HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1999 0120 CC REG ITEM 09BCITY OF MOORPARK
AGENDA REPORT
-11 a, t-A ( <-)
I'T'EM
CITY OF'MOORPkRK, CALTFORNIA
City Council Meeting
of
ACTION: t � Cl� 1�1 ` 3 G1 ���,
mil 19 iG 11
BY: �-"
TO: Honorable City Council
FROM: Nelson Miller, Director of Community Developmenoo�
Prepared by: Wayne Loftus, Planning Manager
John Libiez, Principal Planner
DATE: January 5, 1999(City Council Meeting of 1/20/99)
SUBJECT: CONSIDER MOORPARK HIGHLANDS SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT
(SPECIFIC PLAN 95 -2 /SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2, GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT NO. 95 -2, AND ZONE CHANGE 95 -4) , APPLICANT:
MORRISON - FOUNTAINWOOD- AGOURA.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Moorpark Highlands Specific Plan project is located north of
Charles Street, west of Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park,
easterly of Walnut Canyon Road and contiguous to the City's
northern boundary. The project proposes to develop 532 single
family and 120 multiple family attached and detached residential
units, open space areas, a public park, a middle- school site,
trails and bikeways on a 445 acre site within the City of
Moorpark planning area identified in the General Plan Land Use
Element (1992)as Specific Plan No.2. General Plan Amendments to
the Land Use and Circulation Elements, a Zone Change and Draft
EIR complete the total project.
The Specific Plan site is bordered by development on the south
side, and a portion of the east side. To the north are County
agricultural and open space lands. To the east is the Happy
Camp Canyon Regional Park, the Specific Plan No. 8 site east of
the park, and a portion of single family residential
development. The project site can be viewed as a logical
extension of the development of land uses currently existing
along the southern and a portion of the eastern sides.
The Moorpark Highlands Specific Plan has been prepared to
establish the planning concept, design theme, development
C:m /sp2stfrptcc12099
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 2
regulations and administrative procedures necessary
the orderly and compatible development of the site.
addressed by the Specific Plan and the EIR include:
circulation, 2)open space, 3)parklands, 4)threatene
habitat issues, 5)SR118 and SR23 Bypass reservations
and grading.
Project Description:
to insure
Key issues
1)traffic/
d species/
6) noise,
The Moorpark Highlands, Specific Plan No. 2, project consists of
a General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan, and Zone Change and is
more particularly described as follows:
General Plan Amendment 95 -2 :
The General Plan Amendment (GPA) involves the following
amendments to the Land Use Element and Circulation Element
of the General Plan.
1. Amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan (1992)
by removing overlay designations affecting the
Specific Plan No.2 site. Current designation for the
properties are Specific Plan with an overlay of Open
Space 1 and Rural Low Density. With approval of a
specific plan, permitted development under the current
designation is limited to 475 dwelling units on 445
acres with 7 acres of Institutional use also
specified. Based on provisions of the General Plan, a
maximum of 712 dwelling units could be achieved if the
property owner agrees to provide public improvements,
public services, and /or financial contributions that
the City Council determines is of substantial benefit
to the community. The proposed plan seeks to permit
652 dwelling units on 445 acres, and could comply with
the description of Specific Plan No. 2 of the adopted
General Plan Land Use Element (1992) found on page 30
through 32(attached), if the appropriate findings are
made.
2. Amend the Circulation Element (1992) Figures 2, 3, and
4. to:
(a.) Extend Spring Road from its current terminus at
Charles Street to intersect with Walnut Canyon
Road;
000011
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 3
(b.) Redesignate "C" Street within the plan to connect
from Spring Road to Happy Camp Canyon and
proposed road from properties to the east
(Specific Plan No.8, Hidden Creek Ranch) of the
project site;
(c.) Designate the Spring Road extension and Street
"C" as Four -Lane Arterial roadways;
(d.) Designate bikeways within the Specific Plan area;
and,
(e.) Designate equestrian trails within the Specific
Plan area.
Zone Change 95 -4•
Amend the City Zoning Map by rezoning the subject property
from R -1 (Single Family Residential), RE -5 (Rural
Exclusive -5 acre lot) and RA -10 (Rural Agricultural -10 acre
lots) to SP (Specific Plan Zone) , and to amend Title 17 of
the Moorpark Municipal Code to adopt development standards
contained within the Specific Plan as a Chapter within the
Zoning Code of the City.
Specific Plan 95 -2 (SP -2):
Specific Plan 95 -2 proposes development of a mix of 532
single family detached residential units, 120 multiple
family residential units of which 65 will be affordable
rental housing units, 11 acres of park land, 94 acres of
habitat conservation property, a 20 acre middle school
site, right -of -way reservations for the SR118 and SR23
extensions, and 175 acres of open space lands on a 445 acre
consolidated parcel of land. The bulk of the project
development would occur in the upper 2/3s of the site,
above the proposed SR118 alignment. The Plan incorporates
design guidelines and development standards for the project
area.
BACKGROUND:
The Specific Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report were
circulated for public review and comment on September 1, 1998.
The public comment period was scheduled to end on October 15,
000o u"
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 4
1998 but was extended through October 27, 1998 to allow
responses from agencies requesting extensions. Copies of the
project specific plan and environmental documents were provided
to Federal, State and local agencies for comment as required by
CEQA. Copies were also provided to the Moorpark College Library,
Moorpark Public Library and the public service counter within
City Hall for public review.
The City Council and Planning Commission conducted a joint
public meeting on September 23,1998, to introduce Specific Plan
No. 2 and exchange information with the applicant and public.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing to receive
comments on the project Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
on October 12, 1998. Subsequent public hearings for the Specific
Plan, General Plan Amendments, and Zone Change were conducted by
the Planning Commission on November 23 and 30, 1998, and
December 14, 1998.
At the December 14, 1998, meeting, the Planning Commission by a
unanimous vote adopted Resolution No. PC -98 -362 recommending
that the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report
for the project and adopt the Specific Plan No.2 project, with
modifications as contained within that Resolution, consisting of
Specific Plan No. 2 (Specific Plan 95 -2), General Plan Amendment
95 -2, and Zone Change 95 -4,. A copy of the Planning Commission
Resolution is attached.
DISCUSSION:
The Moorpark Highlands Specific Plan has been designed in
consideration of a variety of developmental design issues
affecting the site, which include geotechnical considerations,
State Highway reservations for two eventual freeways /bypasses,
and habitat preservation for a threatened bird species. These
physical planning issues have resulted in a specific plan that
has consolidated and clustered residential development away from
impacted areas.
Mitigation measures and guidelines for development address the
technical means to reduce or eliminate impacts from geotechnical
impacts such as faulting, soils and slope stability and slide
areas. To the extent possible, affected areas have been left in
open space uses or have been restricted to lower density uses
and distanced from potential hazards and for other areas,
remedial actions that reduce impacts to acceptable levels. This
000013
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 5
results in approximately 91 acres or 21% of the project being
left in open space other than habitat uses. The importance
given to this mitigation has been evidenced by the extent of
study the applicant has commissioned to be done for the project,
namely two full volumes of geotechnical evaluation within the
EIR, which the project by design adheres to. (Appendix B,
Volumes III & IV of the EIR previously circulated to City
Council).
The SR118 and SR23 corridors significantly affect the project
site. These two major circulation corridors account for an 11%
reduction in developable land.
The required habitat for the California Gnatcatcher removes 210
of the project site from development consideration. The habitat
area is a significant loss to design in that much of the 94
acres of this area is in property relatively free from any other
impacts and would be typically easier to develop.
Issues:
During the public hearings before the Planning Commission
several issues were raised by the public concerning the Specific
Plan and EIR and were addressed by the Planning Commission.
Section 4 of the Planning Commission Resolution contains the
recommendations of the Planning Commission to the City Council
regarding those issues. A brief discussion of each of the
issues follows. These items relate to circulation; open- space,
parks and trails; grading; and, noise. The comments and
concerns are summarized in the following comments along with a
brief response of how the issue might be dealt with. Additional
discussion of these concerns can be found in the Planning
commission staff report of December 14, 1998, attached.
Traffic and Safetv:
Most of the comments and concerns identified by public
testimony related to circulation /traffic issues. These
issues considered the Spring Road extension, Walnut Canyon
Road intersection, Charles Street intersection, Los Angeles
Avenue improvements, truck traffic, Bypass issues, and
bikeway provision along Spring Road. These issues and the
Planning Commission recommendations are discussed in the
following paragraphs:
000014
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 6
Spring Road extension:
The extension of Spring Road is proposed by the General
Plan Circulation Element as part of the City's roadway
improvements to complete the City circulation system
(Circulation Element 1992, pg.19 -map, and page 20- text).
As proposed the extension would continue from High Street
to the SR23 Bypass. The element shows this route as a
Rural Collector (2 -4 lanes and 70 -90 feet right -of -way)
trending northeasterly from High Street to connect with
SR23 in the location of "D" Street. The SR23 bypass as
designated in Figure 2 of the City's Circulation Element
would parallel the boundary of Happy Camp Canyon and
eventually connect to Broadway, which is consistent with
the route adopted by the California Transportation
Commission on October 28, 1964. SR23 subsequently
continues to the north intersecting with and generally
following Grimes Canyon Road to the City of Fillmore, and
an eventual intersection with SR126.
The Spring Road extension within the Specific Plan is
oriented northwesterly from High Street to merge with
Walnut Canyon Road. The intersection of these two roadways
would be through a "T" intersection with Spring Road
serving as the leg of the "T" Alternatively, a sweeping
gentle curve such that Walnut Canyon transitions to Spring
Road within and adjacent to this proposed project is
possible. A new intersection between Spring Road and
Walnut Canyon Road would be created. Walnut Canyon Road
north of the intersection would continue north to its
intersection with Broadway with no changes. Walnut Canyon
Road south would be provided as the leg of a "T"
intersection should the alternative be chosen.
No connection to the future SR23 alignment would be
provided via Street "C" as shown upon Exhibit 10 of the
Specific Plan. Street "C" would serve as an arterial
roadway connection between properties to the east (Hidden
Creek Ranch) of the SR23 and Spring Road.
Until the future SR23 alignment may be approved and
constructed, Walnut Canyon Road access to SR 118 via the
Spring Road extension could provide a critical circulation
link for truck traffic thereby removing a large portion of
it from Los Angeles Avenue. This design would provide a
000015
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 7
connection of Walnut Canyon Road to the proposed SR118
Bypass. Without this connection to the 118 Bypass, sand
and gravel trucks would need to continue along Walnut
Canyon Road, Moorpark Avenue, and Los Angeles Avenue,
rather than using the 118 Bypass. The difference in
elevation at Walnut Canyon Road and the proposed the 118
Bypass may make the cost of improvements to effect the
connection at that location infeasible.
The Specific Plan circulation diagram identifies the
intersection of Spring Road and Walnut Canyon Road as a
"T ", with Spring Road as the leg of the "T'. The applicant
presented a historical perspective of the evolution of the
circulation plan to the Planning Commission (Attachment
13) .
The Planning Commission recommended that limitations be
placed on Spring Road, so that no trucks may utilize the
extension of Spring Road from Charles Street to Walnut
Canyon Road as a travel route except for local service,
and, that the full right -of -way and "T" intersection at
Walnut Canyon Road, as shown in the Specific Plan, be
dedicated by the Developer. However, to limit use, Spring
Road should be constructed only as a two lane road from "C"
Street to Walnut Canyon Road.
Intersection Design and Signals at Charles Street and
Spring Road:
Comments from public testimony articulated a need for
traffic control and special design at the intersection of
Charles Street and Spring Road. Concerns were raised for
safe ingress /egress and turning movements into Charles
Street, east of Spring Road once the Spring Road extension
occurred. Also, concerns were raised related to
discouraging cut through vehicles and trucks from Moorpark
Avenue to Spring Road on Charles Street.
The northerly extension of Spring Road creates a four way
intersection where currently a three way stop sign
controlled intersection exists. Residents are concerned
that use of Spring Road by through traffic along a proposed
interim SR23 routing, especially trucks, could cause safety
and access difficulties.
