Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAG RPTS 2017 0627 PC REG PpK a44 /4. 41111f/�92 iRwnitV' Resolution No. 2017-618 9QO9q TEO ,V%- ^^0 PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA JUNE 27, 2017 7:00 P.M. Moorpark Community Center 799 Moorpark Avenue 1. CALL TO ORDER: 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 3. ROLL CALL: 4. PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS, AND SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: 5. PUBLIC COMMENT: 6. REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO, THE AGENDA: 7. ANNOUNCEMENTS, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, AND REPORTS ON MEETINGS/CONFERENCES ATTENDED BY THE COMMISSION: 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (next Resolution No. PC-2017-618) A. Consider Resolution Recommending Approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-03, an Amendment to Chapter 17.64 (Density Bonus Provisions) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Moorpark Municipal Code to Address Changes in State Law Related to Density Bonuses, Concessions, and Incentives, and Determining that this Action is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the public hearing, accept public testimony and close the public hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. PC-2017- . (Staff: Freddy Carrillo) All writings and documents provided to the majority of the Commission regarding all agenda items are available for public inspection at the City Hall public counter located at 799 Moorpark Avenue during regular business hours. The agenda packet for all regular Commission meetings is also available on the City's website at www.moorparkca.gov. Any member of the public may address the Commission during the Public Comments portion of the Agenda, unless it is a Public Hearing or a Discussion item. Speakers who wish to address the Commission concerning a Public Hearing or Discussion item must do so during the Public Hearing or Discussion portion of the Agenda for that item. Speaker cards must be received by the Secretary for Public Comment prior to the beginning of the Public Comments portion of the meeting; for a Discussion item, prior to the Chair's call for speaker cards for each Discussion agenda item; and for a Public Hearing item, prior to the opening of each Public Hearing, or beginning of public testimony for a continued hearing. A limitation of three minutes shall be imposed upon each Public Comment and Discussion item speaker. A limitation of three to five minutes shall be imposed upon each Public Hearing item speaker. Written Statement Cards may be submitted in lieu of speaking orally for open Public Hearings and Discussion items. Any questions concerning any agenda item may be directed to the Community Development/Planning office at 517-6233. Regular Planning Commission Meeting Agenda June 27, 2017 Page 2 B. Consider Resolution Recommending Approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-04, Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05, and Modification No. 2 to Commercial Planned Development Permit No. 2004-03, for Construction and Operation of a Major Wireless Communications Facility Within a 48-Foot High Tower at 14339 White Sage Road (Warehouse Discount Center Site), with Signage on the Tower, and Making Determination of Exemption Under CEQA in Connection Therewith, on the Application of Matt Vigil (Vinculums) for Verizon Wireless. Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the public hearing, accept public testimony and close the public hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. PC-2017- . (Staff: Freddy Carrillo) • 9. DISCUSSION ITEMS: 10. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. Consider Approval of the Regular Meeting Minutes of May 23, 2017. Staff Recommendation: Approve the minutes. 11. ADJOURNMENT: In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, please contact the Community Development Department at (805) 517-6233. Upon request, the agenda can be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability. Any request for disability-related modification or accommodation should be made at least 48 hours prior to the scheduled meeting to assist the City staff in assuring reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104; ADA Title II). STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF VENTURA ) ss CITY OF MOORPARK ) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AGENDA I, Joyce R. Figueroa, declare as follows: That I am the Administrative Assistant II of the City of Moorpark and that an agenda of the Regular Meeting of the Moorpark Planning Commission to be held on Tuesday, June 27, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Moorpark Community Center, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California, was posted on June 23, 2017, at a conspicuous place at the Moorpark Community Center, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on June 23, 2017. (-)10, JrR. Figueroa,Administrative Assistant II ITEM 8.A. MOORPARK,CALIFORNIA Planning Commission of Imo. Z. 2017 ACTION: rnvl d ,to !MCA ti Meal Rvglutimn ND. Prznf7- tilB BY: 6_ h�wrm. MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Planning Commission FROM: David A. Bobardt, Community Development Director Freddy A. Carrillo, Associate Planner I Iv DATE: June 7, 2017 (PC Meeting of 6/27/2017) SUBJECT: Consider Resolution Recommending Approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-03, an Amendment to Chapter 17.64 (Density Bonus Provisions) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Moorpark Municipal Code to Address Changes in State Law Related to Density Bonuses, Concessions, and Incentives, and Determining that this Action is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION On September 28, 2016, Governor Brown signed into law Assembly Bill Nos. 1934, 2442, 2501 and 2556, amending and expanding the State Density Bonus Law (DBL) in Section 65915 et seq. of the Government Code. The State DBL had required local governments to grant increases in allowable density (up to 35%), concessions, and incentives on other zoning regulations for residential development projects in exchange for the provision of housing affordable to very low, low, and moderate income households and senior citizens. Amendments to State law include: • the addition of housing for transitional foster youth, disabled veterans, and homeless persons as being eligible for density bonuses, concessions, and incentives; • the eligibility of commercial projects for concessions and incentives when providing affordable housing or housing for qualifying residents, • the requirement for local government to adopt specific procedures and timelines for applications for density bonuses, concessions, and incentives, with limits on the information that can be requested in applications, and • the amendment of requirements for the replacement of housing with affordability restrictions. 1 Honorable Planning Commission June 27, 2017 Page 2 The City's existing standards and procedures for obtaining density bonuses, concessions, and incentives are contained in Chapter 17.64 (Density Bonus Provisions) of the City's Zoning Ordinance. As the State DBL has historically been amended frequently, the City's provisions were structured as implementing procedures of the State DBL to avoid the need for an amendment to the Municipal Code with changes to the details in the State DBL. However, with the most recent legislation, the City's provisions now need updating to conform to the State DBL. On March 15, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2017-3586, initiating a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to address these changes in State DBL. Specific amendments proposed to Chapter 17.64 are shown in Exhibit A of the attached draft resolution. The following summarizes the changes to the City's Density Bonus Provisions in order to conform to the State DBL: • Housing for transitional foster youth, disabled veterans, and homeless persons is identified as being eligible for a density bonus, concessions, and incentives. • Commercial development that includes or partners with a residential project to provide housing for qualified residents is identified as being eligible for a density bonus, concessions, and incentives. • An Application and Timeline section is added to specify what information is required for an application, and when a decision will be made on the density bonus application. In addition to these changes, City provisions for density bonuses higher than required by state law are reorganized for clarity, without substantive changes. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-03 is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15060(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines in Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations, which provide that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, and the changes in Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017- 03 do not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment in that they are minor changes to implement the provisions of Government Code Section 65915 et seq. (Density Bonuses and Other Incentives) that have changed under Assembly Bills 1934, 2442, 2501, and 2556, signed into law on September 28, 2016. No further environmental documentation is required. NOTICING The notice of the public hearing was published in the Ventura County Star in a 1/8 page ad on June 15, 2017. \\DC1\Department Share\Community Development\DEV PMTS\Z 0 A\2017\2017-03 Density Bonus\MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION.docx 2 Honorable Planning Commission June 27, 2017 Page 3 STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Open the public hearing, accept public testimony and close the public hearing. 2. Adopt Resolution No. PC-2017- ATTACHMENT: C-2017-ATTACHMENT: 1. Draft PC Resolution \\DC1\Department Share\Community Development\DEV PMTS\Z 0 A\2017\2017-03 Density Bonus\MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION.docx 3 RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 2017-03, AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 17.64 (DENSITY BONUS PROVISIONS) OF TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE MOORPARK MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADDRESS CHANGES IN STATE LAW RELATED TO DENSITY BONUSES, CONCESSIONS, AND INCENTIVES, AND DETERMINING THAT THIS ACTION IS EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT WHEREAS, On March 15, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2016- 3586, directing the Planning Commission to study, hold a public hearing, and provide a recommendation on a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to address changes in State law related to density bonuses, concessions, and incentives; and WHEREAS, at duly noticed public hearing on June 27, 2017, the Planning Commission considered Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-03, an amendment to Chapter 17.64 (Density Bonus Provisions) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Moorpark Municipal Code to address changes in State law related to density bonuses, concessions, and incentives; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of June 27, 2017, the Planning Commission considered the agenda report 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 discussed and reached a decision on this matter; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director preliminarily determined that Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-03 is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15060(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines in Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations, which provide that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, and the changes in Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017- 03 do not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment in that they are minor changes to implement the provisions of Government Code Section 65915 et seq. (Density Bonuses and Other Incentives) that have changed under Assembly Bills 1934, 2442, 2501, and 2556, signed into law on September 28, 2016. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: PC ATTACHMENT 1 4 Resolution No. PC-2017- Page 2 SECTION 1. