HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1989 1220 CC REG ITEM 11FPAUL W. LAWRASON, Jr.
Mayor
SCOTT MONTGOMERY
Mayor Pro Tern
ELOISE BROWN
Council member
CLINT HARPER, Ph.D.
Council member
BERNARDO M. PEREZ
Councilmember
LILLIAN KELLERMAN
City Clerk
TO:
FROM:
MOORPARK
MEMORANDUM -·-·· ·-·· ·-···---
The Honorable City Council
Patrick J. Richards> Director of Conmmnity
ITEM
STEVEN KUENY
City Manager
CHERYLJ.KANE
City Attorney
PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P.
Director of
Community Development
R. DENNIS DELZEIT
City Engineer
JOHN V. GILLESPIE
Chief of Police
RICHARD T. HARE
City Treasurer
Develop1Rent'f--
DATE: December 12> 1989 (CG meeting o:f December 20> 1989)
SUBJECT: STATUS RF.PORT AND REQUEST f'OR GOUNCll~ DIRECTION GONCF.RNING THE
CARLSBERG SPECIFIC PLAN
Background
On May 12, 1989, a memorandum was wrj_tton to the City Council recommending
approval of the Agreement between the Ci.ty and Carlsberg for preparation of
the Sped.fie Plan and EIR. The City exocut.ed the agreem~mt for preparation
of the Carlsberg Specific Plan on May 23, 1989. On May 24-, 1989 sta.ff wrote
a letter to PBR giving the firm formal authorization to begin work Oil the
project. Between May and November, PBR had completed the fo)lowing tusks:
o Market Study
o Biological Resources Inventory
o Traffic baseline Inventory
o Slope Analysis
o Opportunity and Constraint Analys :i 1:;
o Context Analysis
o Preparation of Alternative Plans
o Preparation of a Preferred Plan
o Review sessions with City Staff and CArlsberg Financial Corporation
A joint meeting with PBR, City Staff and representatives of the Carlsberg
Corporation was held on November 6, 1989 which discussed. The following
topics were discussed:
o Land Use Plan -primarily a 1Bn<:l nse plan with gross acreage
assignments, densities and yields.
o Conceptual Site Plan -a more definitive illustration of the land use
plan with lot layouts, internal c:f,,·culation and grad.ing shown.
o Cut and Fill Plan -a gen0ra.l:i.;;;ed look at cut and f:U J. and associated
phasing implicatfons.
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529-6864
A: GARLSMM. DCtC/DW4: pp
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Page -2-
The Honorable City Council
Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development
December 12, 1989 (CC meeting of December 20, 1989)
STATUS REPORT AND REQUEST FOR COUNCIL DIRECTION CONCERNING THE
CARLSBERG SPECIFIC PLAN
o Phasing -a look at how developmen1~ could be phased
o Open Space/Recreation Plan -a community recreation scheme identifying
parks, conceptual trail alignments and other features.
A workshop concerning the Carlsberg Specific Plan was held on Monday,
December 11, 1989 at 7:00PM in the Council Hearing Room. The emphasis of
the workshop was to disseminate information to the general public about the
project, the process, and to receive comments. There were approximately 65
people present at the workshop, not including members of the Planning
Commission, Planning staff or PBR. Pat Richards, Paul Porter, and Winnifred
Wilson were present from the City, Bill Masterson and Mike Doty represented
PBR, and Ron Tankersley and Alan Camp were present representing Carlsberg
Financial Corporation. Fifteen individuals from the community, not
including members of the Planning Commission spoke concerning the Carlsberg
Specific Plan.
The meeting began with an introduction from the Director of Community
Development who indicated that those wishing to speak needed to submit
speaker cards to the Chairman of the Planning Commission. Also, all those
persons present who would like to be notified of further public forums on
the Specific Plan should submit their names and addresses to Planning Staff
for future notification of hearings. The Director noted that no decisions
were to be made that night and a report to Council would appear on their
December 20, 1989 agenda. Representatives from City staff and PBR were
then introduced to the public.
PBR prepared a printed Progress Report for the workshop which was available
to the Public. At the beginning of PBR's presentation, Mike Doty indicated
that their presentation would essentially follow the outline in the
progress report. Several maps were placed on the wall and referred to
during PBR's presentation. In general the consultants presentation covered
the following topics:
Introduction
o Purpose of the workshop
o General description of what a specific p]an is.
