Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAG RPTS 2001 1113 PC SPLMOORPARK 1 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 517 -6200 PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA November 13, 2001 7:00 p.m. Next Resolution No. PC- 2001 -417 1) CALL TO ORDER: 2) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 3) ROLL CALL: Janice Parvin, Chairperson William F. Otto, Vice Chairperson Mark DiCecco, Commissioner Paul Haller, Commissioner Kipp Landis, Commissioner ------------------------------------------------------------------- Any member of the public may address the Planning Commission during the Public Comments portion of the Agenda, unless it is a Public Hearing or a Presentation/ Action/ Discussion item. Speakers who wish to address the Commission concerning a Public Hearing or Presentations/ Action/ DiscussioA item must do so during the Public Hearing or Presentations /Action /Discussion portion of the Agenda for that item. Speaker cards must be received by the Secretary for Public Comment prior to the beginning of the Public Comments portion of the meeting and for Presentation /Action /Discussion items prior to the beginning of the first item of the Presentation /Action/ Discussion portion of the Agenda. Speaker Cards for a Public Hearing must be received prior to the beginning of the Public Hearing. A limitation of three minutes shall be imposed upon each Public Comment and Presentation /Action /Discussion item speaker. A limitation of three to five minutes shall be imposed upon each Public Hearing item speaker. Written Statement Cards may be submitted in lieu of speaking orally for open Public Hearings and Presentation /Action /Discussion items. Copies of each item of business on the agenda are on file in the office of the Community Development Department/ Planning and are available for public review. Any questions concerning any agenda item may be directed to the Community Development Department at (805) 51.7- 6228. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Department at (805) 517 -6223. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102- 35.104; ADA Title II). M. ICLaffeurlMlPC- minutes12001minutes1011113 pca spi.doc 11181014:01 PM OPacket to CM OPacket to CC PATRICK HUNTER CUNT HARPER ROSEANN MIKOS KEITH F. MIU_HOUSE JOHN E. WOZNIAK Mawr Mavor Pro Tem Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA November 13, 2001 Page 2 4) PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS AND SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: 5) REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: 6) CONSENT CALENDAR: a) Planning Commission Minutes of September 24, 2001 7) PUBLIC COMMENTS: 8) PUBLIC HEARINGS: a) Consider a Request for Industrial Planned Development Permit No. 2000 -10 for a 118,650 Square Foot Mini - Warehouse /Office Building Located at the Northwest Corner of Los Angeles Avenue and Goldman Avenue at 875 Los Angeles Avenue. Applicant: Asadurian Investments. Staff Recommendations: 1. Accept public testimony, close the public hearing, and provide the applicant with comments on the resubmitted project. 2. Direct staff to re- advertise the public hearing due to the project changes, when the project complies with Zoning Code and incorporates staff and Planing Commission recommendations. (Continued from September 24, 2001) b) Consider Appeal 2001 -06 of 'the Decision of Community Development Director to Deny Zone Clearance No. 01 -316, Requesting a Change of Use and Tenant Improvements for a Pizza Hut Takeout and Delivery Restaurant. Applicant: Tait & Associates. Staff Recommendation: 1. Open the public hearing, accept public testimony, and close the public hearing. 2. Adopt Resolution No. PC -2001- Denying Appeal No. 2001 -06. 9) DISCUSSION ITEMS: 10) ANNOUNCEMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: 11) ADJOURNMENT: M: \CLafleur \M \PC- minutes \2001minutes \011113 pca spl.doc ITEM 61�6 •a 0 Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of September 24, 2001 Page The Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on September 24, 2001, in the City Council Chambers; Moorpark Civic Center; 799 Moorpark Avenue; Moorpark, California 93021. 1) CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Parvin called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. 2) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner DiCecco led the Pledge of Allegiance. 3) ROLL CALL: Janice Parvin, Chairperson William F. Otto, Vice Chairperson Mark DiCecco Paul Haller Kipp Landis All Commissioners were present at the meeting. Staff attending the meeting included Wayne Loftus, Community Development Director; John Libiez, Planning Manager /Advanced Planning; Walter Brown, City Engineer; Laura Stringer, Senior Management Analyst; and Gail Rice, Secretary II. 4) PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS AND SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: NONE. 5) REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: Wayne Loftus requested that Item #8D - Appeal 2001 -05 (Applicant: Hollister) be moved to the beginning of the public hearing section of the agenda. 6) CONSENT CALENDAR: A) Planning Commission Minutes of September 10, 2001. MOTION: Commissioner DiCecco moved and Commissioner Haller seconded a motion to approve the minutes of September 10, 2001. Motion passed with a unanimous 5:0 voice vote. 010924 pcm.f2 1118101 2:22 PM 0 Packet to CM DPacket to CC Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of September 24, 2001 Page 7) PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. 8) PUBLIC HEARINGS: D) Appeal 2001 -05 (Applicant: Hollister) An appeal of the conditions of approval for Administrative Permit No. 2001 -10 located at 6086 Gabbert Road. The applicant is requesting to eliminate or modify condition lb, 2b, 2c, 2f, 2g, 3, 7, 4, and 6. Staff Recommendation: Deny the appeal. Mr. Loftus, stated his concurrence with a request from the applicant's attorney for continuance of this item because the hearing notice was not sent in a timely manner to applicant and applicant's representative. With the agreement of the applicant, Mr. Loftus requested this item be continued, with the public hearing open, to a special meeting on October 15, 2001. Chairperson Parvin opened the public hearing. No speaker cards were submitted. MOTION: Commissioner Otto moved that this meeting be continued to the Special Meeting of October 15, 2001. Commission Landis seconded the motion. Motion passed with a unanimous 5:0 voice vote. A) Consider an Amendment to the City of Moorpark Zoning Code Related to Recreational Vehicle (RV) Parking and Storage; Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2001 -01 (Applicant: City of Moorpark). Staff Recommendations: 1) Open the Pubic