signage designating internalized parking lots, announcing key intersections, and other down-
town features. The medians will also introduce color and greenery to beautify Moorpark
Avenue and High Street.
3.3.9 Lighting
The City of Moorpark recently completed the installation of decorative theme lights along
High Street. These fixtures are beautiful and have significantly enhanced the character of
the street. Ultimately, these fixtures should be continued along High Street up to Moorpark
Avenue and the civic center, and south to the gateway feature, which will designat° the
beginning of the downtown core. Consideration of using these light fixtures as a design
134
zk L%6(kKt4tlsK Specc6lc �CaK
element on Bard and Walnut Streets between High Street and Charles Street, and also
within the Magnolia Court, could also significantly reinforce the small town scale of down.
town. The globes are mounted onto concrete fluted poles, which should be fitted with
bracket hangers to accommodate a custom banner with a selected downtown logo, and to
advertise festivities and events in the future.
In addition to the decorative street lighting, there should be provisions for lighting flag
poles, directional signage, and entrance signage. Lighted bollards should be used in areas
such as the public plaza and Magnolia Court. Bollard style lighting should be similar to the
light poles and fixtures and in keeping with the Early American heritage.
3.3. 10 Street Furnishings
A six-foot bench and trash receptacle should be placed
every 200 feet along High Street and should be clus.
tered at transit stops and public plazas. Decorative
planter pots should be placed adjacent to light posts
and /or benches with a maximum distance of 50 feet
between pots. As the existing benches, trash recep.
tacles and planter boxes need replacing, they should
be replaced with benches similar to the Victorian
wrought iron and wood bench that now exists, or an
appropriate alternate approved by the City of
Moorpark Community Development Department.
Bike racks, lockers, newspaper racks, etc., should also
be carefully located along the street. Drinking foun-
tains should be located in public gathering areas, such
as proposed Magnolia Court and the railroad depot
plaza. Bollards should be used to define public plazas
and walkways. Properly placed, bollards can delin-
eate between vehicle and pedestrian zones, creating a
safe walking environment. General locations for
these furnishings are shown in the Vision Plan, Fig-
ures 8 -11.
1, "d
135
Victorian style iron bollards demarcate pedestrian
walkways
planters provide needed seating, trash collection, and color to pedestrian
areas
3.3.11 Landscaping
//G442�L CC2� D04"eroeo'e ,Sj*.'gt6 PL4K
Handsomely detailed wood planters are encouraged colorful
accents along the street and retail shops
In addition to the street trees and median planting, streetscape
planting is an inexpensive and quick way to beautify a street.
Planting along Moorpark Avenue and High Street should con.
sist of planter pots, flower boxes on the buildings, parking lot Decorative iron drinking fountain
shrub and hedge screens, plaza landscaping, and building set- should be placed in public areas
back landscaping. All planting done within the downtown
core should be consistent with the suggested plant palette shown in Table 5 in Section 2.2.1.
The intent of the plant palette is to complement the historic architecture with plants that
emulate those used in Western - Victorian gardens. Substituted plants should be used with the
approval of the City of Moorpark Community Development Department.
136
a �
Handsomely detailed wood planters are encouraged colorful
accents along the street and retail shops
In addition to the street trees and median planting, streetscape
planting is an inexpensive and quick way to beautify a street.
Planting along Moorpark Avenue and High Street should con.
sist of planter pots, flower boxes on the buildings, parking lot Decorative iron drinking fountain
shrub and hedge screens, plaza landscaping, and building set- should be placed in public areas
back landscaping. All planting done within the downtown
core should be consistent with the suggested plant palette shown in Table 5 in Section 2.2.1.
The intent of the plant palette is to complement the historic architecture with plants that
emulate those used in Western - Victorian gardens. Substituted plants should be used with the
approval of the City of Moorpark Community Development Department.
136
7ilooz,Cia :k Dacv.etouR.c S,tecc6�e �CaK
3.4 Roadway Improvements
In addition to streetscape beautification, a number of roadway improvements are suggested
as a part of the downtown Vision Plan. No significant realignment of either Moorpark
Avenue or High Street will be required to implement the Vision Plan. However, it will be
necessary to re- stripe both Moorpark Avenue and High Street to accommodate left turn
pockets and potential future raised medians (on Moorpark Avenue). The following discus-
sion outlines the various roadway improvements that will be required to implement the
Vision Plan.
3.4.1 Traffic Calming
As the downtown reaches full buildup, it is anticipated that traffic volumes will increase on
Moorpark Avenue and High Street. In order to maintain these two streets for traffic effi.
ciency and keep them from becoming expressways, traffic calming techniques can be utilized.
Tree canopies, textured crosswalks, bulbouts and narrowed drive lane widths can be used in
combination to slow traffic.
A median on Moorpark Avenue would create an entry monument at the intersection with
the Birkenshaw House, slow traffic at its approaches to the downtown, and would control
ingress and egress from driveways and side streets. As noted in Section 3.3.8 - Medians,
construction of a median in Moorpark Avenue would be a long -term objective in the event a
bypass to Route 23 were ever constructed. Currently any roadway modifications to Moorpark
Avenue would need to be fully coordinated with CalTrans. Proposed cross - sections for both
Moorpark Avenue and High Street are shown in Figures 13 and 14.
A pedestrian activated stop light should be considered at the intersection of High and Bard
Streets to eliminate the "thoroughfare" characteristic of High Street. A vehicular stop at this
location would provide a safer point of pedestrian and bicycle crossing and would slow traffic
in the middle of the downtown as necessary for pedestrian safety. This vehicular stop could
also be beneficial for merchant visibility as traffic slows or stops for crossing pedestrians.
3.4.2 Programmed Roadway Improvements
The City of Moorpark recently completed retrofitting High Street with decorative theme
lights. Improvement plans for portions of Everett Street, Walnut Street, Magnolia Street,
Bard Street and Poindexter Avenue have been approved by the City and are currently in the
process of being implemented. The Vision Plan reflects these proposed improvements and
incorporates their roadway configurations.
— �lat� a«al �iaar�s�teatle�c —
137
�F
"Ll..
one eery walk
/ /L443�LCL2� V 4e4/Vt4U." ,SA"'je6 pe",
now erahard -like o"oo trees
1 '.
w 1 111
MOORPARK AVENUE SECTION - LONGTERM OBJECTIVE'
11--W"
he4e plarMnS adds Sroenory
Note: Longterm objective is to construct
• raised, landscaped median in the event
• bypass to Route 23 is ever constructed.
Figure 13
Caliiromia popper Ira
1
WHOM 1 unproved
bulldial
floods
rob
mWW IF-
62' 14' E' S' 17 12' S' a' IF
public plain 1 sidewalk arkin bike drive ldafldriva la bike arkin sidewalk
HIGH STREET SECTION
T_ws"
Figure 14
( tloK &d r�taeei!L�leQt14K
138
'%ilaa2�teaak Daaf.eeaasa S,*eeelle 'PCaK
3.4.3 Re- striping of High Street
The Vision Plan illustrates how the re- striping of High Street would allow for left turn lanes
and through lanes at the intersections of Walnut and Bard Streets with Moorpark Avenue.
These turn lanes will allow for stacking of vehicles, which should accommodate the majority
of turning traffic at most peak hours. The addition of these turn lanes will permit through
traffic to flow unimpeded, thereby increasing traffic efficiency.
3.4.4 Closure of Magnolia Street
While somewhat debated by those who participated in the Plan's formulation, in order to
increase the number of public gathering spaces in the downtown, the Vision Plan illustrates
how Magnolia Street between Charles and High Street could be closed to create an outdoor,
pedestrian plaza. Existing vehicular traffic connecting between Charles and High Streets
could easily use Walnut or Bard Streets versus Magnolia Street. This closure would eliminate
one more potential point of vehicular congestion through the elimination of a cross street
onto High Street. The public and private benefits that would be created through locating an
outdoor pedestrian plaza on the east end of High Street, close to the senior housing complex,
should outweigh the concerns over redistribution of traffic that would a result from con.
structing this new plaza. Construction of this plaza should correspond to development of the
vacant property located at the northwest corner of High Street and Bard Street. The pro-
posed extension plan for the closure of Magnolia Street is intended to guide the future
development, but in no way is intended as a mandatory configuration for implementation.
Magnolia Plaza can provide an important public gathering place and promote retail activity
3.4.5 Relocation of Track Traffic
Every measure should be taken to relocate truck traffic from Moorpark Avenue. Vehicular
circulation through the downtown area should be limited to automobiles, pedestrians, bi-
cycle and mass transit. Implementing this goal would improve circulation, minimize noise
and air pollution, and increase pedestrian and bicycle safety. Alternative routes for truck
traffic could be Spring Road (once it is extended to the north), Grimes Canyon, or a future
State Route 23 bypass arterial. All alternatives and any truck rerouting would have to be
fully coordinated with the appropriate County and State agencies.
&W-4 o 41d
139
'%itaaz�ta2k Daawiraea a SAe,q,c Peas
3.5 Pedestrian/ Bicycle Circulation
According to the City Circulation Element, the City-wide network of bicycle and pedestrian
routes for commuter, school and recreational use is only partially established. The lack of a
continuous bikeway system inhibits the bicycle from becoming an attractive means of trans-
portation throughout the City. The bicycle plan for the downtown Specific Plan area is a
long -range plan for installing a bikeway system both to the downtown and between the
downtown to other uses. When complete, the bikeway system will provide safe and conve-
nient Class 11 bike routes, both within and outside the area. These connections will provide
an essential critical link to regional commuter bike traffic.
The bikeway plan is fairly simple and envisions development of Class II -A and B bike lanes
along Poindexter Avenue entering the Plan area from the west, connecting to Moorpark
Avenue north to High Street, then east along High Street and Los Angeles Avenue to
Princeton Avenue. Class 1I bikeways will also be designated along Spring Road from the
south entering the Plan area at Los Angeles/New Los Angeles Avenue and will extend north
of Charles Street. Other important connections will be provided on the local streets from
Moorpark Avenue to First Street, south to the Flory School.
— '(,vr' eu�ioK aKd $uw7��ieatioK —
140
0 Class I Bike Path
Separated Right -of -Way
E Class Ii-A Bike Lane
Within Roadway
at edge of roadway
N Class II -B Bike Lane
Within Roadway
outside of parking bays
Figure 15
'I1Laaz�iaa!¢ D*&- Oeeaus.e ;VCa"
Under CalTrans Bikeway Planning and Design Standards, bikeways are defined in three
classes as shown in Figure 15.
Bikeways are defined by these categories:
Class I bike paths: Bike paths provided within a completely separated right -of -way for
the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians, with cross -flow of
motorists minimized minimum eight feet wide.
Class II -A bike lanes: Provides a striped lane for one -way bike travel on a street or highway.
Class IIA bike lanes are located between the parking stalls and
the traffic lanes, minimum five feet wide.
