HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1994 0518 CC REG ITEM 09ATO: The Honorable City Council
ff k KIP Ism
FROM: Jaime Aguilera, Director of Gq=*unity Development
Paul Porter, Senior Planner,
DATE: May 5, 1994 (CC meeting of May 18, 1994)
SUBJECT: AMENDMENTS TO THE CARLSBERG SPECIFIC PLAN
Background
At the City Council meeting of January 26, 1993, the City Council
directed staff to make Council directed modifications to the Draft
Resolutions, Specific Plan, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and a
Ordinance amending the City's Zoning Regulations in order to adopt
the amended land use regulations of the Specific Plan as Zoning for
the property. The Council directed staff to bring this matter back
to the City Council on May 18, 1994.
Discussion
The City Council directed staff and the applicant to make the
following changes prior to the City Council's meeting on May 18,
1994 for the Council's review:
1. Add a requirement for City -wide traffic mitigation fee to
the Specific Plan which is to be included as a mitigation
measure to the Mitigation Monitoring Program and
referenced in the City Council Resolution approving the
Specific Plan.
2. Make the Council directed change to the County
requirement to TC 17 on page 18 of the Mitigation
Monitoring Program requiring the developer shall
contribute a pro rata share, as determined by the City of
Moorpark for traffic impacts to County roadways.
3. Make appropriate changes to the Specific Plan showing
trail connections from the active park to the passive
open space areas and state in the Specific Plan that the
active park will be improved to park standards by
incorporating items such as a baseball dugout, restrooms,
sidewalks, parking area, etc. The applicant will also
provide a topographic map showing the proposed trail
connection.
PP05:05:9414:07pmA: \18NAY94.CC
4. The applicant will create an exhibit to be part of the
Specific Plan document indicating which open space areas
are designated for public or private ownership.
5. The applicant shall provide verbiage in the Specific Plan
indicating that the active park does not totally satisfy
the requirements of the Quimby contribution.
6. The Settlement Agreement shall be incorporated into the
Specific Plan.
7. The verbiage in the Specific Plan allowing a Floating
Commercial area along Tierra Rejada Road shall be
eliminated from the Plan
8. Language shall be added to the Plan indicating that
development within the Specific Planning area shall be
subject to current and future growth control Ordinances.
9. Staff shall prepare an Ordinance to amend the City's
Zoning Regulations in order to adopt the "Amended Land
Use Regulations of the Specific Plan" as Zoning for the
property.
10. Staff shall modify the draft resolutions as appropriate.
11. The plan shall be modified to include language indicating
that the knoll located northerly of the proposed active
park shall be preserved.
12. Language shall be added to the Specific Plan stating that
the Specific Planning area will not be subject to any
future Hillside Grading Ordinance unless the Specific
Plan is amended after the adoption of the Hillside
Ordinance.
The City Manager has indicated that negotiations between the City
and Carlsberg Financial Corporation regarding the Settlement
Agreement have not yet been completed. It is possible that
additional points beyond items 1 through 12 listed above may be
added as a result of the Settlement Agreement. Since the City
Attorney has recommended that the Settlement Agreement be
incorporated into the Specific Plan document, this document is not
yet in final form. Staff will have the applicant complete the
Specific Plan document once the Settlement Agreement has been
approved by the City and the applicant.
The proposed changes are cited in the Resolution of Approval and
require that the final document be submitted to the City within
thirty (30) days of approval. Said document (Final Specific Plan)
shall incorporate all conditions cited in the approving Resolution.
PP05:05:9414:07pmA:\18MAY94.CC 2
Staff has completed the draft Ordinance and made the appropriate
changes to the resolutions and Mitigation Monitoring Program which
are attached for the Council's review pending any changes resulting
from the Settlement Agreement. The draft Ordinance has been sent
to the City Attorney for review. Staff expects that first reading
will be held on July 6, 1994.
Recommendations:
1. Review the amended Draft Resolutions, Specific Plan,
Mitigation Monitoring Program, and Ordinance.
2. After approval of the Settlement Agreement:
a. Adopt the Resolution Certifying the Environmental Impact
Report and approve the Mitigation Monitoring Program.
b. Adopt the attached Resolution and findings and statement
of overriding considerations amending the Land Use
Element of the General Plan to reflect the amended land
uses
C. Introduce the Ordinance to amend the City's Zoning
Regulations in order to adopt the amended land use
regulations of the Specific Plan as Zoning for the
property for first reading.
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolutions with Findings
2. Mitigation Monitoring Program
3. Draft Ordinance amending Article 19 of the Zoning Ordinance
PP05:05:94 14:07pmA:\18MAY94.CC 3
./
•
Rev 5/11/94
. RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK,
CALIFORNIA APPROVING'AN 'AMENDMENT PTO THE CARLSBERG SPECIFIC
PLAN;:ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, MAKING CERTAIN
FINDINGS RELATED TO THE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT,
AND. ADOPTING A STATEMENT-OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS. IN
CONNECTION,THEREWITH
•
WHRRFAS '- 'Carlsberg Financial Corporation has filed an application with
the City of Moorpark for an amendment to the adopted Carlsberg Specific Plan
regulating development of.an.approximate-500-acre land.holding located went of
the Moorpark Freeway, (8R23) .east'of Spring Road, north of Tierra Rej ada Road,
and south of •New Los Angeles.Avenue in the City. of Moorpark; .and _
was WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") dated May 18, 1993
prepared and circulated for a 45 day period in order to receive written
commentsaon on the adequacy of the document:from. responsible agencies and from the
•
WHEREAS, before approving an amendment to the adopted Carlsberg Specific
Plan, CEQA requires the preparation and certification of a Subsequent
Environmental impact Report to address the environmental impacts of the proposed
amendment to the Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, . the EIR and proposed amendment to the Specific Plan were
considered by the Planning Commission at its meetings of August 2, 1993, August
16, 1993, and September 7, 1993; and
WHEREAS, .o',the Planning Commission, after considering fall testimony and
evidence presented regarding the EIR and proposed amendment to the Specific Plan,
whether written or oral, recommended approval of the Specific Plan amendment to
the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the DEIR and proposed amendment to the Specific Plan were
considered by the City Council at Several public meetings ; and
WHEREAS, a Final EIR ("FRIR"), dated November 18, 1993, was prepared
containing all written correspondence received commenting on the DEIR, summaries
•
of oral comments on the DEIR made at hearings held by the Planning Commission and
the- City Council on the DEIR, and written responses to these comments; and
•
WHEREAS, after considering the FEIR in conjunction with all evidence and
• testimony, whether written or oral, the City Council reached a decision on this
matter.
NOW, THEREFORE, .THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, DOES
Hstaff: reports,EREBY- FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS based on the EIR, oral and written
Commission and
other testimony
and theCity Council oft evidence he ityofMoorark presented to the Planning
•
ATTACHMENT 1 -
./ .
Rev 5/11/94
SECTION 1. Except as otherwise provided in these findings or in Resolution
No. of the City Council certifying the EIR, the analysis and conclusions of •
the EIR are hereby adopted as if fully set forth herein. .
SECTION 2. Except as otherwise set forth in these findings, the mitigation
measures adopted in connection with the approval of the proposed Specific Plan
amendment wilt "mitigate the projects significant impacts to a lass than
significant level - - _
SECTION .3;: In response to comments received by the City on the'PEIR and
proposed Specific Plan amendment, modifications were made to the Project to
further mitigate-potential impacts.
These modifications to ,the Project axe discussed in the "Project Modification
Summary" dated April 27,-1994. The new information in thin "Project Modification
Summary" is not substantial and does not constitute significant new information
ae:only.minor technical changes'and additions are•made to the.information in the
EIR and no important new issues. about the project are raised.
SECTION 4. Eadh Finding is based on the entire record of proceedings,
including written and oral testimony before the Planning Commission and the City
Council. The description of impacts, mitigation measures and alternatives in
these findings is'.intended to be a summary only. The full descriptions and
analyses are set forth in the EIR and adopted by this City Council except as
expressly set forth herein.
SECTION 4. Prior to considering the approval of the amendment to the
Specific.Plan, the City Council.reviewed the EIR and adopted.Resolution No.
certifying the EIR for the proposed amendment to the Carlsberg Specific Plan as
having been completed in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.
SECTION 5. A Mitigation Monitoring Program ("MMP") which consists of all
the mitigation measures listed in the MMP (a copy of this MMP is attached hereto
as Exhibit A), is hereby approved and adopted and the mitigation measures are
specifically adopted::as.conditions, of.approval of the-amendment.to the amendment
to the-Specific-P1an. .:All mitigation measures previously -imposed as part of the
1990 final EIR Plan that are. not included in the MMP are no longer valid and
applicable to the project. '
SECTION 6. certain of the impacts under the following environmental topics
were identified as potentially significant impacts and were analyzed in the EIR:
topography; hydrology; biota; traffic and circulation; air quality; noise; land
use; and housing. Each of these potential impacts is discussed more fully in
Sections 7 through 25 below.
SECTION 7. Section 6 of the DEIR sets forth the impacts found not to be
significant based on the Initial Study and DEIR. As listed in Section 6 of the
DEIR, these include certain impacts related to the following environmental
topics: soil resources; air quality; light and glare; natural resources; risk of
upset; population; housing; public services; energy; utilities; human health;
aesthetics; recreation; cultural resources.
SECTION S. Under the topic of topography, the EIR concludes that
implementation of the amended Specific Plan would result in the alteration of
Type 1, 2, and 3 ridges on the site and grading of elopes greater than 20
percent. The primary changes associated with the proposed amendment would be
allowing greater development of planning area "C" which would include alteration.
of a Type 2 ridge and the grading of approximately 3 to 5 acres of slopes greater
•
•
•
Rev 5/11/94
than 20 percent that would-not be graded under..the adopted Specific Plan. Area
C" is situated in the central portion of the site and views of this-location •
from off-site .viewpoints are largely precluded. This condition minimizes this
impact to some extent. These impacts will be mitigated to a level of less than
significant:by implementation of mitigation measures.Tl through T25.as.contained
in..the MAP.. - .
SECTION 9. Under the topic of hydrology, the EIR concludes that development under the amended Specific Plan would increase site runoff in the
Arroyo Simi-and Peach. Hill Wash watersheds by 55 cubic feet per second. .This
increase represents a 17.3 percent increase . in runoff in-- the Arroyo . Simi
watershed- and- a. 30.0 percent decrease in runoff in the Peach Hill watershed.
This increase in runoff,will not adversely affect drainage facilities in either
of these watersheds. Detailed development plans have not been completed for the
portion of-the site located .in the Arroyo-Santa Rosa watershed and, therefore,
specific information on.impacts to this. watershed is not available: : .Detailed
hydrologic studies will be required when detailed plans for this portion of the
Specific Plan area are completed prior to approval of the final map. The
applicant.will construct all.improvements as required by the:City to mitigate.any
impact-to the existing drainage:facilities in the Arroyo:.Santa-Rosa watershed.
All impacts associated with increases in runoff will be mitigated to a level of
less than significant by implementation of mitigation measures EY1 to-HY6, as
contained in the MAP.
SECTION 10. Under the topic of hydrology, the EIR concludes that no on-site
flooding impacts will occur-as all storm drain facilities will be designed to
handle 50-year d -yea 'frequency storms and no development is proposed in
yea or 500
the 100- year flood zones as a result of proposed implementation. Mitigation measured HY1 to HY6, as contained in theMAP, require
City review and approval of the storm drain design to ensure that no significant -
flooding impacts occur.
SECTION 11. Under the.topic of -hydrology, the EIR concludes that minimal
erosion:and sedimentation .impacts may- occur during grading. and construction.
Mitigation measure HY1-,. -as 'contained in the AMP, requires preparation of a
erosion, siltation and dust control plan to ensure that these. construction
effects are minimized. Mitigation measures HY7 and HYS, as contained in the MMP,
impose further requirements to mitigate any potential increase in erosion and
sedimentation during construction to, a level of less than significant.
SECTION 12. Under the topic of hydrology, the EIR concludes that 200-300
feet of the uppermost portion of a blueline stream located on the northern
portion of the site would be directly affected by the proposed development.
Further analysis of the proposed project in relation to this stream bed will be
required
of
the property.
as a condition of approval of the. Tentative Tract Map for this portion
property. As no. detailed development plans are available at this time it
would be speculative to examine this potential impact any further at this time.
If feasible, any impact to •this stream will be avoided by refining the grading
plan. Any alteration of this stream will be subject to the approval of the
California Department of Fish and Game and possibly the Army Corps of Engineers.
