Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES CC 2014 3286 2014 0416 RESOLUTION NO. 2014-3286 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT (AP) NO. 2013-19 AND MODIFICATION NO. 4 TO INDUSTRIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (IPD) NO. 93-1 TO ALLOW A 79,042 SQUARE-FOOT MULTI-TENANT INDOOR RETAIL OPERATION IN AN EXISTING BUILDING IN THE M-1 ZONE AT 709 SCIENCE DRIVE, AND ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION UNDER CEQA IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, ON THE APPLICATION OF COMMUNITY MARKETPLACE (MANNY ASADURIAN, JR.) WHEREAS, on December 31, 2013 an application for Administrative Permit No. 2013-19 was submitted by Community Marketplace (Manny Asadurian, Jr.), followed by an application for Modification No. 4 to IPD No. 93-1 , to construct and operate a 79,042 square-foot multi-tenant indoor retail operation in an existing building in the M-1 Zone at 709 Science Drive; and WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration were prepared for this project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (CEQA) and City CEQA Procedures, and circulated for public review from March 11, 2014 to April 1 , 2014; and WHEREAS, the City Council has read, reviewed, and considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project referenced above, together with any comments received during the public review process; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing held on April 2 and April 16, 2014, the City Council considered the agenda report for Administrative Permit (AP) 2013-19 and Modification No. 4 to Industrial Planned Development (IPD) No. 93-1 , and any supplements thereto and written public comments; opened the public hearing and took and considered public testimony both for and against the proposal, closed the public hearing and reached a decision on this matter. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1 . FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS ON MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: The City Council finds and declares as follows: A. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study prepared for this project, attached hereto as Exhibit B, are complete and have been prepared in compliance with CEQA, and City CEQA Procedures. B. The City Council has read, reviewed, and considered the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project referenced above together with any comments received during the public review process before making a decision concerning the project. Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 2 C. Based on the whole of the record before the City Council, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment, with the incorporation of the Mitigation Measures identified in the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration as project conditions of the accompanying Industrial Planned Development and Conditional Use Permit for this project. D. The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City of Moorpark as lead agency. E. The City Council hereby designates the Office of the City Clerk as the custodian of the records constituting the record of proceedings upon which its decision has been based. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: The Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared in connection with Administrative Permit (AP) 2013-19 and Modification No. 4 to Industrial Planned Development (IPD) No. 93-1, attached hereto as Exhibit B, is hereby adopted. SECTION 3. ADOPTION OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM: The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, required by Section 21081.6 of CEQA and 15074 of the CEQA Guidelines, and included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, attached hereto as Exhibit B, is hereby adopted. SECTION 4. APPROVAL OF PERMITS: Administrative Permit No. 2013-19 and Modification No. 4 to IPD No. 93-1 are hereby approved, subject to conditions of approval in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein. SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original resolutions. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of April, 2014. Alk I Janice S. Parvin, Mayor ATTEST: /,‘ i410111010. ,49,s, PIR4104104,- 404 Maureen Benson, City Clerk *AA 14 Exhibit A— Special Conditions of Approval 41.v -47•11"1"--"‘v- Exhibit B — Mitigated Negative Declaration • Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 3 EXHIBIT A SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT (AP) NO. 2013-19 AND MODIFICATION NO. 4 TO INDUSTRIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (IPD) NO. 93-1 1. Prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance for construction, the applicant shall pay the City's air quality fee based on the increase in trip generation above that considered for the project approved by IPD No. 93-1. 2. Prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance for construction, a parking plan must be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Director. All damaged areas in the parking areas on the IPD site shall be repaired to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director prior to occupancy. 3. Detailed landscaping plans demonstrating compliance with the City's Landscape Design Standards and Guidelines must be submitted for review by the Parks and Recreation Director and Community Development Director, or a Variance application for the use of container plants in the parking areas must be submitted and deemed complete, prior to issuance of a Building Permit. All landscaping must be installed in accordance with the approved plan, or if a Variance is requested, a decision on the Variance application must be made and sufficient surety posted with the City to guarantee the installation of the required landscaping prior to occupancy, and all landscaping required by the Variance decision must be installed within 90 days of the decision. 4. Prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance for occupancy, the public art must be restored to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director, or the property owner must submit a complete application to amend the public art feature for Council consideration. 