HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA 1990 0530 CC SPC JNT PCPAUL W. LAWRASON, Jr.
Mayor
SCOTT MONTGOMERY
Mayor Pro Tam
ELOISE BROWN
Councllmember
CLINT HARPER, Ph.D.
Gouncilmember
BERNARDO M. PEREZ
Councilmember
LILLIAN KELLERMAN
City Clerk
95/25:•'9A 10: 52
$ 305 529 _270 CITY OF r900F:FPF,'K
k]
MOORPARK
NOTICE AND CALL OF
SPECIAL, MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MOORPARK
STEVEN KUENY
City Manager
CHERYL J. KANE
City Attorney
PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P_
Director of
Community Development
R. DENNIS DELZEIT
City Engineer
JOHN V. GILLESPIE
Chief of Police
RICHARD T. HARE
City Treasurer
TO THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORVARX
AND TO THE CITY CLERK:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Special Joint Meeting
of the City Council and the Planning Commission of the City
Of Moorpark is hereby Called to be held on WEDNESDAY, May
30, 1990 commencing at 7:30 p.m. Said meeting will be held
in the )%incil Chambers of the City of Moorpark, lcoated at
799 M�-, irk Avenue, Moorpark, California.
id Special Meeting shall be for the
condo purpose of
a third General Plan Update Workshop.
Date' y 24, 1990
Bernardo M. Perez, Mayor
799 Mc rpark Avenue Moorpark, Califarma 93n9i ___.
Joint Meeting of the PC and the City Council on 5/30/90
Mayor Perez called the meeting to order at 7:45 p.m.
Chairman Wozniak led the pledge of allegiance.
Pat R. introduced himself and said we wld be discussing the
beginning of the land use alternatives.
An addl study has been approved
wwd ! w adjustments and these will be available soon.
There wl be sm minor adjustments in the schedule.
Wkshop 4 wl b a dscssn of a land use plan for a land use review.
General Plan Traffic Analysis will be continued discssn froom las
tmeeing.
Sherry Phillips
Ken Ryan PBR
Terry Austin - Austin Faust
Kendall Elmer - Austin Faust
Pat pointed out the new aerial photograph and the land use general
plan maps that are exhibited.
Pat said limited copies of the handouts are.
Turned meeting over to Sherry Phillips.
The next meeting will present a composite of all of these land use
maps. They are not advocating the alternatives, but are offering
guidance on what the law requires. The next meeting will also
present for the land use plan to be used for the EIR to be prepared
and will also include the soi items that were passed by the council
tonite.
Ken Ryan -
objective is to give guidance for the purpose of a land use
alternative. Drew attention to the handouts - statistical summary,
2) two -page items and 3) the foldout that tells what the three
alternatives.
Highlighted the criteria that have been considered for the
laternatives. Hillside development, preservative of suburban
environment in the city, and traffic and circulation, etc.
Talked to alternative 1 - existing general plan and the 10 GPA
requests and the Carlsberg Specific Plan were the criteria for
evaluating this alternative.
He pointed out the varius areas of the requests for the GPA.
He used the long sheet to do the comparison between the existing
buildout and Alternative 1.
Talked to Alternative 2 - criteria - 10 GPA requests at one level
lower and incorporate hillside performance standards in the
community.
20% slope was criteria utilized in determineing density on the
slopes.
Less intense alternative has a limit of 1 unit per 40 acres on the
hillside.
category os4 reflecting the natural features. oaktree havitat
areas - limited develpment designation is included in alt 2.
lvs current ag culture that is there on west end of town.
Highlighted the differences on the long sheet (went over each one)
Talked to alternative 3 - esiting GP and increased hill densities
with the 20 % slope. - 20% slope category wld allow for 1 unit per
1 acre. OS 4 (natural features) is reduced. Increased the
industrial area on the west part of the City. Increased the
commercial in the center of town.
Highlighted the differenced on the long sheet (went over each one)
Summarized with the demographic forecast summary.
said it is consistent with the county projections.
They are consistent with the population estimates.
