HomeMy WebLinkAboutAG RPTS 2004 0106 PC REGResolution No. PC- 2004 -453
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY - January 6, 2004
7:00 P.M.
Moorpark Community Center
1. CALL TO ORDER:
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
3. ROLL CALL:
799 Moorpark Avenue
4. PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS AND SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
5. REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
6. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. Regular Meeting Minutes of December 16, 2003.
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
---------- --- - - - - -- ----------------------------
Any member of the public may address the Commission during the Public
Comments portion of the Agenda, unless it is a Public Hearing or a Discussion
item. Speakers who wish to address the Commission concerning a Public Hearing
or Discussion item must do so during the Public Hearing or Discussion portion
of the Agenda for that item. Speaker cards must be received by the Secretary
for Public Comment prior to the beginning of the Public Comments portion of
the meeting and for Discussion items prior to the beginning of the first item
of the Discussion portion of the Agenda. Speaker Cards for a Public Hearing
must be received prior to the beginning of the Public Hearing. A limitation
of three minutes shall be imposed upon each Public Comment and Discussion
item speaker. A limitation of three to five minutes shall be imposed upon
each Public Hearing item speaker. Written Statement Cards may be submitted in
lieu of speaking orally for open Public Hearings and Discussion items. Copies
of each item of business on the agenda are on file in the office of the
Community Development Department /Planning and are available for public
review. Any questions concerning any agenda item may be directed to the
Community Development Department at 517 -6233.
\ \mor_pri_sery \City Share \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \AGENDA \2004 \04_0106_pca.doc
Planning Commission Agenda
January 6, 2004
Page No. 2
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
(next Resolution No. 2004 -453)
A. Consider General Plan Amendment No. 2001 -05, Zone
Change No. 2001 -02, and Specific Plan No. 2001 -01, for
1,650 Housing Units on 3,586.3 Acres Located Generally
North of Moorpark College and State Route 118 on Land
Immediately Outside City of Moorpark Municipal
Boundaries. Applicant: North Park Village, LP (APN:
500 -0 -120 -065; 500 -0- 170 -135; 500 -0- 180 -125, -1351 -
1451F -1551, -165, -175, -1851F -195, -205, -215, -2250, -
235, -245, -255; 500 -0- 281 -165, -175; 500 -0- 292 -135, -
145, -195, -215, -225; 615 -0 -110 -205, -215; 615- 0 -150-
185) (Continued from December 16, 2003 Meeting)
Staff Recommendation: Continue to accept public
comments and continue the agenda item with the public
hearing open to the January 20, 2004 Planning
Commission meeting.
9. DISCUSSION ITEMS:
10. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
A. January 20, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting:
• General Plan Amendment No. 2001 -05, Zone Change
No. 2001 -02, and Specific Plan No. 2001 -01 (North
Park)
• Public Comments on Re- circulated Section of
Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan No.
2001 -01 (North Park)
• Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2003-
02, General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -02, Zone
Change No. 2003 -02 and Tentative Tract Map No.
5425 (Shea Homes, Inc.)
11. ADJOURNMENT:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special
assistance to review an agenda or participate in this meeting, including
auxiliary aids or services, please contact the Community Development
Department at (805) 517 -6233. Upon request, the agenda can be made available
in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability. Any request
for disability- related modification or accommodation should be made at least
48 hours prior to the scheduled meeting to assist the City staff in assuring
reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting
(28 CFR 35.102 - 35.104; ADA Title II).
ITEM: 6.A.
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of December 16, 2003
Pacre 1
1 The Regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held on
2 December 16, 2003, in the City Council Chambers; Moorpark Civic
3 Center; 799 Moorpark Avenue; Moorpark, California; 93021.
4
1.
CALL TO ORDER:
5
Chair Landis called the meeting to order at 7 :07 p.m.
6
2.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
7
Commissioner Lauletta led the Pledge of Allegiance.
8
3.
ROLL CALL:
9
Commissioners Lauletta, Peskay and Pozza, Vice Chair
10
DiCecco and Chair Landis were present.
11
Staff attending the meeting included Barry Hogan, Community
12
Development Director; Walter Brown, Assistant City
13
Engineer; David Bobardt, Planning Manager; Scott Wolfe,
14
Principal Planner; Dana Privitt, BonTerra Consulting; and
15
Gail Rice, Administrative Secretary.
16
4.
PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS AND SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
17
None.
18
5.
REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
19
None.
20
6.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
21
A. Regular Meeting Minutes of December 2, 2003.
22
MOTION: Commissioner Peskay moved and Commissioner Lauletta
23
seconded a motion that the Planning Commission Regular
24
Meeting Minutes of December 2, 2003, be approved. (Motion
25
carried with a unanimous 5:0 voice vote.)
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2003 Draft \03_1216_pcm.doc 0 00001
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of December 16, 2003
Paae 2
1 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
2 None.
3 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
4 (next Resolution No. 2002 -453)
5 A. Consider General Plan Amendment No. 2001 -05, Zone
6 Change No. 2001 -02, and Specific Plan No. 2001 -01, for
7 1,650 Housing Units on 3,586.3 Acres Located Generally
8 North of Moorpark College and State Route 118 on Land
9 Immediately Outside City of Moorpark Municipal
10 Boundaries. Applicant: North Park Village, LP (APN:
11 500 -0 -120 -065; 500 -0 -170 -135; 500 -0- 180 -125, -1351F -
12 1454F -155, -165, -175, -1850, -195, -2051, -215, -2250, -
13 235), -245, -255; 500 -0- 281 -165, -175; 500 -0- 292 -135, -
14 1451f -195, -215, -225; 615 -0 -110 -205, -215; 615- 0 -150-
15 185) (Continued from December 2, 2003 Meeting)
16 Staff Recommendation: Continue to accept public
17 comments and continue the agenda item with the public
18 hearing open to the January 6, 2004 Planning
19 Commission meeting.
20 Dave Bobardt briefly discussed the Commission's
21 meeting packet and its contents, the 3- dimensional
22 model prepared for the project, guest speaker from the
23 Ventura County Fire Protection District, Bon Terra
24 Consultants, distribution to outside agencies, public
25 notification and public review period.
