HomeMy WebLinkAboutAG RPTS 2018 1127 PC REG
Resolution No. PC-2018-634
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
NOVEMBER 27, 2018
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-2018-634)
A. Consider a Resolution Recommending to the City Council Re-Approval of Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 5437 and a One-Year Extension of Residential Planned
Development (RPD) Permit No. 2004-05 for 21 Homes on Residential Lots and 1
Open Space Lot on Approximately 42.4 Acres on the East Side of Walnut Canyon
Road at Championship Drive, on the Application of Birdsall Group, LLC.
(continued open public hearing from August 28, 2018)Staff
Recommendation: 1) Continue to accept public testimony and close the public
hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. PC-2018-____ recommending to the City
Council conditional re-approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. ___ and a one
year extension to Residential Planned Development No. 2004-05. (Staff: Joseph
Fiss).
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
November 27, 2018
Page 2
B. Consider a Resolution Recommending to the City Council Approval of General
Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change No. 2013-02, Residential Planned
Development Permit No. 2013-01, and Development Agreement No. 2013-01, and
Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration Under CEQA in Connection
Therewith, for a 390-unit Senior Community on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road
and West of Walnut Canyon Road, on the Application of Ernie Mansi for
Aldersgate Investment, LLC.(continued open public hearing from September
25, 2018 and October 23, 2018) Staff Recommendation: 1) Open the public
hearing, accept public testimony and close the public hearing; 2) Recommend
approval to the City Council of a Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 3) Adopt
Resolution No. PC-2018-__ recommending to the City Council conditional
approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change No. 2013-02,
Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01, and Development
Agreement No. 2013-01. (Staff: Joseph Fiss).
9. DISCUSSION ITEMS:
10. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. Consider Approval of the Regular Meeting Minutes of October 23, 2018. Staff
Recommendation: Approve the minutes.
11. ADJOURNMENT:
Posted: November 21, 2018.
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).
CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
Planning Commission Meeting
of November 27, 2018
ACTION:
The Commission Recommended
Denial of Application.
BY: J. Figueroa
A. Consider a Resolution Recommending to the City Council Re-Approval of
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5437 and a One-Year Extension of Residential
Planned Development (RPD) Permit No. 2004-05 for 21 Homes on Residential
Lots and 1 Open Space Lot on Approximately 42.4 Acres on the East Side of
Walnut Canyon Road at Championship Drive, on the Application of Birdsall
Group, LLC.(continued open public hearing from August 28, 2018)Staff
Recommendation: 1) Continue to accept public testimony and close the public
hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. PC-2018-____ recommending to the City
Council conditional re-approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. ___ and a
one year extension to Residential Planned Development No. 2004-05. (Staff:
Joseph Fiss).
Item: 8.A.
MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Planning Commission
FROM: Joseph Fiss, Planning Manager
DATE: 11/27/2018 (Continued from 8/28/2018 PC Meeting)
SUBJECT: Consider a Resolution Recommending to the City Council Re-
Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5437 and a One-Year
Extension of Residential Planned Development (RPD) Permit No.
2004-05 for 21 Homes on Residential Lots and 1 Open Space Lot on
Approximately 42.4 Acres on the East Side of Walnut Canyon Road
at Championship Drive, on the Application of Birdsall Group, LLC
BACKGROUND
On August 28, 2018, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing and, due to
the concerns of adjacent residents, continued the meeting with the public hearing open
to the meeting of November 27, 2018.
The applicant has been working with the Homeowner’s Association, City Attorney, and
staff to resolve outstanding concerns regarding construction and ongoing access.
The primary access for this project was designed to take access through the adjacent
tract 5045-8, commonly known as The Pinnacle (Toll). The Pinnacle project was
approved as part of the Moorpark Highlands Specific Plan. Both projects were originally
entitled around the same time.
In October of 2004, the subdivision map for The Pinnacle project was approved,
including an easement for the benefit of this project. This easement was shown on
recorded map for Tract 5045-8 as an easement to Birdsall deferred to a separate
instrument (Attachment 3). The easement described in Easement Notes on Page 9 and
is denoted as [D] on Lot 11 and a corner of Lot 10 on Page 12.
1
In April of 2005, Resolution No. 2005-2306 (Attachment 4) was adopted by the City
Council, approving the Residential Planned Development for the Pinnacle. Condition of
approval No. 10 required the provision of a vehicular access easement to the adjacent
property to the west, allowing allowed vehicular access through the private street
system of the Pinnacle.
The Pinnacle Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions, were adopted by Toll in August
of 2010 (Attachment 5). Sections 2.19.10, 2.21, and 3.4.11 of this document address
the aforementioned easements and agreement.
Toll subsequently prepared an access and maintenance agreement (Attachment 6),
signed by representatives of Toll, A. Dee Wayne Jones for Canyon Crest Partners
(owners prior to Birdsall Group LLC), and by the owner of lot 10 in June and July of
2013. This document was not signed by the owner of lot 11 and was never recorded.
However, in July of 2018, the owner of lot 11 signed a separate easement instrument
granting access to Birdsall.
Staff is proposing two new conditions to address the concerns of existing residents and
to ensure future residents have access to their homes in accordance with the project
design. If it is later determined that the subdivision does not have access through
Pinnacle, the map would have to be redesigned to ensure access can be provided.
On January 16, 2018, an application was submitted by Birdsall Group, LLC (Scott
Birdsall) for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5437 for 21 residential lots and 1 open
space lot on approximately 42.4 acres on the east side of Walnut Canyon Road at
Championship Drive. This map was previously approved on May 17, 2006 under
Resolution 2006-2463 but has since expired. The applicant has resubmitted the exact
same map, with the same map number, as was previously approved. The approval was
in conjunction with a Residential Planned Development, Zone Change, General Plan
Amendment, and Development Agreement.
Due to market conditions and developer issues, development of this project was
delayed. Development Agreement 2006-01 remains in effect until June 21, 2026 and
Residential Planned Development 2004-05 (approving architecture) was renewed by a
modification to the RPD on March 4, 2015, remaining in effect until March 4, 2018 (3
years from the date of the adoption of Resolution No. 2015-3368). Two additional one-
year extensions were proposed to be permitted at the Community Development
Director’s discretion upon finding progress on project implementation. The applicant
has requested the first one-year extension of the Residential Planned Development
concurrently with this application.
Normally, an extension of an RPD would be considered solely by the Community
Development Director. However, the Zoning code states if more than one discretionary
permit or exception application is required for a proposed use, the Director may require
2
all applications for the proposed use, processed, considered, and decided concurrently
through the most thorough decision-making process and by the highest decision-making
authority of the permits and/or exceptions requested. In this case, it is appropriate for
the Planning Commission and City Council to consider the VTTM and RPD extension
together, since they are so closely tied.
There have been no changes in site conditions since the project and VTTM were
originally approved. No new analysis is necessary, although some modifications to the
conditions of approval are proposed. When this project was originally approved, the
City had not yet adopted Resolution No. 2009-2700 which approved the use of standard
conditions of approval for development projects. The proposed draft resolution adds
several special conditions of approval by reiterating those original conditions specific to
this project, and at the same time adopting, by reference, the standard conditions of
approval.
When the project was originally approved, secondary access was allowed to be
maintained and secured for emergency use only. This was typically done by use of
what is referred to as a Knox Box, which allows only emergency responders to use such
access. Due to lessons learned in recent incidents, the Fire Department has moved
away from allowing emergency only access and now requires secondary access to be
easily useable at all times. This allows for safe entry and exit of residents and
emergency responders in the event the main access is unusable. Signs may be
installed indicating the purpose of the access is for emergency use only. Special
conditions No. 4, 17, and 18 in the draft resolution have been modified to reflect this
requirement as follows:
4. The existing driveway off of Walnut Canyon Road shall be used solely for
emergency access and shall have a decorative driveway constructed with an
electric a gate installed to the satisfaction of the Fire Department that only opens
out to Walnut Canyon Road. A plan for the design and operation of the gate
shall be submitted for review and approval of the Community Development
Director and Fire Department and shall be constructed prior to the issuance of
any residential building permits.
17. Existing driveway at the westerly portion of property shall be for the sole purpose
of emergency access only, subject to the review and approval of the Fire
Department.
18. The existing driveway to be used as emergency access only, shall have a
decorative gate designed and located subject to the review and approval of the
Fire Department equipped with fire department approved locks, which shall be
installed westerly of the proposed fire department turnaround.
3
Further, Condition No. 10, regarding a conservation easement over the areas shown
as open space has been clarified to indicate the easement must be shown and
dedicated on the recorded final map to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and
Community Development Director, as follows:
10. Prior to the approval of the Final Map, the applicant shall offer to irrevocably
dedicate a conservation easement to the City of Moorpark over the areas shown
as open space on the Tentative Tract Map No. 5437, to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer and Community Development Director. The conservation
easement shall be recorded on the Final Map.
In addition several conditions of approval from the original standard conditions have
been brought into the special conditions of approval and a few new conditions of
approval have been added, consistent with conditions of approval from recently
approved projects. These are reflected in Special Conditions of Approval 26 to 39.
Conditions of approval specific to the RPD are proposed to remain unchanged, as the
second part of this request is merely an extension of time to the approved RPD and no
modifications are proposed.
With respect to access through the Pinnacle project, two new conditions of approval are
proposed as follows:
41. The applicant shall provide evidence satisfactory to the Community Development
Director that access rights exist through Tract 5045-8 (The Pinnacle) development’s
private streets and gates. Such confirmation may be in the form of satisfactory
easements or agreements, such as written confirmation from the Pinnacle
Homeowner’s Association.
42. Prior to recordation of the tentative map, the applicant shall provide a
construction management plan minimizing use of private streets, noise, and dust in
Tract 5045-8. Such plan shall be subject to review and approval of the Community
Development Director and City Engineer/Public Works Director.
Findings
The following findings are offered pursuant to the requirements of the Subdivision Map
Act:
A. The proposed map would be consistent with the City of Moorpark General Plan
and Zoning Ordinance if amended by General Plan Amendment No. 2004-03 and
Zone Change No. 2004-02 to allow for a Residential Planned Development at a
density up to one (1) unit per acre.
4
B. The design and improvements of the proposed subdivision are consistent with
the City of Moorpark General Plan if amended by General Plan Amendment No.
2004-03 and Zone Change No. 2004-03 for a Residential Planned Development
to allow for a density up to one (1) unit per acre.
C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed in that the
site can be engineered to allow for all required utilities to be brought to the site,
adequate ingress and egress can be obtained, and the site can be provided with
public and emergency services.
D. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development of one (1)
unit per acre, in that all City Development standards would be met by the
proposed project while preserving 19.63 acres of the project site as open space.
E. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, in that all potential impacts would be
mitigated through project design or conditions including restoration of a 2.2 acre
area of Coastal Sage Scrub habitat.
F. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems, in that adequate sanitation is both feasible
and required as a condition of this development.
G. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of the
property within the proposed subdivision, in that reciprocal access easements for
improvements between Tract 5045 (Pardee) to the east and the site have been
identified and incorporated in the design of this project.
H. There will be no discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an
existing community sewer system in violation of existing water quality control
requirements under Water Code Section 13000 et seq.
I. The proposed subdivision does not contain or front upon any public waterway,
river, stream, coastline, shoreline, lake, or reservoir, in that it is located on a hilly
site at elevations between 770 and 900 feet, away from any public waterways.
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
5
provisions of these regulations, the following timelines have been established for action
on this project:
Date Application Determined Complete: June 21, 2018
Planning Commission Action Deadline: Not Applicable
City Council Action Deadline:September 20, 2018
Upon agreement by the City and Applicant, one 90-day extension can be granted to the
date action must be taken on the application. The applicant has agreed to an extension
to December 19, 2018.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The Community Development Director has determined this project is consistent with the
Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted for the original project, in that there are no
substantial changes to the project which will require revisions to the previously adopted
Mitigated Negative Declaration, there are no changes to the circumstances under which
the project is undertaken that would require revisions to the previously adopted
Mitigated Negative Declaration, and there is no new information of substantial
importance that shows that the project would have one or more significant effects not
discussed in the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration, or that significant
effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the
previous Mitigated Negative Declaration and that no additional environmental review is
required.
NOTICING
Public Notice for this meeting was given consistent with Chapter 17.44.070 of the
Zoning Ordinance as follows:
1. Publication. The notice of the public hearing was published in the Ventura County
Star on August 19, 2018.
2. Mailing. The notice of the public hearing was mailed on August 14, 2018, to
owners of real property, as identified on the latest adjusted Ventura County Tax
Assessor Roles, within one-thousand (1,000) feet of the exterior boundaries of
the assessor’s parcel(s) subject to the hearing.
3. Sign. One 32 square foot sign is to be placed on the street frontage by August
18 2018.
6
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
1. Continue to accept public testimony and close the public hearing.
2. Adopt Resolution No. PC-2018-____ recommending to the City Council
conditional re-approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. ____ and a one year
extension to Residential Planned Development 2004-05.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Aerial Photograph
3. Page 9 and 12 of Tract Map 5045-8
4. Resolution No. 2005-2306
5. Pinnacle Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions
6. Access and Maintenance Agreement
7. Project Exhibits
A. VTTM 5437
B. RPD 2004-05 Floor Plans and Elevations
8. Draft PC Resolution with Conditions of Approval
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
RESOLUTION NO. PC-2018-____
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE
CITY COUNCIL RE-APPROVAL OF VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 5437 AND A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF
RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (RPD) PERMIT NO.
2004-05 FOR 21 HOMES ON RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND 1 OPEN
SPACE LOT ON APPROXIMATELY 42.4 ACRES ON THE EAST
SIDE OF WALNUT CANYON ROAD AT CHAMPIONSHIP DRIVE,
ON THE APPLICATION OF BIRDSALL GROUP, LLC
WHEREAS, on May 17, 2006, the City Council approved Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 5437 and RPD Permit No. 2004-05 for 21 homes on residential lots and 1
open space lot on approximately 42.4 acres on the east side of Walnut Canyon Road at
Championship Drive. The Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Residential Planned
Development Permit approvals have since expired; and
WHEREAS, on January 16, 2018, an application was submitted by Birdsall
Group, LLC (Scott Birdsall) for re-approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5437 and
a one-year extension of RPD Permit No. 2004-05; and
WHEREAS, at duly noticed public hearings on August 28, 2018 and November
27, 2018, the Planning Commission considered Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5437
and a one-year extension of RPD Permit No. 2004-05; and
WHEREAS, at its meetings of August 28, 2018 and November 27, 2018, 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; and reached a decision on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined this project is
consistent with the Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted for the original project, in
that there are no substantial changes to the project which will require revisions to the
previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration, there are no changes to the
circumstances under which the project is undertaken that would require revisions to the
previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration, and there is no new information of
substantial importance that shows that the project would have one or more significant
effects not discussed in the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration, or that
significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in
the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration and that no additional environmental review
is required.
178
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 determination that this
project is consistent with the Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted for the original
project, in that there are no substantial changes to the project which will require
revisions to the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration, there are no
changes to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken that would require
revisions to the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration, and there is no new
information of substantial importance that shows that the project would have one or
more significant effects not discussed in the previously adopted Mitigated Negative
Declaration, or that significant effects previously examined will be substantially more
severe than shown in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration and that no additional
environmental review is required.
SECTION 2. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS: Based upon the
information set forth in the staff report(s), accompanying studies, and oral and written
public testimony, the Planning Commission finds the proposed one-year extension of
RPD Permit No. 2004-05 is consistent with the original findings because there have
been no changes in the adjacent areas, the applicant has worked diligently towards use
inauguration during the initial period of time, and the one-year extension will not change
the findings in the original Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project.
SECTION 3. SUBDIVISION MAP ACT FINDINGS: Based on the information
set forth in the staff report(s) and accompanying maps and studies the City Council has
determined that the Tentative Parcel Map, with imposition of the attached special and
standard Conditions of Approval, meets the requirements of California Government
Code Sections 66473.5, 66474, 66474.6, and 66478.1 et seq., in that:
A. The proposed map would be consistent with the City of Moorpark General Plan
and Zoning Ordinance if amended by General Plan Amendment No. 2004-03 and
Zone Change No. 2004-02 to allow for a Residential Planned Development at a
density up to one (1) unit per acre.
B. The design and improvements of the proposed subdivision are consistent with
the City of Moorpark General Plan if amended by General Plan Amendment No.
2004-03 and Zone Change No. 2004-03 for a Residential Planned Development
to allow for a density up to one (1) unit per acre.
C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed in that the
site can be engineered to allow for all required utilities to be brought to the site,
adequate ingress and egress can be obtained, and the site can be provided with
public and emergency services.
179
D. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development of one (1)
unit per acre, in that all City Development standards would be met by the
proposed project while preserving 19.63 acres of the project site as open space.
E. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, in that all potential impacts would be
mitigated through project design or conditions including restoration of a 2.2 acre
area of Coastal Sage Scrub habitat.
F. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems, in that adequate sanitation is both feasible
and required as a condition of this development.
G. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of the
property within the proposed subdivision, in that reciprocal access easements for
improvements between Tract 5045 (Pardee) to the east and the site have been
identified and incorporated in the design of this project.
H. There will be no discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an
existing community sewer system in violation of existing water quality control
requirements under Water Code Section 13000 et seq.
I. The proposed subdivision does not contain or front upon any public waterway,
river, stream, coastline, shoreline, lake, or reservoir, in that it is located on a hilly
site at elevations between 770 and 900 feet, away from any public waterways.
SECTION 4. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
A. The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of a one-
year extension of Residential Planned Development 2004-05.
B. The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 5437 subject to the Conditions of Approval included in
Exhibit A (Special and Standard Conditions of Approval), attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference.
180
SECTION 5. 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 November, 2018.
Bruce Hamous, Chair
David A. Bobardt, Community Development Director
Exhibit A – Standard and Special Conditions of Approval
181
EXHIBIT A
STANDARD AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 5437
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The applicant shall comply with Standard Conditions of Approval for Planned
Development Permits and Conditional Use Permits as adopted by City Council
Resolution No. 2009-2799 (Exhibits A and 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
Planning Division Special Conditions
1. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5437 is approved per the submitted tentative
map as modified by the conditions contained in this resolution.
2. Up to a maximum of twenty-one (21) residential lots may be developed under this
entitlement.
3. Prior to the occupancy of the first dwelling unit the applicant shall pay
$210,000.00 to the City as the pro-rata share of the street improvements along
the east side of Walnut Canyon Road from the southern property line of the
project site north to the northern city limits, including an improved transition area
beyond the northern city limits. The Final Map shall include an irrevocable offer
for dedication of right-of-way for the east side of Walnut Canyon Road as
determined necessary by the City Engineer and Caltrans for the planned
widening improvements.
4. The existing driveway off of Walnut Canyon Road shall be used solely for
emergency access and shall have a decorative driveway constructed with a gate
installed to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. A plan for the design and
operation of the gate shall be submitted for review and approval of the
Community Development Director and Fire Department.
5. The Tract Map shall show a 200’ deep setback between the residential
development areas of Lots 1 and 17 and the agricultural land on the adjacent
property to the north within the unincorporated area of the County of Ventura.
The Final Map shall include a restricted use easement over this area which shall
restrict the construction of any structures intended for human habitation prior to
the approval of the Final Map. Structures for non-human habitation, including but
not limited to patios, gazebos, horse barns, tack rooms, horse stalls and riding
arenas; may be allowed upon the determination and approval of the Community
182
Development Director on a case by case basis. The future property owners of
Lots 1 and 17 shall be required to sign an acknowledgement of agreement of the
above factors prior to occupancy of any approved residential dwelling unit.
6. The following lots of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5437: One (1) through
Nine (9) and lot Seventeen (17) shall be served with multi-purpose
(hike/bike/equestrian) trails which shall be placed along both sides of the private
“A” Street, from the eastern project boundary to its intersection with “B” Street
and shall be constructed out of decomposed granite at a minimum of ten feet
(10’) in width and shall also be placed to the back of lots Four (4) through Eight
(8), to the north side of lot Nine (9) and in the front of lots One (1) through Three
(3) and lot Seventeen (17). The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall
prohibit the keeping of equine, bovine and cleft hoofed animals on Lots Ten (10)
through Sixteen (16) and lots Eighteen (18) through Twenty-One (21). The multi-
purpose trail plan shall be submitted for review and approval of the Community
Development Director and the approved multi-purpose trail plan shall be shown
on the Final Map prior to approval of the Final Map.
7. All future property owners of lots within Tract 5437 shall be required to sign an
acknowledgement that all properties located within Tract 5437 have been created
at substantial sizes which allow the accommodation of various forms of animal
keeping, including but not limited to horse keeping except for those lots restricted
from horse keeping by condition 6 above.
8. All multi-purpose trails shall be separated from vehicular traffic by the
construction of a tan concrete fence with wood grain appearance at a maximum
height of five feet and with three horizontal cross members subject to the review
and approval of the Community Development Director.
9. Prior to the approval of the Final Map, the applicant shall enter into an agreement
to participate in the development and maintenance agreements of the
Homeowners Association of Planning Areas 8&9 in Tract No. 5045 and
contribute a pro-rated share towards the cost for streets and drainage purposes
to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, City Engineer and Community
Development Director. The multi-purpose trails located throughout Tentative
Tract Map No. 5437, shall be maintained by the Homeowner’s Association.
10. Prior to the approval of the Final Map, the applicant shall offer to irrevocably
dedicate a conservation easement to the City of Moorpark over the areas shown
as open space on the Tentative Tract Map No. 5437, to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer and Community Development Director. The conservation
easement shall be recorded on the Final Map.
11. The multi-purpose trail, trail fencing, private streets, driveway and driveway gate
for the emergency access off of Walnut Canyon Road, fuel modification areas
and common area slopes, drainage facilities including all NPDES requirements
and dissipation and detention structures, and the open space slope areas shall
all be maintained by the Homeowners Association.
183
12. All conditions of Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2004-05 shall
apply to this Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5437.
Engineering Department Special Conditions
GRADING
13. Project soil quantities shall balance. No soil shall be moved to or from this
project for grading purposes.
14. The soils report for this project specifies offsite grading for the remediation of
geotechnical conditions. Letters of permission for offsite grading and any
temporary construction and/or permanent easements shall be provided to the
City Engineer prior to approval of the grading plans.
15. No buildings shall be constructed within 50 feet on each side of any known active
or potentially active fault.
16. The developer shall submit a project specific geotechnical report for review and
approval by the City Engineer.
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE STREETS
17. Existing driveway at the westerly portion of property shall be for the sole purpose
of emergency access only, subject to the review and approval of the Fire
Department.
18. The existing driveway to be used as emergency access only shall have a
decorative gate designed and located subject to the review and approval of the
Fire Department.
19. The Streets “A” and “B” and the Street indicated as “C” Drive, on Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 5437, must be designed and built to Ventura County
Road condition standard plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the
Director of Community Development.
DRAINAGE AND HYDROLOGY
20. A sump condition is proposed on “B” Street and must be shown that 100-year
protection of habitable areas assuming the inlet catch basins in the street clogs
100%. This will require a secondary emergency outlet for the sump waters which
will provide a minimum of 1.0 foot freeboard between the maximum water
surface elevation and the minimum adjacent finish floor elevation. This
emergency outlet system must direct overflows to either a downstream street
with adequate capacity or other acceptable downstream conveyance system.
Point of discharge must be analyzed with regard to prevention of downstream
problems. A sump condition exists whenever water ponds and the inlet is
184
located at a low point and by-pass flow does not occur until right-of-way width
flooding/ponding occurs in the street.
21. The proposed storm drain pipe system outletting easterly of proposed lot 8 shall
include a dissipator structure and rip-rap pad for hydraulic energy and velocity
scour reduction.
22. The proposed trapezoidal channel located on the easterly boundary of the project
shall be concrete channel or alternative channel design that addresses and
mitigates erosive conditions and shall be approved by the City Engineer and shall
be designed in accordance with Ventura County Watershed Protection District
Standards.
23. The applicant must show legal ability to use and benefit from and show
mechanism to in part or whole maintain the drainage basin known as existing
Permanent Basin M-24 on Tract 5045 and associated facilities located for water
quality and detention purposes and must be provided prior to approval of grading
plan and filing of Final Map.
24. All existing and proposed offsite drainage improvements intended to be used and
benefited as part of this project must be shown capable of properly conveying all
tributary flows and must be submitted for review to the City Engineer.
25. To avoid the sky-lining of houses and to protect the ridgeline viewshed as
observed from valley floors, a building restriction setback shall be placed towards
the rear of Lots 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 indicting that there shall not be any above
ground structures above ten (10) feet in height allowed within a 35-foot setback
distance as measured easterly away from the finished elevation of 930 feet
behind the custom lots. The Final Map shall include a restricted use easement
over this area which, shall restrict the construction of any above ground
structures above ten (10) feet in height allowed within a 35-foot setback distance
as measured easterly away from the finished elevation of 930 feet behind the
custom lots, prior to the approval of the Final Map. The future property owners of
Lots 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 shall be required to sign an acknowledgement of
agreement of the above factors prior to occupancy of any approved residential
dwelling unit. These restrictions shall be made a part of the CC & R’s.
26. Within thirty calendar days of submittal of the first plan check for Final Map the
applicant shall provide a copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions
(C.C.&R.’s) to the Community Development Director and the City Attorney for
review and approval to ensure consistency with the Moorpark Municipal Code,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5882 and Residential Planned Development
Permit No. 2016-01, as conditioned. Submittal shall include a $5,000.00 deposit
to be used for the City Attorney’s cost of review.
