HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1988 0601 CC REG ITEM 09ACITY OF MOORPARK
CITY COUNCIL
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT- STAFF REVIEW OF APRIL 13, 1988
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - LDM -10 AND DP -393 - 404
DATE: JUNE 1, 1988
BACKGROUND:
This memorandum reviews those issues and items discussed at the April 13, 1988 Cit•
Council meeting regarding LDM -10 and DP -393 - 404. At the meeting, the applicant af;c'
the City Council expressed concerns regarding the projects. The applicant requested that th"
City Council revise staff's recommended Conditions of Approval per the applicant's Mar
7, 1988 letter to the Planning Commission. The City Council expressed concern regard;
traffic generation and visual impacts. The following summarizes those concerns of the f"
Council at that meeting and the status of their review of I.DM -10 and DP -393 - 404.
SLIMMARY OF CITY COUNCIL CONCERNS
The key revisions requested by the applicant, which were considered by the City
Council included lengthening the time when the conditions would need to
satisfied (City Council to continue consideration of request); defining a more real :.
time limit and dollar value for the recommended covenant that would obligate
landowner to participate in payment of traffic mitigation fees (City Counr.''
approved); and establishing a more realistic time frame for provision of a S -f
wide meandering sidewalk along Los Angelus Avenue (City Council recommen(,.
that Caltrans review).
o Increased traffic generation due to these projects and capacity of existing roadways
to accommodate the increase. City Council stated that traffic is a growing probe
in the City and disputed the traffic report's conclusion that traffic impacts would
negligible due to the projects. City Council will continue to assess traffic icnl,;.t
City Council, however, did concur that the internal circulation plan is a benefit
the project.
o View impacts along Los Angeles Avenue associated with fasade created by
011-393. 01' -393 is the largest of all the projects being proposed. City Cuulw)
expressed concern that the mass and bulk created by DP -393 along Los Ang(,,1c,
Avenue would be a considerable negative visual impiwt. As a mitigation mean ,
the City Council recommended that the applicant revise DP -393 elevations along 1f-
Angeles Avenue. City Council recommended that the Public Works Committee c,kw
sider any future design alterations to DP -393.
The applicant subsequently revised the elevations of DP -393 along Los Angeles
Avenue and submitted the revised elevations to the City on May 23, 1988. Per City
Council recommendation, staff attempted to transmit the revised plans to the Public
Works Committee for review. There was, however, insufficient time to schedule a
meeting with the Public Works Committee. Consequently, the Committee has not
reviewed the design revisions to DP -393. Staff is recommending that Department of
Community Development Condition No. 1 for DP -393 - 396, which currently reads.
"That permits are granted for the land and projects on the submitted plot plans and
elevations. That the location and design of all site improvements shell be as shown
on the approved plot plans and elevations."
be amended to read:
"That permits are granted for the land and projects on the submitted plot plans and
elevations. That the location and design of all site improvements shall be as shown
on the approved plot plans and elevations. The Public Works Committee will
consider and approve all future design of DP -393."
This revised condition will ensure adequate Public Works Committee review of
DP -393,
DP -393 - 404 will create too many users in small industrial buildings. There may
be a loss in scale of operations. With DP -393 - 404, there would not be only a
few major users as was originally intended for the property (based on its current
large lot dimensions). In the long -term, the many users may have detrimental
traffic impacts.
o Need to identify Transportation Systems Management (TSM) methods. Staff
suggested that Air Pollution Control District conditions and the imposition of traffi
mitigation fees are possible TSM methods to consider.
Staff met with the Public Works Committee on two separate occasions to discuss the
foregoing TSM methods. The Committee, however, was unable to formulate av ,
resolution, Committee discussions focused primarily on larger traffic problems.
The Committee is scheduled to meet with Caltrans on May 27, 1988 to conlinov.
discussions on TSM.
STATUS OF APPROVAL
The City Council continued the public hearing regarding LDM -30 and DP -393 - 404 to
June 1, 1988.
Fhe City Council is required to act on the approvals by July 1, 1988.
LIST OF DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO CITY COUNCIL
o Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for UP -393 - 396, DP -397 - 404 and
LDM -10.
o Findings for Mitigated Negative Declarations for DP -393 - 396, DP -397 -404 anti
L.DM -10. Findings for approval of DP -393 - 396, DI' -397 - 404 and LDM -10.
Traffic studies for DP -393 - 396, DP -397 - 404 and t..DM -10.
o Staffs recommended Conditions of Approval for DP -393 - 396, DP -397 -404 and
LDM - 10.
o Planning Commission staff reports for DP-393 - 396, DP -397 - 404, and LDM -10.
o Resolutions for approval of Mitigated Negative Declarations for DP -393 -396,
DP -397 - 404, and LDM -10. Resolutions for approval of DP -393 - 396, DP -397
- 404, and LDM -10.
o March 7, 1988 letter from applicant to Planning Commission recommending
revision of Staff's Conditions of Approval.
o Memorandum to Planning Commission for March 7, 1988 meeting which was a
continuation on the approval of DP -393 - 396, DP -397 404, and LDM -10.
o Conditions of Approval for DP -393 - 396, DP-397 - 404, and LDM -10 written in
legislative format to reflect recommended revisions of applicant.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The attached Planning Commission Staff Report provides all the foregoing documents.
