HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1996 1218 CC REG ITEM 10KAGENDA REPORT
CITY OF MOORPARK
TO: The Honorable City Council
�i
FROM: Nelson Miller, Director of Community Developm�"'
1r7 -•JJ
ITEM-10• K.
DATE: December 11, 1996 (For the City Council Meeting of December 18,1996)
SUBJECT: Ventura County Revised Guidelines for Orderly Development
At their meeting of December 10, 1996, the County Board of Supervisors approved the Revised
Guidelines for orderly Development as recommended by County staff. A copy of the County staff
report is attached, which includes a copy to the revised guidelines in legislative format. Moorpark
was the only City in the County which had not adopted a resolution approving the revised guidelines.
Mayor Hunter and Community Development Director Nelson Miller spoke to the Board of
Supervisors regarding Moorpark's concerns relating to the Guidelines. Council Member Evans also
attended the hearing. The Board acknowledged the City's concerns received at the hearing and
previously delivered in writing, but indicated they did not perceive that Moorpark should be treated
differently than the rest of the County and did not want to change the standard for the entire County.
At the meeting, Supervisor Judy Mikels indicated that the guidelines were strictly for process, as a
general guideline, and defined who was responsible, not what is considered an appropriate land use.
She further indicated that the guidelines were not a General Plan or zoning tool. She also requested
that Moorpark reconsider adoption of the Guidelines and work with the County. County planning
staff indicated that if Moorpark did not adopt the old standard with one acre minimum lot sizes
would apply in the Moorpark Area of Interest.
Supervisor Mikels also suggested Moorpark may want to re- initiate its Sphere of Influence proposal
as a means to address some of the issues it has raised.
City Council may wish to the attached resolution for adoption of the Revised Guidelines for Orderly
Development, or provide alternative direction to staff. The attached resolution, in Section 2, does
identify an issue with the definitions regarding the establishment of commercial and industrial uses.
This issue has been raised regarding the two proposed driving ranges. However, a qualification of
this type may raise concerns with the County regarding the application of the guidelines.
Direct staff as deemed appropriate
Attachments: Resolution
County Staff Report
C:\ OFFICE \WP WIMWPDOCS \CCRPTS \GUIDORDE. WPD
flfl( A I
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK ADOPTING
VENTURA COUNTY REVISED GUIDELINES FOR ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Moorpark as follows:
SECTION 1: The City Council has reviewed and considered the proposed revisions to the
County Guidelines as approved by the County Board of Supervisors on December 10, 1996.
SECTION 2: The City Council finds that the proposed revisions clarify applications of the
Guidelines and are consistent with the basic intent of the existing Guideline,
SECTION 3. The City Council hereby endorses the revisions to the County Guidelines for
orderly Development.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1996.
Patrick Hunter
Mayor
ATTEST:
Lillian Hare
City Clerk
000012
me u faced
Ok *4401A
lnson /
S Z Tow
pwers *daies - _ .... .
— -- -- — ❑ °"ra ❑ rrem ❑ cy for primp -
5 h o►� Gurus A-d,t4 v�lo1, �f
15 �ci S ✓,'x�+ -s A r k lt- f 2, X.& l u
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY
MEMMEME . �ra VMW
December 10, 1996 (Agenda)
Board of Supervisors
County of Ventura
800 South Victoria Avenue
Ventura, CA 93009
Subject. Revised Guidelines for Orderly Development
Planning Division
Keith A, Turner
Direew
L T1tat your Board find that there is no poaaa tt► that tha proposed revidoes to the
Guidelines for Orderly Deveiopmerc eouM b&V a dgdbl t $riot ea the anvirommoeot
and that the proposed pmjsa Is eamapt fto 60 reqAMOMMM Environmental d
Query Act (CBQA) under the Gmerg Rule forexempSOnS, section
15061(b)(3) ofthe State CEQA WdefinM and
I That your Board approve the attadled read0jon adopf revisions to the ()Wdelines
for Orderly Development as recommended by the Talc Force on the GuwWma (the
resolution is induded as Attachment 1, and the revised Quiddines are included as
Attachment 2).
