HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1989 0920 CC REG ITEM 11BELOISE BROWN
Mayor
BERNARDO M. PEREZ
Mayor Pro Tern
CLINT HARPER, Ph. D.
Councilmember
PAUL LAWRASON
Councilmember
SCOTT MONTGOMERY
Councilmember
RICHARD T. HARE
City Treasurer
MOORPARK ITEM lie �-
M E M O R A N D U M
STEVEN KUENY
City Manager
CHERYL J. KANE
City Attorney
PATRICK RICHARDS, A.I.C.P.
Director of
Community Development
R. DENNIS DELZEIT
City Engineer
JOHN V. GILLESPIE
Chief of Police
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Development
DATE: September 11, 1989 (CC meeting of 9/20/89)
SUBJECT: MINOR MODIFICATION PROCESS
Background
Since mid 1986 City staff has been operating under. Council d:i.rect:ion to
have all requests for minor modification passed before them prior to any
final action being taken by staff. Section 8163 -4.4.1 of the Zoning
Code allows for approvals of minor modifications to a discretionary
permit (such as a Residential Planned Development) without a hearing.
A majority of past minor modification requests were related to
residential tract projects. As tracts began to be built -out the
developer found a need to make certain adjustments. Generally these
changes were beneficial to the tract and City.
Currently there has been a number_ of requests for room additions within
Residential Planned. Developments (RPD). Inasmuch as the tract was a PI)
staff has only two choices to make regarding additional living space
which, changes the exterior of the residence a) is this a major or b) a
minor change? To date there have been no major modification
determinations made by staff regarding room additions.
Discussion
At issue is the time and expense associated with a minor modification
process to accomplish a room addition for the homeowner. Current cost -
is $288 deposit and processing time between one and four weeks. This
process is somewhat foreign to both the homeowner and contractors
causing both financial and timing problems for both parties. Also,
staff is spending a substantial amoi.mt of time explaining this process
to the public. How and why did this all came about? First, one should
remember the development climate back in 1986, when the City had several
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864
..)S' :PP:DR:FM::CH .- DR:r::rI
large residential tracts under construciton at one time (not to mention
all the industrial development). The City was also very young at that
time and still trying to form its operating procedures. Therefore, the
Council at that time desired to review those requests that may have an
affect on that which they had approved. It was a simple matter of
regulating development. Should the minor modification process change
for commercial and industrial requests also? Staff would not recommend
that the Council change the current process for commercial and
industrial, mainly because not much comes forward as a minor
modification and the Council should stay informed on these types of
projects
Options
Zoning Code -
Staff has introduced the idea of adopting the latest County Zoning
Code. If this came to be, then the minor modification process is more
clearly defined (see attached). However_, as in the current City Code
the Director of Community Development would have the authority to
approve.
Create New Minor Modification Process
The existing code could be revised to create a "modification to permit
sections ". This new section would have a Purpose, General Provisions
and Findings.
Director's Decision -
The Council may wish to simply allow the Director the ability to approve
such requests as an "over the counter" approval as allowed by the
current code.
Recommended Action
1. That the Council direct the Director of Community Development to
approve requests for minor modifications regarding totally
completed Residential Planned Development projects in accordance
with Section 8163 -4.4.1 of the City's Zoning Code.
2. That the Council direct the Director of Community Development to
send a copy of the approved minor modification to the Council and
City Manager.
Attachements : MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
City Council Meeting
Section 8163 -4.4.1 Moorpark Code of 1982
Section 8111 -7.1.2 et seq. County Code
ACTION:
By
MIMOD /CHRONI PJR:DST:PP:DR:FM::CM:DR:crl
Sec. 8163 -4.2.6 - Fees Prepaid - No application or appeal shall
be accepted for filing or shall be processed unless the applicant
complies with Section 8163 -4.2. (AM. ORD. 3598 - 5/-18/82)
( Sec. 8163-4.2.7 - Penalty Fees - Where a use is inaugurated, or
construction to that end is commenced, without first obtaining
the required permit or variance, the fee for said permit or
variance shall be doubled. Payment of such double fee shall not
relieve persons from fully complying with the requirements, of
this Code, nor from any other penalties prescribed herein. In no
event shall such double fee exceed the application fee plus five
hundred dollars ($500.00). ADD. ORD. 2437 - 4/13/71; AM. ORD.
