HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1991 1120 CC REG ITEM 08DMmwi�OL-W�6L-
MOORPARK
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark California 93021 (805) 529 -6864
1994
ACTION: �/
CITY OF MOORPARK
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
STAFF �ZEPORT gy
TO: The Honorable City Council I �f�
FROM: Patrick J. Richards, D:rector of Community Development
DATE: November 15, 1991 (CC meeting of 11/20/91)
SUBJECT: MCDONALD'S RESTAURANT PROPOSAL - CONTRACT PLANNING
SERVICES
Background
On September 4, 1991 the City Council considered a request from the
McDonald's Corporation to separate the property at the northeast
corner of Spring Road and New Los Angeles Avenue from the City's
current General Plan Update process.. The Council's action was to
allow the Mcdonald's Corporation to separate this property and
allow the filing of entitlement applications. As a related matter,
staff had recommended the use of an outside consultant for
processing of the McDonald's application. In a separate motion
the Council authorized staff to investigate the use of a
consultant.
Discussion
As of the date of this report; the Mcdonald's Corporation has not
yet filed any entitlement application. However, it is anticipated
that an application will be filed very soon. In accordance with
Council's authorization; staff has contacted several planning
consultant firms regarding availability to perform this work on
short notice. Although there are several firms available at this
time, the firm of The Planning Corporation of Santa Barbara appears
to be the most qualified for this work task. This firm is very
active in Ventura County and just completed the Westland project
for the City. Mr. Steve Craig, President of the firm will be the
responsible individual doing most of the work and representing the
firm. Their proposal is attar -h,,d for more detailed information
regarding the firm.
CRL- 11:13:91- 9:46am C: \NP5I\PJR\NCD11 -20.CC
PAUL W. LAWRASON JR 8FRNARDO M PEREZ CCi'T IONT(,OMFRr RO" F TALLEY JR JOHN E WOZNIAK
Mayor Mayor Pro Tem .o, - .lr*:erlbe, CouncilmemDer Counulmemoer
Panted On Recycled Paper
The Honorable City Council
November 15, 1991
Page -2-
The Planning Corporation's cost,
processing of a General Plan and
regarding the Update request doe,
hearings.
Staff Recommendation
.estimate does include possible
Zoning Amendment if a decision
not proceed these entitlement
1. That the Council approve ttie use of The Planning Center
Corporation of Santa Barbara as case planner for the proposed
McDonald's restaurant proposal for a Commercial Planned
Development, and Lot Split as long as the McDonald's
Corporation pays all cost associated with this contract not to
exceed a specified amount. A1. so, that McDonald's pay all City
costs regarding any General Plan Amendment and Zone Change
potentialy added if current cipplicat-ion process is denied by
the City.
2. That McDonald's Corporation be required to deposit $20,000
with the City which is an amount.. to cover the estimated cost
of the consultant contract plus the estimated cost for City
Attorney costs.
3. Authorize the City Manager to sign the contract with The
Planning Corporation of Santa Barbara upon the City receiving
the required deposit of $2 ",000 plus City administrative
costs.
Attachment: The Planning Corporatior, - Scope of Work
CRL- 11:13:91- 9:46am C:\WP5I\PJR\HCD11 -20.CC
7
--- RECEIVED —
® O C 1 16 1991
City of Moorpark ■
PLANNING CORPORATION
October 7, 1991
Pat Richards
Community Development Director
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Dear Mr. Richards:
In response to your request, I have prepared a preliminarti proposal to provide planning and environmental
review services for the proposed McDonald's Restaurant to be situated on the northeast corner of the
intersection of Spring and Los Angeles Avenue in the Cits of Moorpark. The proposed project will require
processing applications for the following entitlements General Plan Amendment, a Zone Change, a
Parcel Map, and a Commercial Planned Development Pc; rill
To process these applications in an expeditious manner t� fotL)µine ,Manning services program will need to
be instituted:
1) Coordination of case planning services ow rare application conferences through
final City Council hearings;
2) Preparation of a Mitigated NegatV,c- )ccl tratior and environmental review
processing;
3) Based on conditions developed in uIc, Negative. Declaration, a mitigation
monitoring program will be developer) and implemented through construction
completion and filing of a final monitom report wit h the City; and
4) Documentation with condition cr,mt aiio- 1'ar the Commercial Planned
Development Permit.
