Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAG RPTS 2009 0526 PC REGPLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA May 26, 2009 7:00 P.M. Resolution No. 2009 -544 Moorpark Community Center 799 Moorpark Avenue 1. CALL TO ORDER: 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 3. ROLL CALL: 4. PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS AND SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: 5. PUBLIC COMMENT: 6. REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO, THE AGENDA: All writings and documents provided to the majority of the Commission regarding all agenda items are available for public inspection at the City Hall public counter located at 799 Moorpark Avenue during regular business hours. The agenda packet for all regular Commission meetings is also available on the City's website at www.ci.mooroark.ca.us. Any member of the public may address the Commission during the Public Comments portion of the Agenda, unless it is a Public Hearing or a Discussion item. Speakers who wish to address the Commission concerning a Public Hearing or Discussion item must do so during the Public Hearing or 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; for a Discussion item, prior to the Chair's call for speaker cards for each Discussion agenda item; and for a Public Hearing item, prior to the opening of each Public Hearing, or beginning of public testimony for a continued hearing. A limitation of three minutes shall be imposed upon each Public Comment and 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 Discussion items. Any questions concerning any agenda item may be directed to the Community Development/Planning office at 517 -6233. Regular Planning Commission Meeting Agenda May 26, 2009 Page 2 7. ANNOUNCEMENTS, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS AND REPORTS ON MEETINGS /CONFERENCES ATTENDED BY THE COMMISSION: (Future agenda items are tentative and are subject to rescheduling.) A. Future Agenda Items: Rescinding Toll Mazur DA, GPA, ZC CUP for National Ready Mix iii. Housing Element Update iv. ZOA 2007 -01 Wireless Facilities — SB 1627 V. Residential Planned Development 2009 -01 (Area Housing Authority of Ventura County) vi. Conditional Use Permit 2008 -05 and Industrial Planned Development 2008 -01 (Pacific Pride Fueling Station) 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (next Resolution No. PC- 2009 -544) A. Consider General Plan Amendment 2009 -02 Amending the Land Use Element, Section 5.1 • Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2009 -02 Amending Chapter 17.64 of the Moorpark Municipal Code in its Entirety; and Downtown Specific Plan Amendment No 2 Amending Section 2.2.3 and 2.3.3 of the Downtown Specific Plan Regarding Density Bonus Policies and Regulations. Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the public hearing, accept public testimony, and close the public hearing; 2) Adopt Resolution No. PC -2009- recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 2009 -02, Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2009 -01, and Downtown Specific Plan Amendment No. 2. (Staff: David Bobardt) 9. DISCUSSION ITEMS: None 10. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. Consider Approval of the Regular Meeting Minutes of January 27 2009 Staff Recommendation: Approve the minutes. SACommunity Development \PLANNING COMM ISSION\NGENDA \2009 \09 0526_agn.doc Regular Planning Commission Meeting Agenda May 26, 2009 Page 3 B. Consider Approval of the Minutes of the Joint Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission Meeting of April 29 2009. Staff Recommendation: Approve the minutes. 11. ADJOURNMENT: In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, please contact the Community Development Department at (805) 517 -6233. Upon request, the agenda can be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability. Any request for disability - related modification or accommodation should be made at least 48 hours prior to the scheduled meeting to assist the City staff in assuring reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102- 35.104; ADA Title ll). S: \Community Development \PLANNING COMM I SSI ON\AG ENDA\2009\09 0526_agn.doc STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF VENTURA ) ss CITY OF MOORPARK ) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AGENDA I, Joyce R. Figueroa, declare as follows: That I am the Administrative Assistant of the City of Moorpark and that an agenda of the Regular Meeting of the Moorpark Planning Commission to be held on Tuesday, May 26, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Moorpark Community Center, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California, was posted on May 22, 2009, at a conspicuous place at the Moorpark Community Center, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on May 22, 2009. (4flel- t �Wh 0 Jo ce R. Figueroa, Administrative Assistant SACommunity DevelopmenAPLANNING COMM ISSION\AGENDA\2009 \09 0526_aop.doc ITEM: 8.A. MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Planning Commission FROM: David A. Bobardt, Planning Director Prepared by Barry K. Hogan, Deputy ity Manager DATE: May 21, 2009 (PC Meeting of 5/26/09) SUBJECT: Consider General Plan Amendment 2009 -02 Amending the Land Use Element, Section 5.1; Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2009 -02, Amending Chapter 17.64 of the Moorpark Municipal Code in its Entirety; and Downtown Specific Plan Amendment No. 2, Amending Section 2.2.3 and 2.3.3 of the Downtown Specific Plan Regarding Density Bonus Policies and Regulations BACKGROUND California Government Code Section 65915 et seq. requires local jurisdictions to adopt ordinances that provide for density bonuses, concessions, and incentives when