HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 1989 0501 PC REGPlanning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of May 1, 1989
Pa?e 1
The regular scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission held on May 1, 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 7:07 p.m., Chairman Douglas Holland
presiding.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The pledge of allegiance was led by newly appointed Commissioner
Michael Scullin.
3. SEATING OF THE NEWLY APPOINTED PLANNING COMMISSIONER & THE OATH TO
OFFICE
By appointment of Eloise Brown, Mayor, Commissioner Michael Scullin.
Chairman Holland introduced Commissioner Scullin and the Recording
Secretary proceeded to administer the oath to office. Commissioner
Scullin seated.
4. ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Chairman Douglas Holland; Vice Chairman John Wozniak;
Commissioner's; Michael Scullin; Bill Lanahan; Glen Schmidt.
ABSENT: None.
OTHER CITY OFFICIALS AND REPRESENTATIVES:
Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development; Paul
Porter, Senior Planner; Celia LaFleur, Administrative
Secretary.
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS
a. Franz Wolf, 14732 Loyola Street, Moorpark, CA. Builder and owner
of 5301 Commerce Avenue industrial. buildings (3 separate lots,
center lot consisting of two individual buildings). Mr. Wolf
submitted to the Commission a letter dated May 1, 1989 referencing
the 5301 Commerce Avenue industrial buildings. Proceeded to state
that during the design process it was the intention that smaller
units where compatible with start -up businesses that did not
require large spaces. It was the intention to provide space for
light industrial and high -tech businesses that shape a business
park atmosphere. Industrial users of this size range are
requiring a larger percentage of office, usually for short term
r
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of May 1, 1989
-------Pare 2
time periods. It was partly for the reason that the top floor of
the building was designed for office use. Mr. Wolf indicated that
during the permit processing period on the building in question he
was unaware that an office use in the industrial zone would
require a conditional use permit and requested of the Commission
if it was possible to accomplish a fast tract processing or
perhaps eliminating the requirement of a CUP.
The Director spoke regarding the request of Mr. Wolf and stated
that under the current zoning ordinance; the industrial zone would
require a conditional use permit to provide office use and that
Mr. Wolf would be require to file an application for a CUP.
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes of April 17, 1989.
MOTION(a): Moved by Commissioner Schmidt; seconded by Commissioner
Lanahan to approve the minutes of April 17, 1989 as
submitted.
r Motion passed on a 4:0 vote, Commissioner Scullin
abstain.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
None.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS (OLD BUSINESS)
None.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS (NEW BUSINESS)
A. Revised Draft of the housing Element to the General Plan
As required by Article 10.6 of the Government Code a periodic updating
of the City's Housing Element is mandated by law every five years.
Presented by Director Richards; reference: staff report dated April 12,
1989.
The City's first Housing Element was adopted on June 2, 1986 almost
three years after the incorporation of the City. Although, this
revision is happening only two years after it's adoption; State law
requires a revision of the Housing Element by July 1, 1989 so as to
include the updated Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) numbers
r created by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of May 1, 1989
---_______Pa
Ae 3
Local housing elements must incorporate a share of regional housing need
figures or indicators of housing production and assistance needs within the
City. These need figures created by SCAG are revised every five years.
Along with the inclusion of updated RHNA numbers, the City must also
provide a description of the progress made towards implementation of
the previous housing element. Section V of this draft contains this
required progress report.
Another State requirement regarding updates is to include any
legislative or judicial decision which affects the preparation of
housing elements. Section IV addresses the State Attorney General's
opinion under inventory of suitable sites.
The last major item this element includes is a discussion of Measure F,
a growth limitation ordinance initiated by the voters in November of
1986. This document goes into some detail to explain the relationship
of Measure F and this Revised Housing Element.
Relevant Issues and Required Data and Analysis Per State Guidelines
The following aspects of data and analysis for housing elements are
based on state law's regarding housing element requirements. The
relevant Government Code Section are cited.
Assessment of immediate housing needs (Section 65583 (a))
Number of existing households and housing units.
