Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1990 0627 CC ADJ ITEM 11DBERNARDO M. PEREZ Mayor SCOTT MONTGOMERY Mayor Pro Tem ELOISE BROWN Councilmember CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. Councilmember PAUL W. LAWRASON, Jr. Councilmember LILLIAN KELLERMAN City Clerk MOORPARK :OORPARK. CALIFORNIA City /Council Meet;ng / of �( 0 q� ACTION :�� M E M O R A N D U M 0 ITEM I I• p• � 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 Honorable City Council �, FROM: Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development DATE: June 15, 1990 (CC meeting of 6/20/90) SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ORDINANCE (CPO) Background On March 7, 1990 the City Council directed the subject of CPO to an Ad Hoc Committee of Councilmembers Harper and Montgomery. The Committee was to meet with the City Attorney so as to revise the draft ordinance to accommodate an additional category of non - designated pool; base capacity figure of 275,000 ADT (Average Daily Trips) to come from the General Plan Consultant;s Traffic Model. The Ad Hoc Committee has met several times with the City Attorney since the March 7, 1990 City Council meeting. There have been numerous additions, changes and alternatives have been reviewed and considered by the Committee. Attached is the latest draft prepared by the City Attorney and was presented to the Council at their June 4, 1990 meeting. At that time, not all of the numbers had been included by staff and the matter was continued to the Council meeting of June 20, 1990. The remaining information to be included in the draft has now been added, and the draft is ready for consideration. Discussion As noted above there have been a number of changes made to this document since the Council last reviewed the matter on March 7th. As indicated in staff's last memorandum to Council the following were items still needing inclusion into the present draft: 1. A title and narrative description of the third category of institutional land use (Sect:i.on 1.7.60.020 (e)). 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864 The Honorable City Council June 15, 1990 Page 2 2. The inclusion of the actual Base Capacities numbers (Section 17.60.040 A.). 3. A geographical description of the location of the Carlsberg Specific Plan (Section 17.60.050 D.1.). 4. The creation of ADT numbers per gross acre for the various land use designations (Section 17.60.070 A.). The third title of institutional land use is titled "Governmental ". This title is to cover such land uses as City Hall, Library, Caltrans Construction Yard, future museum, etc. The inclusion of actual base capacities numbers in this draft differs substantially from the previous draft inasmuch as there is no separate category for holding capacity or base outside of the City. The numbers shown on the current draft are those created by City Staff after reviewing the material provided by the General Plan Update Traffic Engineer (AF). There are a number of ADT count numbers which differ between staff's count and that identified by Austin -Foust (see attached table). Staff's numbers are higher than Austin - Foust's in the residential land uses and lower in the commercial uses. A geographical description for the Carlsberg Specific Plan has been included inasmuch as this Specific Plan is being exempted from its inclusion in making up or changing the Base Capacities (see page 7). Staff has provided ADT numbers per gross acreage for each of the General Plan Land Use designations. It will require that the current General Plan Update efforts retain these land use designations and add only the Governmental designation. This is not what PBR is proposing. The following is a comparison review between the draft given to the Council or March 7th and the proposed draft as modified by the City Attorney and presented from the Committee: 1. The Section numbers have all changed due to the recodification of the City's Municipal Code, 2. The Intent and Purpose section has not changed. 3. Minor changes were made in the definitions section: a. ADT was changed to strike "round ". b. The words "or a Reorganization" were eliminated. 3 The Hono June 15, Page 3 C. d. rable City Council 1990 No change. The term "gross definition. acreage" was added and became a new e. This was the previous "d" section and rural low and rural high was added. Also, school and park were added. f. & g. This is an added definition that refers to "Territorial Area" and Non - Territorial Area. Exhibit A referred to has yet to be created but is assumed to be the current City limits. h. This is a new definition which will deal with future amendments to the City's General plan. i. No change (previous "h" section). Section 17.60.030 (previous 8.60.030) Limitation on General Plan Amendments has not significantly changed with the exception of those new definitions noted above Section 17.60.040 (previous 8.60.040) Establishment of Base and Holding Capacities has changed dramatically. There is no longer the use of Growth Area vs. Non - Growth Area and Section 8.60.050 has been eliminated which dealt with the Establishment of Base Capacities inasmuch as Section 17.60.040 has combined the two functions together. Once the Base Capacity is known, a five percent factor will be added to created the Holding Capacity. Section 17.60.050 Revision of Base Capacities is generally a new section which addressed the need to make changes over time. There are two parts to Subsection B which deals with requests to amend the current General Plan and Subsection C which addresses the Possibility of a future annexation to the City. These are exceptions to Subsection B for Specific Plans and necessary adjustments because of state mandated amendments to the Housing Element. Section 17.60.070 Calculation of ADT. This section is very important because it is the core from which the Base Capacity numbers are created. Also, once adopted these identified land use designations may not be changed without a vote of the people (see Section 17.60.070, Subsection B). There will need to be an assumption that no land use designations changes will occur because of the General Plan Update process. This proposal may precede the final action on the General Plan Update. Table II attached to this report gives a comparison between Austin - Foust's ADT numbers and Staff's as noted previously. q The Honorable City Council June 15, 1990 Page 4 Staff Recommendation Direct staff as deemed appropriate. Attachments: Tables I and II Exhibit C - Land Use and Trip Generation Exhibit B - Appendix A from Austin -Foust Report Exhibit A - Draft CPO Ordinance S TABLE I Comprehensive Program for General Plan Amendments (CPO) CPO Land Use Designations ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 Rural Low Y Y Y Rural High Y Y Y Low Y Y Y Medium Low Y Y Y Medium Y Y Y High Y Y Y Very High Y Y Y Neighborhood Commercial Y Y Y General Commercial Y Y Y C -I Mix Y No No Limited Industrial Y Y Y Medium Industrial Y Y" Y AG. 1 Y Y Y AG. 2 No No No OS. 1 Y Y Y OS. 2 Y Y Y School Y Y Y Park Y Y Y Governmental No No No Other land use Quasi Public OS -3 OS -4 designations proposed OS -4 OS- Landforms by General Plan Update OS Landforms Quasi Public Quasi Public Floodury Floodury TABLE II Comprehensive Program for Gneeral Pan Amendments (CPO) Rate Units ADT Condos 5.86 355 2080 AF 5.857 756 4,427 Stf. ( +250) Apartments 6.10 490 2989 AF 6.595 553 3,647 Stf. Mobile Home 4.81 272 1308 AF 4.814 268 1,290 Stf. S/F Homes 10.06(13) 6104 59,838 AF rate) and 10.062 6971 70,142 Stf. Parks 3.66 385 ac. 141 AF 36.548 29.85 ac. 1090 Stf. ( +70.84) +2589 Students Schools 1.03 3,760 3,879 AF (Elementary) 1.032 3,930 4,055 Stf, (High School) 1.39 1,093 1,519 Stf. 1,193 1.385 862 Combined totals 5,390 AF Comments Under counted number of units. Staff used category 221, "low rise ", AF Used 220 "apartment" AF under counted, LeClub 370, Pines 47, Woodcreek 136. Number of trailers in park can vary AF used separate category for Rural (13 creates a rate for SFA ( such are in Varsity Park). Calculating AF units at the SFD rate the new figure is 61,148 very close to their current total. Staff counted units that are under construction and those that will be built but are not started yet (such as Urban West units) which AF did not do. A difference in judgement over categories (unbuilt parks) Very close totals need to verify numbers of students 5,248 Stf. - continued on next page- Comprehensive Program for General Plan Amendments (CPO) Students (College) Churches Gov. Office Industrial Commercial 1.55 13,000 20,150 AF 1.55 11,500 17,825 Stf. .Square Feet - - - - AF 7.69 (w /day)51,248 394 AF 68.93 11,760 811 AF Varies 5,080/2,700/ 547 Stf. 3,000 6.97 5,912,480 41,210 AF 6.967 2,324,378 16,193 Stf. 6.969 291,039 2,028 Stf. 19.79 23,040 456 AF did not include. Staff used 3 