5. All signs must be in compliance with Chapter 17.40 of the Moorpark Municipal Code (Sign Regulations). A separate sign permit application is required for all proposed signs. No off-site signs or roof signs are permitted for this use. As part of the sign permit application for the use, the applicant shall include a monument sign in a location that helps direct customers toward the northerly driveway to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. The approved monument sign shall be installed prior to occupancy. 6. The applicant shall be required to prepare and implement a plan for the posting of "No Loitering" signs and the implementation of no loitering for the review and approval of the Community Development Director. All of the "No Loitering" signs shall be installed per the approved plan prior to the occupancy of the building and the program shall be operational upon the opening day. The applicant shall enforce the no loitering requirement on the permit area to the maximum extent permitted by local, state and federal laws. Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 4 7. Hours of operation may only be between 10:00 am. and 6:00 p.m. Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, with extended days/hours allowed as follows: • Friday after Thanksgiving (9:00 am. to 8:00 p.m.) • December 23rd (10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) • December 24th (10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.) • President's Day (10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) • Memorial Day (10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) • Independence Day (10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) • Labor Day (10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) • Veteran's Day (10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) 8. All refuse and recycling bins for the center shall be maintained in enclosures. Prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance for occupancy, all enclosures shall be upgraded to be screened with a solid wall and decorative gate and covered with a roof, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 9. All exterior areas of the site, including landscaping and parking areas must be maintained free of litter and debris at all times. 10.Administrative Permit (AP) 2013-19 and Modification No. 4 to Industrial Planned Development (IPD) No. 93-1 may be revoked or its use suspended by the City, if any of the causes listed in Section 17.44.080.B of the Zoning Code are found to apply, including if the use for which the permit was granted has not been exercised for at least twelve (12) consecutive months, has ceased to exist, or has been abandoned. The discontinuance for a period of one hundred eighty (180) or more days of a nonconforming use or a change of nonconforming use to a conforming use constitutes abandonment and termination of the nonconforming status of the use. 11.The City of Moorpark reserves the right to modify, suspend or revoke for cause this permit consistent with Chapter 17.44 of the Moorpark Municipal Code or as may be amended in the future. 12.No major architectural changes are permitted. Minor architectural changes to the building that would be authorized with a Permit Adjustment will require review and approval by the Community Development Director prior to construction. 13.All sales shall comply with all local, State, and Federal laws and regulations. Thrift stores, secondhand shops, consignment stores, tobacco stores, e-cigarette stores, vapor bars, and adult businesses, including adult bookstores, are not permitted. 14. Sales of alcoholic beverages, either for on-site or off-site consumption, shall be by separate permit as required by the Zoning Ordinance. 15.Approval of a Business Registration permit is required for the operator and each vendor prior to initiation of sales. Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 5 16.A maximum of 175 vendors are permitted. Not less than 80% of vendors shall provide taxable retail sales on site, with no more than 20% of vendors providing either on-site or off-site services to customers. A list of each vendor and map showing the location of each vendor shall be provided to the Community Development Director prior to initiation of the operation and with each change in vendor or location. In addition, the applicant shall provide the Community Development Department with the following for each vendor before that vendor is permitted to operate: • A copy of their valid Seller's Permit issued by the State Board of Equalization. ▪ A letter, on business letterhead, certifying that all retail sales generated at the location will be properly reported to the State Board of Equalization as occurring within the City of Moorpark. 17.AII giveaways must comply with State of California Rules for Promotional Giveaways (California Business and Professions Code sections 17533.8, 17537.1.) For more information see California Department of Consumer Affairs Legal Guide U-1. 18.Any raffle or similar game must comply with State of California Rules Prohibiting Lotteries (California Penal Code section 319 and following). For more information see California Department of Consumer Affairs Legal Guide U-2. 19.All contests must comply with State of California Rules for Operation of Contests (Business and Professions Code sections 17539-17539.3, 17539.35). For more information see California Department of Consumer Affairs Legal Guide U-3. 20.The distribution of any prizes or gifts must comply with State of California Rules on Conditional Offer of Prizes or Gifts (California Business and Professions Code section 17537) For more information see California Department of Consumer Affairs Legal Guide U-4. 21.The applicant shall comply with Chapter 8.32 PROHIBITING SMOKING IN PUBLIC PLACES at all times and shall provide signs consistent with Chapter 8.32.040 to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director, prior to initiation of the uses allowed by this permit. 22.The approval of temporary signs, banners, flags, streamers, balloons, or other similar advertising devices are not included under this application. Temporary signs are processed under a separate permitting procedure and are subject to the requirements of Section 17.40 of the Municipal Code and the review and approval of the Community Development Director. 23.The applicant's acceptance of this permit and/or commencement of construction and/or operations under this permit is deemed to be acceptance of all conditions of this permit. 