HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1990 1017 CC REG ITEM 09C MOORPARK ITEM •
BERNARDO M. PEREZ •
STEVEN KUENY
Mayor MOORPARK, C'•.'
SCOTT MONTGOMERY qty Council t.'. _„ ear, City Manager
CHERYL J. KANE
Mayor Pro Tern of /OA ? t 99 Z �P�/�A►r;l, City Attorney
ELOISE BROWN /� i'rt y 1�w PATRICK RICHARDS,A.I.C.P.
Councilmember ACTIONf nrf "� " ' 'o �� ` m" Director of
CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. elf
UO _ e dentetal 'O Community Development
Councilmember n R. DENNIS DELZEIT
PAUL W. LAWRASON,Jr. By�� Z City Engineer
Councilmember341141.edy JOHN V. GPolice
IE
LILLIAN KELLERMAN Chief of Police
City Clerk RICHARD T. HARE
City Treasurer
MEMORANDUM
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development
DATE: October 11, 1990 (CC Meeting of 10-17-90)
SUBJECT: PROPOSAL TO AMEND CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF GENERAL PLAN TO
DELETE SEGMENT OF GISLER ROAD (LIBERTY BELL ROAD) BETWEEN
LASSEN AND LOS ANGELES AVENUES
Background
At the City Council 's August 15, 1990, meeting, the Council
directed staff to initiate an amendment to the Circulation Element
for the possible deletion of Gisler Road/Liberty Bell Road as a
through street between Poindexter and Los Angeles Avenues; and
directed the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing and make
a recommendation on the General Plan amendment no later than
October 8, 1990 .
Discussion
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 8, 1990,
for the proposed Circulation Element amendment. At that meeting,
the Commission adopted Resolution No. 224 (attached) recommending
that the City Council approve an amendment to the Circulation
Element to change Gisler Avenue to Liberty Bell Road and to
identify that Liberty Bell Road shall not serve as a direct
connector road between Los Angeles and Poindexter Avenues . That
resolution also states that the exact width and alignment of
Liberty Bell Road should be determined by the City Council prior to
approval of either a subdivision map or planned development permit
for the properties located adjacent to Liberty Bell Road between
Los Angeles and Poindexter Avenues .
The Planning Commission identified that their intent was to allow
the Council the flexibility to approve either the deletion of a
segment of Liberty Bell Road or a discontinuous alignment for
Liberty Bell Road. Section 1 of the Commission's resolution does,
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529-6864
The Honorable City Council
October 11, 1990
Page 2
however, recommend further analysis of the traffic impacts of a
discontinuous alignment before the Council makes a final
determination on a future residential project.
Environmental issues related to the proposed deletion of a segment
of Liberty Bell Road are discussed in the attached Planning
Commission staff report and Initial Study. A traffic analysis
report prepared by Austin-Foust Associates (attached to Initial
Study) indicates that traffic volumes on Shasta and Sierra Avenues
could increase significantly by the year 2010 if Liberty Bell Road
does not serve as a connector road between Los Angeles and
Poindexter Avenues. Staff did not complete a Negative Declaration
for the proposed Circulation Element amendment because of the
potential for significant traffic impacts .
Staff recommends that, if the Council intends to approve the
revised Greenleaf Residential Project (consisting of a combination
of single-family, duplexes, and condominiums) , a final decision on
the Circulation Element amendment be deferred to allow additional
traffic analysis of a discontinuous alignment for Liberty Bell Road
and concurrent processing of the tentative tract map and the
General Plan amendment.
Recommendation
1. Accept the Planning Commission's recommendaton to approve an
amendment to the Circulation Element to change Gisler Avenue
to Liberty Bell Road and to identify that Liberty Bell Road
shall not serve as a direct connector road between Los Angeles
and Poindexter Avenues.
2 . Postpone final action on amending the Circulation Element
until the appropriate environmental clearance document has
been completed which addresses the impacts of the revised
Greenleaf Residential project as well as the proposed
Circulation Element revision.
PJR/DST
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. PC-90-224
2 . Planning Commission Staff Report dated 10-2-90
3 . Initial Study and Austin Foust Traffic Analysis Report
RESOLUTION NO. PC-90-224
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. GPA-90-
3 WHICH WOULD ALLOW A REVISION TO THE
CIRCULATION ELEMENT RELATIVE TO THE FUTURE
ALIGNMENT AND WIDTH OF LIBERTY BELL ROAD
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on October 8, 1990,
the Moorpark Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment
to the Circulation Element as identified in the staff report dated
October 2, 1990; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting of October 8, 1990, the Planning
Commission considered said proposed amendments at a public hearing
and reached its decision;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1 . To comply with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , the Planning Commission
recommends that a supplemental traffic analysis be completed which
analyzes the projected traffic impacts on Los Angeles Avenue,
Poindexter Avenue, Liberty Bell Road, Shasta Avenue, Sierra Avenue,
Lassen Avenue, and Moorpark Avenue that would result if Liberty
Bell Road is constructed on a discontinuous alignment between Los
Angeles and Poindexter Avenues . Once the results of the traffic
analysis report are known, the Commission recommends completion of
the appropriate environmental document to allow approval of the
Circulation Element amendment.
SECTION 2 . The Planning Commission hereby finds that the
proposed amendment to the Circulation Element is not expected to
result in any inconsistency with adopted General Plan goals and
policies .
SECTION 3 . The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the
City Council approve an amendment to the Circulation Element to
change Gisler Avenue to Liberty Bell Road and to identify that
Liberty Bell Road shall not serve as a direct connector road
between Los Angeles and Poindexter Avenues . The exact width and
alignment of Liberty Bell Road should be determined by the City
Council prior to approval of either a subdivision map or planned
development permit for the properties located adjacent to Liberty
Bell Road between Los Angeles and Poindexter Avenues .
Resolution No. PC-90-224
Page 2
The action with the foregoing direction was approved by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: LANAHAN, SCULLIN, TALLEY, WOZNIAK
NOES:
ABSENT: SCHMIDT
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1990 .
Chairman, John Wozniak
ATTEST:
Celia La Fleur
Secretary
MOORPARK ITEM 7 A-
BERNARDO M. PEREZ ,a• � STEVEN KUENY
Mayor �°9 City Manager
SCOTT MONTGOMERY CoF ,j9 CHERYL J. KANE
Mayor Pro Tern SFr e%A4 City Attorney
ELOISE BROWN attOtt`�u PATRICK RICHARDS,A.I.C.P.
Councilmember 90�°/�' •° Director of
Community Development
CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. '<•.o �` R. DENNIS DELZEIT
Councilmember
PAUL W.LAWRASON,Jr. City Engineer
Councilmember JOHN V.GILLESPIE
LILLIAN KELLERMAN Chief of Police
City Clerk CITY OF MOORPARK RICHARD T. HARE
PLANNING COMMISSION City Treasurer
STAFF REPORT - OCTOBER 2, 1990
SECTION I - GENERAL INFORMATION
A. HEARING DATE: B. HEARING TIME:
October 8, 1990 7:00 p.m.