000016
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 8
Recommendations for signals generally require traffic
warrant system analysis performed by the City's Traffic
Consultant, using Warrant standards prescribed by Caltrans
for urban and rural roadway /intersections. The Traffic
Consultant analysis indicated project traffic alone would
not require the placement of a traffic signal at the
intersection of Charles Street and Spring Road. Under two
scenarios contained within the traffic study, (1)the
incorporation of State Route 23 traffic upon Spring Road,
and /or, (2)the routing of a portion of the Hidden Creek
Ranch daily traffic to Spring Road, would require a signal.
The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council
require installation of a traffic signal at Spring Road and
Charles Street.
Concerns
were voiced on
behalf
of the residents along
Charles
Street, west of Spring
Road, that once the
extension
of Spring Road
occurred
a significant amount of
traffic
utilizing that
roadway
would use west Charles
Street as
a short cut or
a connection between Walnut Canyon
Road and
Spring Road.
One potential option in response to Planning Commission
concerns, would be to create a cul -de -sac on Charles Street
west of Spring Road. The applicant studied this option and
prepared a schematic diagram. (attached). Although this
design would enhance circulation on Spring Road, this
alternative may have other impacts and concerns which the
City may want to further study. Another design option, not
studied but discussed, that may include removable barriers
to insure adequate connection between Charles Street and
Spring Road during special events such as "Country Days ",
or if needed in an emergency situation, is another
alternative that can be incorporated as an added feature
with the cul -de -sac. These options were not the result of
traffic studies, rather they were in response to Planning
Commission concerns.
The Planning Commission recommended that the intersection
design be resolved prior to the approval of the first
tentative tract map, to restrict access to Charles Street
west of Spring Road. Applicant should be held responsible
for the design and construction of the intersection, to
include any removable traffic barriers, as approved by the
City Council.
000017
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 9
Bicycle Path North Along Spring Road:
The Specific Plan Trails Plan, Exhibit 12, establishes
Class 2 bikeways along all major roadways within the
Specific Plan. Concerns were expressed regarding the
placement of a bikeway within the street travelway. The
applicant indicated to the Commission that design of
improvements could be adjusted to remove the bikeway from
the street surface to separate it from vehicle traffic
within the proposed arterial rights -of -ways. However, this
design would require the elimination of almost all
landscaping.
The Planning Commission recommended that a Class I bikeway
(separated from the travel way)be constructed along the
westerly right -of -way of Spring Road from Charles Street to
"C" Street.
East Los Angeles Avenue Improvements:
Testimony received expressed concerns for a need to provide
improvements to Los Angeles Avenue east of Spring Road to
the 118 Freeway.
Los Angeles Avenue east of Spring Road, from Spring Road to
Princeton Avenue is designated a Rural Collector, which
provides for two to four lanes of travel, by the General
Plan. With the Spring Road northerly extension, some
trucks headed eastbound on SR118 could find it more
convenient to utilize Los Angeles Avenue as their
connecting route to the freeway. The dimensions of the
Rural Collector roadway section are adequate to accommodate
truck traffic.
The City has already initiated a project to evaluate right -
of -way and improvement needs for East Los Angeles Avenue.
These actions will eventually result in the construction of
East Los Angeles Avenue to a Rural Collector standard as
required by the General Plan Circulation Element. The Los
Angeles Avenue Area of Contribution Fees, which this
project will be required to pay, will provide funding for
this project.
The Planning Commission recommended that City project
improvements on Los Angeles Avenue east of Spring Road to
00001,8
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 10
the Princeton Avenue interchange with SR 118, be
constructed concurrently with the first phase of
development of this project.
SR 118 Bypass connection to Walnut Canyon Road:
The General Plan Circulation Element currently includes a
provision for a signalized intersection between the
extension of Spring Road and the SR118 Bypass. The
Circulation Element (Figure 2) shows the SR118 Bypass
crossing Walnut Canyon Road but with no connection.
Although previous preliminary conceptual Caltrans alignment
drawings for the SR118 Bypass include a diamond interchange
with ramps at Walnut Canyon Road, there are significant
environmental, topographic and right -of -way issues relating
to a connection or interchange between SR118 and Walnut
Canyon Road that do not apply to a connection at Spring
Road. In order to divert traffic and trucks from Moorpark
Avenue and Los Angeles Avenue to the SR118 Bypass the
extension of Spring Road and its connection to the SR118
Bypass was suggested. An intersection at Spring Road and
the SR118 Bypass may be more easily accomplished than an
interchange connection at Walnut Canyon Road for the
reasons stated. The Planning Commission recommendation
allows SR23/118 development, but limits Spring Road usage
by prohibiting truck traffic on Spring Road.
SR231SR118 Alignments and Rights -of -Ways:
The Specific Plan reflects an alignment for SR23 along the
eastern flank of the project. This alignment reflects the
SR23 alignment adopted by the California Transportation
Commission on October 28, 1964. Reservation of this
corridor increases the likelihood that eventual development
of this roadway will occur, thus reducing impacts,
especially from truck traffic on local streets. The
proposed right -of -way (2001) is adequate to develop a six
lane arterial highway, appurtenant facilities and slope
easements. This alignment is also shown within the adopted
City Circulation Element.
The Specific Plan also reserves a 200' right -of -way for the
SR118 Bypass consistent with the general alignment shown
006019
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 11
within the City Circulation Element and on preliminary
Caltrans drawings. City Council action on December 2,
1998, with regard to the A &B Properties /Southern California
Edison industrial development application west of Gabbert
Road included a requirement for connection of the SR118
corridor to Los Angeles Avenue, incorporating a railroad
underpass, and right -of -way requirements to provide for the
western connection of the SR118 Bypass. Two additional
properties between Specific Plan No. 2 and the A &B /SCE site
are under initial stages of project review. These
properties would provide most of the right -of -way required
to link Specific Plan No. 2 to Los Angeles Avenue via a
dedicated corridor. Actions have been initiated by the
City to complete a study of the SR118 Bypass corridor which
will determine precise alignments, improvements and costs.
Traffic impact mitigation fees for city development
projects will be assessed to provide the local share of the
cost of development of the Bypass.
Trails:
The Specific Plan provides for a number of trails and non -
vehicular circulation system components. Specific Plan
Exhibit 12, contains the trail plan for the project. A
multi -use trail is designated to enter the property from
Walnut Canyon Road and then turn east along Street "C" to
the easterly project boundary. This route is consistent
with the intent of development of an equestrian trail
contained within the City's Circulation Element, Figure 4.
The Hidden Creek Ranch Specific Plan has designated a
multi - purpose trail to connect with Happy Camp Canyon
Regional Park and Specific Plan 2. The location of the
trail within Specific Plan 2 appears to satisfy each of
these purposes.
A "natural" trail is designated to begin off of Spring Road
within Planning Area 13, of the Specific Plan, follow the
north loop road from where it turns north between Planning
areas 9 and 12, then turns easterly parallel to the north
boundary of Planning Areas 12 and 8 at the southerly border
of the required 200 foot buffer zone between the project
and abutting agricultural uses. The trail then proceeds
southerly along the western edge of the SR23 reservation to
its terminus within Planning Area 16. The County
Agricultural Commissioner has expressed concern that the
OMOZO
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 12
buffer distance from development is not sufficient in width
(General Plan Policy 11.2 requires 200 feet vs. requested
300 feet) and that the location encourages, rather than
mitigates, conflicts between urban uses and agricultural
lands and also, as a result, requires significant fencing.
The Agriculture Commissioner's concern, that intrusion is
more likely to occur when the trail location is within the
buffer may have some validity. It is possible to continue
the trail along the north side of the interior loop street
to Street "C" where it could then proceed south along the
SR23 right -of -way to Planning Area 16. Such an alignment
would reduce the opportunity for intrusion into the
agricultural area and serve as an alternate solution to
increase the width of the buffer area and construction of
fencing.
The trails and bikeways designated within the Specific Plan
are intended for public use. Concerns for the construction
and on -going maintenance of the trails is an issue similar
to that of parks.
The Planning Commission recommended that Exhibit 12 of the
Specific Plan be amended to differentiate between public
and private trails to be provided within the Specific Plan.
Trails intended for public use are to be developed
consistent with the adopted trail standards of the City of
Moorpark. The Commission further recommended that all
multi - purpose trails shown upon the trails plan for the
Specific Plan include provisions for equestrian uses.
Habitat Conservation Area:
The Specific Plan proposes to create a 94 acre habitat
conservation area for the protection and preservation of
the California Gnatcatcher, and other species. The
Gnatcatcher is a Federally listed "threatened" bird species
found to be resident within the southerly coastal sage
community habitat within Specific Plan 2. A Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) is generally made a mitigation
requirement for any project that would impact endangered or
threatened species. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
has HCP responsibility under the regulations implementing
the Endangered Species Act. The City's responsibility in
reviewing the proposed project should be limited to require
that an HCP be established and implemented to meet Federal
000021
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 13
requirements, and that development not occur until the
approved HCP is in place.
A major concern is the costs for HCP establishment and
continuation. Short term and long term construction and
maintenance costs for monitoring and maintaining the HCP
should be the responsibility of the applicant. Inspection
and evaluation of the facility and the effects upon the
species should remain under the jurisdiction of FWS, or
their designee, who possesses prime qualifications in the
management of wildlife or habitat areas.
The Planning Commission recommended that prior to the
approval of any master subdivision or parcel map to
establish planning areas or future building areas, and /or
issuance of any development permits for the master grading
and /or construction of roadways, utilities, or structures,
the applicant shall provide to the City of Moorpark an
approved Habitat Conservation Plan for the mitigation of
impacts to, and preservation of, the population of the
threatened species "Polioptila c. californica" (California
Gnatcatcher), resident within the Specific Plan. The HCP
shall be approved by the U.S. Department of Fish and
Wildlife Services (FWS). Applicant shall be responsible
for the satisfaction of all short term and long term
mitigation measures established by the FWS affecting the
HCP including perpetual financial support for the
maintenance of the HCP and the species.
Noise:
Concerns were expressed for the increase in noise the
project could generate. Principally, the concerns were
raised because of the truck traffic component on Spring
Road. However, general project traffic coupled with the
possibility of future traffic from Specific Plan No. 8 is
sufficient to warrant mitigation along the east side of
Spring Road where residential units have side or rear yards
abutting the extension of Spring Road. Roadway noise levels
are contained within Table BB in the EIR. The Planning
Commission Resolution recommended construction of the sound
walls in this area at the expense of the developer.
000022
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 14
Traffic Mitigation Fees:
The Ventura County Resources Agency has requested that the
City and applicant complete an agreement to provide
mitigation fees for traffic impacts upon County roadways
attributed to this project, as a condition to project
approval. (Letter within Response to Comments Document,
following page 3 -79). A similar agreement was prepared and
entered into by the City, County, and Hidden Creek Ranch
Partners. The fee is established by County ordinance and
supports the Congestion Management Plan as a means to
mitigate any impact upon any County roadway created by
projects in the County, or the City. In subsection F of
the recitals to the agreement with Messenger, the County
indicated their intent to consider within two years a
modification to the County Ordinance to relate road needs
and fees on a more local basis for different areas of the
County. State Route 118 bypass is also to be considered as
part of this modification study.
Pa rks :
Many of the citizens who testified expressed a need for a
public park, with good access, to serve the north - central
portion of the City. The Specific Plan proposes to provide
an eleven acre active use park within Planning Area 11
located northerly of the intersection of "C" Street and the
Spring Road extension as shown on the Specific Plan Land
Use, Exhibit 4 (attached). Based upon the City's adopted
formula for requiring park land dedication, the project is
required to provide 10.2 acres of developable property for
the park site.
The location of the park within the project appears to
provide more benefit to residents of the project than to
the community due to the existing development pattern,
access and location in relationship to much of the
residential area of the City. Based upon preliminary
grading concepts provided by the applicant, extensive
grading will be necessary to develop the site and as a
result the actual usable area will be substantially limited
because of the manufactured slopes. Only about three acres
of usable park area of less than 2% slope would be provided
in the preliminary plan without the use of retaining walls.