categories to take into account the libarary and Community Light industrial category Industrial Park category Office building category - -- - -- 2,197 Stf. AC Construction, Misc., La Falda 20,874 Apparently AF based their calculations upon the land area rather than building area. Staff's calculations show 6,855,472 sq. ft. of developed industrial land (approximately). Their total is too high. Convenience commercial Neighborhood commercial. Community commercial Office Shopping centers, office. - continued on next page - Square Feet 117.90 51,290 6,047 AF 84.50 240,570 20,328 AF 52.85 279,470 14,770 AF 18.14 132,960 2,412 AF 704,290 43,217 Various 327,277 30,331 Stf. Convenience commercial Neighborhood commercial. Community commercial Office Shopping centers, office. - continued on next page - Comprehensive Program for General Plan Amendments (CPO) 128,175* 5,213 Stf. Strip shopping 2,660 Gas Station Total 38,204 (This figure includes civic center.) *11.77 acres, assume 25% coverage. A number of inconsistencies exist in AF's method of computing. The following sq.ft. are listed for these shopping centers. Other questions arise. Area 123, where is the commercial? Area 94, 95 are vacant fields. Areas 26, 31,32, 36, 75, 77, 78 show 179, 590 aq.ft minus 14,340 aq.ft. for 216 Moorpark Avenue = 165,250 sq.ft. of commercial area, a very optimistic total, staff's figure of 128,175 is optimistic. Area 92 is Colin Velazquez's center and Park Lane Center 27,458 sq.ft. + 10,544 sq.ft. total of 38,002 sq.ft. not 16,440 sq.ft. AF total is 43,257 ADT, staff is 38,204 ADT (for all commercial ADT). Note that staff's total includes the civic center complex, the adjusted totals are: - continued on next page - Center AF Stat. City Totals Area 76 (T.A.Z) Town Center 211,270 125,113 Area 99 (T.A.Z) Mpk. Plaza 92,780 55,280 Area 46 (T.A.Z) Varsity Pk. Plz. 52,270 21,815 Area 98 (T.A.Z) Gateway Plz. 76,230 30,040 Other questions arise. Area 123, where is the commercial? Area 94, 95 are vacant fields. Areas 26, 31,32, 36, 75, 77, 78 show 179, 590 aq.ft minus 14,340 aq.ft. for 216 Moorpark Avenue = 165,250 sq.ft. of commercial area, a very optimistic total, staff's figure of 128,175 is optimistic. Area 92 is Colin Velazquez's center and Park Lane Center 27,458 sq.ft. + 10,544 sq.ft. total of 38,002 sq.ft. not 16,440 sq.ft. AF total is 43,257 ADT, staff is 38,204 ADT (for all commercial ADT). Note that staff's total includes the civic center complex, the adjusted totals are: - continued on next page - Comprehensive Program for General Plan Amendments (CPO„ With Gov.Ctr. AF Staff 44,368 ADT 38,204 ADT Without Gov. Ctr. AF Staff 43,557 ADT 37,657 ADT The above shows a difference of about 6,000 ADT. Staff attempted to use as many categories as possible, for example, office category 710 for the Poindexter and Baher office, convenience category 851 for Circle K and Tipsy Fox, etc. AF did likewise for office. But out methodology differs for the choice of commercial category. Staff's version of the ITE Manual has one category for shopping center (820) which is divided between under and over 200,000 sq.ft. center. AF has a category for 10- 50,000/50- 100,000 /and 100- 500,000 sq.ft. centers. We both used the same edition of the ITE Manual but the formulas differ. Even with these differences the totals are still only 6,000 off. Staff also took into account each of the proposed General Plan Amendments and a number of options for Carlsberg which AF did not do. Also AF has no calculations for the non - growth area. �11:j ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING CHAPTER 17.60 OF THE MOORPARK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATIVE TO A COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTr;. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Moorpark. Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding Chapter 17.60 to read as follows: Chapter 17.60 Comprehensive Program for General Plan Amendments 17.60.010 Intent and Purpose. The General Plan is a comprehensive, long -term plan for the physical development of --he City. It is the basic land use charter governing the direction of future land use in •ie Citv. As a result, the EXHIBIT /O 11 General Plan embodies fundamental land use decisions that guide the growth of the City. Amendments to the General Plan have the potential for resulting in ultimate physical changes in the configuration and character of the City. The purpose and intent of this chapter is to afford the residents of the City the opportunity to directly partici- pate in the decision to amend t.neir General Plan, which amendments, individually or cumulatively, would have the effect of significantly increasing the density or intensity of land use in the City. 17.60.020 Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, unless the content clearly requ.res a different meaning, the words and phrases set forth in this section shall have the following meanings: (a) "ADT" means average daily vehicular trips. (b) "Component" means each parcel of land that is the subject of a General Plan amendment. (c) "General Plan" means the General Plan of the City of Moorpark, and each Element thereof, as of the effective date of this chapter. (d) "Gross acreage" means gross acreage rounded to the nearest tenth of an acre. (e) "Land Use Designation" means rural low residential, rural high residen'Lal, l:-,w density CJK /6•JP /ORD7 3 511 1 2 (05/21/90) a (k) "Pre - Amendment Land Use Designation" means the Land Use Designation from which *.he component is proposed to be chanaed. 17.60.030 Limitation on General Plan Amendments. A. The Planning Commission shall not recommend approval of, and the City Couricil shall not approve, any General Plan amendment that world cause the Base Capacities established by this chapter t_� exceed the Holding Capacities established by this chapter. In the event that a General Plan amendment consists of morf. than one component, the Planning Commission shall not recommend approval of, and the City Council shall not approve, any combination of components that would cause the Base Capacities to exceed the Holding Capacities. B. For each proposes General Plan amendment, the following information shall be reported by the Director of Community Development to the F'''..annina Commission and the City Council during the public hearings required by State statute and City ordinance. 1• The Pre- Amendment ADT for each component. CJK/ ? /OPD735'_ v (05/21/901) a 17.60.050 Revision of Base Capacities. A. Neither one of the Base Capacities shall be increased or decreased, or otherwise revised, except as provided by this section. B. Upon the adoption of any General Plan amendment which would change any permitted land use from one Land Use Designation to anothe_- Land Use Designation, the City Council shall revise the Base Capacities in accordance with this subsection. The Pre- Amendment ADT for each approved component of the General Plan amendment shall be subtracted from the applicable Base Capacity and the Post - Amendment ADT for each approvec component of the General Plan amendment shall be added the applicable Base Capacity. C. Upon the adoption of any General Plan amendment that is for the initiial Land Use Designation of any Moorpark Non - Territorial Area, the City Council shall revise the Base Capacities in u_cordance with this subsection.and subsection B of -.his section shall not be applicable. The Initial - Amendment ADT for each approved component of the General Plan. amendment shall be added to the applicable Base Capacity. 1rhe Initial- P.mendment ADT shall mean the ADT per gross acre of the initial sand Use Designation minus _ ADT per gross acre times the gross acreage of the component. For ::Lirpose,; of subsec� ion B of - -6- CJK /r4P /OPD73511 (05/21;90) 13 income level, that comprise the City's share of the regional nOUS ing need. 17.60.060 Revision of Holdinq Capacities. A. Neither one of the Holding Capacities shall be increased or decreased, or otherwise revised, except as provided by this section. B. The Holding Capacities, or either one of them, may be revised at any time and in any amount by a simple majority of the voters of the City voting on the revision at a special or general election. 17.60.070 Calculation of ADT. A. The ADT by Land Use Designation and the land use category into which each Land Use Designation falls is as follows: Land Use Categories ADT Per Gross Acre 1. Residential Rural Low Rural High Low Density Medium Low Densit•: Medium Density CJK /WP /OPD7351 (05/21/90) iQ. o! ILI 0 17.60.080 Official Record of Capacities. A. The Director of Community Development shall keep an official record of the Base Capacities and of each revision thereto. No revision shall be made to the Base Capacities except as expressly provided by this chapter. B. The Director of 'ommunity Development shall keep an official record of the Holding Capacities and of each revision thereto. No revision shall be made to the Holding Capacities except as expressi -y provided by this chanter. C. In the event that any General Plan amendment, or component thereof, fails to t�ecome effective or is set aside, voided or annulled by a court of competent jurisdiction, the corresponding revisions shall be deleted from the Base Capacities. 