Through these permit.processes, specific mitigation measures for any direct
impactsl be
mitigatedned.to a leveloofh this rocess this less than significant otental riori ap
to impact will
the Tentative Tract Map. P pprovalof
SECTION 13. Under the topic of biota, the EIR concludes that implementation
of the adopted Specific,. Plan would result in direct and indirect impacts to
3
•
Rev 5/11/94
sensitive plant and animal specieson the site. Implementation of the Project
would result in the loss approximately 21 acres of vegetation associated with the
cactus phase of the coastal sage scrub plant community that provides habitat for
the cactus wren, a sensitive bird species. To mitigate this impact to a level
of less than significant, Mitigation Measure B2, as contained in the MMP,
requires a revegetation program to replace this vegetation on the site.
A vernal pool, containing California Orcutt grass, is. located in the
southeastern portion of the site. Lyon's pentachaeta is also located in this
portion of the site in proximity of the pool. The vernal pool, California Orcutt
grass, and Lyon's pentachaeta are all considered to be sensitive resources. As
designed, the Project avoids direct impacts to known populations of Lyon's
pentachaeta and the vernal pool. The Project includes a Rare Plant Management
Program (RPMP) designed to minimize any indirect impacts to the vernal pool,
California Orcutt grass, and Lyon's pentachaeta. The RPMP addresses the
maintenance of water flown to the vernal pool, preservation of key open space
areas, and provision of a buffer•area to minimize indirect impacts associated
with an increased human presence in the area. Mitigation measures Bl, B3, and B4
to B5 as contained in the DEIR on pages 5-71 to 5-72 were proposed to further
minimize any indirect impacts on these resources. These measures included
increasing the buffer around the vernal pool from 0-50 feet to 100 feet;
specifying types of mosquito control to be used in the pool; forbidding any
draining or disturbance of the pool; and requiring that native plants be used in
project landscaping near open space areas. The California Department of Fish and
Game (CDFG) commented on the DEIR and RPMP, indicating that, in the opinion of
CDFG, the construction and presence of 100 homes in the vicinity of the vernal
pool would result in an unacceptable alteration of the watershed for the vernal
pool and that the artificial hydrologic regime proposed in the RPMP would not
sufficiently mitigate this impact. In addition, CDFG stated that they believed
the buffer provided was insufficient to allow for seasonal fluctuation and
expansion of the populations of Lyon's pentachaeta on the site. In response to
these comments, further revisions were made to the project to minimize any
indirect impacts on these resources including a redesign of lots in this area to
increase the buffer around the vernal pool to 100 to 250 feet.
With implementation of the RPMP and Mitigation Measures B3 to B5, as contained
in the MMP, the potentially significant impacts to the vernal pool, California
Orcutt grass, and Lyon's pentachaeta are considered mitigated to a level of less
than significant by the City Council. Mitigation Measure B1, as contained in the
DEIR, is no longer applicable as the buffer around the vernal pool has been made
- larger than the 100 foot buffer called for by this measure. This finding of the
City Council is based on the information contained in the EIR and the expertise
of the City's biological consultant for this Project. Contrary to the expertise
of the City's ant, the
FG has alleged in lettrs d pulic
testimony thatbiological
the Project willt result in�an unavoidable dverseeimpact tob
bthe
sensitive resources discussed above even with implementation of the RPMP and
other mitigation measures and that a larger buffer should be provided around the
pool. The City Council acknowledges that a disagreement among experts exists
• with regard to this issue. Section 15151 of the CEQA guidelines states that a
disagreement among experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should
summarize the main points of disagreements among experts. The RPMP, as prepared
by the City's biological consultant, was based on extensive hydrological and
other technical studies and required a redesign of the project. The CDFG has
expressed opinions regarding the effectiveness of this mitigation program, but
has produced no technical or other information to support the comments made. The
City Council understands each viewpoint, and based on the information presented
by each expert, has accepted the opinion of the City's biological consultant.
•
•
Rev 5/11/94
If, and to the extent that-, the allegations of CDFG are proven to be true or
partially true at a later date, any future impacts to the vernal pool, California
Orcutt grass, and Lyon's Pentachaeta, are. considered to be acceptable due to the
overriding considerations set forth in Section 29 below.
SECTION 14. Under the topic of biota, the EIR found that implementation of
the amended Specific Plan would result in habitat loss and direct and indirect
impacts to natural habitat on the site. Approximately,33 percent of the natural habitat on 'the site will be removed through implementation of the project.. In
addition, placement.of development adjacent to the remaining open space will
result in indirect impacts to wildlife. Mitigation' measures 84 and 85 will
mitigate the indirect effects to: a level considered less .than significant by
limiting nighttime lighting and requiring the use of compatible plant materials
near open space areas.
SECTION 15. Under the topic of traffic, the EIR concludes that the proposed
amendment to the Specific Plan would generate 37% percent more traffic than the
currently adopted Specific Plan and would result in significant impacts to seven
intersections that would result from implementation of the amended Specific Plan.
These intersections are: Moorpark Avenue/Los Angeles Avenue; Spring Road/Los
Angeles Avenue; Moorpark Road/Tierra Rejada Road; State Route 23
northbound/Tierra Rejada Road; Science Drive/New Los angles Avenue; "A"
Street/Tierra Rejada Road; and "A" Street/"B" Street. In addition, the amended
Specific Plan would improve the operating conditions of the intersection of
Spring Road/Tierra Rejada Road by providing another north/south road, Science
Drive, -that will carry some of the traffic currently using Spring Road. While
the operating capacity of this intersection would improve it would still operate
at a level of service considered to be unacceptable by the City of Moorpark. The
•
impact of the project on the operation of these intersections will be mitigated
to a level that is less than significant by City of Moorpark standards with
implementation of mitigation measures TC 1 through TC 17, as contained in the
MMP. These measures require improvements to certain intersections and a fair
share financial contribution by the applicant towards the costs of improving
other, impacted facilities. These measures provide for improvement of impacted
City of Moorpark, County of Ventura, and State of California Facilities.
Impacts to the County regional roadway system and Congestion Management Plan
network were analyzed based on available traffic analysis methodologies. The
County of Ventura is currently preparing a county-wide traffic model to monitor
cumulative traffic impacts and an associated traffic fee program. In lieu of
this county-wide program, the County has been seeking to establish reciprocal
traffic mitigation fee agreements with the cities in Ventura County defining
inter-jurisdictional responsibilities for mitigation of traffic impacts.
Mitigation Measure TC18, as contained in the MFD?, will ensure that impacts to
County roads are mitigated by requiring the applicant to contribute a pro-rata
share of the cost of improving impacted County roadways, provided that a
reciprocal agreement between the County and the City of Moorpark related to
mitigation of traffic impacts is reached within the next ten years. Absent a
reciprocal agreement or a county-wide program, the City Council finds that there
is no other feasible method available for properly analyzing and mitigating any
impact of the project_on County roadways. If this reciprocal agreement cannot
be reached between the County and the City of Moorpark within a '10 year period
and there is an impact on County roadways that is not fully mitigated, such
impact would be acceptable due to the overriding considerations set forth in
Section 29 below.
5
Rev 5/11/94
SECTION 16. Under the topic of air quality, the EIR concludes that
construction allowed by the. amended Specific Plan would result in short-term
increases in emission levels from construction equipment and dust generation.
The increase in construction emissions is not considered significant due to the
temporary nature of this impact. While not considered significant, mitigation
measures Al through A6, as contained in the. MMP, will minimize construction
impacts related to equipment emissions or fugitive dust generation.
- -:SECTION 17'; Under the topic of airquality, .the EIR also concludes that
implementation.of the amended Specific Plan would result in the generation of
long term air emissions of reactive organic compounds (ROC) and oxides of
nitrogen (NOx) associated with vehicular trips that exceed the threshold of
significance set by the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District.
Mitigation measures A7 through A24, as contained in the.MMP, will mitigate this
impact to a level of less than significant. . These measures include design
features to be incorporated into structures within the project, regulation of the
amount of housing to be built at certain points during build-out of the project,
and payment of a mitigation fee.
SECTION 18. Under the topic of air quality, the EIR concludes that future
localized concentrations of carbon monoxide at intersections that will be
utilized by traffic from the project will not exceed the California ambient air
quality standards. For this reason, the increase in localized carbon monoxide
levels resulting from project traffic is not considered to be significant.
SECTION 19. Under the topic of air quality, the EIR concludes that the
project is consistent with the Air Quality Management Plan.
SECTION 20. Under the topic of noise, the EIR concludes that noise impacts
associated with construction activities would be a short term nuisance to local
residents. This impact is not considered to be significant because of the short
term duration. Mitigation measures N1 through N4, as contained in the MMP, which
control construction related activities, will minimize potential construction
noise effects. -
SECTION 21. Under the topic of noise, the EIR concludes that noise levels
along off-site roadways will not increase significantly as a result of the
addition of project generated traffic to these roadways.
SECTION 22. Under the topic of noise, the EIR concludes that traffic noise
levelsin
would exceed th
' 60dB (A) planning
standard for low density residential acent to the kuses,,ww thout mitigation.
Mitigation measures NS through N8, as contained in the MMP, will reduce this
impact to below a level of significance by requiring additional study of noise
levels in area "A" and the placement of all..residential units outside the 60dB
(A) CNEL contour; design of structures to meet applicable interior noise
standards; controls on outside equipment; and additional analysis of residential
areas along Science Drive to ensure all residential units are outside the 60d2(A)
CNEL contour for this road.
SECTION 23. Under the topic of noise, the EIR concludes that operational
noise levels associated with the uses allowed by the Specific Plan will not
result in significant impacts for surrounding land uses. Noise generated by
uses in the business park portion of the site may, however, be a nuisance for
residents of a new multi-family housing complex on the north side, of New Los
Angeles Avenue. To minimize any nuisance, mitigation measure N8, as contained
in the MMP, limits the time of day certain equipment associated with maintenance
6
Rev 5/11/94
of outdoor areas within.the business park portion of the site can operate to
daytime hours.
SECTION 24. Under the topic of land use, the EIR concludes that the amended
Specific Plan is consistent with the land use designations for the site found in
the City's General Plan and that the land uses within the project are compatible
with surroundinguses. To ensure the compatibility of land uses, mitigation
measure L1,- as contained in the MMP, -:requires-separation and buffering between
different land uses on and off-site along with- conformance with site-plans for
individual areas within the Project ae approved by -the City.
SECTION 25.. Under the topic-of. housing,- the- EIR concludes -that the
elimination of multi-family uses from:the -project would not affect city-wide
programs or result in any other impact to low-moderate income housing, elderly
housin
g, or the demand for housing assistance within the City of Moorpark. This
loss of potential multi-family housing:will, however, contribute to a significant
cumulative impact on the availability .of low-moderate-income housing, elderly
housing, and the demand for housing assistance. This cumulative impact may be
avoided by development of policies and incentive programs by the City that will
stimulate the production of low income housing within the City. To the extent
this cumulative impact is not avoided through the development and implementation
of programs by the City of Moorpark, this impact would be acceptable due to the
overriding considerations set forth in section 29 below.
SECTION 26. Other than the cumulative impact identified above in Section
25, no significant cumulative impacts have been identified.
SECTION 27. The City 'Council hereby makes the following findings in
accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081 and.CEQA Guidelines Section
15091:
A. The imposition of the MMP constitutes changes or alterations in the
project which will reduce certain of the- potentially significant
impacts of the project in the areas of topography, hydrology, biota,
traffic, air quality, and noise to a level 'consideredless than
significant by the City of Moorpark.
E. The imposition of the MMP will also reduce those impacts of the
project found to be adverse, but not significant, in the areas of
construction related emissions and operational noise impacts to
off-site land uses.
C. The city Council finds that the Project will not result in a
significant impact to the sensitive biological resources on the site
ae discussed in Section 13 above. The California Department of Fish
• and Game disagrees with the City Council and its technical experts
and has requested that Alternative 3 be approved to mitigate
potential impacts to these sensitive resources to a level considered
less than significant by the Department. The specific economic
reasons set forth in Section 30 make this alternative infeasible.
D. The City Council finds that potential impacts to County roadways
have been analyzed to the extent .feasible as discussed above in
Section 15. At this time, there is no feasible mechanism for
further analyzing and mitigating any project or cumulative impact to
County roadways. A mitigation measure requiring the applicant to
contribute a pro-rata share of the cost of improving County roads to
7
Rev 5/11/94
mitigate project or cumulative impacts, provided that a reciprocal
agreement between the County and City on road impacts is reached in
the next 10 years, has been imposed on the project. -No other
feasible mitigation measures for this impact have been identified in
the EIR.
E. The cumulative housing impact identified in Section, 25 above may
remain significant if the City is not able ; to develop and
successfully implement programs to stimulate the production of low
income housing within the City. No other feasible mitigation
measures for this potential cumulative impact have been identified
in the EIR or by the City Council.
SECTION 28. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 and other
provisions of law, the City Council has balanced the benefits of this project
against the potentially unavoidable significant impacts identified in Sections
13, 15, and 25 above in the areas of sensitive biological resources, traffic and
housing which are assumed to exist for purposes of this balancing process. For
the reasons listed below, the City.Council has determined that the benefits of
this project outweigh the potentially unavoidable impacts to sensitive biological
resources, traffic, and housing and that such adverse effects area considered
acceptable. Each of the matters set forth below is independent of the other
matters of overriding consideration, warranting approval of the project despite
each and every impact that might remain significant.