C. HEARING LOCATION: D. CASE NO. :
City Council Chambers General Plan Amendment
No. GPA-90-3
E. STAFF CONTACT: F. APPLICANT:
Deborah Traffenstedt Macleod Construction
Senior Planner Co. (Kenneth Macleod)
G. PROPOSED PROJECT AND LOCATION:
The City Council has requested that an amendment to the
Circulation Element be studied which would involve the
deletion of a segment of Gisler Avenue/Liberty Bell Road
between Lassen and Poindexter Avenues .
The necessary revisions to the Circulation Element to
accomplish this amendment include changing the location of
Gisler Avenue on Maps 1 and 2 and Figure 2 and revising page
9 of the text to clarify the required right-of-way width and
alignment. Staff also recommends changing Gisler Avenue to
Liberty Bell Road to avoid confusion. A portion of the
existing corridor map (Map No. 1) which shows the proposed
general location of Gisler Avenue is attached. Possible text
revisions to page 9 of the Circulation Element are as follows
(deletions are shown by strike out lines and the new text is
shown by shading) :
1
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529-6864
Cicicr Avenue Liberty Bell Road
Cicicr Avenue Liberty ;._ Bell ;road between
Poindexter Avenue and Los Angeles Avenue shall
be shown ac a four lane road with a right-of-
way width e4-E8 ranging from 46 to .77.5 feet
pursuant to Maps and"'2 of 'the Circulation
Element The I exact width and:; alignment of
Liberty Bell Roa4 shall be determined by the
City ,Council prior to apprwa of either a
subdivision mapor plAnned deve. opment permits
fox die propertieslocated adjacent to? Liberty
Bell. Road between ;Los Angeles, and Poindexter
Avenues. Liberty e11 R,cacd rhall not :serve s
a directco nector, road between Poindexter as
Los Angeles„Avenues:
H. REQUESTED ACTION AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
1. Open the public hearing and accept public testimony.
2 . Make the appropriate findings.
3 . Recommend that one of the following actions be taken:
A. Recommend continuance of the proposed General Plan
amendment to allow concurrent processing with the
revised Greenleaf Residential Project (This action
would allow for appropriate environmental clearance
when the actual width of road, location of
alignment, location of driveways, etc. , are known) ;
or
B. Recommend approval of the proposed Circulation
Element amendment to allow deletion of a segment of
Liberty Bell Road between Lassen and Poindexter
Avenues; or
C. Recommend approval of an amendment to the
Circulation Element to require that Liberty Bell
Road shall not serve as a direct connector road
between Los Angeles and Poindexter Avenues (this
would allow Liberty Bell Road to be constructed on
a discontinuous alignment) ; or
C. Direct staff to prepare a resolution recommending
denial of the proposed Circulation Element
amendment to allow deletion of a segment of Liberty
Bell Road between Lassen and Poindexter Avenues.
2
SECTION II - PROJECT SITE BACKGROUND
A. SITE ZONING:
RPD-15U (Residential Planned Development 15 units/acre)
B. SITE GENERAL PLAN:
VH (Very High Density Residential, 15 du/acre average)
C. VICINITY ZONING:
North: AE (Agricultural Exclusive)
South: CPD (Commercial Planned Development)
East: RE (Rural Exclusive)
West: R-1-8 (One-Family Residential, 8, 000 sq. ft. lot min. )
D. VICINITY GENERAL PLAN:
North: AG-1 (Agriculture, 10-40 acres/du)
South: C-2 (General Commercial)
East: School
West: M (Medium Density Residential, 4 du/acre average)
E. EXISTING SETTING:
1. Site Description:
The project site is considered to be that general area
where Liberty Bell Road would be located if constructed
between Lassen and Poindexter Avenues . This general area
is currently vacant land and has relatively flat
topography. The site has previously been graded, and
vegetation on the site is predominantly limited to annual
grasses .
2 . Surrounding Land Uses:
The existing land uses surrounding the project site
include the Chaparral Middle School and a remnant citrus
orchard to the east, vacant commercial land to the south,
single-family residential development to the west, and
Poindexter Avenue and the railroad right-of-way to the
north.
F. PROJECT HISTORY:
The Planning Commission reviewed the original proposal for, the
Greenleaf Apartment Project in June and July 1990, and adopted
a resolution recommending denial of that project on July 2,
1990. The Greenleaf Apartment Project was designed with
3
Liberty Bell Road directly connecting Los Angeles and
Poindexter Avenues, and the alignment was shown to the west of
the proposed 236 apartment units .
Based on input from the City Council and adjacent residents,
the applicant (Macleod Construction Company) has proposed a
revised residential project which would include a two-acre
park site and approximately 170-176 residential units to
consist of a combination of single-family detached homes, two-
story duplexes, and condominium units in two-story buildings .
This revised project could be designed so as to either
terminate Liberty Bell Road just south of the park site with
no intersection onto Poindexter, or provide a discontinuous
alignment for Liberty Bell Road which connects Los Angeles and
Poindexter Avenues, but not directly.
At the City Council's August 15, 1990, meeting, the Council
directed staff to initiate a General Plan amendment to the
Circulation Element to be paid for by the applicant for the
possible deletion of Gisler Road/Liberty Bell Street as a
through street between Poindexter and Los Angeles Avenues; and
directed the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing and
make a recommendation on the General Plan amendment no later
than October 8, 1990 (refer to Attachment 1) . The Council
further directed staff to have a traffic study completed which
would analyze the circulation impacts resulting from the
deletion of a segment of Liberty Bell Road.
SECTION III: PROJECT ANALYSIS
A. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
An Initial Study was completed, which analyzes the impacts of
the proposed revision to the Circulation Element (Attachment
2) . That Initial Study identifies noise and traffic as being
the only potentially significant issues related to the
proposed amendment (refer to pages 9, 13, and 14) .
A Traffic Analysis Report was prepared by Austin-Foust
Associates which analyzes the traffic impacts resulting from
deletion of a segment of Liberty Bell Road between Lassen and
Poindexter Avenues . A copy of that report dated October 2,
1990, is attached. The data in this report indicates that
without the Liberty Bell Road connection between Los Angeles
and Poindexter Avenues, the 2010 traffic projections for
Shasta Avenue increase by approximately 160 percent, from 900
to 2 ,300 average daily trips (ADT) , and the 2010 traffic
projections for Sierra Avenue increase by approximately 430
percent, from 300 to 1, 600 ADT.