26 The Commission questioned staff on the extension
27 through January 2004 mentioned in Chapter 3.3.b, and
28 schedule for staff to furnish their comments and
29 recommendations on the Draft EIR.
30 Staff responded that the comment period would remain
31 open through January 30, 2004 and that staff's focus
32 was traffic, which would be addressed by the City's
33 traffic consultant at the next regular meeting on
34 January 6, 2004.
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2003 Draft \03 - 1216— pcm.doc 00 0002
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of December 16, 2003
Paqe 3
1 The Commission left the dais to view the North Park
2 Village & Nature Preserve model, which had been
3 provided by applicant.
4 Lawrence Faulkner, president of Solid Terrain
5 Modeling, Inc., gave a brief presentation of the
6 model.
7 The public questioned the location of the observatory
8 and the traffic route to be used by the first five
9 hundred homes built.
10 The Commission questioned applicant on the location of
11 the City boundary, the internal park structure and
12 possible conflicts with the number of residents
13 sharing individual parks.
14 The Commission returned to the dais.
15
Larry Williams, Fire Prevention supervisor with the
16
Ventura County Fire Protection District, stated that
17
he had reviewed the project's circulation, water
18
supply, building construction, station site, emergency
19
heli -spot, and brush clearance and fuel modification
20
zones. He commented that the applicant was taking a
21
proactive approach to brush clearance in the design of
22
the project. Mr. Williams stated that he was
23
available for questions from the Commission.
24
25
The Commission had no questions of Mr. Williams.
26
27
Dana Privitt, BonTerra Consultants, presented the
28
staff report. She stated she was available for
29
questions or that she could provide specific
30
consultants at future meetings to answer specific
31
questions the Commission may have.
32
33
Mr. Bobardt commented that at the January 20, 2004
34
Planning Commission meeting, staff would invite
35
Austin - Foust, traffic consultants, and BonTerra
36
Consultants.
37
38
The Commission questioned staff on the soil content,
39
The Fox Canyon Groundwater Management letter; existing
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2003 Draft \03_1216_pcm.doc 000003
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of December 16, 2003
Pacae 4
1 oil and gas
facilities and contaminated
soil; grading
2 permits versus
building permits; project funding and
3 assessments;
and LAFCO and the Sphere of
Influence.
4 Kim Kilkenny,
applicant, commented on
Section 3.3 -
5 Traffic, and
recirculation of the draft
EIR to address
6 specific issues from CalTrans.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
The Commission questioned Mr. Kilkenny on a guarantee
that funds will be available to build the interchange.
Debi Aquino, resident, spoke in support of the project
and stated she was astounded by the developer's
commitment to the community. She commented that the
project was a good economic development, that the tax
base and commitment to remedy the traffic situation
was favorable.
Christine Mazza, resident, in support of the proposal
left early and submitted a written statement card.
James Roller, resident, not in support of the project,
stated that the developers still had not posted a bond
or guaranteed the funds. He commented that an
investigation into the applicant's past performance
should be made. He stated that there was no guarantee
for the parks, the schools or the other amenities.
James Carpenter, resident, in support of the proposal
left early and submitted a written statement card.
Chris Childer, resident, spoke in support of the
project and stated the need more housing, that the
project offers amenities for all and open space which
would enhance Moorpark. She commented that she would
like it to go to the public for a vote.
Tom Duck, resident, not in support of the project,
commented about the daily emissions at the
construction site and Moorpark's air quality level
with recent dust, ash, etc. He stated that acres are
being stripped bare at the site. He commented that
watering daily along with hydroseeding would not be
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2003 Draft \03_1216— pcm.doc 000004
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of December 16, 2003
Paae 5
1 enough protection with twenty- four -hour winds and that
2 he felt Moorpark did not deserve the project.
3 Toni Solano, resident, not in support of the project,
4 commented that Planning Commission's approval of the
5 project would be a breeding ground for Simi Valley tax
6 dollars. She stated that traffic on Collins Drive is
7 bad and staff should look at buildout ten or twenty
8 years from now and impact on the economic basis of
9 Moorpark.
10
Randy Griffith, resident, not in support of the
11
project, stated that there were no comments from staff
12
on groundwater issues and that they should meet with
13
Fox Canyon to address the drought in the area. He
14
commented that before the project goes to City
15
Council, the Commission should study all the aspects.
16
Lisa Leal, resident, spoke in support of the project.
17
She stated that the developer was offering additional
18
land for a fire station, an off -ramp and parks for
19
little leagues. She commented she wanted to live in
20
Moorpark, play sports and shop in Moorpark and the
21
project would bring beauty and revenue to the City.
22 Seven (7) written statement cards were submitted, five
23 (5) in favor and two (2) in opposition. The statements
24 will be included in the record.
25 The Commission questioned staff on the hearing
26 schedule.
27 The Commission questioned the applicant on preparing a
28 matrix for staff's use.
29 The Commission questioned staff on review of the
30 traffic study, a staff analysis on traffic levels for
31 Highway's 23 and 118, impacts of Phase A on traffic,
32 impact of college growth on traffic, the Unocal
33 project at full development, the City's General Plan
34 buildout with or without North Park including all
35 projects, traffic being a regional problem and what
36 the county of Ventura is doing to fix the problem.
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2003 Draft \03_1216_pcm.doc 00 0005
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of December 16, 2003
Pacre 6
MOTION: Commissioner Pozza moved and Commissioner
Peskay seconded a motion to approve staff
recommendation.
