The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAGENDA REPORT 1989 0104 CC REG ITEM 11BITEM 11 . B JOHN PATRICK LANE Mayor ELOISE BROWN Mayor Pro Tem JOHN GALLOWAY Councilmember CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. Councilmember BERNARDO M. PEREZ Councilmember MAUREEN W. WALL City Clerk M E M O R A N D U M STEVEN KUENY City Manager CHERYL J. KANE City Attorney PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P. Director of Community Development R. DENNIS DELZEIT City Engineer JOHN V. GILLESPIE Chief of Police TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development DATE: December 21, 1988 (CC meeting of 1/4/88) SUBJECT: PRE -SUBMITTAL PROPOSAL - COUNTY OF VENTURA Background The County of Ventura has advised the City of Moorpark of an interest by the property owners of certain parcels in the Santa Rosa Valley to seek a General Plan Land Use Element Amendment. The request is to change the General Plan from C-S-40ac to RA-5ac on a 275 acre site, and then subdivide the area into five acre lots. The subject property is located on the down slope from Presilla Road in an area that backdrops the South and West Villages of Mountain Meadows and the community of Home Acres. Discussion At this time the County is only advising the city of the property owners intentions. The first step in amending the County General Plan is to place the matter within the General Plan Screening process. The County will be holding the next General Plan Screening during the month of January 1989. Another screening takes place in June or July of 1989. A number of issues were voiced by city staff when Urban West Communities attempted to subdivide property they held next to the water tank. The greatest concern was with circulation. Underlining this request is the overall interest from a variety of property owners to cause a land use change in the eastern portion of 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, Califomia 93021 (805) 529-6864 COUNTYA/CHRONI PJR:DST:CM:crl December 21, 1988 page 2 the Santa Rosa Valley. The McCrea Ranch proposal is still being considered by the City of Thousand Oaks. Also, the McComic proposal is being considered to start a process of General Plan Amendment soon. Recommended Action That the City Council direct staff as deemed appropriate. Attachments: Pre -submittal analysis dated 11/18/88. MOOR'ARK, C'A:UrORMA City Cozinci of_ %—W .18 I AC1'°0"Nf: _:Ut h2 d��fL!rlym COUNTYA/CHRONI PJR:DST:CM:crl RlSOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY county Ventura ;Jame: �Ie a_- �raV 0. Address: Purpose, PRESUBMITTAL ANALYSIS The purpose of the form is to provide information to potential applicants/ developers regarding policies, regula- tions or programs that may have a major effect upon a contemplated project. This information is primarily limited to Planning and does not address other laws or regulations related to environ- mental health, air pollution, fire, road standards, water, sewer, or various physical hazards. Further consultation with other agencies may be warranted Planning Division Thomas Berg Manager Date: 41. before proceeding. In addition, this information may be superseded by future zone changes, ordinance changes, general plan amendments, or policy changes by the County of Ventura or other local agencies that may affect the subject property. Prior to further action on your project, please verify the information with the Planner noted, especially if a period of time has passed since you review your . proposal with them. PART I PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION _Ijp�d Qj 12�,t jtiail.e.� . A. Site Information: n General Location �j (� �B$�ya lbalk c� In City o IIninc. territory? -Assessor's Parcel No(s).: �il(o-6-Z7�-D�jS CBS -Street Address (if none - nearest intersection or road) B. Existing Parcel Size C. Existing.Land Uses/Structures U nf� t D. Surrounding Land Uses: E --7)kL W E. Adjacent PermQs: N S E W I F. Existing Permit(s)/Entitlements on Property -Expired Permits G. Existing Zoningl �6-9 -Overlay Zone H. Is there a Zone Change contemplated If so, list From:"(j 5 _ 40 Ar- on the property by staff/applicant? To:" f - A - 5,46" lExisting Zoning may be inconsistent with the General Plan designation, wlV E means only uses consistent with the plan can be considered, as the Genera 1 takes precedence. If you do not understand this, please discuss with the�Q�;ct $ t planner. 