185
27. CC&R’s and Landscaping Easement Requirements: Covenants, Conditions and
Restrictions (CC&R’s) and by-laws establishing one or more Homeowners’
Associations for the residential development shall be prepared prior to Final Map
Approval. CC&R's shall be subject to the review and approval of the Director of
Community Development and City Attorney. Language shall be placed in the
CC&R's indicating that any subsequent changes to the CC&R's shall be subject
to the review and approval of the Director of Community Development and City
Attorney. All applicable conditions of approval and mitigation measures shall be
incorporated into the CC&R’s as requirements, including but not limited to the
following provisions:
a. Identification of all Common Maintenance Areas including maintenance
of all multi-use trails, open space lots, detention basin landscaping,
parkway landscaping for all streets, any shared driveways, private
streets, storm drains, any fencing or walls within common maintenance
areas, recreational areas, and any slope directly affecting drainage or
residential street facilities. The draft CC&R’s shall be submitted to the
Director of Community Development and the City Attorney for review
and approval prior to approval of the first phase of the Final Map by the
City Council and the subdivider shall be required to pay all costs
associated with such review. All applicable Tentative Map and
Residential Planned Development (RPD) and conditions of approval
shall be highlighted in the copies of the CC&R’s submitted for City
review. Prior to the sale of any lots, the CC&R’s shall be approved by
the State Department of Real Estate and then recorded. Approval of
the City shall not be construed to mean that the City has any obligation
to enforce CC&R’s. The Homeowners’ Associations may modify the
CC&R’s only to the extent that they do not conflict with the terms of
approval of the Tentative Tract Map, approved Residential Planned
Development Permit or any approved Development Agreement. Sixty
(60) day’s notice must be given to the City of the intent to modify
CC&R's. Further, it is the sole responsibility of the Homeowners’
Associations to enforce the CC&R's.
b. Language indicating that where feasible, the use of recycling materials
shall be included in the construction of the project.
c. Provisions that the Homeowners’ Association shall be responsible for
implementing and maintaining the vegetation management
requirements of the Fire Hazard Reduction Program in perpetuity. As
required by the Fire Department fuel modification plan zones are
proposed to be retained in as natural a state as safety and fire
regulations will permit. The zones shall be designed by and planted
under the supervision of a landscape architect with expertise in native
plant materials and habitat restoration, with the approval of the Director
of Community Development, to appear as a transition between the built
environment and natural open space. Final approval of this Program
186
by the County Fire Prevention District and Director of Community
Development shall be required prior to the recordation of the first Final
Map. Appropriate language shall be included on the Final Map
indicating the boundary of all areas of fuel modification hazard zones.
d. Provisions prohibiting human, domestic animal, agricultural, and
motorized vehicle use in preserved designated natural open space
areas, except that horses, non-motorized vehicles and pedestrians are
allowed on designated trails. In addition, provisions shall be included
prohibiting tree houses; play structures; vehicle parking or storage;
agricultural use; wireless communication facilities; sale of easements
for residential use purposes; extraction of subsurface mineral
resources, excavation, drilling, pumping, mining, or similar activity; and
all other development restricted by recorded easements.
e. Provisions that individual front yard landscaping must include a
minimum of one (1) 24” box tree as a part of private front yard
landscaping.
f. Provisions requiring that ultra-low water consumption plumbing fixtures
shall be installed consistent with City Ordinance No. 132. The CC&R’s
shall also include a requirement for the following energy saving
devices or construction features:
Stoves, ovens, and ranges, when gas fueled shall not have
continuous burning pilot lights.
All thermostats connected to the main space-heating source shall
have night setback features.
Kitchen ventilation system shall have automatic dampers to ensure
closure when not in use.
g. Language restricting front and rear yard lighting to be consistent with
the City's Lighting Ordinance.
h. Language that any modifications to structures shall be designed in
accordance with the approved RPD.
i. Language to insure that no sheet flow of drainage occurs between lots
located within or adjacent to the project.
j. Language requiring the Homeowners’ Association to be responsible for
the maintenance of drainage facilities including all NPDES
requirements unless such structures or facilities are accepted into the
master flood protection system by the Ventura County Flood Control
District.
k. Language prohibiting use of roofing material made of wood or asphalt
shingles and requiring tile roofs as determined by the City as roofing
materials for all structures.
187
l. Language that discourages excessive noise generating activities in
garages consistent with adopted community noise standards. Garages
shall remain permanently available for the purpose of automobile
parking.
m. Language requiring the Homeowner's Association to remove any
graffiti within five (5) days from written notification by the City of
Moorpark. All such graffiti removal shall be accomplished to the
satisfaction of the City.
n. Language requiring that all property areas be maintained free of
litter/debris.
o. Language requiring that all on-site storm drains, swales and terrace
drains be cleared at least twice a year, once immediately prior to
October 15 (the rainy season) and once in January. Additional cleaning
may be required by the City Engineer.
p. Language requiring that private roads and parking areas be maintained
free of litter/debris. Sidewalks and parking areas shall be swept
regularly to prevent the accumulation of litter and debris. When swept
or washed, debris must be trapped and collected to prevent entry to
the storm drain system. No cleaning agent may be discharged to the
storm drain. If any cleaning agent or degreaser is used, wash water
shall not discharge to the storm drains; wash water should be collected
and discharged to the sanitary sewer. Discharges to the sanitary sewer
are subject to the review, approval and conditions of the wastewater
treatment plant receiving the discharge.
q. Language requiring that all exterior metal building surfaces be coated
and sealed with rust inhibitive paint to prevent corrosion and release of
metal contaminants into the storm drain system.
r. Language requiring that landscaping be properly maintained with
efficient irrigation to reduce runoff, promote surface filtration, and
minimize the use of fertilizers and pesticides, which can contribute to
urban runoff pollution.
s. Language requiring compliance with the City approved fence/wall plan.
t. Language requiring the Homeowners’ Association to be responsible for
the maintenance of private streets, and emergency access roads, and
private street lighting.
u. Unless otherwise stipulated in the Special Conditions of Approval, all
required on-site drainage improvements and/or stormwater quality
[NPDES] features or facilities shall be maintained by the Homeowners’
Association. The Homeowners’ Association shall provide verification
to the City Engineer that all on-site storm drains have been cleaned at
least twice a year, once immediately prior to October 1st (the rainy
188
season) and once in January. The City Engineer may require
additional cleaning depending upon site and weather conditions.
28. Fence/Wall Plan: A fencing, perimeter, gate, and privacy barrier wall plan,
complete with related landscaping details, identifying the materials to be used
and proposed wall heights and locations shall be submitted to and approved by
the Director of Community Development prior to the issuance of a Zoning
Clearance for grading. The approved fence/wall plan shall be incorporated into
the CC&R’s. All fences/walls along lot boundaries shall be in place prior to
occupancy of each lot, unless timing for installation is otherwise stated in these
conditions. Where applicable prior to approval of the final fence/wall plan, the
Director of Community Development shall approve the connection of property
line wall with existing fences and or walls on adjacent residential properties. The
Developer is required at his/her sole expense to connect or reconstruct adjacent
residential walls and or fences to the project perimeter wall utilizing the same
type of material that comprises existing walls and or fences that are to be
connected to the project perimeter wall.
29. Any Final Map identifying any landscape easement or drainage easement
granted to a Private Responsible Party shall also be irrevocably offered for
dedication to the City and shown on said Final Map. The City reserves the right
to assume the maintenance of parkway landscaping, median landscaping or
drainage improvements being maintained by a Private Responsible Party, should
it be determined by the City, at its sole discretion, that the maintenance being
provided by the Private Responsible Party is inadequate.
30. When, and if stipulated in the Special Conditions of Approval, that certain
identified parkway landscaping and/or drainage improvements are to be
maintained by the City, an Assessment District shall be formed to fund City costs
for such maintenance. In such event, any required landscaping and/or drainage
improvements shall be conveyed to the City in easements for such purposes.
31. Prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance for the first building permit or the
approval of any final map for the Project: the developer shall pay the City a Five
Thousand Dollar ($5,000) Assessment District Formation Fee. The District shall
be for the purposes of funding future costs for the maintenance of landscaping
and irrigation of the landscaped area and related improvements including but not
limited to block walls and hardscape adjacent to Walnut Canyon Road. The City
shall administer the annual renewal of the Assessment District, and any costs
related to such administration shall be charged to the fund established for such
Assessment District revenues and expenses.
32. An Assessment District [herein “Back-Up District”] shall be formed to fund future
City costs, should they occur, for the maintenance of parkway landscaping,
median landscaping or drainage improvements previously maintained by a
Private Responsible Party and then assumed by the City. If a Back-Up District is
189
formed, it shall be the intent of the City to approve the required assessment each
year, but to only levy that portion of the assessment necessary to recover any
past City costs or any anticipated City costs for the following fiscal year. In the
event the City is never required to assume the maintenance of any such
improvements maintained by a Private Responsible Party, the amount of the
annual assessment actually levied upon the affected properties would be minor
amount, possibly zero. The City shall administer the annual renewal of the Back-
Up District and any costs related to such administration shall be charged to the
Fund established for such district revenues and expenses.
33. When it has been determined that it is necessary to form an Assessment District
(including a Back-Up District), the applicant shall be required to undertake and
complete the following:
a. At least one-hundred-twenty (120) days prior to the planned recordation of
any Final Map or the issuance of any zoning clearance for building permit,
whichever comes first:
i. submit the final draft plans for any irrigation, landscaping or
Drainage Improvements [herein “Maintained Areas”] to be
maintained by the Assessment District (including a required Back-
Up District), along with any required plan checking fees;
ii. submit a check in the amount of $5,000 as an advance to cover the
cost of Assessment Engineering for the formation of the
Assessment District [Note: Developer shall be required to pay for all
final actual assessment engineering costs related to the
Assessment District formation along with City administrative costs.];
b. At least sixty (60) days prior to the planned recordation of any Final Map
or the issuance of any zoning clearance for building permit, whichever
comes first, submit to the City the completed, “City approved” plans for the
Maintained Areas (landscaping, irrigation and NPDES Drainage
Improvements);
c. Prior to the planned recordation of any Final Map or the issuance of any
zoning clearance for building permit, whichever comes first, submit to the
City a signed Petition and Waiver requesting formation of the Assessment
District [Note: The Petition and Waiver shall have attached to it as Exhibit
‘A’ the City approved final draft Engineer’s Report prepared by the
Assessment Engineer retained by the City.]
34. Prior to approval of any final map for the Project, the developer shall provide a
Subdivision Improvement Agreement for review and approval by the City Council
consistent with Section 66462 of the Government Code.
35. Improvements along Walnut Canyon Road shall include conduit behind the
sidewalk for future use for broadband to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer/Public Works Director.
190
36. Concurrent with map recordation, the applicant shall provide, as part of the street
improvement plans, a public service easement within the private streets, subject
to approval of the Community Development Director and City Engineer/Public
Works Director.
37. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the Developer shall provide the
City with a written request for the City to adopt a resolution authorizing
enforcement of applicable provisions of the California Vehicle Code and
Moorpark Municipal Code.
38. The Developer shall comply with all mitigation measures of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration. Said mitigation measures are hereby adopted by reference
and made Conditions of Approval.
39. Water impoundment(s) shall be maintained in a manner which will not create
mosquito breeding sources.
40. Prior to or concurrently with approval of the Final Map the applicant shall grant
the City public access easements for future trail and recreational purposes. The
exact location of said easements will be subject to the approval of the
Community Development Director and the City Engineer.
41. The applicant shall provide evidence satisfactory to the Community Development
Director that access rights exist through Tract 5045-8 (The Pinnacle)
development’s private streets and gates. Such confirmation may be in the form
of satisfactory easements or agreements, such as written confirmation from the
Pinnacle Homeowner’s Association.
42. Prior to recordation of the tentative map, the applicant shall provide a
construction management plan minimizing use of private streets, noise, and dust
in Tract 5045-8. Such plan shall be subject to review and approval of the
Community Development Director and City Engineer/Public Works Director.
- END –
191
CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
Planning Commission Meeting
of November 27, 2018
ACTION:
Approved Staff Recommendation, with
Changes as Proposed by the
Commission, Including Adoption of
Resolution No. PC-2018-635.
BY: J. Figueroa
B. Consider a Resolution Recommending to the City Council Approval of General
Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change No. 2013-02, Residential Planned
Development Permit No. 2013-01, and Development Agreement No. 2013-01,
and Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration Under CEQA in Connection
Therewith, for a 390-unit Senior Community on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road
and West of Walnut Canyon Road, on the Application of Ernie Mansi for
Aldersgate Investment, LLC.(continued open public hearing from
September 25, 2018 and October 23, 2018) Staff Recommendation: 1) Open
the public hearing, accept public testimony and close the public hearing; 2)
Recommend approval to the City Council of a Mitigated Negative Declaration;
and 3) Adopt Resolution No. PC-2018-__ recommending to the City Council
conditional approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change
No. 2013-02, Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01, and
Development Agreement No. 2013-01. (Staff: Joseph Fiss).
Item: 8.B.
ITEM 8.B.
MOORPARK PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Planning Commission
FROM: Joseph Fiss, Planning Manager
DATE: 11/27/2018 (Continued Public Hearing from 9/25/2018
SUBJECT: Consider a Resolution Recommending to the City Council Approval
of General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change No. 2013-02,
Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01, and
Development Agreement No. 2013-01, and Adoption of a Mitigated
Negative Declaration Under CEQA in Connection Therewith, for a
390-unit Senior Community on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and
West of Walnut Canyon Road, on the Application of Ernie Mansi for
Aldersgate Investment, LLC.
BACKGROUND
On September 3, 2013, Ernie Mansi, dba Aldersgate Investment LLC, filed an
application on behalf of 1 Moorpark LLC (subsequently Grand Pacific Assed 2), to
develop a 390-unit senior community on 49.52 acres north of Casey Road and west of
Walnut Canyon Road. The application includes a request for a General Plan
Amendment, Zone Change, Residential Planned Development Permit, and
Development Agreement.
The filing of this application was authorized through the General Plan Amendment Pre-
Screening approval by City Council on May 15, 2013. On January 7, 2016, the City
Council appointed an ad-hoc committee, consisting of Councilmembers Pollock and
Van Dam, to negotiate a Development Agreement, as required through the pre-
screening approval process.
On September 25, 2018, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing on this
item and continued this item with the public hearing still open to October 23, 2018 at the
request of staff. There was no staff presentation. However, two neighbors spoke
expressing concerns with the project design. The public hearing was continued to
October 23, 2018 and again continued to November 27, 2018.
DISCUSSION
Project Setting
Existing Site Conditions:
The project site is located on 49.52 acres on the north side of Casey Road, west of
Walnut Canyon Road. The property is generally bounded by fragmented hills on the
east and west with a ravine in the center. The west and north sides abut open land,
including the elevated course of the future North Hills Parkway. On the east, the
property abuts residential parcels accessed from Walnut Canyon Road. The site is
located above those properties and hidden from the Walnut Canyon Road by a ridge
within the property boundaries. Overall, elevations range from 556 feet to 760 feet
above mean sea level, and the average slope is approximately 15 percent.
Predominant vegetation types on this site are coastal sage scrub and annual
grasslands. 121 trees over 9.5 inches in diameter exist on site, including 1 oak tree.
North of the project site, across from the future North Hills Parkway, is the Meridian Hills
tract, which is nearly complete. Traversing a portion of the north end of the project site
is the future North Hills Parkway right of way. West of the site are long-developed
individual single-family residential properties extending north from Casey Road, with the
western frontage beyond, abutting the Hitch Ranch property. East of the site, behind an
existing ridge, is a row of houses facing Walnut Canyon Road. To the south, across
Casey Road, are institutional uses consisting of Walnut Canyon Elementary School,
The Boys and Girls Club, and beyond, the Moorpark Civic Center.
Previous Applications:
In 2004, Centex Homes filed an application to build 110 single-family homes on this
property, involving a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tract Map, and
Residential Planned Development Permit. Centex transferred its interest in the property
to 1 Moorpark LLC in 2007. A similar application was filed by that entity later the same
year for a similar development comprised of 109 homes. Neither project application was
deemed complete and no City entitlement review was conducted.
General Plan and Zoning Consistency
The applicant is requesting a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change for this
project. The current General Plan designations of the site are Rural Low Residential
(RL) and Medium Residential (M). The current Zoning designation is RE (Rural
Exclusive) and RE-5ac (Rural Exclusive-5 acre minimum). The applicant is proposing to
change the General Plan designation for the site to Very High Density (VH) Residential.
The proposal would result in a gross density of 7.9 dwelling units per acre for the entire
site before dedication of streets. The requested zoning designation of RPD-8U would
193
accommodate the proposed density. The General Plan designation of Medium (M)
allows a maximum density of 4 dwelling units per acre, while the requested VH
designation allows up to 15 dwelling units per acre.
GENERAL PLAN/ZONING
Direction General Plan Zoning Land Use
Site Medium Residential (M) /
Rural Low Residential (RL)
Rural Exclusive (RE) /
Rural Exclusive –
5 acre minimum (RE-5ac)
Unimproved
North Medium Low Residential /
Open Space
Open Space (OS) /
RPD-1.8U Residential
South
SP-9 /
Very High Density
Residential
Rural Exclusive /
RPD-19.0U / Institutional
Institutional
East Medium Density Residential Rural Exclusive Residential
West SP-1 Hitch Ranch Agricultural Exclusive Open Space
The purpose of the Residential Planned Development zone is to provide areas for
communities to be developed using modern land planning and unified design
techniques. This zone provides a flexible regulatory procedure in order to encourage:
1. Coordinated neighborhood design and compatibility with existing or potential
development of surrounding areas;
2. An efficient use of land particularly through the clustering of dwelling units and
the preservation of the natural features of sites;
3. Variety and innovation in site design, density and housing unit options, including
garden apartments, townhouses and single-family dwellings;
4. Lower housing costs through the reduction of street and utility networks; and
5. A more varied, attractive and energy-efficient living environment, as well as,
greater opportunities for recreation than would be possible under other zone
classifications.
194
Hillside Management Ordinance
Section 17.38.030 (M) of the Zoning Ordinance provides an exemption for properties
having development agreements exempting them from the provisions of this chapter.
Further discussion of this issue is provided in the Analysis section of this report.
Project Summary
The project is described as a Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC). CCRCs
are retirement communities with accommodations for independent living and assisted
living, offering residents a continuum of care. A person can live in a CCRC
permanently, moving between levels of care as needed.
The project is designed with simple and clear site planning. The projects two main roads
form a "T". At the base of the T is the entry at Casey Road, designed to be inviting to
visitors as well as attractive to the neighborhood. Most of the Casey Road frontage
consists of a landscaped feature including a large detention basin. From there, the road
forms a gentle arc and the first building is revealed, at a setback of nearly 600 feet from
Casey Road. The facilities are as follows:
Independent Living Buildings (76 single story duplex and fourplex villas. 184
apartments in six 2 and 3 story buildings)
Memory Care/Assisted Living/Skilled Nursing (130 units in a 2 and 3 story
complex).
Commons (Great Room/Dining; Theater/Recreation Rooms in a 2 story
building)
Fitness/Recreation (1 story building)
Across both sides of the T’s top bar are one-story duplex independent living homes.
These form a transition between the larger group facility buildings and the single-family
subdivision abutting the project site on the north across the North Hills Parkway right-of-
way.
A range of unit types is proposed within three residential categories:
Assisted Living & Memory Care: 130 Units
Memory Care: 26
Studio: 47
1 Bedroom 57
195
Independent Living Apartments: 184 Units
Studio 70
1 Bedroom 76
2 Bedroom 38
Single Story Duplex Villas: 76 Units
2-Bedroom 47
3-Bedroom 29
The complex would have one or two security guards, with public hours between 8:00
a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Truck deliveries would be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00
p.m.
Development of a project of this size will be phased over time; however, a phasing
schedule is currently unknown. A condition of approval is included, requiring a phasing
plan prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance for grading.
Since the project is not a condominium or “for sale” project, there is no subdivision map
associated with the project. However, the applicant has indicated parcelization may
occur in the future for phasing and financing purposes. A condition of approval is
included requiring all parcels to be maintained as one project regardless of whether
another entity owns and operates a specific portion of the facility (i.e., an entity could
own and operate the assisted living and memory care, as this is a specialized use).
Architecture:
The architectural style is consistently Spanish. The architecture is ordered, with no
eccentric accents typical of much Spanish architecture. Instead, the buildings have
logical, consistent bay widths, while the orientation of walls in projecting and angled
placement provides a humanizing touch.
There is a wide range of massing styles, with the 2- and 3-story Independent Living
buildings having the most ordered massing. Lower masses with attractive transitional
heights are proposed outside of the residential blocks. The large porte cochere of the
Assisted Living building provides an entry statement oriented toward arriving persons. It
has the most varied massing, both in its rambling, curved plan configuration and its
mixture of heights. The Recreation building provides a contrast in its minimal height and
simple massing. Its low profile is also appropriate to its siting above the entry drive,
where taller massing could present a looming effect.
Setbacks:
Setbacks in the RPD Zone are determined by the Conditions of Approval as approved
by the City Council on a project by project basis. This allows for flexibility of design
while meeting market conditions and demand. Setbacks are typically defined as being
196
measured from a building to the edge of the public right of way, or from property line to
property line. In this case the only property lines will be at the perimeter of the property.
Front: From the front (south) property line on Casey Road, the nearest building is set
back nearly 600 feet.
West Side: The setback to the west side is approximately 10 feet to the closest villa unit,
and over 140 feet to the Assisted Living building.
East Side: The closest building is 35 feet from the east side.
Rear: The closest villa unit is over 320 feet to the rear property line. However, the North
Hills Parkway traverses the site in between, with the same unit approximately 90 feet
from the planned roadbed and approximately 10 to 20 feet from the future property line.
Traffic and Circulation:
One consideration in this type of housing is that its vehicular circulation demands are
considerably less than in similar density housing. The residents of retirement
communities have both fewer vehicles per resident and fewer trips per vehicle, as
discussed in the Analysis section.
The aforementioned "T" circulation pattern is augmented by a secondary vehicular
access extending from the east end of the T's bar. That road, winding down to Walnut
Canyon Road, allows the units and associated facilities adequate egress for emergency
purposes. This secondary access would be required to comply with Ventura County Fire
District requirements for secondary access.
A Traffic and Circulation Study was prepared by Associated Traffic Engineers
(3/26/2014) and peer reviewed by Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers (6/10/2015). A
copy of this report can be found in Appendix J of the Initial Study for this project.
The study concluded the proposed project will not reduce the level of service (LOS) of
intersections in the area, with the exception of the Los Angeles Avenue/Spring Road
intersection which crossed a threshold because of the 0.01 contribution and thus
degraded from B to C. A further conclusion was that adequate access to the site will be
provided from Casey Road, and secondary access augmented by a controlled point on
Walnut Canyon Road, with adequate parking will be provided on site, including within
garages, driveways and on public and private streets.
No project-specific impacts were identified in the Traffic Study, so Mitigation Measures
are limited to pro-rata contributions to study-area intersection improvements and to
specific driveway design customary to development.
197
Parking:
Surface parking is proposed in three primary areas for the Independent Living units, and
Assisted Living & Memory Care facility, and common facilities. For the villas, parking is
contained within each unit.
The three parking areas share a total of 246 spaces, while the villas contain an
additional 74 spaces for a total of 320 parking spaces.
The parking requirement for senior housing is 0.5 spaces per unit (0.25 spaces shall be
in a garage or carport). Under this standard, 130 parking spaces (65 covered) would be
required for the combined 260 independent living apartments and villas.
The parking requirement for care facilities is 1 space per 2 beds plus 1 space for each
500 square feet. This would require 65 parking spaces for the 130 units (beds)plus 199
parking spaces for the 99,514 square feet of building.
The parking ordinance does not anticipate large scale hybrid facilities of this nature.
However, Chapter 17.32.010 (I.) allows shared parking for commercial uses reducing
the minimum required parking spaces by up to 25 percent when the community
development director has determined that due to the operational characteristics of the
on-site uses, parking demands will occur at different times. Due to the
commercial/institutional nature of the assisted living facility, it would be appropriate to
apply this standard to the parking required for that facility, reducing the required parking
spaces from 264 to 198.
The total required parking for the facility, if divided by uses, would be 394 parking
spaces versus the 320 proposed parking spaces. Using the shared parking allowance,
328 parking spaces would be required. This deficit of 8 parking spaces can easily be
accommodated throughout the parking area, creating a fully conforming parking
condition. A condition of approval has been included to this effect.
Landscaping:
The majority of the site will be graded; using cut and fill to allow very gentle gradients
within the site as befitting its use. Slopes requiring stabilization comprise a minor portion
of the site’s margins.
The conceptual landscaping submittal indicates the use of trees in informal clusters,
appropriate to the residential use. The tree plantings are used effectively in relation to
the varying heights of the buildings. Open space areas are important to the use, and
particularly to the south of the project, landscaped open space is used to enhance both
the living environment and the view into the site from its primary entrance and
community interface.
198
All landscaping will be required to be consistent with the City’s Landscape Guidelines. It
is also important for final review of landscaping to ensure that the species are capable
of effective screening where appropriate, and suitable to the demands of slope
conditions and growth rates. A draft condition is included to that effect.
Site Improvements and National Pollution Discharge Elimination Standards
Requirements (NPDES):
The City Engineer has conditioned the project to provide for all necessary on-site and
off-site storm drain improvements including the imposition of National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. “Passive” Best Management
Practices Drainage Facilities are required to be provided so that surface flows are
intercepted and treated on the surface over biofilters (grassy swales), infiltration areas
and other similar solutions. A water quality detention basin is proposed at the southern
portion of the property.
Air Quality:
The project is estimated to result in approximately 11.9 tons of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)
per day and 22.9 tons of Reactive Organic Gases per day, mostly from vehicle trip
emissions. The level for NOx exceeds suggested thresholds of the Ventura County Air
Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) of 25 lbs. per day. A Standard Condition of
Approval has been added as part of the project for the developer to pay a contribution to
the City’s Transportation System Management fund, reducing this impact to a less than
significant level.
Neither the VCAPCD nor City of Moorpark have adopted formal Greenhouse Gas
(GHG) emissions thresholds applying to land use projects at this point. Therefore, the
proposed project is evaluated based on the South Coast Air Quality Management
District’s recommended/preferred option threshold of 3,000 metric tons CO2e per year
for all land use types. Total GHG emissions for the project would be approximately
2,181 metric tons CO2e per year. Although development facilitated by proposed project
would generate additional GHG emissions beyond existing conditions, the total amount
of GHG emissions would be lower than the 3,000 metric tons per year threshold;
therefore, impacts associated with GHG emissions would be less than significant.
Development Agreement 2013-01:
As mentioned above, the applicant has requested a Development Agreement.
Government Code Section 65864 and City of Moorpark Municipal Code Section 15.40
provide for Development Agreements between the City and property owners in
connection with proposed plans of development for specific properties. Development
Agreements are designed to strengthen the planning process, to provide developers
some certainty in the development process and to assure development in accordance
with the terms and conditions of the agreement. Vesting of development rights, timing
199
of development, development fees, and provision of affordable housing are addressed
in the Development Agreement.
The terms of the Development Agreement have been negotiated by the developer and
an Ad-Hoc committee of the City Council consisting of Councilmember Pollock and
Councilmember Van Dam. The Planning Commission is a recommending body on the
Development Agreement. In general, the development agreement provides for off-site
development of 26 affordable housing units and payment of $5,200,000 as an in-lieu fee
which is the estimated subsidy for 26 additional affordable units. It also provides for
dedication and partial improvement of North Hills Parkway. Finally, the Development
Agreement identifies development fees consistent with those of other recent projects.
The Development Agreement addresses the provisions of the Hillside Management
Ordinance by acknowledging that grading associated with the North Hills Parkway, a
Circulation Element arterial roadway, will not be considered for determining compliance
of the Project with the standards of the Hillside Management Ordinance (Chapter 17.38
of the Moorpark Municipal Code), provided that contour grading is employed on the
slopes for the North Hills Parkway to the extent feasible as determined by the City
Engineer/Public Works Director.