housing for very low, low, and moderate income households or seniors is provided. A density bonus is an increase in the number of units that can be built above what is allowed under the existing zoning for the land. Moorpark's density bonus policies and regulations are contained in Section 5.1 of the General Plan Land Use Element, Chapter 17.64 of the Zoning Ordinance, and in the Downtown Specific Plan. Recent changes in the Government Code relative to density bonuses require that the City amend its density bonus provisions in all three of these documents. The City's density bonus program is currently capped at a maximum of twenty -five percent (25 %) above the maximum density allowed according to the underlying zoning. State law now requires cities to grant density bonuses up to thirty -five percent (35 %) depending on the percentage and type of affordable housing provided. State law also allows cities to approve greater density bonuses by local ordinance. DISCUSSION General Plan Amendment 2009 -02: In the Land Use Element of the General Plan, Section 5. 1, under Land Use Categories, is a paragraph and a table indicating how density bonuses are to be implemented. Specifically, the language is as follows, with the sugges`_ed changes shown in legislative format: k Vvv1A Honorable Planning Commission May 26, 2009 Page 2 Residential Density For each of the residential land use classifications listed in Table 2, the maximum density for new development shall be the density as shown in Gem A. The City Council may approve a density bonus above ever the otherwise maximum residential density, consistent with the State Density Bonus Law (Section 65915 et seq. of the California Government Code) and any density bonus provisions contained in the City Municipal Code. No dDensity bonuses will increase with the percentage of affordable housing provided, but may not exceed 100 % shall exceed the Density limit chein Column B of Table 2. Table 2 RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DESIGNATIONS Residential Designation X Maximum Density* 13. Density *- RL Rural Low 1.0 DU /5 Acres 1.25 DI J15 AGFe RH Rural High 1.0 DU /Acre 4-.2-& w,1,-.� L Low 1.0 DU /Acre - A- W.IAsre ML Medium Low 2.0 DU /Acre 34Bl 1`e M Medium 4.0 DU /Acre 54)_ F H High 7.0 DU /Acre 10.0- IDWAsre V H Very High 15.0 D U /Acre U/Asre Maximum development density unless a density bonus is approved consistent with State Density Bonus Law and City Municipal Code. No density beRu6 shall Fesult iR a density level whiGh exGeeds the Density Limi established in Table 2 It is not necessary to have detailed density limits in the General Plan when the state law already covers this issue. Having detailed density limits in the general plan provides for a "built -in" area of potential conflict with state law as state law changes in the future. The Zoning Ordinance and Specific Plans, which must be consistent with the General Plan, are where the City's specific concerns can be addressed. The 100% cap on density bonuses is consistent with the recommendations for the Zoning Ordinance. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2009 -02: Chapter 17.64, when adopted in 1994, was in compliance with the state law in effect at that time. It was very specific as to the City's requirements for affordable housing and density bonus. The amendment proposed references state law, describes the City's process for approving density bonuses and, in accordance with state law, provides regulations to allow the City the opportunity to grant density bonuses for developments which provide high percentages of low and very low affordable housing above the levels allowed by state law. S:1Community DevelopmentlDEV PMTSIZ 0 A12009102- Density Bonus1090526 pc agenda rpt.doc ;rn Honorable Planning Commission May 26, 2009 Page 3 State density bonus law allows a local jurisdiction to have an ordinance that grants density bonuses in excess of the thirty -five percent (35 %) levels now mandated. This proposed amendment would give the City Council the authority to grant two levels of greater density bonuses for projects with a high percentage of housing units that are specifically restricted in their price or rent to be affordable to low and very low income households according to the following: Under the proposed ordinance, if a project has sixty percent (60 %) of its units restricted for, and to be affordable by low and very low income households, the Council may grant up to a seventy -five percent (75 %) density bonus. If a project has one hundred percent (100 %) of its units restricted for, and to be affordable by low and very low income households, the Council may grant up to a one hundred percent (100 %) density bonus. In order to grant the density bonus under the proposed ordinance, the City Council would have to approve a residential planned development permit (RPD), development agreement (DA) or disposition and development agreement (DDA) and a housing agreement. Approval of these applications are necessary to ensure quality of the housing development, evaluate any incentives or concessions granted by the City, and to ensure that the low and very low income housing remains affordable for at least thirty (30) years. The allowance to grant density bonuses above the thirty -five percent (35 %) level of state law is only for low and very low income housing, and does not include other types of housing addressed in the state density bonus law, such as senior and moderate income housing. It is staff's opinion that the thirty -five (35 %) density bonus for senior housing or moderate housing under state law is sufficient to attract such housing and if not, it may be supplemented with City incentives or concessions to be determined on a project -by- project basis. The