Hearing; accept public testimony and close the Public Hearing; 2) Adopt Resolution No. PC -2001- recommending to the City Council approval of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance defining standards and criteria for recreational vehicle parking and storage. Wayne Loftus provided an introduction and background. John Libiez, Planning Manager furnished S: \Community Development \Everyone \PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES \010924 pcm.f2.doc Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of September 24, 2001 Page I the staff presentation (reference staff report, dated September 19, 2001). Mr. Libiez summarized that the purpose of the RV Ordinance is to: • Improve and maintain the aesthetic quality of neighborhoods. • Allow for recreational storage within commercial and industrial zones. • Provide for recreational vehicle parking and storage in residential zones compatible with community character. • Provide reasonable standards for RV parking and storage while maintaining public health, safety and welfare for the community. Mr. Libiez reviewed the changes to the Draft Ordinance that had been incorporated based on Planning Commission comments from the September 10, 2001, workshop. Commissioner Landis questioned the issue of height restriction in the front yard area and the language included in proposed changes to Section 17.24.060.4.a. regarding intrusions in required setbacks. Commissioner Landis also asked whether it was the intent of the Ordinance to allow any parking or storage within the front yard setback. Mr. Libiez and Mr. Loftus responded, clarifying that it was not staff's intention to include provisions for parking or storage of recreational vehicles in front yard setbacks, other than parking of vehicles used for day -to -day transportation. Mr. Loftus further agreed that the language in Section 4.a. required re- wording. Mr. Loftus described the Administrative Permit process proposed for RV parking and storage. Commissioner DiCecco asked staff to clarify that there would be no storage whatsoever in the front yard with staff's proposal. He further requested S: \Community Development \Everyone \PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES \010924 pcm.f2.doc Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of September 24, 2001 Page 4 clarification that the Administrative Permit process described by staff would affect every resident who desired RV storage anywhere on their lot. Mr. Loftus confirmed that staff's recommendation included no parking or storage in the front yard setback, and further clarified the impact of the Administrative Permit process. Commissioner Otto expressed concern with the number of requests for permits that the proposed Ordinance may generate, and that the process might be going in the wrong direction, resulting in a burden on city staff and creating an enforcement problem. Discussion between Commission and staff ensued regarding existing facilities for off -site storage of recreational vehicles. Mr. Libiez stated that there would be a 60 -day delay for the Ordinance to be effective, thirty (30) days longer than normal. He indicated that enforcement efforts would work through the various neighborhoods in the City, taking some time to complete. Chairperson Parvin opened the public hearing. Testimony was received from: Nancy Beers, 6891 N. Westwood Street; Moorpark, CA Ms. Beers discussed the character of her neighborhood; with limited impact from Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC &R's), with most neighbors having boats, recreational vehicles with few, if any, complaints from other neighbors. She further expressed the opinion that the residents should all have the right to make their own choices. There were no other speakers. S: \Community Development \Everyone \PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES \010924 pcm.f2.doc Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of September 24, 2001 Page S Chairperson Parvin closed the Public Hearing. The Commission expressed the following concerns for the Draft Ordinance, as presented: Commissioner Landis stated that the language of Section 17.24.060 should be changed, regarding the need for covering and to keep areas free of trash. We need to distinguish the difference between vehicles and items under six (6') feet. Commissioners Landis and Otto both expressed concern with the number of people potentially involved and the impact of having them come to City Hall to obtain a permit. They agreed that the Commission needs to solidify where a permit should be required and clarify height restrictions. Commissioner Haller commented that complaints received referred mainly to on- street parking rather than on -site parking. He questioned what happens when the City is left without any city storage and expressed concern with only sixty (60) days for compliance, along with the hardship it could create to homeowners. ; Commission Landis commented to paving requirements for front yard parking /storage and questioned how much more of the front yard could be paved beyond the 50% already established. Discussion between the Commission and staff concluded that staff would take Commission's' comments and re -draft the Ordinance accordingly, returning on October 15, 2001. MOTION: Commissioner Landis moved and Commissioner DiCecco seconded the motion to continue the item, public hearing open, to the Special Meeting of October 15, 2001, with staff to revise the Draft Ordinance in accordance with the Commission's comments. Motion passed with a unanimous 5:0 voice vote. S: \Community Development \Everyone \PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES \010924 pcm.f2.doc Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of September 24, 2001 Page 6 B) Consider a Revised Open Space, Conservation and Recreation Element (OSCAR) to the Moorpark General Plan; General Plan Amendment No. 2001 -04 (Applicant: City of Moorpark). Staff Recommendations: 1) Open the Public Hearing; accept public testimony and close the Public Hearing; 2) Consider the Negative Declaration before making a recommendation to the City Council; 3) Adopt Resolution No. PC -2001- recommending approval of the revised OSCAR to City Council. John Libiez provided the staff presentation, reviewing General Plan Element requirements and the history of the OSCAR Update review, indicating that comments from the Park and Recreation Commission were incorporated in the Draft being presented. Commissioner DiCecco had a question regarding the graphics on Figure 6, which shows Miller Park as being proposed. Mr. Libiez stated that staff will modify, clarifying Miller Park as an existing park. Commissioner DiCecco questioned the graphics in Figure 2 - Southern California Edison easement identified as natural open space. Mr. Libiez and Mr. Loftus responded, noting that such areas are zoned open space and are identified as opportunities for future open space uses. S: \Community Development \Everyone \PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES \010924 pcm.f2.doc Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of September 24, 2001 Chairperson Parvin commented on Page 54, Policy 1.5 related to wireless communications systems being sensitive to open space, suggesting that rather than listing the various types of facilities, the broader term "wireless communication" be used. There being no public testimony, Chairperson Parvin closed the public hearing. Commissioner Haller made a motion for approval of P.C. Resolution No. 2001 -414, recommending to the City Council adoption of the Update to the Open Space, Conservation and Recreation (OSCAR) Element to the General Plan. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Landis. Motion passed with a unanimous 5:0 voice vote. C) Consider a request for Industrial Planned Development Permit No. 2000 -10 for a 119,650 square foot mini - warehouse /office building located at the northwest corner of Los Angeles Avenue and Goldman Avenue at 875 Los Angeles Avenue. (Applicant: Asadurian Investments). Staff Recommendations: 1) Open the public hearing, accept public testimony; 2) Continue this request, Public Hearing open, to the meeting of November 12, 2001, with direction to project applicant concerning modifications to the plan, as necessary. Paul Porter, Principal Planner, provided the staff presentation (reference staff report, dated 9/24/01). Commission questions and comments to staff and the applicant included: Commissioner DiCecco questioned: • The access gate and leaving it open rather than solid, which would also be preferred by the Moorpark Police Department. S: \Community Development \Everyone \PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES \010924 pcm.f2.doc Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of September 24, 2001 Page 8 • Parking inside the gate vs. outside. Only nine (9) parking spaces will be used by the office personnel. Others will be used by people coming in and out of the facility. • Floor plan showing no way to get into the sales office, once inside the gates. • Turning radius for vehicles. Mr. Porter responded citing Fire Department and Global Van Lines requirements for turnaround radius. Commissioner DiCecco then discussed easements with Mr. Porter. Chairperson Parvin had questions regarding: • Reciprocal access. • Parking spaces for the buildings. • Opening of the gate and possibility of installing a telephone outside the gate for the customer to use to gain access inside. • The building adjacent to the lot line on the west side. • Visibility of roof materials and design. Mr. Loftus responded that staff's desire was to achieve a good project, and that it should have an office appearance even though industrial in nature. Chairperson Parvin commented that her preference was for an open gate where you could see what was ahead of you. Commissioner Haller raised issues about vehicle stacking and additional landscaping. Chairperson Parvin opened the public hearing. Public testimony was received from the following: S: \Community Development \Everyone \PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES \010924 pcm.0 .doc Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of September 24, 2001 Page Greg Call, 8 Fair Valley, Coto De Caza, CA. Mr. Call, the applicant's representative provided a summary of his experience with this type of facility, detailing some of the unique characteristics included. He stated that the interior corridors on this facility are wider than most facilities, and that this facility will accommodate fire trucks, large trucks and will be very comfortable for senior members. He commented to the quality of the architectural elements. Ken Carrell, 24338 E1 Toro Road, Suite E -217, Laguna Woods, CA 92653. Mr. Carrell, architect for the project, provided responses to the Commission's concerns. Mr. Carrell stated that the layout is designed for a hook and ladder truck, the largest turning radius required, including 18 -wheel moving vans. The facility is designed for a 52 -foot outside turning radius. He further commented that the setback requirements on Goldman had been in response to staff's earlier direction, but: that they would accommodate current requests. He commented that the setbacks on Los Angeles Avenue were in response to discussion with staff. He commented that setback varies, with an average setback of twenty -eight (28' ) feet, based on a desire to make the site more interesting. Mr. Carrell addressed the reciprocal access easement issue, commenting that it was granted to the adjacent project, but was not required for this project. Mr. Carrell stated that he is happy to work with staff on the architecture, leaving the gate open, and improving the exterior appearance of buildings B & C, and that he would move the building two (2') feet over and add additional landscaping. S: \Community Development \Everyone \PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES \010924 pcm.f2.doc Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of September 24, 2001 Commissioner Landis questioned Mr. Carrell concerning the availability of parking inside the gates. Mr. Carrell responded that the parking spaces inside were for office staff and the outside parking was for visitors gaining access through the manager by telephone or access code. Mr. Haller questioned the discrepancy between the stated turning radius and the dimension shown on the plan, and recommendations on stacking. Mr. Carrell responded, citing changes in the requirements for turning radius, but stating the dimension shown on the plan met current requirements. Discussion between Mr. Carrell, Commissioner Haller and staff concluded that an additional two (2') feet might be achieved. Mr. Carrell further stated that the stacking shown on the plan was consistent with his experience, but could accommodate staff's recommendation. Commissioner DiCecco requested clarification of the area in the northeast corner being used as a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) facility, as to how water was going to get to that area. Mr. Carrell responded that the area was landscaped with grass. Commissioner DiCecco expressed concern that the client could address staff's recommendations and still make the project work. Commissioner DiCecco further questioned staff's request for an additional eight (81) feet. Mr. Carrell stated that he would prefer not to pull the buildings back because that side has no windows. Commissioner DiCecco commented that many people use that side for