HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2002 0116 CC REG ITEM 09EITEM -
of
-" t�ODoC
MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL 4 .!t4 t C intil
AGENDA REPORT ��Yf: Ma���������►'}�������
TO: Honorable City CouncilUa�cf.1�z -e—,c�
FROM: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, Acting Director of Community
Development 1
Prepared By: Joseph F. Fiss, Principal Planner
DATE: January 2, 2002 (CC Meeting of 1/16/01)
SUBJECT: Consider the Appeal of Planning Commission Decision on
Appeal 2001 -05, Appealing Various Conditions
Established by the Director of Community Development
for Approval of Administrative Permit No. 2001 -10, to
Allow a Second Dwelling Unit at 6086 Gabbert Road.
(Applicant: Cindy Hollister)
BACKGROUND
At its hearing on December 19, 2001 the City Council heard
Staff's report and recommendation and took public testimony
regarding the appeal. The public hearing was continued so that
Staff could address concerns raised by the City Council. Staff,
in conjunction with the City Attorney, has undertaken a review
of the Municipal Code, relevant provisions of State law, and the
City's files concerning the property to respond to the issues
raised at the last hearing. A detailed discussion of those
issues follows.
As a preliminary matter, however, it is important to note that
the proceeding before the Council is an appeal of the conditions
of approval imposed upon an Administrative Permit for a second
dwelling unit. Many of the issues raised at the December 19
hearing are beyond the scope of the appeal.
With regard to the appeal, Staff has confirmed that pursuant to
Moorpark Municipal Code Section 17.28.020(C) and (G) (Attachments
1 and 2) the appropriate City permit for installation of a
mobilehome as a second dwelling unit on the property is an
S: \Community Development \Everyone \a - Appeal 2001 -07 Hollister \Appeal 2001.07
Hollister Cont (Modified).doc 000049
Honorable City Council
01/04/02
Page 2
Administrative Permit. At City direction, the Applicant has
obtained such a permit, although she has appealed the associated
conditions of approval. In preparation for this hearing, Staff
has reviewed the conditions of approval and has recommendations
concerning modification to those conditions, which Staff
believes are less onerous on the Applicant, but still achieve
the City's objective of ensuring the second unit is installed
consistent with governing law. Those recommendations are set
forth at the conclusion of this staff report.
As to the mobilehome presently on site (the "Existing
Mobilehome "), Staff has been advised by the Applicant that it
was manufactured prior to June 15, 1976, although the Applicant
has not allowed Staff to inspect the Existing Mobilehome.
Installation of such a mobilehome on the property violates the
City's ordinances (as discussed more fully below) . There are
only three circumstances under which such a mobilehome might be
able to be installed on the property, but it does not appear
that the Existing Mobilehome qualifies for any of the three:
1) If the Existing Mobilehome was a legal, non - conforming
structure. As discussed below, the mobilehome that preceded the
Existing Mobilehome on the site was illegal, and thus could not
pass any legal, non - conforming status on to the Existing
Mobilehome. Further, the Applicant's voluntary removal of the
original mobilehome and installation of the Existing Mobilehome
would have eliminated any legal, non - conforming status, had such
status existed.
2) If the Zoning Code was amended. Mobilehomes pre- dating
June 15, 1976 can be installed with a code amendment. However,
such an amendment would be inconsistent with federal standards,
the intent of state law and detrimental to the health and safety
of the citizens of Moorpark, in the opinion of Staff. Staff has
not been allowed to inspect the mobilehome, but given its
exterior condition, would not advise a change in the City's
codes to accommodate this structure.
3) If a variance was granted. The Applicant could apply
for a variance from the Code requirements concerning manufacture
date. However, the granting of a variance requires a
determination that a strict application of the code will deny
the Applicant a benefit that similarly situated persons enjoy,
due to the unique characteristics of the Applicant's property.
Staff does not believe such findings can be made.
S: \Community Development \Everyone \a - Appeal 2001 -07 Hollister \Appeal 2001.07
Hollister Cont (Modified).doc
000050
Honorable City Council
01/04/02
Page 3
Accordingly, as detailed at the conclusion of this staff
report, Staff is recommending that the Council deny the appeal
of the Planning Commission's decision, but modify the conditions
of approval to be less onerous on the Applicant. Thereafter,
the Applicant will be legally entitled to install a mobilehome
as a second unit on the property, provided that the conditions
of approval are met, including, but not limited to, a
manufacture date later than June 15, 1976 on the mobilehome.