Class II -B bike lanes: The same as Class IIA, except the bike lane is located in areas where
there is no on- street parking and is adjacent to the curb. Mini.
mum width four feet where there is no gutter.
Class III bike routes: Bike routes provided within the street right -of -way designated by
signs or permanent markings insured with pedestrians or motor.
ists. Figure 12 shows the designated bike lanes that should be
implemented as a part of the Vision Plan. Re- striping of bike
lanes will connect to existing and planned bike lanes outside of
the Specific Plan area. High Street is being reclassified as a Class
II bike route to better facilitate pedestrian and bicycle access to
the downtown core.
3.5.1 Bicycle Racks and Bench /Rest Stops
While no specific locations have been designated in the plan,
bicycle racks and bench /rest stops should be placed on both
Moorpark Avenue and High Street in order to increase rid-
ership. The Vision Plan shows a number of probable loca-
tions for bike racks and rest stops. Bench /rest stops can con-
sist of a simple bench, seating area, and canopy trees for shade.
Bicycle racks can be simply
bolted to an existing sidewalk, a
plaza, or a paving space in a key
area such as downtown.
ald -
141
Bike racks should be functional yet
detailed to complement the historic
charm of downtown
ak 2�ou.Ktou.K Spaac;�g*c Plas
3.5.2 Pedestrian Walkways
Through the implementation of the Vision Plan, a continuous network of pedestrian paths
and sidewalks will be constructed. Currently, the existing sidewalk and crosswalk connec-
tions from the civic center to downtown, as well as along Moorpark Avenue north to the
railroad depot, are interrupted and not well defined. The Vision Plan calls for bulbout,
neckdowns and defined pedestrian crosswalks in specific locations, that will make pedestri-
ans feel more safe and promote walking convenience.
142
%llouz�tiazk V oea oraeaw SAeeejee peew
3.6 Public Transit
3.6.1 Bus Transit
The City currently has a public transportation system which serves the needs of persons
living and /or working in the community. Improved public transit to the downtown will
benefit pedestrian circulation and decrease vehicular trips both through the area and to the
area as a destination. Bus stop connections to the Amtrak and Metrolink station could be
used by commuters as well as visitors to the downtown.
3.6.2 Rail Service
Amtrak and Metrolink currently serve Moorpark both for regional trips as well as intra.
State service. The rail stop is located off of High Street and Moorpark Avenue in the down-
town Specific Plan area. As this service increases and is used to its full capacity, commuter
traffic within downtown Moorpark should increase. The continued need for adequate park-
ing, as well as safe and convenience ingress and egress, will rise and needs to be accommo-
dated in the Vision Plan.
Ongoing coordination with both VCTC and Union Pacific will be necessary to ensure that
safe crossing, at grade at the Metrolink station continues, as well as appropriate buffers be
accommodated along the rail lines and the City-owned parcels. Further, in order for the City
to pursue development of the High Street property, an agreement that allows vehicle access
and parking on a portion of the VCTC right -of -way is necessary. Preliminary discussions
with VCTC staff has indicated their willingness to support this use provided setbacks, fencing
and buffer criteria can be met. Written correspondence from VCTC staff indicating their
support for this use can be found in the Appendix to this Plan. The Vision Plan reflects
these requirements, plus is compatible with these important agency needs.
(��RCK(Q�lOK Q/Yd �IQ��CQtGOK
143
7Kosz,+�iaak DauAACtau4.e S�eec6�e �Caa
3.7 Gateways and Signage
_I"
Ic
3.7.1 Designated Gateway Locations
To facilitate circulation into the downtown and recognize the downtown as a special place in
the City, entry monuments should be constructed at the following gateway locations and
coordinated with CalTrans or private land owners as appropriate. These entry monuments
should be subtle, classy structures that reflect the Victorian, Western, and country character
of the downtown. Signage should reflect a downtown logo and directional arrows to key
stopping points and uses. Signs should be lighted, landscaped, and placed prominently at the
back of the sidewalk or as possibly an over - the - street structure. The following gateway loca.
tions have been reflected in the Vision Plan:
• High Street and Moorpark Avenue.
• High Street and Spring Road.
• Moorpark Avenue and the Birkenshaw House (approximate location).
ETE CAP DETAIL
: BRICK
MOORPARK ENTRY MONUMENT
BRICK COLUMN STYLE
GHT IRON DETAIL
E BRICK
MOORPARK ENTRY MONUMENT
BRICK W/IRON DETAIL'B'
CONCRETE CAP DETAIL
ADOBE BRICK
MOORPARK ENTRY MONUMENT
BRICK WITH IRON DETAIL *A'
eIJWd4e4ft 4-d
144
CAP
VICTORIAN CORNER
DETAIL
8' WIDE WOOD POST
ADOBE BRICK
MOORPARK ENTRY MONUMENT
WESTERN/VICTORIAN WOOD STYLE
Z
4 x4 WOOD BEAM
CHAIN LINKS
4 x 4 POST
2 x 4 BOARDS COMPOSE
HANGING SIGN
ADOBE BRICK BASE
I MOORPARK ENTRY MONUMENT
RURAL STYLE
CITY LOGO
- DESIGN INSET IN CONCRETE
.. CONCRETE CAP
ADOBE BRICK
T' RMSE6 WROUGHT IRON
LETTERS OLD WESTERN
FONT
--T
MOORPARK ENTRY MONUMENT
SPANISH MISSION STYLE
2&*azfiazk Vaea-v eaeav plarc
3.7.2 Signage
Clearly defined, well lit and easy -to -read signage that directs drivers to off - street public park-
ing, key landmarks, and downtown civic uses will smooth the traffic flow and minimize
driver confusion. Signage should be consistent in graphic form and construction materials.
The City should consider developing an "Old Town Moorpark" sign standard that could be
repeated for street signs as well as designating landmarks, historic structures, public plazas,
and civic uses.
Freeway signage calling attention to downtown Moorpark should be added to State Route
23, identifying the downtown area as a specific destination. Freeway signage, both north and
southbound, should be located at the Los Angeles Avenue /Princeton Avenue /State Route
118 and New Los Angeles Avenue /State Route 23 exits. All signing would be coordinated
through the appropriate public agencies overseeing that right of way.
145
%1Zoaz�tiazk Dotu.etau..c S�aec6tc �CaK
3.8 Parking
As buildout continues in the downtown area, sufficient parking to satisfy the increased de-
mand will become critical. Easy access to off-street parking will eliminate the "circling" which
impedes the existing circulation patterns. Ample parking will also perpetuate existing and
new downtown businesses, adding to the overall vitality of the downtown. Off - street park-
ing, both private and public, should be placed behind buildings whenever possible. Large
parking lots can be created behind proposed and existing buildings as shown in the Vision
Plan. By linking parking lots in the rear of each parcel, a large parking center is formed with
specific ingress and egress points, thereby consolidating access and improving efficiency. Clearly
designated signage will direct drivers easily to these parking locations.
3.8.1 Existing Parking Conditions
Parking counts were taken for the number of parking spaces in the downtown from both
field visits and aerial photographs. For study purposes only, five parking blocks have been
designated within the Specific Plan area. As shown in Figure 16, they include:
1. High Street block.
2. Moorpark Avenue block.
3. Charles Street block.
4. The civic center block.
5. The Los Angeles Avenue block.
The two key parking areas include blocks 1 and 2 which focus around Moorpark Avenue and
High Street. Block 3 is predominantly residential where on- street parking is provided and
single family detached homes have driveway access and private parking. Block 4 is the civic
center and sufficient parking is provided for both civic uses, the mobile home park, library,
and the senior center. The Los Angeles Avenue block encompasses the Hughes shopping
center and the single family detached homes on the east side of Moorpark Avenue. The
shopping center is self - sufficient in terms of parking and the homes have alley access connect-
ing Los Angeles Avenue to First Street. Therefore, parking is not generally a problem.
The existing parking inventory is shown in the Tables 10 and 11 on the following page for
blocks 1 and 2, High Street and Moorpark Avenue. A total of 625 parking spaces is generally
available for commercial uses within these two commercial areas, including both on and off -
street parking. These figures do not include the Amtrack/Metrolink land and parking lot
which houses 64 spaces, as well as the Mayflower Market site since it has yet to be recon-
structed. What this table shows is that at proposed buildout, assuming building coverage is
consistent with the Moorpark Zoning Code, parking on -site can be accommodated. Further,
should the City grant the 50% parking incentive reduction to any expansions or new uses in
downtown, building coverage can substantially increase and the number of parking spaces
would still be sufficient.
&Wd4f W and &44AP4&44 —
146
&*dm,142k Doewvt6[!sK Steec�ic �CsK
Parking Blocks
Of
�1 "1
�. fL
._..1
-.. .� .. ....
Legend
E
High Street Block
®
Moorpark Avenue Block
Charles Street Block
®
Civic Center Block
0
Los Angeles Avenue Block
—I'—
Specific Plan Boundary
r
�.
•..
�� ��
✓
t--
T -7
`
1 �
..
F'
r
i
_ ...........
Flo
School
'n
.
Los Angeles Avenue
Parking Blocks
Of
�1 "1
�. fL
._..1
-.. .� .. ....
Legend
E
High Street Block
®
Moorpark Avenue Block
Charles Street Block
®
Civic Center Block
0
Los Angeles Avenue Block
—I'—
Specific Plan Boundary
Not to Scale
• Parking blocks designated for study purposes only
t K &d &"*AMri — Figure 16
147
I
Table 10
HIGH STRUT
�l4oafiazk Daur.stou..c .S ,&cec�'. e PZW v
does not include:
Amtrak /M etrolink land and parking (32,500 s.f J64 sp.)
New market site (18,700 sq.ft.)
Includes new and existing buildings
Square footage measurements and parking counts are approximate on ly. Data taken from aerial photographs.
Per City of Moorpark Zoning Ordinance:
Building Coverage can be 50% At proposed build -out, average building coverage will be only 37%
• Parking spaces shall be a minimum of 1 stall /300 squarefeet. At proposed build-out, parking will be / stall /265 square test.
These calculations include the purchase and construction of a 50•space public parking lot at Walnut and Charles Sts.
Table 11
Includes new and existing buildings
Square footage measurements and parking counts are approximate only. Data taken from aerial photographs.
a«d &X40p4rAW
148
&odt Z,LQZR D6U se Cat of Sae -ceite Veaw
Nevertheless, small businesses and specialty users that are encouraged in the downtown are
typically very sensitive about sufficient parking supply. Therefore, parking management and
a strong program to promote sufficient parking should be entertained by the City. Since it is
apparent that the City's primary focus is to increase the concentration of uses in the down-
town, incentives for parking reductions should be maintained at existing levels. The 50%
parking reduction is generous and sufficient to satisfy user criteria for most small corporate
businesses. However, as existing buildings are expanded or new uses are established which
would require more parking than existing uses now contain, there will be an increased de-
mand for parking.