24.The development shall be in substantial conformance with the plans presented in conjunction with the application for Administrative Permit (AP) 2013-19 and Modification No. 4 to Industrial Planned Development (IPD) No. 93-1, except any Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 6 modifications as may be required to meet specific Code standards or other conditions stipulated herein. 25.All other conditions of approval of Industrial Planned Development (IPD) No. 93-1 shall continue to apply, except as revised herein. 26.AI! necessary permits must be obtained from the Building and Safety Department and all construction shall be in compliance with the Moorpark Building Code and all other applicable regulations. 27.Approval of a Zoning Clearance is required prior to the issuance of building permits. 28.AH other permit and fee requirements must be met. 29.If any of the conditions or limitations of this approval are held to be invalid, that holding will not invalidate any of the remaining conditions or limitations set forth. 30.Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Clearance for tenant occupancy, an occupancy inspection shall be completed by the Building and Safety Division. 31.Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Clearance for tenant occupancy, the prospective tenant shall obtain a Business Registration from the City of Moorpark. All contractors doing work in Moorpark shall have or obtain a current Business Registration. 32.This permit is granted or approved with the City's designated approving body retaining and reserving the right and jurisdiction to review and to modify the permit— including the conditions of approval—based on changed circumstances. Changed circumstances include, but are not limited to, major modification of the business; a change in scope, emphasis, size, or nature of the business; the expansion, alteration, reconfiguration, or change of use; or the fact that the use is negatively impacting surrounding uses by virtue of impacts not identified at the time of application for the permit or impacts that are much greater than anticipated or disclosed at the time of application for the permit. The reservation of right to review any permit granted or approved under this chapter by the City's designated approving body is in addition to, and not in lieu of, the right of the City, its Planning Commission, City Council and designated approving body to review and revoke or modify any permit granted or approved under this chapter for any violations of the conditions imposed on such permit. 33.The Conditions of Approval of this permit, City of Moorpark Municipal Code and adopted city policies at the time of the permit approval supersede all conflicting notations, specifications, dimensions, typical sections and the like which may be shown on plans. 34.Conditions of this entitlement may not be interpreted as permitting or requiring any violation of law or any unlawful rules or regulations or orders of an authorized governmental agency. Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 7 35.The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval by the City or any of its agencies, departments, commissions, agents, officers, or employees concerning the permit, which claim, action or proceeding is brought within the time period provided by the California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6 and Government Code Section 65009. The City will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding, and if the City should fail to do so or should fail to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City or its agents, officers and employees pursuant to this condition. a. The City may, within its unlimited discretion, participate in the defense of any such claim, action or proceeding, if both of the following occur: i. The City bears its own attorney fees and costs; ii. The City defends the claim, action or proceeding in good faith. b. The applicant shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement of such claim, action or proceeding unless the settlement is approved by the applicant. The applicant's obligations under this condition shall apply regardless of whether a building permit is ultimately obtained, or final occupancy is ultimately granted with respect to the permit. 36.Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Clearance for tenant occupancy, the applicant shall submit a Developer Waste Reduction and Recycling Plan to the satisfaction of the Community Services Administrative Specialist. 37. All mitigation measures included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project are incorporated as conditions of approval. - End - Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 8 EXHIBIT B MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF ��������W� �°" " " ��" MOORPARK mieCio 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CA 93021 (805) 517-6200 The following Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 as amended, the State Guide|inoo, and the Environmental Procedures of the City of Moorpark. Public Review Period: March 11, 2014 to April 1, 2014 Project Title/Case No.: Administrative Permit 2013-19, Modification No. 4 to IPD No. 93'1 Community Marketplace Project Location: 709 Science Drive. (Location Map Attached) Project Description: A reques to allow a multi-tenant indoor retail community marketplace in the M-1 Zone. (Retail sales in the M-1 and M-2 zone limited to a maximum of 20% of the gross floor area of the planned development in which it is located.) (Environmental Information Form Attached) Project Type: X Private Project Public Project Project Applicant: Manny Asadurian 11576 Sumac Lane, Santa Rosa Valley, CA 93012 (805) 796-9983 majr747@aol.com Finding: After preparing an Initial Study for the above-referenced project, revisions have been made by or agreed to by the applicant consistent with the mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study. With these revisions, it is found that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the City of Moorpark, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. (Initial Study Attached) Responsible Agencies: City of Moorpark Trustee Agencies: None Attachments: Location Map Initial Study with Mitigation Measures Contact Person: Joseph Fiss, Principal Planner Community Development Department City of Moorpark 799 Moorpark Avenue WYuorpmrh, California, 93021 (805) 517-6226 Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 9 Community Marketplace (AP No. 2013-19 and Mod. No. 4 to IPD No. 93-1) 4'777..,"14,T,F-_,,,A-, CITY OF MOORPARK INITIAL STUDY L.10-1kir , ) 799 MOORPARK AVENUE