HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1997 0305 CC REG ITEM 08Bq1A. (9 '064)
Crry of M00yM*J , CALIFORMA
Cly "Meeting
Of 3 r- 199,E
AGENDA REPORT
CITY OF MOORPARK
TO: The City Council
BYa�,...�
FROM: Paul Porter, Senior PlanneAbl)
Nelson Miller, Director of Community Development
DATE: February 26, 1997 (CC meeting of 3/5/97)
SUBJECT: CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 96 -1
REQUESTING FOR A REVISION TO AMEND SECTION 17.52.060
C.2. OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW A CHANGE OF USE OF AN
EXISTING LEGAL NON - CONFORMING USE TO A SIMILAR USE WITH
APPROVAL OF A CITY COUNCIL APPROVED CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT ON THE APPLICATION OF A.C. CONSTRUCTION
On November 28, 1994, the Director of Community Development
approved Zoning Clearance No. 94 -0267 for Temporary Storage of
Recreational Vehicles on a 6.82 acre site (Assessor's Parcel No.
506 -0- 020 -64) located at the northwest corner of Spring Road and
the Arroyo Simi, just south of Los Angeles Avenue. The Temporary
Use for the storage of recreational vehicles was approved for 18
months ending on May 28, 1996. A condition which was suggested by
the applicant was, if the applicant intended to provide vehicle
storage beyond the 18 -month period, the applicant would apply for
a Zoning Ordinance Amendment and Commercial Planned Development
permit to allow recreational vehicle storage in the Commercial
Planned Development zone to be filed with the Department of
Community Development prior to termination of the 18 -month period.
A determination was made that allowing storage of recreational
vehicles on the site on a temporary basis as allowed under the
Temporary Use Permit would not constitute an expansion of the
contractor's service yard, which was an existing non - conforming
use. The Temporary Use Permit for this use was reviewed by Council
and allowed for this trial period.
A: \5MAR97.CC ,
W2
CC Report for meeting of 3/5/97
AC Construction (Ordinance Amendment No. 96 -1)
Page No. 2
It was understood that the issuance of the Zoning Clearance for the
temporary use of the property for recreational vehicle storage did
not guarantee that the City would approve a Zoning Ordinance
Amendment for permanent use of the property for recreational
vehicle storage in the Commercial Planned Development (CPD) zone.
The temporary allowance of recreational vehicle storage was allowed
as the proposed use was determined to be similar to the existing
Contractor's Storage Yard use already allowed on the site. As
discussed during applicant /City staff discussions and City Council
deliberation on this matter, once the economic feasibility of
recreational vehicle storage was established on the site, the
applicant would request that the use be allowed more permanent by
making application for a Zoning Ordinance Amendment and other
appropriate permit applications.
A MO 0 • u-• \•
Subsequent to notice of expiration to the property owner, on August
5, 1996, the applicant applied for Zoning Ordinance Amendment No.
96 -1 and requested that this matter be brought before the Community
Development Committee to discuss the continuation of storage of
recreational vehicles as well as some type of structures to allow
for mini - storage uses. The Community Development Committee
discussed this matter at their meeting on August 5, 1996, and
requested staff to report to the City Council regarding options
available to allow these uses at Mr. Anderson's property, including
a request by Mr. Anderson, to extend the use of recreational
storage on the property pending the resolution of the Zoning
Ordinance Amendment and request for Commercial Planned Development
Permit.
On October 2, 1996, the City Council discussed this matter,
including the possibility of establishing a Community Services Zone
to allow recreational vehicle storage, as well as mini - warehouse
and other uses, including potentially removing the non - conforming
contractor's storage yard use. After discussing the matter, the
City Council continued the matter to October 16, 1996 and directed
staff to modify the Resolution to authorize the Planning Commission
to study, set a public hearing and provide a recommendation to the
City Council pertaining to amendments to the Moorpark Municipal
Code to allow recreational vehicle storage in the Commercial
Planned Development (CPD) zone. The City Council was not in favor
A: \SMAR97.CC
QM 023
CC Report for meeting of 3/5/97
AC Construction (Ordinance Amendment No. 96 -1)
Page No. 3
of allowing mini - warehouse uses in the CPD Zone with the exception
of possibly providing some storage for the recreational vehicle
owner. However, it was indicated limiting use only to the
recreational vehicle owners would be impracticle to enforce.