proposed ordinance is in Exhibit B of the attached resolution. For density bonuses in excess of the state mandate, the City Council would have to find that the housing meets a need identified by the Housing Element of the General Plan and that projected project is compatible with surrounding development. Downtown Specific Plan Amendment No. 2: Two amendments to the Downtown Specific Plan are necessary in order to bring the Specific Plan into consistency with the proposed amendments to the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance: Section 2.2.3, Residential Planned Development (RPD) under Chapter 2 of Land Use and Zoning; and Section 2.3.3 Lot Consolidation and Incentives The revised language for both sections is shown below in legislative format: SACommunity DevelopmentOEV PMTSIZ 0 A12009102- Density Bonus1090526 pc agenda rpt.doc 1 Honorable Planning Commission May 26, 2009 Page 4 2.2.3 Residential Planned Development (RPD) 2. Development Requirements The density range m °. min the Residential Planned Development area hasve been established to encourage lot consolidation and redevelopment of under - developed or declining properties. Density bonuses may be granted by the City Council for a housing development anvwhere in the RPD areasT he Fna*;mum un.de.- the deRsity Gan only be aGhieved when it Or, f9F a low/veFy low or housing pFejert in accordance with provisions of California Government Code Section 65915 et seg. and Chapter 17.64 of the Moorpark Municipal Code. Section 2.3.3 Lot Consolidation and Incentives low end of 7 dwelling units peF ar.Fe. This allows the fefincreased density under certain standards and conditions. 2.3.3 Lot Consolidation and Incentives The maximum density in the High to Very High Density Residential areas can only be achieved when lot consolidation occurs. On the Specific Plan Zoning Map, Figure 6, those areas are zoned RPD 7 — 14 dwelling units per acre. Lot consolidation allows for greater flexibility in site design, potential for reduction in the number of driveways serving the consolidated property and opportunities to more quickly improve a neighborhood. Density bonuses which are -granted must be consistent with the requirements of Chapter 17.64 of the Moorpark Municipal Code and the California Government Code 65915 et seq. Without lot consolidation the density bonus in the RPD 7 -14 dwelling units per acre zones will be calculated at 7 du /ac With lot consolidation, the density bonus will be calculated at 14 du /ac (The remainder of this section is proposed to be deleted since it conflicts with the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance.) The proposed amendments to Section 2.2.3 clarify that the City Council may approve density bonuses anywhere within the established range of density allowed for RPDs and allows for maximum density bonuses for housing developments which are one hundred percent (100 %) low and very low income housing. The proposed amendments to Section 2.3.3 simplify the process by referring to the Zoning Ordinance provisions for density bonus. S:ICommunity DevelopmentlDEV PMTSIZ 0 A12009102- Dens4 Bonus1090526 pc agenda rpt.doc ►�.?� Honorable Planning Commission May 26, 2009 Page 5 PROCESSING TIME LIMITS Since this ordinance amendment was initiated by the City, the processing time limits under the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 4.5), the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Title 7, Division 2), and the California Environmental Quality Act Statutes and Guidelines (Public Resources Code Division 13, and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3) are not applicable. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION In accordance with the City's environmental review procedures adopted by resolution, the Planning 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. Based upon the results of an Initial Study, the Director may determine that a project will not have a significant effect upon the environment. In such a case, a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration or a Mitigated Negative Declaration is prepared. For many projects, a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration will prove to be sufficient environmental documentation. If the Director determines that a project has the potential for significant adverse impacts and adequate mitigation can not be readily identified, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is prepared. The Director has reviewed this project and found it to qualify for a General Rule Exemption in accordance with Section 15061 of California Code of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines). No further environmental documentation is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Open the public hearing, accept public testimony and close the public hearing. 2. Adopt Resolution No. PC -2009- recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 2009 -02, Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2009 -02, and Downtown Specific Plan Amendment No. 2. ATTACHMENT: 1. PC Resolution 2009- SACommunity DevelopmentOEV PMTSIZ 0 AQ009102- Density Bonus1090526 pc agenda rpt.doc + �;, RESOLUTION NO. PC -2009- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2009 -02, AMENDING THE LAND USE ELEMENT, SECTION 5.1, LAND USE CLASSIFICATIONS, RESIDENTIAL DENSITY AND TABLE 2; ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 2009 -02, AMENDING CHAPTER 17.64 OF THE MOORPARK MUNICIPAL CODE IN ITS ENTIRETY; AND DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2, AMENDING SECTIONS 2.2.3 AND 2.3.3 OF THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN WHEREAS, at its meeting of May 26, 2009, the Planning Commission conducted a duly- noticed public hearing on General Plan