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The Planning Commission concurs with the determination of the Community Development Director that Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-03 is exempt from the provisions of the. California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15060(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines in Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations, which provide that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, and the changes in Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-03 do not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment in that they are minor changes to implement the provisions of Government Code Section 65915 et seq. (Density Bonuses and Other Incentives) that have changed under Assembly Bills 1934, 2442, 2501, and 2556, signed into law on September 28, 2016. No further environmental documentation is required. { SECTION 2. GENERAL PLAN AND SPECIFIC PLAN CONSISTENCY: The Planning Commission finds Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-03 to be consistent with the City of Moorpark General Plan and all adopted Specific Plans, in that this ordinance furthers one of the goals of the Land Use Element which calls for a variety of housing types and opportunities for all economic segments of the community. SECTION 3. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-03 as shown in Exhibit A, attached. SECTION 4. Filing of Resolution: The Community Development Director shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original resolutions The action of the foregoing direction was approved by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PASSED, AND ADOPTED this 27th day of June, 2017. Kipp Landis, Chair David A. Bobardt, Community Development Director Exhibit A—Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-03 \\DC1\Department Share\Community Development\DEV PMTS\Z 0 A\2017\2017-03 Density Bonus\PC Resolution.docx 5 Resolution No. PC-2017- Page 3 EXHIBIT A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 2017-03 AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 17.64 (DENSITY BONUS PROVISIONS) OF TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE MOORPARK MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 17.64 (Density Bonus Provisions) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Moorpark Municipal Code is amended as follows: Chapter 17.64 DENSITY BONUS PROVISIONS 17.64.010 Purpose and intent. 17.64.020 Definitions. 17.64.030 Density bonus, concessions and incentives. 17.64.040 Housing agreement. 17.64.045 Application and timeline. 17.64.050 Compatibility with market-rate housing. 17.64.010 Purpose and intent. This chapter sets forth the requirements under which density bonuses and other incentives may be offered by the city to developers of housing development projects pursuant to State Government Code Section 65915 et seq. The city's intent is to encourage the provision of housing affordable to very low, low, and moderate income households, and to encourage the provision of housing for senior citizens, and to encourage the provision of housing for transitional foster youth, disabled veterans, and homeless persons consistent with the latest adopted Moorpark general plan, the requirements of Government Code 65915 et seq., and this chapter. 17.64.020 Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, unless otherwise apparent from the context, the definitions of Government Code 65915 et seq., shall apply. In addition, the following definition is provided: "Housing agreement" means an agreement between the developer and the city guaranteeing the affordability of rental or ownership units to extremely low, very low or lower income households, or-to senior citizens, transitional foster youth, disabled veterans, or homeless persons, or for providing child care facilities in accordance with the provisions of this chapter and state density bonus law (Government Code Section 65915 et seq.). \\DC1\Department Share\Community Development\DEV PMTS\Z 0 A\2017\2017-03 Density Bonus\PC Resolution.docx 6 Resolution No. PC-2017- Page 4 17.64.030 Density bonus concessions and incentives. A. The city council shall grant a density bonus and/or concessions and/or incentivcs and, if requested by the applicant, concessions or incentives, and/or waivers or reductions of development standards and/or parking ratios for eligible residential and mixed-use commercial development projects in accordance with state density bonus law (Government Code Section 65915 et seq.) and this chapter through the approval of a residential or mixed-use commercial planned development permit, development agreement in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Moorpark Municipal Code, and/or disposition and development agreement in accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq., and a housing agreement. Commercial developers that partner with housing developers to produce affordable housing may qualify for a development bonus pursuant to Government Code Section 65915.7. B. Density. 1. The increase in the allowable housing units under a density bonus is based on the percentage density increase above that permitted under the existing zoning per state density bonus law (Government Code Section 65915 et seq.) and-this chapter. 2. For density bonuses higher than required by state law, the city council must find that: (a) the project will help to meet a local housing need for family housing as identified by the housing element of the general plan: and (b) the project will be compatible with surrounding development. The City Council may grant density bonuses higher than required by state law in accordance with the following standards: a. When one hundred percent (100%) of the units in a housing development project are restricted to be affordable to low or very low income households for the life of the project, a density bonus up to a maximum of one hundred percent (100%) greater density than allowed by the existing zone may be granted by the city council when considering project entitlements. The one hundred percent (100%) maximum density bonus is inclusive of all density bonuses allowed under Government Code Section 65915 et seq., and this chapter. 3b. When at least sixty percent (60%) of the units in a housing development project are restricted to be affordable to low or very low income households for the life of the project, a density bonus up to a maximum of seventy-five percent (75%) greater density than allowed by the existing zone may be granted by the city council when considering project entitlements. The seventy-five percent (75%) maximum density bonus is inclusive of all density bonuses allowed under Government Code Section 65915 et seq., and this chapter. 34. For density bonuscs higher than required by state law, the city council must find that: (a) the project will help to meet a local housing need for family housing as identified by the housing cicmcnt of the general plan; and (b) the projcct will be _- •_ - • - _ . • _ _ e " . - et" " ' . Density bonuses higher than required by state law may not be granted for an age-restricted senior housing projects and housing projects for foster youth, disabled persons, and homeless persons. \\DC1\Department Share\Community Development\DEV PMTS\Z 0 A12017\2017-03 Density Bonus\PC Resolution.docx 7 Resolution No. PC-2017- Page 5 C. Concessions, and/er 'incentives, waivers, reductions, and/or parking ratios. 1. Concessions and/or incentives determined by the city council neccssary in order to develop affordable units in lieu of or in addition to density bonuses may include, - _ -•• -_ _ -- _ _ - : If requested by the applicant, a qualifying project shall be entitled to at least one of the following incentives or concessions, unless the city council makes the findings required by Government Code Section 65915(d)(1): a. A-rReductions in residential or commercial development standards by an amounts not toexceed twenty percent (20%), or reductions in architectural design requirements beyond the minimum building standards adopted by the city; and b. Other regulatory incentives or concessions, incentives, waivers, reductions, and/or parking ratios proposed by the developer or the city, including those specifically identified in Government Code Section 65915 et seq., which result in identifiable cost reductions. 2. The City Council, in granting higher density bonuses under subsections (B)(2) and (B)(3), is not obligated to grant any additional concessions or incentives beyond those required by state law. 17.64.040 Housing agreement. A housing agreement in a form acceptable to the city council is required as part of the granting of a density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers, reductions, and/or parking ratios. This agreement must meet the minimum requirements of Government Code Section 65915 for continued affordability and those projects granted a density bonus under Section 17.64.030(B)(2) or 17.64.030(B)(3) shall remain affordable to low and very low income households for the life of the project, but in no case less than fifty- five (55) years. 17.64.045 Application and timeline. A. An application for a density bonus shall accompany any other required applications for approval of the residential housing project, including those approvals set forth in Section 17.64.030, and shall include written statements of the following: 1. The extent of the density bonus (i.e., the number of units); 2. The requested concessions, incentives, waivers, reductions, and/or parking ratios authorized per this chapter; and 3. An explanation demonstrating the residential housing project's eligibility for a density bonus. No additional studies or reports beyond those required by state law, including Government Code Section 65915 et seq. shall be required as part of the request. B. The community development director or his or her designee shall inform the applicant for a density bonus whether the application is complete in a time and manner consistent with Government Code Section 65943. C. The city council shall consider and take action on the density bonus application concurrently with other applications for the residential housing project, which shall be processed in accordance with timelines established by State law, including the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 4.5), the \\DC1\Department Share\Community Development\DEV PMTS\Z 0 A12017\2017-03 Density Bonus\PC Resolution.docx 8 Resolution No. PC-2017- Page 6 Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Title 7, Division 2), and the California Environmental Quality Act Statutes and Guidelines (Public Resources Code Division 13, and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3). 