HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1992 0304 CC REG ITEM 09B•JOP `�
r
O.
2
o a
OOO TEO J
MOORPARK ITEM 9'. g
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 9302-1.;-
A rF((OiS?r9:6$64
�.: Counci M t:r.3
AS 1992 -
f,CTI N:
TO: The Honorable City Council i3`
FROM: Patrick J. Richards, Director of Community Deve
DATE: February 10, 1992 (CC meeting of 3/4/92)
SUBJECT: APPEAL NO. 92 -2 OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91 -1 (RICHARD AND GLEN
FORSTER)
Background
On January 21, 1992, the Planning Commission approved Conditional
Use Permit 91 -1 on the application of Richard and Glen Forster
subject to compliance with conditions and directed staff to prepare
a Resolution approving CUP 91 -1. The draft Resolution was placed
on the Planning Commission "s Consent Calendar for review by the
Planning Commission at the February 3, 1992 meeting.
Discussion
Prior to the Planning Commission taking action on February 3, 1992,
Commissioner May raised three issues for the record. She had
inspected the property and determined that there were several
issues that were not previously addressed and there was a lack of
information. These issues are as follows:
1. The access road between the railroad tracks and an existing
ranch fence is approximately 40 feet between the fence and the
railroad tracks. Therefore, it appears that the proposed
access to the site may be on Southern Pacific Railroad right -
of -way.
Staff Comment
There has been some question as to whether the access road to the
proposed paintball field is located on the railroad right -of -way.
The City Engineer has placed a condition on the Conditional Use
Permit requiring that the applicant provide the following:
PPJ2 :10:92 19: 24am1i:`.,CCUNCIL.MEM 1
PAUL V: _AWRASG "J JR JOHN E. WOZNIAK SCOTT MONTGOMERY
Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Councilmember
BERNARDO M PEREZ ROY E TAI LE / JR.
Ceuncilmember Councilmember
Printed On Recycled Paper
Condition No. 29.
The applicant shall obtain written permission of the Southern
Pacific Railroad for use of the access road (if access road is in
the railroad right -of -way) to the proposed site and shall meet all
requirements imposed by the railroad for use of this road. A copy
of this approval letter or permit shall be provided to the City
Engineer prior to the issuance of the Conditional Use Permit and
commencement of any business. On February 24, 1992, staff
requested that the applicant provide information as to whether the
proposed access road is within the railroad right -of -way. As of
the writing of this report the applicant has not yet provided this
information to staff.
2. The road at the entry point is 19 feet, 6 inches wide. The
Fire Department generally needs a minimum of 20 feet.
Staff Comment
The Fire Department has reviewed the proposed Paintball operation
and has not placed any conditions on the project. Typically, the
Fire Department requires greater road width when combustible
construction is proposed. Since this proposed use is not proposing
construction of permanent structures, the Fire Department has
determined that the imposition of Conditions of Approval is not
necessary.
3. The operations booth was to be moved out of the flood plain.
Will it now be moved onto the railroad right -of -way?
Staff Comment
Staff is of the opinion that the location of the temporary
operations booth should not be placed either within the Railroad
right -of -way or within the Flood Control Flood Plain. If the
control booth is to be placed within the SPRR right -of -way, the
applicant must first obtain approval to do so from SPRR. Once
approval is granted from the SPRR, the applicant must then obtain
approval from the Director of Community Development as to where,
within the SPRR right -of -way, the control booth may be located.
The Ventura County Flood Control District has imposed the following
condition on the project.
37. That the operations control booth and portable toilet
facilities shall be moved to locations near the road access to
the site which places the operations control booth outside the
100 -year flood plain of the Arroyo Simi.
The Commission discussed Mrs. May's concerns and proceeded to amend
and add additional Conditions of Approval. Planning Commission
changes to the modifications and or additions to the Conditions of
PP01:10:9219:24aM: \COUNCIL.MEM 2
Approval are shown in legislative format on the attached Planning
Commission Resolution. On February 3, 1992, the Planning
Commission approved a resolution approving CUP 91 -1 on a 3 -1 -1 vote
(Mrs. May voted no, Mr. Miller absent).
It was reported at the Planning Commission public hearing on this
project that the sign was not visible in a location readily visible
to the public. Staff has verified that the sign for this hearing
has been posted according to the City's regulations.
Recommendations:
1. Open the public hearing and accept public testimony.
2. Review the proposed project and determine whether the Planning
Commission approval of CUP 91 -1 should be upheld.
Attachments: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. PC -92 -256
approving CUP 91 -1
2. Planning Commission Minutes of hearing on
January 21 and February 3, 1992
3. Planning Commission Staff Report dated January
21, 1992
4. Planning Commission Staff Report dated
February 3, 1992
Pjr/PP
PP02:20:92 19:24aM: \C0UNCIL.M&H 3