Therefore, the Commission considered, individually or in
00GO23
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 15
some combinations, options that included a reduced park
commitment, in -lieu fees and private park development.
These alternatives included: (1) Require that any park to
be developed for public use contain not less than 10.2
usable acres with a slope profile of not greater than 2 %;
(2) Accept a minimum five acre private park constructed by
the developer and supported by the Homeowners Association
and require the payment of an in -lieu fee equal to the cost
of providing 10.2 acres of developed public park land for
construction of park facilities elsewhere. Happy Camp
Canyon Park has been mentioned for possible development of
some active park uses.; (3) Accept a developed neighborhood
park of approximately five acres of flat usable land, and
require payment of in -lieu fees for the remainder for
community park facilities.
The applicant has stated, on the public record, that the
park is an essential portion of his project and that he is
willing to dedicate the required land, develop the required
amenities, and establish a long term financial mechanism,
meeting the City's requirements, in order to ensure the
park development and maintenance. By way of cost
comparison, Peach Hill Park, which is 10 acres in size
costs approximately $78,000.00 per year to maintain. The
former city -wide parks maintenance assessment, which ended
in June, was approximately $40.00 per residence per year.
For Specific Plan No. 2 to be maintained similarly the cost
would be approximately $119.00 per dwelling unit ($78K/652
units = $119.00)
The Planning Commission has recommended that a public park
be constructed on site, of not less than 10.2 acres in size
with a slope not greater than 2 %, and that a suitable
financial mechanism for the perpetual maintenance of the
park as the sole responsibility of the present or future
owners of the property be established.
Open Space:
As shown on the Land Use Summary, Exhibit 5, of the
Specific Plan, 175.1 acres (39.3%) of the project area is
to remain in open space designations. The largest single
entity, 94 acres, is the Habitat Conservation Area to be
preserved as Natural Open Space to protect and preserve the
resident population of the threatened species, the
000024
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 16
California Gnatcatcher, found to nest within the Specific
Plan site. This area will be subject to a Habitat
Conservation Plan as required under the Federal Endangered
Species Act, which must be developed by the applicant and
approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The HCP
will control use, access, protection actions and
requirements for financial support for long range
inspection and maintenance of the site at the sole expense
of the applicant.
The remaining 81.1 acres designated for open space are
reserved as private open space. The applicant intends
these areas for private recreational amenities, private
trail areas, preservation of natural features, fuel
modification areas, and perimeter buffer areas. Private
open space areas would be maintained and managed by a
Master Homeowners Association.
One of the private open space areas, Planning Area 19 as
shown upon the Specific Plan Land Use Map, lies on the east
edge of the project beyond the SR 23 alignment reservation.
Upon completion of the Bypass, access to this parcel would
only be available through the Happy Camp Canyon Regional
Park. A suggestion was made that perhaps this parcel could
be dedicated to the City for future open space use, or
somehow be connected with the Happy Camp Canyon Regional
park. This is probably best considered as an item within
the proposed Development Agreement.
The Commission recommended that prior to the approval of
the first Tentative Tract Map a plan be approved to
identify the specific open space purposes and uses of
Planning areas 12,13,16,17,18 and 19 as identified on the
Specific Plan Exhibit 4 as "private" open space areas. The
private open space planning areas and any amenities
constructed, subject to approved permits, should all be
maintained by a master homeowner's association. An easement
or covenant should be recorded to run with the land for
each identified private open space area to ensure that
adequate open space be retained within the project in
perpetuity.
000025
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 17
Grading:
Some grading has been shown to extend beyond the project
boundaries, particularly for slope areas adjacent to the
proposed Spring Road extension and the intersection to
Walnut Canyon Road. Grading that serves development of
building sites is also shown within the future SR23
alignment along the easterly flank of the property in
Planning Areas 5, 7 and 18.
Some areas with slopes 20% or greater are included. The
applicant has requested an exception from the City's
Hillside Management Regulations as a part of the intended
development agreement. Exception to the standards should be
reduced to a minimum, and best efforts should be made
within the project to meet the intent and purpose of these
regulations. Section 8.8 of the Specific Plan contains
grading design guidelines for the project which will
implement many sections of the City Hillside Management
requirements of Chapter 17.38 of the Municipal Code.
The Planning Commission recommended that all grading other
than for the development of Spring Road and "C" Street, be
confined to within the Specific Plan boundary. Grading
should not occur within any right -of -way area in order to
provide development sites. No grading should occur within
the reserved right -of -way for the SR 118 or SR 23 Bypass,
except that which is consistent with development of those
circulation corridors as permanent transportation routes.
General Plan Consistencv:
Chapter 11 of Specific Plan No. 2 contains an analysis as
to the ways in which the proposed project is consistent
with the General Plan, and is also discussed below:
• The project proposes 652 total dwelling units on 445
acres while the General Plan permits a maximum of 712
units, subject to provision of public improvements,
public services and /or financial contributions thatthe
City Council determines are of substantial benefit to
the community.
■ The project satisfies circulation requirements in that
it reserves the rights -of -ways for the SR118 and SR23
000026
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 18
Bypasses, provides for a linkage to the regional park
facility at Happy Camp Canyon, allows for future
connection to the Hidden Creek Ranch Specific Plan,
provides for the extension of Spring Road from the
City center to the SR23 Bypass, and provides for a
variety of open space and trail opportunities within
the project.
■ The Specific Plan provides for the extension and
delivery of public services and utilities necessary to
serve the project area.
■ Parks and open space needs within the project have
been addressed, including special habitat
requirements. The proposed 11 acre public park
exceeds General Plan standards for acreage to
population ratio which would require 10.2 acres of
parkland dedication for this project. Applicant has
proposed a fully developed park site and financial
mechanism to support operation and maintenance in
perpetuity.
■ The Open Space Conservation and Recreation Element and
the Land use Element, in concert, seek to ensure that
the community has an inventory of lands and uses which
create the highest possible quality of life for
residents.
The OSCAR identifies policies, and maps in broad scale
areas of the community, an Inventory of Land Resources
for potential open space uses such as parks and
recreational facilities, habitat areas, hillside or
ridgeline features, agricultural uses, cultural sites,
paleontological sites, mineral development sites, and
visually aesthetic areas within the City limits and
within the City Sphere of Influence and Area of
Interest. The OSCAR also provides potential methods
for preservation of open space resources as indicated
by the Goals and Policies of the OSCAR, in
consideration of the needs and constraints identified
in the OSCAR.
Specific Plan No.2 is considered consistent with the
OSCAR Goals and Policies for the following reasons:
000027
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 19
1. Design guidelines within the plan regulate
grading impacts and emulate the City's adopted
Hillside Management requirements.
2. Local utilities to serve the project site
will be placed underground to the extent
feasible.
3. The Specific Plan provides for active and
passive recreational uses such as trails and
parks.
4. The Specific Plan provides an active park
location within the north - central portion of the
City where the need exists.
5. The Specific Plan preserves a 94 acre
habitat area for the California Gnatcatcher, a
threatened species under the Federal Endangered
Species Act.
6. The Specific Plan retains in permanent open
space, public or private, 175.1 acres, which is
approximately 40% of the development site.
Approximately 94 acres (Areas 14 & 15), or about
54% of the project open space are designated as
natural open space. Significant portions of
Areas 13, 16, and 19, which are designated
private open and have a total area of
approximately 64 acres, are also expected to
remain as natural open space. Some of those
areas will be graded and have manufactured
slopes, primarily for project roads and possibly
in the future relating to SR 118 and SR 23
bypasses.
7. The Specific Plan preserves a prominent hill
feature in the northerly quadrant of the plan.
■ The Land Use Element provides for the designation of
all lands within the City to specific use categories.
The Land Use Element permits the development of
specific plans for identified areas of the City to
regulate land use consistent with specific guidelines
for the area as contained in the Land Use Element.
000028
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 20
■ The project proposes to provide 65 units of affordable
rental housing (10% of the total housing units)
thereby assisting the City to more closely achieve its
"fair share housing goals" as contained in the
Regional Housing Allocation Plan and the City General
Plan Housing Element.
■ The Specific Plan provides a 20.3 acre middle school
site. The site is larger than typically required for a
middle school. The additional size is considered to
satisfy the requirements for provision of the 7 acres
of public institutional use required by the General
Plan Land Use Element for this site.
■ The Specific Plan is consistent with the adopted
Safety Element in that the environmental analysis and
design of the plan have considered the geotechnical
impacts existing at the site. Extensive analysis of
faulting characteristics has been accomplished as have
evaluations of potential unstable hillside areas and
potential liquefaction areas. Mitigation measures and
guidelines for development address the technical means
to reduce or eliminate impacts from geotechnical
issues. To the extent possible, affected areas have
been left in open space uses or have been restricted
to lower density uses and distanced from potential
hazards to the extent practical.
Environmental constraints such as hydrology, cultural,
viewshed, and biological species impacts have been
addressed and methods for mitigation recommended.
Grading design guidelines which address issues related
to the Hillside Management regulations have been
defined for the project with the level and reasons for
the granting of any exceptions to the regulations as
it relates to this project being minimized.
Certification of Final EIR SCH # 96041030:
A Final Environment Impact Report will need to be certified by
the City Council prior to approval of the project as a whole.
The applicant has agreed to extend the previously agreed upon
date for action on the EIR from January 18, 1999, to March 26,
1999.
000029
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 21
The Final EIR will consist of the Draft EIR, comments received,
and any response to those comments. Review of the Planning
Commission's considerations and recommendations regarding the
EIR will be a part of the formal certification review and
consideration of the City Council action. The EIR, volumes 1 -5,
were previously provided to City Council under separate cover on
August 28, 1998. The Response to Comments Document is being
provided under separate cover along with the Council Agenda
packet. The five volumes previously transmitted to City
Council, plus the Response to Comment document constitute the
Final EIR under CEQA.
The public review period for the Specific Plan No.2(Moorpark
Highlands) EIR ended on October 15, 1998. The Planning
Commission conducted a public hearing to receive testimony
related to the EIR on October 12, 1998, pursuant to the City's
Rules to Implement CEQA. Eight persons commented verbally at
that hearing. Written comments were received from one Federal
agency, one State agency, six County agencies, the Environmental
Coalition of Ventura County, Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy,
and thirteen individuals, including the original eight speakers.
Written responses to comments were prepared and distributed to
agencies or persons that commented. A Mitigation Monitoring
Program, EIR Findings, and a Statement of Overriding
Circumstances will be provided to Council for consideration
prior to making a final decision on the project.
Development Agreement:
A proposed Development Agreement for the Moorpark Highlands
Specific Plan project will be separately scheduled for City
Council consideration at a future public hearing.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Open public hearing; accept staff report and comments; accept
project description testimony from applicant; hear public
testimony, and continue hearing to date certain.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
General
Plan Land
Use Element Extract -
Pages 27 -28,& 30 -32
2.
General
Plan Land
Use Element- Existing
designation
3.
General
Plan Land
Use Element- Proposed
designation
4.
Specific
Plan No.
2 Land Use Exhibit
000030
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No.2
January 20, 1999
Page 22
5.
Specific
Plan No. 2 Land Use Table
6.
Existing
Zoning Map
7.
Proposed
Zoning Map
8.
Park Schematic
9.
Planning
Commission Resolution PC -98 -362
10.
Response
to Comments Document
11.
History
Related to SP -2 Circulation Plan
12.
Charles
Street cul de sac diagram.
13.
Planning
Commission Staff Report, December 14, 1998
PREVIOUSLY DISTRIBUTED DOCUMENTS:
1. Volumes 1 through 5; and, Appendix J, Draft Environmental
Impact Report for Specific Plan No. 2
2. Draft Specific Plan No. 2
000031
PUB - Public /Institutional
This designation identifies public facilities, including:
government buildings, libraries, fire stations, non - profit
organization buildings, and community service centers but excludes
jail facilities.