A preliminary proposal for Case Planning Services (acts -rty 1 above) is attached to this letter. Based on
presently available information, the mitigated ND woul , probably need to address traffic concerns, air
quality, design review (including architecture, landscape i lans and circulation), land use compatibility , and
affordable housing offsets. Once the Initial Study is completed and the scope of work for the Mitigated ND
is prepared, a separate fixed cost proposal will be submitt,. d to thc. City for preparation of the environmental
document. The Planning Corporation has obtained a kv( r of interest from Korve Engineers in Pasadena to
provide review of the applicant's traffic analysis. Korve slould also need to compute level of service and
street capacity effects for intersections designated by tt►c City Engineer as requiring cumulative or project
specific analysis. Once the ND is prepared, then scp.jra� fiKcd price scrape statements and cost proposals
will be prepared for activitit"s I and 4 1tcniU d ahovc
%1, t� ,
Based on comparable projects, estimated costs for activities 2, 3, and 4 are projected to total about $20,000
for ND preparation (excluding traffic subcontractor costs;, $5,1100 for mitigation monitoring, and $4,000 for
condition compliance monitoring. Activity 1 would be performed on a time and materials basis. Estimated
costs for full case processing range from $7,000 to $15,01M1 depending on the complexity of the project and
public response to the environmental document and the V,inning Commission staff report.
I am available to begin work immediately on this project I would recommend that the applicant submit an
initial deposit of about $5,000 to cover pre - application .-oi,ferences, preliminary review of the project, Initial
Study preparation, and related matters..
I have also included a Draft Case Planning Services (on Ir.I�, t Ioi your �'eview.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to work on this roject.
Sincerely,
Steve Craig, President
Planning Corporation of Sa a Barbara
Scope of Work: McDonald's Corporation
Drive In Restaurant ^.'ase Processing
Moorpark, ( difurnia
Task 1: Project Start-up, Initial Study P..- paration, .,nd N1) Coordination
The first tasks would be initiated with a project stars up meeting to be held at the City of Moorpark
between City staff, the applicant, and the Planning Sr: rvices and ND consultant. At this meeting, any
City proposed revisions to the technical studies being prepared by the applicant would be discussed.
The status of the application, determination of mat ,rials necessary to achieve application complete
status, and related matters would be discussed v.it' the applicant. Initial design review would be
completed at this time.
Once the application is determined to be complete, the planning consultant would then prepare an
Initial Study and related narrative. The Initial Study would be reviewed with City staff. The narrative
would be supported by technical data as necessary_ documenting the significance of environmental
effects determined to be insignificant.
Task 2: Review and Comment on Administrative and Draft Mitigated NDs
In consultation with City staff, the administrative Draft ND would be reviewed and any deficiencies
identified. The ND would be amended and core. cted based on this review. City staff (not the
consultant) would be the ultimate authority for p; ,: paration of the public draft ND. Once City
comments are incorporated into the ND, another r,� w of the document would be conducted to make
sure that all comments were properly responded t(i ,r thy: J)raft. All ND noticing would be performed
by the planning consultant.