3.8.2 Parking Recommendations and Design Guidelines
Since there seems to be sufficient parking on- street and within the individual lots, there is no
need to pursue a parking structure or shared parking program at this time. The City should
continue to review its parking standards as buildout in the downtown occurs, and develop a
pro - active program for attaining adequate parking in the downtown. The following parking
standards apply to parking within blocks 1 and 2 of the downtown Specific Plan area. These
parking standards supplement parking standards in the City Zoning Code.
• Where a building or buildings located within the downtown Specific Plan area are
non - conforming only by reason of an inadequate parking spaces (not including resi-
dential conversions to non - residential uses), the provisions of this Specific Plan pro.
hibiting enlargements, structural alteration or expansion shall not apply, provided:
1. That any enlargements, structural alterations or expansions should not further
reduce the existing amount of parking spaces, and
2. New parking spaces should be supplied to meet the parking requirements for
the difference in building area between the existing building and the new build-
ing, and
3. New parking spaces should be supplied to meet the difference in parking re-
quirements for the existing building between the prior use and the new use.
• Long -term storage of recreational vehicles and boats on front driveways of residential
buildings is discouraged to avoid visual impacts on the neighborhood. Covered per-
manent parking area /storage areas are recommended for new single family dwelling
in the Plan area.
• No more than 50% of the front setback area can be paved for driveways in single
family residential projects to maintain landscaping along residential streets.
• Limit curb cut entries into project sites to maintain sidewalk and streetscape continu-
ity. Shared driveway access on adjacent non - single family properties is encouraged
&Ud4t4W 4.d &49M —
149
D[ --.
• Design internal driveways for safety and convenience. For dimensional standards and
requirements on driveways and parking spaces, refer to Section 17.32.080 of the City
Zoning Code.
• Avoid parking in required setback areas to maintain landscape strips along project
boundary, reference Section 17.24, 060 of the City Zoning Code.
• Separate pedestrian and automobile traffic paths and minimize conflict areas for
safety.
• Provide walkways to connect parking lots to building entrances. Define walkways by
landscaping, lighting and paving.
• Minimize the use of surface parking and large office complexes and multi - family devel-
opments to preserve open space and reduce visual effects. Below -grade parking facili-
ties are encouraged.
• When surface parking is unavoidable, cluster parking spaces into small parking areas
dispersed around the site to avoid large paved expanses.
3.8.3 Parking Management Plan
While existing parking conditions in the downtown are sufficient, as the area builds out the
actual demand for parking will increase and parking management may be necessary. It is
recommended that the parking management plan be prepared, which should include but
not be limited to:
• Preparation of an in lieu fee parking program.
• Increased enforcement of parking restrictions for all parkers to emphasize a consis.
tent and fair enforcement program.
• Work with the downtown merchants to conduct a program so that employees do not
park in street curb spaces.
• Work with VCTC to allow public parking in the High Street parking lot and the
Moorpark Avenue parking lot after 5:00 p.m. on week nights and on Saturdays, Sun-
days and holidays, and post appropriate signs to this effect.
• Consider a merchant validation program and explore the use of lots for a merchant
valet program.
• Improve signage to publicly owned, leased, or used lots.
150
Wowr,*a -z Daeovtoeo a S,eecc6CC PCaK
• Improve pedestrian amenities, access and directional signs to public lots.
• Consider constructing a parking structure on either of the Metrolink parking lots so
that commercial intensities on individual parcels can be increased. This would re-
quire developing a parking reduction program for private property owners.
• Consider parking meters for curbside spaces on High Street.
( ealatleK aad &aortdac A&'W —
151
�Kaaz,�iaak Daa.stacav pCaK
4.0 Public Utilities, Infrastructure, Services and Safety
Public services and utility service infrastructure are the framework for all well planned com-
munities. Combined with the roadway system, public facilities such as water, sewer, storm
drainage, and utilities provide the essential services for the orderly growth of a community.
Public services such as fire and police protection, schools, and libraries, need to keep pace
with the growth of a community to keep it a safe and desirable place to live, work and visit.
4.1 Water Service
The City of Moorpark obtains its domestic water from both State water and local ground
water sources. The Calleguas Municipal Water District is the purveyor of State Water for the
Ventura County Water Works District 1. Water Works District 1 manages and provides
water service to the City of Moorpark and its outlying unincorporated areas.
Water Works District 1 is guided in its management of water resources by the 1992 Water
System Master Plan (specific to the District 1 area) and the 1995 update of the Urban Water
Management Plan (prepared by the District for the State Department of Water Resources).
In addition to these district documents, the Ventura County Water Management Plan (adopted
in November of 1994) provides a comprehensive approach to water management and poli-
cies for multiple water districts and communities in the Ventura County area.
While water resources are fully available at a local level to service the project area, water is
still considered a limited resource in California. For this reason, it is still important to utilize
reasonable water conservation methods.
The planting guidelines contained in the different district design guidelines of the Specific
Plan should be implemented as a means of meeting water conservation goals. These mea-
sures include drought tolerant planting and proper irrigation system design. Local and State
codes will augment the Specific Plan guidelines at time of construction permits, by requiring
additional water conservation methods such as low flow showerheads and water closets.
Ad& ft?lt w, 7444 ueet m, saawo, ad Sam —
152
�ilaot�fiazk Dau.KtOUsK 5,�����t� �CsK
4.2 Sewer Service
The City obtains it wastewater treatment service through the Ventura County Water Works
District 1. In 1996 the District adopted a Sewer Master Plan to guide growth and develop.
ment for their service area. That Master Plan calls for the future expansion of the wastewa-
ter treatment plant from its current 3 million gallons per day capacity, to 5 million gallons
per day. Although there are no specific threshold triggers for the expansion of the treat-
ment plant, as with any limited resource or capacity related service, it is important to exercise
efficiency in water use and discharge. The same water conservation methods discussed in
section 4.1 will aid in reducing waster water discharge, thereby prolonging the need to in-
crease capacity at the sewer treatment plant.
4.3 Drainage
The City of Moorpark completed the Downtown Drainage Master Plan in 1987. In April of
1995, a Citywide Master Plan was adopted, updating and expanding the storm drainage
system for the whole City. In May 1997, the Ventura County Flood Control District re-
leased the Draft Gabbert and Walnut Canyon Channels Flood Control Deficiency Study
Report, which identifies needed flood control improvements for the Gabbert Canyon and
Walnut Canyon watersheds. The downtown area has undergone a number of storm drain-
age infrastructure upgrades over the past few years. Additional detention facilities are planned
north of the downtown area and channel improvements and detention basins are also planned
west of the downtown.
The storm drainage system servicing the majority of the residential and commercial areas
within the downtown Specific Plan area, is fully in place. Storm water from the northeast-
ern portion of the plan area (Spring Road and further east) is collected at Spring Road and
designed to discharge at the Arroyo Simi to the south. The northwestern portion of the
plan area is designed to be collected at High Street and then routed west to a concrete box
drain /culvert in Walnut Canyon.
Future private site development within the Specific Plan area would be designed to discharge
to an approved storm drain system as determined appropriate at the time of individual
permit entitlement. Individual projects must comply with Regional Water Quality Control
Board (NPDES) Standards for discharge and pollutant runoff mitigation as well. All public
right -of -way projects would need to be designed compatibly with existing and planned drain.
age systems and infrastructure.
_ — ;Va6& %W4 ica. 1,OU atrueuM, SOW&", 44d Sam —
153
iilaozlaazk T)aevataeua S,deec1le Caw
4.4 Solid Waste and Recycling
Ventura County is divided into four wasteshed areas for purposes of solid waste management
and distribution: the western, eastern, northern and central wastesheds.
The City of Moorpark's downtown area is located in the eastern wasteshed of Ventura County
and the Simi Valley landfill is used for disposal of solid waste generated within the project
area.
The Simi Valley landfill is owned and operated by Waste Management Inc. (WMI). The
landfill is located north of the 118 freeway in between Alamos Canyon and Madera Road, in
the City of Simi Valley. Based on current permits, the landfill has available capacity in excess
of 5 million tons. The average daily disposal rate is approximately 2,000 -3,000 tons, while
the landfill's permit would allow a maximum daily tonnage of 3,000 tons. Current permits
for the landfill would expire in the year 2004, with the ability to extend that permit to 2009
if fill capacity remains available.
The main businesses providing waste hauling services in the Specific Plan area are GI Indus-
tries and Moorpark Rubbish Disposal. In addition to standard hauling services, curbside
recycling service is available to Moorpark residences for household generated containers and
green waste. These recycling efforts will remain in place and will continue as measures that
aid in meeting County and State solid waste reduction mandates.
New development and redevelopment in the Specific Plan area should be conditioned to
reduce solid waste generation as follows:
1. Comply with the provisions of the City of Moorpark's curbside recycling program.
Where possible in new or redeveloped projects, separate recycling container space
should be provided in service areas in addition to trash containers.
3. All refuse generated during construction should be separated, and when possible
recyclable materials (such as concrete, asphalt and steel) should be diverted from the
landfill.
�w6lle 2lultuee. 9ROM44weta w, Sawte", a«d Sam —
154
4k D6ufKtOUfK SAacc6Cc Caw
4.5 Fire, Police Protection and Enforcement
4.5.1 Fire
The City of Moorpark contracts with the Ventura County Fire Protection District for fire
protection services. Station No. 42 is located at 782 Moorpark Avenue, across from the City
Hall, Library, and Senior Center. A second station (No. 40) is located on Cedar Springs
Road outside of the Specific Plan area. Response time for a fire service call to the downtown
area averages 6 minutes or less.
Water and fire protection infrastructure is adequately intact to service the downtown area as
it exists. New development would need to install supplemental fire protection infrastructure
specific to a project's needs, as build -out occurs.
4.5.2 Police
The City of Moorpark police services are contracted from the Ventura County Sheriffs
Department. The Sheriff Substation is located at 2101 East Olsen Road in the City of
Thousand Oaks. Serving the immediate customer support needs for the downtown area is
the Police Resource Center located at 23 West Los Angeles Avenue in the Town Center.
Response time for non - emergency calls averages 7 -8 minutes.
Typical response calls by the Sheriffs Department to the downtown area are related to
loitering, vehicle burglary, and alcohol related incidents. Calls for response to graffiti are
sporadic, experiencing approximately 25 incidents reported in March and April of 1997.
While the Sheriffs office statistics may not paint a picture of a serious crime problem in the
downtown area, a perceived problem with safety or visible traces of vandalism are deterrents
to would -be downtown patrons. This was evidenced by the results of the resident survey
whereby citizens are concerned with potential crime in downtown.
One of the purposes behind the Vision Plan presented in Chapter 3.0 Circulation and Beau-
tification (Streetscape Beautification) is to focus on improving the appearance of public places.
With such improvements, the intent is to increase civic pride and safety in the downtown,
and consequently attract new business and patrons.
