HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1989 0405 CC REG ITEM 11I MOORPARK ITEM II.a .
ELOISE BROWN o, w =, , STEVEN KUENY
Mayor City Manager
BERNARDO M. PEREZ F � �, CHERYL J. KANE
Mayor Pro Tern ��!g►� City Attorney
CLINT HARPER, Ph. D. i0+�SI�V� PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P.
Councilmember o `//� e' Director of
PAUL LAWRASON 0-/ �. Community Development
Councilmember R.."` R. DENNIS DELZEIT
SCOTT MONTGOMERY City Engineer
Councilmember JOHN V. GILLESPIE
RICHARD T. HARE Chief of Police
City Treasurer
MEMORANDUM
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Carolyn Dyer, Records Clerk
DATE: March 31, 1989
SUBJECT: ITEM 11. I. - CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED TRAFFIC MITIGATION FEE
Documents for this item were previously distributed to you.
CAUFORNIA
Cily Cour.ciii Mec;iag
of -Y/-'J 198
f Zeds J/
ACTION:.:fn vqAz(eu �
Ave F-nr�mt, c 0 ^ c n
747 Iva �e, Air -6rr
G4) SONg 3 +tt-1�ntca
itlYL�a,vehla) el l ar-
:ntiot -4
.:� .. ._ • W I r7Ju-?
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021eakn Jibe.
r(fr -5
. e@kew
TO: Honorable Ci Council
FROM: J. Galloway .
DATE: January 13, 1 88
SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE MOOPARK TRAFFIC PLAN
I was recently asked about city priorities for the new year.
Safety on our streets is a number one concern for many residents
and travelers through Moorpark. I would like to suggest a method
by which we might make current procedures more efficient.
Please consider the merits of a comprehensive "Moorpark Traffic
Plan," combining traffic studies and other information into a
"roadmap" for ultimate resolution of transportation problems.
Such a plan might include four elements : a comprehensive Capital
Improvement Program, an index of the latest traffic studies, a
Traffic Management Plan and an Annual Review. Areas where such a
plan might assist in forward planning are:
A. Identification of existing and future traffic
patterns throughout the City
B. Using the General Plan Circulation Element as a
reference, anticipate needed adjustments
C. Comprehensive Capital Improvement Program would
identify necessary road improvements on a regular
basis (resurfacing/striping/signals/construction)
D. Direct city lobbying and outside-funding efforts
to address transportation needs
E. Maintain good working relationships with
CalTrans and County Government on all issues of
concern to Moorpark
F. A Traffic Management plan would assist in
developing plans to reduce peak hour traffic,
discourage unnecessary truck traffic and encourage
car\van pooling\CalTrain service, etc.
G. Procedure for annual review would provide an
opportunity to assess progress to date and put
traffic issues into broad context .
By pulling together information that already exists into a
framework designed to assist in establishing goals and
follow-through-plans on a regular basis, we can virtually
automate the process of addressing circulation problems before
they become critical!
The time has come for the city to develop a blueprint for
. :improved traffic safety in Moorpark. We must take a hard look at
the alternatives and deal effectively with the major traffic
issues confronting us.
It is my hope that the Council will support establishing such a
plan with refinements or additions as deemed necessary.
•
Memorandum
From: Clint Harper
To: City Council
Subject: Comprehensive Planning Ordinance
Date: April 5, 1988
Attached is a copy of the latest version of the proposed Comprehensive Planning Ordinance
(CPO) for your consideration.
This will be discussed under Item 11 1. on our April 6 (April 13?) agenda.