ANALYSIS
Issues
Staff analysis of the proposed project has identified the following areas for Planning
Commission consideration in their recommendation to the City Council:
Biological Resources
Land Use
Open Space
Hillside Management Ordinance
Biological Resources:
This project proposes the removal of 92 mature living trees, both native and non-native,
requiring mitigation in accordance with the Chapter 12.12 of the Moorpark Municipal
Code. Of those, one is an oak.
The project also affects the existing scattered California Sagebrush Scrub (CSS) plants
which comprise the habitat of the California Gnatcatcher (CAGN). The project will
require the removal of approximately 17 acres of existing CSS habitat on the site. As
noted in the report, the existing CSS habitat on the site is fragmented, consisting of
patches of CSS distributed across the site, with the density of this habitat uneven and
varied.
200
10.9 acres of new CSS can be created on the site. This habitat will consist of large
continuous bands of CSS habitat along the edges of the site. This habitat will have a
higher habitat value for CAGN than the existing uneven CSS on the site as it will include
not only shrub species associated with CSS but also mulefat, coyote bush, and blue
elderberry found in the higher quality CSS habitat on the site. The 10.9 acres of high
quality CSS revegetation proposed as part of the Project adequately mitigates the
impact of removing 17 acres of lower quality CSS habitat.
A drainage field subject to classification as wetlands is also affected. To offset impacts
to U.S. and State Wetland and Waters, onsite mitigation will be implemented in the
southern portion of the proposed project. The proposed mitigation/restoration will result
in the creation of 1.24 acres of emergent wetlands, an ephemeral drainage, and
associated Arroyo Willow and Mulefat Thicket riparian habitat similar to the pre-
construction conditions in the northern reach of the drainage to compensate for the
impact to 1.022 acres of jurisdictional area. A Mitigation and Monitoring Plan will be
developed as part of the permitting process and submitted to the USACE and CDFW for
approval.
Land Use
The Continuing Care Retirement Community land use is new to the City, although there
are numerous examples of the use, as close as Thousand Oaks. It is essentially a
combination of residential and institutional uses. It would have a lower external impact
than an ordinary residential use, even one with much lower density, primarily because
its residents as an age group have demonstrated a significantly lower volume of vehicle
trips than other age groups.
The most important distinction between this use and traditional institutional uses (i.e.
places of worship, schools, and libraries) is the extent of external links. The senior
retirement community is much more internalized. There are no students, members, or
parishioners flocking to the site as with some purely institutional uses. The sole index
which would have a heightened neighborhood impact as compared with other
residential uses is medical assistance. This is provided to a large extent by onsite
medical staff. Nevertheless, with an elderly population there will be more instances of
ambulance calls and their attendant impacts.
The anticipated frequency of such impacts is not such that the environmental
determination is affected, or any mitigation measure required. In all, in other
communities similar developments have proven to be quiet and peaceful neighbors,
even compared with the low density development of single-family subdivisions.
A useful nearby example is University Village in Thousand Oaks, next to California
Lutheran University off of Olsen Road. That facility is somewhat larger, with 367
independent living units and 100 beds, and its context is different in that it is close to a
major road (Olsen Road) and freeway (SR 23). It faces the university and its access
201
path does not come close to a single-family residential area. Another difference is its
convenience to a hospital.
Nevertheless, it can be instructive in anticipating the volume of emergency medical calls
and overall parking demand. A discussion with staff at University Village reports
emergency medical calls ranging from 5 to 25 trips per month.
These impacts suggest that the land use is appropriate to the setting, when compared
to the existing zoning, or a comparable single family residential project.
Open Space
In the case of senior housing, onsite open space is of heightened importance relative to
other housing communities. The residents are less mobile and less likely to venture
offsite for either passive or active recreation.
The open space comprising the setback area around the perimeter of the project is too
steep to be useful as either passive or active recreation area. The principal open spaces
are at the south end of the development, enhancing the entry and providing a
comforting sense of a buffer from the city below.
Principal among the open spaces is the area of the detention basin, with two levels
combining to over an acre. The next largest open space, and next in sequence entering
the site, is the “open lawn area for social gathering” to the south of the first residential
building. It comprises approximately a half-acre. Three other open spaces would range
from 10,000 to 20,000 square feet. These are located next to the Assisted Living /
Memory Care porte cochere, the recreation building (principally pool and deck), and the
southeast corner of the villas area. The latter appears to be common area, but its
isolation by a steep slope would make it effectively only a commons for the adjacent
villas. All of the villas have very small front lawns, with modest rear yard open space of
varying size and slope. A few other incidental open spaces of 3,000 square feet or less
are scattered throughout the project.
Another consideration is the visual quality of the site and its dwellings. The sweeping
views from many of the units and from the site itself would create a sense of place
needing less actual open space than would a confined site.
As proposed, the open space is adequate and appropriately distributed. The Assisted
Living facility would have the least demand, and it has the least proximity to open
space. The villas have their own limited open space. It is the Independent Living units
which appropriately have the most open space nearby. The largest open space areas
are to the south, buffer the buildings, take advantage of the view to the south, and
provide at a sense of interface with the neighboring community.
202
Hillside Management Ordinance
Hillsides within the city constitute a significant natural topographical feature of the
community and provide aesthetic relief to the viewscape from virtually every location in
the city. The purpose of the Hillside Management Ordinance is to implement the goals
and policies of the general plan as they relate to development and resource
management in hillside areas.
Chapter 17.38.030 (M) allows for properties having development agreements to exempt
them from the provisions of the Hillside Management Ordinance. The applicant has
negotiated a development agreement for this project, and such an exemption is
included.
There are no protected ridgelines on the site, except for within the future North Hills
Parkway. Outside of the North Hills Parkway, slopes are limited to isolated peninsula-
shaped fingers and small ravines or drainage courses.
In the proposed Development Agreement, the City agrees that grading associated with
the North Hills Parkway, a Circulation Element arterial roadway, will not be considered
for determining compliance of the Project with the standards of the Hillside Management
Ordinance (Chapter 17.38 of the Moorpark Municipal Code), provided that contour
grading is employed on the slopes for the North Hills Parkway to the extent feasible as
determined by the City Engineer/Public Works Director. A condition of approval has
been included to this effect.
Currently the percentage of slopes on the site is as follows:
Slope (percent) Percentage of Site
0-20 56
20-35 18
15-50 15
50 + 11
From a citywide perspective, the project would not impact prominent landforms or
ridgelines. On a neighborhood scale, however, it would involve grading on its east side
that would lower a ridgeline abutting residential parcels on Walnut Canyon Road. This
calls for a visual study of the effect on the views from those properties and from Walnut
Canyon Road. These materials have been submitted and have addressed staff’s
concerns.
The site plan has been adjusted to relocate the one potentially looming building from its
location close to the ridge.
203
The concern in the ordinance is directed toward minimizing alteration of slopes,
particularly as seen from long range. This includes varied rooflines complementing the
slopes, subtle colors, and landscaping/berming.
The project’s general lack of offsite visibility, the need for substantial areas of gentle
slope for the senior residents, and the required grading for the future North Hills
Parkway renders most of the Hillside Development Ordinance’s requirements
inappropriate.
The on-site open space preservation, CSS habitat creation, riparian habitat
preservation, as well as dedication and grading of the North Hills Parkway right-of-way
further alleviate the effects of hillside grading and development on this site.
FINDINGS
Residential Planned Development Permit:
1. 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 site design is consistent with the
better aspects of modern development practice, with siting and landscaping
combining with building massing to prevent any external impacts, and with well-
ordered architectural design to ensure a high-quality environment for residents,
employees, and visitors.
2. The site design would not create negative impacts on or impair the utility of
properties, structures or uses in the surrounding area in that adequate provision
of public access, sanitary services, and emergency services have been ensured
in the processing of this request and the use proposed is similar to adjacent
uses, and access to or utility of those adjacent uses are not hindered by this
project.
3. The proposed uses are compatible with existing and permitted uses in the
surrounding area in that the siting of the project uses slopes and landscaped
setbacks to isolate it from neighboring properties visually. As a denser, but less-
intense category of residential use, it would not tend to create disturbances
regardless of the physical context.
General Plan Amendment and Zone Change:
Formal findings are not required of the legislative acts of General Plan Amendment and
Zone Change, because they are legislative acts. However, the City must determine that
the requests are consistent with the Goals and Policies of the General Plan. This
determination is stated in the following Finding:
204
1. The project is consistent with the Goals and Policies of the General Plan, with
emphasis on the following Housing Element goals:
GOAL 1.0: Assure the quality, safety, and habitability of existing housing and the
continued high quality of residential neighborhoods.
GOAL 2: Provide residential sites through land use, zoning and specific plan
designations to provide a range of housing opportunities.
GOAL 3: Expand and protect housing opportunities for lower income households
and special needs groups.
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). Since this project includes a
General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and development agreement, which are
legislative matters, it is not subject to processing time limits.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
In accordance with the City’s environmental review procedures adopted by resolution,
the Community Development Director determines the level of review necessary for a
project to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Some projects
may be exempt from review based upon a specific category listed in CEQA. Other
projects may be exempt under a general rule that environmental review is not
necessary where it can be determined that there would be no possibility of significant
effect upon the environment. A project which does not qualify for an exemption requires
the preparation of an Initial Study to assess the level of potential environmental impacts.
Based upon the results of an Initial Study, the Director may determine that a project will
not have a significant effect upon the environment. In such a case, a Notice of Intent to
Adopt a Negative Declaration or a Mitigated Negative Declaration is prepared. For
many projects, a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration will prove to be
sufficient environmental documentation. If the Director determines that a project has
the potential for significant adverse impacts and adequate mitigation cannot be readily
identified, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is prepared.
The Director has prepared or supervised the preparation of an Initial Study to assess
the potential significant impacts of this project. Based upon the Initial Study, the
Director has determined that there is no substantial evidence that the project or any of
its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment and has prepared a
205
Mitigated Negative Declaration for Planning Commission review and consideration
before making a recommendation on the project.
The Initial Study (Attachment 4) was prepared and circulated on January 18, 2018. Two
comment letters were subsequently received. A letter from the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife (Attachment 4a) offered mitigation recommendations regarding
wetlands, tree removals, and Coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica
californica) habitat, specifically “Coastal sagebrush scrub.” A letter from an interested
party, known as Better Neighborhoods (Attachment 4b) suggested the City did not
adequately study several issues where there is a reasonable probability of potentially
significant environmental impacts from the Project. In light of these two letters, staff has
reviewed the technical appendices of all special studies and incorporated additional
information addressing these concerns into the Initial Study. The attached Initial Study
is the document as amended.
NOTICING
Public Notice for this meeting was given consistent with Chapter 17.44.070 of the
Zoning Ordinance as follows:
1. Publication. The notice of the public hearing was published in the Ventura County
Star on September 16, 2018.
2. Mailing. The notice of the public hearing was mailed on September 12, 2018, to
owners of real property, as identified on the latest adjusted Ventura County Tax
Assessor Rolls, within one thousand (1,000) feet of the exterior boundaries of the
assessor's parcel(s) subject to the hearing.
3. Sign. One 32-square-foot sign was placed on the frontage on September 14,
2018.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
1. Open the public hearing, accept public testimony and close the public hearing.
2. Recommend approval to the City Council of a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC-2018-__ recommending to the City Council conditional
approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change No. 2013-02,
Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01, and Development
Agreement No. 2013-01.
206
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Aerial Photograph
3. Project Exhibits (Design Submittal Package)
4. Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
A. California Department of Fish & Wildlife Letter
B. Better Neighborhoods Letter
5. Draft Planning Commission Resolution with Recommended Conditions of
Approval
207
208
209
+ 5
..'% # .&.* ( . .
,#&.. .
..
.
!"$
$$#$$
$
$
$ $ $ $
$ $
$
=&@S
;;@= @0S L7, ,= 3S;#&S
S
SD> 'DS>'ASM8-GS
SD> 'DS>(ASM8-GS
S<)SD> 'DS <P'A'$S
SD> 'DS
S <P(A'%S
SD> "(DS>(ASM8-GS
SD> 'DSG<G 4S
SD> (DSG<G 5S
S <P'A'$S
SSD> (DSH<G 5S
S <P(B'$S
S*N(DGS > A1/8*S
SD> 'DS
SD> (DS
S <P'A'$S
SD> 'DSG<I 6S
S$A.P(Q RSE> !'DS
S <P'A'$SD> 'DS
S+O(FJS ? A2-9+S
;:SFIC''KS? A2-9+S
.#$ .+ #* .
* ( .
.
$$ #. !!'..
.
. . .
-WT[[b7WTLCA\b'WC?b
7WTUT[CBb>TSISEb
874b>TSCb'XC?b
:T\?Nb*_CNNJSEb;SI\[b
*CS[I\ab
(]INBISEb)T^CW?ECb
7?WMISEb)T^CW?ECb
-WT[[b,NTTWb'WC?b
(]INBISEb.CIEH\[b
7?WMISEb7XT^IBCBb
# b')b
87* 59b
"b')b
$b*;b
b b*;')
b\Tbb[\TWKC[ b?UU`b
b[U?AC[
7WTVT[CBb*C^CNTVQCS\b 9\?SB?WB[b
,WTS\b 9C\@?AM[b b\aUIA?Nb
9IBCb9C\@?AMb
8C?Wb9C\@?AMb
(]INBISEb9CU?W?\JTSb
*XK^Cb'I[NCb=IB\Hb
7?WMISEb*IQCS[KTS[b
"bQISb&bA]N
BC
[?Ab
b6b
b
b[\TXa%b b\aUIA?N bb6bQISb
bTXbQTWCb [\TWIC[%b bQISb
b
#b`bb]SAT ^CWCBb
b6b`bbAT^CWCBb
'[[I[\CBb1I^KSFbb 9MINNCBb.]W[ISEb
3CQTWab)?WCb
9\]BITb;SI\[b
b(CBXTTQb;SK\[b
4 2)2 '6
.&%($6/5% ! 6
.*006')).6.! 6
/SBCVCSBCS\b1I^KSGb
9\]BITb;SK\[b
b(CBXTTQb;SK\[b
b(CBWTTQb ;SI\[b
4 2)2 '6
.&%($6/5% ! 6
/006')).6.! 6
<INN?[b
b(CBWTTQb;SI\[b
b(CBWTTQb;SJ\[b
4 2)2 '6
.&%($6/5% ! 6
.)006')).6.! 6
b*;b
b
b *;b
b
b*;b b
666
60+ !06
60,6#6
b*;b"
b
b*;bb
"b*;b b
6
60+ !066 )5!.! 6
6 60,6#6
!*;b
b
#b*;b # b
$ . $!60+ !06
661-6 "36
97bb 9I\Cb7N?Sb
'[[I[\CBb2K^KSGbb 3CQTZb)?WCb
'bb )TSACU\]?Nb7CW[UCA\I^C[b
'bb )TSACU\]?Nb+OC^?\ITS[b
'bb )TSACU\]?Nb+OC^?\ITS[b
'bb )TSACU\]?Nb+OC^?\ITS[b
'b b ,OTTXb7N?Sb
'[[K[\CBb1I^ISEb1C^CObb
'b b ,OTTXb7N?Sb
'[[K[\CBb1I^ISEb1C^CObb
'b b ,OTTXb7N?Sb
'[[K[\CBb 1I^ISEb(?[CQCS\b1C^COb
'b"b ,OTTXb7N?Sb
3CQTWab)?WCb
'b#b 8TTDb7O?S[b
'bb ;SI\b7N?S[b
'[[K[\CBb2K^ISEb
'bb ;SI\b7N?S[b
3CQTXab)?XCb
0SBCVCSBCS\b2I^ISGb
'b )TSACU\]?Nb7CW[UCA\I^Cb
(]INBISEb)b
'b )TSACU\]?Nb7CW[UCA\I^Cb
(]INBISEb)b
'b )TSACU\]?Nb +OC^?\ITS[b
(]KOBISEb)b
'b )TSACU\]?Nb+OC^?\ITS[b
(]IOBISEb)b
' b ,OTTXb7N?Sb
(]INBISEb)b2C^CNbb
' b ,OTTXb7N?Sb
(]INBISEb)b2C^CNbb
' b ,OTTXb7N?Sb
(]INBISEb)b(?[CQCS\b1C^CNb
'"b 8TTDb7O?Sb
(]INBKSEb)b
'#b ,OTTXb7N?Sb (]INBISEb'b1C^CPbb
'b ,OTTXb7N?Sb
(]INBISEb'b1C^CNbb
'b ,OTTXb7N?Sb
(]INBISEb(b1C^CNbb
'b ,OTTXb7N?Sb
(]INBISEb(b1C^CNbb
'b ,OTTXb7N?Sb
(]INBISEb(b(?[CQCS\b2C^COb
'b ;SI\b7N?S[b
' b )TSACU\]?Nb7CW[UCA\I^Cb
)TQRTS[b
' b )TSACU\]?Nb 7CW[UCA\I^Cb
)TQQTS[b
' b )TSACU\]?Nb +OC^?\ITS[b
)TQQTS[b
'"b )TSACU\]?Nb+OC^?\ITS[b
)TQQTS[b
'#b ,OTTXb7N?Sb
)TQQTS[b2C^CNbb
'b ,OTTXb7N?Sb
)TQQTS[b2C^CNbb
'b ,OTTXb7N?Sb
)TQQTS[b(?[CQCS\b1C^CNb
'b )TSACU\]?Nb7CW[UCA\I^Cb
8CAXC?\ITSb
'b )TSACU\]?Nb+OC^?\ITS[b
8CAXC?\ITSb
'b )TSACU\]?Nb+OC^?\ITS[b
8CAWC?\ITSb
' b ,OTTXb7N?Sb
8CAWC?\ITSb
<INN?[b
'b
'b
'b
'b
)TSACU\]?Nb7CW[UCA\I^Cb
<INN?b*b
)TSACU\]?Nb+OC^?\ITS[b
<INN?b*b
,OTTXb7N?S[b
;SI\b7N?S[b
.
. #.+ .* ( . .
#).$# ..
.
( -$".
.
. .
210
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
211
9'-1"+/-44'-0"9'-1"9'-1"+/-30'-9"9'-1"+/-44'-0"9'-1"9'-1"+/-30'-9"300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
Scale
0 4 816
Scale
212
213
+/-33'-5"9'-1"9'-1"+/-20'-2"9'-1"+/-44'-0"9'-1"9'-1"+/-30'-9"300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
Scale
0 4 816
Scale
214
DN UP
DNUP
DNUP
ATRIUM
25'-3" x 48'-6"
LIBRARY/
LOUNGE
16'-11" x 20'-4"
PRIVATE
DINING
10'-10" x 24'-5"
SERVICE
6'-5" x 11'-4"
EQUIP.
6'-5" x 5'-0"
STORAGE
6'-0" x 8'-0"
SERVICE
13'-10" x 8'-0"
OFFICE
12'-0" x 12'-0"
MEDS
12'-0" x 8'-0"
STORAGE
12'-0" x 15'-6"
MECHANICAL
11'-10" x 8'-0"
STORAGE
12'-8" x 8'-0"
FREEZER
10'-0" x 8'-0"
COOLER
6'-8" x 8'-0"
KITCHEN
39'-3" x 30'-9"
ELECTRICAL
20'-6" x 8'-0"
SUPPLY
20'-10" x 14'-11"
OFFICE
7'-11" x 12'-7"
LINEN
5'-0" x 12'-7"
EMPLOYEE
LOUNGE
21'-3" x 12'-7"
MEN'S
LOCKER RM.
8'-1" x 8'-3"
MEN'S
9'-1" x 14'-6"
WOMEN'S
LOCKER RM.
10'-8" x 8'-3"
WOMEN'S
9'-1" x 14'-6"
TRASH
9'-2" x 27'-4"
BEAUTY
SALON
17'-2" x 13'-10"
SERVICE
7'-10" x 13'-10"
JANITOR
10'-4" x 5'-2"
MEMORY
CARE
DINING
25'-5" x 42'-10"
ASSISTED
LIVING
DINING
25'-9" x 44'-9"
ASSISTED
LIVING
DINING
31'-4" x 18'-7"
LOUNGE
11'-8" x 20'-11"
KITCHEN
8'-2" x 8'-0"
PANTRY
8'-2" x 13'-5"
DINING
18'-4" x 15'-10"
MEN'S
11'-7" x 10'-0"
WOMEN'S
11'-7" x 10'-0"
STORAGE
17'-7" x 8'-10"
LAUNDRY
8'-0" x 14'-2"
HOUSE-
KEEPING
5'-10" x 14'-2"
MAINT.
8'-4" x 18'-6"
STORAGE
10'-0" x 7'-11"
STORAGE
9'-7" x 6'-4"
OFFICE
10'-10" x 13'-1"
LOBBY
24'-2" x 13'-7"
ADMIN.
OFFICE
13'-8" x 13'-3"
OFFICE
13'-3" x 13'-3"
LOBBY
23'-2" x 10'-8"
PORTE
COCHERE
11'-4"23'-4"22'-7"21'-2"10'-0"22'-8"11'-8"22'-7"11'-8"11'-8"11'-4"9'-6"17'-6"34'-7"11'-4"23'-5"22'-7"11'-8"13'-8"8'-2"7'-6"11'-0"1
3
'
-
8
"
1
1
'
-
8
"
2
2
'
-
7
"11'-8"1
7
'
-
4
"
9'-9"17'-0"9'-9"29'-1"22'-4"17'-5"28'-2"
24'-0"
23'-7"5'-3"
2
7
'
-
9
"27'-5"16'-10"
92'-9"28'-4"23'-7"ASSISTED LIVING - LEVEL 1
23,209 SQ. FT.
COMMON FACILITIES
12,795 SQ. FT.
94'-10"
6'-5"10'-8"17'-1"103'-5"
ADMITTING
11'-8" x 13'-1"44'-0"7'-9"P-1A P-1A P-1A
P-1A
P-1A P-1A
P-1A
P-1A
P-1A
P-1A
P-1B
P-1B
P-1B
P-1B P-1B P-1B
P-1A
P-1A
P-1A
P-SA
P-SA
P-SA
P-SB P-SB
P-SB
P-SC
P-SC
P-SC
P-SC P-SC
P-SC
P-SC
P-SC
P-SD
P-SD
P-A
P-A
P-B
P-B
P-C
8'-2"22'-7"11'-8"8'-10"17'-4"83'-2"86'-8"52'-1"300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
Scale
048 16
Scale
215
DN
DN
DN
LOUNGE
11'-8" x 20'-11"
MEN'S
11'-7" x 10'-0"
WOMEN'S
11'-7" x 10'-0"
LAUNDRY
8'-0" x 14'-2"
HOUSE-
KEEPING
5'-10" x 14'-2"
STORAGE
10'-0" x 7'-11"
STORAGE
17'-7" x 8'-10"
STORAGE
8'-2" x 13'-5"
MAINT.
8'-4" x 18'-6"
STORAGE
9'-7" x 6'-4"
STORAGE
18'-2" x 11'-8"
11'-4"23'-4"22'-7"21'-2"10'-0"
11'-8"22'-7"11'-8"11'-8"11'-4"9'-6"17'-1"34'-7"11'-4"23'-5"22'-7"11'-8"13'-8"8'-2"7'-6"1
1
'
-
0
"
1
3
'
-
8
"
1
1
'
-
8
"
2
2
'
-
7
"
1
1
'
-
8
"17'-4"9'-9"17'-0"9'-9"29'-1"22'-4"17'-5"
ASSISTED LIVING - LEVEL 2
23,209 SQ. FT.
ROOF
BELOW
P-1A P-1A P-1A
P-1A
P-1A P-1A
P-1A
P-1A
P-1A
P-1A
P-1B
P-1B
P-1B
P-1B P-1B P-1B
P-1A
P-1A
P-1A
P-SA
P-SA
P-SA
P-SB P-SB
P-SB
P-SC
P-SC
P-SC
P-SC P-SC
P-SC
P-SC
P-SC
P-SD
P-SD
STORAGE
6'-1" x 20'-4"22'-8"8'-2"22'-7"11'-8"8'-10"17'-4"300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
Scale
048 16
Scale
216
UP
DNUP
UP
LOUNGE
11'-8" x 20'-11"
MEN'S
11'-7" x 10'-0"
WOMEN'S
11'-7" x 10'-0"
LAUNDRY
8'-0" x 14'-2"
HOUSE-
KEEPING
5'-10" x 14'-2"
STORAGE
10'-0" x 7'-11"
MAINT.
8'-4" x 18'-6"
STORAGE
9'-7" x 6'-4"
STORAGE
9'-8" x 7'-4"
COURTYARD
11'-4"23'-4"22'-7"21'-2"10'-0"22'-7"60'-9"11'-8"22'-7"11'-8"11'-8"11'-4"9'-6"17'-1"34'-7"11'-4"23'-5"22'-7"11'-8"13'-8"8'-2"7'-6"11'-0"13'-8"11'-8"22'-7"11'-8"1
7
'
-
4
"
9'-9"17'-0"9'-9"29'-1"22'-4"17'-5"
ASSISTED LIVING - BASEMENT LEVEL
23,076 SQ. FT.
COVERED
PORCH
6'-5"23'-11"77'-10"8'-5"35'-9"51'-0"35'-8"56'-2"36'-6"67'-11"P-1A P-1A P-1A
P-1A
P-1A P-1A
P-1A
P-1A
P-1A
P-1A
P-1B
P-1B
P-1B
P-1B P-1B P-1B
P-1A
P-1A
P-1A
P-SA
P-SA
P-SA
P-SB P-SB
P-SB
P-SC
P-SC
P-SC
P-SC P-SC
P-SC
P-SC
P-SC
P-SD
P-SD
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
Scale
048 16
Scale
217
DN UP
ATRIUM
25'-3" x 48'-6"
LIBRARY/
LOUNGE
16'-11" x 20'-4"
PRIVATE
DINING
10'-10" x 24'-5"
SERVICE
6'-5" x 11'-4"
EQUIP.
6'-5" x 5'-0"
STORAGE
6'-0" x 8'-0"
13'-10" x 8'-0"
BEAUTY
SALON
17'-2" x 13'-10"
SERVICE
7'-10" x 13'-10"
MEMORY
CARE
DINING
25'-5" x 42'-10"
ASSISTED
LIVING
DINING
25'-9" x 44'-9"
ASSISTED
LIVING
DINING
31'-4" x 18'-7"
MAINT.
8'-4" x 18'-6"
STORAGE
9'-7" x 6'-4"
OFFICE
10'-10" x 13'-1"
LOBBY
24'-2" x 13'-7"
ADMIN.
OFFICE
13'-8" x 13'-3"
OFFICE
13'-3" x 13'-3"
LOBBY
23'-2" x 10'-8"
EXAM.
9'-2" x 11'-1"
LOUNGE
13'-2" x 13'-0"
STORAGE
7'-6" x 5'-2"
MED.