DISCUSSION OF ISSUES
The concerns of the City Council were: prior actions and
decisions by Staff; the non - conforming rights of the applicant;
the code requirement regarding the age of the mobilehome; the
maximum size allowable for a second dwelling unit on this site;
and, whether or not Parcel Map 3359 was ever recorded.
Issue 1, Prior actions and decisions by Staff:
Staff's review of the City's files indicates that the following
actions were taken by the City and property owner and /or tenant
in connection with the second unit on the property.
On July 21, 1994 a Zoning Clearance for a cargo container and
horse boarding was approved. This application showed an
existing "trailer double wide" on the lot. There is no record
of a permit ever being granted for such a structure.
On July 22, 1994 an application for a second dwelling on the
site was approved, and then subsequently denied by the Community
Development Director on July 27, 1994. At that time, the
existing dwelling was shown at 1,240 square feet and the
proposed second dwelling was shown as 480 square feet, exceeding
the Moorpark Municipal Code's limitation that a second dwelling
unit be no larger than thirty percent of the size of the primary
unit. (Section 17.28.020(G)(1)(d)) (It is assumed that this is
the unit that was voluntarily replaced with the Existing
Mobilehome by the Applicant.)
On November 18, 1994, a building permit (Permit # 5897) was
issued to Portia Barberis for "mobilehome placement" on this
lot. It is unclear as to whether Building and Safety was acting
upon the July 22, 1994 Zoning Clearance or under some other
authority. There was no record of the July 27, 1994 Zoning
S: \Community Development \Everyone \a - Appeal 2001 -07 Hollister \Appeal 2001.07
Hollister Cont (Modified).doc
000051
Honorable City Council
01/04/02
Page 4
Clearance denial in the Building and Safety file. On February
6, 1995, a "Report of Compliance Review" was prepared by the
Department of Community Development stating that the mobilehome
used as a second dwelling unit has not met all ordinances and
conditions of approval and should not be issued a Certificate of
Occupancy. The reason given for disapproval was that the unit
was "uninhabitable ". On June 1, 1995, a "Report of Compliance
Review" prepared by the Department of Community Development was
issued, stating that the project has met all ordinances and
conditions of approval. It is assumed that all necessary
repairs were made to the satisfaction of the Department of
Community Development. The building permit was not finaled and
on October 20, 1995 a notice was sent to the property owner
stating that Permit # 5897 would expire within 10 days.
No final inspection or certificate of occupancy was ever
obtained under this building permit; therefore, this building
permit expired and is considered null and void. In the absence
of a valid building permit or a certificate of occupancy, the
mobilehome was not a legally permitted structure on the site.
Prior to November 2, 1999 the Applicant voluntarily removed the
original mobilehome from the property and installed the Existing
Mobilehome, without consultation with City staff, or issuance of
any permits authorizing such installation.
On November 2, 1999 the Applicant was contacted by code
enforcement and advised to remove the illegal structure or
obtain proper permits.
On May 18, 2001 the applicant applied for an Administrative
Permit, as required by the Moorpark Municipal Code, which was
granted on August 8, 2001.
On October 15, 2001 the Planning Commission heard an appeal of
the conditions of approval imposed on the Administrative Permit
and further modified those conditions.
Staff contacted the previous planner, Craig Malin, who recalled
this issue, but had minimal recollection of any discussions with
the current applicant.
Staff has reviewed Conditional Use Permit 3626, referenced by
the Applicant and has determined that CUP is not relevant to the
issues concerning the Existing Mobilehome. An application was
S: \Community Development \Everyone \a - Appeal 2001 -07 Hollister \Appeal 2001.07
Hollister Cont (Modified).doc
000052
Honorable City Council
01/04/02
Page 5
made for CUP 3626 on May 20, 1976 for a one -day rodeo to be
allowed on the site. This request was denied on July 1, 1976.
No second dwelling unit was shown on the plans at that time.
Issue 2, Non - conforming rights:
As discussed above, the mobilehome on the site was installed,
but never obtained a final inspection or certificate of
occupancy and thus, was not a legally installed structure.
Accordingly, no legal, non - conforming rights were obtained for
that home.
Had the mobilehome been properly installed and fully inspected,
any non - conforming rights would have nonetheless been lost by
the applicant's own actions. The voluntary removal of the prior
mobilehome and placement of the existing mobilehome eliminated
any legal, non - conforming rights which may have existed under
the terms of the Moorpark Municipal Code.
Section 17.52.070 of The Moorpark Zoning Code states:
"The following provisions shall regulate the
destruction of structures in the given situations:
A. Uses Not Amortized. The following provisions
shall apply to nonamortized, nonconforming structures
and structures containing nonconforming uses not
subject to amortization:
2. Whenever any such structure is voluntarily
removed, damaged or destroyed to the extent of more
than fifty percent (509) of its floor or roof area
which existed before destruction, no structural
alterations, repairs or reconstruction shall be made
unless every portion of such structure and the use are
made to conform to the regulations of the zone
classification in which they are located."