17.60.090 Judicial Review. Any action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul any action to amend the General Plan contrary to tht, provisions of this chapter or to revise the Base Capacitie: or the Holding Capacities contrary to the provisions of t�'is chapter shall not be maintained by any person unless :he action or proceeding is filed in a court of competent jl,risdiction and the City Council is served within thirty 30) days after the date of such action. Thereafter all per.ons a -,e barred from such CJX/ P /0RD735'_i P5- SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance; shall enter the same in the book of original ordina: ices of the city and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of -.he City Council at which the vote is declared by the City Council. 19 PASSED AND ADOPTED th:s day of Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk CJ:{/ Wa /0RD7 3 51 ( 0 2','9u) C /b i7 APPENDIX A LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION The material contained in this appendix summarizes the land use and trip generation for the Moorpark Traffic Analysis Model (MTAM) analysis area. TRIP GENERATION RATES Trip generation rates used for analyzing development in the MTAM have been compiled primarily from the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (7E) "Trip Generation" (Fourth Edition). Table A -1 summarizes the peak hour and ADT trip generation rates for each land use, and Table A -2 summarizes the purpose splitting factors used to generate productions and attractions by trip purpose. The following discusses the derivation of the peak hour and ADT trip generation rates for each land use category. I. Residential - Rural ADT and peak hour trip genreration rates were derived from the ITE rates for single family detached housing. ITE's ADT rate of 10.06 trips per dwelling unit (DU) was adjusted to 13.00 based on rural residential trip generation characteristic of the Ventura County and Moorpark area. Peak hour relationships were derived from the = peak hour rates for single family detached housing and applied to the ADT rate. AM peak hour inbound (IB) and outbound (OB) rates are .26 and .72, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are .82 and .48, respectively. 2. Residential - Low (SFD) ADT trip generation rate of 10.06 trips per DU and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the ITE rates for single family detached housing. AM peak hour IB and OB rates are .20 and .55, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are .63 and .37, respectively. 3. Residential - Medium Low (SFD) ADT trip generation rate of 10.06 trips per DU and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the ITE rates for single family detached housing. AM peak hour IB and OB rates are .20 and .55, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are .63 and .37, respectively. EXHIBIT '8 Table A -1 MTAM PEAK HOUR AND AOT TRIP RATE SUMMARY /8 - -- AM Peak Hour -- -- PM Peak Hour -- Land Use Type Units [n Out Total In Out Total ADT i. Res - Rural DU 26 --------------------------------------------- .72 .98 .82 .48 1.30 13.00 2. Res - Low (SFD) DU :10 .55 .75 .63 .37 1.00 10.06 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) DU 20 .55 .75 .63 .37 1.00 10.06 4. Res - Medium (SFA) DU 5 49 .64 .55 .29 .84 8.10 5. Apartment DU 0 .43 .53 .46 .21 .67 6.10 6. Condominium DU i)7 .38 45 .38 .18 .56 5.86 7. Mobile Home DU .2 .29 .41 .35 .21 .56 4.81 8. Convenience Commercial TSF 2 09 .89 2.98 5.85 6.10 11.95 117.90 9. Neighborhood Commercial TSF 1 42 .61 2.03 3.66 3.80 7.46 84.50 10. Community Commercial TSF -',5 .37 1 22 2.00 2.28 4.28 52.85 11. Medical Office TSF 11 .72 1.63 .98 2.65 3.63 34.17 12. Office (0 -99 TSF) TSF 2 (13 .30 2.33 .38 1.98 2.36 18.14 13. Office (100 TSF +) TSF 1 62 .24 1.86 .29 1.51 1.80 12.02 14. Elementary /Middle School STU :4 .09 23 .01 .01 .02 1.03 15. High School STU 6 .14 140 .01 .03 .04 1.39 16. College STU 15 .03 .18 .04 .08 .12 1.55 17. Government Office TSF 4 �,4 94 5.88 2.87 8.16 11.03 68.93 18. Light Industrial TSF c4 12 96 .12 .92 1.04 6.97 19. Warehouse TSF 9 18 57 .24 .50 .74 4.88 20. Park ACRE 0 00 00 .00 .00 .00 3.66 21. Agriculture ACRE 1 00 .01 .00 .01 .01 .10 /8 Iq 4. Residential - Medium (SFA) ADT trip generation rate of 8.10 trips per DU and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were derived by averaging the ITE rates for single family detached housing and apartments. AM peak hour IB and OB rates are .15 and .49, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are .55 and .29, respectively. 5. Apartment ADT trip generation rate of 6.10 trips per DU and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the ITE rates for apartments. AM peak hour M and OB rates are .10 and .43, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are .46 and .21, respectively. 6. Condominium ADT trip generation rate of 5.86 trips per DU and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the ITE rates for residential condominiums. AM peak hour IB and OB rates are .07 and .38, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are .38 and .18, respectively. 7. Mobile Home ADT trip generation rate of 4.81 trips per DU and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the ITE rates for mobile home parks. AM peak hour IB and OB rates are .12 and .29, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are .35 and .21, respectively. 8. Convenience Commercial ADT trip generation rate of 117.90 trips per thousand square feet (TSF) and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the ITE rates for shopping centers (10 to 50 TSF). AM peak hour IB and OB rates are 2.09 and .89, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are 5.85 and 6.10, respectively. 9. Neighborhood Commercial ADT trip generation rate of 84.50 trips per TSF and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the ITE rates for shopping centers (50 to 100 TSF). AM peak hour IB and OB rates are 1.42 and .61, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are 3.66 and 3.80, respectively. 4--2v 10. Community Commercial ADT trip generation rate of 52.85 trips per TSF and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the ITE rates for shopping centers (100 to 500 TSF). AM peak hour IB and OB rates are .85 and .37, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are 2.00 and 2.28, respectively. 11. Medical Office ADT trip generation rate of 34.17 trips per TSF and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the ITE rates for medical office buildings. AM peak hour IB and OB rates are .91 and .72, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are .98 and 2.65, respectively. 12. Office (0 -99 TSF) ADT trip generation rate of 18.14 trips per TSF and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the ITE rates for general office buildings (10 to 100 TSF). AM peak hour IB and OB rates are 2.03 and .30, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are .38 and 1.98, respectively. 13. Office (100 TSF +) ADT trip generation rate of 12.02 trips per TSF and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the ITE rates for general office buildings (100 to 300 TSF). AM peak hour IB and OB rates are 1.62 and .24, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are .29 and 1.51, respectively. 14. Elementary/Middle School ADT trip generation rate of 1.03 trips per student and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the ITE rates for elementary schools. AM peak hour IB and OB rates are .14 and .09, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are both .01. 15. High School ADT trip generation rate of 1.39 trips per student and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the ITE rates for high schools. AM peak hour IB and OB rates are .26 and .14, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are .01 and .03, respectively. 16. College ADT trip generation rate of 1.55 trips per student and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the TTE rates for junior /community colleges. AM peak hour IB and OB rates are .15 and .03, respectively, and PM peak hour M and OB rates are .04 and .08, respectively. 17. Government OMce ADT trip generation rate of 68.93 trips per TSF and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the TTE rates for government office buildings. AM peak hour IB and OB rates are 4.94 and .94, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are 2.87 and 8.16, respectively. 