3034 - 6/24/75)
Sections 8163- 4.2.89 8163- 4.2.9, 8163- 4.3.9.1, 8163-4.2.9.21
8163- 4.3.9.3, 8163 - 4.2.9.4, 8163 - 4.3.101 8163 - 4.2.10.1,
8163 - 4.2.10.2 are hereby deleted by ORD. 3034 - 6/24/75
Sec. 8163 -4.3 - Repealed by Ord. 3638 - 2/22/83
Sec. 8163 -4.4 - Processia
(ADD.ORD. 363 8-2%£2
Sec. 8163 -4.4.1 - All discretionary application requests shall be decided
after an administrative or public hearing has been held on the subject case
as required by this chapter, except that all minor modifications of
administrative permits whose approval would not result in a significant or
substantial adverse effect on neighboring property interests may be decided
with an administrative hearing. (ADD. ORD. 3638 - 2/22/83)
Sec. 8163 -4.4.2 - Deferral of Discretionary Administrative Decisions - The
Planning Director may defer to the Planning Commission any administrative
• decision on a discretionary permit for one or more of the reasons listed
( below: (ADD. ORD. 3638 - 2/22/83) _
a) Projects which result in significant environmental impacts which cannot
be mitigated to insignificant levels;
b) Projects which involve significant public controversy;
c) Projects Which are in conflict with County policies or would
necessitate the establishment -of new County policy;
d) Projects which are potentially precedent- setting; or
�rhAr c?„se deemed justifiable by the Planning Director.
(ADD. "RD. 3638 - 2/22/83)
Sec. 8163 -5 - HEARING AND NOTICES
Sec. 8163 -5.1 - Whenever an application request, which requires that a
hearing be held before the application can be acted on, is duly filed, the
Planning Division shall set a date, time, and place for the matter to be
heard and shall give notice of said hearing by mailing a written notice,
postage prepaid, containing the date, time, and place of the hearing, not
less than ten calendar days prior to the date of the hearing, to the
applicant, the owners of the property involved, and the owners of the
property situated in whole or part within a radius of 300 feet of the
exterior boundaries of the Assessor's Parcel(s) on which the proposed use is
to be located. Names and addresses shall be obtained by the applicant from
. the last equalized assessment roll. In addition to or in lieu of mailed
C notice, notice may be given by both publication in a newspaper of general
circulation in accordance with Sec. 65854 of the Government Code and posting
said notice in conspicuous places close to the property. (AM .ORD. 24 3 7- 4 / 13 / 7 1-
C883d4
(AM.ORD. 2845- 5 /14 /74- AM.ORD. 3638 - 2/22/83) - -
547
OC -3
Sec. 8111 -6 REAPPLICATION - An application request may be denied with Pre
on the grounds that two or more similar application requests have been deniteedic,
the past two years, or that other good cause exists for limiting the dend
applications with respect to the property. If such denial becomes effective,
application o'
further application for the request shall be filed in whole or in lve' nc
ensuing 18 months except as otherwise specified at the time of the adenial,
t�e
unless there is a substantial change in the application.
