HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1999 0217 CC REG ITEM 10HTO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
SUb1MARY
CITY OF MOORPARK
AGENDA REPORT
Honorable City Council
ITEM o • N .
C; ,'; ;: •- "sOORPARk, CA, (JFORNIA
AC 11 'd, i_.l i Y- l- y Y 1li(_ -1 TL. i :1
Nelson Miller, Director of Community Development
Prepared by: John Libiez, Principal Plann
February 4, 1999(For Meeting of February 17,1999)
CONSIDER LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ALTERNATIVES FOR
ANALYSIS FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 1 (HITCH RANCH)
This staff report provides information related to a revised
draft land use and circulation plan proposal for the Hitch Ranch
Specific Plan, SP -1. It identifies the proposed land use and
circulation plan, proposed alternatives, and issues and concerns
for City Council consideration in providing authorization to
proceed with analysis of this proposal and alternatives.
BACKGROUND
The first submittal for consideration of the Specific Plan No.
1, Hitch Ranch Specific Plan, was received in June of 1993. The
proposal was amended and resubmitted in October of 1993. Two
previous Initial Studies were completed for the project and
reviewed in 1994 and 1995. A third Initial Study was completed
in November of 1998. The 1994 and 1995 studies were followed by
Notices to Prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR)but did
not proceed. The applicant is currently ready to pursue the
preparation of an EIR to assess the current project proposal.
Staff has had several meetings and discussions with the project
managers and EIR consultant since considerations on the project
commenced. Council had previously granted approval for the
applicant and their consultants to prepare the preliminary draft
Specific Plan and EIR documents. A copy of staff's synopsis of
the latest meeting with the applicants on January 5, 1999, is
\ \MOR PRI SERV \home folders \JLibiez \M \SPICCRPT21799.doc
000125
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No. 1
February 17,1999
Page 2
attached, and conveys issues, concerns and suggestions to them
for use in developing the EIR and Specific Plan document.
Discussion:
Development Planning Services (DPS) has requested that City
Council consider the latest proposed land plan design and
circulation design and alternatives for SP -1. Following receipt
of Council considerations Impact Sciences, the environmental and
specific plan consultant, will begin to prepare the preliminary
draft EIR and Specific Plan documents. City Council
consideration is requested because the land plan contains uses
not previously discussed with City Council, and because
Council's recent direction concerning General Plan Amendment No.
97 -02 and Zone Change No. 97 -6 (A & B Properties and California
Edison Company) on the property located to the west of the SP -1
property has suggested revision to the circulation plan of the
Hitch Ranch Plan.
Attachments 1, 2, and 3 provide information on current and
proposed General Plan and Zoning designations for the project
site. Attachment 4 provides narrative information extracted
from the General Plan Land Use Element, 1992, which provides
issues that the Specific Plan must address. Attachment 5
provides an extract from the General Plan Circulation Element,
1992, which identifies circulation system components, some of
which affect the Hitch Ranch proposal.
Project description.
The General Plan permits a total of 415 dwelling units, unless
the specific plan land 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 case the number of units
shall not exceed 620. This provides a range in density between
1.46 dwelling units per acre and 2.17 dwelling units per acre.
Applicant's proposal is for 605 dwelling units at an overall
density of 2.12 dwelling units per acre.
The proposed project contains four single family residential
development areas with lots ranging in size from 4000 SF to 7000
00013-0
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No. 1
February 17,1999
Page 3
SF, and an affordable housing component consisting of one high
density residential area of 10.56 acres with 100 dwelling units
proposed. The residential units are clustered within the
central portion of the property between the proposed SR118
corridor and the proposed extension of Casey Road. The larger
lots are proposed north of the SR118 corridor. Clustering will
not alter the need for grading within areas of the project where
grades exceed 20% but may reduce the extent of visual impact in
some areas.
The area north of the SR118 alignment is bordered by large lot
developments in the West Pointe and Toll Brothers subdivisions
and by the ranchettes off of Gabbert Road at the northwest
corner of the property. Access to the site is planned from
Gabbert Road at the southwestern corner of the project location,
and from Casey Road via its extension from Walnut Canyon Road.
