HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2013 0227 CC SPC ITEM 05A ITEM 5.A.
itY COU1 61 Meeting
AC T i_ON:__,(
D6t a -
MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable City Council
FROM: David A. Bobardt, Community Developmen re for
Prepared by: Joseph Fiss, Principal Planne
DATE: February 20, 2013 (CC Special Meeting of 2/2 13)
SUBJECT: Consider Public Workshop on General Plan Amendment Pre-
Screening No. 2012-02 to Expand the City Urban Restriction
Boundary (CURB) and Establish Land Use Designations on
Approximately 3,844 Acres Generally North and East of Moorpark
College and Campus Hills Currently Outside the City Corporate
Boundaries on the Application of Residential Strategies LLC for
Coastline RE Holdings Moorpark Corporation
BACKGROUND
On October 26, 2012, Residential Strategies, LLC filed an application for a General Plan
Amendment Pre-screening proposing to expand the City's corporate boundaries and
CURB to develop between 552 and 765 homes of various densities on approximately
510 acres of a 3,844 acre site north of Moorpark College on land currently outside the
City corporate boundaries.
Section 17.44.050 of the Municipal Code requires the pre-screening of proposed
General Plan Amendments through procedures set by City Council resolution.
Resolution No. 2008-2672 establishes the procedures for General Plan Amendment
Pre-screening applications. There are two filing periods each year, May 31St and
November 30th. Review and recommendation by the Community and Economic
Development Committee is required prior to a public hearing before the City Council to
determine whether or not a General Plan Amendment application may be accepted for
processing.
On December 19, 2012, the City Council requested a public workshop at a Special City
Council Meeting on February 27, 2012 at 7:00 PM to go over the project and the review
process, and to take early comments and questions from the public on this project. This
workshop is in addition to the process established by Resolution No. 2008-2672.
1
Honorable City Council
February 27, 2013
Page 2
Following the public workshop, at a date to be determined, the Community and
Economic Development Committee will consider this General Plan Amendment Pre-
Screening application and make a recommendation to the full City Council. The City
Council will then consider action on the application after conducting a public hearing.
DISCUSSION
State law, Section 65300 of the Government Code, requires each County and City to
"adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the
county or city, and of any land outside its boundaries which in the planning agency's
judgment bears relation to its planning." State law also gives Cities and Counties broad
authority in the consideration of adopting or amending General Plans. The adoption or
amendment of a General Plan is considered a legislative act; other than certain
mandatory components being required as part of a General Plan, the only required
finding is that the adoption or amendment is in the public interest. Moorpark's General
Plan, with minor exceptions (i.e. highway network, bikeway plan, equestrian trail plan
and horizon lines), addresses land only within the City limits. It establishes the type,
density and intensity of land uses, location and function of roads, and development
goals and standards for the ultimate buildout of the City. The project site, currently
outside the City, is not addressed by the goals, policies, or objectives of the City's
General Plan except by the aforementioned exceptions. The applicant is requesting an
amendment to the City's General Plan that would include the property and allow for its
development as proposed.
Inclusion in the General Plan is the first required step for any property that may be
annexed by a City; the property must first fit in the City's long-term plan for physical
development. Several different amendments would be required to accomplish the goals
of the project. Likely amendments would include changes to the Land Use Element,
Circulation Element, and Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Elements of the
General Plan. Ultimately, if the project site is included in the General Plan, exhibits in
the Housing Element and Safety Element would also need to be amended for internal
consistency; however, goals and policies in these elements could remain unchanged.
Of note in the potential requested amendments to the General Plan for the project is an
amendment to the Moorpark City Urban Restriction Boundary (CURB). The Moorpark
CURB was added to the Land Use Element of the General Plan as a result of Measure
"S", adopted by Moorpark voters on January 12, 1999. The Moorpark CURB is a
boundary beyond which, except for limited exceptions, urban services and urbanized
uses of land could not be extended. The project site is outside the Moorpark CURB; an
extension of the CURB boundary to include the proposed development area of the
project site is requested.