9'-10" x 7'-4"
TOILET
7'-6" x 6'-10"
BATHING
13'-3" x 22'-3"
OFFICE
8'-0" x 8'-0"
UTILITY
10'-6" x 13'-6"
NURSE'S
STATION
14'-10" x 12'-3"
NURSE
9'-4" x 23'-9"
NURSE
9'-7" x 14'-11"
PORTE
COCHERE29'-1"22'-4"17'-5"28'-2"
24'-0"
23'-7"5'-3"
2
7
'
-
9
"
2
7
'
-
5
"
2
4
'
-
1
0
"
8'
-
9
"12'-5"24'-10"12'-5"58'-3"12'-5"24'-10"16'-5"22'-9"28'-10"33'-11"33'-0"17'-11"22'-9"17'-11"8'-0"17'-11"22'-9"16'-10"23'-7"MEMORY CARE - LEVEL 1
17,225 SQ. FT.
COMMON FACILITIES
12,795 SQ. FT.
7'-10"
132'-6"179'-1"ADMITTING
11'-8" x 13'-1"44'-0"7'-9"36'-0"
P-1A
P-1A
P-1B
A
P-SC
P-SC
P-A
P-A
P-A
P-A
P-A
P-A
P-A
P-A
P-A
P-A
P-A
P-A
P-A
P-A
P-B
P-B
P-B P-B P-B P-B
P-CP-CP-CP-C
P-C
P-C
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
Scale
048 16
Scale
218
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
0
Scale
816 32
Scale
219
13'-8"26'-6"17'-0"26'-6"17'-4"23'-6"11'-0"23'-6"11'-8"23'-6"23'-6"16'-4"20'-1"9'-6"3'-6"11'-4"
23'-0"3'-0"26'-6"11'-8"11'-4"
23'-0"3'-0"SLEEPING/
LIVING
AREA
13'-0" X 12'-3"
SLEEPING/
LIVING
AREA
16'-4" X 12'-10"SLEEPING/
LIVING
AREA
11'-6" X 14'-4"SLEEPING/
LIVING
AREA
20'-1" X 13'-3"
BEDROOM
11'-6" X 11'-5"
BEDROOM
11'-6" X 11'-5"
LIVING
10'-6" X 8'-3"
LIVING
10'-6" X 14'-0"
KITCHENETTE
7'-6" X 6'-0"KITCHENETTE
7'-2" X 7'-0"
KITCHENETTE
7'-6" X 6'-2"
KITCHENETTE
8'-4" X 7'-0"
KITCHENETTE
10'-5" X 9'-0"
KITCHENETTE
10'-5" X 9'-0"
PATIO
10'-6" X 5'-2"
BATH
7'-4" X 10'-5"
BATH
10'-10" X 7'-6"
BATH
10'-8" X 9'-0"
BATH
7'-3" X 12'-7"
BATH
11'-3" X 8'-7"
BATH
11'-3" X 8'-7"
PLAN SA - STUDIO, 1 BATH
324 SQ. FT. NET
COUNT: 9
PLAN SD - STUDIO, 1 BATH
410 SQ. FT. NET
COUNT: 6
PLAN SB - STUDIO, 1 BATH
376 SQ. FT. NET
COUNT: 9
PLAN SC - STUDIO, 1 BATH
386 SQ. FT. NET
COUNT: 24
PLAN 1A - 1 BEDROOM, 1 BATH
449 SQ. FT. NET
COUNT: 39
PLAN 1B - 1 BEDROOM, 1 BATH
511 SQ. FT. NET
COUNT: 18
LINEN LINENCOATS COATSLINEN
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
024 8
ScaleScale
220
12'-5"25'-0"13'-11"25'-0"11'-4"28'-0"4'-0"7'-0"21'-0"15'-5"
PLAN C - 1 BED, 1 BATH
371 SQ. FT. NET
COUNT: 6
PLAN B - 1 BED, 1 BATH
318 SQ. FT. NET
COUNT: 6
PLAN A - 1 BED, 1 BATH
282 SQ. FT. NET
COUNT: 14
SLEEPING/
LIVING
AREA
11'-9" X 12'-3"
SLEEPING/
LIVING
AREA
13'-3" X 10'-7"
SLEEPING/
LIVING
AREA
14'-9" X 15'-11"
BATH
6'-3" X 9'-4"
BATH
7'-2" X 11'-0"
BATH
7'-2" X 11'-0"
024 8
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
ScaleScale
221
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
222
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
223
9'-1"+/-44'-0"9'-1"9'-1"+/-30'-11"9'-1"+/-33'-4"9'-1"+/-20'-4"300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
0 4 816
ScaleScale
224
9'-1"+/-33'-4"9'-1"+/-20'-4"9'-1"+/-44'-0"9'-1"9'-1"+/-30'-11"9'-1"+/-33'-4"9'-1"+/-20'-4"9'-1"+/-44'-0"9'-1"9'-1"+/-30'-11"300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
ScaleScale
225
UTILITY
STORAGE
LOBBY
TRASH
PLAN 1B PLAN 1BPLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1A
PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1B PLAN 1BPLAN 2PLAN 2PLAN 2PLAN 1BPLAN 2PLAN 1B189'-11"143'-0"LEVEL 1
16 UNITS
16,950 SQ. FT.
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
ScaleScale
226
UTILITY
STORAGE
TRASH
PLAN 1B PLAN 1BPLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1A
PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1B PLAN 1BPLAN 2PLAN 2PLAN 2PLAN 1BPLAN 2PLAN 1B189'-11"143'-0"LEVEL 2
16 UNITS
16,950 SQ. FT.
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
ScaleScale
227
UTILTY
STORAGE
PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1B PLAN 1BPLAN 2PLAN 2PLAN 1BPLAN 2PLAN 1B189'-11"
BASEMENT LEVEL
10 UNITS
11,705 SQ. FT.
UNITS
ABOVE
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
ScaleScale
228
ROOF PITCH 4:12
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
0 4 816
ScaleScale
229
74'-5"PLAN 1B PLAN 2 PLAN 2 PLAN 1B PLAN 1B
174'-8"
PLAN 1B PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1B
LEVEL 1
11 UNITS
11,136 SQ. FT.
TRASH
UTIL.
LOBBY
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
ScaleScale
230
74'-5"PLAN 1B PLAN 2 PLAN 2 PLAN 1B PLAN 1B
174'-8"
PLAN 1B PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1B
LEVEL 2
11 UNITS
10,977 SQ. FT.
TRASH
UTIL.
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
ScaleScale
231
74'-5"PLAN 1B PLAN 2 PLAN 2 PLAN 1B PLAN 1B
174'-8"
PLAN 1B PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1B
LEVEL 1
11 UNITS
10,977 SQ. FT.
TRASH
UTIL.
LOBBY
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
ScaleScale
232
74'-5"PLAN 1B PLAN 2 PLAN 2 PLAN 1B PLAN 1B
174'-8"
PLAN 1B PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1B
LEVEL 2
11 UNITS
10,977 SQ. FT.
TRASH
UTIL.
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
ScaleScale
233
54'-6"174'-8"
PLAN 1B PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1A PLAN 1B
BASEMENT LEVEL
6 UNITS
6,344 SQ. FT.
TRASH
UTIL.
LOBBY
UNITS
ABOVE
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
ScaleScale
234
7'-4"14'-4"
21'-8"6'-8"26'-5"9'-3"5'-8"6'-10"33'-1"10'-8"14'-4"
25'-0"33'-1"6'-8"26'-5"12'-7"5'-8"6'-10"
11'-6"16'-8"11'-1"4'-4"31'-1"19'-5"5'-0"14'-10"35'-5"39'-2"
PATIO
11'-1" X 6'-0"
PLAN 2 - 2 BEDROOM, 2 BATH
1103 SQ. FT.
PLAN 1B - 1 BEDROOM, 1 BATH
613 SQ. FT.
PLAN 1A - STUDIO, 1 BATH
524 SQ. FT.
BEDROOM
12'-1" X 12'-3"
KITCHEN
6'-3" X 8'-7"
BATH
7'-10" X 10'-11"
SLEEPING
AREA
8'-1" X 12'-4"
LIVING/DINING
12'-11" X 16'-8"
ENTRY
6'-3" X 7'-4"
LIVING/DINING
12'-1" X 16'-8"
KITCHEN
6'-3" X 8'-7"
BATH
10'-11" X 7'-10"
W.I.C.
5'-8" X 5'-0"
ENTRY
4'-4" X 7'-4"
LAUNDRY
LAUNDRY
COATSCOATSMASTER
BEDROOM
12'-5" X 14'-4"
BEDROOM 2
12'-6" X 14'-0"
LIVING ROOM
13'-6" X 17'-4"
KITCHEN
8'-2" X 8'-8"
DINING
7'-7" X 10'-4"
M. BATH
9'-11" X 8'-8"
W.I.C.
6'-4" X 7'-11"
ENTRY
4'-10" X 7'-1"
COATS LINENPATIO
11'-1" X 6'-0"
PATIO
12'-7" X 7'-8"
BATH 2
6'-8" X 9'-10"F.A.U.
F.A.U.
LAUNDRY
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
024 8
ScaleScale
235
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
236
237
238
239
157'-6"
2'-7"123'-11"15'-10"15'-2"14'-6"
43'-0"114'-0"37'-10"37'-10"38'-4"31'-10"15'-2"20'-0"15'-2"31'-10"114'-0"300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
ScaleScale
240
157'-6"
2'-7"37'-7"28'-0"15'-2"58'-4"31'-10"15'-2"20'-0"15'-2"31'-10"114'-0"15'-10"
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
ScaleScale
241
157'-6"
86'-4"15'-10"15'-2"2'-7"31'-10"31'-10"50'-4"37'-7"114'-0"31'-10"15'-2"20'-0"15'-2"31'-10"114'-0"134'-6"20'-6"300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
ScaleScale
242
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
243
244
14'-1"15'-1"19'-7"+/-24'-5"11'-1"12'-6"19'-7"+/-24'-5"300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
ScaleScale
245
ENTRY HALL
21'-5" x 10'-2"
CONFERENCE
ROOM
27'-4" x 27'-0"
BEAUTY SALON
15'-7" x 24'-8"
STORAGE
5'-0" x 10'-10"
JANITOR
5'-0" x 6'-8"MEN'S
9'-10" x 25'-6"
WOMEN'S
14'-8" x 19'-4"
MASSAGE
8'-3" x 9'-11"
STORAGE
6'-3" x 9'-11"
EQUIP. RM.
6'-3" x 8'-7"
STORAGE
14'-1" x 9'-4"
SWIM / SPA
25'-0" x 18'-4"
STORAGE
31'-1" x 15'-1"
FITNESS
CENTER
53'-0" x 61'-11"
HALL
MULTI-PURPOSE/
CRAFT ROOM
19'-5" x 39'-0"STOR.
3'-2" x
13'-2"
PHOTO
9'-6" x 9'-10"
CERAMIC
9'-2" x 9'-7"
SERVICE
9'-11" x 9'-10"
ELEC.
9'-1" x 5'-2"
MECH.
9'-1" x 4'-4"
PATIO
PATIO
16'-5"101'-1"3'-6"8'-0"18'-10"28'-0"10'-2"33'-8"40'-1"54'-8"28'-2"56'-0"12'-9"5'-10"16'-1"129'-0"90'-8"RECREATION BUILDING
8,878 SQ. FT.
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
ScaleScale
246
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
247
10'-1"+/-19'-0"11'-7"10'-1"+/-19'-0"11'-7"ROOF PITCH 4:1210'-1"+/-19'-0"11'-7"10'-1"+/-19'-0"11'-7"300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
ScaleScale
248
PLAN 1 PLAN 1
68'-2"
PLAN 2 PLAN 2
47'-8"93'-2"58'-8"PLAN 1 PLAN 2
80'-8"55'-2"58'-8"114'-10"
PLAN 1 PLAN 2 PLAN 1
VILLA A
2 UNITS
3,352 sq. ft.
COUNT: 5
VILLA B
2 UNITS
3,656 sq. ft.
COUNT: 7
VILLA C
2 UNITS
3,960 sq. ft.
COUNT: 4
VILLA D
3 UNITS
5,332 sq. ft.
COUNT: 14
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
048 16
Scale
249
15'-10"16'-2"
32'-0"30'-2"9'-2"15'-10"58'-0"2'-10"1'-0"57'-0"6'-6"10'-0"17'-6"
13'-2"16'-8"16'-8"46'-2"1'-6"1'-0"2'-6"46'-2"48'-8"46'-6"
11'-2"10'-0"8'-3"17'-1"
GREAT ROOM
15'-6" X 22'-4"
FOYER
7'-2" X 11'-2"
KITCHEN
9'-6" X 10'-8"
MASTER
BEDROOM
15'-6" X 15'-0"
M. BATH
8'-6" X 9'-4"
GARAGE
13'-6" X 20'-6"
BEDROOM 2
13'-0" X 12'-0"
BATH 2
8'-10" X 9'-2"
GREAT ROOM
16'-8" X 23'-6"
KITCHEN
9'-8" X 13'-0"
GARAGE
17'-8" X 20'-0"
MASTER
BEDROOM
16'-0" X 12'-6"
BEDROOM 2
12'-6" X 14'-0"
BEDROOM 3
12'-6" X 14'-2"
BATH 2
8'-8" X 9'-2"M. BATH
16'-0" X 5'-8"
W.I.C.
8'-4" X 5'-6"
FOYER
5'-0" X 7'-10"
LINEN COATSLAUNDRY
LAUNDRY
COATSLINEN
PLAN 1 - 2 BEDROOM, 2 BATH
1676 SQ. FT.
COUNT: 45
PLAN 2 - 3 BEDROOM, 2 BATH
1980 SQ. FT.
COUNT: 29
COVERED PORCH
15'-0" X 9'-2"
PATIO
16'-8" X 8'-0"
PATIO
15'-10" X 8'-0"
COVERED
PORCH
6'-6" X 7'-2"
300 E. Esplanade Dr., Suite 1550
Oxnard, CA 93036
805 988 4114
5900 Canoga Avenue,
Suite 400
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
818 591 3300
024 8
ScaleScale
250
CITY OF MOORPARK INITIAL STUDY
799 MOORPARK AVENUE
MOORPARK, CA 93021
(805) 517-6200
Project Title: Aldersgate Senior Living Project Case No.: GPA No. 2013-02; ZC No.
2013-02; RPD No. 2013-01;
DA No. 2013-01
Contact Person and Phone No.: Joseph Fiss, Planning Manager (805) 517-6226
Name of Applicant: Grand Pacific Asset 2. LLC (Mansi)
Address and Phone
No.:
300 E. Esplanade Drive
Oxnard, CA 93030
805-988-4114
Project Location: North side of Casey Road, west of Walnut Canyon Road
General Plan
Designation:
Rural Low (RL) and Medium
Density Residential (M)
Zoning: Rural Exclusive (RE) and
Rural Exclusive – 5 (RE-5)
Project Description:
A request for development of a proposed 390 unit senior continuing care retirement community on 49.52
acres.The project will include independent living, assisted living, and memory care as well as associated
amenities.
The required entitlements include a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Residential Planned
Development, and Development Agreement.
The project site consists of a 49.52-acre irregularly-shaped parcel on the north side of Casey Road and
tangentially the west side of Walnut Canyon Road in the City of Moorpark, as shown on the Site Location
Map, Figure 1. The site is topographically situated principally within a south-trending canyon bound by the
south-trending low-lying ridges on east and west. Maximum relief across the site is approximately 200
feet.
The proposed Aldersgate Senior Living Project will comprise a 390-unit continuing care senior retirement
community. Site development will include grading and the construction of approximately 40 single-story
and two-story structures, a main paved access road extending from Casey Road, internal paved
roadways and parking areas, and related new utilities and infrastructure, as shown on the project map.
The remainder of the site will be landscaped and paved, with active and, primarily, passive recreation
areas. Structures are expected to be conventional wood frame construction.
Site grading will consist of cut and fill for the proposed structures, related new utilities, access road,
internal roadways, parking and yard/recreational areas, and site drainage.
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
North: Single Family – Meridian Hills Neighborhood
East: Single Family – Walnut Canyon Neighborhood
South: Walnut Canyon Elementary – Boys and Girls Club
West: Ranchettes and Unimproved Property
Responsible and Trustee Agencies:California Department of Fish & Wildlife, Ventura County
Watershed Protection District
PC ATTACHMENT 4 251
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a
"Potentially Significant Impact" or "Less Than Significant With Mitigation," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agricultural and Forestry Resources Air Quality
x Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality
Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise
Population/Housing Public Services Recreation
x Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance
None
DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation,
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the
project proponent. Mitigation measures described on the attached Exhibit 1 have been added to the
project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
Prepared by: Joseph Fiss, Planning Manager
Date: November 21, 2018
Reviewed by: David A. Bobardt, Community Development Director
Date: November 21, 2018
252
INITIAL STUDY EXHIBIT 1:
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
MITIGATION MEASURES AND
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
1. Biological Resources.
Trees:
The replacement trees to be planted on the site (approximately 1,200 trees) shall have a value equal to,
or greater than, the appraised value of $72,231.64 for the removed trees, as identified in the Oak Tree
Report (Tree Life Concern Inc. (TLC), January 31, 2014). The replacement trees shall include two 24”-
box Quercus agrifolia. Should there not be sufficient space to replace the required tree, the applicant
shall pay to the City of Moorpark an amount equal to the difference between the appraised amount and
the value of the trees planted on site.
A five-year maintenance plan for the mitigation trees shall be required, consistent with the City’s Tree
Protection Ordinance. Trees and their irrigation system shall be monitored at quarterly intervals for the
first two years and biennially for the next three years. A Letter of Compliance shall be submitted by the
Project Arborist to the Community Development Department at the end of each time period describing the
condition of each tree and recording their chances for long-term survival. The applicant shall be
responsible for monitoring and maintaining the mitigation trees for the five-year period and no longer. The
proposed landscape plan must specify that mitigation trees are properly installed, staked/guyed and
watered to help ensure their survival. An irrigation system designed for newly planted trees is mandatory
for successful tree establishment. Drip-system irrigation is ideal for managing water distribution near
newly planted trees.” (TLC report #3)
Protective fencing shall be installed around or along all trees listed to remain (see TLM for fence
placement recommendations). Place protective fencing at the Protective Zone (PZ) or as shown on the
TLM. Orange construction fencing is sufficient and its position must be approved by the Project Arborist,
who must be present during the fence placement or repositioning.
An Oak Tree Information Packet including the City’s Tree Protection Municipal Code and the Oak Tree
Report must be available during on-site construction. The applicant and contractor should be familiar with
the contents of these documents.
No oaks outside the property line are to be impacted by this construction project.
The information tags numbering each oak on this site shall not be removed.
No construction materials are to be stored or discarded within the PZ of any oak. Rinse water, concrete
residue, liquid contaminates (paint, thinners, gasoline, oils, etc.) of any type shall not be deposited in any
form at the base of an oak.
Monitoring Action:Five-year regular monitoring of replacement trees
Timing:First 2 years: Quarterly
Years 3 – 5: Biennially
Responsibility:Community Development Department, Parks; Recreation &
Community Services Department
253
Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub (VCCS) Habitat:
10.82 acres of VCSS habitat shall be created and enhanced as in Figure 6 of the Coastal
California Gnatcatcher Focused Survey (BioResource Consultants Inc., July 23, 2015, updated June 1,
2018).
Monitoring Action:Inspection and report to City
Timing:Prior to issuance of Grading Permit
Responsibility:Community Development Department
Riparian/Wetlands:
To offset impacts to U.S. and State Wetland and Waters, onsite mitigation will be implemented in
the southern portion of the proposed Project (Appendix E). The proposed mitigation/restoration will result
in the creation of 1.24 acres of emergent wetlands, an ephemeral drainage, and associated Arroyo Willow
and Mulefat Thicket riparian habitat similar to the pre-construction conditions in the northern reach of the
drainage to compensate for the impact to 1.022 acres of jurisdictional area.
Monitoring Action:Inspection and report to City
Timing:Prior to issuance of Grading Permit
Responsibility:Community Development Department
2.Traffic
The City has established traffic mitigation fee programs for purposes of funding traffic improvements as
needed to maintain Level of Service C operating conditions on the local street system. The Citywide
Traffic Mitigation Fee and Los Angeles Avenue Area of Contribution Fee Programs apply to this project.
The City has identified and programmed construction of improvements to be funded by these mitigation
fees, consisting of the addition of through lanes at the intersections of Los Angeles Avenue/Moorpark
Avenue and Los Angeles Avenue/Spring Road that will mitigate cumulative traffic impacts. Improvements
have also been identified at the intersection of Walnut Canyon Road/Casey Road to be funded by these
mitigation fees, consisting of adding additional phases to the existing traffic signal, that will mitigate
cumulative traffic impacts.
Prior to issuance of zoning clearance for first building permit, the applicant shall pay to the City
Traffic Mitigation fee to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts as determined by the Community Development
Director and City Engineer/Public Works Director.
Prior to issuance of zoning clearance for first building permit, the applicant shall pay the Los
Angeles Avenue Area of Contribution Fee to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts as determined by the
Community Development Director and City Engineer / Public Works Director.
Prior to issuance of zoning clearance for first building permit, the applicant shall submit a driveway
plan for review and approval by the Community Development Director and City Engineer / Public Works
Director.
Monitoring Action:Collection of mitigation fees. Plan review.
Timing:Prior to issuance of zoning clearance for first building permit
Responsibility:Community Development Department
254
AGREEMENT TO PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES AND
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines Section 15070 (California Code of Regulations Title 14, Chapter
3, Article 6), this agreement must be signed prior to release of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for
public review.
I, THE UNDERSIGNED PROJECT APPLICANT, HEREBY AGREE TO MODIFY THE PROJECT
DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION OR OPERATION AS NECESSARY TO INCLUDE ALL OF THE ABOVE-
LISTED MITIGATION MEASURES IN THE PROJECT.
Signature of Project Applicant Date
255
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
A. AESTHETICS –Would the project:
1) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?X
2) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
X
3) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
X
4) Create a new source of substantial light or glare,
adversely affecting day or nighttime views in the area?
X
256
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Response:
1) The project area is situated in a small valley within a ridge and valley system, which
is part of the Little Simi Valley. Panoramic views associated with vantage points,
which provide a sweeping geographic orientation, are not commonly available to or
from the site. Therefore, impacts to panoramic views would be less than significant.
The Site is not located within an identified scenic corridor and scenic resources on
site are limited to typical open rolling land with little vegetation.
Views along Walnut Canyon Road are the chief concern. There, the upslope is
steepest at the east side, continuing further onto the site at a reduced gradient. The
result is that the true ridgeline is generally not visible from Walnut Canyon, while the
apparent ridgeline resulting from the change from very steep to less steep upslopes
is also not visible from offsite locations. This apparent ridgeline is very low, forming a
stark backdrop to the scattered and highly exposed houses in the area. It is open
country, but compromised by the low profile of the apparent ridgeline and the nature
of the existing development to the point that it is not deemed scenic.
2) The project will not damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees,
rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. Neither
Walnut Canyon Road nor Casey Road is a state scenic highway.
3) Conversion of the site from its current undeveloped condition to a senior assisted
housing use would alter the existing setting by grading the site and developing the
proposed buildings, site improvements, and landscaping. The Project site is
bordered by existing residential development on the north and east and the Walnut
Canyon School and Boys & Girls Club on Casey Road immediately south of the site.
The site currently contains a mix of non-native and native vegetation. The trees on
the site consist almost entirely of non-native species. The existing vegetation was
burned in a2006 Fire. The proposed grading complements the existing topography
and the design of the Project, including the site plan, which groups the groups the
residential buildings on the northern portion of the site, the architectural design of the
residential buildings, and the landscaping, will complement the existing residential
development around the site and will not substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its surroundings. The applicant will also be
contributing to the City’s Open Space Fund. The City uses these funds to purchase
land to preserve as open space to maintain the visual character of the community.
4) Normal street lighting and residential light sources will not have a significant impact
on vistas and will be evaluated and be consistent with the City’s lighting ordinance.
Architecture and landscaping will be evaluated for consistency with City standards.
Sources:Project Application (September 3, 2013), Moorpark Municipal Code, General Plan Land Use
Element (1992).
Mitigation: None required
257
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
B. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES – In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation
and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model
to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
1) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland
of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources
agency, to non-agricultural use?
X
2) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
X
3) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
X
Response:The subject site is not located within prime farmland, is not under agricultural use, and is
zoned for residential use. The Ventura County Important Farmland Map classifies the site
as a combination of Farmland of Local Importance (L) and Grazing Land (G)
Farmland of Local Importance (L) is defined as land of importance to the local agricultural
economy as determined by each county's board of supervisors and a local advisory
committee. In Ventura these are soils that are listed as Prime or Statewide that are not
irrigated, and soils growing dryland crops--beans, grain, dryland walnuts, or dryland apricots.
Grazing Land (G) is defined as land on which the existing vegetation is suited to the grazing
of livestock. This category was developed in cooperation with the California Cattlemen's
Association, University of California Cooperative Extension, and other groups interested in
the extent of grazing activities.
A significant impact may occur if the proposed project were to result in the conversion of
state-designated agricultural land from agricultural use to another non-agricultural use. The
California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Protection, lists Prime Farmland,
Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Statewide Importance under the general category of
“Important Farmland.” The Extent of Important Farmland Map Coverage maintained by the
Division of Land Protection indicates that this property is not included in the Important
Farmland category. No impact on farmland or agricultural resources would occur as a result
of conversion of this land to suburban uses.
Sources:Project Application (September 3, 2013); Biological Resources Technical Report (1/22/14);
Archaeological Survey (1/22/14); California Dep’t of Conservation: Ventura County Important
Farmland Map (2000)
Mitigation:None required
258
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
C. AIR QUALITY –Where available, the significant criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
1) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable
air quality plan?
X
2) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
X
3) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard (including releasing emissions
which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
X
4) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
X
5) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people?
X
Response:The project would not have a significant effect on regional air quality, because its operational
emissions (14.5 pounds/day reactive organic compounds; 11 pounds/day oxides of nitrogen)
would be below the 25 pound/day threshold of significance established by the Ventura
County Air Pollution Control District for these pollutants. While this impact is not significant
and no mitigation is required for this reason, a Standard Condition of Approval has been
added as part of the project for the developer to pay a contribution to the City’s Air Quality
fund. The City uses these funds for programs that reduce emissions by promoting programs
such as ridesharing.
Sources:Ventura County Air Pollution Control District: Memorandum to City (Stratton, 7/8/14); Rincon
Consultants Inc., Greenhouse Gas Study (12/31/13); Ventura County Air Pollution Control
District: Project Application (September 3, 2013); Ventura County Air Quality Assessment
Guidelines (2000), URBEMIS 2001
Mitigation: None required
259
D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES –Would the project:
1) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service?
X
2) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat
or other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife
Service?