Amendment 2009 -02 amending the Land Use Element, Section 5.1, Land Use Classifications, Residential Density and Table 2; Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2009 -02 Amending Chapter 17.64 of the Moorpark Municipal Code in its entirety; and Downtown Specific Plan Amendment No. 2, amending Sections 2.2.3 and 2.3.3 of the Downtown Specific Plan, received public testimony on the proposed amendments, and after receiving oral and written public testimony, closed the public hearing and reached a decision; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission concurs with the Planning Director's determination that this project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act by the general rule that CEQA only applies to projects that may have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 2009 -02, amending the Land Use Element, Section 5.1, Land Use Classifications, Residential Density and Table 2; Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2009 -02, amending Chapter 17.64 of the Moorpark Municipal Code in its entirety; and Downtown Specific Plan Amendment No. 2, amending Section 2.2.3 and 2.3.3 of the Downtown Specific Plan as recommended by staff and shown in Exhibits A, B, and C, attached. PC ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution No. PC -2009- Page 2 SECTION 2. CERTIFICATION OF ADOPTION: The Planning Director shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause a cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original resolutions. The action of the foregoing direction was approved by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF Bruce Hamous, Chair David A. Bobardt, Planning Director 12009. Exhibit A: Amendment to the Land Use Element Section 5.1, Land Use Classifications, Residential Density and Table 2 Exhibit B: Amendment to Chapter 17.64 of the Zoning Ordinance Exhibit C: Amendment to Sections 2.2.3 and 2.3.3 of the Downtown Specific Plan SACommunity Development \DEV PMTS\Z 0 A\2009 \02- Density Bonus \PC 090526.doc EXHIBIT A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2009 -02 LAND USE ELEMENT SECTION 5.1 RESIDENTIAL DENSITY AND TABLE 2 Residential Density For each of the residential land use classifications listed in Table 2, the maximum density for new development shall be the density as shown +R C91 . The City Council may approve a density above ever bonus over the otherwise maximum residential density, consistent with the State Density Bonus Law (Section 65915 et seq. of the California Government Code) and any density bonus provisions contained in the City Municipal Code. No - Density bonuses will increase with the percentage of affordable housing provided but may not exceed 100% shall eXGeed the Table 2 RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DESIGNATIONS Residential Designation A Maximum Density* B: ger�sit ** RE Rural Low 1.0 DU /5 Acres RH Rural High 1.0 DU /Acre 445 D' 114r-m L Low 1.0 DU /Acre 244A;/AGe ML Medium Low 2.0 DU /Acre 3 -DU AGfe M Medium 4.0 DU /Acre 5 -04)41 H High 7.0 DU /Acre 10.0 DW AGFe VH Very High 15.0 DU /Acre 29�- DLl/Asrg Maximum development density unless a density bonus is approved consistent with State Density Bonus Law and City Municipal Code. Ne density benus 6hall result OR a density level WhiGh eXGeeds the Density Limit eocaviisi icv , SACommunity Development \DEV PMTS\Z 0 A\2009 \02- Density Bonus \Exhibit A PC Reso.doc ' (: (° 11° EXHIBIT B ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 2009 -02 CHAPTER 17.64 DENSITY BONUS PROVISIONS (AMENDED IN ITS ENTIRETY) 17.64.010 Purpose and intent. 17.64.020 Definitions. 17.64.030 Density bonus, concession and incentives. 17.64.040 Housing agreement. 17.64.050 Compatibility with market -rate housing 17.64.010 Purpose and intent. This chapter sets forth the requirements under which density bonuses and other incentives may be offered by the city to developers of housing development projects pursuant to State Government Code Section 65915 et seq. The city's intent is to encourage the provision of housing affordable to very low, low, and moderate income households and to encourage the provision of housing for senior citizens consistent with the latest adopted Moorpark General Plan, the requirements of Government Code 65915 et seq. and this chapter. 17.64.020 Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, unless otherwise apparent from the context, the definitions of Government Code 65915 et seq. shall apply. In addition, the following definition is provided: "Housing agreement" means an agreement between the developer and the city guaranteeing the affordability of rental or ownership units to very low or lower income households or to senior citizens in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. 17.64.030 Density bonus, concessions and incentives. A. The city council shall grant a density bonus and /or concessions and /or incentives for eligible residential development projects in accordance with state density bonus law (Government Code Section 65915 et seq.) and this chapter through the approval of a residential planned development permit, development agreement in accordance with chapter 15.40 of the Moorpark Municipal Code, and /or disposition and development agreement in accordance with California Health and Safety Code 33000 et seq., and a housing agreement. B. Density. 1. The increase in the allowable housing units under a density bonus is based on the percentage density increase above that permitted under the existing zoning per state density bonus law (Government Code Section 65915 et seq.) and this chapter. t' -� SACommunity Development \DEV PMTS\Z 0 A\2009 \02- Density Bonus \Exhibit B PC Reso.doc (! �" 2. When one hundred percent (100 %) of the units in a housing development project are restricted to be affordable to low or very low income households, a density bonus up to a maximum of one hundred percent (100 %) greater density than allowed by the existing zone may be granted by the city council when considering project entitlements. The one hundred percent (100 %) maximum density bonus is inclusive of all density bonuses allowed under Government Code Section 65915 et seq. and this chapter. 