Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES 1986 121 1215RESOLUTION NO. PC -86 -121 A RESOLUTION OF THE MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE DENIAL OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 1014 AND A RECOMMENDATION FOR NON - CERTIFICATION OF THE ASSOCIATED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE APPLI- CATION OF G.H. PALMER & ASSOCIATES. ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 511 - 08-19, -20, -21, -24, -25, -26, -31 and -32. WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on December 3, 1986, the Moorpark Planning Commission considered the application filed by G.H. Palmer & Associates requesting the approval of 287 residential apartment units located on a portion of a 30.51 acre site between Poindexter Avenue and Los Angeles Avenue and east of Sierra Avenue; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the contents of the Final Environmental Impact Report; and has reached its decision on the matter; and WHEREAS, a study and investigation was made, a staff report was prepared and recommendations were submitted to the Moorpark Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of Article 5 of Chapter 3 of Title 7 (beginning at Section 65300) of the Government Code of the State of California ( "the Planning and Zoning Law "), the City of Moorpark has adopted a General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, THE MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. This Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Planned Development Permit No. 1014 and LDM -9 not be certified for the following reasons: A. The EIR does not adequately address traffic impacts inasmuch as it has identified the project as having an insignificant impact although traffic studies indicate that five intersections will be negatively and permanently affected by the project. IC B. The EIR does not fully address the negative economic and blighting impacts the project may have on the adjacent single family residences, which are located between the project site and westerly industrial development. SECTION 2. This Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that Planned Development Permit No. 1014 be denied based upon the following findings: A. The project, unless disapproved or approved at a lower density, would have the following specific, adverse impacts upon the public health, safety and general welfare: 1. The proposed apartment development would negatively impact adjacent existing single family residential uses because it would cause a significant increase of 1750 vehicle trips per day. This increase in vehicle trips would negatively and permanently impact five out of eight adjacent intersections. 2. The project would aggravate an on- street parking problem presently existing within the adjacent westerly residential neighborhood. 3. The project has the potential to cause economic degradation of surrounding existing residential uses inasmuch as the project would provoke the economic decline of a residential neighborhood bordered between Very High Residential Density and Industrial land use activities. 4. The project does not provide the required design or number of vehicle parking spaces as required by City Code standards. 5. The project does not provide the required park land dedication as identified in the EIR as a mitigation measure for the project. -2- sff /RES1000 6. Government Code Section 65915 et sec requires a density bonus or equivalent financial incentives where the project provides a minimum number of low to moderate income units. The City has already provided equivalent financial incentives through the bond financing provided to this project. 7. The project is not compatible with existing and future land uses within the zone and the general area in which the proposed use is to be located because the duplex portion of the project adjacent to existing single family residences provides less than the required front and rear yard setbacks. B. There are no feasible methods to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the impacts identified above, other than disapproving the project or significantly reducing its density, for the following reasons: 1. Traffic studies conducted have identified eight intersections affected by the proposed project. Three of the eight intersections can provide a "C" level of service ( "LOS ") after future traffic build -up and all improvements have been made. Five of the intersections will provide an LOS below "C" even after maximum feasible improvements are in place. 2. Neighborhood parks are intended to serve surrounding residents. Given the density of this proposal, a significant number of children, seniors and families will be concentrated within the project needing park services. A proposed park site located within the project is one of two sites, in proximity, considered for future park use. The alternative site would require children, seniors and others to cross railroad lines and a major state route ( "23 "), which is unacceptable to the community for safety reasons. Therefore, a neighborhood park within the project is necessary to serve -3- sff/RES1000 future residents which is not provided for under this request. 3. As proposed by the project, an existing medium density single family subdivision would be located between an existing industrial park to the west, and very high density multi- family units to the east. This positioning will have a blighting impact on the single family subdivision. SECTION 3. This Commission incorporates by reference the findings contained in the staff report dated December 3, 1986, as though fully set forth at this point and as amended orally at the public meeting. SECTION 4. This Commission hereby recommends to the City Council that it initiate an amendment to the General Plan and Zoning Code on the northerly 15.26 acres of the 30.51 acre subject site from High Density Residential to Medium Density Residential and to change the zone from RPD -15 to R -1 Single Family Residential. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of December, 1986. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Moorpark Planning Commission of the City of Moorpark, California at a special meeting thereof, held on the 15th day of December, 1986, by the following vote of the Planning Commission: AYES: commissioners Montgomery, Butcher, Perez, Wozniak and Holland; NOES: (Commission Butcher re Non - Certification of EIR) ABSENT: None nterim Chairman ATTEST: a Secretary -4- sff/RES1000