X
3) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
X
4) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
X
5) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy
or ordinance?
X
6) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
X
260
Response:The primary vegetation communities on the 49.5 acre project site are disturbed Venturan
Coastal Sage Scrub (VCCS) (23.8 acres) and non-native grasslands (17.2 acres). A
seasonal wash on the site contains small areas of Arroyo Willow Thicket vegetation (0.34
acres) and Mulefat Thicket habitat (0.69 acres) upstream of a small wetland area (0.34 acre).
The VCCS on the site is distributed in patches on the site separated by areas of non-native
grassland and is uneven and varied. The existing vegetation communities have a moderate
potential to contain two sensitive plant and five wildlife species. These species were not
observed on the site during biological surveys. A pair of non-nesting Coastal California
Gnatcatchers was observed in VCSS on the site during protocol surveys conducted for this
sensitive species.
There are 168 trees scattered throughout the site. The majority of these trees are non-native
varieties such as California Pepper, Olive, and Blue and Red Gum Eucalyptus. Native trees
on the site are limited to 5 black walnut and 1 oak tree. The trees on the site are generally in
poor health and vigor. Many are re-sprouts or re-growth stumps from trees damaged in a
2007 fire. Most of the trees on the site have been rated in fair-to-poor condition and 28 are
listed as nearly dead.
The site is bordered on the north by graded residential lots, Meridian Hills Drive, and
residential uses north of Meridian Hills Drive, on the east by existing homes along Walnut
Canyon Road, on the south by Casey Road, Walnut Canyon School, and the Boys and Girls
Club, and on the west by a single family home and open space between the railroad tracks,
Los Angeles Avenue, Grimes Canyon Road and Championship Drive. The seasonal wash on
the site drains under Casey Road at the southern end of the Project site and ends
approximately 600 feet south of Casey Road. As a result, there is no downstream riparian or
wetland habitat that would be affected by changes to this drainage feature on the project site.
This project result in the removal of 101 of the mature trees on the site, with 98 of these trees
consisting of non-native trees. Removal of 3 native trees consisting of 2 black walnut trees
and 1 oak tree is proposed. The removal of mature trees is regulated by the City’s Tree
Preservation Ordinance. The project will also include the planting of approximately 1,200
new trees of various species and size, including oak, black walnut, and sycamore trees in
conformance with the City’s tree ordinance, to compensate for the proposed removal of 101
trees. The removal of the mature trees is considered a significant impact that will be
mitigated by planting the proposed replacement trees in accordance with the mitigation
measure below.
Project grading would impact 17 acres of the VCCS habitat on the site and 1.02 acres of
riparian/wetland habitat. The proposed project includes a revegetation plan that includes
habitat restoration and enhancement on the project site by creating 10.82 acres of high
quality VCSS habitat to compensate for the loss of 17 acres of lower quality VCCS habitat
presently on the site. This habitat will consist of large continuous bands of VCSS habitat
along the edges of the site with improved habitat value as it will include not only shrub
species associated but also mulefat, coyote bush, and blue elderberry found in the higher
quality VCSS habitat on the site. This higher quality replacement VCSS vegetation will
mitigate the impact of the project by providing habitat with similar value for wildlife to the
lower quality habitat being impacted.
In addition, the project includes the creation of 1.24 acres of emergent wetlands, an
ephemeral drainage, and associated Arroyo Willow and Mulefat Thicket riparian habitat
similar to the existing conditions in the northern reach of the drainage to compensate for the
impact to 1.02 acres of riparian/habitat area. The Implementation of the revegetation plan
and the mitigation measures below will reduce impacts to biological resources, including the
loss of avian and wildlife nesting and foraging habitat for common and sensitive species, to
less than significant.
261
Sources:Oak Tree Report (Tree Life Concern Inc., 1/31/14); Biological Resources Technical Report
(Seven Elk Ranch Design Incorporated, 1/22/14); Coastal California Gnatcatcher Focused
Survey and Amendment (BioResource Consultants Inc., 7/23/15 and 5/12/16); Jurisdictional
Wetlands and Waters Delineation Report (BioResource Consultants Inc., 5/12/16).
(REPORTS ATTACHED)
Project Application (September 3, 2013); California Department of Fish and Game: Natural
Diversity Data Base-Moorpark and Simi Valley Quad Sheets (1993)
Mitigation:Trees:
The replacement trees to be planted on the site (approximately 1,200 trees) shall have a value
equal to, or greater, than the appraised value of $72,231,64 to the removed trees, as identified in
the Oak Tree Report (Tree Life Concern Inc. (TLC), January 31, 2014). The replacement trees
planted shall include two 24”-box Quercus agrifolia.
A five-year maintenance plan for the mitigation trees shall be required, consistent with the City’s
Tree Protection Ordinance. Trees and their irrigation system shall be monitored at quarterly
intervals for the first two years and biennially for the next three years. A Letter of Compliance shall
be submitted by the Project Arborist to the Community Development Department at the end of
each time period describing the condition of each tree and recording their chances for long-term
survival. The applicant shall be responsible for monitoring and maintaining the mitigation trees for
the five-year period and no longer. The proposed landscape plan must specify that mitigation trees
are properly installed, staked/guyed and watered to help ensure their survival. An irrigation system
designed for newly planted trees is mandatory for successful tree establishment. Drip-system
irrigation is ideal for managing water distribution near newly planted trees.” (TLC report #3)
Protective fencing shall be installed around or along all trees listed to remain (see TLM for fence
placement recommendations). Place protective fencing at the Protective Zone (PZ) or as shown on
the TLM. Orange construction fencing is sufficient and its position must be approved by the Project
Arborist, who must be present during the fence placement or repositioning.
An Oak Tree Information Packet including the City’s Tree Protection Municipal Code and the Oak
Tree Report must be available during on-site construction. The applicant and contractor should be
familiar with the contents of these documents.
No oaks outside the property line are to be impacted by this construction project.
The information tags numbering each oak on this site shall not be removed.
No construction materials are to be stored or discarded within the PZ of any oak. Rinse water,
concrete residue, liquid contaminates (paint, thinners, gasoline, oils, etc.) of any type shall not be
deposited in any form at the base of an oak.
Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub (VCCS) Habitat:
10.82 acres of VCCS habitat shall be created and enhanced as shown in Figure 6 of the Coastal
California Gnatcatcher Focused Survey (BioResource Consultants Inc., July 23, 2015, updated
June 1, 2018).
Riparian/Wetlands:
To offset impacts to U.S. and State Wetland and Waters, onsite mitigation will be implemented in
the southern portion of the proposed Project (Appendix E). 1.24 acres of emergent wetlands, an
ephemeral drainage, and associated Arroyo Willow and Mulefat Thicket riparian habitat similar to
the pre-construction conditions in the northern reach of the drainage on the site shall be created
262
E. CULTURAL RESOURCES –Would the project:
1) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of a historic resource as defined in §15064.5?
X
2) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
X
3) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
X
4) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?X
Response:There are no known or expected cultural resources on the project site.
If any archeological or historical finds are uncovered during grading or excavation operations,
all grading or excavation shall immediately cease in the immediate area and the find must be
left untouched. The applicant, in consultation with the project paleontologist or archeologist,
shall assure the preservation of the site and immediately contact the Community
Development Director by phone, in writing by email or hand delivered correspondence
informing the Director of the find. In the absence of the Director, the applicant shall so inform
the City Manager. The applicant shall be required to obtain the services of a qualified
paleontologist or archeologist, whichever is appropriate to recommend disposition of the site.
The paleontologist or archeologist selected must be approved in writing by the Community
Development Director. The applicant shall pay for all costs associated with the investigation
and disposition of the find.
Prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance for a grading permit, a paleontological mitigation
plan outlining procedures for paleontological data recovery must be prepared and submitted
to the Community Development Director for review and approval. The development and
implementation of this Plan must include consultations with the Applicant's engineering
geologist as well as a requirement that the curation of all specimens recovered under any
scenario will be through the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History (LACMNH). All
specimens become the property of the City of Moorpark unless the City chooses otherwise. If
the City accepts ownership, the curation location may be revised. The monitoring and data
recovery should include periodic inspections of excavations to recover exposed fossil
materials. The cost of this data recovery is limited to the discovery of a reasonable sample of
available material. The interpretation of reasonableness rests with the Community
Development Director.
The City has provided notice to Native American Tribes of the opportunity to consult on the
potential effects of the project on Tribal Cultural Resources in conformance with Section
21080.3.1(d) of the Public Resources Code and has not received any requests to consult on
the Project.
Sources:Archaeological Survey (W&S Consultants, 1/12/2014 ); Project Application (September 3,
2013)
Mitigation:None required
263
F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS –Would the project:
1) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death Involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?X
iv) Landslides?X
2) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?X
3) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project,
and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
4) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B
of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial
risks to life or property?
X
5) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste
water?
X
Response:This project will be built subject to compliance with building codes and compliance with all
project conditions of approval. All plans will be subject to the review and approval of the City
prior to issuance of building permits. The site is not located in an earthquake fault zone or
liquefaction hazard zone. The site is not located in an area designated as subject to landslide
risk on the Seismic Hazard Zone Map prepared by the California Geologic Survey. The
proposed slopes are designed to provide an acceptable factor of safety.
Sources:Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report (Workman Engineering & Consulting,
3/7/2014); Preliminary Soils Report Project Application and Exhibits (September 3, 2013),
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Map (Simi Valley West, 1999), Seismic Hazard Zone
Map (Simi Valley, 1997) General Plan Safety Element (2001)
Mitigation:None required
264
G. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS –Would the project:
1) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
2) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
X
Response: The project would be consistent with applicable state, regional, and local plans and policies
for reducing greenhouse gas emissions as presented in Tables 8 and 9 in the Greenhouse
Gas Study completed for the project, including incorporation of features into the project to
conserve water and energy, reducing solid waste and locating Senior Housing use in
proximity to commercial and other services, which will reduce vehicle mile traveled. In
addition, the SCAQMD recommends a quantitative threshold for all land use types of 3,000
metric tons CO2e /year (SCAQMD, “Proposed Tier 3 Quantitative Thresholds – Option 1”,
September 2010). At 2,181 metric tons per year, the amount of greenhouse gas emissions is
below this threshold. For these reasons, the impact is not significant and no mitigation is
needed.
Sources:Project Application (September 3, 2013); Ventura County Air Pollution Control District
Memorandum to City (Stratton, 7/8/14); Greenhouse Gas Study (Rincon Consultants, Inc.,
12/31/13)
Mitigation:None required
H. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS –Would the project:
1) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
X
2) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
X
3) Emit hazardous emission or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
X
4) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
X
5) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
X
6) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would
the project result in a safety hazard for people residing
or working in the project area?
X
265
7) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
X
8) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
X
Response:The site is not identified on any lists of hazardous materials site. The proposed residential
use would not involve the handling, use, or storage of any hazardous materials that would
pose a hazard to uses near the project site. The nearest airports to the project site are the
Santa Paula Airport, located approximately 11 miles northwest of the site, and Camarillo
Airport, located approximately 12 miles southwest of the site. There are also no private
airstrips located within the vicinity of the site. The site is not located on a designated
emergency route and would not physically interfere with emergency evacuation in this portion
of the City. The project site is not located in a wildland area; as it is bordered by existing
residential development to the north and east and by institutional, residential and commercial
uses to the south. Additional residential uses and agricultural uses are located west of the
site. There are no known hazards on the project site, nor will new hazards be created as a
result of the project. No significant hazards and hazardous materials impacts have been
identified and no mitigation measures have been identified.
Sources:Project Application (September 3, 2013), General Plan Safety Element (2001)
Mitigation:None required.
I. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY –Would the project:
1) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
X
2) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production
rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses or planned
uses for which permits have been granted)?
X
3) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of
a stream or river, in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
X
4) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of
a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on- or off-site?
X
5) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
X
6) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?X
7) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
266
8) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
X
9) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
X
10) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?X
Response:The site is not within a within a FEMA identified 100-year flood hazard area.
The eastern portion of the site currently drains to the existing Walnut Creek Channel and the
western portion of the site drains to a defined natural channel that drains south to Casey
Road and conveyed to the Walnut Creek Channel. A small retention basin, with a concrete
spillway, is located in the channel near the center of the site. This basin would retain flows
from small events while flows from larger events would pass over the spillway and would not
be detained.
The proposed grading and development would alter the existing drainage patterns. The
proposed project includes storm drain improvements that will collect runoff from the project
site and discharge this runoff to the Walnut Creek Channel. A detention basin with a capacity
for 3.6 acres will be constructed at the southern end of the site. This basin will detain flows
during a 100-year storm event. The inflow to this basin will be 103.4 cubic feet per second
(cfs) and the outflow will be 42.6 cfs, resulting in the peak flow discharged from the site being
reduced from 527.3 cfs to 504 cfs. The 42.6 cfs outflow from the detention basin is lower
than the 100-year outflow rate of 65 cfs identified by the Ventura Watershed Protection Basin
as the design standard for the Walnut Creek Drainage Area as defined in Section 8.1.3:
Basin No. 1 (Casey Road) of the adopted 2006 Gabbert and Walnut Canyon Channels Floor
Control Deficiency Study (pages 8-4 and 8-5, and figures A and B). The Ventura County
Watershed Protection District holds a flood control easement within Walnut Canyon across
the southeast corner of the site, and District’s conditions will be included as conditions of
approval on the project. The project will not, therefore, result in any significant onsite
erosion/siltation impacts or offsite flooding impacts and no mitigation is needed
Sources:Hydrology and Hydraulics Study (LC Engineering Group, Inc., 2/25/2014); Memorandum
(Ventura County Watershed Protection District [VCWPD], 7/7/2014); Project Application
(September 3, 2013), General Plan Safety Element (2001), Moorpark Municipal Code
267
Mitigation:Indicate the District’s easement over Walnut Canyon on all plans and drawings.
A flood control easement with a minimum width of 20 feet (east-west) at the southeasterly corner of the
property, tapering northeasterly to join the District’s existing easement per 3982 or 862 along Walnut
Canyon, shall be provided for the purposes of channel maintenance and future channel expansion.
Said easement shall be subject to District approval prior to recordation, and shall be recorded prior to
issuance of any development permits.
Modified Detention Basin Site No. 1 (Casey Road) shall be designed to reduce the future 100-year
outflow to 65 cfs in accordance with Section 8.1.3: Basin No. 1 (Casey Road) of the adopted Gabbert
and Walnut Canyon Channels Floor Control Deficiency Study (pages 8-4 and 8-5, and figures A and B),
as prepared by PACE and dated July 2005
An engineering study shall be conducted to determine the appropriate contribution of the development
toward the solution of downstream flooding issues on properties such as those owned by Essex
Moorpark Owner LP and the City of Moorpark. Said study shall be subject to City Department of Public
Works approval prior to issuance of any development permits.
To the extent that the development impacts Walnut Creek, compliance with District criteria is required.
Preliminary drainage studies should address the following District requirements:
i. Any proposed future lateral connections to the red line channel system should
conform to the District’s standard for peak attenuation that the runoff after
development shall not exceed runoff before development for any frequency of
event.
ii. Any activity in, on, over, under or across any jurisdictional red line channel will
require a permit from the Ventura County Watershed Protection District. The
requirements for a District Encroachment Permit can be found on the District’s
website at www.vcwatershed.org or by calling (805)650-4077.
iii. All technical materials submitted in connection with a District Encroachment
Permit application must be prepared, signed, and stamped by a California
licensed civil engineer or other appropriate professional.
No structures or trees shall be placed within the District easement. Nonstructural surface improvements
within the easement shall be subject to a District Encroachment Permit.
The Applicant shall provide for the long term maintenance of any lateral connection to W alnut Creek by
including appropriate provisions in a deed restriction or similar instrument, subject to approval by the
District, recorded prior to zone clearance for use inauguration or issuance of a letter of completion for
the District Encroachment Permit.
It is understood that comments on the NPDES features are the purview of the City. A detailed review of
the detention design will be made upon submittal of final plans under an application for a District
Encroachment Permit. At that time the details of peak attenuation, flow routing, outlet configuration,
function of the detention water surface given the Q100 water surface in the channel, and other
technical matters will be reviewed.
J. LAND USE AND PLANNING –Would the project:
1) Physically divide an established community?X
2) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific
plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
X
3) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan?
X
268
The Residential Planned Development Application was filed concurrently with a General Plan
Amendment and Zone Change. The current General Plan designations for the Project site are
Rural Low Residential (RL) and Medium Residential (M). The current Zoning designation is RE
(Rural Exclusive) and RE-5ac (Rural Exclusive-5 acre minimum). The proposal would result in a
gross density of 7.9 dwelling units per acre for the entire site before dedication of streets. The
proposed amendment would change the General Plan designation for the site to Very High
Density (VH) Residential. The General Plan designation of Medium (M) allows a maximum density
of 4 dwelling units per acre, while the requested VH designation allows up to 15 dwelling units per
acre.
The project is consistent with the applicable Goals and Policies of the General Plan. Specifically,
the proposed senior continuing care retirement community is consistent with the following Land
Use and Housing Element goals:
Land Use Element:
GOAL 1: Attain a balanced City growth pattern which includes a full mix of land uses.
GOAL 3: Provide a variety of housing types and opportunities for all economic segments of the
community.
Housing Element:
GOAL 2: Provide residential sites through land use, zoning and specific plan designations to
provide a range of housing opportunities.
GOAL 3: Expand and protect housing opportunities for lower income households and special
needs groups.
The proposed Project will provide housing opportunities for a special needs group, seniors
requiring living assistance services, and add to the range of housing opportunities available in the
City.
The requested zoning designation to RPD-8U (Residential Planned Development – 8 units per
acre) would accommodate the proposed density. The purpose of the Residential Planned
Development zone is to provide areas for communities to be developed using modern land
planning and unified design techniques. This zone provides a flexible regulatory procedure in
order to encourage:
1. Coordinated neighborhood design and compatibility with existing or potential development of
surrounding areas;
2. An efficient use of land particularly through the clustering of dwelling units and the preservation
of the natural features of sites;
3. Variety and innovation in site design, density and housing unit options, including garden
apartments, townhouses and single-family dwellings;
4. Lower housing costs through the reduction of street and utility networks; and
5. A more varied, attractive and energy-efficient living environment, as well as, greater
opportunities for recreation than would be possible under other zone classifications.
This zoning designation is consistent with the proposed General Plan land use designation and is
appropriate for the site, allowing the development of a site plan that provides opportunities for
habitat restoration after grading while creating a cohesive and logical plan for the proposed
continuing care community.
269
Sources:Project Application (September 3, 2013), General Plan Land Use Element (1992)
Mitigation:None required
K. MINERAL RESOURCES –Would the project:
1) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
X
2) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
X
Response:
There are no known mineral resources onsite.
Sources:Project Application (September 3, 2013), General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and
Recreation Element (1986)
Mitigation:None required
L. NOISE –Would the project result in:
1) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan
or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
X
2) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
X
3) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
X
4) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
X
5) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
X
6) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would
the project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
X
270
Response:There will be a temporary increase in noise during grading and construction. Noise
generators will be required to comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance and allowed hours of
construction. Grading traffic will be minimized through the balancing of cut and fill onsite prior
to the development of the North Hills Parkway.
Future residents on site may hear traffic on Walnut Canyon Road, but the noise analysis
study indicates a measured noise level of 59.5 CNEL on the east property line, below the
threshold for an acoustical analysis.
The project proposes conventional residential use within a sheltered area isolated from
adjacent uses by upward slopes. Nothing indicates any significant impact on surrounding
properties from the permanent use itself. It will be in compliance with all acoustical codes and
requirements of Title 24 and the Uniform Building Code.
Sources:Noise Study (Veneklasen Associates, 1/16/14); Project Application (September 3, 2013);
General Plan Noise Element (1998)
Mitigation:None required
M. POPULATION AND HOUSING –Would the project:
1) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure)?
X
2) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
X
3) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
X
Response:This project will have beneficial impacts of helping to achieve housing goals in support of the
Housing Element of the General Plan, and of providing housing for an unserved segment of
the population -- elderly seeking a continuum of care. There will be no negative impacts
related to population growth or housing.
Sources:Project Application (September 3, 2013)
Mitigation:None required
N. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, need for new
or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?X
Police protection?X
271
Schools?X
Parks?X
Other public facilities?X
Response:
The proposed continuing care community for seniors is located less than one-half mile from
Ventura County Fire Station No. 42 on E. High Street and less than one mile from the
Ventura County Sheriff’s Station on Spring Road and response time for any calls for service
will be acceptable. The Project includes assisted care living units that will have full time staff,
which will reduce calls for emergency services. The incremental increase in calls for
emergency services will not create a need for additional fire or police facilities. The project
plans and information were provided to the Ventura County Sheriff and Fire Departments for
review and comment. No comments were received by the City indicating the project would
have a significant impact on police and fire services that would require new facilities or
alterations to existing facilities to maintain acceptable levels of service that would result in
significant impacts. This senior housing project will not generate students and will have no
impact on school facilities for this reason. Impacts to existing parks and recreation facilities
will be minimized by the inclusion of onsite recreational facilities designed to meet the needs
of the senior residential. The incremental impact on public services is are less than
significant. The Project site Development fees and increased property taxes will be paid to
fund required public services.
Sources:Project Application (September 3, 2013), General Plan Safety Element (2001), General Plan
Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element (1986)
Mitigation:None required
O. RECREATION
1) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of
the facility would occur or be accelerated?
X
2) Does the project include recreational facilities or require
the construction or expansion of recreational facilities
which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
X
Response:
Onsite recreational facilities are proposed. Park and recreation fees will be paid.
Sources:Project Application (September 3, 2013), General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and
Recreation Element (1986)
Mitigation:None required
272
P. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC –Would the project:
1) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system, taking into
account all modes of transportation including mass
transit and non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including but not
limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways,
pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
X
2) Conflict with an applicable congestion management
program, including, but not limited to level of service
standards and travel demand measures, or other
standards established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
X
3) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either
an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that
results in substantial safety risks?
X
4) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
X
5) Result in inadequate emergency access?X
6) Result in inadequate parking capacity?X
7) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
X
Response:The proposed project will not reduce the level of service (LOS) of intersections in the area.
The project would contribute to a significant cumulative traffic impact at the intersection of
Walnut Canyon Road/Casey Road, as the LOS at this intersection would degrade from LOS
C to LOS D with cumulative traffic conditions. The project would also contribute traffic to
other intersections projected to operate at LOS D or worse without project traffic.
The City has established traffic mitigation fee programs for purposes of funding traffic
improvements as needed to maintain the City’s desired Level of Service C operating
conditions on the local street system. The Citywide Traffic Mitigation Fee and
Gabbert/Casey Roads Areas of Contribution Fee Programs apply to this project. The City
has identified and programmed construction of improvements to be funded by these
mitigation fees, consisting of the addition of through lanes at the intersections of Los Angeles
Avenue/Moorpark Avenue and Los Angeles Avenue/Spring Road that will mitigate
cumulative traffic impacts. Improvements have also been identified at the intersection of
Walnut Canyon Road/Casey Road to be funded by these mitigation fees, consisting of
adding additional phases to the existing traffic signal, that will mitigate cumulative traffic
impacts. Payment of these traffic mitigation fees by the project will mitigate the project’s
contribution to cumulative traffic impacts to less than significant.
Sources:Traffic and Circulation Study, Associated Traffic Engineers (3/26/2014); Review of Traffic
Study (Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers (6/10/2015); Project Application (September 3,
2013), General Plan Circulation Element (1992)
273
Mitigation:The City has established traffic mitigation fee programs for purposes of funding traffic
improvements as needed to maintain Level of Service C operating conditions on the local
street system. The Citywide Traffic Mitigation Fee and Gabbert/Casey Roads Areas of
Contribution Fee Programs apply to this project. The City has identified and programmed
construction of improvements to be funded by these mitigation fees, consisting of the
addition of through lanes at the intersections of Los Angeles Avenue/Moorpark Avenue and
Los Angeles Avenue/Spring Road that will mitigate cumulative traffic impacts. Improvements
have also been identified at the intersection of Walnut Canyon Road/Casey Road to be
funded by these mitigation fees, consisting of adding additional phases to the existing traffic
signal, that will mitigate cumulative traffic impacts.
1. Prior to issuance of first building permit, the applicant shall pay to the City Traffic
Mitigation Fund to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts as determined by the
Community Development Director and City Engineer / Public Works Director.
2. Prior to issuance of first building permit, the applicant shall pay the Los Angeles
Avenue Area of Contribution Fee to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts as determined
by the Community Development Director and City Engineer / Public Works Director.
3. Prior to issuance of first building permit, the applicant shall submit a driveway plan
for review and approval by the Community Development Director and City Engineer /
Public Works Director.
274
Q. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS –Would the project:
1) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
X
2) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
X
3) Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
X
4) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed?
X
5) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
X
6) Be served by the landfill with sufficient permitted capacity
to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal
needs?
X
7) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
X
Response:
Utilities and service systems within the area are adequate to serve the project. Development
fees will be paid to fund required utilities and service systems, or improvements needed to
serve the project will be constructed by the developer. The project plans and information
were provided to the agencies providing utility service for review and comment. No
comments were received by the City indicating the project would have a significant impact on
utility and service that would require the construction of new facilities or alterations to existing
facilities to maintain acceptable levels of service that would result in significant impacts. .
Sources:Project Application (September 3, 2013), Ventura County Watershed Protection District:
Technical Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Measures (2002)
Mitigation:None required
R. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
1) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population
to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history of prehistory?
X
2) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental effect of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and effects of probable future projects)?
X
275
3) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
Response:1) The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population
to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history of prehistory. The site has
been largely disturbed by vehicle use and is surrounded on three sides by urbanized uses
reducing its potential as a habitat.
2) The project will not result in impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable. Impacts on Biological Resources and Transportation/Traffic will be mitigated
to less than significant as discussed above in D. Biological Resources and P.
Transportation/Traffic. Impacts to trees and native habitat on the site that will be impacted by
the project will be mitigated by providing replacement tree and habitat onsite as part of the
project, which will also mitigate the contribution of the project to the loss of these resources
in the area. The project will pay traffic mitigation fees to the City that will be used to make
improvements to intersections impacted by cumulative traffic conditions to mitigate these
impacts to less than significant.
3) The project does not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The project has been designed to
eliminate any potential substantial adverse effects on human beings and to provide a needed
residential resource.
Sources:See below.
Earlier Environmental Documents Used in the Preparation of this Initial Study
None
Additional Project References Used to Prepare This Initial Study
One or more of the following references were incorporated into the Initial Study by
reference, and are available for review in the Community Development Office, City Hall,
799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, CA 93021. Items used are referred to by number in the
Response Section of the Initial Study Checklist.
1.Environmental Information Form application and materials submitted on September 3, 2013.
2. Comments received from (departments) in response to the Community Development Department’s
request for comments.