lunch under the tree. Commissioner Otto questioned the average setback from Los Angeles Avenue. Mr. Carrell commented that he did not calculate the average, and that he had worked with staff on the concept of varying setbacks. S: \Community Development \Everyone \PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES \010924 pcm.f2.doc Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of September 24, 2001 Page 11 Commissioner Otto requested Walter Brown's comments on the stacking issue, and the discrepancy on the turning radius. Mr. Brown responded on both issues, commenting to concerns with moving vans pulling in and not being able to take immediate access and that geometry of truck turns is based on Caltrans requirements. Chairperson Parvin questioned landscape plans regarding palms trees and berming. Mr. Carrell responded that the palm trees had been removed from the plan at staff's request, and that berming had been added. Applicant will submit a new landscape plan, if staff requests one. Chairperson Parvin also requested clarification of building elevations on Los Angeles Avenue. Mr. Carrell responded with a description of his intention to reduce flatness of the previous plan. Bob Cheney, 5060 Goldman Avenue, Moorpark, CA 93021 Mr. Cheney, Resident manager at A to Z Self - Storage, commented that this facility is only eighty (80) yards from his storage facility. He further expressed concerns with traffic and access to facilities. He questioned the possibility of a traffic signal. He further discussed the percentages of his business coming from areas outside of Moorpark, stating his concern that another facility in the area is not needed. Commissioner Haller asked Mr. Cheney what his percent of vacancy was. Mr. Cheney responded that his facility was ninety -two (920) percent occupied as of this morning. He had twenty -seven (27) vacancies. Commissioner DiCecco asked about the stacking issue, how often, what is the percentage, and what is the size of the vehicles? Mr. Cheney responded, citing examples of his operation. S: \Community Development \Everyone \PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES \010924 pcm.f2.doc Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of September 24, 2001 Commissioner Landis questioned Mr. Cheney's attrition rate. Mr. Cheney responded with statistics of his operation. Commission discussion included the following: Commissioner Haller commented that he would like to see the project come back with the stacking issue addressed and additional landscaping. Also, he stated the applicant should address the turning radius to within sixty (601) feet, instead of fifty -two (52') feet. Commissioner Landis commented on the need to resolve the easement issue, stating that the applicant and staff could likely work out the other issues. Commissioner Otto commented on the concern and displeasure at having to deal with businesses that may not provide an economic basis for success, citing examples. Commissioner Otto commented that staff's recommendations appear reasonable. Commissioner DiCecco commented on the following issues: • Access gate issue can be worked out with staff and the police department, and no problem with open gate, as long as buildings B and C architecture blends in. • No issue with parking, but agree with stacking issue, and circulation issue and is concerned with getting an 18- wheeler into site and concurs with staff comments. • Building height is all right and waiver of loading area is alright. • Setbacks for landscaping are per code, but possible flexibility in NPDES area. • Prefers landscape buffer in easement area. • Comments on economic feasibility. • A little more polishing of architecture, including 2nd floor office space windows, seeing S: \Community Development \Everyone \PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES \010924 pcm.f2.doc Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of September 24, 2001 Page 13 what the signage looks like and all setback requirements have to be met before we go any further. Commissioner Parvin commented to: • Landscape and architecture could be enhanced, preferring submittal of a new landscape plan. • Agreeing with staff's recommendation for setbacks on Los Angeles Avenue and Goldman Avenue. • Leniency with north corner, if possible. • Reciprocal easement issue, a problem, as applicant will lose property. • Circulation with 18- wheelers on -site had not been envisioned. All Commissioners were in agreement with the setbacks on Los Angeles Avenue to be thirty (301) feet and the setback on Goldman should be twenty (201) feet, per the code. MOTION: Commissioner Landis moved and Commissioner Haller seconded the motion to accept the recommendations and continue the public hearing open to November 12, 2001 (subsequently changed to a special meeting of November 13, 2001 due to a holiday). Motion was passed with a unanimous 5:0 voice vote. 9) DISCUSSION ITEMS: NONE 10) ANNOUNCEMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Wayne Loftus provided information on the following future agenda items: • October 8, 2001 regular meeting cancelled. • Council request for Public Hearing to rescind Ordinance for Specific Plan No. 8 to be tentatively scheduled for Special Meeting on October 15, 2001. • Continuation of Appeal No. 2001 -05 (Applicant: Hollister) to the October 15, 2001 meeting. S: \Community Development \Everyone \PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES \010924 pcm.f2.doc Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of September 24, 2001 Page 14 • Affordable Housing Workshop on October 22, 2001, but may be moved to October 29, 2001. Staff is still working on the date. • Regular Planning Commission meeting on November 12, 2001, may need shifting due to the holiday. • Scheduling a few things for the Commission to look at, such as the Cypress Land Industrial Project and the Target Project. • Development Agreement referrals for West Pointe and SunCal. • West Pointe Project will go to Council next week. • Wireless Communication Ordinance. • Modifications to a number of Zoning Ordinances. Chairperson Parvin announced that this weekend is Country Days and the parade begins at 9:30 a.m. on High Street. 11) ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Landis moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Otto seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m. Janice Parvin, Chairperson ATTEST: Deborah S. Traffenstedt Acting Community Development Director S: \Community Development \Everyone \PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES \010924 pcm.f2.doc ITEM R.CL* MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Paul Porter, Principal Planner �- Deborah Traffenstedt, Acting Director of Community Development ';i1` DATE: November 5, 2001 (PC Meeting of November 13, 2001) SUBJECT: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF INDUSTRIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 2000 -10 ON THE APPLICATION OF ASADURIAN INVESTMENTS TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATELY 118,650 SQUARE FOOT MINI - WAREHOUSE /OFFICE BUILDING ON A 112,195 SQUARE FOOT PARCEL LOCATED AT 875 LOS ANGELES AVENUE WHICH IS AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE LOS ANGELES AVENUE AND GOLDMAN AVENUE, ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 511 -0- 070 -55 (Continued from 9/24/01 - public hearing open). BACKGROUND: This project was heard on September 24, 2001 and continued to November 13, 2001 (public hearing open) :to allow the applicant time to address Planning Commission recommended modifications. In order to assist in improving the appearance and functioning perspectives, achieve compatibility with neighboring properties, avoid potential safety issues, achieve consistency with code provisions and result in a functional development, staff recommended modifications presented at the Planning Commission hearing on September 24, 2001 included the following: • Provide enhanced landscaping along Los Angeles and Goldman Avenues; provide a minimum eight (8) foot landscaping buffer along the northerly property line adjacent to Building "A"; provide additional landscaping along Goldman Avenue to be consistent with the adjacent industrial building to the north of the project site. IPD 20 -2 Planning Commission Staff Report Page 2 • Increase the stacking distance at the entry to a minimum distance as required by the City Engineer. • Modify the architecture for the east elevation of Building "B" and "C" as well as the building elevations facing Goldman and Los Angeles Avenues. • Increase the interior truck turning radius to accommodate truck for a sixty (60) feet radius on all drive aisles throughout the interior of the site. • Increase the width of the reciprocal easement with the property to the west of this project by an additional ten (10) feet. • Increase building setbacks along Los Angeles Avenue to thirty ( 3 0 ) feet and twenty ( 2 0 ) feet on Goldman Avenue, along the northerly property line and along the westerly property line adjacent to the existing industrial building fronting Los Angeles Avenue. • Revise the location of Building "A" along the western property line north of the existing reciprocal access easement to be placed on the property line. After review of the staff report, receipt of public testimony and review of the proposed project, the Planning Commission made the following recommended modifications to the project. The applicant was requested to make appropriate changes to the project and bring the revisions back to the Planning Commission on November 13, 2001 for further consideration. Planning Commission recommended modifications to the project include: • Increase exterior vehicle stacking in order to reduce potential traffic safety issues. • Enhance interior turning movements to facilitate 18- wheelers entering and exiting the site. • Provide a landscape buffer area along the westerly property line adjacent to the existing reciprocal access easement. • Enhance architecture, including second story office space windows. • Increase setback along Goldman Avenue to not less than twenty (20) feet and increase setback along Los Angeles Avenue to not less than thirty (30) feet to meet Ordinance requirements. • Add additional landscaping along areas visible from public streets. IPD 20 -2 Planning Commission Staff Report Page 3 DISCUSSION: Since the Planning Commission meeting on September 24, 2001, the applicant has extensively revised the site plan and elevations which are included with this transmittal for the Planning Commission's information. The proposed project has substantially changed from that seen by the Planning Commission on September 24, 2001. Most notably, the project has increased from 116,811 square feet to 148,010 square feet, a 27% increase, and Buildings B and C originally proposed to be the two interior two -story buildings separated by a drive aisle are now proposed to be one three -story building with elevators rather than a ramp providing access to the upper levels. As a result of the substantial increase in square footage of the project combined with the new three -story building, this project will need to be renoticed for a new public hearing. It is suggested that the Planning Commission make comments concerning the plan as currently modified. The applicant can make any further revisions prior to bringing this project back to the Planning Commission at a new public hearing. Applicant's Modifications: The applicant's architect has made several additional modifications to the project site plan and elevations since last public review: • Architecture of the buildings have changed by placing additional glazing along both street frontages, adding clear glazing to the tower element located at the corner allowing the elevator to be seen from the street. • The proposed colors of the buildings have not changed, but have been used differently to provide additional interest. • Buildings B and C have been combined from two story buildings to one larger three -story building. • The elevations for Building B have been modified to provide additional diversity. • The access gate has been modified to be constructed of tubular steel, which allows visibility into the interior of the site. IPD 20 -2 Planning Commission Staff Report Page 4 • The entry to the site has been relocated farther north now proving a total of thirteen (13) parking spaces, two (2) of which will be provided at the interior of the site, and eleven (11) spaces on the exterior outside the entry gate. It should be noted that the parking stalls which show a length of eighteen (18) feet do not meet minimum requirements (Zoning Code requires twenty (20) feet minimum length. In addition, a minimum twenty five (25) foot drive aisle must be provided (the plan shows twenty -four (24 ) feet. • The redesign increases the stacking area to approximately fifty three (53) feet, not including the sidewalk. • Interior circulation has been increased to allow for a greater turning radius. • Between six (6) and eight (8) feet of landscaping has been provided along the northerly elevation of the building. • The building elevation along Los Angeles Avenue has been set back thirty ( 3 0 ) feet from the property line and the setback has been increased to a minimum of twenty (20) feet along Goldman Avenue to meet the minimum setback as specified in the Zoning Ordinance. • The westerly building elevation of Building A has been moved to the westerly property line. Recommended Modifications Not Completed: Landscaping Adjacent to Goldman Avenue r The revised site plan shows between ten (10) and twenty (20) feet of landscaping along Goldman Avenue, which meets the minimum requirement for landscaping adjacent to a local street, but remains inconsistent with landscaping provided for the industrial building contiguous to the north (which has a setback of approximately twenty eight feet). Reciprocal Access Easement and Landscaping Along the Westerly Property Line There is an existing reciprocal access easement along the western portion of the property which is approximately 1216" wide and is currently utilized for access to both the subject property and the adjacent industrial building to the west. This reciprocal access easement begins at the southwest property line and continues north for approximately one hundred twenty (120) feet. The IPD 20 -2 Planning Commission Staff Report Page 5 reciprocal access easement allows ingress /egress to both the applicant's property at the southwest corner of the site, and to the parking lot to the adjacent industrial building on the west. The proposed entry will eliminate the need for a secondary access from the west. The existing drive aisle /parking stall width (approximately 381) does not meet the minimum Ordinance width requirement for parking lots with ninety (90) degree parking (451) required. In order to provide minimum adequate ingress /egress for this parking area, the existing reciprocal access easement must be increased by an additional ten (10) feet. This would allow sufficient width to provide landscaping along the east side of the parking lot adjacent to the proposed mini - warehouse building and allow sufficient width for the parking lot and drive aisle. It was also suggested that landscaping be provided along the west property line. Although these modifications have not been completed, the applicant's architect has indicated that the reciprocal access easement will be increased and that landscaping will be provided along the west property line. The architect indicated these changes will be incorporated with additional Planning Commission recommended modifications prior to the next Planning Commission hearing. Conclusion: I Because the project resubmitted to the Planning Commission for review and comment has changed substantially with the increase in the total square footage of the buildings from 116,811 square foot to 148,010 square feet, the two interior two -story buildings being modified to one three - story building, and the entryway reconfiguration, this project will need to be renoticed for a new public hearing. It is suggested that the Planning Commission make comments concerning the plan as currently modified and direct staff to readvertise the public hearing when the project complies with Zoning Code and incorporates staff and Planning Commission recommendations. IPD 20 -2 Planning Commission Staff Report Page 6 RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Accept public testimony, close the public hearing, and provide the applicant with comments on the resubmitted project. 2. Direct staff to readvertise the public hearing due to the project changes, when the project complies with Zoning Code and incorporates staff and Planning Commission recommendations. ATTACHMENT: Project Exhibits i i i i i f M W I F�: j _ NbY LOS 6M sE-I ES AVENGE _ PROJECT DATA UASWAR 01 wiC� M1�1@OAIAlAR � MA � � r iop"s W~ I 0 •'�'� A>r so" R!T O�IRi�I 1T1! T"t H A UUMN A �! sm C . IRwYMaw T . �LLIIiK M1ly mlo I IAM { MM4Nm 61 INUT Tm w TSA► S AR O w AAlps Ate! umpw FMK CAAlSA tlNl mn&i N nt. WAW AAAYA. RIbAdMA AI S RAS2 IMYM moon Mgt= = CANU C murnm VAN G TM WA NR MO LAM � N m-m OVERALL SITE/ROOF PLAN ASADURIAN INVESTMENTS � � M ��� 1. PWAssociates MOORPARK ADVANCE STORAGE e4s11,A„ S aN . TAT=R�? . AIt Alt.ttY,. •..l.AA.1* lwooiaPluc u+uFuleAw�1 .w.as ./AMR. �w os ivaa (24�338�8 Toro No�d Sul1e E-217 875 NEW LOS ANMB AVENUE, MOORPARK, CAUFORNIA FACSFA lE i 330400 7LZ ° Td4N.7W1� 14 n mif ' � 1 � I W Z J PUNTING LEGEND NIMI IOTAIrA. 011! WANN WI! LLR TIM ORATAMMI fA6LX" CALrom frimm 1 MLLN j(ICINI MAP IMS Amw%A ow LLe AML IS sk"m ASADURIAN INVESTMENTS r 11 � � �I�°= uwAnAf Ln%WX%m Nerm Glen oMl r SA LM AIYf OLRANS 1AIN6rW X"Aso t &via O11A1r C IN m WATO LR t oA AAr1 O11101111111111111 101L An ZMA1. FILM 1 fALLN OMon" M. LA7LLO 1 fALLMI MTw L1M3 RAIrNO AIRfAAATA GAR RAYAM 1 fALLAII Alf AL o4 JkUM ILLtANT" am~ MORE Alt IO U resruu AM1fA In pow am a mew NLW LOS AN ILA 9 Ar tr_ 0 — — — — — — — — — — — j(ICINI MAP PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN ASADURIAN INVESTMENTS r 11 � � �I�°= MOORPARK ADVANCE STORAGE ; e400WWKs g �. ,_ OM«Tr. • , A /t1,It.ttY /f 1..1 .f.tf 875 NEW LOS ANGELES AVENUE, MOORPARK, CJUJFORNIA ��Ai1 A�Y�OIi � 0" 07AMRC1 , �w �' a u of ate 2�3�9 B Tao Road SLOE-217 `r'�' ;.»` �o 1, �`'�..74 Ham_ JI I •I� Ia____aaa_.J .a 1 a____. ■. 'A A . l 1 - .■ I a____. ■a .t.a I "I■ 1 a____{ f. t J I 1■ 1 a____... 1 a 1J ' ■.. al I ■. a 1■ . J . ■Ia 1 a.■ ans. a1 -al. 1 a.aa1 l a . SIR I ins am I aaaa I aaaal t a . .•Ia.aVla.0 ta.aa is . tarau�Ia■u.Ll.u_3I 1''1- Iaa.�Iaaa�Iaaa.ta 1' 1- I as OUR I as as t.a{ a■ .tA I- is I aaaa I aaaa I aaaa I a ASS1019 AMR S&'. a ,+■ I MUSS .IJ ■ ■alasa...tJ i IN 12.0. tJa.�Ia.■ ■.tom 11 1- I aaaS, 1 a■ ■a I sa.a1 i s I. •1 a.a■ -1 as ■�I aaaa •. I •I I. .. I a1 ■1 •ta 1_. I a_. I a_. • . I -- - '■ . a. I■ . J 1■ . J • ■- Iaaa�l a.aal la ■a.l I . ■- I a.a /1 a.�1 a..I-1 IJ . .-ta..ata. . ■a.IJI . • a . I. 1. '. la-/ 1a ■. { Ia. . 1aaaL. 1 t I.%: - _ttA o tI a{a�I as a�I aaa�Ia 1' I■ Ia...• IIaa�laaa. Ia I-1:►a{aa.I2.aZIa{J�Ia ■ laa{�Iaaa�Ia..�1a 1- Ia 1 a..■ t I..z 1 a..■ ■ I 1 1- Ia.■UR1a.■alaaSUNIa r 'rJaaR laaaalaaaN ta OUR ________ ________ 1 - _. .. 1 JI ■. t as ■41 t a nc3CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCOCCCCCCCCC o °OO OOO�OOOOOOOm� °o °o �v oe00000000moo o 00 0000000000000 0o °o °0 0000�000�0000 °o °o ° °aCC CCOCCCCCOCCCO CCoe 0, °9000o�00000000aa0000000000000� )ORPARK ADVANCE STORAGE — " -'" A"o " "" .AKA NEW Los ANGELES AVENUE. MooO�c_ CAHMMI � @m ��, 1s Rai u'� ■ Mr ■ •.a ■ 1a ■ an I'm museep ang wages, a as l a ■ ■a 1 _aas_at_.aa r a ■ ■■ 1 ail- aat_■� -_a■ ■•. 1 a 1 la I af- ata.a- aaa/,!!! .-1 a 1 •a 1 .1_aglr_•aasa .. 1 a 1- la 1 alaa�_f.f K ■■ 1 a 1 ' 1. 1 a as aalf- a- aa.� ■ ■ ■ 1 • 1' ■■ Iaaa�_faaaaa .. '..1J 1 1■ 1 JI_aa_af aal♦. ■• _.1J 1 ra 1 w_aaaa._aaa>. a.a 1 IN '1 aaaaaaasa -�aa■ '1 J ■' .. t a. aa11 M-1 a l aa.a / a Iwfaal�aaai Joan .fia ■' la Ia ■ ■! 1. ■fa..l L . •la l ilia am J�■ ■■ 1 a■ ■f 1. 1- ■■ 1 aaa■ 1 in 000 / aaaa I a in la. ff _L as Gall a ■af ..1./ la 1 ajaaa t wa.a11 aaaal 1 a .' ,■ 1 ■a. 'I r..alt ail.■ r a _. • ■a 1 a..s71 as ■ ■alwafetlaaa-laaastla ■ ■a 1 aa.ss 1 a■ ■■ l .■ al r ■• 1 � 1 ■■ 1r. as 1J. ■. .l a■ ■■ l• a.. ... r a..