18. Light Industrial ADT trip generation rate of 6.97 trips per TSF and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the TTE rates for general light industrial. AM peak hour IB and OB rates are .84 and .12, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are .12 and .92, respectively. 19. Warehouse ADT trip generation rate of 4.88 trips per TSF and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from the ITE rates for warehousing. AM peak hour IB and OB rates are .39 and .18, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are .24 and .50, respectively. 20. Park ADT trip generation rate of 3.66 trips per acre was taken from the TTE rates for city parks. Peak hour trip generation was assumed to be negligible. 21. Agriculture ADT trip generation rate of .10 trips per acre and the corresponding peak hour trip rates were taken from selected Ventura County traffic studies. AM peak hour IB and OB rates are .01 and .00, respectively, and PM peak hour IB and OB rates are .00 and .01, respectively. 8 9 10 56 55 3 1 2 11 13 15 43 45 54 0 57 58 <OyO 47 4g g 6 7 `" MA�s PARK 53 N 44 O 46 W 4 12 3 14 16 4 49 50 51 52 59 5 4 20 LOS ANGELES 41 SR -11S 1. 18 19 24 27 28 33 38 42 61 60 ASEV W`GK8 34 AN gPRR l i 23 29 X ! �J 25 N HAR 30 .OS 35 LE3 39 40 2? 31 32 37 ,141; 5PH" 65 66 71 73 75 77 79 81 m 64 Q THIRD 70 83 ° 's 84 62 63 �� 68 69 �72174 76 0 78 80 ; 82 °9 �N `13 6 N � 9� 90 91 92 94� 98 ss 133 85 87 88 gg 14 00 °93 95 96 31 M 132 MOORPARK TRAFFIC MODEL 113 123 86 ! ZONE SYSTEM 112 114 120 PEACH HILL w 134 ,2-6 -89 X 101 115 moo° 11 124 N 126 136 142 I 100 1p� a . 125 0 Iwo T 2 3 P ` 0 "'" 109 0 118 119 121 F 110 C, 127, 135 135 �p 108 128 WALNUT CgPE TIERRA RE�A° 0Pp 129 143 0 106 107 111 K 122 130 A 44 �3 1 -26 -1990 1989 MOORPARK TRAFFIC ANALYSIS MODEL LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION -- AM Peak Hour -- -- PM Peak Hour -- Zone Land Use Type Units --------...---•--------------------------- In Out Total In Out Total ADT 2 1. Res - Rural 1.00 DU 0 1 1 1 ------------------------- 0 2 TOTAL 1 13 0 1 1 1 0 1 13 4 1. Res - Rural 1.00 DU 0 1 1 1 0 1 4 TOTAL 0 1 1 13 1 0 1 13 5 1. Res - Rural 5.00 OU 1 4 5 4 2 7 5 TOTAL 65 1 4 5 4 2 7 65 8 1. Res - Rural 1.00 DU 0 1 1 1 0 8 TOTAL 1 13 0 1 1 1 0 1 13 9 1. Res - Rural 2.00 DU 1 1 2 2 1 9 TOTAL 3 26 1 1 2 2 1 3 26 10 1. Res- Rural 1.00 DU 0 1 1 1 0 10 TOTAL 1 13 0 1 1 1 0 1 13 12 1. Res - Rural 12.00 DU 3 9 12 10 6 16 156 12 TOTAL 3 9 12 10 6 16 156 13 1. Res - Rural 1.00 DU 0 1 1 1 0 1 13 TOTAL 13 0 1 1 1 0 1 13 17 1. Res - Rural 1.00 DU 0 1 1 1 0 1 17 TOTAL 13 0 1 1 1 0 1 13 18 1. Res - Rural 20.00 DU 5 14 20 16 10 26 260 18 TOTAL 5 14 20 16 10 26 260 19 1. Res - Rural 1.00 OU 0 1 1 1 0 19 TOTAL 1 13 0 1 1 1 0 1 13 20 1. Res - Rural 1.00 DU 0 1 1 1 0 20 TOTAL 1 13 0 1 1 1 0 1 13 22 1. Res - Rural 1.00 DU 0 1 1 1 0 22 TOTAL 1 13 0 1 1 1 0 1 13 23 1. Res - Rural 1.00 DU 0 1 1 1 23 TOTAL 0 1 13 0 1 1 1 0 1 13 24 1. Res - Rural 5.00 OU 1 4 5 4 24 7. Mobile Home 32.00 DU 4 9 13 11 2 7 65 24 TOTAL 7 18 154 5 13 18 15 9 24 219 25 15. High School 64.00 STU 17 9 26 1 2 25 18. Light Industrial 69.52 TSF 58 8 67 8 3 89 25 TOTAL 64 72 485 75 1' 92 9 66 75 574 Ll 1 -26 -1990 1989 MOORPARK TRAFFIC ANALYSIS MODEL -AND USE AND TRIP GENERATION (cont.) .- AM Peak Hour -- -- PM Peak Hour -- Zone Land Use Type - ------------ Units - In Out Total In Out Total ADT 26 2. Res - Low (SFD) 2.00 - - - -- DU - - -- ---------------------------------------------------- 0 1 2 1 1 2 26 9. Neighborhood Commercial 11.98 TSF 17 7 24 44 46 89 20 1012 26 17. Government Office 11.76 TSF 58 11 69 34 96 130 811 26 18. Light Industrial 21.52 TSF 18 3 21 3 20 22 150 26 20. Park 4.50 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 26 TOTAL 94 22 116 81 162 243 2010 27 1. Res - Rural 1.00 DU 0 1 1 1 0 1 27 2. Res - Low (SFD) 4.00 DU 1 2 3 3 1 4 13 27 TOTAL 1 3 4 3 2 5 40 53 29 2. Res - Low (SFD) 39.00 DU 8 21 29 25 14 39 392 29 TOTAL 8 21 29 25 14 39 392 30 4. Res - Medium (SFA) 25.00 OU 4 12 16 14 7 21 203 30 TOTAL 4 12 16 14 7 21 203 31 4- Res - Medium (SFA) 14.00 DU 2 7 9 8 4 12 113 31 9. Neighborhood Commercial 38.12 TSF 54 23 77 140 145 284 3221 31 18. Light Industrial 51.31 TSF 43 6 49 6 47 53 358 31 TOTAL 99 36 136 153 196 349 3692 32 2. Res - Low (SFD) 9.00 DU 2 5 7 6 3 9 91 32 9. Neighborhood Commercial 54.67 TSF 78 33 111 200 208 408 4620 32 18. Light Industrial 34.76 TSF 29 4 33 4 32 36 242 32 TOTAL 109 42 151 210 243 453 4952 34 1. Res - Rural 4.00 DU 1 3 4 3 2 5 52 34 TOTAL 1 3 4 3 2 5 52 35 2. Res - Low (SFD) 83.00 OU 17 46 62 52 31 83 835 35 6. Condominium 27.00 DU 2 10 12 10 5 15 158 35 TOTAL 8 56 74 63 36 98 993 36 9. Neighborhood Commercial 6.75 TSF 10 4 14 25 26 50 36 18. Light Industrial 101.47 TSF 85 12 97 12 93 106 570 707 36 TOTAL 95 i6 111 37 119 156 1278 37 18. Light Industrial 513.14 TSF 431 62 493 62 472 534 3577 37 TOTAL 431 62 493 62 472 534 3577 38 1. Res - Rural 1.00 DU 0 1 1 1 0 1 38 2. Res - Low (SFD) 9.00 DU 2 5 7 6 13 38 TOTAL 3 9 91 2 6 8 6 4 10 104 39 18. Light Industrial 215.35 TSF L81 26 207 26 198 224 1501 39 TOTAL 181 26 207 26 198 224 1501 40 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 39.00 DU 8 21 29 25 14 39 392 40 18. Light Industrial 51.31 TSF 43 6 49 6 47 53 358 40 TOTAL 1 28 79 31 62 92 750 1 -26 -1990 1989 MOORPARK TRAFFIC ANALYSIS MODEL -AND USE AND TRIP GENERATION (cont.) -- AM Peak Hour -- -- PM Peak Hour -- Zone -------------------------------------------------- Land Use Type Units n Out Total In Out Total ADT 41 18. Light Industrial 397.27 - - - - -- TSF --------------------------------------------------------- 24 48 381 48 365 413 2769 41 TOTAL i34 48 381 48 365 413 2769 42 18. Light Industrial 913.71 TSF '68 110 877 110 841 950 6369 42 TOTAL '68 110 877 110 841 950 6369 45 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 106.00 DU 21 58 80 67 39 106 1066 45 TOTAL 21 58 80 67 39 106 1066 46 2. Res - Low (SFD) 155.00 DU 31 85 116 98 57 155 1559 46 9. Neighborhood Commercial 52.27 TSF 74 32 106 191 199 390 4417 46 TOTAL 05 117 222 289 256 545 5976 47 2. Res - Low (SFD) 144.00 DU 29 79 108 91 53 144 1449 47 TOTAL 29 79 108 91 53 144 1449 48 2. Res - Low (SFD) 131.00 DU 26 72 98 83 48 131 1318 48 4. Res - Medium (SFA) 160.00 DU 24 78 102 88 46 134 1296 48 TOTAL 50 150 201 171 95 265 2614 49 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 186.00 DU 37 102 140 117 69 186 1871 49 20. Park 2.50 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 49 TOTAL 37 102 140 117 69 186 1880 50 4. Res - Medium (SFA) 257.00 DU 39 126 164 141 75 216 2082 50 TOTAL 39 126 164 141 75 216 2082 51 6. Condominium 64.00 DU 4 24 29 24 12 36 375 51 TOTAL 4 24 29 24 12 36 375 52 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 110.00 DU 22 61 83 69 41 110 1107 52 20. Park 4.00 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 52 TOTAL 22 61 83 69 41 110 1121 53 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 73.00 DU 15 40 55 46 27 73 734 53 TOTAL 15 40 55 46 27 73 734 54 14. Elementary /Middle School 450.00 STU 63 41 104 5 5 9 464 54 TOTAL 63 41 104 5 5 9 464 55 1. Res - Rural 12.00 DU 3 9 12 10 6 16 156 55 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 132.00 DU 26 73 99 83 49 132 1328 55 TOTAL 30 81 111 93 55 148 1484 57 16. College 13000.00 STU 1950 390 2340 520 1040 1560 20150 57 TOTAL 1950 390 2340 520 1040 1560 20150 61 7. Mobile Home 240.00 DU 29 '0 98 84 50 134 1154 61 TOTAL 29 ,0 98 84 50 134 1154 a( 1 -26 -1990 1989 MOORPARK TRAFFIC ANALYSIS MODEL t.ANO USE AND TRIP GENERATION (cont -- AM Peak Hour -- -- PM Peak Hour -- Zone ---------------------------------------------- Land Use Type Units ---- In Out Total In Out Total ADT 62 18. Light Industrial 652.18 - - -- -- TSF -------------------------------------------------------- 548 78 626 78 600 678 4546 62 21. Agriculture 51.80 ACRE 1 0 1 0 1 1 5 62 TOTAL 548 78 627 78 601• 679 4551 63 18. Light Industrial 64.56 TSF 54 8 62 8 59 67 450 63 TOTAL 54 8 62 8 59 67 450 64 18. Light Industrial 279.74 TSF 235 34 269 34 257 291 1950 64 TOTAL 235 34 269 34 257 291 1950 65 18. Light Industrial 258.22 TSF" 217 31 248 31 238 269 1800 65 TOTAL 217 31 248 31 238 269 1800 66 2. Res - Low (SFD) 7.00 DU 1 4 5 4 3 7 70 66 18. Light Industrial 150.63 TSF 127 18 145 18 139 157 1050 66 TOTAL 128 22 150 22 141 164 1120 67 18. Light Industrial 213.53 TSF 179 26 205 26 196 222 1488 67 TOTAL 179 26 205 26 196 222 1488 68 18. Light Industrial 338.84 TSF 285 41 325 41 312 352 2362 68 TOTAL 285 41 325 41 312 352 2362 69 18. Light Industrial 371.61 TSF 312 45 357 45 342 386 2590 69 TOTAL 312 45 357 45 342 386 2590 70 2. Res - Low (SFD) 108.00 DU 22 59 81 68 40 108 1086 70 18. Light Industrial 29.80 TSF 25 4 29 4 27 31 208 70 TOTAL 47 63 110 72 67 139 1294 71 18. Light Industrial 26.48 TSF 22 3 25 3 24 28 185 71 