Level of payment compared to ability to pay: the number of very low and
lower income households occupying units at a cost greater than 25
percent of their gross household income; and comparison of the income
distribution of low and moderate income households in the community to
the range of costs of housing units for sale and for rent in the
community.
Overcrowding: the number of households living in overcrowded conditions
(1.01 or more persons per room).
Housing stock conditions: the number of households living in housing
units needing rehabilitation or replacement, identified separately for
owner- occupied and renter - occupied units.
Special needs: assessment of the special needs of large families; farm
workers; the elderly; the handicapped; families with female head of
households and the homeless.
r^
Planninx Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of May 1, 1989
P se4
Projected new construction needs (Section 65584)
Analysis of population and employment trends and quantification of
existing and projected housing needs (e.g., five years) for all income
levels (e.g., very low, lower, moderate, high).
Existing and projected housing needs must include the city's share of
the regional housing needs (calculated by SCAG) and take into
consideration six factors:
1. Housing market demand.
2. Employment opportunities.
3. Availability of suitable sites and facilities.
4. Commuting patterns.
5. Type and tenure of housing needed.
6. Farm worker housing needs.
Analysis of existing and potential sites for housing of all types in
the jurisdiction (Sections 65583, and 65583(a))
Survey of vacant residential zoned land, including assessment of
dwelling unit capacity and availability of infrastructure.
Survey of existing and potential redevelopment sites.
Survey of other sites suitable for
public surplus land, under - utilized
industrial areas, mixed use areas).
residential development (e.g.,
residential, commercial, and
Identify adequate sites to "meet the community's housing goals,"
including making "adequate provision for the existing and projected
needs of all economic segments of the community."
Assessment of actual and potential governmental and nongovernmental
constraints on the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing
for all income levels (Section 655631a)(41 and 15))
Local land use controls and development standards (e.g., lot sizes,
density, unit sizes, height limits, lot coverage, etc.).
Local building codes and their enforcement.
On- and off -site improvements required of developers.
Local processing procedures, including zoning changes, use permits,
building permits, environmental clearances, etc.
Local fees and other exactions required prior to construction or
rehabilitation of a housing development.
I
Plannint Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of May 1, 1989
Pa$e 5
Assessment of non - governmental factors constraining the availability of
housing, including availability of financing, price of land, and costs
of construction.
Analysis of the opportunities for energy conservation in residential
development (Section 65583[a)[71).
Opportunities in the design and construction of individual units.
Opportunities in the design of subdivision.
Quantified Objectives
The housing element must include quantified objectives which specify
the maximum numbers of housing units that can be constructed,
rehabilitated, and conserved within a five -year time frame, based on
the needs, resources, and constraints identified in the housing element
(Government Code Section 65583[b]). Whenever possible, objectives
should be set for each particular housing program, establishing a
numerical target for the effective period of the program.
i Ideally, the sum of the quantified objectives will be equal to the
identified housing needs. However, identified needs may exceed
available resources and limitations imposed by other requirements of
state planning law. Where this is the case, the quantified objectives
need not equal the identified housing needs, but should establish the
maximum number of units that can be constructed, rehabilitated, and
conserved, given the constraints.
Development Policies
The housing element contains goals, objectives, specific policies,
programs, and plan proposals for the development, improvement, and
maintenance of housing (Government Code Section 65583[b]). The
following are some of what is addressed by the housing element's
development policies:
The maintenance, improvement, and development of housing.
The preservation and conservation of existing housing and
neighborhoods.
The provision of sites in suitable locations and with adequate services
which can collectively accommodate a range of housing (type, size, and
price) meeting the needs of all economic segments of the community.
To meet needs and implement policies, the housing element include a
five -year schedule of current and proposed implementation measures and
identifies the agencies or officials responsible for implementation
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of May 1, 1989
Poe6
(Government Code Section 65583(c]). By law, the implementation program
must be designed to do all of the following:
1. Identify adequate sites which will be made available through
zoning and development standards for a range of housing types to
meet the community's housing goals.
2. Assist in the development of housing affordable to low and
moderate income households.
