Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 2001 0611 PC REGPlanning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of June 11, 2001 Page 1 The Regular Meeting or the Planning Commission was held on June 11, 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 7:08 p.m. 2) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Vice Chairperson Otto led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 3) ROLL CALL: Janice Parvin, Chairperson William F. Otto, Vice Chairperson Mark DiCecco Paul Haller Kipp Landis All commissioners were present. Staff attending the meeting included Wayne Loftus, Director of Community Development, Paul Porter, Principal Planner, Walter Brown, City Engineer, and Celia LaFleur, Administrative Secretary. 4) PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS AND SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: None 5) REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO, THE AGENDA: CONSENSUS: By consensus of the Commission, Item 8.B. to be heard first on the agenda followed by 8.A, and S.C. 6) CONSENT CALENDAR: A) Planning Commission Minutes of May 14, 2001 MOTION: Commissioner Haller moved and Commissioner Landis seconded a motion to approve the minutes of May 14, 2001. Motion passed with a 5:0 unanimous voice vote. 7) PUBLIC COMMENTS: None M: ICLefleuNK- minutes12001minutes101Jun 11- pcm.mv.doc Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of June 11, 2001 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS: A) Commercial Planned Development Permit No. CPD 2000.02 for a Jack in the Box Restaurant with drive - through service and two -story retail /office building (Applicants: Jack in the Box and Acres Realty). Planning Commission action is a recommendation to the City Council who will take final action. Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the public hearing, accept public testimony and close the public hearing. 2) Consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the requested entitlement prior to making a recommendation to the City Council. 3) Adopt Resolution No. PC -2001- recommending to the City Council conditional approval of Commercial Planned Development Permit No. CPD 2000.02. Presented by Paul Porter, Principal Planner. Reference: Staff Report dated June 11, 2001. Commissioners discussion and staff responses centered on the following concerns: ❑ Traffic /circulation ❑ Ingress /Egress ❑ Lighting. ❑ NPDES requirements. ❑ Phasing of construction. ❑ Staff efforts to achieve vehicle circulation between the Mobil Gasoline station and the proposed site. ❑ Provisions for signage to identify ground floor office /commercial uses. ❑ Need for safe pedestrian access from the west (Pacific Communities) to allow pedestrian access before crossing the driveway access. ❑ Consider all alternatives for access to the east. ❑ That the drive - through restaurant will be built and office /commercial will not. ❑ Screening of roof mounted materials. Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of June 11, 2001 Page 3 Commissioner Haller commented and staff responded concerning the one way access from Liberty Bell at the Mobil Station and car wash. Staff responded to comments on NP Commissioner DiCecco commented and staff responded concerning lighting and access from Los Angeles Avenue. Commissioner Otto commented to and staff responded concerning phasing. Commissioner Landis commented to and staff responded concerning access alternatives circulation and visibility. Commissioner Haller commented to and staff responded concerning alternatives for access from Liberty Bell Road. Commission Parvin commented to and staff responded concerning roof mounted material. Public hearing opened. Testimony received from the following: Joe Ahearn, applicant's representative, 484 E. Los Angeles Avenue, #214, Moorpark, CA. In support of this proposal. Mr. Ahearn commented on traffic circulation and phasing and conditions relating to access. Mike Palmer, Jack in the Box representative, 100 N. Barranca Avenue, W. Covina, CA. Mr. Palmer stated the conditions as indicated are acceptable, but needed clarification on the status of: ❑ Landscape setback and NPDES requirements. Staff responded to Mr. Ahearn's and Mr. Palmer's comments. Commissioner DiCecco commented on the following: ❑ There was no provision for signage at the first floor level. ❑ The building is too tall, and the pavilion should be lowered. Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of June 11, 2001 Page 4 ❑ The west side of the building should have more articulation. ❑ Need for safe pedestrian access from the west (Pacific Communities) to allow pedestrian access before crossing the driveway access. ❑ No awnings identified at the west side of the office building. ❑ Concur with Commission members to eliminate access to the east. Commissioner Otto commented on the following: ❑ Concurs with Commissioner DiCecco concerning the building height. ❑ Recognizes traffic circulation problems and aware of concerns. ❑ Regarding phasing, not necessary, the foreseeable outcome is the office gets built at (r a later date. ❑ Rework needed where double doors are proposed in the building. Discussion ensued concerning phasing, traffic circulation and signage. Mr. Ahearn recommended adjournment to June 25th to see if there is an allowable unimpeded circulation design. Mr. Ahearn recited a condition from Resolution No. 97 -1409 (CPD- 97 -1), concerning access requirements of development plan CPD 97 -1, on the application of Mr. Gharabigi. MOTION: Commissioner Landis moved and Commissioner DiCecco seconded a motion to continue Item B.A., to the Regular Planning Commission meeting of July 9, 2001, and directed staff and the applicant to return with recommendations for circulation and building design. Motion passed with a 5:0 unanimous voice vote. B) Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 2000.07 for construction of three (3) wireless communicat panel antennas and a 120 souare foot eauio Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of June 11, 2001 Page 5 shelter. (Applicant: Tacit Communications for AT &T wireless). Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the public hearing, accept public testimony and close the public hearing. 2) Determine that the proposed facility and use is exempt from CEQA Guidelines pursuant to Section 15303 of the California Environmental Quality Act. 3) Adopt Resolution No. PC -2001- recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 2000.07. Planning Commission action is final unless appealed. Presented by Paul Porter, Principal Planner. Reference: Staff Report dated June 11, 2001. Commissioner Landis and DiCecco stepped down from the dais due to a potential conflict of interest because of living in proximity to the subject site. Public hearing opened. Testimony received from the following: Kevin Ferrier, representing Tacit Communications, 510 rCastillo Street, Santa Barbara, CA. In support of this proposal. Mr. Ferrier stated this proposal was different, a technology that operate signals sent to residents /customers who are able to subscribe for internet access, multi telephone lines, and multiple computers. Mr. Ferrier further described this proposed site as being the best siting option, compatible, and geared for residential uses. Mr. Ferrier discussed the types of design features, materials proposed, and FCC compliance. In response to Commissioner Haller, Wayne Loftus stated the technical information had been provided by the applicant (Tacit Communications). In response to Commissioner Parvin, Kevin Ferrier stated AT &T /Tacit Communications had studied the City and concluded that the Peach Hill area provide the best alternatives. Hugh J. Finlay, 13125 Thomasville Court, Moorpark, CA. Opposed to this proposal. Mr. Finlay stated he was concerned about the levels and frequency of exposure Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of June 11, 2001 Page 6 to nearby residents. Mr. Finlay recommended Science Drive as the alternative proposed site. Robert Lestak, 13345 Sunnyslope Place, Moorpark, CA. Opposed to this proposal. Mr. Lestak stated he was concerned about the health effects to nearby residents. Mr. Lestak also proposed Science Drive as the alternative site. In response to Mr. Lestak, Wayne Loftus stated that the proposed site was owned by the County Waterworks District with no financial benefit to the City. Robert Demyan, 13303 Sunnyslope Place, Moorpark, CA. Opposed to this proposal. Mr. Demyan was concerned how service would be provided to the homeowners. Tony Banducci, 13324 Wintergreen Lane, Moorpark, CA. Opposed to this proposal. Mr. Banducci was concerned that his property values would decline due to this proposal. Palma Friery, 13372 Wintergreen Lane, Moorpark, CA. Opposed to this proposal. Ms. Friery was concerned that the permit process was not strict enough, and that she was concerned with the health risks. Jeff Hass, 13117 Thomasville Court, Moorpark, CA. Opposed to this proposal. Mr. Hass was concerned that not enough studies had been conducted. Edward Geivet, 13302 Sunnyslope Place, Moorpark, CA. Opposed to this proposal. Mr. Geivet requested staff and the applicant to consider other alternative sites. The Commission discussed the following concerns: ❑ Environmental Impacts ❑ Federal Government standards (FCC) ❑ Frequency and exposure. ❑ Professional /technical expert required, due to a lack of information from the applicant. CONSENSUS: By consensus, the Commission continued Item B.B. with the public hearing open to July 23, 2001, and directed the .applicant to bring his technical consultant, or at the Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of June 11, 2001 Page 7 applicant's expense the City will provide a technical expert. C) Appeal No. 2001 -04 of Decision by the Director of Community Development to Deny Permit Adjustment No. 2001.06 to IPD 96.03 (Applicant: Precision Plumbing) . Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the public hearing, accept public testimony and close the public hearing. 2) Adopt Resolution No. PC -2001- denying Appeal No. 200.04. Commissioner DiCecco stepped down from the dais, due to a conflict of interest that the proposed tenant at Precision Plumbing is also a business client. Wayne Loftus, Director of Community Development provided the staff presentation. Reference: Staff Report dated June 11, 2001. Public hearing opened. Testimony received from the following: John Bascom, applicant, 12455 Misty Grove Street, Moorpark, CA. In support to approve Appeal 2001 -04. Mr. Bascom provided the Commission with background information concerning the business and operations of his company. Mr. Bascom spoke of other violations of surrounding business. The Commission discussed the following concerns: ❑ Lack of recreational vehicle storage facilities in Moorpark. ❑ Recreational vehicle storage in residential zones. ❑ Surrounding properties, accessory uses, structures, screening, and potential violations. ❑ Zoning Code compliance. Public hearing closed. MOTION: Commissioner Otto moved and Commissioner Landis seconded a motion to approve Planning Commission Resolution No. PC- 2001 -407, denying Appeal No. 2001 -04 on the application of Precision Plumbing. Motion passed with a 4:O unanimous voice vote. Planning Commission, City of Moorpark, California Minutes of June 11, 2001 El S) DISCUSSION ITEMS: None 9) ANNOUNCEMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: The Director of Community Development announced SunCal Companies, and two General Plan Elements, including the revised Housing Element and OSCAR were scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting of June 25, 2001. 10) ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Commissioner Landis moved and Commissioner Haller seconded a motion to adjourn at 12:22 a.m. Jan'ce Parvin, Chairperson ATTEST: Celia LaFleur, Secretary to the Planning Commission