The upper portion of the project would be served by at least one
collector street that would cross over the SR118 Bypass, which
bisects the property from the northeast corner to the southwest
corner. An intersection is proposed at the Gabbert Road and SR
118. Crossing of the Union Pacific Railroad tracks is proposed
at grade on Gabbert Road. The westerly most parcel of the
project, west of Gabbert Road, would be served by extension of
the industrial collector road within the A &B Properties site to
the Hitch Ranch site, with emergency only access provided to
Gabbert Road from the westerly parcel. Flood control detention
basins, consistent with preliminary studies for the Walnut
Canyon /Gabbert Canyon Channel Deficiencies Study, are
incorporated to the project land plan. A three acre public
institutional site is reserved at the northeast corner of
Gabbert Road and Casey Road.
Proposed Developments
Applicant has submitted two scenarios that depict options for
development of the project site. The following is a brief
discussion of each submitted proposal.
Preferred Option.
Applicant's preferred option is to create 605 dwelling
units within five residential neighborhoods. Area 1 would
contain 90 units on 7000 square foot lots upon the 71 acres
000131
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No. 1
February 17,1999
Page 4
located above the SR118 alignment reservation. A 600 foot
buffer area would be provided to the ranchettes to the
northwest of the site, and the hills at the north property
line area would be left in open space. Two access roads
are proposed to connect the southern and northern portions
of the project. There are concerns that at grade
intersections to the SR118 may not be preferred or would be
approved for these roadways, which in turn would require
that bridge structures be constructed to insure access.
Area 2 proposes 266 units on 5000 square foot lots on 62.7
acres. Area 3 proposes 96 units on 6000 square foot lots
on 42.2 acres. Area 4 proposes 53 units on 4000 square
foot lots on 14.5 acres. Area 5, which would constitute
the affordable housing component, proposes 100 units on
10.5 acres. Area 6 would be developed with 3.5 acres of
public institutional land use. Area 7 would be developed
with 32 acres of light industrial use similar to that
approved to the west of the site. Access to the project is
provided by the extension of Casey Road, as a local
collector, from Walnut Canyon Road to Gabbert Road. As
noted later in the staff report, the intersection of Casey
Road and Gabbert Road may not be far enough north of the
railroad crossing to accommodate traffic turning movements
and stacking. Gabbert Road is proposed as a four lane
arterial from Poindexter Avenue to the SR118 Bypass. The
SR118 Bypass reservation would permit development of a
four -six lane arterial, and will connect with that portion
required for development of GPA 97 -02 (A &B Properties and
Southern California Edison). This project scenario would
provide 121 acres of open space, 43% of the project area,
in the form of slope areas, perimeter buffer areas, visual
components such as hill features, and flood control
facilities.
Alternative Plan
Applicant's alternative plan reduces total dwelling units
to a maximum of 415. This is the base General Plan Land
Use scenario. Area 1, above the SR118 corridor proposes a
reduction of total lots to 40, with lot sizes increased to
20,000 square feet. Area 2 would retain 5000 square foot
lots but would reduce the number to 175. Area 3 would
reduce total units to 82 and would reduce lot sizes from
000132
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No. 1
February 17,1999
Page 5
6000sf to 5000sf. Area 4 is unchanged. Area 5 would
reduce the number of affordable units from 100 to 65.
Areas 6 and 7 are still proposed to develop as
institutional and industrial uses. Total open space is
increased by approximately 16 acres, but much of the open
space is retained within the boundaries of private lots in
Area 1 while physical features in the southerly portion
remain generally the same. Circulation design and concerns
remain the same as the applicant's preferred scenario.
Prior Guidance and Communication
Staff furnished the applicant a letter dated January 13, 1999,
to clarify issues, concerns, and alternatives to be addressed in
the project design and environmental analysis. Concerns
expressed in that letter included: 1) the need to obtain City
Council direction of land uses not previously discussed or
proposed; 2) addressment of nine key circulation issues; 3)
grading impact reduction; 4) types of open space provision and
the fiscal and physical development and maintenance of those
spaces; and, 5) six distinct scenarios to be addressed within
the EIR for the site.
Issues For Council Consideration
A discussion of the issues for Council consideration follows:
Density
How should the portion of the project above the SR118
Bypass be designed given access, grading, and visual
concerns?
