Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2003 0903 CC REG ITEM 08BMOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM g • B. C'r T 9 -3 A'�`' c.. 1 TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Director Prepared By: Joseph F. Fiss, Principal Plann DATE: August 29, 2003 (CC Meeting of 09/03/03) SUBJECT: Consider Minor Modification No. 3 to Industrial Planned Development Permit No. 1993 -01, an Application for Seasonal Outdoor Storage on an Ongoing Basis within a Parking Area of an Existing Warehouse Facility Located at 709 and 700 Science Drive, on the Application of Aldik Artificial Flowers, Inc. BACKGROUND /DISCUSSION The applicant has requested a continuation of the public hearing in order for their Chief Executive Office to attend the hearing. STAFF RECOMbENDATIONS 1. Open the public hearing, accept public testimony, and continue the public hearing to the October 1, 2003 City Council meeting. ITEM F.B. MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Director Prepared By: Joseph F. Fiss, Principal Plann /� DATE: August 29, 2003 (CC Meeting of 09/03/03) SUBJECT: Consider Minor Modification No. 3 to Industrial Planned Development Permit No. 1993 -01, an Application for Seasonal Outdoor Storage on an Ongoing Basis within a Parking Area of an Existing Warehouse Facility Located at 709 and 700 Science Drive, on the Application of Aldik Artificial Flowers, Inc. BACKGROUND /DISCUSSION The applicant has requested a continuation of the public hearing in order for their Chief Executive Office to attend the hearing. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Open the public hearing, accept public testimony, and continue the public hearing to the October 1, 2003 City Council meeting. � z y ...•�'; "mss �\ r i All- .;` � `t• � �. .'� � a � „'rte,.,. ?��3?�,• tfi '�'° �'S� -- � � � ♦ `� �i r � "'�.�:4 .k�' 'fir` eii., TO: FROM: DATE: MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Honorable City Council Barry K. Hogan, Community Development Prepared By: Joseph F. Fiss, Principal July 24, 2003 (CC Meeting of 09/03/03) ITEM $- B. Director Plann r �.5 A T: 'ITT SUBJECT: Consider Minor Modification No. 3 to Industrial Planned Development Permit No. 1993 -01, an Application for Seasonal Outdoor Storage on an Ongoing Basis within a Parking Area of an Existing Warehouse Facility Located at 709 and 700 Science Drive, on the Application of Aldik Artificial Flowers, Inc. BACKGROUND Aldik Artificial Flowers, Inc. (AAF) occupies (since February 14, 2001) two industrial buildings at 709 and 700 Science Drive for warehouse and distribution purposes. The 253,780 and 152,500 square foot buildings were originally constructed for warehouse and bulk mail processing in 1994, under Industrial Planned Development (IPD) No. 1993 -01. AAF is requesting a third Minor Modification to IPD No. 1993 -01 to allow seasonal outdoor storage on an ongoing basis within the parking area. This modification request is submitted to cure Code Enforcement violation notices. DISCUSSION AAF is requesting permission to allow seasonal outdoor storage on an ongoing basis in the parking area of an existing warehouse /distribution facility. Currently, pallets, trailers, boxes and other items are stored throughout the parking lot in violation of the municipal code. This application was filed as a result of several written notices of violations issued by Code Enforcement, and subsequent meetings with Code Enforcement staff. Although Code Enforcement is maintaining this as an active case, legal action has been deferred to allow the Honorable City Council September 3, 2003 Page 2 processing of this application, consistent with Zoning Code Section 17.44.040 (b) (Attachment 4). This property is zoned M -1. The purpose of the M -1 (Industrial Park) zone is to provide suitable areas for the exclusive development of light industrial, service, technical research and related business office uses in an industrial park context, in conjunction with stringent standards of building design, noise, landscaping and performance. The original building was developed subject to the aforementioned IPD and as such, any changes are subject to the Modification process. "Storage" in general is allowed within the M -1 zone upon approval of a Planned Development Permit. The Zoning Code does not distinguish between indoor and outdoor storage in this case. Some incidental outdoor storage is expected at this type of facility due to the in- and -out nature of distribution uses. However, outdoor storage at this site has exceeded what could reasonably be considered "incidental" and was not originally anticipated in the approval of IPD No. 1993 -01. Section 17.36.050 of the zoning code states that "Accessory outside storage shall be confined to the area to the rear of the principal building or the rear two- thirds of the property, whichever is the more restrictive, and screened from view from any property line by appropriate walls, fencing, earth