Staff recommends that the City Council.
CIA— tL,w A„hlir T�narino,
2. Accept the Mitigated Negative Declarations for LDM -10 and DP -393 - 404;
3. Certify that the information contained in the Negative Declarations was considered on
decisions related to the project;
4. Approve or modify and approve resubdivision LDM -10; and
5. Approve or modify and approve DP -393 - 404.
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
City Council Meeting
of G— /— 198
ACTION:
�a
May 24, 1988
Members of the Moorpark City Council
Moorpark City Hall
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, California 93021
Re: LDM -10; DP393 -396; DP397 -404
Dear Members of the Moorpark City Council:
WEST AMERICA CONSTRUCTION CORP.
8929 WILSHIRE BLVD.. SUITE 400- BEVERLY HILLS. CA.90211
(213) 6528288 CONTRACTORS LICENS - 96605
At the April 20, 1988 meeting of the City Council in which we presented
our above referenced project, we verbally reviewed with you several of
our concerns regarding the Conditions of Approval. For the sake of time
and clarification, we have provided you with a list of our questions.
We would like to discuss the Council's interpretation of our concerns at
the June 1st meeting of the City Council.
1) Traffic Signal at Maureen Lane and Los Angeles Avenue.
393 -396; Condition 4182, Page 32
397 -404; Condition #87, Page 48
LDM -10; Condition 4145, Page 29
(a) This condition is repeated for all three projects. Does the City
have a preference regarding the division of the $70,000 fee
between the three separate projects, or is it the prerogative of
the developer to make the allocation?
(b) It was our understanding at the Planning Commission hearing that
the original fee $65,000 would be increased to $70,000 to handle
the additional cost of necessary traffic studies when needed. It
would then be the responsibility of the City Engineer to perform
the necessary traffic studies when the City and /or Cal -Trans felt
it would be warranted. If the City is responsible for conducting
the traffic counts, would condition 4130, page 24 (LDM -10) and
condition 4156, page 41 (DP397 -404) be removed? Please clarify.
2) Transportation System Management (TSM)
393 -396; Condition 4186, Page 34
397 -404; Condition 4191, Page 50
In the event that a TSM schedule has not been adopted by the timl
we are ready for building permits:
/ (a) Will we be able to pull building permits?
(b) Will the fee be waived?
(c) Will the fee be due prior to occupancy?
Please clarify.
3) Meandering Sidewalk
393 -396; Condition 4129, Page 21
We believe that this condition should be required prior to
occupancy and not zone clearance for the following reasons:
(a) The sidewalk cannot be installed until it has been approved
by Cal- Trans.
(b) During construction, the sidewalk may be damaged with all the
related activity.
(c) We have very little control over Cal- Trans' time schedule;
it could take several months before they approve our sidewalk
layout.
Members of the Moorpark City Council
May 24, 1988
Page 2
(d) We believe it would be fair to require that the sidewalk be
installed prior to occupany or within 30 days after Cal - 'grans'
written approval of our sidewalk design, whichever occurs first.
4) City Engineer - Grading Permit
393 -396; Condition X145, Page 24
397 -404; Condition 1141, Page 38
We believe that it was the intent of the Planning Commission to
allow our grading plans to be submitted to the City Engineer for
review prior to a zone clearance and then have our plans approved
and a grading permit issued prior to the issuance of a building
permit. However, the wording of the condition is a bit confusing
as to when a grading permit is needed. Please clarify.
5) Covenant Agreement for Funding of Traffic Improvements
393 -396; Condition X127 & #501, Pages 20 & 26 respectively
397 -404; Condition X150, Page 40
LDM -10; Condition 1130, Page 23
We have agreed to and are willing to participate our pro -raga fair
share in an assessment district to be established by the City of
Moorpark as payment for traffic mitigation fees. However, we would
like the City to incorporate, within the covenant, some realistic
time and dollar limits. As the covenant presently reads, it would
be extremely difficult to transfer title with such an encumbering
restriction on the property.
6) Zone Clearance Submittal Requirement
In our letter to the Planning Commission dated March 7, 1988 (copy
attached), we asked the Commission to revise certain conditions
which would allow us to submit all required plans, documents and
fees to the Director of Community Development.and the City Engineer
for review and zone clearance. Final approval from the Director of
Community Development and the City Engineer on all submittal items
would be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. By
revising these conditions (see March 7th letter, paragraphs 1, 2,
and 3) it will allow us to simultaneously have Building and Safety
review our working drawingswhile Staff is also reviewing our plans.
