HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1988 0217 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
ITEM 9,
STEVEN KUENY
City Manager
CHERYL J. KANE
City Attorney
Grit \Ffl' PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P.
,et1n9 Director of
M�Q`�PA a`J Community Development
City ,1'j � R. DENNIS DELZEIT
City Engineer
of JOHN V. GILLESPIE
Off: Chief of Police
0Y
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development
DATE: February 10, 1988 (CC meeting of 2/17/88)
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO. 302 - MAJOR MODIFICATION NO. 1
BACKGROUND
The proposed major modification requests involves an addition of
121,520 sq.ft.to an existing 109,000 sq.ft. industrial building
located on Highway 118 (Los Angeles Avenue) at the extreme
westerly boundary of the City.
This request for a major modification was reviewed by the City
Council at a public hearing on January 20, 1988. The Council heard
testimony and referred the matter to their Public Works Committee
for recommendation on the following matters:
1. building elevations in relation to their view form Los
Angele Avenue
2. The potential covering of the adjacent flood control
channel.
3. Landscape treatment(s) needed along L. A. Ave.
The Council continued this matter for 30 days upon the concurrence
of the applicant. Pursuant to the Council's direction the Public
Works Committee met with the applicant, his engineer and architect
on .January 26 and February 1st.
PJR: crl
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864
nP302 .J PCAGENDA
February 10, 1988
Page 2
The applicant's architect presented several variations of basically
the same building. A majority of the review centered on methods to
mask the size of the building. No final resolution was mad
regarding an elevation scheme. However, two basic approaches were
considered within the scope of possibility. These two design
concepts will be brought forward by the application for Council
review on February 17, 1988.
Pursuant to the Committee's request the applicant will add
additional landscaping along Los Angeles Avenue and adjacent to the
building.
Although the Committee's desire was to cover the flood control
channel; the cost appeared prohibitive. The applicant had submitted
to the Public Works Committee a cost extimate to cover the flood
control channel of $2.2 million. The Committee requested the City
Engineer to review the cost breakdown (see attached) and determine
if they were reasonable. The City Engineers office conducted a
quick "ballpark" estimate and concluded that the estimate could be
between $750,000 to $1,000,000 to high. The City Engineers office
also reviewed the cost associated with just covering the existing
channel with a concrete lid and placing an easthern berm over the
entire structure. The "ballpark" costs were in the range of
$450,000 to $500,000.
DISCUSSION
At the January 20, 1988 Council meeting the applicant reviewed a
number of conditions and recommended modifications and deletions.
Conditions No. 35 --
Pertains to a requirement for building off -sets. This conditions
may need to be modified if certain elevations are approved.
Condition No. 26 --
This condition requires the placement of 48 inch box trees on all
four sides of the building. This condition may need to be modified
if certain elevations are approved. There may not be enough space
to plant a 48 inch box tree. Staff would suggest that a substantial
number of 15 gallon, 24 inch box and 36 inch box trees (a variety)
be planted if the 48 inch box trees are deleted.
Condition No. 24 --
Pertains to lighting requirements. Staff would prefer to leave this
condition as written.
Condition No. 103 --
Pertains to the covering of the flood control channel. Leave as
written or modify.
PJR:crl
DP302 /J /PCAGENDA
February 10, 1988
Page 3
Condition No. 105 --
Pertains to providing a westbound right turn lane into the project.
The 300 feet may be modified to a lessor distance if it will meet
City Engineering standards.
Condition No. 106 --
This condition would require a 40 foot roadway for Mountain Drive.
This is the short half street on the west side of the building. The
intent was to provide a full width street to serve the site and
future development to the east (refer to Condition No. 107) .
Condition No. 107 --
This condition would require a 40 foot wide aisle way to be created
on the north side of the property. This width may need to be
modified because of topographic considerations and the location of
the existing building. At least a 32 foot width can be provided.
Condition No. 109 --
Requires the applicant to provide access rights to the easterly
property. This condition should not be modified or deleted.
Condition No. 123 --
The word "carpet" should be deleted.
New City Engineer Condition
See attachment No. 9.
As part of the Council's consideration of this entitlement request a
resolution on the above conditions is needed.
At this time the applicant has granted the City an extension of time
as allowed by State law in order that the Council reach a decision
on this matter. The Council needs to make a decision at this time
or request another continuance from the applicant.
Attached to this memorandum are revised elevations for the proposed
addition. There are two types as noted above because of the Public
Works Committee comments.
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;
PJR:crl
February 10, 1988
Page 4
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. Request the applicants concurrence for a continuance to March
2, 1988 for the adoption of a resolution of approval.
4. Direct staff to prepare a resolution conditionally
approving Development Plan Permit No. 302 Major Modification
No. 1, for consideration at the Council's next regular meeting
of March 2, 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 January 20, 1988 staff report and that
staff be directed to prepare a resolution conditionally approving
Development Plan Permit No. 1066 for the Council's consideration at
its next regular meeting of March 2, 1988."
Attachments:
1. Revised Elevations
2. Revised Building rendering
3. Staff Report to the City Council dated 1/20/88
4. Letter from Tom Nelson dated 1/14/88
5. Letter form Structural Concepts of California, Inc. (undated)
6. Letter from David Sargent, dated 1/14/88
7. Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated 12/7/88
8. Budget - American Products Channel Undergrounding Estimate
undated.
9. City Engineer condition, dated 2/10/88
PJR:crl
DP302 /J /PCAGENDA
Structural Concepts of
California lnc. :
BUDGET
AMERICAN PRODUCTS
CHANNEL UNDERGROUNDING
1) . Water Diversion $ 45, 000.
2) . RC Box Channel 720LF @ 1705. 00 LF 1 , 227,000 .
3) . Rebar 274 , 884 .
4) . . 45 AC/ . 8 AB/ . 9 ASB 18400 SF @ 2. 64 SF 48,576.
5) . Removal/Grade 18400 SF @ . 50 9, 200 .
6) , 4 Catch Basins 12, 000.
7) . Fill/Excavate 6 , 666 cy 23, 144
8) . Demo/Haul 85,000 .
9) . Sign & Strip 7,500.
10) . Power Pole R&R 250, 000.
11) . Re/Lands @ 16560 @ 1 . 30 21 ,528.
12) . Permits 15,000 .
13) . Engineering 15, 385 .
14) . Testing 10,500.
15) . Bonds 23,500.
Sub Total $ 2,068, 217.
16) . Improvements Lost
a. Grasscrete 6,500.
b. Channel Improvements 150 , 000 .
c. Landscaping 19, 872 .
d. Fencing 48, 000.
Total $ 2, 292,589 .
480 CONSTITUTION AVENUE • CAMARILLO,CAUFORNIA 93010 • (805) 388-2305
SENT BY:WILLDAN VENTURA ; 2-10-85 ; 1 :49PM ; WILLDAN VENTURA-► 805 529 8270;# 2
•
ADDITIONAL CONDITION FOR DP-302 (WOODCREST)
MAJOR MODIFICATION
Prior to the start of construction, the applicant shall pay
an inspection fee for all the remaining work in the project
based on the estimated construction costs. These inspection
fees shall be based on the estimated costs of both the
interim and ultimate conditions. If these fees are not
sufficient to cover the actual inspection costs, an
additional inspection fee will be paid prior to acceptance
of the improvements and bond exonerations.
CLIls
cc : John F. Knipe, City Engineer
Mike Ruben, Senior Planner
JN 30265
CMO689 .MIS
f 76
•. .ih
Structural Concepts of
r) California inc. a 1
February 11, 1988
City of Moorpark
City Council
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
RE: DP 302 Major Modification #1
Dear Council Members:
Please find enclosed a list of requested condition deletions
and/or rewrites submitted for your consideration regarding the
above referenced project which is now before you. As the
applicant we believe these to be the conditions that require
additional clarity to facilitate effective incorporation into the
project design, and/or conditions that we believe to be no longer
relative to this project.
We look forward to the opportunity to present our design to the
City Council and we will make available members of our design
team to answer any questions or concerns that you may have.
Sincerely,
c \
Thomas C. Nelson
Applicants Representative
TCN: lmr
1
480 CONSTITUTION AVENUE • CAMARILLO,CALIFORNIA 93010 • (805) 388-2305
77
CONDITIONS
REWRITES AND DELETIONS
Condition 24B shall be changed to read:
Maximum overall height of light pole fixtures along Los
Angeles Avenue and east property line shall not be more than
fourteen (14) feet high. Existing light pole fixtures along Los
Angeles Avenue shall be reduced to fourteen (14) feet.
New light pole fixtures along the north property line shall
be of a height to match the existing fixtures.
Condition 24D shall be changed to read:
There shall be no more than a four to one (4: 1) ratio level
of illumination shown (average to minimum ratio between lighting
standards) .
Condition 24E shall be changed to read:
High pressure sodium energy efficient light fixtures shall
be used.
Condition 24F shall be changed to read:
Maximum average illumination level of one half (1/2) foot
candle.
Condition 24G shall be changed to read:
House side shields shall be placed on lighting fixtures
along Los Angeles Avenue.
Condition 26 shall be changed to read:
The planting area shown on all four side of the building,
directly adjacent to the building walls, shall be landscaped in a
manner that when the tree is grown to two thirds of its maturity
its outer branches touch the other branches of the next adjacent
tree. Trees shall not be planted closer that 16 feet on center
and no farther than 20 on center. Trees in these planting areas
shall be of a specie that is considered to be of a moderate to
fast growth rate and be capable of growing to a height equal to
that of the building itself within 5 to 7 years.
Condition 35:
Delete
• Condition 45:
Delete.
1
78
Condition 103 :
Delete paragraph #3 .
Condition 105 shall be changed to read:
The applicant shall construct necessary improvements to Los
Angeles Avenue to provide a westbound right turn lane east of
Montair Drive of approximately 200 feet long, and shall execute
said work to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
The aforementioned work shall not be a condition of
occupancy, but rather completion shall be required by December
31, 1988. An agreement shall be initiated between the developer
and city to guarantee completion of said work. Said agreement
shall be set up to the satisfaction of the Director of Community
Development.
Condition 106 :
Delete.
Condition 107 :
Delete (refer to condition 109)
Condition 108 shall be changed to read:
It is anticipated that the ongoing Circulation Element
update will require construction of a street parallel to and
south of Southern Pacific railroad tracks east of the project
site and the prolongation of Butter Creek Road, as well as a
traffic signal at the intersection of Los Angeles Avenue with
Butter Creek Road. The developers within the City limits that
will derive benefit from the traffic signal shall be required to
pay supplementary Area of Contribution fees for construction of
the signal, in approximate proportion to the size of the
development site. Prior to zone clearance the applicant shall
execute a covenant running with the land on behalf of itself and
its successors, heirs assigns agreeing to participate in such
supplementary Area of Contribution fees to be accessed at the
time of construction.
Condition 109 shall be changed to read:
Prior to zone clearance the applicant shall record an access
easement that grants the properties to the east and west rights
of access through the applicants property. To facilitate
circulation throughout this area, the applicant shall provide-a
40 foot wide isleway through the parking area along the north
side of the project site east of the easterly most transformer
location, (approx. 150 ft from Montair Drive) . The isleway pad
will remain as is. This condition will be performed to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
2
79
Condition 110 shall be changed to read:
Prior to zone clearance, the applicant shall execute a
covenant running with the land on behalf of itself and its
successors, heirs, and assigns agreeing not to oppose 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.
Condition 113 :
Delete.
Condition 121:
Delete.
Condition 123 :
Delete.
3
r �
CITY OF MOORPARK
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
SECTION I: GENERAL INFORMATION
i1
A. HEARING DATE: December 7, 1987 D CASE NO.: DP-302
Major Mod. No.1
B. HEARING TIME: 7:00 p.m. E. STAFF CONTACT: Fred Talarico
C. HEARING LOCATION: F. APPLICANT:
City Council Chambers, City Hall Peter Sturdivant
799 Moorpark Avenue Structural Concepts of CA, Inc.
Moorpark, California 480 Constitution Avenue
Camarillo, CA 93010
G. REQUESTED ACTION:
I. Approval of Resolution
o Recommending that the City Council accept a Mitigated Negative
Declaration and certifying that the information was considered on decisions
related to the project; :and,
2. Approval of Resolution
o Recommending that the City Council approve the Development Plan
Permit (DP-302) for a one-story light industrial structure of 121,520 square feet
located adjacent to existing 109,300 square feet industrial structure;
H. PROJECT LOCATION: State Highway 11I (Los Angeles Avenue), at the westerly city
limits, Moorpark, California
PROJECT SITE O
cc
LOS ANGELES AVENUE
PROJECT LOCATION
MAJOR MOD. NO.1 TO DP-302
•
ntj4-•
SECTION II: SUMMARY
A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
1. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing, take
testimony from all those wishing to give testimony, and approve Resolution Nos.
and , recommending that the City Council approve the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Development Plan Permit DP-302 Major Mod. No. 1
subject to the conditions as stated on Exhibit "A."