On January 27 and February 10, 1997, the Planning Commission held
a public hearing on this matter and recommended that Section No.
17.20 (Uses by Zone) of the Moorpark Municipal Code not be amended
to allow recreational vehicle storage in Commercial Planned
Development Zones for the following reasons:
a. Allowing the storage of recreational on CPD zoned
properties with direct access along Los Angeles Avenue or
other six -lane arterials will reduce prime commercial
property available for commercial development, especially
retail uses, which would generate sales tax to provide a
better fiscal basis for City services. Furthermore,
allowing storage of recreational vehicles in Commercial
Planned Development (CPD) Districts generally may create
adverse visual impacts.
b. Allowing uses in CPD zones in secondary locations may
include areas adjacent to residential areas, or have
other unintended consequences or impacts and may further
reduce areas available for other commercial uses that
better contribute to purposes of these areas.
In addition, the Planning Commission recommends the following
addition to Section 17.52.060 C.2. of the Municipal Code as it
would allow a change of use of an existing legal non - conforming use
to a similar use with approval of a Conditional Use Permit if the
changed use has no greater impacts than the existing legal
nonconforming use and the changed use is not an expansion of the
legal nonconforming use. By requiring the City Council approved
Conditional Use Permit, conditions could be placed on the permit to
insure that the changed use is compatible with the surrounding
properties. For example any changed use could be denied on the
grounds of unsuitable location and would have to meet the findings
as specified in Section 17.44.030 of the Municipal Code and be
compatible with the character of surrounding development, , not be
A: \5MAR97.CC '
CC Report for meeting of 3/5/97
AC Construction (Ordinance Amendment No. 96 -1)
Page No. 4
detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or
welfare, be compatible with existing and planned uses in the
general area, and not be obnoxious or harmful, or impair the
utility of neighboring properties, as specifically listed below:
a. Is consistent with the intent and provisions of the
city's general plan and this title;
b. Is compatible with the character of surrounding
development;
C. Would not be obnoxious or harmful, or impair the utility
of neighboring property or uses;
d. Would not be detrimental to the public interest, health,
safety, convenience or welfare; and
e. If a conditionally permitted use, is compatible with
existing and planned land uses in the general area where
the development is to be located; and
f. Is compatible with the scale, visual character and design
of the of surrounding properties, designed so as to
enhance the physical and visual quality of the community,
and the structure(s) have design features which provide
visual relief and separation between land uses of
conflicting character.
Section 17.52.060 C.2
Change of Use. The nonconforming use may be changed to a use
that is similar with approval of a City Council approved
Conditional Permit pursuant to the requirements of Chapter
17.44 (Entitlements- Process and Procedures), provided the
changed use is considered to have no greater impact than the
previously existing use, is similar to the nonconforming use
and is not considered as an expansion of the existing use.
Conditions may be imposed, including, but not limited to time
limitations, as deemed necessary for the compatibility of such
nonconforming use with adjacent properties.
A: \5MAR97.CC
CC Report for meeting of 3/5/97
AC Construction (Ordinance Amendment No. 96 -1)
Page No. 5
Time Extension forRecreati onal_ __yehi__ orage at the_ -.c_
C'O11StrLGt� Ori�_l.t�
On October 16, 1996, the City Council authorized the applicant to
continue the use of temporary recreational storage on a 6.82 acre
site (Assessor's Parcel No. 506 -0- 020 -64) until thirty days after
the City Council renders a decision on the zoning Ordinance
Amendment. Filing a complete Conditional Use Permit application
shall allow an additional sixty (60) day extension of the temporary
recreational vehicle storage. However, this time extension shall
not exceed a maximum of one year from October 16, 1996, unless
subsequently extended by the City Council.
Staff recommends that the proposed amendment to the Municipal Code
does not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the
environment is categorically exempt pursuant to State CEQA
Guidelines pursuant to Section 15061 (b) (3) . Any specific request
for approval of a recreational storage facility would require a
separate environmental evaluation subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.