The Planning Commission granted our request and subsequently the
conditions have been revised as indicated.
At the April 20th City Council hearing in which our project was
presented, Pat Richards, the Director of Community Development,
asked the Council to consider over - turning the Planning Commissions
decision to revise these conditions. For the following reasons, we
urge the City Council to uphold the Planning Commission's decision.
(a) The City will still maintain complete control over the approval
process. Building permits will be held up until Staff is
satisfied that all conditions have been met.
(b) With the tremendous work load already inflected on staff, it
sometimes takes weeks or months to have your plans reviewed. It
just makes "timely" sense to have Building & Safety reviewing
the plans simultaneously during this waiting period.
(c) It would relieve Staff of unneeded pressure from builders to
hasten the approval of their plans so they can submit to Building
& Safety. (Building & Safety usually take 4 -8 weeks to review plans).
(d) Our project was submitted to the Planning Department in July of 1987.
Many hours, days, and months have been spent by our Staff and th,:
City's Staff working together to create a project of which we wi11 all
be very proud. Once a project has been approved, it should be s
common goal to expedite the project forward in the most efficiert
and timely matter as possible.
Members of the Moorpark City Council
24, 1988
Page 3
The Planning Commission agreed with our recommended revised conditions for
the same reasons we have outlined above and we encourage the City Council
to uphold the conditions as written .
Thank you for your consideration of the above. We hope this outline will
be helpful in organizing our concerns.
King Regards,
NICHOLAS M. BROWN
Applicant
NB:gpc
MURRAY SIEG L
Applicant
CC: Patrick Richards, Director of Community Development
Steven Kueny, City Manager
Dennis Delzeit, City Engineer
Builders and Land Developers
May 23, 1988
Members of the Moorpark City Council
Moorpark City Hall
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, California 93021
Re: LDM -10; DP393 -396; DP397 -404
Dear Members of the Moorpark City Council:
WEST AMERICA CONSTRUCTION CORP
8929 WILSHIRE BLVD. suirE 400 • BEVERLY MILLS. CA 902,
(213) 652 -8288 CONTRACTORS LICENSE 98805
On April 20, 1988 our project was presented to the Moorpark City Council
for review. It was decided at that meeting to continue the discussion
of our project until the June 1st meeting so the City Coucil and Staff
could investigate possible solutions and /or mitigations to help combat
the growing concerns over the City's traffic problems. In this regard,
we would like to bring to your attention some of the positive benefits
our project will have on the City.
1) The development of our project will ensure the immediate improve-
ment and completion of the street system within this industrial
area.
2) 0-ir master planned 14 acre sub - division will ensure that the
off site improvements and the development of individual buildings
within the park will be provided by one developer, and thus
enabling the City to control the consistency in design throughout
the project. This will protect the City's desire to maintain
the harmony of a planned community by eliminating the possibility
of individual "hodge - podge" building designs.
3) The outcome of the traffic engineers findings were that our project
would have an insignificant impact on the overall traffic on Los
Angeles Avenue. This traffic will undoubtedly continue, with or
without development in Moorpark, until such time as Cal -Trans
improves Los Angeles Avenue and /or alternative routes are established
to relieve the congestion.
4) Based upon an independent physical survey performed by the Siracusa
Company (which is on file with the City), the M -2 light industrial
buildings on the west side of town have one employee for approxi-
mately every'1,100 square feet of building, as compared to the
high -end industrial use on the east side of town (i.e., C, C, & F
parks) which shows one employee for every 350 square feet. Our
project design is consistent with the existing use of industrial
buildings on the west side of town and therefore, we will be
creating less than one third of the allowable density, assuming
similar occupancies.
5) By subdividing LDM -10 into smaller lots and creating small -to-
medium range buildings, we have decreased our building to land
coverage ratio by over 35% less than what is presently allowed by
the City (see attached comparative analysis). As a result of less
land coverage, our landscaping coverage has been increased by over
25 %. (Note: less coverage of building also equates to less parking
and cars generated).
Moorpark City Council Members
May 23, 1588
Page 2
6) We have already accumulated a qualified list of interested
companies who are looking forward to establishing their businesses
in Moorpark. This would create jobs, support other local
businesses and create tax revenue for the City.
7) Also, provided herein for your review is an independent survey pro-
vided by the Siracusa Company which discovered among other things,
the fact that buildings in the 5,000- 10,000 square foot range gener-
ate significantly less truck traffic than the large users (particu-
larly 50,000 square foot and over). It was also found that the
smaller building users tend to employ more personnel from local
neighborhoods than do larger users.
After evaluating the merits of our project, we feel confident that the City
Council and the City of Moorpark will feel as proud and committed to our
project as we do. We have spent many hours working with our design team
and staff to provide a well landscaped, campus -like, working environment
that will be as functional and aesthetically pleasing to both the residents
of Moorpark and Tenants alike.
We trust that the City Council will approve our project so that we may
continue forward with our development.