Although most General Plan Amendment requests are decided by the City Council
(after a recommendation is made by the Planning Commission), the process to extend
the Moorpark CURB differs,. The process to extend the Moorpark CURB is set by
Section 8.4 (E) of the Land Use Element. It only allows an amendment to extend the
\\DC1\Department Share\Community Development\DEV PMTS\G P A\Pre-Screening\2012\02 Foster-Hohman\20130227 Public
Workshop.docx
2
Honorable City Council
February 27, 2013
Page 3
CURB after the City Council, through the public hearing process, places the amendment
on the ballot, and it receives a majority vote (50% plus 1 of those voting) by the
Moorpark electorate.
Project Setting
The project site for the proposed Specific Plan is approximately 3,844 acres (6 square
miles), located generally north of Moorpark College outside the City limits and Sphere of
Influence in unincorporated territory of the County of Ventura. The project site is also
outside the Moorpark City Urban Restriction Boundary (CURB) as established in the
Land Use Element through the SOAR Initiative that was adopted by the public in 1999.
Topography on the project site ranges from approximately 650 feet above mean sea
level in the southeastern portion of the site to over 2,200 feet above mean sea level in
the northeastern portion of the site. The topography of northern portion of the site
includes mostly very steep terrain composing the prominent ridgelines of Big Mountain.
The topography of the southern portion of the project site includes a southward sloping
plateau divided by several steep-walled canyons that trend north to south.
Previous Applications
1. The 1992 Land Use Element of the General Plan included Specific Plan Area 8,
an area of approximately 4,200 acres including the project site. The policy of the
Land Use Element was for a development plan for the site to be developed
comprehensively as a specific plan to include up to 2,400 dwelling units (or up to
3,221 units if the developer agreed to provide public improvements, public
services, and/ or financial contributions that the City Council determined to be of
substantial public benefit to the community).
In 1993, a specific plan application, known as Hidden Creek Ranch, was filed for
4,200 acres by the Messenger Investment Company. The Specific Plan was
approved by the City in 1998, along with zoning designations and regulations for
the site to allow for the development of 3,221 dwelling units, among other uses.
Also in 1998, the City Council submitted an application to the Ventura County
Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to approve an extension to the
City's Sphere of Influence and to include the Hidden Creek Ranch property in the
City's corporate boundaries.
This annexation application was approved, although it was later rescinded in
accord with a decision of the Superior Court. In January 1999, Moorpark voters
adopted Measure "S", also known as the SOAR Ordinance, which, among other
things removed Specific Plan Area 8 from the City's Land Use Element. The City
Council withdrew the application for annexation in 2001. In 2002, the City
rescinded the zoning designations and regulations previously adopted for the
Hidden Creek Ranch property.
\\DC1\Department Share\Community Development\DEV PMTS\G P A\Pre-Screening\2012\02 Foster-Hohman\20130227 Public
Workshop.docx
3
Honorable City Council
February 27, 2013
Page 4
2. On December 21, 2001, after entering a Memorandum of Understanding with the
City, North Park Village filed applications for a General Plan Amendment,
Specific Plan, and Zone Change to develop 1,500 houses and 150 apartment
units on land immediately outside the City limits north of Moorpark College.
Additionally, the City entered into a Development Agreement with the applicant.
On June 1, 2005, prior to approval of the Development Agreement, the City
Council certified a Final Program Environmental Impact Report, adopted findings
in support thereof, approved a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(MMRP) to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures contained in the
Final Program EIR, and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations (EIR).
The EIR constituted the required CEQA review for General Plan Amendment No.
2001-05 ("GPA 2001-05"), Specific Plan No. 2001-01 (SP 2001-01), and Zone
Change No. 2001-02 ("ZC 2001-02") as well as for the Development Agreement.