4
Austin-Foust's report does point out that adequate roadway
capacity will be available to serve the traffic demand that is
projected to utilize the available roadway connections to
Poindexter Avenue, with or without the connection of Liberty
Bell Road to Poindexter Avenue. However, the report further
identifies that the dramatic increases in traffic on Shasta
and Sierra Avenues could be perceived as a serious impact by
residents along these residential streets.
Concern has been expressed by persons residing in the general
vicinity of the project in regard to potential traffic impacts
to Poindexter Avenue if Liberty Bell Road is constructed as a
direct connector roadway between Los Angeles and Poindexter
Avenues . Austin-Foust's study indicates that the increase in
traffic on Poindexter Avenue between Moorpark Avenue and
Sierra Avenue would be expected to be approximately 200-300
ADT by the year 2010 if Liberty Bell Road is constructed as a
direct connector roadway between Los Angeles and Poindexter
Avenues . This increase is not considered to be significant.
While no significant change in noise impacts is expected if a
segment of Liberty Bell Road is deleted between Lassen and
Poindexter Avenues, the increased traffic on Shasta and Sierra
Avenues would result in nuisance noise impacts to adjacent
residents .
The environmental impacts of a discontinuous design for
Liberty Bell Road could not be fully analyzed because of the
lack of information regarding the specific design proposed for
the revised Greenleaf Residential Project and the lack of a
traffic study. Ideally, the revised residential project and
the roadway should be planned so as to minimize driveway
openings onto Liberty Bell Road, thereby minimizing conflict
points.
While the expectation is that the traffic on Shasta/Sierra
Avenues, Liberty Bell Road, and Poindexter Avenue would not be
significant with a discontinuous design, no facts are
available to justify this conclusion. Until the actual design
of the residential project is known (location of road, width
or road, location of driveways, number of units, type of
units, etc . , ) an accurate traffic study cannot be completed to
determine traffic impacts .
Since the revised Greenleaf Residential Project will probably
require a Subsequent EIR, Addendum, or Supplement to an EIR,
the traffic impacts resulting from an amendment to the
Circulation Element should be addressed in conjunction with
the revised residential project. A Negative Declaration
cannot be completed for the proposed deletion of a segment of
Liberty Bell Road because of the potential for significant
traffic impacts . A Negative Declaration cannot be completed
5
for a discontinuous design for Liberty Bell Road because of
the lack of specific design and traffic information for this
proposal which would clearly identify whether or not a
significant environmental impact would result.
B. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY:
The proposed amendment to the Circulation Element would not
result in any specific inconsistency with adopted General Plan
goals and policies .
SECTION IV - CONCLUSIONS AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Several optional actions can be taken by the Planning Commission in
regard to the proposed Circulation Element revision. Following is
a summary of the optional actions and staff 's comments on each of
these potential actions.
A. Recommend that the City Council continue General Plan
Amendment No. GPA-90-3 (Circulation Element revision) for the
following reasons :
1 . Deletion of a segment of Liberty Bell Road between Lassen
and Poindexter Avenues may significantly increase traffic
on Shasta and Sierra Avenues.
2 . Any Circulation Element amendment related to the
alignment and width of Liberty Bell Road between Lassen
and Poindexter Avenues should be processed concurrently
with the tentative tract map for the revised Greenleaf
Residential Project.
3 . Additional environmental analysis of a discontinuous
alignment design for Liberty Bell Road should be done in
conjunction with any supplemental environmental clearance
completed for the revised Greenleaf Residential Project.
Comments: The intent of this action would be to have the
Circulation Element revision returned to the Planning
Commission for review and recommendation when the
tentative tract map for the revised Greenleaf Residential
Project is brought before the Planning Commission at a
public hearing. This action would allow for additional
study of a discontinuous alignment for Liberty Bell Road
in regard to potential traffic and noise impacts .
B. Recommend that the City Council approve an amendment to the
Circulation Element to delete a segment of Liberty Bell Road
between Lassen and Poindexter Avenues .
6
Comments: Staff has not completed a Negative Declaration for
the proposed deletion of a segment of Liberty Bell Road.
Therefore, the Planning Commission would need to make a
determination that no significant impacts would result and
direct completion of the Negative Declaration to allow final
City Council action on November 7, 1990 .
C. Recommend that the City Council approve an amendment to the
Circulation Element to change Gisler Avenue to Liberty Bell
Road and to identify that Liberty Bell Road shall not serve as
a direct connector road between Los Angeles and Poindexter
Avenues . The exact width and alignment of Liberty Bell Road
shall be determined by the City Council prior to approval of
either a subdivision map or planned development permit for the
properties zoned RPD-15 Units/Acre and located adjacent to
Liberty Bell Road between Lassen and Poindexter Avenues .
Comments: This action would allow the Council to approve
a Circulation Element revision for a discontinuous
alignment for Liberty Bell Road without returning this
matter to the Planning Commission. If impacts are
determined to be insignificant, the appropriate
environmental clearance document can be completed prior
to final City Council action.
D. Recommend that the City Council deny the proposed amendment to
the Circulation Element to delete a segment of Liberty Bell
Road been Lassen and Poindexter Avenues based on the potential
for significant traffic impacts to Shasta and Sierra Avenues.
Comments: This action would be similar to a continuance
action in that any revised Circulation Element amendment
proposal, such as a discontinuous alignment for Liberty
Bell Road, would need to be brought back to the Planning
Commission for a recommendation. However, since the
Planning Commission has previously expressed opposition
to having Liberty Bell Road directly connect Los Angeles
and Poindexter Avenues, this action would not clarify
your position regarding the future alignment for this
roadway.
Prepared by:
S. I
Deborah S. Traffen edt
Senior Planner
10-4-90
Date
7
ATTACHMENTS:
Excerpt from Council Minutes dated August 15, 1990
Initial Study
Excerpt from Circulation Element Corridor Map No. 1
Liberty Bell Road Traffic Analysis Report dated 10-2-90
8
Minutes of the City Council
Moorpark, California Page 8 August 15, 1990
Councilmember Montgomery said that the size of the lower
commercial should be analyzed to determine what benefit
reduction of its size would have on air quality
standards.
The Council discussed the park and Councilmember Harper
suggested sending the issue of the park to the Parks and
Recreation Commission for design between now and
September 19th.
In response to discussion to possibly connect the
proposed commercial project with the existing commercial
center to the east (Towne Center) , Mr. Kueny asked for
clarification as to whether Park Lane would remain a
public street or serve as an ingress or egress for the
two projects.
Councilmember Harper clarified the street should not
remain a public street if this occurs.
BY CONSENSUS: By consensus the Council determined to pursue
the option of connecting the proposed new center and the
Towne Center.
AT THIS POINT in the meeting a recess was declared. The time
was 9:40 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 10: 10 p.m.
Councilmember Harper asked that an analysis be
accomplished which addressed the differential regional
impacts with or without this project. An analysis is
needed to understand the cumulative regional impacts of
this project as it relates to the capture of vehicle
trips currently leaving the City.