TOTAL 22 3 25 3 24 28 185 72 21. Agriculture 15.80 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 72 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 73 14. Elementary /Middle School 1020.00 STU 143 92 235 10 10 20 1051 73 18. Light Industrial 48.00 TSF 40 6 46 6 44 50 335 73 TOTAL 183 98 281 16 54 70 1385 74 21. Agriculture 13.00 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 74 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 75 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 50.00 OU 10 28 38 32 19 50 503 75 9. Neighborhood Commercial 40.62 TSF 58 25 82 149 154 303 3432 75 18. Light Industrial 36.75 TSF 31 4 35 4 34 38 256 75 TOTAL 99 57 155 185 207 391 4192 76 10. Community Commercial 156.82 TSF :33 58 191 314 358 671 8288 76 12. Office (0 -99 TSF) 54.45 TSF .11 16 127 21 108 129 988 1 -26 -1990 1989 MOORPARK TRAFFIC ANALYSIS MODEL LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION (cant.) -- AM Peak Hour -- -- PM Peak Hour -- Zone Land Use Type Units In Out Total In Out Total ADT 76 21. Agriculture 8.26 ACRE 0 0 ----------------------------------------- 0 0 0 0 76 TOTAL 244 74 318 334 465 800 9276 77 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 85.00 DU 17 47 64 54 31 85 855 77 9. Neighborhood Commercial 18.30 TSF 26 11 37 67 70 137 1546 77 18. Light Industrial 66.21 TSF 56 8 64 8 61 69 461 77 TOTAL 99 66 164 128 162 290 2863 78 2. Res - Low (SFD) 11.00 DU 2 6 8 7 4 11 111 78 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 20.00 DU 4 11 15 13 7 20 201 78 9. Neighborhood Commercial 9.15 TSF 13 6 19 33 35 68 773 78 12. Office (0 -99 TSF) 10.91 TSF 22 3 25 4 22 26 198 78 14. Elementary /Middle School 777.00 STU 109 70 179 8 8 16 800 78 TOTAL �50 96 246 65 76 141 2083 79 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 144.00 DU 29 79 108 91 53 144 1449 79 18. Light Industrial 64.72 TSF 54 8 62 8 60 67 451 79 TOTAL 83 87 170 98 113 211 1900 80 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 160.00 DU 32 88 120 101 59 160 1610 80 TOTAL 32 88 120 101 59 160 1610 81 18. Light Industrial 261.53 TSF 220 31 251 31 241 272 1823 81 TOTAL 20 31 251 31 241 272 1823 82 1. Res - Rural 1.00 DU 0 1 1 1 0 1 13 82 6. Condominium 264.00 DU 18 100 119 100 48 148 1547 82 21. Agriculture 3.11 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 82 TOTAL 19 101 120 101 48 149 1560 83 18. Light Industrial 498.24 TSF 419 60 478 60 458 518 3473 83 TOTAL 419 60 478 60 458 518 3473 84 1. Res - Rural 2.00 DU 1 1 2 2 1 3 26 84 TOTAL 1 1 2 2 1 3 26 85 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 158.00 DU 32 87 119 100 58 158 1589 85 TOTAL 32 87 119 100 58 158 1589 86 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 131.00 DU 26 72 98 83 48 131 1318 86 TOTAL 26 72 98 83 48 131 1318 87 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 78.00 DU 16 43 59 49 29 78 785 87 TOTAL 16 43 59 49 29 78 785 88 4. Res - Medium (SFA) 185.00 DU 28 91 118 102 54 155 1499 88 20. Park 4.50 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 88 TOTAL 28 91 118 102 54 155 1515 89 2. Res - Low (SFD) 33.00 DU 7 13 25 2 i 12 33 332 e5;z U 1-26-1996- 1989 MOORPARK TRAFFIC ANALYSIS MODEL '_AND USE AND TRIP GENERATION (cont.) -- AM Peak Hour -- -- PM Peak Hour -- Zone Land Use Type ------------------------------- Units In Out Total In Out Total ADT 89 9. Neighborhood Commercial 8.71 - - - - -- --------------------------------------------------------- TSF 12 5 18 32 33 65 736 89 TOTAL 19 23 42 53 45 98 1068 90 21. Agriculture 24.10 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 90 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 91 1. Res - Rural 1.00 DU 0 1 1 1 0 1 13 91 21. Agriculture 18.80 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 91 TOTAL 0 1 1 1 1 1 15 92 1. Res - Rural 5.00 DU 1 4 5 4 2 7 65 92 8. Convenience Commercial 16.44 TSF 34 15 49 96 100 196 1938 92 TOTAL 36 18 54 100 103 203 2003 93 21. Agriculture 10.30 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 93 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 94 8. Convenience Commercial 34.85 TSF 73 31 104 204 213 416 4109 94 21. Agriculture 9.80 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 94 TOTAL 73 31 104 204 213 417 4110 95 21. Agriculture 3.90 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 95 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 96 5. Apartment 490.00 DU 49 211 260 225 103 328 2989 96 TOTAL 49 211 260 225 103 328 2989 97 2. Res - Low (SFD) 20.00 DU 4 11 15 13 7 20 201 97 TOTAL 4 11 15 13 7 20 201 98 10. Community Commercial 45.74 TSF 39 17 56 91 104 196 2417 98 12. Office (0 -99 TSF) 30.49 TSF 62 9 71 12 60 72 553 98 18. Light Industrial 182.08 TSF 153 22 175 22 168 189 1269 98 TOTAL 254 48 302 125 332 457 4240 99 10. Community Commercial 55.67 TSF 47 21 68 111 127 238 2942 99 12. Office (0 -99 TSF) 37.11 TSF 75 11 86 14 73 88 673 99 TOTAL 123 32 154 125 200 326 3615 105 1. Res - Rural 2.00 DU 1 1 2 2 1 3 26 105 TOTAL 1 1 2 2 1 3 26 107 2. Res - Low (SFD) 209.00 DU 42 115 157 132 77 209 2103 107 TOTAL 42 115 157 132 77 209 2103 109 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 233.00 DU 47 128 175 147 86 233 2344 109 TOTAL 47 128 175 147 86 233 2344 110 2. Res - Low (SFD) 195.00 DU 39 107 146 123 72 195 1962 110 TOTAL 39 107 146 123 72 195 1962 1 -26 -1990 1989 MOORPARK TRAFFIC ANALYSIS MODEL LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION (cont.) -- AM Peak Hour -- -- PM Peak Hour -- Zone Land Use Type Units In Out Total In Out Total ADT 111 2. Res - Low (SFD) 68.00 DU --•--------------------------------------------- 14 37 51 43 25 68 684 111 TOTAL 14 37 51 43 25 68 684 112 15. High School 1029.00 STU 268 144 412 10 31 41 1430 112 TOTAL 268 144 412 10 31 41 1430 113 21. Agriculture 33.10 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 113 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 114 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 279.00 DU 56 153 209 176 103 279 2807 114 TOTAL 56 153 209 176 103 279 2807 115 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 166.00 DU 33 91 125 105 61 166 1670 115 TOTAL 33 91 125 105 61 166 1670 116 14. Elementary /Middle School 781.00 STU 109 70 180 8 8 16 804 116 20. Park 8.00 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 116 TOTAL 109 70 180 8 8 16 834 117 4. Res - Medium (SFA) 85.00 DU 13 42 54 47 25 71 689 117 TOTAL 13 42 54 47 25 71 689 118 2. Res - Low (SFD) 92.00 OU 18 51 69 58 34 92 926 118 TOTAL 18 51 69 58 34 92 926 119 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 131.00 DU 26 72 98 83 48 131 1318 119 TOTAL 26 72 98 83 48 131 1318 120 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 318.00 DU 64 175 239 200 118 318 3199 120 TOTAL 64 175 239 200 118 318 3199 121 2. Res - Low (SFD) 225.00 DU 45 124 169 142 83 225 2264 121 TOTAL 45 124 169 142 83 225 2264 122 2. Res - Low (SFD) 76.00 DU 15 42 57 48 28 76 765 122 TOTAL 15 42 57 48 28 76 765 123 2. Res - Low (SFD) 177.00 DU 35 97 133 112 65 177 1781 123 10. Community Commercial 21.24 TSF 18 8 26 42 48 91 1123 123 TOTAL 53 105 159 154 114 268 2903 124 4. Res - Medium (SFA) 199.00 DU 30 98 127 109 58 167 1612 124 TOTAL 30 98 127 109 58 167 1612 125 14. Elementary /Middle School 738.00 STU ]03 66 170 7 7 15 125 20. Park 10.00 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 760 37 125 TOTAL ;,03 66 170 7 7 _5 797 126 2. Res - Low (SFD) 121.00 DU 24 67 91 76 45 121 1217 126 20. Park 5.00 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 126 TOTAL 24 67 91 76 45 121 1236 . 0 1 -26 -1990 1989 MOORPARK TRAFFIC ANALYSIS MODEL LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION (cont.) -- AM Peak Hour -- -- PM Peak Hour -- Zone Land Use Type Units In Out Total In Out Total ADT 127 2. Res - Low (SFD) 222.00 DU --------------------------------------------------------- 44 122 167 140 82 222 2233 127 TOTAL 44 122 167 140 82 222 2233 128 2. Res - Low (SFD) 196.00 DU 39 108 147 123 73 196 1972 128 TOTAL 39 108 147 123 73 196 1972 129 2. Res - Low (SFD) 90.00 DU 18 50 68 57 33 90 905 129 TOTAL 18 50 68 57 33 90 905 130 2. Res - Low (SFD) 71.00 OU 14 39 53 45 26 71 714 130 TOTAL 14 39 53 45 26 71 714 3f 1 -26 -1990 1989 MOORPARK TRAFFIC ANALYSIS MODEL LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY GRAND TOTAL 100.30 5678 15709 7345 11193 18537 177501 AM Peak Hour -- -- PM Peak Hour -- --------------------------------------------------------- Land Use Type Units 1n Out Total In Out Total ADT 1. Res - Rural 83.00 DU --------------------------------------------------- 22 60 81 68 40 108 1079 2. Res - Low (SFD) 2497.00 DU 499 1373 1873 1573 924 2497 25120 3. Res - Medium Low (SFD) 2599.00 DU 520 1429 1949 1637 962 2599 26146 4. Res - Medium (SFA) 925.00 DU 139 453 592 509 268 777 7493 5. Apartment 490.00 DU 49 211 260 225 103 328 2989 6. Condominium 355.00 DU 25 135 160 135 64 199 2080 7. Mobile Home 