FLUX-1 - Floodway
This designation identifies the floodway of the Arroyo Simi as
identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
Habitable structures are prohibited.
rMff -R /W - Freeway Right -of -Way
This designation identifies the existing right -of -way and portions
of future right -of -way for the SR -118 and SR -23 freeways.
5.2 SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION - SP
The specific plan designation has been provided in the Land Use
Element to address large -scale projects in the City and proposed
sphere of influence study area. Pursuant to Government Code
Sections 65450- 65457, specific plans are intended as a tool for the
systematic implementation of the general plan and shall include
text and diagrams indicating:
The distribution, location and extent of land uses and the
circulation system proposed within the specific plan area
The proposed distribution, location, extent and intensity of
major transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste
disposal, energy and other essential support facilities within
the specific plan area
Developed standards and regulations, and standards and
criteria for the preservation of natural resources
An implementation program ensuring the fulfillment of the
items above
Appendix A, located in the back of this Land Use Element, contains
further requirements for specific plan contents and identifies the
evaluation criteria the City Council will consider in determining
whether a plan is appropriate for the area concerned. These
criteria include natural features and topographic constraints,
cultural constraints, environmental effects, land use
considerations, etc. A major goal for the specific planning
process is to ensure that development occurs in an orderly fashion
with due regard to environmental factors. All Land Use Element
27
000032
ATTACHMENT 1:
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT 1992
SPECIFIC PLAN N0. 2 NARRATIVE
goals and policies shall be applicable to designated specific plan
areas. The actual acreage and. locations of development which occur
within each specific plan will be based on the evaluation criteria
the City Council will consider in determining whether a plan is
appropriate for the area concerned.
Based upon the City's implementation of the Land Use Element Goals
and Policies, specific plan areas containing significant
constraints may result in reduced development intensity and greater
amounts of open space from that proposed on the Land Use Plan.
Exhibits 3 and 4 of this document identify the location and the
proposed land use mix of specific plan areas 1, 2, 9, and 10, which
are within the existing City limits, and specific plan area 8,
which is within the unincorporated planning area. Specific plan
area 3 (proposed within the City limits) and specific plan areas 4,
5, 6, and 7 (proposed within the unincorporated planning area) were
studied but were found not to be appropriate for urban development
during the time period covered by this Land Use Element (year 2010
buildout) and were not approved.
Specific plan areas 1, 2, 8, 9, and 10 have been delineated based
on ownership, landform and circulation considerations. Specific
plan areas with adjoining boundaries may be combined to allow for
a consolidated planning effort where all issues are addressed in a
comprehensive manner as required by Government Code Sections 65450-
65457. A detailed description of the issues for each of the
specific plan areas is provided in the following subsections.
Planning Area within City Limits
As noted on the Land Use Plan, four specific plan areas have been
designated within the undeveloped areas of the existing City of
Moorpark limits (specific plan areas 1, 2, 9, and 10). These
specific plans have been designated to address comprehensively a
variety of land use issues including topography, viewshed, and
circulation. Each specific plan area will be required to include
a minimum of 25 percent of the total, acreage for open space. As
noted within each of the following specific plan area descriptions,
residential densities exceeding the maximum density could be
granted at the discretion of the Moorpark City Council if the
property owners within the specific plan area agree to provide
public improvements, public services, and /or financial
contributions that the City Council determines to be of substantial
public benefit to the community.
Specific plan areas within the City are assigned an overlay
designation, as shown on the land use map, to reflect the permitted
land uses in absence of an overall specific plan.
28
000033
Parks - An evaluation will be conducted during the development of
this specific plan to identify required park land dedication
consistent with the City Municipal Code and General Plan
requirements.
Circulation - The specific plan area circulation network will
require consideration for topographical constraints, viewshed
issues, and the adjacent Southern Pacific railroad tracks; shall
provide protection for the conceptual alignment of the future SR-
118 freeway corridor; and shall ensure that roadway rights -of -way
are protected for the planned roadway upgrades, improvements, and
additions as identified in the City's circulation plan.
Proposed Land Uses
The number of dwelling units shall not exceed 415, unless the
specific plan area property owner agrees to provide public
improvements, public services and /or financial contributions that
the City Council determines to be of substantial public benefit to
the community, in which event, the number of dwelling units shall
not exceed 620. A minimum of 3 acres of land shall be designated
as Public Institutional within this specific plan area. The
appropriate amount of land to be designated as Open Space, Park,
School, or any other appropriate land use designation, will be
determined at the time of specific plan preparation or approval.
Overlay Designation - Agriculture 1 (285 acres)
Specific Plan 2
Specific Plan 2 consists of 445 acres under single ownership. It
is located northerly of the City, east of walnut Canyon Road and
west of College Heights Drive. Generally, the majority of this
specific plan area is characterized as a gently sloping plateau
with prominent hillsides in the northern section, and is currently
vacant and used for seasonal grazing.
Opportunities and Constraints
Specific plan area development issues will be addressed during
specific plan preparation and subsequent review, and include:
Topography - Existing steep hillsides within the specific plan area
require a complete evaluation of steep slopes, unstable soils, and
other potential geotechnical constraints during the development/
review of this specific plan. Consistent with City policy, grading
is restricted on slopes greater than 20 percent and development
prohibited in areas where potential hazards cannot be fully
mitigated.
30
000034
Hydrology - An evaluation of existing drainage courses, surface
runoff, potential flood hazards and other hydrological constraints
will be conducted during the development /review of this specific
plan.
Viewshed - The importance and visibility of hillside horizon lines
and prominent ridgelines within this specific plan area from
surrounding areas will be evaluated during the preparation and
review of the specific plan. Clustering of dwelling units should
be considered where appropriate to conserve important visual and
natural resources /hazard areas.
Biological Resources - The significance of biological resources
which may occur onsite (i.e., oak trees, threatened, rare,
endangered plants and animals, etc.) shall be determined during
specific plan preparation and review. The preservation of any
resources determined to be significant shall be encouraged through
habitat preservation, enhancement, or replacement.
Archaeology - The specific plan area will be evaluated to determine
whether archaeological resources occur within the overall plan,area
and their potential significance.
Public Services/ Infrastructure - Water, sewer, gas and electric
service to the specific plan area will be provided through service
extensions from existing transmission lines in the surrounding
area. An evaluation will be conducted during the development of
this specific plan regarding required land use set - asides and
financing for schools and community services such as fire stations
and libraries.
Parks - An evaluation will be conducted during the development of
this specific plan to identify required park land dedication
consistent with the City Municipal Code and General Plan
requirements.
Circulation - The specific plan area circulation network will
require consideration for topography, viewshed, and for its
integration with both the conceptual future freeway alignments for
SR -118 and SR -23, and the future Broadway extension. The specific
plan shall ensure that roadway right -of -ways are protected for the
planned roadway upgrades, improvements and additions as identified
in the City,s circulation plan.
Proposed Land Uses
The number of dwelling units shall not exceed 475, unless the
specific plan area property owner agrees to provide public
improvements, public services and /or financial contributions that
the City Council determines to be of substantial public benefit to
the community, in which event, the number of dwelling units shall
not exceed 712. A minimum of 7 acres of land shall be designated
31
000035
y
s.
as Public Institutional within this specific plan area. The
appropriate amount of land to be designated as Open Space, Park,
School, or any other appropriate land use designation, will be
determined at the time of specific plan preparation or approval.
Overlay Designation - Open Space 1 (300 acres)
Rural Low (145 acres)
Specific Plan 3 (Deleted)
Specific Plan 9
Specific Plan 9 consists of approximately 24.8 acres under one
ownership, located in the western section of the City, north of
High Street, west of Walnut Canyon Road, and south of Casey Road.
This specific plan area consists of the City,s former high school
site and contains the playing fields and classroom buildings. The
area formerly a part of the high school site, that was purchased by
the Moorpark Boys and Girls Club, is not part of this specific plan
area.
Opportunities and Constraints
Specific plan area development issues will be addressed during
specific plan preparation and subsequent review, and include:
Topography - An evaluation of steep slopes, unstable soils and
other geotechnical constraints within the hillside areas of
development will be conducted during the development/ review of this
plan. Consistent with City policy, grading is restricted on slopes
greater than 20 percent and development prohibited in areas where
potential hazards cannot be fully mitigated.
Hydrology - An evaluation of existing drainage courses, surface
runoff, potential flood hazards and other hydrological constraints
will be conducted during the development /review of this specific
plan.
Viewshed - The importance and visibility of hillside horizon lines
and any prominent ridgelines within this specific plan area from
surrounding areas will be evaluated during the preparation and
review of the specific plan. Clustering of dwelling units should
be considered where appropriate to conserve important visual and
natural resources /hazard areas.
32
00003G
C IT Y L I M I T S
Ir -
r ,IRL +\
`\ \� t 1
11 `1
1�
_ SP P(�N 2
LA NX
TOTAL ACRES 44$ AC.
~ `,` _` 11 it i 1 ♦;, /�' ` MAI*M DWELL•INGtWITS 475
PUB \'\ 17 ACRE
- - N TIONAL V7NUMUM
/
OS-1 \,
/ U U 0V /LAY DESIGNATICSN
O U,CPACE 1 ( —
0
I
•
Ell
G -2
RURAL LOW (145 AAC C)
I--i
0
1 / �
FRW Y-R/
-;7RH _ /
■ t► � III• ♦ `�
door
s�
V'
`I,N
�.
\
�
1+
11
/
ri
PUB
FRW Y-R/
-;7RH _ /
■ t► � III• ♦ `�
door
s�
C IT Y L I M I T S
ATTACHMENT 3:
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE MAP
000038
I
1
'
--
\
RL
I-
I
,
,
Ss
OF
i�� WIN l lip
�mill
I/
■
��. 151= T�'!�IIiiY.1�
•ii ®_0����i'
������
. iil��
�`�„
- �IIN :116111ii1i iiilil
�� � � �% ••�
�i ►,�o
„
'��.
�
`wA
5
I
1
U
PUB
r •.
SPECIFIC PLAN 95 -2
`
os -1
(SP 2)
i
ATTACHMENT 3:
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE MAP
000038
I
1
I
I-
� 1
Ss
OF
i�� WIN l lip
�mill
I/
■
��. 151= T�'!�IIiiY.1�
•ii ®_0����i'
������
. iil��
�`�„
- �IIN :116111ii1i iiilil
�� � � �% ••�
�i ►,�o
„
'��.
�
`wA
5
I
ATTACHMENT 3:
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE MAP
000038
ATTACHMENT 4:
SPECIFIC PLAN N0. 2
LAND USE PLAN
000039
Total Developable Area
445.0 AC
Residential
Planning
LAND USE
Density
Max. Gross
DU's
% of
Area
% of
Area
DESIGNATION
Range
Density
POS Private Open Space
Total
07.8%
Total
NOS Natural Open Space
16 AC
du/ac
15
NOS Natural Open Space
78.0 AC
17.4%
16
POS Private Open Space
15.2 AC
03.5 %
17
POS Private Open Space
10.2 AC
02.2%
Area
1
RPD - SF
2.5-6.0
4.0 DU /AC
62
9.5
15.3 AC
03.4%
2
RPD - SF
2.5-6.0
4.0 DU /AC
88
13.4
22.0 AC
04.9%
3
RPD - SF
2.5-6.0
3.5 DU /AC
73
11.2
20.9 AC
04.8%
4
RPD - SF
2.5-6.0
3.5 DU /AC
83
12.7
23.6 AC
05.3%
5
RPD - SF
2.5-6.0
4.5 DU /AC
90
13.8
20.0 AC
04.5%
6
RPD - SF
2.5-6.0
6 DU /AC
48
7.4
8.0 AC
01.8%
7
RPD - MF
8.0-15.0
15 D U /AC
120'
18.5
8.0 AC
01.8%
8
RPD - SF
2.5-6.0
2.5 DU /AC
55
8.4
22.0 AC
04.9%
9
RPD - SF
2.5-6.0
2.5 DU /AC
33
5.1
13.0 AC
02.9%
Subtotal
652
100%
152.8 AC
34.3%
Open Space
Planning
LAND USE DESIGNATION
Area
% of Total
Area
Areal
Area
12
POS Private Open Space
1.1 AC
00.3%
13
POS Private Open Space
34.7 AC
07.8%
14
NOS Natural Open Space
16 AC
03.5%
15
NOS Natural Open Space
78.0 AC
17.4%
16
POS Private Open Space
15.2 AC
03.5 %
17
POS Private Open Space
10.2 AC
02.2%
18
POS Private Open Space
5.5 AC
01.3%
19
POS Private Open Space
14.4 AC
03.3%
Total Open
Space
175.1 AC
39.3%
Non - Residential Uses
Planning
LAND USE DESIGNATION
Area
Areal
% of Total
10 S School
20.3 AC
04.6%
11 P Park
11 AC
02.5%
R/W Right of Way Reservation 118 & 23
49.7 AC
11.2%
R/W Roadways
36.1 AC
08.1%
Subtotal
117.1 AC
26.4%
TOTAL PROJECT
445.0 AC
100.0%
000040
ATTACHMENT 5:
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2
LAND USE TABLE
P
1'111 �I11111U11� � �; ;� ;1111111; _ is
�IIL= cllllilt!: V 1_'111 rr t'
illi� ll /lr !it!!i: "i1m 13: 31aL9'�'
�� 23 :94211111M 40! !