In response to whether he would be willing to fund a
general plan amendment, Mr. Mcleod stated for the record
that he would.
MOTION: Councilmember Montgomery moved and Councilmember
Harper seconded a motion to continue the item, public hearing
open, until September 19, 1990; Community Development
Committee to meet with applicant, staff and public during the
interim period; staff to initiate a General Plan Amendment to
the Circulation Element to be paid for by the applicant for
the possible deletion of Gisler Road/Liberty Bell Street as
a through street between Poindexter and Los Angeles Avenues;
the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing and make a
recommendation on the general plan amendment no later than
October 8, 1990. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
MOORPARK
BERNARDO M. PEREZ ,a• STEVEN KUENY
Mayor o0° ' City Manager
SCOTT MONTGOMERY fp ; CHERYL J. KANE
Mayor Pro Tern � . • ` CityAttorney
ELOISE BROWN o`�i n PATRICK RICHARDS,ofA.I.C.P.
Councilmember o � e Director of
CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. `o Community Development
Councilmember <,Fo R. DENNIS DELZEIT
PAUL W. LAWRASON,Jr. City Engineer
Councilmember JOHN V. GILLESPIE
LILLIAN KELLERMAN Chief of Police
City Clerk RICHARD T. HARE
City Treasurer
CITY OF MOORPARK ,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
INITIAL STUDY
Entitlement: General Plan Amendment No. GPA-90-3
(Proposed revision to Circulation
Element)
•
Date of Initial Study: Original: September 12 , 1990
Revised: October 2 , 1990
Name of Applicant: Macleod Construction Company
Location of Project: North of Los Angeles Avenue, South
of Poindexter Avenue, west of Park
Lane, and east of Sierra Avenue.
(The current Circulation Element
Corridor Map shows a general
location for the referenced road
segment as being approximately 2 ,200
feet west of Moorpark Avenue and
shows it connecting Los Angeles and
Poindexter Avenues . ) See attached
map.
Agency Staff Contact: City of Moorpark
Deborah Traffenstedt, Senior Planner
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
(805) 529-6864
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529-6864
2
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Project:
The proposal is to revise the Circulation Element (Maps 1 and
2 and Figure 2 and page 9 of the text) to change Gisler Avenue
to Liberty Bell Road and to identify that Liberty Bell Road
shall not serve as a direct connector road between Poindexter
and Los Angeles Avenues . The segment of the corridor map (Map
No. 1) which will be corrected is attached. Following is a
possible text revision to page 9 of the Circulation Element.
Deletions are shown by strike out lines and the new text is
shown by shading.
Cicicr Avenue Liberty Bell Road
Cicicr Avenue Liberty Bell ::: Road between
Poindexter Avenue and Los Angeles Avenue shall
be shown ac a four lanc road with a right-of-
way width of 68 ranging .from 40 to' 77,5 feet
pursuant to Maps 1 and 2 of the Circulation
Element. The exact width •and: alignment of
Liberty. Bell Road shall be determined by the
City Council prior to . approval Qf either a
subdivision :;map or; planned development pexmlt
for the properties:::zoned ;RPD-l5Units/Acre and
located adjacent to Liberty 'Bell Road between
Lassen and Poindexter Avenues. Liberty Bell
Road .shall not serve as; a direct connector
road between Poindexter and Los Angeles
Avenues.
The Mission Bell Plaza and Greenleaf Apartments Draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for an
apartment project which showed Liberty Bell as a through road
to Poindexter Avenue. At the request of the City Council, the
apartment project was subsequently revised to delete a segment
of Liberty Bell Road so as to prevent it from being a
connector roadway between Poindexter and Los Angeles Avenues .
While the EIR for the Greenleaf apartment project addresses
the impacts related to a 236 unit apartment project, the
developer (Macleod Construction Company) is now proposing a
project which includes a two-acre park site and 170-176 units
to consist of a combination of single-family detached homes,
two-story duplexes, and condominium units in two-story
buildings .
The exact design of what is now called the Greenleaf
Residential Project is not finalized, and the EIR for the
Mission Bell Plaza and Greenleaf Apartment Projects has not
yet been certified. This initial study is intended to analyze
the impacts of the proposed revision to the Circulation
3
Element to allow either a deletion of a segment of Liberty
Bell Road or an offset design so as to encourage local traffic
only and discourage high speed, pass-through traffic.
Site Description:
The project site is considered to be that general area where
Liberty Bell Road would be located if constructed between
Lassen and Poindexter Avenues . This general area is currently
vacant land that is zoned for very high density residential
development (RPD-15 units) .
The area where the road segment revision is proposed is
generally flat. The site has previously been graded, and
vegetation on the site is limited to annual grasses and summer
flowering forbs . No cultural or historical resources were
located on the site and there are no existing structures .
Surrounding Land Uses:
The existing land uses surrounding the project site include
the Chaparral Middle School and a remnant citrus orchard to
the east, Lassen Avenue right of way and vacant commercial
land to the south, single-family residential development to
the west, and Poindexter Avenue to the north.
II. IS THE PROPOSED PROJECT CONSISTENT WITH:
Yes No N/A
Moorpark General Plan X
Applicable Specific Plan: X
Moorpark Zoning Ordinance X
*No inconsistency with adopted goals or policies will result.
III. ARE ANY OF THE FOLLOWING STUDIES REQUIRED:
Noise Study
Tree Study
Archaeological Report
Biology Report
Geotechnical Report
4
Soil borings and assessment for liquefaction
potential
X. Traffic Study
Other (identify below)
IV. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST AND RESPONSES:
A. Earth
1 . Does the parcel contain slopes of 20% or greater which
will be affected by project construction?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Is any significant modification of major landforms
proposed?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
3 . will the project result in the exposure of people or
property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes,
landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar
hazards?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
4 . Does the site include any unique geological features or
paleontological resources of significance?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
5
5 . will the project result in a significant increase in wind
or water erosion or siltation either off- or on-site
beyond the construction phase of the project?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
6 . Will the project result in changes in siltation,
deposition, or erosion which may modify the channel of a
river or stream?
Yes Maybe No N/A
No earth related impacts will result from the proposed Circulation
Element revision. The proposal is to revise the design and
location of a roadway. The EIR for the revised Greenleaf
Residential Project will analyze the earth-related impacts
resulting from construction of all necessary infrastructure,
including Liberty Bell Road.
B. Air
1 . Will the project result in a significant adverse air
quality impact (based on the estimated date of project
completion) , as identified in the Ventura County Air
Pollution Control District's Guidelines for the
Preparation of Air Quality Impact Analyses?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the project result in a significant cumulative
adverse air quality impact based on inconsistency with
the Ventura County Air Quality Management Plan?