(Motion carried with a unanimous 5:0 voice vote.)
9. DISCUSSION ITEMS:
None.
10. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
• January 6, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting:
- General Plan Amendment No. 2001 -05, Zone Change No.
2001 -02, and Specific Plan No. 2001 -01 (North Park)
Barry Hogan discussed future agenda items.
11. ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION: Commissioner Pozza moved and Vice Chair DiCecco
seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting.
(Motion carried with a unanimous 5:0 voice vote.)
The meeting was adjourned at 9:04 p.m.
Kipp A. Landis, Chair
ATTEST:
Barry K. Hogan
Community Development Director
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2003 Draft \03_1216_pcm.doc 00 0006
ITEM: 8. A.
MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Planning Commission
FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Directo
Prepared by: David A. Bobardt, Planning Man e
DATE: December 30, 2003 (PC Meeting of 1/6/2004)
SUBJECT: Consider General Plan Amendment No. 2001 -05, Zone Change
No. 2001 -02, and Specific Plan No. 2001 -01, for 1,650
Housing Units on 3,586.3 Acres Located Generally North of
Moorpark College and State Route 118 on Land Immediately
Outside City of Moorpark Municipal Boundaries. Applicant:
North Park Village, LP (APN: 500 -0- 120 -065; 500- 0 -170-
135; 500 -0- 180 -125, -135, -145, -155, -165, -175, -185, -
195, -205, -215, -225, -235, -245, -255; 500 -0- 281 -165, -
175; 500 -0- 292 -135, -145, -195, -215, -225; 615- 0 -110-
205, -215; 615 -0- 150 -185)
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission has been discussing the proposed North Park
project since October 7, 2003. Planning Commission meetings since
then have focused on the following topics:
October
7,
2003:
Regulatory Context
October
21,
2003:
Project Description
November
4,
2003:
General Plan Issues
November
18,
2003:
Specific Plan Issues
December
2,
2003:
Schools
December
16,
2003:
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
(EIR)
The public hearing on the project applications has been kept open
through each meeting. This report presents staff's preliminary
recommendation on the applications for the general plan amendment,
specific plan, and zone change. A recommendation from the Planning
Commission will be sought only after the Planning Commission
receives draft responses to any comments received on the new
chapter of the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (3.3b:
Freeway Traffic).
\ \mor_pri_sery \City Share \Community Development \DEV PMTS \S P \11 -North Park \Agenda Reports \66boo7 PC Report . doc
Honorable Planning Commission
January 6, 2004
Page 2
DISCUSSION
General Plan Amendment Application
As noted in the staff report for the November 4, 2003 Planning
Commission meeting, staff has identified 10 key issues related to
consistency of the proposed North Park Specific Plan with the goals
and policies of the City's General Plan, mostly related to the Land
Use and Circulation Elements. In addition, the Planning Commission
identified key General Plan issues related to the extension of
Broadway, provision of entry -level housing and mixed use housing,
schools and the buildout of the City of Moorpark with and without
the North Park project. These issues are discussed below:
Maintaining the Suburban / Rural Character of the City:
The proposed North Park Specific Plan calls for the development of
1,500 single- family houses on 761.4 acres of the project site. At
a density of just under 2.0 units per acre, this density would be
among the lowest in the City if the project is approved. Its
density is comparable to the development in the northern end of the
Moorpark Highlands Specific Plan project (Pardee) at 1.9 units per
acre, and slightly higher than Country Club Estates (Toll Brothers)
at 1.5 units per acre.
Preservation of Important Natural Features, Agricultural Areas, and
Visually Prominent Hillside Areas; Integration of the Proposed
Development with the Natural Features; and Consistency with the
Hillside Management Ordinance:
The proposed North Park Specific Plan focuses its development in
the southern, less visually prominent portion of the project site,
with the development area of approximately 1,140 acres taking up
approximately one -third of the project site. There are no prime
farmlands or farmlands of statewide importance on the project site;
however, it is used for cattle grazing.
The Specific Plan proposes mass grading on the development area,
cutting the smaller ridges and filling the smaller canyons on each
plateau, while preserving the canyons that separate the plateaus
along with approximately two - thirds of the site, primarily in the
steeper, most visible, northern portions of the site. This
approach also minimizes the number of manufactured slopes needed in
the development areas.
The plan is not consistent with the restrictions of the Hillside
Management Ordinance that prohibit grading or construction on
portions of the site with 500 or greater slopes, with limited
exceptions. Plans submitted by the applicant indicate that of
approximately 1,148 acres of the property in this slope category,
J11i1
Honorable Planning Commission
January 6, 2004
Page 3
195.6 acres, or 17.0%, would be graded. The Hillside Management
Ordinance allows for a Development Agreement to specifically exempt
properties from its restrictions. Community Development staff finds
that the approach proposed to developing the North Park site is
sensitive to its natural features by preserving the most visually
prominent features on the site. The applicant is seeking a
Development Agreement for this project.
Variation of Residential Product Types (Including Mixed Use and
Affordable Housing) :
The proposed North Park Specific Plan offers essentially one type
of market -rate housing product type: large -lot single family
housing. Densities within individual planning areas on the site
range from 1.4 to 2.6 units per acre. Some variety is provided
with the affordable housing, which is proposed at 18.1 units per
acre.
The relocation of 33 lots from the groundwater recharge area to
Planning Area 31 (residential area around the lake) brings the
density of this residential area up to 2.9 units per acre. The
increase of density around the lake and commercial center is
consistent with General Plan policies to have the highest densities
closest to arterials and shopping areas. Planning Area 31 could
even support higher densities to create a higher level of activity
around the lake and commercial center and allow for more walking
opportunities to the lake, community park, school site, and
commercial center.