Therefore, even if the previous second dwelling unit had been
legally installed, the applicant would have eliminated any
legal, non - conforming rights by her voluntary removal and
replacement of that structure. Any new structure must conform
to all current codes.
000053
S: \Community Development \Everyone \a - Appeal 2001 -07 Hollister \Appeal 2001.07
Hollister Cont (Modified).doc
Honorable City Council
01/04/02
Page 6
Issue 3, Age of the Mobilehome:
Section 17.28.020(C) of The Moorpark Zoning Code states:
"1. Mobilehome Construction. Mobilehomes may be used
as single - family dwellings if the mobilehome was
constructed on or after June 15, 1976. Mobilehomes
used as second dwellings are subject to this date
limitation."
There was discussion at the December 19, 2001 hearing as to
where this date came from and its importance. In 1976 the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) adopted
preemptive federal regulations for the construction of
mobilehomes (now referred to as "manufactured homes ") to comply
with the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety
Standards Act of 1974. The HUD standards cover Body and Frame
Requirements, Thermal Protection, Plumbing, Electrical, Fire
Safety and other health and safety aspects of the home. They
are published in the Code of Federal Regulations at 24 CFR 3280.
No state, city, county or other local jurisdiction may adopt or
impose any standard for the construction of a manufactured home.
Cities can, however, adopt standards for the installation of
mobilehomes.
Mobilehomes (Manufactured Homes) must be allowed by the local
authority if they meet minimum criteria established by the State
of California, which criteria include a manufacture date after
June 15, 1976 (see California Government Code Sections 65852.3
and 65852.4 in Attachments 3 and 4). However, the local
authority may be even more restrictive and preclude
establishment of mobilehomes over ten years of age at the time
an application is made to install the mobilehome.
There is no provision in state law that would prohibit a City
from adopting a code that allowed the installation of
structures, which predate June 15, 1976. However, such an
ordinance would be contradictory to the intent of the federal
and state statutes, which seek to protect the health and safety
of persons by requiring certain minimum manufacturing standards
in mobilehomes constructed after June 15, 1976. Accordingly,
Staff would advise against such an ordinance in the City of
Moorpark.
S: \Community Development \Everyone \a - Appeal 2001 -07 Hollister \Appeal 2001.07
Hollister Cont (Modified).doc
Honorable City Council
01/04/02
Page 7
As the code is presently drafted, the City has elected to
preclude establishment of mobilehomes that were constructed
prior to June 15, 1976, consistent with the National
Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of
1974 and California Government Code sections 65852.3 and
65852.4.
The City has not taken the further restrictive step of limiting
installation of mobilehomes to those that are less than ten
years in age at the time an application is submitted, although
it may be appropriate for Staff to explore the merits of a code
amendment in that regard.
Issue 4, Maximum Size Allowable for a Second Dwelling Unit:
Section 17.28.020 (G)(1)(d) of the Moorpark Zoning Code states:
"The maximum size of the second dwelling shall be
limited to the more restrictive of either thirty
percent (300) of the existing single - family dwelling
floor space or the following lot size limitations:
i.Lots ten thousand eight hundred ninety (10,890)
square feet to twenty -one thousand seven hundred
eighty (21,780) square feet -- a second dwelling shall
not exceed eight hundred (800) square feet.
ii. Lots twenty -one thousand seven hundred eighty -
one (21,781) square feet to forty -three thousand five
hundred sixty (43,560) square feet -- a second
dwelling shall not exceed nine hundred (900) square
feet.
iii. Lots greater than one (1) acre to five (5)
acres (two hundred seventeen thousand eight hundred
(217,800) square feet) - -a second dwelling shall not
exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet.
iv. Lots greater than five (5) acres -- a
second dwelling shall not exceed one thousand one
hundred (1,100) square feet."
On December 28, 2001, the applicant allowed Staff to measure the
area of the existing primary dwelling to determine the maximum
size of a second dwelling unit that would be allowed. Planning
Staff was accompanied by a Building and Safety Inspector and the
Applicant during the measurement. It was determined that the
existing dwelling is approximately 1,633 square feet in area.
S: \Community Development \Everyone \a - Appeal 2001 -07 Hollister \Appeal 2001.07
Hollister Cont (Modified).doc
Honorable City Council
01/04/02
Page 8
This would allow a second dwelling of approximately 490 square
feet in area. As stated earlier, the applicant did not allow
Staff to inspect the mobilehome; therefore, it was impossible to
determine its size.