Yes Maybe No N/A
3 . Will the project result in the creation of objectionable
odors?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
6
4 . Will the project result in the exposure of sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
The air quality impacts of the proposed Circulation Element
revision cannot be quantified until the exact design of the revised
residential project is known. However, no significant change in
air quality is expected to result from the proposed circulation
system revision. If the scale of the Greenleaf Residential and
Mission Bell Plaza projects is reduced, as is currently proposed,
air quality impacts may also be reduced slightly.
C. Water
1. Does the project involve a major natural drainage course
or flood control channel?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the project result in changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface
runoff?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
3 . Is the project within a 100-year flood hazard area as
identified on the Federal Emergency Management Agency
Flood Insurance Rate Map for the City of Moorpark?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
4 . Will the project result in alterations to the course or
flow of flood waters?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
5 . Will the project result in a change in the quantity of
ground waters, either through direct additions or
withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by
cuts or excavations?
7
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
6 . Will the project result in degradation of ground or
surface water quality?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
7 . Will the project change the amount of surface water in
any water body?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
8 . Will the project result in substantial reduction in the
amount of water otherwise available for public water
supplies?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
No water related impacts will result from the proposed Circulation
Element revision. The proposal is to revise the design and
location of a roadway. The EIR for the revised Greenleaf
Residential Project will analyze the water-related impacts
resulting from project construction.
D. Plant Life
1. Will the project result in a substantial change in the
diversity or number of any species of plants ( including
trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants) ?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Are any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants
present on the project site? (See State and Federal
listings and California Native Plant Society, Inventory
of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants . )
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
3 . Will the project result in the introduction of invasive
species of plants into the area?
8
Yes Maybe No N/A
4 . Will the proposal result in the reduction in acreage of
any agricultural crop?
Yes Maybe No N/A
No plant related impacts will result from the proposed Circulation
Element revision. The proposal is to revise the design and
location of a roadway. The EIR for the revised Greenleaf
Residential Project will analyze the biological impacts resulting
from project construction.
E. Animal Life
1. Will the project result in a reduction in the diversity
or numbers of any species of animals (birds; land
animals, including reptiles; fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms; or insects) ?
Yes Maybe No N/A
2 . Will the project restrict the range of or otherwise
affect any rare or endangered animal species?
Yes Maybe No N/A
3 . Will the project result in a deterioration of any
significant wildlife habitat?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
No animal related impacts will result from the proposed Circulation
Element revision. The proposal is to revise the design and
location of a roadway. The EIR for the revised Greenleaf
Residential Project will analyze the biological impacts resulting
from project construction.
9
F. Noise
1. Will the project result in increases to existing noise
levels?
Yes Maybe No N/A
2 . Will the project result in the exposure of people to
conditionally acceptable or unacceptable noise levels
based on Figure 3 in the City's Noise Element?
Yes Maybe No N/A
In conjunction with preparation of the EIR for the Greenleaf
Apartment Project, a noise analysis study was done for two
different residential project site plans--one that included Liberty
Bell Road as a through road and one that showed Liberty Bell
terminating at Lassen Avenue. Both site plans were identified as
having approximately the same noise levels attributable to project-
generated traffic. For either design, cumulative traffic is
expected to result in significant noise impacts to persons residing
adjacent to Los Angeles Avenue. This impact will occur regardless
of the roadway configuration of Liberty Bell Road. Nuisance noise
impacts would be expected to occur from increased traffic on Shasta
and Sierra Avenues if a segment of Liberty Bell Road is not
constructed between Lassen and Poindexter Avenues (refer to Item M
for further discussion of projected traffic) .
G. Light and Glare
1. Will the project result in new light or glare?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
No significant change in light or glare impacts is expected,
regardless of whether of not Liberty Bell Road is terminated south
of Poindexter Avenue or offset so as to not directly connect with
Poindexter Avenue. Specific impacts related to the revised
residential project would be analyzed in the EIR prepared for that
project.
H. Land Use
1. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of
the present or planned land use of an area?
10
Yes Maybe No N/A
2 . Are adjoining or planned land uses incompatible with the
proposed project, so that a substantial or potentially
substantial interface problem would be created?
Yes Maybe No N/A
3 . Could the project serve to encourage the development of
presently undeveloped areas or result in increases in the
development intensity of existing developed areas
(examples include the introduction of new or expanded
public utilities, and new industrial, commercial, or
recreational facilities) ?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
No change in land use is expected to result from the proposed
Circulation Element revision. No increase in development intensity
is proposed.
I. Natural Resources
1 . Will the project result in substantial depletion of any
nonrenewable resource?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the project result in the conversion of agricultural
land to nonagricultural use or impairment of the
agricultural productivity of agricultural land?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
No significant depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource would
result. No agricultural land will be affected by the proposed
Circulation Element revision.
11
J. Risk of Upset and Human Health
1. Will the project involve or be subject to a risk of an
explosion or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radioactive materials) in the event of an
accident or upset condition?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Is the project within or adjacent to a high fire hazard
area as defined by the Ventura County Fire Protection
District?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
3 . Will the proposal result in the creation of any health
hazard or potential health hazard and/or the exposure of
people to potential health hazards?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
Deletion of a portion of Liberty Bell Road or an offset/
discontinuous design would reduce the potential use of this roadway
as a truck route. Fewer truck trips on Liberty Bell Road would
reduce the potential for a hazardous materials accident. However,
deletion of a portion of Liberty Bell Road would increase local
automobile traffic on Shasta and Sierra Avenues, thereby increasing
the potential for automobile accidents on these residential
streets.
No significant impact to fire suppression services would result
from the proposed modification of Liberty Bell Road. The project
site is not within a high fire hazard area. However, providing an
additional connection between Los Angeles Avenue and Poindexter
Avenue is preferable in regard to improving emergency response
time.
K. Population
1. Will the project alter the location, distribution,
density, or growth rate of the human population of an
area?
12
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
No change in population would result from the proposed Circulation
Element revision, since no increase in development intensity is
proposed.
L. Housing
1. Will the proposal require the removal of any housing
unit(s) ?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the proposal reduce currently available low and
very-low income housing through changes in use or
demolition?
Yes Maybe No N/A
3 . Will the proposal require the displacement of people from
the project site?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
The proposed Circulation Element revision would not affect housing
nor would it require the displacement of people.
M. Transportation/Circulation
1. Will the proposal result in the generation of substantial
additional vehicular movement? ( Identify estimated a.m.
and p.m. peak hour trips and average daily vehicle trips
generated by the project. )
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the proposal result in a substantial impact to the
existing or planned transportation systems?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
13
3. Will the proposal result in an increased demand for off-
site parking?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
4 . Will the proposal result in an increase in traffic
hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians?