Staff is concerned that the area above the SR118 is
served only by a connection across the bypass
alignment. Topographically and aesthetically, fewer
units may be more desirable at the upper end of the
project. A density range of between one dwelling unit
per two acres to one dwelling unit per acre may be
more appropriate, with clustering permitted to reduce
grading and visual impacts. Such a range could permit
development of lots and building pads similar in size
to the Bollinger project with additional open space,
vo0133
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No. 1
February 17, 1999
Page 6
or similar to the existing one acre zoned ranchettes
off of Gabbert Road, which are required to have one
acre minimum lot size but many of which are larger.
Open Space
How and what level of open space, other than flood
control facilities, should be provided and managed
within the project?
Clustering of units, as depicted by the land plan,
permits the project to establish 121 acres of open
space lands, 42.50 of the total site, 17.5% in excess
of the 25% required by the General Plan. Twenty -one
acres of the open space is intended for detention
basin usage. The remaining 100 acres is meant to
provide aesthetic and natural open areas and some
planted slope areas. Development of larger estate
lots north of the SR 118 would allow open space areas
to be incorporated within the lots. The proposed
clustering would leave large open space areas to the
preservation and maintenance by a homeowners
association or other suitable mechanism. Open space
areas in the development below SR 118 would need to be
the responsibility of a homeowners association.
Poindexter Park is located directly across the
railroad tracks and Poindexter Avenue from the
project. Due to the proximity of Poindexter Park and
concerns regarding development and maintenance of
additional parkland, no park areas were included
within the current project design. The General Plan
narrative identifies that this issue is to be
determined during the development of the Specific
Plan. Current guidelines require the parkland
dedication or payment of in -lieu fees for recreation
facilities to be based upon a formula of five acres of
land for every 1000 population in the proposed
development project. Based on an average of 3.13
persons per dwelling (1995 AQMP E -95 factor) estimated
resident population would be in the range between 1299
persons and 1894 persons. This would require park
v00i34
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No. 1
February 17,1999
Page 7
land dedication or fees based upon 6.5 acres or 9.47
acres.
T,a nrl TT.ga
Is the land use mix proposed by the applicant
acceptable, and are the uses appropriately positioned?
The current plan proposes to develop 505 single family
lots, 100 units of high density residential affordable
housing, 25.61 acres of public roadways, 20.5 acres of
flood control facilities, 3.45 acres of institutional
use, and 32.42 acres of light industrial use.
The project proposes to create 32.42 acres of
industrial development westerly of Gabbert Road. This
land use would abut the A &B Properties project west of
Gabbert Road. The applicant has shown primary access
to this area via an extension of the new street to be
developed from the west of A &B Properties to the
location within the Hitch Ranch plan. No access would
occur between the industrial site and Gabbert Road,
except for an emergency access roadway. This
industrial use was not previously considered by City
Council. This portion of the Hitch Ranch is separated
from the portion of the Ranch easterly of Gabbert
Road. Properties located northerly of the proposed
SR118 bypass are provided visual screening from most
of the proposed industrial site by the natural
topographic feature of the hill immediately west of
Gabbert Road. Creation of the emergency access point
appears to be consistent with Council's previous
decisions regarding General Plan Amendment No. 97 -02
and Zone Change No. 97 -6 (A & B Properties and
California Edison Company).
The project plan proposes to place 3.45 acres of
public institutional use at the northeast corner of
the intersection of Gabbert Road and Casey Road within
the project.
0001.35
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No. 1
February 17,1999
Page 8
Circulation
is the proposed circulation plan consistent with the
desired circulation system affecting the Gabbert Road
connections and Casey Road extension?
As currently depicted, Casey Road seems to follow the
connection and extension design Council has previously
considered. Applicant proposes to make the Walnut
Canyon Road connection, previously selected by
Council, rather than extending High Street. Casey
Road would be developed along the southerly project
area parallel to Poindexter Ave north of the railroad
tracks. The intersection distance from the railroad
tracks to Casey Road is minimal and may not offer
adequate stacking distance for incorporation of proper
turn lanes for vehicles between the intersection and
the railroad crossing. Moving Casey road more to the
north will affect the institutional land use parcel
size.
Gabbert Road would be extended as a four lane arterial
street from Poindexter Ave. to the SR118 bypass. If
an interchange is designed at the Gabbert Road
connection to the SR118, the four lanes would need to
be extended to the northern most on and off ramps.