MOORPARK, CA 93021 (805) 517-6200 Project Title: Community Marketplace Case No.: AP No. 2013-19 and Mod. No. 4 to IPD No 93-1 --1 Contact Person and Phone No.: Joseph Piss, Principal Planner(805) 517-6226 i Name of Applicant: Manny Asadurian Address and Phone 11576 Sumac Lane, Santa Rosa Valley, CA 93012— No.: (805) 796-9983 majr747@aol,com — _ Project Location: 709 Science Drive General Plan I-1 Light Industrial Zoning: M-1 Industrial Park Designation: Project Description: A request to allow a multi-tenant indoor retail community marketplace in the M-1 Zone. (Retail sales in the M-1 and M-2 zone limited to a maximum of 20% of the gross floor area of the planned development in which it is located.) (Submitted 12/31/13) Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: North: Light Industrial(manufacturing)/Railroad Right or Way/Arroyo Simi South: Light Industrial(warehousing)lLos Angeles Avenue/Regional Commercial East: SR 23 Freeway West: Light Industrial(general) Responsible and Trustee Agencies: City of Mootpattt ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact or"Less Than Significant With Mitigation, as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics I Agricultural and Forestry Resources X Air Quality Biological Resources I Cultural Resources Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials .. Hydrology/Water Quality IIIILand Use/Planning I Mineral Resources Noise III Population/Housing Public Services Recreation I _ 131 Tra nsoo rtat I on/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance None DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation, 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 revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. Mitigation measures described on the attached Exhibit 1 have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. f : \. <2 ' ' 14 , 'd Reviewed by: - -----7/ Z-W/ f Prepared by '," Date: ,o 3 \ C/i Date: 3 /0 0 1 Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 10 INITIAL STUDY EXHIBIT 1: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 1. Hours of operation may only be between 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, with extended days/hours allowed as follows: • Friday after Thanksgiving (9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.) • December 23rd (10:00 a.m.to 6:00 p.m.) • December 24th (10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.) • President's Day (10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) • Memorial Day (10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) • Independence Day (10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) • Labor Day (10:00 a.m.to 6:00 p.m.) • Veteran's Day (10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) Monitoring Action: Check Hours of Operation Timing: Ongoing and Annually as part of the Community Development Department's Annual Review of Ongoing Mitigation Measures Responsibility: Community Development Director 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay to the Citywide Traffic Mitigation Fund a fair share contribution for intersection improvements at Los Angeles Avenue and Science Drive based on increased trip generation and traffic impacts above that from the previously approved use as determined by the Community Development Director and City Engineer/Public Works Director. Monitoring Action: Receipt of payment Timing: Prior to the issuance of a building permit Responsibility: Community Development Director and City Engineer/Public Works Director AGREEMENT TO PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines Section 15070 (California Code of Regulations Title 14, Chapter 3, Article 6), this agreement must be signed prior to release of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for public review. I, THE UNDERSIGNED PROJECT APPLICANT, HEREBY AGREE TO MODIFY THE PROJECT DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION OR OPERATION AS NECESSARY TO INCLUDE ALL OF THE ABOVE- LISTED MITIGATION MEASURES IN THE PROJECT. Signature of Project Applicant Date Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 11 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact A. AESTHETICS—Would the project: 1) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X 2)Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but X not limited to,trees,rock outcroppings,and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? 3)Substantially degrade the existing visual character or X quality of the site and its surroundings? 4)Create a new source of substantial light or glare which X would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Response: The existing visual quality of the site will not change with the development of this project, since the building is existing and the only change is occupancy and minor changes to some openings (truck dock loading doors). Normal commercial light sources will not have a significant impact on the area and will be evaluated and be consistent with the City's lighting ordinance. The changes to the openings will be evaluated for consistency with City standards. Sources: Project Application 12/31/13. 2/27/14 General Plan Land Use Element (1992). Mitigation None B. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES— In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: 1)Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland,or Farmland X of Statewide Importance(Farmland),as shown on maps d pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources agency,to non-agricultural use? 2)Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,or a X Williamson Act contract? 3) Involve oth r changes in the existing environment X which,due to their location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland,to non-agricultural use? Response: The subject site is not located within prime farmland and is zoned for industrial use, is currently developed and The Ventura County Important Farmland Map classifies the site as "Urban and Built-Up" land. Sources: California Dep't of Conservation: Ventura County Important Farmland Map (2000) Mitigation: None Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 12 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact C. AIR QUALITY—Where available, the significant criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: 1)Conflict with or obstruc implementation of the applicable � air quality plan? 2) Violate any air quality standard or contribute X substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 3) Fesult in a cumulatively considerable net increase of � any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non attainment under art applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard(including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? 4) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant � concentrations? 5)Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number � of people? Response: Mitigation is included to limit the use to three days per week and certain holidays, thereby reducing trip generation from the proposed retail use. In addition, a Condition of Approval will be placed on the project for the applicant to contribute to the City's Transportation Systems Management (Air Quality) fund based on the change of use. Sources: Ventura County Air Pollution Control District: Ventura County Air Quality Assessment Guidelines (2000), URBEMIS 2001 Mitigation: Hours of operation may only be between 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, with extended days/hours allowed as follows: • Friday after Thanksgiving (9:00 am. to 8:00 p.m.) • December 23rd (1U:UOa.m. toG:O0p.mj • December 24th (10:80 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.) • President's Day (10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) • Memorial Day (10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) • Independence Day (10:OOa.m. to 6:00 p.m.) • Labor Day (10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) • Veteran's Day (10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.). D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES—Would the project: 1) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or � through habitat modifications, species identified as a candidate,sensitive,or special status species in local or regional plans,policies,or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 2)Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat X or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 13 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 3)Have a substantial adverse effec on federally protected X wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including,but not limited to,marsh,vernal pool,coastal, etc.)through direct removal,filling,hydrological interruption, or other means 4) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native X resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? 5)Conflict ocal policies or ordinances protecting X biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? 6)Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat � Conservation P|un, Natural Community Conservation P|an, or other approved local,regional,or state habitat conservation plan? Response The use of the existing building will not have any adverse effect on biological resources in that no m jorstructura| chengeoareonouningendthepropooedoocupanoyvvi|| nntcreate any affects to any habitats. Sources: Project Application 12/31/13, 2y27/14, California Department of Fish and Game: Natural Diversity Data Base-Moorpark and Simi Valley Quad Sheets (1993) W1itigotiop: None E. CULTURAL RESOURCES—Would the project: 1)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance X of a historic resource as defined in§15064.5? 2)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X an archaeological resource pursuant to§150645? 3)Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological X resource or site or unique geologic feature? 4)Disturb any human remains,including those interred X outside of formal cemeteries? Response: The use of the existing building will not have any adverse effect on cultural resources in that nomajor structural changes are occurring and the proposed occupancy will not create any affects to any historic or cultural resources. Sources: Project Application 12/31/13, 2/27/14. Mitigation: None F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS—Would the project: 1) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,including the risk of loss,injury,or death Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 14 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact ) Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as delineated on the X most recent Aiquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii)Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii)Seismic-related ground failure,including liquefaction? X iv) Landslides? X 2) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X 3) Be located on a geologic unit ursni|thptiaunstab|o.u, X that would become unstable as a result of the project,and potentially result iii on-or off-site landslide,lateral spreading,subsidence,liquefac on or collapse? 4)Be located on expansive soil,as defined in Table 18-1-B X of the Uniform Building Code(1994),creating substantial risks to life or property? 5)Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of X septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Response: The pr joctvviUhaveno *ffectupongoo|ogynrooi|ointhm1theuseofdhoexist\ngbui\d\ng will not result in any new grading or excavation. Sources: Project Application 12/31/13. 2/27/14, General Plan Safety Element (2801) Mitigation: None C. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS—Would the project: 1)Generate greenho oo gas emissions,either directly or X ndirectly,that may have a significant impact on the environment? 2)Conflict with an applicable plan,policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? X Response: The proposal will not generate additional greenhouse gas emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment in that the impacts of the proposed use are approximately the same as the prior use. Sources: Project Application 12/31/13, 2/27/14 Mitigation: None Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 15 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS—Would the project: 1)Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through the routine transport,use,or disposal of hazardous materials? 2)Create a significant hazard to the public or the X environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? 