Saticoy & Wells Community Plan & Development ... - City Of Ventura

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Saticoy & Wells Community Plan and Code EIRSection 4.9 Land Use and PlanningGuidelines for Orderly Development. LAFCO encourages proposals that involve urbandevelopment or that result in urban development to include annexation to a city whereverpossible. As discussed in Section 4.2 Agricultural Resources, the Project follows the vision of the2005 General Plan by designating 160 acres within the Project Area that are currently inagricultural use for non-agriculture use. Development of such areas could be found consistentwith the Guidelines for Orderly Development, as those areas are surrounded by urban uses. Inaddition, no development would occur until such time as the property in question is annexedinto the City. Given that future boundary adjustments would only be made at such time as theyare deemed consistent with the Guidelines for Orderly Development, the Project could be foundto be consistent with the Guidelines.Greenbelts. LAFCO will not approve a proposal for a city that is in conflict with anyGreenbelt Agreement unless exceptional circumstances are shown to exist. The Project Areadoes not include any lands that are subject to existing Greenbelt Agreements. Therefore, theProject could be found to be consistent with LAFCO’s criteria.Agricultural and Open Space Preservation. LAFCO will approve a proposal for achange of organization that is likely to result in the conversion of Prime agricultural land oropen space land only if it finds that the proposal will lead to planned, orderly, and efficientdevelopment. For a development to be deemed planned, orderly, and efficient, all of thefollowing criteria must be met: (1) the territory involved is contiguous with lands developedwith an urban use or that have received approvals for urban development; (2) the territory islikely to be developed within 5 years and has been pre-zoned for non-agricultural use; (3)insufficient non-Prime agricultural land or vacant land exists within the existing boundaries ofthe agency that is planned and developable for the same general type of use; (4) the territory isnot subject to voter approval for the extension of services or changing of land use designations;and (5) the proposal will have no significant adverse effects on the integrity of other Primeagricultural or open space lands.As discussed in Section 4.2, Agricultural Resources, the Project would facilitate the conversion ofapproximately 160-acres of Prime agricultural lands. These areas include:• UC Hansen Trust, 36 acres• Parklands Site, 67 acres• Citrus Place, 23 acres• Broome Site, 29 acres• Aldea Hermosa, 7 acresAll of the areas that could potentially be converted are contiguous with existing urban uses and,in many instances, are surrounded by urban uses (see Figure 2-5 in Section 2.0, ProjectDescription). Any of the agricultural lands that could be converted under the Project could befound to be consistent with LAFCO’s agricultural and open space preservation policies, thoughLAFCO’s determination would need to be at the time of individual proposals based uponcurrent (at that time) circumstances and the nature of the proposals.School Capacity. LAFCO will not favor a change of organization where any affectedschool district certifies that there is not sufficient existing school capacity to serve the territory4.9-7City of Ventura
Saticoy & Wells Community Plan and Code EIRSection 4.9 Land Use and Planninginvolved. As discussed in Section 4.13, Public Services, many VUSD schools are at or nearcapacity and could be over capacity in 2025 with the growth projected by the 2005 General Plan.Future development in the Project Area would generate new VUSD students, therebycontributing to potential future capacity exceedances. However, as discussed in Section 4.13, Inaccordance with Section 65995(h) of the California Government Code (Senate Bill 50, chapteredAugust 27, 1998), the payment of statutory fees “...is deemed to be full and complete mitigationof the impacts of any legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving, but not limited to, theplanning, use, or development of real property, or any change in governmental organization orreorganization.” Pursuant to CGC §65994(h), impacts relating to school capacity would not besignificant under CEQA if future developers within the VUSD continue to pay State-mandatedschool impact fees. The Project could be found consistent with LAFCO’s criteria.Annexation of Unincorporated Island Areas. Any approval of a proposal for a change oforganization for an area of 40 acres or more will be conditioned to provide that the proceedingswill not be completed until and unless a subsequent proposal is filed with LAFCO initiatingproceedings for the change of organization of all unincorporated island areas that meet theprovisions of Government Code Section 56375.3. This policy means that LAFCO will notapprove annexations of 40 acres or more unless the City has filed an application to annex all ofthe island areas in the City, which include eight separate islands in the Montalvo area totalingabout 55 acres. The 67-acre Parklands site, for which a specific plan is being considered at thetime of this writing, is the only unincorporated site within the Project Area that is greater than40 acres. Presumably, the City would need to file an application to annex the eight islands inMontalvo before the LAFCO will consider annexation of this area.Mitigation Measures. No mitigation is required, though the City would presumablyneed to apply for annexation of eight island areas in Montalvo before annexation of theParklands site would be considered by the LAFCO. The Project is consistent with the LAFCOGuidelines for Orderly Development and with the City’s vision under the 2005 General Plan.Significance After Mitigation. The impact would be less than significant withoutmitigation.Impact LU-3The proposed Project could be found to be consistent withapplicable SCAG policies, therefore, impacts are Class III, lessthan significant impact due to policy consistency.In their comment letter on the NOP, the Southern California Association of Governments(SCAG) wrote that the Project is considered “regionally significant,” and that an assessment ofthe Community Plan and Code’s consistency with its planning documents, including the 1996Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG), the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), andthe Compass Growth Vision, is required. The following discussion lists the applicable policiesfrom the RCPG, RTP, and the Compass Growth Vision and determines whether the Project isconsistent with those policies.SCAG’s Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) serves as a framework for decisionmakingwith respect to regional growth and changes that can be anticipated during the next 20years and beyond. The RCPG provides a general view of regional plans that will affect localgovernments, responses to significant issues facing Southern California, and a summary of how4.9-8City of Ventura
Page 5 and 6:
Saticoy & Wells Community Plan and
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128: Saticoy & Wells Community Plan and
Page 177: Saticoy & Wells Community Plan and
Page 229 and 230:
S a t i c o y & WellsCommunity Plan
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
show all

Saticoy & Wells Community Plan & Development ... - City Of Ventura

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?