Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1992 1021 CC REG ITEM 11BITEM MOORPARK 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 930PNC0u PM864 of ACTION: M E M O R A N D U M TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Jaime R. Aguilera, Director of Community Developmente%--- Prepared by Deborah S. Traffenstedt, Senior Planner SST Dom: October 15, 1992 (CC Meeting of 10- 21 -92) SUBJECT: LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION ( LAFCO) SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT POLICIES Background On September 23, 1992, a LAFCO study session was held to discuss sphere of influence amendment policies. Staff provided the City Council a summary of the discussion at that study session in a memorandum dated September 28, 1992. The LAFCO staff report for the September 23 study session as well as a letter from Simi Valley to LAFCO dated September 22, 1992 are attached. Staff has scheduled this matter for Community Development Committee discussion at the October 19, 1992, meeting. Any recommendations) from the Committee will be presented to the City Council at the October 21 Council meeting. Discussion A LAFCO committee consisting of Commissioners Vanderkolk and Rose has been formed to develop policies for LAFCO staff to follow pertaining to sphere of influence amendments. The LAFCO committee is expected to formally present its recommendations at the next LAFCO meeting in November. It is staff's understanding that the LAFCO committee will be studying the need for administrative Policies for LAFCO staff to follow pertaining to what situations require early Commission involvement, as well as the need for a Policy which would require cities to replace open space acreage within a city's sphere in exchange for LAFCO approval of an amendment to include additional area. To assist the LAFCO committee to develop their recommendations, all of the cities in Ventura County have been requested to respond to a survey (copy attached). That survey asks for an inventory of land use status within city limits and within each city's sphere of influence. Staff is currently preparing a response to the LAFCO survey. PAUL W. LAWRASON JR. JOHN E. WOZNIAK SCOTT MONTGOMERY BERNARDO M. PEREZ ROY E. TALLEY JR. Mayor Mayor Pro Tern Councilmember Coundlmember Councilmember Printed On Rec jr H o ---, The Honorable City Council October 15, 1992 Page 2 The attached survey will not provide LAFCO with the City's position regarding the sphere of influence policies under consideration by the LAFCO committee. Other cities have provided comments to LAFCO either in writing or at the September 23 study session which urge the Commission to maintain flexibility when considering sphere of influence and annexation requests. The City of Simi Valley's letter dated September 22, 1992, covers most of the issues that are also pertinent to the City of Moorpark's planning efforts. Staff is requesting City Council authorization to direct the Community Development Department to prepare a letter for the Mayor's signature that would support the comments made by other cities. In addition, staff proposes to address the fact that Moorpark's City limits and sphere of influence boundary are contiguous; therefore, Moorpark would not have the ability to trade land from within a sphere of influence in order to annex land that is within the Moorpark Area of Interest. Open space land can be permanently preserved without requiring it to be removed from a city's jurisdictional boundaries. It addition to a letter response to LAFCO, staff is recommending that one or two City Councilmembers attend the November LAFCO meeting with staff, and that Councilmembers should personally contact LAFCO Commissioners to express the City's position on this subject. The Mayor has already requested that this subject be scheduled for the November 10, 1992, Association of Ventura County Cities meeting. Recommendation Direct staff to prepare a letter for the Mayor's signature which addresses the City's position regarding LAFCO sphere of influence amendment policies. Designate which Councilmember(s) will attend the November LAFCO meeting. Attachments: 1. LAFCO Staff Report 2. Letter to LAFCO from Simi Valley dated 9 -22 -92 3. LAFCO letter and survey dated September 29, 1992 y -- 1 k. VENTURA LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION MEMORANDUM TO:. City Managers Planning Directors Special Districts Special ' District Advisory Committee - FROM: Stan Eisner, Executive Officer SUBJECT: Study Session on Sphere of Influence Amendments - Policies, Criteria and Guidelines' - DATE: September 18, 1992 Attached is the staff report for the Local Agency Formation Commission Study Session '- scheduled for Wednesday, September 23,1992 at 9:00 am in the Board of Supervisors Hearing Room. We look forward to discussing this subject and hearing your input. If you have any questions, give me a call at (805) 654 -2575. RECEIVED S") ? 