Issue 5, Parcel Map 3359:
Staff has confirmed that Parcel Map 3359, dividing the property
into two lots, was never recorded. Accordingly, notwithstanding
the property is listed with two Assessor's Parcel Numbers in the
County Assessor's Map, the property is still one legal lot.
Accordingly, any mobilehome installed on the property would be a
second unit, and the appropriate process for authorizing
installation of such a second unit is by Administrative Permit.
The Applicant has obtained such a permit and can install a
mobilehome as a second unit on the property, provided that such
home meets the conditions of approval and the code, including,
but not limited to, the limitation on manufacture date.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Staff has reviewed the original approved Administrative Permit
2001 -10 and the approval as modified by the Planning Commission
and feels that there is room for some flexibility in terms of
modifying the conditions of approval. Several conditions are
merely citations of code requirements that cannot be waived and
were previously applied as conditions of approval in order to
reinforce their importance. They can be removed as conditions
of approval, but are fully enforceable as code requirements.
Other conditions, such as the filing of certain covenants,
although meritorious, are unnecessary if the applicant complies
with code requirements. All conditions regarding additional
parking spaces have been removed, as there has been no precedent
set for such conditions based on the size of the second dwelling
unit. There appears to be sufficient driveway parking on site
to accommodate the needs of the residents and any visitors. The
driveway access for the second unit must comply with Code and
Fire Protection District requirements. The modified conditions
of approval are provided as Attachment 5.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Continue the public hearing; accept public testimony; close
the public hearing.
000056
S: \Community Development \Everyone \a - Appeal 2001 -07 Hollister \Appeal 2001.07
Hollister Cont (Modified).doc
Honorable City Council
01/04/02
Page 9
2. Adopt Resolution No. 2002- , sustaining the Planning
Commission decision to Deny Appeal No. 2001 -05, and further
modifying the conditions of approval.
3. Direct Staff to begin code enforcement action for removal
of non - permitted mobilehome within ninety (90) days.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Moorpark Municipal Code 17.28.020(C)
2. Moorpark Municipal Code 17.28.020(G)
3. California Government Code 65852.3
4. California Government Code 65852.4
5. Draft Resolution with Modified Conditions of Approval
000057
S: \Community Development \Everyone \a - Appeal 2001 -07 Hollister \Appeal 2001.07
Hollister Cont (Modified).doc
Moorpark Municipal Code 17.28.020 (C)
C. Mobilehomes and Manufactured Housing.
1. Mobilehome Construction. Mobilehomes may be used as single- family
dwellings if the mobilehome was constructed on or after June 15, 1976.
Mobilehomes used as second dwellings are subject to this date
limitation.
2. Mobilehome Foundation System. Mobilehomes which are used as
single- family residences or as caretaker or farm worker dwellings shall
be installed on a foundation system in compliance with Chapter 2,
Article 7, Section 1333 of Title 25 of the California Administrative
Code. Nonconforming mobilehomes renewed under a continuation permit
shall be in compliance with the applicable provisions of Chapter 2,
Article 7 of Title 25.
3. Exterior Siding. Exterior siding of a single- family dwelling
shall extend to the ground level, or to the top of the deck or
structural platform where the dwelling is supported on an exposed pile
foundation complying with the requirements of Sections 2908 and 2909 of
the Uniform Building Code, or to the top of a perimeter foundation. For
mobilehomes used as caretaker or farm worker dwellings, manufactured
mobilehome skirting shall completely enclose the mobilehome, including
the tongue, with a color and material that will be compatible with the
mobilehome. The siding shall be covered with an exterior material
customarily used on conventional dwellings and approved by the
department of community development.
4. Site Plan and Elevations. The site plans and elevations of the
proposed housing unit are subject to review and approval of the
department of community development. Applicants are required to submit
designs which are in keeping with the overall character and quality of
the neighborhood and community.
5. Roof Pitch. The mobile home or manufactured housing unit shall
have a roof with a pitch of not less than two (2) inches vertical rise
for each twelve (12) inches of horizontal run and consisting of
shingles or other material customarily used for conventional dwellings
and approved by the department of community development and the
building official.
6. Porches and Eaves. The mobile home or manufactured housing unit
may be required to have porches and eaves, or roofs with eaves when, in
the opinion of the department of community development, it is necessary
to make it compatible with the dwellings in the area.