B. ALTERNATIVE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS:
1. Open the Public Hearing; close the Public Hearing; approve Resolutions Nos.
and ; recommending that the City Council accept the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and certify that the information was considered on decisions
related to the project; and, recommending that the City Council approve or
modify and approve Development Plan Permit (DP-302) Major Mod. No. 1 as
recommended by staff.
-or-
2. Find that it has reviewed and considered the Project Findings attached to this
Staff Report. Find that based upon the staff report and testimony presented at
this public hearing that the Commission recommend that the City Council deny
approval of Development Plan Permit DP-392-Major Mod. No. 1.
C. PROJECT SUMMARY:
The proposed project is located on State Highway 111 (Los Angeles Avenue) at the
westerly city limits. The project has one access point from State Highway I11.
Additionally, the project has reciprocal access with the adjacent property to the east.
The proposes project is the construction of a light industrial structure totaling 121,520
square feet (s.f.). The total square footage includes 4,000 s.f. of office area; 92,520
s.f. of assembly area and light manufacturing area; and 25,000 s.f. of warehousing.
The structure will adjoin an existing 109,300 s.f. structure. There will be 424 parking
spaces provided on site.
The applicant manufactures pool/spa supplies, filters, underwater lights, and similar
types of products.
2
t
D. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
1. Existing Conditions:
GENERAL PLAN ZONING LAND USE
Onsite: 1-2 M-2 Vacant-
Industrial building
North: AG-1 A-E Agricultural
Citrus Production
t'
South: AG-2 A-E Agricultural
Row Crop
East: 1-2 - M-2 Vacant
Industrial
West: AG-2 AG-1 Vacant
Agricultural
E. ISSUES:
•
Based upon a review of the proposed project, the issues identified related to the
i
proposed project include: ,•
o traffic
o air quality
O visual resources
o noise
o parking
O oppositio❑ from adjacent residenses
It is the opinion of the staff that conditions of approval on the project, and mitigation
measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration will alleviate the issues
identified above. (Please see Section III.E. for a further discussion).
3
4
r /
!, ' 2
SECTION III: ANALYSIS
A. PROPOSED PROJECT:
The proposed project includes the consolidation and complete relocation of all existing
American Products facility resources from North Hollywood, California, to the existing
Woodcrest property. Corporate offices, support staff, assembly, warehousing and
shipping operations would be relocated to the City of Moorpark. American Products
will employ approximately 265 employees working double shifts from 6:00 am to 3:00
pm and from 10:00 am to 7:00 pm five days a week in the new facility.
The proposed additional structure is 121,520 square feet (s.f.). The total square footage
includes a mix of office area, assembly and light manufacturing and warehousing as
shown below.
BUILDING EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
Office 9,321 4,000 13,321
Mezzanine 7,976 0 7,976
Manufacturing 92,003 95,520 184,523
Warehouse 0 25,000 25,000
TOTAL 109,300 121,520 233,820
The applicant manufactures pool supplies including: filters, filter casings, underwater
lighting and related supplies.
The proposed building will have concrete tilt-up textured concrete walls. Outside
building materials are on file at the City of Moorpark and will be displayed at the
Planning Commission hearing. A small office area will extend from the building
toward State Highway 111 similar to the existing structure.
The proposed addition will include parking for 424 cars, truck loading, and new
landscaping blended to match with the existing landscaping.
a II
4
•
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The proposed project is located at the western city limits along State Highway lll. It is
located in an area that has been designated for industrial uses. Phase 1 of the project
was approved on April 11, 1985. Surrounding land uses include agricultural production
to the north and south and vacant agricultural property to the east and west.
Regional Access is provided to the site primarily along State Highway 111 (Los Angeles
Avenue). Additionally, the project allows for reciprocal access with the adjacent
property to the east.
C. CONFORMANCE WITH EXISTING CITY POLICIES AND GUIDELINES:
The proposed project is in conformance with the existing Moorpark Community Plan
Land Use Element of the City of Moorpark General Plan. In particular, the indus-
trially-oriented policies applicable to the proposed project include the follow-
ing:
o "Policy 2: To encourage industrial development to adopt a harmonious
architectural style with appropriate landscaping and buffer areas."
The project proposes an architectural style and color palette similar to the
existing structure. The proposed landscaping exceeds the required
landscape standards for the zone. Additional landscape/design consider-
ation have been suggested by staff for consideration as conditions of any
project approval by the Planning Commission.
o "Policy 5: In order to discourage strip industrial development, future
industrial facilities should be in the form of industrial parks."
The proposed project is adjacent to and part of an existing planned, and
partially complete, industrial structure. Implementation of the project
would not result in strip industrial development.
o "Policy 6: To establish sites for appropriate industrial uses in locations
which are harmonious with adjoining land uses, and which do not degrade
the general physical environment of Moorpark."
The proposed project is a continuation of existing industrial land use in
an area planned light industrial uses.
The proposed project is generally in conformance with the Moorpark Zoning
• Ordinance as shown in Table 1, following.
Conditions are attached with this staff report to modify the proposed project to provide
for adequate illumination, and to ensure that final landscape and irrigation plans are
provided prior to development of the site.
5
`
f• A
-U
L..
•
Other reviewing departments and agencies have attached conditions ensuring compliance
with Municipal Codes and other applicable regulations. These departments include fire
protection, sheriff, water works, engineering and public works.
The Air Pollution Control District and the Moorpark Unified School District reviewed
the proposed project and have submitted recommendations, as attached to this staff
report. With the attached conditions, the proposed project would meet all planning
requirements for development.
D. PROJECT HISTORY:
On May 22, 1985 DP-302 was approved by the City Council. This project consisted of
the first phase construction program of a 104,840 square foot office and manufacturing
facility. This project is located on Assessor's Parcel No. 500-34-16 adjacent and north
of Los Angeles Avenue, westerly of Gabbert Road. At this time the developer was
obligated to modify the drainage channel adjacent to the parcel according to standards
of the Ventura County Flood Control District.
On May 18, 1987 a minor" modification to DP-302 was approved. The applicant
requested that a 39% increase of the floor area be devoted to office space than
previously approved. The approved office space was 6,664 square feet; the approved
office space is now 9,264 square feet.
6
4 1
•
PROJECT CONFORMANCE TO MOORPARK ZONING ORDINANCE
CITY REQUIREMENTS PROPOSED PROJECT
1. Setbacks: Front: 20% lot width or depth + 1101 feet2 (main structure)
with minimum of 20 feet (109') 82' feet (new office)
Side: 20% lot width or depth + 74 feet, + 179 feet
with minimum of 20 feet
Rear: 15% of the lot width or 55' feet minimum
depth with a minimum of 10 feet 230' feet maximum
2. Height: 30 feet plus 1 foot for each + 36 feet
additional foot of yard, up
to 60 feet.
3. Parking: Mezzanine 16 sp.
Office 44 sp. (including handicapped)
Light Manufacturing 369 sp.
Warehouse 25 sp.
Total 4t 4-Sts
(See Table 1)
4. Minimum Lot Area: 10,000 sq. feet 11.95 acres or 520,542 sq. ft.
5. Development Intensity: No requirement/ .45 floor area ratio
limitation3
6. Site Coverage: No requirement/limitation3 Building footprint = 43%
7. Landscape Coverage: 5 percent 21%
1 The zoning analysis was accomplished based upon total 11.95 acre site. DP-302 Major
Mod. No. 1 is the easterly 5.7 acres of the site. The interior property line will be
removed through the approval of a parcel map.
2 The existing and proposed structure is at +110 feet from the State Highway 111
property line. When viewed as a total project, the existing building became non-
conforming to the front setback requirement.
3 The only restrictions are based upon provision of adequate onsite parking.
7
•
r.
TABLE I
PARKING REQUIREMENTS
CITY EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
REO. S.F. SPACES S.F. SPACES S.F. SPACES
Office 1/300 9,321 31 4,000 13 13,321 44
Mezzanine 1/500 7,976 16 0 0 7,976 16
Manufacturing 1/500 92,003 184 92,520 185 . 184,523 369
Warehouse 1/1000 0 0 25,000 25 25,000 25
Total 109,300 231 121,520 233 230,820 454
E. ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE:
Traffic:
The street system in the vicinity of the study site is now operating at
relatively high levels of service except at the intersection of Los Angeles Avenue
and Spring Road which is operating well in excess of design capacity in the
afternoon peak travel period. The additional traffic that would be generated by
the study project (about 1 ,580 vpd) is relatively low and would not change the
existing street system volume/capacity relationships to a significant degree (a
degradation in ICU value equivalent to one level of service or more attributable
to site traffic) but would incrementally contribute to projected 1993 adverse
traffic conditions at two of the five selected study area intersections. It does
not appear that any additional mitigation measures could be implemented at these
locations that would further reduce these potential adverse 1CUILOS values to any
significant degree. However, it should be noted that the completion of the
connection of the Moorpark (SR 23) and Simi Valley-San Fernando (SR 118)
Freeways, anticipate to occur in the early to slid-1990's, will drastically alter
traffic flow patterns in and through the City of Moorpark and may significantly
improve traffic flow along the concerned portion of Los Angeles Avenue.
8
� 0
_the presently recommended future signal locations on
Los Angeles Avenue at Tierra Rejada Road-Gabbert Road and at Maureen Lane as
well as the possible future signal locations we feel should be considered to serve
the western portion of this industrial park area. These locations are Los Angeles
Avenue/Woodcrest Drive on the west side of the study site; Los Angeles
Avenue/Butter Creek Road (a residential collector street serving a relatively new
single family tract of significant size south of Los Angeles Avenue); and a new
study area collector street access road located between 0.28 and 0.34 miles west
of the Butter Creek Road location.
In the interim time period, Woodcrest Drive would provide ample capacity to
accommodate total future site traffic generation without the need for traffic
signal control and has ample site distance in each direction along Los Angeles
Avenue (a minimum of 430 feet which is equivalent to about a six second minimum
cross traffic visibility factor) . The east bound ingress left-turn lane on Los
Angeles Avenue west of Woodcrest Drive should be a minimum of 150 feet in
length to accommodate the projected maximum peak ingress demand at prevailing
approach speed levels. Though the westbound right-turn site ingress peak traffic
demand (about 110 vph) would not normally necessitate a separate right-turn-only
deceleration lane, the relatively high prevailing speeds along this portion of Los
Angeles Avenue (approximately 50 miles-per-hour) may warrant a separate
deceleration lane until such time as this portion of Los Angeles Avenue is built
out to its ultimate width. Also, it would be desirable to construct Woodcrest
Drive north of Los Angeles Avenue to a minimum width of 40 feet curb-to-curb
to allow the egress approach to be striped for a left-turn-only lane and a right-
turn-only lane while retaining a single ingress lane approximately 15 feet in
width.
9
e
EXISTING VOLUME/CAPACITY RELATIONSHIPS
ICU/LOS VALUES
Study Intersection Morning Afternoon
Peak Hour Period Peak Hour Period
Los Angeles Avenue & Spring Road 0.86/D 0.95/E
Los Angeles Avenue & Moorpark Avenue 0.49/A 0.63/B
Los Angeles Avenue & Maureen Lane 0.72/C 0.81/D
Los Angeles Avenue & Tierra Rejada
f! Road/Gabbert Road , 0.77/C j 0.74/C II
SITE TRAFFIC GENERATION
Time Period Number Of Additional Vehicle Trips
AM Peak Hour
In 163
Out 47
PM Peak Hour
In 54
Out 170
Daily Total 1580
FUTURE VOLUME/CAPACITY RELATIONSHIPS
ICU/LOS VALUES FOR:
r--
Study Area Existing Plus Total 1993 Without Total 1993 With
Intersections On Site Traffic Site Traffic Site Traffic
Los Angeles Avenue At:
AM PM AM PM AM PM
Peak Hour Peak Hour Peak Hour Peak Hour Peak Hour Peak Hour
Spring Road 0.87/D 0.98/E 0.951E 1.01/F 0.95/E 1.02/F
Moorpark Avenue 0.51/A 0.65/8 0.61/B 0.71/C 0.62/B 0.72/C
Gisler Court N/A N/A 0.56/A 0.76/C 0.58/A 0.76/C
Maureen Lane 0.74/C 0.84/D 0.54/A 0.65/8 0r56/A 0:66/8
9 o.e7
Tierra Rejada Road/ ./2/f
Gabbert Road 0.79/C 0.81/0 0.85/0 0.93/E 0.86/D 0A7/6-
9a
``
•
Air Quality:
Traffic trips associated with operation of the facility will contribute to cumulative air
quality impacts in the vicinity. Once operational, the facility would employ
approximately 265 people in a single shift from 6:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday. Average daily trips (ADT) generated by this development are shown in Table
5, below. In addition to the traffic generated by the employees of the facility, truck
trips would occur for deliveries to and from the facility.