3. Address and where appropriate and legally possible, remove
governmental constraints on the maintenance, improvement, and
development of housing.
4. Conserve and improve the condition of the existing affordable
housing stock.
5. Promote equal housing opportunities.
Mandated Implementation Measures
Provide density bonuses or other :incentives to developers who include
units affordable to low or moderate income households.
Amend the zoning ordinance to provide for development of secondary
residential units on existing lots.
Review building and development requirements and standards and modify
those found to be unnecessary or excessive.
Establish a single administrative unit to coordinate processing of
multiple permits for residential developments.
Previous Element Evaluation
The revised element reflects an evaluation of the results of the
previous element (Government Code Sections 65588 {a] and [b]). There
are three parts to the information which the law requires to provided:
1. A comparison of the actual results of the earlier element with its
goals, objectives, policies and programs.
2. An analysis of the significant differences between what was
projected or planned in the earlier element and what was achieved.
3. A description of how the goals, objectives, policies and programs
of the updated element incorporate what has been learned from the
results of the prior element.
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of May 1, 1989
p ou 7
The Housing Element of the City's General Plan is by far the most
involved and complex of all the elements. Therefore, even during
todays efforts to update there are changes and amendments needed to the
draft text. With the settlement of the Building Industry Association
law suit the total allotments available is now 270 per year not 250 as
stated in the draft. Even as this report is being prepared the fees
for development processing are being amended. However, prior to the
final adoption and printing these technical corrections should reach a
conclusion.
In staff's opinion the heart of the revised draft, and for the most
part the element itself begins on page 49 of the text as a discussion
of action programs. Next is a listing of community goals (pg. 54).
These goals are generally created around mandates by the state under
the Housing Element Guidelines and those "need" numbers illustrated by
the SCAG RHNA numbers.
The Draft Housing Element has just recently been submitted to the state
for review. Therefore, no comments are available to the Commission.
State law requires that before the City Council takes any action on the
review draft they must consider the comments made by the state. The
state has 45 days to review and comment. If no comments are received
by the state the City is free to proceed.
Also, at this time the City Attorney is reviewing the draft as
presented to the Commission. Comments are not expected until after
April 30, 1989. When comments are received they will be included in
the Commission's next packet.
Staff is recommending that the Commission proceed with their review of
the draft at this time even though there are only four Commission
members available. Inasmuch as the Housing Element is such an
important part of the City's overall. development posture it is
recommended that no final recommendation be made on the draft until all
five Commission members are seated. Although, as stated earlier, the
City is required to approve an updated Housing Element by July 1, 1989.
Given the fact that the City Council may wish to conduct several
meetings on this subject the Commission should send forth it's
recommendation to the Council no later than May 15, 1989.
Within the staff report as an attachment was the Countywide Planning
Program forecast for population, dwelling units dwelling units (persons
per household), General Plan Capacity.
The Commissions concerns related to the County's population forecast in
relation to the General Plan for Moorpark
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of May 1, 1989
______Pa
its 8
MOTION(b): Moved by Commissioner Wozniak; seconded by Commissioner
Lanahan to continue: the public hearing of the Revised
Housing Element to provide the City Attorney's and State
comments to the Commission's meeting of May 15, 1989.
Motion passed on a 5:0 vote.
10. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ITEMS
A. Day Care Centers
Resolution No. 89 -543 initiating proceedings to have the Planning
Commission set a public hearing so as to review child day care center
requirements of the City's Zoning Ordinance.
The matter of day care centers for children first came to the Commission's
attention at their January 3, 1989 meeting. At that time there was a
recommendation made requesting the City Council to initiate the process of
amending the zoning code to allow such uses In both the commercial and
industrial zones.
The City Council considered the Commission's recommendation at their April
5, 1989 meeting and adopted Resolution No. 89 -543. This resolution formally
initiates proceedings to have the Planning Commission set a public hearing
so as to review child day care center requirements of the City's Zoning
Ordinance. The Council was interested. in having the Commission not only
update the zoning code but to consider current trends and practices of
cities regarding child day care centers.