ATTACHMENT I
Moorpark Municipal Code 17.28.020 (G)
G. Second Dwelling.
1. Standards and Requirements. A second dwelling, as defined in
Section 17.08.010, requires approval of an administrative permit, and
compliance with all of the following standards and requirements:
a. A second dwelling shall only be permitted on a residential zoned
lot that is one - fourth acre (ten thousand eight hundred ninety (10,890)
square feet) or larger in size.
b. The lot on which a second dwelling is to be constructed shall
contain an existing single- family dwelling, which is owner occupied at
the time of application for a zoning clearance and building permit for
the second dwelling.
c. Prior to the approval of a zoning clearance for a second
dwelling, the applicant shall be required to complete a neighborhood
notification process, as established by city council resolution.
d. The maximum size of the second dwelling shall be limited to the
more restrictive of either thirty percent (300) of the existing single -
family dwelling floor space or the following lot size limitations:
i. Lots ten thousand eight hundred ninety (10,890) square feet to
twenty -one thousand seven hundred eighty (21,780) square feet -- a
second dwelling shall not exceed eight hundred (800) square feet.
ii. Lots twenty -one thousand seven hundred eighty -one (21,781)
square feet to forty -three thousand five hundred sixty (43,560) square
feet -- a second dwelling shall not exceed nine hundred (900) square
feet.
iii. Lots greater than one (1) acre to five (5) acres (two hundred
seventeen thousand eight hundred (217,800) square feet) - -a second
dwelling shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet.
iv. Lots greater than five (5) acres -- a second dwelling shall
not exceed one thousand one hundred (1,100) square feet.
e. No more than one (1) second dwelling is allowed on each lot.
f . The second dwelling shall not be sold as a separate unit, but
it may be rented.
g. The lot must conform with the lot area, width and depth
requirements for the underlying zone. A second dwelling shall not be
allowed on a legal nonconforming lot.
h. Establishment of a second dwelling shall not create or increase a
nonconforming use or structure. A second dwelling shall not be allowed
on a lot which contains a legal nonconforming use or structure.
i. Minimum yard setbacks from the property lines for the second
dwelling and associated garage or carport structure shall be the same
as is required for the existing single- family dwelling based on the
more restrictive of either: (i) the setback requirements of an approved
residential planned development (RPD) permit (see Section
17.36.030(B)(3)); or (ii) the setback requirements of the applicable
zone district (see Section 17.24.020).
j. Architectural standards of the second dwelling shall conform to
the existing single- family dwelling through use of the appropriate
building form, height, materials and color. The roof material used for
the second dwelling shall be equal to or of higher quality than that
used for the existing single- family dwelling.
k. The only accessory structures that may be attached to, or share a
common wall with, a detached second dwelling are a garage or carport.
1. The following parking standards shall apply:
i. The number of parking spaces required shall be as follows:
ATTACHMENT �-'
(A) Second dwelling eight hundred (800) to nine hundred (900)
square feet in size -- one (1) covered or uncovered parking space is
required.
(B) Second dwelling larger than nine hundred (900) square feet in
size -- two (2) covered or uncovered parking spaces are required.
(ii) The size of each required off - street parking space shall be an
unobstructed minimum of nine (9) feet wide by twenty (20) feet long.
(iii)The parking space(s) provided for the second dwelling shall not
be located in a required dwelling unit setback and shall be paved.
(iv) The required off - street parking space(s) for a second dwelling
shall be in addition to the parking required for the existing single -
family dwelling, and shall be located on the same lot as the existing
single- family and second dwellings.
(v) Access to the parking area for a second dwelling shall be at
least ten (10) feet wide and paved.
m. The director of community development may approve the use of a
mobilehome or a manufactured house on a fixed foundation as a second
dwelling, if the design is compatible with the existing single- family
dwelling and the surrounding community, and all of the mobilehome and
manufactured housing standards of subsection C of this section are
complied with.
n. A second dwelling processing fee, as established by city council
resolution, shall be paid at the time of application for a zoning
clearance for a second dwelling.
2. Deferral of Decision on Application. The director of community
development may defer any approval or denial decision on an application
for a zoning clearance for a second dwelling to the planning commission
if the proposal:
a. Involves significant public controversy; or
b. Is in conflict with the standards and requirements of subsection
(G)(1) of this section;
c. May be precedent setting; or
d. Should be deferred for any other cause deemed justifiable by the
director of community development.
It1�Yf
California Government Code 65852.3.