3) Emit hazardous emission or handle hazardous or acutely X hazardous materials,substances,or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 4)Be located on a site which is included on a list of X hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and,as a result,would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 5) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, X where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 6) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would X the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 7) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an X adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 8)Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where X residences are intermixed with wildlands? Response: No hazardous material has been identified on the site. The retail use of the existing building will not create any significant hazards to the public in that it will comply with all building and safety codes for the proposed use. Sources: Project Application 12/31/13, 2/27/14, General Plan Safety Element (2001) Mitigation: None I. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY—Would the project: 1)Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge X requirements? 2)Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere X substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g.,the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 16 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 3)Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X or area,including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? 4)Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X or area,including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site? 5)Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the X capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 6)Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X 7) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as X mapped on a federal Flood Hazard boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? 8) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures X which would impede or redirect flood flows? 9) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, X injury or death involving flooding,including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? 10) Inundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow? X Response: The proposal will have no impact upon hydrology and water quality because the use of the existing building will not result in any new construction or modifications that would affect water quality, supplies, or drainage. Sources: Project Application 12/31/13, 2/27/14, General Plan Safety Element (2001) Mitigation: None J. LAND USE AND PLANNING—Would the project: 1) Physically divide an established community? X 2)Conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy,or X regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including,but not limited to the general plan,specific plan, local coastal program,or zoning ordinance)adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 3)Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or X natural community conservation plan? Response: The proposed project is consistent with the current General Plan and Zoning designations for the property. Some retail use is anticipated and is permitted in the M-1 zone. Sources: Project Application 12/31/13, 2/27/14, General Plan Land Use Element (1992) Mitigation: None Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 17 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact K. MINERAL RESOURCES—Would the project: 1) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral X resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? 2)Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important X mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,specific plan or other land use plan? Response: There are no known mineral resources on site. Sources: Project Application 12/31/13, 2/27/14, General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element (1986) Mitigation: None L. NOISE—Would the project result in: 1) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in X excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance,or applicable standards of other agencies? 2) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive X groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? 3)A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels X in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 4)A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient X noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 5) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, X where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 6) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would X the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Response: The project site is far removed from any noise-sensitive land uses. In addition, standard conditions of approval have been placed on the project to adequately address any potential noise issues. Sources: Project Application 12/31/13, 2/27/14, General Plan Noise Element (1998) Mitigation: None M. POPULATION AND HOUSING—Would the project: 1) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either X directly(for example,by proposing new homes and businesses)or indirectly(for example,through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 18 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 2) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 3) Displace substantial numbers of people,necessitating the X construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Response: The proposal will have no impact upon population and housing because the use of the existing building will not result in any population growth or affect housing in any way, since this is a commercial use of an existing warehouse building, serving the local population. Sources: Project Application 12/31/13, 2/27/14 Mitigation: None N. PUBLIC SERVICES 1)Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? X Police protection? X Schools? X Parks? X Other public facilities? X Response: Conditions of approval and Development fees are collected by agencies in order to alleviate potential adverse impacts on public services. The applicant is required to obtain approvals of the Fire Protection District, Waterworks District No. 1 and other applicable agencies prior to obtaining a building permit. Sources: Project Application 12/31/13, 2/27/14, General Plan Safety Element (2001), General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element (1986) Mitigation: None O. RECREATION 1)Would the project increase the use of existing X neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 19 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 2)Does the project include recreational facilities or require X the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Response: The project wi|| nothaveanyeffeotontheCity'sreoreadoninfrootru(turointhatitnn\yentai|s commercial occupancy of an existing warehouse building. Sources: Project Application 12/31/13. 