Since 1969, the cities, the County, and the Local Agency Formation Coate
(LAFCO) have bean emSagad in a g<orMdt and
developer of Veotttta °OO��° art co � the fitttre
County. This aE6ort ha rawrlted is the u�aeatioo oithe Gu>idetina
for Orderly Development, a ad of pommies wNc6 =b t k the tbape that urban
development should be located within incorporated cities whenever or whemer practical.
The Guideliaa were £vat adopted in 1%9 and have been amended twice, m 1976 and
1985. On October 17, 1995, at the request of the Ventura Council of C%ofamnents and
the Ventura County Association of Cities, your Board of Supervisors formed a Task Force
to review the Guidelines and, if necessary; to recommend c)>anges. Phis Task Force was
comprised of one representative from each city council, two representatives from your
Board, and one representative from LAFCO.
The Task Fora met four times and recommended several changes to the Guidelines
(presented in legislative format in Attachment 2). These changes were approved
800 South Victoria Avenue, L #1740, Ventura, CA 93009 (805) 654 -2481 FAX 1805) 654.2509
Pr+nred " ANycjew Pspn 1 _•
DEC 03 1% 15:35 805 654 2509 aerr 924
DO W"W 10, M6 (AS=&)
DMdof sqmvism
POp 2
Ply by Yom' BOrd on July 9, IM A technical di=ml on ofthe proposed
changes is included as Attachment 3.
Following your Board's action on July 9, the revised Gtr were transmitted to the
city councils of each of the ten cities. With one exception, all city councils have adopted
the Guidelines as proposed by the Task Force.
The Moorpark City Council disagreed with the Tads Fore's recordation that the
definition of ` % an deveslo�peoeat" apply to dauo A—N is w be re pads would be under
taw sexes in area. Instead, the Moorpark City Co na rearrrnteoded fiat the definition
should be amended to apply to developme ON, "be +e pezeds would be undwjIm acres in
area (sere Attachment 4). As "Wed in the rankidon. the Moorpark City Council
Audw recOmme & that if a fiv*4=e threshold it trot adopted Countywide, this threshold
should at least be adopted in the Moorpark Area of Interest.
Based on theme roeoramerndettuions from the Moorpark City Couricil, you Board has three
options. These options and a brief analysis follow:
A- Adopt a Countywide fivb acre threshold.
One of the main A mum of Task Face AMONdOw was on Wbet the appropriate
thte6old should be. 1)urmg those &MUdO11116 WRVWeml =amber: of the Task
Force vtpr+msed an initial prehr ace far a vMe rAW of golds, from one acre
to ten saran. To stterrept to react a ocnaemok njar,v members ofd Task Force
modified their initial POEMMOM Task Fcx= m esabets were concerned that if not
all jurisdictions cotM agree OR the lamer thridwld, adoption of a new set of
Guidedinea could bed Under stint cir+cvuauorrroea, the previetu (1985)
Gtridelioot, which have no lot sin thns WK would remain in effect. L>hely,
Severn Task Fora mmhers supported two aura; John Woamhlc of the City of
Mood supported ten act and Jaime 7AWm la and Jun McCormick of
LAFCO supported five acres. One other Task Fora W0001ber, Linda Brewster of
F'dlnwrq was not Present at the meeting but su bm%ted a letter stating that she
could not support a threshold lower than five acres.
Nyour Board were to change the Cousntywi& thrieaioid from two acres to five
Ma► you WWMd need to direct staffto prepetre the neceeeny umaWnjents to the
Cotmoty General Platt to maintain ausia mw between the General phn and the
GukWhM (such amendments would have to be bmught back at a subsequent
• The P &MY mUndmdrts would be to cba V the `urban" and "Waal"
.. ons to incorwate a five -acre threshold and to amend the General plan Map
to include all Runi-designated parcels wldch are leas than five acres in area in
ExbdM Cam. In addition. this cbWV to the Guidelines would have to be
resubmitted to each of the city councils for their approval.
0oou1 :
DEC 03 1Qr, 7C!w
owl. o?H 4DUIV r. W
Dsoad :10,1996 (Apada)
Board at' Supavbm
Pale 3
As stated ftdier, this option is inconsistent with the reeommeada loan of the Task
Force.
