Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1988 0120 CC REG ITEM 09BJOHN GALLOWAY Mayor ELOISE BROWN Mayor Pro Tern CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. Councilmember JOHN PATRICK LANE Councilmember MAUREEN W. WALL City Clerk THOMAS P. GENOVESE City Treasurer MOORPARK III q, /s5 ITEM 9 �. STEVEN KUENY City Manager CHERYLJ.KANE City Attorney PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P. Director of Community Development R. DENNIS DELZEIT City Engineer JOHN V. GILLESPIE Chief of Police M E M O R A N D U M TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development DATE: January 14, 1988 (CC meeting of 1/20/88) SUBJECT: APPEAL NO. 18 - LEONARD LISTON REGARDING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 1066 Background The above item is a request for an automotive service center and full service car wash consisting of 6,540 sq.ft. on a 0.71 acre site in a CPD zone. Attached are previous staff reports and Planning Commission Resolution No. PC -87 -157 on this matter.. The Commisison held a public hearing on this item on October 5, 1987. It was the recommendation of the Planning Commission to deny this item because of the findings contained in Resolution No. PC -87 -157. Discussion Primarily because of problems associated with the close proximity to the church to the south, the Planning Commission chose to deny this .request. At the first City Council appeal hearing, the applicant indicated to the Council that he had a revised plan that incorporated the church's concerns. Because of this the Council referred the matter back to the Planning Commission. The Commission held a public hearing on this item on December 2, 1987 and January 4, 1988. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Commission was satisfied with the project and recommended approval to the Council, subject to the conditions of approval as originally provided with the staff report to the Planning Commission October 5, 1987. PJR:MAR:crl 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864 APPEAL /L /PCAGENDA Page 2 Recommendation 1. Approve the attached Negative Declaration as having been completed in compliance with State CEQA Guidelines. As part of its approval, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Negative Declaration. 2. Make the following findings: a. The proposed uses would be consistent with the purposed, intent, guidelines, standards, policies and provisions of the City's General Plan and Chapters 1 and 2 of the Ordinance Code; b. The proposed uses would not impair the integrity and character of the zone in which they are to be located; C. The proposed uses would be compatible with land uses permitted within the General Plan land use designations and the zones in the general area where the uses are to be located; d. The proposed uses would not be detrimental to the public interest, health safety, convenience or welfare. e. The proposed parking ratio is appropriate. 3. Direct staff to prepare a resolution conditionally approving Planned Development Permit No. 1066, for consideration at the Council's next regular meeting of February 3, 1988. Suggested Motion: If the Council desires, the following motion may be made: "I move that the Negative Declaration be approved; the Permit findings be made as required by Section 8163 -3 of the Municipal Code and as stated in the October 5, 1987 staff report to the Planning Commission; and that staff be directed to prepare a resolution conditionally approving Planned Development Permit No. 1066 for the Council's consideration at its next regular meeting of February 3, 1988. PJR:MAR:crl APPEAL /L /PCAGENDA Page 3 Attachments: 1. Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated 12/30/87 2. Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated /1/87 3. Staff Report to the City Council date 10/28/87 4. Resolution No. PC -87 -157 5. Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated 10/5/87 6. Revised site plans and elevations, and conceptual landscape plans, original existing tree plan. MOORPA City r t CAUFOROIA of it 41,3e¢ing ACtIC,,4. — 1988 PJR:MAR:crl APPEAL /L /PCAGENDA JOHN GALLOWAY Mayor ELOISE BROWN Mayor Pro Tem CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. Councilmember JOHN PATRICK LANE Councilmember MAUREEN W. WALL City Clerk THOMAS P. GENOVESE City Treasurer MOORPARK ITEM�4 M E M O R A N D U M STEVEN KUENY City Manager CHERYL S KANE City Attorney PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P. Director of Community Development R. DENNIS DELZEIT City Engineer JOHN V. GILLESPIE Chief of Police TO: The Planning Commission <.,( - FROM: Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development, DATE: December 30, 1987 (PC meeting of 1/4/88) SUBJECT: APPEAL NO. 18 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 1066 - LEONARD LISTON Bac_ kground At the Planning Commission meeting of December 7, 1987, the Commission requested several refinements to be made to the applicant's proposed full service car wash and automotive service bays. Specific adjustments requested by the Commission were: 1) to provide additional stacking room in the front of the car wash; and 2) eliminate the automotive service bays altogether. Staff had additional concerns dealing with saving trees on the site, providing landscape planters and refinements to the elevations. As a result of the above requests, the applicant has made the following corrections. Staff comment's follow each item: SITE PLAN 1. The car wash has been moved 14 ft. toward the rear of the site. This will enable a stacking room for a total of seven cars in the dry -off location (Four cars could be located previously). However, the applicant has indicated to the staff that only a maximum four cars would be in this area at any one time. Staff Comment: A negative impact of this change is that it has caused 57% of the frontage to be devoted to driveways where as only 4.1% existed previously. Three driveways are proposed now as opposed to 2 previously. The site loses two parking spaces with this change. Positively, the adjustment creates the opportunity to save additional trees in the rear. PJR:MAR:crl 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864 s Page 2 2. An additional planter has been added to the southeast corner of the service building. Staff Comment: This will soften the visual appearance of the wall facing the street at the southwest corner of the service building. 3. The service building has been reduced in size by eliminating one additional service bay at the southeast corner of the building. Staff Comment: This improves circulation between the service building and the car wash and reduces the visual impact of the building as viewed from the church to the south. However, it does not meet the Commission's intent to limit service related uses to those which support the car wash as the primary use. ELEVATIONS 1. The south elevation of the car wash has been given some additonal treatment to alter the appearance of a long blank wall. Additions to the roof line have been made so that there is variation in height of the south wall. Also the south elevation has been illustrated with the stand of acacia trees in front of the to better visualized what the view of this building will be from the church. A horizontal stringer has been added to the south elevation approximately two - thirds of the distance from ground level. Staff Comment: All of these modifications help provide additional relief and variety. They particularly improve the view from the church property to the south. 2. Other elevations of the car wash remain unchanged. 3. The elevations of the service building as viewed from the interior of the site have been revised to include additional elements common to the Western Victorian style of architecture. The most visible change is in the gables where the use of plant -ons have given a more western flavor to these architectural elements. U ?-' Staff Comments: All of these contribute to ve the architecture between this project and the proposed adjacent automotive facility. PJR:MAR:crl APPEAL /J /PCAGENDA Page 3 4. The south elevation of the service building has been given some relief by varying type of masonry. The upper one -third is now proposed to be a split face block and the lower two - thirds a slump stone block. Because the service building was reduced in floor area on the south side, the south elevation that abuts the church is now only 60 ft. in length; it was originally 82 ft. Staff Comment: The greatest improvement is in the reduction church. additional in length of the service building facing the The variation of the masonry offers little variety. As a result of the above revisions the Community Development Department conditions in the staff report to the Planning Comission dated December 1, 1987 have now been satisfied with the exception of Condition No. 1.e. The applicant has provided precisely one parking space per 300 sq.ft. of floor area with one space being located in each service bay. Staff remains of the opinion that the 1/300 parking ratio is appropriate and that it should be entirely outside of the structures in the conventional manner of calculating parking space demand. Recommendation Recommend approval of conditions and forward the City Council. Attachments: the revised project subject to Commission's recommendation to the 1. Staff report to the Planning Commissin 2. Staff report to the City Council dated 3. Resolution No. PC -87 -157 4. Staff report to the Planning Commission 5. Revised site plans and elevations, landscape plans, original existing tree PJR:MAR:crl APPEAL /J /PCAGENDA dated 12/1/87 