Pursuant to the process outlined above, On October 5, 2005, the City Council
called for a Special Election to be held on February 28, 2006, for the voters of the
City of Moorpark to consider the proposed North Park Village and Nature
Preserve Specific Plan project. An ordinance (Measure A6) was put on the ballot
of the Special Election for the voters to consider whether or not to approve a
General Plan Amendment, including an amendment to the City Urban Restriction
Boundary (CURB) line, Specific Plan, Zone Change, and Development
Agreement for this project. Measure A6 was rejected by the voters.
General Plan Land Use Designation
A General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan, and Zone Change are required to change
the planned land use for the site from open space in order to allow for the development
of the proposed project.
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING
Direction General Plan Zoning Land Use
Site Open Space (County) Agricultural Exclusive (County) Cattle Grazing, Oil
Extraction
......_.__.......__..............__._..._._...................._............._.....__._...._._.............................._........................................._........__._..._...._........................................._..................._.............._.._..._........._......._........_......_.._........_.._......._.....-—._._._........_................................_......._.
North Open Space (County) Rur.Agricultural-5Ac (Co.) Open Space/
Recreation
...................................._.............................._............-._...................._..._-.............................__ .......................... ._..........------.........._.............._-......_..........--....._.............._........_........._....._._.................._._ ..._..._._....._...._..._.. ........_..................................
Medium-Low Density Residential Planned Single-Family
South Residential (City), Development-2.5U (City), Residential, Moorpark
Schools (City), Rur. Exclusive-1 Ac (City), College, Cattle
Open-Space ........Open Space (City) Grazing, Oil Extraction
....... .. .... ...._ ....... .... _ ...._ _ .................................._....... .......
East Open Space (County) Agricultural Exclusive (County) Cattle Grazing, Oil
Extraction
......................................._................._................................_.............................................._......................................................_..........._..._............_........._....._..........._..._......_...._.................__..............._._.._.......-- ........_._...__...__......- .-........_.............._......_......_......_................
Agricultural Exclusive(County) Cattle Grazing,
West Open Space(County) Rur. Agricultural-5Ac(Co.) Orchards, Open
Space I Recreation
\\DC1\Department Share\Community Development\DEV PMTS\G P A\Pre-Screening\2012\02 Foster-Hohman\20130227 Public
Workshop.docx
4
Honorable City Council
February 27, 2013
Page 5
Evaluation Criteria
Criteria most pertinent for approval or denial of this General Plan Amendment Pre-
Screening are:
• Conformity with Goals, Policies, and Implementation Strategies of the General
Plan
• Potential for Compatibility with Existing and Planned Uses in the Area
• Facilitation of a Significant Contribution to the Provision of Affordable Housing
• Conformity with Other City Council Policies
• Potential to Provide Public Benefit
General Plan Goals and Policies
Goals and policies from the General Plan most pertinent to this project include:
Land Use Element
• Attain a balanced city growth pattern which includes a full mix of land uses. New
development shall be orderly with respect to location, timing, and density,
consistent with the provision of local public services and facilities, and compatible
with the overall suburban rural community character.
• Establish a logical Sphere of Influence. The City shall strive to obtain and
maintain sphere of influence boundaries consistent with the City Urban
Restriction Boundary.
• Provide a variety of housing types and opportunities for all economic segments of
the community. A mix of residential densities shall be provided which
accommodate the housing needs of all members of the community. Residential
projects shall include variation of product types, lot sizes, and designs where
feasible. Inclusionary zoning shall be used where feasible to require that a
percentage of new units are affordable to very low to moderate income
households.
• Develop new residential housing which is compatible with the character of
existing neighborhoods and minimizes land use incompatibility. Infill
development in existing residential neighborhoods shall be compatible with the
scale and character of the surrounding neighborhood.
• Establish land uses and development intensities which are compatible with
scenic and natural resources and which encourage environmental preservation.