;Dd& ft'li ,W, I4W4 W,&W. SVWiW. 49d Sam —
155
4 2) acaKesu.« s,BceeJee Peaw
Examples of design measures incorporated into this Plan that may help alleviate the per-
ceived crime and safety problems in the downtown area are: a) improved lighting for better
night time visibility and reduced cases of vandalism, b) creation of public gathering places for
downtown patrons, other than private property/curb loitering, c) use of construction mate-
rials for low walls and building exteriors which are designed for durability and safety, d)
landscaping improvements to strengthen the visual character of the community and to em-
phasize the presence of community pride, e) increased business activity that fosters pedes-
trian activity, 0 stronger connections and possible relocation of civic uses to downtown, g)
image building and promotional programs supported and organized by the community.
4.6 Public Utilities
The following utility purveyors provide service to the Moorpark Specific Plan area:
• Electrical service • Southern California Edison Company
• Gas Service • Southern California Gas Company
• Phone Service • Pacific Bell
• Cable TV • TCI
The majority of these services to the downtown area are provided through underground
service rather than above ground service poles. The City's Public Works Department will
continue to oversee public infrastructure projects which include undergrounding.
4.7 Other Public Services
Public services are an important element to a safe and enjoyable community environment.
Maintaining appropriate levels of public service in the area of civic facilities, parks, public
safety, schools and libraries, is critical in generating and maintaining a positive image and
attracting patrons and tourists to the downtown area.
4.7.1 City HAU
City Hall is located within the Civic Center cluster of buildings at 799 Moorpark Avenue.
City Hall houses the following City Departments: City Manager's Office, Administrative
Services, Community Development, Community Services, and Public Works. The City
Council Chambers is adjoining the Senior Center, also located at the City Hall site. The City
Building and Safety Department (which includes Engineering services) is located at 18 West
High Street. The location of these central civic facilities is important to the balance of uses
downtown, and should be retained.
14waduiet , Sa . e 4, arel Sam —
156
iitaaatcask Z) aufntaca.c Spccciic Pea&
4.7.2 Library
The Moorpark County Library serves the City of Moorpark and is located at 699 Moorpark
Avenue, adjacent to the Senior Center and City Hall. The Library is approximately 7,700
square feet (having just undergone a 2,717 square foot expansion completed in June of 1996).
The book collection is currently 37,000 in number, with room to expand. Other available
materials and services include magazines, audiotapes, a reference section, a computerized
catalog/index system, and text -only Internet connection.
4.7.3 Senior Center
The Senior Center is located near City Hall at 799 Moorpark Avenue and is currently 2,100
square feet in size. Attached to the center are two meeting rooms that are used as a Council
Chambers. The Senior Center is staffed by one full time and two part time employees, along
with volunteers who keep the center open Monday - Friday from 8:OOAM - 4:OOPM. The
Center provides a range of activities and services for the senior population, including daily
lunches, a Meals on Wheels program, a wide scope of social services, and educational and
craft classes. The Senior Center hopes to construct an approximate 1,500 square foot expan-
sion to their facility, at this same location, in the near future. Expansion of this important
facility supports the goals for more quasi - public uses in downtown. Efforts to encourage this
expansion should be pursued by the City.
4.7.4 Post Office
The U.S. Post Office is located at 215 West Los Angeles Avenue. The Post Office had been
previously located on High Street, but outgrew their facilities. There has been discussion in
the past about moving the Post Office back to High Street or to a site east of Spring Road
and south of the railroad tracks. The Post Office is a high traffic use that brings users into the
downtown core. In the context of the downtown Specific Plan, there could be a significant
benefit in locating the Post Office closer to the City Hall center and High Street.
4.7.5 Chamber of Commerce
The Chamber of Commerce is located within the "Town Center" commercial complex at
225 West Los Angeles Avenue. The Chamber provides a range of services to a broad group
of retail and service related businesses, as well as tourists and other community visitors. Like
the post office, the Chamber of Commerce Offices were located in the downtown along
Moorpark Avenue. Relocating the Chamber of Commerce closer to High Street would
have positive benefits relating to visitor information availability and business representation
in the downtown.
�u6lte 2G2(�xiia, g4m4ftc4 u. Sawiva, a«d Sam —
157
'IiLaaz;�az� ?tau.- eacu.c SAeee�ec Caw
4.7.6 Satellite Utility Company Offices
While there are no separate satellite offices representing the utility companies in the down-
town, the Chamber of Commerce accepts payments for the Edison, Gas, Cable and ATT
Long Distance Companies. Utility payment services are a beneficial presence in the down.
town, allowing people to combine errands with shopping and other service activity. Expand-
ing satellite payment services (waste disposal and electric company billing as examples) could
have beneficial results for increasing downtown activity, and is encouraged.
4.7.7 Medical Facilities
There are no Hospital or Urgent Care facilities located within the City of Moorpark. How-
ever, there are numerous private medical offices located in the City. Both the Simi Valley
Hospital and the Los Robles Hospital in the City of Thousand Oaks are located approxi-
mately 8 miles away. Ambulance service is provided by American Medical Response, located
on Moorpark Avenue, who provide support emergency response and transportation to each
of the hospitals. Fire Station No. 42, on Moorpark Avenue, has one engine and staffs three
EMTDs (Emergency Medical Technicians certified in Defibrillation) who respond to all calls
and are capable of providing basic life support services. The Plan encourages additional
medical offices in and near the downtown core to increase downtown activity and support
the demand for more senior housing in walking distance to the High Street Corridor.
4.7.8 School Facilities
The City of Moorpark is within the Moorpark Unified School District. The schools with the
Moorpark Unified School District which serve the residential districts within the downtown
Specific Plan area are listed below.
School Grades
Campus Canyon
Peach Hill
Mountain Meadows
Arroyo West
Flory School
Chaparral Middle School
Mesa Verde Middle School
Moorpark High School
Community High School
K3
K3
K2
3 -5
4 -5
6-8
6.8
9 -12
9 -12 (continuation)
1996.97 Enrollment
679
751
723
768
581
693
920
1683
105
�u6lic 2ltcllttea. �«�aotuat�osc. sew&", &d Sam —
158
illaaafiazk Daaf.eeau..a S*eecj a Ple.r
The District's Administrative Offices are located at 30 Flory Avenue. Bus service is available
to students-throughout the district. The schools servicing the downtown area are described
as not being at their capacity. A new elementary school is under construction off of Casey
Road, northwest of the Downtown Specific Plan Area.
4.7.9 Parks
The City of Moorpark has 13 public parks that are maintained by the City's Community
Services Department. Twelve of these are considered Neighborhood Parks and one is a
Community Park.
The Arroyo Vista Community Park and Recreational Center are located at 4550 Tierra
Rejada Road. This park is planned ultimately to be 69 acres in size, and is partially developed
at this time with Community Service staff offices, community rooms, gymnasium, covered
picnic areas, tot play areas, multi -use outdoor rink, four soccer fields, two softball fields and
one football field.
There are no Neighborhood Parks located within the Specific Plan boundary. The closest
Neighborhood Park would be Poindexter Park, located at 500 Poindexter Road, just west of
the Specific Plan boundary near Chaparral Middle School. This 7.1/2 acre park opened in
the fall of 1996 and has two Little League size playing fields, outdoor pavilion areas, and
children's play equipment.
Although not considered a Neighborhood scale park, there is a small City maintained "pocket"
park located at the City Hall complex on Moorpark Avenue. This park has picnic benches
and children's play areas. The Vision Plan within the Specific Plan (Chapter 3.0 - Circula-
tion and Street Beautification) proposes the creation of a number of public green areas and
park -like plazas to augment existing open space and park opportunities in the downtown.
Pu611e 2ftiltitaa, 94ra4awaaie. Sawk4s, aad Sam —
159
%1Zaa2�la2k Dau�Kt4usK S�eec�lc �CaK
5.0 Implementation and Administration of the Specific Plan
This chapter is intended to provide a menu of options for City Council and agency staff to
consider implementing over time. These are recommendations only and future decision -
makers may choose to implement these ideas in whole or in part.
One of the most frequently raised questions is how the City of Moorpark plans to implement
the ideas and programs outlined in this Specific Plan. Implementation involves securing the
necessary capital resources to fund public improvements, agency coordination involving areas
in the Specific Plan where jurisdictions are affected by specific actions (CalTrans, VCTC),
enforcement of standards and guidelines to ensure new development or renovated structures
meet the intent of the Plan, and identifying action steps and programs to fulfill the Plan's
many concepts. The following discussion addresses options for these important components.
The objective of this implementation plan is to clearly describe the potential steps to pursue
the Specific Plan programs. This section contains the following information:
• Summary description of known potential funding sources.
• A description of recommended public projects and programs.
• Opinions of probable cost for each identified improvement.
Both general and detailed descriptions of identified, potential funding sources are described
in Section 5.1 below. These sources are certainly not all encompassing, but layout multiple
alternative financing programs that the City may pursue to implement the Plan.
In addition to the possible available funding sources, this implementation plan sets forth a
number of recommended implementation programs that may target revitalization of the
downtown. These programs are intended to characterize, in a specific way, how the City may
want to continue to invest public monies, staff time, and develop private partnerships to
fulfill the goals of this Specific Plan. These programs recommended for consideration have
been divided into economic development programs as well as promotions and special events
programs.
The Specific Plan public streetscape implementation recommendations have been divided
into four public improvement projects (High Street Corridor, Moorpark Avenue Corridor,
Railroad Depot Plaza, and Magnolia Plaza). For simplicity, public improvement projects
have been summarized into table format, shown in Table 12 entitled "Implementation
Program ". These tables also detail specific improvements recommended for consideration
in the downtown and the probable costs associated with those improvements.
The implementation recommendations and recommended programs are intended to identify
options for consideration by the City and the Redevelopment Agency to achieve the visual
presentation in the Specific Plan.
%Kbj&LGMCGKtQtC4K
160
'liLaoz�tiazk Daa•.teotev a SAccgec �VCaa
5.1 Discussion of Potential Funding Sources
The Downtown Specific Plan contains comprehensive recommendations for both physical
improvements and programs. As such, a variety of funding sources will be required to
implement many of these recommendations. In some cases, public /private partnerships will
need to be formed to implement desired programs. The following describes the various
funding mechanisms that are available at the local, state and federal level that may be pursued
by the City and /or adjoining agencies to implement the planned public improvements.
5.1.1 Local Funding Sources
General Fund Monies (CIP)
This is the most accessible and flexible funding source available to local agencies. Local
revenues are collected in the City General Fund from property tax, sales tax, and transient
occupancy tax and expended on projects and programs as defined in the City's adopted
budget. Projects and programs that may be funded by this source of money generally include
those items which cannot be paid for by other funding sources and which provide a direct
community-wide benefit for the residences or businesses in town. However, since this funding
source is the City's primary operating capital and highly competitive, it should be looked at
as a secondary source to fund most projects.