Yes Maybe No N/A
Using the traffic model developed in conjunction with preparation
of an updated Circulation Element for the City, Austin-Foust
Associates has analyzed the traffic impacts resulting from deletion
of a segment of Liberty Bell Road between Lassen and Poindexter
Avenues. Their traffic analysis report dated October 2, 1990, is
attached. That report indicates that without the Liberty Bell Road
connection between Los Angeles and Poindexter Avenues, the 2010
traffic projections for Shasta Avenue increase by approximately 160
percent, from 900 to 2,300 average daily trips (ADT) , and the 2010
traffic projections for Sierra Avenue increase by approximately 430
percent, from 300 to 1,600 ADT.
Austin-Foust's report points out that adequate roadway capacity
will be available to serve the traffic demand that is projected to
utilize the available roadway connections to Poindexter Avenue,
with or without the connection of Liberty Bell Road to Poindexter
Avenue. However, the report further identifies that the dramatic
increases in traffic on Shasta and Sierra Avenues could be
perceived as a serious impact by residents along these residential
streets.
Austin-Foust's traffic model also indicates that the traffic using
Shasta and Sierra Avenues in the year 2010 would be local traffic,
not regional through traffic. Local traffic was defined as all
vehicle trips in the traffic model which begin or end in the area
east of Gabbert Road, south of Poindexter Avenue, west of Moorpark
Avenue, and north of Los Angeles Avenue.
Concern has been expressed by persons residing in the general
vicinity of the project in regard to potential traffic impacts to
Poindexter Avenue if Liberty Bell Road is constructed as a direct
connector roadway between Los Angeles and Poindexter Avenues.
Austin-Foust's study indicates that a minor increase in traffic
(200-300 ADT) would be expected to occur for the segment of
Poindexter Avenue between Moorpark Avenue and Sierra Avenue if
Liberty Bell Road is constructed as a direct connector roadway
between Los Angeles and Poindexter Avenues.
14
No study has been conducted which analyzes the traffic impacts
resulting from a discontinuous design for Liberty Bell Road similar
to the existing Shasta/Sierra Avenue connection between Los Angeles
and Poindexter Avenues. While the expectation is that the traffic
on Shasta/Sierra Avenues, Liberty Bell Road, and Poindexter Avenue
would not be significant with this type of a discontinuous design,
no facts are available to justify this conclusion. Until the
actual design of the residential project is known (location of
road, width of road, location of driveways, number of units, type
of units, etc. , ) an accurate traffic study cannot be completed to
determine traffic impacts.
Since the revised Greenleaf Residential Project will probably
require either a Supplement or Addendum to the original EIR
prepared for the Greenleaf Apartment Project, the traffic impacts
resulting from a discontinuous design for Liberty Bell Road should
be addressed in conjunction with the revised residential project.
Based on the limited traffic impact information currently
available, a Negative Declaration cannot be completed for the
proposed Circulation Element revision. Deletion of a segment of
Liberty Bell Road between Los Angeles and Poindexter Avenues is
expected to result in a significant traffic impact on Shasta and
Sierra Avenues.
N. Public Services
Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for
new or altered governmental services such as police and fire
protection, schools, parks or recreational facilities, or
other governmental services?
Yes Maybe No N/A
Public services would not be adversely affected by the proposed
Circulation Element revision. By eliminating a segment of Liberty
Bell Road between Lassen and Poindexter Avenues, a more usable park
site will be created. Therefore, a positive impact on park and
recreational facilities will result.
0. Energy
Will the proposal result in the use of excessive amounts of
fuel or energy?
Yes Maybe No N/A
No change in the use of fuel or energy is expected to result.
15
P. Utilities
Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or
substantial alterations to utilities, including power or
natural gas, communications systems, water, sewer, storm water
drainage, solid waste disposal, and street lighting annexation
and/or improvements?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
No change in utilities is expected to result. Any necessary
easements for utilities will be provided for in the development of
the Greenleaf Residential Project and the Mission Bell Plaza
Project.
Q. Aesthetics
1 . Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic
vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal
result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site
open to public view?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the project result in the loss, covering, or
modification of any unique geologic or physical features
such as a natural canyon, rock outcrop, ridgeline, or
hillside with a slope in excess of 25 percent?
Yes Maybe No N/A
3 . will the project result in the loss of a distinctive
landmark tree or stand of mature trees?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
Deletion of a portion of Liberty Bell Road or a discontinuous
design could reduce aesthetic impacts to adjacent residents. The
EIR for the revised Greenleaf Residential Project will address the
aesthetic impacts of that project.
16
R. Archaeological/Historical
1 . Is there a potential that the proposal will result in the
alteration or destruction of an archaeological or
historical site?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
2 . Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic
effects to an archaeological site or historic building,
structure, or object?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
No impact to archaeological or historical resources would result.
No cultural resource sites were identified as being located within
the project area.
S. Mandatory Findings of Significance
1. Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
Based on the responses to the checklist questions, the proposed
Circulation Element revision is not expected to degrade the quality
of the environment or impact biological and cultural resources.
2 . Does the project have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of
time while long-term impacts will endure well into the
future. )
Yes Maybe No N/A
17
Based on the responses to the checklist questions, there is a
potential for a long-term impact to the environment if traffic
levels on Shasta and Sierra Avenues are significantly increased as
a result of the proposed Circulation Element revision.
3 . Does the project have impacts which are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may
impact on two or more separate resources where the impact
on each resource is relatively small, but where the
effect of the total of those impacts on the environment
is significant. The term "cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of an individual
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects . )
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
Based on a preliminary traffic analysis study completed by Austin-
Foust Associates, a significant, cumulative increase in traffic
levels would occur on Shasta and Sierra Avenues if Liberty Bell
Road is not constructed as a connector roadway between Los Angeles
and Poindexter Avenues.
4 . Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
Yes Maybe No N/A
X
Based on the responses to the checklist questions, no substantial
adverse effects on human beings are expected. However, increased
traffic on residential streets would result in increased nuisance
noise, light and glare, and the potential for traffic accidents.
18
V. REFERENCES:
The references used in responding to this questionnaire
include the following:
1. EIR for Ventura County General Plan--Land Use Element for
the Moorpark Area ( 1980) .
2 . Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate
Map, Community Panel Number 060712 0005 A, September 29,
1986 .
3 . General Plan of the City of Moorpark.
4 . Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation,
1987 .
5 . U.S.G.S. Topographic Quadrangle Maps for Moorpark.
6 . Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, Guidelines
for the Preparation of Air Quality Impact Analyses, 1989 .
7 . Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, Ventura
County Air Quality Management Plan, 1988 .
8 . Zoning Ordinance of the City of Moorpark.
VI. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project COULD have a
significant effect on the environment, there will not be
a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures, described on an attached page, could be applied
to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION should
be prepared.