2/27/14. General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element (1986) Mitigation: None P. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC—Would the project: 1)Conflict with an applicable plan,ordinance or policy � establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system,taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections,streets,highways and freeways,podomnananuuicyo|ematme.anumavo ,n,non/ 2)Conflict with an applicable congestion m m X program,including,but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures,or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? 3) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,includi either X an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? 4)Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature X (e.g.,sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g.,farm equipment)? 5) Result in inadequate emergency access? X 6) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X 7)Conflict with adopted policies,plans,or programs X supporting alternative transportation (e.g.,bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Response: A trip generation analysis was prepared for this application. The study shows that traffic impacts from the proposal will be similar to the previous use. Adequate parking will be provided on site. Sources: Project Application 12/31/18, 2/27/14, General Plan Circulation Element (1902). Trip Generation Analysis Prepared by Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc. 2/26/14 Mitigation: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay to the Citywide Traffic Mitigation Fund a fair share contribution for intersection improvements at Los Angeles Avenue and Science Drive based on increased trip generation and traffic impacts above that from the previously approved use as determined by the Community Development Director and City Engineer/Public Works Director. Q. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—Would the project: 1) Ex eouwamo��e,�neeu�on�mqoi,omon�of�hm - X applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 20 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 2) Require or result in the construction of new water or X wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 3) Require or result in the construction of new storm water X drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 4)Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the X project from existing entitlements and resources,or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 5)Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment X provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? 6)Be served by the landfill with sufficient permitted capacity X to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? 7)Comply with federal,state,and local statutes and X regulations related to solid waste? Response: The project is required to enter into agreements and provide adequate utility and service systems prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction. Sources: Project Application 12/31/13, 2/27/14, Ventura County Watershed Protection District: Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures (2002) Mitigation: None R. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 1)Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality X of the environment,substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history of prehistory? 2) Does the project have impacts that are individually X limited,but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"means that the incremental effect of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current projects,and effects of probable future projects)? 3)Does the project have environmental effects which will X cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly? Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 21 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Response: The pr ject does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, have impacts that are individually |imited, but cumulatively considerable, or have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly in that the project entails only occupancy of an existing bui|ding, consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Code. Sources: See below. Earlier Environmental Documents Used in the Preparation of this Initial Study None Additional Project References Used to Prepare This Initial Study One or more of the following references were incorporated into the Initial Study by reference, and are available for review in the Community Development Office, City Hall, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, CA 93021. Items used are referred to by number in the Response Section of the Initial Study Checklist. 1. Application and materials submitted on12/31/13. 2/27/14. 2. The City of Moorpark's General Plan, as amended. 4. The Moorpark Municipal Code, as amended. 5. The City of Moorpark Procedures for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines adopted by Resolution No. 2004-2224 G. Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq. and California Code of Regulations, Title 14 Section 15000 et. seq. 7. Ventura County Air Quality Assessment Guidelines, October 31, 2003. 8. Traffic Study Prepared by Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc. 2/26114 9. Traffic Study Peer Review Prepared by Linonott. Law, and Groenopan. Engineers 3/25/2014 Resolution No. 2014-3286 Page 22 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF VENTURA ) ss. CITY OF MOORPARK I, Maureen Benson, City Clerk of the City of Moorpark, California, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Resolution No. 2014-3286 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Moorpark at a regular meeting held on the 16th day of April, 2014, and that the same was adopted by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Mikos, Millhouse, Pollock, Van Dam, and Mayor Parvin NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None WITNESS my hand and the official seal of said City this 23rd day of April, 2014. Maureen Benson, City Clerk (seal) 411111111,&, FtrAt'IA Apkwy" et, 6.