Casey Road would "T" into Gabbert Road north of the
railroad tracks. An emergency access (entry /exit) to
the westerly most parcel is proposed coincident to the
"T" intersection and appears to follow Council
guidance when the A &B Property development was
approved.
Access from the project to Poindexter Park and
Chaparral Middle School on the south side of
Poindexter Avenue needs to be developed. For the
protection and safety of school children and handicap
accessibility, some form of overpass structure which
allows travel from Casey Road over the train tracks to
Poindexter Ave needs to be studied and incorporated to
the project.
0001.36
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No. 1
February 17,1999
Page 9
The applicant's consultants will make adjustments to the land
use and circulation plan based upon Council direction. The
consultants would then make final revisions to the project
Initial Study, after which the consultants could begin to draft
the Specific Plan document and develop environmental studies for
the EIR. A Notice of Preparation for the EIR and project would
be issued subsequently.
ISSUES AND ALTERNATIVES SUMMARY
The Staff Report and attachments has identified issues for
consideration relating to density, open space, land use, and
circulation, and has identified six alternatives for analysis as
briefly outlined below:
1. Preferred Plan. This is the applicant's primary plan
for 605 dwelling units, open space, institutional use,
and industrial use.
2. Alternative 1. This is the applicant's alternative
plan which considers 415 dwelling units, open space,
institutional use, and industrial use.
3. No Project. This alternative would consider
development of the property pursuant to existing
General Plan and Zoning designations, including an
institutional use area.
4. Modified General Plan Alternative. This alternative
would consider development of 415 dwelling units,
institutional use, and would limit lots above the
SR118 corridor to estate type lots of 2 -5 acres in
size.
5. Low Density Alternative. This alternative would
permit 415 dwelling units, neighborhood commercial use
at the bypass intersection, institutional use, a very
high density housing component, open space; lots north
of the SR118 corridor would be permitted up to two
acres in size or equivalent density, up to a maximum
of 40 units. Clustering to be considered if
visibility from the valley floor is minimized.
C®C1.37
City Council Agenda Report
Specific Plan No. 1
February 17,1999
Page 10
6. Modified Preferred Alternative. This alternative
modifies the applicant's preferred alternative. 605
dwelling units, institutional use, industrial use,
neighborhood commercial use, a high density housing
component and open space areas would be provided.
Lots above the SR118 corridor would be limited to 2
acres in size or equivalent density, up to a maximum
of 40 lots. Clustering would be considered if
visibility from the valley floor was minimized.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the preparation of a draft specific plan based upon
the proposed preferred land use plan and analysis in the EIR of
the alternatives identified in the staff report.
Attachments: 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Existing General Plan
Existing Zoning
Proposed General Plan and Zoning
Extract of General Plan Land Use Element
Extract of General Plan Circulation Element
Applicant Letter, January 20, 1999 with Land
Plan Diagrams
Staff Letter January 13,1999 to DPS
Previous proposed land use and circulation
plan
0002.38
Lai
H Dd
VI 0
H H
H �J
z H
on
�ro
�o
ro
H
H
C
H
N Go
W it
j fif
.RfriiWIN :m flaw
El
im "I
ME
91 C. 1:
1-:1 IY
`Vi�n�i ail �llll
/NINI!Illi� .�
11111111:
1111n■1
J.111___1'
•
U ��
� ���N
-,w-1 - =I
1f ■..f'7T■
N
O
x
H
a
ro �
otid
ro n
O H
ED
L=! H
0 n
ro
�O
ror
0
H
0
n
1
x
H
W
A
N
N
MOORP
RK
;'
o
DARLENE !
!
Q�
�J
!,
i
EN
l
ECMTN ST
EYE RD 10pMT
14 `OS
I I I
Bj SP
EVERETT ST,
�euw�E
sr
j ` � r A
ANGEL
(SPECIFIC PLAN)
�..
m.rn LN a
°,.� OOA
nl,..