17.64.050 Compatibility with market-rate housing. Affordable housing units provided by a density bonus and developed in conjunction with a market-rate housing development must be of similar design and quality as the market-rate units. Exterior colors and materials and interior floor plans and materials of affordable units must be comparable with the market-rate units. Interior window treatments (i.e., blinds, shutters, and/or curtains), must be provided on all windows of affordable units. Other interior features, such as luxury flooring, upgraded appliances and custom lighting fixtures, need not be the same as market-rate units as determined by the city in the housing agreement. - END - \\DC1\Department Share\Community Development\DEV PMTS\Z 0 A\2017\2017-03 Density Bonus\PC Resolution.docx 9 ITEM 8.B. MOORPARK,CALIFORNIA Planning Commission of ;1lr)� 23, 2017 ACTION:/rpvvri ,crI-rtff Be(OmJmcnCk]i7r`5j1 A1rfor1 i11'on Wo. PC ZUI7- BY: S hguPXort MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Planning Commission FROM: David A. Bobardt, Community Development Director Prepared by: Freddy A. Carrillo, Associate Planner I "(, DATE: June 22, 2017 (PC Meeting of 6/27/2017) SUBJECT: Consider Resolution Recommending Approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-04, Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05, and Modification No. 2 to Commercial Planned Development Permit No. 2004-03, for Construction and Operation of a Major Wireless Communications Facility Within a 48-Foot High Tower at 14339 White Sage Road (Warehouse Discount Center Site), with Signage on the Tower, and Making Determination of Exemption Under CEQA in Connection Therewith, on the Application of Matt Vigil (Vinculums) for Verizon Wireless BACKGROUND On December 2, 2016, Matt Vigil (representative of Vinculums for Verizon Wireless), submitted applications for a Conditional Use Permit and Modification to a Commercial Planned Development Permit for construction and operation of a Major Wireless Communication Facility consisting of 12 panel antennas and installation of an above ground equipment enclosure within a 48-foot high wireless communications tower at 14339 White Sage Road (Warehouse Discount Center site). Signage for the tenants at the site was also proposed on three of the sides of the tower at the request of the property owner. The project applications originally were placed on the City Council agenda for its April 19, 2017 meeting. After opening the public hearing (there were no speakers), the City Council continued the agenda item to May 3, 2017, at the request of the property owner, who was unavailable for the meeting. One of the staff-recommended conditions was to prohibit signage on the tower, as this is not allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. The property owner expressed that the proposed signage was essential to his business and 10 Honorable Planning Commission June 27, 2017 Page 2 on April 26, 2017, requested a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to be considered as part of the applications to allow the proposed signage. On May 3, 2017, the City Council closed the public hearing and referred the applications (with the Zoning Ordinance Amendment) to the Planning Commission for recommendation. The primary purpose of the proposed tower is to screen the proposed wireless antennae, which are considered by the Moorpark Municipal Code to be a "major facility", i.e. a wireless communications or collocation facility that is ground mounted, or is wall mounted, utility mounted, or roof mounted but does not meet the definition of a minor facility. This would be considered a "Stealth Facility". The code requires that when proposed as a "stealth facility" a wireless communications facility must be disguised to appear as another natural or artificial object that is prevalent in the surrounding environment or which is architecturally integrated into a building or other concealing structure. In this instance, the applicant is proposing a 48-foot tower, designed in a style consistent with the adjacent buildings, to conceal the wireless communication facility. A Conditional Use Permit is required for such a facility. A Modification to the Commercial Planned Development Permit for the Warehouse Discount Center site is also required as the tower element was not considered as part of the site development. Since the Zoning Ordinance currently does not allow for signage on wireless facilities, an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance would be required for this project to move forward as proposed. A decision on a Conditional Use Permit is normally made by the Planning Commission; however, because this project also involves City Council consideration of the Modification to Commercial Planned Development Permit for the Warehouse Discount Center site and a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to allow for signage on a wireless facility, staff has elevated the decision on all permits associated with the project to the City Council for consideration, as provided for in Section 17.44.040 of the Municipal Code. DISCUSSION Existing Site Conditions: The proposed tower will be located on an 8.15 acre site, consisting of two lots, located north of White Sage Road and east of California State Route 23. The tower is proposed on the southwest corner of the smaller lot. Two commercial buildings exist on site. The first building located on a 6.11 acre lot on the north side of the property is approximately 115,000 square-feet in area and is approximately 44 feet tall. This building is currently occupied by the Warehouse Discount Center appliance store and warehouse. The second building, a multi-tenant retail commercial building, located on a 2.04 acre lot on the south side of the property is approximately 17,500 square-feet in area and is approximately 36 feet tall. This building is occupied by Ortho Mattress and Innovation Dance Center. S:\Community Development\DEV PMTS\C U P\2016\CUP 2016-05 Verizon Wireless\Agenda Reports\20170627 PC Rpt.docx 11 Honorable Planning Commission June 27, 2017 Page 3 Previous Applications: On October 5, 2005, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2005-2398, approving General Plan Amendment No. 2004-04, Commercial Planned Development No. 2004- 03, and Conditional Use Permit No. 2005-04, allowing appliance sales, distribution and warehousing and a multi-tenant retail building. . On December 28, 2012, the City Council considered a conceptual proposal, also submitted on behalf of Verizon Wireless for the same location (see Attachment 4). The proposal was a stealth facility disguised as a City Welcome Sign. The facility was proposed to be used as an entry sign to the City and help freeway travelers be aware of some of the other shopping opportunities adjacent to the freeway that are not on the Moorpark Marketplace sign tower. Staff worked with the applicant on alternative solutions; integrating antenna panels into the building design, or constructing a "monopine" behind the building. The property owner, however, was not in favor of modifying the building, and a monopine behind the building would not provide enough signal coverage desired for this area (vicinity of White Sage Road and 118 Freeway). Staff took the idea of a City Welcome Sign for economic development purposes to the Community and Economic Development Committee on December 19, 2012, for discussion and recommendation. The committee had concerns regarding the visual impacts of the sign, and expressed how it could be designed similar to the tower of the Moorpark Marketplace. After discussion, the committee had no recommendation for the Council. On January 16, 2013, after reviewing the proposal, the City Council voted 3-2 against proceeding with a City Welcome Sign, with Mayor Parvin and Councilmembers Millhouse and Mikos in opposition to the sign, and Councilmembers Pollock and Van Dam dissenting. The applicant did not proceed with a formal application for a wireless facility after this discussion. On December 16, 2014, Verizon Wireless approached the City with a new stealth facility. Community Development staff met with the applicant to discuss the new proposal, along with alternative locations and concepts discussed previously, such as integrating antennas into the building design or constructing a "monopine" behind the building. The applicant did not find the alternative locations to be feasible for them and decided to proceed with the submittal of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the major wireless communication facility and Modification to the Commercial Planned Development (CPD) in the form of a stand-alone tower. On December 22, 2014, an application for Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-09 and Modification No. 1 to Commercial Planned Development No. 2004-03 was submitted for a Major Wireless Communication Facility consisting of 12 panel antennas; and installation of an above ground equipment enclosure within a 48 foot high tower at 14339 White Sage Road. Staff met off-site with Vinculums (representative for Verizon Wireless) and Verizon to review and find more alternative locations. Three locations were identified but needed further evaluation by the applicant. The applicant took over a year to explore the potential locations. Staff attempted to contact applicant several times S:\Community Development\DEV PMTS\C U P\2016\CUP 2016-05 Verizon Wireless\Agenda Reports120170627 PC Rpt.docx 12 Honorable Planning Commission June 27, 2017 Page 4 to determine whether or not the applicant was still proceeding with the project, but applicant was not reachable. Staff rejected the application without prejudice on August 23, 2016 for lack of activity on an incomplete application. General Plan and Zoning Consistency: Disguising a cellular facility within a tower must also comply with all other provisions of Sections 17.42.070.B and 17.42.070.0 of the Zoning Ordinance. The project site is designated General Commercial (C-2) in the City's General Plan and meets the definition of a "Major Facility" in the Wireless Communications Facilities chapter of the Zoning Ordinance and requires a Conditional Use Permit in the Commercial Planned Development (CPD) zone. Currently, the sign regulations in Chapter 17.40 (Sign Regulations) of the Zoning Ordinance do not include any provisions for signage on wireless facilities and Chapter 17.42 (Wireless Communications Facilities) of the Zoning Ordinance prohibit signage on wireless communications facilities except for safety purposes. A Zoning Ordinance Amendment is proposed to address this as part of the application. GENERAL PLAN/ZONING Direction General Plan Zoning Land Use Site General Commercial Commercial Planned Commercial Development Build ings............._ North Open Space I Open Space 10Ac Arroyo Simi 1 DU/10-40Ac South General Commercial Commercial Planned Vacant Development........_......................... .. East Open Space I Open Space 40Ac Arroyo Simi 1 DU/10-40Ac State Route State Route West 118-Freeway 118-Freeway Freeway Proposed Project: The applicant is proposing to lease an area 16 feet 4 inches wide by 16 feet and 4 inches long to accommodate the 48 foot high tower. The proposed tower will be divided into three different vertical sections. The top section has a height of approximately 13 feet 3 inches. This section includes the roof and encloses the 12 panel antennas. The roof is proposed to be made of Spanish tile with a cornice element underneath and one smooth column on each corner. Two louvered vinyl circular elements, which are part of the venting system for the facility, are proposed on the east and west wide of the tower wall. The applicant is also proposing a cornice element between the top and center section of the tower. The center section will be approximately 24 feet 4 inches high made of smooth concrete finish plaster. The bottom portion will be 10 feet 4 inches tall S:\Community Development\DEV PMTS\C U P\2016\CUP 2016-05 Verizon Wireless\Agenda Reports\20170627 PC Rpt.docx 13 Honorable Planning Commission June 27, 2017 Page 5 and include cultured stone veneer. The mechanical equipment is proposed to be located inside this section. The equipment will operate on a 24 hour, 7 day a week remote sensing basis. This allows Verizon Wireless to make minor adjustments remotely through its headquarters located in Irvine instead of having a technician drive to the site. Equipment associated with the operation of a major facility must be located within an underground vault, or an above-ground building or enclosure in a manner complying with the development standards of the zoning district. Equipment located above ground must be visually compatible with the surrounding buildings and structures and either shrouded by sufficient landscaping to screen the equipment from view, or designed to match the architecture of adjacent buildings. Analysis: Architectural design of the tower and its location are the primary concerns in the analysis of this application. The applicant has proposed the 48 foot tall tower approximately 140 feet east of State Route 23 and 65 feet north from White Sage Road. The design complements the existing commercial buildings and its surroundings, and its location will enhance the wireless communications coverage in the vicinity. The tallest commercial building on-site is 44 feet high to the top of the two roof tile tower elements. The second commercial building has a height of 36 feet and has six roof tile tower elements. The applicant is proposing a standalone tower with an overall height of 48 feet, of which the top 4 feet consists of a decorative tile roof and a small finial. All antennas will be hidden within the 4-sided tower (no exterior antenna panels). The material proposed for the exterior of tower is smooth concrete finish