Activity around the lake and commercial center could be further
enhanced by the development of the commercial center as a mixed -use
residential and commercial center. Market -rate apartments with
views and within walking distance of the core of the development
would provide for a greater variety of housing product types in the
City, supporting Housing Element goals. At the present time,
apartments and condominiums of five or more units make up 10.10 of
Moorpark's housing stock, compared to 14.1 o countywide.
Such ,a mixed -use development could also include some of the
affordable units in order to reduce the concentration of these
units in one location. The 150 required affordable units should be
located in several developments either on or off site, and mixed
with market -rate units to avoid a concentration of high density
affordable housing in a single location. In the past, the City has
not allowed concentration of affordable housing as a part of any
other development, except in the case of the 17 affordable units of
William Lyon, located on the west side of Walnut Canyon Road.
000009
Honorable Planning Commission
January 6, 2004
Page 4
Availability of Public Services and Facilities (Including Schools):
Key services for consideration include the provision of water,
parks, and schools.
Water - Potable water is proposed for the lake, and recycled water
is proposed to irrigate common landscaped areas. Water issues are
addressed in detail in the Revised Draft EIR and Responses to
Comments. A report on the water supply to satisfy Senate Bill 610
(Costa) was prepared for the Ventura County Waterworks District No.
1 and adopted by the District Board. This report documents the
availability of water to serve the project. As a Development
Agreement is proposed as part of this project, additional detailed
analysis is required that proves availability of sufficient water
supply during normal, single -dry, and multiple dry years from
reliable sources using a 20 -year projection of demand. The City
has requested this analysis from Waterworks District No. 1, and it
will be provided to the Planning Commission when available
(expected January 2004)
Parks - With 38.3 acres of public parks (6.63 acres /1,000
residents) and 26.1 acres of private parks (4.52 acres /1,000
residents), the North Park project exceeds the City's standard of
5.0 acres of developed parkland per 1,000 residents. The applicant
has also proposed that PA -38, a 5.1 -acre private park, be combined
with PA -37, a 4.7 -acre public park, to create a 9.8 -acre public
park. This would increase the public park acreage to 43.3 acres,
or 7.52 acres /1,000 residents, with private park acreage decreasing
to 21.0 acres, or 3.63 acres /1,000 residents. Public access to the
parks could be improved by switching locations of PA -10, the 29.1
acre community park, with PA -21, the school site. This would allow
for a road undercrossing or overcrossing between the community park
and the lakefront park if desired by the City, potentially
expanding their utility. It should be noted that the established
practice of the City is for public park design and programming to
be developed by the Parks and Recreation Commission and City
Council.
Schools - In its comments on the Draft EIR for the North Park
project, the Moorpark Unified School District has requested a site
not less than 18 acres to accommodate the students estimated from
the project. The applicant has agreed to modify the plan to
provide an 18 -acre school site. Dr. Frank DePasquale,
Superintendent, addressed the Planning Commission on the School
District's planning and needs at its December 2, 2003 meeting. Dr.
DePasquale mentioned that plans for the use of the site have not
yet been made, but that it would likely be either an elementary
school or a Kindergarten through 8th Grade school.
000010
Honorable Planning Commission
January 6, 2004
Page 5
Expansion of Moorpark City Urban Restriction Boundary (CURB) ;
Buffer Area between Moorpark and Simi Valley; and Buildout of
Moorpark:
CURB Expansion - The North Park Specific Plan site is on land
between the Cities of Moorpark and Simi Valley. It is outside the
Moorpark's Corporate Boundary, its Sphere of Influence and the
Moorpark CURB. It is in the City's Area of Interest. The project
involves consideration of an expansion of the Moorpark CURB to
place the area proposed for development (exclusive of the Nature
Preserve) within the Moorpark CURB. The proposed General Plan
Amendment would involve consideration by the Moorpark voters,
consistent with Measure "S ".
Buffer Area - The North Park project proposes a buffer from
development a minimum of 600 feet in width and an average of over
1,000 feet in width along its eastern property line. At the
present time the area north of the SR -118 freeway is largely
undeveloped between Moorpark College and Madera Road, a distance of
approximately 2.5 miles. The buffer proposed by North Park would
maintain a visual separation from existing development in Simi
Valley, particularly since the eastern portion of the North Park
project site is not visible from the freeway. The SR -118
interchange proposed as part of the North Park project would be the
most visible feature in this area, approximately one mile east of
the Collins Drive interchange and one mile west of the future
Alamos Canyon interchange.
The Canyons project site (Unocal), which abuts the North Park
project site to the east in Simi Valley's Sphere of Influence,
currently includes two proposed residential villages at its western
edge, separated from development proposed on the North Park project
site by the eastern portion of the North Park Nature Preserve. The
applicant for the Canyons project has indicated that a revised plan
would be submitted in early 2004. Details on this revised plan are
not available at this time.
Buildout of City - The question of the expansion of the growth
boundary of the City touches on issues related to maintaining a
suburban /rural identity, appropriate buffers from development
planned in Simi Valley, open space issues, continued use of the
site for cattle grazing, wildlife corridors and the ultimate size
of the City when built out under the General Plan. The City of
Moorpark is currently forecast to have a population of
approximately 44,300 at build out; this would increase to
approximately 50,100 (13o increase) if the North Park Specific Plan
is approved.
The following table shows an estimate of population, housing, and
employment with and without the North Park project under buildout
1 1T#
Honorable Planning Commission
January 6, 2004
Page 6
of the General Plan. Current population per household and vacancy
rate figures are used in this estimate. This estimate does not
account for additional employment induced by the new residences.