1�t1Y I.' General Plan Designation: Existingl. Proposed: \ �� 4rp J. Is there a General Plan change If so, list From: contemplated by staff on property? To: PART II PLANNING ISSUES A. Zoning (Chap.I.0) I. Is zoning consistent with General Plan designation? ,1a4— Z. Is proposed use permitted in Zone Q Category? (List proposed matrix line entry) B. General Plan I. Is proposed use permitted in General Plan category? Z. Open Space Element Policy: Is the OS property adjacent to "Ag" designated land? (New parcels contiguous to "Ag" designated land shall be at least 20, acres in size.) C. Other I. Is project located within an Airport Clear Zone? /(/b Z_ Is project affected by: Upper Ojai Density Policy or moratorium, or any other Board policies? L I/ If list: V so, u,.,e, �1 3. Does the applicant or property have as outstanding bill owed to the County? 4. Is the property within a City's Sphere of Influence? Hoer Close to City Limits? Must applicant meet with City Planning staff/LAFCO to determine possibility of Annexation? *If there has not been such a meeting, and project is within. a Sphere, then project cannot progress. S. What is City General Plan/Zoning? 6. Are there any existing zoning violations on the property? (N.A. to Subdivision) If so, list M. 7. Does project conflict with existing permits? If so, list: �.0 8. Is property within a flood hazard area? 9. Is property within a greenbelt(s)? is 10. Is there a question regarding legal lot status (Sec. 8111-1)? 11. Does project conflict with an LCA 'Xb Contract? 12. Oil and Gas Wells a. Within 50 feet of operating well? 'btu b. On top of abandoned well? PART III PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS AND INFORMATION TO APPLICANT The parent subdivision (Tract 2016) was rezoned in 1974 fran the "R-E-lAau zone to the 11R-A-1OAc" zone as a result of the Santa Fla � '' The ah n ` objective of the zone change was to stabilize anticipated popul densities and reduce the possibility of subsequent land divisions by future land owners. In 1983 ,the Board of Supervisors further restricted the subject property with the approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA) to change the lard Use designation frau °RURAL" to "OPEN SPACE" because of the l�,ysica constraints in the area, including: steep slopes, unstable soils, and a "very high" fire hazard. nie property was Subsequently rezoned in 1987 from ,R-A-10 Ac" to 110-S-40 Ad' to be consistent with the C=.rty General -- Plan. Also, a review of the transportation policies and the Regional Road Network map of the circulation section of the County General Plan as well as the Erivironamtal Impact Report (EIR) for said Plan indicates that there may be a cumulative, adverse erivirormlental impact of traffic on Santa Rosa Road when existing lots and proposed subdivisions within the Santa Rosa Valley are built out. General Plan policies state that any develcpnent which would individually or cum l.atively cause any adverse impact shall be prohibited unless: 1) feasible mitigation measures are adopted which would ensure that the in pact does not occur, or 2) a project completion schedule with full ftuxling commitment for road n provownts, is adopted by the Board of Supervisors, which will ensure that the impact will be mitigated within a reasonable period of time. In order to subdivide the property into five (5) acre lots, you will need to request a General Plan AEImxblent (GPA) and Zone Change- est would ultimately result in the amulative impact of traffic on Santa Rosa Road. Mnerefore, the Planning Division could not r appeal of your request, based upon the above analysis and the Board's specific desire to limit the future subdivision of these lots. Presubaittal Planner: ' ' Z u g ervisin Planner 24 phone No. (805) 654-., D �/ i CHO 66 45 fl •]!.N � vyi I �'.10 n e� E u e cn D x ..tA 0)-� ro 5' �• / 0 ' V 4 -�t a° Bpi r�o� fit➢• � p ' / M r°➢1t g N 0 a c 1 \ m ^H JI L � • '• N � T •o Q�aa R �i I a� u W RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY county �� Planning Division n !i ur� Thomas Berg iiiiii YYYY �i��iiiiii Manager "Tame, �CvicZ✓dil�l� Date: Address: ,A q 135� Purpose3 PRESUBMITTAL ANALYSIS The purpose of the form is to provide before proceeding. In addition, this iaformatioa to potential applicants/ information may be superseded by future developers regarding policies, regula- zone changes, ordinance changes, general tions or programs that may have a major plan amendments, or policy changes by the effect upon a contemplated project. County of Ventura or other local agencies This information is primarily limited that may affect the subject property. to Planning and does not address other Prior to further action on your project, laws or regulations related to environ- please verify the information with the mental health, air pollution, fire, Planner noted, especially if a period of road standards, water, sewer, or various time has passed since you review your physical hazards. Further consultation proposal with them. with other agencies may be warranted PART I PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION -_- . /j! SIB- -O/.'r 27. 