plaster painted light brown to match the light brown of the existing buildings. The antenna enclosure is constructed of fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP) with a plaster finish to be painted to match the structure. The design of the tower is compatible with the overall design of both buildings, and as such, the project would improve the commercial planned development. Conditions of approval are proposed to ensure the colors, materials and textures of the building match to the existing buildings. Staff has discussed alternative locations with the applicant. On March 9, 2016, three new locations were identified in the on-site meeting. Verizon has evaluated these locations and has provided their feasibility as follows: • 864 Los Angeles Avenue (Moorpark Marketplace shopping center) — install antennas inside an existing 66 foot high sign structure. Feasibility: Landlord was not interested in entering an agreement with Verizon Wireless. S:\Community Development\DEV PMTS\C U P\2016\CUP 2016-05 Verizon Wireless\Agenda Reports\20170627 PC Rpt.docx 14 Honorable Planning Commission June 27, 2017 Page 6 • 709 Science Drive (Industrial Building) — install a monopine at the bottom of a steep slope (approximately 30-feet below street level). Feasibility: Existing building is 30 feet high. Monopine would need to be over 70 feet high to allow clear antenna line of site. • 14339 White Sage Road (Warehouse Discount Center) — adding a tower onto the existing building. Feasibility: tower would be set back too far from freeway and structurally be too heavy for building. The City's wireless regulations restrict the height of a major facility to the maximum building height for the applicable zoning district in which the facility is proposed to be located. In the case of a Commercial Planned Development, building and structure height is determined by the CPD Permit. The proposed modification, if approved, will allow the tower at the proposed height, which is the height the applicant has indicated is reasonably necessary for operation of the facility. The applicant has indicated Verizon's engineers have determined in order to enhance the service in this area, any new wireless telecommunication facility candidates must provide antenna line-of-sight with a height equal or higher than 44 feet above ground and on a location contained within a search area bound by Princeton Avenue on the north; Patriot Drive on the south; Science Drive on the east; and White Sage Road on the west. As previously mentioned, the property owner has requested signs be permitted on the proposed tower. The Sign Regulations in Chapter 17.40 of the Zoning Ordinance do not have a provision for signage on wireless communications facilities. However, monument signs and pylon signs are permitted in commercial and industrial zoned properties when meeting the criteria of the Sign Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance defines "monument sign" as a sign that is completely self-supportive, has its sign face or base on the ground, and has no air space, columns or supports visible between the ground and the bottom of the sign. Monument signs are allowed a maximum of 36 square-feet of area signage per side and cannot exceed 6 feet in height. The 48-foot high tower could not be considered a monument sign. One monument sign currently exists on the White Sage Road frontage of the property. Staff explored the idea of considering the tower a pylon sign. However, the Sign Ordinance defines a "pylon sign" as a freestanding sign, other than a monument sign, in which the sign face is separated from ground level by means of one (1) or more supports such as poles, pole covers or columns. Although the tower could meet the general definition for a pylon sign, it does not meet the criteria for permitting it as a pylon sign. Currently, the Zoning Ordinance allows such signs to be a maximum of twenty-four (24) feet high, and three-hundred (300) square feet in area. The only S:\Community Development\DEV PMTS\C U P\2016\CUP 2016-05 Verizon Wireless\Agenda Reports\20170627 PC Rpt docx 15 Honorable Planning Commission June 27, 2017 Page 7 existing sign in the City that exceed this height is the Moorpark Marketplace sign which, at 66 feet tall, was subject to specific plan regulations and a settlement agreement. In addition, pylon signs are allowed in shopping centers of 50,000 square feet or larger and located on Los Angeles Avenue. An amendment to the Zoning Ordinance would be required to permit signage on the proposed tower. Signage on wireless communications facilities can meet the goals of the general plan for aesthetics if strictly limited. Staff recommends that the Zoning Ordinance be amended to only allow signage on wireless communications facilities designed as tower elements that match existing architectural design and are in the Commercial Planned Development (CPD) zone on sites with freeway frontage that are developed with over 100,000 square feet of commercial development. This would ensure the scale of the signage does not overwhelm the scale of the development on the site. Limitations of signage to 200 square feet per side are also recommended. The proposed facility would meet these criteria. Finally, this development project was subject to a development agreement which required the developer to provide a location for a City Welcome Sign and a contribution of $25,000.00 toward construction of the sign. While a sign location next to the existing monument sign on White Sage Road has been designated for City signage, staff recommends a condition that an agreement between the City and Developer be executed that allows for City Welcome Signage on the wireless communication facility. Exhibit 3 provides examples of how that signage might be executed. Findings: Prior to approving, conditionally approving, or denying a discretionary permit, the City Council must adopt written findings, by resolution, based upon substantial evidence in view of the whole record to justify the decision. In order for a discretionary permit to be approved, the City Council must find make the affirmative findings required by the Municipal Code. If any of the findings cannot be made, the request must be denied. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Findings Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-04 is consistent with the City of Moorpark General Plan and all adopted Specific Plans, in that this ordinance supports one of the goals of the Land Use Element which calls for a variety of commercial facilities which serve community residents and meet regional needs. Viable and aesthetically pleasing wireless communication facilities are an example of commercial facilities that provide important services to community residents and serve regional needs for wireless communications. S.\Community Development\DEV PMTS\C U P\2016\CUP 2016-05 Verizon Wireless\Agenda Reports\20170627 PC Rpt.docx 16 Honorable Planning Commission June 27, 2017 Page 8 Conditional Use Permit Findings With amendments to the Zoning Ordinance as proposed by Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-04: A. The proposed use is consistent with the provisions of the General Plan, zoning ordinance, and any other applicable regulations, in that the proposed use, height, setbacks and improvements are consistent with City Code requirements. The tower is proposed at 48 feet high and includes 4 feet of Spanish roof tile and a metal finial. B. The proposed use is compatible with both existing and permitted land uses in the surrounding area, in that the wireless communication facility will provide additional cellular service to the commercial and industrial areas. The proposed tower has been determined to be in an appropriate location for a wireless communication facility by the city. C. The proposed use is compatible with the scale, visual character and design of surrounding properties, in that it is designed so as not to detract from the physical and visual quality of the area. The material and color of the tower as conditioned complement the existing commercial buildings. D. The proposed use would not be obnoxious or harmful, or impair the utility of neighboring property or uses, in that the proposed use has been designed to eliminate any negative visual impacts. The proposed tower will not eliminate parking spaces, obstruct driveways, or disrupt vehicular or pedestrian circulation. E. The proposed use would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, or welfare, in that conditions of approval have been added to protect the public. Conditional Use Permit for Wireless Facilities Findings A. The proposed facility will not create any significant blockage to public views, in that the tower will be placed on the corner of an existing commercial site, away from driveways and traffic line-of-sight. B. The proposed facility will be an enhancement to the City due to its ability to provide additional communication capabilities in the eastern part of the City and along California State Route 23. C. The proposed facility will be aesthetically integrated into its surrounding land uses and natural environment, in that it will be constructed of materials, painted in a manner, and constructed in a style that will complement the existing commercial buildings. S:\Community Development\DEV PMTS\C U P\2016\CUP 2016-05 Verizon WirelessWgenda Reports\20170627 PC Rpt.docx 17 Honorable Planning Commission June 27, 2017 Page 9 D. The proposed facility will comply with FCC regulations regarding interference with the reception or transmission of other wireless service signals within the City and surrounding community. E. The proposed facility will operate in compliance with all other applicable Federal regulations for such facilities, including safety regulations, in that AT&T operates its wireless network in compliance with its FCC license and FCC rules and regulations concerning frequency emissions and/or radio frequency interference. The transmission densities emanating from the facility will not exceed current American National Standards Institute (ANSI) recommended maximum exposure levels for wireless transmission frequencies which do not have the potential to significantly impact the community. In all cases, Effective Radiated Power (ERP), and its associated electromagnetic (EM) radiation power densities are a small fraction of the maximum permissible exposure set by ANSI, or the more restrictive exposure standard put forth by the National Commission on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP). F. The public need for the use of the cellular facility has been documented consistent with California law, in that the proposed cell site will provide a substantial increase in the coverage area. G. The applicant will provide at its own expense a field survey or other method consistent with Federal law to provide written verification that the facility is in compliance with applicable Federal regulations regarding electromagnetic frequency emissions. This radio-frequency (RF) report shall also include signal strength exhibits, including calculations and measurements under maximum loading conditions. Such field survey shall be provided to the City upon request, not to exceed one such request in any 24-month period. Planned Development Findings A. The site design, including structure location, size, height, setbacks, massing, scale, architectural style and colors, and landscaping, is consistent with the provisions of the general plan, any applicable specific plans, zoning ordinance, and any other applicable regulations in that the proposed facility has been designed to complement the surrounding built and natural environment; B. The site design would not create negative impacts on or impair the utility of properties, structures or uses in the surrounding area in that the facility has been designed in a manner consistent with the character of the community; C. The proposed uses are compatible with existing and permitted uses in the surrounding area in that a wireless communication facility is not unexpected in the Commercial Planned Development zone. S:\Community Development\DEV PMTS\C U P\2016\CUP 2016-05 Verizon Wireless\Agenda Reports\20170627 PC Rpt.docx 18 Honorable Planning Commission June 27, 2017 Page 10 PROCESSING TIME LIMITS Time limits have been established for the processing of development projects under the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 4.5), the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Title 7, Division 2), and the California Environmental Quality Act Statutes and Guidelines (Public Resources Code Division 13, and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3). Under the applicable provisions of these regulations, the following timelines have been established for action on this project: Date Application Determined Complete: June 22, 2017 City Council Action Deadline: September 20, 2017 Upon agreement by the City and Applicant, one 90-day extension can be granted to the date action must be taken on the application. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The Community Development Director has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines pursuant to Section 15311 (Class 11 — Accessory Structures) of the California Code of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines) in that the project is consistent with the applicable general and specific plan designation and all applicable general and specific plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations; the proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses; the project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; approval of the.project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. No further environmental documentation is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Open the public hearing, accept public testimony, and close the public hearing. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2017- S\Community 017-S:\Community Development\DEV PMTS\C U P\2016\CUP 2016-05 Verizon Wireless\Agenda Reports120170627 PC Rpt.docx 19 Honorable Planning Commission June 27, 2017 Page 11 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Aerial Map 3. Project Exhibits • T-1 Title Sheet • LS-1 Site Survey • A-1 Overall Site Plan • A-2 Enlarged Site Plan, Equipment &Antenna Layout • A-3 East and West Elevations, Tower Elevation (West) • A-4 North and South Elevations • City Welcome Signage Concepts 4. December 28, 2012 City Council Agenda Report and Minutes 5. Resolution No. 2017- S:\Community Development\DEV PMTS\C U P\2016\CUP 2016-05 Verizon Wireless\Agenda Reports\20170627 PC Rpt.docx 20 LJ to w L Ls C f4 4 CO te-. .rt Jd 05 a�SAum atieo o G a) ta + Lcnfaave 'k71('. ,r- �7 w iik cn f' �• 7 r. 5 P RS O CO Cri 41 4.0 L�. _ O x' y6 0 us C o name rm'- CO y Cia V L 4 'CII co CI cc CI 1 L o 0. o 0 N ca) 0 2 , O e— CO cO CU V 1 J i g O t a .o ; 412 A.G N �I � � �INOO d' I No E! , (r Ii _ II s p.. Q Z- d_ o o L a+ wLi. = y ....0N d 9 co coL 1 4., U] L 4— O O coCO en 2M o II - 0 N rn f4 H PC ATTACHMENT 1 21 , _ .- i.::'-'.:,:`,,;,,‘ : - ' r -,-.•. , , • -. c_, a O f0 s; c a U of. T , \S+ o Cn �w ,,. E L 0a �, r., o ,, - `r to r,. - " . � ;x... y o — '` / �M 11Air, 1 N I.a73 I45 4 ,." V . t s .- r. LT Ks IT i - Z 425 tr er a a� x CI c '= , I `' -o co __-- r'ms} µ G 1— ira I 2 �� �� . ;.'- ,'ti ii: cio N 0 co co CD I .:i ice , i> t 'r. Lir -{, .� I +.t . - (13cu 13 . 0 I ' -.'....."C:: a _- N � N --:- .--- 12 IA h 03 1:1 r, . rt ._. \ 4 C) cu 0 m d ' lir N 1 ,. •ti } rr ups a , 15- a? :4' ..4,4 ._.\.,,,,-,..,....----- N‘„,,,.-. � d ° 4 us to PC ATTACHMENT 2 22 PROJECT EXHIBITS • T-1 TITLE SHEET • LS-1 : SITE SURVEY • A-1 : OVERALL SITE PLAN • A-2: ENLARGED SITE PLAN, EQUIPMENT & ANTENNA LAYOUT • A-3: EAST AND WEST ELEVATIONS, TOWER ELEVATION (WEST) • A-4: NORTH AND SOUTH ELEVATIONS • CITY WELCOME SIGNAGE CONCEPTS PC ATTACHMENT 3 23 17Z - 1 Cl) �� -O � 81.9Z6 V0 NIAL11 T Q" < � & 60'3f1N3AVN0ANH00NVS50551 F a CO z o= 4ZOC6 3`)1HVdHOOIN J t } 1 q- a& 1. 'au 3Jb�S 311HM 6££ti4 F y w§" " pLIOZIJIGA u) asoo.4: 1 0 W n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n IX o a - co akkw. ou 0 o o a Z tilt a g .1S �o J 4 F j44 ct i gas�d vp O m m g8E�a gn° W o o gi3 Lora i 'kil N ae 8 z rcz a ��o° a/ 5KF I g o 8 8 33 a c - p z ul :7.!. �0 9 V N jp W 4O < a Nil Q j• zLL < ai m W3 m 5 W y4 g , 26 ®, N °a z ] cc!� yy F ' 5 F .2%! . C5 Ed o z a z c3 c3 o z 8 i .,. CO o N p rS - E .v. o f 20 Z i— P g u V, o a Il. 2 c o c f2 c rc G LL F g 17. g E a i in r.-i `&i W a m m n m N Y m m N a I1 Cr 1 W 7 r n I I N n < < < a a < < n m m m m n w W W W n an = F < en w12 gr' w F zo- VO c . U Ore ZN�Ws,Qm Oa2 Eo w �a 3-j i w CO 'Ow 00 0. 0 • n mo NM 0-kw, ZWm gr 1-z ., Uw 8S C• N rtI O W mto C N� Ii. �WW O OWZ Q• NN C E Q°� W o IL V a z N ,,zau 1� 3,, 71 O o z %" V o W Z rZrn W w `g- x o_x Z i v .-y- 0 ix W Wo$ s Q V O ri 3 c�"'$c$ F au<ic<i� f > 8g k'�3� J �k'W O o�c_o'm 0 0 u) 0 a. LU 6 80 it ZO `3 10 W p%82,,9 O $;�40 Li.) . aV WmWGmW' Q W ib.i Ce ce) ((($III a rO o� Z N Wj iG��a Z��F� Z FSU FM O Q Q Inam��2 K z LL'I:i¢ oN n U //��� a C-NLPF WZZ Oa Ia..= ii" g 2 W.9 K LL U ONK ggRa NNNNN LJ /, U ZO (rid O Z p m O< O m = v ¢ Q s� .oia'w A o3 a v F v a 0015 J � ��m ■ � W � Q 6111 g X J = a \ C l t 0 OC W ° g. r io a W F / gg < o O g F (/) -9 o P s > 2 - P 0 % a ? '7' V• 3z o Gse Wi=b - u az :11 Mp pKvLa Goa OO I. Y a Z � . ,,,re * o "� 0 N �5 w O r3- 333 ti" y czzOoz66 O 65?-h _� 3H0 NNHpO,O F4-0'1"M WW zz^oa 3 N N N C1 z n Tam m a N D.- 4 h z z;l;.zi§.zl V J. tZ-AMH o1 of � - owl ¢rc¢ �- ..zNN..,^ z 0 nn% �4<. .N.v<...-..N.v.. E .-Nnmul • • • • • • • 11 I N_ W- V =o $oma �N oft m O tti.9 .,2 !r4 1,.-,V-1,9 J a t01 No gym/ j EN�ly01 j Pa Y N<nfG,9 w ZmJ<`m O2�Tb NO�,a`•Fq Obi 6. c Yoxm" 2Rb..�a F m z3 111 0'87 w� Q Z2 Ua= i3J >Cmoi O FeZ Z" IQ g Srachil N 1a a a oM hn C7 Fu) W N W W W S ad m s' o OF E o m Z I/� a K O WgOm 7c f.7NO ? mN?^o 0 iii yN Ny.00 I:E'<q .iv oa �<`a3m� OC o rs 7 -ma t U�3 O 3mN ti 29 V?=�...n_.n F� ���Omy yV��Wyj��N W Z_ O y U O L per ( d > K 0 O yy �=a ZF z, Uc�zO" LI ^�O a2� a W 2 O p w yo-011W Q oN UEL =Itia$mou4 w'y `o' o o d Y S rc rc e, 1.," g SZ a �" 1. Li s m w > V— g 11 IiF vN - ç '\ P �i$,_ l-1 / 'X 12 i g w i 1 s' :4 w 701,-,,. 'J1=1 ii ____I 0 55 iq g _. - o a , ilt �� i s gy z o U •1 i ''.-,..'" \ I kkk-4,,\,..\ :0 / ,. 1.. .: ‘,..,,, kly.,,'-;.s'k \ \, \\..\ § giT 0 ggE r /6 \\ \\\\ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \\ \\ \'. fr3WyRI. § ,'�� j P � 4;' g ln �\\ \e 4000 \ \\\\\\\\\\\;\ \a.\ \\ \\\ \\ . t s P. E a s w .. a \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \`\ \ \ \ II ;� :\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ` \ \ \\ \\ zc ®.go • 1 \\\ \ \ \\ \ \ \\\\• \ \ \ \ \ •\ ; Li I �.�� V 'A VA\\\ \ \ V A r ; I I e ��VT)\ \\\\\\ \\\\\� , \\ \\ \\ \\\•• • i 1 1 1 Al- v\ Y AMMW \ \ •\ \ % 1 I I { \ \ \ \\ \\\\ \ ��\ \ \ \\ \\. i§e 1Aza • \ \, \ \ \ \ �a 3 SII 1 i \ \ ,=)Y,;. \ - \\ \ \ \ \ \7r -�. V A \\V.\\\\ \V \ A :•• \ \ \ I \ 15 s A +: 141 \ A \\\,.\\.\ A k d \ V /1 4 \ \ \ \. . \ \ \ � `k p; 1 \ ''' 4- II _ . .- \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ ` \ %\k " ` 1 \ \ \ \ \ E \ 14 P ;1 ---' \ \ \ \ VO1 ' \ \ \ 6V: c. I /� A AVA A VA4.y ��\: VAV \ pd] tl 1J CO \% \ \ \ \ \ \ yt 1 sI \ \ \` \ \ \ \ \is i , bip V9,7. Ii /0". .1i \ \ • -‘o:\ \ \ \ \ ;\ 2,, , _ .4 1 ft/ _Alt ..\ \I \ . \ \, \ \ , \ \ 1 .•\ \ \ \ \\ \ .� \\ \ \ \ \'. s ; , / /•./ // $ / \ \\ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \\ \\ \ \\ \\ V '' t , lg .....X .4611;15,\\\ \\ \\\\\.\\\\\ \\:\ \.‘,. 4 ,:.. . ,,.. , 1 . "\•\ \ ' 't \ \ \ ' ' 2 , 7822-p'---.7- ' / @ / \ \ \ \ ' \ \ t% \ \t, 11; mot / /.•'( /ice // /�� /// •\\ \ \ \• \ \ gas ele I ,e• '7,1/47', / d / / / /� ,�' \ 44) �?• r$ / / f I V. 620--"i / / 61 /.... ' ,X50,4? 1 6§4 g2 m a WPg Jg '- p3g��g . <� d 2514 �p t{ a gW ag 'b't0 e 06 Nii iffl 4% \t ai. zd p2 ilEg itv 16 ow< �� w !;16 ;:1021-: "� � '�` u1p�ip,�W ;;: q� / ' ‘\lt \\ ti,*\;:b119 \ a ad i-i-; �: 1r� N r _4,�� 211:q:;21 Itl kjgb ntl� -.; 4 41 Ymi Nla 1 0 IN4 qii §0601g Rid law h! 1 , ;* ,,, gb ;g_ bm 0 /16114q1,11 0 wsdOg gb.- bala M t, /: gp p- al . ' ''' \ 3A . / , • i �I ' �jj pm F a _rixu; I _ p ..., % .I: Ek 1 A 00- gli 1#11 -a i I-R ..pIwEbOgWMI , <ppN•11F �f< _� �yyII 11401 o g� • d N C7 v y 6 r ������S5S5S5 VI op 2 N S ,� W PPi °j a g s} �5liel b12plz ii -41 `� app iiil � 011M il \ \' ,A . O y, i33� a m� 4a 8Qp4 �� �e ' ,:b n afd5>� Qli�:pi !�•1<yN, w\ / V aW � .ri aaS 4 101: 1 ti=p b2Z� a rv71 0 � w \ •- 2 Z Bell 4 Eg ftg_ _ §N 4w gad g g 6 m � a;.'oa o '� ♦ . UI 0 OHriO '� aix ' `= 420e .;§ ,`�,�•pir0 V It[84„m• 105: 4ig - 1ay� w y� > p w dd §�s <a VaS ro z vn am 1ai ., 'tit 17.- - -,-- . /I` Olgiii/1/1111011Niiiining !111! lig gii h izli Lb: Iffl004 d 17 * . IA .:..., ir- :. \ zw , 11/0 k _ . . zPO 1 °60CM "Wit 5N p- '''uji-1115M M > \ � • � w 111 PIC.4.C.z [ 14 qi '�'_ `�al� 1z <za le= € ; quo 88 J � I via 411 ? �� killi� _. 10 AIR _881gg °WI birg !"Mb8 11 fag W,4m0Pa \./ \ tii Rm. I .•� � .. . ' ~,..„ ., , , , , ~�gV '�'� W �1'ilg gl �2 -% 44 31 2F1 01110 ~ S£cl�a. l/)2 =p07 7 .1, 4 ., ` ...... 1 o m w�jm �`�aGi O�kdR OwN��i0f �. NM' t4TP cn: m mai A4s la siddlix 93 r li! IT a Teo lslsv3'aNlnal T T[U' a w'3flN3AV NOANVO aNVS SOS44ui _; i 41 I' 4Z0£6 V3`�lavaaoow y r < a a -a213JVS 311HM 6££t►L J g LLI " SaO o �u) g 11 - voilp pUOZiolePti \/®VI Va Va�21� 0 410 aLii' ,c, " ` .l. A I. OJ Il§ O C ^w � O CD � 0 8N Z I IN, 3i op Na {x{{{((((11111 yyyyy����� ' O O = 0 La KZO Fj aU I .;` Ca QRSO�= v aQU'ZN TSI'�' Q l� fv>N v 210.X30. Li r l g;'.`6 T3z'N� Y Ia1Z U' v3C2 ri' JO <til: ON� sg.g,0 O=N Oti ---Q5,-----fLii R3 NQ��e= Ns oz� oASi8f N avo, awo ow�M oz o0 o=mReyz 0?� 3JYS aUHM I Rg I rcmJ?� o o rc�(� �oWrcaz 'fir, _ - 1 n 3 a a fL in N o_z a rn a .tea w a a 'j -I -.FSE 3 s d -- -.._ 1 N. ',.. ®'sem \\ k ',' I / ` ``� // '• .. \\• `•• IN 1 ceszlT / / / / i-/ ztirsz 3Nf1 ltypyd \_ —_— - 'it. 3Nn AlH3d011d — — — ——— — + o I I I o g I �. :S`•1 :.s. f�y�}yam:3 :�^ ^; .,+- -+•• _.-• - _ 3 ! •.a•.^u';..�}'}..:.1:`•k''5 .:r:;�:' .;, it t::+::; x.`•+,•+,?; en,o�,+,. •— tO: I Au_ •`". t c „ !e x:•.; -±sem+ } N ti ;cam ! t. I , " ® • I I I II 1 ..c =�i , I >ii,f, / / I I4 a ; I 11 I j a I -- J �///////// %////!//////////l/A W !6,.. i I' I II 1 ! ! I II NI <11 o I / /iaiiaiav� y , / [ I m �- I �iaioiiraaiiariam aiiaraooaiiaiiaaaiiaiiiaiaiaiirmiaiai 00 1 lw X X /z, mr.....=_____ ——— — —,li'£rff 3Nf1 AIHodOtld r. J Jy p 1 "2-R 4.1 / 0EL 0= IpD09in e� 2v-&W \ opWoxM ffi NNENr7ZyyNQ .NOHO M §8 4n W°g cn WI 82 w ��ppL�;:�d o• a wo ac°i3.a ��alaN 0- 0.35 _ actin �W I LI a= ala/ CD � � � t z J - 6 w a z o z z ��� gi •-, z v°, 9 /, o - B 5 1cs co z v a e a a _yri L''‘. < I _ can ... o it J Y I a� 2PI .,,,En x 0 � wo re ::-_,_,z------ -.,.- z F `L%IIIII 66Y2 W '4' % — W U W O En DO V/ Z Z .- Z N N E., IY o°x a ` I-z..., �++i ILI �_'- �wt oYi F. �o — z�SJ za S a 1 :,:k... .1141 I " 0 LZ �� Trelszsv3'3Nlnai T T T g LO'3fiN3nV N0,WV0 0NVS SOOT 1L ca 0 a $ see z o® 4Zo£6 V3'M IVdao0w z $ ggg '� &Q . z A. '421391 5 311HM 6££b6 V g g N 88 cco o w gam$ a �� V a V I �II�9I1 w cl '4 1111 11 a 0o , aa LIPS i ' � i i iW — _-____ - -- - - - - - - -fq 2 --- _ __- P1 —_ w * _ _ ____ _ ......_____ ___ _ ;:--,_ ____—.7_—__:_,— ____:____ _ v-. :::4! —._:;!v2-6 _ _ ! — — — — - - —- -Nn -- - - -- - I i'4 • +• ••••+•.• ....,...*.*.,..*.• ..+...... W."..•••••• titer T N1`-� �Y,• j ' ' • • • WW •::•:::• •.••+•r•.•::: •... .•:•::••••:••:::• r••.•r :• ::••:i• ir; 4._• 1r' •'M� �i LI 1 f ' / y O N ':`y,;.w• ♦ :.;.•:::: .•• • •••••••••••••......•...........•••••:+▪•1?• • •:+•:::+F •:::+ ♦ ••• •• + •...ji. • tJM. — Ny yy11 + r + • •••••••••••• ••••••• «� + r+ ♦ + + r + • + + + ./....•..............: Si'... I I t9 r . . :.•. .•.•.•. . . .•.•:. .•.• 'f' ,'1 Z • zOrz K O Z Gl°elO t --r'a"s'L.4--iii •"•••••.,' o I I \ c!1 ll' g&-,17c a a117N !! I! a a ' '1 - ir a.�3u=i a`r F--- j cc j /j 12 1 II a �r i /7 il& Ivy I 111414TIrre I � ! I 1 1 � �W `..;w 1 I Ij j 1 Z O. I "r ���,// I �Z2 ,,� 1 jl W //////////////////A ce E ' Nom ; d // I W a_ 881n Z / 1 aRo .� Z ,-v W s N co) 4)1i, _ — _ — a, .dA1.0L-,91 .0L-,91 m of 'did.t-,9L L = * .0-,f L 1- .6-,� .01.-.Zi 1.6-,I r _OL-,ZL o •L-,Z .9-,ZL .l-,Z N I .9-.L .OL-.9 , I 1 ? .1,-,01. _ W !- _ a� a I CD I I �� I .o-,oL 1 a I b I Si Z d .0-,9 1 1 z a� 1 .162 g I W �c o o in g i co, mrc co 0N5 i z b 3 I L.-. S.. W m i e — �o 8▪ ° ate= w — I Et Pm I r6- a� &; I & i Io 2t 1mz _ 1 $� Oct .... I t+i� I — I I `. I I I i i I r /_ =i _i. . ,1—a II '.. 