AI a Itltitt:t:1::;���
I�Itltf �■ : - -Mali
`• �� —
a;,� Cms;.iIIi7
Tw
n
U
W
�:-; '�ES.i<ta
MIM
Mull
t..e .-.
� f■' ■I�ti� rr, •1
113.219
tttenra.G� /■
�.'r COMMO 9.2Irnu31►4.
Wampfrit
....:.r„
u •••� . CiEWZL:3L33memo
,•_: .mom,,,....
�•'Ia�=..� : -.1 ■1111 ■ ■ ■- :..���i��uu�3�r�
DO
H
n
1
x
H
ao
Park Description
An eleven acre neighborhood park, consisting of a large open play field for soccer, baseball and active
play; a large active play structure for children ages 2 through 12; two tennis courts, a basketball court;
skateboard park, bermed lawn areas with shade trees; picnic and seating areas, pedestrian walkway
and extensive tree planting.
C
C
A
Ci
'ark
4o.2
ies
ccts
RESOLUTION NO. PC- 98 -362
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK CERTIFY THE PROJECT
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT; AND, APPROVE
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 95 -2; SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 95-
2/ SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2 (MORRI SON- FOUNTAINWOOD-AGOURA) ;
AND, APPROVE ZONE CHANGE 95 -4; LOCATED NORTH OF THE
END OF SPRING ROAD AND APPROXIMATELY 3t MILE EAST OF
WALNUT CANYON ROAD; (APPLICANT: MORRISON-FOUNTAINWOOD-
AGOURA.)
WHEREAS, public notice having been given in time, form, and
manner as required by law, the Planning Commission of the City
of Moorpark held a public hearing for comment on the Draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Specific Plan No.2
project on October 12, 1998, and held public hearings for the
Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment, and Zone Change on
November 23, 1998, November 30, 1998, and December 14, 1998, for
the application filed by Morrison - Fountainwood- Agoura for the
Specific Plan No.2 project, consisting of Specific Plan No.
2 /Specific Plan 95 -2, General Plan Amendment 95 -2, and Zone
Change 95 -4, for an approximately 445.0 acre site located within
the incorporated boundary of the City of Moorpark in Ventura
County contiguous to the City northerly boundary and Charles
Street on the south, and westerly of Happy Camp Canyon Regional
Park and incorporating more or less Assessor Parcel Numbers:
500- 0120 -0351 -55, -065; 500- 240 -035, -045; 500 - 270 -075, -085, -
195, -205; 500 - 160 -125, -525, -545, -555, and -705 and,
WHEREAS, the 'Specific Plan No. 2 project is more
specifically described as follows:
General Plan Amendment No.95 -2:
The General Plan Amendment (GPA) involves the following
amendments to the Land Use Element and Circulation Element
of the General Plan.
1. Amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan (1992)
by removing overlay designations affecting the Specific
Plan No.2 site. Current designation for the properties are
Specific Plan with an overlay of Open Space 1 and Rural Low
Density. Permitted development under the designation of
specific plan is limited to 475 dwelling units on 445
acres. Based on provisions of the General Plan, a maximum
of 712 dwelling units could be achieved if the property 000044
ATTACHMENT 9:
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION
PC -98 -362
RESOLUTION NO. PC -98 -362
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2
Page 2
owner agrees to provide public improvements, public
services, and /or financial contributions that the City
Council believes is a substantial benefit to the community.
The proposed plan would permit 652 dwelling units on 445
acres, which is consistent with the description of Specific
Plan No. 2 in the adopted General Plan Land Use Element
(1992) found on page 31.
2. To Amend the Circulation Element (1992) to (a.) extend
Spring Road from its current terminus at Charles Street to
intersect with Walnut Canyon Road; and, (b.) to create
Street "C" within the plan to connect with properties to
the east of the project site (Specific Plan 8- Hidden Creek
Ranch); and, (c.) to amend Figure 2 of the Circulation
Element to designate the Spring Road extension and Street
"C" as Four -Lane Arterial roadways.
3. To amend Figures 3 and Figure 4 of the Circulation
Element of the General Plan to reflect the placement of
bikeways and multi - purpose trails as reflected within the
Specific Plan document, as amended.
Zone Change No. 95 -4:
Amendment to the City Zoning Map by designating all
properties within the boundary of the Specific Plan as
"Specific Plan Zone" and to remove any overlays currently
affecting the properties.
Specific Plan No. 95 -2 (SP -2):
Specific Plan 95 -2 proposes development of a 445 acre
consolidated property area with a mix of 532 single family
detached residential units, 120 multiple family residential
units, 11 acres of park land, 94 acres of habitat
conservation property, a 20 acre middle school site, right -
of -way reservations for the SR118 and SR23 Bypass
extensions, and 175 acres of open space lands. The bulk of
the project development would occur in the upper 2/3s of
the site, above the SR118 Bypass alignment. The multiple
family component of the plan would incorporate town - homes,
condominiums, and apartments. Sixty -five (65) dwelling
000045
I
RESOLUTION NO. PC -98 -362
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2
Page 3
units of the 120 multiple family homes are proposed as
affordable housing units and will assist the community to
meet its regional housing allocation goals.
WHEREAS, at its public hearings on the EIR and Project, the
Planning Commission took testimony from all those wishing to
testify on the project, closed the public hearing on the project
and the EIR on December 14, 1998, and reached its decision on
December 14, 1998;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK,
CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Based upon the project information presented to
the Planning Commission, including but not limited to, the EIR
and technical appendices; staff reports; applicant, staff and
public testimony; the Planning Commission hereby makes the
following findings:
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) FINDINGS:
1. The EIR for the Specific Plan No. 2 project reflects
the independent judgement of the City of Moorpark, as
lead agency.
2. The EIR for the Specific Plan No. 2 project has been
completed in compliance with CEQA (Division 13 of the
Public Resources Code of the State of California) and
the City's CEQA Procedures.
3. The Planning Commission has received and considered
the information contained in the EIR prior to making
any recommendation decisions for the proposed project
and has found that the Final EIR adequately addresses
the environmental effects of the proposed project.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FINDING
4. The approval of General Plan Amendment No. 95 -2 is
consistent with the City's General Plan subject to the
incorporation of revisions contained in Section 4.,
herein, and imposition of EIR mitigation measures.
000046
RESOLUTION NO. PC -98 -362
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2
Page 4
ZONE CHANGE FINDING:
S. The approval of Zone Change No. 95 -4 is consistent
with the City's General Plan, subject to the approval
of General Plan Amendment No. 95 -2, incorporation of
revisions recommended in Section 4., herein, and
imposition of EIR mitigation measures.
SPECIFIC PLAN FINDINGS:
6. Specific Plan No. 2 /Specific Plan No. 95 -2 is
consistent with the City of Moorpark General Plan as
amended by General Plan Amendment No. 95 -2.
7. Specific Plan No. 2 /Specific Plan No. 95 -2 with
inclusion of the revisions /conditions recommended in
Section 4., herein, is consistent with the
requirements of California Government Code Section
65450 et. seq.
8. Specific Plan No. 2 /Specific
and responds to each of the
the General Plan Land Use
planning area designated for
city limits as contained on
Use Element adopted in 1992.
Plan No. 95 -2 satisfies
criteria established by
Element, 1992, for the
development inside the
pages 30 -32 of the Land
SECTION 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval of General Plan Amendment No. 95 -2 to amend the General
Plan Land Use Element, Exhibit No. 3, removing overlay
designations from the project site (Attachment A); Amending
Figures 2,3, and 4 of the Circulation Element (Attachments B, C,
D,) of the General Plan to reflect the circulation, bikeway and
trails plan locations as contained within the Specific Plan as
modified by the recommended conditions contained in Section 4.,
herein. Attachments A through D as, attached hereto, are
incorporated by reference.
SECTION 3. The Planning Commission hereby recommends
adoption of an ordinance to amend the City Zoning Map to reflect
the designation "Specific Plan" upon the property and to amend
Title 17 of the Municipal Code of Moorpark to adopt controlling
000047
RESOLUTION NO. PC -98 -362
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2
Page 5
development regulations for the Specific Plan site as a chapter
within the Municipal Code.
SECTION 4. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that
the City Council approve the Specific Plan No. 2 project subject
to compliance with all the mitigation measures identified within
the EIR and incorporation of the following recommended
modifications to the Specific Plan:
Parks:
1. Prior to the approval of any subdivisions or
development permits, a public park site with a minimum
of 10.2 acres of developable land having a slope not
greater than 2% in any direction, together with an
appropriate financial guarantee for its development
with uses as determined by the City Council shall be
irrevocably offered to the City. In addition, a
financial mechanism for the maintenance of the park as
the responsibility of the current and or future owners
of property, shall be included in this Specific Plan
shall be provided for City Council approval.
Trails:
2. Exhibit 12 of the Specific Plan shall be amended to
differentiate between public and private trails to be
provided within the Specific Plan. Trails intended
for public use shall be developed consistent with the
adopted trail standards of the City of Moorpark.
3. All multi - purpose trails shown upon the trails plan
for the Specific Plan shall include provisions for
equestrian uses.
Habitat Area:
4. Prior to the approval of any master subdivision or
parcel map to establish planning areas or future
building areas, and /or issuance of any development
permits for the master grading and /or construction of
roadways, utilities, or structures, the applicant
shall provide to the City of Moorpark an approved
Habitat Conservation Plan HCP) for the mitigation of
impacts to, and preservation of, the population of the
threatened species "Polioptila c. californica"
000048
RESOLUTION NO. PC -98 -362
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2
Page 6
(California Gnatcatcher) , resident within the Specific
Plan. The HCP shall be approved by the U.S.
Department of Fish and Wildlife Services. Applicant
shall be responsible for the satisfaction of all short
term and long term mitigation measures established by
the USFWS affecting the HCP including perpetual
financial support for the maintenance of the HCP and
the species.
General Open Space areas:
5. Prior to the approval of the first Tentative Tract Map
a plan shall be approved to identify the specific open
space purposes and uses of Planning areas
12,13,16,17,18 and 19 as identified on the Specific
Plan Exhibit 4 as "private" open space areas. The
private open space planning areas and any amenities
constructed, subject to approved permits, shall be
maintained by a master homeowner's association. An
easement or covenant shall be recorded to run with the
land for each identified private open space area to
ensure that adequate open space be retained within the
project in perpetuity.
Grading:
6. Other than for the development of Spring Road and "C"
Street, all grading shall be confined to within the
Specific Plan boundary. No grading shall occur within
any right -of -way area in order to provide development
sites. No grading shall occur within the reserved
right -of -way for the SR 118 or SR 23 bypass except
that consistent with development of those circulation
elements as a permanent transportation route.