Thank you for your consideration and support.
Very truly yours,
WEST AMERICA CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
NICHOLAS M. BROWN MURRAY SIEGEL
Applicant Applicant
NB:ld
Encl:
CC: Patrick Richards, Director of Community Development
Steven Kueny, City Manager
Dennis Delzeit, City Engineer
Burlders and Land Oevelapers
March 7, 1988
City of Moorpark
Planning Commission
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
To the Members of the Planning Commission:
WEST AMERICA CONSTRUCTION ' -ORP
8929 WILSHIRE BLVD, SUITE 400 • BEVERLY HILLS. ':A.90211
(213) 652.8288 CONTRACTORS LICENSE 98805
Below please find several proposed revisions as well as a few questions
regarding our Conditions of Approval for LDM -10; DP- 393 -396 and DP -397-
404.
1) LDM -10; Condition No. 30, Page 24
DP397 -404; Condition No. 55, Page 41.
"C" Street and "D" Avenue are to be completely constructed
prior to zone clearance of 25% of the total developable land
area within LDM -10, or by July 1, 1989, whichever occurs first.
Regardless of the above time limits, "C" Street and "D" Avenue
are to be completed prior to zoning clearance of any lot taking
access to "D" Avenue or "C" Street, or prior to completion of
Maureen Lane Signal."
PROPOSED REVISION:
Change the words "zoning clearance" in the fifth sentence above
to "occupancy."
2) DP397 -404; Conditions Nos. 11, 21, and 22; Pages 33 and 34
DP393 -396; Conditions Nos. 12, 22, and 23; Pages 18 and 19
- "That prior to the issuance of a zone clearance, a landscaping
and planting plan (3 sets), together with specifications and
maintenance program, prepared by a State licensed landscape
architect in accordance with County Guidelines for Landscape
Plan Check, shall be submitted to the Director of Community
Development for review and approval. The applicant shall
bear the total cost of such review and of final installation.
inspection. The landscaping and planting plan shall be accompa-
nied by a fee specified by the City of Moorpark. All landscaping
and planting shall be accomplished and approved by the Director
of Community Development prior to the issuance of any occupancy
permit for DP- 397 - 404."
- "Prior to issuance of a zoning clearance, the final working
drawings shall be submitted to the Director of Community
Development for review and approval."
- "For all exterior lighting, a lighting plan shall be prepared by
an electrical engineer registered in the :Mate 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; mini-
mize to the greatest extent possible on -site glare; provide
adequate on -site lighting; limit electroliers height to avoid
excessive illumination; provide lighting structures which are
compatible with the total design of the proposed facility."
PROPOSED REVISION:
Change wording of each of the above conditions to read that prior t:
the issuance of a zoning clearance, the applicant shall submit plan
(including landscaping, working drawings, lighting, etc.) to the
Director of Community Development, along with any plan check fee,
if required, for review. All submitted plans are to be plan
checked and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit.
-City of Moorpark
Planning Commission
Page 2.
March 7, 1988
3) DP397 -404; Conditions Nos. 41,42,43, and 47; Pages 38 and 39
DP393 -396; Conditions Nos. 45,46,47, and 50; Pages 24 and 25.
- "The applicant 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."
- "The applicant 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."
*- SEE BELOW.
- "The applicant 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 an 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."
PROPOSED REVISION:
Change wording of each of the above conditions to read that
prior to the issuance of a zoning clearance, the applicant
shall submit plans (including grading, soil reports, street
improvement, drainage, hydrologic, hydraulic, etc.) to the
City of Moorpark, along with any plan check fee, if required,
for review. All submitted plans are to be plan check and approved
prior to the issuance of a building permit.
4) DP397 -404; Condition No. 26, Page 35
DP393 -396; Condition No. 28, Page 20.
"That the final design of site
including materials and colors,
the Planning Commission."
QUESTION:
improvements for each project,
is subject to the approval of
Will this condition be aproved at this meeting? If so, can
it be eliminated from these conditions?
5) DP393 -396; Condition No. 29, Page 21
"That the applicant shall provide a five (5) foot wide mean-
dering sidewalk along Los Angeles Avenue and shall provide land-
scaping and trees along Los Angeles Avenue to the satisfaction
of the Director of Community Development."
PROPOSED REVISION:
This condition should be prior to occupancy in lieu of prior
to zone clearance.
6) LDM -10; Condition No. 31, Page 24
DP397 -404; Condition No. 56, Page 41.
"To assist the City Engineer in determining when a traffic
signal should be installed at the intersection of Los Angeles
Avenue with Maureen Lane, the developer shall conduct manual
turning counts from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. prior to the issu-
ance of zone clearance for Development Projects corresponding
to 40 %, 65 %, and 90% of the developable portion of the parent
parcel. If this information is provided by other sources
(City, Caltrans, or other developments) to the City Engineer's
satisfaction, part or all of this condition may be waived by
the City Engineer."