* X I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect
on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
19
10-2-9 0
Date Deborah S. Traffenstedt, Senior Planner
/0-,2—yrs 7V
Date atrick X. ichards, Director of
Community Development
* Based on the preliminary traffic analysis report prepared by
Austin-Foust Associates, deleting a segment of Liberty Bell
Road between Lassen and Poindexter Avenues would result in a
significant traffic impact.
An Addendum, a Supplement, or a Subsequent EIR to the Mission
Bell Plaza and Greenleaf Apartments EIR may be appropriate if
the conclusion of a traffic analysis study for the revised
Greenleaf Residential Project is that no significant traffic
impact would result from an offset design for Liberty Bell
Road.
\km--� t1NOAlIM4=
W
ZCAMPUS PARK ORIv(
O
2
COLLINSDRIVE
FUTURE COLLEGE VIEW AVE
i ® R — SONO FI,EEwAr
t a _ - ._._
FUTURE • `�� �'
J ,....._. i
23 5•. .,
. ..7 . ,
,,,,,..„. )�% , . .
_, ,.<7.„:
, . .L.
NIGH STREET LOS ►H --
. - —'�
c Pp1N0E*TER AVE. \�-. 01-. O l.�
NJ
W 4 FUTURE FUTURE
_..............----"--i
W 4 Y
m Ir o 23 1
a , o . JA$GE•LOS v ANGELES S AVE NEW LOLE •
4
0
/ 4
°9
4009 j \•lc,
94- va
J qo \
'o 2 3
sl44. ,, aO p0
OsfO aE,'OP
1
.94.440A R0,0 I% .
CORRIDOR MAP - MAP NO. I
0
If
P
LEGEND
•
ammo FREEWAYS
- CONVENTIONAL STATE HIGHWAYS
LOCAL ROADS
memo INTERCHANGE
•
•
•
--- - -- .. .. - -
NOTES
1 ROADS INDICATED 00 NOT SNOW RIGHT OF WAY REQUIREMENTS.
FOR Riw REQUIREMENTS SEE MAXIMUM NO. OF LANES MAP-
MAP NO. 2.
2. THE CORRIDOR MAP DOES NOT PORTRAY PRECISE ALIGNMENTS,
PLEASE CONSULT WITH THE CITY OF MOORPARK PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
Ok+O SPECIFIC ALIGNMENT IS EITHER SUGGESTED OR IMPLIED ALONG THIS
ROUTING BETWEEN ASTERISKS.
Draft
LIBERTY BELL ROAD
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Technical Notes
Prepared by:
Austin-Foust Associates
2020 N. Tustin Avenue
Santa Ma, California 92701
October 2, 1990
LIBERTY BELL ROAD TRAFFIC ANALYSIS October 2, 1990
Technical Notes
These technical notes summarize the results of a traffic analysis of the potential future
extension of Liberty Bell Road to Poindexter Avenue in the City of Moorpark. The purpose of
the analysis is to determine future local and regional usage of the extension and to estimate the
impact on the surrounding arterial system if the extension is not constructed. The analysis results
are intended as supportive background data in the determination of the need or justification for
the Liberty Bell Road extension.
TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS
Traffic forecasts were projected using the Moorpark Traffic Analysis Model (MTAM). This
model was developed by Austin-Foust Associates, Inc. (AFA) for the City of Moorpark for use in
the on-going General Plan update traffic study. For this analysis the buildout (2010) current
General Plan version of the MTAM was used. This version, which is based on the city's current
General Plan land use and circulation elements, was used to develop projections for the 2010 "no-
project" scenario examined in the General Plan Traffic Analysis report.'
The MTAM 2010 current General Plan average daily traffic (ADT) projections for the
arterial system in the immediate vicinity of the Liberty Bell Road extension are illustrated in Figure
1. Using a special feature of the traffic model, corresponding projections for selected areas within
the model study area can be extracted. This "select area" assignment procedure was used to
determine the "local traffic" ADT projections also illustrated in Figure 1. These local traffic
estimates represent all vehicle trips in the traffic model which begin or end in the shaded select
area.
a
As the figure indicates, the daily projections from the traffic model for Liberty Bell Road
range from 3,900 south of Poindexter Avenue to 10,000 north of Los Angeles Avenue. Local
(select area) traffic accounts for the majority of the projected Liberty Bell Road traffic, and the
bypass or thru traffic is calculated as the difference between the total ADT and local ADT. The
' "City of Moorpark General Plan Traffic Analysis", Austin-Foust Associates, Inc., May 1990.
1
TOTAL ADT o
cn
12000
p HIGH
5000 5200
4400
w
a 2600 O S O 1` 5500
E., .-y ` o
pQ1ND t� M E ro'' m rn
vo M
oo
3400 r
r-) o ,1 o SECOND
F C do
m 1800
6
co co o L.ASSEN
ao
o _a
v o w
o o O
O 6 c0 0
0 \_.c.c;
CO 0. .---
cn
36100 44400 46800 45700 a 49100 50800 61100
LOS ANGELES
0
o ? 0o 0 0
c.0 0 0 o 0
'a co isN 'V to w
a
LtNLnOs
LOCAL [SHADED AREAL ADT
0
c
7 3100
HIGH
4000 4200 3200 0
/ "r
0 1600 . : .///, / ..,/./'/C �� ,'�.j // 4300 `n
o amp / gtt;.� ///.//7.-"//
i"/ 0 is-- 0 dr,' //// / •
i/'/
� /Y /`. /// ////,/,-/ /i f, , W �' / 0
i / ///`� /// %/�, // Po
2400
^� /./// //// .//////
/ // /O f5 SECOND
/ / /./2/::' /14ti / / 0
tel
03
✓/ /r/f .1.13 /// / 0 r/7LASS4N -
v�/ / v o o cd
// // /.;/'
/ // :j%:'%%//0 / /,/ coo // h
4300 Ir i/ 7 8200 /�-//10500 / z/10900 /,�' _ 14100 /• - 13 00 �� 18000
LOS ANGELES i'
0 z
o a 0 Q 0 0
a M T0
UNIDOS r �+
Figure 1
2010 ADT VOLUMES
.--� 41- - WITH LIBERTY BELL ROAD
- iar "ir.j AUSTIN-FOUST ASSOCIATES, INC. EXTENSION
I
resulting estimate of regional bypass usage of Liberty Bell Road based on the traffic model
projections is 200 ADT.
The only other bypass route available for regional usage in the immediate vicinity of Liberty
Bell Road is the existing Shasta Avenue/Sierra Avenue connection between Los Angeles Avenue
and Poindexter Avenue. The primary users of this facility today are the residents of approximately
110 residential dwelling units located between Shasta Avenue and Sierra Avenue. The base year
(1989) version of the MTAM indicates that this residential development generates approximately
900 ADT, of which 20 percent (around 200 ADT) arrres the neighborhood from Poindexter
Avenue at Sierra Avenue, and 80 percent (around 700 ADT) access via Los Angeles Avenue at
Shasta Avenue.