Sherry Phillips interjected. 1) Large ownership allows more
freedom of stability of soils, etc., for land use choices. Small
ownership doe snot allow this. Large also allows clustering of
units. You have he ability to require the landowner to justify
fiscal impact, etc., on the City. State law requires that you
designate kind, location and intensity of uses. From that
statistical summary and the narritive you can give guidance to the
landowner for the development. More so than if you tie your hands
todya. They advocate specific land use alternatives as they have
outlined.
Turned it over to Terry Austin -
to service development and to service the development into the
City.
They have developed the traffic model and take the land use plan
and see how it will look in 2010. We incorporated Moorpark into
the context of the County. Traffic model is a tool to convert land
use plan to vehicles on the road.
So far 10 runs of the model have been run.
Summarized the key points.
Explained adt (average daily traffic) as being 170,000 today.
Circulation alternatives sep
strategic alternatives - major decision w respect to circulation,
1) existing situation was pointed out,
assume 23/118 connector will be finished by the time the GP
buildout is done in 2010. This assumption is made for all of their
alternatives.
2) basic element they are proposing- one most significant is
connection between Spring and Princeton that wld serve this area
and provide another route through the City.
corresponds to land use #1 (alternative A)
3) alternative 1 - bypass on Walnut Canyon. Does not alone provide
a
4) alternative 2 - arterial east /west bypass with connections at
Spring Street and Walnut and it goes all the way to the edge of the
City. It is successful to relieving volume on LA. Avenue. L.A.
cld be downgraded to a 2 -land arterial.
5) alternative 3 - take out 23 bypass and connect to Walnut
(east /west bypass)
The adt numbers on each alternative they present pretty much speak
for themselves.
Considered Broadway being extended to the end of the City. Cldn't
get enough traffic on it to use as an alternative. Campus Canyon
extension might want to be considered further in the sphere of
influence study.
each one of these has minor variations.
Sherry Phillips reemphasized the point the soi addition (existing
colored area (unincorporated) is 12 sq mi. That will be doubled
with the inclusion of the soi now. All satistics will a redone.
Tery's numbers will be redon,too. Next time these will be
presented to you. Things may have a different slant on it.
Mayor called for questions.
Harper - editorial comments - rather large documents.
1)consistency in use of terminology (use ltr and # designation in
a consistent manner.
2) baseline vs basecase are confusing (use two more dissimilar
terms)
3) reference to 1,2,3 on page
4)methodology of I -2 be more specific on how they were arrived at
(software used, kind of machine run on, etc.)
5) definition on I -5 - capacity - what does an intersection look
like at 100% capacity.
Level of service goes a -f, when it goes to D (missing the green
first time) Terry said he will include the definitions
6) II -3 - Moorpark College
Terry said alternative 1(land use) was used as the basis.
The traffic model includes the sphere. We will run as many as
needed to make a decision.
Clint said between now and next meeting we will have to tell you
what land use elements.
Use 1 acre and add that to alternative 1? - CHarper.
Mrs. Brown -
Alternative A - clarification that the traffic reduction on L.A.
Avenue will be lower than today with the use of the alternative
route? Answer is yes from Terry Austin.
8:50 p.m. took a break --
Reconvened at 9:10 p.m.
Public speakers - Dennsi Hardgrave -
Development Planning Service, representing the Levy Company -
pleased what they hae seen from the Austin Foust to give plenty of
options in terms of land use plans. Levy is highly supportive of
the 118/23 bypass route. alternatives tonight demonstrate that the
118 bypass is an item that should be implemented as quickly as
possible.
Alternative 1 (land use) is the one they advocate with the
intensive of land use alternatives.
As the sphere study is done, the Levy owns property west of
Buttercfeek tract, we request that property be analyzed on a low
density basis and we iwll provide graphics, etc. to assit in that
process.
Paul Lawrason - are any of these alternatives similar to the ones
that the Levy company has previously presented. The one that
connects at Princeton and continues across JBR, the Schlevy, across
Walnut Canyon - has two different terminus points.
Currently working with ------- - - - - -- --Company for a Gabbert .
Analyzing it and will pursue it. It is beyond the scope of the
General Plan itself.
Paul said the concept will be embodied in the study.