Preservation of Significant Vegetation and Environmentally
Sensitive Habitats:
With the development area covering approximately 1,140 acres of the
Specific Plan site, potential native grassland, coastal sage scrub,
oak woodland and riparian habitats are all affected. Although much
of the site was burned in the October 25 -26, 2003 fire, the habitat
is expected to recover. Mitigation for loss of the habitat is
addressed in the Revised Draft EIR. It should be noted that the
conclusion of the EIR is that the loss of approximately 703.4 acres
of native grassland and non - native grassland is an unavoidable
significant impact that contributes substantially to an ongoing
regional and local loss of foraging habitat for special status
raptor species, particularly the white - tailed kite, northern
harrier, ferruginous hawk, golden eagle, merlin, prairie falcon,
short -eared owl, long -eared owl, and burrowing owl. Approval of
the project would require findings that the benefits of the project
override its significant environmental effects.
Mitigation of Traffic Impacts and Phasing of Traffic Improvements
with Development:
The most impacted intersection in the project vicinity, the
intersection of Collins Drive and Campus Park Drive, is currently
functioning below City standards during morning and afternoon peak
hours. Improvements to this intersection are proposed as part of
the Specific Plan. Per the Commission's request, an updated
exhibit showing the proposed improvements and their effect on the
operation of this intersection is attached.
000012
EXISTING (2003)
BUILDOUT UNDER
BUILDOUT IF
ESTIMATES
APPROVED
NORTH PARK
PROJECTS AND
PROJECT IS
CURRENT GENERAL
APPROVED
PLAN
POPULATION
34,529
44,310
50,068
HOUSING
91895
12,698
14,348
UNITS
EMPLOYMENT
9, 052
16, 697
16, 900
Preservation of Significant Vegetation and Environmentally
Sensitive Habitats:
With the development area covering approximately 1,140 acres of the
Specific Plan site, potential native grassland, coastal sage scrub,
oak woodland and riparian habitats are all affected. Although much
of the site was burned in the October 25 -26, 2003 fire, the habitat
is expected to recover. Mitigation for loss of the habitat is
addressed in the Revised Draft EIR. It should be noted that the
conclusion of the EIR is that the loss of approximately 703.4 acres
of native grassland and non - native grassland is an unavoidable
significant impact that contributes substantially to an ongoing
regional and local loss of foraging habitat for special status
raptor species, particularly the white - tailed kite, northern
harrier, ferruginous hawk, golden eagle, merlin, prairie falcon,
short -eared owl, long -eared owl, and burrowing owl. Approval of
the project would require findings that the benefits of the project
override its significant environmental effects.
Mitigation of Traffic Impacts and Phasing of Traffic Improvements
with Development:
The most impacted intersection in the project vicinity, the
intersection of Collins Drive and Campus Park Drive, is currently
functioning below City standards during morning and afternoon peak
hours. Improvements to this intersection are proposed as part of
the Specific Plan. Per the Commission's request, an updated
exhibit showing the proposed improvements and their effect on the
operation of this intersection is attached.
000012
Honorable Planning Commission
January 6, 2004
Page 7
Under the present proposal, all project traffic not using the
freeway interchange (and all traffic from Phase "A ") would use
Collins Drive for access. Turn movements to and from Campus Road
would be prohibited. Circulation would be improved if Campus Road
could be used as a second means of access. Campus Road, however, is
a private driveway of Moorpark College, and not a public street.
It would need to be acquired and improved to public street
standards if utilized as a through way. An alternative to the use
of Campus Road is the development of an extension of Campus Park
Drive as analyzed in the Alternatives chapter of the Revised Draft
EIR. Both the Collins Drive and Campus Park Drive routes from the
project site would end up in the same location, the intersection of
Collins Drive and Campus Park Drive, however, the provision of an
additional route helps spread the impact of the traffic and it
allows college students to access to parking lots along Campus Road
from the new interchange without having to circle around the
college.
Another key issue for consideration is the timing of proposed new
freeway interchange with the development of the proposed project.
The construction of this interchange and the access road from the
interchange to the project site (and Moorpark College) is a key
public benefit. It would accommodate much of the Moorpark College
traffic that comes from the east. The Moorpark College Master Plan
estimates that approximately 400 of college students come from the
east. Building permits for the first phase could be tied to
progress on the completion of this interchange and access road to
ensure its completion.
As indicated in Chapter 3.3b of the Revised Draft EIR, the project
would add to traffic on the SR -118 and SR -23 freeways, which would
exceed design capacity with or without the project. Timelines for
improvements to the freeway vary due to the uncertainty of funding
these improvements. The proposed Specific Plan includes land for a
neighborhood center which, with convenience retail, could help
reduce project freeway traffic. The shopping center approved at
Collins Drive and Campus Park Drive would also help reduce freeway
traffic from the North Park project. Other than through local land
use policy, which promotes trip demand reduction measures
incorporated into the project design, policy and spending issues
for freeways need to be addressed at a regional level.
Extension of Broadway
The current Highway Network Plan of the Circulation Element shows
an extension of Broadway from its eastern terminus to the SR -118
freeway at Alamos Canyon Road as a Rural Collector. This Rural
Collector was identified in the 1992 Circulation Element "to serve
circulation needs of potential future development in the portion of
000013
Honorable Planning Commission
January 6, 2004
Page 8
the planning area northeast of the City limits." Specific Plan
Area No. 8 was planned for this area, to have a development of up
to 3,221 dwelling units, provided that the City Council determined
substantial public benefit from the amenities and /or financial
contributions.
The SOAR Ordinance, Measure "S ", amended the land use element by
establishing an urban service boundary that did not include
Specific Plan Area No. 8 and by deleting all planning for Specific
Plan Area No. 8. It also amended the Circulation Element by
amending the purpose of the planned extension of Broadway to be for
"potential agricultural, open- space, or recreational uses in the
portion of the planning area northeast of the City limits."