1.1992 VENTURA LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION MEMORANDUM TO: Local Agency Formation Commission Members and Alternates FROM: Stan Eisner, Executive Officer SUBJECT: Study Session on Sphere of Influence Amendment - Policies, Criteria, Guidelines DATE: September 23, 1992 BACKGROUND Spheres of Influence are defined in the Cortese -Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985 (Section 56076) as "..a plan for the probable ultimate physical boundaries and service area of a local agency, as determined by the commission ". Section 56425 establishes criteria for the establishment of Spheres of Influence, and subsection "(b)" states "the commission... shall periodically review and update the adopted sphere." The Act provides no criteria, policy, standards, or guidance other than those for the establishment of the original sphere: (a) In order to carry out its purposes and responsibilities for planning and shaping the logical and orderly development and coordination of local governmental agencies so as to advantageously provide for the present and future needs of the county and its communities, the commission shall develop and determine the sphere of influence of each local governmental agency within the county. In determining the sphere of influence of each local agency, the commission shall consider and prepare a written statement of its determinations with respect -to the following: (1) The present and planned land uses in the area, including agricultural and open -space lands. (2) The present and probable need for public facilities and services in the area. AGENDA ITEM N0. 42 (3) The present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services which the agency provides or is authorized to provide. (4) The existence of any social or economic communities of interest in the area if the commission determines that they are relevant to the agency. (b), Upon .determination of a sphere of influence, the commission shall adopt that sphere, and shall periodically review and update the adopted sphere. (c) The commission may recommend governmental reorganizations to particular agencies in the county, using the spheres of influence as the basis for those recommendations. Those recommendations shall be made available, upon request, to other agencies or to the public. CURRENT POLICY Your Commission has been operating under the policy set forth in a document titled "AREAS OF INTEREST, SPHERES OF INFLUENCE AND GREENBELT AGREEMENTS IN VENTURA COUNTY ", which states: LAFCOs are mandated by statute to develop Spheres of Influence. These are plans "for the probable, ultimate boundaries and service areas" of every city and special district. Spheres of Influence plan the future organization of government in the County, both in terms of urban form and the provision of public services. Since the State legislation was enacted in 1971, the Ventura LAFCO has adopted Spheres of Influence for all cities and special districts. City Spheres of Influence are based to a significant degree on adopted local land use plans and county -wide projections for air and water quality and transportajion planning. They can be thought of as planning lines that demarcate future city boundaries. City Spheres of Influence extend to varying degrees beyond current city boundaries. The City of Moorpark's Sphere is the same as the City boundary. LAFCOs are required by law to periodically review and update Spheres of Influence. The Ventura LAFCO's policy is to re- examine Spheres when a city general plan is amended or the county -wide planning program is amended for the area. The appropriate procedure to amend a Sphere is for the city to amend its General Plan to include the desired area and submit an application to LAFCO. This keeps the "cart before the horse" by relying on cities to complete their plans prior to LAFCO determining the appropriate Sphere location. The criteria listed above were used to establish the original Spheres for each of the cities in Ventura County. Because each city is a unique entity, the same criteria have led to different results - tailored to the specific circumstances of that city. Trying to develop a set of principals or criteria to be used generally for the amendment of spheres (over and above those set forth above) may be very difficult, if not impossible, given the diverse qualities and circumstances of the ten cities. RECOMMENDATION -- That the Commission consider adopting a policy that states "Sphere of Influence shall be amended only after a comprehensive study of the entire sphere, including review of general plans, specific plans, and such environmental documents as the Commission deems necessary, to assure compliance with the criteria set forth in Section 56425 of the Government Code, and such policies as may be established by this Commission relating to open space conservation, agricultural land resource preservation, and the prevention of urban sprawl." T CITY of -mom SIMI VALLEY � EY 2929 Tapp C inyon Road, gib l/alley, CSWOMla 83053 • (805) 583 -8700 September122, 1992 Copy Faxed 9/22/92 Chairpers n Fiore and Members of the Commission Ventura C unty Local Agency Formation Commission 800 S. Vi JAtoria Avenue Ventura, 93009 . SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION FOR REVIEW OF SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT POLICY Dear Chailperson Fiore and Members of the Commission: The City `f Simi V alley.has received a copy of the staff report for the September 239 1992 tudy session on the subject issue. This letter discusses the City's view on S here of Influence amendments and 'their affect on.regional planning Issues, 1 cal general plans, and most importantly on the local decision making process. Any changes in the current policy on Sphere of Influence amendments could gre tly hinder Simi valley, and possibly other cities in the County, in reaching heir goals towards General Plan objectives which are consistent with adopted r gional planning policies in Ventura County. LAFCO pol cy -and State Law requlre.Spheres of Influence to be periodically reviewed nd updated. These updates should be based upon the city's ability to provide p blic facilities and services, as well as based upon considerations for preservat an of agricultural and open -space lands. The Countywide Planning Program (PP). established a Simi Valley growth area for which the population