The issue which sparked the need to consider zoning code amendments for
child day care centers is the fact that staff discovered no allowance for
such a use within the City's commercial zones. Inasmuch as a majority of
the large franchised day care facilities are located in commercial areas,
there appeared to be a need to expand the opportunities for this use within
the City. Presently, if an applicant approached the City only the
residential zones would be available. In staff's report to the Commission
in January we pointed out a number of drawbacks to limiting such a use to
residential zones. First, a limited amount of property is available, and
most is not well sited for such a use. Second, proper planning and design
constraints may preclude a good project.
Third, increased traffic and noise will be generated by parents dropping off
and picking up their children causing potential interface concerns.
Several years ago the State preempted cities and counties from regulatory
child day care centers of six children or less. Therefore, our discussion
here addresses only seven or more children where there is less than a
le— twenty -four hour care.
Planning Comission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of May 1, 1989
Page
Are all commercial zones appropriate for such a use? How should this use be
regulated? The City has four Commercial Zones in the City:
1. Neighborhood Commercial (C -1)
2. General Commercial (C -2)
3. Commercial Planned Development: (CPD)
4. Commercial Office (C -0)
The City has very little property zoned C -1. The only two areas are on the
east side of Moorpark Avenue and at the northwest corner of Spring and
Tierra Rejada Road. The C -2 zone is generally centered in the older
commercial area along High Street. The remaining commercial areas are
identified as CPD. There are no properties zoned in the City as C -0 at this
time. All new construction is being developed under the CPD zone and is not
expected to change in the near future. The only zone that staff would have
any concern with is the C -0 if the City elected to use this zoning in the
future. From staff's perspective it would be inappropriate to introduce a
day care center within a commercial office zone because of the nature of the
business which may prove to be disruptive. Also, office uses generate very
similar peak hour vehicle trip generation factors which may over burden
existing roadways.
Staff has some concern with the introduction of such a use on High Street as
it would appear incompatible with either existing or future uses within this
unique center area of Moorpark. This area will be (someday soon) regulated
by a Specific Plan or overlay zones to control the general ambiance.
Although specific uses have not been discussed by the City; it is staff's
general impression that the area is intended to support specialty retail
goods and service only.
The City has only two Industrial Zones within the City:
1. Industrial Park (M -1)
2. Limited Industrial (M -2)
The M -1 zone generates slightly less intense industrial uses than the M -2
zone.
When the Commission reviewed the subject of day care centers, there was an
interest to open up the opportunities in the industrial areas. However, the
Commission qualified there interest to include such a use where it was
either operated by the industrial user or under contract within the
industrial building or complex it served. To introduce such a use as a
stand alone business in an industrial zone would in staff's opinion not be
appropriate. The potential interface problems with noise, truck traffic and
general safety of children would be of deep concern to staff.
Planning Co®ission, City o£ Moorpark, California
Minutes of May 1, 1989
P Qe 10
Child Care and Development Proposals
The significant rise in the number of full -time working mothers, dual earner
families and single parent households make child care a necessity and a fact
of life for the majority of families with young children. The supply of
convenient and appropriate child care services has generally not kept pace
with this accelerating demand. Developers of property could play a valuable
role in providing child care by allocating space for child care and by
joining in other options such as child care referral services or charitable
contributions. As the City begins it's general plan update there may be
opportunities to look towards the social aspects of the planning process.
Child Care and State Law
Staff has provided as an attachment excerpts from Chapter 3.4 and 3.6,
Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. As indicated above the City does
not regulate day care for 6 or fewer children. The State does allow cities
the ability to regulate day care centers of 7 to 12 children by a simple
zone clearance if desired by the City. The State does not preempt cities
from regulating either 7+ children in residential areas nor does it prevent
regulation in either commercial or industrial. zones.
Method of Implementation
Staff would recommend that the Commission consider requiring a conditional
use permit for the establishment of all day care centers in either
residential, commercial or industrial zones. As the name implies this type
of regulation is designed to impose conditions as they relate to each
separate application. This process will allow a great deal of flexibility
to tailor any needed regulations on such. a user.