B. Adopt a five -acre threshold in the Moorpark Area of Interest.
To implement this option, your Board, the cities, and LAFCO would either have to
modify the basic Guidelines or adopt an addendum to the GuWCL- u to include
different defnitions or thresholds for various Areas of Interest. In addition, your
Board would have to amend the County General Plan to wCaporate a variable
threshold defi"m of urban and rural development, depending on which Area of
Interest a property may be located in.
Tznple - -- -on of this option pox` several basic problems:
1. Adopting differeat lot sins daphohds in difierent Aron of Interest
would be difficult to justify in the Countywide General Plan alone.
2. Im anentatiOn of this option nWd be jug ed an Area Plan
preparation process, band on unique local circumstances, However,
there do not appear to be my unique earrum�stanw in the Moarpark
Area of Interest wamp&S a lKW pared size threshold in this area
relative to other areas of the County. Pr "MiOn of a Mompart Area
Plan is not currently buddetsd, nor would it be wuTasftd beaarse dun
are no Rural- de&ted PWCds in the Moorpark Area of Interest which
would be affected by the adoption of a five -acre threshold.
3. Estabiishiog variable d0finitim or thresholds for various Areas of
Interest would set a precode®t whereby other cities could request
different urban/rural de6hiti was for their Areas of bterest.
lPI B such requests could cause confusion, a nguider legal
challenges, and be time - consuming.
C. Adopt the Pressed Guidelines with two-acre threshold
The third option is to simply adopt the GuidaWas as recoAoamended by the Tank
Fare, with a two -acre threshold. The spesdfic General Plan amendmauft which
would be needed to ensure consistax.7 betwom the Guidelim and the General
Plan have been prepared and are on your Board's agenda for this same meeting
(December 10, 1996) under a separate item number.
This third option is County staffs reconnmended action, based on your Board's
conceptual approval of the Guidelines on July 9, 1996, and the subsequent
approval by nine of the ten cities.
000615
nPr Olz 9 OG 4 C • ZG
December 16, 19% (AS,--&)
Based of &Vavism
Page 4
The Local Agency Formation Commission has tarts r dy scheduled consdemon
Of this item for their January meeting.
The proposed revisions to the Guidelines for Orderly Development have been reviewed
pursuant to the requiremwU of the CaWbrok Ewhmr wmd Quality Act (CEQA) and
have been found to be exempt from CEQA under the Gemnl Rule, Section 15061(bx3)
Of the State CEQA Guidelines. A Notice of Exemption is attached (Attachment 5).
If you have questions regarding this tra * plan contact Bruce Smith, Manager,
General Plan Section, at 654- 2497,, or Steve Wood, Project Planner, at 6542457.
Keith A. Turner, Director
Planning Division
Attachments
00OUG
T1C01 n� . --
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. _
December 10, 1996
A RESOLUTION OF TAB BOARD OF SE2VRVISM ADOPTyNG REVISIONS TO THE
VENTURA COUNTY GUIDELINES FOR ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT
WI ML'k& tie Bwed of Sirpeevmn boa rsvienad aid oomidered tits proposed
revisions to ties County OuidaBses a rsooeeemodod by do G dddkm Task Forcer cou prieed of
rep "u%ad m km tie day► oo=c& of tbs test cities in Vm*n Comely, from the Local Agency
Foraratioa Commieaioq and Grass the Board of Supervisors; and
V43wa ,tie Bond 0fSuparvmm bas atads the nsosssmy abmem to 60 Countywide
CvmKd Pfau on Deownber 10, 1996, to tag= comWomy, bohnm the General plan and the
revised Guidelines; and
V40O EAS, the Board Gads that them is so posdbft tier the propped revsioos to the
Cihri O&W couid bm a 00 6=1 eBba an tits eerrioeemt and the the prppa project is
apt ftm the rs*wo m a of the Csii mm E *omta1 Qty Act (CEQA) under the
General Rule, Section IS061(b) (3) oftbe State CEQA GuWehn ; and
WiEMMAS, the Bowd Gads that the proposed ewitiom dmdfy the app6oatioan of the
GWdel'mes and are oon with the basic baeat of the eodsting Guidelines.