• Identify and encourage the preservation of viable agricultural resources in the
City and its Area of Interest. Unless property has not been used for agricultural
purposes in the immediately preceding 2 years and is unusable for agriculture
\\DC1\Department Share\Community Development\DEV PMTS\G P A\Pre-Screening\2012\02 Foster-Hohman\20130227 Public
Workshop.docx
5
Honorable City Council
February 27, 2013
Page 6
due to its topography, drainage, flooding, adverse soil conditions, or other
physical reasons, it shall be deemed viable.
• Establish land uses and development intensities which are compatible with
scenic and natural resources and which encourage environmental preservation.
New development shall be located and designed to minimize adverse visual
and/or environmental impacts to the community. New development shall
respect, integrate with, and complement the natural features of the land. Areas
identified as significant aquifer recharge areas shall be protected and preserved.
• Maintain a high quality environment that contributes to and enhances the quality
of life and protects public health, safety, and welfare. Public and private projects
shall be designed so that significant vegetation shall be maintained and
protected, including riparian and oak woodland vegetation and mature trees.
Ecologically sensitive habitats shall be protected and preserved or replaced with
no net loss of habitat so long as there is substantial public benefit to any
relocation program. Natural and cultural resources having significant
educational, scientific, scenic, recreational or social value shall be protected and
preserved. The City shall require developers to maintain wildlife corridors to
allow for the passage of animals between designated open space or recreation
areas.
• Enhance and maintain the suburban/rural identity of the community. The overall
density and intensity of development should decrease as the slope increases.
• Enhance the physical and visual image of the community. New development
shall be compatible with the scale and visual character of the surrounding
neighborhood.
Housing Element
• Provide residential sites through land use, zoning and specific plan designations
to provide a range of housing opportunities.
• Expand and protect housing opportunities for lower income households and
special needs groups.
Noise Element
Protect the public from adverse noise impacts. Incorporate noise considerations
into planning decisions to prevent or minimize future land-use incompatibilities.
Limit the impact of nuisance noise sources upon residential areas. Residential
buildings should be located and oriented to minimize or eliminate a noise
problem for a site adjacent to a highway.
\\DC1\Department Share\Community Development\DEV PMTS\G P A\Pre-Screening\2012\02 Foster-Hohman\20130227 Public
Workshop.docx
6
Honorable City Council
February 27, 2013
Page 7
Circulation Element
• Provide a transportation system that supports the land use plan in the General
Plan and provides for the safe and efficient movement of people, goods, and
services within, into, out of, and through the City of Moorpark.
• The completion of the ultimate circulation system, through the improvement of
sub-standard roadway segments and intersections and the construction of
missing roadway links and related facilities shall be actively promoted.
• Provide a circulation system which supports existing, approved and planned
land uses throughout the City while maintaining a desired level of service on all
streets and at all intersections. Level of service "C" shall be the system
performance objective for traffic volumes on the circulation system. For
roadways and interchanges already operating at less than level of service "C",
the system performance objective shall be to maintain or improve the current
level of service.
• New residential streets should be designed so as to discourage pass-through
trips which do not begin nor end within the residential areas within the City of
Moorpark.
• New development projects shall mitigate off-site traffic impacts to the maximum
extent feasible.
• Roadways in hillside areas shall not have a significant, adverse impact on the
natural contours of the land; grading for streets shall be minimized; and harsh cut
slopes which may not heal into natural appearing surfaces shall be avoided.
• Provide a citywide system of safe, efficient and attractive bicycle and pedestrian
routes for commuter, school, and recreational use.
• Multi-use equestrian, bicycle, and pedestrian trails shall be encouraged wherever
feasible.
ANALYSIS
Under the current County General Plan Designation, this property could be developed
with up to 384 ten-acre lots. However, the current Zoning Designation would allow only
96 forty-acre lots.
Although this proposed General Plan Amendment, when accompanied by an
appropriate development proposal could further a number of the City's General Plan
goals and policies stated above, it would also involve many policy decisions that could
only be made through careful analysis after preparation and consideration of an
Environmental Impact Report. If the processing of this project is to proceed, staff would
recommend that a development agreement be required to be processed concurrently
with the applications for a General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, Zone
Change, Subdivision Map, Residential Planned Development Permit, and any other
necessary entitlements.