*- Condition No. 43 was inadvertently omitted from Paragraph 3 - this
paragraph should be incorporated with 3 above, as follows;
"The applican 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."
City of Moorpark
Planning Commission
Page 3.
March 7, 1988
QUESTION:
Can this condition be waived or eliminated in lieu of the
fact that the applicant shall pay a $65,000.00 supplementary
contribution for the construction of the traffic signal at
Maureen Lane and Los Angeles Avenue as referred to in the
Conditions No. 45 (LDM -10), #87 DP397 -404), and No. 82
(DP393 -396), and revised in the new Additional Conditions
of Approval?
Caltrans will determine when a signal is warranted at this
intersection. The applicant shall have no further liability
or responsibility associated with this signal.
7) DP397 -404; Conditions Nos.25 and 50; Pages 35 and 40 respectively
DP393 -397; Conditions Nos.25 and 50(1); Pages 20 and 26 respectively.
"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 an 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."
PROPOSED REVISION:
We feel this paragraph should be re- written to incorporate
the need for a more defined and realistic time and dollar
limit. The paragraph as it stands now is too vague and
open- ended.
Thank you for your consideration of the above.
Very truly yours,
WEST AMERICA
CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
Nicholas M.
Brown
Applicant
mw
The Siracusa Company
REAL ESTATE MARKET RESEARCH
May 26, 1988
Mr. Nicholas Brown
West American Construction Corporation
8929 Wilshire Boulevard. Suite 400
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
OP 993 --316 ; OP 351- yoy
Subject: Industrial User Survey; City of Moorpark
Dear Mr. Brown:
Pursuant to your request, we are pleased to present the findings of
our industrial user survey for the city of Moorpark.
The purpose of the study has been to examine the density of
employment and intensity of truck visitation activity associated with
industrial buildings in Moorpark, with particular focus upon the nature
and scale of such activities as they relate to the size of users.
In conducting this survey, 33 companies occupying industrial
buildings in Moorpark were contacted. Company representatives were
questioned as to their number of employees. their employees' place of
residence, the square feet of building area occupied, the number and
type of trucks owned, and the average daily truck visitation by common
carrier delivery companies with reference to the size of trucks
operated.
The survey data is summarized in EXHIBITS A, B and C. The data has
been arranged by size of company and geographic location. Characteris-
tics of companies located in western and central Moorpark are presented
in EXHIBITS A and B. EXHIBIT A includes industrial users of 5,000 to
10,000 square feet. EXHIBIT B includes industrial users larger than
20,000 square feet. EXHIBIT C includes industrial users located in the
Moorpark Business Center and the Freeway Business Center.
Analysis of the data comparing smaller to larger buildings revealed
several significant differences in employment density and truck
visitation activity.
5,000-10,000 S uare Foot Users in West End Industrial Area (SEE EXHIBIT
A
o Most users generated only five to ten employees per company.
o The 14 companies surveyed had 138 employees and occupied
102,184 square feet of building area. This represents a ratio
of 740 square feet per employee.
RESIDENTIAL • INDUSTRIAL • COMMERCIAL
5743 Corsa Avenue, Suite 202, Westlake Village, CA 91362 (805) 495 -5872, (818) 889 -3777
Mr. Nicholas Brown
May 26, 1988
Page 2
o Only two of 14 companies owned their own trucks. This
included two vans, two flatbed trucks under 20 feet in length
and two trucks of 40 feet in length.
o Delivery truck visitation was significantly less frequent than
for larger industrial companies in the city. The most
frequent visitation was from UPS and Federal Express vans
which typically made one delivery in the morning and one
pick —up in the afternoon to most businesses. Courier vans
operated by Emory Airfreight, Purolator Courier, etc. also
made visitations, but usually on a far less frequent basis
than UPS or Federal Express.
o Even more significantly, most companies reported they had no
or very infrequent deliveries or pick —ups by common carriers
using flatbed or similar trucks in the under 20 foot or over
20 foot range. Frequencies for the latter ranged from only
once a month to once very other day.
o Employee residence patterns were almost exclusively limited to
Ventura County with little to no commuting outside of the
county.
20,000 Square Foot Users and Larger:
A. West End Industrial Area (see EXHIBIT B)
o The survey included 12 companies occupying 20,000 square feet
or more. In combination this represented a total of 571,578
square feet and had 516 employees. The average ratio was 1108
square feet per employee.
o Only five companies reported owning trucks and these primarily
consisted of vans, pick —ups or flatbed trucks under 20 feet in
length. One company reported that it owned ten delivery
trucks greater than 20 feet in length.
o Truck visitation by common carriers was more frequent,
compared to the companies occupying only 5,000- 10,000 square
feet. While the UPS van frequency was equal or greater, a
higher frequency of visitation was reported for Federal
Express and other courier companies.
o More importantly, the frequency of delivery /pick —up activity
for trucks of less than 20 feet was somewhat higher than for
5,000- 10,000 square foot users, and significantly higher for
trucks greater than 20 feet. The latter type of activity
significantly increases for companies occupying 50,000 square
feet and over. Frequencies ranged from once daily to 15 -20
times daily.