3. The City of Moorpark’s General Plan, as amended.
4. The Moorpark Municipal Code, as amended.
5. The City of Moorpark Procedures for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines adopted by Resolution No. 2004-2224
6. Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq. and California Code of Regulations, Title 14 Section
15000 et. seq.
7. Ventura County Air Quality Assessment Guidelines, October 31, 2003.
276
EDMUND G. BROWN JR.,Governor
CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director
Conserving California’s Wildlife Since 1870
Subject: Aldersgate Senior Living Project in the City of Moorpark, Ventura County
(Project) SCH No. 2018021010
CDFW ROLE
seq
seq
seq
277
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Proponent:
Project Summary:
Project Objectives:
Location:
COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
I. Project Description and Shortcoming:
Issue #1:
Quercus agrifolia
Quercus agrifolia
Juglans californica Sambucus caerulea
278
Baccharis salicifolia
Salix lasiolepis Populus fremontii
Leymus condensatus Rumex
crispus
Specific impact:
Calochortus clavatus var. gracilis
Calochortus plummerae Senecio aphanactis
Centromadia parryi ssp. australis Danaus
plexippus Cnemidophorus tigris stejnegeri
Phrynosoma blainvillii Diadophis
punctatus modestus Aimophila ruficeps
Evidence impact would be significant:
Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s):
Mitigation Measure #1:
Mitigation Measure #2:
Identification
and mapping of rare plant communities
279
Issue #2:
Quercus agrifolia
Specific impact:
Why impact would occur:
Evidence impact would be significant:
Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s)
Mitigation Measure #1:
Mitigation Measure #2:
280
II. Environmental Setting and Related Impact Shortcoming
Issue #1: Polioptila californica californica
Evidence impact would be significant:
Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s)
Mitigation Measure #1:
Issue #2:
Specific impact:
Why impact would occur:
Evidence impact would be significant:
281
Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s)
Mitigation Measure #1:
Mitigation Measure #2:
Mitigation Measure #3:
Issue #3:
282
Why impact would occur:
Specific impact:
Evidence impact would be significant:
283
Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s)
Mitigation Measure #1:
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
284
FILING FEES
CONCLUSION
Ecology 83,
-
Conservation Biology
Trends in Ecology &
Evolution 28,
285
117901 Von Karman Ave, Suite 600
Irvine, CA 92614
(949) 556-8714
www.better-neighborhoods.com/
jfiss@moorparkca.gov
286
287
288
289
290
RESOLUTION NO. PC-2018-____
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MOORPARK, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL
OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2013-02, ZONE CHANGE 2013-02,
RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 2013-01, AND
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2013-01, AND ADOPTION OF A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IN CONNECTION THEREWITH,
FOR A 390-UNIT SENIOR COMMUNITY ON A 49.52 ACRES NORTH OF
CASEY ROAD AND WEST OF WALNUT CANYON ROAD, ON THE
APPLICATION OF ERNIE MANSI FOR ALDERSGATE INVESTMENT,
LLC
WHEREAS, on September 3, 2013, an application for Residential Planned
Development 2013-01, General Plan Amendment 2013-02 and Zone Change 2013-02
was filed by Aldersgate Investment LLC, , for a request to change the General Plan land
use designation from Medium Residential (M) and Rural Low Residential (RL) to VH –
Very High Density Residential (up to 15 d.u./acre) and the zoning designation from
Rural Exclusive (RE) and Rural Exclusive – 5 acre minimum (RE-5ac) to RPD-8U,
located on a 49.52-acre site on the north side of Casey Road west of Walnut Canyon
Road; and
WHEREAS, at duly noticed public hearings on September 25, 2018, October 23,
and November 27, 2018, the Planning Commission considered Residential
Development Permit 2013-01, General Plan Amendment 2013-02 and Zone Change
2013-02; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting of November 27, 2018, 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; and reached a decision on this matter; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has preliminarily determined
that, with the incorporation of changes to the project or conditions of approval to
mitigate potentially significant impacts with respect to biology and traffic issues, there is
no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant
effect on the environment and a Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration has been
prepared for this project.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MOORPARK, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: The Planning
Commission has read, reviewed and considered the Initial Study and Proposed
Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project prior to making a
recommendation on the project. The Planning Commission concurs with the
Community Development Director that with the incorporation of changes to the project
or conditions of approval to mitigate potentially significant impacts with respect to
PC ATTACHMENT 5 291
biology and traffic issues, there is no substantial evidence that the project or any of its
aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment, and recommends adoption
of the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project.
SECTION 2. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 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 17.44.030:
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 site design is consistent with the
better aspects of modern development practice, with siting and landscaping
combining with building massing to prevent any external impacts, and with well-
ordered architectural design to ensure a high-quality environment for residents,
employees, and visitors.
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 adequate provision
of public access, sanitary services, and emergency services have been ensured
in the processing of this request and the use proposed is similar to adjacent
uses, and access to or utility of those adjacent uses are not hindered by this
project.
C. The proposed uses are compatible with existing and permitted uses in the
surrounding area in that the siting of the project uses slopes and landscaped
setbacks to isolate it from neighboring properties visually. As a denser, but less-
intense category of residential use, it would not tend to create disturbances
regardless of the physical context.
SECTION 3. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 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 15.40.100:
A. The provisions of the development agreement are consistent with the general
plan and any applicable specific plan in that the proposed project will provide
for the orderly development of land identified in the City’s General Plan and
Zoning Ordinance as appropriate for residential development and the
Development Agreement will strengthen the planning process by providing
vesting of development rights, addressing timing of development, determining
development fees, and providing affordable housing.
B. The provisions of the agreement are consistent with Chapter 15.40 of the
Moorpark Municipal Code in that the City is authorized to enter into a binding
contractual agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in
292
real property within its boundaries for the development of such property in order
to establish certainty in the development process.
SECTION 4. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
A. The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of General
Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change No. 2013-02, and Development
Agreement No. 2013-01;
B. The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of
Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01 subject to the Special and
Standard Conditions of Approval included in Exhibit A (Special and Standard
Conditions of Approval), attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 5. 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 November, 2018.
Bruce Hamous, Chair
David Bobardt, Community Development Director
Attachments:
Exhibit A: Existing General Plan Designation
Exhibit B: Proposed General Plan Designation
Exhibit C: Existing Zoning Designation
Exhibit D: Proposed General Plan Designation
Exhibit E: Standard and Special Conditions of Approval for Residential Planned
Development Permit No. 2013-01
Exhibit F: Draft Development Agreement
293
EXHIBIT A
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
294
EXHIBIT B
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
295
EXHIBIT C
EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATION
296
EXHIBIT D
PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION
297
EXHIBIT E
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF
RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 2013-01,
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The applicant shall comply with Standard Conditions of Approval for Subdivisions and
Planned Developments as adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2009-2799 (Exhibit
A), 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 FOR RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
NO. 2013-01
1. This planned development permit will expire two (2) years from the date of its
approval unless the use has been inaugurated by issuance of a building permit
for construction. The Community Development Director may, at his/her
discretion, grant up to two (2) additional one-year extensions for use inauguration
of the development permit, if there have been no changes in the adjacent areas
and if the applicant can document that he/she has diligently worked towards use
inauguration during the initial period of time. The request for extension of this
planned development permit shall be made in writing, at least thirty (30) days
prior to the expiration date of the permit and shall be accompanied by applicable
entitlement processing deposits.
2. A development phasing plan shall be provided prior to issuance of a Zoning
Clearance for grading.
3. Contour grading shall be employed on the slopes for the North Hills Parkway to
the extent feasible as determined by the City Engineer/Public Works Director.
4. All future phases or parcels shall be maintained as one development project
subject to the same entitlements regardless of whether another entity owns and
operates a specific portion of the facility.
5. A total of 328 parking spaces are required. This deficit of 8 parking spaces is to
be distributed throughout the parking areas, creating a fully conforming parking
condition. The parking plan must be updated prior to issuance of a Zoning
Clearance for grading.
6. Landscaping must be consistent with the City’s Landscape Guidelines, ensuring
plant species are capable of effective screening where appropriate, and suitable
to the demands of slope conditions and growth rates. A landscaping and
irrigation plan, subject to the review and approval of the Parks, Recreation, and
298
Community Services Director and Community Development Director must be
submitted prior to issuance of a Zoning Clearance for grading.
7. A fence/wall plan is required to be submitted prior to issuance of a Zoning
Clearance for grading. Location, design, material and height of all fences and
walls shall be approved by the Community Development Director. Architectural
enhancements, such as window reveals and plant-ons are required on all side
and rear elevations subject to the approval of the Community Development
Director.
8. There shall be no storage of recreational vehicles of any type on any lot,
driveway, or street within the development. This requirement shall be reflected
on the Homeowner’s Association (HOA) Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions
(CCR’s).
9. There shall be no parking on the main driveway. “No Stopping at Any Time”
signs shall be installed or curbs painted red at the sole cost of the applicant to
the satisfaction of the Ventura County Fire Prevention District and the City
Engineer/Public Works Director.
10. Front yards of the residential villas shall be shall be landscaped, irrigated, and
maintained by the Facility Operator, Homeowner’s Association, or other
appropriate entity.
11. All remainder areas not designated for resident use or vehicular maneuvering
shall be landscaped, irrigated, and maintained by the Facility Operator,
Homeowner’s Association as common area subject to the review and approval of
the Community Development Director.
12. Final colors and materials must be reviewed and approved to include a minimum
of three color schemes per architectural style subject to review and approval of
the Community Development Director.
13. Painted and decorative sectional roll up garage doors, including garage window
glazing, compatible with the architectural style of each villa.
14. Durable materials are required for trim on the ground floor levels of the homes,
such as wood window trim, or ¼” minimum cementous stucco coat over foam.
15. Any proposed change to the Architecture shall be considered by the Community
Development Director upon filing of a Permit Adjustment application and
payment of the fee in effect at the time of application.
16. Any gates to control vehicle access are to be located to allow a vehicle waiting
for entrance to be completely off the intersecting roadway. A minimum clear
open width of fifteen (15’) feet in each direction shall be provided for separate
entry/exit gates and a minimum twenty (20) for combined entry/exit gates. If
299
gates are to be locked, a Knox system shall be installed. The method of gate
control, including operation during power failure, shall be subject to review by the
Fire Prevention Division. Gate plan details shall be submitted to the Fire District
for approval prior to installation. A final acceptance inspection by the Fire District
is required prior to placing any gate into service. Signage is required for the gate
at the western end of the project site that it is only to be used for emergency
exiting to the satisfaction of the Fire Department and City Engineer/Public Works
Director.
17. LED street lights shall be used within the project, to be owned and maintained by
the Facility Operator or Homeowners Association. Design of street lighting shall
be to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and City
Engineer/Public Works Director to ensure consistency with future LED street
lighting to be used in the City.
18. Prior to issuance of building permits, the plans shall be submitted to the Police
Department for Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)
review and recommendations.
- END -
300
EXHIBIT F
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2013-01
Recording Requested By
And When Recorded Return to:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF MOORPARK
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, California 93021
EXEMPT FROM RECORDER'S FEES
Pursuant to Government Code
§ 6103
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN
CITY OF MOORPARK
AND
GRAND PACIFIC ASSET 2 LLC
301
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This Development Agreement the ("Agreement") is made and entered into on
______________, 2018 by and between the CITY OF MOORPARK, a municipal
corporation (referred to hereinafter as "City") and Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC, the owner
of real property within the City of Moorpark generally referred to as Residential Planned
Development Permit 2013-01 (referred to hereinafter as "Developer"). City and
Developer are referred to hereinafter individually as a "Party" and collectively as the
"Parties." In consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained in this
Agreement, City and Developer agree as follows:
1. Recitals. This Agreement is made with respect to the following facts and for the
following purposes, each of which is acknowledged as true and correct by the
Parties:
1.1 Pursuant to Government Code Section 65864 et seq. and Moorpark
Municipal Code Chapter 15.40, City is authorized to enter into a binding
contractual agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest
in real property within its boundaries for the development of such property
in order to establish certainty in the development process.
1.2 Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC is the owner in fee simple of certain real
property in the City of Moorpark identified in the legal description set forth
in Exhibit “A”, which exhibit is attached hereto and incorporated by
reference, referred to hereinafter collectively as the “Property”.
1.3 Prior to, and in connection with, the approval of this Agreement, the City
Council reviewed the project to be developed pursuant to this Agreement
as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA.”) On
___________, 2018, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2018-____,
adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program the ("MMRP") prepared for this
Agreement and the Project Approvals as defined in Subsection 1.4 of this
Agreement.
1.4 General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 2013-02, Zone Change (ZC) No.
2013-02, and Residential Planned Development (RPD) No. 2013-01,
including all subsequently approved modifications and permit adjustments
to the RPD and all amendments thereto (collectively "the Project
Approvals"; individually "a Project Approval") provide for the development
of the Property with a 390-unit senior housing community and the
construction of certain off-site improvements in connection therewith ("the
Project").
302
1.5 By this Agreement, City desires to obtain the binding agreement of
Developer to develop the Property in accordance with the Project
Approvals and this Agreement. In consideration thereof, City agrees to
limit the future exercise of certain of its governmental and proprietary
powers to the extent specified in this Agreement.
1.6 By this Agreement, Developer desires to obtain the binding agreement of
City to permit the development of the Property in accordance with the
Project Approvals and this Agreement. In consideration thereof,
Developer agrees to waive its rights to legally challenge the limitations and
conditions imposed upon the development of the Property pursuant to the
Project Approvals and this Agreement and to provide the public benefits
and improvements specified in this Agreement.
1.7 City and Developer acknowledge and agree that the consideration that is
to be exchanged pursuant to this Agreement is fair, just and reasonable
and that this Agreement is consistent with the General Plan of City, as
currently amended.
1.8 On ____________, 2018, the Planning Commission commenced a duly
noticed public hearing on this Agreement, and at the conclusion of the
hearing on ____________, 2018 recommended approval of this
Agreement.
1.9 On ___________, 2018, the City Council of City (“City Council”)
commenced a duly noticed public hearing on this Agreement, and
following the conclusion of the hearing closed the hearing and introduced
and provided first reading to Ordinance No. ___ (“the Enabling
Ordinance”) that approves this Agreement. On __________, 2018, the
City Council gave second reading to and adopted the Enabling Ordinance.
2. Property Subject To This Agreement. All of the Property shall be subject to this
Agreement. The Property may also be referred to hereinafter as "the site".
3. Binding Effect. The burdens of this Agreement are binding upon, and the
benefits of the Agreement inure to, each Party and each successive successor in
interest thereto (subject to Subsection 3.2 below) and constitute covenants that
run with the Property. Whenever the terms "City" and "Developer" are used
herein, such terms shall include every successive successor in interest thereto.
3.1 Constructive Notice and Acceptance. Every person who acquires any
right, title or interest in or to any portion of the Property shall be
conclusively deemed to have consented and agreed to be bound by this
Agreement, whether or not any reference to the Agreement is contained in
303
the instrument by which such person acquired such right, title or interest,
subject to Subsection 3.2 below.
3.2 Release Upon Subsequent Transfer. Upon the conveyance of
Developer’s interest in the Property or any portion thereof by Developer or
its successor(s) in interest, the transferor shall be released from its
obligations hereunder with respect to the portion of Property conveyed as
of the effective date of the conveyance, provided that the transferee
expressly assumes all obligations of the transferred portion of the Property
and a copy of the executed assignment and assumption agreement is
delivered to the City prior to the conveyance. Failure to provide a written
assumption agreement hereunder shall not negate, modify or otherwise
affect the liability of the transferee pursuant to this Agreement. Nothing
contained herein shall be deemed to grant to City discretion to approve or
deny any such conveyance, except as provided in Subsection 6.13 of this
Agreement with respect to the sale of completed “affordable units” (as
defined in that subsection) to qualified buyers. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, this Agreement shall not be binding upon the transferee of a
Completed Unit with respect to the transferee’s interest in such Completed
Unit, and the rights and obligations of Developer under this Agreement
shall not run with the portion of the Property that is conveyed with the
Completed Unit after such conveyance of the Completed Unit by
Developer or its successor in interest. For purposes of this Agreement,
“Completed Unit” means a completed residential unit within the Property
for which the City has issued a certificate of occupancy.
4. Development of the Property. The following provisions shall govern the
subdivision, development and use of the Property.
4.1 Permitted Uses. The permitted and conditionally permitted uses of the
Property shall be limited to those that are allowed by the Project Approvals
and this Agreement.
4.2 Development Standards. All design and development standards, including
but not limited to density or intensity of use and maximum height and size
of buildings, that shall be applicable to the Property are set forth in the
Project Approvals and this Agreement.
4.3 Building Standards. All construction on the Property shall adhere to all
City building codes in effect at the time the plan check or permit is
approved per Title 15 of the Moorpark Municipal Code and to any federal
or state building requirements that are then in effect (collectively "the
Building Codes").
304
4.4 Reservations and Dedications. All reservations and dedications of land for
public purposes that are applicable to the Property are set forth in the
Project Approvals and this Agreement.
5. Vesting of Development Rights.
5.1 Vested Right to Develop; Timing of Development. Developer and its
successors in interest shall have the vested right to develop the Property
in accordance with the terms and provisions of the Project Approvals and
this Agreement. The Parties intend that this Agreement, together with the
Project Approvals, shall serve as the controlling document for all
subsequent actions, discretionary and ministerial, relating to the
development and occupancy of the Property, including, without limitation,
all Subsequent Approvals (as defined below). Developer shall have the
right, without obligation, to develop the Property in such order and at such
rate and times as Developer deems appropriate within the exercise of its
subjective business judgment.
No future amendment of any existing City ordinance or resolution, or
future adoption of any ordinance, resolution or other action, that purports
to limit the rate or timing of development over time or alter the sequencing
of development phases, whether adopted or imposed by the City Council
or through the initiative or referendum process, shall apply to the Property
provided the Property is developed in accordance with the Project
Approvals and this Agreement. Nothing in this subsection shall be
construed to limit City's right to ensure that Developer timely provides all
infrastructure required by the Project Approvals, Subsequent Approvals,
and this Agreement.
5.2 Amendment of Project Approvals. No amendment of any of the Project
Approvals, whether adopted or approved by the City Council or through
the initiative or referendum process, shall apply to any portion of the
Property, unless the Developer has agreed in writing to the amendment.
5.3 Issuance of Subsequent Approvals. Applications for land use approvals,
entitlements and permits, including without limitation subdivision maps
(e.g. tentative, vesting tentative, parcel, vesting parcel, and final maps),
subdivision improvement agreements and other agreements relating to the
Project, lot line adjustments, preliminary and final planned development
permits, use permits, design review approvals (e.g. site plans,
architectural plans and landscaping plans), encroachment permits, and
sewer and water connections that are necessary to or desirable for the
development of the Project (collectively "the Subsequent Approvals";
individually "a Subsequent Approval") shall be consistent with the Project
305
Approvals and this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement,
Subsequent Approvals do not include building permits.
Subsequent Approvals shall be governed by the Project Approvals and by
the applicable provisions of the Moorpark General Plan, the Moorpark
Municipal Code and other City ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations,
policies, standards and requirements as most recently adopted or
approved by the City Council or through the initiative or referendum
process and in effect at the time that the application for the Subsequent
Approval is deemed complete by City (collectively "City Laws"), except
City Laws that:
(a) change any permitted or conditionally permitted uses of the
Property from what is allowed by the Project Approvals;
(b) limit or reduce the density or intensity of the Project, or any part
thereof, or otherwise require any reduction in the number of
proposed buildings or other improvements from what is allowed by
the Project Approvals;
(c) limit or control the rate, timing, phasing or sequencing of the
approval, development or construction of all or any part of the
Project in any manner, provided that all infrastructure required by
the Project Approvals to serve the portion of the Property covered
by the Subsequent Approval is in place or is scheduled to be in
place prior to completion of construction;
(d) are not uniformly applied on a citywide basis to all substantially
similar types of development projects or to all properties with similar
land use designations;
(e) control residential rents;
(f) prohibit or regulate development on slopes with grades greater than
20 percent, including without limitation Moorpark Municipal Code
Chapter 17.38 or any successor thereto, within the Property; or
(g) modify the land use from what is permitted by the City's General
Plan Land Use Element at the Operative Date of this Agreement or
that prohibits or restricts the establishment or expansion of urban
services including but not limited to community sewer systems to
the Project.
306
5.4 Modification of Approvals. Throughout the term of this Agreement,
Developer shall have the right, at its election and without risk to or waiver
of any right that is vested in it pursuant to this section, to apply to City for
modifications to Project Approvals and Subsequent Approvals. The
approval or conditional approval of any such modification shall not require
an amendment to this Agreement, provided that, in addition to any other
findings that may be required in order to approve or conditionally approve
the modification, a finding is made that the modification is consistent with
this Agreement and does not alter the permitted uses, density, intensity,
maximum height, size of buildings or reservations and dedications as
contained in the Project Approvals. Notwithstanding the foregoing or any
provision of this Agreement to the contrary, Developer shall have the right,
at its election and without risk to or waiver of any right that is vested in it
pursuant to this Agreement, to apply to the City Manager for modifications
to the product mix for the Project (i.e., to reasonably vary the number of
Villas, Independent Living Apartments and Assisted Living and Memory
Care Apartments, as well as the mix of studio, 1, and 2 bedroom unit mix),
and the City Manager shall have the authority to approve such
modifications administratively provided that they do not cause the
maximum development density of the Project to exceed 390 units.
5.5 Issuance of Building Permits. No Building Permit shall be unreasonably
withheld or delayed from Developer if Developer is in compliance with this
Agreement and the Project Approvals and Subsequent Approvals. In
addition, no Final Building Permit final inspection or Certificate of
Occupancy will be unreasonably withheld or delayed from Developer if all
infrastructure required by the Project Approvals, Subsequent Approvals,
and this Agreement to serve the portion of the Property covered by the
Final Building Permit is in place or is scheduled to be in place prior to
completion of construction, the Developer is in compliance with all
provisions of this Agreement, the Project Approvals and Subsequent
Approvals, and all of the other relevant provisions of the Project
Approvals, Subsequent Approvals and this Agreement have been
satisfied. Consistent with Subsection 5.1 of this Agreement, in no event
shall building permits be allocated on any annual numerical basis or on
any arbitrary allocation basis.
5.6 Moratorium on Development. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent
City, whether by the City Council or through the initiative or referendum
process, from adopting or imposing a moratorium on the processing and
issuance of Subsequent Approvals and building permits and on the
finalizing of building permits by means of a final inspection or certificate of
occupancy, provided that the moratorium is adopted or imposed (i) on a
Citywide basis to all substantially similar types of development projects
307
and properties with similar land use designations and (ii) as a result of a
utility shortage or a reasonably foreseeable utility shortage including
without limitation a shortage of water, sewer treatment capacity, electricity
or natural gas.
6. Developer Agreements.
6.1 Development as a Residential Project. Developer shall comply with (i) this
Agreement, (ii) the Project Approvals, (iii) all Subsequent Approvals for
which it was the applicant or a successor in interest to the applicant and
(iv) the MMRP of the MND and any subsequent or supplemental
environmental actions. Developer agrees not to apply for any non-
residential uses on the Property. The administrative and support offices,
kitchen/dining facilities, personal care and service uses, sundries market,
library, computer room, lounge, movie theater, bank, salon, recreational
facilities and other structures and amenities to serve the residents of the
Project are considered to be part of the residential use of the Property.
6.2 Condition of Dedicated or Conveyed Property. All lands and interests in
land dedicated to City shall be free and clear of liens and encumbrances
other than easements or restrictions that do not preclude or interfere with
use of the land or interest for its intended purpose, as reasonably
determined by City.
6.3 Development Fee Per Unit. As a condition of the issuance of a building
permit for each residential dwelling unit within the Property, Developer
shall pay City a one-time development fee as described herein (the
“Development Fee”). The Development Fee may be expended by City in
its sole and unfettered discretion. The amount of the Development Fee
shall be as follows:
Villas: $8,660.00/unit
Independent Living Apartments: $5,802.00/unit
Assisted Living and Memory Care Apartments: $2,858.00/unit
The Development Fee shall be adjusted annually commencing January 1,
2020, by the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The annual CPI adjustment
shall be determined by using the information provided by the U.S.
Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, for all urban consumers
within the Los Angeles/Riverside/Orange County metropolitan area during
the prior year. The calculation shall be made using the month of October
over the prior October.
308
In the event there is a decrease in the referenced Index for any annual
indexing, the current amount of the fee shall remain until such time as the
next subsequent annual indexing which results in an increase.
6.4 Traffic Mitigation Fee. As a condition of the issuance of building permit for
each residential dwelling unit within the boundaries of the Property,
Developer shall pay City a one-time traffic mitigation fee as described
herein (“Citywide Traffic Fee”). The Citywide Traffic Fee may be
expended by City in its sole and unfettered discretion. The amount of the
Citywide Traffic Fee shall be as follows:
Villas: $8,791.00/unit
Independent Living Apartments: $8,791.00/unit
Assisted Living and Memory Care Apartments: $4,396.00/unit
The Citywide Traffic Fee shall be adjusted annually commencing January
1, 2020 and annually thereafter by the change in the Caltrans Highway Bid
Price Index (Bid Price Index) for Selected California Construction Items for
the twelve (12) month period available on December 31 of the preceding
year (“annual indexing”). In the event there is a decrease in the Bid Price
Index for any annual indexing, the current amount of the fee shall remain
until such time as the next subsequent annual indexing which results in an
increase.
6.5 Los Angeles Avenue Area of Contribution (LAAOC) Fees. Developer shall
pay the LAAOC fee in effect at the time of building permit issuance for
each residential dwelling unit within the Property.
6.6 Air Quality Fees. Developer agrees that the Mitigation Measures included
in the City Council approved MND and MMRP, or subsequent
environmental clearance document approved by the Council, set forth the
mitigation requirements for air quality impacts. Developer agrees to pay to
City a one-time air quality mitigation fee, as described herein (“Air Quality
Fee”), in satisfaction of the Transportation Demand Management Fund
mitigation requirement for the Project. The Air Quality Fee may be
expended by City in its sole discretion for reduction of regional air pollution
emissions and to mitigate residual Project air quality impacts. The Air
Quality Fee shall be as follows:
Villas: $1,268.00/unit
Independent Living Apartments: $850.00/unit
Assisted Living and Memory Care Apartments: $634.00/unit
309
The Air Quality Fee shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit
for each residential dwelling unit in the Project. If the Air Quality Fee is not
paid by January 1, 2020, then commencing on January 1, 2020, and
annually thereafter, the Air Quality Fee shall be adjusted by any increase
in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) until all fees have been paid. The CPI
increase shall be determined by using the information provided by the
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, for all urban
consumers within the Los Angeles/Riverside/Orange County metropolitan
area during the prior year. The calculation shall be made using the month
of October over the prior month of October. In the event there is a
decrease in the CPI for any annual indexing, the fee shall remain at its
then current amount until such time as the next subsequent annual
indexing which results in an increase.