limits have been continually met. In fact, the Simi Valley population estimate for July, 1992 is approximately 2 500 persons b i The Simi ' populatio General f populatio which set combined managed vi conform w making del The Simi planning Sphere of the revie providing Knox and Influence County -wic The Simi 1 =wRY STR T ON. N.w - e ow the forecast. lley General Plan uses the CPP and Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) forecasts as the basis for land use planning in the City. The overall Ilan strategy is designed to meet the regional planning goals and forecasts through use of the Simi Valley Growth Limitation Ordinance the number of residential building permits issued per year. The ffect of the regional plans and our local ordinance result in locally owth consistent with regional policies. The ability of a community to th these growth management tools should be considered by LAFCO when isions on Spheres of Influence. alley General Plan was updated comprehensively in 1988 and includes a rea which encompasses our Area of Interest (which is larger than our Influence). It is important to note that LAND staff participated in Of the General Plan Update in 1988. This participation, while not express approval, did consider the relative compliance with Cortese - LAFCO policy. Specifically, LAFCO policy states that Spheres of are based, to a significant degree, on adopted local land use plans and e projections for air and water quality and transportation planning. alley General Plan is consistent with the county -wide projections. AGENDA ITEM N0. DAV1S. Meyer Pro Tern - SANDI WERE, Council Member - JUDY MIK`LS. Cruncd Member 0 m -t*, W. aPC:=, Caunc'I vemT,! i I I i Chairperson Fiore and Members of the Commission Ventura C unty Local Agency Formation Commission Page 2 The Guide ines for Orderly Development requires developers to cooperate with the affected bity rather than the County when proposing urban development. The putting of the "cart before the horse ", as your staff report states, is not necessari y problematic since it leaves the land use decision making to the local jurisdict ons who are more keenly aware of the local constituency's needs. The question FCO needs to consider before making any changes in the Sphere of Influence policy is whether or not there is a need for LAFCO to make a change in a system which is widely recognized as being superior to that of other counties. Questions Ishould also be discussed as to whether LAFCO should have the authority to get into a land use decision making role, a more specific role than Cortese - Knox envisioned. Your consideration of these issues is very important to all of the cities in the County and should be carefully weighed against the effectiveness of past practices If the policy is focused on consistency with regional planning principle,, it will probably be found that most cities will be in compliance. Thank you for taking the decision o change current or Laura uhn at 583 -6875. Sincerely M. L. Koette City Manager time to consider this information before making any policies. If you have any questions, please call me cc: Cit Council Ven ura County City Managers Dir ctor of Environmental Services Dir ctor of Public works Sta Eisner, Executive Director, LAFCO Tom�Berg, Director, RMA September 29, 1992 RECEIVED Sip 3 0 1992 City of M01041 William Phelps, Acting Planning Director City Of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark CA 93021 Dear William: Ventura local agency formation commission hall of administration. L #1850 800 south victoria avenue ventura. ca 93009 (805) 654.2576 fax (805) 654 -5106 members ALEX FIORE JOHN K. FLYNN LARRY ROSE MARIA E. VANDERKOLK DORILL B. WRIGHT alternate members VICKY HOWARD JANIS MCCORMICK ROBERT N. McKINNEY Executive Officer STANLEY A. EISNER At its September 23,1992 Study Session, the Local Agency Formation Commission asked for an inventory of land use status within city limits and within each city's Sphere of Influence. The attached questionnaire outlines the specific questions raised by the LAFCO Commissioners. We would appreciate your filling in the appropriate information and returning it to us as soon as possible. A copy of the completed Survey will be available prior to the Local Agency Formation Commission's next meeting in November. Thank you for your timely attention to this request. Regards, LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION tanley A. Eisner Executive Officer SAE:cmw ® Recycled Paper `' PECEWED -- .311 `' �a �,� , .r r--f- City Of Moorpark Within City Corporate boundaries: 1. How much total acreage is within the City boundaries? 2. How much acreage is in urban use? 3. What percentage of total acreage does that acreage in urban use represent? 4. How many acres of unused land are there within city boundaries? 5. What percentage of total acreage does that acreage of - unused land represent? 6. How many acres of unused land in the city boundaries are suitable/available for development? 7. What percentage of total acreage does that unused land that is suitable/available for development represent? Within the City's Sphere of Influence: 1. How much total acreage is within the City's Sphere of Influence? 2. How much acreage is in urban use? 3. What percentage of total acreage does that acreage in urban use represent? 4. How many acres of unused land are there within city boundaries? 5. What percentage of total acreage does that acreage of unused land represent? 6. How many acres of unused land in the city boundaries are suitable/available for development? 7. What percentage of total acreage does that unused land that is suitable/available for development represent?