Task 3: ND Hearings and Finalization of the D-Wuma [it
A separate proposal for the preparation of the ND would be submitted to the City and the applicant
for review and funding. Once the ND is published, the planning consultant would conduct the
environmental certification public hearings. The cor sultant would also coordinate internal review of
the Draft ND by the City Attorney, City Managcr„ the Community Development Director, City
Engineer, and other pertinent individuals. Cornni :mts on the Draft would be forwarded to the
consultant. Once all comments and responses arc )mplete.d and amendments and additions to the
Draft are finalized, the consultant would review thr .'• 9mimstrative Final ND. Completion of the Final
ND would conclude this task
Task 4: Planning Services: Staff Reports, Resolutiwr s, Ordinances, and Meetings
After certification of the EIR, the following act rv, res would he required to bring the project to
Planning Commission and City Council for deliberate �n. The planning support activities that would be
performed by the planning consultant include but a re of limited o the following major activities:
4.1 Prepare separate staff reports and �
for Planning Commission and t'it
Development Department standard
for the Tract MAp and CPD pe In
4.2 Prepare Planning Commission ..i:
Mitigation Reporting and Mont, i
011dii ions of Approval for the residential project
Council consistent with the City Community
remits parate conditions would be prepared
City Council resolutions for the ND and
P -o �r.3m .end for the entitlement requests.
4.3 Prepare City Council Ordinance for ',one C'hany,e.
4.4 Prepare public hearing notices anc rnail notice, to all residents within 1,000 feet of
project boundaries for each schedule l put,lic hc.mng.
4S Attend meetings with the Planning ,aft t,a discuss design, project density, integration
of the project with the Deparr n nt e >f Transportation (CalTrans), and related
matters.
4.6 Attend and make presentations to rie Planning Commission (estimated to require 3
hearings), and City Council (estin!ar d to require 2 hearings).
Task 5: Project Design Review and Analysis: Initial Planning Review, Reviewing Project Design and
Modifying the Project, Amending the Application/ Project Description to Minimize Environmental
Effects
The following planning services would be performed Irom the outset of the processing through the final
hearings on the application to assist the City in shaping and designing the project to satisfy local design
interests, guidelines, and concepts of proper community design and aesthetic planning:
5.1 Analyze the project to determine application completeness. The consultant would
make recommendations to City cgarding any items determined necessary to
complete all application material, Prepare letter to applicant for Community
Development Director's signaturt identifvinl any information which must be
submitted to complete the applic;111;
5.2 Work with applicant to finalize application Prepare letter to applicant for
Community Development Direch;r signature vhen application is determined to be
complete.
53 Work with City Engineer's Ofti(, to determine appropriate onsite and offsite
circulation. Work with County )r State agencies as necessaryy to coordinate
appropriate design of any necessar,, mproverri rrts.
5.4 Work with applicant to ensure ;hat ND suggested mitigation measures are
incorporated into the project d, --sWi - "h(-r,- feas,ihle.
`5.5 Work with the applicant to modify i project minimize environmental impacts.
5.6 Analyze the project in accordar), c with sound planning principles, and make
recommendations to City and ahpii:.ant regarding appropriate design for site plans,
elevations, floor plans, colors and r .atcrials, and conceptual landscaping and lighting
plans. This activity is basicalh n architectural review board type of function.
Planning Corporation staff designee Charles Rowley would participate in this part of
the planning services work. Mr. R wley currently serves on design review boards in
the City of Santa Barbara anc; ha,, performed design guideline development for the
City of Ventura. This review would tx coordinated with the Community
Development Department director nd staff
5.7 Analyze the project to detern ins- m,istency with the City's General Plan, Zoning
Code, and planning policies.
5.8 If the CPD Permit, Parcel Map, and other entitlements are approved by the City
Council, work with the applicant to a,btain compliance with conditions of approval as
needed to allow City Council appro�.il of a Final Map and Community Development
Department approval of a Zoning ( i arance
Task 6: Prepare and Implement Mitigation Monitoring Program and Submit A Mitigation
Monitoring Report Once Certificates of Occupanev arV Issued
The planning consultant would prepare the Mitigation Monitoring program based on Planning
Commission and Environmental Review Conditions. I )uring the period of construction, the consultant
would implement the monitoring program. A monitor would be present on -site during the
implementation of conditions during the preliminary grading and site development. When the project
is near completion, the consultant would monitor ll rekiriirerrients specified in the Conditions of
Approval to determine if requirements have been m,.;. The consultant would ensure enforcement of
all conditions through negotiation and report non, ompliance to the City as necessary. At the
conclusion of the project, a mitigation monitoring report would be prepared and sent to the City.