6.7 Park Fees. Prior to the issuance of the building permit for each residential
dwelling unit within the Property, Developer shall pay a one-time fee in lieu
of the dedication of parkland and related improvements (“Park Fee”). The
amount of the Park Fee shall be as follows:
Villas: $8,660.00/unit
Independent Living Apartments: $5,802.00/unit
Assisted Living and Memory Care Apartments: $2,858.00/unit
If the Park Fee is not paid by January 1, 2020, the Park Fee shall be
adjusted annually commencing January 1, 2020 by the larger increase of
a) or b) as follows:
(a) The change in the CPI. The change shall be determined by using
the information provided by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau
of Labor Statistics, for all urban consumers within the Los
Angeles/Riverside/Orange County metropolitan area during the
prior year. The calculation shall be made using the month of
October over the prior October; or
(b) The calculation shall be made to reflect the change in the Caltrans
Highway Bid Price Index (Bid Price Index) for Selected California
Construction Items for the twelve (12) month period available on
December 31 of the preceding year (annual indexing).
In the event there is a decrease in both of the referenced Indices
for any annual indexing, the Park Fee shall remain at its then
current amount until such time as the next subsequent annual
indexing which results in an increase.
310
Developer agrees that the above-described payments shall be
deemed to satisfy the parkland dedication requirement set forth in
California Government Code Section 66477 et seq. for the
Property.
6.8 Community Services Fee. As a condition of issuance of a building permit
for each residential dwelling unit within the boundaries of the Project,
Developer shall pay City a one-time community services fee as described
herein (Community Services Fee). The Community Services Fees may be
expended by City in its sole and unfettered discretion. The amount of the
Community Services Fees shall be $2,700.00 per residential dwelling unit.
Commencing on January 1, 2020, and annually thereafter, the Community
Services Fee shall be adjusted by any increase in the Consumer Price
Index (CPI) until all Community Service Fee have been paid. The CPI
increase shall be determined by using the information provided by the
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, for All Urban
Consumers within the Los Angeles/Anaheim/Riverside metropolitan area
during this prior year. The calculation shall be made using the month of
October over the prior month of October or in the event there is a
decrease in the CPI for any annual indexing, the Community Service Fee
shall remain at its then current amount until such time as the next
subsequent annual indexing which results in an increase.
6.9 Art in Public Places Fee. Developer agrees to pay the Art in Public Places
Fee (Art Fee) in effect at the time of building permit issuance for each
building prior to the issuance of the building permit for that residential
building within the Project consistent with City Resolution No. 2005-2408
or any Successor Resolution (1.0 percent of total building valuations
excluding land value and off-site improvement costs, for such building).
6.10 Other Development and Processing Fees. In addition to fees specifically
mentioned in this Agreement, Developer agrees to pay all City capital
improvement, development, and processing fees at the rate and amount in
effect at the time the fee is required to be paid. Said fees include but are
not limited to Library Facilities Fees, Police Facilities Fees, Fire Facilities
Fees, drainage, entitlement processing fees, and plan check and permit
fees for buildings and public improvements. Developer further agrees that
unless specifically exempted by this Agreement, it is subject to all fees
imposed by City at the Operative Date of this Agreement and such future
fees imposed as determined by City in its sole discretion so long as such
fees are imposed on a citywide basis on all projects similar to the Project
or on all property similar to the Property.
311
6.11 Processing Fees. On the Operative Date, Developer shall pay all
outstanding City processing costs related to preparation of this
Agreement, the Project Approvals and the MND.
6.12 Landscape Maintenance Assessment District (LMD). Prior to issuance of
a Zoning Clearance for the first building permit or the approval of any final
map for the Project, the City Council shall determine if a Landscape
Maintenance District will be required for this project. If required,
Developer shall pay the City a Five Thousand Dollar ($5,000.00) LMD
Formation Fee. The LMD shall be for the purposes of funding future costs
for the maintenance of landscaping and irrigation of the landscaped area
and related improvements including but not limited to the areas along
Casey Road and North Hills Parkway.
If a Landscape Maintenance District is required, City shall administer the
annual renewal of the LMD, and any costs related to such administration
shall be charged to the fund established for such LMD revenues and
expenses. Developer agrees to cast affirmative ballots for the
establishment of the LMD, and for annual increases in the assessments
thereunder, for the purposes specified in this subsection. Developer
hereby waives any right it may have to contest or protest any such
assessments or assessment increases. In the event that any such LMD
has insufficient funds for its purposes prior to acceptance of the LMD by
the City, then Developer shall pay the funds required for the LMD costs
within five (5) business days after written demand from the City.
If a Landscape Maintenance District is required, Developer shall be
responsible for all LMD costs until acceptance of the Assessment District
by the City. Developer acknowledges and agrees that, if established, the
LMD will not be accepted by City until after the final occupancy is
approved for the last residential dwelling unit in the Project and Developer
has made all required LMD improvements in a manner that are acceptable
to City’s Parks and Recreation Director and Developer has provided City
with a deposit for the next subsequent twelve (12) months of LMD
maintenance costs.
Prior to approval of the first final map for the Project, the City Council at its
sole discretion may determine that all or a part of the improvements
planned to be included in the LMD may instead be placed in the
Homeowners’ Association or in a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District
for the Project.
312
6.13 Densities Allowed for Development and Affordable Housing.
(a) Developer agrees that densities vested and incentives and
concessions received in the Project Approvals include all densities
available as density bonuses and all incentives and concessions to
which Developer is entitled under the Moorpark Municipal Code,
Government Code Sections 65915 through 65917.5 or both;
Developer shall not be entitled to further density bonuses or
incentives or concessions and further agrees, in consideration for
the density bonus obtained through the Project Approvals that is
greater than would otherwise be available, to provide twenty-six
(26) housing units, on one or more sites, within the City of
Moorpark but not on the Project Site, with a minimum of 1,200
square feet, affordable to low income households (not to exceed
80% of median income adjusted for family size). These twenty-six
(26) housing units may be referred to as “affordable units” or units
affordable to low income households or required affordable units.
(b) Developer may opt to construct all twenty-six (26) units so long as
Developer meets all requirements of this Agreement and the
proposed project and property on which the units are proposed to
be constructed conform to the City's General Plan, Zoning Codes,
and the Moorpark Municipal Code. Nothing in this Agreement
requires City to consider a General Plan Land Use Amendment,
Zone Change, or any other land use entitlement to allow or permit
said proposed construction,
(c) Developer may also purchase and rehabilitate units within the City
of Moorpark, as outlined in this Section 6.13, to meet this
requirement. All single family detached units shall include a
standard size two-car garage with roll-up garage door and a
minimum driveway length of eighteen (18) feet measured from the
back of sidewalk, meet minimum setback requirements of the City
RPD zone, include concrete roof tiles, and other amenities typically
found in moderately priced housing in the City (e.g., air
conditioning/central heating, washer/dryer hookups, garbage
disposal, built-in dishwasher, concrete driveway, automatic garage
door opener). The duplex type units in Tracts 3841, 3070-2, 3070-
3, 3070-4, 4170, and 5133 are considered to be single family
detached units for the purposes of this subsection 6.13.
Subject to City's sole discretion, this obligation, in whole or part,
may be met by providing attached for sale units in lieu of single
family detached units at the ratio of one and one-half (11/2)
313
attached for sale unit for each single family detached unit. In the
event such substitution results in any fraction of a unit, then the
requirement shall be rounded up to the next higher whole number
(e.g. the requirement of 3 single family detached units are met by
41/2 attached for sale units, then 5 attached for sale units are
required). Each of the substituted units shall be at the income level
of the units for which they are being substituted.
The attached for sale units shall provide the same number of
bedrooms and bathrooms and contain all of the same amenities for
a single family detached unit as described above, except the
minimum driveway length.
Prior to acquiring any housing unit to meet the obligations of this
subsection 6.13, Developer must first receive the written approval
of City Manager or his/her authorized representative that the unit
meets the requirements of this Development Agreement and any
applicable Affordable Housing Agreement for Tract ____.
Developer agrees that lack of a written response from City is
deemed a rejection of the Developer's request.
(d) Developer agrees that it shall provide the required number of
affordable housing units as specified above regardless of the cost
to acquire or construct said housing units. Developer further
agrees that City has no obligation to use eminent domain
proceedings to acquire any of the required affordable housing units
and that this Subsection 6.13 is specifically exempt from the
requirements of Subsection 7.2, and that the cost of purchasing
property, obtaining all necessary entitlements and permits, and
completing design, engineering, and construction of the affordable
units shall be entirely the obligation of the developer. The City has
no obligation to approve any entitlement or permit applications for
the affordable units which do not meet the zoning, engineering, and
building standards of the City and are not of comparable quality
expected from other development projects.
(e) Developer also explicitly acknowledges that its agreement to
construct or provide these affordable units is given both as specific
consideration for both the density bonus and in general as
consideration for City’s willingness to negotiate and enter into this
Agreement and for the valuable consideration given by City through
this Agreement. Developer further acknowledges that its
agreement to construct or provide these affordable units is not the
314
result of an existing policy or regulation imposed by City but instead
is the result of arm’s length negotiation between Parties.
(f) Prior to issuance of the first building permit for this Project, the
parties agree to execute an Affordable Housing Purchase and Sale
Agreement (Affordable Housing Agreement) that sets forth the
Developer’s and City’s obligations and provides procedures and
requirements to ensure that all of the required affordable housing
units are provided consistent with this Agreement and applicable
State laws and remains affordable for the longest feasible time.
The Affordable Housing Agreement shall include but not be limited
to the following items: Initial Purchase Price, market value, buyer
eligibility, affordability and resale covenants and restrictions, equity
share and second trust deed provision, respective role of City and
Developer, the responsibility of providing the affordable units by
each developer in the event of successors and/or assigns to this
Agreement, quality of and responsibility for selection of amenities
and applicability of home warranties to meet all or a portion of its
obligation and any other items determined necessary by the City.
Developer shall pay the City’s direct costs for preparation and
review of the Affordable Housing Agreement up to a maximum of
ten-thousand Dollars ($10,000.00).
(g) All affordable units shall meet the criteria of all California Health
and Safety Code statutes and implementing regulations pertaining
to for-sale Affordable Housing units so as to qualify as newly
affordable to low income households and to satisfy a portion of the
City’s RHNA obligation. The affordable units required by this
Agreement are consideration for City’s entry into this Agreement
and therefor none of the affordable units shall duplicate or
substitute for the affordable housing requirement of any other
developer or development project. All subsequent approvals
required of City under this Subsection 6.13 shall be made at City’s
sole discretion. If any conflict exists between this Agreement and
the Affordable Housing Agreement required by and negotiated
pursuant to this Agreement or the conditions of approval for RPD
No. 2013-01, then the Affordable Housing Agreement shall prevail.
(h) In the event monthly HOA fees for any of the affordable units
exceed two hundred dollars ($200.00), Developer shall deposit one
hundred twenty dollars ($120.00) for each dollar or portion thereof
of the monthly HOA fees that are in excess of two hundred dollars
($200.00) into a City administered trust account to assist with future
HOA fees for each affected unit.
315
(i) The Affordable Sales Price for low-income buyers shall not exceed
affordable housing cost, as defined in Sec. 50052.5(b) (3) of
California Health and Safety Code. Section 50052.5(h) of the
California Health and Safety Code provides that an appropriate
household size in terms of determining purchase price is one more
person than the number of bedrooms. This means that the pricing
for a three (3) bedroom unit will be based on a household of four (4)
regardless of the actual size of the household purchasing the unit.
For example, the monthly “affordable housing cost” for a three (3)
bedroom unit would be 30% times 70% of the current median
income for a household of four (4) in Ventura County, divided by
twelve (12). This monthly amount includes the components
identified in Section 6920 of Title 25 of the California Code of
Regulation shown below (See Section 50052.5(c) of the Health and
Safety Code). The Affordable Sales Price for a low income
household purchasing a three (3) bedroom unit under current
market conditions, based upon the following assumptions:
Item Detail Amount 3 Bedroom
Affordable Sale
Price $208,000.00
Down Payment 5% of Affordable Sales Price $10,400.00
Loan Amount Affordable Sales Price less Down
Payment $197,600.00
Interest Rate 4.65%
Monthly
Property Tax
1.25% of Initial
Purchase Price 217.00
LMD Not Currently N/A
HOA 200.00
Fire Insurance 60.00
Maintenance 30.00
Utilities 180.00
Low Income Buyer
(j) The assumptions associated with the above purchase price figures
for low income households include a 5% down payment, based on
Affordable Sales Price for a three (3) bedroom unit, mortgage
interest rate of 4.65%, no mortgage insurance, property tax rate of
316
1.25%, based on Affordable Sales Price, homeowners’ association
dues of $200.00 per month, fire insurance of $60.00 per month,
maintenance costs of $30.00 per month, and utilities of $180.00 per
month for a three (3) bedroom unit.
(k) Developer acknowledges that changes in market conditions may
result in changes to the Affordable Sales Price, down payment
amounts, mortgage interest rates, and other factors for both low
income and very low income buyers. Furthermore, if “affordable
housing cost”, as defined in Section 50052.5 of California Health
and Safety Code, should change in the future, the above guidelines
will be modified. The Affordable Housing Purchase and Sale
Agreement negotiated pursuant to this Agreement shall address
this potential change.
Developer acknowledges that amounts listed in the “Low Income
Buyer” table in Subsection 6.13(g), above, are for illustration
purposes only and are subject to change.
(l) In the event the City, at its sole discretion purchases one or more of
the units from Developer in lieu of a qualified buyer, the Affordable
Sales Price shall be based on a household size appropriate to the
number of bedrooms in the unit being purchased by the City,
consistent with all requirements of this Subsection 6.13. Developer
agrees that, pursuant to City’s rights under this Agreement and/or
the Affordable Housing Agreement and prior to and upon the sale
of a required unit to a qualified buyer (or City in lieu of a qualified
buyer as determined by City at its sole discretion), City may at its
sole discretion take any actions and impose any conditions on said
sale or subsequent sale of the unit to ensure ongoing affordability
to low income households and related matters. After the sale of a
housing unit by Developer to a qualified buyer (or City in lieu of a
qualified buyer as determined by City at its sole discretion), City,
not Developer, shall have sole responsibility for approving any
subsequent sale of that housing unit.
(m) Developer agrees that City shall be responsible at its sole
discretion for marketing the affordable units, selecting and
qualifying eligible buyers for these units, and overseeing the escrow
processes to sell the affordable units to low income households,
providing the forms of Deed of Trust, Promissory Note, Resale
Refinance Restriction Agreement and Option to Purchase Property
and Notice of Affordability Restriction on Transfer of Property and
all necessary contracts and related documents to ensure that the
317
referenced affordable units remain occupied by low income
households for the longest feasible time (the “Affordability
Documents”). Developer further agrees that the difference between
the Affordable Sales Price (as referenced in this Agreement) paid
by a qualified buyer and market value shall be retained by City as a
second deed of trust.
(n) Developer shall pay closing costs for each affordable unit, not to
exceed eight thousand dollars ($8,000.00). Beginning January 1,
2020 and on January 1st for each year thereafter, the maximum
eight thousand dollars ($8,000.00) to be paid for closing costs shall
be increased annually by any percentage increase in the Consumer
Price Index (CPI) for All Urban Consumers for Los
Angeles/Riverside/Orange County metropolitan area during the
prior year. The calculation shall be made using the month of
October over the month of October. In the event there is a
decrease in the CPI for any annual indexing, the closing costs for
each affordable unit shall remain at its then current amount until
such time as the next subsequent annual indexing which results in
an increase. The referenced Developer funded closing costs shall
be for the benefit of qualified buyers (or City in lieu of qualified
buyers if one or more of the required units are purchased by the
City) in their acquisition of a unit from Developer not Developer’s
acquisition of a unit from one or more third parties. The
Developer’s escrow cost shall not exceed the then applicable
maximum amount per unit regardless of the number of escrows that
may be opened on a specific unit.
(o) Developer warrants that the quality of materials and construction
techniques of the affordable units sold to the qualified low income
buyers, or City shall in all manner be substantially identical to that
of all other units constructed in this Project and subject to all
Conditions of Approval and shall meet all Building Codes.
(p) Developer agrees that the City shall have approval authority over
basic finish options in the affordable units and final walk-through
approval of condition of unit before close of sale. Basic finish
options provided to buyers of affordable units shall be provided to
City for review and approval, including but not limited to color and
style choices for carpeting and other floor coverings, counter tops,
roofing materials, exterior stucco and trim of any type, fixtures, and
other decorative items. The City staff person responsible for
affordable housing will select basic finish options for the affordable
units. This applies to both new affordable housing units, or existing
318
housing stock, purchased and rehabilitated pursuant to this
Agreement.
(q) Developer agrees that all warranties for the affordable units shall be
consistent with applicable state law for new residential construction
and shall inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the ultimate
occupants of the affordable units and that all warranties by
subcontractors and suppliers shall inure to the benefit of and be
enforceable by such occupants. The home warranties for the new
affordable units shall be the same duration as warranties for new
housing units and not less than the maximum time required by
State law. Developer shall be required to provide an extended 10
year warranty either internally, or by a reputable 3rd party for major
structure and building systems and a one year fit and finish
warranty.
(r) Developer agrees to provide comparable quality standard features
for the affordable units (purchased by the low income buyer, or
City) as those amenities that are provided for the market rate Villa
units. The standard features shall include but not be limited to
concrete roof tiles; air conditioning/central heating; garage door
opener; washer/dryer hook-ups; garbage disposal; built-in
dishwasher, stove, oven and microwave; windows; wood cabinets;
shelving; counter-tops; floor coverings; electrical outlets, lighting
fixtures and other electrical items; plumbing fixtures including sinks,
bathtubs and showers; and door and cabinet hardware, and shall
all be of the same quality and quantity as provided in the Project’s
market rate Villa units as determined by the City’s Community
Development Director and City staff person responsible for City’s
Affordable Housing Programs.
(s) For newly constructed affordable units, the floor plan and size of
the units shall be approved by the Community Development
Director and City staff person responsible for City’s Affordable
Housing Programs, and include a downstairs bathroom if the
affordable units are two stories.
(t) The parties agree that prior to and upon the sale of an affordable
unit to a qualified buyer or City, City may at its sole discretion take
any actions and impose any conditions on buyer eligibility and on
said sale or subsequent sale of the unit to ensure ongoing
affordability to low income households and related matters.
Developer agrees if it sells any of the affordable units directly to
qualified low income buyers, all requirements of the buyer,
319
including, but not limited to, completion of a City approved
homebuyer education training workshop and the Affordability
Documents, shall be included as a requirement of the sale. The
language of all such documents shall be approved by City at its
sole discretion. Developer may select lenders, escrow and title
companies to assist with the sale of the affordable units, however,
selection of said professionals is subject to City approval at its sole
discretion. Lenders submitted for consideration shall be required to
provide confirmation in writing that they are able to underwrite the
loans for the affordable units, with no mortgage insurance, subject
to the City’s Resale, Refinance, Restriction Agreement and Second
Deed of Trust. Developer’s selected lender shall not be exclusive to
the program. Future buyers of the affordable units shall be able to
choose from the qualified lenders available to the program at that
time. City shall provide a qualified real estate professional to work
with the affordable home buyers at City’s cost. Developer may
select whatever real estate professional they deem appropriate to
represent the Developer’s side of the transaction.
(u) In the event City is unable to provide a qualified buyer when one of
the low-income units has received final inspection approval,
Developer shall be allowed to continue to obtain building permits
and/or final inspection approval for the non-affordable units. Any
low-income units remaining unsold six (6) months after the final
inspection approval of the last unit associated with RPD No. 2013-
01 will be purchased by the City, as provided for in the Affordable
Housing Agreement. Developer is required to maintain low-income
units in move-in condition until such time as the City finds a buyer.
For purposes of this schedule, final inspection approval requires
approval of the City’s Building Official and Community Development
Director.
(v) Developer also agrees that subsidiaries, divisions or affiliates of
Developer may not be used to provide lending or escrow services
relevant to the purchase transactions for the affordable units. (Not
needed here.)
(w) If a qualified low income buyer is identified by City prior to or at the
time of final inspection approval of any of the affordable units,
Developer shall open escrow for the sale of said unit as provided
for in the Affordable Housing Agreement, and shall enter escrow
directly with the buyer identified by City, and proceed to closing of
said escrow. If a qualified low income buyer has not been identified
at the time Developer receives final inspection approval for an
320
affordable unit, City, at its option, may agree to purchase the
affordable unit required to be provided by Developer for the amount
and at the time as provided for in this agreement. Developer and
City agree to use their best efforts to complete the close of escrow
within forty-five (45) days of the final inspection approval of an
affordable unit.
(x) Developer shall satisfy all mechanic’s, laborer’s, material man’s,
supplier’s, or vendor’s liens and any construction loan or other
financing affecting any affordable unit, before the close of escrow
for that affordable unit.
(y) Developer agrees that the required construction of the low income
affordable units must receive final inspection approval by Developer
on terms consistent with this Agreement and the Affordable
Housing Agreement as specified in the following schedule:
Prior to Occupancy of Number of Affordable Units
75th Market Rate Unit 6 Units
150th Market Rate Unit 6 Units
225th Market Rate Unit 6 Units
300th Market Rate Unit 8 Units
TOTAL 26 Units
(z) In addition to the twenty-six (26) affordable units required in
Subsection 6.13 (a) above, Developer also agrees to pay to City a
one-time In-Lieu Fee (In-Lieu Fee) of $5,200,000.00 equivalent to
the estimated subsidy for 26 additional affordable units (16 Low-
Income and 10 Very Low Income). The one-time In-Lieu Fee shall
be paid as follows:
Prior to Building Permit for In-Lieu Fee Amount
100th Market Rate Unit $1,300.000.00
175th Market Rate Unit $1,300.000.00
250th Market Rate Unit $1,300.000.00
325th Market Rate Unit $1,300.000.00
TOTAL $5,200.000.00
6.14 Casey Road Improvement. Prior to issuance of the first building permit for
a residential unit in the Project, Developer shall at its sole cost irrevocably
offer to the City all rights of way, permanent easements and construction
easements on the north side of Casey Road necessary for construction of
the Project’s improvements to Casey Road for an ultimate 76-foot wide
321
public right-of-way from Walnut Canyon Road to the westerly project
boundary (the “Casey Road Improvements”), including a Caltrans-
compliant curve radius at the northwest intersection of Casey Road and
Walnut Canyon Road, 8-foot wide sidewalks on both sides of Casey Road,
an 8-foot wide bike lane on the north side of Casey Road, two 12’ foot
wide travel lanes, 14’ wide parking/bike lane on the south side of Casey
Road, and a 14-foot wide left turn median, with the design subject to
review and approval by the City Engineer/Public Works Director and
Caltrans. Developer shall also have prepared improvement plans for the
Casey Road Improvements that are consistent with the City’s and Caltrans
requirements as determined by the City Engineer/Public Works Director,
and finalize plans for the Casey Road Improvements so plans are
submitted to Caltrans prior to issuance of the first building permit for a
residential unit in the Project. Developer shall obtain a Caltrans
encroachment permit for the construction of the Casey Road
Improvements and complete construction of the Casey Road
Improvements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer/Public Works
Director prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for a
residential unit in the Project. Upon receipt of a written request from
Developer, City may construct all or part of the Casey Road Improvements
and Developer shall reimburse City for all actual and reasonable costs
thereof, including but not limited to construction, permits, contract
administration, design, inspection, utility relocation and all other Caltrans
requirements.
6.15 Annual Review Procedures. Developer agrees to comply with Section
15.40.150 of the Moorpark Municipal Code and any provision amendatory
or supplementary thereto for annual review of this Agreement and further
agrees that the annual review shall include evaluation of its compliance
with the approved MND and MMRP.
6.16 Eminent Domain. Developer agrees that any election to acquire property
by eminent domain shall be at City’s sole discretion, and only after
compliance with all legally required procedures including but not limited to
a hearing on a proposed resolution of necessity.
6.17 Street Improvement Standards. The street improvements for all streets
scheduled for dedication to the City shall be designed and constructed by
Developer to provide for a 50-year life as determined by the City Engineer.
6.18 Implementation Plan. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit,
Developer shall submit and gain approval from City Council a plan to
guarantee the Developer agreements contained in this Agreement and in
the conditions of approval for the RPD. The plan shall address the entities
322
responsible and method and timing of guarantee for each component of
Developer’s obligations and is subject to City approval at its sole
discretion.
6.19 Fee Protest Waiver. Developer agrees that any fees and payments
specifically provided for in this Agreement for the Project shall be made
without reservation, and Developer expressly waives the right to payment
of any such fees under protest pursuant to California Government Code
Section 66020 and statutes amendatory or supplementary thereto.
Developer further agrees that the fees it has agreed to pay pursuant to
Subsections 6.3, 6.4 and 6.8 of this Agreement are not public
improvement fees collected pursuant to Government Code Section 66006
and statutes amendatory or supplementary thereto.
6.20 CPI Indexes. In the event the “CPI” referred to in Subsections 6.3, 6.6,
6.7 and 6.8 or the Bid Price Index referred to in Subsections 6.4 and 6.7
are discontinued or revised, a successor index with which the “CPI” and or
Bid Price Index are replaced shall be used in order to obtain substantially
the same result as would otherwise have been obtained if either or both
the “CPI” and Bid Price Index had not been discontinued or revised.
6.21 North Hills Parkway Improvements. Prior to the issuance of a zoning
clearance for filing of a Final Map, Developer agrees to provide an
irrevocable offer of dedication for a two-hundred-foot (200’) wide future
right-of-way along the entire northerly boundary of the Property for North
Hills Parkway, along with necessary slope easements for construction.
Developer agrees to construct the full width grading of North Hills Parkway
from the top of slope at the eastern end of the Developer’s Property to the
eastern boundary of the Hitch Ranch Specific Plan property. Additionally,
Developer agrees to construct the southern one-half (1/2) of North Hills
Parkway, including a driveway for a northern project entrance, two (2)
lanes of travel, emergency parking/bicycle lane, curb, gutter, sidewalk,
drainage, full median and parkway landscaping and street lighting along
the entire frontage of the project and west to the eastern boundary of the
Hitch Ranch Specific Plan property (the “North Hills Parkway
Improvements”). Developer shall cause the North Hills Parkway
Improvements to be completed prior to occupancy of the 225
th residential
unit in the Project. Developer agrees that all horizontal and vertical
alignments of the North Hills Parkway shall be determined by the City in its
reasonable discretion. The cost to acquire any fee title property or
easements necessary to complete the required construction and
maintenance of the North Hills Parkway Improvements that are outside the
Property boundaries shall be borne by the Developer. Per Section 7.7 of
this Agreement, City agrees that credit will be given by the City toward the
323
payment of the Citywide Traffic Fee in Section 6.4 of this Agreement for
the fair market value of off-site property acquired by the City or Developer
as determined by City to be necessary to complete these improvements.