The air quality in this region is generally good. However, this project, in conjunction
with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects would incrementally
contribute to a degradation of air quality. This impact is not, however, considered a
significant impact. All Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (APCD)
regulations will be implemented into the project to help lessen any cumulative air
quality impacts from the project.
Visual Resources:
The project site is ±11.95 acres total. The existing structure is on 6.25 acres and
proposed on 5.7 acres. Combined, the project has approximately 952 feet of frontage
on State Highway 111 (Los Angeles Avenue) at the easterly city limits. The nature of
surrounding land uses (primarily vacant and/or agricultural uses) combine with the scale
of the project to make a significant impact on visual resources at this location.
Staff has suggested several measures as conditions of project approval for Planning
Commission consideration. These measures fall into the following areas:
1. Ventura County Flood Control Channel
2. Enhanced Landscaping
3. Building Texture Modification
4. Building Facade Changes
This combination of measures should eliminate/reduce most visual concerns. The
project scale is such that it will be a statement at the City entrance. A more detailed
discussion of the above is provided on page 3.
Roof equipment may also be visible from residents across Highway 111. This equip-
ment could include vents, air conditioners, and possibly heaters. The applicant is
however, subject to a condition of approval to provide screening of this roof
equipment. The screening would be composed of materials similar to the structure, and
would be subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development.
It is the opinion of City Staff that, subject to the condition of approval on the roof
equipment, the applicant will have provided methods to reduce visual impacts to the
extent feasible.
10
•
Noise:
The proposed project will result in automobile and truck traffic and the operation of
outside mechanical roof equipment. Auto traffic will primarily occur from employees
coming and going to work, lunch, and errands. Truck traffic will be the result of
distribution of manufactured goods, and deliveries to and from the site. Mechanical
equipment such as fans and air conditioners may be in operation some, or all, of most
days.
The traffic and equipment will result in increased noise throughout each day. The
noise generated at the site would be perceived primarily by onsite users and is not
considered a significant impact.
Automobile and truck traffic that occurs offsite, but is directly related to the proposed
use, could be perceived by other uses within the vicinity. When roadway and intersec-
tion improvements are completed in the project vicinity (please refer to the Traffic
discussion), traffic is expected to flow at satisfactory levels. It is anticipated that
smooth-flowing traffic would result in less objectionable noise levels than congested
traffic where engines would alternately idle and then rev.
The proposed project is anticipated to result in incremental, although not objectionable,
noise levels in the project vicinity.
F. STAFF ANALYSIS
General Plan/Zoning
The proposed project is consistent with the Moorpark General Plan Land Use Element
and for the goals and policies designated for light industrial uses. The project site is
designated for light industrial use on the General Plan. In addition, the project will be
consistent with the Moorpark Zoning Ordinance (please refer to Section III.C). The site
is zoned M-2, for light industrial use.
Environmental
The project would not result in significant environmental concerns. Potential
environmental issues related to traffic, air quality, visual resources, and light and glare
are not considered significant, or can be reduced to a level of insignificance. All
appropriate mitigation measures have been included as suggested Conditions of Approval
(Exhibit A).
Existing municipal services can be provided to the site without causing the need for
additional facilities. Wastewater services may be delayed to the site due to the timing
of a planned expansion to sewer treatment facilities. The demand for the expansion
already exists. (Please see attached letter).
11
sr
,•
Parking
As indicated in Table 1 Page 7, the proposed total project has a requirement for 454
onsite parking spaces. The site plan indicates that a total of 424 spaces will be
provided as noted below.
Required 454
Provided 425
Short 29 (6.8%)
None of the parking spaces depicted on the site plan are shown as compact spaces.
Staff has suggested a Condition No. 10 p3. of any project approval that 29 additional
parking spaces be provided in a manner satisfactory to the Director of Community
Development.
Building Mass
The existing structure and the proposed Major Mod. No. 1 provide a large building
mass at the westerly entry to the City of Moorpark. As a major entrance to the
community staff questions the scale of the proposed project (233,820 s.f.) to be
t_ tedstructure.
as one
The proposed project will have ±507 foot structure face along Los Angeles Avenue
from the administrative offices to the most southeasterly point of the proposed
structure. This will be over 1-1/2 football fields in length (1.69) Staff would suggest
that a series of off-sets be placed the length of this wall face. Each offset should be
designed so as to provide visual relief and enhanced landscape areas (Condition No.
4 7 ). A minimum of 50% of the area should offset in a staggered manner.
In addition to the concern expressed by staff relate to the building face along State
Highway 111, staff is concerned with the building mass. The 233,820 s.f. structure will
be a significant building mass in this location. The measure indicated above will
reduce the visual effect of the project from the highway. The structure will remain a
large mass at the entrance of.the community. One measure to reduce the effect of the
structure would be to have the space constructed in two or more buildings. This would
provide the same amount of space to the applicant.
This would not reduce the overall mass of the structure. It would eliminate having one
large building at the entrance to the community. Staff has not recommended this
approach. Two structures would not be as useable to the project proponent as one
single structure. Additionally, to achieve a effective use of the land the two buildings
would need to be locate in close proximity to one another. From most areas of the
community two buildings in close proximity to one another will have the same building
visual mass a one large structure. The offset approach recommended above will achieve
a similar result.
12
I '
Los Aneeles Avenue Setback Landscaping
The proposed structure will be located ± 110 feet from travel lanes on Los Angeles
Avenue (State Highway 111).
Within Right-of-Way
o curb
o sidewalk 8.0'
o landscape area 4.5 '
Within Property
o Flood control easement
- channel 19'
- landscape area 11 '
Total (VCFC) 30.0'
o Parking Lot landscaping + 1G.G'
o Parking 18'
o Driveway 25.0'
o Parking 18'
o Landscaping 10.0'
TOTAL + 110.0'
The flood control easement will be landscaped by the applicant. A 6 foot tall
security fence runs the length of the easement. This combination fence, channel, and
relative short distance (4.5 from sidewalk to channel). No significant vegetation vertical
mass is shown between the fence and sidewalk on the site plan.
Staff offers the following suggestions to reduce or eliminate this concern.
1. That the Flood Control Channel be placed underground and covered over for the
entire length of frontage.
•
or
2. That the eight foot (8') sidewalk section be reduced to four feet (4') in selected
areas (25% of total) to allow for vertical landscape elements.
and
13
r, n
The existing wall/fence design be continued the length of the property.
and
That the landscape plan be revised so as to provide solid screening of the fence and
wall for 40% of the total project along Los Angeles Avenue (State Highway 111) within
5-7 years of installation.
ADJACENT RESIDENTS OPPOSITION
It has been indicated to the staff that the residents locate east of the project will be in
opposition to approval of Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302. The residents opposition it is
believed will relate to the following:
a. Additional Traffic
b. Noise Impacts
c. Odor Impacts
d. Growth Inducing Effects
The traffic impacts of the project are as discussed on page S. of this report. In
effects are w 17 M jt
summary, the within acceptable -
The project has the potential to have two types of noise impacts on the community.
The first is traffic related noise effects from cars and trucks generated by the facility.
These effects are within normally acceptable ranges as established by the Initial Study
for the project. The second type of effect is operational noise from the facility.
Condition No. --will require that all operations on the site be conducted within the
building. The project applicant will be required to submit to the Director of
Community Development a acoustical report, prepared by a licensed acoustical engineer
that indicates that all roof top mechanical equipment and other noise generation sources
onsite be attenuated to 55 dBA at the property line.
Another concern expressed by the residents is that odors from the facility will carry to
their homes. This type of effect is regulated by the Ventura County Air Pollution
Control District (VCAPCD). The VCAPCD has not expressed concern with the opera-
tional characteristics of the facility to staff. The applicant will be required to meet all
standards of the District.
The final concern expressed by the residents is the overall growth inducing effect of
the project. It is important to note that project being heard by the Planning
Commission is Major Mod. No. 1. The first part of this development has occurred.
Growth in the area has been established by the City's General Plan. The general plan
indicates this area for industrial uses. Overall residential growth in the community is
limited.
•
14
The planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider recommendation
of the requested actions on the proposed project to the City Council.
Prepared by: - Approved by:
•
•
15
fir._
SECTION IV: ATTACHMENTS
EXHIBIT "A"
a. Findings
b. Conditions
1. Community Development (including landscaping)
2. Environmental Health
3. Fire
4. Police
5. Public Works
6. Flood Control
7. Air
8. Waterworks
9. Public Works
1. RESOLUTION NO. ("Mitigated Negative Declaration")
2. RESOLUTION NO. (DP-302)
3. TRAFFIC REPORT (Prepared by Thomas Montgomery and Associates)
4. INITIAL STUDY
5. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
6. EXHIBITS
a. Site Plan and Elevations (separate attachment)
b. Existing General Plan
c. Existing Zoning
16
EXHIBIT A
RECOMMEND FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS
OF APPROVAL FOR
DP-302 MAJOR MOD. NO. 1
DECEMBER 7, 1987
A. FINDINGS
1. Mitigated Negative Declaration:
a. That the Initial Study is complete and has been prepared in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines and City
Policy.
b. That the contents of the Initial Study have been considered in the various decisions
on this project.
c. That in order to reduce adverse impacts of the proposed project, all feasible
mitigation measures discussed in the environmental document have been incorpor-
ated into the proposed project. Specific economic, social or other considerations
make infeasible any other potential mitigation measures to the proposed project.
d. That the mitigation measures have been incorporated into the proposed project and
are expressed as suggested Conditions of Approval.
2. DP-302 (MAJOR MOD. NO. 1):
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;
d. The proposed uses would not be obnoxious or harmful or impair the utility of the
property itself or neighboring property or uses;
e. The proposed uses would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety,
convenience or welfare;
17
f. The proposed project, together with the provisions for its design and improvement,
is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed project is compatible with the
objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan.
g. The Planning Commission has considered the effect of its action upon the housing
needs of the region and has balanced these needs against the public service needs
of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources.
3. CONDITIONS:
Conditions to be imposed upon the proposed project are provided below and are sorted
by municipal department or advising agency.
•
18
•
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE. MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON THE S %
APPLICATION OF STRUCTURAL CONCEPTS OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on December 7, 1987, the Planning
Commission considered the application filed by Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
requesting approval to construct an industrial facility of 121,500 square feet. Located on
State Highway 118 (Los Angeles Avenue), Assessor Parcel No. 500-34-33-34.
. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after review and consideration of the information
contained in the staff report dated December, 7 1987 and the Mitigated Negative Declara-
tion, has found that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment; and
has reached its decision in the matter;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission ha; held a public hearing on the recommen-
dation to City Council for approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed all environmental documenta-
tion prepared to evaluate the proposed project;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, OF THE CITY OF MOOR-
PARK, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (Division 13 of the Public Resources Code of the State of California (beginning at
Section 21000)) the Planning Commission of the City of Moorpark recommends that the City
Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
SECTION 2. That the findings contained in Exhibit "A" dated
December 7, 1987, which report is incorporated by reference as though fully set forth
herein with conditions as modified by said Commission, are hereby recommended to the
City Council for approval;
SECTION 3. That at its meeting of Deeember7,--19877 the Planning Commission
took action to direct staff to prepare a Resolution with attached staff recommended
conditions, as modified, to recommend that the City Council accept the Mitigated Negative
Declaration; recommend that the City Council certify that the information was considered on
decisions related to the project; and, recommend that the City Council approve the Mitigated
Negative Declaration said Resolution to be presented for Consent Calendar action at the next
regular scheduled meeting.
The action with the foregoing direction was approved by the following roll call vote;
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF , 1987.
Chairman
ATTEST:
Acting Secretary
fi. eU
•
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE
DP-302 MAJOR MOD. NO. 1
ON THE APPLICATION OF STRUCTURAL CONCEPTS OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on December 7, 1987, the Planning
Commission considered the application filed by Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
requesting approval to construct an industrial facility of 121,520 square feet. Located on
State Highway 118 (Los Angeles Avenue). Assessor Parcel No. 500-34-33-34.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after review and consideration of the information
contained in the staff report dated December 7, 1987 and the Mitigated Negative Declara-
tion, has found that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment; and
has reached its decision in the matter;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing on the adoption of
such development plans; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does hereby FIND that the adoption of such
development plans is consistent with the City's General Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, OF THE CITY OF MOOR-
PARK, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (Division i 3 of the Public Resources Code of the State of California (beginning at
Section 21000)) the Planning Commission of the City of Moorpark recommends that the City
Council approve Major Mod. No. 1 to Development Plan Permit No. DP-302.