Sec. 8111 -7 - MODIFICATION SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION
Sec. 8111 -7.1 - Modification of Permits - An application for modification of
permit or variance pursuant to this Section may be filed by any person
entity listed in Sec. 8111 -3.1. Any change of an approved discretionar:
permit is also a discretionary decision and is considered to fall into one o;
the following three categories:
Sec. 8111 -7.1.1 - Permit Adjustment - Any change which would not alter any
of the findings made pursuant to Sec. 8111 - 2.1.2, nor an
contained in the environmental document , findings
not have any adverse impact on surrounding for the permit, and deemed I
permit adjustment and acted upon by the Planning properties, Director or desig a'
without a hearing. Such changes include, but are not limited to $IIee�
following: the
a. Any increase or decrease of not more than ten percent in floor or
permit area, or in the area of walls, fences or similar structures'
used as screening, or in height, provision of landscaping or similar
standards or dimensions, provided that any increase in parking space
requirements can be accommodated on -site;
b. Internal remodeling or minor architectural changes or embellishments
involving no change in basic architectural style;
c. Any change in' use where the new use requires the same or a lesser
permit than the existing use; or the establishment of a new use in an
unoccupied building that has been granted a permit; provided, in both
cases, that any increase in parking space requirements can be
accommodated on -site. (ADD.ORD.3810- 5/5/87)
Sec. 8111 -7.1.2 - Minor Modification - An
� criteria of a site Y proposed change that exceeds the
plan adjustment, but is not extensive enough to be
considered a substantial or fundamental change in land use relative to the
permit, would not have a substantial adverse impact on surrounding
properties, and would not change any findings contained in the
environmental document prepared for the permit, shall be deemed a minor
modification and be acted upon by the Planning Director or designee through
an administrative hearing process.
Sec. 8111 -7.1.3 - _Major Modification - Any proposed modification which is
considered to be a substantial change in land use relative to the original
permit, and /or would alter the findings contained in the environmental
document prepared for the permit, shall be deemed a major modification and
be acted upon by the decision - making authority which approved the original
permit.
8 -1
132
OC -4
CC)()A' i ,% C c 1101t_
t'
ec. 8111 -8
call be prc
et forth it
1
Sec. 8111 -7.2 - ycj ification, Suspension and Revocation for Cause - An
or variance y permit
lance heretofore or hereafter granted may be modified or revoked, or its
use suspended, by the• same decision- making authority and procedure which would
approve the permit
modification, or variance under this Chapter. An application for such
listed suspension or revocation may be filed by any person or entity
such in Sec' 8111 -3.1, or by any other aggrieved person. The applicant for
one or modification, suspension or revocation shall have the burden of proving
more of the following causes:
a• That any term or condition of the permit or variance has not been
complied with;
b• That the property subject to the permit or variance, or any portion
thereof, is or has been used or maintained in violation of any statute,
ordinance, law or regulation;
c• That the use for which the variance or permit was granted has not been
exercised for at least 12 consecutive months, has ceased to exist, or
has been abandoned;
d. That the use for which the permit or variance was granted has been so
exercised as to be detrimental to the public health, safety or general
welfare or as to constitute a nuisance;
e. That changes in technology, or in the type or amount of development in
the vicinity of the use, or other good cause warrants modification of
conditions of operation or imposition of additional conditions of
operation to assure that the use remains compatible with existing and
Potential uses of other property within the general area in which the
use is located.
Sec. 8111 -7.2.1 - Nonwaiver - The failure of the Planning Director,
Planning Commission or Board of Supervisors to revoke a variance or permit,
or to suspend its use, whenever cause therefor exists or occurs, does not
constitute a waiver of such right with respect to any subsequent cause for
revocation or suspension of the use.
Sec. 8111 -7.2.2 - Prohibition - No person shall carry on any of the
operations authorized to be performed under the terms of any permit during
any period of suspension thereof, or after the revocation thereof, or
pending a judgment of court upon any application for writ taken to review
the decision or order of the final appeal body in the County in suspending
or revoking such permit; provided, however, that nothing herein contained
shall be construed to prevent the performance of such operations as may be
necessary in connection with a diligent and bona fide effort to cure and
remedy the default, noncompliance or violation, for which a suspension of
the permit was ordered by the applicable County entity, or such operations
as may be required by other laws and regulations for the safety of persons
and the protection and preservation of property.
C. 8111 -8 - APPEALS - Unless otherwise provided in this Chapter, an appeal
all be processed in the same manner as other discretionary application requests
t forth in this Article and in accordance with the following:
1 133
OC -4
V t ,q CCU ti�i% C "cis