NOW Ting U IT RESOLVED that to Board of Supervisors of tbs Ca mty of
Venture hereby Wopu the rs Gt"dAft for Orderly, D"dopment as prpeoted in the
transmittal letter to the Bond dated December 10, 1996.
Upon motion of Supervisor and emooded by Supervisor,
of December, 1996. and "carried, the ibreg M rrsoT<rtion is aPproved on this 10th day
ATTEST:
RICHARD D. DBAK County perk
County of Verona, State of
California and Ex4)GScio
Clerk of the Board of supervisors
theereot
By
DEC 03 '% 15:37
Chair, Bwd of Supervisors
000017
K 7 •'w=
— j IM Gki"nes for
Oily Dtvel °pneem (Draft)
Preface:
la a cooperative short to tlidB #AM Sim aed drvahlm ast. dr Gift. COMW ad Local 40my
ForroaAioa Coassriewsa bm pat dsipeed io *9 aiit MWddleee der Orderly Devdopmmt,-
?hc h a iddiaos are a coasierratiaa ordW ysiiii M width Mee woolly adopted is 1969, and
maintain the theme diet urban devdopmm should be
wbem ptac&a. boded wi6t tcop cities whenex or
The iatmt of there EnWalii ue r to dW* the MlIft ft boom tie cidu and ter
utbao piancb . cove m a bwlet��i ala.der to MrW + •aooe m land use iegMML
dw regional � of Camay dr..ie�prwae n oorar within citip, and to eohaaoe
Thm Suiddha I?taUft the orderly plamieg aed drwiopoww n[vmtura Calmly by.
o Providing a ftaroework for coopegmn Via! n ba m.
O Allowing for urbarisappa a a n"W dent WA a000auondue daz developeeeee !!mss of the
inifividuat ocmmunfi e:. VA& conserving doe reeeareea dvartma Cooney.
C Promobag d scums and adfMM ddivay of COMMUuity Mvioes for amftg and fuhue reaMIM :.
0 ldendfyhg in a mama usOastandsble to the Pweal Pablie the planning and service
relpomrb"a of foal SOMIN uft FWAve wtban services wltbin Vey County.
General Policies:
anal e a firl wig =1- aai aissewr pm kA w;ti,is r,� cities
Planning.
rasre umicipd urviow aed are MV= ft for tabaa had ux
will AM these mina skoald skive sD prvdaw gaeeaal PIS, oedmaooes and F*cM which
guidelter.
Policies Witkin Spkem °f I► hmace:
710 "O"ag po"M"W* wiehir C* Spbassr diisetoe (� didl.. as �d
�O. as r9Ufred by Sha j"• m mw* oho lateidi bauridw of educe aed spedal b9
ft
Mli d a spberee maybe amended lFom time to tiueee a: oeat�ssione wartaea): '�'
3. Applkmb for land use pennies a aooithmeMM iar miei ww Ad be mcwraWd to apply to the
City to achieve their drA ftom foals and diumaW fiam aiPk," to the CauaY.
4. ilre City is prune* respoestble for local land nse planing and &rr pm idiog Mmicipsl services.
5. Friar to both developed for utbaa purposes or to ,
rNeiving =M** saviors, land should be
annexed to the City.
6. Anmmation to the City is prderable to the &motion of new or WV atWon of
service arzu. B
• Land use which are allowed by the County wiehoat Mm= W= should be equal to or more
restrictive than land uses allowed by the City.
8 DenWpweat standards and Capital imptovenesal requiraAs i Ip -, by the Comfy for mean or _
°9mdm6 &--loPmtams should no be less than those that would be unposed by the City.
000618
DEC 03 196 15:37
I-96 G""M fw 0140* Dd-d"mm (D t)
Ast_
Policies min Areas qfI&Wm MIM o
me "Mms Pbmon q* wia6ie A m of wriet.*p a City ®Mi. bet am* the Cites Spbm of
1n4>t+eaoe (Ann so m aue eared by LaCO m mbo* � on" of DOMMn zdm= Wr&n
which there will be no auore 4h�m oatc City):
9.
M p*a6 tx 6111110M yea use Paoteipt Or.otid.,r,d"be raft to the city for
10. JU Covow is P. 1oa1 hod uu AFL cuistm with the
uaa,oak ad obju�va:e of the City. 8�a1 land
11. � Q als W be allowed only w*m does as d on the
12.