The proposed North Park Specific Plan, as currently designed, does
not include a road connection between Alamos Canyon Road and
Broadway. The traffic study contained in the Revised Draft EIR
does not indicate the need for such a road to provide for traffic
demand from the project. The traffic study projected that only to
of project trips would travel north on Walnut Canyon Road,
potentially to Broadway (some may turn at Championship Drive). A
higher number, 480 of project trips, are projected to travel east
of the City on the SR -118 freeway. With the proposed new
interchange, an additional connection at Alamos Canyon Road would
be redundant. While regional benefit may be gained by a connection
of Broadway to Alamos Canyon Road, such a purpose for a regional
connection was not contemplated in the City's general plan, both
before and after the approval of Measure "S" by the Moorpark
voters.
Provision of Public Transportation and Trails:
The Circulation Element does not address bikeways on the project
site but does include an equestrian trail connection through the
site. An extension of planned trails to be consistent with the
goal for a citywide system of safe, efficient and attractive
bicycle and pedestrian routes is a critical issue for
consideration, given the size of the project site. Such a multi-
use trail connection to the Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park should
be easily accessible to the public with appropriate parking
facilities. Consideration should also be given for facilities for
the City's transit route to serve the public parks and commercial
center if this project is approved.
Avoidance of hazards:
Issues related to geologic hazards, flooding, and existing oil
extraction activities are addressed in the Revised Draft EIR,
Comments, and Responses to Comments. Mitigation is included to
000014
Honorable Planning Commission
January 6, 2004
Page 9
ensure proper abandonment of
development footprint.
Noise Compatibility:
existing oil wells within the
Traffic noise and noise compatibility of the proposed park site are
addressed in the Revised Draft EIR, Comments, and Responses to
Comments. Traffic noise from the project is both individually and
cumulatively less than significant. Future activities at the
proposed Community Park (identified in draft Specific Plan as Youth
Sports Park) are not known at this time and would ultimately depend
upon consideration of a park improvement plan by the Parks and
Recreation Commission and City Council. Such a plan would address
the issue of noise, as well as, night lighting and expected
nighttime activities.
Specific Plan and Zone Change Application
As the Planning Commission is only considering General Plan
Amendment, Specific Plan and Zone Change applications, conditions
of approval normally developed for consideration of Tentative Tract
Maps and Planned Development Permits are not provided. Rather, any
conditions would take the form of recommended amendments to the
Specific Plan. It should be noted that all mitigation measures
developed as part of the Revised Draft EIR would be applied to the
project, unless findings are made supported by substantial evidence
that such mitigation measures are infeasible. Amendments to the
Specific Plan could be made to address General Plan issues as well
as other issues.
Staff recommended amendments to the Specific Plan to address
General Plan concerns are as follows:
A. Provide for a greater variety of residential densities, with
the highest densities around the lake and commercial center.
Any increase in overall density of the development area should
result in an increase in the size of the nature preserve.
B. Provide a mixed -use commercial /residential development at the
neighborhood center. Include both market -rate and affordable
units in this development.
C. Provide a more detailed plan for the provision of affordable
units that includes greater mixing of affordable units with
market -rate units, possibly both on and off site.
D. Switch the locations of PA -10 (Community Park) with PA -21
(School) to allow for a road undercrossing or overcrossing
between the 29.1 acre Community Park and Lakefront Park if
desired by the City.
000015
Honorable Planning Commission
January 6, 2004
Page 10
E. Delete any schematic diagrams of public parks or any
discussion of improvements or programming of public parks.
Parks should be referred to by names designated in the Open
Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element based on their
size and service area. The design and programming of public
parks should take place through the established practice of
the Parks and Recreation Commission and City Council. The
Specific Plan should, however, identify appropriate funding
mechanisms for the improvement and maintenance of the public
parks.
F. Incorporate a public swim area (with restrooms and locker
rooms) and public boat rental operation (docks and concession
building) into the proposed lake to enhance the public benefit
of the lake.
G. Provide an 18 -acre school site as requested by the Moorpark
Unified School District.
H. Include a phasing plan that ties the issuance of permits in
Phase A to continued progress on the development of the new
SR -118 interchange and access road.
I. Provide a full -time road connection to the site (in addition
to Collins Drive) either through the conversion of Campus Road
to a public street or through the extension of Campus Park
Drive.
J. Include language in the Specific Plan that transit stop
locations shall be provided for the commercial center and
Community Park, if desired by the City.
K. Provide public access from the Lakefront Parks to a trail
connection that reaches Happy Camp Canyon Regional Park.
Extend public access to at least 750 of the lake frontage.
Provide a public pocket park at the turnaround point of the
lake public access (trail) .
The following table identifies 21 issues that that the applicant
has identified during the hearings on the proposed Specific Plan
project. The applicant's option to address these issues and
staff's recommendation on each issue are included. Some of these
repeat the General Plan concerns noted above.
No. Issue /Project Proposal Applicant Staff
option Recommendation
1 School Site Size (PA- Increase the school site Increase the school site
10): 12 -acre school to 18 net usable acres to to 18 net usable acres to
site. satisfy a request from the satisfy a request from the
Moorpark Unified School Moorpark Unified School
District. District.
Honorable Planning Commission
January 6, 2004
Page 11
No.
Issue /Project proposal
Applicant
Stiff
Option
Recommendation
2
Day Care Site Size (PA-
Reduce the size of the day
Reduce the size of the day
22): 1.6 acre day care
care site to .5 acres to
care site to .5 acres to
site.
allow for an increased
allow for an increased
school site size.
school site size.
3
Vernal Pool
Relocate the water tank to
Relocate the water tank to
Preservation - Water
avoid the impacts to the
avoid the impacts to the
Tank (PA -54): Water
vernal pool watershed.
vernal pool watershed.
tank encroaches into a
vernal pool's
watershed.