Redevelopment Area Tax Increment Financing
The Downtown Specific Plan area lies within a City Redevelopment Area, thus, is eligible for
expenditure of bond proceeds levied against the potential increased tax increment for the
area. The City Redevelopment Agency has invested upwards of $3 million in downtown
improvements in recent years. Most of these monies have been expended to upgrade
infrastructure facilities (storm drains, new curb and gutter), and streets (widening, bulbouts,
sidewalks, lane and parking space striping). In addition to the infrastructure "fixes" to
downtown, funds have been used to install new, decorative style lampposts on High Street,
some street furniture (benches, trash receptacles and planters), street trees and landscaping.
To date, the City Redevelopment Agency has completed one bond issuance totaling $10
million. Another bond issuance is not likely in the short term. Approximately $1 million in
bond proceeds remains that must be spent on public improvements in the Redevelopment
Area. These remaining funds should be carefully used to implement some of the higher
priority programs identified in this Specific Plan.
Gas Tax Revenue
The City receives State Gas Tax revenue which can be used for transportation planning and
capital improvements for roadways. Gas tax is based on the percentage of total value of gas
sold within the City.
Property and Business Improvement Districts
A property and business improvement district (PBID) is a newly established benefit assessment
district that can be formed based upon state legislation known as AB3754. PBID districts are
1W, *teWeXr4ti*W
161
iitou2�ia2k Data.ctoa"t S,*ecejee Vlswr
geographically defined business areas in which private property owners band together to
gain legal standing and generate sufficient revenue to realize common goals for improving
the service and facilities of an area. All types of businesses and some residential zones can be
included within this district including commercial, professional office, finance institutions,
and high density residential. The PBID can perform a number of activities designed to
supplement existing City services such as marketing district businesses and activities, promotion
of public events, street and sidewalk cleaning, graffiti removal, promotion of tourism,
sanitation, retail retention and recruitment. Physical improvements such as benches, kiosks,
pedestrian shelters, signs, lighting, restrooms, trash receptacles, planting area, fountains,
plazas, etc., are often also funded by a PBID. This is a potential funding source that may be
appropriately utilized along the High Street Corridor. Establishing a PBID in this area may
be difficult until more properties develop and downtown business sales improve, and should
be reconsidered as a likely future source of revenue.
Municipal Bond Financing
Federal and State laws allow cities to issue bonds with interest payment to investors that are
exempt from Federal and State income, thus allowing cities to sell the bonds at below market
interest rates. Cities in turn can utilize funds for certain projects that serve a public purpose.
Provided the public purpose is well defined, such bonds give cities a powerful vehicle for
financing capital improvements. Bond payments for improvements within the Specific Plan
area would be secured by the formation of an assessment district. An assessment district such
as a landscape, lighting, or street improvement can be formed to fund public improvements
that will benefit a localized area. The City floats bonds to pay for such improvements, and
the debt is paid by assessing property owners who will be served by this improvement. The
individual property owner portion of the debt is based on the owner's proportion of benefit.
Any method that reasonably measures these benefits can be used to spread the debt among
property owners. One drawback of municipal bond financing is that it requires approval of
two- thirds of the voters in a local election. Also, since the project is within the City's
Redevelopment area, additional property obligations are not warranted.
Landscape and Lighting District
The City of Moorpark has a number of existing landscape and lighting districts. These
districts were established to maintain landscape and lighting in sub -areas of the city, the
maintenance cost being paid for by assessments on property owners within each district.
The City has previously established a Citywide lighting and landscaping district based on land
use type, to supplement maintenance costs. However, creation of new districts is highly
unlikely since the passage of proposition 218, which requires a 2/3- majority voter /landowner
approval for formation. Today, the existing residential neighborhoods surrounding the
downtown are generally comprised of low to moderately priced homes. It is unlikely that
these owners would be willing to support additional tax assessments.
— 9MC�SlcMCc�tatta� —
162
ask Daea se.4 "t S,*eec6Ce pCaK
City Housing Rehabilitation Program
As a recommendation of the earlier 1989 Downtown Study, the City has implemented a
Housing Rehabilitation Program that targets rehabilitation substandard housing in the
redevelopment area. Originally established using CDBG Small Cities Set Aside Funds, this
2 1/2 year standing program is administered wholly by the City and has been successful to
date, with 40-45 projects either completed or in progress. The program originated with a
maximum offering to eligible participants of up to a $5,000.00 grant and a $10,000.00 low
interest deferred loan. Due to strong activity, the grant award was removed from the program,
but the $15,000.00 loan cap retained. Operation and monitoring of the program is staff
intensive due to complex bidding procedures and contractor coordination requirements.
However, modifications to the program at these early stages in its inception may cause the
program to suffer, and are not recommended.
Development Impact Fees
While most of the Specific Plan area is built out, some of the planned improvements could
be necessary because of the pressures for either new development or recent growth in the
surrounding area. Therefore, it could be logical to attach an appropriate portion of the
financial responsibility of these improvements to new development. A mechanism commonly
utilized for funding various roadway improvements is development impact fees. Impact fees
collected through this mechanism are based on the proportion of impact relative to the
improvements necessary, providing a clear connection or "nexus" between development and
particular improvement. Since most of the project area is built out, development ' impact
fees will not likely be one of the primary mechanisms for paying for improvements. The
only likely parcels to be developed and conditioned or assessed with impact fees to improve
the downtown are the Ci"wned parcels on High Street, the various undeveloped parcels
on High Street and the vacant land on the east side of Spring Road.
Vehicle Registration Surcharge Fee (AB 2766)
Available to cities, counties, and transit operators, this competitive fund is administered by
the Ventura County Air Quality Management District (VCAQMD), requires no City fund
match and can be used for any public improvement that demonstrates reductions in emissions
including commuter and recreational bicycle use.
Bicycle License Fees
At the discretion of local jurisdictions, bicycle license fees and /or additional fees (i.e. special
tax, user fee, etc.) on the sale of bicycle equipment can be used to help pay for local
improvements to the bicycle system. At the very least these programs can be used to fund a
bicycle engraving and registration program which can greatly add to the ability to recover
stolen bicycles.
Rule 20A Funds
While most of the utility lines downtown have been placed underground, a few unsightly
lines exist along Moorpark Avenue that should be placed underground. The Public Utilities
7/K�CCKiLKtQtGOK
163
'illaazlia2k Daeaaeaew s - TAec46Cc Plas
Commission required utility companies to create a fund in each jurisdiction for the purpose
of underground the utility lines. Each city adopts a priority list of projects for the use of these
funds. The City should review its current list to ensure that the downtown is a priority area
for future undergrounding of utilities. It may take several years for the fund to accumulate
sufficient monies to allow for pole undergrounding. However, the City may borrow funds
from the account for up to five years against future expected monies. If the City chooses to
borrow monies from this fund, no other underground projects can be funded during the
same time period. The City may also choose to augment Rule 20A funds with other sources,
if deemed appropriate.
5.1.2 State Funding Sources
Proposition C Local Return Funds
May be used for public transit projects as well as a broader category of public transit, bikeways,
street and road improvements that benefit transit and congestion management activities.
Proposition C funds cannot be traded.
Transportation Demand Agency (TDA) Funds
The State Transportation Agency sets aside approximately 2% of all TDA funds for bike
improvement projects. In some cases additional funding may be set aside through this funding
course on a case by case basis, depending upon the effectiveness of the bikeway system that is
planned. Allocation of these funds requires a competitive forum applicable to all local agencies.
This State source of funding could be applied to bikeway projects within the downtown area.
Flexible Congestion Relief (FCR) Program
Available to cities, counties, transit operators, and CalTrans, FCR funds can be used to fund
both commuter and recreational bikeway projects.
State and Local Transportation Partnership Program (SLPP)
These monies are available to any road project being resurfaced using local funds that includes
bike lanes. The City is required to front the expenditures, and then can be reimbursed
through this CalTrans- administered program. Since Class II bike lanes and Class III bike
routes are planned for portions of the Specific Plan area, these funds may be available to
supplement project improvements.
Bicycle Lane Account (BLA) Program
This program makes monies available for planning, design, and construction of bike lanes
statewide, this CalTrans- administered program requires a 10% City fund match and the City
having an adopted Bikeway Plan. The City does not currently have a comprehensive Bikeway
Plan. However, if pursued, these funds may be attainable to fund improvements in the
downtown.
%NIL�CCKLGKtQt1OK
164
7900zoazk Daafovtoaf.c Soccc6ec PCaK
Petroleum Violation Escrow Account (PEVA)
This program is funded by fines levied against petroleum producers in the State, and is
available to local jurisdictions for projects which demonstrate energy conservation such as
bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Project funding must be approved by CalTrans or by special
legislation for allocation to local agencies, and is subject to review by the California Energy
Commission and U.S. Department of Energy.
Environmental Enhancement Measures (EEM) Fund
EEM monies are another State funding source and are affiliated with the State Highway
Account Fund. The EEM funds are set aside for environmental enhancement and are
available through a competitive process to various local agencies throughout the State. Projects
that are eligible are those which contain environmental elements which will serve to beautify,
or environmentally enhance a roadway. Such elements may be; landscaping for heat reduction
and traffic calming, rubberized asphalt for noise reduction and drainage and runoff systems
to help meet NPDES standards, some of these planned improvements could apply to State
Route 23 or Moorpark Avenue as a regional arterial through the downtown.
5.1.3 Federal Funding Sources
As of the writing of this Specific Plan, a number of Federal funding sources were identified.
The availability and legislative policy framework for identified sources is subject to modification
over time.
Inter -modal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA)
This Federal legislation provides California with approximately 200 million dollars over a
six-year period for transportation enhancement activities from the ISTEA Act of 1991.
Although the ISTEA program itself will be sunsetting in 1998, this Federal funding program
provides money for transportation enhancement activity such as bike lanes, landscaping,
beautification, safety, and assistance in alternative transportation beautification activities.
Improvements such as street trees, sidewalks, pedestrian crossing, bike lanes, median
landscaping, street repair, intersection signalization, and transit improvements all may be
eligible for funding. CalTrans is the agency responsible for allocating funds in California
through this Act. This next calendar year, the Federal Government is revamping the ISTEA
program. Called the NEXTEA program, increased funding levels are targeted especially for
alternative transportation improvements (bike lanes, public transit, pedestrian enhancement,
etc.)
ISTEA ( NEXTEA) Funding Programs
These programs, which will be reauthorized (and possibly reconfigured) in 1997, currently
include:
'9M , &tcMr6MtateO4
165
'%itaazfiiazk %%kew atau..e S'Aeeejee pCaw
Surface Transportation Improvement Program (STIP): This competitive program is
administered locally by the Ventura County Transportation Commission and approved
by CalTrans and the FHWA. Funds are available to local jurisdictions for bikeway
improvements and require a 20% City fund match, or no match if the project improves
safety.
Congestion Management and Air Quality Program (CMAQ): For non - attainment
regions, this program is available for local bikeway projects that serve a primarily
transportation purpose.
Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA): This competitive program is available
to local jurisdictions for projects which enhance the transportation environment,
including bikeway and streetscape projects. The program is administered locally by
the Ventura County Transportation Commission and are approved statewide by the
California Transportation Commission (CTC). The program requires a 20% City
fund matches.
Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRR): This program is available
to local jurisdictions to assist in the reconstruction of bridges (including bicycle and
pedestrian components), and must be approved by the CalTrans Division of Structures
and Office of Local Programs. Since no bridges exist in the downtown, this program
is probably not available to the City of Moorpark.
• National Highway System: Available to local jurisdictions for bikeway projects that
provide a high degree of safety, this program is administered by CalTrans and requires
a 20% City fund match.
• Scenic Bikeways Program: This CalTrans- administered project will be available when
TEA funding expires. Since Downtown Moorpark is located in rural Ventura County
and State Route 23 is considered a regional commute pattern, it is likely that program
criteria could be met and these funds available for project improvements.
• Office of Traffic Safety: Administered by the State Office of Traffic Safety, this program
is available to local jurisdictions for safety program implementation and training, and
for identification of highway hazards. The program requires a 25% City funds match.
• US Department of Agricultural Forest Service Fund: The USDA Forest Service
provides funds for a variety of urban and community forest programs. In addition,
the Forest Service provides information on selecting, planting and maintaining trees
in stressful urban environments. Because the project involves some landscaping,
funding for tree purchase and planting within the downtown may be made available
from this program, particularly for installation along Moorpark Avenue.
/KG�LGKLGK�Qti6K
166
illaazfia2k V aeooeeau..e S,&eeej a PlaK
5.2 Recommended Implementation Programs
This Specific Plan should be viewed as an economic development strategy for downtown
Moorpark. Every implementation program is intended to directly or indirectly benefit the
downtown. Below are the various implementation programs recommended in this Plan
that will spur the downtown business environment. These programs should be implemented
on an as- needed basis, as determined by City efforts and policy. For simplicity, these programs
have been divided into two categories: A. Economic Development, and B. Promotions and
Special Events.
5.2.1. Economic Development Recommended Programs
A. Hire an economic development specialist to support the RDA. The purpose of this new
position will be to design, oversee and target potential business to the City, with a specific
action to attract users identified in this Plan to the downtown.
Program 1. Work with the Redevelopment Agency and City Council to determine/
project general fund and RDA funding limits to target the City's ability to hire a new
full or part -time position. This position should be funded to assist and supplement
the redevelopment manager's responsibilities. Should permanent funding not be
available, possibilities for a -contract position, dedicating half -time for existing staff or
partnering with a local non - profit for services should be pursued.
B. Implement and monitor the Redevelopment Agency's downtown Business Retention
and Attraction Program. (If the program remains current and operational there is up to
$25,000 in loan funds available, amortized at 3% - first participant at the time of Plan
preparation is the Red River Restaurant on High Street.
Program 1. Advertise and promote this new program to downtown merchants/
landowners.
Program 2. Monitor this low interest loan program for facade /storefront and interior
restoration over a five -year period. If activity is low, evaluate whether additional
monetary incentives are needed to prompt participation, or if loan requirements
(security, amortization period, etc.) need reevaluation.
Program 3. Initiate a grant program for downtown businesses and property owners
for painting, awnings, signs and window displays.
Program . Set -up a low interest loan program, similar to the business retention and
attraction program for seismic upgrades /retrofits (although few exist in the downtown).
Program 5. Formalize a program to streamline the permit process and /or reduce
permit fees when a new business meets the preferred land use type and goals of this
Specific Plan. Components of an ideal incentive program may include:
• Credit toward application and permit fees of up to the cost of redesigning the building.
— 7NC,Blaacektatia.c —
167
ilZooz,Isa¢k Doa..ctou." Peas
• Waiver of fees related to a building renovation project that does not result in any
increase in FAR (including sewer, water, utility fees, etc.) if they exist.
• Waiver of construction permit and planning fees for replacement buildings that are in
full compliance with the Downtown Specific Plan
• Waiver of sewer and water charges during the construction period, limited to a
maximum of 6 months, and not to exceed 6 months of occupied use.
• Simplified process for demolition of non - historic or non - compliance buildings with
the intent /design guidelines of the Downtown Specific Plan
• Differentiation between Level A and B building renovation improvements:
Level A: Cosmetic plant -ons, facade upgrades
Level B: Full structural remodel
Progjarn 6. Formalize a "fee write- down" program for new businesses that meet the
preferred land use type and goals of this Specific Plan. This program should grant new
business owners a reduction in permitting fees based upon a quantified percentage
(10 0/c-20 %) of the businesses 5 -year projected revenue stream (combination of property
tax, sales tax, job generation and transit occupancy tax). The projected revenueswould
be calculated through a simple checklist and permit fees offset by the percentage of
revenue anticipated.
C. Solicit new "anchors" to the downtown.
Program 1. Write and issue an RFP for developer participation/sale or lease of the
City-owned railroad depot property on High Street, with the preferred uses and urban
form combining private businesses with public spaces. Preferred uses include retail
commercial, specialty retail, restaurant /dining, transit- dependent, entertainment (i.e.
performing arts or classic moviehouse), and /or civic (post office or civic offices), etc.
Program . Devise a sales program for the property, including preparation of a sales
brochure on the property and placing the site on the market.
Program 3. Pursue relocating other civic uses to the High Street site (i.e. post office,
library, civic offices) and evaluate the possibility of a developer partnership in trade
for a guaranteed lease.
Program 4• Should developer interest in the High Street City-owned property be low,
or the VCTC decides that use of the right -of -way is not preferred, consideration should
be given to the following:
1. Investigate with the banking community the lending feasibility should a developer
wish to build -out the property (80 -90% coverage) and provide parking off -site. This
alternative would require City cooperation to allocate off -site parking to the property.
- /KL�iLGKICKtQtLOK
168
'woozoctzk DausKtau..e S,4eeej a flaw
2. Prepare financial projections for reuse of the site should the VCTC ROW not be
obtained, including the following reuse options:
• Maintain /expand existing leaseholds assuming an aggressive solicitation program, and
build -out of the property based upon existing legal right.
• Conventional development of the property outside the right -of -way, assuming on -site
parking provided at City ordinance requirements (and lender satisfaction). This option
would likely have the site built -out with structures anchoring the ends and a parking
lot in the center, facing High St. ( +/ -35% single story site coverage is estimated).
• Develop the site as a parking lot and park, and increase the downtown FAR's accordingly
to absorb the unrealized development potential.
• Develop the site into a series of "pavilions", a marketplace or mercantile. This alternative
would involve strategic and carefully designed and managed semi - permanent structures
that could be housed with a range of uses such as; crafts, foods, bath and home, quick
print, bookstore, etc. This option would require the City soliciting pre- leases to
determine the market and potential lease rates. The intent of this alternative is to
provide uses consistent with the community voiced desires for the downtown, but that
would not require substantial City investment in construction.
Program 2. Provide a subsidy to attract the preferred uses listed above and /or earmark
staff time to develop an incentive based program to entice preferred users.
Program . Pursue formal approval from the VCTC for use of the right -of -way for
parking and landscaping per the Vision Plan diagram.
Program . Work with the landowner of the seven -acre Spring Road property to entice
the preferred uses as defined by this Plan. Provisions should be made to streamline
the Planned Development permit process that incorporate the elements of this Specific
Plan, waiver or reduction of processing/permitting fees, or relax certain development
standards if the overall design of the project meets or exceeds the design objectives of
this Specific Plan. Incentives that involve the reduction of fees or the relaxation of
development standards will need to be considered carefully so that other public
objectives are not compromised.
D. Support continued participation in the City Housing Rehabilitation Program.
Program 1. Continue to devote 50% to 100% of a full time equivalent staff member
to management of this program.
Program 2. Within a 5 -year period, evaluate the annual participation levels of targeted
housing in the downtown, and determine if staffing support is sufficient to meet
program goals.
Pro,glam 3. Upon successful operation of the program for a five -year period, reinitiate
the $5,000 grant offering to program participants.
%ML�LCCKLGKtQCCOK �--
169
nddotowtji Daca.etou..e SAeee�(le Caw
E. Improve public streetscape and other public spaces to help draw people downtown.
One of the primary goals of this Specific Plan is to attract people to the downtown local
businesses. To accomplish this, one major goal is to improve the public spaces, namely the
streets, the Depot Plaza, the civic facilities and the key gateways into the historic core. Increasing
the public spaces provides for new opportunities such as outdoor dining, picnicking, holding
small gatherings /concerts /performances and other special events. The following programs
should be pursued either as a whole or incrementally to invest in the success of these important
public spaces.
Program 1. Implement streetscape improvements on High Street (crosswalks, bike
lane striping, landscaping, furniture, brick banding, gateway signage, etc.).
Program 2. Work with the RDA to solicit a developer to "partner" the improvements
to the Depot Plaza.
Program 3. Implement streetscape improvements along Moorpark Avenue (medians,
crosswalks, gateway signage, street trees, transit stops, etc.).
Program 4. Conversion of Magnolia Street to a public plaza - to be closely coordinated
with adjacent landowners and phased with future development of the vacant/
underdeveloped properties at the corner of High Street and Magnolia Ave.
Program 5. Consider purchase of the parcels at the corner or Moorpark Avenue and
Third Street for community center complex, public spaces or civic uses.
Program 6. Work with the VCTC and Union Pacific to increase visibility/awareness
of the Metrolink station and parking lot, through directional signage and promotional
programs.
Program . Work with CalTrans to construct freeway signage announcing downtown
at the identified locations specified in this Specific Plan.
Program 8. Consider re- establishing the "friendly police presence" on High Street
through either one of the following:
• Relocation of the volunteer police resource center (that originally located at the High
Street/Moorpark Avenue intersection) to High Street.
• Develop an image building program to promote "safe shopping" in the downtown.
• Locate an agricultural employment kiosk to display employment opportunities in a
central, accessible location. (Possibly bilingual).
• Appoint a "local safety advisory committee" of local residents /merchants /property
owners to address safety issues.
• Designate a (part or full -time) uniformed police /security officer specifically to cover
the downtown "beat ".
• Develop a cultural arts program, possibly with local youth or school district participation
aimed at integrating community based public art into the downtown.
• Develop an apprenticeship program with local youth participation that could offer
employment opportunities in civic or special public projects.
— 9MC,�le.aestattos —
170
iltoezfcaak vaea ardep e SAacc64*c peas
F. Continue to provide ample parking and access.
Prgram 1. Construct downtown entry statements at the three identified locations
specified in this Specific Plan.
Program 2. Construct downtown parking lot directional signage as identified in the
Specific Plan Vision Plans.
Program 3. Continue to work with the VCTC to advertise use of the Metrolink and
plentiful parking availability.
Program 4. Encourage new development to design sites with parking lots behind
buildings and easily identified signage to clearly mark public and private parking spaces.
Program 6. As properties develop, the demand for sufficient parking will increase.
The City Department of Community Development should re- evaluate the parking
supply downtown every 5 years. If the parking needs are not being satisfied, the City
should implement the parking management provisions as recommended in Section
3.8 of this Specific Plan.