AOOb ' �� C�4�eheeeed urban asrviors alieh we ootnp,ereble 111=1 Ila
to thou
u�t servioa Ptwlded by Otim.
� M
AV-
�r
IL
/I�i� Ry l.. !�iiktil n.
000US
DEC 03 196 1536
IOM afor &duo pe"Ag,,,od (Dr4m
AKs 3
A..:7 7 L . 7 71
000.20
DEC 03 '96 1538
Attachment 3
Seery OfPmpwed Changes to the
Guidetftles for Orderly Developmeirt
A. Proposed choWes wrthI8 Areas of Ilrlf►est where a city adse.
Arne of Iaoerem an gesgrapbie Ares amad by L VCO to ideMfy Wg.d Are#s of
cormeoa Mer"t Wilhite which theta will be no more than one dry. An Ara of Imam
MP is Praidad at do end of this suaunmy. Tb= ebasrges art: ProPomd fat this
section of the Guidelines:
1. CZwOS=Wfx e9f.>"M title - Th# motion tide wouW be amefried to more
clewly =isms that the polities ittdWW = *k Notion only apply within
Ames otLit wiets a . #mta. A,spasms me od'soar podidea thin be
adopted !br Ares ad Inreresf wdras no cry eaiste (see Section B).
2 lC 0P9Nmd n - P0110r 9 walk be amaded to requited be
m m
tmincorpormad This policy is ab"* bd" Wowed by County.
#IP#dm - Policy 12 would be awls — to der* list the
'Unkoonmated urb0 ind cram• rsAe00d to in tits am 'Z?rdift
Cmelrauaidsa' as idssti8ed in tbs Cony► Gimical Pheo. The proposed
aanmdroew to Polley 12 would simply pew wpb
Policy w
a+0 d 0a Wim ntbtm
de8oeiaaotPotiadr� � � However a
Of Pdiry 11 mad to em me *a ds CoWW GaaNd Hem c We iooenc
Cor ==tiI are mccipatawd NO the Oltide&= (sae $«� DDI �B
A Proposed NewpoJGida in Areas of,[X trest where yes c
I& agWtr:
In addition to Mss of hoW wbeto a city oilM.11100 800 also Asm of Latae Pat
wheat w cily iodate, 304 sew have been WIMdW by LAFCO an 1eVa1 arw of
Oak Pad; NO�oe/BeII CI MM mdat Corsaldy, thwa m 16nr s0ch areas: Piru,
may). Catrynet, and the Loa Pom Valley (see map at end of this
The proposed new FAicim world be as fellows:
L lariat f0P°i" , - Policy 13 tsnuld =&aaf dog the Coo ty is
lc for local land use plse0irti sod dlor p ovi ft nueitspnl mrviees.
Mu Po ofof Ism to � 4. � brdsatn t o iml e& city
uenee, cities are rzaponsI& for local land use phrooing and for
Providing munieipal .
Resniaiows an rrram dewkpww - Policy 14 world wily allow urban
in Un000tpa d Urban Comer Ea66 commaitim
These two BWOVbde ales world be do&W a des p0posed mm ions (see
Swbow D and E. UaiaooepMVW Urban Coo odst (a have been
APPmv*D in the Piro, Oak Paris, sad AW=mg&d Ranch reWre *a Areas of h>tu
but = in the Las Posm Valley. The Guiddim would not
Unincorporated Urban Ceater be locau4 jo aseh of tbew Areas of loteres, an
tb�'Y would simply allow no Wrote than sae sash oemer per Area of law=.