Traffic /Safety:
7. Limitations shall be placed on Spring Road, so that no
trucks may utilize the extension of Spring Road from
Charles Street to Walnut Canyon Road as a travel route
except for local service.
8. The full right -of -way and "T" intersection at Walnut
Canyon Road, as shown in the Specific Plan, shall be
dedicated by the Developer, however, to limit use,
Spring Road shall be only a two lane road from "C"
000049
RESOLUTION NO. PC -98 -362
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2
Page 7
Street to Walnut Canyon Road.
9. The intersection of Charles Street and Spring Road
shall be redesigned when the extension of Spring Road
north of Charles Street to Walnut Canyon Road is
constructed to incorporate limitations on movements to
west bound traffic from Spring Street to Charles
Street. The method and design of improvements needed
to limit this traffic flow shall be proposed as part
of the first Tentative Map that would create
residential lots or establish the Spring Road right -
of -way north of Charles Street. Costs of design and
construction of improvements of this intersection will
be the responsibility of the developer and shall be
subject to the approval of the City Council.
10. A traffic signal shall be placed at the intersection
of Charles Street and the future extension of Spring
Road. The signals shall be interconnected with the
signal at Spring Road and High Street. All costs
associated with this signalization program shall be at
the sole expense of the applicant /developer of
Specific Plan No. 2, and shall be subject to the
approval by the City Council.
11. A Class I bikeway (separated from the travel way)
shall be constructed along the westerly right -of -way
of Spring Road from Charles Street to "C" Street.
12. It is recommended that the City project improvements
of Los Angeles Avenue east of Spring Road to the
Princeton Avenue interchange with SR 118, be
constructed concurrently with the first phase of
development of this project.
13. Prior to the development of the attached housing units
within Planning Area 7, the location, terminus, and
construction of "C" Street shall be determined. The
master development map shall as a minimum reflect the
irrevocable dedication of right -of -way sufficient to
permit future development of the connection of "C"
Street beyond the Specific Plan boundary as an
arterial roadway, including any bridge works across
0000�U
RESOLUTION NO. PC -98 -362
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2
Page 8
SR23, to provide access to Happy Camp Canyon Regional
Park, and serve as alternate access for the Hidden
Creek Ranch Specific Plan to the east of Happy camp
Canyon Regional Park.
Aesthetics and Noise:
14. Applicant shall design and construct a decorative
block wall along the property line of the lots that
will abut the east side of Spring Road north of
Charles Street. The design and construction plans for
any walls shall be subject to review and approval of
the Community Development Director.
15. All exposed roof areas, except those flat roof
portions, shall be of masonry products or equal as
determined by the Community Development Director.
Housing:
16. The applicant shall provide 65 units of affordable
housing designated for low or very low income
occupants within the Specific Plan area or at other
designated sites within the City of Moorpark as
approved by the City Council.
Institutional Use:
17. The proposed dedication of a 20.3 acre middle school
site shall be recognized as fulfilling the intent of
provision of seven acres of public/ institutional land
within the Specific Plan.
THE ACTION WITH THE FOREGOING DIRECTION WAS APPROVED BY THE
FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE:
AYES:
NAYES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
000051
RESOLUTION NO. PC -98 -362
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2
Page 9
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 14" DAY OF DECEM13ER, 1998.
afy L /bwtd-nberq`Chairman
ATTEST:
Celia La Fleur
Secretary
ATTACHMENTS:
A.
Proposed
General Plan
Land Use
Map
B.
Proposed
Circulation
Element,
Figure 2,
C.
Proposed
Circulation
Element,
Figure 3,
D.
Proposed
Circulation
Element,
Figure 4,
E.
Specific
Plan No. 2
Highway Network
Bikeway Element
Equestrian Trails
000052
C I T Y L I M I T S
MEMO
= '011N . IIi1fIiNi illlll -� n �I�I ;� �I► i�o .� �� �.-�
=11�i IIIIN III{I•AeNlNlllll �� 11 �� .��/ \ � � _ ���1
ATTACHMENT: A
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN
LANI�,,[.�$,F�.3iAP
VVVVJ
r
/
,
RL
\1 r
1
\
\'
�\
fill
PUB
SPECIFIC PLAN 95 -2
`
os -1
(SP 2)
i
U
MEMO
= '011N . IIi1fIiNi illlll -� n �I�I ;� �I► i�o .� �� �.-�
=11�i IIIIN III{I•AeNlNlllll �� 11 �� .��/ \ � � _ ���1
ATTACHMENT: A
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN
LANI�,,[.�$,F�.3iAP
VVVVJ
1........
z
s
H
0
------- I Ism T
1 56
i
1 A EACH H
— � C
y = 9
xR �
1,
.roux
TTERR
1 �F%1DOwM Rf/ADA
-----------------------------------------
U :000 I= 60M
.O1E
R
�._. —. —.
All
J
.-. .- .- ,_. -:N
i
i
FIGURE 2
CITY OF MOORPARK
GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT
HIGHWAY NETWORK
May 13. 1992
ATTACHMENT: B
CIRCULATION ELEMENT AMENDMENT
HIGHWAY NETWORK
000054
ANE A ARTERIAL
SD(4 IX•LRT
FOUR-LANE ARTERL L
R—
RURAL COLLECTOR
LOCAL COLLECTOR
SIGNAI�lA INTERSECTION
❑
AT4RADE RR CROSSING
GRADE SEPARATED RR CROSSING
— •— • —• —• —•
CITY LDAIT BOUNDARY
�������■
SR-119 FREEWAY CORRIDOR
Th. my bm w p-M ptae .lipmew Ia tuna
,e y. Pb,— - ." W w Ory d M—pv! Nbls
wa`a C p— d C—.u.M Dc bi,— OeP--
ry wa�me.N hteemniaa
R
�._. —. —.
All
J
.-. .- .- ,_. -:N
i
i
FIGURE 2
CITY OF MOORPARK
GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT
HIGHWAY NETWORK
May 13. 1992
ATTACHMENT: B
CIRCULATION ELEMENT AMENDMENT
HIGHWAY NETWORK
000054
I
H
Fw ppw � - �ar4 ��rrrrr I
0 5000 1000 6000
Ulunllnitlt CUSS I BUCEWAY (BDCE PAM - A fadity designed fa
exclusive use by bicycles and phyually aepanted hom
vehicular traffic by a barrier, grade separation or open spar
Cross-flows by ve fdcles and pedestrians afiowed but min nixed
ZONES CLASS D BDCEWAY (BIXE LANE) - A paved area of a
roadway designated for preferential use of bicydec Pavement
markings and signage indicate the presence of a bike lane on
the roadway.
MIUVWX CLASS III BIKEWAY (BIKE ROUTE) - A oonventional street
where bike routes are indicated by sign only. there are no
special pavement walkways and bicycle traffic shares the
roadway with motorized traffic Only Class m facilities 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 II facilities or.the regional bikeway
system should be considered as Class 111 bikeways.
CITY LIMIT BOUNDARY
Rf},::`awrauurrrrrrraarsrs
FIGURE 3
CITY OF MOORPARK
GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION FI.EMENT
BIKEWAY ELEMENT
May 13. 1992
ATTACHMENT: C
CIRCULATION ELEMENT AMENDMENT
BIKEWAY EbF&djs
0000...
00'00 �
0000.
2/ J
N
4—
0 am 6000 6000
LEGEND
• • 0 0.0 EQUESTRIAN TRAILS
• - - -• -- CITY LIMIT BOUNDARY
.000000 0
0000..•
0000 ••..••.....•.•..••••• •
0
N
FIGURE 4
CITY OF MOORPARK
GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT
EOUESTRIAN TRAIL NETWORK
May 13, 1992
ATTACHMENT: D
CIRCULATION ELEMENT
EQUESTRIAN TRAILS
Q00056
(SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER)
ATTACHMENT 10
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS DOCUMENT
000057
MORRISON- FOUNTAINWOOD - AGOURA
711 Daily Drive, Suite 110
Camarillo, CA 93010
(805) 482 -2423 FAX (805) 482 -9301
December 7, 1998
Moorpark Planning Commission
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, California, 93021
Re: Circulation Alternatives for Specific Plan No. 2, the Moorpark Highlands
Dear Planning Commissioners:
In response to a number of questions raised by the Planning Commission at the recent
public hearings for S.P. No. 2, the following is a summary of the various circulation alternatives
that have been considered for the Morrison Highlands Project. Also included is a discussion of
the various steps taken during the past 4 years to arrive at the current land use and circulation
plan for the project.
Beginning in early 1995 several meetings were held with the Community Development
Committee to discuss a number of possible circulation plans for Specific Plan No. 2. From
preliminary discussions with the CDC, four different circulation plans were prepared for review
(see circulation plans 1, 2, 3 & 4 attached). After substantial discussion, the CDC indicated that
circulation alternate #2 should be considered as the basis for the land use plan.
Circulation alternative #2 provides full right -of -way reservations for both future SR -118
and SR -23 of approximately 50 acres along with the extension of Spring Road North through the
project with a "T" intersection to Walnut Canyon Road. The Spring Road connection to Walnut
Canyon Road was envisioned to provide a secondary outlet for project only traffic, and not
proposed as a transition of Walnut Canyon Road to Spring Road encouraging truck traffic onto
Spring Road. Circulation alternative 42 also includes "C" Street which provides a major arterial
connection to Happy Camp Regional Park and possible future access to Specific Plan No. 8. It
should be noted that circulation alternative #4 did consider a connection of "C" Street to Campus
Park West.
With direction from the CDC, the land use plan was then prepared and presented to the
public during a joint City Council / Planning Commission workshop in December 1995.
In the spring of 1997 the project was again presented to the City Council for a discussion
000058
ATTACHMENT 11:
SP -2 CIRCULATION PLAN HISTORY
of circulation alternatives. The Coiulcil requested that 4 additional connections of Spring Road
to Walnut Canyon Road be included for further consideration in the Draft E.I.R. Those 4
additional connections were taken from 7 studies conducted to investigate the possibility of
providing additional points of access to the project. Those 7 studies are attached as exhibits A
thru G with studies A, B, C, D & E given additional consideration in the Draft E.I.R. The
fodowing summarizes each study.
A) Spring Road to Walnut Canyon Road through the SR -118 right of wa��. This
alternate involves 70 foot cuts in the area adjacent to Walnut Canyon Road. This alternative
would conflict with the design objectives for the future SR -1 18 freeway.
B) Spring Road "T" intersection connection to Walnut Canyon Road south of
prominent knoll. This is the connection to Walnut Canyon shown on the preferred plan. This
alternate would involve maximum cuts of 40 feet and would require realignment of an existing
driveway for a residence North of the connector.
C) Spring Road to Walnut Canyon Road north of the prominent knoll. This
alternative would involve a maximum of 50 foot cut slopes. This alternative would not allow the
future use of Spring Road as a SR -23 bypass due to the circuitous nature and grade of the road.
D) Spring Road transition to Walnut Canyon Road. This alternative eliminates the
need for vehicles using the SR -23 to make a left or right turn on to Spring Road. This alternative
would facilitate truck traffic down the proposed Spring Road through Specific Plan No. 2.
E) Spring Road to Walnut Canyon agad north of the adiacenLGuny proptM. This
alternative would involve cuts in excess of 100 feet and would eliminate portions of an existing
foundation and access to adjacent property.
F) Second access onto Los Angeles Avenue from the Southern portion of the site.
This access would require cuts in excess of 100 feet and require elimination of I existing home.
The road grade would exceed the 12% maximum requirement for local roads and would
eliminate access to 2 other existing homes.
G) Access through Crawford Canyon in the South Eat portion of project. This
would require substantial grading which would encroach onto the SR -118 / SR -23 right -of -way.
The access road elevation would be substantially lower than the adjacent SR -118 / SR -23
roadway and would limit the ability to provide extensions to either the SR -118 or SR -23 in the
future, as this potential road would access the property at the location of the potential future SR-
118 / SR -23 interchange but at a substantially lower grade.