Connie Lawrason - question on traffic. Where did the capacity for
four -lane, six lane, etc., when and where wer the traffic studies
taken.
Response from Terry Austin Capacity of a roadway has a history
Al the other questions can be answered by reading the volumes.
Connie - what is the traffic forecast on High Street which is
alrady at 11,000?
Terry Austin - new seciton wld have 10,000.
Pat Ellis - Unolca - owns east of college and north of freeway
The amended designation does not indicate the current zoning which
allows more density than the land use designation (reduced from 700
to 6).
Explained their concerns.
Requesssted from OS2 to medium or medium low. Wld ask that this
e planned to comply with staff's recommendation
SM - should the zoning and the land use element be consistent?
PR - We are updating these of which zoningg may change. All you
are seeing are alternatives being proposed?
Mrs. Brown - are 700 units correct?
PR - I haven't calculated it. There is also a question of which
came first the zoning or hte general plan.
Mrs. Brown - Was this land at one time part of our GP update?
PR - it was considered and then unocal decided they didn't want to
participate.
CHarper - is petroleum production taking place?
Spkr - along the north side?
Prchsed w express interest for development not mineral rights
CHarper - when was it purchased?
1980's
CH - it was OS in 1979 update. That was prior to the purpose.
CHarper said the general plan designation prevails vs the zoning
designation.
Bollinger - Bollinger Development
Question - clustering is acceptable
East west corridor - what is the significant of the large link
across the land just south of Broadway.
Terry Austin said some circulation continuity should be offered and
not necessarily a capacity needed roadway.
Therese Purdham - queston - will ub addressing the issue of sand
and gravel and Happy Camp at the next meeting?
Terry Austin - yes.
Request CC carry this matter to 6/6 for discussion so we can
assimilate the information and maintain the schedule outlined with
the sphere of influence study.
Needs to begin to narrow the scope of what we're dealing with.
Both staff and the consultants need an apreciation from the CC
about the likes /dislikes.
Are there any thoughts this evening?
SM - 1) ub restricted to examining only one of these 3 alternatives
in the eir?
Response - not just one, but a composite of these. We will have
a preferred project.
SM - 2) widesheet - alt 3 - increases in industrial, commercial and
agriculture is non - existent. ADT's w /alt 1 - alt 3 has less adt's.
It doesn't make sense if we have more housing.
Terry - it relates to trip distribution
SM - if the differential could be cited (multifamily vs single
family) it would be helpful
does that also explain the solid waste reduction per day?
SM - multifamily's put out less? contact the Ventura County solid
Waste representative and it will reveal difference.
Terry Aut - we will look at it more closely.
Mrs. Brown - how were the dwellings broken down -
Terry Austin - Appendix A gives it
Paul - to Pat - are you going to try to lead us through this to
some extent. There is massive data here. We have correct the lack
of data that I complained about last time.
Alt 1 - I'm not sure is the ideal one.
Pat - there are some ideas that have been identified for change
that are not acceptable (i.e., west of substation). We need
direction.
Paul - we don't have copies of these maps.
Pat said we iwll provide those before th June 6 meeting.
Sherry Phillips - The specific plans can be for smaller candidates,
also
Sm - specific plan is okay - the cpo is tied to the general plan
and we might run into problems. Shld be underlying narrative
CHarper - Alternative 2 looks good.
where is the downtrend in the size of the family coming. 2010
county figure is optimistic? Where is this coming from
wld like to see some data tht says the numbrs are decreasing
SK - Mpk has the highest in the county (3.4)
SK - what else (must look at goals and policies).
Sherry - we will addres that at the next meeting.
SK - if alt 3 is chosen, will the eir be a problem?
Sherry - the reverse will be true
SK - said they need goals and policies to make decision.
CH - cited the figures that staff ran for him. Wld like to
reproduce this for the CC members in making their .
Perez - when can we expect the maps?
Sherry - two -day process. we will Federal Exprress
Mrs. Brown - wld rather move for a special meeting on the sixth.
One additional speaker card - Gerald
give the planning people updated maps. Those maps are outdated.
Sherry - we will include new maps that will include the ncorporated
maps as well as the sphere
SM , CH seconded. Adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Paul