(a) A city, including a charter city, county, or city and county,
shall allow the installation of manufactured homes certified
under the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety
Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. Secs. 5401 et seq.) on a
foundation system, pursuant to Section 18551 of the Health and
Safety Code, on lots zoned for conventional single- family
residential dwellings. Except with respect to architectural
requirements, a city, including a charter city, county, or city
and county, shall only subject the manufactured home and the lot
on which it is placed to the same development standards to which
a conventional single- family residential dwelling on the same lot
would be subject, including, but not limited to, building setback
standards, side and rear yard requirements, standards for
enclosures, access, and vehicle parking, aesthetic requirements,
and minimum square footage requirements. Any architectural
requirements imposed on the manufactured home structure itself,
exclusive of any requirement for any and all additional
enclosures, shall be limited to its roof overhang, roofing
material, and siding material. These architectural requirements
may be imposed on manufactured homes even if similar requirements
are not imposed on conventional single- family residential
dwellings. However, any architectural requirements for roofing
and siding material shall not exceed those which would be
required of conventional single- family dwellings constructed on
the same lot. At the discretion of the local legislative body,
the city or county may preclude installation of a manufactured
home in zones specified in this section if more than 10 years
have elapsed between the date of manufacture of the manufactured
home and the date of the application for the issuance of a permit
to install the manufactured home in the affected zone. In no case
may a city, including a charter city, county, or city and county,
apply any development standards that will have the effect of
precluding manufactured homes from being installed as permanent
residences. (b) At the discretion of the local legislative body,
any place, building, structure, or other object having a special
character or special historical interest or value, and which is
regulated by a legislative body pursuant to Section 37361, may be
exempted from this section, provided the place, building,
structure, or other object is listed on the National Register of
Historic Places.
000Oss
ATTACHMENT :3
California Government Code 65852.4.
A city, including a charter city, a county, or a city and county, shall
not subject an application to locate or install a manufactured home
certified under the National Manufactured Housing Construction and
Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 5401 et seq.) on a
foundation system, pursuant to Section 18551 of the Health and Safety
Code, on a lot zoned for a single- family residential dwelling, to any
administrative permit, planning, or development process or requirement,
which is not identical to the administrative permit, planning, or
development process or requirement which would be imposed on a
conventional single- family residential dwelling on the same lot.
However, a city, including a charter city, county, or city and county,
may require the application to comply with the city's, county's, or
city and county's architectural requirements permitted by Section
65852.3 even if the architectural requirements are not required of
conventional single- family residential dwellings.
ATTACHMENT
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, DENYING APPEAL 2001-
07 TO A DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO
APPEAL NO. 2001 -05 TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS
REQUIRED BY THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT FOR APPROVAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE
PERMIT NO. 2001 -10 FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A SECOND
SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 6086 GABBERT ROAD
ON APPROXIMATELY 39.46 ACRES OF LAND, ON THE
APPLICATION OF CINDY HOLLISTER
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed Public Hearing on December 19,
2001, and continued to January 16, 2002, the City Council
considered an appeal to the decision of the Planning Commission to
deny an appeal to certain conditions required by the Community
Development Director for approval of Administrative Permit No.
2001 -10 on the application of Cindy Hollister for placement of a
second single- family residence on approximately 39.46 acres of
land, located at 6086 Gabbert Road, Assessor's Parcel No. 500 -0-
330 -245 & 255; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting of December 19, 2001, the City Council
opened the Public Hearing, and after receiving public testimony,
continued the hearing to January 16, 2002; and
WHEREAS, after review and consideration of the information
contained in the City Council agenda report, and testimony received
on December 19, 2001 and January 16, 2002, the City Council reached
its decision on this matter.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby find that the decision
of the Planning Commission to deny Appeal No. 2001 -05 to the
decision of the Director of Community Development to require
certain conditions for placement of a second single - family
residence by approval of Administrative Permit No. 2001 -10 is
consistent with the purpose and intent of provisions of Title 17,
Zoning, of the Moorpark Municipal Code, including specific
development criteria contained in the Zoning Code related to second
dwelling units and mobilehomes, and that the facts presented are
not adequate to grant the applicant's appeal.
SECTION 2. That the City Council adopts the following
additional findings:
OOOOS3
\ \MOR PRI SERV \City Share \Community Development \Everyone \Resolutions and Conditions \cc 020116
Appeal 01 -07 Hollister.doc
Resolution No. 2002 -
Administrative Permit 2001 -10 (Cindy Hollister)
Page 2
C.E.Q.A. Finding
Section 15303 of The California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) guidelines exempts single - family residences and second
dwelling units from its provisions and appeals of decisions
related to those projects.
Administrative Permit Finding
The proposed second single- family residence is consistent with
provisions of the Zoning Code, as conditioned, that provide
for the placement of a second dwelling unit in residential
areas zoned for single- family development.
SECTION 3. That the City Council denies Appeal No. 2001 -07 to
the Planning Commission denial of Appeal No. 2001 -05 to certain
conditions required by the Community Development Director for
approval of Administrative Permit No. 2001 -10.