mounds or landscaping." AAF is proposing to continue to maintain open storage throughout the site, without adequate screening. This storage is visible from Science Drive, New Los Angeles Avenue and State Route 23. Said storage currently occupies required parking spaces. In order for the City Council to determine that the requested modification is consistent with the requirements of the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, and the Industrial Planned Development Permit, certain findings would need to be made. Industrial Planned Development Findings: Staff has determined that this application does not meet the requirements of the City of Moorpark, Municipal Code Section 17.44.030 in that: 1. The proposed project is not consistent with the intent and provisions of the City's General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan and Title 17 of the Moorpark Municipal Code, in that Goal 10 of the General Plan Land Use designation S: \Community Development \DEV PMTS \I P D \1993 \IPD 93 -1 \Minor Mod 3 \cc agendareport 030903.doc tir v ti. v -w✓.v Honorable City Council September 3, 2003 Page 3 encourages development in a compatible manner with surrounding land uses. Outdoor storage is not consistent with the surrounding Industrial Park uses. The proposal is inconsistent with Policy 10.2 regarding minimizing adverse impact on adjacent uses and enhancement of visual characteristics of the area. 2. The proposed project is not compatible with the character of surrounding development, in that surrounding uses do not legally maintain outdoor storage. Outdoor storage is not consistent with the Industrial Park nature of the Science Drive corridor. 3. The proposed project may be obnoxious or harmful, and may impair the utility of neighboring property or uses, in that the proposed outdoor storage causes a visual degradation to the area and allows for harboring of vectors. 4. The proposed project would be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare, in that this project is inconsistent with the types of uses contemplated by the Industrial Park designation of the zoning code. 5. The proposed project is compatible with the scale, but not the visual character and design of the surrounding properties, is not designed so as to enhance the physical and visual quality of the community, and the structures have design features which provide visual relief and separation between land uses of conflicting character, in that outdoor storage is not a design improvement nor a visual enhancement to the area. This proposal has been carefully reviewed and based upon the evidence presented by AAF, the analysis within the agenda report and the lack of necessary findings to support the request, staff recommends that the request be denied. The proposal presents no factors to justify that unscreened outdoor storage is any benefit to the area or the community at large. The proposal causes major detrimental effects to the visual aesthetic of this corridor and is not consistent with a "business park" environment. Aside from a very dense landscaped buffer along the 23 Freeway and New Los Angeles Avenue (118) frontage, there is little that can be done to mitigate the inherent characteristics of outdoor storage on this site. S: \Community Development \DEV PMTS \I P D \1993 \IPD 93 -1 \Minor Mod 3 \cc agendareport 030903.doc Honorable City Council September 3, 2003 Page 4 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION In accordance with the City's environmental review procedures adopted by resolution, the Community Development Director determines the level of review necessary for a project to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Some projects may be exempt from review based upon a specific category listed in CEQA. Other projects may be exempt under a general rule that environmental review is not necessary where it can be determined that there would be no possibility of significant effect upon the environment. A project which does not qualify for an exemption requires the preparation of an Initial Study to assess the level of potential environmental impacts. The Director has reviewed this project and found it to be Categorically Exempt in accordance with Section 15301 (Class 1, Existing Facilities) of the California Code of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines). No further environmental documentation is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Open the public hearing, accept public testimony, and close the public hearing; 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2003- denying Minor Modification No. 3 to Industrial Planned Development No. 1993 -01. Attachments: 1. Site Plan (May - September Storage Proposal). 2. Site Plan (October -April Storage Proposal). 3. Draft Resolution No. 2003- 4. Zoning Code Section 17.44.040 (b). \ \mor _pri_sery \City Share \Community Development \DEV PMTS \I P D \1993 \IPD 93 -1 \Minor Mod 3 \cc agendareport 030903.doc ly 13 &I I'M 014 BUIUANG OF 01 -'I - UCCWL OF TWAN', OPE OF IENANT �-SC, UPSCIVEWNT WOR�� ?