c.c. Planning Commission
Steve Kueny
Pat Richards
{iedioolN to Asa ass 40 sia5OA
ass Jo lenoidde wasp ayl lnoyl!M uoseei ALM iol pa6ueyo eq lou Aew deo s!yl
.>pedioo;n! ;o Alia ay;io; pays!!gelsa eq Heys a'doed 000'EE to deo uoiseindod v (a
pesn eq Hogs (nods pue nodw) no ied l4V Ol 10
1010E18w pus pesn eq Heys eoueuid to luewuedea elels eqs Aq pesn naiad suosied
66£'£to impel uopeieue6 uoueindod luanno egs 'uo!selnaleo;o sesodind ioq
• •sdul epiyan
('!ep ebeiens 000'; 40 ssaoxa w s/eMy6!y alels pue swans Asia 010111E4 ppe IIIM (E
io 'Woad 098;o ssaoxa w Al!a eel of uoiseindod ppe JIM (3
io 'saiae ssoib aiow JO 001 ;o pue' anlonu! (1
:sew swawpuewy ueld leiaue !lie io; pannbei s! 'enaidde ialoA (y
• aea uo!le'naod/bu!ssaooid VdS :1 lied
:eaueu!paO ;o lualuoa
•aleio;0ala ass
(q uopeiep!suoo luenbesgns Jo; saunoa Aso ayl Aq Hew Mau e ;o uopeiedaid ayl esnbai
AIleo!lewolne !I!M sialon ayl Aq seoueu!pio l;eip palepuew ayl to (lie ;o uogoefad •sialon )
ayl Aq paloelei io paldope asp pue loileq ayl uo peoeld eq ism seoueu!pio ayl 'I10unoo
Alla eyi Aq uopdope pue uo!ssiwwoa bu!uueid Mia ass Aq Me!nei ';;Bis AG bu!i;eip law
.senss! 6wuueid eOuei Boys pue buol sseippe sew suopoe uieuao a)!el pue seoueu!pio
leuop!PPE Heil) 01 I10uno0 Asia eel sesepuew leyl /ioMeweil e Ape!luesse s! II lied
• pedioow ;o Al!a eel to uoiseindod ass uo deo e saysi gelse pue sseoaid luewpuewy
ue'd iwauee ass sessaippe I lied :stied uiew oM; ow! pap!nip s! Oda pesodoid ayl
:aanseaw eqi 40 aanionajS
(lopeq uo!loele le!oeds
e iol %s; 1 tolleq uopoele led!o!unw ie nbai e uo ainseew ayl to lueweoeJd iol pei!nbei
em sialon peialsibei ass to %01 to sain;eu6!s) sielon ass Aq Aisoanp lopeq ass uo peoe'd
eq pInoM ainseew ass inouoo sou scop AUiofew paunoa ass J! 'lolleq 8861 'iagwanoN ass
uo luawaoeld io; Iounoa Asia ass of palueseid eq p'noo Oda sew ayl 'lenaidde Jo; sialon
ass o; pall!wgnsIvo ' pedioo!N ;o /1!a ass Jo eoueu!pio us eq ism ainseew pesodoid ayl
:uoilonpoaluf
IMeids uegin bu!llnsei pue uopez!uegm p!dei Aq passes sioedw! eqs bulz!w!u!w
epgM 'acid lamas s;(ua ass yl!M luals!suoo ' {iedioow ;o luewdolanap Apepio Molle 01
:asodand
88-V-b
vo `Naedaoor Jo Hila
(Oda) aoueuipJO buiuueid anisuayaidwoo •
P aol
(lc" lA) lesodoad U G
Part II: Mandated Future Ordinances and Actions by the City Council
A) This section mandates the drafting of a Hillside. Ridgeline and Open Space
Preservation Ordinance. The final ordinance shall address in detail development
criteria for all projects that occur on or above 10% natural slope and/or within
significant view sheds or open space areas.
Until the draft ordinance is prepared by staff or consultants, reviewed by the
• City Planning Commission, approved by the City Council and ratified by a majority
of the electorate, no entitlements shall be granted by the City of Moorpark
for areas above 15% natural slope or vacant property exceeding 50 gross acres.
B) This section of the CPO mandates the drafting of a comprehensive Development
Standards Ordinance in a manner similar to that employed in subsection (A)
above. This ordinance would address specific development and design standards
for all projects within the City of Moorpark. Specific attention would be given
to the question of compatibility of adjacent land uses. Specific guidelines would
be developed to discourage the construction of additional "mini-malls" and
the proliferation of strip commercial development.
C) This section will require the development of a comprehensive Traffic
Management and Circulation Development Plan for the City of Moorpark.
A level of service (LOS) "C" shall be adopted by the City of Moorpark. Any projects
approved subsequent to passage of this measure must achieve or maintain LOS C
or better at all intersections within the project and within 1.50 miles of
all project boundaries.
D) Adoption of this measure by the voters will mandate that the City Council of the
City of Moorpark begin negotiations with the cities of Simi Valley and
Thousand Oaks and the County of Ventura to establish additional green belt
agreements to protect open space areas surrounding Moorpark.
E) Adoption of the CPO by the voters will also mandate that the City Council of the
City of Moorpark begin an inventory of historical structures, sites and
significant trees within the City. Furthermore, policies shall be drafted and
adopted to preserve and pro eel soon suuci'ur es, siios
For more information regarding this proposed ordinance contact:
Clint Harper city councilmember 529-3860
Beverly Harris 529-0626
Bill LaPerch former planning commissioner 529-0222
Tom Baldwin school board member 529-3316
Steve & RoseAnn Brodsky 529-7219
John Wozniak planning commissioner 529-0329
Mary Horton-Wozniak 529-0329
•
Bob Crockford president/Committee for Managed Growth 523-7477
The CPO is endorsed by:
The Committee to Preserve Rural Moorpark
The Moorpark Community Alliance
MOORPARK ITEM
JOHN PATRICK LANE STEVEN KUENY
Mayor o,P^ ,,, ' City Manager
ELOISE BROWN o�/�4<i it ' CHERYL J. KANE
Mayor Pro Tem `T^� • CityAttorney
JOHN GALLOWAY Pin PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P.