3. When at least sixty percent (60 %) of the units in a housing development project are restricted to be affordable to low or very low income households, a density bonus up to a maximum of seventy -five percent (75 %) greater density than allowed by the existing zone may be granted by the city council when considering project entitlements. The seventy -five percent (75 %) maximum density bonus is inclusive of all density bonuses allowed under Government Code Section 65915 et seq. and this chapter. 4. For density bonuses higher than required by State law, the city council must find that a) the project will help to meet a local housing need identified by the housing element of the general plan and b) the project will be compatible with surrounding development. C. Concessions and /or incentives. 1. Concessions and /or incentives determined by the city council necessary in order to develop affordable units in lieu of or in addition to density bonuses may include but are not limited to the following: a. A reduction in development standards by an amount not to exceed twenty percent (20 %), or a reduction in architectural design requirements beyond the minimum building standards adopted by the city; and b. Other regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by the developer or the city, which result in identifiable cost reductions. 17.64.040 Housing agreement. A housing agreement in a form acceptable to the city council is required as part of the granting of a density bonus. This agreement must meet the minimum requirements of Government Code Section 65915 for continued affordability. 17.64.050 Compatibility with market -rate housing. Affordable housing units provided by a density bonus and developed in conjunction with a market -rate housing development must be of similar design and quality as the market -rate units. Exterior colors and materials and interior floor plans and materials of affordable units must be comparable with the market -rate units. Interior window treatments (i.e. blinds, shutters, and /or curtains), must be provided on all windows of affordable units. Other interior features, such as luxury flooring, upgraded appliances and custom lighting fixtures, need not be the same as market -rate units as determined by the city in the housing agreement. S: \Community Development \DEV PMTS\Z 0 A\2009 \02- Density Bonus \Exhibit B PC Reso.doc EXHIBIT C DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2 SECTIONS 2.2.3 (2) AND 2.3.3 2.2.3 Residential Planned Development (RPD) 2. Development Requirements The density range ein the Residential Planned Development area hasye been established to encourage lot consolidation and redevelopment of under - developed or declining properties. Density bonuses may be granted by the City Council for a housing development anywhere in the RPD areasThe maximum undeF the density bGRU6 PFGgFaFn is 20 units/aGFe. The maximum in accordance with provisions of California Government Code Section 65915 et seg. and Chapter 17.64 of the Moorpark Municipal Code Section 2.3.3 Lot Consolidation and Incentives sestionallows the fe;xincreased density under certain standards and conditions. 2.3.3 Lot Consolidation and Incentives The maximum density in the High to Very High Density Residential areas can only be achieved when lot consolidation occurs. On the Specific Plan Zoning Map, Figure 6, those areas are zoned RPD 7 — 14 dwelling units per acre. Lot consolidation allows for greater flexibility in site design, potential for reduction in the number of driveways serving the consolidated property and opportunities to more quickly improve a neighborhood. Density bonuses which are granted must be consistent with the requirements of Chapter 17.64 of the Moorpark Municipal Code and the California Government Code 65915 et seq. Without lot consolidation the density bonus in the RPD 7 -14 dwelling units per acre zones will be calculated at 7 du /ac. With lot consolidation the density bonus will be calculated at 14 du /ac. (The remainder of this section is proposed to be deleted since it conflicts with the amendment to the Zoning Ordinance.) ..-1 SACommunity Development \DEV PMTS\Z 0 A\2009 \02- Density Bonus\Exhibit C PC Reso.doc ` . t L ITEM: 10.A. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Moorpark, California January 27 2009 A Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Moorpark was held on January 27, 2009, in the Council Chambers of said City located at 799 Moorpark Avenue; Moorpark, California. 1. CALL TO ORDER: David Bobardt, Planning Director called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Joyce Figueroa, Administrative Assistant, led the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. OATH OF OFFICE: A. City Clerk Administers Oath of Office to the Planning Commission (Staff: Deborah Traffenstedt) City Clerk, Deborah Traffenstedt, administered the oath of office to Planning Commissioners Jodi Bagwell, Mark Di Cecco, Bruce Hamous, Kipp Landis, and Mark Taillon. Staff attending the meeting included Barry Hogan, Deputy City Manager; David Bobardt, Planning Director; Joseph Fiss, Principal Planner; Freddy Carrillo, Assistant Planner I; and Joyce Figueroa, Administrative Assistant. 4. PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS AND SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: A. Consider Selection of Chair and Vice Chair Jodi Bagwell Mark Di Cecco Bruce A. Hamous Kipp Landis Mark G. Taillon Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the floor to nominations for a Chair; 2) Once sufficient nominations have been made, close the nominations and vote; 3) Open the floor for nominations for a Vice Chair; and 4) Once sufficient nominations have been made, close the nominations and vote. (Staff: David Bobardt) J C Minutes of the Planning Commission Moorpark, California Page 2 January 27 2009 MOTION: Commissioner Landis moved and Commissioner Di Cecco seconded a motion to nominate Commissioner Hamous as Chair. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. MOTION: Commissioner Taillon moved and Commissioner Di Cecco seconded a motion to nominate Commissioner Landis as Vice Chair. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. AT THIS POINT in the meeting the Commission recessed to allow the Chair and Vice Chair to be seated. The time was 8:07 p.m. The Planning Commission meeting reconvened at 8:20p.m. 5. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. 6. REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO, THE AGENDA: None. 7. ANNOUNCEMENTS, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS AND REPORTS ON MEETINGS /CONFERENCES ATTENDED BY THE COMMISSION: (Future agenda items are tentative and are subject to rescheduling.) A. Future Agenda Items: i. Rescinding Toll Mazur DA, GPA, ZC ii. CUP and IPD for Pacific Pride Fueling Station iii. CUP for National Ready Mix iv. Housing Element Update B. Mandatory Ethics Training for the City Council, Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission and staff will be on Wednesday, February 25, 2009; 7:00 p.m. — 9:30 p.m. C. 2009 Planners Institute and Mini Expo, March 25 — 27, 2009, Anaheim, California Mr. Bobardt announced the mandatory Ethics Training for the City Council, Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission and staff will be on Wednesday, February 25, 2009, and discussed future agenda items. Chair Hamous welcomed Commissioner Bagwell to the Planning Commission. SACommunity Development\PLANNING COMMISSION\ MINUTES \2009 \09_0127_pcm_draft.doc q > 60 'V A d Minutes of the Planning Commission Moorpark, California Page 3 January 27 2009 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (next Resolution No. PC- 2009 -541) A. Consider Conditional Use Permit No. 2008 -09 a Request to Install a New Thirty -Five Foot (35') Tall "Mono- pine" Wireless Communication Facility at the Ventura County Water Works Reservoir District 1 (South of Tierra Reiada, Between Thomasville Court and Sunnyslope Place) on the Application of Vince Amaya, for Verizon Wireless. (Continued from November 25. 2008 meeting) Staff Recommendation: 1) Close the public hearing and take item off calendar. (Staff: Freddy Carrillo) Mr. Bobardt requested that this public hearing be closed and taken off calendar. Staff is working with the applicant on redesign of the project, and will come back at a later date with a re- advertised public hearing. Chair Hamous closed the Public Hearing. MOTION: Vice Chair Landis moved and Commissioner Taillon seconded a motion to approve staff recommendation. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. B. Consider Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 2008 -11, to Allow Service of Beer and Wine for On -Site Consumption with Food Service at an Existing Restaurant (Tokiwa Sushi) Located at 476 Los Angeles Avenue #B10 on the Application of Vince Doan. Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the public hearing, accept public testimony and close the public hearing: 2) Adopt Resolution No. PC- 2009 -541 conditionally approving Conditional Use Permit 2008 -11. (Staff: Freddy Carrillo) Chair Hamous recused himself due to a potential conflict of interest; he has a listing agreement on some of the vacant space in the retail center, and stepped down from the dais. The time was 7:11 p.m. Mr. Carrillo gave the staff report. A discussion followed among Commissioners and staff as to whether the applicant was recommending service of alcohol with food service only, and hours of operation. Clarification was made that staff is recommending approval of this request only with food service, no walk -in purchase of alcohol. Vice Chair Landis opened the public hearing. In response to Vice Chair Landis, Mr. Bobardt stated there were no speakers or written cards for this item. SACommunity Development\PLANNING COMMISSION\ MINUTES \2009 \09_0127_pcm_draft.doc e01 Minutes of the Planning Commission Moorpark, California Page January 27 2009 Vice Chair Landis closed the public hearing MOTION: Commissioner Di Cecco moved and Commissioner Taillon seconded a motion to approve staff recommendation, as amended with corrections to Resolution No. PC- 2009 -541. The motion carried by voice vote 4:0, Chair Hamous absent. The Planning Commission has final approval authority for this project Chair Hamous returned to the dais at 7:16 p.m. C. Consider Conditional Use Permit No. 2008 -12, to Allow a Full Service Restaurant with Beer, Wine and Other Alcoholic Beverage Sales for On- Premises Consumption at 6593 Collins Drive Suites D18 and D19 on the Application of Joudi Alsaadv (Garlic Jim's Pizza). Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the public hearing accept public testimony, and close the public hearing; 2) Adopt Resolution No. PC- 2009 -542 approving Conditional Use Permit 2008 -12. (Staff: Joseph Fiss) Mr. Fiss gave the staff report A discussion followed among Commissioners and staff regarding outdoor service of alcohol, hours of operation, and entertainment. Chair Hamous opened the Public Hearing. Joudi Alsaady, applicant, discussed the project and stated there will not be any sales of liquor outside of the business and that the conditions state that food must be ordered in order to serve alcohol, he has 27 years of restaurant business, owns multiple restaurants, and one restaurant is located within 3 -4 miles away from a college, and most of the restaurants are located at airports. A discussion followed among Commissioners and the applicant regarding locations of businesses, is restaurant going to offer delivery service, and what other procedures are in place to ensure that patrons order food, Terry Adams, Told Partners, spoke in favor of the project and is comfortable with the concept of a full - service restaurant. Linda Brown, Told Partners, spoke in favor of the project and hoping Garlic Jim's Pizza will bring revenue to our golf course. Chair Hamous closed the Public Hearing e ,&I SACommunity Development\PLANNING COMMISSION\ MINUTES \2009 \09_0127_pcm_draft.doc � & ^� Minutes of the Planning Commission Moorpark, California Page 5 January 27 2009 MOTION: Commissioner Di Cecco moved and Commissioner Taillon seconded a motion to approve staff recommendation, as amended, including adoption of Resolution No. PC- 2009 -542. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. The Planning Commission has final approval authority for this project. D. Consider Zoning Ordinance Amendment No 2008 -01 a Request to Amend Title 17.40.110 of the Moorpark Municipal Code (Sign Regulations) to Create a New Category and Standards for Freeway Oriented Pylon Signs in Commercial Retail Shopping Centers of 50,000 Square Feet or Larger Within 150 Feet of a Freeway, on the Application of Signs Pacific on Behalf of Campus Plaza Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the public hearing accept public testimony and close the public hearing; 2) Adopt Resolution No PC- 2009 -543 recommending to the City Council denial of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No 2008 -01. (Staff: Joseph Fiss) Mr. Fiss gave the staff report. A discussion followed among Commissioners and staff regarding visibility heading eastbound. Chair Hamous opened the Public Hearing. Bruce Rokos, applicant, discussed the project and the need for visibility to be viable and businesses to be seen from the freeway. He also discussed the Sign Program that was written on and received by the City on September 20, 2004, at which time the sign program did not include a pylon sign. The sign ordinance was in place when the project began and allowed for a pylon sign. During the construction of the site, the City changed the sign ordinance and rules. At the request of Chair Hamous, Mr. Hogan, Deputy City Manager clarified the history of the Sign Program. When the center first came forward, there was a proposal for a pylon sign. The City has never allowed a pylon sign outside of Los Angeles Avenue. It has never been in the code and is a misstatement by the speaker. The applicant, M &M Development did want a pylon sign, however, was asked to remove from their package and it is not permitted. When the sign ordinance came to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation to the City Council, M &M Development came back again and said they'd like a pylon sign, the Planning Commission did direct staff to draft an Ordinance Amendment to allow pylon signs for freeway- oriented signs. The City Council unanimously turned it down. SACommunity Development \PLANNING COMMISSION\ MINUTES \2009 \09_0127_pcm_draft.doc & F �, Minutes of the Planning Commission Moorpark, California Page 6 January 27 2009 AT THIS POINT in the meeting, due to technical difficulties the Commission recessed. The time was 8:04 p.m. The Planning Commission meeting reconvened at 8:23 p.m. Bruce Rokos, applicant continued his presentation and discussed the existing matrix and need for a pylon sign and the visibility of the center to advertise. The pylon sign does not further impact the adjacent residents and the view of the residents of the Campus Plaza building. Mr. Rokos discussed the representation of more than 600 signatures McDonalds collected from nearby residents who are in favor of the pylon sign and viability of the center. The sign welcomes travelers to Moorpark and serves as a gateway to our community. A discussion followed among Commissioners and the applicant regarding height of the pylon sign and tower on the building, how much square footage of signage area would be available on face of the tower if the square footage of signage could fit on the tower, square footage of landscape area proposed at the pylon sign, and if there was any discussion or thought put into actually projecting a blade sign off the wall perpendicular to the freeway. J. Randolph Huston, McDonald's Corporate Attorney, spoke in favor of the project and urged the Commission to support the project. Janet Argoti, Property Manager of Moorpark Campus Plaza, spoke in favor of the project and strongly feels the center needs the sign. Debbie Voss, McDonalds Owner, spoke in favor of the project and her concern about existing business owners in the center struggling. Creating traffic in the center would be a win, win situation. Patrick Ellis, Moorpark Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support of the project and the need for signage to attract more people. He does not want to see the center fail. The success of the center is impactful on the city. Chair Hamous closed the Public Hearing. MOTION: Commissioner Taillon moved and Commissioner Bagwell seconded a motion to recommend to the City Council approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow freeway- oriented pylon signs, including adoption of Resolution No. PC- 2009 -543. The motion carried by voice vote 3 -2, Commissioner Di Cecco and Vice Chair Landis dissenting. The City Council has final approval authority for this project. SACommunity Development \PLANNING COMMISSION\ MINUTES \2009 \09_0127_pcm_draft.doc Minutes of the Planning Commission Moorpark, California Page January 27 2009 9. DISCUSSION ITEMS: A. Consider Regular Meeting Schedule, Time and Place. Staff Recommendation: 1) Approve the 2009 regular meeting schedule of the fourth (4t ) Tuesday of each month starting at 7:00 p.m. at the Moorpark City Hall Community Center, 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark CA 93021. (Staff: David Bobardt) Mr. Bobardt gave the staff report. CONSENSUS: It was the consensus of the Commission to approve staff's recommendation. 10. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Commissioner Di Cecco moved and Commissioner Taillon seconded a motion to approve the Consent Calendar. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. A. Consider Approval of the Regular Meeting Minutes of November 25 2008. Staff Recommendation: Approve the minutes 11. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Vice Chair Landis moved and Commissioner Di Cecco seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. The time was 9:43 p.m. Bruce A. Hamous, Chair David A. Bobardt, Planning Director SACommunity Development \PLANNING COMM ISSION\ MINUTES \2009 \09_0127_pcm_draft.doc " ' ITEM: 10.13. MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION Moorpark, California April 29 2009 A Special Joint Meeting of the Moorpark City Council and Planning Commission was held on April 29, 2009, at 7:30 p.m. at the Moorpark Community Center located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. 2. 3. 9 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Parvin called the joint meeting to order at 8:42 p.m. THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Barry Hogan, Deputy City Manager, led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: City Council: Councilmembers Mikos, Millhouse, Van Dam, and Mayor Parvin. Planning Commission: Commissioners Bagwell, DiCecco, Taillon, and Chair Hamous. Absent: Commissioner Landis. Staff Present: Steven Kueny, City Manager; Barry Hogan, Deputy City Manager; David Bobardt, Planning Director; Captain Ron Nelson, Sheriff's Department; Deborah Traffenstedt, Administrative Services Director /City Clerk; and Maureen Benson, Assistant City Clerk. PUBLIC COMMENT: Janet Murphy, Moorpark resident, proposed consideration of a community garden as an objective for the city. She volunteered to organize the effort for a centralized, downtown, one -acre, or larger size garden with support from the Women's Fortnightly Club and Madrona Ranch. Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission Moorpark, California Page 2 April 29 2009 5. PRESENTATION /ACTION /DISCUSSION: A. Consider Status Report on Mission Statement, Priorities, Goals and Objectives for Fiscal Year 2008/2009 and Direction for Fiscal Year 2009/2010. Staff Recommendation: Direct staff as deemed appropriate. Mayor Parvin opened the item for discussion. There were no speakers. The Commission discussed: 1) The importance of Top Ten Priority No. 10 as there is a great need for multi - family housing in the downtown area; 2) Consideration of using reclaimed water in greenbelt areas of the city; 3) Consideration of using synthetic sod for the parks and downtown area in place of grass; 4) Finding more ways to retain /attract businesses to Moorpark for example by advertising the City does not have a sales tax on gross receipts; 5) Developing a cost /benefit analysis of a 5 -10 year program for development; 6) Consideration for expediting "green building" projects: 7) The possibility of using CERT graduates as a resource in neighborhoods; 8) Keeping the Planning Commission informed about projects developed by other agencies for construction in Moorpark; 9) Abatement response to graffiti within the city and the frustration with penalties not deterring repeat offenses; and 10) Working with groups such as "Blight Lifters" to have graffiti removed from private property within 24 hours without spending city funds. The Council and staff discussed: 1) The update to the General Plan Elements with an environmental study to follow; 2) A draft of the Housing Element coming to Council; 3) Working in conjunction with Calleguas Municipal Water District and the City of Simi Valley to access their reclaimed water; 4) Scheduling an environmental study with the acquisition of the fueling station site on High Street; 5) Including a goal for attracting business that will spend dollars within the community to enhance revenue; 6) Consideration for incentives for "green building" such as allowing businesses to convert their air quality fees into their projects for green technology; 7) The progress on the Metrolink parking lot exit onto First Street has identified two options with possible presentation to Council in June; 8) Incorporating input from the Arts Commission early on in project design; 9) Near completion of a graffiti data base for inter - department use by Code Enforcement, Redevelopment Agency, Community Development, and Public Works to assist in identifying trends and signatures of individual graffiti criminals; 10) Inviting someone from the District Attorney's office to come to a Council meeting to learn the Minutes of the City Council and Planning Commission Moorpark California Page 3 April 29, 2009 limitations they are facing in dealing with graffiti; and 11) Revisiting an analysis of the issue of restricting the local sales of spray paint. 6. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Parvin adjourned the City Council meeting and Chair Hamous adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 9:38 p.m. Janice S. Parvin, Mayor Bruce Hamous, Chair ATTEST: Maureen Benson, Assistant City Clerk