H) Study showing the Charles Street - Spring Road intersection. This study provides
OOOOEJ
for the West side of Charles Street to cul -de -sac precluding South bound traffic on Spring Road
from turning right onto Charles Street.
A comprehensive evaluation of the various circulation alternatives and access points to the site
has been conducted over the past four years. Input and direction from the City Council and
Planning Staff has been sought through the process in a cooperative effort to determine the most
logical and technically feasible means of not only providing access to Specific plan No. 2 but
also meeting the regional long term circulation requirements of the City of Moorpark. The
proposed land use and circulation plan brought forward for your consideration incorporates the
results of those efforts.
To mitigate the impact of the Spring Road extension on adjacent residences, we suggest the
following conditions be considered.
1) Prohibit truck traffic on Spring Road by use of a weight restriction similar to that used
on Tierra Rejada Road.
2) Signalize the Spring Road & Charles Street intersection to provide a safe and
controlled means for the residents of the Village Heights neighborhood to enter and exit. The
signals should be properly timed to coordinate with a signal at Spring Road and High Street so as
to eliminate a car stacking problem between the two intersections.
3) Install noise attenuation devices such as block walls and landscape screening at the
rear of the homes on Sir George Court which are adjacent to the Spring Road extension.
4) Construct Spring Road North from "C" Street to Walnut Canyon Road as a 2 lane
local street to discourage cars on Walnut Canyon Road from turning onto Spring Road.
5) Install a bike lane in the parkway on Spring Road from Charles Street north to the
proposed park site. This will allow children from the downtown area to ride bikes to
neighborhood park.
In summary, after viewing this property in the context of the City's circulation element and
established or proposed street patterns in the surrounding area, the extension of Spring Road is
the only feasible access opportunity for this project.
The extension of "C" Street through the site has been proposed only to be consistent with one of
the two westerly access opportunities identified for Specific Plan No. 8.
Again we appreciate the opportunity to respond to the issues raised by the Planning Commission
and Public.
Sincerely,
Michael J. Greynald
MORRISON - FOUNTAINWOOD- AGOURA
OOOOGO
Jf ,
�• ri
r I I
4 L ►� �. ,, �. l_ �'
a^ rert — �� Il��l► —
WON
1 dI \��t' . , 1 ,' II� 'car v�Q ► 1
:d.'ff Ern: i9F�n - - " ��► Ai
cis
).'i Cyr l4��r�.. 4 � � r�� 1 al .. i M t�: '\ •. r fC7 � i.T,�r
c4 �.�,'f'�- �'� °�rz1.� \•� /y u�r ••l�l�� � IiY � ,� >`��� !� ►r�`��q� w
tc7 S ! ds . 15 iw: '�fS �_ \ I �►i1:.Ar I �n\
Fi l) -
��
r• 1
_ Ilk O'r
•• ���\I cam"
4 � r P� `— •Y `+�1 � � r
r�
fit. 111118:: r '
t:, ,._ � sae ,D3 =•cam l " ; I�l!�
'` I
—1 r /.�! .1 Ili .:�•y
is f5� mil.. • * t
i " T, • .yr
\t
\�I \'
�,i ,lv ��, �,,,�sr,,�� w . � i � rA 1�n`l� r �•�j`t � � ` \, TI
lilt
aim
.dry /ems; f�� w.�l� ► � j /fJ�i _��� ��e. ?� ' �. `��.�_ , � \� uur �
f 1
f 1 Yi
GI c I 'PF:a s Ir
.i � - \.• 5 11��1 \q `11'1
w = == O
V
f9
z ILA
' 14
_ � � �' �/ -- � � rCREt 1 � s ��_ — ♦:
'' �,�.. H 1„ _- j r •-i.. II � — - i�.. O ` \'�jrc.�. r,.qR ; ` _ i � � / u vy1
w.d�k C:nti�'I.(j�4��e . au � s . �� .��Fii r 1S+L°`S' 1� 1 �I / � I ,�►, � �� �� � '
pp' 141
4 yy _
rw��tM •Os�iji.� I /41��� �` f111fl�.
.�y�4.�'(�r'`�. `a`-'- �1- ..ftjlr• ".,•:r fir' G his - �,1�►__��� oo.�
4k(� r /��,.,..•,.y.ni� v� �•_ ; �r :i�,�tp � )Ji[ Vii• �y ey� +%f/ �j�i t� .n-�.
n;
� �� �Il —N��, I� rtN1 / / / / /lllll�t � /!11 •` -
4 $-
f \
sa•
i 1'
Atf
-
P(
ht_It �
«CALL >•
t
I. .. _._�: t' C ^� a 'r� / GC •� .
o s-
( V 1IL
era ,� _ i,I \ � `I � / 7 ♦ \ \ ^ �
"\1ti ��:�✓- � ��!�P 117, ®�� \; `L � � � �
• � �: _ '. to �' .F ; �� i
•�1 n �0' 1111M
P M
L.F.
'W'
MOORPARK SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2
CITY OF MOORPARK
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
i�0UU65
E D A W
wee o�Sr.
C �1
.Z� �• J��� i _ --. /
afAl391 11 11!11(0. N/ "� l: ✓i/ r - ii
X//Jr, •- _ `� i U1 y� .
gFI
1'1�
h �
I 1�,
0
-ky �# Y \A I, �
el
A -1 IV
II
CB
tt
el
A -1 IV
II
CB
� � Y
H
� I i `_4�. / - - I �_\\ Y� � /�� Jam, , f ✓ 1/ * -_� r�, l�l /�� L� \... ') •`. M1, a
'rtj �(f /%' / / •/ may/ � � : t ` �:F i
\ / ^tt �t••l_ ����� Mf��., p/�•f• RaC elf.(M17i
CDd
r 3'
', \ - ' _ .r•x+ /; 1, \\` T _...� o -- a - - `__
y �
1 k. � � • � Vii' _
fir,
011
Dill
_:_
CE
X
\V1A o
t
$ 6ol a'
j.
PCTFNTiDN �,�I ��� CF
PQ o
CGG -4 Sic
,i
57AS Ecr'T
7
.,N _00072
(I ATTACHMENT 12:
II CHARLES STREET
_. CUL DE SAC OPTION
City of Moorpark
Community Development Department
MEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: Nelson E. Miller, Community Development Director
Prepared by: Wayne Loftus, Planning Manager ,
John Libiez, Principal Planne
DATE: December 8, 1998 (For meeting of 12/14/98)
SUBJECT: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING AN APPLICATION
FROM MORRISON- FOUNTAINWOOD- AGOURA FOR APPROVAL OF
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95 -2, ZONE CHANGE 95 -4,
SPECIFIC PLAN 95 -2 (SPECIFIC PLAN 2), AND
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT.
REQUESTS: Public Hearing to receive testimony related to:
A. An Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan 2.
B. Approval of General Plan Amendment 95 -2 to:
1. Amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan (1992) by
removing overlay designations affecting the Specific Plan 2
site.
2. To Amend the Circulation Element (1992) to (a.) extend
Spring Road from its current terminus at Charles Street to
intersect with Walnut Canyon Road; and, (b.) to create
Street "C" within the plan to connect with properties to
the east of the project site; and, (c.) to amend Figure 2
of the Circulation Element to designate Spring Road
extension and Street "C" as Four -Lane Arterial roadways;
(d) to amend Figure 3 of the Circulation Element to
designate bikeways within the plan area; and, (e) to amend
Figure 4 of the Circulation Element to adopt
equestrian /multi - purpose trails within the plan area.
C. Approval of Zone Change 95 -4 to amend zoning on the subject
property from R -1 (Single - Family Residential), RE -5 (Rural
Exclusive -5 acre lot), and RA -10 (Rural Agricultural- 10 acre
lots) to SP (Specific Plan) Zone.
D. Approve Specific Plan 95 -2 (SP -2) to permit development of
652 residential units and related uses on 445 acres.
RECObDWMATION SUM14ARY: Conduct Public Hearing to receive
additional testimony and comment upon the Specific Plan, General
Plan Amendment, Zone Change; close public hearing; discuss
0000'73
ATTACHMENT 13
SPECIFIC PLAN 2
Planning Commission Staff Report
December 14, 1998
Page 2
issues identified from previous public hearings related to the
Specific Plan, Zone Change, General Plan Amendment and
Environmental Impact Report; adopt Resolution recommending
certification of the EIR and approval of the GPA, ZC and SP,
subject to recommended conditions.
BACKGROUND AND PRIOR ACTIONS: On September 23, 1998, the
Planning Commission and City Council conducted a joint meeting
to introduce Specific Plan 2 and its associated components
including the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to the
citizens of Moorpark. On October 12, 1998 the Planning
Commission conducted a Public Hearing to receive written and
oral comments concerning the Draft Environmental Impact Report.
On November 23, 1998, the Planning Commission received
additional testimony at a public hearing concerning the EIR and
Specific Plan and continued the public hearing open to November
30 and subsequently to December 14, to accept additional
testimony on the proposed project.
DISCUSSION: At the meetings of November 23 and November 30,
1998, a number of concerns were identified by speakers related
to safety, circulation, truck traffic, trails access, use and
maintenance of open space. In the Staff Report of November 23,
1998, staff identified issues which the Planning Commission
considered and subsequently provided direction or
recommendations to the applicant and staff. The items where
direction was given included open- space, parks and trails;
grading; and, noise. Additional discussion took place on these
issues at the November 30, 1998 meeting. Commissioners
identified several common concerns and expressed their
individual considerations on the issues. Commissioners requested
that staff clarify some of these matters at the December 14,
meeting. The following discussion addresses Commission's
comments.
1. Prohibit truck traffic on Spring Road from Walnut Canyon to
High Street.
Testimony of neighboring property owners expressed concerns that
use of Spring Road for trucks is not desirable, with which the
Planning Commission appeared to agree. The Planning Commission
Resolution containing recommendations on the Specific Plan
000074
M: IJLIBIE2IMIPCSTFRPRTSP2121998 .DOC /SP -2
SPECIFIC PLAN 2
Planning Commission Staff Report
December 14, 1998
Page 3
project to the City Council will include a section which
identifies suggested conditions to apply to the project,
including a condition to address this issue. However, the use
of Spring Road as a truck route until the SR23 alignment is
developed into a freeway or arterial bypass has been suggested
to address community circulation needs and allow improvements
which may not be feasible on Walnut Canyon Road. Limiting
trucks between Walnut Canyon Road and the SR118 Bypass could
remove these trucks from the Walnut Canyon Road /Moorpark Avenue
corridor where expansion of the roadway is not feasible and
helps to improve traffic circulation along Moorpark Avenue and
Los Angeles Avenue.
2. Design Intersection at Spring Road and Walnut Canyon to
discourage truck traffic.
The projects proposed circulation plan identifies the
intersection of Spring Road and Walnut Canyon Road as a "T ",
with Spring Road as the leg of the "T'. This configuration
resulted after several meetings with staff, the Community
Development Committee, and joint Planning Commission and City
Council workshops. The applicant has presented a historical
perspective of the evolution of the circulation plan which is
attached to this staff report. An alternative proposed by the
City to the "T" intersection would require the creation of a
gentle curve /sweep from Walnut Canyon Road to the Spring Road
alignment. This City alignment alternative offers the
opportunity for an interim SR23 connection to the SR118
alignment and preserves options for the future development of
these circulation corridors.
3. Signalize the intersection at Charles Street and Spring
Road.
Recommendations for signalization are generally based upon a
traffic warrant system analysis performed by the City's Traffic
Consultant. Warrant standards are prescribed by Caltrans for
urban and rural roadway/ intersections. The Traffic Consultant
has indicated that project traffic alone would not require the
placement of a traffic signal at the intersection of Charles
Street and Spring Road. Under two scenarios contained within
the traffic study, (1)the incorporation of State Route 23
traffic upon Spring Road, or, (2)the routing of a portion of the
Hidden Creek Ranch daily traffic to Spring Road, signalization
would be required. The City Council may require installation of
traffic signals it believes enhances the public safety. A
000075
M: �JLZBIEZ\MIPCSTFRPRTSP2121498 .DOC /SP -2
SPECIFIC PLAN 2
Planning Commission Staff Report
December 14, 1998
Page 4
condition may be included in the Commission Resolution
recommending a signal at the intersection of Spring Road and
Charles Street location to insure reasonable function of this
access to the Village Heights neighborhood.