A. The Project will provide funding for public improvements, including
improvements to major arterials that will benefit the entire
community.
B. The Project will provide improvements to Spring Road. This road is
an important link in the City's circulation network and improvement
of this road will benefit the entire community.
C. The Project will construct Science Drive, which will provide an
alternative north-south roadway to Spring Road. This addition to
the circulation network will benefit the entire community.
D. The Project provides for permanent open space areas that benefit the
entire community.
E. The Project will enhance the "gateway" to the City of Moorpark by
facilitating relocation of the existing California Department of
• Transportation Maintenance yard.
F. The amended Specific Plan includes a substantial amount of business
park and commercial uses that will generate direct and indirect
• revenues for the City of Moorpark.
G. The amended Specific Plan has a better balance of jobs and housing
than the plan as currently adopted.
SECTION
the "No Project/SiteE Buildout Consistent alternativered three with thes adopteto thed SropecificclPlan"
alternative. This alternative is discussed on DEIR pages 7-2 through 7-7 and
analyzes build-out of the project under the Carlsberg Specific Plan as currently
adopted. The applicant has requested this amendment as build-out of the project
under the Specific Plan as currently adopted is not financially feasible at the
8
•
•
Rev 5/11/94
present time. Both the currently adopted Specific .Plan and the Project are
considered consistent with the General Plan. The primary differences between the
two plane are the allowed type and location of housing. The Project would allow
147 more homes than the adopted Specific Plan and allow increased development of
planning area "Ca, an area largely reserved for open apace uses in the current
plan. As a result of this change The Project would impact slightly more native
vegetation in area "C" (approximately 7 acres) than the adopted. Specific Plan,
but would still impact the two endangered plant species and vernal pool in area
"A". As the adopted plan allows less unite in area "C":than the currently adopted
plan, this alternative would result in' slightly less grading of elopes over 20
percent and less grading of the type 2 ridge line in area "C". The location of
the additional grading allowed by the Project is not-in areae.highly visible from
off-site locations. As^ less unite would be-built under this alternative, less
traffic, vehicular noise, and vehicular emissions would be generated. The
significance of the traffic,. noise, and air. quality impacts, after'mitigation,
however, would be similar between the currently adopted -and-proposed amendment
to the Specific Plan. Based on the findingsthat the environmental impacts of
this alternative and the project.are not substantially different for most of the
topics analyzed; the Project will result in less impact to the sensitive
biological resources in planning area "A"; and the economic viability of the
Project is considered to be superior, the City Council is not selecting thin
alternative for approval.
The EIR also considered the "Site Buildout Consistent with the 1990 Final EIR
Plan" alternative. This alternative is discussed on draft EIR pages 7-7 through
7-11 and considers build-out of the site under the plan analyzed in the 1990 EIR.
This alternative would not include development of planning..area "C" but would
include more development of planning area "A" near sensitive biological
resources. Thin alternative would result in less grading of slopes over 20
percent and the type 2 ridge line in area "C". The location of the additional .
grading allowed by the Project is not in areas highly visible from off-site
locations. While this alternative includes the same number of units as the
Project, some of the units wouldlbe_multi-family units. nue.to the different trip
generation rates for multi-family .units, this alternative would generate less
traffic and associated vehicular emissions -and noise than the Project. The
significance of these traffic, noise, and air quality impacts, after mitigation,
however, would be similar between the Project and this alternative. This
alternative would result in greater impacts to the biological resources in area
"A" while preserving more natural haabbitat in area "C". Based on the findings that
the environmental impacts of the alternative and the project are not
substantially different for most of the topics analyzed; the Project will result
in less'impact to the sensitive biological resources in planning area "A"; and
the economic viability of the Project is considered to be superior, the City
Council is not selecting this alternative for approval.
The third alternative considered in the EIR .is the "Hybrid Alternative". This
• alternative is analyzed on draft EIR pages 7-12 through 7-16. The Hybrid
Alternative was formulated' to reduce identified impacts to a level considered
lees than significant, as feasible, in accordance with CEQA. In comparison to
the Project, this alternative would consolidate development on the northern
two-thirds of the site to reduce impacts on existing topography and the
biological resources on the southern one-third of the site. In addition, this
alternative reduces the amount of development in order to reduce air quality
impacts to below the County's threshold of significance and creates buffers along
Highway 23 and Tierra Rejada Road. Higher densities would occur on portions of
the site to compensate for the reduced density on the southern portion of the
site. As formulated, this alternative would result in no impact to the sensitive
9
1.
Rev 5/11/94
biological resources in area "A", lees than significant air quality impacts, and
less traffic and vehicular noise impacts. While this alternative is considered
to be environmentally superior, it is not considered to be financially feasible
by the City Council based on information provided by the applicant in a letter
dated April 29, 1994, entered into the administrative record. For this reason,
the City Council is not selecting this alternative for approval.
SECTION 30. The City Council directed that the following changes to the
proposed Specific Plan amendment be made at the meeting of May 4, 1994:
A. Make appropriate changes to the Specific Plan showing trail
connections from the active park to the passive open space areas and
state in the Specific Plan that the active park will be improved to
park standards by incorporating items such as a baseball dugout,
• - restrooms, sidewalks, parking area, etc. The applicant will also
provide a topographic map showing the proposed trail connection.
B. The applicant will create an exhibit to be part of the Specific Plan
document indicating which open space areas are designated for public
or private ownership.
C. The applicant shall add a statement to the Specific Plan indicating
that the active park does not totally satisfy the requirements of
the Quimby contribution.
D. The Settlement Agreement shall be incorporated into the Specific
Plan.
E. The provision in the Specific Plan allowing a Floating Commercial
area along Tierra Rejada Road shall be eliminated from the Plan.
F. Language shall be added to the Plan indicating that development
within the Specific Planning area shall be subject to current and
future growth control Ordinances.
G. Make appropriate changes to the Specific Plan to preserve the Knoll
located north of the proposed active park.
H. Add a requirement for City-wide traffic mitigation fee to the
Specific Plan which is to be included as a mitigation measure to the
Mitigation Monitoring Program.
I. Language shall be added to the Specific Plan stating that the
Specific Planning area will not be subject to any future Hillside
Grading Ordinance unless the- Specific Plan is amended after the
adoption of the Hillside Ordinance.
SECTION 31. The City Council hereby approves an amendment to the Land Use
Element of the General Plan to reflect the land uses as continued in the amended
Specific Plan dated May 18, 1994 presented to the Planning Commission and City
Council, subject to the Mitigation Monitoring Program attached hereto as Exhibit
A and incorporated herein by reference, and all the applicable policies,
procedures, resolutions, and ordinances of the City of Moorpark. This approval
is based on the finding that the amended Carlsberg Specific Plan is consistent
with the City's General Plan.
10
Rev 5/11/94
SECTION 32. The record of proceedings upon which this decision is based is
located in the office of the city Clerk, who is the custodian of records for the
Same.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _ day of , 1994. .
Paul W. Lawrason, Jr., Mayor
ATTEST:
Lillian E. Hare, City Clerk
L ;
11
RESOLUTION NO.
•
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK,
CALIFORNIA CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
CARLSBERG SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT. .•.••
WHEREAS, Carlsberg Financial Corporation has filed an application with the City of Moorpark
for an amendment to the adopted Carlsberg Specific Plan regulating development of an approximate 500-
acre landholding located west of the Moorpark Freeway (SR23), east of Spring Road, north of Tierra
Rejada Road, and south of New Los Angeles Avenue in the City of Moorpark;and
WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR`) dated May 18, 1993 was prepared
and circulated for a 45 day period in order to receive written comments on the adequacy of the document
from responsible agencies and from the public;and
WHEREAS, before approving an amendment to the adapted Carlsberg Specific Plan, CEQA
requires the preparation and certification of a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report to address the
environmental impacts of the proposed amendment to the Specific Plan;
WHEREAS, the EIR and proposed amendment to the Specific Plan were considered by the
Planning Commission at its meetings of August 2, 1993, August 16, 1993, and September 7, 1993;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after considering all testimony and evidence
presented regarding the EIR and proposed amendment to the Specific Plan, whether written or oral,
recommended certification of the EIR to the City Council;and
WHEREAS, the EIR and proposed amendment to the Specific Plan were considered by the
City Council at several public meetings ;and
WHEREAS, a Final EIR ("FEIR"), dated November 18, 1993, was prepared containing all
written correspondence received commenting on the DEIR, summaries of oral comments on the DEIR
made at hearings held by the Planning Commission and the City Council on the DEIR, and written
responses to these comments; and
WHEREAS, atter considering the FEIR in conjunction with all evidence and testimony,
" whether written or oral,the City Council reached a decision on this matter. •
NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, DOES
HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS based on the EIR, oral and written staff
reports, and other testimony and evidence presented to the Planning Commission and the City Council
of the City of Moorpark: •
SECTION 1. The EIR for the Carlsberg Specific Plan Amendment consists of the DEIR dated
May 18, 1993, and the FEIR dated November 18, 1993. The document contains all of the elements
required to be contained in an EIR as specified by CEOA and the CEQA Guidelines, and adequately
addresses each of the required elements.
SECTION 2. The EIR was presented to the City Council, who reviewed and considered the
information contained in the EIR prior to approving the proposed amendment to the Specific Plan.
SECTION 3. The City Council members have reviewed the EIR and said document reflects the
independent judgement of the City of Moorpark.
SECTION 4. The EIR for the amendment to the Carlsberg Specific Plan is hereby certified as
adequate and complete.
SECTION 5. The record of proceedings upon which this decision is based is located in the
office of the City Clerk,who is the custodian of records for the same.
APPROVED AND APOPTED this_day of_, 1994, by members of the City Council voting
as follows:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers: .. . .
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
Mayor Lawrason
•
I ..
•
EXHIBIT"A" • -
' •• .. MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
PROJECT NAME: Carlsberg Specific Plan •PILE NUMBER: '
APPROVAL DATE: ,1994 EIR No.: •
The following environmental mitigation measures were incorporated in to the approval for this project in order to mitigatepotentially significant environmental impacts to a level of insignificance.A
completed and signed checklist for each mitigation measure indicates that this mitigation measure has been complied with and implemented,and fulfills the City of Moorpark's monitoring
requirements with respect to Assembly Bill 3180(Public Resources Code Section 21081.6). The mitigation measures are numbered consecutively in the text of this EIR.
Env.Issue Potential EIR - Mitigation Measure Method of I Responsible Monitoring Verification of ,
Significant Page No. Review Agency Milestone Com liance
1 Effect , Reference Verification Initial 1 Date 1 Remarks
Topography Alteration 5-14 Ti. Graded slopes visible from off-site a. Review of a. Director of a. Prior to
of sites to the west shall be hydroseeded landscape Community issuance of
natural immediately upon completion, concept plans Development grading permit
appearance. consistent with thelandscape and Director of
concept plan. The city shall Public Works
specify deadlines for completion
of hydroseeding based on the b. Field b. Director of b. Prior to final
grading schedule. verification Public Works grading
inspection
Topography Alteration 5-14 and T2. The entry treatment at Science a. Review of a. Director of a. Prior to
of sites 5-15 Drive and Tierra Rejada Road street Community issuance of
natural shall be completed concurrent improvement Development grading
appearance with the construction of Science and landscape and Director of permits
Drive and the intersection at concept plans Public Works
Tierra Rejada Road. Perimeter on-
site landscaping along Spring b. Field b. Director of b. As required in
Road and Tierra Rejada Road verification Public Works mitigation ,
west of the intersection of Science measure
Drive,including any parkways •
shall be installed concurrent with .
the first phase residential
construction within Area D.
Perimeter landscaping and
parkway along Tierra Rejada
• Road east of the intersection of .
Science Drive shall be installed •
concurrent with the first phase of
residential construction within
Area A.
ATTACHMENT 2
• -1-
Env.Issue Potential EIR, Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of
Significant Page No. .. .. Review Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference Verification Initial Date I Remarks 1
Topography Alteration 5-15 T3. landform and grading design a. Review of a. Director of a. Prior to I.
of site's shall be consistent with the City of grading plans Public Works issuance of
natural Moorpark grading standards. grading
appearance permits
b. Field b. Director of a. Prior to final
verification Public Works sign-off of
grading
Topography Alteration 5-15 T4. New slopes adjacent to roadways a. Review of a. Directof of a. Prior to
of site's and development areas shall be grading plans Community issuance of
natural •
graded in such a way that an Development grading
appearance - undulating appearance in the and Director of permits
graded plane shall be provided. Public Works
• b. Field
verification b. Director of b. Prior to final
Public Works sign-off of
grading
Topography Alteration 5.15 T5. Manufactured landforms shall be a. Review of a. Directof of a. Prior to
of sites contoured to provide a smooth grading plans Community issuance of
natural and gradual transition of graded Development grading
appearance and natural slopes,while and-Director of permits
preserving the basic character of Public Works
the site. •
' b. Field b. Director of b. Prior to final
verification Public Works sign-off of
grading
Topography Alteration 5.15 T6. The maximum gradient for any a. Review of a. Director of a. Prior to
of sites slope shall not exceed a 2:1 slope grading plans Public Works issuance of
natural inclination except where special and Director of grading
appearance circumstances exist. In the case of Community permits
special circumstances where Development
steeper slopes are warranted,
plans will be reviewed by a b. Field b. Director of b. Prior to final
certified geologist and will be verification Public Works sign-off of
subject to the review and grading
approval of the City Engineer and
theDirector of Community
i•• Development.