10/28/87 dated 10/5/87 and conceptual plan. CI JOHN GALLOWAY Mayor ELOISE BROWN Mayor Pro Tern CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. Councilmember JOHN PATRICK LANE Councilmember MAUREEN W. WALL City Clerk THOMAS P. GENOVESE City Treasurer TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MOORPARK M E M O R A N D U M The Planning Commission Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community December 1, 1987 (PC meeting of 12/2/87) ITEM yA STEVEN KUENY City Manager CHERYL J. KANE City Attorney PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P. Director of Community Development R. DENNIS DELZEIT City Engineer JOHN V. GILLESPIE Chief of Police Development APPEAL NO. 18 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 1066 - LEONARD LISTON Background On October 5, 1987, th6_Planning Commission held a public hearing on the above entitlement. Upon conclusion of the hearing, the Commission voted to deny the applicant's request. This was primarily due to problems the Commission felt would occur because the project site is located next to a church. Details of the Commission's reasons for denial are found in the attached Resolution No. PC -87 -157. The applicant subsequently appealed the Commission's decision to the City Council. On November 23, 1987, the Council held a public hearing on this item. At the hearing the applicant indicated that a revised plan had been developed and it was intended to address the concerns raised at the Planning Commission's public hearing. Discussion The new plan substitutes a full service car wash for the originally proposed coin- operated car wash. The floor area of the automotive service bays was reduced from 9,000 sq.ft. to 7,000 sq.ft. Because of the requirements of a full service car wash, the circulation of the front portion of the site has changed. Other aspects have changed as well including setbacks, landscaped areas, parking, and architectural theme. PJR: MAR: cr]_ 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, Califomia 93021 (805) 529 -6864 PD1066 /H /PCAGENDA Page 2 Parking is proposed to allow each service bay as a parking space (the Commission permitted this allowance in its approval of the adjacent project (PD -1065 - Velazquez). Staff remains of the opinion that 1/300 parking ratio is necessary and has included a condition to this effect. Since numerous revisions are proposed the Council felt that the Planning Commission should review the revised project. Then, the Council will consider the Commission's recommendation as part of the input in the appeal process. Staff has reviewed the revised project and recommends to the Planning Commission that several refinements be made. These are listed in the attached additional conditions Recommendation Approve the revised project subject to the attached conditions and forward the Commission's recommendation to the City Council. Attachments: 1. Staff report to the City Council dated 2. Resolution No. PC -87 -157 3. Staff report to the Planning Commission 4. Revised site plans and elevations, and landscape plans, original existing tree PJR:MAR:crl 10/28/87 dated 10/5/87 conceptual plan. i CASE NO.: Appeal No. 18 - Planned Development Permit No. 1066 APPLICANT: Leonard Liston PC MEETING OF: December 7, 1987 ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY. DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS 1. THE FOLLOWING REVISIONS SHALL BE MADE TO THE SITE PLAN PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A ZONING CLEARANCE: a. The black acacia and silk oak trees shown on the tree plan between the car wash and the automotive service building shall be retained and incorporated into the landscape plan. b. Additional landscape planters shall be to the automotive service building between the doorways. C. The planter on the south property line to provide a four (4) ft. width in elevation of the south end of the building. provided adjacent to provide planters shall be extended front of the west automotive service d. The area to the west of the car wash shall have additional planters provided and shall be adequately striped to clearly delineate the circulation intended for the car wash and for the area from the automotive service building to the south side of the car wash. e. Parking shall be provided at the ratio of one space per 300 sq.ft. shall be revised to provide the appropriate parking ratio. 2. THE FOLLOWING REVISIONS SHALL BE MADE TO THE ELEVATIONS PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A ZONING CLEARANCE: a. The south elevations of both buildings shall be revised to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. Additional architectural treatment, or relief is needed to improve the interface with adjacent property to the south. b. All remaining elevations shall be revised to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. More variety in use of materials is necessary and additional minor architectural features are necessary to enable the project to be architecturally compatible with the proposed adjacent automotive service center (PD -1065 - Velazquez). -1- PD1066/I/PCAGENDA JLI1 I 'l I • w AL. LVHII VG IV 1 Ul1n L -D f + 1 1 • 4t$AM + WILLUAN VtN I UNA-4 805 529 8270;# 2 10 PD -1066 (Liston) - Additions /Modifications to City Engineer Conditions 1. Add the following language to City Engineer Condition lc: "A meandering sidewalk shall be provided on Park Lane Avenue. The precise design and location shall be approved by the City Engineer and Director of Community Development." 2. Change the following language in City Fngineex Condition lc: From: "Driveways shall be constructed per Plate E -2. The northerly driveway shall be 20' wide and signet. for entrance only. The southerly driveway shall be 1_4_L wide and signed for exit only." To: "Driveways shall be constructed per Plate E -2. The northerly driveway shall be 201 wide and signed for entrance only. The southerly driveway shall be 301 wide and signed for exit only." 3. City Engineer Condition ld should read as follows: The developer shall offer to dedicate to the City of Moorpark for public use, all the public street right -o£ -way along Park Lane shown on the site plan. 4. The second paragraph of City Engineer Condition 1p should be amended as follows: Quantities of water, water flow rates, major water courses, drainage areas and patterns, diversions, collection systems, flood hazard areas, sumps and drainage courses. Hydrology shall be per current Ventura County Standards except as follows: a. all sumps shall carry a 50 -year frequency storm; b, all catch basins on continuous grade shall carry a 10 -year storm; G. all catch basins in a sump condition shall bo sized such that depth of water at intake shall canal depth of approach flows: d. all culverts shall carry a 100 -year frequency storm; e. drainage facilities zhall be provided such that surface flows are intercepted and contained prior to entering collector or secondary roadways; RECEivti. DEC 0 -2 198 1 JGIY i u • wLLLUMIY VCIY I URM r I L- L-U l r l 1• wJMM r w1LLUMIY VCIY I URM- OUO OL7 OL I V OO 0 it f. under a 10 -year frequency storm, all collector streets shall be provided with a minimum of one travel lane with a goal that local, residential streets shall have one travel lane available where possible. CL: go aino5ll . not JN 30180 r /9 1TEIt�i �• v f 12-o MOORPARK CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. STEVEN KUENY Mayor City Manager ELOISE BROWN PO ► "" `'�, ° CHERYL J. KANE Mayor Pro Tern �o° i City Attorney THOMAS C. FERGUSON PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P. Councilmember O Director of JOHN GALLOWAY Community Development Councilmember °oa ' R. DENNIS DELZEIT JOHN PATRICK LANE °q,TEO ��� City Engineer Councilmember JOHN V. GILLESPIE MAUREEN W. WALL Chief of Police City Clerk THOMAS P. GENOVESE M E M O R A N D U M City Treasurer TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development DATE: October 28, 1987 (CC meeting of 11/ 2/87) SUBJECT: APPEAL NO. 18 PUBLIC HEARING ON PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 1066 - Leonard Liston Background The above item is a request for an automotive service center consisting of 9,000 sq. ft. on a 0.71 acre site in a CPD zone. Attached is the staff report and Planning Commission Resolution No. PC -87 -157 on this matter. The Commission held a public hearing on this item on October 5, 1987. It is the recommendation of the Planning Commission to deny this item because of the findings contained in Resolution No. PC -87 -1567. Discussion If_ the Council. desires to consider an approval of this item, staff recommends that the conditions of approval in the staff report dated October 5, 1987 be applied to this project.In addition to the material contained in the staff report, staff would like to request the following langiiage to be added to City Engineer Condition No. l.c.: "A meandering sidewalk shall be provided on Park Lane Avenue. The precise design and location shall be approved by the City Engineer and Director of Community Development." Also, staff_ wishes to direct the Council's attention to three areas of concern. 1. The City has begun the General Plan Update. This may lead to an analysis of the Los Angeles Avenue corridor as being more appropriate for other land uses than what is currently proposed by this project. Automotive oriented uses have not yet been introduced in the area south of Los Angeles Avenue. 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864 PD1.066 /G /PCAGENDA 13 October 29, 1987 Page 2 2. This request is one of three entitlements for automotive service centers on the Council's November 4th agenda. A fourth is presently in process and will be heard by the Planning Commission on November 16th. Two more are anticipated to be submitted to the City for processing in the near future. 