—� -I.- W)W 01 Q, m/ s ` M0171111 tip < -7, <' j 'MILL i eci LL 7/0" VIC As CC ATTACHMENT 1 nom' NWTA NO EXTERIOR WORK - ISSUED FOR BLDG DEPT. REFERENCE ONI.Y bo o. Tr-" , , 116, nom' NWTA NO EXTERIOR WORK - ISSUED FOR BLDG DEPT. REFERENCE ONI.Y bo o. Tr-" , j7 m 15> WOK (W TEWT N MAW, OF TPWANT UPROVEA&NT AWK 4- ry _77 < V IIEC�I:s SCOPE CI TEtW4T 4A nOVEWNY WORK W I W liff. KOR'fl v IWA'l CC ATTACHMENT NO EXTERIOR WORK N j I E P 1. ISSUED FOR BLDG. DEPT, REFERENCE ONLY _1, . tx' z:1 l'o f it 0 u �A 7- uj iF CC, .1 "p- Ly F - 77' RESOLUTION NO. 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, DENYING MINOR MODIFICATION NO. 3 TO INDUSTRIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 1993- 01, REQUESTING SEASONAL OUTDOOR STORAGE ON AN ONGOING BASIS WITHIN A PARKING AREA AT AN EXISTING WAREHOUSE FACILITY LOCATED AT 709 AND 700 SCIENCE DRIVE, ON THE APPLICATION OF ALDIK ARTIFICIAL FLOWERS, INC. (ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 512 -0- 240 -195 and -205) WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on September 3 2003, the City Council considered Minor Modification No. 3 to Industrial Planned Development Permit (IPD) No. 1993 -01, on the application of Aldik Artificial Flowers, Inc., to allow seasonal outdoor storage on an ongoing basis in the parking area of an existing warehouse ldistribution facility, located at 709 and 700 Science Drive, (Assessor Parcel Nos. 512 -0- 240 -195 and -205); and WHEREAS, at its meeting of September 3, 2003, the City Council opened the public hearing, took public testimony and closed the public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council, after review and consideration of the information contained in the staff report and public testimony, has reached a decision on this matter; and WHEREAS, The Community Development Director has reviewed this project and found it to be Categorically Exempt in accordance with Section 15301 (Class 1, Existing Facilities) of the California Code of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines), and no further environmental documentation is required. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The aforementioned Minor inconsistent with the City Council does Modification to City's General Plan. hereby find that the IPD No. 1993 -01 is SECTION 2. INDUSTRIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS: Based upon the information set forth above, it has been determined that this application does not meet the requirements of the City of Moorpark, Municipal Code Section 17.44.030 in that: A. The proposed project is not consistent with the intent and provisions of the City's General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan and Title 17 of the Moorpark Municipal Code, in that Goal 10 of the General Plan Land Use designation CC ATTACHMENT 3 Resolution No. 2003 - Page 2 encourages development in a compatible manner with surrounding land uses. Outdoor storage is not consistent with the surrounding Industrial Park uses. The proposal is inconsistent with Policy 10.2 regarding minimizing adverse impact on adjacent uses and enhancement of visual characteristics of the area. B. The proposed project is not compatible with the character of surrounding development, in that surrounding uses do not legally maintain outdoor storage. Outdoor storage is not consistent with the Industrial Park nature of the Science Drive corridor. C. The proposed project may be obnoxious or harmful, and may impair the utility of neighboring property or uses, in that the proposed outdoor storage causes a visual degradation to the area and allows for harboring of vectors. D. The proposed project would be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare, in that this project is inconsistent with the types of uses contemplated by the Industrial Park designation of the zoning code. E. The proposed project is compatible with the scale, but not the visual character and design of the surrounding properties, is not designed so as to enhance the physical and visual quality of the community, and the structures have design features which provide visual relief and separation between land uses of conflicting character, in that outdoor storage is not design improvement nor a visual enhancement to the area. SECTION 3. CITY COUNCIL DECISION: The City Council hereby denies Minor Modification No. 3 to IPD No. 1993 -01. SECTION 4. 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 3rd day of September, 2003. Patrick Hunter, Mayor ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt, City Clerk 17.030 d. That the granting of such variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, nor to the use, enjoyment or valuation of neighboring properties; and e. That the granting of a variance in conjunction with a hazardous waste facility will be consistent with the portions of the county's hazardous waste management plan (CIINI' W) which identifies specific sites or siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. 