1. Open the public hearing, take public testimony and close the
public hearing.
2. Determine that the allowing recreational vehicle storage at
the AC Construction property in that the proposed amendment to
the Municipal Code does not have the potential for causing a
significant effect on the environment.
3. Introduce the Ordinance for first reading.
4. Require the applicant to apply for a Conditional Use Permit to
continue the use of temporary recreational storage on a 6.82
acre site (Assessor's Parcel No. 506 -0- 020 -64) within thirty
days after the City Council adopts the attached Ordinance.
A: \5MAR97.CC
CC Report for meeting of 3/5/97
AC Construction (Ordinance Amendment No. 96 -1)
Page No. 6
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission Resolution
2. Draft Ordinance
A: \5MAR97.CC
000027
RESOLUTION NO. PC -97 -331
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA PROVIDING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY
COUNCIL PERTAINING TO A PROPOSED CHANGE TO SECTION 17.52.060
C.2 (CHANGE OF USE) OF THE MOORPARK MUNICIPAL CODE CITY OF
MOORPARK ZONING ORDINANCE.
Whereas, Section 17.60.020 of the Municipal Code provides that the
City Council may initiate proceedings to consider amendments to the
Zoning Code by the adoption of a resolution of intention requesting the
Planning Commission to set the matter for study, public hearing, and
recommendation within a reasonable time; and
Whereas, On October 16, 1996, the City Council authorized the
initiation of proceedings to consider an amendment to the Municipal Code
by the adoption of a resolution of intention requesting the Planning
Commission to set the matter for study, public hearing, and
recommendation to the City Council for the purposes of considering an
amendment to Section 17.20 to allow recreational vehicle storage in the
CPD zones; and
Whereas, at a duly noticed public hearing on January 27 and February
10, 1997, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter;
and
Whereas, the Planning Commission determined that the modifications
to the City's Municipal Code is categorically exempt pursuant to State
CEQA Guidelines pursuant to Section 15061 (b) (3) in that the proposed
amendment to the Municipal Code does not have the potential for causing
a significant effect on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK,
CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That on January 27 and February 10, 1997 the Planning
Commission studied, held a public hearing, and recommended that the City
Council make the modification described in Section 3 to the Municipal
Code to modify nonconforming use section.
SECTION 2. The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council
that Section No. 17.20 (Uses by Zone) of the Moorpark Municipal Code not
be amended to allow recreational vehicle storage in Commercial Planned
Development Zones for the following reasons:
a. Allowing the storage of recreational on CPD zoned properties
with direct access along Los Angeles Avenue or other six -lane
arterials will reduce prime commercial property available for
commercial development, especially retail uses, which would
generate sales tax to provide a better fiscal basis for City
Attachment
I 1 =�
Resolution No. PC -97 -331
Proposed Change to Section 17.52.060 C -2
Page 2
services. Furthermore, allowing storage of recreational
vehicles in Commercial Planned Development (CPD) Districts
generally may create adverse visual impacts.
b. Allowing uses in CPD zones in secondary locations may include
areas adjacent to residential areas, or have other unintended
consequences or impacts and may further reduce areas available
for other commercial uses that better contribute to purposes
of these areas.
SECTION 2. The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council
the following addition to Section 17.52.060 C.2. of the Municipal Code:
3. - Change of Use - The nonconforming use may be changed to a use
that is similar with approval of a City Council approved
Conditional Permit pursuant to the requirements of Chapter
17.44 (Entitlement- Process and Procedures), provided the
changed use is considered to have no greater impact than the
previously existing use, is similar to the nonconforming use
and is not considered as an expansion of the existing use.
Conditions may be imposed, including, but not limited to time
limitations, as deemed necessary for the compatibility of such
nonconforming use with adjacent properties.
SECTION 3. That the modification to the City's Municipal Code is
categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15061 (b) (3) in that the
proposed Ordinance Amendment does not have the potential for causing a
significant effect on the environment.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1997.
AYES: Millhouse, Norcross, Miller, Lowenberc and Acosta
NOES:
ATTEST:
Celia LaFleur, Secretary
to the Planning Commission
Ernesto T,, Aco )3th, ChaXrman