3. The Municipal Code currently lists the land use "Garage, Repair /Storage" as permitted use in the CPD, and M -2 zones subject to a Planned Development Permit, or a Development Plan Permit. With the approval of a Conditional Use Permit, this use may also be located in an M -1 zone and is where three of the City's automotive repair businesses are located on Goldman Avenue. Some of the lots that have access from Goldman Avenue abut a single family residential area (Shasta Estates) . Aside from this close proximity, staff is of the opinion that the industrial zones are better suited for automotive repair than are the commercial zones. In keeping with this thought, it would seem more appropriate to require a Conditional Use Permit for automotive repair in the commercial zones, and have this as a permitted use in the industrial zones. However, the current code is just the opposite. Recommended Action 1. Approve the attached Negative Declaration as having been completed in compliance with State CEQA Guidelines. As part of its approval, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Negative Declaration. 2. Consider the recommendation of the Planning Commission as stated in Resolution No. PC -87 -156. 3. If the Council wishes to approve the project, make the following findings: a. The proposed uses would be consistent with the purpose, intent, guidelines, standards, policies and provisions of the City's General Plan and Chapters 1 and 2 of the Ordinance Code; b. The proposed uses would not impair the integrity and character of the zone in which they are to be located; C. The proposed uses would be compatible with land uses permitted within the General Plan land use designations and the zones in the general area where the uses are to be located; PD1066 /G /PCAGENDA 1Lf October 28, 1987 Page 3 d. The proposed uses would not be detrimental to the public interest, health safety, convenience or welfare. e. The parking ratio provided shall be 1/300 square feet of floor area. 4. Direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution for Planned Development Permit 1066, for consideration at its next regular meeting of November 18, 1987. Attachments: 1. Resolution No. PC -87 -157 2. Staff report dated October 5, 1987 NIA _ktqlAtT ii •O' City � Iri • of • ' i • �.� aiiZAz,;,t, / PM OrNA /r. /PrAr.F. ,MA 15 WOW RESOLUTION NO. PC -87 -157 A RESOLUTION OF THE MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, DENYING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 1066 ON THE APPLICATION OF LEONARD LISTON, ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 506 -0- 150 -140. WHEREAS, at a duly notice public hearing held before the Planning Commission of October 5, 1987 to consider the request to construct an automotive service center of 9,000 square feet, and a coin operated car wash located on the west side of Park Lane Avenue approximately 130 feet south of Los Angeles Avenue. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission after review and consideration of the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration fund that this project would have a significant effect on the environment, and has reached its decision in the matter not to approve Planned Development Permit No. 1066. WHEREAS, a study and investigation was made, a staff report dated October 5, 1987, and recommendations were submitted to the Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Moorpark, California, does resolve:and in particular, the Planning Commission specifically finds that the proposed use would be inconsistent with the purposes, intent, guidelines, standards, policies, and provisions of the City's General Plan and Chap SECTION 1. The Planning Commission is unable to make all of the { findings as specified in the staff report dated October 5, 1987, and in particular, the Planning Commission specifically finds that the proposed use would be inconsistent with the purposes, intent, guidelines, standards, policies, and provisions of the City's General Plan and Chapters 1 and 2 of the Ordinance Code and that the proposed use would be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, and welfare. SECTION 2. The project constitutes a more intense use of the property that the uses recommended in the adopted General Plan of the City and as such, the project would be in conflict with the abutting church and nearby single- family residences and would impose significant and detrimental impacts on the nearby residential neighborhood through excessive noise and loitering. SECTION 3. The proposed use will be detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare, and to the property in the vicinity in which the use is situated. SECTION 4. The imposition of conditions upon the requested use will not adequately or significantly mitigate the above described injurious, detrimental effects. -1- 157101687 SECTION 5. That at its meeting of October 5, 1987, the Planning Commission took action to direct staff to prepare a resolution with the attached recommended conditions, as modified, said resolution to be presented for Consent Calendar action at the next regular scheduled meeting. The action with the foregoing direction was approved by a roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Montgomery, Wozniak, Butcher and Lawrason; NOES: None; ABSENT: Douglas Holland. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of October, 1987. ATTEST: Celia LaFleur, Secretary VICE 9%IRMAN Scott Montgomery APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: P trick J. 'R fcyaras, Director of ommunity De lopment I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Planned Commission of the City of Moorpark; California, at a regular meeting held on the 19th day of October, 1987, roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Montgomery, Butcher, Wozniak and Lawrason; NOES: None. ABSENT: None; ABSTAIN: Commissioner Holland. ATTEST: Celia LaFleur, Secretary -z- 157101687 CLINT HARPER, Ph.D. Mayor ELOISE BROWN Mayor Pro Tem THOMAS C. FERGUSON Councilmember JOHN GALLOWAY Councilmember JOHN PATRICK LANE Councilmember MAUREEN W. WALL City Clerk Applicant: Subject: Location: Assessor Parcel No.: Site Size: Floor Area: Building height: General Plan/ Zoning: Surrounding Zoning/ Land Use: North: South: East: West: MOORPARK STAFF REPORT TO: MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting of October 5, 1987 ITEM S$•�� STEVEN KUENY City Manager CHERYLJ.KANE City Attorney PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P. Director of Community Development R. DENNIS DELZEIT City Engineer JOHN V. GILLESPIE Chief of Police THOMAS P. GENOVESE City Treasurer Case No. Planned Development Permit No. 1066 Leonard Liston 31129 Via Colinas, Suite #705 Westlake Village, California 91362 Automobile service center and coin - operated car wash. West side of Park Lane Avenue approximately 130 feet south of Los Angeles Avenue. 506 -0- 150 -140 30,970 sq.ft. (.71 acres) 9,000 sq.ft. Service bays Car wash: 24 feet 20 and 22 feet General Commercial /CPO Commercial Planned Development Zoning General Plan CPD- Commercial Planned Development /General Commercial CPD - Commercial Planned Development /General Commercial CPD- Commercial Planned Development /General Commercial CPO-Commercial Planned Development /General Commercial Site & Project History:December 23, 1980: Ordinance No. 3512 was adopted by - the County of Ventura changing the zone classification to its present designation of CPD (from its prior designation of RE /Rural Exclusive). 799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529-6864 Case No.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 Applicant: Leonard Liston PC Meeting Date: October 5, 1987 August 6, 1981: Resolution No 81 -43 was adopted by the Planning Commission of the County of Ventura approving a conditional use permit for a 2 -story 16,900 sq.ft. office building. Use inauguration was to occur within two years from the date of approval. This did not occur and the permit expired effective August 6, 1983. Environmental Determination: Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues: 1. Land Use 2. Proximity to adjacent similar project 3. Proximity to future residential uses 4. Internal circulation Parking: Two components exist with this project: a 9,000 sq.ft. automotive service area consisting of eight individual service bays and a four stall coin operated car wash. Since no parking requirement is set by the code for the automotive service area, the Planning Commission shall fix the parking requirement. The staff has suggested to the applicant that the standard retail requirement of one space per 300 sq.ft. of floor area be provided. The applicant has complied with this request. The car wash itself requires no parking as a function of floor area. However, no provision is directly made for a "dry off" area that is typically provided in self - service car washes. Indirectly it can be visualized on the site plan that cars will pull into spaces nos. 21 -30 at the south and north side of the property to dry off if they are vacant. These spaces are intended for all day parking for patrons and employees. However, the peak periods for the car wash are likely to be evenings and weekends when the service bays are not likely to be in use. Therefore somewhat of a joint use of parking is provided. Access: Two driveways off of park Lane Avenue are proposed. The north driveway is proposed for ingress and the south driveway is for egress. Internal Circulation: The two driveways provide for a "U - shaped" circulation pattern within the site. One defect in the design of the car wash area is that no stacking room is provided for cars waiting to enter the car wash when all four bays are full. The Municipal Code does not provide standards for stacking room. However, it is foreseen that there will be times when cars will be waiting in the required parking aisle and will block traffic waiting to get to the service area of the site. Therefore, an interference with internal circulation would be created. -2- 174305 Case No.