Councilmember q �� . 'ea Director of
CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. o. . Community Development
Councilmember oo R. DENNIS DELZEIT
BERNARDO M. PEREZ J"` City Engineer
Councilmember JOHN V. GILLESPIE
MAUREEN W. WALL Chief of Police
City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
•
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Steven Kueny, City Manager
DATE: October 19, 1988
SUBJECT: Proposed Means of Proceeding with the
Establishment of a City-Wide Traffic Mitigation Fee
As you are aware, the issue of traffic and needed solutions is the
biggest concern in the City. For some time the City has discussed a
City-wide AOC or Traffic Mitigation Fee to provide unspecified street
improvements not covered by an existing AOC that are needed to meet
the demands caused by the Impacts of cumulative development. One
such improvement would be a connection to Broadway through the JBR
properties or Happy Camp Park or a northerly extension of Spring
Road. There may be a number of other potential improvements of
City-wide benefit, but they are more difficult to identify. A complete
list of such improvements probably would not be developed until
completion of the work anticipated as part of the Circulation Element
update. As you know, this is anticipated to take 18-24 months to
complete.
The City has been and continues to impose as a standard condition, a
requirement that the developer agree to pay a fee or participate in an
assessment district for road improvements. The condition reads as
follows: "In recognition of the need for public street and traffic
improvements to meet the demand generated by cumulative development
in the City, the applicant shall, prior to the issuance of a zone
clearance for the project, execute a covenant running with the land on
behalf of itself and its successors, heirs and assigns agreeing to
participate in the formation of, and be subject to, any assessment
district or other financing mechanism, including but not limited to the
payment of traffic mitigation fees, to provide funds for such
improvements should such a mechanism be established by the City. "
I suggest that the Council consider quantifying the potential
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529-6864
• The Honorable City Council
October 19, 1988
Page 2
improvements and fee as soon as possible, even if it is only an
estimate. One way of approaching this would be to proceed with an
estimate of the previously mentioned northerly extension to Broadway
and to begin assessing a fee for a portion of the estimated cost on a
City-wide basis in the same manner as the existing AOC. The reason
for suggesting that only a portion of the estimated cost be assessed is
that the development of Happy Camp Park and other projects in the
unincorporated area should help pay for this particular road
improvement. The fee would only be preliminary and would be adjusted
when a more thorough study can be done. The City also needs to
consider the requirements of AB 1600 regarding imposition of new fees
after January 1, 1989. A brief synopsis of AB 1600 is attached.
Staff Recommendation:
This matter is presented for the purpose of discussion and to assist
the Council with consideration of potential direction to Staff to
quantify the traffic mitigation fee condition currently being imposed
on all new development.
SK:se
cm.8101912
Attachment
F
J
conditions on building permits during the five year period
following a subdivision's approval.
Ch. 218, SB 497 (L. Greene) makes a technical change to the legislative
findings pertaining to the statute of limitations on suits
challenging local agency land use decisions, by expanding its
applicability to all development projects.
Ch. 799, SB 524 (Russell) provides local agencies with the option to
prosecute violations of the Subdivision Map Act as either
misdemeanors or felonies.
Ch. 803, AR 450 (Costa) specifies that any revisions to time limits and
locally prepared lists of information that development project
applicants are required to meet, apply prospectively only. This
bill prohibits local agencies from declaring an application
incomplete based on said revisions, unless: 1) information is
needed to determine whether an environmental impact report (EIR)
or negative declaration is required; or 2) information is needed
to comply with new federal, state, or local requirements. AB 450
also extends until January 1, 1996, the sunset clause for
Government Code Section 66475.4, which sets forth a procedure for
judicial review of dedication requirements.
Ch. 982, AB 1208 (Cortese) makes numerous technical changes to the
Subdivision Map Act.
Ch. 985, AB 1486 (Sher) clarifies and amends the Permit Streamlining Act
to ensure due process through public notice, prior to automatic
approval of development projects. This bill also requires
permitting agencies to notify permit applicants of three sections
of existing law: 1) the public notice distribution requirements;
2) the hazardous waste and substance site requirements; and 3)
the prohibition of a public agency in imposing certain conditions
for approval of a building permit, or tentative subdivision or
parcel maps. AB 1486 makes other clarifying changes to -the
Permit Streamlining Act.
Ch. 927, AB 16 00 '(Cortese) .with certain exceptions, requires local
agencies on or after January 1, 1989, to ocmply with all`°of the
following requirements when establishing, increasing, or imposing
a fee as a condition of approval of a development project: -:"-1)
identify the purpose of the fee; 2) identify the use to which- the
fee is being put; . 3) show there is a reasonable relationship
between the fees use and the type of development on which the fee
is imposed; and, 4) show there is a reasonable relationship
between the need for the public facility and the .type of
development project on which the fee is imposed. . This-measure .
also requires local agencies to segregate the-fees into separate
accounts and to reexamine- the necessity for the unexpended
balance of the fee every five years . Various methods of
refunding unexpended fees are permitted by this bill. AB'1600
410
becomes operative on January 1, 1989.
iv -