■ I . 1 fa 1- ■l' la■ ■a■1 a ■.a. .la la 1M. aSO a.aall a..arla 1' Ia ling..' I/a gall ail..- 1• 1'l■ Iaaa�l aaa-I aa.-ia ,■ Iaiaastlsaastlaaaf.la 1 /■ tJI•■• 1.. aalra..■ 1� la in am r. a� r a■.- I as a- r a fA 1■1 >r M y pa OA f10 Y fIM 0111 N Y 1x11 {�L � �. D ae1 1s 111 f1. m1 '1 111 fe r 1. 1. m .. m, D arrj D SOS D D Nos D kill D am, D %as D Van f01 D D D D D D D D D Di D ©0000aoaoa0000�� f1 000000a © ©aooao�.: 0o°©0oo0o o 0©il ©©0oo v oo©© o o o © © © ©© © © ©o© ©a oa© © o o© ©©o©a0000 000©000 o ©aoo ©oaoo©a ooa© © col o C3 V-3 oo"L3E3 c�0©o © a© ° j�oor�oo ©o ©o ©o ©000©o©c3cJ© =m I I Q ° owl oil • 0 co: 0000ao© ©o ©v ©a0000 ©v ©a ©ooccE Mp7j�..,.�a000 vv ©o ©ail o l' fto Am T ftwu CAP EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS FACING GOLDIAN STREET —Wkff " WMNW k= rw Accolf PWOTT w eTnae cam 111,111= —Millit cow Rolm X111 114A4111111! an" OMIM1 N IM ti' /Associates to =A LA WAVA If= N40 W= — am AMA Lox ru QRA LA PAM PUM 49-M WU Cka LA WM 91111C0 4946 WMAL am " LA WAVA SYM " GMTAL RICK MOORPARK 101cm FM "M um A4000YYK C0000M 93021 A1,011114111 8711111~ "M 11111=111 FIRM anwr um BW MY ~ lRA9WX17l~ SWU ICTAL WAr Allfr Reelr Woods MOM T19"49.711LOI 14 am AMD RAM 111141111110— OM RAM VMW WAN WJOW 7 TT in "WOWAL Nam Ckft AMM UM WTALOW IM= "am WA ww am RAM mom Well $000111111! wff FACE WANU am WTA► or ►AIMA – 11TA11111111 " INTA► Or MAllk Amn k= wo — WAR, PRIZE W011011 Ism W"M WTAL40LO MW WISDOM WIN WINAW - --T7]FTTl"TTT r,rTT1 1 i-T-r 7-1 .1 717.1 FUTT-17-1 - I .7 3L afflillillit I" K"M GRA kA IVAU Sn= 19-M CK, EMBIDA ELEVATIONS FACING LOS ANGELES Avemuc - EMT END ICE a"11114 cow K"M "M M ma Am a=" MR EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS FACING GOLDIAN STREET 9—f r v DCTERIOR ELEVATIONS cNot" A&ADURIAN INVESTMENTS X111 114A4111111! an" OMIM1 N IM ti' /Associates to 875 NEW LOS ANCOM AVENUE Archilegfuro Rome Estate MOORPARK ADVANCE STORAGE A4000YYK C0000M 93021 WAKIP41 #IWO 243M 0 Taro 000 1111AA01 SUVA E-217 875 NEW LOS ANGELES AVENUE, MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA To""" ;g 530 FACNAU SW4U" Reelr Woods MOM T19"49.711LOI 14 cAwaff 0 92M FM 9".716.0118 IMr AR>1>11r flMll7 W — — no o p !!1lRMt am r1AFM MA u "m sym 9940 COW M LAOR IAIM W CRAR U 111iRA frYLSi 111 rM c11tT1 MAIM ir1Q1 a�1Li mn=m ma wAsw UM Vann Fm MAtlll'r 11M am Alma ft== WON MIT + ttim /WI !era MM! slat nAa1e rAO1/1M RrAM /rnae -!_1 l r r 1_ T_ � l J MA AIM S YAa IFU wx PAM WAM km 1� -__ C.-... ' i 01 .or IAWA .._ . -! F C40R RAIt2 AAOMJM iAN Ir11M0' — _. 1ilAR AiMaa 11AU MAW *AT — - .�.. `_ -T - -i j - - -j GOlr1<A1MR1:r WCCIL/C[ fa �- i -r-r- - - r t Awl -_ -- -- 1 ` i ' I r F { �. �•`�• _ - _- _ -__ -_ ___ - -�- - Tom.._.. -��_ -_ -_- _ -_ - = -__ =_ _- _ r1S-i% is •J.y!k •/. , `:'f a: r`i 4. b.1. � •j' � -- --- — sr�- �isr��.::m. exTERIOR ELCVATIONS FACING NORTH FROM ADJACENT PROFCRTY - EAST ENO P" Acm twm to CLS u YANA STM /l+n ClMtrs Pm=w psa rA NO am Am" am rut- Irtlr PAM wimv M.ICt -_ ........ COLOR AN900 NAO/ fAY1 MAY •- _ . _. -- �:..`.: :.'. auR u WM Mf = I94M cabs - - - . "!era rotor 001AR 1*'. pAaw Rr.#jk -s f wM CnettroR CLCVATIONS FAGINO WEST FROM AD HT FROPGRTY - i �W-- r� /«AssoCi tes EXTERIOR E LE1/ATIQNS ASADURIAN INVESTMENTS %" °` fgMi rA•�r'Q Arc111rfccYrf Ilffi afi +if STORAGE 8751m,m,A,,,, �. 0/OCT1.. ,�. . M04RPARK ADVANCE '�°�`�'�"�` 1� °` "�� `� �Mat�� 5" E-217 ,t�ra�e s�o•ooe9 ..,..1 �, � w� awn" AVENUE MOORPARK, CAUFORN'A FACNW ��+ nocr:1 .�tt.ott4 we .�ibott• 875 NEW LOS ANGELES • ITAL901 KAY YlrAL IWW R4110M WTAL IAI6p Oka UYALM wromm WTAL rom = A NO U030 -- 1umm PAR MAIM MA1L>< 011alM WTAL KILV NN LnOt AM" Alin YAN MAY cma No Auxica - ---� OUT YlrAL PAWU W PLAWIIII ow WAL rnm A mil mm Gkft MUM MOM w" IA/hi: mm i Fle4li 1H YlTAL PAND" cam ICI sumum- ovtwAI 1trAL "LLAP NN CdA& ICI "mm ITAYNM NO WTAL IPWLN MV% I WAL Ff" IT"= no WrAL WW ITAWW KAY WTAL form EXTERIOR ELEVATION FACING WEST - INTERIOR OF SITE a • a � EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS AVOURIAN INVESTMENTS X0 MAMN 1.'. ` y' �� ' Associ MOORPARK ADVANCE STORAGE M Pe& Un MWZ MEMA WA 0oRL. ,, ArcllLltllt•.• YIYI Estate MOOIIri1110(, CJILRCIdW�93021 LalArons w'" � �w aua � 2433! B Toro fwd Stloe E217 875 NEW LOS ANGELES AVENUE, MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA � 9"264 n " ��� r L CCLaI�bPn�y .71v ao 14 Fsc949.7t6.0 —Pass. flaa waver km MAN, AaiaJIll km wr war am WTAL WFM AW rLim i 01 RAM VAW WAR AMA wASfl!lelW IASAL $11111111 taanc w s ecarA STAlm am lRAL ow Caw! rWAM urIMO WTAL PAM um 1111131111. IAAAM W namm Cif! rAAM MCtN10 Wall &WAI E OISl w kvAL "LLrr 000! CoLw wa rcow � war em dwm ITwelr ow om !or 11eL>w FM 111 l UM — au. ft= NOW KM WPM =A u m wrwls dm wa W ft wean km WAS eur Ieeaw flaw weer ma enew aela KAns mm a1e.w alwrt "To r aLr! a!!6A 01AOR Mw rM/ alwl 4 wwN lllQe MM arrrK NR C1Xw: LA IMIM plRt! MM OM r; ,,'•yt ELM w MCI 111— r' r # r EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ASADURIAN INVESTMENTS` N �r • PwAssociates 875WWUX W$ � �� ,Q �� ArcAlcccAOr• lcai latctc MOORPARK ADVANCE STORAGE w1AlOAS A1.s ii 24330 e1ilOOdi 875 NEW LOS ANGELES AM ME MOORPARKfl CAUFMA f�R X921 F�wU IV om M�01 ` n«TO flo `r�".»�.oi 14 %ftiff0 92W F=949.716.0118 —STAMW RM 1eTeL ROMw r� re♦I® irk rwetlslt r--- e�e�ewllr��, tug► coot OWE •AOtatlow MAL I71M00t cow PJM � liTM //IBJIs Qeta fM�! IAt�rr 1011 tJNI� OlA u MAMt tiT{Rf ■m ttR! fi1� ttiLq on Am A1J< u BI TC�[i 1 1 F-- � 41 1 r /R tv CROSS SECTION THRQtJ6H THE SITE r r r r CROSS SECTION Associates EXTERfOR ELEVATIONS/ JQSADURIAN INVESTMENTS '' .� !G�/ lA�l� Afclllletture fetal Rotate MOORPARK ADVANCE STORAGE L06N�"'9M1 pow , 11�0011rIN0l.CNEOIMN93021 sJ1lN � •••w• �24p3]u��BTao�o�d 3110tE -2j7 875 NEYV LOS AMGE ES AVENUE, MOORPAI K, CAUFORNIA FK3MEP2 s3"w no « Taio •7� d0 14 Fat"9.7116A1�18 METAL ROOF TO WALL Zv Now" *law /// j fffflf ffa. ; ' wIw• TYPICAL FOOTING = 1® DECORATIVE METAL HEAD ,' O7 DECORATIVE METAL SILL H ® VEHICLE RAMP FOOTING 10 rr ww• ww Oft fa wamrf nhkmwwir OVERHEAD DOOR HEAD , w i� ~ DOOR HEAD- STOREFRDNT ,;;: 11 SATE POST HINGE ,, w O8 40800 ■Ir �It• ■fal ft• m Msf f{ wa Ieft em � MM UM MUL t■af aISM �wrw GNOMON TUBE STEEL FENCE ,. O5 STANDARD PARKING STALL ra 1! ma fl I= NQ W WOMAN s MMM MMM mzzm om w MIMME • M " fa w lamo yam fu w �� ti OVERHEAD DOOR THRESHOLD 1® "OR SILL - STOREFRONT ,'�; 1®. ENCLOSURE GATE LOCK ,'�; O9 "ROLLING ENTRY GATE , �';. © "HANDICAP PARKING STALL BUILDING DETAILS ASADURIAN INVESTMENTS T� ��'` u,, /«associates 875 NEW LOS ANGELES /WEAK ONE oo OCT I. •A �!Q •' Arcnl�•c�ur• f••I E.t•�• MOORPARK ADVANCE STORAGE MOORPNtK. UUFdWA93021 fE A&a :: ` L2a4y33v6�aEI TaoRosd�E 21 875 NEW LOS ANGELES AVENME, WORPARK, CN FORMA FACUMU W5� 53 MM 0.5 OCT of ID •" TeT 949.716.0114 `� Fsc 949.716.0118 8 ITEM v • b onuffmom ON CITY OF MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT DATE OF MEETING: November 13, 2001 Appeal No. 2001 -06 Appeal of decision by the Director of Community Development denial of Zone Clearance 2001 -316 Assessor Parcel Numbers APN Nos.: 506 -0- 020 -650 CEQA Exempt, Class 1, Existing Facilities Applicant: Tait & Associates REQUEST: Appeal from the decision of the Director of Community Development to deny Zone Clearance 2001 -316 (Attachment 1), to allow occupancy of 1478 square -foot unit to develop a take out and delivery pizza restaurant that would exceed parking requirements. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: This appeal, together with the Zone Clearance request, are categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a Class 1 exemption under Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). LOCATION: 484 New Los Angeles Avenue. (SW Corner New Los Angeles Ave. and Spring Rd., Gateway Center) Vicinity Map � s units ,r -T- 'T- - --- - yiE' -- -- -- _7 A�— �V ?uiMUtsl_w Ar �„� s.. 1�'.lu rUTABtO•< I i M 0 >� >�? .i ..D?F? n .._AV- IST ST L_'. _. _. ._ y! v`+I Pt If �r <iAiow� ttt Eli! XTER � 3!�l j _. ST n� - UP FITCH AY RR NEiROLIN OR - 1 PARK i )SA AV !411 1 Flu < � 3E 1 LASSE' AV �.0 >� Iw AV� IJ II.F•Y;YY S; e_.: a t�!' a9 ER ; AVit EVF.RCSI =! a Po o ; C., Sm a � �zE-_w_ ;. I AV AV ■ ■ - =s�F a —AV, NEW LOS 1 IUMIOOS AV•t,i /' SCE A. E3 tl.. I ¢ No 2- 1 W WITA'. i!k i � Qi' E V111A r.A1ESEAw! Av 51 CT Site a 4 I _ N I RECOMMENDATION SUN 4ARY : DENY the appeal. S: \Community Development \Everyone \APPEALS \Appeal 2001.06 Pizza Hut.doc Planning Commission Agenda Report - Appeal 2001 -06 November 13, 2001 Page 2 BACKGROUND AND PRIOR ACTIONS: On September 26, 2001, the Director of Community Development denied Zoning Clearance 2001- 316. Th? application was a request to change use of a 1468 square foot unit from a medical /chiropractic office into a take- out and delivery pizza restaurant. The Zoning Clearance was denied due to a lack of required parking. The applicant filed an appeal on October 8, 2001 ORDINANCE AND POLICIES: Section 17.44.090 of the Zoning Ordinance provides that within ten (10) calendar days after a permit is approved, conditionally approved, or denied, any aggrieved person may file an appeal of the decision to the Planning Commission to be reviewed at the earliest convenient date. General Plan and Zoning Designation and Land Use Direction General Plan Zonincr Land Use Site: C -2 CPD Commercial North M R -1 Single- family Residential South C -2 CPD Recreational Vehicle Storage Yard and Flood Control Channel East C -2 CPD Commercial West C -2 CPD Commercial C -2: General Commercial; CPD: Commercial Planned Development; M: Medium Density Residential (4du /acre maximum); R -1: Single Family Residential. DISCUSSION: Applicant has submitted an appeal to the denial by the Director of Community Development of Zoning Clearance 2001- 316, requesting tenant improvements and occupancy of a 1478 square foot retail space for a take -out and delivery restaurant. S: \Community Development \Everyone \APPEALS \Appeal 2001.06 Pizza Hut.doc Planning Commission Agenda Report - Appeal 2001 -06 November 13, 2001 Page 3 The previous use of this space was a medical office, which at the required parking rate of one (1) space per 300 square feet of floor area requires five (5) parking spaces. A take -out restaurant, as proposed, requires one (1) space per 100 square feet of floor area, or fifteen (15) parking spaces, creating a deficit of ten (10) parking spaces. There is insufficient parking on site to accommodate the deficit. The Application to File an Appeal submitted on October 8, 2001, (Attachment 2) presented the applicant's grounds for appeal and action requested. Under the applicant's grounds for appeal, the applicant states that no consideration was given for peak hour operations of a delivery and take -out only pizzeria. The applicant has provided graphs and photos supporting that position. Chapter 17.32.020 of the Zoning Ordinance allows staff the option to grant up to a 20% reduction in the required number of parking spaces for mixed use projects when it can be demonstrated that the peak hour parking for each of the uses does not compete with each other. The Community Development Director previously considered that option and rejected it since many of the office /retail /service uses have overlapping peak hours to the restaurant uses. Staff has reviewed the submitted information and determined that the information provided does not satisfy the criteria to grant such a reduction. This site has a variety of uses, including restaurants, which require the full number of parking spaces throughout their hours of operation. Even if a 20% reduction were approved, there would still be a deficit of 7 parking spaces. The applicant requests that the Planning Commission overturn the decision to deny the Zoning Clearance. The applicant has stated, incorrectly, that there is a deficit of one stall. This is in reference to the parking code requirements of Chapter 17.32.010HH, which requires take -out restaurants have a minimum of six (6) parking spaces, regardless of size. This requirement prevails for smaller occupancies, and does not supercede the one (1) space per 100 square feet of floor area standard when the latter requires more than six (6) parking spaces. S: \Community Development \Everyone \APPEALS \Appeal 2001.06 Pizza Hut.doc Planning Commission Agenda Report - Appeal 2001 -06 November, 13, 2001 Page 4 The applicant's request is tantamount to asking the Director, and the Planning Commission to grant a variance to standards without benefit of a variance application and review. It is doubtful. that requisite findings for a variance can be made in this situation. There are sufficient vacant commercially zoned units in other centers that could accommodate this use. SUMARY Denial of the Zoning Clearance is the appropriate action. There is no authority in the Zoning Code to waive parking requirements unless it can be shown that this is a mixed use project that can demonstrate that the peak hour parking for each of the uses does not compete with other uses on site. Even if the parking requirement were reduced by 200, a deficit of 7 parking spaces remains. The applicant has clearly not demonstrated that the parking requirement should be reduced for this site, nor has a variance to do so been filed. STAFF RECObMNDATIONS 1. Open the public hearing, accept public testimony and close the public hearing. 2. Adopt Resolution No. PC 2001- denying Appeal No. 20Cl -06 t By: Jo �ph'kiss' - Principal Planner Attachments: 1. Zone Clearance 2001 -316. 2. Application to File an Appeal with attachments. S: \Community Development \Everyone \APPEALS \Appeal 2001.06 Pizza Hut.doc