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 Applicant: Leonard Liston PC Meeting Date: October 5, 1987 An additional circulation problem has been created by the he landscaping on the site. The problem Can be corrected. Insufficient aisle width is provided to spaces 10, 11, 29, and 30. The City standard is 25 feet. Only 14 feet is provided to spaces 29, and 30, and 22 feet is allowed for spaces 10 and 11. Architectural Description: Materials used in this project consist of an earth tone pallete. California Mission "S" tile is used for the roof and is consistent which commercial development in the vicinity. Below the roof line a Roman style of architecture is prevalent. Rounded arches and use of columns with various relief features and plant -on are combined. Stucco will be the primary finish material and will be a dark beige color; stucco trim will be painted a pale beige. A medium red will be used as an accent color in limited places. Because of the function that would be served by this proposed project, its design leads to certain aspects that are less desirable in a commercial zone. The open view from the street of roll -up doors, mechanical repair equipment, and automobiles and other vehicles being serviced is a less attractive view than other uses normally associated with commercially zoned property. Although this proposal has put forth some mitigating features, such as placing the repair function in the rear and the car was and landscaping in the front, there still is an inherent industrial quality that exists. Landscaping: The County of Ventura Guide to preparing Landscaping Plans used by the City of Moorpark requires a minimum of 10% of site area to be landscaped for commercial projects. The project site has 11% landscaping shown on the site plan. The Moorpark Municipal Code Section 9.13.110(d) requires parking areas to provide 10% landscaping, which may be counted toward the overall site requirements. Since the site is very small it has been designed that all of the landscaping is in the parking area. Therefore both applicable landscape requirements have been satisfied. Due to the problem mentioned in the internal circulation section, some of the landscaped areas will have to be relocated or the problem may be solved by eliminating the excess landscaping that interferes with the required aisle width. If these areas are eliminated it appears that the minimum 10% landscaping would still be provided. A total of 26 trees exist on the site. One of these is proposed to be relocated. Of the remaining trees, eight will be saved and incorporated into the landscape plan. The dollar value of all trees on the site is $17,478.36 -3- 174305 1q Case No.: Applicant: PC Meeting Date: Interface with Surrounding Land: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 Leonard Liston October 5, 1987 IKIFJ according to the tree survey and appraisal furnished by the applicant. The trees that are proposed to be saved have a combined value of $8,853.80. Therefore, the value of the trees not proposed to be saved is $8,624.36. Additionally 2 other trees at the front property line could be saved, but would require a minor adjustment in the sidewalk configuration. If these two trees ( #2 and #21 in the appraisal) were saved it would further reduce the appraisal amount of the trees proposed for removal to a value of $6,455.27. See Community Development Condition No. 2.a. for the subject of replacement trees. The site is in an area that is developing with retail commercial and residential uses. To the north of this site is a neighborhood convenience shopping center. to the south is a church. The Circle "K" convenience market is to the east, and a contractors storage yard is to the west. The latter property is the site of a similar proposed project (PD -1065) which is proposed to have automotive service bays and automotive oriented retail stores. Therefore, if both PD -1065 and 1066 are approved, two similar uses will abutt one another. Approximately 137 feet to the south of this site is the site of Villa Campesina an approved 62 lot single family subdivision for low and moderate income families. An irregular relationship exists with respect to the adjoining Park Lane shopping center. At their common property line both projects would abut each other with no separation. The shopping center has approximately a 69 ft. setback from Park Lane Avenue. The proposed auto service bays would be set back 102 ft. from Park Lane Avenue. Although the landscaping proposed will soften the appearance of the south wall of the shopping center, the lack of any side setback of this project (PD -1066) is a detriment to its design. Public Improvements: Full sidewalk, curb, and gutter will be provided whereas none presently exist. The existing improvements on Park Lane Avenue as part of the shopping center site would be continued south to this project site. Park Lane Avenue would be dedicated and improved 15 feet from centerline. General Plan Update: As the Commission is aware, the City has begun its update of the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the General Plan. The vicinity in which this project is located is one that critically needs intensive study pertaining to both land use and circulation. Not having the benefit of a study on this -4- 174305 Case No.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 Applicant: Leonard Liston PC Meeting Date: October 5, 1987 area is a detriment in the evaluation process of this project and others in this vicinity. It may be premature to consider the approval of individual development proposals on an incremental basis due to the current circumstances. The loss of comprehensive insight into future land use decisions may be forsaken by making such decisions at this time given the present status of the City's General Plan. Discussion: A combination of 2 automotive oriented uses are proposed for this site. A coin - operated car was and automotive service bays. This represents a new land use in an area that is developing with single family residential nearby and retail commercial. As such it may be incompatible to introduce this type of land use in this area. Generally, the staff has attempted to encourage more separation between automotive and residential uses than will be provided in this proposal. Adjacent to this site is a similar proposed project (PD -1065) located to the west. The two projects together may well represent a concentration of automotive related uses in an area that is not best suited for this use due to the proximity to the residential area to the south. Recommended Action: 1. Make the following findings: a. The proposed uses would be consistent with the purposed, intent, guidelines, standards, policies and provisions of the City's General Plan and Chapters 1 and 2 of the Ordinance Code; b. The proposed uses would not impair the integrity and character of the zone in which they are to be located; t C. The proposed uses would be compatible with land • uses permitted within the General Plan land use designations and the zones in the general area where the uses are to be located; d. The proposed uses would not be detrimental to the public interest, health safety, convenience or welfare. e. The proposed parking ratio is appropriate. 2. Approve the attached Negative Declaration as having been completed in compliance with State CEQA Guidelines. As part of its approval, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Negative Declaration. -5- 175001 Case No.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 VOW Applicant: Leonard Liston PC Meeting Date: October 5, 1987 Final Disposition: EXHIBITS: 3. Direct staff to prepare a resolution conditionally approving Planned Development Permit No. 1066, for consideration at its next regular meeting of October 19, 1987. Pursuant to Resolution No. 86 -276, this is a Commercial Planned Development Permit of less than 20,000 square feet. Therefore, the Planning Commission has final approving authority unless appealed to the City Council 1. LOCATION MAP; 2. MITIGATIVE /NEGATIVE DECLARATION; 3. SITE PLAN; 4. ELEVATIONS. -6- 175001 IVF old w I. None II. CITY OF MOORPARK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA 93021 _ NEGATIVE DECLARATION MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 1. Entitlement: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 2. _Applicant:_ Leonard Liston 3. Proposal_ 9,000 sq.ft. automotive center and four -stall coin - operated car wash. 4. Location & Parcel Number(s): West side of Park Lane Avenue approximately 130 feet south of Los Angeles Avenue. AP# 506 -0 -150, 040. 5. Responsible Agencies: STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: An initial study was conducted by the Community Development Department to evaluate the potential effects of this project upon the environment. Based upon the findings contained in the attached initial study it has been determined that this project (could,) (could not), have a significant effect upon the environment. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ONLY: These potentially significant impacts can be satisfactorily mitigated through adoption of the following identified measures as conditions of approval. MITIGATION MEASURES INCLUDED TO AVOID POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS: 1. All automotive repair work shall be conducted indoors. 2. Hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. III. PUBLIC REVIEW: 1 E Prepared by: Legal_N_oti_ce Metho_d:Direct mailing to property owners within 300 feet. Yes Document_Postinq_Period: September 23, 1987 - October 7, 1987 Approved by: Name/Date Name /Date Michael A. Rubin Patrick J. Richards Senior Planner Director of Community Development 4006' CITY OF MOORPARK INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST FORM 1. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Applicant 2. Project Description le / 3. Date of Checklist submittal /f 4. Project Location /" o . II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS V (Explanations of all. "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.) 1. EARTH. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in situation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? YES MAYBE NO 2� YES MAYBE NO Z. AIR. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? C. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? d. Is there a potential for cumulative adverse impacts on air quality in the project area? 3. WATER. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? C. Alterations to the course or flow of flood -- waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface rater quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f.. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h. Degradation of ground water quality? i. Substantial reduction in the amount of water _ otherwise available for public water supplies? j. Exposure of people or property to writer related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? 0 YES MAYBE NO 4. PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in the diversity of species or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species or numbers of any species of animals -(birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? b. Restrict the range of or otherwise affect any rare or endangered animal species? C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. NOISE. Will the proposal. result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. LIGHT AND CLARE. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? __ x S. LAND USE. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 9. NATURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable resource? 10. RISK OF UPSET. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 11. POPULATION. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. HOUSING. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. TRANSPORTATION /CIRCULATION. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional. vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities or demand for new parking? C. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and /or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or pair traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 1.4. PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect unon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental servies in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? l). Police protection? C. Schools? d. Parke or other recreational facilities? C. Other governmental services? 15. ENERGY. Will the proposal. result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? YES MAYBE NO PAAF x x FA Zl' Z l YES MAYBE NO b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of energy? 16. UTILITIES. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications system? C. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? C. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? g. Street lighting annexation and /or improvements? 17. HUMAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? 13. AESTHETICS. Will the proposal result in the obstruc- tion of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. ARCHAEOLOGICAL /HISTORICAL. Will. the proposal.: a. Affect possible unknown archaeological or historic- al sites? b. Result in destruction or alteration of a known _ archaeological or historical site within the vicinity of the project? C. Result in destruction or alteration of a known archaeological or historical site near the vicinity of the project? YES MAYBE NO 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. III. x a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals? (A short -term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long -term impacts will endure well into t the future.) C. Does the project have impacts which are individu- ally limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where impact on ea.h resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) \4 d. Does the project have environmental. effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on l,um.an beings, either directly or indirectly. RECOA'IME"'I'DAT I.ON On the basis of this initial evaluation: In conformance with Section 15060 of the State EIR Guidelines, I find with certainity that the proposal would not have a significant impact on the environment. I find the proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to class I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECI.ARA`I'ION should be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in- this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet could be applied to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION SHOULD BE PREPARED. K& I find proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. _ I find proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ADDENDUM to an existing certified Environmental Impact Report is required. _ I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and this effect is adequately addressed in a certified Environmental Impact Report, and thus SUBSEQUENT USE of the existing EIR is required. .15l 152 Case No.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 Applicant: Leonard Liston, PC Meeting Date: October 5, 1987 ADDENDUM TO INITIAL STUDY The following are responses to "yes" and "maybe" responses to the initial study. I.b. As a result of grading and site preparation, displacement, compaction and overcovering of soil will occur. These are construction impacts and will be short term. No long range impacts are anticipated due to the necessary pre- construction earthwork. d. The proposed project when considered collectively with other project proposals in the City may contribute to cumulative adverse impacts on air quality in the vicinity. There is no present mitigation measure available at this time inasmuch as single projects are concerned. 3.b. The site is presently improved with a single family residence. The proposed project including the parking area will cover 90% of the present site. This will result in a great increase of surface area impervious to water, and will increase the rate and amount of surface runoff. However, existing storm drains in the vicinity are adequate to accommodate the increased runoff. 6.a. The primary on site source of noise generation is anticipated to emanate from vehicular traffic. Some additional noise can be expected to result from the automotive repair work. However if the work is properly conducted indoors no adverse impacts should result. Residential uses will be located 137 feet to the south of the site. 7. New light and glare will be introduced as a result of the proposed project. Illumination from signs. parking lots and vehicular traffic will contribute to an increase in existing light and glare. However the location of the building is such that most of the illumination will not directly impact the future residential area to the south. Additionally, the hours of operation are proposed to be limited to 7:00 a. m. to 7:00 p.m. With these hours, only during the winter months will automobile headlight glare be a problem. 8. Since the property is presently improved with a single family residence the removal of the residence and subsequent construction of the auto service center may represent a substantial alteration in the present land use. This use is permitted by the zoning ordinance. Since the site is zoned for commercial use, the zoning is consistent with the General Plan. -1- Case No_: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 Applicant: Leonard Liston PC Meeting Date: October 5, 1987 13.a. Since the site is presently undeveloped, any new development on the property would result in a significant increase in on -site vehicular movement. Local circulation is such that traffic from this site will be immediately dispersed to State highway 118 (Los Angeles Avenue) and is not expected to significantly impact the immediate vicinity. The type of business proposed is more likely to have a constant flow of traffic through the day, with barely discernible peak periods. 13.b. A demand for new parking will be created by the project proposal. However current Municipal Code requirements will require a specific number of spaces to serve the proposed project. f. An increase in traffic hazards with respect to motor vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians will occur as is the case in any development project where the site potential is intensified. Design features of the site such as setbacks, sight distance requirements, driveway and aisle widths will help mitigate traffic safety concerns and potential hazards. 