272.00 DU 33 79 112 95 57 152 1308 8. Convenience Commercial 51.29 TSF 107 46 153 300 313 613 6047 9. Neighborhood Commercial ,,25�F-A2240.57 TSF i42 147 488 880 914 1795 20328 10. Community Commercial 279.47 TSF '38 103 341 559 637 1196 14770 11. Medical Office 0.00 TSF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12. Office (0 -99 TSF) �L 132.96 TSF r,70 40 310 51 263 314 2412 13. Office (100 TSF +) 0.00 TSF 0 0 0 0 0 0 14. Elementary /Middle School 3766.00 STU 527 339 866 38 38 75 0 3879 15. High School 1093.00 STU 284 153 437 11 33 44 1519 16. College 13000.00 STU :.950 390 2340 520 1040 1560 20150 17. Government Office 11.76 TSF 58 11 69 34 96 130 811 18. Light Industrial 5912.48 TSF :966 709 5676 709 5439 6149 41210 19. Warehouse 0.00 TSF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20. Park 38.50 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 141 21. Agriculture 191.97 ACRE 2 0 2 0 2 2 19 GRAND TOTAL 100.30 5678 15709 7345 11193 18537 177501 SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 5 -20 -90 ; � :29 ; 71426121281 805 529 8270;9 2 June 20, 1990 Honorable Mayor Perez, City Council and Planning Commission City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 RE: PBR Comments Regarding The Comprehensive Plan Ordinance (CPO) Process Dear Mayor Perez, Councilmembers and Planning Commission: On June 13, 1990 I transmitted to you a letter presenting PBR's concerns regarding the pending adoption of the CPO and its potential relationship to the General Plan Update process. After reviewing my June 13, 1990 letter it appears that the reason for my initiating the letter may be misconstrued. In the past, staff has mentioned the need for PBR to be aware of the CPO process and its relationship to the General Plan Update process. However, my recent written comments were not solicited by staff. It is our review of the recent Council discussion relative to the CPO that prompted our letter. It is my strong concern about the process that prompted me to act on my own to transmit the letter. I apologize if my previous letter misled you otherwise. Sincerely, P BR M 144-- Cheri Perisho Phelps Vice President cc: Steve Kueny, City Manager Pat Richards, Director of Community Development PLANNING • URBAN DESIGN . ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION • VARKET & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS • ENTITLEMENT 18012 SKY PARK CIR . IRVINE, CA 92714 . 7141261 -8820 FAX 714/261 -21,2o • IRVINE • SAN DIEGO a SAN FRANCISCO BERNARDO M. PEREZ Mayor SCOTT MONTGOMERY Mayor Pro Tern ELOISE BROWN Councilmember CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. Councilmember PAUL W. LAWRASON, Jr. Councilmember LILLIAN KELLERMAN City Clerk TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Background MOORPARK M E M O R A N D U M The Honorable City Council Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community June 27, 1990 (cc meeting 6/27/90) Comprehensive Planning Ordinance 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 Development On June 6, 1990, the City Council reviewed the latest draft of the Comprehensive Planning Ordinance. This item was carried over to the meeting of June 27, 1990 to incorporate text changes by the City Attorney and to resolve a discrepancy regarding the Base and Holding Capacity ADT numbers. Discussion In the previous draft, the Base and Holding numbers were transposed and the totals presented to Council represented the existing conditions (what was previously known as the Base). In this report, the figures represent the City build -out at the current General Plan. Staff is aware of the differences between the totals of Austin -Faust and what staff is showing in the latest draft. The base capacities for the Comprehensive Planning Ordinance is based upon the build -out of the city at the Current General Plan Designations. This does not include any of the proposed General Plan Amendments. The Carlsberg Specific Plan is exempt from the provisions of this proposed Ordinance and is not reflected in the total ADT numbers. The following totals have been developed separately by staff and Austin -Faust in conjunction with the General Flan Update and work done on the CPO draft. 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864 The Honorable City Council June 26, 1990 Residential Commercial Office Industrial Other (schools, parks churches) Austin -Faust 99,500 ADT 11,391 DU's 122,100 ADT 2,069 TSF* 16,800 ADT 1,076 TSF* 56,900 ADT 8,883 TSF* 34,000 ADT 329,300 Staf f 99,647 ADT 75,566 ADT 40,135 ADT _28,173 ADT 243,521 2 As can be seen, a large disparity exists between the totals presented above. The following is a description of the differences between Austin -Faust and Staff's ADT numbers: Residential Austin -Faust quotes a total of 11,391 dwelling units (7,221 units currently). Staff totals are 8,835 units presently and 10,120 total units of General Plan build -out in units. This represents a difference of 1,271 units, but only 147 total ADT difference. Austin -Faust includes 28 traffic study zones which are outside the city limits. These 28 zones are listed as including 1,597 units which would reduce Austin - Faust's total to 9,794. Commercial /Office Austin -Faust has divided their commercial calculations between retail and office uses based upon a 60% retail and 40% office split. Staff assumes that all commercial will be retail (Staff's ADT calculations for shopping centers takes into account a commercial /office mix). Austin -Faust projects 2,069,000 square feet of commercial and 1,076,000 square feet of office at General Plan build -out. Austin Faust included the Carlsberg business park as part of "office" numbers. Staff also included the Carlsberg Specific Plan category for industrial only. Staff projects a total of 1,600,317 square feet commercial and office. This represents a difference of 1,544,683 square feet and 63,334 ADT at build - out. *TSF - Thousand square feet The Honorable City Council 3 June 27, 1990 Industrial Austin -Faust indicates a General Plan build -out total of 8,883,200 square feet of industrial space for creating 56,900 ADT. Staff totals are 5,550,727 square feet at build -out. The difference of 3,332,473 square feet represents approximately 22,300 ADT. In addition, 357,000 square feet of industrial is included in the Austin -Faust numbers outside of the city limits. Other Austin -Faust ADT numbers include schools and parks in this category; however, staff included churches. Austin -Faust also used a higher student generation factor in their numbers. Schools (EL) (HS) Parks Churches College Austin -Faust ADT Staff ADT 4,547 stu 4,683 3,930 stu 4,055 1,093 stu 1,519 904 stu 1,193 74.6 acres 27 "; 100.69 acres 3,679 394 13,000 stu 20,150 11,500 stu 178825 approximately 34,000 28,173 CEQA Requirements In order that this draft ordinance adhere to the State CEQA Guidelines, staff has prepared a Negative Declaration. The review period for the Negative Declaration is 21 days. Therefore, no final action may be taken by the Council until after the 21st day. The review period is from June 27, 1990 to July 18, 1990. Attached to this report is a reply from the City Attorney regarding the subject of CEQA as it relates to the draft CPO. Staff does not recommend that the Council consider an exemption under the CEQA, inasmuch as the burden of findings would potentially extend the process. Conclusion Staff believes that our numbers are a more accurate representation of the conditions within the corporate boundaries and should be used to set the base and holding capacity numbers within the draft CPO. The Honorable City Council June 27, 1990 Recommendation 4 Direct Staff as deemed appropriate. Attachment: - 6/25/90 Draft Comprehensive Program for General Plan Amendments Ordinance. - 6/26/90 Letter from City Attorney CM26JUN9 *TSF - Thousand square feet ORDINANCE NC H N CITY OF MOORPARK Z 003/015 AN ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING CHAPTER 17.60 OF THE MOORPARK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATIVE TO A COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Moorpark Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding Chapter 17.60 to read as follows: Chapter 17.60 Comprehensive Program for General Plan Amendments 17.60.010 Intent and Purpose. The General Plan is a comprehensive, long -term plan for the physical development of the City. It is the basic land use charter governing the direction of future lard use in the City. As a result, the 06/25/90 18:10 %T213 236 2700 BW &S LA MAIN --- CITY OF MOORPARK - 16004/015 General Plan embodies fundamental. land use decisions that guide the growth of the City. Amendments to the General Plan have the potential for resulting in ultimate physical changes in the configuration and character of the City. The purpose and intent of