HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 2004 0203 PC REGPlanning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of February 3, 2004
Paqe 1
The Regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held on
February 3, 2004, in the City Council Chambers; Moorpark Civic
Center; 799 Moorpark Avenue; Moorpark, California; 93021.
1. CALL TO ORDER:
Chair Pozza called the meeting to order at 7:22 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Vice Chair Lauletta led the Pledge of Allegiance.
3. ROLL CALL:
Commissioners DiCecco, Landis and Peskay, Vice Chair
Lauletta and Chair Pozza were present.
Staff attending the meeting included Barry Hogan, Community
Development Director; Walter Brown, Assistant City
Engineer; David Bobardt, Planning Manager; Laura Stringer,
Senior Management Analyst; and Gail Rice, Administrative
Secretary.
Also attending the meeting were Dana Privitt from BonTerra
Consulting and Joseph Montoya of Leighton and Associates.
4. PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS AND SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
None.
5. REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
None.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. Regular Meeting Minutes of January 20, 2004.
MOTION: Commissioner Peskay moved and Commissioner DiCecco
seconded a motion that the Planning Commission Regular
Meeting Minutes of January 20, 2004, be approved. (Motion
carried with a unanimous 5:0 voice vote.)
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2004 Final \04 0203 pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of February 3, 2004
Page 2
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
None.
8. DISCUSSION ITEMS:
None.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
(next Resolution No. 2004 -454)
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, -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) (Continued from January 20, 2004 Meeting)
Staff Recommendation: Continue to accept public
comments and continue the agenda item with the public
hearing open to the February 17, 2004 Planning
Commission meeting.
David Bobardt gave the staff presentation.
Joseph Montoya, geologist for Leighton and Associates,
subconsultants for BonTerra Consulting. Mr. Montoya
provided information on oil well depth and production.
He commented on the oil processing procedures,
handling of oil, maintaining facilities and possible
leaks. He explained the types of waste and processes
used in cleanup, non -toxic chemicals contained in the
oil, and explained the analyses performed by the
California Department of Toxic Substances Control. He
explained the roll of the Division of Oil, Gas, and
Geothermal Resources (DOGGR). Mr. Montoya advised that
Ventura County Environmental Health Department could
oversee site cleanup under its voluntary program. He
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2009 Fina1\04_0203_pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of February 3, 2004
Paae 3
also provided information on Phase I and Phase II
reports and their timing with regard to development.
The Commission questioned Mr. Montoya on the number
active wells on the property, the Phase II report,
methods for identifying subsurface tanks or pipelines,
potential contaminants, and who oversees production if
the wells continue operating.
Steven A. Fields, Operations Engineer from DOGGR was
available for questions.
The Commission questioned Mr. Fields on the regulatory
oversight that is provided with ongoing operations and
asked if there were previous reported incidents on
this site. Mr. Fields responded that the department
had a good working relationship with the operator.
Kim Kilkenny, applicant, addressed questions on oil
wells and identification of underground systems. He
then submitted an updated matrix which included
staff's recommendation and the position of the
applicant on various issues.
The Commission questioned the applicant on sub - surface
mineral rights and surface rights, oil operations
inside the property lines and the lakeside trail.
Chris Childer, resident, spoke in support of the
proposal, and commented that the project would provide
the City with much needed housing and that it should
be sent to the people for a vote.
Sharonmarie Fisher Laughrey, resident, not in support
of the proposal, commented on traffic, noise problems
and environmental issues. She stated that she would
like the onramp first, that speed bumps and longer
traffic lights did not cover concerns with children
walking. She commented that crosswalks would not work
because there was no stopping the college traffic.
Susan Nardi, resident, not in support of the proposal,
commented that with an impact of 23,000 cars, two
entrances and one exit will be an issue. She commented
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2004 Fina1\04_0203_pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of February 3, 2004
Paae 4
on the possibility of no transportation funds which
could affect the project and the loss of nature due to
construction traffic making this a major thoroughfare.
Dorothy Ventimiglio, resident, not in support of the
proposal, commented on concerns with soil
contamination because of the oil wells and expressed
concern that the underground piping should be removed
prior to grading.