1 I rril--447-1. j 11 I \ "•:;...., 5, yjr. — i t'I. —— E _ ,, :, , . i ) � : / I `P I ♦�Y a ,�I t J I 1 r 1- r--1 , <` IIF I [dill 01131;01dk, i •o+ 1 1I If VIII I II rill �. L__ 0 I�AIIini % lV I L_J. III. • III911 I11�I — II lull M1— - - I;I'!11liiii lin 114I N �a er. S 9� Ott / 4 / 4O . OC �" 3 z >g o o cl 9 a a °d li 6 zzd F o w z i5 1`mov g 3 o z �W w.. z xoo �a.J F p~ sv NZ J Nv a M N2 M m U.. NZ �F-z z— F 4 �bUi o Kg— op__ NZ� M o .. a 0 5g g^ U � IL Mp - m09W w _ p C<L7 tQIL S 4"7":' N O B3 m m m0 m=� m m$ F to N OO O OIU- O 1.. p o� wl °o-u a- a.2um O,,�IX VI mow rcc� moor �o z rc rc rc m 2o m ao rc � ..."- n.2... a96 aw2a if n.m a9 a a a Z a3 E$ a- s J az aX ax/a aa��� si r N �� �� aD 1). " (ID d� �) d CD aD® Z CD �) dD W rn 40F. W 4M h 4' M 9Z ir w TI; Or aWMY3'3NIA211 lr T �,�^ 6 1il'3f1N3AVN0ANVJ�1Y8506&1 LO 1 NA [31-- sees _ iZOC6 VO` NYCLWOow M 11 11 I/ : a la M 61 F 1 1 X11 'dv Iv;= ; iiw 1 5g la.-n0 L.44:1 1° Al.' leA,. AL. _AL. ill I" 1 I T � ill i 1 06 Iig 11 El ! ijSs t IIIA III 1 i 11�111111iii1Iii; 1 1-- _ - - rl,, � 1 . Wg I ir ir .0-.1 i a F 1 16 1 mg t�III� I Um 2 15_ 8�� il 1 1 lige E 9 ;g 0 IOC pp *MN z� if; a dE ka§% aw§ig f.-.01SWM 3i �N� CL Mg 11 3Nfl II130 UMW X11 N021810380dONd 01-410 g. ui 1NN[31N11 MUNI NO2NC3A 03S0d0&I 01 0-.$ MOON Tram/ifi0O1 Q3SOdONd'01,P-.t e n n 1 ( lb 1NOCH TIA[3AO 1190.121d.0-,5► k twisty in a3SOdONd 01.0-0 I 13N1SC31113O Melt MSA O SOdoad.L—.6 M I .'N.1 r .+—,O1 N r b W V � Iii 1 it � I ii • . ri•RwRew h I 0 1111111,1, ;uum( 1 I - ram/ig ( •1i11ifiik,i- 1 O 4 , itt:v1% 5 5 ° 62 1 2111 iW it ]ig i i-(41 a g 1R 41 F m :I.'FN"-- A§ ( . . i 11 El iliD Wal a RR 121 1 i f-.9L a . i 2 �.i-.n 1 6 lax 9 iii VihL 1 01 56 62 W ilgl ills! I 1 11 f 01;i 1 g! iN4i . a 88 -- k Wim _ -__` _ 1 1 il ,r1, • ,• , r7, aii0 amS: a s 1 I, - - :,,_:„.,,,, _ , I W gi � I I I � { i I W i .t-,01 4 2 ( i e i ( 1 3N1pC3M O WOW MA 03NOdONd.3--,B W 1 1 W AWN NA O3S0dONd '0'1.0-M. ! o MBA ThWAO 0MSOd0Nd.0-0 ' i 1 I 1 asia.aan.wn.Inwa.....n au..a.a.aa..e .4L a. 6Z 1 [1""(13 t r � a SF9GBDBIrJ'3NIAtilT � �LO'3nN3AVN0AMfJ ONVS9O89L O In .4C a 1.7.0E5 V3 litiVdMOON fill 110 'Ot13©1/S 311HM BESt4t i IhII '..'evavrva V1:11:1311 i� 4C 441 so 1 51 0 r. N 1111:131 71993A0 0396dOUd.0-,9Y I N 11 wooly SA 03 IDHd'0'1,A-'pp IN 3KE 13��Y u iwv NA•IBIAMONd j-,BE 11 1W .*-' 11w Ia ' 1W 1 6 4 ' I 4 I Z � l4 . P:— u iin1�ir il,I� i 111111111 /A; ct'C'ii"'iI '' = i 1\ - = iii ' .i � i 1 1, M.vre. x01 611 1 I 1 1 Eg- 1 g 3Em ! !I 1 .,; Sig u5- wig I IF; il;! h: I a e8 __ ,i;.: -.,_ 1I Wg EIWIP DE 1 S5 I Q. Q._ IL ...: %gnu , ,: 1 I V-14 � 1 1 11:11 e 1 r''''''"`I: drc ` 1 \ Li el gi gwrEg M - I iiI . 11 i5 a 0 812 R--a2 m i2 s g MOM 4 E 1 ag �i aoR =-__ __ MEM I @ 0 r I! h z !! 1 I t 0-i o liL 0 § Eg jI 1 t ; 4 NI.. 3:.0-.I I 1 n1 1 1 -- g•' -_-74g- li 4 1 1[N Iii 1 , ! I ; 1 1 I 0Nil I 0 Let.: 1 .ror J 3NI11LUN3'J WOW Mn o39odotw.a-.ac N iWIN31W SA 933041011d01.0-.14 111Of3N 11M1O O390d0Hd.0-AF ! 0 Z a OG Ii 1- a r w o -- Z .6 U o G O = o vZ O CZ ft C) LL , z u;7 7., o O re O wJS . mS U ONaJU ; O z zZw -.Z W a ,-,,,--1p CD U R V 4 G W mwJ (n . 6sJo xw5 = , 0 w 2 3 N w m o>m W I-`e� OF OmP_ a�P- m o '.713 o � oaw o� Ww1.� ccNW3a .-.'z� w=o o J= 1--/ i=-I I a — N i -.. Q � Cn OP nen En CC O �J ��► � w � a + =.....1 ,,,., ......, ,, E_. , bt -.— In w w Q Vla4 :)-) V � ~ o 1 I 2 1 Ne O fM 0 M dO Q o 8 nE =11[1 \ \ ,r______, 14.. 1 1 11. 11nr ,v, .: .,.; ...... .„.,:,_ illA : it I® , 1.. .,-.. .. .--,..-.111 ri.„ 1 in o o., t, 47 11/11,• = 06 I±1 " 41 C ICC M iii o La 014 o Z z ! ca 9 _ . , ,...,, .,.., ,:„z, .,I ,., , . L, , , °111' L._ ei t I,, c..) -[1111.O - .i _,..,,=, 11‘'‘AV 1 1�; ill1 11lin LII N N C co o _ o v 11 Pi le 41 _tili..... Ph. - . \ Ario , , . .t. .. . .4 .' "TT 412 1...,.':..:''.' : ‘. ;I:ti.•_..i.:‘,..„, OivC) 4:45 11 ICX . 8 i <4, 0t Ila m1iiiiIi LLI o 'er., z z m ! C :A z.:, % '\\I * ca .,,, . (...) , IIIIIIH1,.. •.. , 0 - ,... , :Y 1 1 1 ® Ne I ] • % �t I i N N I O - CO I d, CO d O d' CCacw•.cji:Westing cr;____J/4 443 acme44t.tfw • rte-is pie eAetf MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL � 66 AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable City Council FROM: David A. Bobardt,Community Development Director DATE: December 28,2012(CC Meeting of 111612013) SUBJECT: Consider Potential City Welcome Sign on State Route-23 Freeway at Los Angeles Avenue BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION Consultants for Vernon have approached City staff recently about the'need to construct a new cell tower adjacent to the State Route (SR)-118 freeway on the Warehouse Discount Center property near Los Angeles Avenue.Community Development staff has worked with ,them on a number of concepts to comply with the Curs wireless communications fealties ordinance, including integrating antenna panels into the building design or construelhg a '4nonopine" behind the building. Their transmission needs, however, called for a tower as close to the freeway as possible,so while these alternatives ware viable,they were not optimal for coverage. Separately, one idea being contemplated by staff was to create, as part of the City's economic development efforts, a City welcome sign in this location that would help freeway travelers be aware of some of the other shopping opportunities adjacent to the freeway that are not on the Moorpark Marketplace sign tower(e.g. Staples, Dick's and Petco). Verizon consultants agreed to consider a City sign tower that would hold their antenna panels and equipment inside the tower element, and have submitted an initial concept(attached). Such a sign would require an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance as"off-premise signs are currently not permitted anywhere in the City. Property managers of the Moorpark Marketplace and Village at Moorpark have not been contacted to gauge their or their tenants' current interest in such a sign, although interest was expressed in the past Property owners for the Village at Moorpark had worked with staff•on a sign tower at the corner of Miller Parkway and Los Angeles Avenue,•but have not been actively pursuing permits for such a sign recently.This sign tower would help the visibility of their location from the freeway, but not to the extent of a sign immediately adjacent to the freeway. PC ATTACHMENT 4 31 Honorable City Council January 16,2013 Page 2 Although premature to evaluate the specific design of the sign as it would currently not be permitted, staff took the idea of a City sign for economic development purposes to the Community and Economic Development Committee (Councilmembers Mlkos and Pollock) on December 19, 2012 for discussion. The committee also considered the conceptual sign design submitted by Verizon. While understanding the economic development benefits of such a sign,the committee expressed concerns over the visual impact of a sign tower, and noted that the sign could be designed more like the sign tower for the Moorpark Marketplace, rather than what was proposed. After discussion, the committee had no recommendation for the Council as a whole. As noted above, a sign at this location advertising the centers on the other side of the freeway would require an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. Staff believes that an ordinance can be drafted that would permit such a sign without leading to a proliferation of offpremise signs elsewhere in the City, due b the unique size and location of the centers. If the City Council wishes staff to prepare such ari amendment for consideration and recommendation by the Planning Commission, the City Council may direct staff to return with a resolution to initiate consideration of a Zoning Ordinance amendment. FISCAL IMPACT None. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Direct staff as deemed appropriate Attachment 1. Conceptual Cell TowerlCity Welcome Sign S.1Communliy Devebprr enMDMNWIgenda Reports.MisclCity Welcome SignnCity Welcome Sign.docx 32 • n n � n n n • \ / + 1 . SA rhi 11 0 I0 . 7 r 0 111 . . I We r ; \ / . t-. ImscouNT r • L. NCER ORThO MATTRESS :1.... . TENANT_ ,- SIGN :1� .......••• o TENY.AN• T•SIGN•••: i •.•,..•. L .... . TENANT SIGN . •......• -• Moorpark Marketplace , .oorp TARGET KOHL'S :. ; • }. • •. .. • .4. - • . . tea, c The Village at Moorpark- ::•• -- DICK'S Pete STAPLES ,:: T— .-=�reirrrr� 2 r_�—= —..----.—.......--.....--- l',== 33 Minutes of the City Council/Successor Agency Moorpark, California Page 7 January 16.2013 service exclusively to the city and not to any person, business, or entity located in the city? Section 5.08.010 B B. modified to read: "Businesses engaged in providing professional design work, including but not Milted to architecture or landscape architecture services, provided such work does not involve on-site work within the city. There were no speakers. Mr. Ennis read the title of Ordinance No. 417. MOTION: Councilrnember Pollock moved and Councrimember Van Dam seconded a motion to waive further reading, declare Ordinance No. 417, as amended, read for the first time, and schedule second reading and adoption for February 6,2013. The motion carried by unanimous roll call vote. MOTION: Coundlmember Milos moved and Coundlmember Pollock seconded a motion to adopt Resolution No.2013-3153,adopting a revised fee schedule for services rendered pursuant to the Moorpark Municipal Code relating to Business Registration Fees and rescinding Resolution No.2011-1994. The motion carried by unanknous roil call vote. D. _�l:L::_i;:i �yi__t',1 �, welcom= 1 , ' u- 1 11 ." :i �. � _ _ . Avenue. Staff Recommendation: Direct staff as deemed appropriate. Mr. Bobardt gave the staff report. Coundlmember Micas reported she and Counc itmember Pollock serving on the Community and Economic Development committee could not come up with a unified recommendation for this signage. A discussion followed among the Coundlmembers and staff focused on: 1) Recognition of economic development potential of the sign;2)Concern regarding the conceptual design; 3) Not wanting to set a precedence for signage along State Route 23 corridor, 4) Consider siting the cell tower within an architectural structure rather than signage;5) City retains control of cell tower sites if coverage can be obtained elsewhere;and 6) Desire to explore more options. There were no speakers. MOTION: Coundlmmnber Milihouse moved and Mayor Parvin seconded a motion not to proceed with the City Welcome Sign on State Route-23 at Los Angeles Avenue. The motion carried by voice vote 3-2, Councilmembers Pollock and Van Dam dissenting. 34 RESOLUTION NO. PC-2017- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COOUNCIL APPROVAL OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 2017-04, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05, AND MODIFICATION NO. 2 TO COMMERCIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 2004-03 FOR CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A MAJOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY WITHIN A 48- FOOT HIGH TOWER AT 14339 WHITE SAGE ROAD (WAREHOUSE DISCOUNT CENTER SITE), WITH SIGNAGE ON THE TOWER, AND MAKING DETERMINATION OF EXEMPTION UNDER CEQA IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, ON THE APPLICATION OF MATT VIGIL (VINCULUMS) ON BEHALF OF VERIZON WIRELESS WHEREAS, On December 2, 2016, an application was filed for Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 2016-05 and Modification No. 2 to Commercial Planned Development (CPD) Permit No. 2004-03 by Matt Vigil (Vinculums) for a major wireless communications facility on a 48-foot high tower located at 14339 White Sage Road (Warehouse Discount Center); and WHEREAS, on May 3, 2017, the City Council referred these applications back to the Planning Commission for a recommendation, along with Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-04, which was requested by the property owner on April 26, 2017 to allow for signage on the Wireless Communications Facility at 14339 White Sage Road; and WHEREAS, at duly noticed public hearing on June 27, 2017, the Planning Commission considered Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-04, Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 2016-05 and Modification No. 2 to Commercial Planned Development (CPD) Permit No. 2004-03; and WHEREAS, at its meeting of June 27, 2017, the Planning Commission considered the agenda report 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 discussed and reached a decision on this matter; and WHEREAS, The Community Development Director has preliminarily determined the project is Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Section 15311(Class 11 - Accessory Structures) of the California Code of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines) in that the project is consistent with the applicable general and specific plan designation and all applicable general and specific plan policies as well as with the PC ATTACHMENT 5 35 Resolution No. PC-2017- Page 2 applicable zoning designation and regulations; the proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses; the project site has no value, as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species, approval of a project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality; and the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. No further environmental documentation is required. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: The Planning Commission concurs with the Community Development Director's determination that this project is Categorically Exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Section 15311 (Class 11 — Accessory Structures) of the California Code of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines) in that the project is consistent with the applicable general and specific plan designation and all applicable general and specific plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations; the proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses; the project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. No further environmental documentation is required. SECTION 2. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT FINDINGS: The Planning Commission finds Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-04 is consistent with the City of Moorpark General Plan and all adopted Specific Plans, in that this ordinance supports one of the goals of the Land Use Element which calls for a variety of commercial facilities which serve community residents and meet regional needs. Viable and aesthetically pleasing wireless communication facilities are an example of commercial facilities that provide important services to community residents and serve regional needs for wireless communications. SECTION 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS: Based upon the information set forth in the staff report(s), accompanying studies, and oral and written public testimony, the Planning Commission makes the following findings in accordance with City of Moorpark, Municipal Code Section 17.44.040: With Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance as proposed by Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-04: A. The proposed use, as conditioned, is consistent with the provisions of the General Plan, zoning ordinance, and any other applicable regulations, in that the proposed use, height, setbacks and improvements are consistent with City Code requirements. The tower is proposed at 48 feet high and includes 4 feet of Spanish roof tile and a metal finial. 36 Resolution No. PC-2017- Page 3 B. The proposed use, as conditioned, is compatible with both existing and permitted land uses in the surrounding area, in that the wireless communication facility will provide additional cellular service to the commercial and industrial areas. The proposed tower has been determined to be in an appropriate location for a wireless communication facility by the city. C. The proposed use, as conditioned, is compatible with the scale, visual character and design of surrounding properties, in that it is designed so as not to detract from the physical and visual quality of the area. The material and color of the tower as conditioned complement the existing commercial buildings. D. The proposed use, as conditioned, would not be obnoxious or harmful, or impair the utility of neighboring property or uses, in that the proposed use has been designed to eliminate any negative visual impacts. The proposed tower will not eliminate parking spaces, obstruct driveways, or disrupt vehicular or pedestrian circulation. E. The proposed use, as conditioned, would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, or welfare, in that conditions of approval have been added to protect the public. Conditional Use Permit for Wireless Facilities Findings: A. The proposed facility, as conditioned, will not create any significant blockage to public views, in that the tower will be placed on the corner of an existing commercial site, away from driveways and traffic line-of-sight. B. The proposed facility, as conditioned, will be an enhancement to the City due to its ability to provide additional communication capabilities in the eastern part of the City and along California State Route 23. C. The proposed facility, as conditioned, will be aesthetically integrated into its surrounding land uses and natural environment, in that it will be constructed of materials, painted in a manner, and constructed in a style that will complement the existing commercial buildings. D. The proposed facility, as conditioned, will comply with FCC regulations regarding interference with the reception or transmission of other wireless service signals within the City and surrounding community. E. The proposed facility, as conditioned, will operate in compliance with all other applicable Federal regulations for such facilities, including safety regulations, in that AT&T operates its wireless network in compliance with its FCC license and FCC rules and regulations concerning frequency emissions and/or radio frequency interference. The transmission densities emanating from the facility will not exceed current American National Standards Institute (ANSI) recommended maximum exposure levels for wireless transmission frequencies which do not 37 Resolution No. PC-2017- Page 4 have the potential to significantly impact the community. In all cases, Effective Radiated Power (ERP), and its associated electromagnetic (EM) radiation power densities are a small fraction of the maximum permissible exposure set by ANSI, or the more restrictive exposure standard put forth by the National Commission on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP). F. The public need for the use of the cellular facility has been documented consistent with California law, in that the proposed cell site will provide a substantial increase in the coverage area. G. The applicant will provide at its own expense a field survey or other method consistent with Federal law to provide written verification that the facility is in compliance with applicable Federal regulations regarding electromagnetic frequency emissions. This radio-frequency (RF) report shall also include signal strength exhibits, including calculations and measurements under maximum loading conditions. Such field survey shall be provided to the City upon request, not to exceed one such request in any 24-month period. SECTION 4. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FINDINGS: Based upon the information set forth in the staff report(s), accompanying studies, and oral and written public testimony, the Planning Commission makes the following findings in accordance with City of Moorpark, Municipal Code Section 17.44.040: A. The site design, as conditioned, including structure location, size, height, setbacks, massing, scale, architectural style and colors, and landscaping, is consistent with the provisions of the general plan, any applicable specific plans, zoning ordinance, and any other applicable regulations in that the proposed facility has been designed to complement the surrounding built and natural environment; B. The site design, as conditioned, would not create negative impacts on or impair the utility of properties, structures or uses in the surrounding area in that the facility has been designed in a manner consistent with the character of the community; C. The proposed use, as conditioned, is compatible with existing and permitted uses in the surrounding area in that a wireless communication facility is not unexpected in the Commercial Planned Development zone. SECTION 5. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council: 1) approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-04 as shown in Exhibit A, attached; and 2) approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05 and Modification No. 2 to Commercial Planned Development Permit No. 2004-03, subject to Standard and Special Conditions of Approval as shown in Exhibit B, attached. 38 Resolution No. PC-2017- Page 5 SECTION 4. Filing of Resolution: The Community Development Director shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original resolutions. The action of the foregoing direction was approved by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PASSED, AND ADOPTED this 27th day of June, 2017. Kipp Landis, Chair • David A. Bobardt, Community Development Director Exhibit A— Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-04 Exhibit B — Standard and Special Conditions of Approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05 and Modification No. 2 to Commercial Planned Development Permit No. 2004-03 39 Resolution No. PC-2017- Page 6 EXHIBIT A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 2017-04 AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 17.40 (SIGN REGULATIONS) AND CHAPTER 17.42 (WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES) OF TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE MOORPARK MUNICIPAL CODE Letter "I" is added to table in Section 17.40.110 (Commercial/industrial zones) of Chapter 17.40 (Sign Regulations) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Moorpark Municipal Code as follows: Sign Type Sign Location Maximum Sign Area, Other Regulations Height, and Width I.Wireless communication facilities. Signs on a stealth Location must comply Area: Two hundred Number: One(1)tower facility designed as a with standards in (200) square feet element with signage tower element on Chapter 17.42 (Wireless maximum per each side per eligible site. private property Communications of tower element, but Maximum four(4) signs (Only permitted in the Facilities) and CPD not to exceed 50% of on each side of Tower Commercial Planned Permit. the surface area of any element. Development(CPD) one side of tower Design: Tower element zone on a site element. must meet definition of developed with 100,000 Height and Width: Per stealth facility in square feet or more of Chapter 17.42 (Wireless Chapter 17.42 (Wireless building area and Communications Communications adjacent to a freewaY.1 Facilities)and CPD Facilities)and have an Permit. Signage may approved CPD Permit not extend beyond the with a design, including edges of the tower materials, colors, element. architectural style and details, and proposed signage to match existing site architecture as determined by the City Council. Illumination: Internal, but no exposed neon lighting or exposed bulb. Landscaping: Four(4) foot wide planter surrounding tower element. 40 Resolution No. PC-2017- Rage 7 Section 17.42.050 (Development requirements for all wireless communications facilities) of Chapter 17.42 (Wireless Communications Facilities) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Moorpark Municipal Code is amended as follows: 17.42.050 Development requirements for all wireless communications facilities. A. General Development Requirements. The facility shall comply with each of the following requirements: 1. Any signs or advertising devices other than certification, public safety, warning, or other required seals or required signage are prohibited, except as provided for in Chapter 17.40 (Sign Regulations). 2. Any and all accessory equipment, or other equipment associated with the operation of a minor facility, including but not limited to transmission cables, when not located within an existing above-ground building in a manner that is not visible from the outside, in association with a stealth facility, must be located within conduit or in an underground vault. Any and all accessory equipment, or other equipment associated with the operation of a major facility, including but not limited to transmission cables, must be located within conduit, an underground vault, or an above-ground building or enclosure in a manner that complies with the development standards of the zoning district in which such equipment is located. Equipment located above ground must be visually compatible with the surrounding buildings and structures and either shrouded by sufficient landscaping to screen the equipment from view, or designed to match the architecture of adjacent buildings. 