Recent peak hour traffic counts taken at the intersection of Shasta Avenue and Los Angeles
Avenue indicate that existing volumes on Shasta Avenue north of Los Angeles Avenue are around
55 vehicles per hour (VPH) in the AM peak and 75 VPH in the PM peak. The AM peak hour
trips for a residential development are typically around eight percent of total ADT generated, and
the PM peak hour trips are typically around 10 percent of the total ADT. Based on these
relationships, the ADT estimate derived from the AM peak hour count is around 690 ADT and
the estimate derived from the PM peak hour count is around 750 ADT, both of which are
comparable to the existing 700 ADT on Shasta Avenue north of Los Angeles Avenue as projected
by the traffic model.
The 2010 current General Plan version of the traffic model shows the residential
development between Shasta Avenue and Sierra Avenue increasing to 148 dwelling units which
would generate around 1,200 ADT. As the traffic projections in Figure 1 indicate, 25 percent (300
ADT) of the residential trips access Poindexter Avenue from Sierra Avenue, 75 percent (900 ADT)
access Los Angeles Avenue from Shasta Avenue, and no regional bypass traffic is projected on the
Shasta Avenue/Sierra Avenue connection between Los Angeles Avenue and Poindexter Avenue.
In order to estimate future traffic conditions if an extension of Liberty Bell Road to
Poindexter Avenue is not constructed, a special version of the traffic model was run in with the
3
extension deleted. The 2010 projected total and local ADTs for this case are illustrated in Figure
2. A comparison of the total ADT volumes with and without the Liberty Bell Road extension
indicates that without the extension, increases in traffic occur on all parallel facilities in the
immediate vicinity of the extension. The most significant increases occur on Shasta Avenue and
Sierra Avenue, and the traffic model estimates indicate that virtually all of the increase in projected
traffic on these facilities is attributed to development within the local shaded area as shown on
the lower portion of Figure 2.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this analysis indicate that with or without the connection of Liberty Bell road
to Poindexter Avenue, adequate roadway capacity will be available to serve the traffic demand that
is projected to utilize the available roadway connections to Poindexter Avenue. Therefore, from
• a level of service perspective, the need or justification for the Liberty Bell Road extension is not
clear. However, a perceptual impact on the Shasta Avenue/Sierra Avenue connector should be
recognized. The 2010 projections with the Liberty Bell Road extension assumed show relatively
low traffic increases on Shasta Avenue and Sierra Avenue compared with the estimated existing
volumes. Without the Liberty Bell Road extension, the 2010 traffic projections on Shasta Avenue
north of Los Angeles Avenue, increase by around 160 percent, from 900 to 2,300 ADT, and the
projections on Sierra Avenue south of Poindexter Avenue increase by around 430 percent, from
300 to 1,600 ADT. Such dramatic increases in traffic on what today is primarily a residential
roadway, could be perceived as a serious impact, particularly by the residents along Shasta Avenue
and Sierra Avenue.
4
TOTAL ADT o
cn
12000
0 HIGH '
1 4900 4100 m
in
o 19°C o 5300
gR tI� o
o E4 3300
•
M o> •, o SECOND
F — K in
co
1200
a
0 0 LASSEN
o
s
M y N O x O C
tO M `w m a -0 CCA
N
36100 44500 46900 46900 00 49600 51200 61200
LOS ANGELES
0
o cil o 0 0 0
CO C N0 CO Co
a N co co co
UNIDOS \
LOCAL [SHADED AREA] ADT
0
N
3000
^
HIGH
3800 3000 0
p0 / ///// 4200 'n
o 18 ER / / 0 4,// /�
o
Pn
0/�/ �i/ /��g;7 � /
/27 in,
2500
o i �� ai i/// SECOND/ / /
m i / / / 1200 i / t// h
.r //// / :/ //j o 7//:///`t�0 /j/ / p;/i.///j,
O' i
4300 / / ,300 / / /10600 / / /'/12100 /, ', /14500/// ///. /14000 18000
LOS ANGELES
0
o cu o 0 0 0
:47a ¢o N —
0
o
Lo N W
Qa —
UNIDOS
Figure 2
E 2010 ADT VOLUMES
- WITHOUT LIBERTY BELL ROAD
CreAUSTIN-FOUST ASSOCIATES, INC. EXTENSION
L
5
wj
BRIAN A. KELLY
Four Embarcadero Center
Suite 1000
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 981 -5550
October 10, 1990
Honorable City Council Members
Moor Park City Council
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Re: October 17, 1990 Public Hearina
Dear Honorable City Council Members:
— RECEIVED —
0 CT 12 1990
City of Moorpark
I am writing on behalf of my grandmother, Myrtle
Gisler, a long time Moorpark resident. I will not be able to
attend the October 17 council meeting, and my grandmother's
health does not permit her to attend. Therefore, we are
constrained to write to you regarding our concerns.
We are concerned and object to the proposed name change
of "Gisler Road" to "Liberty Bell Road ", which we understand you
will consider on October 17. We do not object to Gisler Road not
serving as a connector roadway between Los Angeles and Poindexter
Avenues, however.
Charles J. Gisler's father purchased the land on which
Gisler Road is located in 1910. Charlie passed -away in August
1989, at age 87, and was an important part of Moorpark's history.
Two Gisler brothers, Charlie and Adolf, operated farms on the
land, beginning in the 1920's. The Gisler Family's contribution
to Moorpark has been significant: They were instrumental in the
building of the Holy Cross Catholic Church; they were active as a
board member and with the P.T.A. of Flory Grammar School; and
they were active in numerous Moorpark events.
With such a long and dedicated commitment to Moorpark,
it was disappointing to receive a Notice of Public Hearing which
advised us that the City contemplated supplanting Gisler Road
with a name that has no relation to Moorpark history.
We strongly encourage the City Council to take no
action on the "Gisler Road" name change, and to consider changing
the name of "Liberty Bell Road ", whi.ch is a short street south of
l
Honorable City Council Members
October 10, 1990
Page 2
Los Angeles Ave., to "Gisler Road ". This change will promote a
sense of Moorpark history, and will show respect to a pioneer
Moorpark family -- The Gislers.
Thank you for your consideration. We encourage you to
do what is right and respectful.
Very truly yours,
- a •
B 'fan A. Kelly
BAK:cym
C725:\AT \BAK\59028AK.LTR]
Citv Council Members:
The Honorable Paul Lawrason
The Honorable Eloise Brown
The Honorable Bernardo Perez
The Honorable Clint Harper
The Honorable Scott Montgomery
cc: Macleod Construction Company
4262 Telegraph
Ventura, CA 93003
Mr. Patrick Richards, Director of Community Development
Mr. Steve Kueny, City Manager