18. Automotive oriented land uses typically are designed with conventional roll -up doors. This can be visualized as an offensive view from the street. Although certain design features will reduce the visual impact, the presence of new development with roll -up doors tends to give an industrial appearance to a building in a commercial zone. 21.c. A cumulative impact will result with respect traffic. The is not expected to significantly impact the vicinity or whole. However it will have a cumulative impact when other existing projects and projects pending approval. -2- project alone the City as a considered with lip 34 CASE NO.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 APPLICANT: Leonard Liston PC MEETING DATE: October 5, 1987 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 1. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: a. The permit is granted for the land and project as shown on the plot plans and elevations labeled Exhibit "C ", "D" and "E" except or unless indicated otherwise herein. b. The development is subject to all applicable regulations of the M -1 zone and all agencies of the State, Ventura County, the City of Moorpark and any other governmental entities. c. Unless the use is inaugurated not later than two years after the date this permit is granted, this permit shall automatically expire on that date. The Director of Community Development may, at his discretion, grant one additional one -year extension for use inauguration if there have been no changes in the adjacent areas, and if permittee has diligently worked toward inauguration of use during the initial two -year period. d. All facilities and uses other than those specifically requested in the application are prohibited unless a modification application has been approved by the Director of Community Development. e. The design, maintenance and operation of the permit area and facilities thereon shall comply with all applicable requirements and enactments of Federal, State and County and City authorities, and all such requirements and enactments shall, by reference, become conditions of this permit. f. If any of the conditions ar limitations of this permit are held to be invalid, that holding shall not invalidate any of the remaining conditions or limitations set forth. g. Signs are subject to the Moorpark Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 50 of Title 9. A sign permit is required for all on -site signs. Where there are more than two signs on the building or within the complex a sign program shall be approved by the director of Community Development. No off -site signs are permitted. h. No later than ten (10) days after any change of property ownership or of lessee(s) or operator(s) of the subject use, there shall be filed with the Director of Community Development name(s) and address(es) of the new owner(s), lessee(s) or operator(s), together with a letter from any such person(s), acknowledging and agreeing to comply with all conditions of this permit. -1- CASE NO.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 APPLICANT: Leonard Liston PC MEETING DATE: October 5, 1987 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 1. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS (CONT.) i. If in the future,-any use or uses are contemplated on the site differing from that specified in this permit, either the permittee, owner or each prospective tenant shall file a project description prior to the execution of the new lease agreement or the initiation of the use. A review by the Director of Community Development will be conducted to determine if the proposed use is compatible with the C -P -D zone and the terms and conditions of this permit. Said review will be conducted at no charge and an approval letter sent, unless a minor or major modification is required, in which case all applicable fees and procedures shall apply. j. The permittee agrees as a conditions of issuance (or removal) and use of this permit to defend, at his sole expense, any action brought against the City because of issuance (or renewal) of this permit or, in the alternative, in relinquish this permit. Permittee will reimburse the City for any court costs and /or attorney's fees which the City may be required by a court to pay as a result of any such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate in the defense of any such action, but such participation shall not relieve permittee of his obligations under this condition. k. The permittee's acceptance of this permit and /or commencement of construction and /or operations under this permit shall be deemed to be acceptance by permittee of all conditions of this permit. All utilities shall be placed underground to the nearest off -site facility except through transmission Utilities. m. No conditions of this entitlement shall be interpreted as permitting or requiring any violation of law or any unlawful rules or regulations or orders of an authorized governmental agency. In instances where more than one set of rules apply, the stricter ones shall take precedence. n. That prior to construction, a zoning clearance shall be obtained from the Department of Community Development and a building permit shall be obtained from the Building and Safety Division. -2- Y40 CASE NO.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 APPLICANT: Leonard Liston PC MEETING DATE: October 5, 1987 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 2. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A ZONING CLEARANCE, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: a. A landscaping and planting plan (3 sets), together with specifications and maintenance program prepared by a State Licensed Landscape Architect, generally in accordance with County Guidelines for Landscape Plan Check or such other guidelines shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Community Development. The landscape plan shall be in substantial conformance to the conceptual landscape plan. The applicant shall bear the total cost of such review and of final installation inspection. The landscaping and planting plan shall be accompanied by a fee specified by the City of Moorpark. - Landscaping along streets and at intersections shall not impair sight distance. Low -lying shrubbery should be planned around intersections so that a seated driver does not have to partially enter the intersection in order to gain a clear view of oncoming traffic. - Landscaping shall be designed as not to obstruct the view of any building or office entrance /exit, windows, walkways or vehicles parked in the parking lot. - All landscaping and planting within paved areas shall be contained within raised planters surrounded by six- (6)inch concrete curbs. - The final landscape plans shall provide for a 50% shade coverage within all parking areas. Shade coverage is described as the maximum mid -day shaded area defined by a selected specimen tree at 50% maturity. That turf plantings associated with this project shall be drought tolerant, low -water using variety. / - Additional trees, or larger sizes of proposed trees shown in the conceptual landscape plan shall be added to the mix of trees to approximate the replacement value of $8,624.56 worth of trees being removed. b. Roof Design and construction shall include a minimum 18" (inch) extension of the parapet wall above the highest point of the roof. C. Pullover parking shall be limited to 24 inches maximum. -3- I1 CASE NO.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 APPLICANT: Leonard Liston PC MEETING DATE: October 5, 1987 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 2. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A ZONING CLEARANCE, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: d. The applicant shall execute a covenant running with the land on behalf of itself and its successors, heirs and assigns agreeing to participate in the formation of and be subject to any assessment district or other financing technique including but not limited to the payment of traffic mitigation fees, which the City may implement or adopt, to fund public street and traffic improvements directly or indirectly affected by the development. Traffic mitigation fees shall be used for projects in this Los Angeles Avenue Area of Contribution, such as, but not limited to, the extension of New Los Angeles Avenue. e. Trash disposal areas shall be provided in locations which will not interfere with circulation parking or access to building, and shall be screened with a six (6) foot high solid wall enclosure with metal or wooden gates. Final design of said enclosure shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development. f. All property line wal 1 s and fences shall be no further than one inch from any property line. g. The building(s) shall be constructed employing energy- saving devices. These shall include those required by the California Administrative Code, Title 24. h. For all exterior lighting, a lighting plan shall be prepared by an electrical engineer registered in the State of California and submitted to the Department of Community Development for review and approval prior to the issuance of a Zone Clearance. The lighting plan shall achieve the following objectives: Avoid interference with reasonable use of adjoining properties; minimize on -site and off -site glare; provide adequate on -site lighting; limit electroliers' height to avoid excessive illumination; provide structures which are compatible with the total design of the proposed facility. These plans shall include the following: - A photometric plan showing a point by point foot candle layout to extend a minimum of twenty (20) feet outside the property lines. Layout plan to be based on a ten (10) foot grid center. - Maximum overall height of fixtures shall be not more than fourteen (14) feet in or adjacent to residential areas and not more than twenty (20) feet in non - residential areas. Fixtures must possess sharp cut-off qualities at property lines. -4- CASE NO.