SECTION 2. That the findings contained in Exhibit "A" dated December 7, 1987,
which report is incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein with conditions as
modified by said Commission, are hereby recommended to the City Council for approval;
SECTION 3. That at its meeting of December 7, 1987, the Planning Commission
took action to direct staff to prepare a Resolution with attached staff recommended
conditions, as modified, does hereby recommend that the City Council approve Major
Modification No. 1 to Development Plan Permit No. DP-302, said Resolution to be pre-
sented for Consent Calendar action at the next regular scheduled meeting.
The action with the foregoing direction was approved by the following roll call vote;
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF , 1987.
Chairman
ATTEST:
Acting Secretary
CITY OF MOORPARK
DEPARTMENT OF CCNMUNITy DEVELOPMENT /•, ' 4
799 MOORPARK AVENUE - J
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA 93021
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
I . PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
1. Entitlement; Dpvelnpmenr Plan Permit PP-307 Major Modification No l
2. Pnoiicant; Peter Sturdivant, Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
3. Proposal; The proposed facility is a 121,520 s.f. building used for
office manufacturing, and warehouse uses. The company manufactures and
assembles swimming pool equipment and accessories.
4. Location and Parcel Number(s) :
Along State Highway 118 (Los Angeles Avenue) at the westerly city limits,
neares cross street: Gabbert Road; Moorpark, CA.
5_ Responsible Agencies: State of California, Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) . .
II. STATE:-IFNr OF ENVIRONMENPAL FINDINGS:
An initial study was conducted by the Department of Community Development
to evaluate the potential effects of this project upon the enviroun nt.
Based upon the findings contained in the attached initial study it has
been deternuned 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 SIGNtFICANP EFFECTS:
(I"F APPLICABLE)
See attachment
III. PUBLIC REVIEW:
1. Legal Notice Method; Direct mailing to property owners within 300
feet.
2. Document Posting Period;
•
Prepared by: Appr vedd by:
Jaime C. Maldonado 11-22-87 /7 2 -8
(Name) (Date) ( ) ( / / (Date)
4
NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF DRAFT
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
TO CONCERN PARTIES :
The City of Moorpark is currently processing the following land
use permit request. California State Law requires that an evaluation
be conducted to determine if this project could significantly
affect the environment. Based upon an initial review, it has
been found that a significant affect would not occur; therefore ,
a Negative Declaration has been prepared.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Entitlement: Development Plan Permit, Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
Applicants Name: Peter Sturdivant, Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
Parcel Size: 11.95 acres
Assessors Parcel No. (s) : AP No. 500-34-33 and 34
Zoning Designation: M-1
General Plan Designation: Medium Industrial (I-2)
Project Location: North side of State Highway 118 (Los Angeles Avenue) , at the
westerly city limits, nearest cross street: Gabbert Road,
Moorpark, CA.
Description of Land Use That Would Result If Permit Is Approved:
The proposed facility is a 121,520 s.f. building for office, manufacturing, and
warehouse uses. The company manufactures and assembles swimming pool equipment
and accessories.
The public review period for the draft Negative lDeclarationnis
from to
y
questions or comments regarding the project or adequacy J. Richards, Director
the
draft Negative Declaration, please call or write,
of Community Development , 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, CA. 93021,
(805) 529-6864 .
Copies of this draft Negative Declaration may be reviewed or
purchased at the above address. -
Prepared by:
Jaime C. Maldonado Date- 11-2 2-87
Sanchez Talarico Associates, Inc.
•
c. n
CITY OF MOORPARK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST FORM
•
I. BACKGROUND
1. Name of Applicant Peter Sturdivant StructUra
c rl; fornia Tnc.
2. Project Description The ro osed facilit is a 121,320 s.f. building
•
hsed for office m u
anufactring and warehouse uses. The company
r s swimmingool e ui ment and accessories.
3. Date of Checklist submittal November 23 1987 ,
lw2Y 118 .(1 ARPeleS •.A r
4. Project Location North side o Hi"-.F
at the westerly city limits, nearest cross street: Gabbert Road, Moorpark,• CA
II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS •
"maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.)
(Explanations of all "yes" and y
YES MAYBE NO
1. EARTH. Will the proposal result in:
X
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes . ._
in geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or X ---.
overcovering of the soil? •
—
c. Change in topography or ground surface X
• relief features?
d. The destruction, coveting or modification of
_ X
al
any unique geologic or p y
X
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, X
either on or off the site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands,
X
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
X
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud-
slides, ground failure, or similar
•
r.J .
YES MAYBE NO
2. AIR. Will the proposal result in:
X
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration —
of ambient air quality? .
X
b. The creation of objectionable odors? —
. X
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
X i
impacts on air quality in the project area? -
3. . WATER. Will the proposal result in:
. . X .
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,
X •
or the rate and amount of surface runoff?
X
c. Alterations ,to the course or flow of flood —
waters?
• X
d. Change in the amount of surface water in.
any water body?
. X
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any —
alteration of surface water quality, including
but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity?
X.
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of
ground waters?
.X
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either —
through direct additions or withdrawals, or
through interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations? •
X
h. Degradation of ground water quality? X
i. Substantial reduction in the amount of water —
otherwise available for public water supplies?
or property to water related -�
J. Exposure of people
hazards such as flooding or tidal waves?
1
r
V/-
• YES MAYBE NO
•
4. PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in the diversity of species or number of _L
any species of plants (including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, and aquatic plants? .
•
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or X
—
endangered species of plants?
X
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? A •
5. ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in. the diversity of species or numbers of X.
—
any species of animals (birds, land animals
including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
b. Restrict the ran x
ge of or otherwise affect any X
rare or endangered animal species?
c. Introduction of new species of animals into an X x
area, or result in a barrier to the migration
or movement of animals?
•
x
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife X
habitat? .
6. NOISE. Will the proposal result in:
v
n
i a. Increases in existing noise levels?
x
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? —
7. LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce new •
x
. light or glare?
8. LAND USE. Will the proposal result in a substantial •
alteration of the present or planned land use of an X
area?
9. NATURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural
X
resources?
X
b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable X
resource?
1
•
•
•
YES MAYBE NO
10. RISK OF UPSET. Will the proposal involve:
X
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, X
distribution, density or growth rate of the human
population of an area?
X
12. HOUSING. Will the proposal affect existing housing, —
or create a demand for additional housing?
13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Will the proposal result
ic:
X
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular —
movement?
b. Effects on existing parking facilities or demand X —
for new parking?
s X
c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation
systems?
X
d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or --
movement of people and/or goods?
X
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? —
X
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, —
bicyclists or pedestrians?
14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered
governmental servies in any of the following areas:
X
a. Fire protection?
X •
b. Police protection?
__ X
c. Schools?.
d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X
X
e. Other governmental services?
15. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in:
X
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? —
MMI"t
YES MAYBE NO
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources X
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? _X'
b. Communications system? X
X
c. Water?
_ d. Sewer or septic tanks? X
X
e. Storm water drainage? _
f. Solid waste and disposal? —
g. Street lighting annexation and/or improvements? X
17. HUMAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health X
hazard (excluding mental health)?
. b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? X
18. AESrl±lTICS. Will the proposal result in the obstruc- X —
t{on 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
X
upon the'quality or quantity of existing recreational
opportunities?
20. ARCHAEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL. Will the proposal:
a. Affect possible unknown archaeological or historic-
X
al sites? ,
b. Result in destruction or alteration of a known —
X
archaeological or historical site within the
vicinity of the project?,
c. Result in destruction or alteration of a known
X
archaeological or historical site near the
vicinity of the project?
i
i
YES MAYBE NO
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
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 X
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 X
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 X
significant.)
d. Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects X
on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
III. RECOMMENDATION •
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•DECLARATIO'N. should be prepared.
X 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.
1
•
INITIAL STUDY RESPONSES
MAJOR MODIFICATION NO. 1 TO DP-302
The following section discusses the yes, maybe, and no responses given in
the Initial Study prepared for the proposed project.
l.a. A limited amount of grading would be required in that the site has
previously been graded in preparation for future development.
This project would not result in unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures.
l.b. There is the possibility of compaction, disruption, and overcover-
ing of soils due to grading operations associated with the pro-
posed project. All grading is anticipated to be balanced onsite.
All grading will be done in accordance with approved City stan-
dards. Grading is not anticipated to adversely impact the pro-
ject.
l.c. The project site is flat, with no visible ground surface relief
features. Minor modifications to the earth surface may occur
related to landscaping and drainage. No major alterations to the
topography are anticipated to occur.
1.d. There are no known unique geologic or physical features onsite.
The proposed project would not result in the destruction, cover-
ing, or modification of unique features.
1.e. During construction of the proposed project, only a limited amount
(5,000 cu.yds.) of grading is anticipated to occur. There would
not be a substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils
due to necessary earth movement.
l.f. In that no beach sands, rivers, streams, oceans, or bays exist
onsite, the proposed project would not result in changes to any of
these features.
l.g. No geologic or seismic hazards are known to exist onsite or within
the immediate vicinity. The proposed project would not result in •
exposure of people or property to geologic or seismic hazards.
2.a. The proposed office and manufacturing facility would not emit
significant amounts of pollutants. The project would not result
in substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air
quality.
2.b. In that the proposed project would not emit significant amounts of
pollutants, the facility would not create objectionable odors.
1.
2
•
2.c. The proposed project consists of construction of approximately
121,520 s.f. of office, manufacturing, and warehouse. It would
not result in an alteration of air movement, moisture, or tempera-
ture or any change in climate, either locally or regionally.
2.d. The new development is not expected to create cumulative adverse
impacts on air quality in the project area due to the relatively
non-pollutant nature of the project. However, the additional
employment base will result in additional traffic to the City of
Moorpark. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the
project which will mitigate this cumulative impact to the extent
feasible.
3.a. No marine or fresh waters are present onsite. The proposed pro-
ject would not result in the change in currents or the course of
direction of such water bodies.
3.b. The proposed project represents a change in land use from vacant
land to approximately 43% lot coverage. This may result in a
change in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and
amount of surface runoff. Adequate flood control is provided by
the drainage facility which borders southern edge of the site.
3.c. Concrete swales and an underground drain to Ventura County Flood
Control Channel will provide protection from adverse changes.
The proposed project would not alter the course or flow of flood
water.
3.d. The proposed project would not alter the course or flow of flood
water. Concrete swales and an underground drain to Ventura County
Flood Control will provide protection from adverse changes.
3.e. All excess onsite water would be diverted to existing storm drains
south to the Flood Control Channel then west. The proposed pro-
ject would not result in discharge to surface waters, or in any
alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to
temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity.
3.f. The construction and operation of the proposed project would not
alter the direction or rate of flow of any known groundwaters. •
Water is provided by the Ventura County Waterworks District No. 1;
no wells would be constructed. No aquifers are located onsite.
3.g. The proposed project would obtain water for the facility from
the Ventura County Waterworks District No. 1. The project would
not change ,the quantity of groundwater either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by
cuts or excavations.
. l
ummomft
3.h. The proposed project would obtain water for the facility from
the Ventura County Waterworks District No. 1. The project would
be served by existing water mains 12" PVC on property side off
existing 36" water line sized and served to meet water demands of
the proposed project.
3.i. The proposed project would not result in a substantial reduction
in the amount of water otherwise available for public use. Ade-
quate capacity and water pressure exist to serve the site. No
additional constraints for fire protection are known to exist.
3.j . The proposed project• is served by the Ventura County Flood Control
District (VCFCD) . The VCFCD provides adequate service to the
site. No flood hazards are anticipated as a result of the pro-
posed project.
4.a. No trees would be removed with implementation of this project.
The project would not result in a change in the diversity of
species or number of any species of plants.
4.b. There are no known unique, rare, or endangered species onsite.
Therefore, the project would not result in the reduction of any of
these types of species.
4.c. The proposed project includes the introduction of new plant
species to be utilized for landscaping. The proposed project
would not present a barrier to the normal replenishment of onsite
vegetation.
4.d. No crops currently exist onsite. The proposed project would not
result in the reduction in acreage of any agricultural crops.
5.a. No species of animals are known to exist on site other than, pos-
sibly, rodents and reptiles. No rare or endangered species are
known to exist onsite. Therefore, the proposed project would not
result in a change in the diversity of species or numbers of any
species of animals.