A:CARLSMM.DOC/DW4:pp
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Page -3-
The Honorable City Council
Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development
December 12, 1989 (CC meeting of December 20, 1989)
STATUS REPORT AND REQUEST FOR COUNCIL DIRECTION CONCERNING THE
CARLSBERG SPECIFIC PLAN
o What is involved in a specific plan.
o Current status of the Carlsberg Specific Plan to date.
Site Description
o Project location
o Context of the site within the community.
o Site summary
Plan Previously Proposed By Carlsberg Financial
o Review and analysis
Plan Currently Under Consideration By The C:iJ:y
o Develop concept and program
o Land use plan
o Conceptual grading plan
For more specific information concerning the above listed subject areas,
refer to the attached Progress Report.
Following the presentation from PBR, there were questions concerning the
preparation of the Specific Plan which were answered by PBR. Next, those
persons requesting to speak on the subject were requested to present their
views. A summary of the issues and concerns are summarized in the
Discussion section of this Memorandum.
Discussion
The following individuals who spoke at the workshop are:
1. Edward Alberts
2. Tom Baldwin
A:CARLSMM.DOC/DW4:pp
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Page -4-
The Honorable City Council
Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development
December 12, 1989 (CC meeting of December 20, 1989)
STATUS REPORT AND REQUEST FOR COUNCIL DIRECTION CONCERNING THE
CARLSBERG SPECIFIC PLAN
3. Pat Basso
4. Marjorie Blye
5. Allen Camp
6. Lynn Crockatt
7. Tom Duffy
8. Ted Green
9. Jim Hartley
10.John Lane
11.Steve Brodski
12.Robert Moran
13.Ronald Phillis
14.Ron Tankersley
15.Tom Thompson
At the end of the public comment portion of the workshop each of the
Planning Commissioners presented their :individual comments.
The following is a summarization of the major issues that were discussed at
the workshop:
Location of a Future Middle School
Several individuals spoke concerning the proposed location of the middle
school as identified in the PBR plan. Tom Duffy, Superintendent of the
Moorpark Unified School District spoke first on this issue. He indicated
that a site selection committee began looking for a school site during
Spring, 1988. The committee evaluated a number of prospective sites and
recommended the site adjacent to Spring Road and the Church property for a
number of reasons including: a) It was near an existing roadway; b)
utilities were close to the site; c) the school site could be obtained
prior to future development of the Car] sberg property; and d) there is a
need to build a middle school as soon as possible. Mr Duffy was concerned
with PBR' s revised location for the school site because: 1) substantial
sums of money has already been spent on plans for the school; 2) there is
no guarantee that the project phasing of Carlsberg' s property will cause
the development of the school when it is needed; 3) the cost of site
preparation of the site proposed by PBR would be costly due to the amount
of grading that would be necessary; l~) funding to build the middle school
could be lost if it is not started in the near future. Mr. Duffy continued
A:CARLSMM.DOC/DW4:pp
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Page -5-
The Honorable City Council
Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development
December 12, 1989 (CC meeting of December 20, 1989)
STATUS REPORT AND REQUEST FOR COUNCIL DIRECTION CONCERNING THE
CARLSBERG SPECIFIC PLAN
by stating that construction of the school was to begin during the next
year and that substantial funding and funds already spent could be lost if
PBR's site was chosen over the site already picked by the District. He also
mentioned that representatives of the property owned by the adjacent church
were involved in the site selection process and that shared parking for
special events could be provided by three institutional uses being placed
in close proximity to each other. It was mentioned that the school district
could condemn the land for the school without approval of the specific plan
and could start construction late September, 1990.
In response, Mike Doty from PBR indicated that schools are not always good
neighbors with homeowners and that the site picked by PBR appeared to be a
perfect site for a middle school for several reasons: a) The site is
buffered from single family residences; b) It is difficult to place a
subdivision next to a school because it is more difficult to sell the
homes; c) there is excellent circulation around the school site; and d)
the PBR site is also adjacent to proposed park land and proposed trail
systems which would facilitate access to the school by students. Mr. Doty
added that the preferred site by the school district utilized prime
residential land which could have views of a major drainage course and
proposed park area within the specific planning area.
Ron Tankersley from Carlsberg Financial Corporation indicated that he did
not object to placing the proposed school in either of the two locations.