Mr. Nicholas Brown
May 26, 1988
Page 3
B. Moorpark Business Center and Freeway Business Center (see EXHIBIT
o This group of companies includes seven users occupying
buildings having from 86,412 to 200.000 square feet. Most are
highly improved with office uses.
o The seven companies located in these two business parks occupy
a total of 862,756 square feet and have a combined employment
of 2,422 persons. The space utilization ratio is 356 square
feet per employee, which is twice as high as the ratio for
companies in the west end of the city.
o Nearly all companies owned one or more trucks which mostly
vans and small pick —ups. Only three companies reported owning
a truck greater in length than 20 feet.
o All companies reported that UPS and Federal Express vans
stopped by at least twice a day.
o All but one reported daily deliveries /pick —ups by trucks of
less than 20 feet in length. Frequencies ranged from one to
seven visitations per day.
o All reported daily deliveries /pick —ups by trucks of more than
20 feet in length. Frequencies ranged from .5 to six
visitations per day (i.e., 10 to 120 visitations per month).
o These companies had a far higher frequency of employees
commuting from Los Angeles County than did the companies
occupying 5,000 to 10,000 square feet.
Mr. Nicholas Brown
May 26, 1988
Page 4
SUMMARY
UPS/
Sq Ft/ Fed Ex Average Visitation /Day
Employee Visitation Common Carrier Trucks
Ratio Per Day <20 ft >20 ft
West End
5.000 - 10.000 sq ft 740 .5-2 0-2 0-.25
20.000+ sq ft 1108 .15-2 0 -3 .10 -20
East End
86.000+ sq ft 356 2 1 -7 .5-6
Source: The Siracusa Company
It has been our pleasure to prepare this report for you. If you
have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me.
Very truly yours.
THE SIRACUS,A / COMPANY
Ernest V. Siracusa, Jr.
President
EVS /dj
EXKrBIT A
5, 000 - 109000 SQUARE FOOT INDUSTRIAL USER SIRVEY - NWi>OFi)ARK
Sources The Sirsasse Company
S0. FT./
TRUCK ACTIVITY
CORPANY
SQ. FT.
MMBER
EMPLOYEE
UPLOYEE RESIDENCE
TRKS
COMM CARRIER DELIVERIESIMO
ADDRESS
TYPE OF BUSINESS
OCCUPIED
EMPLOYEES
RATIO
NDORPARK
OTHER Y.C. S.F. VALA.A.
OWNED
UPS FED EX
(20 FT
>20 FT
STUOEBWER "VICES
SOM Goldman Avenue
NYchins Shop/
59500
6
017
X
Simi —
0
4
0
0
Auto Body Shop
SAW VAL TOOL i DYE
5000 Goldman Avaau
IYchins Shop
5,500
14
323
X
Mai —
0
40
2
1
SENICO DUCTOR
5154 Goldman Avenue
M1fg. Semiconductors
10,000
30
333
—
S,Ox,C,T.0. —
0
40
6
B
EQIIPNENT CORP.
PACIFIC MAST
5162 Goldman Avenue
Auto Body Shop
54000
5
1,000
X
T.O. —
0
40
0
0
AUTO BODY
AMERICAN HIGH LIFT
875 Y. Los Angeles Ave
Resit Heavy Lifting Equip
7,500
12
625
X
M.A. —
2
21
6
2
(401)
UDRLD WIDE AERONAUTICS
870 M. Los Angeles Ave
(Marahouse)
0,000
10
000
X
Sid —
0
40
40
10
Export Aircraft Parts
KCROS SURGICAL
610 Flinn Road
Rfg. Surgical Instruments 7,254
B
1,210
—
M.Y. Chats
0
40
1
1
KENDEX
516 Fitch
What Distrib. of
11,340
20
557
—
Ag.,T.0. —
0
46
1
1
Imported Yeas
FARACD( ENGINEERING
5215 Kaalco Coat
Defense Tooling
5,000
4-5
1,000-
—
— —
0
10
0
0
1,250
ULTRON SYS.
Lot 6
Mlfg. Small Irdninw to
5,246
6
674
—
— —
0
10
0
0
5214 Bonsai Street
Clasp Computer Parts
ACARI
Lot 10
Masahouae Bell Bearings
5,200
5-6
867-
—
— —
0
10
0
0
5240 Brian Street
1,040
THARPE
Lot 11
Ymrdxxm Cosewtirs,
5,210
8
857
—
— —
0
10
0
52M Beam Street
Dist. to Hotels/Nbtals
0
H l H SUPPLY
5300 Gshbest Road
Dist. Automotive
10,724
7
1,532
2
T.O.,Ox.,S.Y. —
0
40
0
Finish Prod.