5.b. No rare or endangered species are known to exist onsite. There-
fore, the proposed project would not restrict the range of, or
otherwise affect, these species.
S.c. Introduction of animal species is not proposed with this project.
No animal species are known to exist onsite. The proposed project
would not introduce new animal species or result in a barrier to
the migration or movement of animals.
S.d. There are no known existing fish or wildlife habitats onsite.
Therefore, the proposed project would not deteriorate these habi-
tats.
v
4
6.a. Manufacturing activities associated with the proposed project may
result in increases in existing noise levels. These possible mea-
sures could be lessened through proper installation of the facil-
ity and through muffling of large machinery. The project through
the additional traffic will cumulatively add to noise along Los
Angeles Avenue. The project-specific traffic noise increase
will not be audible and not considered an impact.
6.b. Manufacturing activities within the proposed facility would not
exceed surrounding noise levels. Therefore, the proposed project
would not result in exposure of people to severe noise levels.
7. The site is currently vacant and has no onsite lighting. The pro-
posed project would introduce lighting associated with parking
areas, headlight glare and the illumination of the new facility.
Mitigation has been proposed which reduces this impact to the
extent feasible.
8. The site is currently planned for manufacturing use. The
existing surrounding uses include, primarily, agricultural uses.
The project would therefore result in an alteration of the present
land use, but it is consistent with the planned land use of the
area.
9.a. The proposed project would not be utilizing any natural resources.
Therefore, the proposed project would not result in an increase in
the rate of use of any natural resources.
9.b. The proposed project would not use substantial or nonrenewable
resources other than non-renewable construction materials. There-
fore, the proposed project would not result in a substantial
depletion of these resources.
10. The new development is not expected to create a risk of upset in
the project area due to the relatively non-hazardous nature of the
project.
11. The proposed project would employ ±265 employees. This could
possibly alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate
of the human population in the area including relocation for
employment of the employee and family.
12. The proposed project would employ +265 employees. This could
possibly affect existing housing, or create a demand for addi-
tional housing. The demand is anticipated to be associated
locally by the amount of residential construction presently in
process.
f. I i
•
5
TRAFFIC SUBJECT TO CHANGE PENDING OUTCOME OF TRAFFIC REPORT
13.a. The average daily trips associated with employee traffic and truck
traffic associated with the proposed facility will generate addi-
tional vehicular movement. Existing peak hour traffic congestion
is a current problem and, therefore, additional traffic could be
considered a substantial increase. Mitigation has been proposed
which reduces the impact the potential impact to a level of insig-
nificance. (I.D. existing ADT on LA Ave. and see if the no. of
trips is truly insignificant) .
13.b. The proposed project would construct 223 parking spaces to provide
for employee and truck parking onsite. This parking would meet
City requirements. The proposed project would not result in a
demand for other new parking offsite.
13.c. Any new development in the City of Moorpark will have a substan-
tial impact on the present transportation system. Mitigation to
reduce this impact to a level of insignificance has been proposed
and is attached for review.
13.d. In that all roads to and from the project have already been built,
the proposed project would not result in alterations to present
patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods.
13.e. There would be no waterborne, rail, or air traffic associated with
the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would not
alter these types of traffic.
13.f. The proposed project would increase the amount of automobile and
truck traffic in the area. It could present an increase in traf-
fic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians. Effec-
tive use of setbacks and sight distance criteria will minimize
potential hazards.
14.a. The addition of a new building with +265 employees may require the
need for additional fire protection personnel in the area.
14.b. The addition of a new building with +265 employees may require the
need for additional police protection personnel in the area.
14.c. The probable influx of people (as employees) associated with the
proposed project may require the need for new schools in the area.
14.d. The probable influx of people (as employees) associated with the
proposed project may necessitate the development of new parks or
other recreational facilities.
15.a. The proposed project, with 121,520 s.f. of office, manufacturing,
and warehouse uses, would not result in the use of substantial
amounts of fuel or energy.
6
15.b. The proposed project, with 121,520 s.f. of office, manufacturing,
and warehouse uses, would not require a substantial increase in
demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development
of new sources of energy.
16.a. The proposed project, with 121,520 s.f. of office, manufacturing,
and warehouse uses, would not substantially alter or require new
power or natural gas.
16.b. The proposed project, with 121,520 s.f. of office, manufacturing,
and warehouse uses, would not substantially alter or require new
communication systems.
16.c. The proposed project, with 121,520 s.f. of office, manufacturing,
and warehouse uses would not substantially alter or require new
water.
16.d. The proposed project, with 121,520 s.f. of office, manufacturing,
and warehouse uses would not substantially alter or require new
sewer or septic tanks.
16.e. The proposed project, with 121,520 s.f. of office, manufacturing,
and warehouse uses, would not substantially alter or require new
storm water drainage.
16.f. The proposed project, with 121,520 s.f. of office, manufacturing,
and warehouse uses, would not substantially alter or require new
solid waste and disposal.
16.g. The proposed project, with 121, 520 s.f. of office, manufacturing,
and warehouse uses, would not substantially alter or require new
street lighting annexation and/or improvements.
17.a. The proposed project would not be using any materials that would
result in the creation of any health hazards or potential health
hazards.
17.b. The new development is not expected to expose people to health
hazards due to the relatively non-hazardous nature of the project.
•
18. The proposed project, is a one story 121,520 s.f. building. As
an addition to an existing single story 109,300 sq. ft. building
is at present visually prominent, it disrupts a view of an agri-
cultural area from the residential area 1/2 mile east of the site.
The addition will further reduce the view of an area considered to
be rural in character.
19. The proposed project, with a 121,520 s.f. building, one story in
height, would not result in an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities.
F• •
7
20.a. No archaeological or historical artifacts are known to exist
onsite. Therefore, the proposed project will not affect archaeo-
logical or historical resources.
20.b. No archaeological or historical artifacts are known to exist
onsite. Therefore, the proposed project will not affect archaeo-
logical or historical resources.
20.c. There are no known archaeological or historical sites near the
vicinity of the project. The proposed project would not result in
destruction of these resources.
21.a. The project is not located in an area where it could impact bio-
logical, or cultural resources.
21.b. The project will have long-term benefits to the City of Moorpark.
Short-term visual impacts are likely co be prevalent until the
stretch of industrial development is completed along Los Angeles
Avenue.
21.c. A cumulative impact will result with respect to traffic. The pro-
ject alone is not expected to significantly impact the vicinity or
the City as a whole. The project will have a cumulative impact
when considered with other past present and reasonably foreseeable
projects.
21.d. This project will not have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects or pose a health hazard to human
beings.
0
r -1
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
MAJOR MODIFICATION NO. 1 TO DP-302
MITIGATION MEASURES
1. The applicant shall be subject to requirements set forth by the Ventura
County Air Pollution Control District as modified by the City of Moor-
park (I .S. Ref. 2.d. ) .
2. The applicant shall provide exterior lighting with shields that face
down, or are otherwise so directed, to reduce evening and nighttime
light and glare from offsite locations (I.S. Ref. 7) .
3. The applicant shall use reduced wattage light fixtures to avoid night-
time glare on residential uses and on motorists along Los Angeles Ave-
nue (I.S. Ref. 7) .
4. The applicant shall encourage alternative means of transportation to
reduce automobile trips to the facility by providing a bike rack and a
preferential parking area for carpoolers and vanpoolers (I.S. Ref.
13.c. ) .
5. To the extent feasible, the applicant shall soften the architectural
lines of the proposed project in order to reduce the visual impact
created by the bulk of the new building. Large specimen (48" box
trees) trees or shrubs shall be used at the east property line to
reduce the visual impact of the residential units 1/2 mile to the east
of the proposed project (I.S. Ref. 18) , and as well as to the west and
on the front of the property.
5. The developer shall cap the flood control channel on the southern
boundary of the site to avoid visual impacts and to encourage an under-
ground channel for the remainder of the channel along Los Angeles Ave-
nue (I.S. Ref. 18) .
7. The developer shall comply with Engineering (Public Works) Condition
Nos. 5, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 17 (pages 34-37 of the staff report) . They
hereby are included as traffic mitigation. ( I .S. ref. 13)
gY✓d 4 .t^
,;;`•„;C d'►'"fi��e
'• .. .' .I•:F .. a N� S � �� L L ,�.''.;x'`'"Sk.
'^C
0 D1
MEMORANDUM;• ^
..r u �l i+ _
om
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: PATRICK J. RICHARDS, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SUBJECT: DP-302 - MAJOR MODIFICATION NO. 1
DATE: JANUARY 20, 1988 r —�
JAN 1 ' 1288
€ a CITY OF MOOR PARK
RK
PROJECT SUMMARY/LOCATION
The proposed project is a light industrial use totalling 121,520 square feet (s.f.). The total
square footage includes 4,000 s.f. of office area; 95,520 s.f. of assembly and light
manufacturing area; and, 25,000 s.f. of warehousing. The location of the proposed project
is as shown on page 1 of the Planning Commission Staff Report.
•
REQUESTED ACTIONS
1 Approval of Resolution c,
on-A' y s• Ji °. �, krs.1 9: ,P'u l'?ui tr +e d
Sustaining the recommendation of the Planning Commission by accepting a Miti-
gated Negative Declaration and certifying that the information was considered on
decisions related to the project; and,
r w` 2. Approval of Resolution
E ' Sustaining the recommendation of the Planning Commission approving Major Mod.
?' t No. 1 to Development .PIan Permit (DP-302) for a light industrial structure
of 121,520 square feet located on Los Angeles Avenue at the westerly city limit.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission at its January 4, 1988 opened the public hearing, took testimony
from all those wishing to give testimony, and approved Resolution Nos. PC-88-159 and -160
(5 ayes, 0 noes) recommending that the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302 subject to the conditions as stated on Exhibit
"A" of the Planning Commission Staff Report. In making this recommendation, the Planning
Commission made the following changes to Exhibit A (Conditions). A copy of the condi-
tions are provided as Attachment 1 to this Memorandum. Attachment 1 to this memoran-
, dum reflects the changes made at Planning Commission.
,^ i E
Major Mod._ No. 1
• , DP-302
1) The Planning Commission changed the wording of Condition No. 24f.
Changed from: [t -�
c. Vtiw
24f. Minimum of one-half candle illumination.
Changed to:
24f. Average maximum of one-half candle illumination.
2) The Planning Commission added Condition No. 24g.
24g. House site shields shall be placed on all lighting fixtures.
3) The Planning Commission changed the wording of Condition No. 34.
Changed from:
34. That the preliminary site plan and landscape plan be redesigned to the satisfaction
of the Director of Community Development, City Engineer, and Ventura County
Flood Control District to underground and cover over the flood control channel.
Changed to:
34. That the preliminary site plans and landscape plan be redesigned to the satisfaction
of the Director of Community Development and Ventura Flood Control District
encompassing changes designed to soften, obscure, and ultimately reduce the visual
impact of the existing Gabbert Canyon Flood Control Channel improvements.
Such changes may include reducing sidewalk width from eight (8) feet to a
minimum of five (5) feet, mounding from curb line to channel wall, altered
landscape design, and reduced height of the wrought iron fence.
4) The following conditions were deleted by the Planning Commission. These conditions
were repeats of other conditions shown in Attachment A of the Planning Commission
Staff Report. The superseding condition number is provided below:
a. Condition No. 43 was deleted and superseded by Condition No. 26.
43. To the extent feasible, the applicant shall soften the architectural lines of the
proposed project in order to reduce the visual impact created by the bulk of
the new building. Large specimen (48" box trees) trees or shrubs shall be
used at the east property line to reduce the visual impact of the residential
units 1/2 mile to the east of the proposed project (I.5. Ref. 18, and as well
as to the west and on the front of the property.
2
Major Mod. No. 1
ti DP-302
•
v1y. 003
b. Condition No. 93 was deleted and superseded by Condition No. 34.
93. Developer shall provide street improvements to Los Angeles Avenue in
accordance with the Los Angeles Area of Contribution report and the City's
General Plan, with all improvements subject to approval by both the City
Engineer and Caltrans. Improvements shall be provided as follows:
(Developer shall construct the ultimately planned improvement to the portion
of the Walnut Canyon Channel fronting the property and crossing under Los
Angeles Avenue per the VCFCD, with money reimbursement arrangements for
the improvements to the channel made with the VCFCD.) Improvements to
Los Angeles Avenue shall include 8" sidewalk, curb and gutter, and an
addition 8" of pavement (per Plate B-2B and core improvements shown on
page 7 of the Los Angeles Avenue Area of Contribution Report).
c. Condition No. 95 was deleted and superseded by Condition No. 100.