Randy Griffith, resident, not in support of the
proposal, commented on the groundwater and concerns
regarding a conflict between Fox Canyon Ground Water
Management and Ventura County Waterworks District.
Commissioner Lauletta clarified that the issue had
been addressed earlier in the meeting, prior to Mr.
Griffith's arrival.
Lisa Leal, resident, spoke in support
commented Hidden Creek offered no amE
project, supported the helipad, the
traffic flows will benefit from the
commended the developer for their
people and the community.
of the proposal,
unities like this
park, and that
interchange. She
support of the
Three (3) written statement cards were submitted and
two were in favor and one neutral for the project. The
statements will be included in the record.
The Commission questioned staff on Fox Canyon's
response to overpumping, the water supply assessment,
improvements if contamination is found, the active
wells, construction traffic routes, the day care site
being built adjacent to the school, switching daycare
center and park site with the school, review of the
matrix, voluntary cleanup program, and the previous
conflicts between Ventura County Waterworks District
and Fox Canyon Groundwater Management Agency.
Chair Pozza called a seven minute recess due to
electronic equipment problems.
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2004 Finai \04_0203_pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of February 3, 2004
Paae 5
The Commission reviewed items #1 through #17 on the
matrix.
By consensus, the Commission concurred with staff's
recommendation on items 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, and
16.
The Commission provided direction to staff or
recommendations on the following items:
Item No. 1: Vice Chair Lauletta requested MUSD
Superintendent to return and discuss projections
including North Park Village at buildout, and
Commissioner Landis commented that he preferred
multiple school levels.
Item No. 2: Commissioner Peskay recommended the Day
Care Site be adjacent to school site. The Commission
by consensus concurred with that recommendation.
Item No. 6: The Commission recommended replacement of
trees removed for the Canyon Crossing rather than
compensation.
Item No. 7: Mr. Hogan provided the Commission with a
summary of recent City Council discussions and
direction regarding gated communities. The majority
of the Commission expressed no concern with a gated
community. Commissioner DiCecco expressed preference
for no gated entries, however supported the relocation
of the gates as suggested by staff.
Item No. 11: The Commission requested developer return
with options for lakeside public access.
Item No. 12: Commissioner DiCecco expressed preference
for increased density (single and multi - density) in
PA -31 and Vice Chair Lauletta and Commissioner DiCecco
expressed preference for mixed use in the commercial
site. There was discussion concerning market rate
mixed use units. It was concluded that the applicant
would work further with staff on this issue.
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2004 Fina1\04_0203_pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of February 3, 2004
Paqe 6
Item No. 15: Vice Chair Lauletta requested that
habitat restoration and protection be included in the
maintenance plan.
Item No. 17: There was discussion of the pros and
cons of narrower streets and the impact on driveway
aprons and Handicap accessibility. Commissioner
DiCecco recommended that the main roadway include a
median similar to Tierra Rejada Road. The applicant
was requested to provide additional information on
street widths for the next meeting.
By consensus the Commission agreed to continue the
review of the matrix to the February 17, 2004,
meeting.
MOTION: Vice Chair Lauletta moved and Commissioner
DiCecco seconded a motion to approve staff
recommendation.
(Motion carried with a unanimous 5:0 voice vote.)
10. DISCUSSION ITEMS:
None.
11. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
(Future agenda items are tentative and are subject to contin•jation.)
A. February 3, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting:
• General Plan Amendment No. 2001 -05, Zone Change No.
2001 -02, and Specific Plan No. 2001 -01 (North Park)
B. February 17, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting:
• 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.)
Barry Hogan discussed future agenda items.
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2004 Final \09 - 0203— pcm.doc
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of February 3, 2004
Paae 7
12. ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION: Commissioner Landis moved and Commissioner Peskay
seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting.
(Motion carried with a unanimous 5:0 voice vote.)
The meeting was adjourned at 10:16 p.m.
'I
S�� z hair
ATTEST:
B rry, Hog
mm n'ty D Jopment Director
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COMMISSION \MINUTES \2004 Fina1\04_0203_pcm.doc