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 APPLICANT: Leonard Liston PC MEETING DATE: October 5, 1987 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 2. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A ZONING CLEARANCE, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: - There shall be no more than a seven to one (7:1) ratio of level of illumination shown. (Maximum to minimum ratio between Lighting Standards). - Energy efficient lighting fixtures which are compatible with adjacent commercial lighting to the north and east. - Minimum of one -foot candle illumination. i. A utility room with common access to house all meters and the roof access ladder shall be provided. No exterior access ladder shall be permitted. j. All exterior building materials and paint colors shall be approved by the Director of Community Development prior to the issuance of a Zoning Clearance for the purpose of determining compatibility with adjacent development. k. Developer shall pay all energy costs associated with street lighting for a period of one year from the initial energizing of the street lights. 1. A minimum 25 ft. parking aisle width shall be provided to all spaces. 3. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: a. An "Unconditional Will Serve Letter" for water and sewer service will be obtained from Ventura County Waterworks District No. 1. b. The developer shall pay all school assessment fees levied by the Moorpark Unified School District. 4. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: a. All parking areas shall be surfaced with asphalt or concrete and shall include adequate provisions for drainage, striping and appropriate wheel blocks, curbs or posts in parking areas adjacent to landscape areas. b. All landscaping and planting shall be installed and inspected. -5- CASE NO.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 APPLICANT: Leonard Liston PC MEETING DATE: October 5, 1987 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 4. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: c. No use for which this permit is granted shall be commenced until a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued by the Building and Safety Division. In addition, no Certificate of Occupancy may be issued until all on -site improvements specified in this permit and has posted a Faithful Performance Bond or other form of financial security to guarantee the agreement; said on -site improvements shall be completed within 120 days of issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. In case of failure to comply with any term or provision of this agreement, the City Council may be resolution declare the surety forfeited. Upon completion of the required improvements to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development, the surety may be exonerated by action of the Director of Community Development. 5. AFTER ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE APPLICABLE: a. Continued landscape maintenance shall be subject to periodic inspection by the City. The permittee shall be required to remedy any defects in ground maintenance as indicated by the City within two weeks after notification. b. Dead or dying material shall be replaced in accordance with the approved landscape plan. In addition, it shall be the responsibility to the property owner to maintain tree wells adjacent to this property in a safe condition and free from trash, weeds, or other debris and public nuisances. c. All required yards, fences, parking areas, storage areas, operations yards and other uses on the site shall be improved as required by these regulations and shall at all times be maintained in a neat and orderly manner. d. No outside storage of parts, materials, or merchandise shall be permitted. e. All work shall be conducted indoors. f. Hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. g. Any violations of the above Community Development Conditions shall be immediate cause for revocation of the Planned Development Permit., va CASE NO.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 APPLICANT: Leonard Liston PC MEETING DATE: October 5, 1987 CITY ENGINEER'S CONDITIONS 1. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A ZONING CLEARANCE, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: a. The developer shall submit to the City of Moorpark for review and approval, a grading plan prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer; shall obtain a Grading Permit; and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing completion. b. The developer shall submit to the City of Moorpark for review and approval, a detailed Soils Report certified by a registered professional Civil Engineer in the State of California. The grading plan shall incorporate the recommendations of the approved Soils Report. c. The developer shall submit to the City of Moorpark for review and approval, street improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer; shall enter into an agreement with the City of Moorpark to complete the improvements; and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing the construction of the improvements. The improvements shall include concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, striping and signing and paving in accordance with the Ventura County Road Standards. The applicable Road Standard Plates are as follows: - Park Lane shall be constructed per Plate B -3C along the entire frontage of the property. Street improvements shall consist of 112 the street width plus an additional 12' of paving on the easterly side of the centerline. - Driveways shall be constructed per Plate E -2. The northerly driveway shall be 20' wide and signed for entrance only. The southerly driveway shall be 14' wide and signed for exit only. d. The developer shall offer to dedicate to the City of Moorpark access easements over all private streets right -of -way along Park Lane Avenue shown on the approved site plan to provide access for all governmental agencies providing the public safety, health and welfare. e. The developer shall demonstrate for each building pad to the satisfaction -. of the City of Moorpark as follows: a. Adequate protection from 100 -year frequency storm; and b. Feasible access during a 10 -year frequency storm. f. The developer shall deposit with the City of Moorpark a contribution for the Los Angeles Avenue Improvement Area of Contribution. The actual deposit shall be the then current Los Angeles Avenue Improvement Area of Contribution applicable rate at the time the Building Permit is issued. -7- 41 CASE NO.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 APPLICANT: Leonard Liston PC MEETING DATE: October 5, 1987 CITY ENGINEER'S DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 1. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A ZONING CLEARANCE, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: g. That prior to zone clearance, the developer shall pay all energy costs associated with street lighting for a period of one year from the initial energizing of the street lights. h. If grading is to take place during the rainy season, an erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval along with the grading plan. Along with the erosion control measures, hydroseeding of all graded slopes shall be required within 60 days of completion of grading. Prior to zone clearance, the developer shall have prepared a geotechnical investigation with regard to liquifaction, expansive soils, and seismic safety. Per the City's safety element, this report shall be prepared by a Registered Professional Civil Engineer or Geologist. j. No grease or oil discharge to City Streets or City storm drain system will be permitted. k. The Moorpark Central Drainage Study requires an approximately 33 inch reinforced concrete pipe be placed under Park Lane along the subject property frontage. As a part of the Hydraulic Report and Plans, prior to zone clearance the developer shall provide the design for this RCP from Los Angeles Avenue to the Arroyo Simi. The developer shall be responsible for installing the portion of this reinforced concrete pipe along the subject property frontage, plus five feet past both property lines. Provisions shall be made for connections to this RCP when future development occurs. If no interferences exist, the RCP should be placed on the eastern side of Park Lane in the section of roadway which is not being constructed as a part of this project. When the property on the eastern side of Park Lane opposite the subject property develops, the developer of the subject property shall be reimbursed for one -half the cost of the storm drain installatio er the City Reimbursement Policy. 1. The developer shalli submit as a part of his drainage plans, provisions to ensure adequate drainage along Park Lane from the southerly property line to the Arroyo Simi. m. No trees with a trunk diameter greater than 4 inches shall be removed or disturbed without prior City Council approval. n. A drain of sufficient capacity to intercept all flow for a 10 year storm shall be provided near both driveway entrance /exits. The drain will be provided with a connection to both the street and the new reinforced concrete pipe in Park Lane. At the present time, the flows .will be directed to the street. When the RCP within Park Lane is completed to the Arroyo, the connection to the street will be plugged and all flows will be directed to the RCP in Park Lane. a 410 CASE NO.