-2-
Env.Issue Potential FIR Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of
• Significant Page No. , , Review j Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference 1 Verification Initial 'Date I Remarks
Topography Alteration 51-5 T7. Planned structures,roadways, a. Review of a. Director of a. Prior to I
of site's paths,vegetation,irrigation and landscaping Community issuance of •
natural continuing maintenance programs plans and Development/ grading
appearance shall be used to stabilize homeowners Director of permits and
manufactured slopes. association Public Works prior to
landscape issuance of
maintenance certificate of
plan. occupancy
•
b. Field b. Director of b. Prior to
verification/ Public Works issuance of
monitoring certificate of
occupancy and
during life of
project
Topography Alteration 5-16 TB. Substantial quantities of trees and a. Landscape a, Director of a. Prior to
of site's shrubs of varying sizes on graded plan review Community issuance of
natural • slopes shall be used to soften the Development grading
appearance visual appearance. permits
b. Field b. Director of b. Prior to
verification Community issuance of
Development occupancy
permits
Topography Alteration - 5-16 T9. All graded slopes shall be planted• a. Landscape a. Director of a. Prior to
of sites in a timely manner meeting the plan review Community issuance of
natural approval of the Director of Development grading
appearance Community Development with permits
groundcover,trees and shrubs
that will stabilize slopes and b. Field b. Director of ' b. Prior to
minimize erosion. verification Community issuance of
Development occupancy
' permits
•
- -3
Env.Issue Potential EAR Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible T Monitoring Verification of -
• Significant Page No-. Review Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference • Verification Initial Date f Remarks -
Topography Alteration 5-16 T10. All development areas and lots a. Grading and a. Director of a. Prior to
of sites shall be designed so that surface drainage plan Public Works issuance of
•
natural drainage is directed to street review grading
appearance frontages of natural or improved permits
drainage courses as approved by b. Director of
the City Engineer b. Field Public Works b. Prior to final
verification grading and
street
improvements
sign-offs.
Topography Alteration 5-16 T11. Grading shall emphasize scenic a. Grading plan a. Director of a. Prior to
of site's vistas to the open space areas. review Community issuance of
natural Development building
appearance and Director of permits
• Public Works
b. Field b. Director of b. Prior to final
• verification Community grading sign-
Development off
and
Engineering
Services
inspector
Topography •Alteration • 5-16 T12. Concrete drainage structures shall a. Grading plan a. Director of a. Prior to
of sites be tan colored concrete. review. Public Works issuance of
natural grading
appearance permits
b. Field b. Director of b. Prior to final
verification Public Works grading sign-
off
•
•
•
Env.Issue Potential EIR Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of -
• Significant Page No., Review Agency Milestone - Co liance
i Effect Reference Verification Initial Date Remarks
Topography Alteration 5-16 T13. Protection of existing vegetation a. Grading plan a. Director of a. Prior to .
of sites through careful site planning review and Public Works issuance of
natural which may reduce areas of preliminary and Director of grading •
appearance grading. site survey Community permits
Development
b. Director of
. b. Field Public Works b. Prior to final
' verification grading sign-
off
Topography Alteration 5-17 TI4. Utilization of current good a. Tract map a. Director of a. Prior to
of sites practices of design,architecture, review. Community approval of
natural landscape architecture,civil Development tract map by
appearance engineering,and hillside land planning
planning to preserve,enhance and commission
promote the existing and future
appearance and resources of b. Issuance of b. Director of b. Prior to
hillside areas. building Community issuance of
permits Development building
permits
Topography Alteration 5-17 T15. Retention of designated natural a. Grading plan a. Director of a. Prior to
of sites topographic features. review and Public Works issuance of
natural preliminary and Director of grading
appearance site survey. Community permits
' Development
•
•
b. Field b. Director of b. Prior to final
verification Public Works grading sign-
. off
Topography Alteration 5-17 T16. If grading is required or a. Grading plan a. Director of a. Prior to
of site's necessary,conservation of natural review Public Works issuance of
natural topographic features and grading
•
appearance appearances by means of land • permits
sculpturing to blend graded
slopes and benches with natural b. Field b. Director of b, Prior to final
topography. verification Public Works grading sign-
off
•
. . 5_
Env.Issue Potential EIR Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of -
' Significant Page No. • .. Review Agency Milestone _ Compliance
Effect Reference Verification Initial Dale 1 Remarks -
. Topography Alteration 5-17 T17. Utilization of varying pads sizes, a. Tentative tract a. Director of a. Prior to
of site's setbacks,building heights, map review Public Works issuance of
natural innovative building techniques, and Director of grading
appearance and building and wall forms Community permits and
which serve to blend buildings Development building
into the terrain. In highly visually permits
sensitive areas,buildings shall be
designed to fit the landform b. Field b. Director of b. Prior to final
rather than adjusting the verification Public Works grading sign-
landform to fit the home. off and
issuance of
•
certificate of
occupancy
Topography Alteration 547 .T18. Conservation and introduction of a. Grading plan a. Director of a. Prior to
of site's fire resistant plant material to check and Public Works issuance of
natural protect slopes from slippage and landscape and Director of grading
appearance soil erosion,and to minimize the plan review Community permits
visual effect of grading and Development
construction. •
b. Field b. Director of b. Prior to final
verification Public Works grading sign-
off and
issuance of
••
certificate of
occupancy
Topography Alteration 5-17 T19... Provision of safe access for a. Tentative tract a. Director of a. Prior to
of sites vehicular and pedestrian traffic map review, Community approval of
natural ' with minimum disturbances of landscape Development tentative tract
appearance the natural terrain. Utilization of plan review and Director of map and
street designs and improvements and grading Public Works issuance of
which serve to minimize grading plan check grading
impact and harmonize with the permits.
natural contours and character of
the hillsides. b. Field b. Director of b. Prior to final
verification Public Works grading sign-
off.and
issuance of
certificate of
occupancy
- -6-
Env.Issue Potential EIR ' Mitigation Measure Method of- Responsible Monitoring Verification of -
Significant Page No. Review Agency Milestone .Compliance
Effect Reference Verification i Initial 1 Dale I Remarks J
•
Topography Alteration 5-17 T20. Utilization of home designs that a. Building plan a. Director of a. Prior to
of site's allow for diversification of hillside check Community issuance of
natural development styles based on the Development building
appearance different land form types permits
including ridgeline,side ridges,
canyon and the valley Floor.
Topography Risk of 5-18 T21. Planning,design,and a. Tentative tract a. Director of a. Prior to
natural development of home sites that map and site Community approval of
hazards - provide maximum safety with plan review Development tentative tract
respect to fire,earthquake faults, and Director of map and
geologic drainage,erosion,and Public Works approval of
siltation hazards. site plan.
Topography Alteration 5-18 ; T22_ Every reasonable effort shall be a. Tentative tract a. Director of. a. Prior to
of site's made to preserve or minimize the map review, Community approval of
natural impact on view corridors and landscape Development tentative tract
appearance scenic vistas. plan review and Director of map and
and grading Public Works issuance of
plan check grading
permits. -
b. Field b. Director of b. Prior to final
verification Community grading sign-
Development off and
• and Director of issuance of
Public Works certificate of
occupancy
•
-7-
Env.Issue Potential EIR Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of
Significant Page Nd.' " Review Agency • Milestone 7 Compliance
Effect Reference Verification Initial Date I Remarks_
• Topography Alteration 5-18 T23. Every reasonable effort shall be a. Tentative tract a. Director of • a. Prior to
of sites made to preserve mature trees, map review, Community approval of
natural ' especially coastal live oaks landscape Development tentative tract
appearance (enemas agnfolia). Special plan review and Director of map and
consideration shall be given to the and grading Public Works issuance of
preservation or relocation of plan check grading
heritage trees. permits.
b. Field b. Director of b. Prior to final
verification Community grading sign-
Development off.and
• and Director of issuance of
- Public Works certificate of
occupancy
Topography Alteration 5-18 T24. Every reasonable effort shall be a. Tentative tract a. Director of a. Prior to
of site's made to preserve and minimize map review, Community approval of
natural the impact on riparian habitats by landscape Development tentative tract
appearance utilizing innovative designs to plan review and Director of map and
incorporate stream beds and and grading Public Works issuance of
channels into development. plan check grading
Linkage of these areas shall be .. permits.
provided throughout the —•
development. b. Field b. Director of b. Nor to final
verification Community grading sign-
Development off.and
and Director of issuance of
Public Works certificate of
_. occupancy
-8-
Env.Issue Potential EIR Mitigation Measure Method of r Responsible ' Monitoring Verification of , -
• Significant Page No. Review . Agency Milestone _ Compliance
Effect Reference Verification Initial I. Date I Remarks -
- Topography Alteration N/A T25. The Knoll located north of the a. Tentative tract a. Director of a. Prior to
of site's proposed active park shall be map review, Community approval of
natural preserved. landscape Development tentative tract
appearance - plan review and Director of map and
and grading Public Works issuance of
plan check grading
permits.
b. Field b. Director of b. Prior to final
verification Community grading sign-
Development off.and
and Director of issuance of
Public Works certificate of
occupancy
Hydrology Increased 5-36 'HYI. Concurrent with submittal of the a. Review of a. Director of a. Prior to
runoff and mass grading plan,an erosion, grading and Public Works issuance of ,
erosion due siltation,and dust control plan erosion control and grading
to project shall be submitted by the plans. Community permits
develop- applicant and shall be subject to Development
ment. approval by the City of Moorpark.
Hydrology Inaeased 5-36 and HY2. Prior to final map approval, a. Review of soils a. Director of a. Prior to
runoff and 5-37 completed grading and drainage report, Public Works approval of
erosion due plans and calculations shall be hydrology final map
to project submitted to and approved by the study and
develop- City of Moorpark. The plans shall street
meet. depict all on-site and off-site improvement
drainage structures required by plan.
the City. The plans shall include a
soils report,hydrology study and
street improvement plans.
Drainage plans shall be included
with the street improvement
plans. All grading plans and
calculations shall be submitted
separately and also must be
approved by the City prior to final •
map approval.
-9-
•
Env.Issue Potential EIR I Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of -
Significant Page No., ., Review Agency Milestone Comvliance
Effect Reference Verification I Initial I Date Remarks -
Hydrology Increased 5-37 HY3. The applicant shall provide for all a. Tentative tract a. Director of a. Prior to
runoff and necessary on-site and off-site map Public Works approval of '
erosion due storm drain facilities required by Tentative Tract •
to project the City of Moorpark to Map
develop- accommodate upstream and on-
ment site flows. Facilities, as b. Field b. Engineering b. Construction .
conceptually approved in the verification Services phases ,
specific plan, shall be delineated inspector
on the tentative map and final
plans approved by the City.
Either on-site retention basins or
storm water acceptance deeds
from off-site property owners
must be specified. These facilities .
must also be acceptable to the
' Ventura County_Public Works
t
Agency.
Hydrology Increased 5-37 HY4. Grading shall occur only during a. Grading plan a. Director of a. Prior to
runoff and the non-rainy season from April check Public Works issuance of
erosion due 15 to October 31 unless otherwise grading
to project . approved by the City of _, permits
develop- Moorpark and subject to
meet installation of debris and erosion b. Field b. Engineering b. During
controlfacilities. verification Services construction
inspector
Hydrology Increased 5-37 HYS. As recommended by the civil a. Tentative tract a. Director of a. Prior to
runoff and . engineers,the pipeat culvert map and street Public Works issuance of
erosion due crossings(Station 70+83)shall be improvement grading
to project lowered to accommodate the plans permits
develop- ultimate widening of Tierra
ment Rejada Road.
-10-
•
Env.Issue Potential Bit Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of -
Significant Page No. -• Review Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference Verification Initial Date I Remarks -
—
Hydrology Increased 5-37 HY6. All structures proposed within the a. Tentative tract a. Director of a. Prior to
runoff and 100-year flood zone shall be map and Public Works approval of
erosion due elevated at least one foot above grading plan tentative tract
to project the 100-year flood level. check map and prior
develop- to issuance of .
meet grading
permits.