These activities would be funded as a separate pl3nni„:r, serice once the ND is finalized.
Task 7: Administrative Services: Timing, ProcessrnL� and Noticing
The following administrative functions would be corn; eted by the planning consultant. We would:
7.1 Make recommendations to Drrc, for of Community Development regarding
application completeness three wren., after initial or any subsequent CPD and Parcel
Map application submittals are rc+ c -d b- the t itV.
7.2 Complete and mail letter identifvina whether application is complete or incomplete
prior to the 25th day after any application submittal is received by the City.
73
Provide draft Conditions of Appr+i,.::a to the City six weeks prior to the first Planning
Commission hearing, and to the al
plica-it three weeks prior to the first Planning
Commission hearing.
7.4
Provide draft Planning Commission
taff Report one month prior to the first hearing.
7-5
Initiate ND circulation 45 days pri,)i
r the first Planning Commission hearing.
7.6
Provide Planning Commission pui,ii,
hearing an,l ND circulation Public Notice Form
to City three weeks prior to initiatioi
,if ND cirn elation.
7.7
Notify applicant to post the pi o).
a site six weeks prior to the first Planning
Commission hearing and three wc,,
ks prior tc any subsequently scheduled public
hearings. City policy requires sign t,
he posted un the site three weeks prior to initial
public hearing and two weeks p -ire
any uent public hearing.
7.8
Mail the Public Notice Forn I)
ill residents within 1,000 feet of the project
boundaries at least two weeks pri, r !
anv scheduled public hearing.
7.9
Provide Final Staff Reports to
tw„ week prior to any scheduled Planning
Commission or City Council he An it
7.10
Perform any other related planniii ,,
tiistance dittos as assigned.
Project Schedule
The consultant can begin the work immediately The esti;nated minimum time of performance time
for this development project would be 6 months. Processing such applications through final hearings
typically require between about 6 and 12 months. Mitigation monitoring would commence at the onset
of construction and would continue periodically for aM out one year
Qualifications
All work would be performed by Steve Craig, Stephanie Lawson, and Charles Rowley. A package of
Planning Corporation qualification materials (including EIRs prepared for jurisdictions in southern
California) are on file with the City. Mr. Craig and W . Lawson are both familiar with City policies and
procedures.
Hourly Rates and Reimbursement Agreement
Mr. Craig and Ms. Lawson charge between $50.00 and $90.00 per hour for different services. Design
review provided by Mr. Rowley is charged at $50.00 t,er hour. These billing rates include all overhead
charges, insurance and operating expenses, fax tran. missions, phone, travel and other miscellaneous
expenses. Detailed and itemized billings are presented on all time and materials invoices. Billings
would be submitted monthly to the City. If a fixed price agreement is necessary for case planning
services, an itemized cost projection would need to b< prepared. This is not recommended in this case
since it is very difficult to accurately estimate plannnm eAv,ces c As.
Referen, vs
Everett Millais: Community Developmeni 1) cxi'or, i:`ita of San Buenaventura.
(805) 658 -4722
Keith Turner: Director of the Resource ti., ❑ageenent agency, County of Ventura
(805) 6542481
Bruce Smith : Comprehensive Planning C)i -ctor, County of Ventura.
(805)654 -2497
David Dietrich: Director of Development, S rta Barbara Museum of Natural History.
(805) 682 -4711 extension :�4
Loretta McCarty. Housing Development Fajr)er, Comprehensive Planning Division, City of
San Buenaventura.
(805) 6584721
Peter Brown: Hatch and Parent, (Attorney Santa Barbara, California
(805) 963 -9231
Alice McCurdy. Environmental Planner, I ?i4 .ion A Environmental Review, County of Santa
Barbara.
(805) 568 -2006
Miriam Mack: Redevelopment Agency Girt :tor, City of San Buenaventura.
(805) 654 -7809