Staff Recommended Action
1. That the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council amendments
to:
Article 10 Section 8128 -1 adding Child Day Care Centers;
Article 11, Section 8129 -1 adding Child Day Care Centers;
Article 12, Section 8130 -1 adding Child Day Care Centers;
Article 23, Section 8141 -1.4 and Section 8141 -2.4 adding Child Day Care
Centers sponsored by or permitted within the industrial use on the same
site;
I
Planning Co®ission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of May 1, 1989
Pairs 11
Article 47, Section 8170 -0 adding a definition for Child Day Care
Centers as follows:
Shall mean an establishment where care or supervision is provided
on a less than twenty-four (24) hour per day basis, limited to
children only, which is licensed according to applicable State
Law. This terms shall include nursery schools.
MOTION(c): Moved by Vice Chairman Wozniak, seconded by Commissioner
Lanahan to approve staff's recommendation and to include
Commercial Office zones (Article 21, Section 8139 -1).
Motion passed on 5:0 vote.
H. Consider Proposed Property Acquisition Consistency with the Citv
of Moorpark General Plan
On May 25, 1988 the City received a notice from the Moorpark Unified School
District of their proposal to offer for sale, lease or exchange all or a
portion of the former Moorpark Memorial High School site. This is the so
called Naylor Notice in reference to applicable provisions of Education Code
Section 39390 et. seq. The City responded to Moorpark Unified School
District notifying them of the City's desire to acquire surplus school
property as identified in the City's response to the District's Naylor
Notice.
Although the City has responded to the District regarding it's intent to
purchase surplus property; Government Code Section 65402 requires that the
Planning Commission of the City must first make a finding of conformity with
the City's General Plan. This section of the Government Code states that no
real property may be acquired by the City until the matter has been
submitted to the Planning Commission and that they have reported upon its
conformity with the adopted General Plan. The Planning Commission must
render its report as to conformity within forty days after the matter is
first before them.
The City's interest in acquisition is directed to the area known as the
lower fields of the site. It is this area the City desires to create a
downtown park.
Staff reviewed the City's entire General Plan and finds the following Goals
and Policies to be consistent with the City's intent to create a downtown
park:
- Open Space, Conservation and Recreation Element
Goal 2
Policy 2.2 - Encourage and ensure equal access to parkland for all
residents, including the young, handicapped and elderly.
Policy 2.6 - Acquire and provide parkland in areas where existing
demand is the greatest in proportion to population.
Planning Comission, Citv of Moorpark, California
Minutes of May 1, 1989
Page 12
Land Use Element
Goal 1
To provide a full range of recreational facilities and programs
which are easily accessible to all people in Moorpark.
Goal 2
To provide appropriately 'located neighborhood parks easily
accessible to residents.
Staff has also researched the State CEQA Guidelines regarding this matter
and determined that the acquisition of property for park purposes is
categorically exempt under Section 15316 or Class 16 - Transfer of ownership
of land in order to create Parks.
Staff Recommended Action
1. That the Planning Commission find that the acquisition of a portion of
the Moorpark School District's surplus property (Moorpark Memorial High
Y School) for park purposes is conforming and consistent with the City's
General Plan.
2. That the Planning Commission find that the acquisition of surplus
property from the Moorpark School District is categorically exempt
under Section 15316 of CEQA.
MOTION(d): Moved by Commissioner Schmidt; seconded by Commissioner
Wozniak to approve staff's recommendation.
Motion passed on a _';:0 vote.
10. INFORMATION /FUTURE ITEMS
None.
11. COMMISSION COMMENTS
For sale vehicles on Spring Road at: Tierra Rejada Road in violation.
Commissioner Wozniak stated that he had received from the City
Engineer's office information of the sign that will be provided for
"Not A Through Street" on Spring Road near Charles Street.
12. STAFF COMMENTS
r— None.
Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California
Minutes of May 1, 1989
Page 13
13. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business the meeting of the Planning Commission
adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED ON
JUNE 19, 1989, BY:
Celia LaFleur, Secretary
CHAIRMAN /VESIDING:
Dougla's Rolland