• b. Field b. Engineering b. Construction
verification Services phases
inspector
Hydrology Increased 5-38 HY7. During site preparation and a. Grading plan a. Director of a. Prior to •
runoff and construction,minimize check Community issuance of
erosion due disturbance of natural Development grading .
to project groundcover on the project site and Director of permits
develop- until such activity is required for Public Works
ment grading and construction
purposes.
b. Field b. Engineering b. Prior to final
verification Services grading sign-
inspector off `
Hydrology Increased 5-38 HYS. During site preparation(i.e., a. Grading plan a. Director of a. Prior to
runoff and grading)and construction, check Public Works issuance of
erosion due construct temporary storm water grading
to project diversion structures per City of permits
develop- Moorpark standards.
ment b. Field b. Engineering b. During
verification Services construction.
inspector
•
-11-
,Env.Issue Potential FIR Mitigation Measure Method of ' Responsible Monitoring Verification of
Significant Page No. ' '' Review Agency Milestone _ Compliance
Effect Reference Verification Initial Date I Remarks •
•
• Hydrology Impacts to N/A HY9. A total of 200 to 300 feet of the a. Review of a. Director of a. Prior to
riparian uppermost portion of the btuetine tentative tract Community approval of
habitat stream located on the northern map Development tentative tract
portion of the project site shall be map
analyzed as part of the grading
plan to determine if potential
impacts to the streambed can be
avoided. Any alteration to'the
stream will require California
Department of Fish and Game
and possibly Army Corp of •
Engineers approvals
Biota Impacts to 5-70 BI. To further reduce direct and a. Tentative tract a. Director of a. Prior to
native indirect impacts to the Orcutt map and Community approval of
habitats and grass and seasonal pool,no grading plan Development tentative tract
sensitive development(with the exception review and Director of map and
species of drainage control features)shall Public Works issuance of
occur within 100 fat of the upper grading
limits of the seasonal pool. This permits
measure would increase the 0-to •
53-feet buffer zone that is b. Field b. Director of b. Construction
proposed as part of the current verification Community phases
project description and Rare Plant Development
Management Plan. and Director of '
Public Works '
•
•
•
-12-
Env.Issue Potential I Elk Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verion of
[
Significant Page No. Review Agency Milestone Compliance Effect Reference Verification Initial Daleficati Remarks
!iota Impacts to 5-70 132. To reduce direct impacts to the a. Revegetation a. Director of a. Prior to
native cactus wren,the applicant should plan Planning and issuanceof
habitats and offset the loss of the cactus phase Community grading
sensitive of the coastal sage scrub on the Development permits
species site. Figure 22 as contained in the
DEIR,dated May 18,1993, b. Field b. Director of b. During life of
identifies locations on the site verification Community project
where revegetation efforts can be Development .
successfully implemented. This and Director of '
revegetation plan should be Public Works •
implemented under the direction
• of a qualified biologist. As '
proposed,this measure would
replace the 20.79 acres of cactus
phase coastal sage lost due to -
project grading activities.
Studies indicate that cactus phase
coastal sage is an invasive plant
community. Establishing this
plant community can occur where
suitable Soil conditions and micro-
climates are present. However,
revegetation efforts must be
conducted under the supervision
' of a qualified biologist. It is
expected that complete
revegetation would require many
years(5 to 10 years). However,
Establishing the vegetation in a
form that minimizes management
could be accomplished in less •
than 5 years.
•
•
-73-
Env.Issue Potential Elk Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring I Verification of
Significant Page No. Review Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference! Verification Initial Date Remarks -
Biota Impacts to 5-70 and 133. When water is present in the a. Review of a. Director of a. Prior to •
native 5-72 seasonal pool,it shall not be mosquito Planning and issuance of
•
habitats and artificially drained or otherwise abatement Community occupancy
sensitive subjected to disturbance. plan. Development permits
species Biological methods for mosquito
control shall be utilized,including
the use of Bacillus
thuringiensis/israelensis(BB,a •
commercially-available biological
control which is specific for
mosquito larvae.
Biota Impacts to 5-72 B4. The landscape plan for areas a. Landscape a. Director of a. Prior to
native adjacent to natural open space plan and Planning and issuance of
habitats and shall conform with the recently- grading plan Community grading
sensitive published"List of Native Plant check Development permits
species Species for use in Landscaping in
the Santa Monica Mountains". b. Site inspection b. Planning and b. Prior to
Community issuance of
Development occupancy
• inspector permits
. Biota Impacts to 5-72 B5. Lighting in areas adjacent to the a Lighting/ a. Director of a. Prior to
native natural open space portions of the landscape Community issuanceof
• habitats and site shall be fully hooded and plan,street Development grading and
sensitive shielded to prevent illumination' improvement and Director of building
species of sensitive habitats. plan and Public Works permits
building plan
check
b. Field b. Director of b. Prior to
verification Community issuance of
Development final street
and Director of improvements
' Public Works sign-off and
certificate of
occupancy.
•
•
•
-14-
Env.Issue Potential EIR Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of -
Significant Page Nd. " Review Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference j Verification j Initial I Date j Remarks '
Traffic Impacts to 5-105 TC1. Design and construct both"A" a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
intersection Street between New Los Angeles improvement Public Works issuance of
operating Avenue and"B"Street as a four- plan review grading
capacities lake roadway(two lanes in each permits
direction)to accommodate peak
hour and ADT background plus b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to
project traffic projections. Public Works issuance of
final street
improvements
sign-off
Traffic Impacts to 5-105 TO. Science Drive/New Los Angeles a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
intersection Avenue: Applicant to fully improvement Public Works issuance of
operating construct the south leg of the plan review grading
capacities intersection,and provide - permits
westbound left-turn lane;
eastbound right-turn lane;shared b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to
southbound through Public Works issuance of
lane/southbound right-turn lane; final street
northbound left-turn lane;second improvements
northbound left-turn lane; sign-off
northbound right-turn lane;
shared northbound through
lane/northbound right-turn lane;
and modify signal to provide
• eastbound right-turn overlap with
the northbound left-turn
movement.
-Traffic Impacts to 5-105 TO. "A-Street/Peach Hill Road: a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
intersection Applicant to fully construct and improvement Public Works issuance of
operating provide northbound left-turn plan review grading
capacities lane,northbound through lane, permits
southbound through lane,
southbound right-turn lane, b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to •
eastbound left-turn lane,and Public Works issuance of
eastbound right-turn lane. final street
improvements .
sign-off
-15-
•
Env.Issue l Potential I EIR ! .. Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of
Significant Page No. Review _ Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference Verification Initial Date I Remarks
Traffic Impacts to 5-105 TC4. "A"Street/Tierra Rejada Road: a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
intersection Applicant to fully construct north improvement Public Works issuance of
operating leg of intersection and provide plan review grading
capacities westbound right-turn lane, permits
eastbound left-turn lane,
southbound left-turn lane,and b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to
southbound right-turn lane Public Works issuance of
(project share 63 percent). final street
improvements
sign-off
Traffic Impacts to 5-107 TO. "A"Street/"B Street: Applicant to a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
intersection fully construct intersection and improvement Public Works issuance of
operating provide northbound left-turn lane; plan review grading
capacities northbound through lane; permits
northbound right-turn lane;.
southbound left-turn lane;second b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to
southbound left-turn lane;shared Public Works issuance of
southbound through final street
lane/southbound right-turn lane; improvements
westbound left-turn lane; sign-off
westbound right-turn lane;shared
westbound through —'
lane/westbound right-turn lane;
eastbound left-turn lane;shared
eastbound through lane/eastbound
right-turn lane;and provide
northbound right-turn overlap
with the westbound left-turn
movement as part of signal
installation.
-16-
Env.Issue Potential EIR Mitigation Measure I Method of Responsible I Monitoring Verification of 1
Significant Page No. Review . Agency Milestone Compliance
I Effect Reference Verification Initial Date 1 Remarks -
Traffic Impacts to 5-107 TC6. Spring Road/Tierra Rejada Road: a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
intersection Applicant to contribute the fair improvement Public Works Issuance of
operating share of the cost to add a second plan review grading
opacities westbound through lane. It is permits
assumed that the applicant will
t contribute Area of Contribution b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to ,
(AOC)funds for the addition of a Public Works issuance of
second eastbound through lane. final street
' Note These improvements are improvements'
required to mitigate"no-project"as sign-off
well as"with-project"conditions •
' (project share 32 percent).
Traffic Impacts to 5-107 TC7. Moorpark Road/Tierra Rejada a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
intersection Road: The applicant will improvement Public Works issuance of
operating contribute Tierra Rejada AOC plan review grading
capacities funds. To the extent that the permits
following improvements exceed
the AOC widening project,the b. Site inspection b, Director of b. Prior to
applicant is to pay fair share of Public Works issuance of
costs to add a second westbound final street
left-turn lane;second northbound improvements
right-turn lane;eastbound right- sign-off
turn Lane;and provide northbound
right-turn overlap with the
westbound left-turn movement as
part of signal installation(project
share 48 percent). Note: These
improvements are required to
mitigate"no-project"as well as
"with-project"conditions.
Traffic Impacts to 5-108 TC8. Science Drive/New Los Angeles a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
intersection Avenue: Applicant to pay fair improvement Public Works issuance of
operating share to add third eastbound plan review grading
opacities through lane and third westbound permits
through lane. Note: These
improvements are required to b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to
mitigate"with-project"conditions Public Works issuance of
only. No mitigation is required for final street
"no-project"conditions(project improvements
share 67 percent). sign-off
-17-
•
Env.Issue I Potential E1R I. .. Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of
Significant Page No. Review , Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference , Verification i p Initial Date 1 Remarks -
Traffic Impacts to 5-109 TC9. "A"Street/Tierra Rejada Road: It is a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
intersection assumed that the applicant will improvement Public Works issuance of
operating contribute AOC funds to add a plan review grading
opacities second eastbound through lane permits
and second westbound through
lane. Note: Widening of Tierra b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to
Rejada Road to four lanes is Public Works issuance of
required to mitigate"no-project"as final street
well as"with-project"conditions. improvements
sign-off
Traffic Impacts to 5-109 TCIO. Moorpark Avenue/Los Angeles a. Street a. Director of a: Prior to
intuveition Avenue: Applicant to pay fair improvement Public Works issuance of
' operating share of the costs to convert the plan review grading
opacities shared southbound left-turn permits ,
lane/southbound through •
lane/southbound right-turn lane to b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to
a second southbound left-turn lane Public Works issuance of
and convert southbound right-turn final street
lane to shared southbound through improvements
lane/southbound right-turn lane, sign-off
Note These improvements are --
• required to mitigate'no-project"as —'
wen as"with-project"conditions
(project share 34 percent).
Traffic Impacts to 5-109 TC11. Spring Road/Los Angeles Avenue: a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
intersection Applicant to pay fair share of the improvement Public Works issuance of
operating costs to add a third eastbound plan review grading
opacities through lane;third westbound permits
through lane;remove second
eastbound left-turn lane;and b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to
modify signal to provide a - Public Works issuance of
southbound right-turn overlap final street
with the eastbound left-turn improvements
movement and westbound right- sign-off
turn overlap with the south-bound
left-turn movement. Note: These
improvements are required to
mitigate"no-project"as well as
"with-project"conditions(project
share 50 percent).
-18-
Env.Issue Potential EIR - Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible r Monitoring Verification of
Significant Page No. Review , Agency Milestone _ Compliance
c Effect Reference - Verification Initial Date 1 Remarks -
Traffic Impacts to 5-110 TC12. State Route 23 northbound a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to •
intersection ramps/Tierra Rejada Road: improvement Public Works issuance of
operating Applicant to pay fair share of the plan review grading
capacities costs(potentially through permits
Proposition 111,Congestion ,
Management Program)to convert b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to
the shared northbound left-turn Public Works issuance of
' lane/northbound right-turn lane to final street
northbound right-turn lane,and to improvements
add second northbound left-turn sign-off
lane and second northbound right •
-
turn lane. Note•. These ,
improvements are required to
mitigate"no-project-as well as
"with-project"conditions. -
Traffic Impacts to 5-li1 and TC/3. Applicant to pay fair share of the a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
intersection 5-112 costs for the signal reconstructions improvement -Public Works issuance of ,
operating at Spring Road/Los Angeles plan review grading
capacities Avenue,Spring Road/Tierra permits
Rejada Road,State Route 23
northbound ramps/Tierra Rejada b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to
Road,and Science Drive/New Los Public Works issuance of
Angeles Avenue, final street
improvements
sign-off
Traffic Impacts to 5-112 TC14. Applicant to pay fair share of the a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
intersection costs for the signal installations at improvement Public Works issuance of
operating Moorpark Road/Tierra Rejada plan review grading
capacities Road,and State Route southbound . permits
ramps/Tierra Rejada Road.
b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to
Public Works issuance of
final street
improvements
sign-off
-19-
Env.Issue Potential I EIR . .. Mitigation Measure • Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of
Significant Page No. Review . Agency Milestone _ Com liance
I Effect Reference Verification Initial Date] Remarks •
• Traffic Impacts to 5-112 TC15. Applicant to fully install the signals a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
intersection at"A"Street/"B"Street,and"A" improvement Public Works issuance of .
operating Stteet/Tierra Rejada Road. plan review grading
capacities permits •
b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to
Public Works issuance of .
final street '
improvements -
sign-off
Traffic Impacts to 5-112 TC16. Applicant to contribute fair share a. Street a. Director of a; Prior to
intersection of the costs(through funds improvement Public Works issuance of
•
operating partially contributed by the plan review grading
capacities proposed project or applicant - permits
payment of additional AOC or
Proposition 111 fees)should a b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to
traffic signal be installed at the Public Works issuance of
intersection of Moorpark final street
Road/Tierra Rejada Road as part of improvements
' the AOC widening project. sign-off
Traffic Impacts to N/A TCI7. Prior to development,the applicant o. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
intersection shall execute a covenant running improvement Public Works issuance of
operating with the land on behalf of itself and plan review grading
capacities its sucessors,heirs and assigns - permits
agreeing to pay a City-wide traffic
mitigation fee at the rate that is b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to
applicable at the time of Public Works issuance of
development to fund street and final street
traffic improvements dimctly or improvements
indirectly affected by the sign-off
development.