\\DC10epartment Share\Community Development\DEV PMTS\G P A\Pre-Screening\2012\02 Foster-Hohman120130227 Public
Workshop.docx
7
Honorable City Council
February 27, 2013
Page 8
PROCESSING TIME LIMITS
Time limits have been established for the processing of development projects under the
Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 4.5), the
Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Title 7, Division 2), and the California
Environmental Quality Act Statutes and Guidelines (Public Resources Code Division 13,
and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3). Since this project proposal
requires consideration of a General Plan Amendment, which is a legislative matter, it is
not subject to processing time limits under the Permit Streamlining Act. None of the
other time limits are applicable to this pre-screening application.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
A GPA Pre-Screening application does not involve any approval action and is therefore
not subject to environmental review. Should the City Council allow the filing of a GPA
application on this project, an initial study would be prepared to determine the proper
environmental documentation. It is expected that an Environmental Impact Report
would be prepared due to the nature, location, and scale of the proposed project.
FISCAL IMPACT
Costs related to the processing of the entitlement applications are paid for by the
developer.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Refer application to Community and Economic Development Committee for
recommendation.
Attachment: Proposed Conceptual Site Plan
\\DC1\Department Share\Community Development\DEV PMTS\G P A\Pre-Screening\2012\02 Foster-Hohman\20130227 Public
Workshop.docx
8
SUMMARY TABLE
MOO RP/A5RK PROJECT
PLANNING SUB-AREA LAND AREA
AREA USE ACRES DU/AC TOTAL UNITS
_ 1 ®A SCHOOL/COMMUNITYUSE 15.0 n/a
Subtotal 15.0
..;4s ■B MOTOR COURT 6.0 6.P7.0 36.42
C 5OXIOD/MOTOR COURT &9 4.5-7.0 40-62
D MOTORCOURT 7,3 6.0-7.0 44-51
E SOXIOD 10.6 4.5-5.2 48-55
® F 50X100 24,6 14.4.8 84-118
G 6OXI00 IS.2 3.7 56
Subtotal 72-6 307-385
a 'r•�
„or
2 H 50X]110 14.0 3,4-4.9 4 8-69
'l
;.
9&.2 2 5 7
8.3,9 1 1
Subtotal 32-2 9&140
3 ❑J 7OXIO0 14.3 22-3.7 31-53
I; 7OX100 27.9 22.3.7 6k103
❑
❑ C 6OX100 18.9 2.8-45 53-85
Subtotal 61.1 146341
TOTAL$ 1p.! m?"
h
K I
/
t
ti s
PL A�IG AREAS�.
PA3 PA2
PREPARED BY.-
PA3 .
'4k
/ >✓` �. � � a ,. . HUN-ST&EB�,C80CM X65
�k*r
FR WY 719 ,,:• '. .
^- �,... r�mreo or:vamr e�m oar: w ns,zciz oa:+s:v c. r2c rn�1/�axr:�2\m.a�w,r.r_c..-r,n.�..n,.-:,...,rw.-•:�a-.rers-ens-artaar
9
5
H-UNSAFER & ASSOCIATES W.O 3085-1;June , 2012
� C405-1 c
I R V I N E , I N C . Leon M. Cautill®
PLANNING ® ENGINEERING ® SURVEYING
Thme Huoes-Irvine,CA 92618- PH:(949)583-1010-FX-(949)583-0759
North Park Moorpark 200 ac Mass Grade Concept — 3-29-12
161-
zm
A 4&Q
CUT FILL
Area "A" 3,179,900 CYS 3,179,900 CYS
Area of Grading -185,48 ac
Area "B" 1,599,600 CYS 1,599,600 CYS
Area of Grading - 84.23 ac
ESTIMATED TOTALS 4,779,500 CYS 4,779,500 CYS
Area of Grading - 269.71 ac
't4 9
10