Others at the meeting that spoke on the school issue favoring the site
chosen by the School district included John Lane, Lynn Crockatt, Tom
Baldwin, Tom Thompson, and Pat Basso.
Development of a 55 Acre Area Locateg __ in the Southeast Corner of the Site.
During the presentation made by PBR, it was indicated that there was a 55
acre area located along the southern portion of the site adjacent to Tierra
Rejada Road and the 23 Freeway. During the process of completing the plan,
the site had been eliminated for development due to the fact that the area
A:CARLSMM.DOC/DW4:pp
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM:
DATE:
Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development
December 12, 1989 (CC meeting of December 20, 1989)
SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT AND REQUEST FOR COUNCIL DIRECTION CONCERNING THE
CARLSBERG SPECIFIC PLAN
Page -6-
would be growth inducing for the remaining three corners of the freeway
intersection. There was concern with maintaining the intent of the Tierra
Rejada Greenbelt Agreement. Also, the area represents a significant "view
shed" for the City's entry and therefore, should be protected as an open
space area.
John Lane questioned why the area was not included in the preferred plan,
indicating that consideration should be given for developing at least some
of this area. He further stated that to tell the developer that he can not
develop 23% of his site might not be equitable.
Bob Moran, president of the Steeple Hill Homeowner' s Association also
questioned why the Southeast portion of the site was not being planned for
development and indicated that he personally favors some development.
Lynn Crockatt, explained that eliminating the 55 acres from development is
unfair to the developer and he would like to see large residential lots in
this area.
Pat Basso spoke in favor of developing the property along
long as there were larger lots proposed along Spring Road.
that if the southeast area developed that there should be
density along Spring Road.
Tierra Road as
She also noted
a reduction in
Mike Scullin and Roy Talley of the Planning Commission indicated a
preference for developing the 55 acre site, while Bill Lanahan spoke
against the development of the area on the basis that in the long run
development of the area could erode the intent of the Greenbelt Agreement.
Ron Tankersley and Alan Camp representing the Carlsberg Corporation showed
a plan proposed by Carlsberg which diffored from PBR' s in two respects, one
of which was the development of the 55 acre portion of the site in
question. They indicated that this area was prime developable land and that
it could be developed in a manner which could buffer the housing from the
permanent greenbelt areas through landscaping and other mechanisms. As a
representative of two separate property owners for the 497 acre specific
land area, Carlsberg was in the position of attempting to balance the
A:CARLSMM.DOC/DW4:pp
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Page -7-
The Honorable City Council
Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development
December 12, 1989 (CC meeting of December 20, 1989)
STATUS REPORT AND REQUEST FOR COUNCIL DIRECTION CONCERNING THE
CARLSBERG SPECIFIC PLAN
development of the site to the benefit of the individual property owners.
The PBR plan essentially eliminated a majority of development on the
southern portion of the property and thus created a problem for the
property owner on this parcel. Without development of this 55 acre portion,
it was not possible for the development to pay for the necessary
infrastructure and to make a profit on the development. Mr. Tankersley
stated that the original General Plan allowed 795 units on the ent:1.re 497
acres and that PBR's proposal allows far less units, thus the PBR proposal
is not consistent with the General Plan. He also indicated that allowing
only 40% of the site to be developed leaving 60% of the site undeveloped is
unfair to the developer.
12.6 Acre Site Located North of Los Ang~les Avenue Designated For Attached
Housing(l0-20 units/acre)
Ron Tankersley and Alan Camp stated that this portion of the site was the
second area that differed between their plan and PBR' s. They indicated
that to build apartments and to pay for the necessary infrastructure,
density has to be at 20-25 units per acre. To allow development at only 15
units/acre would render the development unprofitable.
Recommendation for Walking Tour of Prop1:'\_:r::ty
Marjorie Blyth indicated that it was difficult to visualize what
development of the property would look like without touring the property.
She suggested that a tour be given to the public.
Need For Hospital
Ted Green indicated that the plan should address the City's need for a
hospital and that the possible need to utilize a portion of the property
for other social needs should also be explored.
A:CARLSMM.DOC/DW4:pp
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Page -8-
The Honorable City Council
Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development
December 12, 1989 (CC meeting of December 20, 1989)
STATUS REPORT AND REQUEST FOR COUNCIL DIRECTION CONCERNING THE
CARLSBERG SPECIFIC PLAN
Need For Apartment Units
Commissioner Scullin noted the fact that there was a need for low to
moderate income housing and this site might help that need.