20
Env.Issue Potential I EIR Mitigation Measure Method of T Responsible MonitoringVerification of
Significant Page No, T Review , Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference I Verification Initial Date Remarks •
Traffic Impacts to N/A TCIB. The project developer shall a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
intersection contribute a pro rata share,as improvement Public Works issuance of
operating determined by the City of plan review grading
capacities Moorpark,for traffic impacts to permits
County roadways or related
facilities impacted by the approval b. Site inspection b. Director of b. Prior to
of a development permit for the Public Works issuance of
Specific Planning area if the final street
following agreement is improvements
implemented within ten(10)years sign-off
of the approval of said
development permit:
'That a reciprocal agreement shall
be reached between the County •
and the city of Moorpark regarding
the conditioning of entitlement
projects within one jurisdiction in
order to assist the financing of
roadway improvements in the
otherjurisdiction. Specifically,this
reciprocal agreement shall meet the
requirements of Ventura County
General Plan Policy 4.223(d)
concerning city adoption of policies
consistent with County General '
Plan Policies 4.22.4 and 42.25:'
Upon execution of the above
agreement,the permittee shall
agree to,and shall participate in,
any assessment district or other
financing technique,including the
• payment of traffic mitigation fees,
which the County of Ventura may
adopt to fund or partially fund its
pro rata share of impacts to County
roads as impacted by the project.
•
-21 -
Env.Issue Potential EIR Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of
Significant Page No. Review , Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference Verification Initial 1 Date Remarks
Air Quality Construe- 5-131 and Al. During clearing,grading,earth a. Grading plan a. Department of a. Prior to
Hon related 5-132 moving or excavation operations, check and field Building issuance of
impacts fugitive dust emissions should be verification grading
controlled by regular watering, permits and
paving construction roads and other during
dust prevention measures. The ' construction
applicant shall submit a fugitive
dust control plan,acceptable to the
city,concurrently with submittal of
the mass(as opposed to the precise)
•
grading plan. This plan shall
include,but is not be limited to the •
following measures:
• Water all site access roads and
material excavated or graded on-or
off-site to prevent excessive
amounts of fugitive dust. Watering
shall occur at least two times daily,
preferably in the late morning and
after the completion of work for the
day.
•
•
-22-
Env.Issue I Potential ElK .- Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of
Significant Page No. Review Agency Milestone _ Compliance
Effect Reference Verification i - Initial Date Remarks
• Cease all clearing,grading,earth
moving,or excavation operations •
during Periods of high winds 05 mph •
or greater in one hour). The contractor
shall maintain contact with the APCD
meteorologist for current information
about average wind speeds.
•
• Water or securely cover all material
transported off-site and on-site to
•
prevent excessive amounts of dust. •
• Minimize the area disturbed at any
onetime by clearing,grading,earth
• moving and excavation'so as to
prevent excessive amounts of dust.
• Keep all grading and construction
equipment on or near the site,until
these activities are completed.
• Wash off heavy-duty construction
vehicles before they leave the site.
Env.Issue Potential EIR " " Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of
Significant Page No, Review , Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference Verification
Initial Date I Remarks
• Apply nonhazardous chemical
stabilizers to all inactive portions of •
• the construction site. When '
appropriate,seed exposed surfaces
with a fast-growing,soil-binding plant
to reduce wind erosion and its
contribution to local particulate levels.
• Observe a 15 mile per hour speed limit
for the construction area.
• Periodically sweep public streets in the
vicinity of the site to remove silt(i.e.,
. fine earth material transported from _
the site by wind,vehicular activities,
water runoff,etc.)which may have
accumulated from construction
activities.
Air Quality Construc- 5-132 AZ During smog season(May-October) a. Grading plan a. Department of a. During
tion related thecity shall order that construction check and field Building and construction
impacts cease during Stage Ill alerts to verification Safety
' minimize the number of vehicles
and equipment operating,lower
ozone levels and protect equipment
operators from excessive smog '
levels. The city,at its discretion,
may also limit construction during
Stage II alerts.
Air Quality Construe- 5-132 A3. The developer shall request that all a. Field a. Department of a. During
tion related employees involved in grading verification Building and construction
impacts operations on the project wear face Safety
• masks during dry periods.
Air Quality Construc- 5-132 A4. Maintain equipment engines in a. Feld a. Department of a. Prior to and
tionrelated good condition and in proper tune verification Building and during
impacts as per manufacturers'specifications Safety construction
- to prevent excessive emissions.
24.- '
'Env.Issue Potential l MR1. .. Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification.
of
Significant Page No. Review . Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference Verification I L Initial-I Date 1 Remarks
Air Quality Construe- 5-132 AS. All diesel engines used in a. Field a. Director of a. Prior to and
Lion related construction equipments should use verification Building and during
impacts •. high pressure injectors. Safety construction •
Air Quality Construe- 5-133 A6. All diesel engines used in a. Field a. Director of a. Prior to and
iron related construction equipments should use verification Building and during
impacts reformulated diesel fuel. Safety construction
Air Quality Operational 5-133 A7. Residential building permits issued a. Building a. Director of a. Prior to
impacts for the project shall be consistent permits Community issuance of
. with the dty's Ordinance 103 to Development certificate of
achieve population forecast - occupancy
consistency.
Air Quality Operational 5.133 A8. The city,as operators of the transit a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
impacts system,shall encourage plans for a improvement Community issuance of
bus route and bus stop near"A" plan Development grading
street along New Los Angeles to and Director of permits
service the commercial areas of the Public Works
project. If required by the city,the
applicant shall include a bus stop in
final street improvement plans and
provide for its construction. •
Air Quality Operational 5-133 A9. The city shall review all a. Tentative tract a. Director of a. Prior to
impacts nonresidential site plans to assure map and street Community approval of
pedestrian and bikeway access improvement Development tentative tract
between bus stop and bicycle paths, plan and Director of map
• respectively,and on-site ' Public Works
development of such.
Air Quality Operational 5-133 A10. Recommend the use of on-site solar a. Building plan a. Director of a. Prior to
impacts energy units and water heaters. check Community issuance of
Development building
permits
Air Quality Operational 5-134 All. Orient structures and pool areas to a. Building plan a. Director of a. Prior to
impacts optimize the effectiveness of solar check Community issuance of
energy units and water heaters. Development building
permits
•
-25
Env.Issue Potential EiR Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring I Verification of
Significant Page No. Review , Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference i Verification Initial Date Remarks
Air Quality Operational 5-134 All When possible,use light-colored a. Building plan a. Director of a. Prior to
impacts roofing materials and concrete check Community issuance of
parking areas as opposed to dark Development building
roofing materials and asphalt permits
parking areas.
Air Quality Operational 5-134 A13. Use building materials that produce a. Building plan a. Director of a. Prior to .
impacts fewer emissions during their stages check Community issuance of •
of development or use(e.g.,bricks, Development building
stones,water-based paints). permits
•
•
. Air Quality Operational 5.134 A14. Provide extensive landscaping to a. Building plan a. Director of a: Prior to
impacts shade buildings and parking areas check Community issuance of
for energy efficiency. Development building
permits
Air Quality Operational 5-134 A15. Specify energy-efficient lighting a. Building plan a. Director of a. Prior to
impacts controls,air conditioners, check Community issuance of
refrigerators,etc.as applicable for Development building
• each of the proposed uses. permits
Air Quality Operational 5-134 A16. Increase roofing and wall insulation a. Building plan a. Director of a. Prior to
• Impacts over the minimum standards check Community issuance of
currently required. Development building
permits
Air Quality Operational 5-134 A17. Install special sunlight-filtering a. Building plan a. Director of a. Prior to
impacts window coatings or double-paned check Community issuance of
windows,to reduce thermal gain or Development building
loss. permits
Air Quality Operational 5-135 A18. Provide conveniently-located a. Building plan a. Director of a. Prior to
impacts recycling centers on-site with check Community issuance of
• adequate access for haulers. Development building
permits
Air Quality Operational 5-135 A19. Provide bicycle lockers and lockable a. Building plan a. Director of a. Prior to
impacts storage areas at the commercial and check Community issuance of
office lots to encourage alternative Development building
vehicle transportation to and from permits
the site.
•
-26-
Env.Issue Potential ER •I .. Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of
Significant Page No. Review . Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference Verification 1
Initial Date Remarks
Air Quality Operational 5-135 A20. Where possible,provide a. Tentative tract a. Department of a. Prior to
impacts consolidated truck delivery areas at map review Community approval of
the commercial lots to minimize the and site plan Development tentative tract
number of stops(and possible shut- review map and site
off and restarts)that delivery review plan
vehicles would make within the site.
Air Quality Operational 5-135 A21. Provide outlets for electric vehicle • a. Building plan a. Director of a. Prior to
impacts recharge units in all residential check Planning and issuance of
garages. Community building
Development permits
Air Quality Operational 5-135 A22. Electric mowers and other emission- a. Review of a. Director of a. Prior to
impacts efficient landscaping equipment common area Planning and approval of
should be used to maintain maintenance Community CC&Rs by
landscaping within the Specific Plan plans and Development City and
area. CC&Rs during life of
project.
Air Quality Operational 5-136 A23. Contribute 51,109,405.79 to a City- a. Street a. Director of a. Prior to
impacts managed off-site Transportation improvement Planning and issuance of
Demand Management(TDM)fund, plan Community grading •
or fund or implement Development permits •
Transportation Demand
• Management(TDM)measures
within the Oxnard Plain Airshed
that are capable of reducing
• emissions within the Airshed by
106.6 pounds per day(ppd)of
reactive organic compounds(ROC)
AND 157.7 ppd of oxides of .
nitrogen(NOx),or a combination of
both. The developer shall fund or
implement such programs to the
satisfaction of the City of Moorpark
and the Ventura County Air
Pollution Control District. •
Examples of TDM programs that •
could be implemented include(the
developer is not limited to this list):
•
•
-27 •-
Env.Issue Potential I E(R . .. Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of
Significant Page No. Review Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference Verification
i I I initial Date l _ Remarks
• On-site Transportation Management
Association(TMA)and
Transportation Coordinator
• Park-and-ride lots
• HOV by-pass lanes
•
•
• Class l bike paths and class 2 bike
lanes
• Bicycle parking
•• Transit shelters and bench '
• HOV capital improvements •
• Clean fuel dispensing stations
• Funding of an old vehicle scraping •
program ..-
•
•
•
-28-
Env.Issue I Potential MR - I . Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of
Significant Page No. Review ,. Agency Milestone Compliance
Effect Reference Verification
i Initial Date� Remarks
• Contributions to local shuttle
services
• Purchase of dean fuel vehicles for
other facilities
• Purchase of clean fuel transit buses
• Purchase of compressed natural gas
(CNG)school buses
•
• Shuttle service to and from the
project site
• Provide telecommuting and/or
video conference facilities
• Contribute$10,407.21 per pound of
ROC to be reduced to a City-
managed TOM fund. For this
measure alone,one pound of ROC
reduced is equivalent to 1.39 pounds
of NOx.
•
Noise Construe- 5-163 NI. Construction activities should be - a, Grading and a. Department of a. Prior to
tion related limited to weekdays and Saturdays building plan Building and issuance of
noise from 7d10 A.M.to 7U0 P.M. No checks Safety grading and
construction activities should occur building
on Sundays. permits and
during
construction
Noise Construe- 5-163 N2. Truck noise from hauling operations a. Haul route a. Department of a. Prior to
Lion related shall be minimized through plan check Building and issuance of
noise establishing hauling routes which Safety grading and
avoid residential areas. The hauling - building
plan must be identified. permits and
during
construction
29 •
Env.Issue I Potential I Elk I. .. Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring I Verification of
Significant Page No. Review , Agency Milestone L Compliance
Effect Reference Verification I Initial[Date 1 Remarks
' Noise Construe- 5-163 N3. The Specific Plan shall require the a. Haul route a. Department of a. Prior to T
lion related developer(s)to provide staging plan check Building and issuance of
noise areas on-site to minimize off-site Safety grading and
transportation of heavy construction building
equipment. Locate these areas to permits and
maximize the distance between during
activity and residential areas. construction .