6.22 City Ability to Modify. Developer acknowledges the City’s ability to modify
the development standards and to change the General Plan designation
and zoning of the Property upon the termination or expiration of this
Agreement (if the Project has not been built), and Developer hereby
waives any rights they might otherwise have to seek judicial review of
such City actions after the termination or expiration of this Agreement (if
the Project has not been built) to change the development standards,
General Plan designation and zoning to those development standards and
density of permitted development to those that were in existence prior to
the approval of GPA 2015-02 and ZC 2015-03.
6.23 Proposed Mello-Roos Community Facilities District. Developer agrees
that if a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (“CFD”) is formed
consistent with Section 7.8 of this Agreement, Developer shall submit the
required deposit and reimbursement agreement to fund all City costs
associated with the proposed CFD formation. Developer also agrees that
the City Council upon the conclusion of the public hearing required by
applicable law and in its sole and unfettered discretion may abandon
establishment of the CFD. In addition, prior to issuance of a Zoning
Clearance for the first building permit or the approval of any final map for
the Project, the City Council shall determine if a CFD will be required for
this project to fund ongoing maintenance and service costs instead of an
LMD per Section 6.12 of this agreeement.
Developer agrees that any CFD bond proceeds in the Project
Improvement Fund in excess of the amount required to fund authorized
costs, including any City and CFD consultant costs associated with the
redemption of bonds shall be applied to redeem a portion of the bonds,
consistent with applicable provisions of State and Federal laws and
regulations.
Developer also agrees that if a CFD is authorized, the CFD may include
on-going annual special taxes for services provided to the Project.
Developer agrees that it shall prepay all special taxes levied, or which may
be levied in the future (except special taxes for on-going services), on any
of the affordable units as part of the CFD or any successor or any
additional CFD prior to the sale of any of the affordable units to the City or
qualified buyer. The intent of this section is that the owners of the
affordable units shall at no time have any obligations to make any special
324
tax payments to or for the benefit of the CFD or its bondholders except
special taxes for services.
Developer further acknowledges and agrees that the City Council shall
determine the total amount of CFD bonds to be sold and the amount
Developer may receive as reimbursement from the CFD bonds proceeds.
7. City Agreements.
7.1 Commitment of Resources. At Developer’s expense, City shall commit
reasonable time and resources of City staff to work with Developer on the
processing of applications for Project Approvals and all Subsequent
Approvals and Building Permits for the Project area and if requested in
writing by Developer shall use overtime and independent contractors
whenever possible.
7.2 Easement and Fee Title Acquisitions. If requested in writing by Developer
and limited to City’s legal authority, City at its sole and absolute discretion
shall proceed to acquire, at Developer’s sole cost and expense,
easements or fee title to land in which Developer does not have title or
interest in order to allow construction of public improvements required of
Developer including any land which is outside City's legal boundaries.
The process shall generally follow Government Code Section 66462.5 et
seq. and shall include the obligation of Developer to enter into an
agreement with City, guaranteed by cash deposits and other security as
the City may require, to pay all City costs including but not limited to,
acquisition of the interest, attorney fees, appraisal fees, engineering fees,
City staff costs, and City overhead expenses of 15% on all out-of-pocket
costs.
7.3 Concurrent Entitlement Processing. City agrees that whenever possible
as determined by City in its sole discretion to process concurrently all land
use entitlements for the Project so long as the application for such
entitlements are “deemed complete” in compliance with the requirements
of Chapter 4.5 Review and approval of Development Projects (Permit
Streamlining Act) of the California Government Code.
7.4 Park Fees. City agrees that the Park Fee required under Subsection 6.7 of
this Agreement meets all of Developer's obligations under applicable law
for park land dedication.
7.5 Reimbursements from other Developments. City shall facilitate the
reimbursement to Developer of any costs incurred by Developer that may
be subject to partial reimbursement from other developers as a condition
325
of approval of a tract map, development permit or development agreement
with one or more other developers and at City’s discretion may include
provisions requiring such reimbursement to Developer for the same in
such other development project conditions of approval.
7.6 Early Grading Agreement. The City Manager is authorized sign an early
grading agreement on behalf of the City to allow rough grading of the
Project prior to City Council approval of a final subdivision map. Said
early grading agreement shall be consistent with the conditions of the
Project’s approved tentative map and contingent on City Engineer and
Director of Community Development acceptance of a performance bond in
a form and amount satisfactory to them to guarantee implementation of
the erosion control plan and completion of the rough grading; construction
of on-site and off-site improvements consistent with the City Council
approved Project and Tentative Map. In the case of failure to comply with
the terms and conditions of the early grading agreement, the City Council
may by resolution declare the surety forfeited.
7.7 Credit toward Payment of Citywide Traffic Fees. City agrees that credit
will be given by the City toward the payment of the Citywide Traffic Fee in
Section 6.4 of this Agreement for the fair market value of off-site property
acquired by the developer as determined by City to be necessary to
complete the improvements identified in Section 6.21 of this Agreement.
7.8 Proposed Mello-Roos Community Facilities District. City agrees that
upon receipt of a landowner petition by Developer and Developer’s
payment of a deposit of Fifteen Thousand ($15,000.00) and agreement to
reimburse all City costs related to processing of the proposed Mello-Roos
Community Facilities District (“CFD”), as prescribed in the applicable
sections of the California Government Code, City shall commence
proceedings to form a CFD and to authorize the issuance of bonded
indebtedness for the CFD to finance all or portions of the development
fees, In-Lieu Fees, public facilities, infrastructure and services that are
required for the Project (including, without limitation, the fees and other
amounts payable by Developer pursuant to Section 6 of this Agreement)
and that may be financed pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community
Facilities Act of 1982 (the “ACT”); provided, however, the City Council, in
its sole and unfettered discretion, may abandon establishment of the CFD
upon the conclusion of the public hearing required by the applicable
section of the California Government Code. In the event that a CFD is
formed, the special tax levied against any residential lot or residence
thereon shall afford the buyer the option to prepay the special tax (except
for special taxes for on-going services) in full prior to the close of escrow
on the initial sale of the developed lot by the builder of the residence. All
326
on-going costs for City to administer the CFD shall be included in the
costs to be paid by the CFD. Upon issuance of the bonded indebtedness
for the CFD, to the extent permitted by applicable law as determined by
bond counsel, the Developer may be reimbursed for unexpended costs
advanced or paid by Developer for CFD formation and related
proceedings.
7.9 Hillside Management Ordinance. City agrees that per Section
17.38.030(M) of the Moorpark Municipal Code, this project is exempt from
the provisions of the Hillside Management Ordinance.
8. Supersession of Agreement by Change of Law. In the event that any state or
federal law or regulation enacted after the date the Enabling Ordinance was
adopted by the City Council prevents or precludes compliance with any provision
of the Agreement, such provision shall be deemed modified or suspended to
comply with such state or federal law or regulation, as reasonably determined
necessary by City.
9. Demonstration of Good Faith Compliance. In order to ascertain compliance by
Developer with the provisions of this Agreement, the Agreement shall be
reviewed annually in accordance with Moorpark Municipal Code Chapter 15.40.
of City or any successor thereof then in effect. The failure of City to conduct any
such annual review shall not, in any manner, constitute a breach of this
Agreement by City, diminish, impede, or abrogate the obligations of Developer
hereunder or render this Agreement invalid or void. At the same time as the
referenced annual review, City shall also review Developer’s compliance with the
MMRP.
10. Authorized Delays. Performance by any Party of its obligations hereunder, other
than payment of fees, shall be excused during any period of "Excusable Delay",
as hereinafter defined, provided that the Party claiming the delay gives written
notice of the delay to the other Parties as soon as possible after the same has
been ascertained. For purposes hereof, Excusable Delay shall mean delay that
directly affects, and is beyond the reasonable control of, the Party claiming the
delay, including without limitation: (a) act of God; (b) civil commotion; (c) riot; (d)
strike, picketing or other labor dispute; (e) shortage of materials or supplies; (f)
damage to work in progress by reason of fire, flood, earthquake or other
casualty; (g) failure, delay or inability of City or other local government entity to
provide adequate levels of public services, facilities or infrastructure to the
Property including, by way of example only, the lack of water to serve any portion
of the Property due to drought; (h) delay caused by a delay by other third party
entities which are required to approve plans or documents for Developer to
construct the Project, or restrictions imposed or mandated by such other third
party entities or governmental entities other than City, (including but not limited
327
to, Ventura County Watershed Protection District); or (i) litigation brought by a
third party attacking the validity of this Agreement, a Project Approval, a
Subsequent Approval or any other action necessary for development of the
Project.
11. Default Provisions.
11.1 Default by Developer. The Developer shall be deemed to have breached
this Agreement if it:
(a) practices, or attempts to practice, any fraud or deceit upon City; or
willfully violates any order, ruling or decision of any regulatory or
judicial body having jurisdiction over the Property or the Project,
provided that Developer may contest any such order, ruling or
decision by appropriate proceedings conducted in good faith, in
which event no breach of this Agreement shall be deemed to have
occurred unless and until there is a final adjudication adverse to
Developer; or
(b) fails to make any payments required under this Agreement within
five (5) business days after City gives written notice to Developer
that the same is due and payable; or
(c) breaches any of the other provisions of this Agreement and fails to
cure the same within thirty (30) days after City gives written notice
to Developer of such breach (or, if the breach is not able to be
cured within such thirty (30) day period, Developer fails to start to
cure the same within thirty (30) days after delivery of written notice
by City of such breach or fails to thereafter diligently prosecute the
cure to completion).
11.2 Default by City. City shall be in breach of this Agreement if it breaches
any of the provisions of this Agreement and fails to cure the breach within
thirty (30) days after Developer gives written notice to City of the breach
(or, if the breach is not able to be cured within such thirty (30) day period,
City fails to start to cure the same within thirty (30) days after delivery of
written notice from Developer of such breach or fails to thereafter diligently
prosecute the cure to completion).
11.3 Content of Notice of Violation. Every notice of breach shall state with
specificity that it is given pursuant to this section of this Agreement, the
nature of the alleged breach, and the manner in which the breach may be
satisfactorily cured. Every notice shall state the applicable period to cure.
The notices shall be given in accordance with Section 20 hereof.
328
11.4 Remedies for Breach. The Parties acknowledge that remedies at law,
including without limitation money damages, would be inadequate for
breach of this Agreement by any Party due to the size, nature and scope
of the Project. The Parties also acknowledge that it would not be feasible
of possible to restore the Property to its natural condition once
implementation of the Agreement has begun. Therefore, the Parties
agree that the remedies for breach of this Agreement shall be limited to
the remedies expressly set forth in this subsection.
The remedies for breach of the Agreement by the City shall be injunctive
relief and/or specific performance.
The remedies for breach of the Agreement by the Developer shall be
injunctive relief and/or specific performance. In addition, and
notwithstanding any other language of this Agreement, if the breach is of
Subsection 6.13, 6.14 or 6.21 of this Agreement, City shall have the right
to withhold the issuance of building permits from the date that the notice of
violation was given pursuant to Subsection 11.3 hereof until the date that
the breach is cured as provided in the notice of violation.
Nothing in this subsection shall be deemed to preclude City from
prosecuting a criminal action against Developer if it violates any City
ordinance or State statute.
12. Mortgage Protection.
12.1 Discretion to Encumber. The Parties hereto agree that this Agreement
shall not prevent or limit Developer, in any manner, at Developer’s sole
discretion, from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any
improvements thereon then owned by such person with any mortgage,
deed of trust or other security device (“Mortgage”) securing financing with
respect to the Property or such portion. Any mortgagee or trust deed
beneficiary of the Property or any portion thereof or any improvements
thereon and its successors and assigns (“Mortgagee”) shall be entitled to
the following rights and privileges.
12.2 Lender Requested Modification/Interpretation. City acknowledges that the
lenders providing financing to Developer for the Property may request
certain interpretations and modifications of this Agreement. City therefore
agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with Developer and
representatives of such lenders to discuss in good faith any such request
for interpretation or modification. The City will not unreasonably withhold
its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification provided
such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and
329
purposes of this Agreement, provided, further, that any modifications of
this Agreement shall be subject to the provisions of this Agreement
pertaining to modifications and amendments.
12.3 Mortgage Protection. This Agreement shall be superior and senior to the
lien of any Mortgage. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach of this
Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any
Mortgage made in good faith and for value, but this Agreement shall be
binding and effective against the Mortgagee and every owner of the
Property, or part thereof, whose title thereto is acquired by foreclosure,
trustee sale or otherwise; provided, however, Mortgagee and such owner
shall not be responsible for any matters that occurred prior to their
acquisition of the Property or such portion.
12.4 Written Notice of Default. If a non-monetary default is not cured by
Developer within thirty (30) days after written notice by City to Developer
or a monetary default is not cured with in five (5) days after written notice
by City to Developer, then each Mortgagee shall be entitled to received
written notice from City of the applicable default by Developer under this
Agreement provided the Mortgagee has delivered a written request to the
City for such notice and shall have provided its address for notices in
writing to the City. Each such Mortgagee shall have a further right, but not
the obligation, to cure such default for an additional period of thirty (30)
days after delivery of such notice of default by City to the Mortgagee. City
shall not commence legal action against Developer by reason of
Developer’s breach without allowing the Mortgagee to cure the same as
specified herein.
13. Estoppel Certificate. At any time and from time to time, Developer may deliver
written notice to City and City may deliver written notice to Developer requesting
that such Party certify in writing that, to the knowledge of the certifying Party, (i)
this Agreement is in full force and effect and a binding obligation of the Parties,
(ii) this Agreement has not been amended, or if amended, the identity of each
amendment, and (iii) the requesting Party is not in breach of this Agreement, or if
in breach, a description of each such breach. The Party receiving such a request
shall execute and return the certificate within ten (10) days following receipt of
the notice. City acknowledges that a certificate may be relied upon by
successors in interest to the Developer who requested the certificate and by
holders of record of deeds of trust on the portion of the Property in which that
Developer has a legal interest.
14. Administration of Agreement. Any consent or approval herein to be given by the
City may be given by the City Manager provided it is express and is in writing.
Any decision by City staff concerning the interpretation and administration of this
330
Agreement and development of the Property in accordance herewith may be
appealed by the Developer to the City Council, provided that any such appeal
shall be filed with the City Clerk of City within thirty (30) days after the affected
Developer receives written notice of the staff decision. The City Council shall
render its decision to affirm, reverse or modify the staff decision within thirty (30)
days after the appeal was filed. The Developer shall not seek judicial review of
any staff decision without first having exhausted its remedies pursuant to this
section.
15. Amendment or Termination by Mutual Consent. In accordance with the
provisions of Chapter 15.40 of the Moorpark Municipal Code of City or any
successor thereof then in effect, this Agreement may be amended or terminated,
in whole or in part, by mutual consent of City and the affected Developer.
15.1 Exemption for Amendments of Project Approvals. No amendment to a
Project Approval or Subsequent Approvals shall require an amendment to
this Agreement and any such amendment shall be deemed to be
incorporated into this Agreement at the time that the amendment becomes
effective, provided that the amendment is consistent with this Agreement
and does not alter the permitted uses, density, intensity, maximum height,
size of buildings or reservations and dedications as contained in the
Project Approvals or Subsequent Approvals.
16. Developer Indemnification. Developer shall indemnify, defend with counsel
approved by City, and hold harmless City and its officers, employees and agents
from and against any and all losses, liabilities, fines, penalties, costs, claims,
demands, damages, injuries or judgments arising out of, or resulting in any way
from, Developer's performance pursuant to this Agreement including, but not
limited to, Developer’s construction of the Project on the Property and any injury
sustained by any person in connection with the construction or partial
construction of buildings and improvements on the Property by or on behalf of
Developer.
Developer shall indemnify, defend with counsel approved by City, and hold
harmless City and its officers, employees and agents from and against any action
or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul this Agreement, or any
provision thereof, the environmental documents prepared and approved in
connection with the approval of the Project, or any Project Approval or
Subsequent Approval or modifications thereto, or any other subsequent
entitlements for the project and including any related environmental approval.
17. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each provision of this Agreement of
which time is an element.
331
18. Operative Date. As described in Subsection 1.9 above, this Agreement shall
become operative on the Operative Date, being the date the Enabling Ordinance
becomes effective pursuant to Government Code Section 36937.
19. Term. This Agreement shall remain in full force and effect for a term of twenty
(20) years commencing on the Operative Date or until one year after the
issuance of the final building permit for occupancy of the last unit of the Project,
whichever occurs last, unless said term is amended or the Agreement is sooner
terminated as otherwise provided herein. Expiration of the term or earlier
termination of this Agreement shall not automatically affect any Project Approval
or Subsequent Approval or Building Permit or Final Building Permit that has been
granted or any right or obligation arising independently from such Project
Approval or Subsequent Approval or Building Permit or Final Building Permit.
Upon expiration of the term or earlier termination of this Agreement, the Parties
shall execute any document reasonably requested by any Party to remove this
Agreement from the public records as to the Property, and every portion thereof,
to the extent permitted by applicable laws.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the following shall survive the expiration or earlier
termination of this Agreement: (i) all obligations arising under this Agreement
prior to the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement; and (ii) Subsection
6.22 of this Agreement.
20. Notices. All notices and other communications given pursuant to this Agreement
shall be in writing and shall be deemed received when personally delivered or
upon the third (3rd) day after deposit in the United States mail, registered or
certified, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the Parties at the
addresses set forth in Exhibit “B” attached hereto and incorporated herein.
Any Party may, from time to time, by written notice to the other, designate a
different address which shall be substituted for the one above specified.
21. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and those exhibits and documents
referenced herein contain the entire agreement between the Parties regarding
the subject matter hereof, and all prior agreements or understandings, oral or
written, are hereby merged herein. This Agreement shall not be amended,
except as expressly provided herein.
22. Waiver. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall constitute a waiver
of any other provision, whether or not similar; nor shall any such waiver
constitute a continuing or subsequent waiver of the same provision. No waiver
shall be binding, unless it is executed in writing by a duly authorized
representative of the Party against whom enforcement of the waiver is sought.
332
23. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this
Agreement shall be effective to the extent the remaining provisions are not
rendered impractical to perform, taking into consideration the purposes of this
Agreement.
24. Relationship of the Parties. Each Party acknowledges that, in entering into and
performing under this Agreement, it is acting as an independent entity and not as
an agent of any of the other Parties in any respect. Nothing contained herein or
in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as creating
the relationship of partners, joint ventures or any other association of any kind or
nature between City and Developer, jointly or severally.
25. No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the
sole benefit of the Parties and their successors in interest. No other person shall
have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement.
26. Recordation of Agreement and Amendments. This Agreement and any
amendment thereof shall be recorded with the County Recorder of the County of
Ventura by the City Clerk of City within the period required by Chapter 15.40 of
the Moorpark Municipal Code of City or any successor thereof then in effect.
27. Cooperation Between City and Developer. City and Developer shall execute
and deliver to the other all such other and further instruments and documents as
may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this Agreement.
28. Rules of Construction. The captions and headings of the various sections and
subsections of this Agreement are for convenience of reference only, and they
shall not constitute a part of this Agreement for any other purpose or affect
interpretation of the Agreement. Should any provision of this Agreement be
found to be in conflict with any provision of the Purchase and Sale Agreement,
the Project Approvals or the Subsequent Approvals, the provision of this
Agreement shall prevail.
29. Joint Preparation. This Agreement shall be deemed to have been prepared
jointly and equally by the Parties, and it shall not be construed against any Party
on the ground that the Party prepared the Agreement or caused it to be
prepared.
333
30. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement is made, entered into, and executed
in the County of Ventura, California, and the laws of the State of California shall
govern its interpretation and enforcement. Any action, suit or proceeding related
to, or arising from, this Agreement shall be filed in the appropriate court having
jurisdiction in the County of Ventura.
31. Attorneys' Fees. In the event any action, suit or proceeding is brought for the
enforcement or declaration of any right or obligation pursuant to, or as a result of
any alleged breach of, this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to its
reasonable attorneys' fees and litigation expenses and costs, and any judgment,
order or decree rendered in such action, suit or proceeding shall include an
award thereof.
32. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each
of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which constitute one and the
same instrument.
33. Authority to Execute. Developer warrants and represents that to its knowledge
as of the Operative Date and with respect to each entity that is defined as
Developer: (i) it is duly organized and existing; (ii) it is duly authorized to execute
and deliver this Agreement; (iii) by so executing this Agreement, Developer is
formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement; (iv) Developer’s entering into
and performance of its obligations set forth in this Agreement do not violate any
provision of any other agreement to which Developer is bound; and (v) there is
no existing or threatened litigation or legal proceeding of which Developer is
aware that could prevent Developer from entering into or performing its
obligations set forth in this Agreement.
334
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Development
Agreement effective as of the Operative Date.
CITY OF MOORPARK
Janice S. Parvin, Mayor
ATTEST:
Maureen Benson, City Clerk
GRAND PACIFIC ASSET 2 LLC,
a California limited liability company
By:
Name, Title
335
EXHIBIT “A”
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
336
EXHIBIT “B”
ADDRESSES OF PARTIES
To City:
City of Moorpark
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
Attn: City Manager
To Developer:
Grand Pacific Asset 2 LLC
Number and Street
City, CA Zip
337
CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA
Planning Commission Meeting
of November 27, 2018
ACTION:
Approved Staff Recommendation.
BY: J. Figueroa
A. Consider Approval of the Regular Meeting Minutes of October 23, 2018. Staff
Recommendation: Approve the minutes.
Item: 10.A.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Moorpark, California October 23, 2018
A Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Moorpark was held on
October 23, 2018, in the Council Chambers of said City located at 799 Moorpark
Avenue, Moorpark, California.
1. CALL TO ORDER:
Chair Hamous called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Commissioner Landis led the Pledge of Allegiance.
3. ROLL CALL:
Present: Chair Hamous, Commissioner Di Cecco, Commissioner
Haverstock, and Commissioner Landis.
Absent: Vice Chair Aquino.
Staff Present: Joseph Fiss, Planning Manager; 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:
None.
7. ANNOUNCEMENTS, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, AND REPORTS ON
MEETINGS/CONFERENCES ATTENDED BY THE COMMISSION:
Commissioner Haverstock reported he had attended the Moorpark Morning
Rotary Club annual Moorpark Beer Tasting Festival in downtown Moorpark on
October 13, 2018. It was a great event and well-attended.
Chair Hamous reported he had attended the No-Limit Texas Hold 'em Charity
Poker Tournament presented by Kiwanis Club of Moorpark on October 20, 2018.
ITEM 10.A.
338
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (next Resolution No. PC-2018-632)
A. Consider a Resolution Recommending to the City Council Approval of
General Plan Amendment No. 2013-02, Zone Change No. 2013-02,
Residential Planned Development Permit No. 2013-01, and Development
Agreement No. 2013-01, and Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Under CEQA in Connection Therewith, for a 390-unit Senior Community
on 49.52 Acres North of Casey Road and West of Walnut Canyon Road,
on the Application of Ernie Mansi for Aldersgate Investment, LLC. Staff
Recommendation: 1) Continue to accept public testimony and continue
the agenda item with the public hearing open to the regular Planning
Commission meeting of November 27, 2018. (Staff: Joseph Fiss)
Chair Hamous and Commissioner Di Cecco announced, to avoid a
potential conflict of interest, they would recuse themselves and left the
dais at 7:06 p.m.
Commissioner Landis led the meeting.
Mr. Fiss announced that this item was continued from September 25,
2018 to October 23, 2018 and is requesting that this item be continued
with Public Hearing open to the November 27, 2018 regular Planning
Commission meeting.
Commissioner Landis announced the Public Hearing remains open.
There were no speakers.
In response to Commissioner Landis, Mr. Fiss stated there were no
additional speaker cards or written cards for this item.
Due to the lack of quorum, this item will be continued with public hearing open to
the November 27, 2018 regular Planning Commission meeting.
The City Council has final approval authority for this project.
Chair Hamous and Commissioner Di Cecco returned to the dais at 7:08
p.m.
B. Consider Resolution Approving Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 2018-
02, to Allow an Automobile Dealership with Light Repair Services at 13816
Princeton Avenue, and Making a Determination of Exemption Under
CEQA in Connection Therewith, on the Application of Mir Rafiq. Staff
Recommendation: 1) Open the public hearing, accept public testimony
and close the public hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. PC-2018-633
approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2018-02 with conditions of approval
339
and making a determination of exemption under CEQA in connection
therewith.(Staff: Joseph Fiss)
Mr. Fiss gave the staff report.
A discussion followed among the Commissioners and staff, which focused
on: 1) Modification to item 23. on stamped page 20, where it reads no
outdoor repair or maintenance, including washing, cleaning, or detailing of
vehicles is allowed under this permit, with the added clarification major
cleaning, or major detailing; 2) Modification to item 25. on stamped page
20, where it reads all vehicles left overnight and on weekends (outside
business hours), both operative and inoperative, must be parked inside
the service bays, with the added clarification all vehicles for service left
overnight; and 3) Has there been any proposed lighting.
Chair Hamous opened the public hearing.
Mir Rafiq, Hi-Tech Auto and Tire Center, Owner, described the project and
stated the business is trying to extend their services with a used cars
sales dealership service.
A discussion followed among the Commission and Mr. Rafiq regarding: 1)
What types of vehicles will be sold; 2) Will repair be done on the site or at
Hi-Tech Auto and Tire Center; and 3) Discussion regarding repair and
reconstruction of the site.
In response to Chair Hamous, Mr. Fiss stated there were no additional
speaker cards or written cards for this item.
Chair Hamous closed the public hearing.
A discussion followed among the Commissioners supporting the project.
MOTION: Commissioner Di Cecco moved and Commissioner Landis seconded a
motion to approve staff recommendation, with changes as proposed by the
Commission, including adoption of Resolution No. PC-2018-633. The motion
carried by voice vote 4-0, Vice Chair Aquino absent.
The Planning Commission has final approval authority for this project.
9. DISCUSSION ITEMS:
None.
340
10. CONSENT CALENDAR:
MOTION: Commissioner Haverstock moved and Commissioner Di Cecco seconded a
motion to approve staff recommendation. The motion carried by voice vote 4-0, Vice
Chair Aquino absent.
A. Consider Approval of the Regular Meeting Minutes of August 28, 2018.
Staff Recommendation: Approve the minutes.
B. Consider Approval of the Regular Meeting Minutes of September 25,
2018. Staff Recommendation: Approve the minutes.
11. ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION: Commissioner Landis moved and Commissioner Haverstock seconded
a motion to approve staff recommendation. The motion carried by voice vote 4-
0, Vice Chair Aquino absent. The time was 7:39 p.m.
Bruce Hamous, Chair
David A. Bobardt, Community Development Director
341