4. An alternate access to the project should be provided.
Access to the site of this proposed Specific Plan is achieved by
connecting Spring Road from Charles Street to Walnut Canyon
Road. Additionally, the projects "C: Street has been aligned to
connect the Spring Road connection to the Hidden Creek Ranch
Specific Plan (Specific Plan 8) which was recently approved by
City Council with this "C" Street connection as an alternative
to a connection of Broadway to the Specific Plan 8 project. The
initial connection across Happy Camp Canyon would involve a two
lane roadway. However, upon development of phase three of
Hidden Creek Ranch, this connection becomes a four lane arterial
roadway. These connections avoid adverse impacts to endangered
or threatened species habitat areas and are shown or anticipated
by the Circulation Element of the General Plan.
Access alternatives to the proposed project from East Los
Angeles Ave have been considered. However have been concluded as
infeasible due to issues of environmental sensitivity,
topographic constraints at Los Angeles Avenue (100' high bluff),
and conflict with future bypass corridors. Construction of an
additional access along the southern boundary could
significantly affect the ability to practically develop the SR23
alignment as well as adversely affect the habitat of the
California Gnatcatcher in conflict with the provisions of the
Endangered Species Act and early consultations with the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service. Access from the west end of Campus
Park Drive was also considered, but determined by the City to
not be further considered. The various circulation alternatives
analyzed are further discussed in a document prepared by the
applicant (Attachment 3).
5. Alternate access to Village Heights should be considered.
The Planning Commission requested that staff explore the
potential to supplement the access to the Village Heights
subdivision with an additional point of ingress and egress.
Currently, access is provided by Charles Street with emergency
access provided to the neighborhood through a connection at the
end of Hedyland Court to Los Angeles Avenue. This emergency
access is one lane and is steep, and is not intended for use
000076
M:\JLIBIEZ\MIPCSTFRPRT9P2121aoa nnricn_i
SPECIFIC PLAN 2 „
Planning Commission Staff Report
December 14, 1998
Page 5
except in extreme emergencies by the safety services. Provision
of a new street access at this location meeting street
development standards does not appear to be feasible because of
the limited land available, impacts on existing residences,
difficult topographic conditions, and would create an inadequate
intersection with Los Angeles Ave.
6. Restrict West bound access to Charles Street at Spring Road.
Trucks and vehicles over three tons can be restricted from using
Charles Street between Spring Road and Moorpark Avenue by
implementing existing ordinances of the City regulating truck
traffic. This would curtail the use of Charles Street as a
heavy vehicle shortcut to Los Angeles Avenue from Walnut Canyon
and vice versa. One potential option is to consider modifying
the intersection at Charles Street and Spring Road to be
designed as a three way "T" intersection by creating a cul -de-
sac on Charles Street west of Spring Road. The applicant did
look at this option and prepared a schematic diagram of this
option which is included in an attachment to this report.
Although this design would enhance circulation on Spring Road,
this alternative may have other impacts and concerns which the
City may want to further consider. Any design that may be
envisioned can include removable barriers to insure adequate
connection between Charles Street and Spring Road during special
events such as "Country Days" or if needed in an emergency
situation. The bus stop now located on Spring Road could be
accommodated or relocated as determined by the School District
and City.
7. Bicycle path north along Spring.
Comments were offered concerning placement of the bikeway within
the street travelway along Spring Road, since it is intended to
serve as a four lane arterial. Considering the right -of -way and
improvements needed to serve the project and the community, the
design of improvements can be adjusted to remove the bikeway
from the street surface to separate it from vehicle traffic
within the proposed right -of -way. Applicant can modify the
arterial street cross section exhibit within the specific plan
to reflect a change in bikeway placement along Spring Road.
B. East Los Angeles Avenue Improvements.
Commissioners and residents indicated a desire to see some form
of improvements along East Los Angeles Avenue from Spring Road
OOG077
M:IJ LIBIEZIM IPCSTFRPRTSP2121498.DOC /SP -2
SPECIFIC PLAN 2
Planning Commission Staff Report
December 14, 1998
Page 6
to Princeton /SR118. The City has already initiated a project to
evaluate right -of -way and improvement needs for East Los Angeles
Avenue. These actions will eventually result in the
construction of East Los Angeles Avenue to a Rural Collector
standard as required by the General Plan Circulation Element.
The Los Angeles Avenue Area of Contribution Fees which this
project will be required to pay will provide funding for this
project.
9. SR118 Bypass connection to Walnut Canyon Road
The General Plan Circulation Element currently includes a
provision for a signalized intersection between the extension of
Spring Road and the SR118 Bypass. The Circulation Element
(Figure 2) shows the SR118 Bypass crossing Walnut Canyon Road
without connection provision. However, preliminary Caltrans
alignment drawings for the SR118 Bypass include a diamond
interchange with ramps at Walnut Canyon Road. There are
significant environmental, topographic and right -of -way issues
relating to a connection or interchange between SR118 and Walnut
Canyon Road that do not apply to a connection of Spring Road to
the SR118 Bypass. In order to divert traffic and trucks from
Moorpark Avenue and Los Angeles Avenue to the SR118 Bypass the
extension of Spring Road and its connection to the SR118 Bypass
has been suggested. An interchange at Spring Road and the SR118
Bypass may be more easily accomplished than a connection at
Walnut Canyon Road for the reasons stated.
10. SR231SR118 alignments and rights -of -ways
The Specific Plan reflects an alignment for SR23 along the
eastern flank of the project. This alignment reflects the SR23
alignment adopted by the California State Transportation
Commission on October 28, 1964. Reservation of this corridor
increases the likelihood that eventual development of this
roadway will occur, thus reducing impacts, especially from truck
traffic on local streets. The proposed right -of -way (2001) is
adequate to develop a six lane arterial highway, appurtenant
facilities and slope easements. This alignment is also shown
within the adopted City Circulation Element.
The Specific Plan also reflects a 200' right --of -way alignment
for the SR118 Bypass. This alignment satisfies the general
alignment shown within the Circulation Element and upon
preliminary Caltrans drawings. City Council action on December
2, 1998, with regard to the A &B Properties /Southern California
000078
SPECIFIC PLAN 2
Planning Commission Staff Report
December 14, 1998
Page 7
Edison industrial development application west of Gabbert Road
included a requirement for connection of the SR118 corridor to
Los Angeles Avenue incorporating a railroad underpass to provide
another link in the SR118 Bypass. Two additional properties
between Specific Plan No. 2 and the A &B /SCE site are under
initial stages of project review, that if approved, would
provide most of the right -of -way required to link Specific Plan
No. 2 to New Los Angeles Avenue via a dedicated corridor.
The City has initiated actions to complete a study of the SR118
Bypass corridor which will determine precise alignments,
improvements and costs. Traffic impact mitigation fees for city
development projects will be assessed to assist in providing the
local share of the cost of development of the Bypass.
11. Parks
The Specific Plan proposes the
site for future development as
indicated in previous discuss
would also build the park and
comprised of this project, to
the facility.
dedication of an eleven acre park
a public park. The applicant has
ion with the Commission that he
institute an assessment district,
provide continued maintenance for
The location of the park within the project may provide more
benefit to residents of the project than to the community due to
the existing development pattern, access and location in
relationship to much of the residential area of the City. Based
upon preliminary grading concepts provided by the applicant,
extensive grading will be necessary to develop the site and as a
result the actual usable area will be substantially limited
because of the manufactured slopes
Alternatives that the Commission may consider could include: (1)
Require that any park to be developed for public use contain not
less than 10.2 usable acres with a slope profile of not greater
than 2 %; (2) Accept a minimum five acre private park constructed
by the developer and supported by the Homeowners Association and
require the payment of an in -lieu fee equal to the cost of
providing 10.2 acres of developed public park land for
construction of park facilities elsewhere. Happy Camp Canyon
Park has been mentioned for possible development of some active
park uses.; (3) Accept a developed neighborhood park of
approximately five acres of flat usable land, and require
payment of in -lieu fees for the remainder for community park
facilities.
000073
M:I JLIBIEZ 4MIPCSTFRPRTSP2121498.DOC /SP -2
SPECIFIC PLAN 2
Planning Commission Staff Report
December 14, 1998
Page 8
12. Trails /fencing
Multi- purpose trails shown on the Specific Plan Trails exhibit
(Exhibit 12) should reflect the opportunity for equestrian uses.
The Agricultural Commissioner has indicated that the natural
private trail (private - project residents only) within the 200'
buffer along the north boundary of the plan may have impacts to
agricultural uses. (Property northwest of Specific Plan 2 is a
developed lemon orchard.) A request has been made to increase
the buffer to 300', remove the trail, and secure the project
boundary with a masonary wall and chain -link fence. General
Plan policy 11.2 requires that a minimum 200' residential
setback (property line to structure)be created between any new
residential construction and any existing agricultural use.
Staff believes that the placement of the trail intended as a
private trail will have a minimum impact on adjoining property
used for agriculture since it is more than 500 feet from the
agricultural use. However, if the trail were intended for public
use and maintenance, it should be relocated within the street
right -of -way.
The Agricultural Commissioner has requested a solid block wall
be constructed along the perimeter of the northwest corner of
the specific plan a distance of 300' easterly and southerly from
the corner point. The intention of the wall is to discourage
vandalism and theft within the abutting grove area. An eight
foot high chain -link fence has also been requested along the
remaining north property line. Staff would recommend that
Planning Commission consider not requiring a wall or fencing
because of the 15 foot high slope within the 200 foot buffer
proposed. The provision of an eight foot high block wall may
detract from the preservation of views to open space areas and
does not appear to offer any greater protection than the
proposed graded slope and appropriate plant materials placed on
the slope. Use of fences and walls should be limited to
immediate planning areas intended for residential occupancies
and should meet design standards approved for the specific plan.
13. School provision and Institutional Land Use Requirement
The Specific Plan includes a 20 acre site designated for a
public school (middle school) . Timing of construction and the
extent of improvement is subject to agreements between Moorpark
Unified School District and the applicant. The site location
0 00080
SPECIFIC PLAN 2
Planning Commission Staff Report
December 14, 1998
Page 9
and type of school are shown based upon discussions between
Moorpark Unified School District staff and the applicant to
date. The District staff has not advised City staff of the need
for any additional mitigation beyond that typical for school
mitigation. Mitigation fees applicable at the time of building
permit issuance will be applied.
A majority of the Commission comments on November 30, seemed to
conclude that the larger than typical (10 -15 acre) school site
being offered by the Specific Plan was adequate to substitute
for the provision of a minimum of seven acres of institutional
use as required by the General Plan Land Use Element. There may
be a number of alternatives to that of accepting the larger
school site to meet the institutional use requirement,
including, but not limited to: identification of a seven acre
site within the project to be designated for institutional use,
or payment of an in -lieu fee as a substitute to the designation
of seven acres.
14. Affordable Housing
The applicant has agreed to incorporate 65 units of rental
housing to meet affordability requirements for the project. This
represents 10% of the project's total housing unit count and is
consistent with other Specific Plan projects. These units are
intended to serve very low and low income families.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Accept public testimony related to the Specific Plan,
General Plan Amendment, and Zone Change; Close public
hearing; and, Adopt Resolution PC -98- recommending
Certification of the project EIR, and approval of GPA 95 -2,
ZC 95 -4, and SP 95 -2 by City Council, including suggested
conditions of approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. November 23, 1998 Staff Report
2. November 30, 1998 Staff Report
3. Project History /MFA Document
4. Resolution
0000SI
M: IJLIBIEZ IMIPCSTFRPRTSP2121498.DOC /SP -2