Noise Operational 5-163 N4. The Specific Plan shall require the a. Grading and a. Department of a. Prior to
noise developer(s)to ensure that building plan Building and issuance of
construction equipment is fitted checks Safety grading and
with modern sound-reduction building
equipment. permits and
during
• construction
Noise Operational 5-164 N5. Additional acoustical analysis a. Review of a. Director of a. Prior to
noise acceptable to the City shall be acoustical Community approval of
submitted by the applicant or analysis and Development tentative tract
developer concurrently with building plan - and Director of map.
submittal of tentative tract maps for check Public Works
planning area A . Dwelling units .
• shall be located in areas outside of —'
the projected 60 dB(A)CNEL noise
• contour,with appropriate
mitigation.
Noise Operational 5-164 N6. All operations/equipment within a. Building plan a. Director of a. Prior to
noise the future park and outdoor air check Community issuance of
conditioners,pool or spa pumps in Development building
residential areas shall be allowed permits
only if no City noise standards off-
site or on-site for exterior areas are b. field b. Building and b. During
exceeded. verification Safety construction
•
-30-
Env.Issue Potential EIR Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible Monitoring Verification of
Significant Page No. Review . Agency Milestone ' Compliance
Effect Reference Verification 1
i lnifial Date Remarks
Noise Operational 5-164 N7. The Specific Plan shall require the a. Building plan a. Director of a. Prior to
noise developer(s)to be in compliance check Community issuance of
•
with,requirements of the State of Development building
California Office of Noise Control permits
regulations regarding exterior to
interior noise reduction,such that
no habitable portion of the
development would be exposed to •
interior noise levels greater than 45
dB(A)CNEL as enforced by local •
governing building and safety -
departments. Any necessary noise -
reduction can be achieved through a
variety of construction technologies
including,but not limited to,the use
of non-standard wall assemblies, ,
incorporation of attenuation
blankets inside outer walls,and the
use of double-pane glass windows.
Noise Operational 5-164 and N8. Additional acoustical analysis a. Submittal of a. Director of a. Prior to
impacts. 5-165 acceptable to the City shall be acoustical Community approval of submitted by the applicant or •analysis Development tentative tract
developer concurrently with and Director of map and
submittal of tentative tract maps for Public Works issuance of
planning areas B,C,and D. building
Dwelling units shall be located in permit
areas outside of the projected 60
dB(A)CNEL noise contour for the
proposed extension of Science
Drive,with appropriate mitigation.
Noise Operational 5-165 N9. Use of part dng lot vacuums and a. Site plan a. Director of a. Prior to
impacts landscape maintenance equipment review and Community issuance of
' shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 CC&Rs Development building
A.M.and 8:00 P.M.weekdays and permits
Saturdays.
•
-31 -
Env.Issue Potential FIR Mitigation Measure Method of Responsible I Monitoring I Verification of
Significant Page No. Review , Agency Milestone _ Compliance
Effect Reference Verification Initial r Date I Remarks.
Land Use Modifica- 5-178 Ll. AR development shall conform with a Review of a. Director of a. Prior to
tion to the development standards and landscape plan Community issuance of
Specific •. landscape concept plans ultimately Development grading
Plan adopted or negotiated by the City. permits
Specific Plan to provide separation
and buffering between different
land uses on site,and the churches
along Spring Street and off-site
residential uses west of Spring
Street.
Housing Modifica- 5-183 HI. No mitigation measures are a. Submittal of a a. Director of a: Prior to
tion to required or recommended for this copy of the Planning and issuance of
Specific • topic. agreement, Community building
Plan. signed by the Development permits
project
developer(s)
_32_
ORDINANCE NO.
AN'ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 189 TO ADD ARTICLE 19
*CARLSBERG SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE REGULATIONS'
Whereas, Carlsberg Financial Corporation has filed an
application with the City of Moorpark for an amendment to the
adopted Carlsberg Specific Plan regulating development of an
approximate 500. acre landholding located west of the Moorpark
Freeway (SR23) , east of Spring Road, north of Tierra Rejada Road,
and south of New Los Angeles Avenue in the City of Moorpark; and
Whereas, the Draft EIR, Zoning Ordinance Amendment and
Amendments to the Specific Plan were considered by the Planning
Commission and City Council at several public meetings and the City
Council public hearing was closed on November 10, 1994; and
Whereas, on May 18, 1994, the City Council Certified the
Environmental Impact report for and approved the amendments to the
Carlsberg Specific Plan; and
Whereas, on May 4, 1994, the City Council directed staff
. to prepare an Ordinance which reflects the•.issues considered by the
Planning Commission and City Council at the duly noticed public
hearings, in order to amend the City's Zoning Regulations for the
purpose of adopting the amended Land Use Regulations of the
Specific Plan as Zoning for the property; and
Whereas, the changes to the Zoning Ordinance as directed
by the City Council are for the benefit of the health and welfare
of the citizens of Moorpark. •
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK,
CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the modifications to the City's Zoning
Ordinance are categorically exempt pursuant to State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15061 (b) (3) .
SECTION 2. That the Current Zoning Ordinance No. 189 is
hereby amended by adding Article 19 entitled "Carlsberg Specific
Plan Land Use Regulations" as enumerated in Section 3 are hereby
adopted.
•
•
ATTACHMENTS
•
SECTION 3. ARTICLE 19
CARLSBERG SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE REGULATIONS
Sec. 8119-0 - PURPOSE AND INTENT - The purpose of these regulations
is to act as the controlling mechanism of the implementation of
development within the Carlsberg Specific Plan area.
Implementation of the standards set forth in' this section will
ensure that future development proceeds in a coordinated manner
consistent with the goals and policies of the Carlsberg Specific
Plan and the City of Moorpark General Plan. Future review of site •
plans and other necessary discretionary approvals by the City of
Moorpark will ensure the realization of these standards.
The following standards apply to development of all residential,
business park, commercial and open space areas . All such develop-
ment shall conform to the development standards as set forth in the
specific plan for the permitted uses.
The city zoning ordinance and/or subdivision ordinance shall have
effect on all areas, except as specified by the standards contained
herein. As the development standards of the Specific Plan are
adopted by ordinance, in any areas of conflict between the zoning
ordinance and/or subdivision ordinance and these provisions, this
Specific Plan shall control. Where the Specific Plan does not
address development standards or provisions, the city's zoning
ordinance and/or subdivision ordinance shall control. Any future
amendments to the city zoning ordinance and/or subdivision
ordinance which are not addressed by the Specific Plan or existing
Zoning and/or Subdivision Ordinance shall also apply to the
specific plan area as applicable.
Sec. 8119-1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS - Terms used in these regulations
shall have the same definitions as given in the City of Moorpark
Zoning Code unless otherwise !defined herein.
a. Any details or issues not specifically covered in these
regulations shall be subject to the regulations of the
City of Moorpark Zoning Code, as amended.
b. These regulations are adopted pursuant to Section 65450
et seq. of the State of California Government Code. It
is specifically intended by such adoption that the
development standards herein shall regulate all develop-
ment within the Specific Plan area.
c. Grading plans submitted for all projects in the Specific
Plan area shall be based on the city grading ordinance
and shall be accompanied by geological and soils
engineer's reports which shall incorporate all recommen-
dations as deemed appropriate by the City Engineer. The
Page - 2 - 2/94
soils engineer and engineering geologist must certify the
suitability of a graded site prior to issuance of a
building permit: The final grading plan as it reflects
development in the specific plan area shall be approved
by the City Engineer.
d. planning Areas are defined as each land use area depicted
in Exhibit 7, Land Use Plan.
e. All landscape and/or grading plans shall include provi-
sions for temporary erosion control on all graded sites •
which are scheduled to remain ' unimproved during the
winter months.
Sec. 8119-2 - GENERAL STANDARDS
Sec. 8119-2.1 - Screening - The following standards shall
apply to all development except for single family
detached subdivisions, which shall be exempt:
a. Parking areas abutting street: A screen such as a
hedge, wall or berm, or other similar structure
shall be installed along all parking areas abutting
any street. Except as otherwise provided below,
the screening shall have a maximum height of three
and one-half (3-1/2) feet.
b. Where the finished elevation of the property is
lower than an abutting property or street, appro-
priate landscape screening shall be employed to
screen structures/parking areas.
c. A screen as referred to above shall consist of one
or any combination of the following:
1) Walls, including retaining walls: A wall
shall consist of stone, tile or similar type
of solid masonry material a minimum of eight
(8) inches thick.
2) Berms: A berm shall be constructed of earthen
materials and it shall be landscaped. A berm
shall be a minimum of three (3) feet high.
3) Fences: A fence shall be constructed of
materials having a nominal thickness of one
(1) inch. Wrought iron or chain link fencing
will not be permitted for screening purposes.
(See design guidelines for acceptable
materials. )
d. Mechanical equipment: Mechanical equipment placed
Page - 3 - 3/94
•
on any roof such as, but not limited to, air con-
ditioning, solar devices, heating, ventilating
ducts and exhaust, shall be screened or recessed
.from view from abutting streets or highways or any
abutting residential planning areas.
Sec. 8119.2.2 Landscaping - The following standards shall
apply to all development except, however, single family
detached subdivisions not having common areas shall be exempt.
Landscaping, consisting of evergreen or deciduous trees,
shrubs, or groundcover, shall be installed and permanently
maintained subject to the following conditions and standards:
a. Separation: Any landscaped area shall be separated
from an adjacent vehicular area by a wall or curb
at least six (6) inches higher than the adjacent
vehicular area.
b. All areas to be commonly maintained shall be des-
ignated as separate lettered lots on subdivision
maps.
c. Water: Permanent automatic watering facilities
with water sensors shall be provided for all land-
scaped areas. This system may be augmented by
drought-resistant vegetation.
d. Maintenance: All landscaping shall be permanently
maintained in a neat, clean and healthful condi-
tion.
e. Landscape.Plan: Prior to the issuance of a build-
ing permit, detailed landscape and irrigation plans
prepared by a registered landscaped architect,
shall be submitted to, reviewed and approved by the
Director of Community Development The plan shall
provide for substantial screening and breakup of
parking areas, as well as buffering the structural
elevations. Failure to maintain all landscape
materials and irrigation systems in a permanently
healthy and functional manner. shall constitute a
violation of the city's zoning ordinance. Upon
completion of the project and prior to the issuance
of a Certificate of Occupancy, the registered
landscape architect shall submit a letter of
certification to the city stating the landscape and
irrigation system have been installed per the
approved plans. All landscape and irrigation
designs shall meet all current city standards and
codes. The detailed landscape plans shall include
the specific palette recommendations 'and require-
ments for the area. All landscape and irrigation
Page - 6 -
2/91
•
plans shall incorporate drought-tolerant plant
material and water efficient irrigation systems.
Sec. 8119.3 - SINGLE FAMILY - AREAS A, B and D
Sec. 8119 .3.1 - Purpose and Intent - These single family
residential planning areas are intended to provide for the
development and maintenance of medium density residential
neighborhoods offering detached dwelling units. These
regulations allow for a variety of residential uses, and
community facilities and accessory uses which are complementary to and harmonize with such neighborhoods.
It is the intent of these regulations to set basic standards
which can be applied in response to individual community needs
and to encourage innovative community design. •
This use category allows for a maximum density of 3.7 dwelling
units per acre.
Sec. 8119-3.2 - Permitted Uses
a. Conventional subdivisions of detached single family
residential dwellings (one dwelling per building
site)
b. Open space uses
C. Public facilities
d• Public utility buildings and structures
e. Public or private parks
Sec. 8119-3.3 - Conditional Uses (subiect to Conditional Use
Permit)
a. Communication, transmitting or relay facilities
b. " Churches, temples, and other places of worship
c. Fire and police stations
d. Any other use which the Planning Commission finds
consistent with the purpose and intent of this
category
Sec. 8119-3.4 - Accessory Uses and Structures
a. Fences, walls and patios
Page - 5 -
2/94
•
b. Garages and carports
c• Greenhouses (non-commercial)
d. Private recreation facilities, including but not
limited to passive parks, swimming pools accessory
to a primary residential use, tennis courts, putt-
ing greens, lakes, and trails
e. Other accessory uses which are clearly incidental
to permitted uses and for , the exclusive use of
•
residents of the site.