95. That prior to zone clearance, the Developer shall Deposit with the City of
Moorpark a contribution for the Los Angeles Avenue Improvement Area of
Contribution.
d. Condition No. 101 was deleted for it is superseded by Condition No. 88.
101. That prior to zoning clearance, the applicant 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.
REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
1. Mitigated Negative Declaration:
a. That the Initial Study is complete and has been prepared in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines and
City Policy.
b. That the contents of the Initial Study have been considered in the various
decisions on this project.
c. That in order to reduce adverse impacts of the proposed project, all feasible
mitigation measures discussed in the environmental document have been incorpor-
ated into the proposed project. Specific economic, social or other considerations
make infeasible any other potential mitigation measures to the proposed project.
d. That the mitigation measures have been incorporated into the proposed project
and are expressed as suggested Conditions of Approval.
3
Major Mod. No. 1
DP-302
2. DP-302 (Major Mod. No. 1)
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;
d. The proposed uses would not be obnoxious or harmful or impair the utility of
the property itself or neighboring property or uses;
e. The proposed uses would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety,
convenience, or welfare;
f. The proposed project, together with the provisions for its design and improve-
ment, is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed project is compatible
with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the
General Plan.
g. The Planning Commission has considered the effect of its action upon the housing
needs of the region and has balanced these needs against the public service needs
of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources.
3. Conditions:
Conditions to be imposed upon the proposed project are provided as Attachment 1 to
this Memorandum as modified by Commission actions and staff suggestions within this
report. They have been sorted by municipal department or advising agency.
REMAINING ISSUES
The applicant has prepared correspondence stating which conditions he will contest at the
City Council hearing. This letter is included as Attachment 2 to this Memorandum. It is
expected that the main discussion will focus on Condition No. 24b and Condition No. 35.
24b. Maximum overall height of pole fixtures shall not be more than fourteen (14) feet.
Existing pole fixtures shall be reduced to fourteen (14) feet.
35. Prior to issuance of a zone clearance, the structure face along Los Angeles Avenue
shall be redesigned to the satisfaction of the Director Community Development. The
redesign shall include a series of staggered offsets that total 50% of the structure face
between the existing offset area and most southeasterly corner of the structure.
4
.
V r i R:.
t./
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
APPROVING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON THE
APPLICATION OF STRUCTURAL CONCEPTS OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on January 20, 1988, the City Coun-
cil considered the application filed by Structural Concepts of California, Inc. requesting
approval to construct an industrial facility of 121,520 square feet. Located on State
Highway 118 (Los Angeles Avenue), at the westerly City limit. Assessor Parcel No.
500-34-33 and 34.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission after review and consideration at a public
hearing, adopted Resolution numbers PC-88-159 and -160 recommending* that the City
Council make certain findings, accept and certify the Mitigative Negative Declaration; and
make additional findings and approved Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, after review and consideration of the information
contained in the staff report dated July 15, 1987 and the Mitigated Negative Declaration,
has found that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment; and has
reached its decision in the matter;
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing on the recommendation to
City Council for approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration;
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed all environmental documentation pre-
pared to evaluate the proposed project;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL, OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK,
CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That at its meeting of January 4, 1988, the Planning Commission
adopted a Resolution recommending that the City Council accept the Mitigated Negative
Declaration; recommend that the City Council certify that the information was considered on
decisions related to the project; and, recommend that the City Council approve the Mitigated
Negative Declaration said Resolution to be presented for Consent Calendar action at the next
regular scheduled meeting. The action with the foregoing direction was approved by the
following roll call vote;
AYES: 5
NOES: 0
5
L' V
SECTION 2. That the findings contained in the memorandum to the City Council
dated January 20, 1988, which report is incorporated by reference as though fully set forth
herein with conditions as modified by said Commission and suggested by staff, are hereby
approved by the City Council;for approval;
SECTION 3. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (Division 13 of the Public Resources Code of the State of California (beginning at
Section 21000)) the City Council of the City of Moorpark approve the Mitigated Negative
Declaration.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF , 1988.
Chairman
ATTEST:
Acting Secretary
6
1
00r(•
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO. DP-302
ON THE APPLICATION OF STRUCTURAL CONCEPTS OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on January 20, 1988, the City Coun-
cil considered the application filed by Structural Concepts of California, Inc. requesting
approval to construct an industrial facility of 121,520 square feet. Located on State
Highway 118 (Los Angeles Avenue), at the westerly City limit. Assessor Parcel No.
500-33-34 and 34.
WHEREAS, the City Council, after review and consideration of the information
contained in the staff report dated January 20, 1988 and the Mitigated Negative Declaration,
has found that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment; and has
reached its decision in the matter; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission after review and consideration at a public
hearing, adopted Resolution numbers PC-88-159 and -160 recommending that the City
Council make certain findings, accept and certify the Mitigative Negative Declaration; and
make additional findings and approved Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing on the adoption of such
development plans; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby FIND that the adoption of such devel-
opment plans is consistent with the City's General Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK,
CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That at its meeting of January 4, 1988, the Planning Commission
took approved a Resolution recommending that the City Council approve Major Mod. No. 1
to DP-302. The action with the foregoing direction was approved by the following roll call
vote;
AYES: 5
NOES: 0
SECTION 2. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (Division 13 of the Public Resources Code of the State of California (beginning at
Section 21000)) the City Council of the City of Moorpark approves Major Mod. No. 1 to
Development Plan Permit No. DP-302.
0 !i 8
�
SECTION 3. That the findings contained in the memorandum to the City Council
January 20, 1988, which report is incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein
with conditions as modified by said Commission and suggested by Staff, are hereby
approved by the City Council.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF , 1988.
Chairman
ATTEST:
Acting Secretary
8
009
ATTACHMENT 1
CONDITIONS
9
trl 1 0
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. I to DP-302
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS
1. That the permit is granted for the land and project on the plot plans(s) and elevations
labeled Exhibits "3" and "4" except or unless indicated otherwise herein. That the
location and design of all site improvements shall be as shown on the approved plot
plans and elevations.
2. That unless the use is inaugurated (building foundation slab in place and substantial
work in progress) not later than one (1) year after this permit is granted, this permit
shall automatically expire on that date. The Director of Community Development may,
at his discretion, grant up to one (1) additional year extension for use inauguration if
there have been no changes in the adjacent areas and if permittee can document that
he has diligently worked toward inauguration of use during the initial one-year period.
3. That any minor changes may be approved by the Director of Community Develop-
ment upon the filing of a Minor Modification application, and the passing before the
Planning Commission prior to the appeal period ending. But any Major Modification
is to be approved by the City Council.
4. That prior to the occupancy or change of occupancy or introduction of an additional
occupancy of this building by the tenant(s), either the owner or prospective tenant
shall apply for the use of this building. The purpose of the zoning clearance shall
determine if the proposed use is compatible with the existing zoning and terms and
conditions of this permit.
5. That 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.
6. That 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.
7. That if any of the conditions or limitations of this development plan are held to be
invalid, that holding shall not invalidate any of the remaining conditions or limitations
set forth.
10
011 .
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS (Cont'd.):
8. That prior to construction, a zone clearance shall be obtained from the Department
of Community Development and a building permit shall be obtained from the Building
and Safety Division.
9. 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 accompanied 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 the modification to DP 302.
10. That 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. Landscaping and irrigation
shall be provided to the curb adjacent.
11. That all turf plantings associated with this project shall be drought tolerant, low-water
using variety. Plantings in and adjacent to parking in vehicular area shall be
contained within raised planters surrounded by 6" high concrete curbs.
12. Landscaping shall not obscure any exterior door or window from street view.
13. 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.
14. Landscaping (trees) shall not be placed directly under any overhead lighting which
could cause a loss of light at ground level.
15. That all roof mounted equipment (vents, stacks, blowers, air conditioning equip.)
that may extend above the parapet wall shall be enclosed on all four sides by view
obscuring material. Prior to the issuance of a zone clearance, the final design and
location of any roof mounted equipment of the project must be approved by the
Director of Community Development.
11
012
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS (Cont'd.):
16. That trash disposal areas shall be provided in a location which will not interfere with
circulation, parking or access to the building and shall be screened with a six (6) foot
high, solid wall enclosure with metal gates, final design of said enclosure shall be
subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development prior to the
issuance of zone clearance.
17. That all utilities shall be underground to the nearest off-site utility pole except through
transmission lines.
18. That all parking shall be surfaced with asphalt or concrete and shall include adequate
provisions for drainage, striping and appropriate wheel blocks or curbs in parking
areas.
19. That signs are subject to the Moorpark Code, Chapter 50, Title 9, Sign Ordi-
nance. A sign permit is required. No building signs of any type shall be allowed on
any building wall or window. Only a monument sign shall be permitted for this
development plan and shall not exceed 30 square feet, no higher than 5' above average
ground level. A sign program shall be submitted and approved by the Director of
Community Development for all other onsite directional signage.
20. Roof design and construction shall include a minimum 18" (inch) extension of
the parapet wall above the highest point of the roof.
21. That the permittee agrees as a condition of issuance 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 to relinquish this permit. Permittee will
reimburse the City for any court cost which the City may be required by 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
obligation under this condition.
22. That the continued maintenance of the permit area and facilities shall 4Hbe subject to
periodic inspection by the city. The permittee shall be required to remedy any defects
in ground maintenance,' as indicated by Code Enforcement Officer within thirty (30)
days after notification.
23. Prior to issuance of a zoning clearance, the final working drawings shall be
submitted to the Director of Community Development for review and approval.
12
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS (Cont'd.):
24. 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 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.
These plans include the following:
a. A photometric plan showing a point by point foot candle layout to extend a
minimum twenty (20) feet outside the property lines. Layout plan to be based on
a ten (10) foot grid center.
b. Maximum overall height of pole fixtures shall be not more than fourteen (14) feet.
Existing pole fixtures shall be reduced to fourteen (14) feet.
c. Fixtures must have sharp cut-off qualities at property lines.
d. 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.)
e. Low pressure energy efficient light fixtures shall be used.
f. Average maximum of one-half candle illumination.
g. House side shields be placed on all lighting fixtures.
25. Pullover parking (overhangs) shall be limited to 24 inches maximum.
26. The planting area shown on all four sides of the building shall be landscaped to
include 48-inch box trees capayeof growing above the buildings to further obscure
the view of the building. Die I lS`r* t inch box trees shall be planted to help
obscure the building and shall be shown on the landscape plan approved by the
Director of Community Development in such a way as to accomplish the intent within
5 - 7 years.
27. That prior to the issuance of a building permit the developer shall pay all school
assessment fees levied by the Moorpark Unified School District.
13
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS (Cont'd.):
28. Prior to the issuance of a zone clearance the developer shall show evidence of a
recorded covenant to hold as a single parcel lots 33 and 34 of Ventura County
Assessors Office Book 500, page 34.
29. That no later than ten (10) days after any change of property owner or of lessee(s)
or operator(s) of the subject use, there shall be filed with the Director of Community
Development the names(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 prior to zone clearance.
30. That permittee's acceptance of this permit and/or operation under this permit
shall be deemed to be acceptance by permittee of all conditions of this permit.
31. Prior to occupancy by any tenant or subsequent owner that would
employ or dispose of hazardous waste or materials, a Major Modification shall be
processed and filed. •
32. No outside storage of any materials or overnight Simi-trucks or truck trailers, beyond
the loading bays, of any kind shall be permitted after occupancy.
33. That the applicant shall construct a utility room with common access to house all
meters. No exterior ladders shall be permitted.
34. That the preliminary site plan and landscape plan be redesigned to the satisfaction of
the Director of Community Development and Ventura Flood Control district encom-
passing changes designed to soften, obscure, and ultimately reduce the visual impact of
the existing Gabbert Canyon Flood Control Channel improvements. Such changes may
include reducing sidewalk width from eight (8) feet to a minimum of five (5) feet,
mounding from curb line to channel wall, altered landscape design, and reduced height
of the wrought iron fence.
35. Prior to issuance of a zone clearance the structure face along Los Angeles Avenue shall
be redesigned to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. The
redesign shall include a, series of staggered offsets that total 50% of the structure face
between the existing offset area and most southeasterly corner of the structure.
36. The applicant shall, prior to the issuance of a zone clearance, 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,
14
r'
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS (Cont'd.):
which the City may implement or adopt, to fund public street and traffic improve-
ments directly or indirectly affected by the development. Traffic mitigation fees shall
be used for projects such as, but not limited to, the extension of New Los Angeles
Avenue.