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 APPLICANT: Leonard Liston PC MEETING DATE: October 5, 1987 CITY ENGINEER'S CONDITIONS 1. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A ZONING CLEARANCE, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: o. The developer shall indicate in writing to the City of Moorpark, the disposition of any water well(s) and any other water that may exist within the site. If any wells are proposed to be abandoned, or if they are abandoned and have not been properly sealed, they must be destroyed per Ventura County Ordinance No. 2372. p. The developer shall submit to the City of Moorpark for review and approval, drainage plans, hydrologic, and hydraulic calculations prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer; shall enter into any agreement with the City of Moorpark to complete the improvement and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing the construction of the improvements. The drainage plans and calculations shall indicate the following conditions before and after development: Quantities of water, water flow rates, major water courses, drainage areas and patterns, diversions, collection systems, flood hazard areas, sumps and drainage courses. Storm drain systems shall be sized such that all sumps shall carry a 50 year frequency storm, all catch basins on continuous grades shall carry a 10 year storm, and all culverts shall carry a 100 year frequency storm. 2. DURING CONSTRUCTION THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL APPLY: a. Where roads are to be built requiring 4- inches of pavement, developer shall construct 3- inches of paving as an interim condition until all utility cuts or trenching is completed. The final 1 -inch cap of asphalt shall be placed after all necessary trenching is completed. b. Prior to any work being conducted within the State or City right -of -way, the developer shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from the appropriate Agency. CASE NO.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 APPLICANT: Leonard Liston PC MEETING DATE: October 5, 1987 VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 1. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A ZONING CLEARANCE THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED. a. Lighting devices shall be high enough as to eliminate anyone on the ground from tampering with them. All parking areas shall be provided with a minimum of one foot candle of lighting. Fixtures shall be weather and breakage resistant. b. Landscaping shall not cover any exterior door or window. c. Landscaping at entrances /exits or at any intersection within the parking lot shall not block or screen the view of a seated driver from another moving vehicle or pedestrian. d. Landscaping (trees) shall not be placed directly under any overhead lighting which could cause a loss of light at ground level. e. Front door entrances shall be visible from the street. f. Monument signs shall not block the view of a seated driver when exiting the site from another vehicle or pedestrian. g. There shall not be any easy exterior access to the roof area, i.e., ladders, trees, high walls, etc. h. All exterior doors shall be constructed of solid wood core minimum of 1 and 3 /4- inches thick or of metal construction. Front glass doors commonly used for entry are acceptable but should be visible to the street. i. Doors utilizing a cylinder lock shall have a minimum five (5) pintumbler operation with the locking bar or bolt extending into the receiving guide a minimum of 1 -inch deadbolt. j. If an alarm system is used, it should be wired to all exterior doors and windows and to any roof vents or other roof openings where access may be made. 2. DURING CONSTRUCTION THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL APPLY: a. A licensed security guard is recommended during the construction phase, or a 6 -foot high chain link fence shall be erected around the construction site. b. Construction equipment, tools, etc., shall be properly secured during non - working hours. -10- CASE NO.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 APPLICANT: Leonard Liston PC MEETING DATE: October 5, 1987 VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 3. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED. a. Address shall be clearly visible to approaching emergency vehicles and mounted against a contrasting color. b. Address numbers shall be a minimum of 6 inches in height and illuminated during the hours of darkness. c. Each single unit in a tract or commercial development, constructed under the same general plan, shall have locks using combinations which are interchange free from locks used in all other separate dwellings, proprietorships, or similar distinct occupancies. -11- 4S CASE NO.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 APPLICANT: Leonard Liston PC MEETING DATE: October 5, 1987 VENTURA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 1. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A ZONING CLEARANCE, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED. a. The applicant shall submit plans to the Ventura County Bureau of Fire Prevention for approval of the location of fire hydrants. Show existing hydrants on plan within 300 feet of the development. b. That access roads shall be installed with an all weather surface, suitable for access by fire department apparatus. c. That if any building(s) are to be protected by an automatic sprinkler system, plans shall be submitted, with payment for plan check, to the Ventura County Bureau of Fire Prevention for review. d. That any structure greater than 5,000 square feet in area and /or 5 miles from a fire station shall be provided with an automatic fire sprinkler system in accordance with Ventura County Ordinance #14. e. An aisle width of 20 fee minimum shall be provided, allowing for one -way traffic with parking on at least one side. f. That a plan shall be submitted to the Ventura County Bureau of Fire Prevention for review indicating the method in which buildings are to be identified by address numbers. g. That the access roadway shall be extended to within 150 feet of all portion of the exterior walls of the first story of any building. Where the access roadway cannot be provided, approved fire protection system or systems shall be installed as required and acceptable to the Bureau of Fire Prevention. h. Any gates, to control vehicle access, are to be located to allow a vehicle waiting for entrance to be completely off the public roadway. If applicable, it is recommended that the gate(s) swing in both directions. The method of gate control shall be subject to review by the Bureau of Fire Prevention. -12- i- CASE NO.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 APPLICANT: Leonard Liston PC MEETING DATE: October 5, 1987 VENTURA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 2. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: a. The minimum fire flow required shall be determined by the type of building construction, proximity to other structures, fire walls and fire protection devices provided, as specified by the I.S.O. Guide for Determining Required Fire Flow. Given the present plans and information, the required fire low is approximately 1500 gallons per minute. The applicant shall verify that the water purveyor can provide the required quantity at the project. 3. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL APPLY: a. Fire hydrants shall be installed and in service prior to combustible construction and shall conform to the minimum standards of the County Waterworks Manual. - Each hydrant shall be a 6 -inch wet barrel design and shall have one 4 -inch and two 2 -1/2 -inch outlet(s). - The required fire flow shall be achieved at no less than 20 psi residual pressure. - Fire hydrants shall be spaced 300 feet on center, and so located that no structure will be farther than 150 feet from any hydrant. - Fire hydrants shall be recessed in from curb face 24 inches at center. b. That all grass or brush exposing any structures shall be cleared for a distance of 100 feet prior to framing, according to the Ventura County Weed Abatement Ordinance. 4. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED: a. Address numbers, a minimum of 6 inches high, shall be installed prior to occupancy, shall be of contrasting color to the background, and shall be readily visible at night. b. Fire extinguishers shall be installed in accordance with National Fire Protection Association, Pamphlet #10. The placement of extinguishers shall be reviewed by the Fire Department Bureau. c. Permits shall be obtained for storage, handling and dispensing flammable or combustrible liquids. d. That plans shall be submitted for any hazardous operation for approval by the Ventura County Bureau of Fire Prevention. -13- 41 . CASE NO.: Planned Development Permit No. 1066 APPLICANT: Leonard Liston PC MEETING DATE: October 5, 1987 VENTURA COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 1. DURING CONSTRUCTION THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED. a. If any hazardous waste is encountered during the construction of this project all work shall be immediately stopped and the Ventura County Environmental Health Department, the' Fire Department, the Sheriff's Department and the City Inspector shall be notified immediately. Work shall not proceed until clearance has been issued by all of these agencies. -14-