SECTION 4. That The City Council has reviewed and adopted the
modified conditions of approval included as Exhibit A to this
resolution.
SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of
this resolution and shall cause a certified resolution to be filed
in the book of original resolutions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of January, 2002.
Patrick Hunter, Mayor
ATTEST:
Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk
Attachment: Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval for
Administrative Permit No. 2001 -10
000064
ATTACHMENT,
Resolution No. 2002 -
Administrative Permit 2001 -10 (Cindy Hollister)
Page 3
EXHIBIT A
T L� MODIFIED �CONDITIONS
�+ON�D/�I TT �ITO�NS �O7,TF MEETING � (� � � �
MODIFIED D PLANNING SING GOM 'MINI MEETS�IG O 10/1 / Al
FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT NO. 2001 -10
1. In accordance with Section 17.28.020.B of the Zoning Ordinance
for Mobilehomes and Manufactured Housing:
a) The manufactured home must be constructed on or after June 15,
1976. In eemplianee i=equir-effteRts —ez the Hi:iniei-p,�
Gede,
Develepffient Registr- aton Gai=Ei Deeal —Ne. LBG412 ,
ba- h- scrr- zTen file in the effieimalw file fe- r zcmrxirr ... r at i „ ..
-geicffii:4� Ne. 2001-10. eldi ien lly p Proof of manufacture date
shall b e e l e r lnT�t e -ire is n it anel/e=--�� b l e Tee
.in the form of a HUD label affixed to the outside
surface of the rear wall at the floor level of each
transportable section.
-eb) The exterior siding shall extend to the ground level, or
manufactured home skirting matching the color and material of
the manufactured home shall completely enclose the foundation
support system and the tongue. The manufactured home siding
shall be comprised of an exterior material and colors subject
to review and approval by the Director of Community
Development. The pain4� ee1-ers shewn - -en the -- eeler bearel
r
2001, ,a inelileled --ate a part of thims apprey-,cl, shall be
walls. The exterior (the
"wood -tone siding" appearance) of the manufactured home shall
be maintained free of chips, excessive fading, or peeling as
determined by the Director of Community Development, for as
long as the manufactured home is located on this property.
000065
Resolution No. 2002-
Administrative Permit 2001 -10 (Cindy Hollister)
Page 4
'dc) The project shall conform to the - a revised site plan and
elevations, subject to approval of the Director of Community
Development through a Zoning Clearance and shall be in
compliance with the conditions of approval of Administrative
d T,,l . 1 ca 200 pt reviseel
the ��_"__ _ _ __ ___ _ _1' _._ , �� -��-e^
1 The , f- et,, red h....,e shall have - a—reef with
lea than twe twelve
(12+
( �rch e vertic al rise
inehes heL=izentarrdn all
^ l
—ef and — -- eensist of asphalt
teh tl: .
�e'�— the 'J'L
_hi --
'th 'AZ— L1 �ev� e•e e� — e2 Tg �Tg�
beta
=f T
y
r-siel .flee and — eE r weight,
pre,aidet life.
d) The proposal shall comply with all requirements of Section
17.28.020(C) relating to Mobilehomes and Manufactured Housina.