Requbv mu for Are# Pim - Before urban
Un=corporsted Urban Centers can Qatar in
adopted by the C . Polley IS would require that as Arse Plan be
aM County. Area Plans have been adopted in the Piro, Oak Park,
Ahmsu=n/Bell Ranch Areas Of Lrterest, but not in the LAS Poses Valley,
00021
DEC 03 196 15:39
/CbOWsWmWW
C Proposed d UNom of "orb= *veAPpmwmn
The Ores[ 04WI ins do sac deice utbaa d 71m pr�� I Goi+wilm
would hWbWIo s stew dd6ddoa. based m dee0 orieais (if any of dwe cdowk are met,
the dWbdtion would apply):
77ye iwalywww wwrLrrpr%tbs attW�iahsen,t'/ae„ , �,,,�
tyatawr or At 84OMlie.ae e+pa or of edttb►� ao+nttwxJh, �+�
By i peryaob %N& mom awr or syd6 mdy CKPOOdad
sews Service sysi ms ws 'lttbaor• the & ob= WNW mom rw
E>o wheto treattdene plplm facalitiee and a pip W =,mk
are (or sbmW b0) availabk.
The idw afft a*dm is m di am WMA mqmi= =bm;ype
aeeviaes to boeae in wbm annk vA" in Us, a km dts e&jW and
included in *e PPS Ouiddina. This it cos dthe objocfivea
It dmmW b0 MI d drt the ptgpased def mitioa ,vvW eat atettoasessbr dafase
°� �Q�o Bawer saevisae as "Wbm- D* dw Mal W11 " - i�WOM moo r ara��� m'yl, Idrai Mm
°f syroene atgoaiaos an "dod ammo waoid be
based oar ilta CAMW Pte,. vo Inds" s to cat gore
'the oast a t'oeeo0eliag to the ptrbl;c saner syMen with die oat d' a
�i ryreeen. The Swwr poi* wooW sr�e �,
ptojeax alma sad wMo dte od aeeer U'� a wino a i dt11e
*tetboW tpadiflad a dte oMM@d >m d sy hd aaC below dre dmmmmok . abo�neaeioosd lltwaala. l)iedor srKh
do sawn comreodm would not be 000a &md * dfi m
nk deodgmag f nmtld result IN tie mW"-of rieeta/ lob lea Bean
nrr f�1 w� In area
TWO=' tot Cotoaty tiMWW PbO det'loes " rboa• as airy developmmt which
WUvM Mari[ b 1110 a+eneioa of tniiiant�ial htt h o dtas M sett d eta
(amept in ease we by the Opi Valley Am Plak wbm the t mdjdd v
2 aa�aa). The pttpsasd OGW@b9m mjkeriou wooW ewahiisb a poem 2 -acre
°eh0� srsat of the Com ty.
if*6 2-aae
areas MWh would r+es* in dw ereafto, of bet WAAIJW t
sndler than 2 aces) would have to be loemad is an Unmmporated (3.e.,
CoMa or ao lr5dst ng Coamrmmty
Yke derdgmm would reewlt In the mft&fiAmwU of Iona ae dd a
irO&Od uses wild are �eodaer apiarfhrrd/ � nor M&Ua to toe
Prodaetlor of ndnerod resources
The indusien of dw critcrioa would not dow auras county policies
contained is the county General plan and �ti Ordiattoce. Tbeae policies
direct uses which are now allowed only m commercial and industrial zoom to
E`11* Con munities or Unincorporated Utbaa Canters. For reference, all
u>i and 11MIUtrral uses which we hstad in Artick S. Section 8103-5 of
the Coomy Z=ing OWinsooe, ectitled •
re
and which a not Baled in Aeticle 5. Soctioo 8105 -4.
bg=2&= would be defmod as `iuban."
000(122
DEC 03 1 6 j5:39 ROM GCA nCILC
GAwj ..cbww*mm• v
pops
D. PIrOpNlpld of " Cow"
�s PraPossd ddki*m is =amok* at as ddmi dm awm* ooMind in the Convey
General Pbta. Tba dtda don vmM taveiat mim welopoaa to aaisti dlr j lh: d
areas. is adw m psaat to limt< atom nwdi ccwn wdm. k wmm a6o
psvou 601 i Ir ap"W afi waft Comw idm br WM* beo
a Yd try iatdVlwt iioOWN m d Lad vas to paevi Q*-M bushed
kvals. u in"ma atddo dsmidma w dd. witlme dw Guiddines, chi' aad
>�oece Pdiciea A"* Wm h5awed by the Camty.