4
Vernal Pool
Modify the alignment of
Modify the alignment of
Preservation- Moorpark
Moorpark College Road
Moorpark College Road
College Road Alignment:
and /or require the
and /or require the
Moorpark College Road
adjacent slope to be
adjacent slope to be
encroaches into the
returned through the use
returned through the use
pool's watershed.
of walls to prohibit
of walls to prohibit
encroachment into the
encroachment into the
vernal pool watershed.
vernal pool watershed.
5
Wildlife Movement:
Modify the North Park land
Modify the North Park land
Moorpark College Road
plan to add a second
plan to add a second
contains one wildlife
wildlife crossing on
wildlife crossing on
crossing
Moorpark College Road.
Moorpark College Road.
(Included as Mitigation in
the Revised Draft EIR)
6
Canyon Crossing: Road
Modify the Land Plan to
Re- evaluate the number of
crossing impacts mature
relocate a canyon crossing
living oak trees in the
trees.
to minimize impacts to
impact area (as a result
trees. Alternative 1 would
of the October 25 -26, 2003
preserve an additional 49
fire) and develop a
trees. Alternative 2
crossing to preserve as
would preserve an
many as possible without
additional 64 trees but
the need for a sewer
would require a wider
pumping facility. Trees
canyon crossing and
to be removed would
installation of a sewer
require replacement or
pumping facility.
compensation consistent
with City Ordinance.
7
Gated Entry Locations:
Relocate the middle and
Relocate the middle and
The middle and western
western entry cottages
western entry cottages
entry cottages are
further into the
further into the
immediately adjacent to
community.
community. PA -11 should
public areas. The
be in front of any entry
proposed public Nature
gate and the western entry
Park (PA -11) is behind
gate should be moved west
a gated entrance.
to be less visible from
the public areas.
000017
Honorable Planning Commission
January 6, 2004
Page 12
No.
Zs'8ue /Project Proposal
Applicant
Staff
Option
Recomrnendatiou
8
Separation of Lakeside
Consolidate PA -37 and PA-
Consolidate PA -37 and PA-
Parks (PA -37 and PA-
38 into a single 9.8 -acre
38 into a single 9.8 -acre
38): Public and private
public accessible lakeside
public accessible lakeside
park separated by
park on the north side of
park. Create a separate
commercial center.
the Neighborhood Center.
public swim area in the
This re- configuration also
lake adjacent to this park
widens the end of the lake
with restroom and changing
to increase its
facilities, and provide a
recreational value.
public boat rental
operation with concession
building and docks.
Incorporate timing
language to tie permit
issuance to completion of
this amenity.
9
Lakeside Neighborhood
Move the Lakeside
Move the Lakeside
Center (P -50) :
Neighborhood Center (P -50)
Neighborhood Center (P -50)
Currently between a
to the east or west.
to the east or west.
public and private
park.
10
Parking for Nature
Clarify that public
Clarify that public
Park: The park is
parking at the Nature Park
parking at the Nature Park
placed behind the entry
is a permitted use.
is a permitted use.
cottage and parking is
not shown on the plan.
11
Length of Public Access
Extend the lakeside public
Include at least 750 of
on Lakeside Trail: The
trail to connect the
the lake perimeter as
proposed plan calls for
revised 9.8 acre lakeside
publicly accessible by a
a public trail on a
public park to the
pedestrian trail. Provide
portion of the south
trailhead location in PA-
for a public pocket park
lake shore from the
44.
at the mid - point. Connect
commercial center to a
the revised 9.8 acre
pocket park (PA -41).
lakeside public park to
Public access to the
the trailhead location in
Nature Preserve is
PA -44 as part of this
indicated but not
trail.
clearly defined.
12
Mixed Use (Residential
Modify the plan to permit
Include both market -rate
and Commercial: No
all or a portion of the
and affordable housing
mixed -use development
affordable housing
units as part of a mixed -
is proposed.
requirement be satisfied
use (horizontal and /or
as a mixed -use component
vertical) development in
within the Neighborhood
PA -50. Reduce the size of
Center PA -50.
the commercial component
to allow for housing on
this site. Possibly
increase the size of PA -50
with a reduction to the
size of PA -31 to
accommodate a mixed -use
development.
000018
Honorable Planning Commission
January 6, 2004
Page 13
000019
xaaue /Project ,Proposal
Applicant
Staff
Option
Recommeadatsom
13
Public /Quasi - Public
Designate PA -9 for
Provide several locations,
Uses on PA -9: The
Public /Quasi- Public Uses.
possibly both on and off
Specific Plan now
the project site for the
locates 150 affordable
provision of affordable
housing units on PA -9.
housing units mixed with
market -rate units to avoid
a concentration of
affordable units in a
single location.
14
Night Lighting at the
Prohibit night lighting at
Eliminate any exhibits or
Community Park (PA -10):
the park (PA -10).
references to this site as
The DEIR analyzed the
a Youth Sports Park.
impacts of night
Designate the site a
lighting of the park.
Community Park and follow
the normal City process of
park and facility design
through recommendation by
the Parks and Recreation
Commission and approval by
the City Council.
15
Nature Preserve
Enact a condition to
Mitigation in the Revised
Maintenance Funding
require the establishment
Draft EIR provides that a
of an ongoing funding
non - wasting endowment or
program for the
landscape management
maintenance of the
district be established to
preserve in the amount
provide for ongoing
requested by SMMC.
management costs of the
Nature Preserve.
16
Groundwater Recharge
Remove development from
Remove development from
Outcrop: The Specific
the outcrop and relocate
the outcrop and relocate
Plan development
33 residential lots into
33 residential lots into
footprint encroaches
PA 31.
PA 31.
into about 15 acres of
the Fox Canyon Outcrop.
17
Street Widths: The
Modify the plan to apply
Leave the Street Standards
proposed Specific Plan
narrower streets
as shown in the Specific
applies County Road
standards.
Plan and consistent with
Standards.
the City of Moorpark
adopted standards.