sr ,ke Ag 10
GN
IWA US A' �
AV
AV
/"WTU_ � CC
�AvnA
RR — I NCifOI
VIM
i ;
pp1HD�'Tf AAV 0 Nf0 a Q 15T.ST
"�
�_�AV I DR
i
✓�
'Al
�_ Ar
TND
ST
AV
:
R1 Ar
t SPT
i HERTZ A I, ` tASS
AY Y ]C 3RD Si
AV
Z
jI
3�
KOBE
AV
Q�
cS
4
ANGELES
WnNn
Ix�orte A
rnEn �5 Po 8 . Z
t� ,z� AV Ir
R AAV
NEW S p.��F.�-
LO
II
L
—
k
il
�2+ ticnnr.
t oos Ar
I
`�
Specific Plan 1
Specific Plan 1 consists of 285 acres under single ownership,
located in the western section of the City, north of Poindexter
Avenue and the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. Gabbert Road
crosses the westerly portion of the specific plan area. Generally,
the specific plan area is characterized by rolling hillsides which
are currently used for grazing purposes.
Opportunities and Constraints
Specific plan area development issues to be addressed during
specific plan preparation and subsequent review will includes
Topography - An evaluation of steep slopes, unstable soils, seismic
faults, and other geotechnical constraints within the hillside
areas of development will be considered 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.
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 visual importance of hillside horizon
lines /prominent ridgelines within this specific plan area from
surrounding areas will be evaluated during the preparation and
review of this specific plan. Clustering of dwelling units should
be considered where appropriate to conserve important visual and
natural resources.
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. 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, sewn, 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.
29
ATTACHMENT 4
01,00142
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)
30
0001.43
:<:;,•.�•u• ..•..�: .. .. :.:.:. ..:, v ::nom:.::.::.. :., <a
• Provision of an east /west SR -118 arterial
bypass from the SR -23 /SR -118 connector to Los
Angeles Avenue west of Butter Creek Road,
without a connection to Walnut Canyon Road,
and.recognition of a potential future SR -118
freeway extension west of the City limits.
• Provision of a north /south SR -23 arterial
bypass from the SR -23 /SR -118 connector to
Broadway Road.
• Extension of Spring Road north to the SR -23
arterial bypass.
• Provision of a local collector system to serve
circulat,ion needs in the northwest portion of
the City. Local collectors added to the
existing circulation system include an
extension of Casey Road to Gabbert Road, "C"
Street between Grimes Canyon Road and the SR-
23 arterial bypass, and "D" Street between
Princeton Avenue and the SR -23 arterial
bypass.
• Provision of a roadway system to serve
circulation needs in the Carlsberg Specific
Plan (Moorpark Highlands) area in the
southeast portion of the City. Roadways added
to the existing circulation system include an
extension of Science Drive from New Los
Angeles Avenue to Tierra Rejada Road, and an
extension of Peach Hill Road to Science Drive.
• Provision of an eastern extension of Broadway
Road potentially connecting with Alamos Canyon
Road and the SR -118 freeway to serve
circulation needs of potential future
development in the portion of the planning
area northeast of the City limits.
20
(jO(M44
ATTACHMENT 5
4111s
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING SERVICES
651 Via Alondra, Suite 714
Camarillo, CA 93012
(805) 484 -8303 • Fax: 484 -8993
January 20, 1999
Mr. John Libiez
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Dear Mr. Libiez:
On behalf of Specific Plan Number 1, Hitch Ranch, attached please find ten copies each of
the most recent revision of the preferred land use plan (605 units) and Alternative (415
units) for your use in updating the City Council on the status of this project.
Please note that the revisions reflect the recently approved access concept for the A -B and
SCE industrial properties to the west of Hitch Ranch. This access concept assumes that the
railroad underpass connection to Los Angeles Avenue by way of the Bugle Boy property will
be constructed. The ultimate plan provides for a fire gate access only for any future
development west of Gabbert Canyon Road, north of the railroad tracks and Poindexter
Avenue.
Further, both plans have eliminated Neighborhood Commercial use from the Gabbert Road
area. The parcel at the intersection of Casey Road and Gabbert Road has now been indicated
for Public/ Institutional uses. This location could provide for a permanent worship or
institutional use at a site easily accessible from the entire city and outside of industrial or
commercial zones. The low intensity of traffic and other impacts make this an appropriate
use south of the 118 Bypass.
I look forward to addressing the City Council at the earliest possible date regarding these
changes and our intent to complete the Specific Plan and EIR documents. Thank you for
your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Dennis Hardgrave
cc: Hitch Ranch RECEIVED RECEIVED -
-
Steve Kueny, City Manager --�
JAN 2 0 1999
000145
Public Agency Entitlement • Planning Design • Project Management ATTACHMENT 6
� as
� iii, 1�� � t � d \� � -� ` ! �✓� � ��.