Sec. 8119-3.5 - Site Development Standards
a. Height of all buildings: 25 feet maximum.
b. Setbacks:
1) Front: 20 feet
2) Side:
a) Interior: 5 feet minimum. For lots over
70 feet in width; sum of side yards must
equal 15 percent of lot width. For
second story dwelling with windows; 10
feet minimum.
b) Exterior: Same as interior lots except
reverse corner lots; 20 feet on street
side.
3) Rear: 20 feet
4) Special: I :
Area D - Perimeter housing to be built
overlooking Spring Road shall be limited to
one-story; except, two-story construction
shall be permitted provided additional set-
back from top of slope achieves the same
roof profile as one-story with normal set-
back.
c. Minimum lot size: 6,000 square feet
d. Minimum lot width: 65 feet at setback line
e. Parking standards: Pursuant to the City of Moor-
park Zoning Code.
gaga - 6
2/94
•
f. Animal Requirements: Same as required for R-1 and
the City's Zoning Ordinance.
Sec. 8119-4 SINGLE FAMILY - AREA C
Sec. 8119-4.1 - Purpose and Intent
Area C residential planning area is intended to provide
for the development and maintenance- of higher density
residential neighborhoods offering attached duplex,
detached conventional units or zero lot line patio homes.
These regulations allow for a'variety of residential
uses, and community facilities and accessory uses which
are complementary to and harmonize with such neigh-
borhoods.
It is the intent of these regulations to set basic
standards which can be applied in response to individual
community needs and to encourage innovative community
design.
The use category allows for a maximum density of 5.0
dwelling units per acre.
Sec. 8119-4.2 - Permitted Use
a. Conventional subdivisions, attached duplex and
detached patio/zero lot line single family resi-
dential dwellings (1 or 2 dwellings per building
site)
b. Open space uses
c. Planned Unit Developments (PUD's) including zero-
lot line homes and patio homes.
d. Public facilities
e. Public utility buildings and structures
£. Public or private parks
Sec. 8119-4.3 - Conditional Uses (subiect to Conditional Use
Permit)
a. Communication, transmitting or relay facilities
b. Churches, temples and other places of worship
•
c. Fire and police stations
Pew, - 7 - 2/94
•
U. Any other use which the Planning Commission finds
consistent with the purpose and intent of this
category.
Sec. 8119-4.4 - Accessory Uses and Structures
a. Fences, walls and patios
b. Garages and carports
c. Greenhouses (non-commercial)
d. Private recreation facilities, including but not
limited to passive parks, swimming pools accessory
to a primary residential use, tennis courts, putt-
ing greens, lakes, and trails.
e. Other accessory uses which are clearly incidental
to permitted uses and for the exclusive use of
residents of the site.
Sec. 8119-4.5 - Site Development Standards
a. Height of all buildings: 25 feet maximum.
b. Setbacks:.
1) Front: 20 feet
2) Side:
a) Interior: 5 feet minimum. For lots over
70 feet in width; sum of side yards must
equal 15 percent of lot width. For
second story dwelling with windows; 10
feetd minimum.
b) Exterior: Same as interior lots except
reverse corner lots; 20 feet on street
side.
3) Rear: 15 feet
c. Minimum lot size: 4,000 square feet
d. Minimum lot width: 40 feet at setback line
e. Parking standard: Pursuant to Section 9.13.010,
Required Off Street Parking, of the City of Moor-
park Zoning Code.
f. Animal Requirements: Same as for the R-1 resi-
Pago - g
2/94
dences in the City's Zoning Ordinance.
Sec. 8119-5 - SUB-REGIONAL RETAIL/COMMERCIAL (SR/C)
Sec. 8119-5.1 - Purpose and Intent
The sub-regional retail/commercial overlay area is
intended to provide for a shopping center featuring both
retail and service commercial uses for, the convenience of
residents of the development as well as of the
surrounding community.
The physical effects of permitted and conditional uses in
this planning area will be limited so that negative
impacts, such as noise, odor, glare, visual impacts, and
other such effects that could be harmful to life or
nearby property, will not be generated. All permitted
and conditional uses shall be conducted entirely within
a completely enclosed building, and no outdoor storage of
supplies, equipment or materials shall be allowed, except
for company vehicles, garden centers and other similar
uses and as otherwise noted herein.
Sec. 8119-5.2 - Permitted Uses
a. Business/Commercial Services (eg. , office - supply
stores, communication services, courier services,
etc. )
b. Civic Uses
c. Commercial Entertainment Uses
d. Commercial Recreation Uses
e. Cultural Uses
f. Educational Uses
g. Food Services, including fast-food and full-
service facilities
h. Minor Repair Service (e.g. T.V. /radio repair)
i. Office Uses (e.g. accounting, barbershop)
j . Personal Services
X. Photographic Reproduction and Graphic Service
•
1. Public Safety Uses
Page - 9
2/94
m. Religious Uses/offices
n. Retail Sales
0. Any other use which the Planning Commission finds
consistent with the purpose and intent of this land
use category
Sec. 8119-5.3 - Accessory Uses and Structures
a. Fences and walls
b. Security and construction and storage offices,
during construction
d: Signs, per the City Zoning Ordinance and an ap-
proved Master Sign Program (see page 18) .
e. Accessory structures or uses the Director of Com-
munity Development finds to be consistent with, and
subordinate to, a principal use on the same site.
Sec. 8119-5.4 - Site Development Standards
a. Height of all buildings: 30 feet (2 stories)
b. Setbacks:
1) Front: 30 feet
2) Side:
a) Adjacent to residential lot - 50 feet
b) Adjacent to street - 30 feet
c) Adjacent to alley - 5 feet
d) None of the above - 0 feet
3) Rear:
a) Adjacent to Residential lot - 50 feet
b) Adjacent to street - 30 feet
c) Adjacent to alley - 5 feet
d) None of the above - 0 feet
c. Parking standards: Pursuant to the City of Moor-
park Zoning Code.
Pago - 10 - 2/94
d. Minimum site landscaping: 10 percent.
Sec. 8119-6 —NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL/COMMERCIAL (NR/C1
Sec.8119-6.1 - Purpose and Intent
' The neighborhood retail/commercial use is intended to
provide for development and maintenance of low intensity
commercial uses which serve the immediate needs of the
surrounding neighborhoods.
The physical effects of permitted and conditional uses
will be limited so that negative impacts, such as noise,
odor, glare, visual impacts, and other such effects that
could be harmful to life or nearby property shall be
mitigated.
Sec. 8119-6.2 - Permitted Uses
a. Business/Commercial Services
b. Commercial Recreation Uses
c. Food Services
d. Retail Sales (including gas and convenience
stores)
e. Any other use which the Planning Commission finds
consistent with the purpose and intent of this
category
Sec. 8119-6.3 - Accessory Uses and Structures
• a. Fences and walls
b. Security and construction and storage offices,
during construction
c. Signs, per the City Zoning Ordinance and an ap-
proved Master Sign Program.
d. Accessory structures or uses the Director of Com-
munity Development finds to be consistent with, and
subordinate to, a principal use on the same site.
Sec. 8119-6.4 - Site Development Standards
a. Height of all buildings: 30 feet (2 stories)
b. Setbacks:
?ago - 11 -
2/96
•
1) Front: 30 feet
2) Side:
a) Adjacent to residential lot - 50 feet
b) Adjacent to street - 30 feet
c) Adjacent to alley - 5 feet
d) None of the above - 0 feet
3) Rear:
a) Adjacent to Residential lot - 50 feet
b) Adjacent to street - 30 feet
c) Adjacent to alley - 5 feet
d) None of the above - 0 feet
4) Parking standards: Pursuant to the City of
Moorpark Zoning Code .
5) Minimum site landscaping: 10 percent
Sec. 8119-7 - BUSINESS PARK (BP1
Sec. 8119-7.1 - Purpose and Intent
The business park designation is intended to provide for
the development of a wide variety of office, light
industrial/assembli,'research and development and service
uses, which will serve the City of Moorpark and the
surrounding communities. In addition, this land use
category allows a limited amount of business, commercial,
and personal services that directly serve the users and
employees of the business park. The business park is
intended to provide a high quality business environment
which will take advantage of convenient access to the
Moorpark Freeway and New Los Angeles Avenue (SR 118/23) .
The physical effects of permitted and conditional uses in
this Planning Area will be limited so that negative
impacts, such as noise, odor, glare, visual impacts, and
other such effects that could be harmful to life or
nearby property, will not be generated. All permitted
and conditional uses shall be conducted entirely within
a completely enclosed building, and no outdoor storage of
Page - 12
2/94
•
supplies, equipment or materials shall be allowed, except
for company vehicles and as otherwise noted herein.
Sec. 8119-7.2 - Permitted Uses
a. Business/Commercial Services (eg. , office supply
stores, communication services, courier services,
etc.*
b. Civic uses
c. Clinical services •
d. Food services in conjunction with the principal
use.
e. Light industrial/assembly uses
f. Office uses
g. Personal services*
h. Research and development uses
i. Service uses
J . Warehousing and storage uses
k. Wholesaling
1. Any other use which the Planning Commission finds
consistent with the purpose and intent of this land
use category.
* Business,. commercial and personal service uses
combined I shall be limited to a total of 50
percent of the gross floor area of structures
in the business park.
Sec. 8119-7.3 - Conditional Uses (subiect to a Conditional Use
Permit)
a. Commercial recreation uses
b. Educational uses
c. Food services in conjunction with the principal
use.
d. Minor automotive service
e. Public utilities
Page - 13 -
2/96
•
is
f. Religious uses
Sec. 8119-7.5 - Site Development Standards
a. Height of all buildings: 30 feet, however, if the
site is to be utilized by one single user the
height limit shall be 50 feet.
b. Setbacks:
1) Front: 20 percent of lot width or depth with
a minimum of 30 feet.
2) Side:
a) Interior: 15 percent of lot width or
depth with a minimum of 30 feet
b) Exterior: 10 percent of lot width or
depth with a minimum of 30 feet
3) Rear: 15 percent of lot width or depth with a
minimum of 10 feet
c. Minimum lot size: 20,000 square feet
d. Minimum lot width: None specified
e. Parking standards: Pursuant to the City of Moor-
park Zoning Code.
f. Minimum site landscaping: 10 percent
g. All other applicable City codes/standards apply.
Sec. 8119-8 - NEIGHBORHOOD PARR (P)
Sec. 8119-8.1 - Purpose and Intent
The park designation is intended to provide for active
recreation, for the enjoyment of the neighboring resi-
dents, the City of Moorpark and the County of Ventura.
Sec. 8119-8.2 - Permitted Uses fsubiect to Site Plan Review)
a. Public or quasi public uses may include, but are
not limited to, the following:
1) Playfields - The park improvements are to
include a softball field with a minimum 300
foot distance from home plate to the out field
perimeter without overlap of adjacent playing
Page - 14 - 2494
•
field, a separate soccer field and parking.
2) Pedestrian and bicycle trails
3) Vista points
4) Nature preservation and study areas
5) Shade structures
6) Picnic facilities
7) Restroom facilities
b. Infrastructure service facilities or extensions
necessary for the development of the adjacent.urban
areas, including but not limited to, the following:
1) Roads
2) Flood control works
3) Utility transmission lines
4) Utility easements
5) Infrastructure service facilities or extension
necessary to serve the adjacent areas.
c. Agriculture
d. Accessory uses which clearly are incidental or
necessary to permitted uses
e. Community centers
f. Swimming pools
Sec. 8119-8.3 - Site Development Standards
Development standards for those uses permitted shall be
established by the approved site plan.
Sec. 8119-9 - OPEN SPACE (OS)
Sec. 8119-9.1 - Purpose and Intent
The open space area is intended to provide for the
preservation of natural physical and visual resources in
recognition of the environmental and aesthetic value of
the area with either public or private ownership.
Page - 15 - 2/94
•
Sec 8119-9.2 - Permitted Uses (subject to Site Plan Review
a. Open space
b. Agricultural uses (subject to Conditional Use
Permit approval)
c. Pedestrian trails
d. Nature preservation and study areas
e. Infrastructure service facilities
f. Structures and other uses accessory to permitted
uses
g. Utility easements
h. Any other use which the Planning Commission finds
consistent with the purpose and intent of this land
use category.
Sec. 8119-9.3 - Site Development Standards
Development standards for those -uses permitted shall be
established by the site plan review process. When uses
proposed in the Open Space land use classification are
permitted in other land use classifications of the
Specific Plan, the development standards in those other
applicable classifications shall apply.
Sec. 8119-10 - INSTITUTIONAL (II
Sec. 8119-10 . 1 - Purpose and Intent
The institutional area is intended to provide for the
development and maintenance of institutional uses such as
a library, museum or similar uses. The physical effects
of such uses will be limited so that negative impacts.
such as noise, odor, glare, visual; impacts, and other
such effects that could be harmful to life or nearby
property will not be generated.
Sec. 8119-10.2 - Permitted Uses
Museum, library, or similar uses permitted in the zoning
ordinance sections 8105.4 and 8105.5.
Page - 16 - 2/94