18
Moorpark College Road
Modify Moorpark College
Modify Moorpark College
Design: The proposed
Road to become a four -lane
Road to become a four -lane
Specific Plan
collector with a 13 -foot
collector with a 13 -foot
establishes Moorpark
wide median.
wide median.
College Road as four -
lane collector without
a median.
000019
Honorable Planning Commission
January 6, 2004
Page 14
No.
Issue /Project Proposal
.Applicant
Staff
Option
Recommendation
19
Architectural Style:
Modify the Specific Plan
Add a ranch home as an
The proposed Specific
to delete the `Italianate
architectural style.
Plan identifies a
House" style and add a
series of architectural
ranch -style theme.
styles, generally
categorized as
"California
Heritage", including
`Italianate House"
style but not including
a ranch -style theme.
20
Guarantee Lake
Impose a requirement that
Impose a requirement that
Maintenance and Access:
as a conditional of
as a conditional of
The proposed Specific
approval the project's
approval the project's
Plan identifies states
CC &Rs provide that the
CC &Rs provide that the
that the proposed lake
Homeowner's Association
Homeowner's Association
will be accessible to
maintain the lake to
maintain the lake to City
the public.
prescribed standards, and
of Moorpark prescribed
be obligated to continue
standards, and be
public access to the lake;
obligated to continue
and that these
public access to the lake;
restrictions cannot be
and that these
modified without a
restrictions cannot be
unanimous vote of all
modified without a
members of the Homeowners
unanimous vote of all
Association.
members of the Homeowners
Additionally, require the
Association and approval
applicant to provide an
of the City of Moorpark.
easement be granted to the
Additionally, require the
City assuring public
applicant to provide an
access to the lake.
easement be granted to the
City assuring continuous
public access to the lake.
21
Collins Road
Impose a requirement that
Include the improvement of
Improvements: The
as a conditional of
the Collins Road /SR -118
proposed Specific Plan
approval of the project's
and Campus Park
requires that the
the applicant immediately
intersection as part of
applicant complete the
and diligently pursue the
the Specific Plan, with
Collins Road
Collins Road improvements
timing for improvements to
improvements prior to
upon project approval by
be completed prior to the
the issuance of the
the electorate and
issuance of any permits
first building permit.
annexation of North Park
related to the Specific
Village into the City.
Plan, including soil
testing.
With appropriate amendments to the Specific Plan as recommended,
along with the incorporation of all mitigation measures contained
in the Revised Draft EIR, staff finds that the proposed project
could be found consistent with the goals and policies of the City's
General Plan, would provide both market rate and affordable
housing, would meet school needs, and would provide a public
benefit in the dedication of public open space, the publicly
000020
Honorable Planning Commission
January 6, 2004
Page 15
accessible lake, public parks, a fire station site, and an
additional freeway interchange. Community Development staff
recommends that the project be approved, subject to the recommended
amendments, all mitigation measures, and any amendments of the
Planning Commission. It should be noted that ultimate approval is
subject to an affirmative vote of the Moorpark electorate.
STAFF RECOM4ENDATION
Continue to accept public comments and continue the agenda item
with the public hearing open to the January 20, 2004 Planning
Commission meeting.
ATTACHMENT:
Proposed Improvements to the Intersection of Collins Drive and
Campus Park Drive
00002:1
Campus Park Drive
VOnven Ine C%Isung Cai [=uno 1 nrougn
Lane to a -Right Turn Only' Lane and a
6 Bike Lane.
SR
1Ab � 1
o Add a 2nd Westbound Left Turn Lane
Modify the Existing Traffic Signal to Provide
an Eastbound Right Turn Overlap with a
Northbound Left Turn.
Convert the Existing Right Turn Lane
to -a Free Right Turn Lane.
B
r Convert the Existing Westbound
Right Turn Lane to a Free
Right Turn lane.
VNor16Ark
PC ATTACHMENT
Proposed Lane Configurations
SR 118, Collins Drive, Campus Park Drive
ACaxns Ddvo at
Campus Park DAve
L06 L03 DER IWV % NPV %
— _ --
AN Peak Pr paa 1 OIM
Taub —
Ew gC'ondhona E C 33-9 C% 100%
-- — --
Abla
ZOO vwlham Propq F D 3.19 0% 0%
2007 weh Phase A (500 do Tabb
arA a tin ti 8 9 3.3 91 100%
2020 Rpe,ft Plan Build.rx T.W.
vnln Ned fKS'�my lnlerCar ® B_ 3.1.1 Oh,. 100:4
BCoNins Or!- at SR 116
Wastbound Ramps, LA A".
LOS LOS DEM NPV % NPV %
_ AM PMk PM Pack "PW OLr _
Tabb
E st!ng COrMitxvn E C 139 OW 1004
Table
700; wthoul PrgwA F O 334 0% 014.
2007 wvh Phase A (500 du) Tale
El 3.}15 9% 1004
2020 So."" Plan a111d.,x Tab.
wkh New Fraewa 6 6 1}21 0% 100%
CColons DAve at SR 116
Eastbound RamPa t LA Ave.
LOS LOS OEM NPv% NPV%
AM Peak PM Peak Impact oNr
Tad.
Erehn9 Gxrdtons E 1 C 3.3 -9 V, -( —100%
_
Tad. —_
2007.i . Pmiact t F I. 0 33 -0 0
2001 eh PI— A(500.,,) �—�-- Table
,B.__- T 3.3. -15- 5%.
?020 S,xcfic Pbn S.Adma Trxe
wd1 New Freewa kNercna B e 3 3-11
I I
Phase No
North Perk Vi` 's affen v to
r 1
� (rH* V o 6POr ry
d the Fvst Htms m Ute Spec a Plan
ANatinfOA
Tra w "inesrs
'.41anc« a. 7003
000022