Senior Housing and Conference Center
Commissioner Talley commented on the fact that the proposed area was near
goods and services for senior housing. Marjorie Blyth indicated her desire
to have senior housing and a conference center on the property.
Hotel/Motel
Jim Hartley suggested that the plan allow for a future hotel or motel site
associated with freeway commercial.
Alternative Specific Plan
At the December 11, 1989 workshop Mr. Tankersley presented an alternative
land use plan to the public, Commission and staff. This latest interest by
the Carlsberg organization is to provide a plan close to what the Moorpark
School District desires and to allow development of the southeast portion
of the site. No copies were made available to staff or the public. It is
assumed that this plan will be presented to the City at a later date.
Housing Shortage
This was a subject addressed only by Mr. Camp and Mr. Tankersley at the
December 11th Workshop. They spoke about the City's need to provide 2743
units by the year 1994. These numbers are being generated by the SCAG
Regional Housing Needs Assessments. These are "target" numbers only. Few
cities and counties in the state actually achieve such numbers. Currently
there are ample opportunities to provide housing in the City. Also, the
City is currently in the process of updating it's General Plan which will
possibly change the land use designation or a.t least some properties. This
will further open the availability of future housing.
A:CARLSMM.DOC/DW4:pp
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Page -9-
The Honorable City Council
Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development
December 12, 1989 (CC meeting of December 20, 1989)
STATUS REPORT AND REQUEST FOR COUNCIL DIRECTION CONCERNING THE
CARLSBERG SPECIFIC PLAN
Recommendation
1. Direct staff to proceed with preparation of the detailed Specific Plan
and Environmental Impact Report based upon the information provided to
date. The emphasis to the draft Specific Plan and EIR will be the
proposed plan by PBR.
2. That staff be directed to ensure that the alternatives to the PBR Land
Use plan evaluated in the EIR shall be the original Carlsberg Land Use
Plan dated May 1988, and an alternative plan which studies impacts
someplace between the two plans noted above.
Attachment
1. Packet material prepared by Carlsberg for workshop presentation.
2. Carlsberg Specific Plan Progress Report dated December 11, 1989
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
City Council Meeting
of /2-/.:zt'c' 198,L.._
ACTION:~· aZ/ic;.4,;/
/1,/~~✓j.
A:CARLSMM.DOC/DW4:pp
(
Minutes of the City council
Moorpark, California Page 9 December 20, 1989
MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Brown
seconded a motion to direct the consultant and staff to remove
the middle school site as identified in exhibit 7 from the land
use map and to not show a school site on the land use map but
address the issue of the school site including alternate sites
in the text; to complete analysis of all impacts of the site the
Moorpark Unified School Board has identified for the middle
school; to let the consultant and staff determine whether or not
to change the map to reflect open space where the middle school
is now identified and that the text of the specific plan discuss
both sites as possible future school locations, the EIR to
consider the impacts of both sites. The motion carried by
unanimous voice vote.
Council member Harper discussed the possibility of having
the business park area of the site analyzed for commercial
uses rather than industrial.
After further discussion by the Council on the advantages
of having a large anchor with associated uses located on
this northeast corner of the project, the following motion
was heard:
MOTION: Councilmember Harper moved and Councilmember Brown
seconded a motion to direct the consultant and staff to analyze
a portion or all of the business park area on exhibit 7 for
commercial uses, not neighborhood commercial, including but not
limited to a major commercial anchor. The motion carried by
unanimous voice vote.
Council member Harper discussed the 55 acre area located in
the southeast corner of the site. He asked for
consideration of large lot development in this area if
deve 1 opment is to occur in this area and in conjunction
with reducing densities on the west side. He said the lots
should be several acres in size.
The Council discussed size of lot and number of units that
should be allowed in the area.
Mr. Kueny suggested analyzing the impacts of 1/2 acre lots,
using a maximum 75 housing units for analysis.
MOTION: Councilmember Montgomery moved and Councilmember Brown
seconded a motion to analyze the impact of minimum 1/2 acre lots
in the 55 acre portion of the site; the maximum number of lots
to be analyzed not to be more than 95. The motion carried 3-2,
Councilmember Harper and Perez dissenting.