Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 1989 0306 PC REGPlanning Co®ission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of March 6, 1989 Page 1 The regular scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission held on March 6, 1989 in the City Council Chambers of the Community Center located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at: 7:10 p.m., Chairman Holland presiding. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance was led by Armondo Aquire, Reporter for the Enterprise Newspaper. 3. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chairman Douglas Holland; Vice Chairman John Wozniak; Commissioner's William Butcher; Bill Lanahan; Glen Schmidt. ABSENT: None. OTHER CITY OFFICIALS AND REPRESENTATIVES: r Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development; John Knipe, Assistant City Engineer; Deborah S. Traffenstedt, Associate Planner; Celia LaFleur, Administrative Secretary. 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of. February 6, 1989 Planning Commission November 30, 1987 Planning Commission November 16, 1987 Planning Commission November 16, 1987 (Residential Development Evaluation Board) MOTION(a): Moved by Commissioner Butcher, seconded by Commissioner Lanahan to approve the minutes of February 6, 1989 as submitted. Motion passed on 5:0 vote. Planning Co=ission, City of Moorpark -California Minutes of March 6, 1989 Page 2 MOTION(b): Moved by Commissioner Butcher, seconded by Commissioner Wozniak to approved the minutes of November 16, 1987 (Residential Development Evaluation Board), November 16, 1987, November 30, 1987 with the correction of page 2 of the minutes. Motion passed on a 3:0:2 vote, Commissioners Lanahan and Schmidt abstain. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR 10 -TIT -V 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS (OLD BUSINESS) None. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS (NEW BUSINESS) A. Appeal No. 89 -1 Ericsson The applicant is appealing a encroachment permit to allow a 10 le- approximately 28 feet south of the Tract 3306 - Glenmoor). Located at Presented by Director Richards, February 22, 1989. denial of his request for an foot curb cut (second driveway), existing driveway, for Lot 22 of 13217 Peach Hill Road, Moorpark. Testimony received by the following: reference: staff report dated 1. K.C. Ericsson, 13217 Peach Hill Road, Moorpark, CA. Stated to the Commission his grounds for the appeal, they were as follows: a. Aesthetically the permit would assist to remove the vehicle from public view and off the street. b. Residence not under Homeowners Association or CC&R's. C. Does meet the Ventura County guidelines. d. By providing a 6 -foot wall the required 5 -foot side yard could allow for a vehicle storage and access. e. Circulated petition in support of the Ericsson's second driveways (11 signatures). Planning Co=ission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of March 6, 1989 Page 3 2. Doris Meifert, 13191 Golidrina Street, Moorpark, CA. Presented the Commission with a letter dated March 5, 1989 and spoke on behalf of an adjacent resident, Mr. David J. Barros, 13197 Golodrina Street who is opposing the permit requested. Ms. Meifert address the Commission with the following concerns. a. Toxic fumes that would generate from Mr. Ericsson's side yard to her adjacent home. b. Visual appearance. C. Light spillage and excessive noise. d. Change in occupancy and the original intended use as a side yard. 3. Charles Johnson, 13183 Golondrina Street, Moorpark, CA. In opposition to the request to permit a second driveway and second garage structure. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. The Commission addressed the following concerns: This was an issue with health and safety although the applicant would only park his vehicle in the street. Therefore, favoring a second driveway. The existing sideyard and under the current code would allow with a 6 -foot wall and 5 -foot sideyard. Concern with the lack of visibility exiting the second driveway. MOTION(c): Moved by Commissioner Lanahan, seconded by Commissioner Butcher to uphold the Director's decision to deny the second driveway as requested and that Mr. Ericsson be allowed to resubmit a request if and when there was a master plan. This decision is final unless appealed to the City Council within 15 days (March 21, 1989). Motion passed on a 5:0 vote. Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of March 6, 1989 Page 4 9. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ITEMS A. Development Plan Permit No. 310 Minor Modification No. 1 Proposed modification for the construction of a block wall along the front of the building. The building is located between Maureen Land and Goldman Avenue. MOTION(d): Moved by Commissioner Schmidt, seconded by Commissioner Butcher to uphold the Director's decision. Motion passed on a 5:0 vote. B. PD -1059 Chevron Minor Modification No. 1 The applicant is requesting a minor modification to allow the installation of a soil vapor filter system with an eight square foot fence enclosure along Spring Road. Testimony received by the following: 1. Peter Rafferty, 2646 Palma Drive, Suite 230, Ventura, CA 93007. Representing Groundwater Technology, Inc., MOTION(e): Moved by Commissioner Wozniak, seconded by Commissioner Butcher to approve staff's recommendation. Motion passed on a 5:0 vote. 10. INFORMATION /FUTURE ITEMS A. Schedule for Planning Projects - Development Permits Schedule showing current and recently completed entitlement requests. Received and filed. 11. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE A. General Plan Update - Processing Summary With regards to the matter of citizen participation the Council noted the Planning Commission's desire to be more involved in the update process and therefore elected to use the Commission as the host for providing a series of public meetings 3 -4 times during the update process. The Council's proposes to work as follows: Planning Co_ission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of March 6, 1989 Paae 5 * The Commission holds separate evening public meetings (3 -4 times) during the update process. * The Consultant to make presentations and present work in progress, work accomplished, and present their draft goal statements for public and Commission comments. * At the conclusion of each public meeting the consultant would summarize he public and Commission comments and present them to the City Council no later than one month from the Commission's meeting. * Neither the consultant nor the Commission would take further action until the Council reviewed past progress, comments and provided any necessary direction. With regards to the issue of "fair share" cost distribution, the Council accepted their subcommittees' (Community Development Committee) recommendation and selected the use of the traffic impact process to assign costs to the eighteen interested property owners. There was one change from the Table "A" (see Council's memo of February 14, 1989 attached) where the Moorpark School District proposal was evaluated at 15.49 acres of High Density rather than a review of Residential and Commercial land use as was previously requested by the District. Current Status As of February 28, 1989 staff has contacted the firm of PBR regarding the Council's selection and requested certain information so as to begin the negotiation process. 12. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Schmidt raised the issued of whether or not the City had any policy or guideline related fencing (wood fencing). Chairman Holland suggested perhaps the City should look into a "comprehensive property maintenance ordinance" Commissioner Butcher stated that since the Planning Commission may not be meeting during their regular scheduled meeting 13. STAFF COMMENTS None. Planning Comission, city of Moorpark, California Minutes of March 6. 1989 14. ADJOURNMENT Page 6 There being no further business the meeting of the Planning Commission adjourned at 9:50 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED APRIL 3, 11989 BY: Celia LaFleur, Secretary