3. The wireless communications facility's exterior finish shall be comprised of non- reflective material(s) and painted, screened, or camouflaged to blend with the materials and colors of surrounding buildings, structures, topography and vegetation. 4. Wireless communications facilities and/or support equipment that are accessible to pedestrians shall be covered with a clear anti-graffiti material of a type approved by the planning commission or community development director. The planning commission or community development director may grant an exception to this requirement if the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the planning commission or community development director that there is adequate security around the facility to prevent graffiti. 5. All screening used in connection with a wall mounted and/or roof mounted wireless facility must be compatible with the architecture, color, texture, and materials of the building or structure to which it is attached, and must be maintained to the satisfaction of the community development director. 6. Wireless facilities may not be illuminated unless specifically required by the Federal Aviation Administration or other governmental agencies with appropriate jurisdiction, or to illuminate signage as allowed by Chapter 17.40 (Sign Regulations). 7. The applicant, and the property owner if different from the applicant, shall not enter into any exclusive agreement which prohibits future collocation of other facilities on or with the applicant's facility, unless technological requirements preclude that collocation. B. Setback Requirements. All facilities must comply with the main structure setback requirements for the zone in which they are located as specified in Chapter 17.24 of the Moorpark Municipal Code, with the exception of utility mounted facilities, if all other requirements in Sections 17.42.070(B) and 17.42.070(C) can be met. In all 41 Resolution Noe PC-2017- Page 8 instances, the determination of need for a larger setback for the facility may be considered by the city in connection with the processing of the applicable permit. (Ord. 396 § 3, 2011) - END - 42 Resolution No. PC-291 7- Page 9 EXHIBIT B STANDARD AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) NO. 2016-05 AND MODIFICATION NO. 2 TO COMMERCIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 2004-03 STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The applicant shall comply with Standard Conditions of Approval for Conditional Use Permits as adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2009-2799 (Exhibit B), except as modified by the following Special Conditions of Approval. In the event of conflict between a Standard and Special Condition of Approval, the Special Condition shall apply. SPECIAL CONDITIONS 1. This Conditional Use 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 conditional use permit or impacts that are much greater than anticipated or disclosed at the time of application for the conditional use 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. 2. The development must be in substantial conformance with the plans presented in conjunction with the application for Conditional Use Permit No. 2014-09 and Modification No. 1 to Commercial Planned Development No. 2004-03, except any modifications as may be required to meet specific Code standards or other conditions stipulated herein. 3. Approval of a Zoning Clearance is required prior to the issuance of any new Building Permits. All contractors must have valid City of Moorpark Business Registrations. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the wireless communications facility, the property owner and City shall enter into an agreement to allow City Welcome signage on the tower. 43 Resolution No. PC-2017- Page 10 5. This facility is approved as an unstaffed operation. Following construction of the facility, traffic generated by this use shall be limited to periodic and emergency maintenance of the facility. Required parking and loading spaces on the site shall be maintained in compliance with Zoning Ordinance. 6. The applicant will provide, at its expense, a field survey or other method consistent with Federal law to provide written verification that the facility is in compliance with applicable Federal regulations regarding electromagnetic frequency emissions. This radio-frequency (RF) report shall also include signal strength exhibits, including calculations and measurements under maximum loading conditions. Such field survey shall be provided to the City upon request, not to exceed one (1) such request in any 24-month period. 7. Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Clearance for any new building permits, the applicant shall submit all construction plans for review and approval by the Community Development Director. 8. The wireless facilities under this permit shall be maintained so that the materials and colors remain compatible with the rest of the building. Failure to maintain these facilities to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director shall result in the scheduling of a revocation hearing. 9. In the event that this antenna array is abandoned, the applicant shall remove the facility within ninety (90) days at the request of the Community Development Director. Should the facility owner fail to remove the facility upon abandonment, the property owner shall be responsible for its removal. 10. In the event that the uses under this Conditional Use Permit are determined to be abandoned, the City of Moorpark may, at its discretion, initiate revocation procedures for cause per the provisions of Section 17.44.080. For purposes of this condition, "abandoned" shall mean a cessation of a business or businesses which would render the use unavailable to the public for a period of 180 or more consecutive days. Initiation of revocation procedures may result in the revocation of the permit or modification of the permit, based upon the evidence presented at the hearing. 11. Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Clearance for building permit, all landscape deficiencies must be corrected, and a landscape maintenance plan shall be submitted for review and approval of the Community Development Director and Parks and Recreation Director. 12. Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Clearance for building permit, hedge plants shall be planted on the north side of the property, adjacent to the parking lot to the satisfactory of the Community Development Director. -End- 44 PlanotintatTM' of z7, 2C17 ACTION: Ap p rr'vM MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION BY: Moorpark, California May 23, 2017 A Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Moorpark was held on May 23, 2017, in the Council Chambers of said City located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California. 1. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Landis called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: David Bobardt, Community Development Director, led the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Aquino, Haverstock, Vice Chair Hamous, and Chair Landis. Absent: Commissioner Di Cecco Staff Present: David Bobardt, Community Development Director; Sean Corrigan, City Engineer/Public Works Director; Freddy A. Carrillo, Associate Planner I; and Joyce Figueroa, Administrative Assistant II. 4. PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS, AND SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: None. 5. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. 6. REORDERING OF, AND ADDITIONS TO, THE AGENDA: UNANIMOUS CONSENSUS: It was the unanimous consensus of the Commission for Item 9.A. to be heard prior to Public Hearings upon the request of Mr. Bobardt. 45 Minutes of the Planning Commission Moorpark, California Page 2 May 23, 2017 7. ANNOUNCEMENTS, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, AND REPORTS ON MEETINGS/CONFERENCES ATTENDED BY THE COMMISSION: Commissioner Haverstock announced the Moorpark Morning Rotary Club Moorpark Field of Valor event will be held at Tierra Rejada Park on May 29, 2017. Commissioner Hamous announced the Moorpark Rotary Golf Invitational will be held on June 1, 2017 at the Moorpark Country Club. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (next Resolution No. PC-2017-617) A. Consider Resolution Recommending Approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2017-01, an Amendment to Chapter 17.08 (Definitions), Chapter 17.20 (Uses by Zone), Chapter 17.28 (Standards for Specific Uses), Chapter 17.32 (Off-Street Parking Requirements), and Chapter 17.36 (Standards for Specific Zones and Zone Types) of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Moorpark Municipal Code to Address Changes in State Law Related to Accessory Dwelling Units and Determining that this Action is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the public hearing, accept public testimony and close the public hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. PC-2017-617. (Staff: Freddy Carrillo) Mr. Carrillo gave the staff report. A discussion followed among the Commissioners and staff, which focused on garage conversion and setbacks; landscape requirement; parking requirements; and minimum lot size of the units. Chair Landis opened the public hearing. In response to Chair Landis, Mr. Bobardt stated there were no speaker cards or written cards for this item. Chair Landis closed the Public Hearing. A discussion followed among the Commissioners supporting the project. MOTION: Commissioner Aquino moved and Commissioner Haverstock seconded a motion to approve staff recommendation, including adoption of Resolution No. PC-2017-617. The motion carried by voice vote 4-0, Commissioner Di Cecco absent. The City Council has final approval authority for this project. 46 Minutes of the Planning Commission Moorpark, California Page 3 May 23, 2017 9. DISCUSSION ITEMS: A. Consider Draft Seven-Year Capital Improvement Program for the Department of Public Works for FY 2016/17 ® FY 2022/23. Staff Recommendation: 1) Find the draft Seven Year Capital Improvement Program for the Department of Public Works for FY 2016/17 - FY 2022/23 to be in conformity with the Moorpark General Plan, except as noted above; and 2) Find the planned acquisition of street right-of-way for certain specified projects described in this report, to be in conformity with the Moorpark General Plan. (Staff: Sean Corrigan) Mr. Corrigan gave the staff report. There were no speakers. A discussion followed among the Commissioners and staff, which focused on traffic driving northbound on Moorpark Road into the two left and one right hand turn lanes, illegally driving straight onto Miller Parkway. Is there some way to allow the traffic to go straight as opposed to turning left or right. Mr. Corrigan stated that he would make inquiries with Moorpark Police Department regarding records of accidents that may have occurred at the intersection. MOTION: Commissioner Haverstock moved and Vice Chair Hamous seconded a motion to find the program to be in conformity with the Moorpark General Plan except as noted; and to find the planned acquisition of street right-of-way for specified projects to be in conformity with the Moorpark Gene4ral Plan. The motion carried by voice vote 4-09, Commissioner Di Cecco absent. 10. CONSENT CALENDAR: MOTION: Commissioner Haverstock moved and Vice Chair Hamous seconded a motion to approve the Consent Calendar. The motion carried by voice vote 4-0, Commissioner Di Cecco absent. A. Consider Approval of the Regular Meeting Minutes of April 25, 2017. Staff Recommendation: Approve the minutes. 47 Minutes of the Planning Commission Moorpark, California Page 4 May 23, 2017 11. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION: Chair Landis moved and Commissioner Aquino seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion carried by voice vote 4-0, Commissioner Di Cecco absent. The time was 7:39 p.m. Kipp Landis, Chair David A. Bobardt, Community Development Director 48