''``
� ! �T ���M
. y ` -
v /� i
,,,
..���
t f °: �M�
� y
44�.���
��� ��
. f"
1 �•'
T' ♦ , _ i
!1 y
Y _
� �.
ti', � i ..
•
• �� •�.
Land Use Summary
V11, 1111h D-Ily NI) 0 10
(P,B)
TOTAL 283.23 605 121.18
M
AREA
j,ANDMSTRIA 4-
R
All
4A
WE
Bill
r Ito
W401
W
-Sam
0* Ni' - -
MOORPARK
1 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864
January 13, 1999
Mr. Dennis Hardgrave
Development Planning Services
651 Via Alondra, Suite 714
Camarillo, Ca. 93012
Subject: Synopsis of January 5, 1999 Meeting Related to Hitch
Ranch Specific Plan, Specific Plan No. 1.
Dear Dennis,
This letter is provided to clarify staff's presentation of the
issues discussed at our January 5th meeting:
A. RBF Fiscal Study. Staff will provide a second transmittal of
the agreement and information to DPS for action by client
related to the Walnut Canyon /Gabbert Canyon Drainage
Deficiency fiscal analysis to be prepared by RBF.
Participation by Hitch Ranch anticipated to be approved by
client.
B. Hitch Ranch Specific Plan preliminary diagrams will be revised
to reflect land use and circulation proposals to be pursued.
Because of the decision related to A &B Properties development,
which affects the SP -1 land use proposals west of Gabbert
Road, the designation of land uses and the circulation system
needs to be reconsidered.
C. Hitch Ranch Specific Plan preliminary plans have reflected
industrial and commercial land uses not previously contained
in preliminary plans presented to the City Council. Inclusion
of these uses and related circulation considerations should be
presented to the City Council prior to issuance of a Notice of
Preparation for the project EIR and drafting of the Specific
Plan document.
D. Circulation issues which must be addressed by the project
include:
1. Extension of Casey Road between Walnut Canyon Road and
Gabbert Road.
2. Casey Road and Walnut Canyon Road intersection.
PATRICK HUNTER CHRISTOPHER EVANS CLINT D. HARPER DEBBIE RODGERS JO�j
Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Councilmember Councilmember C 0 I
ATTACHMENT 7
Specific Plan No.l Meeting Summary
January 12, 1999
Page 2
3. Intersection improvements and roadway improvements at
Gabbert Road and Poindexter Ave.
4. Gabbert Road and the Union Pacific Railroad Crossing
improvements.
5. Gabbert Road and Casey Road improvements and
intersection. Since Casey Road west of Gabbert is not
proposed to extend westerly as a full street, emergency
access to the western properties, including A &B, needs
analysis.
6. Bicycle, pedestrian and equestrian trails within the plan
need to be provided with connection to other city -wide
trail components.
7. Access between the southerly portion of the development
and the northerly portion, across the SR118 Bypass, needs
to be incorporated into the revised land use and
circulation plan and any proposed alternatives. Since the
bypass is anticipated to be suppressed at this location,
this connection would appear to be accomplished by
bridging the bypass.
8. A pedestrian connection between Poindexter Ave. and Casey
Road needs to be provided by the project. This may
require an overpass or underpass, subject to U.P.
approval. Such a facility must provide for public safety
and security, as well as meet accessibility requirements.
9. Emergency access connections for the project through an
adjacent property to a public street need to be
evaluated.
E. Concerns regarding grading issues and the relationship of
project grading to the City adopted hillside management
regulations needs to be carefully examined. The specific plan
and environmental documents need to consider slope profiles,
soil stability, grading in areas with 20% or greater slopes,
faulting and liquefaction potentials. Geotechnical issues
should be addressed so that the information gathered may
assist in the amending of the City Safety Element. Explore
the use of engineered foundations and split pad grading within
the area north of the proposed SR118 to limit grading impacts
to that needed for roadway and or driveway access.
000149
Specific Plan No.l Meeting Summary
January 12, 1999
Page 3
F. Open space areas and their uses need defined. The method of
long term maintenance for these areas needs to be addressed.