37. No repair or maintenance of trucks or any vehicle shall occur on the subject site.
38. Loading and unloading operations shall not be conducted between the hours of 10:00
p.m. and 6:00 a.m.
39. That the development is subject to all applicable regulations of the (Limited Industrial)
zone and all agencies of the State of California, County of Ventura, City of Moorpark,
and any other governmental entities.
40. That the final design of site improvements, including materials and colors, is subject
to the approval of the Planning Commission.
41. That at the time water service connection is made, cross connection control devices
shall be installed on the water system in accordance with the requirements of the
Ventura County Environmental Health Department.
42. That no asbestos pipe or construction materials shall be used for the project entitlement
without prior approval of the City Council.
43. Deleted.
44. All roof top mechanical equipment and other noise generation sources onsite be
attenuated to 55 dBA at the property line. That prior to the issuance of the certificate
of occupancy the applicant shall submit a report to demonstrate to the satisfaction of
the Director of Community Development that all onsite noise generation sources have
been mitigated to this level. The report shall be prepared by a licensed acoustical
engineer in accordance with accepted engineering standards.
itrw
45.
46. That parking spaces shall be provided that meets current code requirements as of the
adoption date of this project.
15
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
VENTURA COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
47. That prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy of any use in the proposed
structure, such use shall be reviewed and approved by the Ventura County Environ-
mental Health Division.
48. The storage of all potentially hazardous materials, including the latex material, shall be
by means approved by the Ventura County Environmental .Health Division. The tim-
ing of installation of the holding tank, meter, and a monitoring manhold shall be
determined by the District.
VENTURA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT
49. That the applicant shall provide sufficient proof of the ability to prevent vehicle
parking in "no parking" areas and that enforcement can be secured in order that access
by emergency vehicles will not be obstructed.
50. That access road shall be installed with an all-weather surface, suitable for access by
fire department aparatus.
51. That all drives shall have a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet, 6 inches (13'6").
52. 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.
53. That prior to construction, 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 with 300 feet of the development.
54. That fire hydrants shall be installed and in service prior to combustible construction
and shall conform to •the minimum standards of the Ventura County Water Works
Manual.
a. Each hydrant shall be 6 inch wet barrel design and shall have two 4 inch and one
2-1/2 inch outlet(s).
b. The required fire flow shall be achieved at no less than 20 psi residual pressure.
16
1
. i
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
VENTURA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT (Cont'd.):
c. Fire hydrants shall be spaced 300 feet on center, and so located that no structure
will be farther than 150 feet from any one hydrant.
d. Fire hydrants shall be recessed in from curb face 24 inches at center.
55. That the minimum fire flow required is determined by the type of building construc-
tion, 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 flow is approximately 4,000 gallons per
minute. The applicant shall verify that the water purveyor can provide the required
quantity at the project.
56. That a minimum individual hydrant flow of 4,000 gallons per minute shall be provided
at this location.
57. That all grass or bush exposing any structures shall be cleared for a distance of 100
feet prior to framing, according to the Ventura County Weed Abatement Ordinance.
58. That address number, 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. Where structures are setback more than 250 feet from the street, larger
numbers will be required so that they are distinguishable from the street. In the event
a structure(s) is not visible from the street, the address number(s) shall be posted
adjacent to the driveway entrance.
59. That a plan shall be submitted to the Ventura County Bureau of Fire Prevention for
review indicating the method in which the building is to be identified by address
numbers.
60. That building plans of public assembly areas, which have an occupant load of 50 or
more, shall be submitted to the Ventura County Bureau of Fire Prevention for review.
61. That building plans of all "H" occupancies shall be submitted to the Ventura County
Bureau of Fire Prevention for review.
62. That fire extinguishers shall be installed in accordance with National Fire Protection
Pamphlet #10. The placement of extinguishers shall be reviewed by the Fire Protec-
tion Bureau.
17
•
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. I to DP-302
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
VENTURA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT (Cont'd.):
63. That the building is to be protected by an automatic sprinkler system, plans shall be
submitted, with payment for plan check, to the Ventura County of Fire Prevention for
review.
64. That plans for the installation of an automatic fire extinguishing system (such as, halon
or dry chemical) shall be submitted to the Ventura County Bureau of Fire Prevention
for review to insure proper installation.
65. That plans shall be submitted for any hazardous operation for approval by the Ventura
County Bureau of Fire Prevention.
66. That roofing material shall be any fire retardant roofing as defined by the Uniform
Building Code.
67. That appropriate permits be obtained as necessary for high piled stock, flammable
liquid storage, and any other as are applicable.
68. The developer of DP-302 shall install a fire access gate within the east property line.
The gate shall be located such as to provide ease of access between the adjacent
properties.
69. The Fire Prevention Bureau of Ventura County and the Ventura County Environmental
health Department will require permits for the onsite storage of hazardous materials.
70. If the manufacturing process associated with this project generates combustible fibrous
material as defined by the Ventura County Fire Code, the building plans shall address
"H-3" occupancies requirements.
71. If the building plans for the project demonstrate a cafeteria or a large conference
room, the plans shall be modified to address "A-3" occupancies.
72. The Developer shall submit building plans to the Ventura County Fire Department
concurrently with the submittal of building plans to the Department of Building and
Safety for plan check.
18
Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Ma j
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
73. A six-foot chain-link fence shall be erected around the construction site and locked
during evening hours and or weekends when no construction activity is present.
74. Construction equipment, tools, etc., shall be properly secured during non-working hours.
75. 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.
76. Lighting devices shall be high enough as to prevent anyone from tampering with them.
All parking areas shall be provided with a lighting system capable of illuminating the
parking surface with a minimum of light and shall be designed to minimize the
spillage of light onto adjacent properties. All exterior lighting devices shall be
protected by weather breakage resistant covers.
77. All exterior doors shall be constructed of solid wood core minimum of 1 and 3/4
inches thick or of metal construction. Front glass door(s) commonly used for entry are
acceptable but should be visible to the street.
78. Doors utilizing a cylinder lock shall have a minimum of five pintumbler operation with
the locking bar or bolt extending into the receiving guide a minimum of 1 inch.
79. All exterior sliding glass doors or windows shall be equipped with metal guide tracks at
the top and bottom and be constructed so that the window cannot be lifted from the
tract when in the "closed" or "locked" position.
80. There shall be no exterior access to the roof area, i.e., ladders, trees, high walls, etc.,
which would provide any roof access. All service access shall be taken from inside
the buildings(s).
81. Landscaping at entrances/exists 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.
82. All exterior doors and windows should be well-lighted during hours of darkness
especially during non-working hours.
83. All driveway entrances/exits off from the surface streets (excluding the main entrance)
should be minimum of thirty (30) feet in width with radius curb returns.
19
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
ENGINEERING CONDITIONS
84. That prior to zone clearance, 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.
85. That prior to zone clearance, 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.
86. That 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.
87. That prior to zone clearance, the developer shall demonstrate to the City of Moorpark
that the building site will be protected from flooding.
88. That prior to zone clearance, the developer shall indicate in writing to the City of
Moorpark, the disposition of any water wells(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.
89. That prior to zone clearance, the developer shall submit to the City of Moorpark for
review and approval, grading, 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:
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.
90. If the grading operation occurs during the rainy season, (between October and April),
an erosion control plan'shall be submitted 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.
20
•
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
ENGINEERING CONDITIONS (Cont'd.):
91. If the land which is to he occupied is in an area of special flood hazard, the developer
shall notify all potential buyers of this hazard condition.
92. If any hazardous waste is encountered during the construction of this project, all work
shall be immediately stopped and the Ventura County Environmental Health Depart-
ment, 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.
93. Deleted.
94. That prior to zoning clearance, the Developer shall demonstrate feasible access with
adequate protection from Q10 storm to the satisfaction of the City of Moorpark.
95. Deleted.
96. That prior to zoning clearance, the Developer shall deposit with the City of Moorpark
a contribution for the Walnut Canyon Improvement Local Drainage Area.
97. That prior to zoning clearance, the Developer shall annex the subject site into Ventura
County Waterworks District No. 1 for the purpose of obtaining water and sewer
services.
98. In the event of the unforeseen encounter of subsurface materials suspected to be of an
archaeological or paleontological nature, all grading or excavation shall cease in the
immediate area, and the find left untouched until a qualified professional archaeologist
or paleontologist, whichever is appropriate, is contacted and called in to evaluate and
make recommendations ;as to disposition, mitigation and/or salvage. The developer
shall be liable for costs associated with the professional investigation.
99. That prior to zoning clearance, the applicant 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.
21
P" 2
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
ENGINEERING CONDITIONS (Cont'd.):
100. That prior to zoning clearance, the applicant shall deposit with the City of Moorpark
the total required 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 zoning clearance is issued.
101. Deleted.
102. If any of the improvements which the applicant is required to construct or install is to
be constructed or installed upon land in which the applicant does not have title or
interest sufficient for such purposes, the applicant shall do all of the following at least
60 days prior to the filing of the final or parcel map for approval pursuant to
Government Code Section 66457.
a. Notify the City of Moorpark (hereafter "City") in writing that the applicant wished
the City to acquire an interest in the land which is sufficient for such purposes as
provided in Government Code Section 66462.5;
b. Supply the City with (i) a legal description of the interest to be acquired, (ii) a
map or diagram of the interest to be acquired sufficient to satisfy the require-
ments of subdivision (e) of Section 1250.310 of the Code of Civil Procedure, (iii)
a current appraisal report prepared by an appraiser approved by the City which
expresses an opinion as to the current fair market value of the interest to be
acquired, and (iv) a current Litigation Guarantee Report;
c. Enter into an agreement with the City, guaranteed by such cash deposits or other
security as the City may require, pursuant to which the subdivider will pay all of
the City's cost (including, without limitation, attorney's fees and overhead
expenses) of acquiring such an interest in the land.
103. That prior to zoning clearance, 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:
22
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
ENGINEERING CONDITIONS (Cont'd.):
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.
The drainage plans will provide for covering the Walnut Canyon Channel within the
subject property and removal of the wrought iron fence which presently runs along the
h westbound right turn lane along Los Angeles Avenue is
� �, open channel. Where the g
a / required on top of the channel, the channel design will be sufficient to carry the
anticipated traffic loads. These plans for the channel shall be reviewed and approved
�' by the Ventura County Flood District and the City Engineer.
104. That prior to any work begin conducted within Walnut Canyon Channel, the applicant
shall obtain a Ventura County Flood Control District Watercourse Encroachment Permit.
,
105. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit, the applicant shall construct necessary
improvements to Los Angeles Avenue, and the Walnut Canyon to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer, to provide a 12' wide, 300' long westbound right turn lane east of
Montair Drive.
106. To facilitate ingress/egress, the applicant shall, prior to issuance of occupancy permit,
widen Montair Drive to 40' between curbs from Los Angeles Avenue to the middle
project driveway (approximately 200'), to the City Engineer's satisfaction. At the
applicant's option this widening can occur on either the east or west side of existing
improvements.
107. It is anticipated that the ongoing Circulation Element update will require construction
of a street parallel to and south of the Southern Pacific railroad tracks between the
project site and the prolongation of Butter Creek Road. To facilitate circulation
throughout this area, the applicant shall provide . 40' wide aisleway through the
parking area along the north side of the project sit and a connection to the future
street at the northeast corner of the project site, to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. !
23
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
ENGINEERING CONDITIONS (Coned.):
108. It is anticipated that the ongoing Circulation Element update will require construction
of a street parallel to and south of the Southern Pacific railroad tracks between the
project site and the prolongation of Butter Creek Road, as well as a traffic signal at
the intersection of Los Angeles Avenue with Butter Creek Road. The developers
within the City limits that will derive benefit from the traffic signal shall be required
to pay supplementary Area of Contribution fees for construction of the signal, in
approximate proportion to the size of the development site. Prior to zone clearance
the applicant shall pay to the City a supplementary Area of Contribution fee of
$13,500 for the eventual installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Los
Angeles Avenue with Butter Creek Road.
109. Prior to zone clearance, the applicant shall record an access easement that grants to the
properties to the east and west rights of access through the applicant property.
110. Prior to zone clearance, 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.
VENTURA COUNTY FLOOD' CONTROL
111. A flood control permit shall be obtained from the Ventura County Flood Control
District for any connections into the flood control channel.
112. A watercourse permit shall be obtained from the Ventura County Flood Control District
for any work within the flowage easement, including landscaping.
113. Improvements to the Ventura County Flood Control Channel adjacent to the site
(DP-302) shall be completed in compliance with the standards and requirements of the
Ventura County Flood Control District. Prior to obtaining a building permit, the
Developer shall submit to the Ventura County Flood control District the following for
approval of construction of channel improvements across frontage of parcel (Ex. 8).