45
INTERNATIONAL LEL%K
5580 Twin Circle
(Trucks mks 30 trips
8.710
j5
1.042
1
F(1),Aq(1), —
2 <20
10
PRODIATS
se/m) Wa
orehouse for Spas
M.Y./T.0.(2)
2 Wass
0
2
TOTALSt
102,184
138
740
Sources The Sirsasse Company
1) Full tine employees that work in the building daily.
Also have 14+ field employees that only come to building occasionally
2) This figure is expected to increase due to continuing hiring.
Source: The Siracusa Company
EXHIBIT B
20,000 SQUARE F00T
OR LARGER INDUSTRIAL USER SURVEY - MOORPARK WEST
END INDUSTRIAL AREA
SQ. FT'/
TRUCK ACTIVITY
COMPANY
ADDRESS
TYPE OF BUSINESS
SQ. FT.
OCCUPIED
NUMBER
EMPLOYEES
EMPLOYEE
EMPLOYEE RESIDENCE
/ MKS
COMMON CARRIER DELIVERIES /MO
RATIO
MIOORPARK
OTHER V.C. S.F. VAL/L.A.
OWNED
UPS FED EX
<20 FT
>20 FT
SCOSCHE INDUSTRIES
5160 Gabbert Road
Mfg, d Dist. of Auto
19,074
30
636
+15
S.V.
Sound Accessories
+14
1
0
40
2 -3
2 -3
N.G.I.
5151 Commerce Avenue
Machine Shop
19,813
25
792
2
15
8
1 pickup
40
5-10
3-5
SIMPSON CARPENTRY
5220 Gabbert Road
Mfg. High-End Cabinetry
19,992
111)
1,817
0
Mldgs. for Custom Hares
(14 +)
S.V.
S.F.V.
2 <20' flat
10-
varies
1 pickup
15
+20
G.T. WATER PRODUCTS
5239 Commerce Avenue
Mfg. Drain Devices
22,239
27
824
B
5
14
0
40
0
Max 8
PRUDENTIAL OVERALL
5300 Gabbert Road
Industrial Laundry
28,040
28
1,001
13
SUPPLY
12
13
12 <20'
8
0
5
1 22'
AIRLESSCO
5397 Commerce Avenue
Machine Shop
31,728
40-45
793-
2
1
37-
1 pickup
40 / 2 -3
100
100
705
42
LAGOMARSINO LIQUOR
5360 Commerce Avenue
Liquor Warehouse
42,000
17
2,470
2
15
0
10 >20'
3-
60
24 own
3 <20'
S
24 oth
ODLORDL
5155 Goldman Avenue
Wallpaper Warehouse /
54,052
58
932
4
20
Distribution
29
0
40 / 40
20 (mail)
80
AIR DRY CORPORATION
5297 Maureen Lane
Mfg. Dehydrators 3
60,000
64
937
+6
Manifolds
+30
+30
0
40
20
20
KENNY MANUFACTURING
11910 Poindexter Ave
Drapery Warehouse /
62,640
13
4,805
2
Distribution
7
4
0
20
0
8
VARIFLEX
5152 Commerce Avenue
Mfg. Bicycles,
104,000
78
1,333
20
+11
47
0
Scooters, Etc.
40 / 12
4
15-20
daily
KDI- AMERICAN PRODUCTS
10951 Los Angeles Ave
Mfg. Swimming Pool
108,000
120 2)
900
+10%
+5%
+85%
0
20 /
Equipment
(Ph.I)
40
0
0
TOTALS:
571,578
516
1,108
1) Full tine employees that work in the building daily.
Also have 14+ field employees that only come to building occasionally
2) This figure is expected to increase due to continuing hiring.
Source: The Siracusa Company
EXHIBIT C
INDUSTRIAL USER SURVEY - M OORPARK BUSINESS CENTER b FREEWAY BUSINESS CENTER
1) Employment subject to change due to personnel turnover.
2) Federal Express visits twice daily. Other courier services also visit twice daily.
NOTE: In addition to Fed Ex deliveries, other carriers such as Emory, OHL, etc. also make deliveries, but at less frequent intervals.
Source: The Siracusa Company
SQ. FT'/
TRUCK ACTIVITY
COMPANY
ADDRESS
TYPE OF BUSINESS
SQ. FT.
OCCUPIED
NUMBER
EMPLOYEESI)
EMPLOYEE
EMPLOYEE RESIDENCE
/ TRKS
COITION CARRIER DELIVERIES/MO
RATIO
MOORPARK
OTHER V.C.
S.F. VAL/L.A.
OWNED
UPS FED EX
<20 FT
>20 FT
MICOM
6100 Candor Drive
Mfg. Data
86,412
150
576
+1 -2%
+28 -29%
+70%
2 vans
40 / 20
40-
Communications Equip.
1D-
1 -15'
S0
15
2 pickups
TERMINAL DATA CORP.