G. Project aesthetics are important. View -shed issues from
properties above and below the site as well as from the hills
on the south side of the valley must be addressed.
Preservation of ridgeline views needs to be clearly
demonstrated.
H. Alternatives analysis for the EIR needs to consider viable
options to the preferred plan and first alternative presented
by the applicant. Suggested scenarios for possible analysis
in the EIR are:
1. Preferred Plan
2. Alternative No.l
3. No project
4. General Plan project of 415 dwellings with open space and
institutional use with estate sized lots (2 -5 acres)
north of the proposed SR118.
5. 415 large lot dwelling units, neighborhood commercial,
institutional use, very high density housing area, open
space areas; lots north of the SR118 to be 2 acres in
size or equivalent density, up to a maximum of 40 units.
Clustering may be considered if visibility from the
valley floor is minimized.
6. 605 units, institutional use, industrial use,
neighborhood commercial use, high density housing area,
open space areas, with lots to the north being 2 acres in
size or equivalent density, up to a maximum of 40 units.
Clustering may be considered if visibility from the
valley floor is minimized.
I. The Initial Study will be revised by Impact Sciences based
upon the revisions to design plans that DPS prepares for City
Council review. Revised maps and information need to be
forwarded to staff so that we can prepare a report to the City
Council. This item is tentatively scheduled for February 3.
Based upon this date, plans and information packets need to
come to staff prior to January 20th'
(30O150
Specific Plan No.l Meeting Summary
January 12, 1999
Page 4
Dennis, in a related matter, that of Mike Sanders Pre -App, you were
having prepared an area wide development map and supporting data.
It would be helpful to have these for inclusion with the SP -1
materials in the City Council report package, if at all possible.
Sincerely yours,
Jo L. L biez 1
Principal Planner
C: Steve Kueny, City Manager
Nelson Miller, Director of Community Development
Wayne Loftus, Planning Manager
File
Chroni
000151.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable City Council
FROM: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, Senior Planner
DATE: March 14, 1996
SUBJECT: ALTERNATIVE LAND USE PLANS TO BE ANALYZED IN
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO.
1 PROJECT (HITCH RANCH)
For your information, attached are three alternative plans for
Specific Plan No. 1. Staff's opinion is that the attached Plans are
consistent with the direction given by the City Council at a
meeting on February 15, 1995, regarding land use and circulation
alternatives to be analyzed in the EIR. Work on the Draft EIR was
delayed, approximately one year, due to reorganization of the Levy
Company. The applicant's representative, Development Planning
Services (DPS), has indicated that they are now proceeding with
preparation of the Draft EIR (reference attached letter).
If the City Council has any comments on the attached alternative
plans, please contact me, and I will either schedule an item on a
Council agenda (if requested), or will forward any comments
received to DPS.
Attachments: Letter from DPS dated 3 -1 -96 and Alternative Plans
cc: Steven Kueny, City Manager
Richard Hare, Deputy City Manager
()0G15-4
ATTACHMENT 8
fills
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING SERVICES
651 Via Alondra, Suite 714
Camarillo, CA 93012
(805) 484 -8303 • Fax: 484 -8993
March 1, 1996
MAR 0 4 1996
City of lviourpark
Ms. Deborah S. Traffenstedt, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Dear Debbie:
Attached please find eight sets of the three Specific Plan #1 Alternatives prepared on 11 ° x 17" color
xerox. These three plans substantially reflect in a generalized illustrative manner the detailed
development and grading concepts which we reviewed with you this past week.
As we discussed, Hitch Ranch is ready to proceed with preparation of the Draft EIR by Impact Sciences
as soon as possible, but only after staff has provided these three Specific Plan #1 Alternatives to the City
Council on an informational and comment basis. Thank you for your input and responses to our planning
designs to date. Please feel free to call me at any time with any further direction or information.
attachment: 8 sets of 3 color reduction plans
cc: Rick Hambleton
Sincerely,
Dennis Hardgrav
Public Agency Entitlement • Planning Design • Project Management 000153
i
t
�-F�
i �(1.�
..
C `
v
q
C
Q,&
i
t
�-F�
i �(1.�
..
C `
01,
.G.�
{�� \
l
1
I
y i
I y.
-fl I
l �{
I
v /