6 �) AeAJ 576-0go-67S A.. Site Information: / 1� General Location fy-4 I& In City o Uninc. territory? . -Assessor's Parcel No(s).: $i6.Ogl -O7S' S`�6--Di -Street Address (if none - nearest intersection or road) B. Existing Parcel Size Ar. . f} C. Existing Land Uses/Structures ae, , � D. Surrounding Land Uses: N .�A� - .��^y indetflS ':52� E /I W E. Adjacent Permi& U N S E W P F. Existing Permits)/Entitlements on Property -Expired Permits l G. Existing Zoningl 6-!% 6 -Overlay Zone H. Is there a Zone Change contemplated If so, list From: ,1' A, on the property by staff/applicant? Toe, le- rTJ' ' lExisting Zoning may be inconsistent with the General Plan designation, which means only uses consistent with the plan can be considered, as the General Plan takes precedence. If you do not understand this, please discuss with the case nlannpr A Ooen Soar E� lement Area Plan I. General Plan Den gnation: cam11 Existingl : Proposed: J. Is there a General Plan change If so, list From: contemplated by staff on property? To: PART II PLANNING ISSUES A. Zoning (Chap.1.0) l- Is zoning consistent with General Plan designation? 2• Is proposed use permitted in Zone U Category? (List proposed matrix line entry) --------------- B. General Plan I. Is proposed use permitted in General Plan category? Z* Open Spacc Element Policy: Is the OS property adjacent to "Ag" designated land? (Nev parcels contiguous to "A&'' designated land shall be at least 20. acres is size•.) ko- C- Other T. Is project located within an Airport Clear Zone? Z_ Is project affected by: Upper Ojai Density Policy or moratorima, or any other Board Policies? 4�Y If so,. list: V ' 3. Does the applicant or property have as outstanding bill owed to the County? , 4. Is the property within a City's Sphere of Influence? How Close to City Limits? Must applicant meet with City Planning staff/IMCO to determine Possibility of Annexation? *If there has not been such a meeting, and project is within a Sphere, then project cannot progress. S- What is City General Plan/Zoning? 6• Are there any existing zoning violations on the property? (N.A. to Subdivision) If so, list permits? I ) If so, list: �A 8. Is property within a flood hazard area? �44Z ' 9. Is property within a greenbelt(s)7 10. Is there a question regarding legal lot status (Sec. 8111-1)? /�(d 11. Does project conflict with an LCA Contract? 12. Oil and Gas Wells a. Within 50 feet of operating well? 44-* b. On top of abandoned well? �1(� PART III PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS AND INFORMATION TO APPLICANT The parent subdivision (Tract 2016) Was rezoned in 1974 from the "R-E-1Ac" zone to the "R-A-lOAc" zone as a result of the Santa Rosa Study. The objective of the zone change was to stabilize anticipated population densities and reduce the possibility of subsequent land divisions by future land owners. In 1983 the Board of Supervisors further restricted the subject property with the approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA) to change the Ladd Use designation _ from 'rRURAL,, to "OPEN SPACE" because of the physical oastrairrts in the area, including: steep slopes, unstable soils, and a "very high" fire hazard. The property was subsequently rezoned in 1987 frOM "R A-10 AC" to 110-S-40 Ac" to be consistent with the County General Plan. Also, a review of the transportation policies and the Regional Road Network map of the C�ation section of the County General Plan as well as the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for said Plan indicates that there may be a cumulative, adverse environmental impact of traffic on Santa Rosa Road when existing lots and proposed subdivisions within the Santa Rasa Valley are built cut. General Plan policies state that any development which would individually or cumulatively cause any adverse impact shall be prohibited unless: 1) feasible mitigatict measures are adopted which would ensure that the impact does not occur, or 2) a project completion schedule with full ftuxiing commitment for road improvements, is adopted by the Board of Supervisors, which will ensure that the impact will be mitigated within a reasonable period of time. In order to subdivide the property into five (5) acre lots, you will need to request a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Zone Marge. Your request would ultimately result in the cumulative impact of traffic on Santa Rosa Road. Therefore, the Planning Division could not recam end approval Of your request, based upon the above analysis and the Board's specific desire to limit the future subdivision of these lots. Prnubeittal Plainer: Phone No. (805) 654- a /Supgrvising Planner OC, J ROY m QM CD x ti A"99A