Program 7. As ridership increases or decreases, the City should work with the VCTC
to consider reuse of the Metrolink parking lot on the south side of the railroad tracks.
Should peak use not demand all parking spaces provided, partial reuse of this central
facility is encouraged.
5.2.2 Promotions and Special Events Recommended Programs
The downtown must develop an identity as a place recognized by the community for being
special. In order to succeed, it must be clearly distinct from the other existing and proposed
commercial areas of the City. A combination of the programs identified in this
Implementation Plan should be pursued to promote the long -term vitality of the downtown.
However, this process must also build on the attractive features of the High Street core,
including its historical character. The design guidelines of this Plan emphasize Moorpark's
historic purpose as a rural, agricultural and early American center, balancing its evolution
into the bedroom community that it is today. Using its past as an attraction, the downtown
must become the venue for an expanding list of seasonal and other special events. To
accomplish this, the City and its residents must invest in not only physical improvements to
the downtown, but in promotional campaigns /efforts that reinforce the special character of
the downtown. The following programs are recommended to enhance the downtown image
and environment:
Program 1. Invest in downtown promotion and planning through either initiating,
promoting or influencing one or a combination of the following:
• Assist and /or fund a portion of the Chamber of Commerce annual budget to promote
the downtown image and community events,
• Charge the existing Downtown Merchants Association with local promotion, focused
on fund raising efforts to rebuild the downtown image.
— 9MC�lc�cKtatioK —
171
%Koo¢,fia tk Doewmedta m S�Oau�(Cc PCaw
• Develop a community- supported logo for downtown, and consider "Shop Moorpark ",
"Moorpark Beautiful ", banner and flag programs, and other local themes /awards
programs to recognize downtown efforts and events.
• Hire part -time staff or a consulting firm (advertising) to coordinate downtown
promotions and special events and develop a regular event schedule. This could be
done as a pilot project for a 5 -year period, hopefully resulting in success for downtown
merchants /landowners who then could consider organizing into a formal "Business
Improvement District" (BID or PBID).
• Establish a downtown BIA (merging the existing Merchant's Association) as a consortium
of downtown businesses whose mission is to promote the downtown as a place for
business and community activities. The roles of this association will be to guide the
efforts of this Plan through a cooperative partnership between the City,
Redevelopment Agency and downtown business, and to act as the lead in sponsoring
downtown activities.
Program 2. Consider developing a public display of the City's agricultural heritage.
Program 3. Consider setting aside "seed" monies for establishing a historical museum,
walking tour, or brochure on the City's past.
— 9MC�lcMCCKtattoK —
172
'%%Loaz�iQZk 'Dau.Ktoas.c �Vla,r
5.3 Public Streetscape Improvements
The following tables outline in detail the various public streetscape improvements envisioned
in the Vision Plans, Figures 8 through 11. These improvements can be phased as the City
obtains funding, or as individual parcel development occurs that may influence or participate
in the planned improvement. Such elements as entry monument signage, banner signs,
street furniture and street trees may be constructed or installed initially in stages, since such
improvements do not require substantial road resurfacing, traffic controls and significant
capital investment. Other suggested improvements such as Moorpark Avenue median
construction, decorative bulbouts and crosswalks, sidewalk banding, etc. will demand a greater
degree of merchant participation and capital cost, thus should be planned for accordingly.
Plaza improvements could be developed independently by the City, but should be phased to
correspond with future development of vacant /underdeveloped parcels so that landowner/
developer participation is achieved.
- 7/K�CGKiCKtQtiOK
173
zk D4ew-vedL4K Soecei e ;Pla,s
Table 12
M. 00 PARK
PrellmInartr Stetam'entof Proba<bts Cost
April 10 1997
Note: The following cost estimate is for preliminary budget purposes only. The cost items do not include
general conditions, traffic signalization, drainage, subsurface items, and cost escalation. This estimate is not
based on construction documents or detailed design plans but on schematic plans.
DEMOLITION
ea
17.
$1,000.00
$17,000.00
Mobilization
Is
., _ ......
$300 00 .........
$29,500.00
Traffic control plan
Is
28,
$300.00
$3,500.00
Traffic control
........................... .
Is
2,800
$0.40
$16,000.00
Sawcut concrete sidewalk for tree grates
If
800.
$1.75
$1,400.00
Sawcut asphalt roadway for crosswalk
If
1,150
$2.00
$2,300.00
Sawcut asphalt roadway for median
If
1,620
$2.00
$3,240.00
Sawcut concrete for accessible ramps
if
440
$1.75
$770.00
Remove concrete sidewalk for tree grates
sf
1,275
$5.00
$6,375.00
Remove asphalt roadway for crosswalk
sf
7,020:
$0.75
$5,265.00
Remove asphalt roadway for median
sf.
6,035
$0.75
$4,526.25
Remove concrete for accessible ramps (225 sf /ramp)
sf
3,825,
$5.00
$19,125.00
BTOTALI 592.001.25
Assemble ramps at crosswalks
ea
17.
$1,000.00
$17,000.00
Arrow striping (acrylic paint)..
ea
16,
$300 00 .........
$4,800.00
_.
Bike lane logo striping (acrylic paint)
ea
28,
$300.00
$8,400.00
Bike lane striping (acrylic .pamt)
If
2,800
$0.40
$11,120.00
Crosswalk adobe -like paving material
sf
5,830
$11.00 ;_._
$64,130.00
Crosswalk concrete banding
sf
1,150:
$5.00
$5,750.00
Crosswalk striping _(acrylic ..paint) . .. _
H
1,150
$1 00..._.......
$1,150.00
Median striping (acrylic paint)
If
1,660
$0.40
$664.00
Median curbing
If
1,620;
$12.00 !
$19,440.00
Median nose textured concrete paving
sf
835
$5.50
$4,592.50
Parallel parking striping (acrylic paint)
If
50
$1.00
$50.00
Roadway cold milling
sy
8,722.
...... $7.5.0
$65,415.00
Roadway resurfacing (asphalt paving)
st
78,500
$0.35
$27,475.00
Roadway striping (acrylic paint)
M
960.
$0.40
$384.00
Tree grates
B8 .... ' .......
................. 51.......
,......... $.6.0.0....0.0
$30,600.00
SUBTOTALI
$250.970.50
Gateway sign ea 1 $12,000.00 $12,000.00
Median shrubs/groundcover
sf
5,200
$1.25
$6,500.00
Median trees (1.5.gal)......,
ea
17
$100.00
$1,700.00
Street trees in grates (15 „gal).
ea
51
$100.00
.......... -.1
$5,100.00
Soil preparation and fine grading
sf
5,200:
$0.07
$364.00
Import 6' top soil for all grading areas
cy
21 ...........
... $30.9.01.1
$630.00
Mulch (2" layer on all planting areas)
_, cy
211,
$47.00
$987.00
90 day maintenance period
sf
?,200 .........
..._.._._ $0.10
1 $520.00
Imgation(piping, heads)
sf
6,475:
2.25
$14,568.75
._ ....
Controller with enclosure
ea
1
$4,500.00 !
$4,500.00
RP device with enclosure
__... ..
ea
1
$3,500.00 !
.......... $3,500.00
Meter hook up _
is
1
not included
SUBTOTALF
$38,369.75
Total
$393,341.50
15% Contingency
$59,001.23
Grand Total
$452,342.73
- 9MC�lc�cKtatteK -
174
%iloozfiazk Daus.etacu.a SAeec6te PCaK
MOORRARKI
Praliminary 3YStesnentotProaabIs.Cost
April 10 1997
Note: The following cost estimate is for preliminary budget purposes only. The cost items do not include
general conditions, traffic signalization, drainage, subsurface items, and cost escalation. This estimate is not
based on construction documents or detailed design plans but on schematic plans.
High Street
1111T •4AF%lTlTT
111.11'
U1151 hATEF1511141
$13,000.00
DEMOLMON
ea...._
16............
$300.00 _
$4,800.00
Mobilization
Is
12. ...
$300.00_ _
$40,000.00
.................
Traffic control plan
Is
2,2001.......
$0.40
$4,000.00
Traffic control
Is
540:
$5.50
$18,000.00
Sawcut concrete sidewalk for adobe -like banding
If
7,871
$1.75
$13,774.25
Sawcut asphalt roadway forbulbouts
If
770
$2.00
$1,540,00
Sawcut asphalt roadway for crosswalk
If
3,270;
$2.00
$6,540.00
Sawcut concrete for comer planter
If
70i
$1.75
$122.50
Sawcut concrete for accessible ramps
....................... .
If
450 _
$1.75
$787.50
Remove concrete sidewalk for adobe -like banding
sf
7,871
$5.00
$39,355.00
Remove adphalt for bulb-outs _
sf
4,050!
$0.75
$3,037.50
Remove asphalt roadway for crosswalk
..........
sf
7,280
$0.75
$5,460.00
Remove concrete for comer planter
sf
350
$5.00
$1,750.00
m
Reove concrete for accessible ramps (225 sf/ ramp)
sf
1,200;
$5.00
$6,000.00
SUBTOTAILI $140.366.7
Assemble ramps from sidewalk to crosswalks
; ea
13 j
$1,000.00:
.
$13,000.00
Arrow striping (acrylic paint)
ea...._
16............
$300.00 _
$4,800.00
Bike lane logo striping (acrylic paint)
ea _
12. ...
$300.00_ _
$3,600.00
Bike lane striping (acrylic paint)
If.........
2,2001.......
$0.40
$880.00
....... ....
Bulb-out adobe4ike paving
sf
540:
$5.50
$2,970.00
Bulb-out concrete w/ reinforcing and driveway
sf
200.
$4.00
$800.00
Bulb-out curb and gutter
If
770:
$14.00
$10,780.00
Crosswalk adobe4ike paving material
sf
3,830
$11.00
Crosswalk concrete banding
sf
730
$5.00
$3,650.00
Crosswalk concrete slab
sf
540.
$5.00
$2,700.00
Crosswalk striping (acrylic pain!)
730
$1.00
$730.00
Parallel parking striping (acrylic paint)
If
1,150
$1.00
$1,150.00
Roadwaycoldmilling
- ._sy - ..... .......
.10,60.0 ..........
.__.... $7.50...
$79,500.00.
Roadway resurfacing (asphalt paving)
sf
95 400
$0.35
$33,390.00
Roadway striping (acrylic paint)
If
230:
$0.40
$92.00
Sidewalk adobe4ike banding
If.......
7,871
$5.50
290.50
Benches (6' Cambridge Lionshead)
ea
5
$800.00
$4,000.00
__.
Bike racks
ea
2
$625.00
$1,250.00
_.
......... ....... ....._._.._.
Gateway monument sign (in median)
! ea.
$12,000.00
$24,000.00
Parking directory sign (in median)
ea
2
$350.00
$700.00
Flagpoles with flags in comer planter
ea 1
2
$3,000.00
$6,000.00
Public art (in median)
ea
t
not included
Drive -up mailbox
ea
2
.............
not included
Wrought iron fencing (4' tall)
ff_.._
170
$25.00
Trash receptacle (Cambridge Lionshead) .. .......
ea ...