1. Improvement plans for the modification to existing L.A. Avenue crossing.
2. Improvement plans for the modification of the existing flood control channel
adjacent to the project site.
24
c�. J
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
APPLICANT: Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
VENTURA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL (Cont'd.):
3. Structural analysis of the existing channel walls and floor and to include
recommendation for structural repair if necessary.
4. Channel modification construction program.
VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
114. Prior _to occupancy, the applicant shall complete a relocation study and develop a
Transportation Systems Management (TSM) program approved by the City Traffic
Engineer to encourage car pools and van pools.
115. Preferential parking shall be designated with signage near the employee exit of the
building for at least 20 parking stalls. These stalls shall be for use by car pool and
van pool vehicles only.
116. Onsite bicycle facilities shall be provided to accommodate bicycle storage.
117. Prior to occupancy, the proposed project shall designate one onsite rideshare
coordinator, spending a minimum of 4 hours per week, to manage carpool/vanpool
programs.
118. Employees shall be encouraged to register for commuter computer services. Car
pooling information shall be available with the facility on a regular basis so long as
occupied.
VENTURA COUNTY WATERWORKS
119. Prior to zone clearance and contingent upon satisfactory applicant data, the Ventura
County Waterworks District No. 1 will provide a letter of commitment to issue an
"Unconditional" will serve letter prior to issuance of a building permit.
120. Prior to zone clearance, the applicant shall provide a detailed analysis of composition,
volume, rate (including peaking values), and timing of all anticipated discharge into
the sewage system that are related to the operation of the facility and products used
onsite. The analysis shall be approved by Ventura County Waterworks District No. 1.
121. Prior to zone clearance, applicant must submit information regarding onsite pretreatment
facility for the wastewater discharge.
25
.
rI �,)
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PERMIT NO.: Major Mod. No. 1 to DP-302
APPLICANT: ` Structural Concepts of California, Inc.
DATE: January 20, 1988
VENTURA COUNTY WATERWORKS (Cont'd.)
122. The applicant shall comply with the Ventura County Waterworks District No. 1 rules
and regulations including requirements for the industrial waste discharge ordinance
currently being developed.
0123. The developer shall submit plans to Waterworks District No. I for approval prepared by
a licensed civil engineer, demonstrating an onsite holding tank and a metered water
flow release device. The system shall be designed to release wastewater from the
�J / t manufacturing plant at frequent intervals to diminish strong or heavy volume
q• surge entering the District Wastewater Treatment Plant. Plans shall be approved by the
County Waterworks District No. 1 prior to obtaining a building permit to the approval
of the District.
124. That the licensed Civil Engineer for the project submit calculations demonstrations that
the 4,000 gpm required fire flow can be provided by the districts system following the
requested modifications.:,,,.In addition, the engineer shall certify that the existing sewer
lines have adequate capacity to serve the proposed project and the remaining area
which will ultimately drain to this sewer line.
125. That the tenant for the, building or the developer submit information specifying the
flow rate, volume, and constituents of the wastewater to be discharged from this
project. In addition a monitoring manhole will be requested on each of the sewer
laterals leaving the proposed building.
26
9 .
.,. .
.. . .
.: .
,..
ATTACHMENT 2
CORRESPONDENCE
27
Structural Concepts of
r ' California Inc
January 14, 1988
City of Moorpark
City Council
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
RE: DP 302 Major Modification #1
Dear Council Members:
Please find enclosed a list of requested condition deletions
and/or rewrites submitted for your consideration regarding the
above referenced project which is now before you. As the
applicant we believe these to be the conditions that require
additional clarity to facilitate effective incorporation into the
project design, and/or conditions that we believe to be no longer
relative to this project.
Also enclosed for your convenience are photographs of the project
rendering, master site plan showing the proposed landscape and
proposed access easements designed to effectively facilitate
ingress/egress from properties to the west and east, vicinity map
to further illustrate our project in relation to adjacent
properties and proposed ingress/egress, scaled site section to
illustrate view angles from Los Angeles Avenue after landscape
and ultimate improvements have been completed, as well as the set
back design of phase II. Additionally enclosed are actual
photographs of a project of similar design utilizing a
combination of wrought iron fencing and landscape to derive
positive results in site design.
We hope that these materials will assist in your review, and we
look forward to the opportunity to present our design to the
Council. We will make available members of our design team to
answer any questions or concerns that you may have.
Sincerely,
b-� .)
Thomas C. Nelson
Applicants Representative
TCN:
1
480 CONSTIMION AVENUE • CAMARILLO,CAUFORNIA 93010 • (805) 388-2305
1
CONDITIONS
REWRITES AND DELETIONS
Condition 24B shall be changed to read:
Maximum overall height of light pole fixtures along Los
Angeles Avenue and east property line shall not be more than
fourteen (14) feet high. Existing light pole fixtures along Los
Angeles Avenue shall be reduced to fourteen (14) feet.
New light pole fixtures along the north property line shall
be of a height to match the existing fixtures.
Condition 24D shall be changed to read:
There shall be no more than a four to one (4 : 1) ratio level
of illumination shown (average to minimum ratio between lighting
standards) .
Condition 24E shall be changed to read:
High pressure sodium energy efficient light fixtures shall
be used.
Condition 24F shall be changed to read:
Maximum average illumination level of one half (1/2) foot
candle.
Condition 24G shall be changed to read:
House side shields shall be placed on lighting fixtures
along Los Angeles Avenue.
Condition 26 shall be changed to read:
The planting area shown on all four side of the building,
directly adjacent to the building walls, shall be landscaped in a
manner that when the tree is grown to two thirds of its maturity
its outer branches touch the other branches of the next adjacent
tree. Trees shall not be planted closer that 16 feet on center
and no farther than 20 on center. Trees in these planting areas
shall be of a specie that is considered to be of a moderate to
fast growth rate and be capable of growing to a height equal to
that of the building itself within 5 to 7 years.
Condition 35:
Delete (please see letter attached)
Condition 45:
Delete.
1
AMMEMMEMMEMMEft
LI
Condition 103 :
Delete paragraph #3 .
Condition 105 shall be changed to read:
Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit, the applicant
shall construct necessary improvements to Los Angales Avenue, to
•• the satisfaction of the City Engineer, to provide a wstbound
tight turn lane east of Montair Drive of approximately 200 feet
long.
Condition 106:
Delete.
•- .Condition 107 :
Delete (refer to condition 109)
Condition 108 shall be changed to read:
It is anticipated that the ongoing Circulation Element
update will require construction of a street parallel to and
south of Southern Pacific railroad tracks east of the project
site and the prolongation of Butter Creek Road, as well as a
traffic signal at the intersection of Los Angeles Avenue with
Butter Creek Road. The developers within the City limits that
will derive benefit from the traffic signal shall be required to
pay supplementary Area of Contribution fees for construction of
the signal, in approximate proportion to the size of the
development site. Prior to zone clearance the applicant shall
execute a covenant running with the land on behalf of itself and
its successors, heirs assigns agreeing to participate in such
supplementary Area of Contribution fees to be accessed at the
time of construction.
Condition 109 shall be changed to read:
Prior to zone clearance the applicant shall record an access
easement that grants the properties to the east and west rights
of access through the applicants property. To facilitate
circulation throughout this area, the applicant shall provide a
minimum 25 foot wide isle way through the parking area along the
north side of the project site, to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
Condition 110 shall be changed to read:
Prior to zone clearance, the applicant shall execute a
covenant running with the land on behalf of itself and its
successors, heirs, and assigns agreeing not to oppose 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.
2
Condition 113 :
Delete.
Conditon 121:
Delete.
Condition 123: 031.
Delete.
3
ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIORS
%J o
14 January 1988
City of Moorpark
City Council
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, California 93021
Re: DP 302, American Products
Dear Council Members,
As the architect of this project, Rasmussen & Associates has been work-
ing closely with your planning staff to understand and respond to the
City' s design concerns relative to the project. We believe that we
have responded appropriately, and the Planning Commission approval
indicates their support for our design, with the exception of a few
conditions of their approval . The one condition this letter addresses
is condition 35: "Prior to issuance of a zone clearance the structure
face along Los Angeles Avenue shall be redesigned to the satisfaction
of the Director of Community Development. The redesign shall include
a series of staggered offsets that total 50% of the structure face be-
tween the existing offset area and most southeasterly corner of the
structure". We understand this condition to be a reaction to two con-
cerns:
A. That the Phase I building , currently under construction, is per-
ceived to be too close to Los Angeles Avenue.
B. That the total project is large and care must be taken to avoid
a "big box".
We share these concerns and have taken great care in the design of
Phase II , the case now before you, to address these concerns:
1 . Phase II has been set back from Los Angeles Avenue substantially
farther than the Phase I building. The main mass of Phase II has
been stepped back 25' from the face of Phase I with a low scale
element extending across Phase II in the same front plane as Phase
I . This low element acts visually to tie Phase I and II together,
while also articulating the scale and mass of the overall build-
ings. It is also 3 1/2 feet lower than the Phase I building.
2. The banding on Phase 1 has been reinterpreted on Phase II in the
form of a grided pattern of windows and solid panels. This grided
pattern acts to further reduce the visual mass and height of the
facade of Phase II .
LARRI R a i 'A U 3 `i = > A S r E. 'I c. F ,1 n J E n r s A ! A D A '+ I D s a n G E N T AIA
2SB SOUTH. MtLL5 ROAD Y ENT URA CA..LIrORhttA :9,300.3 ( 05) . 644_. T347. „ _t ,
. y
w `
City of Moorpark
City Council
Re: DP 302 , American Products
Page 2
3. On the Phase I building the horizontal banding will be painted a deep
terra cotta color. This banding effect has always been part of our
design and will substantially reduce the apparent height and mass of
the Phase I building.
4. The main color of the Phase II building will also be the deep terra
cotta color. While using the same color in both phases will act
to tie both phases together, in Phase II the color is being used
for another more important reason. The nature of a deep color on
a wall plane is to cause that plane to recede visually. We are
using this color to strengthen the stepped back quality of the
building facade, and to reduce the mass of the building by making
it appear farther away.
5. An open stepped entrance frame element has been incorporated into the
Los Angeles Avenue facade of Phase II . This will act to break up the
linear nature of the facade and lower the scale of the building at the
entrance.
6. Because Phase II has been stepped back from Phase I , additional land-
scaping has been added in front of the building (approximately 25 ' of
landscaping) along Los Angeles Avenue. Berming and landscaping has
been added to further soften the effect of the buildings as well as
screening the flood control channel .
It is our opinion that the integrated effect of these design elements is
a high quality design which responds to the intent of Condition 35. We
will be happy to resolve detailed design issues with the Director of Com-
munity Development as the project procedes, but request that the City
Council approve the project as presently designed and presented. We
suggest that if the Council concurs, it would be appropriate to delete
Condition 35 from the conditions of approval . We look forward to the
opportunity to present our design to the Council and respond to any
questions or concerns you may have.
Very truly yours,
\ftc ..„_,e,..jMIJSSEN S IATES
David Sargent, A. I . .
DS/jd
111 .1111111111111111111.11111111.1.1111111111111.11111.11111111111111111111111.1111111111111111111.11111111111111.111111111111.1
. ,.
034
Structural Concepts of
- T. California inc. •
24. For all exterior lighting, a lighting plan shall be prepared by an
electrical engineer registered in the State of California and sub-
mitted 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 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.
These plans include the following:
PER PLANNING COMMISSION PROPOSED RE-WRITE
24B. Maximum overall height of pole Maximum overall height of pole
fixtures shall be not more fixtures along Los Angeles
than fourteen (14) feet. Exist- Avenue and east property line
ing pole fixtures shall be shall not be more than fourteen
reduced to fourteen (14) feet. (14) feet high. Existing light
pole fixtures along Los Angeles
Avenue shall be reduced to fourteen
(14) feet.
New light pole fixtures along the
north property line shall be of a
height to match the existing
fixtures.
24D. There shall be no more than There shall be no more than a four
a seven to one (7: 1) ratio of to one (4 :1) ratio level of
level of illumination shown. illumination shown (average to
(Maximum to minimum ratio minimum ratio between Lighting
between Lighting Standards. ) Standards. )
24E. Low pressure energy efficient High pressure sodium energy
light fixtures shall be used. efficient light fixtures shall be
used.
24F. Average maximum of one-half Maximum average illumination level
candle illumination. of one half (1/2) foot candle.
24G. House side shields be placed House side shields shall be placed
on all lighting fixtures. on lighting fixtures along Los
Avenue.
480 CONSTIMION AVENUE • CAMARILLO,CALIFORNIA 93010 • (805)388-2305 -