2. In accordance with Section 17.28.020.G of the Zoning Ordinance
for a Second Dwelling:
a)The manufactured home /second dwelling shall be placed on the
same lot as the existing single- family residence (identified
as APNs 500 -0- 330 -245 and 500 -0- 330 -255). If this property is
subsequently divided into two separate parcels, the
manufactured home /second dwelling shall be removed from the
site, or brought into conformance with the Zoning Ordinance
requirements in effect at the time for a primary single- family
residence, prior to recordation of the final map. The ^ ,n4}
i=eq,drL=ee1 in eendiceie —
this— i �
Resolution No. 2002 -
Administrative Permit 2001 -10 (Cindy Hollister)
Page 5
O - •c a -- s - a s -- - - - - ' --
eb) The maximum size of the second dwelling shall not exceed
490 square feet (thirty percent (300) of the floor space of
the existing single- family primary residence)., er 1,100 (ene
thews ca ene h., . C aa � e—feet, FE�C ze ram$ less. TnL=re co
the isslianee of a Zone —Gl nee — and - Building Permit f t
��r�l rt- -e-r�z c
:, J L 1 - J-
.-..] the rri Try= .�] ; t / f , , f -, e t , , r ...-1
r�s -i d ~� �e-ge . �e� -a-dso dwelling
h ,-..., e shall b p r6vi El l.d : the
Dpa t,, .,t. Teldi�-, --- l 1. the appileant shall i=e idest an
existing prifftai=y -single -f ffiily residenee,
stateffient fL=e er— arehh�t .,e t; f. .,g the eF
the primary 'r- r�rm--rry - 1_:-nit, pi =ieTTe the issuanee ef a Zene Z'eara1TCC
and m , r rldzz g— Permit. Pe Z0n-e— Gl-e- arranE e D ,
l-el 1ng Per�
shall be issaed fer he—ins -,l-r atien -ef the _---,-,.,1 dwel l=
r J
it unless it is elefftenstrated anel ' v= cri-frcc that the s-ccen-cr
dwelling unit i n eenf2rffianee —moo with this evrrcrr�len of
required by this cvi xc�rti-6 "' be pat'el — Ei1=�e_ - =1' t-e
Departffient o f Bidileling and Safety a n el are net eens i d ec -red -a as
000067
Resolution No. 2002 -
Administrative Permit 2001 -10 (Cindy Hollister)
Page 6
qCT GT (i) -G@ver2E ��r dzeev, - ��- e-ff_ i -e, et parking
spuee
shall be L2cga±L =e _Fe the eenei e1welling idn + The
this paicking spaee shall be an id n e b s t r,, t- e ,a FRinimiafft ez nri
(9) feet wid e by twenty (20) feet deep. Access to }1 e ark±- -
r_ cTi�-'i= -n—r-i i � r
�r- ea -fer the second dwelling shall be at least ten (10) feet
wide and shall be pave d -wAh -as- phi- a-1 -t-i -e een rote twe -(2) inehes
. . .. -h e t-h i=e k ever a-€e ur— nc h t
with an all weather surface,
which meets the Ventura County Fire Protection District
standards . As an alternative to- he - -pa i ng
providing an all weather surface e- f- access to the second unit,
.................. ........................ ............__...................................._._..........._.._................._................................_....................................... ...............................
consideration will be given to the - paving- providing an all
weather surface of -t access road to the primary dwelling
unit to serve as access to both structures. Reg dared parking
fer t-he -weer idnim� ffi y i=efftr-,-„- -as as er Fftay be icel-ee
Any and all ases and struc�L=es
en-- the -p r e p e
barn,— that
-rte , -ewe p tt t
have been
existing - picifflary - residential unit
and
net
to inspeetlen fer the
l
, n
—final — seeend
trre
e._,e
J up -it.
t6
:n L=uLZ cr iae _ 1elcTrc rrrcc en x- -site
p
r.. ,
te t'IY'e
r;3-C- -tuL�-e-S
-.
r�ev' rz __,,m�....�crrT -_ __ prier
Glearanee fer thrseeend- unit.
is
d) The proposal shall comply with all requirements of Section
17.28.020(G) relatinq to Second Dwellinqs.
3. The existing dumpsters used for horse maintenance and trash as
identified on the attached site plan shall be visually screened
from view from the public right -of -way
behind the r-e��, e through the addition of landscape
screening er ..ie -a -dit e - vfelid fleneine ....-...in
lend -gin wit aid prior to issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy for the second unit.
4. The existing second dwelling unit /travel trailer that is
currently located on the property without a permit shall be
r
Resolution No. 2002 -
Administrative Permit 2001 -10 (Cindy Hollister)
Page 7
removed from the site by April 30, 2002.
rcx%evl T the cscrrt mc h at s' az- a r-crov'rl — elecs — net take p=
ut
within m he :' ±* rre— seeifieel abev ,c-- this depesit will be ,t; l ed
r e l e e a t e el te - b`e-ninel — the barn e r- te - nether l e pie n ewe
/ as eleteL=ffiineel lay y
Level•e'p Fften. that id h that yehiele shall net - VTTIbT�efft
the street. -This required pesting ef sidLaety anel removal
releeatien of the trailer shall occur prior to issuance of a
Zone Clearance and Building Permit for te— pr-epesed— the
approved second dwelling unit.
5. All permit and fee requirements must be met, including the
requirement for a Zone Clearance and Building Permit and the
payment of all applicable development fees for a new
sidenee, second dwelling unit.
6. The_8outstanding processing fee-& of $1320.00 for Administrative
Permit 2001 -10 shall be paid prior to issuance of a Zone
Clearance and Building Permit for the second dwelling unit. Tire
7. The property shall be maintained, in accordance with the
provisions of Section 8.48.020 of the Moorpark Municipal Code.
Prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance and Building Permit, the
old tires and bathtub located westerly of the proposed second
dwelling /manufactured home shall be removed or relocated to
within the existing barn corral area on the property.
0060