3. Burtien of Proof. The applicant shall have the burden of proving to the satisfaction of the appropriate decision - making authority that the above standards are met. 4. Duration. Any variance remains valid for so long as the use or structure which requires the variance(s) continues. I. A request for a minor excerption from standards of zoning regulations may be approved by the director of community development as an administrative exception, upon making the following findings: a. That the granting of the exception will not create impacts to abutting properties; and b. That the strict application of the zoning regulations its they apply to the subject property will result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose of such regulations; and c. That the granting of the exception is consistent with the general plan and/or any applicable specific plan. 2. The director of community development shall provide a notice of the request, the date when the action is to be taken and a request for written comments for or against the request. The notice shall be mailed to all sur- rounding property owners, within three hundred (300) feet of the property, whose names appear on the latest - equalized assessment roll of Ventura County. A copy of the notice shall be provided to the city council, planning commission and the city manager. An administrative exception may be granted only in the following situations: a. To allow a decrease not to exceed twenty percent (20%) in any rtxluired minimum setback, provided that such exception may be granted only once from the minimum standard adapted by this code or any planned development permit approved consistent with this code; b. To allow a decrease not to exceed ten percent (10%) in required parking aisle: width or similar dimensional requirements; c. To allow walls, fences or hedges to exceed the height limit regulations by a maximum of one (1) foot in setback areas, except in a required sight triangle; d. To allow an increase not to exceed ten percent (10%) for maximum building coverage, or sign area or sign height; (Moorpurk 7 -61) e. To allow a five- percent (5%) decrease in the required lot area for sxond units. (Ord. 271 § 1 (part), 2001) 17.44.040 Filing and processing of application requests. A. Submission of Applications. An application for a permit or variance may be filed by the owner of the proper- ty or his/her authorized agent, a lessee who holds a lease whose terns permit the use ap plic d for, or by any duly constituted government authority or agent thereof. Such application requests shall be filed with the department of community development. No application request shall be accepted for filing and processing unless it conforms to the requirements of this title, contains in a full, true and correct form the required materials and information pre- scribed by the form supplied by the department of commu- nity development and is accompanied by the appropriate processing fees. B. Existing Violations. No application request for an entitlement shalt be accepted if a violation of the zoning ordinance, subdivision ordinance or municipal code exists on the lot, provided that the violation was a result of the act<ons or inactions of the applicant or his predecessor(s) in interest, until t1he violation is abated, unless the accep- tance of the application is necessary to the abatement of the existing violation. C. Content of Applications. The content of applications shall be determined by the city. Site plans and elevations (in color, with building materials identified), sample floor plans and samples of exterior finishing materials may be required as part of the permit procedure. if the project is proposed to be developed in phases, the sequence of such phases shall also be shown. D. Compieteness of Application. The applicant shall be notified in writing as to whether the application. is complete or incomplete, no later than thirty calendar days after the city has accepted an application under this title, except in the case of zone changes and general plan amend- ments, which are legislative acts and thus are not subject to the thirty (30) day limit. If the application is determined to be incomplete, the applicant shall be notified in writing of the rcasons for such determination and of die infomtation needed to make the application complete. 1. Review of Supplemental Information. If an applica- tion is deemed incomplete and the applicant subsequently submits the required information, a new thirty (30) day review period begins on the day that the supplemental information is submitted. 2. Termination of incomplete Application. Upon written notification to the applicant, processing of an incomplete application may be terminated if no reasonable effort has been made by die applicant to complete the application CC ATTACHMENT 4