589B Condor Drive
Desigm 8 Mfg. Electronic
97,680
257
326
+<10%
S.V. ±40%
+50%
1
40 / 40
Document Image System
—
van
20--
100-
d Micrographic System
1 Pickup
120
TAMDEN
405 Science Drive
Design b Manufacture
105,500
350
301
<50
N.A.
S.V. >50%
1 >20'
20 / 40
20-
Computers
40-60
1 van
40
20
1 10'
METAL BELLOWS
200 Science Drive
Mfg. Precision Metal
112,320
200
562
N.A.
30-40%
60-70%
2 vans
40 / 40
6D-
Parts for Aerospace
40
1 >20,
BO
KAVLICD
14501 Los Angeles Ave
Mfg. Transducers d
120,000
530
226
N.A.
S.V., Oxnard
1/3 L.A. Co.
3 pickups
40 / 40
140
Capacitors for Aero-
Palmdale,
2 vans
40-
120
space b Auto Ind.
Valencia
LITTON HERO PRODUCTS
6101 Condor Drive
Design 6 Manufacture of
140,844
575
245
60
N.A.
N.A.
Navigation System
1 van
40 / 40-
60+2
0
120
TELEDYNE -LAARS
6000 Condor Drive
Mfg. 8 Dist. Pool b
200,000
360
556
a few
10 S.V.
Majority
4 24'
20 / 40
10
Spa Heaters
8 T.O., W.V.
N. Hollywood,
stakebed
N.A.
Van Nuys
TOTALS:
662,756
2,422
356
1) Employment subject to change due to personnel turnover.
2) Federal Express visits twice daily. Other courier services also visit twice daily.
NOTE: In addition to Fed Ex deliveries, other carriers such as Emory, OHL, etc. also make deliveries, but at less frequent intervals.
Source: The Siracusa Company
PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
ERNEST V. SIRACUSA, JR. PRESIDENT
Ernest V. Siracusa, Jr., a veteran of more than 20 years as a real
estate market research consultant, is founder of THE SIRACUSA COMPANY, a
market research consulting firm offering a full line of specialized
services for residential, industrial and commercial real estate.
Mr. Siracusa has a rich and varied background in market research,
property appraisals, economic feasibility analysis and real estate
development planning. In the course of his career, he has successfully
completed hundreds of complex assignments, ranging from condominium
conversions to large —scale master planned communities.
He has extensive experience in the analysis of sites for the
development of apartment buildings, condominiums (shelter through
luxury), single family detached and attached housing, office buildings,
industrial buildings and mixed use developments. He maintains an
up —to —date knowledge of current industry trends by regularly visiting
new residential and commercial projects in Southern California. Since
1975, he has maintained a unique and exhaustive residential, industrial
and commercial project data bank for Los Angeles and Ventura counties
which is continually updated and expanded to include the most recent new
developments.
A unique service conceived and directed by Mr. Siracusa is a
quarterly survey of all new and planned residential, office and
industrial developments in Ventura County. Results from the survey are
published in the quarterly Ventura County "Market Bulletin" sponsored by
Continental Land Title Company.
Prior to founding his own firm, Mr. Siracusa was retained as a
Senior Consultant to the nationally —known real estate market research
and consulting firm of Robert Charles Lesser & Co., for which he managed
a variety of specialized assignments for major national accounts.
Early in his career, Mr. Siracusa held the position of Senior
Research Analyst in the Marketing Research Department of the Larwin
Group, a major California homebuilder. In this capacity, he was
responsible for the management of nationwide housing studies ranging
from site specific feasibility analysis to regional entry evaluation.
His participation included concept development /marketing strategy and
market evaluation for several successful Larwin housing programs.
Prior to his affiliation with the Larwin Group, Mr. Siracusa was a
senior member of Development Research Associates, the urban economic and
real estate consulting division of Booz, Allen and Hamilton, Inc. For
three years Mr. Siracusa directed a variety of diverse studies for
private and public clients in the areas of property appraisal,
economic /financial feasibility, urban renewal, and environmental impact
analysis.
Mr. Siracusa is a graduate of the University of California at Santa
Barbara where he earned a Bachelor's degree in economics with
specialization in micro— and macro — economic growth and development
theory. Mr. Siracusa has also undertaken nearly two years of graduate
study at the same university leading to the Master's degree in urban
studies.
GpM�ATIV� ANAL`(SI� St✓ I)
or ppopos be),/ELoPH ENT(1
Af.J t7 51hiC l.s; `"j.'EN�NT �- 3UIU�INC-t —
A �.
M%SpNti
lea C.4-IFI-51
lel
AREA � 1o2,81c �T.
I
;�JUG�►� �L,�, r1G% i� �`1� j c� ; r1 t� ; 'f
ZT
r
I�
-(S
,mss- -TT
i
bi►- lo1) lT-I I =1 °Ia"InIr- I
— olICC% .YI t1�'�!P
,� J K�•
M-es.ut;�,EEN.l LANG-
LAKI V-:
179