this chapter is to afford the residents of the City the opportunity to directly partici- pate in the decision to amend their - General Plan, which amendments, individually or cumulatively, would have the effect of significantly increasing the density or intensity of land use in the City. 17.60.020 Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, unless the content clearly requ _ires a different meaning, the words and phrases set forth in this section shall have the following meanings: (a) "ADT" means average daily vehicular trips. (b) "Component" means each parcel of land that is the subject of a General Plan amendment. (c) "General Plan" means the General Plan of the City of Moorpark, and each Element thereof, as of the effective date of this chapter. JL " n ra ZLj1.n gpcj� n amendments to the n rai n ex amendments c angina Lhe la designations Qf occur 6U gl re of t4l 2f th-Q Generg Plan t wad Lin proms dress PA Truly 1.6 199Q, CJK /wP /ORD73511 (05/21/90) hbi'Lb /bO 16:10 uZ13 Z36 Z'100 Ati'-, LA MAIN • C•I II Uh MUUKYAKh �1VV5iUl� t-e-A. "Governmental" a &a use signatiO 1 t er h use " facility for operation of v rnm agenci..es 2.r four t�rovisi� f services governmentalaenc�ies. permitted inc u but a.La 09—t rX,__ museums e2ui meat Yam fire at n gnd ay office. (f) "Gross acreage" means gross acreage rounded to the nearest tenth of an acre. (g) "Land Use Designation" means rural low residential, rural high residential, low density residential, medium low densitt) residential, medium density residential, high density residential, very high residential, neighborhood comrr,erciay, general commercial, commercial - industrial mix, lirrited industrial, medium industrial, agriculture 1, agriculture 2, open space 1, open space 2, school or park, as described in the Land Use Element of the General Plan, c., oovernmental, as described in W 2f this section. (h) "Moorpark Territcrial Area" means the geographical area shown as territorial area on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A. (i) "Moorpark Non - Territorial Area" means any geographic area that is not w:t.hin the Moorpark Territorial Area. CJK /`rdP /ORD7 3 51 {05/21/90} 06/25/90 18:10 'a213 236 2700 BWr S LA MAIN --- CITY OF MOORPARK Q006,-015 (j) "Post- Amendment ADT" means the ADT per gross acre of the Post - Amendment Land rise Designation times the gross acreage of the component. (k) "Post- Amendment Land Use Designation" means the land use designation to which the component is proposed to be changed. (1) "Pre- Amendment ADT" means the ADT per gross acre of the Pre - Amendment Land Use Designation times the gross acreage of the component. (m) "Pre- Amendment Land Use Designation" means the Land Use Designation from which the component is proposed to be changed. 17.60.030 Limitation on General Plan Amendments. A. The Planning Commission shall not recommend approval of, and the City Council- shall not approve, any General Plan amendment that would cause the Base Capacities established by this chapter to exceed the Holding Capacities established by this chapter. In the event that a Gene_'al Plan amendment consists of more than one component, the Planning Commission shall not recommend approval of, and the City Council shall not approve, any combination of components that would cause the 9ase Capacities to exceed the Holding Capacities. -4 -. CJK /WP /ORD73511 (05/21/90) B. For each proposed General Plan amendment, the following information shall be reported by the Director of Community Development to the Planning Commission and the City Council during the public hearings required by State statute and City ordinance. 1. The Pre - Amendment ADT for each component. 2. The Post - Amendment ADT for each component. 3. The Base Capacity for each land use category. 4. The Holding Capacity for each land use category. C. The City Council may, by resolution, adopt rules and regulations to implement the provisions of this section. 17.60.040 Establishment of Base and holding Capacities. A. As of the effective date of this chapter, the Base Capacities, by land use c<_egories, shall be as shown C.. CJK /WP /ORD73511 (05/21/90) - , ° 1 1 , ­ , , k' I �I --- r i Tv nF MnnRPARK Q1008/015 06/25/90 18.11 'a21) 236 2700 " below and the Holding Capacities, by land use categories, shall be 1.o5 times the Base Capacities as shown below. Land Use Categories Base Capacities Holding Capacities Residential q9; (_4 7 Total ADT /d It, 6z9 Total ADT 3 874 Total ADT /_5-/ d67Total ADT Non - Residential 17.60.050 Revision of Base Capacities. A. Neither one of the Base Capacities shall be increased or decreased, or otherwise revised, except as provided by this section. B. upon the adoption of any General Plan amendment which would change any permitted land use From one Land Use Designation to another Land Use Designation, the City Council shall revise the Base Capacities in accordance with this subsection. The Pre--Amendment ADT for each approved component of the General Plan amendment shall be subtracted from the applicable Base Capacity and the Post - Amendment ADT for each approved component of the General Plan amendment shall be added to the applicable Base Capacity. C. Upon the adoption of any General Plan amendment that is for the initial Land Use Designation of any Moorpark Non--Territorial Area, the City Council shall CJK /WP /ORD73511 (05/21/90) 06/25/90 18:12 OL213 236 2700 BW &S LA MAIN --- CITY OF MOORPARK Z 009/015 revise the Base Capacities in accordance with this subsection and subsection B of this section shall not be applicable. The Initial- Amendment ADT for each approved component of the General Plan amendment shall be added to the applicable Base Capacity. The Initial- Amendment ADT shall mean the ADT per gross acre of the initial Land Use Designation minus ADT per gross acre times the gross acreage of the component. For purposes of subsection B of Section 17.50.030, there shall be no Pre - Amendment ADT and the Initial- Amendment ADT shall serve as the Post - Amendment ADT. D. Subsection B of this section shall not be applicable and no revision sha:_ be made to Base Capacities when the General Plan is amended to change any permitted land use from one nand Use Designation to another Land Use Designation: 1. In conjunction with the initial adoption of a specific plan for the Moorpark Territorial Area bounded by New kU An e Avenue to the north, rr Figlada " to the south, 23 .reeway to the east and Sprina RoAa to the west; or CJK /WP /ORD73511 (05/21/90) 06/25/90 18:12 $213 236 2700 BW &S LA MAIN --- CITY OF MOORPARK Z010/015 2. in order to meet the City's share of the regional housing need set forth in any State mandated amendment to the Housing Element. This exception to :subsection S shall apply only to the extent that the change in Land Use Designation is necessary to increase the inventory of residential land to the gross acreage needed to accommodate the number of dwelling units, by housing types for each income level, that comprise the City's share of the regional housing need. 17.60.060 Revision of Holding Capacities. A. Neither one of the Holding Capacities shall be increased or decreased, or otherwise revised, except as provided by this section. B. The Holding Capacities, or either one of them, may be revised at any time and --n any amount by a simple majority of the voters of the City voting on the revision at a special or general election. 17.60.070 Calculation of ADT. A. The ADT by Land Use Designation and the land use category into which each Land Use Designation falls is as follows: CJK /WP /ORD73511 (05/21/90) 06/25/90 18!13 $213 236 2700 BPI &S LA MAIN --- CITY OF MOORPARK Z011xO15 Land Use Categories 1. Residential Rural Low Rural High Low Density Medium Low Density Medium Density High Density Very High 2. Non - Residential Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Commercial- Industrial Mix Limited Industrial Medium Industrial Agriculture 1 Agriculture 2 Open Space 1 Open Space 2 School Park Government -9- ADT Per Gross Acre 2.01 1 26.16 40.24 40.9 9B 920.?Q 44 11 -1 115.E 1.00 25 56.08 1 -Q 06/2590 1 13 $213 236 2700 B�'� `._ ` LA MAIN --- CITY OF MOORPARK Z012/015 B• The General Plan shall not be amended to add any new Land Use Designation or revise any existing Land Use Designation without the amendment and a corresponding ADT Per gross acre for the new designation being approved by a simple majority of the voters of the City voting on the amendment and the corresponding ADT per gross acre at a Special or general election, Z& 92M ion of tbg ZQaLr 1 Plan Jpdar , s4bsecxion A ction ang DAr2aradh jai 0 An 17.60 p� shy ame^ r�hwith to be consistent with h Land Us d _ 1?esian bons escribed in eneral EL" a2Lat Um .2 time .f this sec ion h�a� also � n to ro � -�Ag n ADT ner ^rotes cre four eac L Designa ?on �h�s a�n d in is not subsection 8 � section i ors the ac c_ ntzon the n ral Plan a2ALLe. . The ar ss acre Land Desiana sh�a11 be v r ae of they p Cry s r of sonable ram ,_4SeR *hit w ld be that 4 e Desianar_i n, wh the ADT h lan 44A nq talk fxorn U.2 then cum adition In5t -Ute 2-f Tra____ffig c pine,ers' Manual. Notwithst subsec 'cn $ �f this ion end section 17.54.100, -re amendm n+ an PLY his sha�l it and G —- ��U Ut nnrova� 4.v the C'7K /WP /0R7)7I -10- ;2S ,-G 06/25/90 18.14 'x°21; 236 2700 & ,A MAIN - -- CITY OF MOORPARK fj013/015 17.60.080 Official Record of Capacities. A. The Director of Community Development shall keep an official record of the Base Capacities and of each revision thereto. No revision shall be made to the Base Capacities except as expressly provided by this chapter. B. The Director of Community Development shall, keep an official record of the Holding Capacities and of each revision thereto. No revision shaLl be made to the Holding Capacities except as expressly provided by this chapter. C. In the event that any General Plan amendment, or component thereof, fails to become effective or is set aside, voided or annulled by a court of competent jurisdiction, the corresponding :.evisions shall be deleted from the Base Capacities. 