1
$900.00
$900.00
Recycling receptacle (Cambridge Lionshead)
ea
1
....
$900.00
$900.00
SUBTOTAL
$42,000.00
%KL�ILCMGCKSQtLOK
175
Bulb -out shrubs/grotmdcover
Bulb-out trees (15 gal)
Bulb-out trees near Magnolia Q (24" box)
Shrubs in circular comer planter
Accent groundcover by gateway sick
Accent groundcover on comer
Large trees in bylbout by crosswalk 1 (24" box)
Sal preparation and fine grading
Import 6" top sal for all planting areas
Mulch (2" layer on all planting areas)
90 day maintenance period
Irrigation (piping, heads)
Controller with enclosure
RP device with enclosure
Meter hook up
...............................
Sf
ea
ea
Sf
sf
Sf
ea
sf
cy
cy
sf
,... sf
ea
Pa.-
Is
a.zk 2) ae400 ta40Oe SAeec6ee PCa v
SUBTOTAJLI 555.562.22
Total $481,391.47
15 % Contingency, $72,208.72
Grand Total $553,600.19
— �I«r�ilc«rzeKtattoK —
176
a2,6 Ddeo troeom SAeec6Le Pe'aw
MOORPARK
Prelim Inie ry Sts tam entofProbable, Cast
April 10 1997
Note: The following cost estimate is for preliminary budget purposes only. The cost items do not include
general conditions, traffic signalization, drainage, subsurface items, and cost escalation. This estimate is not
based on construction documents or detailed design plans but on schematic plans.
OBMOLI'TtON
Mobilization
Is
7
$800 00
$17,300.00
Demolition of existing concrete, curb and asphalt paving
sf
12,580
$2.00
$25,160.00
Removal of existing concrete, curb and asphalt paving
sf
12,580
$4.00
$50,320.00
.............................
........
1
SUBTOTALI
$92,780.00
CONSTRUCTION'
ea ._ ...
9 _
$400.00
$3,600.90
Site preparation ..
ea
1
...... $8,000.00:
$8,000.00
Adobe -like brick paving
sf
12,580!
$5.50:
$69,190.00
Circular concrete accent
sf
255
$5.00.
$1,275.00
Raised planter seatwalls (18' high)
If
230
$50.00
$11,500.00
Tree Grates
ea
-11. 2
$600.00
$7,200.00
SUBTOTALr
$89.165.00
Benches Cambridge Lionshead)
_ ea
7
$800 00
$5,600.00
..(6"
Bike racks
ea
1
$625.00:
................
$625.00
Bollards _ _
ea
5
$660.00 .. ......
$3,300.00
Drinking Fountain
ea
1
$3,500.00
$3,500.00
Hanging
ea ._ ...
9 _
$400.00
$3,600.90
Kiosk
ea
1
...... $8,000.00:
$8,000.00
Planter pots (square Cambridge Lionshead),
......
ea
8
$1,000.00
$8,000.00
Trash container (Cambridge Lionshead)
ea
3
$900.00
$2,700.00
Recycling container (Cambridge Lionshead)
ea
3
..... $900.00
$2,700.00
Shrubs/ flowers in planter pots
Shrubs/ groundcover in raised planters
Trees in planters (15 gal)
Trees in grates (15 gal)
Soil preparation and fine grading
Import 6' top soil for all planting areas
Mulch (2' layer on all planting areas)
90 day maintenance period
Irrigation (piping, heads) ....
Controller with enclosure
RP device with enclosure
..........
Meter hook up
BTOTALI S38.025.00
sf
72
$2.75 !
$198.00
sf ...........
500:
$1.25: ......................
$625.00
_ ._ .
ea
5
$100.00
$500.00
ea
12'
$100.00
$1,200.00
sf
572
$0.07,
cY
2
$30.00
$60.00
cY
2
$47.00
$94.00
sf
572
$0.10
$57.20
sf
872
$2.25
$1,962.00
ea
1
$4,500.00
$4,500.00
ea
..... .........:...
1
$3,500.00
$3,500.00
Is
1
not included
SUBTOTALI $12,736.24
Total: $232,706.24
...............................
15% Contingency $34,905.94
Grand Total! $267,612.18
%KL�CGKLCKta�L6K
177
7&**,rfaas4 Doa-. raeo a .SAeee�(e'e PtaK
MOORPARK J
Pralln.inary Statement of Probable Cott 1
April 10 1997
Note: The following cost estimate is for preliminary budget purposes only. The cost items do not include
general conditions, traffic signalization, drainage, subsurface items, and cost escalation. This estimate is not
based on construction documents or detailed design plans but on schematic plans.
High Street Plaza UNIT QUANITITY UNIT COST •
DEMOLITION
Mobilization Is $19,650.00
SU BTOTAI-1 $19,650.00
r wgTnti(Trt1111
Site preparation ....
Adobe -type brick. paving _ ......... sf 7,600 $10.00 ...........$76,000.00
Concrete or brick paths _ sf 6,600 _ $5.00 ........ $33,000.00
Restroom not included
SUBTOTAILI S109.000.00
Benches (6' Cambridge Lionshead)
.....
24
$247.50
$19,200.00
Bike racks
ea
?
$625.00___
$1,250.00
Bandstand .
.... —
.
1
$35,000.00
$35,000.00
.........
Trash container (Cambridge Lionshead)
ea
4
$900.00
$3,600.00
Recycling container (Cambridge Lionshead)
ea
4
$900.00
$3,600.00
Planter pots (Square Cambridge Lionshead)
ea
10
$1,000.00
$10,000.00
Drinking fountain
ea .....
t..
$3,500 00
$3,500.00
sf
....... .......
12,020
.. ... .: .......
SUBTOTAL
...... $1,202.00
$76,150.00
Shrubs/flowers-in planterpots
Trees (15 gal)
Sod
............. .............................._
Shrubs/ groundcover
Large trees by bandstand (36 box)
24' box tree
Soil preparation. and fine grading
Import 6' top soil for all grading areas
Mulch (2' layer on all planting areas)
90 day maintenance period
........... ...... ..............
Irrigation (piping, heads) ........
..........
Controller with enclosure
. _ .... ........ ..................... .............._
RP device with enclosure
Meter hook up
sf
..... ..._.....
..... 90:
$2.75
$247.50
sf
20
$100.00
$2,000.00
sf
12,000`
$0.75
$9,000.00
ea
3,500
$1.25
$4,375.00
ea
2
$500.00
$1,000.00
ea
6
$300.00
$1,800.00
sf
12,020.
$0.07
$841.40
cY
49
$30.00..:...
$1.470.00
cY ......_...
49,_ _.
$47.00..._
sf
....... .......
12,020
.. ... .: .......
$0.10
......... ....... ...
...... $1,202.00
sf
12,320:
$2.25
$27,720.00
ea
1
$4,500.00
$4,500.00
ea
1
$3,500.00
$3,500.00
Is
1'
not included
SUBTOTALI $59.958.90
Total' $264,758.90
15% Contingency $39,713.84
Grand Total' $304,472.74
— 9MC�Ela�xastattoa —
178
%lleozhazk VOMMtoa.le SAeee�Cc PC4t
MOORPARK.
Prstirninenr Sta#emen# of Probable Cost
April 10 1997
Note: The following cost estimate is for preliminary budget purposes only. The cost items do not include
general conditions, traffic signalization, drainage, subsurface items, and cost escalation. This estimate is not
based on construction documents or detailed design plans but on schematic plans.
Avenue
19
wanolia Court $267,612.181
I Hiah Street Plaza $304,472.741
— �1Ne�tile�eetatCaK —
179
'%itoez�tiazk Dou..ctau..c S'&ecc�(le PCaK
5.4 Specific Plan Administration, Adoption and Amendments
This section of the Downtown Specific Plan describes the process, procedures and criteria for
administration, adoption and amendments to the Downtown Specific Plan.
5.4.1 Specific Plan Administration
The Moorpark Community Development Department is responsible for the administra-
tion, implementation, and enforcement of this Specific Plan. The Community Develop-
ment Director is responsible for making the determination of whether an amendment to
the Specific Plan text or maps is needed. Amendment procedures are described below.
5.4.2. Specific Plan Adoption
The Specific Plan was adopted by City Council Resolution. Adoption of this Specific Plan
involved City Council approval of a General Plan Amendment (text and map). Upon adop.
tion, the Specific Plan, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan
established the land use and zoning for the downtown. An ordinance amendment was pre-
pared to supplement the City Zoning Code. This ordinance set forth text and map zoning
amendments for establishing new zones, specific site development standards and allowable
uses for the downtown. The City Council adopted this enabling ordinance as a part of the
City Zoning Code. In the event that any regulation, condition, program, or portion'of this
Specific Plan is held invalid or unconstitutional by a California or Federal Court of compe-
tent jurisdiction, such portions shall be deemed separate, distinct, and independent provi.
sions, and the invalidity of such provisions shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of the Specific Plan.
5.4.3 Specific Plan Amendments
Over time, sections of the Downtown Specific Plan may need to be revised, as economic
conditions or City needs indicate. Proposals to amend the Downtown Specific Plan must be
accompanied by detailed information to document the change requested. The request should
include revised Specific Plan text and revised Land Use and Zoning diagrams, where rel-
evant, depicting the amendment desired. The applicant should indicate the economic, so-
cial or technical issues that generate the need to amend the Specific Plan. When applicable,
any proposal to amend the Specific Plan must be accompanied by studies that analyze the
amendments potential effects. City staff is responsible for review of all submitted informa-
tion in support of the amendment request, and will determine whether the proposed amend-
ment is both consistent with the General Plan and can be supported by the conclusions of
the supplemental studies, if needed. Both the Planning Commission and City Council must
hold public hearings on the Specific Plan amendment, in accordance with Section 65453 of
the State Government Code. Amendments to any new land use, zone, site development
— 79atateaaaee. LL±aelea aad Reaeaa&y,
180
illaazfiazk Doau.ttaca.c S�eec�lc PIaK
standards or allowable uses as prescribed by the Specific Plan enabling ordinance (which has
been adopted by City Municipal Code) shall be adopted by ordinance. All other amend-
ments shall be adopted by City Council Resolution. Adoption of any proposed amendment
to this Plan shall include the determination of the following findings:
A. Changes that have occurred in the community since the approval of the original
Specific Plan which warrant approving the proposed amendment.
B. The proposed amendment is consistent with the City of Moorpark General Plan.
C. The proposed amendment will result in a benefit to the area within this Specific
Plan.
D. The proposed amendment will not result in any unmitigated impact to adjacent
properties.
E. The proposed amendment will enable efficient and less costly delivery of necessary
services and /or public facilities to the population within the area of this Specific
Plan.
Amendments to the Specific Plan are subject to additional CEQA review.
— i 44dea taee. aad Reaova e&A.,
181