E Proposed m of ff UxbWorporoWd UrbeA C wvw"
Mn PaPg 14 ddmwmo k nbaiw of dw dsa,ieima now cawaiDw in the Caamty
Gm d Pbta. Y1a ich m of this ddoMm woald„ within the G aelinm, clarify and
P 1, 1 Pdidieo aiawdy beima knomM by to Ccuidy.
000( 23
DEC 03 '96 15:48
1
Ate'
RBSOLUT:.�N No. 96- 1227
A► MMLU T1ON OR THE CITY
COMM OF VEIfI PA. STAT I CALM MIA, OR MOD"ARK
RLrVISIo1/S TO RECC!/MING
C"My DEVELOlMM COVS DwJ►PT CUIDELINBS FOR
9E I RESOLV® by the City Council
:ollows: of the City Moorpark, as
SECTION 1. The City Council has nevi
the proposed rev's'ons to the County Guidelines & as considered
conceptually by the County Board of supervisors on Jul 9approved
Y 1996;
SECTION 2. The City Council
Of Urban Development be changed such tom` creation off lots ion
five (S) acres or lose be considered Urban the creation of lots
the
Moorpark Area of Interest;
SECTION 3. The City COU=11 heamby
s'nce a census was not reached by
further recommends that
-anus of lot size, that lot sire dial Task Force on the
r
considered, or if this definition is no rAat'ong be further
then the creatiOn of rossdential lees of five to b* used Cornlewade,
considered Urban, at least, within the Moorpark Area of Interest.
PASSED AND ADOpTjW this, 1Ith
day of SEItpOIA 1996.
�Tylor Paul w. wrason J
Lijljam�47'.' Rare,
City C%rk
6
DEC 03 196 1540
805 ssd ?Toro Mr . --
000624
r v V v v r r v r To /t e is P% rr rr e\ V r
."Ljrftof
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
A. PROMQ7 Dswwr oN-
Planning Division
Keith A. Turner
1 • ACTWR' Abopdon of 1996 Vc=m County GaWIHIen *w Otderiy D
I APELJCAM. Cot=y of Vesta
3. WCAM& County of Vc=m
4. PIQ 1'b�s+wioPeerc . Adopf of f ie enrisad 1911 VWWM c4mw y Omwee a for
The � woaanm M peWw Im W'r
cnPW N b oym alga am==* * wbaa &odgww ata and eeo, Wmay
PIMUMbS aed an wkc aapooatbtMm of ew1 G1W and is Cater. 41M*M bgeadarim for
the peoviti pn dmow ipal aerviocs; atd wow dfrvetn*�wt b *am witbin
Caw. Zit pte ww mvuioas iaehtdt s� #w tuba! devalopaawt atd ne w
POW" rueming whae urban dmWpo m cm ooeaer in unioomponmed Item.
APPROVING Pg=CT-
Vemus Comfy Baud of Supaviwn
2. C e �I h a', .ee. Stwm W04 Vectum
3. 1UM'a r, M .1 18.1: _ i
XXXMSTAM
0.
D. U&MUM r, REMN
Adeplio of d a reviled Gaiddion would 10009e1010 wnwl pow" aaw cortaited in the
caumr►arrumalPiaLa,ae ,tt w �,�p,un.a Udmi
a�b iiwaaP raat ti anew dr6t.a es
COMM" IU popoa 1 wv;sim would Wn m* o Am Piw hr aaw arbor
dvvdCPMW in MMy Z%imooepormul Urbw Cabo aid avo dour MW devrimpomc
vvM* etaaw hob atttnor tom taw aexea as ' w6w" Nett of do prapoted rvviriom
waetid N&M m x. or ditainm any of tie ammbneb oouM bW in the ,u .01 GWddiaa
for Oodwly De+eeloptuewt, -hick war adopted in 1983. Tbun6m it ten be wen with
c=UiNW 69 there is no possibility that the pmpand mvioiaao coWd brave i mpdk wt
eNeet an they environment.
DATE OF PROH= APPROVAL: Dw mb cr 10, 1996
PREPARED BY.- Steve Wood, Can Planner
Tom. -
PNa W* Division
Attachment S
111
300 Say -:r+ `) ttar.a a,er•uz, ent:,ra. CA 93009
DEC 03 196 15;40 _ -- --
TOTAL P.0