17.60.090 Judicial Review. Any action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul any action to amend the General Plan contrary to the provisions of this chapter or to revise the Base Capacities or the Holding Capacities contrary to the provisions of this chapter shall not be maintained by any person unless the action or proceeding is filed in a court of competent jurisdiction and the City Council is served within thirty 30) days after the date of CJK /WP /ORD73511 (05/21/90) 06/25/90 13:14 X213 236 2700 B &S LA MAIN -•- CITY OF MOORPARK Z 014/015 such action. Thereafter all persons are barred from such action or proceeding or from any defense of invalidity or unreasonable of that action on the ground that it violates this chapter. 17.60.100 Amendment of Chapter. This chapter shall not be amended or repealed without the approval of a simple majority of the voters of the City voting on the amendment or repeal at a special or general election. SECTION 2. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, part or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council declares that t would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, part or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, parts or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 3. Pursuant to section 4013 of the California Elections Code, this Ordinance shall be considered as passed and adopted upon the date that the vote is declared by the City Council and shall go into effect 10 days after that date. CJK /WP /0RD�3511 ens i -) , /CO1 CITY OF MOORPARK (6o15i015 SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the Passage and adoption of this ordinance; shall enter the same in the book of original ordinances of the city and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council at which the vote is declared by the City Council. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of 19 Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk CJK /WP /0RD735i1 -13- (05/2'/90) 06/26/90 17.20 $213 236 2700 BWiS LA MAIN - -- CITY OF MOORPARK Z002/004 LAW 0,"FICEs Bzmxn, WILLIAMS & SOR$NSEN ONE WILSH,RE BUILD CQ MARTIN J. SURKe' GREGORY A. DQCIMG QZ♦ SOL,TH GRAND AVENUE, TN F'L0QQ JAMES Z I)RADSKAW, JR! CLIZABETH L HANNA vt NTVRA COUNTY 0,,,C[ MARK C. ALLEN, JR.• KATHRYN R PFTLRO' LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017 2310 POk O£RO SA DRIVE MARTIN L, BURKE' LISA E KRANITZ SUITE 1 CARL K. NEWTON' KIM C. Mc NALLY (213) 23k`. -0.500 CAMARILLO, CALIFORNIA 93010 J. ROBERT FLANORICK' DENNIS I. FLOYD 1006) 907-44406 NORMAN G GAAR} LINDA L, QAV6C EDWARD M. FOX- M. LO,! 60SAK TELL CO PIER ri.3) i36 -2700 OCNNIB R SURKL' ROSCRT K WADDEN ORANGE COUNTY OFFICE LELAND G DOLLEM FRANK M. WMtTCMEAO, » COVN LCNNARD' HARRY C WILLIAM6 3200 EwISTOL STIAEET i COTT H. CAMPBELL THOMAS J. FIE MA✓AYANN LINK GQQOKIND 410 "Ibe7l iVITC S40 COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 02a:e NEIL R YEAGER- TIMOTHY 9. MOOSKER 84 AN A, OIERl K' ROYAL M, 6CRCNSEN 17141 S."569 DIANA L. FIELD ofa1983 CMARLGi M. CALDERON' RITA J. TAYLOR PETER M. THOMSON• STEVEN J. DAWSON LIGHrON PLAZA JERRY M. PATTERSON JAMES F. KIGALI 7300 COLLEGE ■GULEVARD MAROLO A SAID(3ES• JAMES R. FELTON SUITE 220 CHERYL J. KANE' TERRY R KAUFMANN OVtw LANG PARK, KANSAS SSitO RAYMOND J. FLItNTKO• STEPMCN R. QNSTQT t913) 332 -6200 VIRGINIA R, PESOLA JAIME AREVALO S. PAUL SRUGUCRA June 26, 1990 F DANIM66 CRAWFORD, 6. DEREK STRAATOMA MARIANNE WOO W CQVNicu DOUGLAS C. HOLLAND JOHN E. CAVANAUGH DWIGHT A. NEWELL DON G. KIACNER MARK O. NENSLEY MICHELE VAOON- RIVERA PETER O. TREMBLAY SCOTT ►, FItLO G MICHAEL 2WC16ACK DIRECT DIAL ROGER T ITS MARY REDU6 O*. duRUS G rOVNG. Vw. 1R �Wj ^RITIER'E 21.3 -236 -2836 • #Ikapet 10NAL COAFORAhON OUR FILE NO. 01359-001 •A POOICOVOMAL ASECEIATION AOMITTrQ MNSIIS 6 MISSGURI •.OMI"go KANS" Telecopy 6/26/90 Mr. Patrick Richards Director of Planning and Redevelopment City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 ... Dear Pat: The City Council is considering the adoption of an ordinance, otherwise known as the "CPO ", that would subject major general plan amendments to approval by voter initiative. The City Council is also considering submitting the CPO to the voters as an initiative ordinance. By telephone inquiry of June 20, 1990, you asked whether the CPO is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA ", Pub.Res.Code § 21000 et seQ.) Further inquiry was made by the City Council at its meeting of June 20th. Proposed governmental action is subject to CEQA unless (i) the action does not constitute a project or (ii) the action comes within an exemption. (CEQA Guidelines, title 14, Ca1.Admin.Code § 15061.) Specifically excluded from the definition of project is the submittal of a proposal to a vote of the people. (Guidelines, § 15378(b)(4).) However, the submittal has to be a non - discretionary, ministerial act; that is, action pursuant to a petition signed by the requisite number of voters. (Stein _)EA City of Santa onica, 06/26/90 17.20 x'213 236 2700 LA MAIN --- CITY OF MOORPARK Z003/004 Mr. Patrick Richards June 26, 1990 Page 2 110 Cal.App.3d 458.) Since the CPO would be placed on the ballot by City Council initiative rather than voter initiative, the action is discretionary rather than ministerial. Project means "the whole of an action which has a Potential for resulting in a physical change in the environment, directly or ultimately . . . .11 (Guidelines, § 15378(a).) An action is exempt from CEQA where it can be seen "with certainty" that there is "no possibility" of a significant elect on the environment. (Guidelines, § 15061(b)(3).)// The CPO would impose a procedure by which general plan amendments are processed in the City. The CPO imposes no criteria by which general plan amendments would be evaluated for approval; nor does the CPO foster the initiation of general plan amendments. Thus, if you recommend to the City Council, and the City Council finds, that the CPO does not constitute a project that has the potential for resulting in a direct or ultimate physical change in the environment or that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the CPO may significantly affect the environment, then a determination can be made that the CPO is not subject to CEQA. Otherwise, an initial study must be undertaken. The results of that study will then determine if a negative declaration is warranted or if an environmental impact report must be prepared. The CPO does not present a special or unique situation under CEQA. As a general rule, any activity over which the City has discretionary approval should be subject to a preliminary review to determine whether the activity is subject to CEQA. A notice of exemption may be filed following the approval of any activity which the City decides is not subject to CEQA. The posting of the notice by the county clerk starts a 35 day statute of limitations 1/ This exemption is in addition to the so called statutory exemptions (Guidelines, § 15260 et sea.) and categorical exemptions (Guidelines, § 15300 g� sea,), none of which I believe have the possibility of application to the CPo. 06/26/90 17!21 'U213 236 2700 LA MAIN --- CITY OF MOORPARK 16004/004 Mr. Patrick Richards June 26, 1990 Page 3 period on legal Challenges to the City's decision; without a notice of exemption the statute of limitations is 180 days. If I can be of any further assistance to you in this matter, Please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, CHERYL J. BANE CITY ATTORNEY, MOORPARK; and BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN CJK:hsk cjk /LTR47659